Are hunters really that un educated ?

[mojo stick]

So I had a client call me about hunting upland birds, said he went with an outfitter last year and the outfitter told him if the property isn't marked with no trespassing signs than you can go in and hunt it whenever you want . I had to laugh. I have been in the hunting industry a lot of years and as far as I am concerned if it is private land marked or not you are considered to be trespassing and will be charged if caught , am I wrong ?

[welsh]

The only situation where the outfitter would be correct would be where nothing has been done to improve the land in any way: no crops, no buildings, no nothing. Just bush. And this would not apply to woodlot areas in southern Ontario -- it really only applies up north.

[werner.reiche]

The only situation where the outfitter would be correct would be where nothing has been done to improve the land in any way: no crops, no buildings, no nothing. Just bush. And this would not apply to woodlot areas in southern Ontario -- it really only applies up north.

I don't think the law makes a distinction between up north and southern Ontario.

Generally what the outfitter said is correct - with exceptions for agricultural land - property must be marked no trespassing.

However, that said, the law is badly out of date. I'm not sure why the province hasn't updated it.

[Fox]

I don't think the law makes a distinction between up north and southern Ontario.

Generally what the outfitter said is correct - with exceptions for agricultural land - property must be marked no trespassing.

However, that said, the law is badly out of date. I'm not sure why the province hasn't updated it.

This is what I have read too, if you cross a fence or the land is developed then it is trespassing or it needs to be signed off, either dots (red dots are no trespassing, orange dots are no hunting) or signs.

That being said, if you are kicked off it once and you are shown the property lines then you can be charged if you are back on the property.

[3Wheelerdude]

Straight from the Act :

Prohibition of entry

3. (1) Entry on premises may be prohibited by notice to that effect and entry is prohibited without any notice on premises,
(a) that is a garden, field or other land that is under cultivation, including a lawn, orchard, vineyard and premises on which trees have been planted and have not attained an average height of more than two metres and woodlots on land used primarily for agricultural purposes; or
(b) that is enclosed in a manner that indicates the occupier’s intention to keep persons off the premises or to keep animals on the premises. R.S.O. 1990, c. T.21, s. 3 (1).

Therefore the outfitter is right. It need to be clearly posted if it is not maintained (cultivated,fenced, cut or something that makes it look owned)

[bowj]

I heard one of the guys on DUTV say this when hunting in Saskatchewan. he said they choose to ask permission anyways, but in Canada it has to be posted or you can hunt it. I laughed since he oversimplified the rule (which probably made a whole lot of people think they can do anything they want), but essentially that is the case, if it is an uncultivated woodlot or waterbody etc.

it seems in SWO finding land that meets this criteria would be next to impossible. not to mention it doesn't help landowner/hunter relations if you push these loopholes for your own benefit. just go ask....

[Fox]

I heard one of the guys on DUTV say this when hunting in Saskatchewan. he said they choose to ask permission anyways, but in Canada it has to be posted or you can hunt it. I laughed since he oversimplified the rule (which probably made a whole lot of people think they can do anything they want), but essentially that is the case, if it is an uncultivated woodlot or waterbody etc.

it seems in SWO finding land that meets this criteria would be next to impossible. not to mention it doesn't help landowner/hunter relations if you push these loopholes for your own benefit. just go ask....

My dads place is a thick bush with swamp, he signed it off because people claimed they "did not know"

He has no problem with hunters or whatever, but he wants people to ask as it becomes a liability. If he goes out to drop trees and someone is in a stand that he does not know about or someone is hunting in there when he is during the gun hunt things can get iffy very fast and nobody needs to die over that.

I always ask but I know the law does not specify this.

[mojo stick]

I have contacted the mnr and police over this matter and they stated if you enter land without knowing whether it is private or not you can be charged with trespassing , land does not have to be marked, it helps but it is up to the person entering the land to know there surroundings .
They did say however marking the land does help if someone were to get hurt on the property , this way you cover your own butt . I just was amazed , the land this outfitter was trying to enter was a set of popplers that butts up to a corn field and it is fenced in all the way around , I know the exact property , the outfitter even had a guy Drop him and the clients off so there was no vehicles at the road .
I just wanted to clarify and cover all basis before calling him in this up and coming fall .

[JUDGE]

What they told you is what they believe. Not necessarily the law . Look again at the REGULATIONS.

I have contacted the mnr and police over this matter and they stated if you enter land without knowing whether it is private or not you can be charged with trespassing , land does not have to be marked, it helps but it is up to the person entering the land to know there surroundings .
They did say however marking the land does help if someone were to get hurt on the property , this way you cover your own butt . I just was amazed , the land this outfitter was trying to enter was a set of popplers that butts up to a corn field and it is fenced in all the way around , I know the exact property , the outfitter even had a guy Drop him and the clients off so there was no vehicles at the road .
I just wanted to clarify and cover all basis before calling him in this up and coming fall .

[welsh]

I don't think the law makes a distinction between up north and southern Ontario.

Correct, Werner. It doesn't. But in practical terms, the kind of land you can enter on the assumption it is not private -- unimproved, uncultivated, etc. -- essentially does not exist in southern Ont.

Also, the exception is not just agricultural land. Anything that would make it appear that the land is private would count -- the real point of the rule is that you can only assume the place is not private if there is nothing to suggest otherwise. For that reason, I don't think it really is out of date.