New SK trespassing laws coming soon

Status
Not open for further replies.
scott_r

scott_r

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 99.6%
223   1   0
Location
Behind a .204 Ruger
I hate even linking anything to CBC but this was out there. Looks like things are gonna change for hunters, hikers, ATV'er, snowmobilers ect... in Sask. Nothing new for us trappers who have to ask permission, get special permits and report to CO's often. I really don't understand why FSIN is so against having people obtain permission on private land to enter on it, Im sure the chief would be upset if you just wondered on his property for the hell of it.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sask...respassing-law-mandatory-permission-1.4815756
 
So we have a few criminals stealing and vandalizing. So lets make it harder for all of the people who respect the land when they use it.
I have 100 times more people use my land respectably without permission than I have thieves and vandals.

Does anybody really think this will stop thieves and vandals?

As far as chief Cameron's concerns, Indians are already banned from hunting private land without permission so nothing changes for them.
 
Last edited:
skhunter said:
So we have a few criminals stealing and vandalizing. So lets make it harder for all of the people who respect the land when they use it.
I have 100 times more people use my land respectably without permission than I have thieves and vandals.

Does anybody really think this will stop thieves and vandals?

As far as chief Cameron's concerns, Indians are already banned from hunting private land without permission so nothing changes for them.
Click to expand...

There is a U.N Proposal that would grant Indigenous People's unfettered access to ALL land for the purpose of hunting&fishing.

I know even IF Canada were to adopt this proposal it would be highly unlikely they would allow 1st Nations to access private land without permission.....BUT nothing Tru-DOPE does make sense so wouldn't be a bit surprised because every year there is less &less game on Crown Land due to unregulated hunting.


Cameron "hinted" to this in his statement that they "feel" Treaty Rights Trump landowners?

Who do you think LIEberal Supreme Court would side with?

I suspect it would lead to violence so the RCMP would likely try to keep the peace by siding with Farmers?
 
Nothing will change. Now, LEO and Conservation will have to divert their resources to the exploding trespass/poaching problem this will cause.
 
350 Mag said:
There is a U.N Proposal that would grant Indigenous People's unfettered access to ALL land for the purpose of hunting&fishing.

I know even IF Canada were to adopt this proposal it would be highly unlikely they would allow 1st Nations to access private land without permission.....BUT nothing Tru-DOPE does make sense so wouldn't be a bit surprised because every year there is less &less game on Crown Land due to unregulated hunting.
Click to expand...

I suppose we all know what would happen if unregulated hunting was allowed on private land then as well.
 
canadian hunter312 said:
So how does it actually work out there? Do you guys currently just hunt wherever you'd like regardless of whose land it is?
Click to expand...

Right now the onus is on the landowner to post his land if doesn't want anyone on it. So anyone may access unposted land, but if told to leave by the landowner they must leave immediately.

There are regulations about proximity to dwellings.
 
Right now in sask it is tresspassing if you enter private land any time of the year even if its not posted but if you have a hunting licence you can enter private land if its not posted. It is still best to ask permission
 
canadian hunter312 said:
So how does it actually work out there? Do you guys currently just hunt wherever you'd like regardless of whose land it is?
Click to expand...

In the 90s when I hunted southern Saskatchewan, there were deer everywhere. It was possible to shoot them in the stubble fields without a building in sight and not a single vehicle pass on the grid road while I was dragging something back to the road allowance. Unless the land was fenced, posted NO HUNTING, or HUNTING WITH PERMISSION ONLY, I always operated under the 'if it isn't illegal, its legal' principle. And, if the corrals were in use, I just kept on driving.
 
I prefer and am used to a system where all private land requires explicit permission to access for any reason. It is privately-owned, is it not? Most places in the world and even in Canada operate like that. In Alberta we even have to request permission to access public land that's under a grazing lease. Makes sense; the leasee is paying money to have use of the land. They are required to provide reasonable access for recreation on leased land.

My "homeland" of Finland allows non-hunting or fishing recreational land access without permission on private land. Sounds a bit communist to me. But there the right to hunt is based on land ownership. You can get moose tags based on how much land you and/or your hunt club members own. The hunt club pools the land and might get 20 tags among 50 members if the members' land parcels are not big enough to support a tag for each one. At least that's how I understood it.
 
Wonder if we would see a lot less hunters in the field when this passes and see a lot less $$$ going back to the govt, less money equals less game wardens ?? Some valid points that criminals wont bother following these rules either. Everyone could loose on this if it passes when you think about it.
 
I, for one, think alot of trespassers these days have more than hunting in mind. Most are looking to steal.

The RCMP has stated there will be no extra police officers only a few extra patrols?

Our Government s prefer to spend taxpayer's $$$$ on policing the law-abiding rather than go after criminals.

Criminals will ALWAYS be means to an end for Socialist/Leftist Government s because they can use the "guise of public safety" to trample on the Rights of Free Men.

That's why the LIBtards recently reduced mandatory minimum s and penalties specifically aimed at deterring people from joining gangs?
 
Why doesn't the UN stick to what they were originally mandated to do?
Canada is always a soft target and the Un always gets a few points by siding with "indigenous" rather than getting the facts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom