hunting on unposted land- what are the laws ? surprising find
duty-honor-country
on private land- much to my surprise, any land not posted, fenced, or
enclosed, is considered "open to public recreation"- that includes
hunting and fishing. This varies from state to state, with the states
of Washington, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and many others, having very
lenient laws- leaning towards hunters' initial rights in this respect.
We have a lot more clout than we realize- and a hunting or fishing
license really does carry a lot of power- good to rememer next time you
plop down the cash for your license.
Of course, any hunter/fisherman MUST leave if accosted by the landowner
and told to leave in person- but without the land being posted, there
is no wilfull misconduct and no laws broken on the outdoorman's part,
if he enters the land initially. Just something to keep in mind, if
there is a tract you are hunting that has a "grey area" as to whether
you're allowed in or not- from a legal standpoint, you can go in if
it's not posted, in Pa. Read below:
Pennsylvania's statute, 18 PA. CONS. STAT. ANN. § 3503 (West 2000), is
based on the Model Penal Code's trespass provision, which does not
specifically mention hunting but requires posting (or fencing or
enclosing) to exclude all trespassers from land (posting is not
required for buildings and occupied structures). See also infra notes
\l "F88"- \l "F89"
\l "B63" Pennsylvania courts generally hold that posting is required
to exclude hunters. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Sweeley, 29 Pa. D. &
C.4th 426, 433 (C.P. 1995) ("Open lands that are not posted or fenced
off are presumed open for recreational use by the public, especially in
rural counties where hunting and outdoor activities are common.").
Various secondary sources provide general insight about whether and
when landowners must post to exclude hunters. The Model Penal Code's
criminal trespass provision, on which Pennsylvania's trespass statute
is based, \l "F88" requires landowners to post nonfenced land [*pg 565]
(excluding buildings and occupied structures) to exclude any would-be
trespassers, including hunters. \l "F89" The Restatement (Second) of
Torts states that,
[I]f. . . it is the custom in wooded or rural areas to permit the
public to go hunting on private land . . . , anyone who goes hunting .
. . may reasonably assume, in the absence of posted notice or other
manifestation to the contrary, that there is the customary consent to
his entry upon private land to hunt or fish." \l "F90"
§ 52 ("A license to hunt does not confer any right on the holder to go
upon lands owned by another, or to enter the enclosure of another,
without his permission. In the case of unenclosed land, however, the
right has sometimes been conferred by immemorial usage or by
constitutional provision." (footnotes omitted)).
R Landon
Also what is "posted" ? Indiana states that 1 sign at "the entrance" to the land is enough to count as posted..
>:| Thu, 30 Nov 2006 13:19:55 +0000 duty-honor-country <backthet...@YAHOO.COM>
about "[HUNTING] hunting on unposted land- what are the laws ? surprising find" , using :
Mike
without permission. If you shoot a deer and it walks 5 yards crosses
over to another property and dies, you can't get it without permission.
Posted or not, tresspass rules apply in Texas.
http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/nonpwdpubs/media/outdoor_annual_2005_2006.pdf
see page 19 - Retrieval of game
Dick F
> I did some research recently on my home state of Pa. concerning hunting
> on private land- much to my surprise, any land not posted, fenced, or
> enclosed, is considered "open to public recreation"- that includes
> hunting and fishing. This varies from state to state, with the states
> of Washington, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and many others, having very
> lenient laws- leaning towards hunters' initial rights in this respect.
> We have a lot more clout than we realize- and a hunting or fishing
> license really does carry a lot of power- good to rememer next time you
> plop down the cash for your license.
Idaho is very lenient. We have huge amounts of public rangeland and it's
often impossible to tell where the boundaries are. So...the law is that
land that's not cultivated or irrigated must be posted or it's open for
hunting & fishing without permission. The regulations are specific as to
what constitutes legal posting. Land that's cultivated or irrigated
(during the most recent crop season) is huntable by permission only.
Dick
JoeSpareBedroom
news:ekmlpr$o31$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
>I did some research recently on my home state of Pa. concerning hunting
> on private land- much to my surprise, any land not posted, fenced, or
> enclosed, is considered "open to public recreation"- that includes
> hunting and fishing. This varies from state to state, with the states
> of Washington, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and many others, having very
> lenient laws- leaning towards hunters' initial rights in this respect.
> We have a lot more clout than we realize- and a hunting or fishing
> license really does carry a lot of power- good to rememer next time you
> plop down the cash for your license.
>
> Of course, any hunter/fisherman MUST leave if accosted by the landowner
> and told to leave in person- but without the land being posted, there
> is no wilfull misconduct and no laws broken on the outdoorman's part,
> if he enters the land initially. Just something to keep in mind, if
> there is a tract you are hunting that has a "grey area" as to whether
> you're allowed in or not- from a legal standpoint, you can go in if
> it's not posted, in Pa. Read below:
Of course, you *could* be on land that WAS posted, but some meat sock tore
down the signs, something that happens with annoying regularity.
A few times over the years, I've been able to figure out which house
belonged to the land I wanted to cross to get to a stream, and I've asked
permission. I've never had anyone say no. Might be different for hunters,
though.
chris reinke
>>>>Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and many others, having very lenient laws-
>>>>leaning towards hunters' initial rights in this respect.
How do you figure WI is lenient towards hunter’s initial rights? According
to page 39 of the WI deer hunting regulations:
http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/wildlife/regs/Deer06.pdf
Trespassing: <snip> “According to s. 943.13, of the Wisconsin Statutes, it
is illegal to:
enter land of another without the express or implied consent of the owner or
occupant of the land, or
enter or remain on land after having been notified by the owner or occupant
not to enter or remain. A person has received notice from the owner or
occupant if he or she has been notified personally, either orally or in
writing, or if the land is posted.
Remember: Although hunters are required to make a reasonable effort to
retrieve game they have killed or injured, hunters may not trespass to
retrieve such game, even if the game was shot from outside the posted area.
Ask first for permission.”
Are you stating that just because people don’t post their land in WI, they
are giving implied consent? With that definition, many unethical hunters
would simply tear down the posted signs, walk in and hunt, claiming later it
was never posted in the first place and therefore free for all. Even if old
signs fell down naturally or was never posted, if the landowner never gave a
person who entered their land express consent, the person is considered
trespassing and subject to a fine. Not exactly lenient towards hunters'
intial rights to me.
Just my opinion, Chris
_________________________________________________________________
Share your latest news with your friends with the Windows Live Spaces
friends module.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwsp0070000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mk
Harry
news:ekmlpr$o31$1...@grapevine.wam.umd.edu...
> on private land- much to my surprise, any land not posted, fenced, or
> enclosed, is considered "open to public recreation"- that includes
> hunting and fishing. This varies from state to state, with the states
> of Washington, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and many others, having very
> lenient laws- leaning towards hunters' initial rights in this respect.
> We have a lot more clout than we realize- and a hunting or fishing
> license really does carry a lot of power- good to rememer next time you
> plop down the cash for your license.
>
New Hampshire's laws are very smilar to PA - If it's not posted. it's OK to
hunt there. Also, you may retrieve an animal that ran over the border and
died on posted property, that's OK too.
duty-honor-country
towards the hunter and his right to initially enter unposted land.
It's amazing that this is not common knowledge among all hunters. I
often thought that, they sell us a license, but where are you allowed
to hunt beside gamelands ? Read the logic behind the statute- it's very
sound- otherwise someone like Bill Gates can buy all the land in your
state, and close it all to hunting. They basically say ok, Rich Guy,
you can do that- but if you do, you have to post ALL THE PERIMETERS of
said lands, and post signs that are signed by you, the landowner.
Naturally that's hard to do with large plots- so the natural tendency
is, hunters enter and hunt- the laws are specifically written to favor
the little guy.
Here is it:
CONCLUSION:
Twenty-nine states currently require private landowners to post their
land to exclude hunters, twenty-seven of these states by statute. The
posting statutes were an outgrowth of the American desire to ensure
that hunting was available to everyone, not just the rich and landed.
The statutes vary widely in their particulars, but the core idea behind
them -- that landowners must take often onerous steps to [*pg 585]
ensure that hunters do not enter their land -- exists in all
twenty-seven statutes. Whatever the merits of these statutes when first
formulated, as a result of social changes they now unfairly privilege
hunters over landowners.
TRESPASSING AND POSTING: THE LAWS
Some states have laws that specifically address trespassing while
hunting, and others rely simply on the general trespassing statutes of
the state. In 22 states posting is not required; that is, it is against
the law for hunters to trespass on private property without the
landowner's permission even if the land is not posted. Where posting
is required some states have laws specifying how to post land. But
trespassing and posting laws can be somewhat confusing, so we recommend
that you post your land even if you are not legally required to do so
at a minimum, posting strengthens your case when trying to combat
trespassing by hunters. Posting also identifies your property
boundaries so that hunters and law enforcement officers know where your
private property begins. We also recommend that you get to know the law
enforcement and wildlife officers who would enforce the trespassing
laws in your area so that they might better respond when you have a
problem.
The breakdown of states that require posting follows:
Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana,
Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North
Dakota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Vermont,
Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin
This legal net posting was put up in 2005, some of it by radical ANIMAL
RIGHTS people so their constituents know the laws- so I'm pretty darn
sure, Wisconsin is included too. That's what their webpage says. I'd
wager that is may be "illegal" to enter private property without
permission in Wisconsin, but if an arrest was made, and it went to
court, the landowner would not have a leg to stand on if the property
wasn't posted in the first place- and the defense would use the
statutes to defeat the landowner- it's a very clear, obvious ruling in
favor of the hunter.
The bottom line is, buying a hunting or fishing license carries a lot
of power for the hunter/fisherman- in states with land posting statutes.
duty-honor-country
Pennsylvania, unless a land owner has placed NO TRESSPASING signs at
intervals not to exceed 50
feet around the entire property. The signs must be signed, dated, and
replaced annually. Signs must be placed on their own standard, not on
trees or posts.
The posting statutes were designed to balance the rights of two
different groups: hunters and landowners. For many Americans, hunting
is an almost sacred activity, one enshrined in the national culture.
The posting statutes create an obvious problem: they pit the rights of
one group, hunters, against the rights of another group, landowners.
The rights of both groups are powerful. For hunters, the right to hunt
and trap on all land has its source in the early national egalitarian
desire to allow everyone to hunt.
Municipalities do face one impediment if they decide to take such
action -- preemption. The regulation of firearms (including ownership
restrictions and licensing) is a field that states have traditionally
occupied completely, thus preempting any municipal ordinances in
conflict with state law. \l "F194"
chris reinke
permission in Wisconsin, but if an arrest was made, and it went to court,
the landowner would not have a leg to stand on if the property wasn't posted
in the first place- and the defense would use the statutes to defeat the
landowner- it's a very clear, obvious ruling in favor of the hunter.
Here is my own research, again supporting my first point. Again, citing a
reputable source (the WI DNR) "Anyone on private land without the consent of
the owner is trespassing and subject to monetary penalties up to $1,000.
Wisconsin law does not require landowners to post their land for a
successful prosecution. The law places the burden on the individual to know
whose land he or she is on at all times."
http://dnr.wi.gov/org/caer/ce/news/rbnews/2005/110405co1.htm
A warning to those who hunt in Wisconsin!! Do not listen to that guy! I
would much rather listen to the laws outlined on the DNR website than
research found "at some website online". Heck, I could create my own
webpage stating it legal to hunt in all 50 states regardless if the land is
posted, with special seasons in all city parks and zoos.
Read it again...the same agency who is in charge of issuing the hunting
licenses for the state says "Wisconsin law does not require landowners to
post their land for a successful prosecution!!!!"
What kind of hunting are you encouraging by telling hunters in this group to
hunt "illegally" but fight it in court?? Do you honestly think that it
would hold up in court when the DNR is telling you upfront that you will be
successfully prosecuted? Do you honestly think that this is giving the rest
of us who hunt the state a good image? I am sure what you are advocating is
doing more harm than good, because the next one of us ethical hunters who
goes to ask persmission from that landower "who doesn't have a leg to stand
on in court" if we can hunt their land, I am sure the answer is NO!!
I am not speaking for all 29 states, strictly WI. I strongly encourage
those who plan on hunting in those 29 states to read that particular state's
laws first! If you do indeed get nailed for trespassing based on what this
guy is saying, I am sure a sheriff is going to laugh at you when you tell
him that you are hunting because someone online said it was legal. LOL
Chris
_________________________________________________________________
Talk now to your Hotmail contacts with Windows Live Messenger.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://get.live.com/messenger/overview
Mike
I see a poor guy who really wants to hunt so bad that he sells his
pickup, turns down the thermostat, eats cornbread and beans for a few
years and saves up enough for the down payment on land advertised as
excellent deer hunting (meaning it is unimproved, lesser value land).
Then he posts the land. Opening day he has to work to pay for the
first payment. Sunday he gets out there and the posted sign has been
tossed face down onto the ground near the poacher's shiny truck's big
mud grip tracks. While eating more beans that night since all the
venision was shot or scared away, he gets on the internet and reads
that only RICH people own hunting lands.
What would you think if someone jumped your backyard fence and walked
around your house with a rifle? Why is it different because it is not
in the city limits?
Richard I Landon
>:| Sat, 2 Dec 2006 08:05:30 -0800 duty-honor-country <dutyhono...@HOTMAIL.COM>
about "Re: [HUNTING] hunting on unposted land- what are the laws ? another update" , using :
>I have been told that a tresspass violation cannot be enforced in
>Pennsylvania, unless a land owner has placed NO TRESSPASING signs at
>intervals not to exceed 50
>feet around the entire property. The signs must be signed, dated, and
>replaced annually. Signs must be placed on their own standard, not on
>trees or posts.
<><><><><>
tagline follows;
><><><><><
EARTH FIRST! We'll strip-mine the other planets later.
JoeSpareBedroom
news:1165075530.5...@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>I have been told that a tresspass violation cannot be enforced in
> Pennsylvania, unless a land owner has placed NO TRESSPASING signs at
> intervals not to exceed 50
> feet around the entire property.
In *can* be enforced easily, assuming the hunter did not tell anyone else
where he would be hunting that day.
duty-honor-country
> Funny how your comment about the RICH guy reads to me.
>
> I see a poor guy who really wants to hunt so bad that he sells his
> pickup, turns down the thermostat, eats cornbread and beans for a few
> years and saves up enough for the down payment on land advertised as
> excellent deer hunting (meaning it is unimproved, lesser value land).
> Then he posts the land. Opening day he has to work to pay for the
> first payment. Sunday he gets out there and the posted sign has been
> tossed face down onto the ground near the poacher's shiny truck's big
> mud grip tracks. While eating more beans that night since all the
> venision was shot or scared away, he gets on the internet and reads
> that only RICH people own hunting lands.
>
> What would you think if someone jumped your backyard fence and walked
> around your house with a rifle? Why is it different because it is not
> in the city limits?
ps- that's a crock- you won't see any "poor guy" buying large tracts of
land today- if the land is priced that cheap, the monied people will
buy it up for development to turn a profit
and you know it...
duty-honor-country
> Funny how your comment about the RICH guy reads to me.
>
> I see a poor guy who really wants to hunt so bad that he sells his
> pickup, turns down the thermostat, eats cornbread and beans for a few
> years and saves up enough for the down payment on land advertised as
> excellent deer hunting (meaning it is unimproved, lesser value land).
> Then he posts the land. Opening day he has to work to pay for the
> first payment. Sunday he gets out there and the posted sign has been
> tossed face down onto the ground near the poacher's shiny truck's big
> mud grip tracks. While eating more beans that night since all the
> venision was shot or scared away, he gets on the internet and reads
> that only RICH people own hunting lands.
>
> What would you think if someone jumped your backyard fence and walked
> around your house with a rifle? Why is it different because it is not
> in the city limits?
we have 52 acres here that we post per letter of the law- you're
fictional horror story doesn't hold any water- post your land, you
won't have any problems- and if someone is caught there trespassing
when it's posted per the statute, you can have them fined and it will
stick
if you choose not to post it, you don't have a leg to stand on in
court, esp. if your state is a posting statute state
so stop whining about it, and do what the law requires- we do, so
should you
JoeSpareBedroom
> Mike wrote:
>> Funny how your comment about the RICH guy reads to me.
>>
>> I see a poor guy who really wants to hunt so bad that he sells his
>> pickup, turns down the thermostat, eats cornbread and beans for a few
>> years and saves up enough for the down payment on land advertised as
>> excellent deer hunting (meaning it is unimproved, lesser value land).
>> Then he posts the land. Opening day he has to work to pay for the
>> first payment. Sunday he gets out there and the posted sign has been
>> tossed face down onto the ground near the poacher's shiny truck's big
>> mud grip tracks. While eating more beans that night since all the
>> venision was shot or scared away, he gets on the internet and reads
>> that only RICH people own hunting lands.
>>
>> What would you think if someone jumped your backyard fence and walked
>> around your house with a rifle? Why is it different because it is not
>> in the city limits?
>
>
>
> land today- if the land is priced that cheap, the monied people will
> buy it up for development to turn a profit
>
> and you know it...
Actually, you WILL see it, and I see it all the time. In NY, the North
Country and Western regions have plenty of land that's useless for farming,
and are of no interest to developers. Plenty of large properties are owned
by families you'd consider "poor". There's a sad joke that circulates about
the Adirondack mountains - seeing kids with no shoes and half their teeth
missing, sitting on a porch barely attached to a house that leans at a 20
degree angle. But there's a shiny new 4-wheeler parked in the yard. It's not
really a joke. It's true.
duty-honor-country
so you're advising murder as a punishment for trespassing ?
keep in mind the hunter has a gun too- and he most likely is a better
shot than you are
take a potshot at him, you may be eating a 175 gr. 7mm Rem Mag at 200
yards, in the puss...
it's called self defense- and if you start taking potshots at someone
who's armed, they have a right to defend themselves
I think you'd be better off posting your land first, rather than
shooting someone who's already armed with a high powered, scoped
repeating rifle- at worst you may end up dead or charged with murder,
at least you'll be charged with attempted murder and be jailed
Chris Barnes
> if you choose not to post it, you don't have a leg to stand on in
> court, esp. if your state is a posting statute state
Which is one reason I am REALLY glad I live in a state where land owner rights
are held in preemence. There is no posting requirement here in Texas. If it's
public land, it will say so. If it doesn't and you don't own it, you better not
be there (even if just out for an unarmed stroll through the woods). You might
just get shot...
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Chris Barnes AOL IM: CNBarnes
ch...@txbarnes.com (also MSN IM) Yahoo IM: chrisnbarnes
True Hunter
private land, posted or not.
Nat Man
I don't care what the laws say, if you don't know who owns it and you don't
have permission - stay out. It is called respecting others' property and
rights.
"Mike" <mgm...@YAHOO.COM> wrote in message
news:1165086375.7...@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> Funny how your comment about the RICH guy reads to me.
>
> I see a poor guy who really wants to hunt so bad that he sells his
> pickup, turns down the thermostat, eats cornbread and beans for a few
> years and saves up enough for the down payment on land advertised as
> excellent deer hunting (meaning it is unimproved, lesser value land).
> Then he posts the land. Opening day he has to work to pay for the
> first payment. Sunday he gets out there and the posted sign has been
> tossed face down onto the ground near the poacher's shiny truck's big
> mud grip tracks. While eating more beans that night since all the
> venision was shot or scared away, he gets on the internet and reads
> that only RICH people own hunting lands.
>
> What would you think if someone jumped your backyard fence and walked
> around your house with a rifle? Why is it different because it is not
> in the city limits?
>
>
>
>
>
Nat Man
"chris reinke" <crankb...@HOTMAIL.COM> wrote in message
news:BAY125-F90FE8DE00...@phx.gbl...
Mike
many boards.
Not worth my time.
JoeSpareBedroom
news:el480f$fvc$1...@news.tamu.edu...
> duty-honor-country wrote:
>> if you choose not to post it, you don't have a leg to stand on in
>> court, esp. if your state is a posting statute state
>
> rights are held in preemence. There is no posting requirement here in
> Texas. If it's public land, it will say so. If it doesn't and you don't
> own it, you better not be there (even if just out for an unarmed stroll
> through the woods). You might just get shot...
Does anyone else find it weird that this discussion is even happening?
Would anyone here enter another person's property and use their swimming
pool?
Gary Kubat
Murder isn't something to be joked about. That's sick.
Here we have many longwinded discussions about humanely taking game, not
wounding them, being ethical hunters, etc., yet I've only seen
'duty-honor-country' respond to this. Thinly veiled allusions to killing
someone over a trespass dispute are not appropriate, and will only give
fodder to the anti's, even if the comment was said in jest.
Gary
Gary Kubat
wrote:
>Does anyone else find it weird that this discussion is even happening?
Yep.
>Would anyone here enter another person's property and use their swimming
>pool?
Nope.
Pretty simple, if I don't own it and it's not public property I don't
enter except to go to a front door to ask permission. I thought this was
the accepted norm, even though I know some people will always strive to
ignore such social norms and the law.
Gary
caspian
but it is an interesting subject..
With the decline in open hunting areas some people are seeking other methods to gain access to land for hunting..
Some states may have laws that allow hunting on un posted land..
But I have yet to see any law that requires anything more than a single sign on the customary entrance to the land..
personally it is not worth the risk..
>:| Tue, 5 Dec 2006 17:48:05 GMT JoeSpareBedroom <dishbo...@YAHOO.COM>
about "Re: [HUNTING] hunting on unposted land- what are the laws ? surprising find" , using :
>Does anyone else find it weird that this discussion is even happening?
>Would anyone here enter another person's property and use their swimming
>pool?
<><><><><>
tagline follows;
><><><><><
A problem is a chance for you to do your best. - Duke Ellington
Chris Barnes
> Just found out that you are a spammer and have posted this non-sense to
> many boards.
Fwiw, I just figured that out too.
Doug
land. The motto is "ask first". Now if its mixed in with public land
and not fenced or posted, the land is probably going to be hunted and
you probably aren't going to be hassled. But.... technically he could.
Not sure what the sheriff would do in that case. Most private land in
Colorado is fenced, but I have seen some that is not and is near BLM or
National Forest. And it gets hunted as if it is public. So there are
always exceptions.
lucky
I think an important issue was lost in the heat of the debate. While
some posts have referred to respecting others' property and rights, and
not being worth the risk of the consequences of trespassing, nothing
was said about the image we project.
As hunters who want to retain/protect the right to hunt, we need to
conduct ourselves as model citizens. Those who don't understand or
appreciate hunting are looking for reasons to take this privilege away
from us. When out in the field, preparing to hunt, or engaged in a
discussion about hunting, we must keep in mind that everything we do
can either positively or negatively reflect on ALL hunters. With that
in mind, we must show the utmost respect for land owners, habitat, the
animals we hunt, the weapons we carry, and the law. Loopholes and
enforcement of the law should not be a topic of discussion or a focus
of the group (or any individual).
JoeSpareBedroom
news:1165611515.6...@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Excellent points. Remember, too, that the news usually features only the
worst members of any group. Soldiers who rape and murder, hunters who poach
or shoot their hunting partners, drivers who drink and kill. People who
treat others with respect rarely make the newspaper, and that's exactly what
you want. Impress just one or two landowners with your manners, and they
will be far less likely to vote for reactionary people or ideas.