hunters and landowners in Pa.- interesting rights and responsibilities under laww

wrote:[i]
On 5 Dec 2006 05:16:31 -0800, "duty-honor-country"
wrote:


wrote:
On 3 Dec 2006 13:37:42 -0800, "the lying liberal from Lancaster"
wrote:


wrote:
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 21:09:33 -0500, vincent p. norris
wrote:

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.").

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"

I live in Centre County, PA, and have always assumed that if I don't
see a NO HUNTING or NO TRESPASSING sign, I can hunt on that land.
Provided it's in the country and not obviously a home area, of course.

I've never had a problem.

. Signs must be placed on their own standard, not on trees or posts.

I would estimate that 99 and 44/100 % of the signs I've seen have been
on tree trunks.

vince

Un-flocking-believable...do you feel the need to post your home with a
sign that says "No one is allowed to come in and help themselves to
whatever they wish" to prevent people from doing such? Would you
support such a requirement? And how would you feel if you were required
to similarly post _every_ single possession you to which you have title?
As a landowner, I pay property taxes in a fair number of areas (and
can't homestead exempt) at the same rate as those who utilize the full
services those taxes support, and in several instances, I am required by
law to pay "non-resident" licensing to hunt or fish my own land. And
yet, if I don't post my land in a highly-specific method, I am construed
to be allowing its use as essentially open land. I make no claim to the
free-roaming game that might happen upon the land, only to my right to
control access to the land that I own. Yet you and others seem to think
trespass fair and just. So, I repeat - how to you feel about your own
home and possessions?

TC,
R


ps- as a landowner, you're pret-ty damn UNINFORMED about posting
statutes that have been in effect since the land was first settled by
the Pilgrims on the Mayflower...

Well whaddaya know - you learn something every day...I had no idea "the
Pilgrims on the Mayflower" first settled Pennsylvania...although, now
that you mention it, it might explain those funky-assed hats some of
them folks up yonder way tend to wear...

I guess it's time you "landowners" woke up and smelled the coffee ?

OK...have you decided yet?


your posts are a poor excuse for not posting your land per statute...


maybe the time you spend windbagging here, you should spend posting
your land properly

You ASSume I don't already post it....WRONG!! And you ASSume that I am
not well-aware of the requirements for posting, fencing, etc., and in
multiple jurisdictions...WRONG!!


then stop debating the wrong side of a statutory law which burdens you,
and favors hunters

if your posters are outdated by more than a year, they mean nothing
legally

keep that posting current- required yearly...

"the lying liberal from Lancaster" wrote in
message ups.com...


then stop debating the wrong side of a statutory law which burdens you,
and favors hunters

if your posters are outdated by more than a year, they mean nothing
legally

keep that posting current- required yearly...

You have got to be the biggest PETA moron to ever walk the face of the
Earth!

First you argue that hunters should have the right to hunt unposted land,
and now you argue to post lands to thwart hunters?

Your screen name says it all. You are a LAIR!

Op

On 5 Dec 2006 16:06:27 -0800, "the lying liberal from Lancaster"
wrote:


then stop debating the wrong side of a statutory law which burdens you,
and favors hunters

if your posters are outdated by more than a year, they mean nothing
legally

keep that posting current- required yearly...

Thanks for "information," Nancy Grace...

On the off chance anyone is still reading this shtick and takes it
seriously, "duty"/"lying"/whatever doesn't have a clue about which he
speaks as far as the situation across the US. Posting laws vary widely
across the country and many states have no posting requirements - if you
don't have personal permission directly from the owner, you're
trespassing regardless of the lack of posting, fencing, or any other
markings (and some states require permission to be in writing). Other
states allow fencing (of varying types) or cultivation to serve as
"posting." Others allow paint or other types of markings to serve, and
still others have minimal signage requirements, such as at gates.
Moreover, the laws can and do change drastically - for example,
Louisiana did just that in 2004.

Bottom line: before you go onto private land for any reason, know the
law in the jurisdiction, and IMO, it's always better to get permission
from the landowner.

And FWIW, if and when you ask for permission, show up with your ID and
appropriate license(s) at the ready (better yet, have them already
photocopied) and express willingness to sign a liability release whether
or not the jurisdiction already grants statutory release to the
landowner. And remember that it isn't your land - leave the land, the
fences, hard and soft gates (if you found it open, leave it open, and if
it's a soft gate, leave it _exactly_ as you found it), etc., as you
found it unless you have specific permission to do otherwise.

HTH,
R

wrote:
On the off chance anyone is still reading this shtick and takes it
seriously....

HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

Wolfgang
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

"Opus" wrote in message
...

"duty-honor-country" wrote in message
oups.com...



yo, Zippy- how the hell are you supposed to know who owns what, with
large tracts of hundreds of acres, and no homes in sight ?


Yo ho, anonymous ****head!

Here in the land of the, at least semi-literate, we have a county
government with offices that handle just such questions. For example,

This is the map of my mother's and uncle's land: http://tinyurl.com/3qc2o

Which can be found by going to this site: http://maps.co.caldwell.nc.us/

You might even check with the register of deeds?

With just the slightest amount of due diligence, you might even find
someone who knows someone, who knows the landowner? You see, you know
that you don't own the land. So, maybe it belong to someone other than
you?

Really, it's not that difficult a concept to grasp. Sure the owner might
be required by law to post his or her land, but it never hurts to ask
first, before you go stepping on you dick!

that's what the posting statutes were specifically designed to prevent-
the wholesale CLOSING OFF of hunting lands by owners who don't even
live in the area

What does it matter, if they don't live in the area? If they post the
land and you don't have permission to hunt it, you are trespassing.

From your source:

"The current state of American hunting law reflects the history of the
right to hunt in this nation. Most states now have statutes requiring
landowners to post their land to exclude hunters; the other states have
statutes requiring hunters to get explicit permission from landowners
before they hunt. Even Vermont, which has a constitutional provision
granting hunters the right to hunt on unenclosed private land, has a
posting statute."
http://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite.pl?54+Duke+L.+J.+549
You see things have changed a slight bit since the 1700s.

otherwise the King of England could effectively buy and close all
hunting land in the USA- and not post it either- and not even be a
citizen to boot

Ok, we know that you are a TROLL and that you're not all that bright, but
the last King Of England died in 1952. They now have a Queen. Her name
is Elizabeth II

Be that as it may. Many foreign companies own land in the U.S., and I'd
bet a shiny nickle that Queen Elizabeth II has some land here too. And I
bet that you can't hunt that land either.

think about the abuses of that system, you are proposing

I propose nothing. You on the other hand propose to rush willy nilly on
to someone's land with a firearm, without the decency of asking the
landowner first! If I were proposing anything, and I am not, I would
proposr that you think before you shove you head up your ass, next time.

the posting statutes see to it, so that billionaire tycoons don't
effectively choke off hunting from common folk

No they don't, you dimwitted mutant ****-maggot. Billionaire tycoons, or
raccoons for that matter, would simply pay someone to post their lands for
them and you still couldn't legally hunt that land--dumbass!

Posting statutes give common folk the right to protect their lands from
imbeciles like you!

ever heard of government by the people, for the people ?

Yeah, I'm a student of political science, so I know that "government of
the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the
earth." is a the last phrase in Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, and has
nothing to do with posting statutes, but referred to the salvation of the
Union.

that's the USA

Well yeah, since Lincoln's armies were able to defeat those of the
Confederate States. However, that's a story for another time, right?

Op


And in California, 1/2 the land is owned by the people. Via government
ownership. So, most likely posting needs to be required. Look at a BLM map
of lots of Northern California woodlands and every other square mile is
public land. Left over from the railroad building days. so if you want the
people to stay off your land, you better post it as yours. With your
contact info. So people can actually check on ownership. A few grazing
lease holders in the West have been slapped down for posting the land. Just
because you have grazing rights, does not infer you have total use of the
land.

Opus wrote:
"the lying liberal from Lancaster" wrote in
message ups.com...


then stop debating the wrong side of a statutory law which burdens you,
and favors hunters

if your posters are outdated by more than a year, they mean nothing
legally

keep that posting current- required yearly...

You have got to be the biggest PETA moron to ever walk the face of the
Earth!

First you argue that hunters should have the right to hunt unposted land,
and now you argue to post lands to thwart hunters?

Your screen name says it all. You are a LAIR!

Op


the screen name is a spoof on a jerk liberal from Lancaster, CA.- who's
been following me around posting after me.

I'm a hunter, fisherman, shooter, and outdoorsman for the past 30
years.

My purpose is twofold- inform hunters and landowners of the law, and
their rights and responsibilities in this matter. Our family also has
land.

To be quite honest, 2 of our borders are not posted properly. So now
we know, if someone enters there, they actually had a right to under
law. Of course we can ask them to leave if we see them there in
person. But we need to post our own land better.

wrote:
On 5 Dec 2006 16:06:27 -0800, "the lying liberal from Lancaster"
wrote:


then stop debating the wrong side of a statutory law which burdens you,
and favors hunters

if your posters are outdated by more than a year, they mean nothing
legally

keep that posting current- required yearly...

Thanks for "information," Nancy Grace...

On the off chance anyone is still reading this shtick and takes it
seriously, "duty"/"lying"/whatever doesn't have a clue about which he
speaks as far as the situation across the US. Posting laws vary widely
across the country and many states have no posting requirements - if you
don't have personal permission directly from the owner, you're
trespassing regardless of the lack of posting, fencing, or any other
markings (and some states require permission to be in writing). Other
states allow fencing (of varying types) or cultivation to serve as
"posting." Others allow paint or other types of markings to serve, and
still others have minimal signage requirements, such as at gates.
Moreover, the laws can and do change drastically - for example,
Louisiana did just that in 2004.

Bottom line: before you go onto private land for any reason, know the
law in the jurisdiction, and IMO, it's always better to get permission
from the landowner.

And FWIW, if and when you ask for permission, show up with your ID and
appropriate license(s) at the ready (better yet, have them already
photocopied) and express willingness to sign a liability release whether
or not the jurisdiction already grants statutory release to the
landowner. And remember that it isn't your land - leave the land, the
fences, hard and soft gates (if you found it open, leave it open, and if
it's a soft gate, leave it _exactly_ as you found it), etc., as you
found it unless you have specific permission to do otherwise.

HTH,
R


you DUMB ASS- read the OP- the states that require posting of private
property to exclude hunters/fishermen are listed- you obviously didn't
read the entire thread

see it here, Duke Law briefs on the subject- posted again due to your
lack of knowledge on the subject- most states actually REQUIRE posting
to exclude hunters- that's the whole point

https://www.law.duke.edu/shell/cite....Duke+L.+J.+549

INTRODUCTION
Rod Froelich, owner of seventy-five hundred acres in Sioux County,
North Dakota, was tired of having hunters enter his land to hunt
without his permission. Froelich had not posted "no hunting" signs on
his land, which under the common reading of the state's posting statute
meant that hunters were not obligated to seek his permission to hunt.1
As a member of the North Dakota House of Representatives, he sponsored
legislation that would have required hunters to get permission from
landowners before hunting on private land.2 When the legislation
failed, Froelich, with the support of the North Dakota Stockmen's
Association3 and the North Dakota Farm Bureau,4 sued the governor and
the director of the Game and Fish Department of North Dakota, seeking a
declaratory judgment that hunters must have landowner permission before
hunting on private land.5 In moving for summary judgment, Froelich
argued that the posting statute, which provided for a criminal penalty
if a hunter entered posted land, did not abrogate his common law right
to exclude and his civil trespass remedy to enforce that right on
unposted land.6 He further argued that if the statute was interpreted
to effect such an abrogation -- which was the common reading -- it [*pg
550] would amount to an unconstitutional taking.7 In reply, the
defendants simply relied on the existence and history of the posting
statute to support their position that the public could hunt on
unposted land without permission, free from any civil or criminal
sanction.8 They further stated in a newspaper article that, "The
assumption that unposted land is open for hunting has been the case for
decades, if not since statehood."9 The court deemed Froelich's
complaint a request for an improper advisory opinion and granted
summary judgment for the defendants, declining to reach the merits of
the case.10

The year before Froelich filed his suit, an Arizona landowner mounted a
similar protest before an Arizona House of Representatives committee,11
lobbying in support of a bill to repeal Arizona's recently enacted
posting statute.12 Although agreeing that the statute clearly abrogated
a landowner's civil trespass remedy against people hunting on unposted
land, she argued that it unfairly undermined private property rights.13
In hearings before the committee, she stated that proper posting under
the statute was difficult if not impossible, that some hunters knock
down "no hunting" posts, that hunters were often dangerous, and that,
in the end, the state's posting law was simply inimical to private
property rights.14 Three other landowners testified similarly.15
Members of the Arizona Game and Fish Commission, the Arizona Wildlife
Federation, and the National Rifle Association argued in response that
the posting law was a reasonable "compromise" between the [*pg 551]
rights of hunters and landowners.16 After a lively debate, the bill
failed.17

These two conflicts revolve around state posting statutes -- statutes
that require private landowners desiring to exclude hunters from their
land to post "no hunting" signs. As an initial matter, as this Note
later shows, Froelich's argument that the statutes are only criminal
and therefore do not affect landowners' civil remedies is unavailing --
the posting statutes actually make hunting on unposted land perfectly
"legal."

Wolfgang wrote:
wrote:
On the off chance anyone is still reading this shtick and takes it
seriously....

HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

Wolfgang
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!


sig heil

"the lying liberal from Lancaster" wrote in
message ups.com...

the screen name is a spoof on a jerk liberal from Lancaster, CA.- who's
been following me around posting after me.

NO, YOU ARE A LIAR!

You constantly change your screenname because you are killfiled by most
folks and you can't stand it. You seek attention and validation, which you
may receive at first, but it's fleeting, once folks see that you are a
piece-o-**** TROLL!

I'm a hunter, fisherman, shooter, and outdoorsman for the past 30
years.

And a LIAR, don't forget that!

My purpose is twofold- inform hunters and landowners of the law, and
their rights and responsibilities in this matter. Our family also has
land.

why don't you run for political office, as a Dem. or Repub., you have the
requisite skills--Liar!

To be quite honest, 2 of our borders are not posted properly. So now
we know, if someone enters there, they actually had a right to under
law. Of course we can ask them to leave if we see them there in
person. But we need to post our own land better.

Hell, not only are you a LIAR, you are a pathetically lazy MORON. Get off
your lazy ass and post that land, dip****!

Op

wrote in message
ups.com...

sig heil

And now we see where your loyalties lie.

Do you wear your brown shirt, when posting land throughout Pa.?

Op