No Trespass Law

Allen

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
10,474
Likes
1,485
Points
553
Location
Lincoln, kinda...
Davey,

I respectfully disagree. Any slob hunter who would tear down a sign and hunt will simply plead "Oh, I thought this was farmer Joe's land who IS on the registry of places to hunt". We see versions of that anyway, but in today's world if there is a sign there it's a little harder to argue being lost. Yeah, I know signs disappear, but have you ever seen an entire section's worth of signs disappear? I haven't, slobs don't tend to be that thorough, they just take down the one beside their truck.

I guess I should just be prepared to finally buy more land expressly for hunting. :(
 


Davey Crockett

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
13,689
Likes
1,192
Points
553
Location
Boondocks
Davey,

I respectfully disagree. Any slob hunter who would tear down a sign and hunt will simply plead "Oh, I thought this was farmer Joe's land who IS on the registry of places to hunt". We see versions of that anyway, but in today's world if there is a sign there it's a little harder to argue being lost. Yeah, I know signs disappear, but have you ever seen an entire section's worth of signs disappear? I haven't, slobs don't tend to be that thorough, they just take down the one beside their truck.

I guess I should just be prepared to finally buy more land expressly for hunting. :(



FWIW the way the law stands now that loophole I'm talking about only needs one sign down for that land to be not legally posted.

It'll be interesting to see what these changes are and what the final draft will be. I'll fish for some answers from Terry at NDGF and I am sure he will give us all a little more wood to grip. The technology is there electronically , I'm an uneducated hillbilly and even I can look at land VIA satellite image and within a couple of clicks find out everything there is to know about that land. EXCEPT who rents it and who controls the hunting rights. That I have a feeling is where we will see changes , Also for those without technology the information can be added into the free plots books for all to see so I don't buy the lack of ownership/control knowledge until I see it. I think printed satellite images along with the regular township sections would be a good thing. Sell the things for 5 bucks if that's what it takes, Then people will take better care of them and not have 3 or 4 floating around the vehicle till they finally show up at a gas station garbage can. Anyway I'll post what NDGF has to offer , I believe they are neutral as I think I was stated earlier and that's the way they have rolled for years. That was hard for me to grasp at first but it makes sense now.

- - - Updated - - -

I've lived close to the rez long enough to see damn near every trick in the book. They like this side of the mountain where it's not poached out.
 

Allen

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
10,474
Likes
1,485
Points
553
Location
Lincoln, kinda...
FWIW the way the law stands now that loophole I'm talking about only needs one sign down for that land to be not legally posted.

Not if they are using "No Hunting or Trespassing" signs. There is a legal difference between hunting and trespassing. All you as a landowner have to do is make it reasonably noticeable to the general public that you don't want people on your land and they are guilty of trespass. No Hunting signs though have a much more stringent notification to the public that you don't want people hunting on your land. If the land is not "legally posted" according to the No Hunting sections of the Century Code, they are able to use the loophole you speak of.

I got my ass chewed out over this by my stepfather quite a few years ago when I bought No Hunting or Trespassing signs to post our land. He was very particular over verbiage and I had to learn the difference.

- - - Updated - - -

p.s. I don't believe the NDGF is the correct law enforcement agency for prosecuting Trespass violations, for that you have to go to your county sheriff to initiate prosecution.
 

Migrator Man

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Posts
3,961
Likes
22
Points
226
It's a blanket policy , Sort of like ND speed limit law. You might not see the sign right in front of you but you know what the law is if it's not posted otherwise. All the pig hunters have to do now the way the law stands is tear down the sign and they are free to roam as long as they deny tearing down the sign. If they get caught they didn't see any sign and they get off scott free.


If this passes it's the end of the line for the pig hunters when they get caught , which a lot of them do but they know they will get off . NDGF won't even attempt in most cases because they know they have a good chance of getting thrown out of court. We will have to wait till the final draft but if it looks decent there is a good chance I'll be on board with it for the simple fact that it gives NDGF incentive to do their job without getting thrown out of court.
How often does that even happen where they tear every sign down before hunting on posted land? I personally have not heard of any people getting off free for hunting posted land. Even if there are old worn posters or only one poster on the whole quarter section a hunter will get busted for hunting it without permission.

- - - Updated - - -

FWIW the way the law stands now that loophole I'm talking about only needs one sign down for that land to be not legally posted.
.
I have never heard of that. If that was the case I could legally be hunting approximately 25% of the posted land I see because it’s not legally posted for no hunting. I have been told by LEO that just because it’s not legally posted for hunting I can still be prosecuted for trespassing because they intent is there. You need to call the sheriffs department if you are having trouble getting people charged.
 

Davey Crockett

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
13,689
Likes
1,192
Points
553
Location
Boondocks
Boy do I wish we could have a chat session with NDGF and some of our legislators or encourage some of them to join this site and chime in. Something I might even mention to Terry in my email. Would you guys refrain from the dogpile syndrome if I could convince them that opening communications on NDA would be a win win ? This dog pile BS is a poor display of sportsmanship and some of you guys bleed that shit. take that with a grain of salt just calling a beet a beet . If you told me it's a bad Idea I would believe you.

- - - Updated - - -

So I used to memorize the proclamation but life got in the way and I am not aware of any changes made on posting land but the proclamation has instructions how to legally post. Anything short of what is stated in the ND century code is not legally posted and thus a loophole. I'll stand behind what I have said and if you can dig up something to prove me wrong I'll thank you for schooling me

- - - Updated - - -

And yes Allen , I have always went with "No hunting or trespassing" . It seems to make no difference, Are you saying it's me that needs a tune up.

- - - Updated - - -

TYPO: That was supposed to be a question , Insert question mark where the last period in my post resides.
 


Obi-Wan

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
7,494
Likes
2,524
Points
678
Location
Bismarck
I believe land owners have liability protection from someone getting hurt on their un posted land. does this law remove that protection?
 

SLE

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2016
Posts
1,104
Likes
213
Points
233
There's a lot of talk on this thread about "slob" and unethical hunters which I think most agree are the minority that ruin it for the rest. I have not heard a word about the "slob" landowner however, and although they are also the minority, they're also out there. This is a two way street when it comes to throwing stones and I've seen plenty. I've had landowners place posted signs (twice) LITERALLY WHILE WE WERE HUNTING the property, and then proceeded to get my ass chewed for hunting posted property, WTH! Of course we were polite, and as expected the landowners didn't want to call the local warden for a discussion. I mean we actually watched them, while we were walking, pound the post in the ground, screw the board to the post, and staple the sign up! I had a run in with a landowner north of garrison that chewed my ass up one side and down the other even the though the land was NOT posted in any way shape or form. I had a tree stand in a grove of trees and had tracked down the land owner/ whom was an attorney in the twin city's and said go ahead, but the guy that chewed me out was the renter! Funny thing, I was telling a fiend about that and they had the same guy, do the EXACT same thing to them while they were goose hunting one morning. The ass chewing was almost verbatim.

We do our best to scope out property for posted signs and I'll be the first to admit that I've walked some stuff only to leave or come across a single half torn up sign from several years ago stapled to a log, and half covered with snow. This has happened a couple of times. In this case I haven't had a run in with an owner/renter but feel bad for being out there even though it wasn't legally posted. And of course, there are those that post their neighbors land (without permission), school land, or place the posted sign right on the section line when they only own the one quarter and the neighboring quarter isn't posted. I also have to say that you sometimes have to look awfully hard for signs because there's a bunch of different types and sizes of posted/no trespass signs. The new plastic ones that slip over a fence post are nice, but running into them the first time a couple of years ago in NW ND, I initially just thought they were orange pipeline markers! They look almost the identical.

I'm not out looking for confrontation by any means and I don't think most are, but I sure hope that these aren't the situations that landowners are complaining about "slob" hunters.

The realty is, this is a two way street, and I'm sure there is some middle ground somewhere. Under the current statute, make sure the landowner doesn't have ANY liability for people legally entering un-posted land, better enforcement of the current laws, get rid of the loop holes. If it's posted and the intent is there and well visible, then it's posted, period! And make posting easier. Heck, have the state supply nice metal posted signs that are standardized, long lasting, and easy to see to those that want to post property. We could even employ a data base that could go along with the posted property ;:;rofl. I have no problem with the discussion and completely understand some of the issues landowners face, but instead of hitting the nuclear launch button, let's look at what real issues are truly happening and make some adjustments to our current regulations.
 
Last edited:

eyexer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2015
Posts
13,730
Likes
708
Points
428
Location
williston
On a side note time to get on legislators to force recording all legislative activity and make it available on state website. Video would even be preferred
 

Walleye_Chaser

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Posts
2,134
Likes
155
Points
293
Location
Fargo
Anyone caught tearing down Posted signs should get a $5,000 fine and lost hunting privileges for 10 years. That is unbelievable to me.
 

PrairieGhost

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 15, 2015
Posts
10,326
Likes
680
Points
443
Location
Drifting the high plains
SLE very well spoken and reasonable not emotional. Back home where I hunt a couple of landowners are the biggest violaters. Years ago one would spot from a plane for about five vehicles on the ground. That's over though after he drilled it into the ground. Some of us watch for posted signs and some think the whole world is their oyster and posting means nothing. I can't see any good coming from this bill. The guys who keep introducing it must have a miserable life. Hats off to the honest and polite hunters and landowners.
 


SLE

★★★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2016
Posts
1,104
Likes
213
Points
233
Hats off to the honest and polite hunters and landowners.

I'll second this! At the end of the day, these are the majority on both sides and hopefully reason and logic in the majority will prevail over the minority that has a tendency to ruin it for all.
 

Bacon

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 14, 2015
Posts
1,217
Likes
63
Points
218
Location
Napoleon
Anyone caught tearing down Posted signs should get a $5,000 fine and lost hunting privileges for 10 years. That is unbelievable to me.
How about using them for target practice. That’s always a good standby out here. For the record, I am against this new proposed law.
 

Allen

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
10,474
Likes
1,485
Points
553
Location
Lincoln, kinda...
- - - Updated - - -

And yes Allen , I have always went with "No hunting or trespassing" . It seems to make no difference, Are you saying it's me that needs a tune up.

- - - Updated - - -

TYPO: That was supposed to be a question , Insert question mark where the last period in my post resides.

This kind of a tune-up? No.

Old-man-slap-a-bear_o_119130.gif



I'm just saying that NDGF wardens enforce No Hunting violations. If you are using No Trespass signs, you need to call the sheriff's office to go after someone for trespass.
 

njsimonson

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2015
Posts
274
Likes
3
Points
115
Location
Capital City, ND
First I ever heard of this , tell me more .

This is codified in NDCC 53-08-01 et seq. Basically, what it says is that anyone entering onto land, uninvited (ie: a hunter, entering onto unposted land) assumes the risk, and the landowner owes no duty to the visitor and is not liable for injuries in the normal course.

https://www.legis.nd.gov/cencode/t53c08.pdf

It's AMAZING how many people (including law makers) don't realize this is part of the law, but it is SOOO integral to the whole system we have in our state of allowing access, preventing liability, and sustaining the hunting heritage through the unique setup we have for unposted lands.
 


Kurtr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
18,238
Likes
1,970
Points
648
Location
Mobridge,Sd
This kind of a tune-up? No.

Old-man-slap-a-bear_o_119130.gif



I'm just saying that NDGF wardens enforce No Hunting violations. If you are using No Trespass signs, you need to call the sheriff's office to go after someone for trespass.


I have nothing to add other than the gif is fucking awesome and i keep making different things up in my head that guy said to the bear as he bitch slapped him. Thanks for making my Friday
 

Davey Crockett

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
13,689
Likes
1,192
Points
553
Location
Boondocks
https://www.legis.nd.gov/cencode/t53c08.pdf


I skimmed over the ND century code without putting much time into thought I came away thinking this too needs an overhaul unless I interpreted it wrong. what I got out of it was that anything I try to do to help a hunter for safety reasons pretty much bends me over to take it in a courtroom. Since I know the lay of my land I like control for safety reasons . Supposing I give someone permission to hunt a specific area on my property and they get hurt or hit by a stray bullet . Does that make me liable because I gave instructions and placed them in that spot because I thought it was the safest option ?
 
Last edited:

Allen

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
10,474
Likes
1,485
Points
553
Location
Lincoln, kinda...
https://www.legis.nd.gov/cencode/t53c08.pdf


I skimmed over the ND century code without putting much time into thought I came away thinking this too needs an overhaul unless I interpreted it wrong. what I got out of it was that anything I try to do to help a hunter for safety reasons pretty much bends me over to take it in a courtroom. Since I know the lay of my land I like control for safety reasons . Supposing I give someone permission to hunt a specific area on my property and they get hurt or hit by a stray bullet . Does that make me liable because I gave instructions and placed them in that spot because I thought it was the safest option ?


Only if you charge for access. Once you do that the legal entanglements change, dramatically.

This is the applicable portion:
53-08-02. Duty of care of owner.
1. Subject to the provisions of section 53-08-05, an owner of land owes no duty of care tokeep the premises safe for entry or use by others for recreational purposes, regardlessof the location and nature of the recreational purposes and whether the entry or use byothers is for their own recreational purposes or is directly derived from the recreationalpurposes of other persons, or to give any warning of a dangerous condition, use,structure, or activity on such premises to persons entering for such purposes.


People get hurt all the time while out hunting. Stepping in badger holes, stitches from rusty barbed wire, etc, etc. When is the last time you heard of a lawsuit in ND where a hunter sued a landowner for getting hurt on their land while hunting? In town you will get sued if you don't clean your sidewalk of ice (I know of several occasions where this happened), and I don't know of a single incident where a hunter sued, much less won, a negligence case against a landowner for rolling his ankle on a muddy creek bank.
 
Last edited:

Davey Crockett

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2015
Posts
13,689
Likes
1,192
Points
553
Location
Boondocks
I've never heard of a land owner ever getting sued by a hunter, Just saying my interpretation of the century code. There is a first time for everything is always lurking in my mind to keep myself safe. It lurks in the mind of others to get rich quick.

- - - Updated - - -

ok after reading your updated post I need to read the century code again and rethink

- - - Updated - - -

I stand corrected :;:thumbsup

- - - Updated - - -

I sometimes overthink stuff , Nothing against lawyers other than the fact they are smarter than me.

Weather 2315 passes or fails should have no bearing on the status of this. Right ? crazier things have happened but I'm pretty sure there are cowboys riding the herd that wouldn't let it slip through the cracks.

- - - Updated - - -

reminds me of when the snowmobile trail went through my property , They paid me $1 a year for the lease.
 

johnr

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2015
Posts
19,994
Likes
3,590
Points
803
Location
Dickinson
Your painting with a pretty broad brush , I don't see this taking any rights away from anybody. What I do see is hunters complaining because they have to ask for permission to hunt if the land owner doesn't opt out of the program and have his/her land open to everyone. I've been down the road of hunters without permission wrecking a good hunt for hunters with permission , More than once. Guess what they said . :;:huh Well I didn't know it was posted.

Another point you some of you are missing is basic hunter safety and hunter etiquette where it's safer and more sportsman like to know if someone has been sitting all day in a stand waiting for the right one to show up. I've heard time and time again on here and from talking with hunters where someone will be walking a piece and someone else will stop on the road and shoot the deer. I'd say this could be an advantage to some hunters that are willing to do their homework and a disadvantage to others that arent and each one is in charge of their own destiny .

I have only received one reply so far.

" So…I am hearing that there are some amendments coming that may change the bill significantly but I am not sure what they are yet. As far as recording of the committee meetings…. They do an audio recording of committee meetings and take notes but the only way to hear or read them is to come to the capitol and ask. Two committees right now are having all their committee meetings recorded with the hope that all committees will have this done in the future. I am at times surprised at how paper dependent the process is here in Bismarck. I would have thought that more of it would be on-line but I think they are working towards that."










- - - Updated - - -

I'm not ready to jump on one bandwagon or the other until I see the revised bill in its entity.

thats why I said I feel, I by no means speak for anyone, but feel as though the general consensus is as stated.

Not looking to put my words in anyone’s mouth.
 


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 159
  • This month: 133
  • This month: 116
  • This month: 108
  • This month: 103
  • This month: 86
  • This month: 82
  • This month: 76
  • This month: 75
  • This month: 74
Top Bottom