non posted land

[Common Sense]

Hunt where you know its legal.

It may not be "right", but according to CA state law it is legal to hunt on property that is not posted, fenced, or under cultivation.

Many states say you are tresspassing if you hunt on private property without permission, but not California.

Just because you say I am tresspassing with a gun if I enter unposted, unfenced, and uncultivated property; doesn't make it a fact. The facts are on my side, although I don't really think the law is "right", it is the law. The law is on my side.

The first time I hunted unposted private property was after a game warden checked me and my son for licenses and tags while we were hunting on national forest land. After talking to us he called me aside and told me about the above law. He then drew a little map of where there was forty acres of unposted, uncultivated, and unfenced private property. He told me to take my boy there if he wanted to bag his first deer. He cautioned me not to cross the fence-line onto the other unposted privated property, but assured me that I could not be charged with any violation if I stayed on the forty acres. He did say if anyone "caught" me, I should be polite and leave quickly and never return. My son bagged his first deer there, and many more as the years went by.

 

[Dark matter]

Posted, fenced, or cultivated private land is private land. Wether law says its ok or not I wouldn't do it out of respect for the land owner. Just saying

 

[KTKT70]

i think now were are to the ???? in another post about hunting etiquette. sad part is sum of us got it and sum of us dont. What will show you are a good pearson is what u do when u think ppl dont know. Not how u act when ppl are watching.

we wouldnt need so many laws if more ppl would just do the right thing more offten.

 

[64ssking]

When I stared this post it was because I found pigs on land tha is not forest or Blm I did not want to hunt them if it was not legal, now knowing that its perfectly legal I will hunt them I will still try to find out who the property belongs to. I try to practice above average etiquette if I'm by my self or in view of others. Not all of us are privileged to "know" someone that will hunt there land or own there own huntable land.

 

[Grasslandhntr]

Ya and those people that don't have places hunt public land not knowingly hunting land that's not blm whether the law says its right or not hunting etiquette says its wrong

 

[64ssking]

Not true in this case, it's county land! For those of you not privileged to have private land pm me for cords.

 

[Common Sense]

Ya and those people that don't have places hunt public land not knowingly hunting land that's not blm whether the law says its right or not hunting etiquette says its wrong

Am I hell bound for ground sluicing quail on uposted, unclutivated, unfenced property owned by a corporation?

Whether shooting a quail off a stump or hunting privately owned property, the law is on my side. And being one of them hicks from Tulare County that many of you make fun of, I reckon I must just be too stupid to understand your logic. I ain't condeming you all for your beliefs, so why do you find fault in my legal activities???? As one of you city folk once said: "Why can't we all just get along?"



Life is Good.

 

[Grasslandhntr]

Do what u want I don't care what the law says IMO that's wrong you know it's not public land stay off it mayb it's some poor old couple who couldn't afford to go out and put up a new fence and signs after the last one fell over its just low but to each his own

 

[Bubblehide]

... mayb it's some poor old couple who couldn't afford to go out and put up a new fence and signs ...

They don't need to fence it, they don't need to cultivate it. They only need to put 3 signs per mile somewhere along their property boundary. Hell the signs could be on paper and hand written. And if someone doesn't want a perfectly legal activity to occur on their land, don't they have the obligation to make it known? I know a few people with land that don't post their property, because they don't have any objection to people hunting it.

 

[cali-carnivore]

They don't need to fence it, they don't need to cultivate it. They only need to put 3 signs per mile somewhere along their property boundary. Hell the signs could be on paper and hand written. And if someone doesn't want a perfectly legal activity to occur on their land, don't they have the obligation to make it known? I know a few people with land that don't post their property, because they don't have any objection to people hunting it.

Come to think of it, I have not posted my home or put a sign on my car that I don't want people to borrow it! If you are hunting on land that you are looking out for property owners/enforcement as much as game you know what right and wrong are.

 

[Common Sense]

Come to think of it, I have not posted my home

If your front yard is not fenced or posted, anyone can enter your property legally. They can do anything they want in your yard, as long as it is legal. You cannot press charges for tresspassing. You can ask them to leave, and if they refuse; the police will arrest them for disturbing the peace.

 

[cali-carnivore]

If your front yard is not fenced or posted, anyone can enter your property legally. They can do anything they want in your yard, as long as it is legal. You cannot press charges for tresspassing. You can ask them to leave, and if they refuse; the police will arrest them for disturbing the peace.

Come in my yard with a weapon and you are an instant felon. You can wander on to my unfenced property by accident but add a weapon and its on.

 

[#1Predator]

Fish and Game Code, section 2016:

2016.

"It is unlawful to enter any lands under cultivation or enclosed by a fence, belonging to, or occupied by, another, or to enter any uncultivated or unenclosed lands, including lands temporarily inundated by waters flowing outside the established banks of a river, stream, slough, or other waterway, where signs forbidding trespass or hunting, or both, are displayed at intervals not less than three to the mile along all exterior boundaries and at all roads and trails entering those lands, for the purpose of discharging any firearm or taking or destroying any mammal or bird, including any waterfowl, on those lands without having first obtained written permission from the owner, or his or her agent, or the person in lawful possession of, those lands. Signs may be of any size and wording that will fairly advise persons about to enter the land that the use of the land is so restricted."

In addition, if the owner or the owner's agent (ranch foreman, supervisor, etc.) tells me that the land is private and asks me to leave, I must immediately leave the property unless I can positively prove that the land in question is public land but be careful when challenging a land owner/agent. If I'm wrong, usually the sheriff will be the one asking me to leave at the request of the landowner/agent but I might be ticketed and/or arrested (a misdemeanor) by the sheriff for trespass, Penal Code section 602(o):

(o) "Refusing or failing to leave land, real property, or structures belonging to or lawfully occupied by another and not open to the general public, upon being requested to leave by (1) a peace officer at the request of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession, and upon being informed by the peace officer that he or she is acting at the request of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession, or (2) the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession. The owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession shall make a separate request to the peace officer on each occasion when the peace officer’s assistance in dealing with a trespass is requested. However, a single request for a peace officer’s assistance may be made to cover a limited period of time not to exceed 30 days and identified by specific dates, during which there is a fire hazard or the owner, owner’s agent, or person in lawful possession is absent from the premises or property. In addition, a single request for a peace officer’s assistance may be made for a period not to exceed six months when the premises or property is closed to the public and posted as being closed. However, this subdivision shall not be applicable to persons engaged in lawful labor union activities which are permitted to be carried out on the property by the Alatorre-Zenovich-Dunlap-Berman Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975 (Part 3.5 (commencing with Section 1140) of Division 2 of the Labor Code) or by the National Labor Relations Act. For purposes of this section, land, real property, or structures owned or operated by any housing authority for tenants as defined under Section 34213.5 of the Health and Safety Code constitutes property not open to the general public; however, this subdivision shall not apply to persons on the premises who are engaging in activities protected by the California or United States Constitution, or to persons who are on the premises at the request of a resident or management and who are not loitering or otherwise suspected of violating or actually violating any law or ordinance."

 

[KTKT70]

ok... thats a lot of words.. lol let me try to brake it down...


Do whats right.. not only what the law says.. Its a sad day in the world when the only why we know right from wrong is when there is a law to tell us.

if u try to find the owner of the land. Thats cool of you. But if you know you should not b on the land and just do it cuz the law says its ok.. u are wrong and the kind of hunter that gives others have a bad name.

sorry.. off my soap box now anic::smiley_doh:

 

[Common Sense]

Do whats right.. not only what the law says.. Its a sad day in the world when the only why we know right from wrong is when there is a law to tell us.

We are a nation of laws. I try to do what is right, for example I have been married for well over 40 years to the same woman. I think divorce is "wrong". Yet I don't make fun of those who've gone throught divorce; after all it is legal, so who am I to fault others??????

If you think it is wrong to enter private property legally, don't do it. I think it is okay. Why is your opinion better than mine?


I know a couple of places where there's thousands of acres of BLM property swarming wih deer. I can glass them from the public road, but can't access the land without crossing fenced private property. Although it is "right" for me to have access to the property, I don't hunt there because I know what the law says.

 

[Grasslandhntr]

KTK I agree gives us all a bad name

 

[KTKT70]

atiotic-wavin-flag i thank the Lt.Col for the way i am. He did his best to show me right from wrong. Its up to me now. I have big shoes to fill.. or try to live up too i guess.

 

[Bobaloo]

If the law states I can hunt somewhere, you darn bet I'll be in there. Regardless of what people "think about it".

 

[desert_s10]

So correct me if I am wrong- legally you man enter private property that is fenced but has either a trail/road entrance or that is in disrepair provided that it is also not posted, developed, or under cultivation.

I know the ethical answer to this but would like to be clear on the legal obligation.

The under cultivation is a broad statement. If it is a large property, it is quite possible that you may not know of a developed/ cultivated area within the boundaries. Which would be a clear violation in my eyes.

 

[#1Predator]

So correct me if I am wrong- legally you man enter private property that is fenced but has either a trail/road entrance or that is in disrepair provided that it is also not posted, developed, or under cultivation.

I know the ethical answer to this but would like to be clear on the legal obligation.

The under cultivation is a broad statement. If it is a large property, it is quite possible that you may not know of a developed/ cultivated area within the boundaries. Which would be a clear violation in my eyes.

"So correct me if I am wrong- legally you may enter private property that is fenced but has either a trail/road entrance or that is in disrepair provided that it is also not posted, developed, or under cultivation." No, you may not.

In the eyes of the law (in California) if I knowingly enter private property (even though it isn't fenced, posted or under cultivation) without written permission, I have violated the law. Why is that, you say? Let's say that I get kicked off of some private land (not fenced, posted or under cultivation) by a sheriff or the owner. What's to prevent me from coming back next week or even the next day to do the same thing?

By the way, that's the purpose of Penal Code 602(o) - it's a warning to me that the land I was on was private property. I can leave voluntarily or be cited and/or taken into custody. If I leave voluntarily but then return to that land and trespass again, I have demonstrated mens rea (latin for "a guilty mind") because I intentionally and/or knowingly violated the law. Now I am definitely subject to arrest and/or citation.

Trespass is "a wrongful entry upon the lands of another." In legal parlance, quare clausum fregit, meaning, "wherefore he broke the close". "Breaking a close" was the technical common law expression for an unlawful entry upon land (even though it was not fenced, posted or under cultivation). In the eyes of the common law, every unauthorized entry upon the soil of another was a trespass.

A fence, even though it is in disrepair, is considered a man made warning (nature doesn't "grow" fences) that the land I am about to enter is private property. Notice that the F&G Code section doesn't say, "a fence in good condition" it just says "fence".