No Hunting Signs & Proper Verbage

[dogpound]

ElkCanyon,
Perhaps read my post again:
My post was clearly asking you to clarify your Farmer Brown analogy, commenting on your percieved crop damage statement, and I was also asking you why you felt a landowner is required to extend you some courtesy - not making a statement on your ethics, morals or codes of practice.

I could be wrong but it appears you are trying to legislate morality - good luck with that. Landowners are having trouble with hunters contravening actual hunting regulations and the petty trespass act, that is the problem, not what a landowner chooses to do on his/her private property or what type of sign he/she hangs on the fencepost.

You and many others on this board are arguing about the type of sign a landowner should be allowed to erect on his/her land and suggesting that the landowner should also obey those signs - that is absurd.

Suggesting that if you cannot do something on my land then neither can I is absurd and borders on socialism.

You purchased a hunting license and a tag, not the equal rights of a landowner to hunt private land.

Since you do single out the "No Hunting" signs as immoral if a landowner chooses to hunt his own land - you are making the suggestion that you have equal rights on private land which you do not. If this makes you upset I am sorry.

Some landowners provide full access to land, a good portion of landowners manage access. Some landowners prohibit all access. All of these landowners contribute to improving your hunting experience. Should there be more managed access - I think there probably should be.

Crop Damage:
Not sure where you hunt but West of HWY 2 from Calgary to Red Deer is predominately Hay land not crop land. Generally speaking if you see canola or barley it is usually a cover crop between 4 to 6 year cycles of hay. I farm my land and live around people who farm - never have I heard any of them complain about hay/crop damage due to deer. Damage to hay due to deer is minimal and therefore a non-issue in this part of the province.

Is there a problem in these areas from overpopulation of deer - yes I would agree, it is more of an auto insurance issue than a hay/crop damage issue. The problem is probably due to less hunting and reduced access to private land. Why is there less hunting, it could have something to due with less access to private land. Why is there less access to private land - no respect for private land, property, livestock and equipment.

I will say this again - if you see signs posted on land - whatever they read is not necessarily the case.

The signs do reduce unauthorized access, at what percentage I am not sure but it is very noticeable.

My apologies - not sure how to use the fancy quote option yet:
Your Quote:
"My other opinion is this act contributes to alot of poor practices and criminal activity"

Poor practices and criminal activity are the reason hunters do not enjoy more access to private land. I think you will probably agree that those actions are not excusable by the type of sign a landowner chooses to hang on his land nor what he/she chooses to do on that private land.

When hunters finally realize the landowner is taking a huge leap of faith by allowing strangers to walk their backyard with loaded firearms despite the problems we face each year you will find we are being much more reasonable than we probably should be.

The issue is not what sign should landowners put up, the issue is how do we reduce the unauthorized access and criminal activity so hunters can enjoy more authorized managed access to private land.

[bowman077]

Dogpound,

Another great quote. Agree 100%

I know its hard for people to drive by a great hunting land that is posted and see some people hunting it knowing you can't but it is no different then someone driving past your place and seeing you with that big screen TV or fancy new car and knowing they can't just sit down on your couch and watch or grab your keys and drive. I know I am being silly here but the landowners paid for the land as you did with your possesions and I for one am glad for the right of private ownership.

[nekred]

Simple Solution: Post what you mean... After all don't most ranchers/farmers appreciatte strait talk......

the original question was someone asking how to post their land....

If you allow hunting with permission.... post that....

If you do not allow hunting period. Post that...

IMHO I feel that when you take time to post land don't make it ambivelent and make us guess whether or not to bother you the landowner.

As for what you do on your land... not a big issue to me.... You are posting land to provide information to me..... If you yourself hunt it and it is posted no hunting meaning public can't hunt.... Fair enough... the sign tells me I will not get permission to access....

Just my thoughts....

[Waxy]

Originally Posted by bowman077

Dogpound,

Another great quote. Agree 100%

I know its hard for people to drive by a great hunting land that is posted and see some people hunting it knowing you can't but it is no different then someone driving past your place and seeing you with that big screen TV or fancy new car and knowing they can't just sit down on your couch and watch or grab your keys and drive. I know I am being silly here but the landowners paid for the land as you did with your possesions and I for one am glad for the right of private ownership.

I agree it is an oxymoron but I know there is certain things you do in your house that you would never let a stranger do, won't go into specifics, so why can't I hunt on my own property while denying other people? It's my land my rules.

I couldn't disagree with you more. The analogy you're making is totally false.

Owning land does not let you make your own rules on that land (ON EDIT - regarding wildlife). The law is the law, and it applies equally to all.

You can't hunt because you don't own the wildlife, I do, we ALL do. It's equivalent to me saying "My wildlife, my rules." No one's asking permission to hunt your cattle, or to regulate their harvest.

For your analogy to be correct, I would be looking into your window at MY big screen TV and that would be MY car in the driveway. You would be denying me access to MY stuff because it's on your property.

That's the reality of the situation we all deal with. I think if you read my posts, you'll see I have a pretty reasonable approach to that. However, I believe in equality and transparency in the system, thus my proposals regarding the signage issue.

Waxy

[nekred]

Come on guys you are splitting hairs....

For your analogy to be correct, I would be looking into your window at MY big screen TV and that would be MY car in the driveway. You would be denying me access to MY stuff because they it's on your property.

HOLY CRAP I DID NOT REALISE I YOU WERE THE CREATOR!..... You made your wildlife!.....

land is posted for Public information what the public can and can't do....

Does not apply to owners....

Ever see a keep of the grass sign..... Who the heck mows it?... The owner
Ever see a Keep Out sign...... Who put it up?

We all know ownership has its priveleges!....

[Waxy]

Originally Posted by dogpound

You and many others on this board are arguing about the type of sign a landowner should be allowed to erect on his/her land and suggesting that the landowner should also obey those signs - that is absurd.

Absurd? Hardly. Quite frankly, this is not in keeping with your posts so far.

We have already agreed that you don't own the wildlife. You can do whatever you like (within the law of course) regarding your lands and your possessions, and I will support you 100%, but that is NOT the case here.

As I posted above, owning land does not make you exempt from the law. You are still bound to obey all fish and wildlife statutes, not to mention every other aspect of the law.

You are dealing with public property here, not your own, and you are not free to do with it as you please.

Suggesting that if you cannot do something on my land then neither can I is absurd and borders on socialism.

Nonsensical hyperbole.

Wildlife is public property. I'm suggesting that all citizens have equal access to that public property. This is not an issue of property rights, it's an issue of public property.

This isn't a new idea, public access, property rights, and the entire Wildlife Act are based on this.

You purchased a hunting license and a tag, not the equal rights of a landowner to hunt private land.

That's true.

However, that purchase is also an binding agreement to abide by laws set forth by the Wildlife Act, which regulates, when, where and how wildlife (a public resource) may be harvested. Landowners must also purchase tags and agree to abide by those laws when hunting on their own property. Hunting your own private land does not make you exempt of the wildlife laws.

Remember, I'm not demanding, or even asking for, access, I'm merely asking for equality in the application of the law with regard to public property.

Since you do single out the "No Hunting" signs as immoral if a landowner chooses to hunt his own land - you are making the suggestion that you have equal rights on private land which you do not. If this makes you upset I am sorry.

I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT I HAVE EQUAL RIGHTS ON PRIVATE LAND. That's what's known as a "strawman" argument. You're arguing against a claim that I haven't made. I am suggesting that we all have equal rights to wildlife, and it should be enforced as such.

It doesn't make me any more upset than my suggestion makes you.

Crop Damage:
Not sure where you hunt but West of HWY 2 from Calgary to Red Deer is predominately Hay land not crop land. Generally speaking if you see canola or barley it is usually a cover crop between 4 to 6 year cycles of hay. I farm my land and live around people who farm - never have I heard any of them complain about hay/crop damage due to deer. Damage to hay due to deer is minimal and therefore a non-issue in this part of the province.

Is there a problem in these areas from overpopulation of deer - yes I would agree, it is more of an auto insurance issue than a hay/crop damage issue. The problem is probably due to less hunting and reduced access to private land. Why is there less hunting, it could have something to due with less access to private land. Why is there less access to private land - no respect for private land, property, livestock and equipment.

I don't hunt west of HWY 2, I'm a prairie boy. I have seen major overpopulation issues in these areas, mainly driven by harsh winters and unusually high snow falls.

When hunters finally realize the landowner is taking a huge leap of faith by allowing strangers to walk their backyard with loaded firearms despite the problems we face each year you will find we are being much more reasonable than we probably should be.

The issue is not what sign should landowners put up, the issue is how do we reduce the unauthorized access and criminal activity so hunters can enjoy more authorized managed access to private land.

I completely agree that the landowner has far more to lose and far less to gain in the deal.

I obviously disagree on the signage issue.

Waxy

[Waxy]

HOLY CRAP I DID NOT REALISE I YOU WERE THE CREATOR!..... You made your wildlife!.....

Huh, I really wouldn't have expected such a response from you.

Pretty ridiculous, I'm not even sure how to respond.

He didn't make the TV or the car, but we all agree he owns them, what's the difference?

land is posted for Public information what the public can and can't do....

Does not apply to owners....

Ever see a keep of the grass sign..... Who the heck mows it?... The owner
Ever see a Keep Out sign...... Who put it up?

Well, here's hoping that some day it will.

We all know ownership has its priveleges!....

It sure does.

Waxy

[dogpound]

Waxy,

Two Words - Crown Land

You say that like landowners are baiting "your deer" and not allowing them to leave.

Use bowmans analogy referencing the air in your home and we shall see if you still have that stance...or is it because you bought that hunting license & tag and now have the same rights to hunt on private land that the landowner has.

Also seems to be a huge perception that all landowners are hunting their land, which it has been my experience that couldn't be further from the truth. I do not even go outside as often during November for fear of being mistaken.

Hunting is about getting out away from home, exploring new places and comraderie between friends - think about the reasons you hunt. I spent one day on my land hunting deer, no luck, and the novelty wears off really quick, now them pesky coyotes thats another story. If your hunting consisted of screaming kids and wife pestering you to feed the cows - would you enjoy hunting at home? I have fished the dogpound a half dozen times, but I will travel to the Green River in Utah to hook a smaller brown trout - that make sense?

[Waxy]

Originally Posted by dogpound

Waxy,

Two Words - Crown Land

You say that like landowners are baiting "your deer" and not allowing them to leave.

Really? Please show me where I've said that.

Use bowmans analogy referencing the air in your home and we shall see if you still have that stance...or is it because you bought that hunting license & tag and now have the same rights to hunt on private land that the landowner has.

I don't follow. It's air, we all have a right to it. When I put up a sign on my driveway that says "No Breathing of Air on Property", you might have a point. Of course, you'd be able to buy the place for yourself at the estate sale.

Also seems to be a huge perception that all landowners are hunting their land, which it has been my experience that couldn't be further from the truth. I do not even go outside as often during November for fear of being mistaken.

I was under the impression that none, or at least very few, landowners were hunting their land that was posted no hunting. Only this board has opened my eyes to the reality of the situation.

Hunting is about getting out away from home, exploring new places and comraderie between friends - think about the reasons you hunt. I spent one day on my land hunting deer, no luck, and the novelty wears off really quick, now them pesky coyotes thats another story. If your hunting consisted of screaming kids and wife pestering you to feed the cows - would you enjoy hunting at home? I have fished the dogpound a half dozen times, but I will travel to the Green River in Utah to hook a smaller brown trout - that make sense?

Completely, and I couldn't agree more.

Waxy

[dogpound]

Waxy,
If a landowner is hunting animals on his own land without the appropriate license and tags that is illegal and the landowner should be charged as such.

[nekred]

Sorry Waxy got carried away!....

While the wildlife is considered to be held in common.... none of us really "owns" it....The analogy with the TV etc... was way wrong in many ways....just pointed out how ridiculous it really was and then was made even more ridiculous.....wildlife is not a possession.....

owners and general public are totally different things.

To take it to the ridiculous.... Why would you make it complicated.... No Hunting signs would have to be posted as Hunting by Owner only......or No Hunting except for Owner.... How nice would that one be.... talk about rubbing it in your face.... The sign would then read to me... Hunting by owner only...na ne na ne na na.... get your own land...

Owner already knows rules... he is posting for general public.... i would just like to see the signs be meaningful for public....

After all I found that No Hunting may mean Hunting by permission only....

[Waxy]

Originally Posted by nekred

Sorry Waxy got carried away!....

While the wildlife is considered to be held in common.... none of us really "owns" it....The analogy with the TV etc... was way wrong in many ways....just pointed out how ridiculous it really was and then was made even more ridiculous.....wildlife is not a possession.....

LOL, that was basically my point in the first place. The analogy was totally flawed, but I attempted to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear -b asically use the analogy to show the flaw in reasoning.

To take it to the ridiculous.... Why would you make it complicated.... No Hunting signs would have to be posted as Hunting by Owner only......or No Hunting except for Owner.... How nice would that one be.... talk about rubbing it in your face.... The sign would then read to me... Hunting by owner only...na ne na ne na na.... get your own land...

That would be, and is, ridiculous. Sadly, I don't think it's all that far from reality is some cases.

Owner already knows rules... he is posting for general public.... i would just like to see the signs be meaningful for public....

After all I found that No Hunting may mean Hunting by permission only....

Completely agree.

Waxy

[Okotokian]

Signs, signs, everywhere a sign
blocking out the scenery, breaking my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the signs?????

[dogpound]

We can't get people to obey laws and regulations and what people seem to be suggesting is that we define a "moral" way for people to post private land and make them all follow "moral" guidelines as to the actions they perform on their private land - that is a real can of worms to open and I'm here to say it is never going to change.

Is it "moral" for a Landowner to post his/her land with "No Hunting" and hunt the land themselves and not allow others to hunt, some would say yes, some would say no. I would say it is hypocritical unless its occupied land. Is it within their rights to do so - yes.

As far as hunting goes I lean towards "do whatever the hell I want on my own land" (within the law) and manage access. However, as each year goes by I get less friendly towards hunting on my land, things are getting worse. I may decide to restrict access completely 2 or 3 years from now - who knows. Perhaps a bullet hole in my shop just may do it, dead cow etc.. If I completely restrict access one day, I am not going to deprive myself of the right to shoot any animal on my land should I choose to do so.

When the hunting community realizes there is a problem, (and it isn't what's on the signs) they may begin to find ways to mitigate the problems and improve landowner relations in order to gain more access to private land. If you look at trends it is getting worse for hunters not better.

If you are thinking of developing a guideline on how to properly sign your property I am all for it, any amount of publicity on the problem will definately help.

If you think landowners should have to obey these signs when contravening one of the signs is not breaking a law - good luck.

[bowman077]

When I was referencing TV's and Cars it was not an analogy to the deer that live on the land but the land it self. We bought this land and we get to utilize all the perks that come with it just like when you bought that car or TV. As the land owner you have no right to tell anyone they can't shoot a deer when it steps off your property but if it steps on it then of course I have a right to say who can access my land. Just because my land is 160 acres and your city lot is measured in feet make no difference its private property.

[nekred]

Good post DP

The way I see it, it is hard to change the "hunting community" I look after my own actions, make sure they are moral and responsible and in return I get repeat access to private land.

How do we change the hunting community....

Education,
discussion,

penalise bad players.....

But we have some issues there... Who does the education.... we have many volunteer instructors through AHEIA..... These are people who take this stuff to heart and do their part......

Discussion on places like this forum where hunters and landowners can communicate, hunters can communicate with other hiunters... helps reinforce the proper behavior..

penalties... Again we have processes to report... but often we do not want to be bothered because it is rampant and the penalties are very weak....

It all comes down to proper communication and understanding....
Signs play a small part in this.....

obeying them is the bigger issue.......

My dad's theory always was he did not have to worry about the person asking permission to access land.... it was the ones not asking permission.... So I hope you never completely close access to hunters on your land DP. Although that is definitely your choice.

Who knows maybe one day i may be stopping by to ask permission.... I can guarantee that I will not shoot your cows, property vehicles, etc. I will close what I open.... Stay out of the crops... be courteous and respectful, if I see a wire off or a post crooked I will fix, If I see a cow that looks like it is where it should not be... let you know...(by cell if possible) and then try to get it where it should be.....etc... If I see someone else doing something that is not in rules you posted earlier you will know about it along with any other relevant information.

But If land is posted as no hunting prior to the post we would never have met because I would see a no hunting sign and assume landowner did not want to be bugged by me......In fact I probably drove by your place going hunting many times when i lived down South!....

[Waxy]

Originally Posted by dogpound

We can't get people to obey laws and regulations and what people seem to be suggesting is that we define a "moral" way for people to post private land and make them all follow "moral" guidelines as to the actions they perform on their private land - that is a real can of worms to open and I'm here to say it is never going to change.

Is it "moral" for a Landowner to post his/her land with "No Hunting" and hunt the land themselves and not allow others to hunt, some would say yes, some would say no. I would say it is hypocritical unless its occupied land. Is it within their rights to do so - yes.

I'm not sure how you made this into a "moral" issue. Morality has absolutely nothing to do with. It's a simple matter of legality and clarity in the posting of land.

As far as hunting goes I lean towards "do whatever the hell I want on my own land" (within the law) and manage access.

Including immunity from the wildlife act? Or does that fall within the law?

I'm going to assume you mean within the wildlife act.

However, as each year goes by I get less friendly towards hunting on my land, things are getting worse. I may decide to restrict access completely 2 or 3 years from now - who knows. Perhaps a bullet hole in my shop just may do it, dead cow etc.. If I completely restrict access one day, I am not going to deprive myself of the right to shoot any animal on my land should I choose to do so.

Heavily restricting access and outright prohibiting hunting are two different things.

Hunting with Permission Only vs. NO Hunting.

When the hunting community realizes there is a problem, (and it isn't what's on the signs) they may begin to find ways to mitigate the problems and improve landowner relations in order to gain more access to private land. If you look at trends it is getting worse for hunters not better.

I think you're right. I also think the hunting community realizes there is a problem. Unfortunately, there's very little the 99% of us can do about the 1% that are ruining it for us. We can work on increasing hunter education, but it takes increased enforcement of the laws, and I think we all know what the chances of that funding appearing are...

If you are thinking of developing a guideline on how to properly sign your property I am all for it, any amount of publicity on the problem will definately help.

If you think landowners should have to obey these signs when contravening one of the signs is not breaking a law - good luck.

This is exactly what I'm proposing, and others here as well.

I think this thread is pretty darn good evidence that the current system isn't working all that well, there's a lot of confusion and misunderstandings as to exactly what the signage means for everyone involved.

In my opinion, what's required is a simple, straightforward system that defines exactly what the signage means for both hunter and landowner. On top of clearly defining the signs and rules for access, the rules regarding disobeying the signs should also be very clear, and punishment for doing so should be swift and severe. All the signs and rules in world are useless without that.

In my opinion, those steps alone would go a LONG ways towards solving the problems faced by everyone involved.

Waxy

[bowman077]

Now heres a simple solution. Just go ask the landowner no matter what the signs say because I do agree that the landowner may have his own reasons for posting a specific sign. As I have stated before the amount of Trespassers went way down on our land when we switched our "No Hunting without permission" sign to "NO Hunting No Tresspassing". It was if some people think that if landowner would probably give permission then its ok to go on without asking. And I do let a number of people who ask permission to hunt each year.

Again just go ask what is the worst that will happen, they will say no. But we are mostly grown men and women we can take a little rejection.

[dogpound]

Waxy,
Right now it is a moral issue you are debating - there is no law/regulation against posting your land no hunting and hunting it yourself.

If I were to post my land with "No Hunting without Permission", grant no-one permission, and hunt the land myself you are OK with that. How will you ever know who obtains permission to hunt the land. The F&W body is undermanned as it is, lets now have them police who is allowing hunting and who is not - cause that would be most important. Is the government then to get involved with a land registry whereby each hunter will issue the legal land description of the gov't to prove a landowner is letting some people on his/her land. Hunters will then have to issue the landowner a request, probably carbon copy to each landowner they wish to ask. Sounds like nightmare to me.

I think you will find that increased clarity may not be achieved. I also think you may find more landowners prohibiting access altogether.

Owning land does come with special privelages, if you own a home right now you should realize that. Owning land also comes with special hunting privelages, even the government seems to realize that, I can actively hunt and shoot a cougar on my land without a permit - you need to purchase one, and ask for permission to hunt and access my land to harvest that cougar.

[dogpound]

Originally Posted by bowman077

Now heres a simple solution. Just go ask the landowner no matter what the signs say because I do agree that the landowner may have his own reasons for posting a specific sign. As I have stated before the amount of Trespassers went way down on our land when we switched our "No Hunting without permission" sign to "NO Hunting No Tresspassing". It was if some people think that if landowner would probably give permission then its ok to go on without asking. And I do let a number of people who ask permission to hunt each year.

Again just go ask what is the worst that will happen, they will say no. But we are mostly grown men and women we can take a little rejection.

Exactly Bowman,

I have constant phone calls and people stopping by regularly, and yes some of them get permission to hunt. My signs are not deterring the people from asking, it is however significantly reducing the unauthorized access. If the "No Hunting without Permission" thing increases the activity much more & the unauthorized access - I may be inclined to say no hunting at all.

More willing landowners open to access would certainly help the pressure on a place like mine. I would not suggest making thinngs more difficult for us will open up more land to access.

[Waxy]

Originally Posted by dogpound

Waxy,
Right now it is a moral issue you are debating - there is no law/regulation against posting your land no hunting and hunting it yourself.

There is the hypocritical compenent of it for sure, and I will admit that I don't like it (see below). However, beyond that, I disagree for all the reasons I've stated.

I guess we'll leave it at that.

If I were to post my land with "No Hunting without Permission", grant no-one permission, and hunt the land myself you are OK with that.

Yes, as odd as it sounds, I am.

At least I know that the possibility exists of obtaining permission. I also know that even though I'm denied access, others are hunting the land, even if it's only the landowner.

If it's posted No Hunting, then I would know unequivocably that no hunting is occurring on that land, it is strictly off limits. I actually don't mind those signs believe it or not, like I said, I view it as a nature preserve of sorts. I also have far more respect for a landowner that stands by the conviction of not allowing hunting and means what he says.

How will you ever know who obtains permission to hunt the land.

It's not that hard to find out through the grapevine who's hunting where.

Ultimately though, I won't, but I don't really care either when it comes right down to it. My issue isn't with who has access.

The F&W body is undermanned as it is, lets now have them police who is allowing hunting and who is not - cause that would be most important. Is the government then to get involved with a land registry whereby each hunter will issue the legal land description of the gov't to prove a landowner is letting some people on his/her land. Hunters will then have to issue the landowner a request, probably carbon copy to each landowner they wish to ask. Sounds like nightmare to me.

You're arguing with hyperbole. Nothing has to change in terms of how permission is currently granted and enforced. Land owners don't have to jump through any hoops, there is no red tape. There is only one change -

If you hear gun shots and see hunting on land posted No Hunting, it's a no brainer that those people are breaking the law. There's no grey area.

Everything else is unchanged.

So in my opinion the opposite is true, the increased clarity would make their jobs easier, both in minimizing illegal access and making it easier to apprehend, charge, and convict those that do.

I think you will find that increased clarity may not be achieved. I also think you may find more landowners prohibiting access altogether.

That's their perogative, but I think there's a lot of landowners out there that are avid hunters as well, and understand the issues involved. What goes around comes around.

Owning land does come with special privelages, if you own a home right now you should realize that. Owning land also comes with special hunting privelages, even the government seems to realize that, I can actively hunt and shoot a cougar on my land without a permit - you need to purchase one, and ask for permission to hunt and access my land to harvest that cougar.

That's an apples to oranges comparison.

Waxy