SB 5233 Notice Against Trespass

[grundy53]

Here is an example. I'm sure many of us have spent time in the Swakane. I'm sure many don't know that Weyerhaeuser owns quite a bit of land up there most of the main roads go through Weyerhaeuser property at some point. I would like to hear from those who say " if you don't know or don't get permission then stay out". Were you aware that you went on Weyerhaeuser property? Did you call Weyerhaeuser and ask permission before going on their property?



The white squares are owned by Weyerhaeuser. They include portions of the Entiat ridge road, Roaring ridge road, Tillicum creek road, Dinkelman ridge road as well as many other lesser roads. Have you ever traveled on any of them?

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[Bob33]

Here is an example. I'm sure many of us have spent time in the Swakane. I'm sure many don't know that Weyerhaeuser owns quite a bit of land up there most of the main roads go through Weyerhaeuser property at some point. I would like to hear from those who say " if you don't know or don't get permission then stay out". Were you aware that you went on Weyerhaeuser property? Did you call Weyerhaeuser and ask permission before going on their property?



The white squares are owned by Weyerhaeuser. They include portions of the Entiat ridge road, Roaring ridge road, Tillicum creek road, Dinkelman ridge road as well as many other lesser roads. Have you ever traveled on any of them?

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

I haven't, but I'm not sure what your point is. It sounds like you're saying it's OK to trespass.

[grundy53]

No, I'm saying that unless it's marked it can be impossible to tell if you are crossing a property line. So, if you don't want people on your land then post it. There are many other examples and I would bet most people have been on private land with out knowing it.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[Wacenturion]

If I had to guess, and again, merely my opinion, that the reason the system works well in Idaho is the availibility of lands to access for the general public.  Just that in itself greatly reduces landowner/public conflicts.  With that said, I firmly believe that whatever you would implement is not without the problems we already have.  With the lack of areas to go, trespass increases.

It's already a fact that individuals post public land with no trespassing signs for their own benefit.  Putting up orange markers, painting things, etc is just another way to have these same individuals do the same thing, just using a different method.

I worked with landowners and the hunting public my entire career.  Nothing has changed except the excuse making evolves from one generation to the next.  It comes down to people flat out ignoring the obvious, with a few rare exceptions.  Changes in posting techniques is nothing more than a bandaid on a serious wound. 

I hunted for most of my life and for the life of me I still cannot understand how it is relaxing or fun to not know where you are for sure and be constantly looking over your shoulder.  No thanks, that's not quality recreational time in my opinion.  Have I driven by easy opportunities over the years on land I didn't have permission on with deer and other things just standing there waiting to be killed?  The kind of things many can't resist.  Lots of times.  It was the right thing to do.  It's my ethical standard.  If I'm not absolutely sure, I don't even think about it  Then again, killing something to prove my success is not my thing.

Simple fact is, if you want to educate the hunting public whether young or old, educate them and make sure they follow the laws.  Also make sure they know there is a penalty if you choose otherwise.  Trespassers like poachers steal from you.  In the case of trepass it reduces your opportunity to access private land.   

[bobcat]

The Weyerhaeuser land shown on the map Grundy posted, if someone were to unknowingly walk across from the public land onto the private, would most likely not be considered trespass, since the property lines are probably not posted, and much like Idaho, if property is not posted, fenced, or cultivated, you cannot be charged with tresspassing.

[grundy53]

The Weyerhaeuser land shown on the map Grundy posted, if someone were to unknowingly walk across from the public land onto the private, would most likely not be considered trespass, since the property lines are probably not posted, and much like Idaho, if property is not posted, fenced, or cultivated, you cannot be charged with tresspassing.

Exactly. I guess that's what I've been trying to say. It isn't trespassing unless it's posted, fenced, or cultivated. In other words, there is a a definitive boundary.


Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[Bob33]

The Weyerhaeuser land shown on the map Grundy posted, if someone were to unknowingly walk across from the public land onto the private, would most likely not be considered trespass, since the property lines are probably not posted, and much like Idaho, if property is not posted, fenced, or cultivated, you cannot be charged with tresspassing.

Exactly. I guess that's what I've been trying to say. It isn't trespassing unless it's posted, fenced, or cultivated. In other words, there is a a definitive boundary.


Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Legally it may not be, but I would not do it intentionally and wouldn't encourage anyone else to.

[Wacenturion]

"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!"

Sorry, but that just seems outdated and back******** to me.  I can tell you that would not work in Washington.  Remove  a couple signs before light, enter and hunt, get stopped by the warden who has to now prove it was unlawful because it isn't posted after getting a irate landowner call about someone trespassing.

Might add that it happens all the time now, except the law in Washington is different and allows enforcement to addrss the issue at the time.

This should be inscribed on every hunting or fishing license sold right above your signature block with a small notation that you understand and adhere to the above.

Does private property need to be posted in Washington State in order for trespass rules to be enforced?

No. If the land has indications of private ownership, such as buildings, fences, or signs, you cannot go onto the land without the landowner’s or tenant’s permission, if you go onto land despite seeing or being aware of No Trespassing signs, you can be cited for trespassing. If you trespass on private property that is not posted with signs or fenced, or is only sparsely posted with signs or fenced, and you refuse to leave the property when asked to do so by the property owner, you can be cited for trespass.



.

[grundy53]

The Weyerhaeuser land shown on the map Grundy posted, if someone were to unknowingly walk across from the public land onto the private, would most likely not be considered trespass, since the property lines are probably not posted, and much like Idaho, if property is not posted, fenced, or cultivated, you cannot be charged with tresspassing.

Exactly. I guess that's what I've been trying to say. It isn't trespassing unless it's posted, fenced, or cultivated. In other words, there is a a definitive boundary.


Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

Legally it may not be, but I would not do it intentionally and wouldn't encourage anyone else to.

I think intentionally is the key word. That's why I like how the law is written up. To be charged with trespassing you would pretty much guarantee it was intentional.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[Wacenturion]

The Weyerhaeuser land shown on the map Grundy posted, if someone were to unknowingly walk across from the public land onto the private, would most likely not be considered trespass, since the property lines are probably not posted, and much like Idaho, if property is not posted, fenced, or cultivated, you cannot be charged with tresspassing.

Right in one respect, but I'm sure Weyerhauser probably marks it.  I may be wrong though.

Does private property need to be posted in Washington State in order for trespass rules to be enforced?

No. If the land has indications of private ownership, such as buildings, fences, or signs, you cannot go onto the land without the landowner’s or tenant’s permission, if you go onto land despite seeing or being aware of No Trespassing signs, you can be cited for trespassing. If you trespass on private property that is not posted with signs or fenced, or is only sparsely posted with signs or fenced, and you refuse to leave the property when asked to do so by the property owner, you can be cited for trespass.

[Wacenturion]

The Weyerhaeuser land shown on the map Grundy posted, if someone were to unknowingly walk across from the public land onto the private, would most likely not be considered trespass, since the property lines are probably not posted, and much like Idaho, if property is not posted, fenced, or cultivated, you cannot be charged with tresspassing.

Exactly. I guess that's what I've been trying to say. It isn't trespassing unless it's posted, fenced, or cultivated. In other words, there is a a definitive boundary.


Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

It's still technically trespassing in the example cited, but one can be cited if he or she refuses to leave.

[grundy53]

If you unknowingly/accidentally "trespasses" why would you refuse to leave?

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[Wacenturion]

If you unknowingly/accidentally "trespasses" why would you refuse to leave?

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

I was referring to a specific portion.....

Does private property need to be posted in Washington State in order for trespass rules to be enforced?

No. If the land has indications of private ownership, such as buildings, fences, or signs, you cannot go onto the land without the landowner’s or tenant’s permission, if you go onto land despite seeing or being aware of No Trespassing signs, you can be cited for trespassing. If you trespass on private property that is not posted with signs or fenced, or is only sparsely posted with signs or fenced, and you refuse to leave the property when asked to do so by the property owner, you can be cited for trespass.

Over the years I have seen several examples of people refusing to leave if approached by those who have permission and point out to the ones without, that they are trespassing.  Some get pretty obnoxious.  If you're not the landowner, some personality types take advantage by for lack of a better word bullying.

I'll give you kind of an example of what I'm referring to.  Years ago when I was out hunting ducks in a cornfield covered in snow with a friend who also worked for the old Dept. of Game, there was an individual that was a couple hundred yards away hunting as well.  Might note that the field was open under Feel Free To Hunt.  However it became quite obvious that his shotgun was unplugged.

Like so many of my personal outings back then, I had to now put on my work cap so to speak and address the issue.  When I approached him and identified myself as a Dept. of Game employee and showed him my commission card, he became beligerant and almost threatened to take it out on me if I didn't leave him the **** alone.  Show me your freaking badge of go you know what to yourself.

I hollowered at my friend who I knew carried a badge wallet to come over.  Once he flipped out the badge the guy nearly melted, almost on the brink of tears and apologies.  Funny, he was on the verge of spending the night in the Grant County jail.  Lucky for him he quickly changed his attitude.  I ticketed him and we parted.  So, people can and do strange things.  It happens a lot on trespass disputes.

[grundy53]

If you unknowingly/accidentally "trespasses" why would you refuse to leave?

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

I was referring to a specific portion.....

Does private property need to be posted in Washington State in order for trespass rules to be enforced?

No. If the land has indications of private ownership, such as buildings, fences, or signs, you cannot go onto the land without the landowner’s or tenant’s permission, if you go onto land despite seeing or being aware of No Trespassing signs, you can be cited for trespassing. If you trespass on private property that is not posted with signs or fenced, or is only sparsely posted with signs or fenced, and you refuse to leave the property when asked to do so by the property owner, you can be cited for trespass.

Over the years I have seen several examples of people refusing to leave if approached by those who have permission and point out to the ones without, that they are trespassing.  Some get pretty obnoxious.  If you're not the landowner, some personality types take advantage by for lack of a better word bullying.

I'll give you kind of an example of what I'm referring to.  Years ago when I was out hunting ducks in a cornfield covered in snow with a friend who also worked for the old Dept. of Game, there was an individual that was a couple hundred yards away hunting as well.  Might note that the field was open under Feel Free To Hunt.  However it became quite obvious that his shotgun was unplugged.

Like so many of my personal outings back then, I had to now put on my work cap so to speak and address the issue.  When I approached him and identified myself as a Dept. of Game employee and showed him my commission card, he became beligerant and almost threatened to take it out on me if I didn't leave him the **** alone.  Show me your freaking badge of go you know what to yourself.

I hollowered at my friend who I knew carried a badge wallet to come over.  Once he flipped out the badge the guy nearly melted, almost on the brink of tears and apologies.  Funny, he was on the verge of spending the night in the Grant County jail.  Lucky for him he quickly changed his attitude.  I ticketed him and we parted.  So, people can and do strange things.  It happens a lot on trespass disputes.

I really don't see how this pertains to the discussion. I clearly stated it is trespassing if there is a fence, it's cultivated, or there is signs or you refuse to leave after being asked to.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[Wacenturion]

Maybe I just misunderstood your point, but people do refuse to do what you think might be logical.