SB 5233 Notice Against Trespass

[Wacenturion]

I agree that I would not want to put my name and contact info on a posting sign, but I disagree with much of Wacenturion's statement. If you own the land and are too lazy to post it, why do you think someone is lazy for not researching the often convoluted land ownership? Also you assume that:

1.) everyone has common sense, we already know they don't
2.) everyone know where and how to research land ownership
3.) everyone has internet at their disposal to do the research
4.) everyone has the gadgets to tell them where that often invisible line exists
5.) that the actual land boundaries are placed correctly, I have found plenty that were not
6.) everyone cares about who owns the land

I Don't disagree that people should take ample care to hunt on land they have permission to do so, but it is not always that easy or clear cut.  I have been in areas where the land is all cut up with public and private properties and few clear boundaries, but some great public lan mixed in. I have been in areas where a good bit of cover is on an edge, that according to my GPS with a small error factor, is public though the fence or posted signs are on the wrong side. I have also been in areas with no marking or boundary between land ownership.   I feel that, as a land owner, there should be a reasonable posting or boundary expectation if you expect the general public to respect "your" property.

Ok.....lets say you are standing in front of some property.
1.  Do you own it.....no
2.  Do you know who owns it...no

Simple, unless you know, don't trespass.  How basic is that.  Can't believe how people think or reason in these situations.  The problem with landowners and the lack of access allowed by them, comes right out of this mindset. 

It's so simple. The only explanation for people not following that is also simple: they have no respect for private landowners.

Exactly.............

[AntlerHound]

It would just make it easier for people to wrongfully post land... Which I see a lot of. (Mostly State).... Also just another excuse to trespass for people who don't pay attention to new laws

[grundy53]

I agree that I would not want to put my name and contact info on a posting sign, but I disagree with much of Wacenturion's statement. If you own the land and are too lazy to post it, why do you think someone is lazy for not researching the often convoluted land ownership? Also you assume that:

1.) everyone has common sense, we already know they don't
2.) everyone know where and how to research land ownership
3.) everyone has internet at their disposal to do the research
4.) everyone has the gadgets to tell them where that often invisible line exists
5.) that the actual land boundaries are placed correctly, I have found plenty that were not
6.) everyone cares about who owns the land

I Don't disagree that people should take ample care to hunt on land they have permission to do so, but it is not always that easy or clear cut.  I have been in areas where the land is all cut up with public and private properties and few clear boundaries, but some great public lan mixed in. I have been in areas where a good bit of cover is on an edge, that according to my GPS with a small error factor, is public though the fence or posted signs are on the wrong side. I have also been in areas with no marking or boundary between land ownership.   I feel that, as a land owner, there should be a reasonable posting or boundary expectation if you expect the general public to respect "your" property.

Ok.....lets say you are standing in front of some property.
1.  Do you own it.....no
2.  Do you know who owns it...no
3.  If you know who owns it and don't have permission

Simple, unless you know or have permission if you do, don't trespass.  How basic is that.  Can't believe how people think or reason in these situations.  The problem with landowners and the lack of access allowed by them, comes right out of this mindset. 

I disagree. There are many instances where you could be on public land in the middle of nowhere and and cross onto private and not even know that there was a property line. Timberland can be very hard to tell. You can go from federal lands to state lands to private lands and have it look exactly the same. I bet if you were on Weyerhaeuser land and you crossed onto my property you would have no clue whatsoever that you did.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[huntnphool]

but it is not always that easy or clear cut.

 But it actually IS that easy nimrod.........easy for honest people that is, not so easy for those that are simply looking for a excuse.

 The "default" position honest people have is UNLESS it's "clear cut", that means you know for a fact either way, the answer is NO!!!!

 In a nutshell, those seeking the truth will obey the law, those seeking excuses break the law.

[Bob33]

I agree that I would not want to put my name and contact info on a posting sign, but I disagree with much of Wacenturion's statement. If you own the land and are too lazy to post it, why do you think someone is lazy for not researching the often convoluted land ownership? Also you assume that:

1.) everyone has common sense, we already know they don't
2.) everyone know where and how to research land ownership
3.) everyone has internet at their disposal to do the research
4.) everyone has the gadgets to tell them where that often invisible line exists
5.) that the actual land boundaries are placed correctly, I have found plenty that were not
6.) everyone cares about who owns the land

I Don't disagree that people should take ample care to hunt on land they have permission to do so, but it is not always that easy or clear cut.  I have been in areas where the land is all cut up with public and private properties and few clear boundaries, but some great public lan mixed in. I have been in areas where a good bit of cover is on an edge, that according to my GPS with a small error factor, is public though the fence or posted signs are on the wrong side. I have also been in areas with no marking or boundary between land ownership.   I feel that, as a land owner, there should be a reasonable posting or boundary expectation if you expect the general public to respect "your" property.

Ok.....lets say you are standing in front of some property.
1.  Do you own it.....no
2.  Do you know who owns it...no
3.  If you know who owns it and don't have permission

Simple, unless you know or have permission if you do, don't trespass.  How basic is that.  Can't believe how people think or reason in these situations.  The problem with landowners and the lack of access allowed by them, comes right out of this mindset. 

I disagree. There are many instances where you could be on public land in the middle of nowhere and and cross onto private and not even know that there was a property line. Timberland can be very hard to tell. You can go from federal lands to state lands to private lands and have it look exactly the same. I bet if you were on Weyerhaeuser land and you crossed onto my property you would have no clue whatsoever that you did.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

I believe that I would. Regardless, I think your situation is slightly different when someone inadvertently crosses onto private they do not have permission to be on. The more obvious one is where someone deliberately accesses property that he doesn't have permission to be on, simply because it's not posted.

[grundy53]

I agree that I would not want to put my name and contact info on a posting sign, but I disagree with much of Wacenturion's statement. If you own the land and are too lazy to post it, why do you think someone is lazy for not researching the often convoluted land ownership? Also you assume that:

1.) everyone has common sense, we already know they don't
2.) everyone know where and how to research land ownership
3.) everyone has internet at their disposal to do the research
4.) everyone has the gadgets to tell them where that often invisible line exists
5.) that the actual land boundaries are placed correctly, I have found plenty that were not
6.) everyone cares about who owns the land

I Don't disagree that people should take ample care to hunt on land they have permission to do so, but it is not always that easy or clear cut.  I have been in areas where the land is all cut up with public and private properties and few clear boundaries, but some great public lan mixed in. I have been in areas where a good bit of cover is on an edge, that according to my GPS with a small error factor, is public though the fence or posted signs are on the wrong side. I have also been in areas with no marking or boundary between land ownership.   I feel that, as a land owner, there should be a reasonable posting or boundary expectation if you expect the general public to respect "your" property.

Ok.....lets say you are standing in front of some property.
1.  Do you own it.....no
2.  Do you know who owns it...no
3.  If you know who owns it and don't have permission

Simple, unless you know or have permission if you do, don't trespass.  How basic is that.  Can't believe how people think or reason in these situations.  The problem with landowners and the lack of access allowed by them, comes right out of this mindset. 

I disagree. There are many instances where you could be on public land in the middle of nowhere and and cross onto private and not even know that there was a property line. Timberland can be very hard to tell. You can go from federal lands to state lands to private lands and have it look exactly the same. I bet if you were on Weyerhaeuser land and you crossed onto my property you would have no clue whatsoever that you did.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

I believe that I would. Regardless, I think your situation is slightly different when someone inadvertently crosses onto private they do not have permission to be on. The more obvious one is where someone deliberately accesses property that he doesn't have permission to be on, simply because it's not posted.

Without a GPS you wouldn't know. Our timber is the same age as the Weyerhaeuser timber on the other side of the property line so it looks like one stand of timber. I know many other examples similar to mine. As well as checker board ownership that most are not aware of because there is no signage and the owners don't care. Basically my thought is if you don't want people on your land then post it.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[Gringo31]

A bit shocked how many people are against this bill.


Good fences make good neighbors.  Making it easier to post (while not even necessary) seems like a no brainer.  If you don't know the details of the land you walk on, you shouldn't be out walking on it.

[headshot5]

Good fences make good neighbors.  Making it easier to post (while not even necessary) seems like a no brainer.  If you don't know the details of the land you walk on, you shouldn't be out walking on it.

 

[Bob33]

I agree that I would not want to put my name and contact info on a posting sign, but I disagree with much of Wacenturion's statement. If you own the land and are too lazy to post it, why do you think someone is lazy for not researching the often convoluted land ownership? Also you assume that:

1.) everyone has common sense, we already know they don't
2.) everyone know where and how to research land ownership
3.) everyone has internet at their disposal to do the research
4.) everyone has the gadgets to tell them where that often invisible line exists
5.) that the actual land boundaries are placed correctly, I have found plenty that were not
6.) everyone cares about who owns the land

I Don't disagree that people should take ample care to hunt on land they have permission to do so, but it is not always that easy or clear cut.  I have been in areas where the land is all cut up with public and private properties and few clear boundaries, but some great public lan mixed in. I have been in areas where a good bit of cover is on an edge, that according to my GPS with a small error factor, is public though the fence or posted signs are on the wrong side. I have also been in areas with no marking or boundary between land ownership.   I feel that, as a land owner, there should be a reasonable posting or boundary expectation if you expect the general public to respect "your" property.

Ok.....lets say you are standing in front of some property.
1.  Do you own it.....no
2.  Do you know who owns it...no
3.  If you know who owns it and don't have permission

Simple, unless you know or have permission if you do, don't trespass.  How basic is that.  Can't believe how people think or reason in these situations.  The problem with landowners and the lack of access allowed by them, comes right out of this mindset. 

I disagree. There are many instances where you could be on public land in the middle of nowhere and and cross onto private and not even know that there was a property line. Timberland can be very hard to tell. You can go from federal lands to state lands to private lands and have it look exactly the same. I bet if you were on Weyerhaeuser land and you crossed onto my property you would have no clue whatsoever that you did.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

I believe that I would. Regardless, I think your situation is slightly different when someone inadvertently crosses onto private they do not have permission to be on. The more obvious one is where someone deliberately accesses property that he doesn't have permission to be on, simply because it's not posted.

Without a GPS you wouldn't know. Our timber is the same age as the Weyerhaeuser timber on the other side of the property line so it looks like one stand of timber. I know many other examples similar to mine. As well as checker board ownership that most are not aware of because there is no signage and the owners don't care. Basically my thought is if you don't want people on your land then post it.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Posting is good, but I still expect that hunters should know where they are. Get a GPS if you're not sure.

[bearpaw]

Well, it's back!

SB 5233 would make a fluorescent orange marking equivalent to a "No Trespassing" sign. The only exception is along access roads which would require a sign.

"Posting in a conspicuous manner" includes posting a sign or signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, indicating that entry is restricted or, if the property is located outside of urban growth areas and incorporated cities or towns, the placement of identifying fluorescent orange paint marks on trees or posts on property.

(a) Identifying fluorescent orange marks must be:
(i)  Vertical lines not less than eight inches in length and not less than one inch in width;
(ii)  Placed so that the bottom of the mark is between three and five feet from the ground; and
(iii)  Placed at locations that are readily visible to any person approaching the property and no more than one hundred feet apart on forest land, as defined in RCW  76.09.020, or one thousand feet apart on land other than forest land.
(b)  A landowner must use signs for posting in a conspicuous manner on access roads.

The bill is sponsored by Senators Sheldon, Dansel, Dammeier, Becker, Schoesler, and Honeyford. All are Republicans except Sheldon, however he caucus' with Republicans.

http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2015-16/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5233.pdf

This works very well in Idaho and Utah. It makes it easier for landowners to post property, the paint can't be removed as easily as signs by trespassers, and the paint is very easy to see. I actually use orange/red paint on posts and trees around some private property we lease in WA and it's far more effective than just signs.

If property in ID or UT isn't legally posted, or fenced, or cultivated, that means it's open to hunt, some landowners want to allow hunting to the public. It's a great system!

[grundy53]

Well, it's back!

SB 5233 would make a fluorescent orange marking equivalent to a "No Trespassing" sign. The only exception is along access roads which would require a sign.

"Posting in a conspicuous manner" includes posting a sign or signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, indicating that entry is restricted or, if the property is located outside of urban growth areas and incorporated cities or towns, the placement of identifying fluorescent orange paint marks on trees or posts on property.

(a) Identifying fluorescent orange marks must be:
(i)  Vertical lines not less than eight inches in length and not less than one inch in width;
(ii)  Placed so that the bottom of the mark is between three and five feet from the ground; and
(iii)  Placed at locations that are readily visible to any person approaching the property and no more than one hundred feet apart on forest land, as defined in RCW  76.09.020, or one thousand feet apart on land other than forest land.
(b)  A landowner must use signs for posting in a conspicuous manner on access roads.

The bill is sponsored by Senators Sheldon, Dansel, Dammeier, Becker, Schoesler, and Honeyford. All are Republicans except Sheldon, however he caucus' with Republicans.

http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2015-16/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5233.pdf

This works very well in Idaho and Utah. It makes it easier for landowners to post property, the paint can't be removed as easily as signs by trespassers, and the paint is very easy to see. I actually use orange/red paint on posts and trees around some private property we lease in WA and it's far more effective than just signs.

If property in ID or UT isn't legally posted, or fenced, or cultivated, that means it's open to hunt, some landowners want to allow hunting to the public. It's a great system!

  I hunt Idaho and I really like how they do it.

[Wacenturion]

Comparing Idaho to Washington is like comparing apples to oranges.  Washington is the smallest state west of the Mississippi with the 2nd largest population.  Idaho has fewer people and far more federal land as well.

Thios visual should make it easy to understand why........

[bearpaw]

Comparing Idaho to Washington is like comparing apples to oranges.  Washington is the smallest state west of the Mississippi with the 2nd largest population.  Idaho has fewer people and far more federal land as well.

Thios visual should make it easy to understand why........

I wasn't trying to say Idaho was more or less populated or had more or less public land, I was simply comparing their system of marking private lands to WA's system, it's really a much better system that serves landowners and hunters better.

[grundy53]

Comparing Idaho to Washington is like comparing apples to oranges.  Washington is the smallest state west of the Mississippi with the 2nd largest population.  Idaho has fewer people and far more federal land as well.

Thios visual should make it easy to understand why........

I wasn't trying to say Idaho was more or less populated or had more or less public land, I was simply comparing their system of marking private lands to WA's system, it's really a much better system that serves landowners and hunters better.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[Bob33]

There are lots and lots of places in Washington where you can hunt without fear of crossing onto public land. There are plenty of tools, including several free ones like WDFW's GoHunt that will provide a general idea of where public land is.

If you wish to hunt in an area that is in close proximity to private land, then you have an obligation to either (a) stay far enough away from the boundary that the odds of trespass are negligible, or (b) take advantage of technology that will allow you to have more precise knowledge of your location and the boundaries.