Can you hunt on land owned by OPG, or land owned by provence of Ontario Infrastucture?

[greatwhite]

This seems to be more of a Southern Ontario thing. At least where I live we don't seem to really have a problem. I know the farmers in my area could not be bothered to write a letter.

You almost sound annoyed that some landowners don't mind hunters on their properties unless they are charging people money. Things are different here so it seems. Most farmers I know are happy to have responsible hunters on their land. I have a good enough reputation around here that I can get access to almost any property.

Put the onus on the hunter or person to prove that they have a right or permission to be on that parcel of land.
Change the wording in the act to make it clear what trespassing is and what are the consequences for those smart azzes that are fully aware that they are on private property.
Stiffer fines are needed and like mentioned by trimmer license suspension for those repeat offenders.
Have clear and concise directives for police officers and judges to help them do their jobs properly.

And yes Bbd my properties are identified as private property with no trespassing allowed.
I’m presently sitting in my camp on 240 acres situated on 2 lakes and could bore you all night with trespassers stories.
Also sorry, I’m not going to waste my time arguing with someone that says it’s ok to play stupid and trespass on others people property that they worked hard all their life’s to acquire.
Good night, getting up early to work on my properties.

I agree that the FWCA should be changed to have hunters have written permission on their person while hunting on private property other than their own. This is the way it works for the deer hunt on Manitoulin Island if I'm not mistaken. The onus should not be on the landowner to sign property, etc. and under the FWCA there is provision for hunting suspensions when convicted.

[Deer Hunter]

How much clearer do you want the wording to be ??
If you read the act in it's entirety, it is very clear . link; www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-t21/latest/rso-1990-c-t21.html

IMO I shouldn’t have to plant a garden or post a red dot to stop trespassers from entering on my property.

[Deer Hunter]

This seems to be more of a Southern Ontario thing. At least where I live we don't seem to really have a problem. I know the farmers in my area could not be bothered to write a letter.

You almost sound annoyed that some landowners don't mind hunters on their properties unless they are charging people money. Things are different here so it seems. Most farmers I know are happy to have responsible hunters on their land. I have a good enough reputation around here that I can get access to almost any property.

Wow, you are assuming some weird stuff.
Good for you if you have a verbal agreement with landowner. Then it’s not trespassing.

[Bluebulldog]

I’m not going to waste my time arguing with someone that says it’s ok to play stupid and trespass on others people property that they worked hard all their life’s to acquire.

For the record, I never said such a thing.

People come on here and get their panties in a bunch.

Here's the thing. The TPA was not written specifically with Hunters in mind. It was written to protect landowners from incursions onto their properties.

It was written so that an innocent error, would not result in overly punitive measures against someone, say like a group of hikers wandering off the Bruce Trail, onto farmland.

The fact that hunters exploit it is unfortunate, but my posts haven't said it's ok, only responded to the OPs original question from a legal perspective....

[benjhind]

2. What you have posted is clearly misleading. Any farmer, with an active operation or not, doesn't have to fence, nor sign their property for the TPA to be in effect. There would be no confusion as to a workable piece of land vs. a remote section of bush, which is what was referred to by the OP.

I disagree here. I own a chunk of a big woodlot. My land is not "primarily used for agricultural purposes" as I don't farm or own farmland. However, all of my neighbours (who share the same woodlot) are farmers and their parcels all have agricultural land.

Someone entering from the road can access my land if it isn't signed or fenced, that is clear. But where does my property end and the agricultural land begin? The property lines are not fenced. To someone stopping at the road, it all looks like one bush, so how are they to distinguish which pieces are "primarily used for agricultural purposes"?

I think there is plenty of room to argue that a large woodlot accessible from the road could be seen as land not used primarily for agriculture, even if the parcels do encompass some agricultural land. I would advise any farmer who wants to restrict access that they are best to post any access point. The law is clear that they can't walk across the field to enter, but if they enter from a roadway or another property things get murky.

[MarkB]

I do not believe this to be factually correct. But am researching it as we type; for an actual doc that clarifies.
Also note as per Province of Ontario:

Under the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, if you are convicted of giving false notice, you can be fined up to $25,000 and/or receive up to one year in jail.

Yeah, I was going to say ... I would think no way you can walk on an OPG site, even if it isn't properly marked. OPG owns nuclear stations ... lol. And yes, they should be and likely are marked, but a missing sign post does not give the right to trespass.

Besides OPG has many partners on their sites, and those facilities require protection.

Anyhow, I'm glad you followed up with research, not a hip fired response.

[Gilroy]

"Pretty simple".

The TPA isn't written specifically with hunters, or written permission in mind now is it Gilroy? ( Ex LEO, correct?).

Now, if we were to crack open the FWCA and firm up the "Trespass to hunt" criteria.....

That is correct the TPA is not specifically written with hunters in mind.But you did ask "what would the revisions look like". I gave you my answer that written permission would be a good update for the TPA and would be pretty simple.

I agree with the other posters that private land owner,s should not have to post land but that the hunter should do their homework before entering land.Very
little excuse these days with Crown Atlas and so forth.

[MikePal]

The law: why the onus is on the landowner to sign it , if it's not obvious.

Provincial regulation

Every province in Canada has trespass legislation, such as Ontario’s Trespass to Property Act. Only the territories rely on the common law. In some provinces, Privacy Acts, Motor Vehicle Acts, Fish and Wildlife Acts and even All Terrain Vehicle Acts may give a legal right to an owner to prosecute trespassers.

The purpose of any trespass legislation is to give greater control over entry or use of an owner’s or tenant’s premises, to provide penalties and remedies for breaches of the Act, and to facilitate the recreational use of private lands.

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.

[Deer Hunter]

For the record, I never said such a thing.

People come on here and get their panties in a bunch.

Here's the thing. The TPA was not written specifically with Hunters in mind. It was written to protect landowners from incursions onto their properties.

It was written so that an innocent error, would not result in overly punitive measures against someone, say like a group of hikers wandering off the Bruce Trail, onto farmland.

The fact that hunters exploit it is unfortunate, but my posts haven't said it's ok, only responded to the OPs original question from a legal perspective....

OK. I don’t get what it is your trying to accomplish. I can just imagine how a young new hunter will interpret your post?

[trimmer21]

OK. . I can just imagine how a young new hunter will interpret your post?

Really,it's very straight forward for a newbie. If the land is posted or under cultivation,stay off. If you're told to leave private property that's not posted,you do so,if not,you're committing an offense. Pretty simple.