Thoughts on permission for hunting private land

[deepskyal]

Here are the applicable laws: http://www.legis.state.wv.us/WVCODE/ChapterEntire.cfm?chap=61&art=3B

(4) "Posted land" is that land upon which reasonably maintained signs are placed not more than five hundred feet apart along and at each corner of the boundaries of the land, upon which signs there appears prominently in letters of not less than two inches in height the words "no trespassing" and in addition thereto the name of the owner, lessee or occupant of the land. The signs shall be placed along the boundary line of posted land in a manner and in a position as to be clearly noticeable from outside of the boundary line. It shall not be necessary to give notice by posting on any enclosed land or place not exceeding five acres in area on which there is a dwelling house or property that by its nature and use is obviously private in order to obtain the benefits of this article pertaining to trespass on enclosed lands.

This is for WV.....notice the exclusion for "enclosed land or place not exceeding five acres. Enclosed being the key operative here.

Pa. throws in height requirement, no less than 3' from the ground and no more than 5' and also addresses hand painted signs being a bright orange and letter size.

From what I've been reading, and there is a fairly stong consesus state to state, you cannot expect reasonable privacy when your property is large in acerage, wooded, unfenced and unposted and not of clearly visable agricultural use.

Pennsylvania's Constitutional, private property laws go further than the US Consitution in protection of owners rights. But the requirement is still there to somehow convey that ownership to anyone that either intentionally or unintentionally trespasses.

I close my case.

Al

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[Gary in Pennsylvania]

So, if I owned a piece of property in PA, and didn't fence it, post it, or mow it, I'm supposed to believe that the law would side with the guy that wandered on in, started searching for tangible items buried on the property, and removed (stole) whatever items he found to be to his liking ?

What does PA law say about theft?

Diggem'

Diggem'.........your post is INCOMPLETE. I think you forgot something.
You forgot the 'bell' that signaled the end of ROUND 1. It's up to you to make the 'Ding!' sound for your own benefit.
Is it that you didn't get what you wanted out of the OP? Some folks thought the trap was set on the trespassing.......but that trap didn't work. Neither I nor deepskyal have been on the offensive in this thread at all. We honestly answered a poll and thread question and have had to dodge the stones thrown ever since. But I don't mind. I'm absolutely prepared to defend my convictions......believe me, I don't live life with blinders on.
But - since you insist on going there......
Prove that the few coins & junk in my finds bag came from this property. I enter only under those conditions that Pa State Law would allow. So that's covered. Now how can anyone demonstrate that the few coins or pulltabs in a finds bag definitively came from this property.
If you wanna gnaw this bone further - start your own thread.
JB started what appeared to be an honest poll thread. My perception is that it is a failed witch hunt. We're talking land permissions here.

If you can afford the property, you can afford to protect it thru signs or fences. Why should I incur an expense because someone can't define their property?

I could flip that around and say "why should they incur an expense because someone can't keep themselves off of other people's property".

That sounds like an issue that needs to be taken up with the state......not the citizens. Though we strive to abide by the law.......we, by no means, MAKE the law.




Ok jb7487....I'm going to hold you accountable for your statement now. See next quote:

I think that property owners should have a reasonable expectation of privacy and shouldn't have to take any measures at all to put up fences and signs just to claim their land. You believe the opposite.

Find me ANYWHERE in this thread or any other post where I or deepskyal believe that homeowners SHOULD have to take measures just to claim their land. That's one nugget you won't ever find....at least not from me (and I'm sure deepskyal as well). What WE'RE saying is that the law is the law. It is what it is. The language of PA law is such that we CAN, in SOME circumstances, enter unposted and unfenced land. Do NOT manipulate this discussion and our words thus compromising the facts.

I could flip that around and say "why should they incur an expense because someone can't keep themselves off of other people's property". I'm not trying to put you down with that comment. I'm just pointing out the differing opinions. I think that property owners should have a reasonable expectation of privacy and shouldn't have to take any measures at all to put up fences and signs just to claim their land. You believe the opposite. A long time ago, before all of the land was taken, it was reasonable for people to have to lay claim to land to point out that it was "taken". But in this day and age it really shouldn't be required. If you don't personally own a given piece of land then it should be obvious that it is owned by someone else. And it should be your responsibility to find out if it is ok for you to use it. That's my feelings on the subject. You obviously disagree and so does your state.

What strikes me as most amazing is that this is YOUR THREAD. You posted a poll and asked a question. You got respectful and tactful answers. Did you put that second option there as an HONEST option......or were you merely baiting just to posture yourself for an argument? If you just TRULY wanted the answer/information - you got it. Move on. Otherwise, shame on your conniving self.
This reminds me of one of those lessons in life "Don't ask a question if you're not prepared for honest answers"

 

[jb7487]

you cannot expect reasonable privacy ...

And this is where our opinions diverge. I expect reasonable privacy by default. You think that someone should have to show their desire for reasonable privacy. We are on opposite sides of the fence. You may indeed be right and the law is perhaps on your side in some (or even all) states. If so, I think that is a shame. Back in the old days it made sense that you had to claim your land. Today, all land belongs to someone or something. So privacy should be the default in my book. But my book is not the book of the law or maybe even of common belief. I also live in an area that has a lot of smaller plots of land and farm fields. I do not live in an area with thousands of acres of woodlands, swamps, moutain ranges, or deserts. If I lived in these area I might think differently about land use and privacy.

 

[Gary in Pennsylvania]

you cannot expect reasonable privacy ...

And this is where our opinions diverge. I expect reasonable privacy by default. You think that someone should have to show their desire for reasonable privacy. We are on opposite sides of the fence. You may indeed be right and the law is perhaps on your side in some (or even all) states. If so, I think that is a shame.

Bingo.

Very well said JB. That is true. We differ on our opinions. Diversity is good….but with diversity, you’ll get some things that ya just don’t like.
We likely agree on most things and disagree on very few.
We’re human.


But let me say with deep confidence………our Daily Finds thread FASCINATES me. What B-E-A-U-T-I-F-U-L and amazing finds. DOZENS per day. EVERY day.
Don’t be fooled.
Just like the thread where most of us admitted that we’d be mum if we found a valuable cache/treasure……I don’t believe for one second that every single ‘Today’s Find’ post was approved with a notarized stone chiseled tablet!

 

[diggemall]

Folks, I meant no disrespect whatsoever by my questions / remarks, and you have my most sincere heartfelt apologies if my posts came off that way.

I see a wide differentiation between public and privately owned land, and anything thereon. The notion of unauthorized trespass doesn't really offend me nearly as much as the idea of someone feeling justified in poking around as they see fit and removing whatever they deem appropriate, regardless of the state of the property.

Truly abandoned property, on the other hand, would effectively be property that has returned to the county or state for lack of taxes paid, death of the former owner and no legal heirs, or whatever.

As has been stated, laws do vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In my case, if ownership were to revert to the county, I would be in trouble for MD-ing it because our lovely county has a strict no-MD-ing county owned properties w/o a permit issued by the county board ordinance, and they have NEVER granted a permit to date, except to bona-fide archies.

As others have said, I guess we shalll agree to disagree.

Diggem'

 

[deepskyal]

Well, I'll agree also...some laws just suck, whether we like em or not.

When I had my home in a county park, there was no way for anyone to know when they were tromping thru the woods to know when they crossed into my woods. Generally, this didn't bother me...until they began to allow hunting in the park to thin the deer population. The park dumping their debris didnt help either.

I could no longer assume people knew what was mine or the park's. If I expected to be able to keep hunters out and let park employees know my woods weren't there dump...I had to post it.

I hated the idea...but it's what I had to do.

None of us like the restrictions they impose, seemingly daily, on metal detecting. I drove 5 hours one time to hit a ghost town, only to see a huge No Metal Detecting sign....very specific. A ghost town for Pete's sake...absolutely nothing visable but cut grass.

I'm sure...at some point in time, we here in Pa. will begin to see more restrictions....just like everyone else. Presque Isle in Erie has minor restrictions of when you can detect and where, State Gamelands are off limits....(all those old lumbercamps, imagine), state parks you have to check in......and recently I requested to detect a ghost town on RR property and got the old NO because of Liability...which again, according to Pa. law, the owner isn't responsible for someone getting hurt on their property. But that issue is still thrown in our face.

This has been a great discussion guys...thank you.

Al

 

[Gary in Pennsylvania]

Folks, I meant no disrespect whatsoever by my questions / remarks, and you have my most sincere heartfelt apologies if my posts came off that way.

Oh……Absolutely none taken and goodness – no apologies necessary! Debate is debate. Standing up for one’s conviction should be commended – as you have……and me as well.
I’m a quotey kind of guy. Lemme share one:

"A good leader must sometimes be stubborn. Armed with the courage of his convictions, he must often fight to defend them. When he has come to a decision after thorough analysis - and when he is sure he is right - he must stick to it, even to the point of stubbornness."

General Omar N. Bradley
Address to the US Army Command and
General Staff College, May 1967

That doesn't prove that I'm right and you're wrong....it just exemplifies the strength of our convictions.

I see a wide differentiation between public and privately owned land, and anything thereon. The notion of unauthorized trespass doesn't really offend me nearly as much as the idea of someone feeling justified in poking around as they see fit and removing whatever they deem appropriate, regardless of the state of the property.

And I can see where you’re coming from. I DO feel justified….but not as I see fit. I justify myself within the narrow loopholes in my state law (which, in MY area, are plentiful). Remember, had I/you/other MD’er not come along whether permission is granted or not……it is entirely likely that whatever you uncovered would have STAYED covered for another millennia. It’s like the paradox of Schrödinger's cat……..without the MD’er there to recover – you’ll never even know if there’s stuff in the ground or not.

As has been stated, laws do vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In my case, if ownership were to revert to the county, I would be in trouble for MD-ing it because our lovely county has a strict no-MD-ing county owned properties w/o a permit issued by the county board ordinance, and they have NEVER granted a permit to date, except to bona-fide archies.

OUCH! That’s pretty HARSH!

As others have said, I guess we shall agree to disagree.

This guarantees that our lives will not be reduced to a wretched, boring existence!

 

[MD Dog]

Been doing this for a long time and it's really all about common sense. Too many people get wrapped up in their own Idea of what the hunting sites look like where they come from. But it really varies allot from one location to the next. People think that when someone says if it's not posted then I hunt it, they start thinking in terms of someone going onto someones manicured front lawn and digging fox holes looking for clad dimes and such. But the reality is no one is that stupid or they wont last long in this hobby. But for instance where I live there are very old villages with some very old broken down homesteads. if these places have no signs saying posted or no trespassing and they are obviously uncared for I jump right in and detect. No I don't have angry owners showing up with shotguns blazing or dogs being set loose. Most times if an owner shows up and doesn't want me to detect the land they'll say who gave me permission and I'll say it looked abandoned so I didn't think anyone owned it. If they say leave I do, no hassles no fuss. If they call the police the police will tell me to leave, no hassles no fuss. No I don't get arrested, and no I don't have that happen very often at all. In fact I would say it has only happened about three times in the last ten years. In fact I have been chased out of public spaces far more by cops that anywhere else.

If it is posted I skip it all together. If it is public I jump right in and detect. If I get chased away from a public site I leave without any hassles, then wait a month or two then go right back, most times without anybody saying anything the second time out. I don't worry about what can happen because it doesn't. The police aren't looking to hook up senile old folk like me for doing something as harmless as metal detecting. They have their hands full with the next door neighbors druggie kids stealing guns and shooting each other. The courts are overrun with drug cases. the prisons are too full to keep DUI cases for more than 3 days and the states are too poor to afford more police or prison guards. For those who wanna say my way leaves a bad impression about our hobby I say, your wrong our hobby had a bad name long before I got involved and fixing it won't be possible anytime in the future since the amateurs have easy access to MD's. So I'll continue to ask for permission only when I think it is warranted. And have plans for how to detect for the future when it is outlawed all together.