is this harassment

That did cross my mind - because correct me if I'm wrong, they're still public property, yes/no??

Not necessarily. A land owner can apply to the local municipality to purchase a portion of an unopened concession road allowance that abuts his property. If the municipality has no intention of opening a road on that allowance they might sell after offering half of the road allowance to the property owner on the other side, posting their intention and asking for public comment, and passing a bylaw in council. It could get sticky if there was formerly a road on it or historically used in some way to access a water body for example. I am a tenant on a property which includes a portion of such a CRA purchased by a previous owner. It is private property from the road back to the back edges of the 2 properties abutting the CRA. The municipality in question has a GIS site which still shows the road allowance and does not identify it as being part of any property. I was concerned when new neighbours were cutting trees on said CRA and I had to go to the Land Registry Office to determine that they in fact owned one half of the CRA and my landlord owned the other half.

There may be other circumstances where they will sell unopened concession road allowances, eg. access to a landlocked property, but I'm not sure about that and if so it would probably depend on the property owners on either side of the CRA having no objection and no interest in purchasing themselves.
 
Last edited:
Not to stir the pot any more but purely out of curiosity. If livestock had have gotten out because the officer left the gate open and they caused an accident would the officer not be liable?
 
Not to stir the pot any more but purely out of curiosity. If livestock had have gotten out because the officer left the gate open and they caused an accident would the officer not be liable?

Would depend on how hard his/her manager-supervisor-superintendent-assistant deputy minister-deputy minister-minister-premier back them with the typical "nothing to see here" that is so common in Canadian politics these days....

"What?? $20M of taxpayers money wasted of a fraudulent land deal?? Nothing to see here."....."What?? Electrical meters from Asia installed by a company from Texas and cost us $50M, that are burning houses down?? Nooooo....that can't be...."...."what, a dreamy program that costs a cool $40M from a smooth talking man from Seattle that promises to save us billions, yet actually leaves us in the red??? Noooooo....."...."WHAT???!!! Thousand of federal employees haven't been paid in months because of a half-assed attempt at streamlining??? No way!!! That can't happen!!!"

GGG
 
Last edited:
just a question during deer season a MNR pickup drove onto property up and old shut down road. Opened the gate a my property line drove thru left gate open that is not good as I graze cattle and goats on that property and proceeded to drive thru my hay fields and eventually crossed a out of repair bridge and drove off the property.
Curious to that 2 days earlier we had 2 OPP on a side by side stop and talk to the wife of one of the hunters.
have not seen either MNR OR OPP for 15 yrs

No, but they should have closed the gate. Call and make a complaint.
 
As Hoyt said, they require probable grounds to believe that someone is hunting or committing an offence on the property to enter it (unless it's public), they cannot just randomly enter and search properties looking for hunters.

I do not believe it to be harassment though. Just an individual being inconsiderate.

In spades.

Well worth a phone call up to the Provincial level to light a fire under that ones arse for his unprofessional foolishness.

CO's have a pretty broad range of rights as far as going and checking things in the actioning of their Duties, but it does not excuse them from needing to have a better reason than "I just wanted to look over there!", or from taking due care with other folks property.

He reflects poorly on the whole lot, and sending a message up the chain would be appropriate.

Cheers
Trev
 
In spades.

Well worth a phone call up to the Provincial level to light a fire under that ones arse for his unprofessional foolishness.

CO's have a pretty broad range of rights as far as going and checking things in the actioning of their Duties, but it does not excuse them from needing to have a better reason than "I just wanted to look over there!", or from taking due care with other folks property.

He reflects poorly on the whole lot, and sending a message up the chain would be appropriate.

Cheers
Trev

I was trying to be delicate, because when it boils down to it, we really still don't know all the facts of the incident. :)
 
Call the officer's superior, and tell him that that the gate was left open, and you are still rounding up the animals that escaped, and you want to know how to submit a bill to recover your expenses. That should get their attention.
 
ou
I was trying to be delicate, because when it boils down to it, we really still don't know all the facts of the incident. :)

True enough.

We (my family) had an incident with a CO who was using a part of our property as his party spot. Basic weekend fishing, drinking, camping, sort of party, with up to a dozen of his CO friends from around the countries (Canada and US).

A phone call up the chain, brought THAT to a screeching halt.

Moral of that story. There are a few around that will use their rights as a means to further their own agenda.

Communication first with the actual perpetrator, then, up the chain of command. In simple terms, if you don't report it to the boss, it likely didn't happen.

Cheers
Trev
 
I grew up around them, lots of them. My opinion is that roughly 20% of them are great people, who are capable, and reasonable, love the outdoors, and not authority hungry. The other 80-ish percent are pretty dorky, and still angry that they couldn't make it to into RCMP training......

Maybe my numbers are off a bit, but you get my point.
 
I grew up around them, lots of them. My opinion is that roughly 20% of them are great people, who are capable, and reasonable, love the outdoors, and not authority hungry. The other 80-ish percent are pretty dorky, and still angry that they couldn't make it to into RCMP training......

Maybe my numbers are off a bit, but you get my point.

In Ontario, CO jobs are extremely sought after PS positions,especially,by OPP officers looking to make a switch within the Ontario PS to keep their pensions. They're the first to find out and get first crack at any openings. I worked with a couple of people that "jumped the fence" to OMNRF Enforcement and never once looked back.
 
In Ontario, CO jobs are extremely sought after PS positions,especially,by OPP officers looking to make a switch within the Ontario PS to keep their pensions. They're the first to find out and get first crack at any openings. I worked with a couple of people that "jumped the fence" to OMNRF Enforcement and never once looked back.

I don't know of a single CO here that used to be a cop. They train at our tech school, two year diploma.

When my parents trained (almost 40 years ago) there were lots of jobs, but now they are grossly underfunded, and understaffed. Maybe the supply:demand curve is taking its toll now and they are selecting better candidates???

I do know that they are unionized, and therefore the typical "sh!t floats" phenomenon occurs.....the easiest way to get rid of a putz is to promote them!!!
 
I don't know of a single CO here that used to be a cop. They train at our tech school, two year diploma.

When my parents trained (almost 40 years ago) there were lots of jobs, but now they are grossly underfunded, and understaffed. Maybe the supply:demand curve is taking its toll now and they are selecting better candidates???

I do know that they are unionized, and therefore the typical "sh!t floats" phenomenon occurs.....the easiest way to get rid of a putz is to promote them!!!

Could it be that jumping from the federal PS to the provincial PS is problematic? Pensions,service time and benefits aren't transferable between the two.
 
Not sure why everyone is dumping on NB here. It's a simple system. Don't want people walking/driving on yer land? Then post it no trespassing. Otherwise, everyone will assume you're ok with some level of considerate access.

Don't want anyone hunting Post a red disc every 100m and at entrances.

Only want certain people hunting it? Post a yellow disc every 100m and at entrances. Otherwise, again, people will access it. Not that tricky a concept. If you don't want anyone hunting but yourself, up go the yellow discs and deny everyone but you and your friends access.

If you care enough about your property, then post whatever discs/signs you require and then sic law enforcement on tje transgressors. It's not rocket science. The only place I ever hear of problems is people too lazy to post their land and other people too lazy to use common sense on unposted land -- but they're legally fine, just unethical. And that's a problem no matter what the laws are.
 
Not sure why everyone is dumping on NB here. It's a simple system. Don't want people walking/driving on yer land? Then post it no trespassing. Otherwise, everyone will assume you're ok with some level of considerate access.

Don't want anyone hunting Post a red disc every 100m and at entrances.

Only want certain people hunting it? Post a yellow disc every 100m and at entrances. Otherwise, again, people will access it. Not that tricky a concept. If you don't want anyone hunting but yourself, up go the yellow discs and deny everyone but you and your friends access.

If you care enough about your property, then post whatever discs/signs you require and then sic law enforcement on tje transgressors. It's not rocket science. The only place I ever hear of problems is people too lazy to post their land and other people too lazy to use common sense on unposted land -- but they're legally fine, just unethical. And that's a problem no matter what the laws are.

Fill your boots, but I prefer to live where the landowner does not have to jump through hoops to stop folks from accessing their land.

Much prefer the current state of affairs where the onus is placed directly upon the shoulders of the persons out and about, to be aware of where they are, and where they should not be.

As a land owner, it makes more sense to me that I should NOT have to jump through hoops to have my property lines treated with some respect.

So, maybe folks are 'dumping' on NB, because it comes off sounding like it's about three ways arse backwards, between the way that you get treated as hunters and recreational shooters, plus the foolishness of laying the onus onto the landowner to have to go put up something of an indicator, easily removed by those of a mind to, in order to assert a small amount of control over what is already theirs.

Cheers
Trev
 
I guess it comes down to what you're used to.


I grew up on PEI which had super stiff trespass laws, but we never knew anything about them as kids, and we hiked, biked, sledded, and fished and played pond hockey over everyone's farms. Even used to use our "quad" (read: VW Rabbit without glass) in the tractor roads. Nobody ever complained because we were respectful and didn't tear up land or fences or leave garbage anywhere. And like I said, nobody actually read us the Trespass Act, so as kids we were blissfully unaware of where we could and couldn't be.

People here in NB are usually respectful enough they won't hop into your back 40 and blast away without asking permission. But unmarked Woodlots, especially ones that aren't being used .... nobody worries too much once you get away from farmland and city limits. I'm happy with the way laws work out here, because they favour hunters, but if I moved out west, I'd be buying a Platt book or whatever pretty fast.

Can't argue about dumb hunting and shooting laws, but the hunting seasons are slowly getting fixed.


Fill your boots, but I prefer to live where the landowner does not have to jump through hoops to stop folks from accessing their land.

Much prefer the current state of affairs where the onus is placed directly upon the shoulders of the persons out and about, to be aware of where they are, and where they should not be.

As a land owner, it makes more sense to me that I should NOT have to jump through hoops to have my property lines treated with some respect.

So, maybe folks are 'dumping' on NB, because it comes off sounding like it's about three ways arse backwards, between the way that you get treated as hunters and recreational shooters, plus the foolishness of laying the onus onto the landowner to have to go put up something of an indicator, easily removed by those of a mind to, in order to assert a small amount of control over what is already theirs.

Cheers
Trev
 
Back
Top Bottom