New SK trespassing laws coming soon
- Thread starter scott_r
- Start date
- Status
There was a reason for the seemingly strange law that hunters didn't need permission on un-posted land. It is part and parcel with the law saying that you can't charge for hunting access and that goes back to before most of us were born. The fear was that outfitters would lease up land and locals would have no place to go. Naturally the first thought was if that the outfitters couldn't rent it up front; they would do it sneakily or under the table. That lead to another law; that it is illegal to outfit on posted land. Even if you made an under the table deal to lease hunting access you couldn't post it. That takes all the fun out of illegal leasing when you couldn't stop other people from hunting there. At least the outfitter couldn't, the land owner could still tell people to leave, but he'd have to look his neighbour in the eye when he asked about the outfitter. Which you know is the first thing he is going to do.
I wish they would have just left things alone. I'm a hunter and a landowner. My thoughts about what is logical about game ownership and access won't be popular.
I wish they would have just left things alone. I'm a hunter and a landowner. My thoughts about what is logical about game ownership and access won't be popular.
That's the way it is here . A poor shot gives no right to trespass . If you shoot a deer here and it runs on to private property you must get the land owners permission to recover it . If permission isn't granted or can't be obtained the only other legal option is to call a CO who can escort you on to private land . This happened to a neighbor a few years ago . He heard a shot and drove down his hill to find 3 hunters on the road just as a CO was driving up the hill . The CO said the hunters could recover a deer they shot , which the neighbor was going to allow anyway but attitude changed the situation . The neighbor told the CO and the hunters they could go find and recover the deer but two of them would be leaving their rifles in the truck and they could take one rifle to finish off the deer as they have no permission to hunt on his land and don't require three rifles . The CO agreed . The deer was found dead .
Well, the law may change, otherwise more landowners will be doing this...........
https://imgur.com/a/ZP35YbU
Ask, it's only good ethics, morals and values for hunters.
Just to clarify:
1) the signs- I’m simply trying to point out what they cost, we don’t post our land now.
2) I don’t own the best hunting land around here, the ranchers all have land better suited for deer hunting.
3) I don’t charge for access, I’m hearing rumours from other RM’s about it.
4) Bradley Directories makes up some map booklets that have contact information for people that live in the RM on farms and acerages, give them a call and see which RM’s he has coverage for.
Thank You for the history lesson on the ridiculous permission rules in Saskatchewan that I have always scratched my head about...I'd bet your thoughts on game ownership and access are near the same as anyone with a lick of sense and a back forty.
No its not
You two really need to stop making up BS.
Just because you are too lazy to make a phone call, does not magically put up an impenetrable force field around peoples land. No matter how much you are trying to make it sound that way.
Shawn
"There was a reason for the seemingly strange law that hunters didn't need permission on un-posted land. It is part and parcel with the law saying that you can't charge for hunting access and that goes back to before most of us were born. The fear was that outfitters would lease up land and locals would have no place to go. Naturally the first thought was if that the outfitters couldn't rent it up front; they would do it sneakily or under the table. That lead to another law; that it is illegal to outfit on posted land. Even if you made an under the table deal to lease hunting access you couldn't post it. That takes all the fun out of illegal leasing when you couldn't stop other people from hunting there. At least the outfitter couldn't, the land owner could still tell people to leave, but he'd have to look his neighbour in the eye when he asked about the outfitter. Which you know is the first thing he is going to do.
I wish they would have just left things alone. I'm a hunter and a landowner. My thoughts about what is logical about game ownership and access won't be popular."
Not sure where you are getting your information. A landowner in Sask. can post his land No Hunting but he can still let people hunt at his discretion. There is lots of land in South East Sask that is posted no hunting and outfitters have it tied up. Not hard to have them pay the taxes on it if you are in goose country.
I wish they would have just left things alone. I'm a hunter and a landowner. My thoughts about what is logical about game ownership and access won't be popular."
Not sure where you are getting your information. A landowner in Sask. can post his land No Hunting but he can still let people hunt at his discretion. There is lots of land in South East Sask that is posted no hunting and outfitters have it tied up. Not hard to have them pay the taxes on it if you are in goose country.
If that's the case the new law is meaningless.
If under the new law I am able to access the land to look for wounded game without permission and not be trespassing.
LOL
So now you having to ask permission makes trespassing laws meaningless
You just cant stop can you
Shawn
No, me accessing unposted land to pick up a wounded goose without prior permission is trespassing under the new law.
Under the current law it is not trespassing.
So as I said before, under the new law a wounded goose would have to be left in the field if the hunter does not have permission to access the land.
Its trespassing now, but there is a law contrary to property rights on the books
Shawn
The wildlife act; read it sometimes if you get bored.
Sale of hunting rights
43 Subject to this Act and the regulations, no person shall, directly or indirectly,
sell, trade or barter or offer for sale, trade or barter the hunting rights for wildlife
on any land.
1998, c.W-13.12, s.43.
If you are paying the outfitter and hunting on posted land you are directly and indirectly paying for hunting access. If the outfitters have it all sewed up then they are directly charging for access because you couldn't go there without them. If the outfitters are paying the landowners taxes they can both be charged. Proving that last one might be a little tougher, but forensic audits can do wonders. If you don't like it, find a CO with a set of balls and have the outfitter and hunters charged. Or go to your MLA and have him make them do their job.
You're right that a landowner can post their land and still allow some people to hunt and keep others out. Where you're wrong is that as soon as money gets tossed into the mix it changes.
The right exists whether or not I tell you about.
The fact you think otherwise is telling. Some would also call it a "clue" that this exists no where else. Yet every where else hunting has not been criminalized or disappeared like you claim it will.
Shawn
Again, you have the right to control access now. So do I.
The fact you are too lazy to assert that right is telling.
Never said hunting would be criminalized or that it would disappear. I said the way some people hunt would be criminalized even though the way they hunt now does no harm to people or property.
You mean like your right that you are too lazy to use by not putting a don't steal my cell phone sticker on your cell phone? LOL
My right exist whether or not I choose to use it. Its still a fact you have no right to anyone else's property no much how much you want too LOL
What was that?
LOL
Shawn
You do not need to post no stealing signs on your land.
Again, have never claimed access is a right.
All BS made up by you taking statements out of context.
Go ahead and quote where I said that. But you are arguing that I need to put signs up to tell you that you cant use my land or you think you have the right to use it.
Sure you have and we all know it. You just have not come out and admitted it. You are just whining that you are loosing your not right to use land that is not yours and that it criminalizes you and the "law abiding" LOL
Sure not my fault that your BS that you never said it was proven wrong by your own posts
Shawn
- Status
