# No trespassing signs on the weeb



## flydaddy834 (Sep 11, 2007)

so I was wondering I have fished a certain hole on the weeb for over 7 years or so. there r no houses and I have seen a sign from time to time but it usually gets torn down by vandals or something or could someone be putting a sign up to protect their secret hole. I have been approached by fish and game been checked at this hole and the only thing they ever said then was where I parked. So my question without giving out the spot is how can you tell if its reallys private property etc? Isnt there a rule that in order to be private it has to be so many feet by a persons house as long as you travel by river? Can I call fish and game or even the county and ask them about this spot? been up on the weeb the last few weeks nothing to big all browns for me this one is from yesterday have a bunch more but we all know what dinks looks like still fun catching though.


----------



## Al Hansen (Sep 7, 2007)

You might also try the local Sheriffs Dept.


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

You'd have to check with the county and have specific details about the location in order to know for sure.

If it is private, but not properly posted, you can access it and fish it until the landowner or LEO asks you to leave.

From the proc, page 11:

“Properly posted” means that “No Trespassing” signs—or a minimum of 100 square inches of bright yellow, bright orange or fluorescent paint—are displayed at all corners, on fishing streams crossing property lines, and on roads, gates and rights-of-way entering the land. If metal fence posts are used, the entire exterior side must be painted. 

Private land doesn't necessarily need a sign to be off limits either. If it's land that has been cultivated for agricultural use, it doesn't need to be posted.


----------



## kochanut (Jan 10, 2010)

here is another fun little fact that does not involve fishing a river but private property. if there is something marked, like a rock painted yellow, then that by UT state definition is marked. also a fence. if you come across a fence you have come across private property, as LOAH has mentioned.. i dont want to know where you were, but could you at least say if you were between rockport and echo or down below echo? reason i ask is because alot of the family owns a ton of land between coalville and wanship and several miles of river flows there (edit) with easments


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

Hey Koch, I believe the fence must be properly marked. Just because you hop a fence doesn't mean you're trespassing. And a painted rock would have to have 100 sq in of area that was colored to be properly marked.

Technicality, I know, but as far as the above definition is concerned, that's what it would take.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

LOAH said:


> And a painted rock would have to have 100 sq in of area that was colored to be properly marked.


Thats a tiny rock!

surface area = 4*pi*r^2

100 = 4*pi*r^2

r = root( 100 / 4*pi)

r = 2.8209479177387814347403972578039

diameter = 2 *r = 5.64 inches. Not even 6 inches across.

-DallanC


----------



## flydaddy834 (Sep 11, 2007)

wow thanks for the info dudes.

let me try to get this right if it is not painted yellow and the sign just says No Trespassing its in black n white and its on a gate which was opened btw today and I have even drove my car as far back as I could. Anyway if its not marked with yellow or anything else bright for that matter I could still cross... right? 

Now that I think about it all the No Trespassing signs I ever seen arent painted yellow or bright does that mean you can cross on their land or does this pertain to fishing rivers etc?

Thanks again for the info.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

flydaddy834 said:


> let me try to get this right if it is not painted yellow and the sign just says No Trespassing its in black n white and its on a gate which was opened btw today and I have even drove my car as far back as I could. Anyway if its not marked with yellow or anything else bright for that matter I could still cross... right?


Are you trying to be funny! I sure hope so, because your summary of the information couldn't be more wrong and using such assumptions make up a big part of the reason that some landowners feel so much contempt towards fishermen who can't use a thread of common sense. 
When in doubt, check it out. Go to the county's website, I don't know which county that is, but here is Weber County's map that will give all ownership info http://gis.co.weber.ut.us/website/gizmo/viewer.htm. 
Salt Lake County: http://assessor.slco.org/html/maps.html
Summit County: http://maps.summitcounty.org/countymap/
You may have to go from that site once you get the parcel number and then go to the County Treasurer's website, but there is the map to identify the parcel. 
I don't think Morgan County has their's online yet, but most others do.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

DallanC said:


> LOAH said:
> 
> 
> > And a painted rock would have to have 100 sq in of area that was colored to be properly marked.
> ...


??

If a square is 100 square inches it is 10" wide by 10" tall.

If a circle is 100 square inches the diameter would be 11.2837916709".

Fishing should not be complicated.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

> LOAH wrote: If it is private, but not properly posted, you can access it and fish it until the landowner or LEO asks you to leave.


With this reasoning ya'll can go have a picnic in LOAH's back yard until he or an LEO asks you to leave.   (unless it's properly posted or cultivated) :mrgreen:


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

wyogoob said:


> If a square is 100 square inches it is 10" wide by 10" tall.
> 
> If a circle is 100 square inches the diameter would be 11.2837916709".


It was a failed attempt at humor I guess. Rocks are round I used the formula to compute the radius from a sphere, knowing the area. Nothing in the proc says the paint has to be on a flat surface :lol:

-DallanC


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

DallanC said:


> wyogoob said:
> 
> 
> > If a square is 100 square inches it is 10" wide by 10" tall.
> ...


I get it now.


----------



## flydaddy834 (Sep 11, 2007)

Just so Huge29 knows I put this post up because I do not want to be like a person that you described. I take pride in being a stand up guy I do not want to intrude on someones land. I want to treat people the way I would want to be treated and I think trying to seek out information on what is right and wrong is the best thing to do. I mean come on I could easily have crossed the fence and went fishing but did not. Now laws r laws they r there to protect fisherman and land owners. I pay fees like everyone else and I am intitled to fish where the law lets me fish. Now I know up in Wyoming people will put up signs no trespassing etc when its not even their land they just dont want out of towners fishing the good holes. Anyway hope that claifies some stuff for you and maybe you will see I am not out ever to tick someone off or trespass on someones property... thats just not me.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

flydaddy834 said:


> Just so Huge29 knows I put this post up because I do not want to be like a person that you described. I take pride in being a stand up guy I do not want to intrude on someones land. I want to treat people the way I would want to be treated and I think trying to seek out information on what is right and wrong is the best thing to do. I mean come on I could easily have crossed the fence and went fishing but did not. Now laws r laws they r there to protect fisherman and land owners. I pay fees like everyone else and I am intitled to fish where the law lets me fish. Now I know up in Wyoming people will put up signs no trespassing etc when its not even their land they just dont want out of towners fishing the good holes. Dangit.....Hey, I took all of mine down.  Anyway hope that claifies some stuff for you and maybe you will see I am not out ever to tick someone off or trespass on someones property... thats just not me.


----------



## Dagwood (May 12, 2010)

Flydaddy-

In addition to Huge's links, I think you will find this one helpful: http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE23/htm/23_20_001400.htm

I also know of an area that I have fished for a while until a black and white No Trespassing sign suddenly showed up on the gate. That black and white sign does not meet the specifications described in 23-20-14 (1)(d), but it is likely you would still get a ticket then have to hire a lawyer to fight it out in court. Also, at my spot anyhow, that gate opens up to cultivated land which is covered in 23-20-14 (1)(a) (i,ii,iii) and 23-20-14 (2)(a)(i) which states: 
(2) (a) While taking wildlife or engaging in wildlife related activities, a person may not:
(i) without the permission of the owner or person in charge, enter upon privately owned land that is cultivated or properly posted;

So if its cultivated OR properly posted, it is trespassing. Stay out.

Here is a tricky one though. If anyone has insight to this situation I'd love to hear it. I know of a spot where the water flows through cultivated land, then under a public street. So if I park on the side of the road and enter the water from the public street, without going through gates or fences or past any signs at all, is it legal to walk from there, even though it goes through cultivated land? That one has me scratching my head. It's not posted, no fences, no gates. It goes through cultivated land, but I do not need to go through said land to access the water. Ideas?


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

Try asking the property owner.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

Dagwood said:


> Here is a tricky one though. If anyone has insight to this situation I'd love to hear it. I know of a spot where the water flows through cultivated land, then under a public street. So if I park on the side of the road and enter the water from the public street, without going through gates or fences or past any signs at all, is it legal to walk from there, even though it goes through cultivated land? That one has me scratching my head. It's not posted, no fences, no gates. It goes through cultivated land, but I do not need to go through said land to access the water. Ideas?


That's not legal access. Before the most recent law change, the public owned an easement to access stream beds that were privately owned. Thus, the public could access any stream so long as the user kept his feet wet. This is referred to as "wet boot" access.

After the law changed, the public lost its easement to access stream beds that are privately owned. Thus, the public no longer has a right to access the land under the stream that is privately owned. The public still has a right to the water but not to the land underneath the water, which essentially means that your access to the water is meaningless without a boat. You can access the water by floating but the second your boat touches a rock implanted in the stream bed, you are trespassing.

This is a little over simplified because there are slight twists in the law. But this explanation gives a good easy rule to follow: If the stream flows through private land, stay out or float.


----------



## Dagwood (May 12, 2010)

Grandpa D said:


> Try asking the property owner.


Great idea, but there is no house in sight. Maybe with those links Huge provided (or one like them) I will be able to figure out who owns the land and how to contact them. Until then I am curious if I am being smart for not fishing the area, or being paranoid about fishing an area I have the right to fish.


----------



## Dagwood (May 12, 2010)

Dodger said:


> Dagwood said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a tricky one though. If anyone has insight to this situation I'd love to hear it. I know of a spot where the water flows through cultivated land, then under a public street. So if I park on the side of the road and enter the water from the public street, without going through gates or fences or past any signs at all, is it legal to walk from there, even though it goes through cultivated land? That one has me scratching my head. It's not posted, no fences, no gates. It goes through cultivated land, but I do not need to go through said land to access the water. Ideas?
> ...


Thanks for the feedback. It sounds like I was over thinking the whole thing and made the right decision by only fishing right next to the bridge (it was awesome! that's what got me wondering what was downstream  ). Looks like I need to do my homework and figure out who owns that land.


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

bowgy said:


> > LOAH wrote: If it is private, but not properly posted, you can access it and fish it until the landowner or LEO asks you to leave.
> 
> 
> With this reasoning ya'll can go have a picnic in LOAH's back yard until he or an LEO asks you to leave.   (unless it's properly posted or cultivated) :mrgreen:


If it isn't posted, there wouldn't be any way to know it was private.

I'm not saying it's what you _should_ do if you _know_ it's private, but it's not properly posted. Just saying that you can't be cited for being there.

Another technicality, but true.

There are fences all over the place for all sorts of reasons, placed by all sorts of people/agencies. So many that I can't assume anything is private unless it's posted. Obviously, if there's a house behind a fence line, that is private and it would be in poor taste to use the technicalities to fish the land, posted or not.

(And unfortunately, I'm not a 'landowner' at this point. I wouldn't mind a picnic or a barbecue though. Just BYOF&B, folks! :mrgreen: )


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

A reminder, and I'm sorry if this is a little off topic.

In some states, like Wyoming, the land does not have to be posted at all. It's up to the outdoorsman to know where he is at. That includes private and public ground.


----------



## flydaddy834 (Sep 11, 2007)

hey that fishing up in wyoming even the little kids will chase you off the honey holes. there is some fantastic fishing up there I know that. those eyes that follow you while fishing though can make a man nervous. thats a nice piece of information to know that they dont even have to post a sign. Kinda like Texas you get caught on someones land and they can shoot you same goes if a man is sleeping with your wife in your home and you catch him well the law is in your favor there also kinda off subject but funny nontheless.

I am tracking down the land owner of the spot I am curious about I have fished it for a long time like I stated and really enjoy the spot. I am curious though not for the fact that I want to tresspass on land I have no business on but just for know how I wonder how correct LOAH is, if its not posted up correctly can you still get a ticket it is something if true you would win in court but will the law still give you a ticket and make you fight it in court. all of this is really good info and I appreciate the knowldge. dont anyone forget either I am not going to tresspass.


----------



## Dagwood (May 12, 2010)

LOAH said:


> bowgy said:
> 
> 
> > > LOAH wrote: If it is private, but not properly posted, you can access it and fish it until the landowner or LEO asks you to leave.
> ...


I think that is only partially true. If you are just walking through and empty field and it's not 'properly posted' you are ok. However, if the land is cultivated it doesn't need to be posted. That's how I interpret it anyhow. The law states:

23-20-14 (2)(a)(i)
(2) (a) While taking wildlife or engaging in wildlife related activities, a person may not:
(i) without the permission of the owner or person in charge, enter upon privately owned land that is cultivated *or* properly posted;

Information is power 8)


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

wyogoob said:


> A reminder, and I'm sorry if this is a little off topic.
> 
> In some states, like Wyoming, the land does not have to be posted at all. It's up to the outdoorsman to know where he is at. That includes private and public ground.


+1. I wish Utah would implement the same thing. Imagine that, unfettered accountability. :shock:

I don't think anyone purchases property with the intent of letting whomever feels like it, using it. SOme just don't have the time and resources to keep up with posting it and running people off. I spend quite a bit of time posting, running folks off who ignore it and then at the end of it all, wasting tax payer money with law enforcement because people don't know where they are and/or not caring.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

No only are you trespassing if you touch the river bottom, your are if any part of your fly/lure/weight/hair/anything touches bottom. Floating or not. Just ask steve ault on the Provo. I hope the courts decide this mess soon. It will make it a lot easier.


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

Dagwood said:


> I think that is only partially true. If you are just walking through and empty field and it's not 'properly posted' you are ok. However, if the land is cultivated it doesn't need to be posted. That's how I interpret it anyhow. The law states:
> 
> 23-20-14 (2)(a)(i)
> (2) (a) While taking wildlife or engaging in wildlife related activities, a person may not:
> ...


Yeah, I mentioned that about the cultivated land, originally.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

> LOAH wrote: If it isn't posted, there wouldn't be any way to know it was private.
> 
> I'm not saying it's what you should do if you know it's private, but it's not properly posted. Just saying that you can't be cited for being there.


Just messin with ya a little  If I know it is private and I don't have permission, I stay off of it. It is just my way. I would want people to respect my property so I try to respect theirs. Just sayin'.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

martymcfly73 said:


> No only are you trespassing if you touch the river bottom, your are if any part of your fly/lure/weight/hair/anything touches bottom. Floating or not. Just ask steve ault on the Provo. I hope the courts decide this mess soon. It will make it a lot easier.


That's kind of true. It's called "trespassing by chattel," which may or may not be defined in the code, I haven't looked. Any decent lawyer would point out that trespassing by chattel is not regular old vanilla trespass and the code, at least as far as I've seen, doesn't specifically deal with trespass by chattel in a criminal suit. I think you'd be able to bounce that citation pretty easily.

In a civil suit brought by the land owner, he'd have to show damages from your fly/lure/weight/hair/anything hitting his land. He'll be able to get you on civil trespass by chattel but he's only going to get nominal $1 damages.


----------



## flydaddy834 (Sep 11, 2007)

k I am feeling way dumb right now what is cultivated land? land used for cows is that what it means?


----------



## sawsman (Sep 13, 2007)

flydaddy834 said:


> k I am feeling way dumb right now what is cultivated land? land used for cows is that what it means?


From Websters.

Cultivate

: to prepare or prepare and use for the raising of crops; also : to loosen or break up the soil about (growing plants)
2
a : to foster the growth of <cultivate vegetables>


----------



## kochanut (Jan 10, 2010)

answered your question and gave you an alternate access point check your pm's =-)


----------



## Dagwood (May 12, 2010)

flydaddy834 said:


> k I am feeling way dumb right now what is cultivated land? land used for cows is that what it means?


All of this is in that link I posted earlier...

(1) As used in this section:
(a) "Cultivated land" means land which is readily identifiable as:
(i) land whose soil is loosened or broken up for the raising of crops;
(ii) land used for the raising of crops; or
(iii) pasturage which is artificially irrigated.

It's part (iii) that got my spot


----------



## flydaddy834 (Sep 11, 2007)

if thats the definition of cultivated land wouldnt all land be considered that? just sayin :?


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

The basic difference is farm land compared to range land when considering huntable private land.
Cultivated is plowed, planted and irrigated. Range land is not, more like mountain property and desert range.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

bowgy said:


> The basic difference is farm land compared to range land when considering huntable private land.
> Cultivated is plowed, planted and irrigated. Range land is not, more like mountain property and desert range.


I would almost leave it at irrigated, be it flood irrigation or sprinklers, so if there are no sprinklers or the furrows you are most likely ok (again, assuming not posted).


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

flydaddy834 said:


> Just so Huge29 knows I put this post up because I do not want to be like a person that you described. I take pride in being a stand up guy I do not want to intrude on someones land. I want to treat people the way I would want to be treated and I think trying to seek out information on what is right and wrong ...


Sorry, that was worded too strongly. I thought you were trying to be a smart A, but I now see that I misread it and your question was sincere.


----------



## flydaddy834 (Sep 11, 2007)

no worries HUGE29 thanks though for letting me know. I take things totally wrong myself on these dang forums so hard to see what people mean etc etc. I see your down in Price you better get out and do some fishing down there.


----------

