Post your trespassing/poacher stories here

[Buckmeister]

Just reading srupp's post about trespassers on private gated/fenced land reminded me of something that happened to me two seasons ago that absolutely boiled my blood.

Almost a year ago we moved back into town from my Bro-in-laws property. He had us house sitting for him for about 3 years. The place was a hunting haven in region 3. Great mule deer spot, tons of terrain, great access, and private. The property was a quarter section in size, gated and fenced and well posted with signs. Yet, except for winter, people would trespass on a regular basis all year round. Dirt bikers would come in from the top side where there was no gate (but was posted) and tear up the hillside doing hill climbs and crap. All sorts of hunters would sneak across whenever they got the chance. I caught a number of people and chased off others. The common reply would be, "I didn't know this was private". My reply would be, "I guess that means you don't know how to read then either".

Anyways, it was late November, only a few days left in hunting season, I was out in the yard on the tractor when I thought I heard a distant gun shot. I quickly turned off the tractor and listened....nothing more. I wasn't sure what I heard and thought maybe I mistook the noise I was making for a gun shot. I really needed to finish the work I was doing in the yard and only had 1/2 hour of light left, so I decided to keep working and not check out the hillside for poachers. Bad mistake.

The next morning I went for a hunt and found the evidence. There was about an inch of snow on the ground from a few days back so I could easily tell what these poachers were doing. There was two of them, they had entered onto the property where a tree had fallen across the fence, then proceeded to hunt the upper half of the land. They had an ATV, one stayed on the machine while the other hunted on foot. I studied the tire tracks and boot prints very carefully and memorized what they looked like. I found a gut pile and four deer hoofs. They left the way they came in. Not much else I could do. I figured they wouldn't be back again since they had got a deer. I was wrong again!

A number of days past and it was now the last day of the month. My son had yet to get a deer so we headed up the hill at first light, very hopefull. I came up to a spot that afforded a good glassing opportunity of the hillside so I stopped and had a look thru the bino's. And what do I see, but a guy standing almost smack dab in the middle of the property. We ourselves were on an ATV so I quickly went up and "talked" to this fellow. I chewed him out a new arse hole and told him to leave. He told me he couldn't cause he was waiting for his buddy who was about 500 yards away on the ATV. A light went off in my head. I went down the track to find his buddy, all the while studying his tire tracks, they were the same as the other day. I found the other fellow, he was busy glassing the hillside. I approached and asked if he saw anything, he said he was watching a doe. I said, "Hey, that was a nice buck you guys got the other day right over there". He looked kinda sheepish and disturbed at the same time and replied, "Uh, thanks. But that was my buddy who got it." I said, "That guy over there I just talked to?". "Yep" he replied. I then chewed him out a new arse hole. I explained that if they would just come knock on my door and ask real nice, that I might just let them hunt up here. But now that I caught them sneaking around, I would never, NEVER, let them in again. Do you know what he had the nerve to say??? He said, "Well so and so (a previous owner who died long ago) used to let me hunt here", and "I've hunted all season and haven't got a deer yet". Well boo hoo, cry me a river man. I sent them packing.

I mean, what else could I do?? These guys left the property the same way they came in, thru the broken fence. I called it in to R.A.P.P., I have the number in my cell phone, all they could ask me to do was get a description of their vehicle and license plate since officers were busy somewhere else. I couldn't provide them with that info because I didn't know where they parked. I went for a search of the vehicle soon after, but all I found was tire tracks of where they parked. I continued with my son hunting for the rest of the day, but it was a bust. Much later I discovered that at least one of these guys lived just 5 minutes down the road. In that neck of the woods, that constitutes them as neighbors.

It just burns me about the lack of respect. These guys were younger, say in their twenties or early thirties. When I did have anybody come and knock on the door asking permission, which didn't happen often, it was always older guys, say 50 to 85 years of age, and I usually granted them their requests. Yet, nearly everytime I went up to hunt, I would find tire tracks or footprints on the property.

Oh, one last thing, I think these same guys came back a year later (last season) and legally got a two-point moose I had my eye on. It wasn't on the private land but on the crown land just above, so everything was legal. But I bumped into them that same day and thought they looked familiar.

Anyways, rant over.....for now. I've been holding that in for almost two years now. So post up any stories you may have please.

[Gateholio]

I had some idiot from Surrey tell me to move the firewood I was cutting (on my driveway) because he wanted to "go up the road and camp up there." I told him to screw off and start backing up the way he came, as my house was only another 100m up the hill. He tried to argue for a bit, but I can be persuasive if I have to be.

[sawmill]

I had some idiot from Surrey tell me to move the firewood I was cutting (on my driveway) because he wanted to "go up the road and camp up there." I told him to screw off and start backing up the way he came, as my house was only another 100m up the hill. He tried to argue for a bit, but I can be persuasive if I have to be.

And you know how to cook him too!

[squamishhunter]

I remember being with my dad hunting on his friends farm in merville (with permission obviously) and we are hiding in a creek bed looking out into the fields. We hear a vehicle drive along the road at the back end of the property and stop, then a few minutes later, the classic "Disney" crooks show up (one short and fat, one tall and thin) rocking track pants and sweats. They were picking stuff out of the fields, and being young (10?) had to have my dad explain what shrooms were. So my dad told me to wait where we were and he walked up to them and told them to get lost.

[Jagermeister]

This rant reminds me of all the property owners that illegally gate access roads to crown land and there are quite a few of them throughout the province. Region 3 has more than the fair share expanding their private hunting reserves.

[houndsman]

Hey Dustin I Know the guys that you are talking about & have had my own problems with guys. I was after that big old tom at the end of the deer season & ran into them ,I asked them to drive their quads in their old tracks as it made it much easier to find Cougar tracks when the snow wasn't all messed up .when I went up the hill the next day they had driven all over every inch of fresh snow on the mountain & I was pissed .A few hours later I ran into them again & they said that there were some other guys up there the day before & they had driven all over the snow I told them that it was funny that the other guys have the same track pattern as them, I also told them that this was the last year that they would be hunting on that hill as the new owner would physically rip off there faces & throw them off the hill .The trespassing is grinding to a halt As the new owner has been laying down the law with the locals.

[BuckNaked]

Called the RAPP line on a couple of people poaching pinks from the Chilliwack River between the lake and sleese crk the other day.

[Buckmeister]

Hey Dustin I Know the guys that you are talking about & have had my own problems with guys. I was after that big old tom at the end of the deer season & ran into them ,I asked them to drive their quads in their old tracks as it made it much easier to find Cougar tracks when the snow wasn't all messed up .when I went up the hill the next day they had driven all over every inch of fresh snow on the mountain & I was pissed .A few hours later I ran into them again & they said that there were some other guys up there the day before & they had driven all over the snow I told them that it was funny that the other guys have the same track pattern as them, I also told them that this was the last year that they would be hunting on that hill as the new owner would physically rip off there faces & throw them off the hill .The trespassing is grinding to a halt As the new owner has been laying down the law with the locals.

That's good to hear. I drove by the house the other day and saw all the changes, looks good. I was up there hunting on the opposite side of the valley, and when I was coming down and nearing the property I could see a person on a dirt bike riding down hill. Does the new owner or one of his family ride dirt bike?

[rides bike to work]

I talked to a ranch hand the other day near Princeton the other day that admitted firing his gun at a tree beside a hunter to scare him off as well he told me this was common practice with rancher. I found this quite disturbing. As well with your story of chewing the trespassers faces off I find isn't an effective way to deal with the trespassers. You have trespassers poaching on your land. Call the police and have them charged.
ive met a few other ranchers some friendly some down right sh!t house crazy. The ones that block access to crown land seem to think that that's their land now .

Heres my story
we where hunting an area that bordered ae ranch land as does most land in Bc we drove down a dead end road and hiked around for mabey half an hour when we heard a chain saw running not far from our truck so we headed back and about 200 yards from our truck there was A man who had cut down a tree blocking the road.the mans truck had a bunch of fire wood in it so We walked up to see what was up and offer our help to load his fire wood. The man asked "so whatcha kill" I mentioned that we had taken a white tail doe the day before . The man says "oh so you shot old bessy eh to bad she was the only white tail around here we were hoping she would attract some bucks to the area. Where did you shoot her ? You nknow most of this is private land dont you" at that I pulled out my map wich I had printed off showing the private land and showed him the vast amount of crown land in the area as well told him the doe was shot on crown land and rest of the details were none of his business. He continued to ask to many questions as well imposing his opinion that we had just wiped out the white tail population in the area . Knowing better than to argue with an idiot I bit my tongue grabbed my chains saw cut his log in three and pushed them off to the side and drove around him. Without saying a single word .
It is my opinion that all private land must be clearly posted.
A link to private land maps in Bc sticky on here and on hunt buddy app would be a great tool for all of us as well.

[Rackem]

I know of a rancher in 150 Mile who has pulled a rifle and pointed it, with one up the spout, safety off, right at hunters who were on CROWN land that he had a cattle lease on. Now this fella had a very very quick temper, and was prone to violence.

The hunters were not interfering with his cattle in any way, and were not on his private land. He claimed someone had shot one of his cows the day before, and now he was hunting anyone with a firearm. It took some quick talking to calm him down so he didn't commit a double murder, but it was a frightening experience for the hunters to say the least. They filed a police report and were told by the police that the same fella had been falling trees across roads and trapping hunters and confronting them. He fell a tree right on some hunters truck that same year.

[Cookie1965]

Wildlife Act (Section 39) - A person is
not permitted to hunt on cultivated land
or on Crown land which is subject to a
grazing lease while the land is occupied
by livestock, without the consent of the
owner, lessee or occupant of the land.

I know I've been guilty of this one, probably everyone here has. Be polite to that grouchy rancher, if he holds a range lease you may be trespassing.

[Rackem]

Yes, but the area they were actually hunting was devoid of cattle.

[Cookie1965]

Huh? But he had a cow shot the day before? How would anyone know where the cattle was on the range? Either they're using it or they're not (i.e. they've been rounded up). Maybe if you ask the rancher he could tell you which areas his animals are in.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending pointing a loaded firearm at anyone, I just think sometimes gates may be locked because we're supposed to go and ask for permission. I know of gates that are locked in the summer and fall but unlocked winter and early spring. The rancher's livelihood is walking around out there and he may be nervous some idiot is going to do something stupid.

[Ambush]

And this man is still in possession of firearms??


I know of a rancher in 150 Mile who has pulled a rifle and pointed it, with one up the spout, safety off, right at hunters who were on CROWN land that he had a cattle lease on. Now this fella had a very very quick temper, and was prone to violence.

The hunters were not interfering with his cattle in any way, and were not on his private land. He claimed someone had shot one of his cows the day before, and now he was hunting anyone with a firearm. It took some quick talking to calm him down so he didn't commit a double murder, but it was a frightening experience for the hunters to say the least. They filed a police report and were told by the police that the same fella had been falling trees across roads and trapping hunters and confronting them. He fell a tree right on some hunters truck that same year.

[Rackem]

He had several leases, in different areas. No gates were locked. Nothing posted. Well known area for hunting. No cows on that lease at that time. He rotated leases. Permission is very good to get, when it is required.

I understand the ranchers livelihood, as I also depended on the cattle industry at the time. He was a person I had worked with several times on his ranch.

But on crown, with no locked gate, no posting and no cattle on that lease....pointing a loaded firearm at people is just not a good thing.

The police said that the hunters had done nothing wrong. The shot cow was in another area.

[Rackem]

I am pretty certain that this particular rancher is no longer allowed to have firearms, due to further actions later on.

[hawk-i]

The Asshats that post crown land should be charged with interferring....Every "No Hunting or NO tresspassing" sign should have to include the owners name and phone no. to make it a legally posted sign... this would stop a lot of the false posting BS.
As for a poaching story, this year I was hunting north of Chetwynd for a while....met a lot of very friendly and helpful people in the area. However on the 9th of oct. I met a guy that had the belief that I shouldn't travel down a powerline because he had left his Quad parked off to the side of it a few miles from the access point to the line. He was quite ignorant when we met, his first words where "didn't you see my quad" and it pisses me off when I've been sitting here all day and someone comes through. All I replied was "oh, so this is your stop is it" and asked if they would be hunting the same place the next morning, his reply was yes. Anyways seeing as there was two of them I thought it best to just turn around and leave as I seen some pretty good sign a few miles away in another direction that same day.
These guys had a trailer parked at the enterance to the hunting area and there was no one else in the area.
I had my truck and camp set up about a mile away from their trailer, hidden out of sight off the side of a 4x4 trail. To see it you have to round a corner and then you're only twenty yards from my set up. Went to sleep early that night in anticipation of the next days hunt when anterless whitetail opened (about 9 PM). Around midnight I was awoken by the sound of a v-8 engine varying its rpm, like it would on the 4x4 trail. Peeking out I can see lights scanning the treeline in front of my camp slowly coming closer. The lights round the corner, and it looks like the truck head lights and someone standing in the box with a hand held spot light, as they see my truck they come to a sudden stop and reverse in a hurry with the spot light scanning my truck as they disappear around the corner. It was a little unnerving as you really don't know what their intentions are or how many wobbley pops may have been involved during the adventure by them. Anyways get back to sleep and I'm off to my choosen hunting spot in the pre-dawn darkness the next morning....ended up being a great morning as at a few minutes after 9 AM I have a nice 6 point bull Elk come in to check out my calling, I range him at 503 yards, crank up 9 MOA on the 8-32x56 Sightron and send a 300 grain Accubond down the barrel of my 338 LM, the bull simply collapses on the spot. So now the work begins, I quarter him and take the first load back to my camp. On the way back for the next load I decide to use the trail that will take me past where the other guy are camped, not a trace of their camp....packed up and gone! Now I can't say for sure, but to me it would appear that these guys were the lights in the dark and after being surprised in the dark by my camp decided it best to pack up and leave before anyone could get a plate number.
It was an extra great day hunting for me, on return after the second load of Elk,I also shot an anterless whitetail, this one with my 270 win model 700 remington (changed rifles as the LM is a little heavy to pack when packing meat).

[skibum]

It is my opinion that all private land must be clearly posted.

Agreed, If someone has a problem with land they own, they should mark it. If can patrol it, they can obviously put up a couple signs (and the signs will get shot up, but still it is their responsibility)

[rides bike to work]

Talked to a fellow today who was moose hunting up around vanderhoof this past week. A member of his hunting party shot a 4 point muley in a cut block and as they were cleaning it a co pulled up and said this is private property. A neighbor had called it in. The neighbor then showed up freaking out at the hunters. The co told the man to calm down and let him do his job. The land wasn't posted wasn't cultivated a according to the co is only recently private. The co gave the hunter a 100$ fine and took the animal away. The co was quite cooperAtive agreeing with the hunter that it was an honest mistake

[hawk-i]

Doesn't the BC hunting regs say private property is considered enclosed and subject to tresspass laws if it is cultivated, enclosed by a fence or hedge, or river bank or it is clearly posted at all access points....I think I'd be going to court over the 100 dollar fine and looking to get the deer back. This looks more like entrapment than an innocent mistake.

[caddisguy]

Wildlife Act (Section 39) - A person is
not permitted to hunt on cultivated land
or on Crown land which is subject to a
grazing lease while the land is occupied
by livestock, without the consent of the
owner, lessee or occupant of the land.

I know I've been guilty of this one, probably everyone here has. Be polite to that grouchy rancher, if he holds a range lease you may be trespassing.

Holy cow crap. Where can we get maps showing where are the grazing leases are? There's so many cattle guards in some areas, it's hard to tell where the cattle are even supposed to be restricted to and thus which part would even be restricted to hunters. Seems like most of the places I end up have cattle roaming in one place or another. Signs should be mandatory and up to the rancher to maintain if he doesn't want to end up with hunters "trespassing" on "his/her (crown) land".

[J-Man]

You can download the files from my signature and put it into google earth

[caddisguy]

You can download the files from my signature and put it into google earth

Thanks J-Man... glad I haven't had any crazy ranchers cut trees down on me or shoot at me... though I'm a new hunter and haven't shot anything in these areas either.

[J-Man]

Talked to a fellow today who was moose hunting up around vanderhoof this past week. A member of his hunting party shot a 4 point muley in a cut block and as they were cleaning it a co pulled up and said this is private property. A neighbor had called it in. The neighbor then showed up freaking out at the hunters. The co told the man to calm down and let him do his job. The land wasn't posted wasn't cultivated a according to the co is only recently private. The co gave the hunter a 100$ fine and took the animal away. The co was quite cooperAtive agreeing with the hunter that it was an honest mistake
Vanderhoof is like hunting Sheridan Lake, always tripping over private land or leases anywhere close ish to town. Anyone heading to Kenny Dam sees tons of deer along those fields but anytime I have stopped to talk to a farmer I've been read the riot act for just driving up to talk to him.

[Cookie1965]

Hey J-Man, the clicky links in your sig aren't working.

[J-Man]

It works when I click it, but here is the webpage (http://www.data.gov.bc.ca/dbc/geographic/connect/index.page) you want the Land Ownership and Status, Google Earth uses the KML files.

- I think the BC Law site is screwed up right now, the first two aren't loading on any of their pages

[aggiehunter]

we were all nestled into our treestands in the late BOS for whities in the EK..we had watched a red Dodge pickup with a young guy in the back with bow in hand and soon they drove by...one stand is close to the road and a few whities were making there way to my Nephews treestand...all three guys got out and launched a barrage of arrows at one deer...gut shooting it...it ran and bedded down in some bush 17 yards from his perch...the truck drove away...came back a few minutes later and then drove away. Shortly after that a guy appears to my nephews left carrying a scoped rifle...he proceeds to shoot the deer a few times as my nephew yells at him. While shaking he climbs out of his tree and confronts the guy..the guy says he just didn't want the deer to suffer..they slide the deer away and take off as I'm climbing down to see if he's Ok. We sacrifice the rest of the hunt calling the CO...he comes out and investigates...drives back to town and comes back with a police dog to find the spent casings...that was all interesting...he takes statements and three days later he calls to tell us he caught the guys in town...the confessed...and he let them off. This after wasting our valueable hunting time and thousands of dollars of CO/Police time. So maybe next time our phones will stay off.....

[Cookie1965]

Holy cow crap. Where can we get maps showing where are the grazing leases are? There's so many cattle guards in some areas, it's hard to tell where the cattle are even supposed to be restricted to and thus which part would even be restricted to hunters. Seems like most of the places I end up have cattle roaming in one place or another. Signs should be mandatory and up to the rancher to maintain if he doesn't want to end up with hunters "trespassing" on "his/her (crown) land".

The reality is that it's more complicated than it seems, because, among other complications, there are grazing leases and grazing licenses which bestow upon the holder different levels of "power" over other land users. Of course the rancher who doesn't want hunters around his cattle ain't likely to tell you he only holds a license not a lease as he tries to kick you out.
I laugh at the idea that it's the cattleman or landowners responsibility to post the land. In law thats like me walking into your back yard and saying it's OK because you didn't post it. As a user of the land it's your responsibility to figure out where you're allowed to be and who to ask if you need to ask for permission. Ignorance is no excuse in the law.
Fact is most times it won't be an issue as long as you show some respect. If someone approaches you don't get in his face with your "right" to be there. If you open a gate close it. Don't scare the crap out of the guys livestock, just common sense stuff. But I know even 40 years ago my ranching family didn't want to let hunters on their land because the ass's never closed a gate behind themselves, but confrontational ranchers are the exception too, in my experience.

[Swamp mule]

A grazing lease is only for the rancher to have access to the forage for livestock and the ability to harvest any crop on that land. Other than that all other natural resrouce users have access to this crown land and they can not inhibit this access. However that being said, as quoted under sec. 39 anytime livestock is on there there can not be any hunting occurring on the land until all livestock has been removed. In addition to that the ranchers that I have talked to mistake their grazing licences for leases. big difference right there. Anytime that you go on imapbc, grazing licences always start off with RAN####### followed by the number. Grazing leases do not follow this numbering scheme. I have also seen in several instances where there has been crown land posted as "no hunting" or "no trespassing" Make sure that your GPS points and your locations are accurate and if so then take the GPS point and picture of the signage and report that to the forest district range person or C&E and they will deal with the rancher.
Wildlife Act (Section 39) - A person is
not permitted to hunt on cultivated land
or on Crown land which is subject to a
grazing lease while the land is occupied
by livestock, without the consent of the
owner, lessee or occupant of the land.

I know I've been guilty of this one, probably everyone here has. Be polite to that grouchy rancher, if he holds a range lease you may be trespassing.

[BearStump]

we were all nestled into our treestands in the late BOS for whities in the EK..we had watched a red Dodge pickup with a young guy in the back with bow in hand and soon they drove by...one stand is close to the road and a few whities were making there way to my Nephews treestand...all three guys got out and launched a barrage of arrows at one deer...gut shooting it...it ran and bedded down in some bush 17 yards from his perch...the truck drove away...came back a few minutes later and then drove away. Shortly after that a guy appears to my nephews left carrying a scoped rifle...he proceeds to shoot the deer a few times as my nephew yells at him. While shaking he climbs out of his tree and confronts the guy..the guy says he just didn't want the deer to suffer..they slide the deer away and take off as I'm climbing down to see if he's Ok. We sacrifice the rest of the hunt calling the CO...he comes out and investigates...drives back to town and comes back with a police dog to find the spent casings...that was all interesting...he takes statements and three days later he calls to tell us he caught the guys in town...the confessed...and he let them off. This after wasting our valueable hunting time and thousands of dollars of CO/Police time. So maybe next time our phones will stay off.....
soooo you called the co's because somebody did the right thing and finished off a wounded deer?? How was he supposed to know that you guys were 17 yds away hiding in a tree? I'm surprised that the CO even wasted his time coming out once, let alone coming back with a dog for a non-offense. This story sounds fishy to me.

[E.V.B.H.]

Even killing a wounded animal with a gun is illegal In a bow only season. Use your bow.

[dirtrider999]

Last week I was on my quad for the first morning of a week long trip. I noticed a vehicle behing me so I turned on the first atv trail and a few minutes later I heard a shot coming from the road I just turned off of. So when I got back to the road and went .5 km down the road I seen the vehicle off into the bush about 60 yards with some deer legs in the air and I could only see that it was gutted. Well it had turned out that my dad was only about 3-4 minutes behing the vehicle. So when he pulled up to the vehicle he figured he would go over and congratulate the two hunters. As he was walking up they seemed really uneasy and were quick to say that 4 more deer had run off in the other direction. So my dad walked up to the deer to see it was a doe with its neck slit right around. So not to get in a bad situation with them he just got the licence plate number and was on his way. So after repeating it about 1000 times in his head we met back at camp and called it in. We are still waiting to hear back from the CEO . But these two guy were pretty stupid being 60yards from a well used road.

[Davey Crockett]

Holy cow crap. Where can we get maps showing where are the grazing leases are? There's so many cattle guards in some areas, it's hard to tell where the cattle are even supposed to be restricted to and thus which part would even be restricted to hunters. Seems like most of the places I end up have cattle roaming in one place or another. Signs should be mandatory and up to the rancher to maintain if he doesn't want to end up with hunters "trespassing" on "his/her (crown) land".

The interesting and confusing part with this section of the wildlife act is that it would lead you to believe that it is permissible to hunt on a graze lease as long as there are no animals. Not true.

A graze lease is issued under the land act and is much different the other forms of range tenure (range permit under frpa). A graze lease is pseudo private land and the lease holder has the right to "quiet enjoyment" which basically means that unauthorized people are not permitted to enter. If a person hunts, or enters for that matter, upon a graze lease without permission, they would be committing an offence under the trespass act. There are certain fencing and/or signage standard that must be met or the person must ask you to leave. It's a mystery to me why the wildlife act includes this as an offence...

[.300WSMImpact!]

my dad owns some great hunting land in manitoba, and we cant put trail cams on it because when people come onto his land illegally and see his cams they smash them so they dont leave a picture

[6.5x55]

Crown animals are everybody's, its high time the private property owners realized that they don't have the right to every animal on their property. There is a huge difference between a man's home is his castle and holding 100's of acres of mother earth hostage to the exclusion of everybody. A number of civilized countries have put a stop to this feudal nonsense and opened the rural areas to hunting as they should . The only caveat that I would absolutely require is that a program such as that offered by the BCWF for private property access be mandated by legislation and enforced. Everybody deserves to be empowered not just the property owners.

[.300WSMImpact!]

Crown animals are everybody's, its high time the private property owners realized that they don't have the right to every animal on their property. There is a huge difference between a man's home is his castle and holding 100's of acres of mother earth hostage to the exclusion of everybody. A number of civilized countries have put a stop to this feudal nonsense and opened the rural areas to hunting as they should . The only caveat that I would absolutely require is that a program such as that offered by the BCWF for private property access be mandated by legislation and enforced. Everybody deserves to be empowered not just the property owners.

I think thats what they have in sask, I like the idea!!!

[aggiehunter]

Bearstump...as my as happened story was written this occured during a BOS....

[Terrier Blades]

There are a lot of interesting posts here. I do not think that if a good honest hunter goes to a farmer and asked for permission that a lot of them will deny permission...... unless they have had bad experiences with hunters.... and here is the root of the problem.
For years I am hunting on several famers fields and properties. For years they are surprised that I am the ONLY one who comes and asks, the others just take things for granted. For Years I have to listen to their complains about cut wires & fences, broken off fence posts, damaged gates, garbage left during hunting season, damaged fields, hunters driving over their fresh cut hay etc..... yes for years I have listened to all this.
More and more farmers are upset about 'some' hunters behavior and the good guys take the communal brunt too. So if you are getting into contact with an upset farmer who is afraid for his life stock, doesn't want to spent the time and money to fix his fences again etc etc. ask yourself the question why this is! And the regs state it is the hunters responsibility to make sure he/she knows where you hunt and private property, trappers cabins or outfitters cabins need permission from the owner to be used.
Despite all the trouble I can still go and ask for the right to hunt their fields and get it. it is THEIR property or lease and they pay for it if its lease money or property taxes etc. and they have to follow tough regulations if not they will lose their rights, intact fences are one of them. Despite what the law and the regulation states, some good old fashion respect and common sense goes a long way.
The comment that property owners regard game animals as theirs .... I don't know where that comes from.... I never had any trouble getting permission to hunt on private property but maybe it depends on how one asks. And actually in elk country a lot of farmers like ta have hunters shoot some of the elk as they can be a lot of trouble for farmers.
The BCWF tries to act in the good interest for hunters and landowners, but be sure that even if this becomes regulation/law there will be restrictions to respect private issues and property; fences and fence post are just one of them, means private property.
So if you don't get permission, ask yourself why! If the landowner is upset ask why!

[Swamp mule]

It is true.
That has been challenged in court and won in the favour of a recreational user. A grazing lease is issued under the lands act under the agriculture policy. There is a difference between your "range tenure (range permit under FRPA)" that is two different meanings for that as well. Yes, the lease holder has the right to quiet enjoyment but people are still able to enter onto that land and does not require permission from the land owner because it is still crown land. Though they may pay taxes and run their cattle on it or harvest crops. It is not a Ag lease and that is more stringent than a grazing lease. A person would not be committing an offence under the trespass act.
The interesting and confusing part with this section of the wildlife act is that it would lead you to believe that it is permissible to hunt on a graze lease as long as there are no animals. Not true.

A graze lease is issued under the land act and is much different the other forms of range tenure (range permit under frpa). A graze lease is pseudo private land and the lease holder has the right to "quiet enjoyment" which basically means that unauthorized people are not permitted to enter. If a person hunts, or enters for that matter, upon a graze lease without permission, they would be committing an offence under the trespass act. There are certain fencing and/or signage standard that must be met or the person must ask you to leave. It's a mystery to me why the wildlife act includes this as an offence...

[gcreek]

Crown animals are everybody's, its high time the private property owners realized that they don't have the right to every animal on their property. There is a huge difference between a man's home is his castle and holding 100's of acres of mother earth hostage to the exclusion of everybody. A number of civilized countries have put a stop to this feudal nonsense and opened the rural areas to hunting as they should . The only caveat that I would absolutely require is that a program such as that offered by the BCWF for private property access be mandated by legislation and enforced. Everybody deserves to be empowered not just the property owners.

Do you own property? If so, do you have any problem with someone camping on your lawn without asking and shitting in your flower bed?

Regardless of size, a rancher/ farmer's land is his backyard. He has either paid for it or has a mortgage on it and if a trespasser should fall down and injure himself on that property he is liable. I have no problem giving permission to those who ask but have no respect or patience to one who thinks what is mine is his for enjoyment.

[Rackem]

Do you own property? If so, do you have any problem with someone camping on your lawn without asking and shitting in your flower bed?

Regardless of size, a rancher/ farmer's land is his backyard. He has either paid for it or has a mortgage on it and if a trespasser should fall down and injure himself on that property he is liable. I have no problem giving permission to those who ask but have no respect or patience to one who thinks what is mine is his for enjoyment.

No doubt, if I am paying rent, mortgage or hard earned cash for my 160 acre parcel, I'll be damned if a hippy drum circle sets up camp and starts the next Burning Man on my hayfield.

I would want the discretion as to WHO I let on my property and WHEN. If I wanted a commune, I would select the participants carefully, not some random jackass from the city with no understanding of respect or nature.

If I did own a quarter section, I would hunt it myself anyway. My friends could hunt after my freezer was full. When theirs was full, then respectful hunters could have a crack at it.

[Davey Crockett]

It is true.
That has been challenged in court and won in the favour of a recreational user. A grazing lease is issued under the lands act under the agriculture policy. There is a difference between your "range tenure (range permit under FRPA)" that is two different meanings for that as well. Yes, the lease holder has the right to quiet enjoyment but people are still able to enter onto that land and does not require permission from the land owner because it is still crown land. Though they may pay taxes and run their cattle on it or harvest crops. It is not a Ag lease and that is more stringent than a grazing lease. A person would not be committing an offence under the trespass act.

Do you recall the court case? This would apparently contradict common law.

[Looking_4_Jerky]

A grazing lease is only for the rancher to have access to the forage for livestock and the ability to harvest any crop on that land. Other than that all other natural resrouce users have access to this crown land and they can not inhibit this access. However that being said, as quoted under sec. 39 anytime livestock is on there there can not be any hunting occurring on the land until all livestock has been removed. In addition to that the ranchers that I have talked to mistake their grazing licences for leases. big difference right there. Anytime that you go on imapbc, grazing licences always start off with RAN####### followed by the number. Grazing leases do not follow this numbering scheme. I have also seen in several instances where there has been crown land posted as "no hunting" or "no trespassing" Make sure that your GPS points and your locations are accurate and if so then take the GPS point and picture of the signage and report that to the forest district range person or C&E and they will deal with the rancher.

Actually Swamp mule, sadly you are wrong on this. Grazing Lessees are given "the right to quiet enjoyment" of the leased land and exclusive control of access/egress explicit in their tenure (I work with Crown land tenures of various sorts every day). All that land and rights for pennies in return to the Crown! What a great deal for every other land user in the province (not). Because the origins of the grazing lease are of a time when there was much land available with little competing interests, and that differs starkly to today, the province decided to revamp the grazing program and eliminate grazing leases as they slowly expired. The cattleman's association, however, preyed on the f*cking bleeding hearts in Victoria and lobbied successfully to have leases renewed if they already exist. So, now the deal is that no new ones are issued but those existing are given option of a 30 yr renewal at time of expiry. Good deal for ranchers, can't say the same for anyone else. If I had my way I'd nuke grazing on Crown land all together. If you want to raise cattle, put them in feed lots and manage the filthy maggots yourself instead of making them everyone else's problem.

[caddisguy]

Actually Swamp mule, sadly you are wrong on this. Grazing Lessees are given "the right to quiet enjoyment" of the leased land and exclusive control of access/egress explicit in their tenure (I work with Crown land tenures of various sorts every day). All that land and rights for pennies in return to the Crown! What a great deal for every other land user in the province (not). Because the origins of the grazing lease are of a time when there was much land available with little competing interests, and that differs starkly to today, the province decided to revamp the grazing program and eliminate grazing leases as they slowly expired. The cattleman's association, however, preyed on the f*cking bleeding hearts in Victoria and lobbied successfully to have leases renewed if they already exist. So, now the deal is that no new ones are issued but those existing are given option of a 30 yr renewal at time of expiry. Good deal for ranchers, can't say the same for anyone else. If I had my way I'd nuke grazing on Crown land all together. If you want to raise cattle, put them in feed lots and manage the filthy maggots yourself instead of making them everyone else's problem.

How much are these grazing leases anyway? Can I get a lease, throw a cow on it and deny access to other hunters? Seriously though, I'm glad this thread came up. I did not realize how much private and leased land is out there. I am lucky I did not end up hunting on any of it.

Right now, I'm looking specifically at Iron Mountain and Selish Mountain in the Comstock/Gwen Lake area. I see License Tenures and License Applications, but no private land or leases, for the purpose of "wind power" That said, I did notice a few sets of cattle guards and some livestock grazing near the summit of Iron Mountain and fencing in a lot of areas around Selish Mountain. Was I allowed to be there? If I would have seen a buck I would have shot it. Now I have no idea and I'm glad I didn't see anything.

If there is a lease / license for livestock, how do you track down the rancher who owns the lease to ask permission to hunt in the area?

[Rackem]

No hunting for you –no hunting for anybody else & that includes the owner. PERIOD.
The wild animals belong to all.

You are at the mercy of the owner whether you can hunt or not on his/her property. Cherry picking the hunter/s is wrong. This is the main reason why I will never hunt elk on private property or any other animal for that matter.

I would rather have NO hunting rights to my own land than have every city slicker with a gun traipsing across my land with a firearm. How would you like it if I showed up at your place unannounced and started looking around your yard, firearm in hand?

How is cherry picking the hunters wrong? The animals can move freely from my land to yours to crown. I am the one who will determine WHO and WHEN. Anything less than that is a direct threat to me, my kids, and my livestock and property.

[caddisguy]

My point was that why should someone that knows the owner or is a friend or a friend of a friend or a relative have the advantage over another well- meaning, law-abiding hunter to hunt on his/her land

I try to think of analogies outside of hunting to evade my internal bias. Maybe I have the biggest, flattest lawn in the neighbourhood. Is it unfair that my theoretical kids would have the best soccer practicing opportunities? Maybe people from all over should just be able to come over and play soccer on my lawn. Maybe I have an epic view of the city and mountains from my hot tub, so I should not be bothered coming home to find kids from all over playing in my backyard while strangers enjoy my hot tub... good soil and sun exposure too, so everyone should be entitled to gardening and sun bathing. After all, I don't own the sun right? And if I don't let other people access and do all these things on my property, I should not be allowed to do enjoy my hot tub, garden or sun rays.

My car is property, but others opt not to buy cars or can't afford them. Why should I have the unfair advantage of driving to my hunting spot while others would have to seek other arrangements. If I don't want to let anyone who wants drive off in my car, maybe I shouldn't be allowed to drive it either?

My friends would definitely have an advantage over the generic public when it comes to the above examples of using my hot tub, playing soccer on my lawn, driving my car, sunbathing in my yard, etc.

I think private property and whatever the owner wants to do on their property is nobody elses business. IMHO property rights are paramount to living in a free society. And we still live in a somewhat free society, so we're all welcome to buy our own property if we wish, but just because we don't own something doesn't mean we're entitled to someone elses. It does not hurt to ask if they are willing to share what they have, but I wouldn't be offended if they did not.

Signs are nice, as they help good folks avoid making mistakes, but might enrage others and might be ripped down or entice vandalism. And we can't put signs every 10 meters or on everything we own. I was thinking along the same lines about how there should be signs, as I was worried about hunting on private land by mistake. However, that imapbc thing works pretty good.

[Davey Crockett]

How much are these grazing leases anyway? Can I get a lease, throw a cow on it and deny access to other hunters? Seriously though, I'm glad this thread came up. I did not realize how much private and leased land is out there. I am lucky I did not end up hunting on any of it.

Right now, I'm looking specifically at Iron Mountain and Selish Mountain in the Comstock/Gwen Lake area. I see License Tenures and License Applications, but no private land or leases, for the purpose of "wind power" That said, I did notice a few sets of cattle guards and some livestock grazing near the summit of Iron Mountain and fencing in a lot of areas around Selish Mountain. Was I allowed to be there? If I would have seen a buck I would have shot it. Now I have no idea and I'm glad I didn't see anything.

If there is a lease / license for livestock, how do you track down the rancher who owns the lease to ask permission to hunt in the area?

You can check the crown land registry through layers available for google earth (sounds like you did). Fences can be for range permits etc and do not necessarily mean you can't be there. I would rely on maps and signage.

I don't think joe blow can get a grazing lease and i don't think that they are awarded in many areas now. You need appurtenancy (i.e. a whole bunch of your private agricultural land to go along with a lease) so most people couldn't meet the requirements anyway. Luckily, there aren't any of these and if a guy wants to hunt them, you can always ask permission and wait for the cows to be gone.

[caddisguy]

You can check the crown land registry through layers available for google earth (sounds like you did). Fences can be for range permits etc and do not necessarily mean you can't be there. I would rely on maps and signage.

I don't think joe blow can get a grazing lease and i don't think that they are awarded in many areas now. You need appurtenancy (i.e. a whole bunch of your private agricultural land to go along with a lease) so most people couldn't meet the requirements anyway. Luckily, there aren't any of these and if a guy wants to hunt them, you can always ask permission and wait for the cows to be gone.

Looking at the DataBC / imapbc it just looks like a license for windpower projects or something. Maybe the cows I saw were runaways or abandoned. Heck I ran into wild horses in the south cariboo last weekend. Anyway I *think* I should be able to hunt there (Iron Mountain & Selish) but I will have to do more research on this stuff first.

For land that is leased, I'm still not sure how to find the contact info for the lease holder.

Luckily I won't need to worry about this for my next trip, as it appears none of the land is in use.

I'm glad this thread came up. I've learned quite a bit and without this info I was probably heading for a fine or getting thoroughly yelled at.

[Davey Crockett]

I believe range permits (vast majority of agricultural tenure in the woods) are found in another layer. These done have any impact on your right to hunt.

[Jagermeister]

This problem existed in the sixties and into the 70's. People, not only ranchers, were throwing up "No Trespassing" signs with no legal right. Just purchase one and nail it up on your favorite road. In some instances, more enterprising individuals would install a couple of posts but usually using a couple or trees from which they would string a cable/chain and lock with the proverbial "No Trespassing" sign. It became epidemic, especially in the southern interior.
Resident hunters were quite frustrated and started complaining to the BCWF who in turn took it to the BC Cattleman's Association. At first the BCCA told BCWF tough-titty. The Fed then suggested that the resident hunter would be told to remove signs that the hunter thought to have no authority. Didn't take the BCCA long to figure out that even legal signs would be hitting the dirt. So in collaberation with the BCWF, both parties agreed to fund signs that were endorsed by both parties and made available to ranchers at no cost. This did not appear to last too long, I suspect because not all ranchers were compliant.
Now, access will diminish more as leases increase for communication towers, private hydro projects, wind farms and the like. This will be exacerbated once some mindless twit pumps a bullet into the array on a com-tower or the blade on a wind turbine.
We have better access than Alberta, but are slowly closing that gap.
I don't think this will ever improve unless the resident hunters are prepared to put up a pretty big united squawk.

[balian]

Where does it say that if you post "NO HUNTING "signs on your property nobody can hunt it including the owner?? My sister owns a property and is thinking of putting signs on the fence as everytime we hunt there we see trucks slowly driving and looking around. Does it mean that if she posts the "no hunting" signs i cant hunt there even with permission?

[caddisguy]

I'm so confused. So is it illegal to hunt on land with *any* sort of lease, including wind projects, research, grazing, mining, etc without written permission?

[1/2 slam]

Where does it say that if you post "NO HUNTING "signs on your property nobody can hunt it including the owner?? My sister owns a property and is thinking of putting signs on the fence as everytime we hunt there we see trucks slowly driving and looking around. Does it mean that if she posts the "no hunting" signs i cant hunt there even with permission?

It doesn't say it anywhere. As an owner you can post it "no hunting". The owner or whoever the owner wants can then hunt it.
I don't know where some people here get this information about no hunting, even by the owner, but they are wrong.

[Davey Crockett]

I'm so confused. So is it illegal to hunt on land with *any* sort of lease, including wind projects, research, grazing, mining, etc without written permission?
I believe that if it is the land itself is leased then yes. Anything with licence or permit do not grant exclusive rights to the land. That is my understanding. Leases are daily easy to find with govt layers available in google earth. If you are unsure, you can always ask through front counter bc.

[Gateholio]

There is an old wives tale that has been circulating long before I was born that if someone posts a "No hunting" sign on thier property, then nobody- including the landowner or his amily and friends- can hunt on it. It's just some made up BS that has no basis in law. You can stick whatever sign you want on your private property, but the sign doesn't have to be applicable to you. You can put up a "no beer drinking" sign on your property, but there is no law that says that you have to stop drinking beer.

[Buckmeister]

Doesn’t make any sense!
From BC HUNTING AND TRAPPING SYNOPSIS

2012 - 2014
No Hunting Area
- means a designated area in which hunting is prohibited.

I’m not sure if this applies to private property with No Hunting signs but it should.
It only makes sense that NO HUNTING means No to all & not to some. There can be no exceptions! That’s the way I see it!
If there is a loophole then the law should be changed that defines NO HUNTING as no hunting to all!
This is a democratic country!

Why don't we apply that logic to another scenario? Let's say...mineral claims, or privately owned gravel pits, or woodlots? Why should the owner of these have exclusive rights to the goods? Shouldn't it be for the enjoyment and betterment of all? If I need firewood, why can't I go to the woodlot with the good trees and cut some down for cord wood? Or I really need to fill in that ravine in my backyard, so taking a few truckloads from the local pit shouldn't be a problem. Or I really need some extra cash for Christmas presents, so I spend some time on Joe Blow's placer claim lining my pockets.

But heaven forbid, I am not given default access to any of these unless I ask and am granted permission by the owners/holders of said property. So if I'm not allowed to access these areas, then neither should anyone, including the owners/holders.

Now, having said that with tongue in cheek, here are some thoughts. This world is a messed up place with many exploited and underprivileged peoples who deserve food, clothing, shelter, and friendship. There are many "haves" that do not share what they have with the "have not's". And I believe that the "haves" have a responsibility to share what they have in excess with those who have very little of anything. Greed is an ugly thing. I don't believe in a free handout to those who are capable of working for their needs. But stinginess in the face of true need is shameful. But those in a have not position must also exercise respect and courtesy and thankfulness, these traits can get a person a long ways. If someone approaches me with these traits and asks for something I have, whether it be hunting access or use of my vehicle, then I am inclined to help them out. But if they stomp their feet and start preaching entitlement and "it's my right" with arrogance, then I'm prone to show them the door.

[Rackem]

My point was that why should someone that knows the owner or is a friend or a friend of a friend or a relative have the advantage over another well- meaning, law-abiding hunter to hunt on his/her land?

Ok so you are a proponent of Communism? A fan of the Mao? Buddies with Castro? Red is your favorite colour?

One of the highly prized values of our society is property rights.

If I work long and hard enough in my life, save my money, and buy some land, I can have privileges that someone who doesn't work, or doesn't save, will not have. Is this unfair? I believe it is just a different choice. I don't have the benefit of spending my cash on whatever I like because I have a financial goal. That is my choice. The person who chooses to spend all his money as he goes, enjoys say nice vacations, maybe nicer vehicles...that is his choice.

We live in a relatively wealthy country, and we are not forced to share this wealth with poorer countries/peoples. I do what my conscience tells me is good. I am generous to people who are in need, as long as they are not abusing my generosity, I share meat with people who need to eat. I share garden produce, or if I have something I can give that I am not using, I give it.

But if you think that you can just walk onto my property, that I bought, and have full rights to, just because a buck you have your eye on happened to walk across it, without permission, you will find yourself in an extremely uncomfortable position.

I will not post no hunting signs, because, NO TRESPASSING covers it all. I will post GUARD DOGS ON DUTY, and DANGEROUS LIVESTOCK DO NOT ENTER, and WARNING HIGH VOLTAGE FENCE, and DANGER DO NOT ENTER signs every eight feet.

If you were dumb enough to still enter my land, then I would press charges, after pulling the dogs off...and the bull...and the wild boars...

It is ridiculous to think that a property owner would have no say in who could hunt on his property. He is not controlling the game animals, they can come and go freely. In fact, I have had to FENCE out the deer from the gardens etc or I would not have a garden.

Why should friends family have dibs over a stranger? Good lord, really?????? You may be the nicest guy ever, but you, as a stranger, will never come before friends and family. You can ask nice, you can bring me a gift, but if don't want you on my land, you are not getting on my land.

That being said, if my freezer is full, and my family is provided for, I may very well say yes. But that is MY prerogative.

[Big Lew]

Ok so you are a proponent of Communism? A fan of the Mao? Buddies with Castro? Red is your favorite colour?

One of the highly prized values of our society is property rights.

If I work long and hard enough in my life, save my money, and buy some land, I can have privileges that someone who doesn't work, or doesn't save, will not have. Is this unfair? I believe it is just a different choice. I don't have the benefit of spending my cash on whatever I like because I have a financial goal. That is my choice. The person who chooses to spend all his money as he goes, enjoys say nice vacations, maybe nicer vehicles...that is his choice.

We live in a relatively wealthy country, and we are not forced to share this wealth with poorer countries/peoples. I do what my conscience tells me is good. I am generous to people who are in need, as long as they are not abusing my generosity, I share meat with people who need to eat. I share garden produce, or if I have something I can give that I am not using, I give it.

But if you think that you can just walk onto my property, that I bought, and have full rights to, just because a buck you have your eye on happened to walk across it, without permission, you will find yourself in an extremely uncomfortable position.

I will not post no hunting signs, because, NO TRESPASSING covers it all. I will post GUARD DOGS ON DUTY, and DANGEROUS LIVESTOCK DO NOT ENTER, and WARNING HIGH VOLTAGE FENCE, and DANGER DO NOT ENTER signs every eight feet.

If you were dumb enough to still enter my land, then I would press charges, after pulling the dogs off...and the bull...and the wild boars...

It is ridiculous to think that a property owner would have no say in who could hunt on his property. He is not controlling the game animals, they can come and go freely. In fact, I have had to FENCE out the deer from the gardens etc or I would not have a garden.

Why should friends family have dibs over a stranger? Good lord, really?????? You may be the nicest guy ever, but you, as a stranger, will never come before friends and family. You can ask nice, you can bring me a gift, but if don't want you on my land, you are not getting on my land.

That being said, if my freezer is full, and my family is provided for, I may very well say yes. But that is MY prerogative.

Good post!

[Rackem]

Its like this quote says:

"If you expect the world to be fair with you, because you are fair, you're fooling yourself. That is like expecting the Grizzly Bear not to eat you because you don't eat him."

[caddisguy]

Ok so you are a proponent of Communism? A fan of the Mao? Buddies with Castro? Red is your favorite colour?

I was thinking the same thing. Glad someone had enough balls to say it ;-P


I will not post no hunting signs, because, NO TRESPASSING covers it all.

Get out of my head! Was thinking this too, but by the same logic--if you post a no trespassing sign--I think some folks will argue and say that means you are not allowed to enter your own property.

The sense of entitlement some have is a little revolting and somewhat scary. Seems to translate to "you have what I want, so I'm just going to help myself to it"

[Rackem]

LMAO, if it is MY property, I am NOT trespassing...

[Big Lew]

If you're at all concerned, "No Trespassing" and/or "No Hunting without written permission" should cover it all.

[Cookie1965]

Ridiculous. If YOU post YOUR property with YOUR signs, the only one who can enforce them, is YOU and you're not likely to call the cops on yourself, are you?

[Sitkaspruce]

Designated no hunting areas are designatd by order in council by the Gov, not some land owner or company posting up no hunting signs. Read your regulation and laws to understand this stuff before making comments that you really know nothing about.

A good example of this is around here, you will see no hunting within 1 km of a gas plant or one company put up a sign that said no hunting, private property 5 km from their gas plant at the end of the road. You can ignore those signs as they have no legal authority to stop hunters from hunting. You would be an idiot to shoot towards the plant, but they cannot stop you from hunting around it. A well know gas company up here has a dead end road with a big gas plant at the end of it, someone shot a moose on the road, guess that pi$$ed off someone as the next week there was 4x8 sign "No hunting, No Trespassing pass this point". A few weeks later, a retired CO went in to hunt that area and a guy from the plant tried to run him off, he ignored the guy but got a call the next day from the RCMP. After he pointed out a few things about private property, no hunting etc, the cop said "Well just don't hunt inside the fence around the plant"

Know your laws people, understand where you stand on private/crown land and all the legalities around leases, trespass act, landowners rights, grazing leases and grants etc. Using ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law.....and really, are you that hard up to "KILL" something that you will break the law to do it??

Cheers

SS

[Rackem]

Designated no hunting areas are designatd by order in council by the Gov, not some land owner or company posting up no hunting signs. Read your regulation and laws to understand this stuff before making comments that you really know nothing about.
Cheers

SS

Who is this directed at? Isn't that against the law of the Internet??

Are you saying that a private landowner cannot prevent trespass?

http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/00_96462_01

BC Trespass Act

Trespass prohibited4 (1) Subject to section 4.1, a person commits an offence if the person does any of the following:
(a) enters premises that are enclosed land;
(b) enters premises after the person has had notice from an occupier of the premises or an authorized person that the entry is prohibited;
(c) engages in activity on or in premises after the person has had notice from an occupier of the premises or an authorized person that the activity is prohibited.
(2) A person found on or in premises that are enclosed land is presumed not to have the consent of an occupier or an authorized person to be there.
(3) Subject to section 4.1, a person who has been directed, either orally or in writing, by an occupier of premises or an authorized person to
(a) leave the premises, or
(b) stop engaging in an activity on or in the premises,
commits an offence if the person
(c) does not leave the premises or stop the activity, as applicable, as soon as practicable after receiving the direction, or
(d) re-enters the premises or resumes the activity on or in the premises.

[Rackem]

Methods of giving or posting notice5 (1) For the purposes of paragraph (c) of the definition of "enclosed land", signs must be posted so that, in daylight and under normal weather conditions, from the approach to each ordinary point of access to the enclosed land,
(a) a sign is clearly visible,
(b) if a sign contains writing, the writing is clearly legible, and
(c) if a sign uses graphic representation, the graphic representation is clearly visible.
(2) For the purposes of section 4 (1) (b) or (c), notice may be given
(a) orally or in writing, or
(b) by means of a sign posted at or near an ordinary point of access to the premises so that, in daylight and under normal weather conditions from the approach to the ordinary point of access, the sign satisfies the requirements of subsection (1) (a), (b) and (c) of this section.
(3) In a prosecution for an offence under section 4 (1) (a), (b) or (c), proof that a sign that complies with subsection (1) or (2) (b) of this section, as applicable, was posted at the ordinary point of access used by the defendant to enter the premises is sufficient for the purpose of establishing, as applicable, that
(a) the premises are enclosed land, or
(b) notice was given for the purpose of section 4 (1) (b) or (c).
(4) A sign, posted in accordance with subsection (2) (b), that names an activity and has an oblique line drawn through the name or that shows a graphic representation of an activity and has an oblique line drawn through the representation is sufficient for the purpose of giving notice that the activity is prohibited.
(5) A notice under this section may relate to all or a part of premises and different notices may be given or posted in relation to different parts of premises.
(6) A person, other than an occupier or authorized person, must not remove, alter or deface signs posted for the purpose of subsection (1) or (2) (b).
(7) A person who contravenes subsection (6) commits an offence.

[Rackem]

Trespasser must give name and address8 (1) On the demand of an occupier of premises, or an authorized person, who has reasonable grounds to believe that a person is on or in the premises, or was on or in the premises, in contravention of section 4 (1) (a), (b) or (c) or (3), the person must provide the occupier or authorized person with his or her correct name and address.
(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence.
(3) A person who contravenes subsection (1) and remains on or in the premises commits an offence.

[Rackem]

Arrest without warrant10 (1) In this section, "peace officer" means a peace officer described in paragraph (c) of the definition of "peace officer" in section 29 of the Interpretation Act and includes a conservation officer as defined in section 1 (1) of the Environmental Management Act.
(2) A peace officer may arrest without warrant any person found on or in premises if the peace officer believes on reasonable and probable grounds that the person is committing an offence under section 4 in relation to the premises.
(3) If a peace officer believes on reasonable and probable grounds that a person has committed an offence under section 4 and has recently departed from the premises, the peace officer may arrest the person without warrant if
(a) the person refuses to give his or her name and address to the peace officer on demand, or
(b) the peace officer believes, on reasonable and probable grounds, that the name or address given by the person to the peace officer is false.

Court may order compensation11 (1) The Provincial Court, on application of an occupier of premises or another person injured, may order a person convicted of an offence under section 4 or 5 (7) in relation to those premises to pay restitution for the damage or loss that was sustained by the occupier or other person as a result of the commission of the offence.
(2) If an order is made against a defendant under subsection (1), no action for damage for trespass lies against the defendant for the loss or damage of the occupier or other person sustained as a result of the commission of the offence.

[Rackem]

http://www.marymacgregor.ca/article26.htm

Note that a “No Hunting” sign is not adequate to prevent trespassing. The sign must say “Trespass prohibited” or “No Trespassing”, or similar content so that it is clear that trespass is prohibited. There is no requirement in the Act that the owner, tenant or occupier include his or her name or other information.

Offenses. The trespasser commits an offence, and can be prosecuted under the Trespass Act. A person found on enclosed land must give his true name and address to the owner, tenant or occupier of the land, and if he does not do so, also commits an offence.
The investigation and prosecution of the offence is carried out by police and Crown counsel, like any other prosecution. A peace officer, including a conservation officer under the Wildlife Act (B.C.), can arrest a trespasser without warrant if he has reasonable and probable grounds to believe the person is on enclosed land without permission.
If the trespasser causes damage, he can be ordered to “make good all the damage”. If such an order is made, one cannot also sue for damages.
Of course the land owner’s challenge is to persuade the authorities that trespass is a serious matter and warrants their time and attention.
Penalty. The penalty, if prosecuted for trespass, is under the Summary Conviction Act (B.C.), and is up to six months imprisonment or a fine of up to $2,000.
Exemption for Land Surveyors. There is a special exemption for land surveyors and their assistants when actually engaged in their duties. If you refuse to permit a land surveyor or assistant to enter your property, even if cultivated, you commit an offence and if convicted, are liable for imprisonment for up to two months, or a fine of not more than $50. The surveyor must make good any damage he does.
Summary. The Trespass Act provides that a person can be prosecuted for trespass, if the police, conservation officer, and Crown counsel are willing. If the police and Crown counsel are not willing to lay charges, then one can lay a private information and prosecute the charge with one’s own lawyer.

In the next article, we will compare the procedures and remedies under the Trespass Act, with the procedures and remedies available if the landowner sues the trespasser for the tort of trespass.

[Rackem]

Interesting re: Cattle Leases...http://www.marymacgregor.ca/article41.htm

RANCHERS TAKE HEED - LEASE VALIDITY QUESTIONABLE by Mary MacGregor (originally published in Beef in B.C. in 2011)
On October 19, 2010, the top BC court decided that a lease for a portion only of a parcel of land is not valid unless created after May 31, 2007 or is for a term of three years or less; unless the landlord and tenant went through the lengthy and costly process of defining the part of the parcel to which the lease applies.
Any rancher operating under a private lease of land made before June 1, 2007, for less than the whole parcel of land, should be aware that the lease may not be valid.

[cariboo hunter]

Mpotzold-What! You should just stay in Vancouver with that mentality. It my land, I pay for it, I will hunt on it if I want and I will let someone hunt on it if I want.

[caddisguy]

I'm so frusturated with all the lease/license/tenure stuff. Looking at the layers on imapbc, I don't see how it is legal to hunt anywhere within 100km of Merritt or or the entire South Cariboo region. Heck even most gravel pits have a tenure, ie "quarrying sand/gravel" ... guess those are offlimits too. Are we all breaking some law or another every time we hunt? Or maybe I am still misinterpruting laws? Does anyone have an exact list of imapbc layers to check off in order to ensure 100% compliance?

[hare_assassin]

Just "Crown Lease Tenures", "Private Ownership", "Indian Reserves", "Ecological Reserves", "Protected Areas" and Conservancy Areas", I would say. Looks to me like there are plenty of places to hunt around Merritt.

For National and Provincial parks it is best to check on the websites. Some permit hunting, some don't.

[Sitkaspruce]

Rackem

I was talking about simple designated land as no hunting as on crown land. Private land is private land and the owner can do as they wish.

If you look at my examples, you will see they are all on crown land. Designated "No hunting or No shooting areas", like around Dawson Creek, on the Peace below the Taylor Bridge (for waterfowl) and other areas as found in the regs are all done by the Order in Council in the Government. Nobody, other than the Minister or their designate or an Order in Council can close an area to hunting or shooting on crown land outside town/city/village limits. There is other ways as well, but these are the ones that affect us the most.

Cheers

SS

[Rackem]

Sitka Spruce I guess I was confused because you said this
Designated no hunting areas are designatd by order in council by the Gov, not some land owner or company posting up no hunting signs. Read your regulation and laws to understand this stuff before making comments that you really know nothing about.

[The Dawg]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZzVdomYHnI

[Rackem]

From the Regs:
NOTICE! TO HUNTERS
To enter, hunt over or
trap in cultivated land,
posted land
or private property
without the owner’s
permission is
committing an offence.
It is the responsibility of
the hunter or trapper to
be aware
of the status of the land
they hunt and to get
permission
from the land owner
before accessing private land.

[Rackem]

From the regs:
ACCESS RESTRICTIONS
4Several laws govern public access to
wildlife and several types of closures specifically
limit access by licensed hunters or
others. In brief the following laws apply:
1. Trespass Act - The provincial Trespass
Act sets out strict limits on any public
access to enclosed private land. Private
property is considered enclosed if any
one of the following conditions are
met:
● there are clearly visible signs prohibiting
trespassing posted at each ordinary
access point; or
● the property is surrounded by a lawful
fence; or
● the property is surrounded by a natural
boundary such as a river bank or a 4
1/2 foot hedge.
● In the Fraser Valley, and to a lesser
extent elsewhere in agricultural areas,
local sporting groups (clubs) have made
private arrangements with landowners
to exclude other hunters. Such areas
are frequently posted to no trespassing
by these sporting groups.
2. Forest and Range Practices Act
On May 31, 2009 the Forests and Range
Statutes Amendment Act introduced
a provision that makes it illegal for
individuals to cause environmental
damage. Irresponsible off-road vehicle
use in alpine, grassland or wetland
areas can disturb soil and destroy
plants, risk watershed and water
source quality, threaten or kill birds and
animals, introduce invasive plants and
reduce wildlife and cattle food sources.
Regulations have been revised and
update the definition of environmental
damage to include any change to soil
that adversely alters an ecosystem.
Under the new provision, individuals
found to have caused environmental
damage may be levied a violation ticket
that carries a $575 fine. More serious
cases of damage could lead to penalties
of up to $100,000 and/or a year in jail.
While travelling on a Forest Service
Road, operators of ATVs are required
to hold a valid driver’s licence, carry a
minimum of $200,000 third-party liability
insurance.
3. Wildlife Act (Section 39) - A person is
not permitted to hunt on cultivated land
or on Crown land which is subject to a
grazing lease while the land is occupied
by livestock, without the consent of the
owner, lessee or occupant of the land.
4In addition to the above, there is authority
under provisions of the Wildlife Act to
limit access by hunters or other persons.
Relevant regulations include the Motor
Vehicle Prohibition Regulation and the
Public Access Prohibition Regulation.

[Ltbullken]

I talked to a ranch hand the other day near Princeton the other day that admitted firing his gun at a tree beside a hunter to scare him off as well he told me this was common practice with rancher. I found this quite disturbing. As well with your story of chewing the trespassers faces off I find isn't an effective way to deal with the trespassers. You have trespassers poaching on your land. Call the police and have them charged.
ive met a few other ranchers some friendly some down right sh!t house crazy. The ones that block access to crown land seem to think that that's their land now .



Ah yah... criminal offence to discharge a firearm at someone. I can understand protecting your interests around your land but why lose everything in doing so?

[Ltbullken]

I believe that if it is the land itself is leased then yes. Anything with licence or permit do not grant exclusive rights to the land. That is my understanding. Leases are daily easy to find with govt layers available in google earth. If you are unsure, you can always ask through front counter bc.

But the land then must be posted as private in accordance with the Trespass Act for a valid trespass to occur? Otherwise, no trespass has occurred...

[Jagermeister]

There is an old wives tale that has been circulating long before I was born that if someone posts a "No hunting" sign on thier property, then nobody- including the landowner or his amily and friends- can hunt on it. It's just some made up BS that has no basis in law. You can stick whatever sign you want on your private property, but the sign doesn't have to be applicable to you. You can put up a "no beer drinking" sign on your property, but there is no law that says that you have to stop drinking beer.Sorry to debunk that as far as I remember, it was applicable.
Here's the rational. You can buy the beer and post the sign. You cannot buy the wildlife of the province since they are the property of the crown. Posting No Hunting signs with total exclusion, exclusive only to the use of the landowner and his entourage were effectively taking the crown wildlife and putting them into a private reserve. The government received many complaints and ruled that No Hunting meant No Hunting for all. To circumvent that, those (primarly the Cattlemen) affected asked if it would be alright if the owner added the codicil "Except With Permission". "Except With Permission" essentially nullified the absolute No Hunting ruling because every sign changed to include the proviso.
Thanks to guys like Alsagar, wildlife ownership in the province is now allowed under the auspices of agriculture. Deer farms are throughout the province. These farms were supposed to have high deer proof fence containment. However, over time, like many other rules that countervened the Cattleman's Association desire, they were relaxed or dropped.
We will have to wait the outcome of the Douglas Lake affair to see which way this issue will go.

[caddisguy]

We will have to wait the outcome of the Douglas Lake affair to see which way this issue will go.

I notice Douglas Ranch has leases in the Cariboo as well, but so far it doesn't look like they're trying to block access to any lakes and charge people to fish out there yet.

[Terrier Blades]

Rackem
As hunters we followed this post with very great interest as this is a difficult topic. We sure appreciate your enthusiasm as well as your efforts in explaining the regulations etc.
We look @ this as a very professional way in which you participate in a difficult subject. We also noticed that several others support your posts and explanations. So we'd like offer you a small gift as token of appreciation, a Terrier Blades Necky. Please sent us a private message if you accept.

[Buckmeister]

Rackem
As hunters we followed this post with very great interest as this is a difficult topic. We sure appreciate your enthusiasm as well as your efforts in explaining the regulations etc.
We look @ this as a very professional way in which you participate in a difficult subject. We also noticed that several others support your posts and explanations. So we'd like offer you a small gift as token of appreciation, a Terrier Blades Necky. Please sent us a private message if you accept.

Congrats Rackem! You can thank me for starting this thread later. A little hijacked, but a good hijack nonetheless.

[Gateholio]

Sorry to debunk that as far as I remember, it was applicable.
Here's the rational. You can buy the beer and post the sign. You cannot buy the wildlife of the province since they are the property of the crown. Posting No Hunting signs with total exclusion, exclusive only to the use of the landowner and his entourage were effectively taking the crown wildlife and putting them into a private reserve. The government received many complaints and ruled that No Hunting meant No Hunting for all. To circumvent that, those (primarly the Cattlemen) affected asked if it would be alright if the owner added the codicil "Except With Permission". "Except With Permission" essentially nullified the absolute No Hunting ruling because every sign changed to include the proviso.
Thanks to guys like Alsagar, wildlife ownership in the province is now allowed under the auspices of agriculture. Deer farms are throughout the province. These farms were supposed to have high deer proof fence containment. However, over time, like many other rules that countervened the Cattleman's Association desire, they were relaxed or dropped.
We will have to wait the outcome of the Douglas Lake affair to see which way this issue will go.

We don't have to wait. There is simply no law that states a No Hunting sign excludes the owner from hunting his land

[Jagermeister]

We don't have to wait. There is simply no law that states a No Hunting sign excludes the owner from hunting his landThere doesn't have to be a law.
From the wildlife act.
Minister's powers3 The minister, for the purpose of access to or the management or protection of wildlife, may
(a) acquire and administer land, improvements on land and timber, timber rights and other rights on private land, and
(b) enter into and carry out an agreement with a person, association or other body.

I'm telling you the ruling existed, it became redundant with the addition of "With Permission."Just because you can't find a law doesn't mean it did not exist, there is a thing called "repealed". Rules by the Director or Minister do not always get posted in the conventional manner.

[Gateholio]

There doesn't have to be a law.
From the wildlife act.
Minister's powers

3 The minister, for the purpose of access to or the management or protection of wildlife, may
(a) acquire and administer land, improvements on land and timber, timber rights and other rights on private land, and
(b) enter into and carry out an agreement with a person, association or other body.

I'm telling you the ruling existed, it became redundant with the addition of "With Permission."

Just because you can't find a law doesn't mean it did not exist, there is a thing called "repealed". Rules by the Director or Minister do not always get posted in the conventional manner.

As I said- we don't have to wait for anything. No such law currently exists. Can't find any record of what you are saying, either. Nor is there any record of anyone being charged with an offense of this nature. Of course the whole thing is redundant- land owners could simply post "private property no entry" signs and have the same effect as a no hunting sign.

however, I would be very interested in seeing any sort of record of this regulation actually existing. When I looked into it a few years ago all I could come up with was that in some other provinces such a law actually may have existed at one point.

[Rackem]

Rackem
As hunters we followed this post with very great interest as this is a difficult topic. We sure appreciate your enthusiasm as well as your efforts in explaining the regulations etc.
We look @ this as a very professional way in which you participate in a difficult subject. We also noticed that several others support your posts and explanations. So we'd like offer you a small gift as token of appreciation, a Terrier Blades Necky. Please sent us a private message if you accept.

PM sent, thanks for the compliments! :) Very kind of you. Thank you.

[Jagermeister]

As I said- we don't have to wait for anything. No such law currently exists. Can't find any record of what you are saying, either. Nor is there any record of anyone being charged with an offense of this nature. Of course the whole thing is redundant- land owners could simply post "private property no entry" signs and have the same effect as a no hunting sign.

however, I would be very interested in seeing any sort of record of this regulation actually existing. When I looked into it a few years ago all I could come up with was that in some other provinces such a law actually may have existed at one point.

The best bet would be to see if the BCWF has any documentation on such a ruling as I believe they advanced it. The time line would be the late '60s or very early '70s.

[Citori54]

Crown animals are everybody's, its high time the private property owners realized that they don't have the right to every animal on their property. There is a huge difference between a man's home is his castle and holding 100's of acres of mother earth hostage to the exclusion of everybody. A number of civilized countries have put a stop to this feudal nonsense and opened the rural areas to hunting as they should . The only caveat that I would absolutely require is that a program such as that offered by the BCWF for private property access be mandated by legislation and enforced. Everybody deserves to be empowered not just the property owners.


We do not live in a communist or socialist country but one that thankfully recognizes private property rights. Why should I have the right to access someone's property without their permission? What is this "holding mother earth hostage" hog swallow? I agree completely with gcreek.

[Jagermeister]

I wonder how many public roads are illegally gated in this province by landowners that have "divine rights"?

[1/2 slam]

The best bet would be to see if the BCWF has any documentation on such a ruling as I believe they advanced it. The time line would be the late '60s or very early '70s.

Sorry but there is no such law. Straight from the CO's office

Thank you for your email dated October 18, 2013, regarding posting private land as "No Hunting". Your enquiry has been forwarded to me for response.


If a property owner posts their private land with "No Hunting" signs, the property owners may still hunt, and allow people to hunt, on their private land. Similarly, if a person posts a "No Trespassing" sign on their private property, the property owner is still permitted to be, or allow others to be, on the private land.


If a person hunts or access private land without permission, the offended party or person is the landowner, and the landowner has the option to contact the authorities and have the matter investigated and request enforcement of regulations regarding trespass. There is no offended party or person if a landowner hunts on his own land or allows another to hunt on their land, regardless of whether the landowner has posted No Hunting signs.

[OutWest]

Black bear shot and left on the side of the road off Weltek FSR near Big White. Only the gall bladder was taken. It has been reported.

[Surrey Boy]

So this one time in July I was driving through a canola field when a huge bear came along . . .

[Iron Sighted]

This problem existed in the sixties and into the 70's. People, not only ranchers, were throwing up "No Trespassing" signs with no legal right. Just purchase one and nail it up on your favorite road. In some instances, more enterprising individuals would install a couple of posts but usually using a couple or trees from which they would string a cable/chain and lock with the proverbial "No Trespassing" sign. It became epidemic, especially in the southern interior.
Resident hunters were quite frustrated and started complaining to the BCWF who in turn took it to the BC Cattleman's Association. At first the BCCA told BCWF tough-titty. The Fed then suggested that the resident hunter would be told to remove signs that the hunter thought to have no authority. Didn't take the BCCA long to figure out that even legal signs would be hitting the dirt. So in collaberation with the BCWF, both parties agreed to fund signs that were endorsed by both parties and made available to ranchers at no cost. This did not appear to last too long, I suspect because not all ranchers were compliant.
Now, access will diminish more as leases increase for communication towers, private hydro projects, wind farms and the like. This will be exacerbated once some mindless twit pumps a bullet into the array on a com-tower or the blade on a wind turbine.
We have better access than Alberta, but are slowly closing that gap.
I don't think this will ever improve unless the resident hunters are prepared to put up a pretty big united squawk.

I doubt you will see wind farms causing access issues due to leases unless you plan to hunt right on the turbine pad. The companies that own the turbines have to pay to lease the land they use, they likely don't want to lease land that they don't need to as they will be paying huge taxes on it for nothing. I can see your point however if the site if situated in the middle of good hunting territory as it will obviously cause some displacement of game animals when it is constructed.

The roads on the wind farms are just right of way uses as well for them and the public should have full access as well.

[Rackem]

I saw lots and lots of game up by the windmills here, including this nice big black bear...

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/923176_10151410133155754_600523448_n.jpg

https://scontent-b-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/947004_10151409827025754_438435040_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/946880_10151409844880754_1240957523_n.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/971837_10151409848610754_404643918_n.jpg

[Iron Sighted]

Is that the Dokie windfarm? I have seen lots of game within the site here in T.R. too

[Rackem]

Yup Dokie....