# what do you think about improperly posted land?



## mfeining (Nov 2, 2002)

I was wondering what other sportsmen think of improperly posted land? Also, what about land that is posted ambiguously, you know like when a sign is placed in such a way that it could be interpreted as posting the whole darn county? I'm not looking for someone to strum my heartstrings and tell me that it is courteous to ask even if land isn't posted or that you should always know where you are at. I know that. If you want to see where I am coming from, look at section 24 in your small game proclamation. It lays out the requirements for land to be considered to be posted. In a nutshell it says landowners must legibly sign posters (how often is the landowner's name legible if it is even signed at all). It also states signs must be placed NOT MORE THAN 880 yards apart (1/2 mile) or at all gates if enclosed by a fence. How about when you go through a cattleguard and there is a sign on the left side of it and the land on both sides once you cross the cattleguard both sides are fenced? The reason I am asking this question is that I just got my first antelope buck with the rifle and it was pretty tough figuring out whether land I saw antelope on was posted or not. On top of that, if the land was posted there was either no signature or one that was difficult to read.


----------



## Tator (Dec 10, 2005)

lot of people don't post their land properly, which kinda urks me in a way but waht can ya do. Wether posted properly or not, if there is a posted sign, I don't hunt on it. Just because it's not posted properly doesn't mean you can go on it anyways, I believe they could still nail ya for trespassing, but I"m assuming.

Tator


----------



## DakotaDog72 (Sep 27, 2005)

I agree with Tator. Is it really worth the trouble. You should get the point when a sign reads "No Hunting" that they don't want you in there. Besides there are plenty of spots to hunt in ND


----------



## KYUSS (Aug 27, 2005)

Yep, I agree D.Dog72. No hunting means no hunting.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Your way better to put up signs that say no trespassing... that way it will be prosecuted under the criminal trespass law. If you put no hunting it falls under the hunting statues. Its this way to create revenue for G&F.

So you see in ND there are two separate laws regarding trespass.. what you post implies which law you are going to follow.

And as always TAKE IT TO COURT and let a jury decide no matter how trivial it is.


----------



## dieseldog (Aug 9, 2004)

just feel lucky that you can still hunt on private land that isn't posted. Even if there is a sign that looks like a year old stay the heck off the intent is there. Keeping abusing the well it isn't posted right bs and pretty soon all private land will be posted irregardless. Also some names are hard to read because the sun wind and rain ruin the ink it was written with. If it even remotely looks posted stay off. Pretty simple concept.


----------



## Tator (Dec 10, 2005)

geez, relax, having a bad fantasy football day?????


----------



## dieseldog (Aug 9, 2004)

no just sick and tired of people ignoring perfectly posted land and hunting anyways. I can't spend all day patrolling my land that is why I put up posters.


----------



## Dak (Feb 28, 2005)

As far as I'm concerned, the old tire with "no hunting" painted on it means the same thing as "by the book" posting. Stay out.


----------



## nomrcy (Jul 14, 2005)

I agree- no hunting means no hunting. In a conversation with a Warden while teaching Hunter Safety one time-the landowner can still file criminal trespass charges if he wants to. I don't feel like taking that chance.


----------



## mfeining (Nov 2, 2002)

You have all made excellent points and it looks like the consensus is stay off even if the land is posted improperly. I wanted to clarify that I don't go on land that's posted even if the landowner doesn't "follow the proper procedure". My dad doesn't even go on land that has a piece of plywood on a fencepost with no sign attached, citing the possibility that the sign could have been "ripped down in last night's windstorm". What do you guys think about that?


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

mfeining said:


> My dad doesn't even go on land that has a piece of plywood on a fencepost with no sign attached, citing the possibility that the sign could have been "ripped down in last night's windstorm". What do you guys think about that?


That may be a good policy. I was chewed out a couple years ago about being in posted land and when I told the landowner that I searched the whole piece of property and there wasn't a sign anywhere, he said WHAT??? ~ I got in his pickup with him and we drove around the land and apparently someone had taken down his posted signs from the plywood :eyeroll: I apologized and he let me finish the hunt.... I got one of the 3 roosters I had shots at :eyeroll:


----------



## njsimonson (Sep 24, 2002)

Improper posting...the way it is going will be a thing of the past, as ND gets ready to join the rest of the country regarding trespass law. Unless you contact your legislators to combat the almost certainty that is the trespass bill that comes in each session, you won't have to worry about posting issues.

As for now, improper posting does not save you from a trespassing charge, it only gives you a defense at law. Why push the issue and go to court, if you get the landowner's intent is "KEEP OUT" it's best you do not push the envelope, and have to pay the price of a court case.


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

I agree with what everyone has said. I still like the posting signs with names and phone numbers though as it makes it much easier to locate the owner for asking permission.
I realize No Hunting means No Hunting but sometimes I wish there was a sign that would say what it is posted for, especially when coyote/fox hunting in winter. Rarely is land posting meant for predator hunting (although it sure could be!) but how many of you ignore No Hunting signs if you see a coyote running across a field in a safe place to shoot with no farmhouses around?


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

9 times out of 10 the judge will side with the landowner when it comes to improperly posted land. The best course of action is dont go on, or get permission to go on.
Its annoying when you see one sign on a half section, or signs with no name, but the intent to post is obviously still there.


----------



## Burly1 (Sep 20, 2003)

Barebackjack is correct. And to answer the post; it matters very little what we might think about improperly posted land. If there is even a small token effort to post a piece of property, in the eyes of the law, it is enough. Burl


----------



## wallmounter (Jan 12, 2005)

I have a new twist to this topic. I just returned from a ND duck hunt and one night while scouting we found a posted field and decided to track the owner down to seek permission. After chasing around for over an hour the owner happened to be a G/O, and the land was leased. What do you guys think about making G/O state on their posts that this land is owned/leased by a G/O so people don't waste their time trying to track them down.

I also agree that any form of posting is not worth the risk of hunting, but I don't think it is to much to ask of the owner to legibly write their name and number on the post.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

I agree wallmounter. In a perfect world the land would all be posted in accordance with the written law (well actually, in a PERFECT world the land wouldnt be posted at all but...) its far from a perfect world. Ya have to make due.


----------



## DustinS (Nov 9, 2004)

barebackjack said:


> I agree wallmounter. In a perfect world the land would all be posted in accordance with the written law (well actually, in a PERFECT world the land wouldnt be posted at all but...) its far from a perfect world. Ya have to make due.


Actually, in a PERFECT world, farmers and landowners wouldn't have to worry about posting their land.


----------



## tclark4140 (Aug 8, 2006)

well...while we were hunting in n.d. this year. as always we stay off of posted ground unless there is a peice of posted ground close to a farmhouse or someone is in the field working. and then we ask just in case we can obtain permission. well from the very nice farmer we got this reply. "u dont need to ask i dont post my ground" we said well there is a sign on the corner is that NOT your ground he said absolutly it is. we rode down with us and took the UNSIGNED new sign down and told us to have fun. i think there maybe alot of creative ways for people to have secured there own private hunting spots this year, or why wouldn't someone sign the sign. if u thought you would get bothered to much sign it and say dont even ask.


----------



## mfeining (Nov 2, 2002)

wallmounter makes an excellent point. tclark makes an excellent point as well. the only thing i don't like about making outfitters post their land as leased is that it seems like free advertising if every parcel that is outfitter controlled had to be posted as such. i think it would be even worse if there was a specific sign they were required to post. it would be painfully obvious to especially visiting hunters where they could hunt if they paid x amount. tclark is right, a legible printed name with don't even ask is much more acceptable than a tire with no hunting painted on it hanging on a post.


----------



## Lvn2Hnt (Feb 22, 2005)

My take on it from both a landowner and hunter point of view:

As a landowner, if you are really concerned enough to post your land no hunting and expect others to abide by your limitations, then take the time to make sure you have posted properly. Whether it's a tire or a $15 sign, your intent should be expressed at every corner, gate and every 880 yards (minimum). Granted, weather and inconsiderate hunters may bring demise to your signs, but it is not unreasonable to expect that you as a landowner should take responsibility for the upkeep of your posted signs.

As a hunter, there is nothing more frustrating than driving an entire section of land and seeing one lone sign on a fence post and wondering what land it corresponds to. Or, after driving the entire section, seeing absolutely no sign, deciding that it is open for hunting, walking that land and at the very back end of the field finding a dilapidated sign - that's when your heart sinks and you start to wonder if you're going to get in trouble and if the land is posted or not.

As many on this forum have pointed out time and time again, you should always ask. Yes, I agree, but how are you supposed to know who to ask when there isn't a name or a farmyard w/in miles. Or what about when that moster is just standing out in the middle of the field and won't be there when you get back?


----------



## 264 (Sep 23, 2005)

This has got to be one of the most touchiest topics around hunting. As for who's land is who's someone told me last year you can buy topographical maps or some kind of map stating who owns what! My thoughts on this are that, if I as a hunter has to follow the laws/rules of posted signs than so should the landowners. Fair is fair.....RIGHT? Just sign them already, and if you don't wan't anyone asking you for permission, write on there don't even ask or find a sign that says that! Easy enough! If I owned land I would sign it right! 8)


----------



## dieseldog (Aug 9, 2004)

are you going to go and resign after every time it rains then too. Pain in the *** to keep a good name on there. A no hunting sign means no hunting signed or not. If you want to know who's it is buy a plat book and figure it out.


----------



## itchy (Aug 15, 2006)

On our last trip, we saw tons of geese in a field. Didn't see any signs EXCEPT for one hidden behind a plastic drum, the ONLY one we (I) found around this section. We tracked down the landowner and he said "Oops, must have missed that one" when he was taking down his no hunting signs. He said it wasn't posted go ahead, and you might want to check out this field and gave us directions to a field we limited out on the next day in 1-1/2 hours. My brother gave me sh*t when I saw this ONE sign, but I like to err on the cautious side. Needless to say, my brother was eating crow, not to mention geese, the next day.


----------



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

dieseldog, you need to quit using the kid's washable markers!  :lol:


----------



## Bushwacker (Mar 30, 2003)

I agree with requiring signs to have a name on them. I have run across and heard of guys who have posted land they have no right to but didn't put any name on the signs. It is illegal to post land you don't have a right to. They post land with absentee landowners and the signs are intimidating enough to keep the average guy out so they can have good spot to themselves. Also if we didn't require signs with names on them we would all have to buy county atlases. They cost over $40 each. Look in one sometime any you will find many sections that have multiple landowners, often four or more in one quarter, and often the property lines are not marked, and rented by someone else.


----------



## mfeining (Nov 2, 2002)

Didn't the ND Century Code used to state that land posted with no hunting signs had to be reposted every year (a sign was only valid for a 12 month period from the day it was signed)? I just looked and couldn't find it. That would be helpful with the problem dieseldog mentioned. I've seen some of those yellow posted signs with signatures 3 years old signed with a sharpie and still legible.


----------



## Duckslayer100 (Apr 7, 2004)

This may be a bit off topic, but I thought it was funny. Was out scouting south of HWY2 and come across a field full of ducks. Kept going down the road and saw a famrhouse up ahead. As we got closer we noticed a big 4x8 piece of plywood with this written on it:

*Hunters: Don't even ask*

...and then a smily face.

It cracked me up. Got the point across if you ask me. :wink:


----------



## Horsager (Aug 31, 2006)

What do I think of improperly posted land?

I think it's a pain in the arse!!

And I don't go on it without permisson.


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Here is the NDCC laws that reference posting.

*20.1-01-17. Posting of lands by owner or tenant to prohibit hunting - How posted -Signs defaced. * 
Only the owner or tenant of any land may post it by placing signs alongside the public highway or the land giving notice that no hunting is permitted on the land. The name of the person posting the land must appear on each sign in legible characters. The signs must be readable from the outside of the land and must be placed conspicuously not more than eight hundred eighty yards [804.68 meters] apart. As to land entirely enclosed by a fence or other enclosure, posting of signs at or on all gates through the fence or enclosure constitutes a posting
of all the enclosed land. No person may in any manner deface, take down, or destroy posting signs.

*20.1-01-18. Hunting on posted land and trapping on private land without
permission unlawful - Penalty.* 
No person may hunt or pursue game, or enter for those purposes, upon legally posted land belonging to another without first obtaining the permission of the person legally entitled to grant the same. No person may enter upon privately owned land for the purpose of trapping protected fur-bearing animals without first gaining the written permission of the owner or operator of that land. A person who violates this section is guilty of a class B misdemeanor for the first offense and a class A misdemeanor for a subsequent offense within a two-year period.

*20.1-01-19. When posted land may be entered. * 
Any person may enter upon legally posted land to recover game shot or killed on land where the person had a lawful right to hunt.

*20.1-01-20. Entering posted land with gun or firearm prima facie evidence of intent to hunt game. *
Proof that a person having a firearm, or other weapon declared legal by
governor's proclamation, in the person's possession entered upon the legally posted premises of another without permission of the owner or tenant is prima facie evidence the person entered to hunt or pursue game.

Even though it does not state it in the current law IMO a sign posted and unsigned still constitutes an intent to post the land.

Bob


----------



## parker_lipetzky (Aug 31, 2006)

If its posted at one corner or no nmae on the sign it shoulndt matter posted is posted and repect it because its not your land!!! and you should drive around the feild to check if its posted even if its not posted on one corner.


----------



## M*F (Nov 3, 2006)

I think we should join the ranks of "everything's automatically posted" and be done with it.


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

Personally, I'd rather not have to defend my actions by saying to an irate land-owner that "there was no year on the sign and it looked old", but if it wasn't posted at all on the corners (or other obvious places) but there was an obviously old sign in an out of the way location (an easily missed or forgotten spot), I'd probably go on it.

Yes, technically, it may be legal to go on it because it isn't posted correctly, but I just don't want the confrontation.


----------



## boondocks (Jan 27, 2006)

mfeining said:


> You have all made excellent points and it looks like the consensus is stay off even if the land is posted improperly. I wanted to clarify that I don't go on land that's posted even if the landowner doesn't "follow the proper procedure". My dad doesn't even go on land that has a piece of plywood on a fencepost with no sign attached, citing the possibility that the sign could have been "ripped down in last night's windstorm". What do you guys think about that?


What do I think about that? If the sign was ripped down in a wind storm, how am I supposed to know that? If isn't posted I'm hunting it. Piece of plywood or not.


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

I may have to re-think my position somewhat... really near where we hunt there have been a couple of guys slapping posted signs on everything that isn't posted with nothing at all written on them (I suppose they don't want to be held responsible).

I think I'll have to take it case-by case as to whether I go on the land. I feel like these idiots are using the responsible nature of guys like us against us. :******: I don't want them to gain any advantage by doing this, but I don't feel like it would be my place to take them down. The land-owners either don't notice or don't care enough to drive around to take them down.

I'm not about to try traipse though any land because the posted sign isn't autographed. We've got plenty of areas to hunt, and I'm not about to go out of my way to hunt those areas. Although, If there's a patch that's never been posted before and it has a blank sign, and there's a promising looking patch of weeds across the line from where I'm at, I'll probably check it out and bounce back into our land.


----------



## Whelen35 (Mar 9, 2004)

As a land owner in the middle of Fargo and Grandforks I see a lot of people. And I post my land. I post it because I and some of my freinds hunt it. I get a lot of people who disreguard the no hunting signs. I want to know where people are so they don't shoot at each other. I have never had people ask if they sould hunt before the hunting season has begun. I have had people refuse ot leave atert asked to, and I have had my wife threatened when asking people to not hunt. I have been called every name in the book, and I still let people I know or that have asked before hand to hunt. I have even had people walk whrough my back yard to hunt when my famile watched and they even walked my no hunting signs and were in my yard!! I have let a lot of people hunt my land in the years, but there are a lot of people who don't care for the land owners choice to allow acces to their land.


----------



## rap (Mar 26, 2002)

i only read the title of this post and haven't read the posts, but even though land might be improperly posted, you should consider that land as posted and respect the landowner....


----------



## BigDDL (Sep 29, 2004)

Here's an idea I've had for a while. How about all legal No hunting signs be provided by the Fish and Game and be paid for with F&G money. Signs would be printed with the current year in large numerals, and would be good for say, three hunting seasons. Landowners and/or Renters (with posting priveleges) would be the only persons able to obtain these signs at the county courthouse, and the courthouse clerk would be responsible for legibly printing the name, address, and phone number onto the sign. As for the talk of writing coming off, well, I'm sure we can find a permanent marker that will last three seasons. After the three seasons are over, the landowner/renter would be responsible for obtaining and posting the land with current signs. The G&F could even work with local hunting/conservation organizations and provide persons to help post land by landowners who are unable to post their land for health or other such legitimate reasons. (I don't believe that living out of state should be a viable reason)
The landowner may still post his/her land for no trespassing, however unless the signs saying no hunting are the official signs, they cannot press charges for hunting on private land. They may still press charges for trespass.
In exchange I think that the Landowners/Renters should be given immunity from any sort of accident that may occur to anyone hunting/trapping on their land, except in the case of gross negligence on the landowner/renter's part.
I think this would help people determine if a posted sign is valid, and would help to stop persons from posting land that they have no right to post. It would also be a hassle to out of state owners who post their land, and to G/O who post all the land that they can. Anything that makes things harder for those two groups is always a plus in my book.
I don't think that it would be much of a problem to legit lanowners/renters. They have to post every year or every few years already. They may have to make a special trip to the courthouse, but they would be getting the official no hunting signs for free (after showing proof of ownership in the plat book or a copy of their lease/rental agreement)..
just a few thoughts


----------



## BigDDL (Sep 29, 2004)

Here's another idea. A G/O can also obtain official no hunting signs with written permission from the landower. However a G/O must pay a #dollar per-acre-posted tax. This would not only benefit hunters in general, but also the landowner. For example, the G/O knows that if he posts the land that it will cost him say, 1000 dollars. Of course the G/O will want the landowner to do the posting to save that money. However the landowner can then request more money from the G/O just for posting his own land.


----------

