Running Coyotes and Trespassing

Lol Mike you still enjoy making weak uniformed insults from the safety of behind your computer.About people you don't know.

Hmmm, the OP is a property owner, not an Urban Snowflake as you like, clearly fed up ( not unlike many other landowners). This is hardly the first thread on this specific topic, nor hardly the first thread (not even remotely) on the very clearly growing problem for any one capable of pausing long enough to see ( or past their cataract eyes, hows that for tit for tat shall we)? Heck why not, "snowflake urban dwellers that are cityiots too boot. Well alot of dimwitted country bumpkins........

Landowners turning away hunters more and more. You do know don't you that "antis" are a minority....the vast majority are in the middle, ok with hunting....Do the math...Its rudimentary. Its not the few "Antis" turing more and more guys away.......

Landowners refusing to allow people to use property for snowmobile trails...More and more..

Pretty hilarious really, for a thread about "respect" and why landowners (more and more of them) are getting fed up.
"I would imagieg this is uncommon to rare"
"Its the few that ruin it for the many"

One might have assumed anyone with an ounce of grey matter, the ability to read, or failing that, taking a second to pause, try to figure whats being said, even if someone says "whats your address"

Too funny

And Mike its your kind of attitude that causing landowners to......
Why should they put up with it.
And its not just guys running dogs in winter. ITs this that and the others all year!!!

MP, you let your true feeling slip with the,...... 'ill informed urban dwellers who have a hang up about TRESPASSING on THEIR 1/4 acre'.... comment. I highlighted the words, that matter to me. They have the final say about who and what is on THEIR property not you, or the locals who think they have more rights, because they have been there longer. Maybe if you are upset about what a neighbor allows or does not allow on his property, you should be the one to move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

.What you want to do on your place is your business what we want to do on our place is our business.Seem reasonable to you?

---

My post was directed to Song Dog, he has a grasp on the issue. The fact you don't understand, is probably why you fall outside the category of 'most' people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishermccann

MP, you let your true feeling slip with the,...... 'ill informed urban dwellers who have a hang up about TRESPASSING on THEIR 1/4 acre'.... comment.

---

I didn't let it slip....folks who live in the urban environment have far more angst over their property line and trespassing than rural folks..common knowledge. The mere fact that the city has to have arbitrators on staff to resolve disputes over 3" of yard between neighbours to put a fence borders on the sublime.

Just because you can't grasp the concept that 'most' rural folk don't have an issue with hunters running hounds across their property is probably because you live in a congested environment where tall fences make good neighbours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

Both the shooting of dogs (outside of protecting poultry and livestock) and the theft or destruction of collars are illegal activities. Why is this discussion even being permitted here?

---

An excellent question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werner.reiche

Also, you can lie to cops, but not to a CO - that in itself is an offence.

---

A number of offences can apply to lying to a cop. In particular, making a false statement to police is an offence, based on the assumption that statements will be used in court proceedings. Also, making false claims in an attempt to get charges laid or to prompt an investigation is an offence.

It never ceases to amaze me that people (not you, Werner) who go on and on about personal integrity and taking responsibility suggest that lying to the cops is okay when talk turns to trespassing and trespassers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

A few pictures of damage or injury or at best,video evidence is a slam-dunk in Court.

---

I'm puzzled by how we arrived at the conclusion that the presence of dogs on a property causes damage and injury and therefore justifies shooting dogs.

The circumstances under which a property owner can shoot a dog are limited. Shooting dogs simply for being on your property is illegal, unless you keep livestock on the premises. Any further discussion of shooting dogs veers quickly into the territory where we're talking about shooting dogs and then making up a story to justify it, which as Werner rightly observes, has no place here.

I don't condone people deliberately running dogs on private land without permission. But these discussions quickly get stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welsh

I'm puzzled by how we arrived at the conclusion that the presence of dogs on a property causes damage and injury and therefore justifies shooting dogs.

The circumstances under which a property owner can shoot a dog are limited. Shooting dogs simply for being on your property is illegal, unless you keep livestock on the premises. But these discussions quickly get stupid.

---

Yeah,me too.

Another secondary reason I said "I imagine this is uncommon to rare".

Around here where ten acres might cost $500,000 I sincerely doubt the vast majority of land owners turning people away from their 100 acres are Urban Snowflakes that don't like the smell of manure. In fact there are huge swaths of land between concessions its all farmland.......
/looks towards SW where the OP resides.
Figure it out.

But at the end of the day "if that happens" ( aka your dog gets shot ) no-one to blame but yourself. If the landowner has crossed the line, well LEO will figure that out to. Charged or not

Who let the dogs loose?

Trespassing/Tresspassors Welsh.
Suspect there are a lot of people who don't care about, think it's no big deal, hence lying to leo about it, no big deal either.

Either way, with the amount of crap landowners have to put up with. We see it every fall with the mount game cameras/tree stand stolen, trails being closed and so much more.

"no wonder"

I am a farmer. I am a hunter. I don't mind coyote hunters but am fed up with trespassing

[QUOTE=Ontariofarmer;1016888]I am a farmer. I am a hunter. I don't mind coyote hunters but am fed up with trespassing deer hunters. Ask permission and if it's no no means no I want to hunt my land with my kids. I bought it I own it and you don't. If you want to coyote hunt you are allowed on my land. But stop trespassing in deer season If an urbanite says no hunting and he owns the land he can say no
If you want to change your ability to hunt someone's land buy it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/QUOTE


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MP, people who trespass are law breakers, pretty hard to defend them no mater how big the property involved. People value their 1/4 acre as much as you do your hundreds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishermccann

MP, people who trespass are law breakers, pretty hard to defend them no mater how big the property involved. People value their 1/4 acre as much as you do your hundreds.

---

No one has said otherwise, my comments only clarify that the most rural owners don't get bent when a Hunt Camp runs the dogs during Deer or Yote season. It's a way of life out here and MOST appreciate the efforts, especially when they are hunting predators.

Just in case some of you are not aware, Ontario Trespass laws are a little different;

Quote:

---

The law, in most cases, does not take away an owner's or tenant's right to sue for trespass, but usually grants the government the authority to seek its own sanctions as a way to control this sort of behaviour.

While trespassing is usually defined as the unlawful entry onto the private land of another, it also includes performing an unlawful activity on the land and refusing to leave when told to do so.

In some provinces, such as Ontario, there is a reverse onus provision. In Ontario, a person is presumed to be trespassing if he or she is found in a private garden, field or other land under cultivation, inside lands that are fenced for livestock or cultivation and on lands where notice has been posted. It is important to note that trespass is not presumed in privately owned natural areas if it is not posted as prohibited. This point is in line with the philosophy of encouraging recreational activity on privately held lands.

Offenders may be fined, in some cases up-to several thousand dollars. There are a number of defences available to a person charged under provincial trespass legislation. If there is a fair and reasonable supposition that an accused had a right to be on the land, the person may be acquitted. There is also an implied permission to approach a door of a building unless there is a notice warning people to stay away.

---

So if it's clearly fenced and in use your not permitted to enter without permission. However if you have a large track of bush land and it's not posted, it' presumed to be OK to use it. I drove around this area a few weeks back , took the concession grids roads for about 10km in east/west and 4-6km north/south south, so rough60sq/km. with a buddy looking for farms to hunt. We saw only 2 bush lots that were posted. So assumption is the rest can be used unless told otherwise.

So if you have vacant land that is not clearly in use...then hunters crossing your land are not considered trespassing unless it's been posted or they have been told to stay off.