Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 55

Thread: Trespass law

  1. #31

    Default

    maybe Roy, MT is right on the border with ND?

  2. #32

    Default

    I looked...it isn't

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by McFarmer View Post
    For the life of me I canít figure how anyone would think they could go onto private property without permission.
    Which is kind of sad, since America's founding tradition was that you could more or less walk wherever you wanted in this country. People here didn't want to end up like peasants in England who'd had their commons grounds robbed from them and given to aristocrats. Most of the trespass laws we now think of as normal were created during the Jim Crow-era to criminalize black people walking freely around.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by s.davis View Post
    Which is kind of sad, since America's founding tradition was that you could more or less walk wherever you wanted in this country. People here didn't want to end up like peasants in England who'd had their commons grounds robbed from them and given to aristocrats. Most of the trespass laws we now think of as normal were created during the Jim Crow-era to criminalize black people walking freely around.
    I guess we’ll have to disagree on that one.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    162

    Default

    There’s not much to disagree with, because it’s not an opinion, except whether or not you find it sad. When people say, “this used to be a free country”, that’s the kind of thing they mean, even if they don’t know it.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by s.davis View Post
    There’s not much to disagree with, because it’s not an opinion, except whether or not you find it sad. When people say, “this used to be a free country”, that’s the kind of thing they mean, even if they don’t know it.

    Seems a little socialist to me. Private property is just that.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    162

    Default

    Meh, maybe I’m more scared of not being free than of boogeymen like “socialism”. Of course, socialism doesn’t have anything to do with what we were talking about, and of course, this country is “a little socialist” and always has been. But it’s a pretty far cry from saying a person should have the right to walk across a cornfield to arguing that no one should have the right to private property (which is also not what socialism means).

    Of even more relevance is that we are talking about largely agricultural land, in a largely agricultural state (which is ironic, since agriculture as its practiced in the US is a very, very socialist industry), and that the issue is not whether hunters can trespass against landowners wishes, its whether or not landowners in North Dakota should be forced by the government, at the behest of a few large agro-industrial lobbies, to change their culture and long-standing practice of letting people freely hunt on their land.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    166

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by s.davis View Post
    Meh, maybe I’m more scared of not being free than of boogeymen like “socialism”. Of course, socialism doesn’t have anything to do with what we were talking about, and of course, this country is “a little socialist” and always has been. But it’s a pretty far cry from saying a person should have the right to walk across a cornfield to arguing that no one should have the right to private property (which is also not what socialism means).

    Of even more relevance is that we are talking about largely agricultural land, in a largely agricultural state (which is ironic, since agriculture as its practiced in the US is a very, very socialist industry), and that the issue is not whether hunters can trespass against landowners wishes, its whether or not landowners in North Dakota should be forced by the government, at the behest of a few large agro-industrial lobbies, to change their culture and long-standing practice of letting people freely hunt on their land.
    Preach my man

  9. #39

    Default

    Okay some of this is going over my admittedly hard head. As is now much of North Dakota is posted and to be properly posted the landowner's name and contact information has to be visible. What's not posted is not posted because the landowner doesn't care, primarily wheat stubble where I hunt. There are some areas such as draws that aren't tillable and wet spots that hold birds. The big Crp fields are almost all posted, contacting the info on the signs generally gets you a no until after deer season when nobody seems to care. The way I understand it is that the new law will take away those small areas and also the signage with the contact info. Bottom line is there will be less opportunity. Not a lot less, but some. Most landowners in the west do not live on their land, but rather live in town or on another parcel miles away. It's not like farther east where the farmer owns a section and his own house is also on that piece of land. It's just another cut away at open hunting land for the public making way for pay to hunt. For the uninformed ditches in North Dakota are off limits if the adjacent land is posted.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    387

    Default

    Alright, seems I am transferring my Iowa experience to North Dakota and that is not appropriate here. The farming forum I participate in had a discussion and it seems many like the way it is. Or, if they don’t like it the way it is now they don’t think the bill will correct the issues they have with current law.

    A few thoughts from the members:

    “What was initiated by the DAPL protests as a need to re-write our private property trespassing laws has now been spun into a big bill that is primarily focused on hunting access. Being a land owner and a hunter I have concerns about this bill.”


    “I live in a prime waterfowl migration area where we get lots of non resident hunters every year. There's a lot of respectful hunters that come here, but also a bunch of guys who think it's the wild west and our trespass/hunting laws (waterfowl hunters are allowed to drive off trail) give them the right to do whatever they want. We have a lot of trouble with hunters driving off trail and tearing up fields, leaving ruts, etc.”

    “This bill in ND does nothing to stiffen up penalties for trespassing, which in the past has been a big problem with our current laws. Without consequences slob trespassers and hunters will continue on like slobs.”

    “If it isn't obvious already, i'm not in favor of this bill being passed. I don't think it addresses any of the real issues we need to fix and it's only going to drive more of a wedge between land owners and non land owning hunters (something we already have a problem with in this state).”

    “I've been told by a pretty reputable source that one of the main representatives pushing this bill along happens to be a landowner that is in cahoots with a hunting outfitter and leases his land to said outfitter. Coincidence that he's trying to create tougher land access for hunters?”

    “Rutted up fields, rutted up roads, trash being left in piles by fields, broken/damaged decoys being left in fields, holes dug in fields so hunters could lay flatter?, walking in fields with swathed canola (canola growers would know how bad that is), hunting guides posting my land without talking to me, leaving vehicles on road while they walk the slough next to the road - and I need to get buy with farm equipment.”


    “I have had my No Hunting signs taken down by deer hunters. Frustrating.

    I have waterfowl hunters tell me that muddy fields are no problem to them because they have four wheel drive in their vehicles.

    I gave up posting except this past year I put up some hunting signs I got that said "walking hunters welcome" put up near a good area for waterfowl hunting. I got a pile of cheese from a Wisconsin hunter telling how much he appreciated the land being marked to welcome hunters (walking only) since he has seen so many posted areas.”

    “Actually, having it posted doesn't make much difference. I learned a long time ago apparently no one in MN or Wisconsin can read, or at least they sure as hell can't see the no trespassing signs.”

    “ Have had duck hunters drive through soft fields and “it doesn’t matter because your going to work the field anyways”. Good thing I practice no till buddy.

    I have no problem with the guys that ask, they are usually hunting like it should be done imo and putting in the time.”

    “I'm grateful we have all "good" hunters. We don't post our land and every Hunter still asks. They've all been courteous and respectful”


    So I guess maybe I’m more wrong than right in my thinking, just not the way it’s done here. That certainly doesn’t mean what N.D. has isn’t the way it should be for them.

    So I guess I’ll just stay out of it.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •