Private Property Question

Looks like it Shawn. 8D


Stick

24-02-11_1200.jpg

"Rivers are living things, sometimes swollen and discoloured, other times thin and anaemic. Spend enough time around a particular river, you learn to read its moods, like a spouse reads a partner."

Gord Ellis ONTARIO OUT OF DOORS
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stick

To all. I look at the private property question this way. If someone asks you to leave you should have asked permission in the first place. And it is up to you to prove they don't own the area you are tresspassing in. Chances are pretty good that you are in their back yard, and as a home owner, no one I don't want is going to hang around in my backyard. You can be charged very easily if you refuse to leave. Check out the Tresspass to Property Act in Ontario.



I disagree with this. I feel like the best opportunities that we have to maintain our common resource rights are to use them. You are right that the LPC successfully argued to have their rights extended into what might be understood as a common resource area, but this area is understood by most Ontarians as a common resource area and I expect that they expect challenges from time to time because of this. The company's rights are likely maintained through the "beds of navigable waters act".
Similarly, creeks are maintained as common pool resources via the "beds on navigable waters act", so all of the creeks and their beds are navigable" (unless otherwise identified by the crown as was done with the LPCompany). You don't need permission to access those creeks, provided you can get from right-of-way to creek without trespassing, and most creeks cross a road somewhere!
The idea of the TPA is an interesting one. From the text, if you are entering a natural area (where trees are at least 2m), you aren't trespassing until you are notified of the owner's intent: so here, there may be opportunities to access a watercourse without "trespassing".
I personally encourage those who stand their ground in these identifiably public areas (like creeks), but recognize that the surrounding legislation is difficult to understand; however, the best way to maintain those rights is to use them- it's also probably the best way to maintain the resource (fish).
 
In the situation I posted this about, I was on the bottom of the lake erie cliff or coast line, you cant even see the houses 30 feet above you, if there are even any there... just walking the shore on ice/beach. I did ask for permission to access the beach by one owner who actually said he wished more people would ask to come and enjoy this beautiful area. I guess I assumed he owned the entire stretch and never thought Id be hearing from another landowner a couple hundred yards down. Again, its not like I was in viewing distance or anyone could even see me, I was 30 feet below any houses, due to the high embankment on lake eries shores. I highly doubt this guy owned right up to the waters edge, but maybe he does. Its not somewhere I'd go regularily, so its not a big issue with me, I was just curious to ask. I will look into it eventually.

DSCF1047.jpg
 
A copy and paste from the following link,

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-t21/latest/rso-1990-c-t21.html

Trespass an offence

2. (1) Every person who is not acting under a right or authority conferred by law and who,

(a) without the express permission of the occupier, the proof of which rests on the defendant,

(i) enters on premises when entry is prohibited under this Act, or

(ii) engages in an activity on premises when the activity is prohibited under this Act; or

(b) does not leave the premises immediately after he or she is directed to do so by the occupier of the premises or a person authorized by the occupier,

is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $2,000. R.S.O. 1990, c. T.21, s. 2 (1).

And

Prohibition of entry

3. (1) Entry on premises may be prohibited by notice to that effect and entry is prohibited without any notice on premises,

(a) that is a garden, field or other land that is under cultivation, including a lawn, orchard, vineyard and premises on which trees have been planted and have not attained an average height of more than two metres and woodlots on land used primarily for agricultural purposes; or

(b) that is enclosed in a manner that indicates the occupier’s intention to keep persons off the premises or to keep animals on the premises. R.S.O. 1990, c. T.21, s. 3 (1).



Stick

24-02-11_1200.jpg

"Rivers are living things, sometimes swollen and discoloured, other times thin and anaemic. Spend enough time around a particular river, you learn to read its moods, like a spouse reads a partner."

Gord Ellis ONTARIO OUT OF DOORS
 
The question here is are you "on premises" if not then this act does not apply. It appears in the vast vast majotrity (exceptions like millionaires, power facitlities and logging operartions are very few) you are not. I too am a firm believer in making sure we can use areas we are entitled to use and not have others impede upon this as they have the impression only they should be able to access said areas.

Scott
 
quote:
Originally posted by quinner01

You tell em bass assassin. More people should, we as anglers always get **** on when it comes to fishing and private property..land owners who think they own everything.



your last sentence there doesnt make sense to me. you're complaining about landowners who think they own everything, yet you don't even know owns the land in question.

we as anglers and hunters always get **** on because of people ASSuming they can fish or hunt wherever they please without finding out who owns the land first. its those people that make landowners look at the rest of us and automatically think trespasser, poacher, etc. anglers and hunters are the ones who are obligated to find out who owns what BEFORE you head out fishing or hunting...
 
Guys, this is a touchy subject.

I can't comment much on the Nav Water issues being discussed in LP Bay. However, when it comes to beach front or stream bank access I have some thoughts.

When it comes to fishing/hunting we are privileged to live where we do. However, access issues can hinder some of our enjoyment of our outdoor passions. Anglers and Hunters need to be part OUTDOOR ENTHUSIAST and part AMBASSADOR. Always be sure to be representing your sport the best way you can. Every encounter with others while in the field can leave a lasting impression.

If you are not sure of the local property rights find out before venturing out. What I like to do is consult with a good map first. I used to consult topographic maps. Now I use Google Earth/Map. Print off maps of the area you are interested in and note road names, stream names, etc.

I would then go to the local township office to determine who owned the property. You don't need to know names of the land owners. Just look at the property boundaries near the point you want to access. Between your map and the township into you should be able to quickly determine who owns the parcel you are interested in.

Then it is door knocking. Don't go to the door with your rod or gun in hand. Visit the landowner and plan for a casual meeting. Tell them your name, where you live, etc. You can even provide them a piece of paper with this info.

Remember, you are an AMBASSADOR. Keep a smile on your face. Ask questions and answer questions. You may be surprised how positive this can be. We are at a time when more and more signs are POSTED and we need to maintain access opportunities.

Sure...we can negotiate with landowners about WHO owns WHAT. However, a little positive conversation goes a long way. Trust me. I have learned this through work and play. I meet landowners all the time and have had a variety of 'meetings' or 'discussions' over the years.

Don't be afraid to visit the local township office and look at the mapping of the area.

My 0.02 cents, for what its worth.

Name: Jason Barnucz (Delhi, Ontario)
Thanks to my sponsors Bass Magnet Lures, Koppers Live Target Lures, Fishing World (Hamilton)
2007, 2011 Team Ontario, Ontario BASS Federation Nation
 
quote:
Originally posted by breakingclay

The question here is are you "on premises" if not then this act does not apply. It appears in the vast vast majotrity (exceptions like millionaires, power facitlities and logging operartions are very few) you are not. I too am a firm believer in making sure we can use areas we are entitled to use and not have others impede upon this as they have the impression only they should be able to access said areas.

Scott




Definitions

1. (1) In this Act,

“occupier” includes,

(a) a person who is in physical possession of premises, or

(b) a person who has responsibility for and control over the condition of premises or the activities there carried on, or control over persons allowed to enter the premises,

even if there is more than one occupier of the same premises; (“occupant”)

“premises” means lands and structures, or either of them, and includes,

(a) water,

(b) ships and vessels,

(c) trailers and portable structures designed or used for residence, business or shelter,

(d) trains, railway cars, vehicles and aircraft, except while in operation. (“lieux”) R.S.O. 1990, c. T.21, s. 1 (1).

You are on premises as soon as you enter someones property.

When I took the Fish and Wildlife Guardian Program course with the MNR our instructor was very precise and informative as to what constituted trespassing. If you are on someones land without their permission you are trespassing, except when you are going to their door. There is a provission for that in the act.

Even floating or walking in the water down a navigable water way you could be tresspassing. If the original deed granted "Millers Rights" giving the occupier the creek bottom and you walk, anchor, tie off to a tree or even portage over a log jam that is coming from their property you can be charged with trespassing.

Stick

24-02-11_1200.jpg

"Rivers are living things, sometimes swollen and discoloured, other times thin and anaemic. Spend enough time around a particular river, you learn to read its moods, like a spouse reads a partner."

Gord Ellis ONTARIO OUT OF DOORS
 
Stick I am not trying to negate what you are quoting. I too agree with finding out first, then potentially exercising these rights. Your last quote does bring up an interesting point though, what if that log jam is blocking a navigable waterway is that in itself not contraveining some act some where:)

Scott
 
PART IIOBSTACLES AND OBSTRUCTIONSInterpretation
Definition of “owner”


14. (1) In this Part, “owner” means the registered or other owner at the time any wreck, obstruction or obstacle referred to in this Part was occasioned, and includes a subsequent purchaser.
Interpretation

(2) A reference to a “thing” in sections 15 to 18 and 20, with respect to a thing that is or is likely to become an obstruction or obstacle to navigation, does not include a reference to a thing of natural origin unless the obstruction or obstacle, or likely obstruction or obstacle, is caused by a person.

R.S., 1985, c. N-22, s. 14; 2009, c. 2, s. 330.

So it looks like if it fell on it's own the owner is OK, unless he dug a hole near the base of the tree which subsequently caused it to fall and block the navigable waterway:)

Scott
 
Good topic, but full of uncertainties, still, to this day.
On the Nine Mile River, at Port Albert(Lake Huron), there is a landowner that wants everyone to stay away from the river running through his property. He has even strung a "heavy" steel cable above the river, with a no trespassing sign hung directly above the river. I/we have never recognized this sign as a legitimate or legal deterant from walking "in" the river along the edges. This river is a navigable waterway. As kids, we would canoe down from a couple of bridges upstream during the late spring runoff. There, by definition, it's navigable, thus crown land. Federal legislation covers ALL of Canada, from coast to coast. That includes the shores of all the great lakes. Still, nobody likes confrontation, but don't be bullied either.
 
Sticke see your first post where you outline some of the conditions for "prohibition of entry"... list them all next time, and look at what is purposely missing and how it can be reconciled, then look at my post that addresses the TPA.
 
quote:
Originally posted by ch312

quote:
Originally posted by quinner01

You tell em bass assassin. More people should, we as anglers always get **** on when it comes to fishing and private property..land owners who think they own everything.



your last sentence there doesnt make sense to me. you're complaining about landowners who think they own everything, yet you don't even know owns the land in question.

we as anglers and hunters always get **** on because of people ASSuming they can fish or hunt wherever they please without finding out who owns the land first. its those people that make landowners look at the rest of us and automatically think trespasser, poacher, etc. anglers and hunters are the ones who are obligated to find out who owns what BEFORE you head out fishing or hunting...






You missed the part where I said I asked for permission and it was granted. The owner said he actually wished more people would use his property. I generally always ask if I know 100% the property is infact private. But dont come out and say its always the fishermans fault, a lot of the time owners do get carried away with what they own.

If people didnt litter and disrespect peoples property, I'm sure there wouldnt be much of an issue here... All too often I find myself picking up after others, while fishing on someone elses property.

DSCF1047.jpg
 
This is never more apparent while turkey hunting on property that I have paid taxes on and you have a decoy that is visible from the road just watch how many cars and trucks slow down had one guy get out with his gun, even though resources are there it is not an automatic right to shoot the world. Be considerate with land owners.
 
Back
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Advertising is what keeps Channel 6-8 on the air. To this end, please take a moment to disable your AdBlocker. If you would prefer an ad-free experience, but would still like to help support site operations, please consider making a donation.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks