# Private property



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

Being a Utah hunting virgin, I've read the regs and know what they state for private property and trespass, but I'm curious what public opinion is on shooting an animal on unposted private property. When we were on the Monroe for a week becoming familiar with the mountain for my wife's upcoming elk hunt, we noticed that most of the private property was open for travel on the roads and some of it was unposted. At this point, we plan on hunting public land only, but what if we saw a monster on unposted private land? Shoot it or not? Interested in input.

Also, do the roads on the Monroe that were open on private land stay open during hunting seasons?


----------



## dadams41 (Jul 9, 2013)

When is your hunt? May have some input for you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

dadams41 - We are headed out tomorrow after work. Hope to get there mid day Thursday and maybe find something Friday to go after Saturday morning. My wife is pretty excited. Should be a lot of fun. PM if you like. Appreciate any input you are willing to give.


----------



## dadams41 (Jul 9, 2013)

Pm sent. All right of way roads should stay open. I personally wouldn't shoot anything on land I know is private, marked or unmarked. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tall Tines (Apr 16, 2017)

If they don't want you on their property, they should mark it.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

It was in the stream access battles at the legislature that the "cultivated" language was added to "properly posted" in the wildlife code under trespassing. It wasn't enough to screw over the public by removing thousands of miles of public water from public access, but they needed to reduce a landowners responsibility to actually post their property as well. 

If it were me, I'd be hesitant to hunt property I knew was private. That said, for it to be trespassing, there has to be some notice to the public. Expecting everyone to have OnX maps is not sufficient.


----------



## High Desert Elk (Aug 21, 2012)

Of course, game officers will tell you "it is the hunters responsibility to know where they are at all times"...


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

If it is obvious that it is private leave it alone. 

For me personally I would stay away from any of the private on the mountain which is mostly on the northern end of it. There is a lot of country to hunt on that mountain that is public. 

As for knowing where you are at all times, it is the hunters responsibility to know, and if you don't want to get into any disputes with a property owner and the sheriff then knowing is better than not knowing. Colorado has been this way for a long time even before the chips came out to let you know. And in Colorado the land does not need to be posted or marked in any way. You have to know


----------



## SidVicious (Aug 19, 2014)

I don't think I would be comfortable hunting private land, even if it wasn't posted. The feeling of having to watch my back and worry if there was going to be repercussions would take away from the hunt to me. I'd rather know I was legit, and relax and just enjoy the hunt.


----------



## muleydeermaniac (Jan 17, 2008)

I keep my property well posted and people still trespass. I kick a few off every deer hunt. I am more than willing to accommodate and have taken parents up with their kids so they can have a descent chance at a first buck. That being said, all of the property around mine is private and not posted. The owners get upset when people are on their land and the sheriff sides with the landowners even though it isn't marked. But this is up in Morgan where 95% of the land is private and everyone knows it.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Critter said:


> And in Colorado the land does not need to be posted or marked in any way. You have to know


^ This is NOT the law in Utah, however. Utah requires notice by the property owner.

Here is what the law says under the wildlife code, decide for yourself how you want to proceed:

Utah Code 23-20-14: 
(2)	
(a)	While taking wildlife or engaging in wildlife related activities, a person 
may not:
(i)	without permission, enter upon privately owned land that is 
cultivated or properly posted;
(ii)	enter or remain on privately owned land if the person has notice 
to not enter or remain on the privately owned land; or
(iii)	obstruct any entrance or exit to private property.

(b)	A person has notice to not enter or remain on privately owned land if:
(i)	the person is directed to not enter or remain on the land by:
(A)	the owner of the land;
(B)	the owner's employee; or
(C)	a person with apparent authority to act for the owner; or
(ii)	the land is fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner that a 
reasonable person would recognize as intended to exclude 
intruders.

Utah Code also has other trespassing provisions that could be applicable. Here are a couple links to those:

Criminal Trespass: 
https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapter6/76-6-S206.html?v=C76-6-S206_2017050920170509

Criminal Tresspass on Agriculture Land or Range Land 
https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapter6/76-6-S206.3.html?v=C76-6-S206.3_1800010118000101


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

High Desert Elk said:


> Of course, game officers will tell you "it is the hunters responsibility to know where they are at all times"...


Actually I had a long convo with a CO just last year during the general year. After he checked our tags/licenses and thanked us, I brought up this same concern. I made this same complaint to him about an area my family hunts. Lots of private but much of it un-posted with the land owners not even caring and in other states.

He said the law requires the land to either be posted or "cultivated" like mentioned above. So if the land is not being used for crops, irrigated has buildings, etc. along with not being posted, you can legally hunt that.

He stated it's the land owners responsibility to keep you off their property if it is un-cultivated.


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

A bunch of interesting viewpoints. Public/private property issues can definitely be a long and interesting topic.

Let me ask the question a different way, as I really wasn't trying to start a discussion on the law/opinion of public/private land, I was more interested in just what people would do.

If you saw a 400"+ bull on unposted private property, would you take a shot?

As someone stated earlier, the worry of possibly having a hassle with an owner or the law enforcement would really make me think twice. I don't think I would tell my wife to take a shot, I don't think it would be worth messing with. BUT, until we are actually in this situation, who knows what we would really do. Would love to test the theory though, as it would be pretty cool to actually see a bull that size! 

On the bright side, there is a ton of beautiful public land on the Monroe from what we've seen with fantastic hunting. My wife is excited to get out there.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

mrkrik said:


> Being a Utah hunting virgin, I've read the regs and know what they state for private property and trespass, but I'm curious what public opinion is on shooting an animal on unposted private property. When we were on the Monroe for a week becoming familiar with the mountain for my wife's upcoming elk hunt, we noticed that most of the private property was open for travel on the roads and some of it was unposted. At this point, we plan on hunting public land only, but* what if we saw a monster on unposted private land? Shoot it or not? * Interested in input.
> 
> Also, do the roads on the Monroe that were open on private land stay open during hunting seasons?


Not!


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

It seemed to me that most private on the Monroe was marked pretty well. The exception being some cabins maybe close to the road. Those would fall under the safe distance rule most likely anyway.

It never hurts to have a map or one of the mapping services handy when in doubt. It is not entirely unheard of for people to mark their property where it is convenient not necessarily where the actual property line is.


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

bowgy said:


> Not!


Short and to the point. I like it!


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

Oh and to make it more confusing not all fences indicate private property. There are a ton of fences out there that simply separate grazing allotments.


----------



## kodoz (Nov 4, 2016)

This has been one of the biggest planning challenges for hunting in WY. There it's the hunter's responsibility for knowing which lands *and* roads are public. Land isn't too hard--that info is available free from WGF and the county assessor. The roads are a PITA to figure out. BLM maps, if they are available for your area, on the Avenza maps for free or a few bucks (naturally my area was in the corner of 4 maps...) indicate roads that cross private property but have a public right of way. The rest of them, I guess I'll just have to see when I get there. Fences and gates sure don't seem to be an indicator either. 

On the positive side, I just happened to check back on the WGF site last week and they posted a bunch of HMAs that opened up huge chunks of land and roads! Wish I'd known that when I was applying for permits, but now it's a super bonus.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

mrkrik said:


> If you saw a 400"+ bull on unposted private property, would you take a shot?


Asked that simply, my simple answer is likely yes. I'd take a shot.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

While I prefer to hunt public lands, I would hunt private range lands that are not posted. If the landowner asked me to leave, I would. Growing up hunting and ranching in Utah, I know many ranchers who allow people to hunt their lands without permission. Unfortunately, a lot of private has been posted because of CWMUs, leases, and public abuse. We will lose more accessible private lands if people continue to be disrespectful. It is all about respecting the land- be it private or public.


----------



## maverick9465 (Nov 21, 2016)

I'm a Utah/public lands newbie too. I've found the OnX Hunt Map app to be hugely helpful. It clearly shows where you are. Like others have said, I'd be very hesitant to shoot anything that I wasn't 100 percent sure was on public land.


----------



## plottrunner (Apr 3, 2008)

It's called private property for a reason. Would you like it if someone used your driveway to change their oil or used your lawn to have a BBQ? If it's private, stay off it whether it's posted or not. There is plenty of Forest Service, State Land Trust and BLM in this state for those without private property. If your tag is composed mainly of private property and you don't own property there, quit putting in for that tag.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Tall Tines said:


> If they don't want you on their property, they should mark it.


How about if it ain't yours keep off it. Unless of course you don't mind me coming camp out in your front yard or back yard and using your bbq grill as I please and taking a crap in your yard when I need to relieve myself. But I suppose you have your property marked to keep out in the front, back and on the sides...right?


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

I apologize if this thread is going down the wrong path. I really didn't intend it to be about property rights as that can be a very heated topic.

Looking back at my original post I should have put my question about road access first. That was really my main concern as we were quite surprised when we were out there in July that we had road travel privileges through most of the private sections. Really just wondering if those were open all the time.

Then I was curious on peoples input on what they would do if they saw a monster bull on unposted private land while passing through. If it was legal, would they shoot it? I was just curious on peoples input. That should have been the second question. I'll be honest, I don't think I would do it, but if I ever see a 400" bull in this situation, what will I do? Who can really say with certainty until it happens? It's kind of like criticizing Tiger Woods for his indiscretions. Easy to do when I've never had anyone interested in me other than my wife since I've been married!


----------



## muleydeermaniac (Jan 17, 2008)

The road going into my property is only accessible to those who have land beyond the gate. I don't know if this is how it is everywhere but I would make sure before going through an unlocked gate. As for shooting a bull I know is on private land. Even if it is unmarked I would not do it. I have horrible luck and would end up on the short end of the rope. And I do not want my kids learning things like this as it can lead to other things that are in a gray area of the law.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

LostLouisianian said:


> How about if it ain't yours keep off it. Unless of course you don't mind me coming camp out in your front yard or back yard and using your bbq grill as I please and taking a crap in your yard when I need to relieve myself. But I suppose you have your property marked to keep out in the front, back and on the sides...right?


This is a pretty poor analogy. The law is pretty clear on all this stuff. It's also clear that if it is not cultivated, it must be marked as private. I'm not sure how much time you spend out on national forest land, but there is quite a bit of private property mixed in throughout in many places. If it is not marked, how would anyone know they are not allowed there unless they are taking survey equipment and a professional along with them?


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

mrkrik said:


> Looking back at my original post I should have put my question about road access first. That was really my main concern as we were quite surprised when we were out there in July that we had road travel privileges through most of the private sections. Really just wondering if those were open all the time.


The road up out of Greenwitch and through the private property will be open until the snows close it. That is unless there is now a gate on it that I don't know about. I haven't been that way in a number of years.


----------



## plottrunner (Apr 3, 2008)

Vanilla said:


> This is a pretty poor analogy. The law is pretty clear on all this stuff. It's also clear that if it is not cultivated, it must be marked as private. I'm not sure how much time you spend out on national forest land, but there is quite a bit of private property mixed in throughout in many places. If it is not marked, how would anyone know they are not allowed there unless they are taking survey equipment and a professional along with them?


No, it's a perfect analogy. It is your responsibility to know where you are at all times when you are hunting. If you shoot a deer in a national park and try to claim ignorance as an excuse because the boundary wasn't clearly marked, you will lose your case. Same if you are hunting near a state line. It is your responsibility as a hunter to always know where you are at. As far as road access, many county roads have a right away through private property but that does not mean you can shoot animals that are next to the road. It means you can drive down the road and that is it....


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

plottrunner said:


> No, it's a perfect analogy. It is your responsibility to know where you are at all times when you are hunting. If you shoot a deer in a national park and try to claim ignorance as an excuse because the boundary wasn't clearly marked, you will lose your case. Same if you are hunting near a state line. It is your responsibility as a hunter to always know where you are at. As far as road access, many county roads have a right away through private property but that does not mean you can shoot animals that are next to the road. It means you can drive down the road and that is it....


Yes, but the law does state private property is required to be posted. That's the law. I have 50 acres in the middle of the state's largest elk herd.

You can gauranfreakintee I keep that posted, every 100 ft, every side of the property. Follow the law, it needs to be posted. It's pretty simple and I'm not sure why you are arguing against it.


----------



## plottrunner (Apr 3, 2008)

I'm not arguing against the law, just making the point that private property is just that private, we post ours as well as the law requires but I still spend half my time during the hunts kicking people off that can understand what a sign means. Their argument is that the road is public. The county road cuts right through the middle of our property and I get sick of joe q public thinking they can hunt it just because the road goes through it... Labor day weekend there was a group of 20+ people that had drove down our road and were driving their razors all over one of our meadows... They had to drive past a No Trespassing sign to get to where they set their pick nick up. Wouldn't it piss you off bowhunter if people drove by your signs and used your 50 acres?


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

plottrunner said:


> Wouldn't it piss you off bowhunter if people drove by your signs and used your 50 acres?


Absolutely!


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

plottrunner said:


> I'm not arguing against the law, just making the point that private property is just that private, we post ours as well as the law requires but I still spend half my time during the hunts kicking people off that can understand what a sign means. Their argument is that the road is public. The county road cuts right through the middle of our property and I get sick of joe q public thinking they can hunt it just because the road goes through it... Labor day weekend there was a group of 20+ people that had drove down our road and were driving their razors all over one of our meadows... They had to drive past a No Trespassing sign to get to where they set their pick nick up. Wouldn't it piss you off bowhunter if people drove by your signs and used your 50 acres?


Unfortunately this is the real problem... people that have no respect for others and property whether it is posted legally or not. For these people, it doesn't matter what the law is, they just don't care for some reason. I am also a property owner and have seen people intentionally tear down signs. I feel for you in your situation. Personally, if I leave property unposted, I don't have a problem with people that follow the law and are responsible and respectful. But, sometimes it seems like this is the minority unfortunately. Most people I know that post their property have done so because of incidents like this.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

We post our ranch too, and at times have to deal with illegal trespassers. But that is apples and oranges to using open private lands. One is posted private and the other is not. 

I know of many areas in the state where hundreds of people hunt and it is private. Yet the landowners don't care if people hunt it. Just 25 years ago there were tens of thousands of acres along the Wasatch Front- all private- all open to hunting. Back when people respected the land and the land owner respected the people. Now there are subdivisions and annexations which have changed the use of much of it. Other lands changed hands and the new owners have posted it, while others have posted their lands because of vandalism and disrespect from users. Yet there are still many areas which remain private and open to hunt. A friend of mine has land out in the middle of no-where in Utah, thousands of acres, and he does not care if people respectfully use it. That whole respect thing can go both ways..... 

.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

plottrunner said:


> No, it's a perfect analogy.


Except for that it isn't.



plottrunner said:


> It is your responsibility to know where you are at all times when you are hunting.


Except for by law, it's not.



plottrunner said:


> If you shoot a deer in a national park and try to claim ignorance as an excuse because the boundary wasn't clearly marked, you will lose your case. Same if you are hunting near a state line.


Apples to oranges. You're talking unit boundary lines, not public vs private property lines. The law distinguishes between these two things, I do too.



plottrunner said:


> As far as road access, many county roads have a right away through private property but that does not mean you can shoot animals that are next to the road. It means you can drive down the road and that is it....


Agreed. That is what the law says too when that property is properly posted.

Not trying to be flippant with the topic or sound like a jerk, but what the law says is what rules, not what we try and impose upon other people through our own ethics and morals. When it comes to hunting private property in Utah, if it is properly posted, cultivated, or you receive notice to leave, you can't hunt it without written permission. If it is none of the above, it is open for hunting.

If people are trespassing on land that under the law they should not be there, then they should be prosecuted. But we can't start enforcing things against society that are not against the law.


----------



## KRH (Jul 27, 2015)

Forget what the rules say, it's 100% unethical to hunt on property you KNOW is private. If you end up hunting private without your knowledge that is not marked, that's a different story. As soon as hunters start acting unethically we lose opportunity. We are a small minority as far as policy making.

I'm not trying to sound insensitive, but it's a rifle hunt on a top level limited entry unit during the rut. I know a paraplegic that was able to take a nice bull on Monroe on public land during this hunt. Just do yourself and all hunters a favor and stick to that.


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

KRH said:


> Forget what the rules say, it's 100% unethical to hunt on property you KNOW is private. If you end up hunting private without your knowledge that is not marked, that's a different story. As soon as hunters start acting unethically we lose opportunity. We are a small minority as far as policy making.
> 
> I'm not trying to sound insensitive, but it's a rifle hunt on a pretty top level limited entry unit during the rut. I know a paraplegic that was able to take a nice bull on Monroe on public land during this hunt. Just stick to that.


I'm also not trying to sound insensitive, as we have no plans of hunting private land during my wife's hunt. But saying it is 100% unethical, is a pretty bold statement. Like Vanilla states above, if it is legal by the law and the owner chooses not to post it, and the person is responsible and respectful, how is it unethical? Not to be a smart butt, but are you the official ethics god? Who decides that? That is the problem with so called ethics. Everyone thinks theirs are the right ones.


----------



## plottrunner (Apr 3, 2008)

Vanilla, can you pm me your personal address you too mrkrik, I need a place to hold a party next week as well as to dump my black water tanks in my rv.... Thanks in advance. Especially since you probably don't have your yards posted...


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

plottrunner said:


> Vanilla, can you pm me your personal address you too mrkrik, I need a place to hold a party next week as well as to dump my black water tanks in my rv.... Thanks in advance. Especially since you probably don't have your yards posted...


Ouch. So much for a civil discussion.

On a side note... does your poop stink?


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

plottrunner I too have property with a county right of way through it so I feel your pain. I can't count the times I've had to clean up somebody's pile of crap just so i could unlock my gate without stepping in it. And both sides of the road are well posted. I'm sure they do it out of spite.
I myself don't like confrontations particularly when more than likely the other side is armed and feel that if I really piss them off they will just come back another day when I'm not there and do some serious damage.
This goes on continuously all summer and into the hunts. I will admit it has improved since option 2. I have not had anybody set up their camp in my driveway since they capped the numbers.
And for what it's worth I certainly hope that you and Lost can tell that my property in the city is cultivated and respect it. Can't say much for the dog walkers that don't clean up their mess either but it is what it is.


----------



## plottrunner (Apr 3, 2008)

mrkrik said:


> Ouch. So much for a civil discussion.
> 
> On a side note... does your poop stink?


Very much so :grin::grin::grin::grin:


----------



## KRH (Jul 27, 2015)

I'm certainly no God of any kind. However, using something that is not yours without permission is wrong, there's no gray area there. Sounds like you agree with that because you have no plans on hunting private.

This is a great unit with plenty of public bulls. During the rut with a rifle you should be able to achieve success. Wish you the best of luck



mrkrik said:


> I'm also not trying to sound insensitive, as we have no plans of hunting private land during my wife's hunt. But saying it is 100% unethical, is a pretty bold statement. Like Vanilla states above, if it is legal by the law and the owner chooses not to post it, and the person is responsible and respectful, how is it unethical? Not to be a smart butt, but are you the official ethics god? Who decides that? That is the problem with so called ethics. Everyone thinks theirs are the right ones.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

mrkrik said:


> Then I was curious on peoples input on what they would do if they saw a monster bull on unposted private land while passing through. If it was legal, would they shoot it? I was just curious on peoples input. That should have been the second question. I'll be honest, I don't think I would do it, but if I ever see a 400" bull in this situation, what will I do?


I would love to say my high horse principles about private land being private would prevail . . . but I know my brain and I know that private land needs to be cultivated or posted and that technically if the land wasn't properly posted and wasn't cultivated in any way and I had a valid tag, in season, and a 400" (heck, even a 350-360" would likely tip the scales) I'd be pulling over, stepping off the drivable surface of the road and trying to punch my tag.

The law works both ways, and in Utah there is responsibility on both landowner and hunter. We had a couple hundred acres in the 9 mile unit at the top of Indian Canyon, fenced, posted, painted, and marked it religiously but that never stopped anybody it seemed. Every single time in the 18 years we owned it (sold it last year) that we visited it was clear that somebody else had been there recently. Sometimes we caught them and kicked them out, other times just had things stolen/broken. If we hadn't posted it, we wouldn't have been so indignant, but since we did there was no excuses for the trespassers.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

plottrunner said:


> Vanilla, can you pm me your personal address you too mrkrik, I need a place to hold a party next week as well as to dump my black water tanks in my rv.... Thanks in advance. Especially since you probably don't have your yards posted...


This is why we can't have nice things around here. Complete red herring that has nothing to do with the discussion. I'm sure you think you're making a great, witty point. But you're not. You clearly don't understand the law. I'll stick to what the books say.

You're welcome to come over any time. I'll put some meat on the smoker and then educate you on Utah's trespassing laws. Free of charge! Who knows, we might even become friends?


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

KRH said:


> Forget what the rules say, it's 100% unethical to hunt on property you KNOW is private.


I 100% disagree.

Which one of us is 100% correct, and which one of us is 100% incorrect?


----------



## plottrunner (Apr 3, 2008)

Vanilla said:


> This is why we can't have nice things around here. Complete red herring that has nothing to do with the discussion. I'm sure you think you're making a great, witty point. But you're not. You clearly don't understand the law. I'll stick to what the books say.
> 
> You're welcome to come over any time. I'll put some meat on the smoker and then educate you on Utah's trespassing laws. Free of charge! Who knows, we might even become friends?


I understand the law and that is why our property is posted as per the law requires. I just hate it when even though we post, people looking to skirt gray area's still try to push the boundaries. I'm not trying to be witty, just making a point. This is why landowners, including the ones that hunt and fish, hate hunters and fishermen. I have had guys tell me they can hunt my property because they have a tag issued by the Department of Wildlife Resources and because it was issued by the state, they have the right to hunt anywhere in that unit. Now I know that you know they are ignorant to the law but it still gets frustrating and old. Last year during the Muzzleloader, a road hunter shot a deer on our property right next to the road and right next to a No Trespassing sign. He made a piss poor shot and hit it in the hind quarter. While reloading, he saw us coming and drove off like he had just robbed a bank. We, not knowing really what was going on, did not get a license plate. As we drove up to where he was in a side by side, we noticed a deer standing on the side of the hill with blood all over its hind. It was a decent 4 point. I finished it off and used my tag on it as it wasn't dead but it ended my hunt and the guy was trespassing.


----------



## shaner (Nov 30, 2007)

You guys can't camp in my front yard, I cultivate it each week with a 21" rotary mower.


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

plottrunner said:


> I understand the law and that is why our property is posted as per the law requires. I just hate it when even though we post, people looking to skirt gray area's still try to push the boundaries. I'm not trying to be witty, just making a point. This is why landowners, including the ones that hunt and fish, hate hunters and fishermen. I have had guys tell me they can hunt my property because they have a tag issued by the Department of Wildlife Resources and because it was issued by the state, they have the right to hunt anywhere in that unit. Now I know that you know they are ignorant to the law but it still gets frustrating and old. Last year during the Muzzleloader, a road hunter shot a deer on our property right next to the road and right next to a No Trespassing sign. He made a piss poor shot and hit it in the hind quarter. While reloading, he saw us coming and drove off like he had just robbed a bank. We, not knowing really what was going on, did not get a license plate. As we drove up to where he was in a side by side, we noticed a deer standing on the side of the hill with blood all over its hind. It was a decent 4 point. I finished it off and used my tag on it as it wasn't dead but it ended my hunt and the guy was trespassing.


Plottrunner -

I'm on my way out the door to the great state of Utah for my wife's hunt, so this will be my last post for awhile.

I fully understand your points. I hate people that do what you described. But in defense of myself, I never once in this thread stuck up for any illegal activity, I even have stated that I have no intention on hunting legal to hunt private land. I have just sided with Vanilla in stating that there is a difference between personal opinion and what the law says. I even stated that I'm not sure I could pull the trigger on a monster in a legal situation, but as I tell my daughter all the time, it's not what you say, it's what you do. I admit I may be in the same boat as Johnnycake and have a hard time sticking to it.

That being said, dumping your black tank on my lawn is one thing, but having a party on my property without inviting me is unacceptable. I hope when all is said and done you can see we have a lot more in common than not, and hopefully you would invite me for some of the BBQ at least. Later.

Mike

By the way, anyone that's hunting... have fun, but most importantly stay safe and make it back to the family in one piece.


----------



## dadams41 (Jul 9, 2013)

What a topic. I don't have any private ground so while I have all of the land owners attention on this thread, can I get permission to hunt your property? I figure there is no better time to ask


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

There are alot of corporations that own huge tracks of land that dont give a rats *** if people hunt it or not. All of the corner canyon area was this way for decades, when Estes Corp bought it in the early 1980s. Great place to hunt, all privately owned but not a single person cared until they decided to develop it recently.

I tend to try and get permission for areas where people might care. I hunt alot of areas privately owned by corporations that couldn't care less if people hunt on it or not (so far). I've also had great luck talking to landowners / caretakers and getting permissions to hunt some great gems of areas. Sliding rock area above alpine? I was given a key to that big locked gate and hunted it for 30 years. You wouldnt believe how many deer we took out of that place. 

Do homework on an area prior to the hunts. Find out who owns it, if its a specific person or you know its managed by someone, go talk to them. If its corp owned and not posted / farmed... go for it. Make sure to leave no trace though. Surest way to get a area closed down is to do something stupid on it.

-DallanC


----------



## plottrunner (Apr 3, 2008)

mrkrik said:


> Plottrunner -
> 
> I'm on my way out the door to the great state of Utah for my wife's hunt, so this will be my last post for awhile.
> 
> ...


LOL sounds good...Best of luck on your hunt :O||:


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Seems like a loaded question to me but hey, I made top of page.:grin:


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

I've read most of this thread, and I keep coming back to something Vanilla posted:



Vanilla said:


> Here is what the law says under the wildlife code, decide for yourself how you want to proceed:
> 
> Utah Code 23-20-14:
> (2)
> ...


To me, having signs that say "no trespassing" are not necessary if the land has a fence around it. Am I the only person reading interpreting it this way?

This is how I've always looked at private land.

Would I shoot at an animal on private land? 
Only if I had permission to do so.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

The one problem with fences is that unless you know that it is private on the other side you have no idea. There are so many range fences in the hills that are on public land. I have also seen private property owners try to fence off public land when the private stopped 1/2 a mile further away, not to mention placing signs on public land to try and scare others off.

I was even confronted one time as I walked down a road that the person claimed was private, it wasn't. He also told me that he owned the land surrounding the immediate area, come to find out the property had reverted back to the BLM.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

PBH said:


> I've read most of this thread, and I keep coming back to something Vanilla posted:
> 
> To me, having signs that say "no trespassing" are not necessary if the land has a fence around it. Am I the only person reading interpreting it this way?
> 
> ...


Grazing allotments have fences around them and are not private property. So fences indicating private property should be marked with signs IMHO.


----------



## plottrunner (Apr 3, 2008)

middlefork is correct, some grazing allotments have fencing but not all. I have never seen fence on Forest Service grazing permits but I have seen it on BLM permits. In fact on our winter range, we had to fence one of our permits to keep it from getting over fed. I have nothing against the requirement of having to post land. My problem is the people that disregard posted land and trespass anyways....


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

wait a minute -- we just went from "knowing" to "not knowing".

If you know the land is private, and it is fenced, then it doesn't need "no trespassing" signs. The fence provides the notice.

If you don't know: shouldn't you find out??

Regarding whether or not a land owner or grazing allotment user should or should not post those areas is another discussion.

The OP asked a question: 


mrkrik said:


> ... I'm curious what public opinion is on shooting an animal on unposted private property.
> 
> ... we noticed that most of the private property was open for travel on the roads and some of it was unposted ... if we saw a monster on unposted private land? Shoot it or not?


while the road (right-of-way) may be open for travel, the land may not be open to hunt. did you pass through a fence or cattle guard when the public road crossed into private land? if so, I would have to say that the fence provided notice as stated in the law.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

This may be what you are looking for. And I don't know if it was superseded by Vanilla's post.
http://le.utah.gov/~1999/bills/sbillenr/SB0238.pdf

(c) "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, fishing
streams crossing property lines, roads, gates, and rights-of-way entering the land. If metal fence
posts are used, the entire exterior side must be painted.

Oh and you are not required to know if it is private unless it is marked properly.


----------



## NVDuckin (Apr 18, 2016)

This is my favorite debate to read every year.


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

NVDuckin said:


> This is my favorite debate to read every year.


Blinds on water holes is a good one too.

Or, mechanical broadheads vs fixed broadheads is also a good one if you bowhunt.

On a side note, we've made it to Richfield, Utah and are about to head up the mountain. Good luck to everyone hunting early rifle and be safe.

And if you do shoot anything on unposted private land.... don't post it here!!! :grin::grin:


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

"(ii) the land is fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner that a 
reasonable person would recognize as intended to exclude 
intruders." In a manner-- to exclude intruders. This does not refer to livestock fences.

"I have never seen fence on Forest Service grazing permits" There are drift/allotment fences on most of the FS lands we hunt. Uintas, Nebo, Manti, Wasatch, Vernon, Cache, etc.... A livestock fence does not mean a separation of public/private lands.

"I have nothing against the requirement of having to post land. My problem is the people that disregard posted land and trespass anyways...." 100 percent in agreement.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Packout said:


> "(ii) the land is fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner that a
> reasonable person would recognize as intended to exclude
> intruders."
> 
> In a manner-- to exclude intruders. This does not refer to livestock fences.


The purpose of the fence is not mentioned, only what a "reasonable person" would recognize as intended to exclude intruders.
A fence constructed around the perimeter of private land, possibly including a cabin, crop field, or even animals, very well could be intended to serve both purposes of preventing livestock escapement and excluding intruders.

Here in the West where open range rules, livestock fences are intended to EXCLUDE open range animals -- not prevent animals from leaving. Not all private land owners run livestock.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

Depends on the county's fencing laws.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

This either means stay out or they have the worlds wildest cattle. :mrgreen:










-DallanC


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

DallanC said:


> This either means stay out or they have the worlds wildest cattle. :mrgreen:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Doesn't look posted to me though...and the pack out might take care of the butchering if we're careful!


----------



## gdog (Sep 13, 2007)

....just tell them your from Evingston...right G:shock::shock:B?


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

gdog said:


> ....just tell them your from Evingston...right G:shock::shock:B?


Driving through *Evingston* that looks like the fencing they have around their trailer courts.:shock:


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

PBH said:


> The purpose of the fence is not mentioned, only what a "reasonable person" would recognize as intended to exclude intruders.
> A fence constructed around the perimeter of private land, possibly including a cabin, crop field, or even animals, very well could be intended to serve both purposes of preventing livestock escapement and excluding intruders.
> 
> Here in the West where open range rules, livestock fences are intended to EXCLUDE open range animals -- not prevent animals from leaving. Not all private land owners run livestock.


The funny thing about the reasonable person does not take into account what the subjective intent of the property owner was, but simply what the objective reasonable person would believe. And the reasonable person does not exist in a vacuum either. So, the answer to your question would be...it depends.

A fence around a residential home is very clearly constructed in a manner that a reasonable person would believe it was intended to exclude intruders, even if the sole intention of the landowner was to keep their children or dog INSIDE the property.

A fence around a cabin would likely be viewed the same way.

A fence on open land that is mixed with open public lands? Not so much. At least according to the law.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

bowgy said:


> Driving through *Evingston* that looks like the fencing they have around their trailer courts.:shock:


But that is to keep them in and not out.


----------



## APD (Nov 16, 2008)

High Desert Elk said:


> Of course, game officers will tell you "it is the hunters responsibility to know where they are at all times"...


i thought the same thing until someone poached an elk at a ski resort. DWR came up and said it wasn't posted properly, so they let him go about his business with the elk.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

APD said:


> i thought the same thing until someone poached an elk at a ski resort. DWR came up and said it wasn't posted properly, so they let him go about his business with the elk.


Actually if the ski resort is on Forest Service property that they are leasing it is quite likely that you can hunt it.

I have hunted on a number of ski resorts in Colorado, Vail in particular and have shot elk on a ski run.


----------



## Pzn801 (Mar 15, 2016)

Utah is a fence out state, I was recently at a surveyor luncheon, and speaking with the guest lecturer on the subject. He actually told me a story of actually being hired by someone to post private property signs in a prominent unit. He further explained that 3 people had been caught killing elk on the clients property, and nothing could be done cause of no posting signs being visible.


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

So, not to beat a dead horse, but there is a lot of mis-information on this thread. Specific fence laws can be made at the county level. Some counties are fence out, most counties are fence in. Fence out and fence in pertains to livestock, not people. People fences come in play with the whole "to exclude intruders" phrase. Private lands do not need a fence to be posted no trespassing.

This is a good summary of fencing laws relating to livestock and range land-- 
http://summitcounty.org/DocumentCenter/View/4590


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Packout said:


> People fences come in play with the whole "to exclude intruders" phrase. Private lands do not need a fence to be posted no trespassing.


also, Private lands do not need to be "posted". They merely need a fence that any reasonable person can recognize is intended to keep people out.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

I think the whole moral to this thread, especially concerning the original posters question, is: If it looks like a duck, and it sounds like a duck, then maybe it is a duck.

-8/-:bathbaby:


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

What's this about ducks? Does this need to be moved to the waterfowl section?

:boink:


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

You ever hear the one about the guy that shoots a duck, but it lands on the other side of the fence...?


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

johnnycake said:


> You ever hear the one about the guy that shoots a duck, but it lands on the other side of the fence...?


I don't know about a duck but I can tell you a story about a swan that managed to get hit and land on some property that we didn't have access too and what it took to get it.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

Critter said:


> I don't know about a duck but I can tell you a story about a swan that managed to get hit and land on some property that we didn't have access too and what it took to get it.


But the bag of frozen peas worked in the end, right? Worth it every time....


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Frozen peas could be another story. 

By the end we could write a book.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

plottrunner said:


> I understand the law and that is why our property is posted as per the law requires. I just hate it when even though we post, people looking to skirt gray area's still try to push the boundaries. I'm not trying to be witty, just making a point. This is why landowners, including the ones that hunt and fish, hate hunters and fishermen. I have had guys tell me they can hunt my property because they have a tag issued by the Department of Wildlife Resources and because it was issued by the state, they have the right to hunt anywhere in that unit.


I think you're pissed about a different thing that what this thread is about. Just sayin.

Carry on.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

mrkrik said:


> Being a Utah hunting virgin, I've read the regs and know what they state for private property and trespass, but I'm curious what public opinion is on shooting an animal on unposted private property. When we were on the Monroe for a week becoming familiar with the mountain for my wife's upcoming elk hunt, we noticed that most of the private property was open for travel on the roads and some of it was unposted. At this point, we plan on hunting public land only, but what if we saw a monster on unposted private land? Shoot it or not? Interested in input.
> 
> Also, do the roads on the Monroe that were open on private land stay open during hunting seasons?


Back to the OP, think of the "Golden Rule".

What if it was your property, you paid for the land, you paid the taxes, you maintained the roads, you upgraded the springs and maintained the ponds, you maintained the fences, you cleaned up the garbage that was blown in by the wind or left by others, etc. What would you want a stranger to do when they came up to your property line?


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

bowgy said:


> Back to the OP, think of the "Golden Rule".
> 
> What if it was your property, you paid for the land, you paid the taxes, you maintained the roads, you upgraded the springs and maintained the ponds, you maintained the fences, you cleaned up the garbage that was blown in by the wind or left by others, etc. What would you want a stranger to do when they came up to your property line?


Well sure, that's an easy one to answer. How about this:

What about the landowner that only bought the land speculate on its value as an investment, does not live in the state, possibly has never even seen the land himself, never hunts it, never posted it, probably doesn't even think about it more than a few times a year. The property is completely unused.

You think its wrong to hunt on that type of property?

-DallanC


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

bowgy said:


> What would you want a stranger to do when they came up to your property line?


Look for the properly posted signs and painted posts. Then turn around or call me.

On my friend's ranch-- he would want them to be considerate, pick up their trash, not drive off-road, and be respectful. He would also be happy for them to shoot a critter or catch a fish. Even if he never met them.

Once again, some are painting the whole canvas with one broad brush. There are people-- for various reasons-- who do not care if you respectfully use their private property. And there are people who do not want you to stop on a public road and look at their private property. The canvas has many colors and strokes. Laws govern use. Obey the laws.


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

bowgy said:


> Back to the OP, think of the "Golden Rule".
> 
> What if it was your property, you paid for the land, you paid the taxes, you maintained the roads, you upgraded the springs and maintained the ponds, you maintained the fences, you cleaned up the garbage that was blown in by the wind or left by others, etc. What would you want a stranger to do when they came up to your property line?


This is a perfect example of turning my original post 180 degrees in another direction in order to look for a fight. Read my post again. How does your reply have anything to do with what I asked? Go find a fight somewhere else. Geez.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

mrkrik said:


> This is a perfect example of turning my original post 180 degrees in another direction in order to look for a fight. Read my post again. How does your reply have anything to do with what I asked? Go find a fight somewhere else. Geez.


Wow!!!!!!!!!!!! Not looking for a fight, just answering you post. Sorry if it offended you but you asked for opinions, you will need to get a little tougher skin if you ask for opinions on an open forum.

*Being a Utah hunting virgin, I've read the regs and know what they state for private property and trespass, but I'm curious what public opinion isApparently not. on shooting an animal on unposted private property. When we were on the Monroe for a week becoming familiar with the mountain for my wife's upcoming elk hunt, we noticed that most of the private property was open for travel on the roads and some of it was unposted. At this point, we plan on hunting public land only, but what if we saw a monster on unposted private land? Shoot it or not? Read my answer to this question. What would you want someone to do if it was your land? Interested in input.Again, apparently not.

Also, do the roads on the Monroe that were open on private land stay open during hunting seasons?*


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

DallanC said:


> Well sure, that's an easy one to answer. How about this:
> 
> What about the landowner that only bought the land speculate on its value as an investment, does not live in the state, possibly has never even seen the land himself, never hunts it, never posted it, probably doesn't even think about it more than a few times a year. The property is completely unused.
> 
> ...


Good question Dallan, never really ran into that situation, but in thinking about it, if I knew that it was private and I didn't have permission I would not trespass or shoot an animal on it from a public road.


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

bowgy said:


> Wow!!!!!!!!!!!! Not looking for a fight, just answering you post. Sorry if it offended you but you asked for opinions, you will need to get a little tougher skin if you ask for opinions on an open forum.
> 
> *Being a Utah hunting virgin, I've read the regs and know what they state for private property and trespass, but I'm curious what public opinion isApparently not. on shooting an animal on unposted private property. When we were on the Monroe for a week becoming familiar with the mountain for my wife's upcoming elk hunt, we noticed that most of the private property was open for travel on the roads and some of it was unposted. At this point, we plan on hunting public land only, but what if we saw a monster on unposted private land? Shoot it or not? Read my answer to this question. What would you want someone to do if it was your land? Interested in input.Again, apparently not.
> 
> Also, do the roads on the Monroe that were open on private land stay open during hunting seasons?*


Well then, if you were just answering my question, I'll answer yours. If I had done all that to my property and I DIDN'T WANT ANYONE ON IT, I would POST it per Utah law. But my original post had nothing to do with posted land. All it was asking was wether other people would take a shot in that scenario. I didn't even support one or the other, in fact I even posted multiple times that I didn't think I could take the shot. But you and others have turned it into something it was not. So not sure what the "golden rule" has to do with me. So again, read my post, how does your preaching about private property really answer my original post. Please explain.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

mrkrik said:


> But my original post had nothing to do with posted land. All it was asking was wether other people would take a shot in that scenario. I didn't even support one or the other, in fact I even posted multiple times that I didn't think I could take the shot.


Hypothetical situations, like the one you stated, will always have large variations of responses based on an individuals' ethical/moral beliefs, there is not a one-size-fits-all solution for your own question. You have received responses from both ends of the spectrum - i.e. "Yes, I'd take the shot because if the landowner didn't want me to be on his/her property, he/she should have posted it per Utah law," to Bowgy's golden rule response (no, he wouldn't take the shot).

Does it really matter what a bunch of people, that you'll probably never meet really think??? Opinions are like butts, some are better than others, and some just stink.

My opinion on the hypothetical situation:
No, I would/will never shoot an animal on property that I know is private, even if the property was not posted. Do I care what others think about my opinion? Nope!


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

Make it simple if you are driving through private property and see a 500" bull standing off the side of the road you would be illegal to take the shot no matter if the property was posted or not. 

Legally you can not shoot a big game animal from a road.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

mrkrik said:


> If I had done all that to my property and I DIDN'T WANT ANYONE ON IT, I would POST it per Utah law.


Again, per Utah law as cited in this thread, the land does not need to be posted. It only needs to be fenced in a manner that a reasonable person can tell that the fence is intended to keep intruders out.

My personal opinion on all the hypotheticals is: if it's private, I don't hunt it unless I have permission.

Another hypothetical: If I owned land I would probably fence it. If I allowed people to hunt it, I'd put up a sign that says "Pack it in --> Pack it out!"


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

mrkrik said:


> Well then, if you were just answering my question, I'll answer yours. If I had done all that to my property and I DIDN'T WANT ANYONE ON IT, I would POST it per Utah law. But my original post had nothing to do with posted land. All it was asking was wether other people would take a shot in that scenario. I didn't even support one or the other, in fact I even posted multiple times that I didn't think I could take the shot. But you and others have turned it into something it was not. So not sure what the "golden rule" has to do with me. So again, read my post, how does your preaching about private property really answer my original post. Please explain.


You seem to still be taking it too personal. And you didn't answer my question and you don't have too.

I didn't ask what you would do to the property or if you did or did not want anyone to hunt. I asked, "if it was your property, (posted or not), what would you want a hunter to do in the situation that you stated)?

Again, in an open forum there are many opinions and you asked for them.

Also in an open form many of the posts are for all who read them, not just one person.

I was not trying to preach anything, just posting some information to take into consideration that those that do not own land may not have considered.

Again, sorry if I offended you, that was certainly not my intention.


----------



## Charina (Aug 16, 2011)

PBH said:


> Again, per Utah law as cited in this thread, the land does not need to be posted. It only needs to be fenced in a manner that a reasonable person can tell that the fence is intended to keep intruders out.


I cannot recall having met a fence while out hunting that in my opinion was "intended to keep intruders out". The only fences I have observed are three or four strand barbwire livestock fence. And I had to cross many of those on Forest Service, SITLA, and BLM land, where they clearly are not intended to keep [human] intruders out. I shudder to think what it would cost to actually fence any sizable piece of property with fencing that could be reasonably interpreted as intended to keep intruders out. I dislike law/regulation that is so subjective. It is impotent, and comes down in the end to nothing more than who has the better attorney to make a more persuasive argument.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Chairna, I honestly do not believe the law is all that subjective on the fencing. PBH is trying to make it that way, but it's really not. I think the law is pretty clear, actually. And you are correct that no reasonable person would believe the fences you describe, without proper posting, would be intended to keep intruders out. 


One's own morals and ethics is where this conversation becomes very subjective, and therefore, as you put it, impotent. Know the laws, and follow them. Don't worry about trying to know what every person's own morals and ethics say. I'd hate to have to govern my hunting, not based upon the law, but upon how PETA feels about it, for example.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Vanilla said:


> PBH is trying to make it that way, but it's really not. .. no reasonable person would believe the fences you describe, without proper posting, would be intended to keep intruders out.


Definition of "fence": a barrier, railing, or other upright structure, typically of wood or wire, enclosing an area of ground to mark a boundary, control access, or prevent escape (from: Dictionary.com)

From Merriam-Webster: a barrier intended to prevent escape or intrusion or to mark a boundary; especially *:*such a barrier made of posts and wire or boards

Just sayin'.

-O|o-


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

PBH said:


> Definition of "fence": a barrier, railing, or other upright structure, typically of wood or wire, enclosing an area of ground to mark a boundary, control access, or prevent escape (from: Dictionary.com)
> 
> From Merriam-Webster: a barrier intended to prevent escape or intrusion or to mark a boundary; especially *:*such a barrier made of posts and wire or boards
> 
> ...


Also from Merrimack Webster:

Definition of irrelevant

:not relevant :inapplicable that statement is irrelevant to your argument

Just sayin back!


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

While we are on the subject of fences, if you are hunting, forest, BLM, or even private land and come up to a fence, it doesn't matter if it is a pole fence, a chain link fence with constantine wire on top, a field fence or stranded barbed wire fence that has been laid down for the winter. To prevent trespass you will need to turn right or left and follow the fence, whether it be a few hundred feet or a few miles, until you come across a major stream crossing, a gate, or a corner to see if it is posted properly.


In fact, if truth be know you could "legally" hunt most private land if you wanted to justify, "your morals or ethics" by following a fence, because there is a good chance that you could come across a place that the land owner missed a stream crossing or corner or because of terrain it was impossible or too expensive to fence.

My "morals and ethics" keep me off of land that I know is private out of respect to the landowner.


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

bowgy said:


> You seem to still be taking it too personal. And you didn't answer my question and you don't have too.
> 
> I didn't ask what you would do to the property or if you did or did not want anyone to hunt. I asked, "if it was your property, (posted or not), what would you want a hunter to do in the situation that you stated)?
> 
> ...


I apologise if I misread your intent. As far as taking it personal, nope. Like you posted, when you ask for opinions you get opinions. But sometimes you also get what appear to be implied attacks such as the guy that stated it's 100% unethical to take a shot on private property. Sometimes you have to reply bull. Sorry I took your response that way.

To answer your question, I would want the hunter to respect the law (whatever that might be) and respect the property.

To add to that, as someone else stated, I also think that there is responsibility on both sides. The hunter and property owner should both know the laws and do what is necessary to abide by them. Throwing in "ethics" and "morals" really doesn't mean much when they are an individual thing while the law applies to everyone ( at least it's supposed to).


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

Critter said:


> Make it simple if you are driving through private property and see a 500" bull standing off the side of the road you would be illegal to take the shot no matter if the property was posted or not.
> 
> Legally you can not shoot a big game animal from a road.


I agree. That is a common law in most states. The original question was assuming you obeyed all laws.

An interesting and related question. Some states also stipulate that you can not shoot across roads. I can't recall how Utah's law is worded, but many of the meadows on the Monroe have forest service two tracks running through them, if you were sitting on the edge of the meadow, would you take a shot at an elk on the others side in this situation?


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

PBH said:


> Again, per Utah law as cited in this thread, the land does not need to be posted. It only needs to be fenced in a manner that a reasonable person can tell that the fence is intended to keep intruders out.
> 
> My personal opinion on all the hypotheticals is: if it's private, I don't hunt it unless I have permission.
> 
> Another hypothetical: If I owned land I would probably fence it. If I allowed people to hunt it, I'd put up a sign that says "Pack it in --> Pack it out!"


I'm not disagreeing with your interpretation of that although there appear to be others on this thread that question it.

I merely stated that I would post it, as by Utah law that makes it obvious that you are trespassing.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

lol


Now we're going to get into the "what is classified as a road in Utah" debate?


where's Mike Noel when you need him??
:mrgreen:


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

mrkrik said:


> An interesting and related question. Some states also stipulate that you can not shoot across roads. I can't recall how Utah's law is worded, but many of the meadows on the Monroe have forest service two tracks running through them, if you were sitting on the edge of the meadow, would you take a shot at an elk on the others side in this situation?


*BANG* 

You cannot shoot from or over a _*highway*_. 2-tracks dont count.



> You may not discharge a dangerous
> weapon or firearm under any of the following
> circumstances:
> 
> •From, upon or across any highway


-DallanC


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

For those that say they won't hunt private property. I'm curious on how you would handle this situation. 

I'm currently hunting in Arizona in a unit I've hunted many times. Part of it is checker boarded private/public land. I hunt it. Sometimes it seems like everyone is hunting it. None of it is posted, the only fences are cattle fences. Outfitters take their clients there. Would you tell your guide that you won't hunt there if you're on a guided hunt?


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

PBH said:


> lol
> 
> Now we're going to get into the "what is classified as a road in Utah" debate?
> 
> ...


I guess we're getting too many questions in one thread. :?


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

DallanC said:


> *BANG*
> 
> You cannot shoot from or over a _*highway*_. 2-tracks dont count.
> 
> -DallanC


BANG! Question solved! :grin:


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

mrkrik said:


> BANG! Question solved! :grin:


It used to include "improved roads" but I see that restriction has been removed.

-DallanC


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

I skipped all this but the OP.

I don't like to hunt on roads, and I won't hike on known private. I have gotten into scuffles with people trespassing on our land, I know the feeling. Yes we mark it, but I would still feel the same deep in the wilderness. Can't have every tree posted. 

Plus, you are on a unit with plenty of premium public with a limited entry tag. Go hunt there!


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

mrkrik said:


> For those that say they won't hunt private property. I'm curious on how you would handle this situation.
> 
> I'm currently hunting in Arizona in a unit I've hunted many times. Part of it is checker boarded private/public land. I hunt it. Sometimes it seems like everyone is hunting it. None of it is posted, the only fences are cattle fences. Outfitters take their clients there. Would you tell your guide that you won't hunt there if you're on a guided hunt?


Yes, I would tell my guide I'm not hunting there. Guided or unguided, I DO NOT hunt private property for which I have not contacted the landowner and obtained written permission. Yes, I would hunt it with my guide if he had written permission from the landowner, and yes - I would want to see the written permission slip. Overboard? Probably. Clear conscience? Yep.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

CPAjeff said:


> Yes, I would tell my guide I'm not hunting there. Guided or unguided, I DO NOT hunt private property for which I have not contacted the landowner and obtained written permission. Yes, I would hunt it with my guide if he had written permission from the landowner, and yes - I would want to see the written permission slip. Overboard? Probably. Clear conscience? Yep.


CPA's have a conscience???? (Oh snap!)


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

PBH said:


> lol
> 
> Now we're going to get into the "what is classified as a road in Utah" debate?
> 
> ...


Now that there is funny!


----------



## mrkrik (Jan 26, 2016)

CPAjeff said:


> Yes, I would tell my guide I'm not hunting there. Guided or unguided, I DO NOT hunt private property for which I have not contacted the landowner and obtained written permission. Yes, I would hunt it with my guide if he had written permission from the landowner, and yes - I would want to see the written permission slip. Overboard? Probably. Clear conscience? Yep.


Kudos to you if you are ever in that situation and you stick to your principles. A clear conscience is a good thing.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

Vanilla said:


> CPA's have a conscience???? (Oh snap!)


I really have nothing, no witty comeback, nothing. :yield:

However, I did get a top of the page!!


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

CPAjeff said:


> I really have nothing, no witty comeback, nothing. :yield:
> 
> However, I did get a top of the page!!


Lacking the wit to even take the easy retort and counter with a lawyer dig....


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

DallanC said:


> *BANG*
> 
> You cannot shoot from or over a _*highway*_. 2-tracks dont count.
> 
> -DallanC


2-tracks don't count?

Per page 58 of the Utah Big Game Field Guidebook under Definitions:
"*Highway* means the entire width between property lines of every way or place of any nature when any part of it is open to the use of the public as a matter of right for vehicular travel."

In other words, if you can use your vehicle to travel on it, it's a highway. And note, it's from the property line on one side to the property line on the other side.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

CPAjeff said:


> I really have nothing, no witty comeback, nothing. :yield:
> 
> However, I did get a top of the page!!


TOTP is the ultimate mic drop.

And elkfromabove, what if that two-track or dirt road is entirely surrounded by national forest property? Or it's entirely on BLM owned land? By your definition, do you have to go all the way to the next property line? (Maybe miles and miles from the road itself?)


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

Ok, this thread has just shown me how completely nuts some of the sane people are on this site. hahaha 

Goodness-- the lawyer makes the most sense and has the wittiest comebacks. Mind-is-Blown

..


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

johnnycake said:


> Lacking the wit to even take the easy retort and counter with a lawyer dig....


I usually leave the low hanging fruit for shorter people, like those poor souls who are 5'6" or less - JC, you don't happen to fall into that group, right?!? 

What's the difference between a jellyfish and a lawyer?
- One is a spineless, poisonous nightmare. The other is a form of sea life.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

CPAjeff said:


> I usually leave the low hanging fruit for shorter people, like those poor souls who are 5'6" or less - JC, you don't happen to fall into that group, right?!?
> 
> What's the difference between a jellyfish and a lawyer?
> - One is a spineless, poisonous nightmare. The other is a form of sea life.


I will have you know that in the right shoes I am almost 5'8". But yes, I never turn down the opportunity for low hanging fruit.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Man this thread took a monster muley turn for the worse.
As for the original post I own a small piece of property on the Wasatch unit. and have it properly marked most people are pretty respectful of it.

Before I posted It as private I had people wonder onto it. I couldn't blame them if I don't want them stumbling upon it I should have signs up to not do so is just lazy and asking for tresspassers


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

hazmat said:


> Man this thread took a monster mule turn for the worse.
> As for the original post I own a small piece of property on the Wasatch unit. and have it properly marked most people are pretty respectful of it.
> 
> Before I posted It as private I had people wonder onto it. I couldn't blame them if I don't want them stumbling upon it I should have signs up to not do so is just lazy and asking for *VISITORS*


I fixed it for ya. If it ain't posted, they ain't trespassers. (In the illegal sort of way, at least.)


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

Actually, they can be defined as trespassers-- entering without permission. But they are not illegal. That is why signs say "No Trespassing". It is ok to trespass if there is no notification given to the trespasser that trespassing is not wanted. 

All those door to door salesmen and missionaries trespass when walking from the sidewalk to the front door of a house. If they don't know the homeowner, then they don't have their permission to enter the property, thus they are trespassing by walking to the door. Of course, many on here would never walk up to someone's door without permission. They just hollar from the sidewalk....... And they surely would never turn around in someone's driveway without permission as that would be trespassing too........  (All in fun and sarcasm intended)

..


----------



## flinger (Nov 19, 2007)

Ok, case study time just to feed my curiosity. What would be a good defense for a trespasser that was caught on a piece of property that is one parcel consisting of an entire section (1 mile wide by 1 mile long) with one road going into it. It has "no trespassing" signs or bright orange marked clearly at all 4 corners and also where the road crosses the property line, but there are no other signs in-between. There are no other roads, row, or fishing streams that cross the parcel. There is also no fencing. The trespasser claims that he/she didn't know it was private and didn't know where they were at. I mean how could they know unless they had maps or a gps since 1 mile between signs is a considerable distance for the naked eye, not to mention topography challenges. Ok...go.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

Just a few definitions with a quick search.

trespass
n. entering another person's property without permission of the owner or his/her agent and without lawful authority (like that given to a health inspector) and causing any damage, no matter how slight. Any interference with the owner's (or a legal tenant's) use of the property is a sufficient showing of damage and is a civil wrong (tort) sufficient to form the basis for a lawsuit against the trespasser by the owner or a tenant using the property. 

Trespass
An unlawful intrusion that interferes with one's person or property.
Tort Law originated in England with the action of trespass. Initially trespass was any wrongful conduct directly causing injury or loss; in modern law trespass is an unauthorized entry upon land. A trespass gives the aggrieved party the right to bring a civil lawsuit and collect damages as compensation for the interference and for any harm suffered. Trespass is an intentional tort and, in some circumstances, can be punished as a crime.

Trespass
Trespass is defined by the act of knowingly entering another person’s property without permission. Such action is held to infringe upon a property owner’s legal right to enjoy the benefits of ownership. Criminal charges, which range from violation to felony, may be brought against someone who interferes with another person’s legal property rights.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

The first thing that I would need is the actual requirements for posting the land. 

I may be wrong but on a continuous fence it should be marked every 1/4 mile. So not only would the road crossing need to be marked along with the corners but a few more signs along the way. Also as a defense see just how much of the fence post are painted to see if it meets the requirement of 100 sq inches. I have seen a lot of fence post with orange paint on them and they don't have the required amount of paint on them. 

It will also depend on just where the person crossed the fence.


----------



## hazmat (Apr 23, 2009)

Vanilla said:


> hazmat said:
> 
> 
> > Man this thread took a monster mule turn for the worse.
> ...


Thanks vanilla very true visitors indeed


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

Critter said:


> The first thing that I would need is the actual requirements for posting the land.
> 
> I may be wrong but on a continuous fence it should be marked every 1/4 mile. So not only would the road crossing need to be marked along with the corners but a few more signs along the way. Also as a defense see just how much of the fence post are painted to see if it meets the requirement of 100 sq inches. I have seen a lot of fence post with orange paint on them and they don't have the required amount of paint on them.
> 
> It will also depend on just where the person crossed the fence.


They used to have to be marked every so often but it changed.

"Properly posted" means that signs
prohibiting trespass-or bright yellow, bright
orange or fluorescent paint-are clearly
displayed at all corners, on fishing streams
crossing property lines, and on roads, gates
and rights-of-way entering the land. Or, they
are displayed in a manner that is visible to a
person in the area.

https://wildlife.utah.gov/guidebooks/2017_pdfs/2017_field_regs_low.pdf


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

bowgy said:


> They used to have to be marked every so often but it changed.
> 
> "Properly posted" means that signs
> prohibiting trespass-or bright yellow, bright
> ...


Lots of ways to interpret "and on roads...entering the land."

Then there is the troubling language "Or, they are displayed in a manner that is visible to a person in the area." That is a doozy right there! Arguably you could be required to ensure it is posted within line of sight.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Arguably? 

It's pretty clear it has to be visible to someone in the area to be properly posted. If line of sight does not apply, how would it be visible? 

Maybe we can get PBH to pull out Webster's Dictionary again for us?


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

Vanilla said:


> Arguably?
> 
> It's pretty clear it has to be visible to someone in the area to be properly posted. If line of sight does not apply, how would it be visible?
> 
> Maybe we can get PBH to pull out Webster's Dictionary again for us?


Agreed, but I was trying to give some wiggle room for argument to the other side of the debate.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

johnnycake said:


> Agreed, but I was trying to give some wiggle room for argument to the other side of the debate.


Friggin lawyers...


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

johnnycake said:


> Lots of ways to interpret "and on roads...entering the land."
> 
> Then there is the troubling language "Or, they are displayed in a manner that is visible to a person in the area." That is a doozy right there! Arguably you could be required to ensure it is posted within line of sight.


At least for the landowner it is "Or" and not "and".

And for the land I manage as far as roads, anything that is a trail or road that has a gate is posted. All corners and stream crossing, anyone could say, "I fish it".

Like it has been said, some fences can go for miles so I am glad that they took the every so often rule out. I can't remember if it was in feet or yards or fractions of a mile. So again, if you come to a fence that is private you need to turn left or right and follow the fence till you come to a gate, a stream, or a corner to see if it is posted properly.

I still wouldn't hunt private even if it could be legal without permission. Not worth the hassle of getting chewed out or paying my lawyer to prove the legality of my trespass.


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

bowgy said:


> At least for the landowner it is "Or" and not "and".
> 
> And for the land I manage as far as roads, anything that is a trail or road that has a gate is posted. All corners and stream crossing, anyone could say, "I fish it".
> 
> ...


I still think the ambiguity about posting "on roads...entering" would mean you have to periodically post along the road--line of sight. The requirement is posting on roads which enter the land...not "post roads at the entrance to private land"


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

johnnycake said:


> I still think the ambiguity about posting "on roads...entering" would mean you have to periodically post along the road--line of sight. The requirement is posting on roads which enter the land...not "post roads at the entrance to private land"


Oh, I see now, you are talking a public road through a private land. I was thinking a gate across a private road entering private land. I should have realized due to the OP.

There is one road that is on the way to one of our properties that is a county road, when you enter the property on both ends going over a cattle guard there is a large sign on both ends of the property stating that you are on private land for the next "X" amount of miles. Kind of like the Indian reservations do on the highway. They don't post every so often except for gates and I wouldn't want to get caught on their property.


----------



## flinger (Nov 19, 2007)

Vanilla said:


> Arguably?
> 
> It's pretty clear it has to be visible to someone in the area to be properly posted. If line of sight does not apply, how would it be visible?


It's very arguable imho. The term "or" like bowgy said means just one has to be done, not both by the landowner. It would be pretty hard to post a corner if it fell in the middle of a river or was on the side of a near vertical cliff, which would then require the landowner to post in a visible area.

I suppose one could argue that it wasn't "clearly" posted at the corner if you were 1/2 mile away from the corner and didn't see the sign or paint at the corner, but that's a stretch imo. Maybe the legislature intended the landowners to have to post signs big enough to be read from a half mile away, but I doubt it.

The law is worded so ambiguously, no wonder it's argued so much (probably just what the friggin lawyers like though). It's too bad too, since the DWR director threatened to push to make the Utah trespassing laws like Colorado and Wyoming a few years ago if we as sportsmen didn't do better at respecting private property. I have hunted private property that isn't posted, so I hope it doesn't get to that point. I know where the roads/gates and corners are and check them before hunting it. As a starting point, I would suggest the OP at least check the corners and where the road enters the private land in addition to the visible areas before assuming it's not properly posted or attempted to be properly posted.

The land that most roads we hunt from (like dirt roads) is still owned by the owner of the parcel and are not owned by state or local governments or easement holders, even if the public or dominant estate owner has a right to drive over it, so it could be argued that the road "enters" at just the boundary of the parcel.

Just my thoughts and opinions. Take it all at your own risk.


----------

