Shame on you hunters

[NDSportsman]

I also agree with property rights and that everyone should ask before entering. However, not posting land is giving permission to whomever wants to enter for recreational purposes without them having to ask. It's implied. Currently, the decision to let people use their land rests with the property owner. Landowners make the decision. Making all private land posted REMOVES that decision from the landowner. So, passing this policy actually violates your premise of property rights resting with the owner as it takes away their right to decide and gives it to the state. The second part to this is you actually agree that the no trespass law won't increase land open to the public. Now I'm really confused as to why you think we should implement this policy as to do so would go against TWO of the things you say you support. As far as the grazing and other issues you bring up, I agree with you, but those are unrelated to the trespass bills and can be addressed though your representatives.

Sorry KDM but we'll have to agree to disagree. Private property is just that, private. It really shouldn't have any bearing when discussing public land or hunting access to the general public. If landowners don't want to be bothered and don't care if people access their property then they can post them open just as easily as requiring people to post them closed now. I'm all for more public land in this state and that's why I want something in return for the no trespass bill being passed. Eliminate some of the perks the farm and ranch community has and increase public land in exchange. Like I said give and take.

 

[fly2cast]

I've never hunted any state other than North Dakota. What's it like in a state like South Dakota to get permission to hunt? Is it one of those things where you don't hunt unless you know or are a landowner? Is it hard to get permission? I'm only asking cause I'm curious.

As other have stated, State School Land really gets grazed to hell in some places with absolutely no habitat. If the no trespassing laws went into effect, I would love to see the state spend some money to manage these lands for habitat (which I know would come from increased hunting license fees.) Chunk off sections of it to plant trees, develop grasses and then have stricter grazing requirements. Its a give and take. Farmers want their land posted then hunters get more quality public land.

 

[feather_duster]

If you want give and take then lets fix the gratis tag regulations. Find it ridiculous that a landowner can apply for both a gratis and a lottery tag, so if they don't get a lottery tag they get a gratis. They should have to choose which tag they want to try for and that's that. Screws Joe Public out of a tag. It is also ridiculous that they give gratis tags for "once in a life time" tags. ;:;popcorn

 

[PrairieGhost]

Also the permits they get to shoot elk because they are eating their hay or whatever damage they are claiming. Don't cow elk cause damage too? Specify cow elk only for depredation permits. I talked with one rancher bragging about the six huge bulls their family has shot. The same rancher with the crazy trespass sign. He didn't push, but he tried slightly to run us off a prairie dog town on public land that he leased. The turning point was NODAKTRAX on the gps.

 

[Kurtr]

I've never hunted any state other than North Dakota. What's it like in a state like South Dakota to get permission to hunt? Is it one of those things where you don't hunt unless you know or are a landowner? Is it hard to get permission? I'm only asking cause I'm curious.

As other have stated, State School Land really gets grazed to hell in some places with absolutely no habitat. If the no trespassing laws went into effect, I would love to see the state spend some money to manage these lands for habitat (which I know would come from increased hunting license fees.) Chunk off sections of it to plant trees, develop grasses and then have stricter grazing requirements. Its a give and take. Farmers want their land posted then hunters get more quality public land.

Not really lots of guys will say cant hunt opening week end for deer and pheasants and then let you on. Moved here in 2002 and been told no once for hunting waterfowl and it ended up being my eventual father in law who had permission before me. When asking for coyotes i get told i better not miss and kill them all every time

 

[Obi-Wan]

First of all, I actually agree with property rights and believe people should have to have permission to access private property. It's just the right thing to do and should have been that way from the beginning. Just because we have had it the opposite way for so long does not make it right. As far as more land open to the public, no making all private land posted is not going to help that and I never said it would, I said we need more public land in this state. Another thing I will add to my rant is the over grazing of current public lands, especially our state school lands which have been abused far to long by the ranching and farming community. If landowners want private lands to be no trespass then the public lands should be off the table for farming and ranching practices too. Give and take!

Let them rent it but no posting as it is public land. If they are worried about their cattle they can remove them prior to hunting season

 

[KDM]

Sorry KDM but we'll have to agree to disagree. Private property is just that, private. It really shouldn't have any bearing when discussing public land or hunting access to the general public. If landowners don't want to be bothered and don't care if people access their property then they can post them open just as easily as requiring people to post them closed now. I'm all for more public land in this state and that's why I want something in return for the no trespass bill being passed. Eliminate some of the perks the farm and ranch community has and increase public land in exchange. Like I said give and take.

According to you, private land is private, but the trespass bill only affects private landowners and will force them to post their land open instead of just leaving it the way it is where they need to do nothing to make their wishes known?? You want more land open to the public and taking away access to private land is your way of accomplishing that?? You are for property rights and supporting a bill that takes the right to decide to post or not post AWAY from property owners is a good way to support property owners rights?? I think you are correct. We need to agree to disagree, because you talk from two separate and totally opposite sides of the issue simultaneously.

 

[Kurtr]

Let them rent it but no posting as it is public land. If they are worried about their cattle they can remove them prior to hunting season

Thats the nice thing it is public here all the time unless there are standing crops

 

[db-2]

Grew up on the farm but for the last 50 years in town.
Have work with land owners and have found them, for the most part, to open their land to me. So now I have my own spots (bow hunter) but if I move outside of my spots, 99% of those land owners have welcome me on their land.

So post it all, for me it will not matter. I have my spots and if not a simple visit will open them up even out in the bad lands (make sure one takes the Minnesota plates off and replace with buddies ND plates and do not say your from the east ND).
Hell for most of those people they are wishing and hoping for company to come and talk to them. Sometimes it is hard to drive into a stranger's yard but it works. db

 

[NDSportsman]

According to you, private land is private, but the trespass bill only affects private landowners and will force them to post their land open instead of just leaving it the way it is where they need to do nothing to make their wishes known?? You want more land open to the public and taking away access to private land is your way of accomplishing that?? You are for property rights and supporting a bill that takes the right to decide to post or not post AWAY from property owners is a good way to support property owners rights?? I think you are correct. We need to agree to disagree, because you talk from two separate and totally opposite sides of the issue simultaneously.

I think that's you actually. Private land is private. You want the burden to post it closed kept in place where most don't think that's right. If you want to leave your land open then you can post it as such. Either way nothing is going to open more private land to the public. That's why some of the other laws need to be changed so we can actually have more public land.

 

[guywhofishes]

I think that's you actually. Private land is private. You want the burden to post it closed kept in place where most don't think that's right. If you want to leave your land open then you can post it as such. Either way nothing is going to open more private land to the public. That's why some of the other laws need to be changed so we can actually have more public land.

source?

 

[dwos03]

First of all, I actually agree with property rights and believe people should have to have permission to access private property. It's just the right thing to do and should have been that way from the beginning. Just because we have had it the opposite way for so long does not make it right. As far as more land open to the public, no making all private land posted is not going to help that and I never said it would, I said we need more public land in this state. Another thing I will add to my rant is the over grazing of current public lands, especially our state school lands which have been abused far to long by the ranching and farming community. If landowners want private lands to be no trespass then the public lands should be off the table for farming and ranching practices too. Give and take!

I would go one step further and say that public land cannot be completely landlocked by private land. There must be an access! Otherwise you are just giving the landowner sole use of land meant for public use.

 

[NDSportsman]

I would go one step further and say that public land cannot be completely landlocked by private land. There must be an access! Otherwise you are just giving the landowner sole use of land meant for public use.

I agree but I don't know of any situation like that in ND with our section line rules.

- - - Updated - - -

source?

You don't think most people would agree that you should have permission before entering private property?

 

[bilbo]

The same rancher with the crazy trespass sign. He didn't push, but he tried slightly to run us off a prairie dog town on public land that he leased. The turning point was NODAKTRAX on the gps.

Are you talking about the big neon yellow signs?

 

[Duckslayer100]

Agreed [MENTION=337]guywhofishes[/MENTION]. I, too, would like to see this "majority" spoken of. Because based on rudimentary causal personal observation, I'd say that the majority of ag land in the state I've witness is still un-posted. Sure, there are pockets where densities tilt the other way; however, I'd still wager that as a whole, the stat has more land not posted than posted.

Which would place the burden on folks who already don't post.

Which makes the argument null.

 

[guywhofishes]

I agree but I don't know of any situation like that in ND with our section line rules.

- - - Updated - - -


You don't think most people would agree that you should have permission before entering private property?

So you don't have a source - this is just your gut feel?

What most people's answer would be would really depend on how you ask the question - what the circumstance is.

Does my neighbor need my permission to enter my yard to retrieve their dog or pick up garbage of their's that blew into my yard? Nope.

In fact - I'm not sure I could press charges for that - even if I was a$$hole enough. It seems like a crime or intent of crime has to take place first. I would imagine that only when I asked someone not to verbally - or in written form (posted) - would I have a legal leg to stand on when the sheriff shows up.

Are property laws (and prosecutions) really that much different in the city than farm properties? Asking sincerely since they seem the same to me.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.ndsu.edu/pubweb/~saxowsky/aglawtextbk/chapters/torts/Torts2.html

some really interesting questions/answers here

 

[NDSportsman]

So you don't have a source - this is just your gut feel?

What most people's answer would be would really depend on how you ask the question - what the circumstance is.

Does my neighbor need my permission to enter my yard to retrieve their dog or pick up garbage of their's that blew into my yard? Nope.

In fact - I'm not sure I could press charges for that - even if I was a$$hole enough. It seems like a crime or intent of crime has to take place first. I would imagine that only when I asked someone not to verbally - or in written form (posted) - would I have a legal leg to stand on when the sheriff shows up.

Are property laws (and prosecutions) really that much different in the city than farm properties? Asking sincerely since they seem the same to me.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.ndsu.edu/pubweb/~saxowsky/aglawtextbk/chapters/torts/Torts2.html

some really interesting questions/answers here

Actually, yes they do.

Note that a trespass does not need to involve harm or damage to give rise to liability; the entrant is legally responsible for merely being on the property without permission.

 

[guywhofishes]

Uh yeah - I posted the link to that answer already - thanks though

 

[NDSportsman]

Uh yeah - I posted the link to that answer already - thanks though

Lol then why did you post the question and give the wrong answer?

 

[guywhofishes]

Lol then why did you post the question and give the wrong answer?

I found the “legal beagle” answer after posting first part - as you can see. That’s why I posted the second part update.

My answer in first part of my post was from my personal perspective - “Nope, not in my opinion” is what I was thinking in the first part. That’s why I asked how it all works - country vs city.