New beefier trespassing law passed

[WaHeadhunter]

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2012/oct/25/landers-new-law-raises-penalties-for-trespassers/

[scout/sniper]

Very nice. I love it!

[Boss .300 winmag]

  Seams to read like a good law.

[WaHeadhunter]

    

yes, a damn good law.

[dbor]

Does this include everyone that trespasses? Just wondering... It sounds good if it does...

[scout/sniper]

Does this include everyone that trespasses? Just wondering... It sounds good if it does...

This is a game law and the way I read it is that this particular law applies only when trespassing in the pursuit of game. Other statutes cover trespassing.

[jackmaster]

i love it if it covers all tresspassing while hunting of any animals or birds, losing your rifle and huntn privelages for 2 years would suck, but there is still the *censored*es that will do it for a little 2pt or spike, and hopefully they get caught, what about people that trespass onto lands like hancock without the proper pass, will it cover that trespassing as well? or here is a touchy one and not meant to start a war, but what if a native is caught killing a deer or elk on private property, i only ask because of an incident a few years ago when a native shot a huge bull on some farmers land out by the twin lakes out by kapowsin...

[JackOfAllTrades]

However, the new law offers trespassers an avenue for defending themselves against a citation in the case of retrieving game.
An officer can give them leniency if they can prove they made “all reasonable attempts to contact” the landowner for permission to collect the animal so they could avoid breaking the state law that forbids wasting fish or wildlife.

 
So if the land owner says no, who gets the citation for wasting game?
 
-Steve

[NoBark]

I believe gammies can use that idea (citing for waste) as a way of getting you onto someones land to retrieve your animal.

[JimmyHoffa]

I believe gammies can use that idea (citing for waste) as a way of getting you onto someones land to retrieve your animal.

but under this change to the law, it would be the gamie going to retrieve the animal and not giving it to the poacher (but could give it to a legit shooter).

[BIGINNER]

quick question... i know of a certain chunk of land, (huge chunk) that is not posted or fenced or cultivated. and have no idea where to check if i can hunt that land.... could i be cited for tresspassing if i hunt there?

[KyleMB123]

quick question... i know of a certain chunk of land, (huge chunk) that is not posted or fenced or cultivated. and have no idea where to check if i can hunt that land.... could i be cited for tresspassing if i hunt there?

I'm not a lawyer, but I don't believe that a citation like that would hold up in court. If it's not posted, fenced, or cultivated, and the landowner (if there is one) hasn't previously told you to leave the property then you cannot be charged with trespassing or trespassing while hunting. If you really want to know call a lawyer.

[CedarPants]

quick question... i know of a certain chunk of land, (huge chunk) that is not posted or fenced or cultivated. and have no idea where to check if i can hunt that land.... could i be cited for tresspassing if i hunt there?

My guess would be that that in today's information age, it would be next to impossible to have no idea where to check for property ownership to obtain permission.

I also understand that wasn't an answer to your question

[Humptulips]

quick question... i know of a certain chunk of land, (huge chunk) that is not posted or fenced or cultivated. and have no idea where to check if i can hunt that land.... could i be cited for tresspassing if i hunt there?

You might look up your countys web-site. In my county they have geo mapping where you can zoom in on a property and then clik info and get the ownership, owner address, valuation etc.

[scout/sniper]

quick question... i know of a certain chunk of land, (huge chunk) that is not posted or fenced or cultivated. and have no idea where to check if i can hunt that land.... could i be cited for tresspassing if i hunt there?

I'm not a lawyer, but I don't believe that a citation like that would hold up in court. If it's not posted, fenced, or cultivated, and the landowner (if there is one) hasn't previously told you to leave the property then you cannot be charged with trespassing or trespassing while hunting. If you really want to know call a lawyer.

I own property and would have no issue letting a hunter retrieve wounded game. That being said, land does not have to be posted, all though it should be. It is up to the hunter to determine if they are on private property or not.

[fireweed]

Unfenced Timberland must be conspicuously posted or the owner/agent must "personally communicate" that it is closed.

5) "Enters or remains unlawfully." A person "enters or remains unlawfully" in or upon premises when he or she is not then licensed, invited, or otherwise privileged to so enter or remain.

     A license or privilege to enter or remain in a building which is only partly open to the public is not a license or privilege to enter or remain in that part of a building which is not open to the public. A person who enters or remains upon unimproved and apparently unused land, which is neither fenced nor otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders, does so with license and privilege unless notice against trespass is personally communicated to him or her by the owner of the land or some other authorized person, or unless notice is given by posting in a conspicuous manner. Land that is used for commercial aquaculture or for growing an agricultural crop or crops, other than timber, is not unimproved and apparently unused land if a crop or any other sign of cultivation is clearly visible or if notice is given by posting in a conspicuous manner.


My gripe with any strengthening of these trespassing laws is the affects not on farms or ranches, but on private timberland, which covers millions of acres, is not fenced, cannot be "conspicuously posted", changes companies and management often, closes willy-nilly for "fire danger", has different rules for different people, and tries any Permit-lease-or raffle to make a buck of OUR wildlife, all while enjoying huge property tax breaks beaks because of the public benefits they provide.

[huntingfool7]

Where is the full text on this?

[jess]

ok let me get this straight, if you are cought trespassing while hunting of fishing you loose your hunting and fishing RIGHTS for two years? This law is bullsh*t made up by liberals in olympia... I got a trespass ticket a few years ago on land that was not posted and used to be bosie cascade land and was sold unknown to me.. Do you think i should have lost my hunting and fishing RIGHTS ?

[RifleRidge]

Simple!....KNOW BEFORE YOU GO! Ignorance to the law is no excuse!...

[jess]

what about the tickets that are given out on state or federal land by a warden that does not know the area and has a rancher that has leased grazing rights and think he owns the whole mountain and tells the warden that he does? I see this as more goverment control over the people...

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Funny, the story is about trespassing on private land, but the poaching examples are all on public land.

[BOWHUNTER45]

If you can pay $ 47,000 for the governors tag then I am sure he could give a rats arz on what they charge him with 

[deerslyr]

Simple!....KNOW BEFORE YOU GO! Ignorance to the law is no excuse!...

And theres no such thing as an honest mistake......

[RifleRidge]

Simple!....KNOW BEFORE YOU GO! Ignorance to the law is no excuse!...

And theres no such thing as an honest mistake......

Sadly enough, Its all about revenue!..

[klikboom]

I think trespassing on timber lands for hunting purposes should be less enforced not more! We are just there for the animals not hurting anything and biking 15 miles behind a gate would only be worth it if I could camp (also illegal).   

[JLS]

ok let me get this straight, if you are cought trespassing while hunting of fishing you loose your hunting and fishing RIGHTS for two years? This law is bullsh*t made up by liberals in olympia... I got a trespass ticket a few years ago on land that was not posted and used to be bosie cascade land and was sold unknown to me.. Do you think i should have lost my hunting and fishing RIGHTS ?

The "liberals" in MT have a similar law.  You can lose your privileges there for hunting without landowner permission.  In WA the suspension only applies if you kill an animal.

[bigtex]

ok let me get this straight, if you are cought trespassing while hunting of fishing you loose your hunting and fishing RIGHTS for two years? This law is bullsh*t made up by liberals in olympia... I got a trespass ticket a few years ago on land that was not posted and used to be bosie cascade land and was sold unknown to me.. Do you think i should have lost my hunting and fishing RIGHTS ?

this law does not include fishing, only hunting

[KyleMB123]

     A license or privilege to enter or remain in a building which is only partly open to the public is not a license or privilege to enter or remain in that part of a building which is not open to the public. A person who enters or remains upon unimproved and apparently unused land, which is neither fenced nor otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders, does so with license and privilege unless notice against trespass is personally communicated to him or her by the owner of the land or some other authorized person, or unless notice is given by posting in a conspicuous manner. Land that is used for commercial aquaculture or for growing an agricultural crop or crops, other than timber, is not unimproved and apparently unused land if a crop or any other sign of cultivation is clearly visible or if notice is given by posting in a conspicuous manner.

Thank you for posting this.  As I posted earlier, landowners MUST post or fence their land if it is timber, unimproved, or uncultivated.  My stance has always been that if you don't fence or post you don't care about trespassing.  It should always be up to the landowner to communicate to would-be trespassers where the border of his/her property is located.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Good post.

[Bob33]

     A license or privilege to enter or remain in a building which is only partly open to the public is not a license or privilege to enter or remain in that part of a building which is not open to the public. A person who enters or remains upon unimproved and apparently unused land, which is neither fenced nor otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders, does so with license and privilege unless notice against trespass is personally communicated to him or her by the owner of the land or some other authorized person, or unless notice is given by posting in a conspicuous manner. Land that is used for commercial aquaculture or for growing an agricultural crop or crops, other than timber, is not unimproved and apparently unused land if a crop or any other sign of cultivation is clearly visible or if notice is given by posting in a conspicuous manner.

Thank you for posting this.  As I posted earlier, landowners MUST post or fence their land if it is timber, unimproved, or uncultivated.  My stance has always been that if you don't fence or post you don't care about trespassing.  It should always be up to the landowner to communicate to would-be trespassers where the border of his/her property is located.

I agree with the first part of your post, but not the second. It should always be up to the ethical hunter to understand where boundaries are, posted or not. Legally the trespasser can claim this exemption, but ethically it's no excuse in my mind.

[Special T]

I find this kind of comical... I ran into a couple of Skagit county sherriffs and sked them about a couple of public land bounderies. they gave me the basic lay of the land but said the WDFW officer had the final say... I told them that i wanted to try and stay on the right side of the law that is why i was asking. Well they both laughed and said. "This is fir island, we get 90% of our tresspassing calls from bird watcher ans people taking pics of snow geese and swans!"  I asked why do hunters get a bad rap for it then? The reply was " Who do you think calls the cops every time they see something? Bird watchers!"

I think the intent of this law may be good, but likely isn't well written. BTW the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[Bob33]

Where is the full text on this?

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?Cite=9A.52.010

[csaaphill]

Said this elsewhere on here for the same issue. Especialy in my area, from some of my research over land I know is posted is owned by a lot of LLC company's, not even in our state Oregon for one California for others. If some is kind of local it's in Tri cities or Seattle.
Don't know for sure but with a name  like AG Renaissance NW LLC seems like a anti hunting group to me. This land was feel free to hunt a few years ago now it's posted. Pasco is it's location.
Might get permision, but very *censored*ing doubtful.
I see bank of america owns some land around me just north of this location.
Those that love this are blind to the truth This here my friends is the Anti hunting movement in force don't be fooled.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

I see bank of america owns some land around me just north of this location.
Those that love this are blind to the truth This here my friends is the Anti hunting movement in force don't be fooled.
[/quote]

Yah, good old BOA. I gotta get a new credit card from a different bank. They just reissued my card and it no longer is a Second Amendment Foundation card.

[Special T]

I have a DU bank of america card that they won't let me cancle!  That is an oxy moron right there!