I hate trespassers....

Not trying to sound like a lawyer, but if the landlord granted Tactical 870 a Right to hunt on his property, than tactical does have legal stand to allow him to intercept, eject or charge anybody who encroaches on that right, provided that he can prove having that right. Not much different than a tenancy situation, where the tenant has all those rights.

Also, the crock's using Tactical's equipment/blind, in my opinion, amounts to the theft of his property, also entitling him to defend his property. The trespasser doesn't need to move his blind. By siting in it, he has unlawfully taken possession of somebody else's property.

Accordingly, in my humble opinion, one bird shot (7/12 or 8, not larger than 20 ga) fired at the perpetrator's butt from a distance, not less than 12 meters is perfectly justified! Disclaimer; Please note that I am not a real judge. Proceed at your own peril! :D
 
Last edited:
Accordingly, in my humble opinion, one bird shot (7/12 or 8, not larger than 20 ga) fired at the perpetrator's butt from a distance, not less than 12 meters is perfectly justified! Disclaimer; Please note that I am not a real judge. Proceed at your own peril! :D

Pepper Spray is all the rage right now.
 
OK 870, situation is becoming more clear - if the landowner is willing to say you are acting as his agent as far as trespass is concerned on his land, and you should make sure it is in writing with a legal description of the property etc..

Compare it to a mall cop acting for Sears or 1123200 Ont Ltd. Just the mall cop goes to court.

Just make sure that will fly with your land owner, and local leos. And go ahead and deal with the trespassers. You are the guy on the ground with this as far as reading whether you are becoming a PITA to the landowner or doing him a favour by turfing undesireables.

I havent enforced the TPA in years but as it stood when I retired this should work without involving your landowner in court.
 
The law here states you must have written permission on you. Not that you must have permission. Regardless of having permission or not, you can be charged if you do not have a letter from the landowner. There's no reason for the landowner to be involved for that particular charge.

I get what the law says.

What your not getting is that there are no law enforcement officers that are not going to do their due diligence and contact the land owner.

Unless you have something in writing more than you have permission to hunt the land. You will need something that says you are able to act on behalf of the land owner.

Which again will be checked with the landowner by law enforcement.

No matter how you look at it the land owner will be involved.

Just be aware of that and weight that against the possibility that the land owner may think this is more trouble than its worth. And decide to not have you use his land.

Shawn
 
Not trying to sound like a lawyer, but if the landlord granted Tactical 870 a Right to hunt on his property, than tactical does have legal stand to allow him to intercept, eject or charge anybody who encroaches on that right, provided that he can prove having that right. Not much different than a tenancy situation, where the tenant has all those rights.

My first thought is the fact 870 is not buying the right to hunt and no money is changing hands changes this dramatically. So it is not a tenant situation at all.
 
Got more land with our brand grazing on it and our hay and crops growing on it than most people could even fathom. We do have some posted land, because we have cows out there usually until the middle of December. If we had a guy ask to go hunt on it and then piss and moan when he saw signs of other people out there, then go contact the CO when we said not to, that person would never be welcome on ANY of ours. Its not your land, do act like it is.

I agree.

I have friends that have very wonky ideas about the private land they hunt.

I see Hillbilly`s point, but I guess some here don`t.
 
Back
Top Bottom