Thanks to the Tribune!

[adamsoa]

Glad to see that people are out making this stuff up once again. While there might have been trespassing I don't see guys with quick draw bows shooting at residents but you never know.
To the best of my knowledge there haven't been a lot of dogs, goats, cattle and children shot by archers lately. Maybe he had a crossbow
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/57220212-82/bow-highland-property-beware.html.csp
Letter: Highland residents should beware of bow hunters
First Published 6 hours ago ? Updated 6 hours ago
I live in Bull River, a small planned-unit development on the Highland/Lehi border that is about 118 acres with 40 property owners. Everyone has at least two acres and we have a large common area to buffer our properties from roads and other developments.
A neighbor noticed an unfamiliar vehicle parked on his property. He decided to walk down the hill to check it out. As he walked down the path he came out from behind an evergreen tree and was startled by a bow hunter with his bow drawn and pointed at him.
The hunter was on private property. He immediately left but commented that our neighbor should put up "no trespassing" signs around the property.
Because of Highland City?s decision to allow bow hunting for deer, and because all private property in Highland isn't posted, we suggest that all of our neighbors beware. If you have large dogs, goats, donkeys, horses, cows ? oh, and children ? you might consider keeping them indoors. If you do venture out, please consider wearing hunter orange clothing.
Hunting is prohibited in Bull River, and we are posting signs to designate this sanctuary for animals and people.
Linda P. Walton
Highland


respect my authorita

 

[TOPGUN]

You really have to admit that with the way some people violate other's property rights that if this really happened that it would be another scar and very detrimental to those of us who try and obey all the laws, including having permission to be on private property whether it's posted or not!

 

[Birdman]

You never know what the paper says as being true or not but like Topgun says there are always someone who does not care about rules and will cause trouble. This is a list of the rules according to the Daily Herald news paper.

The hunt, approved by elected officials in August, is a two-year pilot program necessary because of complaints by residents about deer damaging landscaping.

Hunters must pass a test and become certified. They will then will be issued a coupon and tag from the DWR. Highland's hunt requires baiting the deer with food to lure them into designated areas. Certified archers ensconced in elevated stands shoot from above to avoid arrows traveling out of sight range.

Hunters may not go on private property without the owner's approval. Hunters may keep the deer if they would like; if not, the city will pay to have the meat processed so it can be donated to a food

He confirmed that hunters had killed deer in the city; archers are required to report to him after taking any deer under the urban permit.

 

[TOPGUN]

Birdman---That sounds like a very good program and there will probably be more places going that route because of animals moving within city limits with resultant car accidents, browsing on landscaping, etc. That is the price the poor animals have to pay as our human population moves in and takes away their habitat.

 

[2lumpy]

If the story is completely accurate and it happened as reported, it's wrong and it's still wrong even if she exaggerated the encounter. The hunter shouldn't have been hunting there in the first place, it's illegal to hunt private property, posted or not, without written permission from the landowner.

However.

The Salt Lake Tribune is no friend of the hunting lifestyle. Hasn't been for the last 40 years most likely won't change in the next 40. In my opinion, nearly every article they publish is an outright negative statement toward hunting, if not outright it is subtle, which leaves the reader question hunter morals and hunter ethics. Rarely, if ever, do they shine a positive light on hunters. Conservation, yes,.......... hunting, absolutely not.

When it comes to hunting, I always read the Tribune with guarded suspicion.

DC

 

[c3]

Utah state law is at issue here. If it's not posted and it's not in use, aka a plowed field or quarry, it is perfectly legal to hunt it. You can be asked to leave, but without the proper posting of private property, it's not illegal.

Now, as for people doing this, it certainly does create a bad image for bow hunters and should be avoided at all cost IMHO.

I hike behind private property all the time and have landowners below yell at me regularly that I am trespassing. I just say "sorry for bothering you" and move along. The local CO had to handcuff a belligerent land owner near there once who was going off about bow hunters in "their" back yard.

Needless to say, it comes with the tag is seems and we all need to be conscious of how our actions effect the image of bow hunting. There's a lot more of them than there are of us and we can't win in the court of public opinion if we are freaking people out, right or wrong.

All I can say is try to keep it out of sight and out of mind then the confrontation doesn't ever happen.

Cheers,
Pete

 

[Birdman]

Last modified: Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Trespass laws of specific interest to hunters and anglers
1. Written permission is required to enter or cross properly posted private property.

2. Written permission is also required to access unposted private property if:

The soil has been loosened or broken up for the raising of crops
There are crops on the land
The land is a pasture irrigated by a sprinkling system or ditches
3. In addition, those taking wildlife while trespassing may be charged with an additional Class B Misdemeanor for illegally taking wildlife. The harvested wildlife is also subject to seizure.

 

[2lumpy]

23-20-14. Definitions -- Posted property -- Hunting by permission -- Entry on private land while hunting or fishing -- Violations -- Penalty -- Prohibitions inapplicable to officers.
(1) As used in this section:
(a) "Cultivated land" means land that is readily identifiable as:
(i) land whose soil is loosened or broken up for the raising of crops;
(ii) land used for the raising of crops; or
(iii) pasturage which is artificially irrigated.
(b) "Division" means the Division of Wildlife Resources.
(c) "Permission" means written authorization from the owner or person in charge to enter upon private land that is either cultivated or properly posted, and shall include:
(i) the signature of the owner or person in charge;
(ii) the name of the person being given permission;
(iii) the appropriate dates; and
(iv) a general description of the property.
(d) "Properly posted" means that signs prohibiting trespass or bright yellow, bright orange, or fluorescent paint are clearly displayed:
(i) at all corners, fishing streams crossing property lines, roads, gates, and rights-of-way entering the land; or
(ii) in a manner that would reasonably be expected to be seen by a person in the area.
(2) (a) While taking wildlife or engaging in wildlife related activities, a person may not:
(i) without permission, enter upon privately owned land that is cultivated or properly posted;
(ii) enter or remain on privately owned land if the person has notice to not enter or remain on the privately owned land; or
(iii) obstruct any entrance or exit to private property.
(b) A person has notice to not enter or remain on privately owned land if:
(i) the person is directed to not enter or remain on the land by:
(A) the owner of the land;
(B) the owner's employee; or
(C) a person with apparent authority to act for the owner; or
(ii) the land is fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner that a reasonable person would recognize as intended to exclude intruders.
(c) The division shall provide "hunting by permission cards" to a landowner upon the landowner's request.
(d) A person may not post:
(i) private property the person does not own or legally control; or
(ii) land that is open to the public as provided by Section 23-21-4.
(3) (a) A person convicted of violating Subsection (2)(a) may have the person's license, tag, certificate of registration, or permit, relating to the activity engaged in at the time of the violation, revoked by a hearing officer.
(b) A hearing officer may construe any subsequent conviction which occurs within a five-year period as a flagrant violation and may prohibit the person from obtaining a new license, tag, certificate of registration, or permit for a period of up to five years.
(4) Subsection (2)(a) does not apply to peace or conservation officers in the performance of their duties.
(5) (a) The division shall provide information regarding owners' rights and sportsmen's duties:
(i) to anyone holding licenses, certificates of registration, tags, or permits to take wildlife; and
(ii) by using the public media and other sources.
(b) The restrictions in this section relating to trespassing shall be stated in all hunting and fishing proclamations issued by the Wildlife Board.
(6) A person who violates Subsection (2)(a) or (d) is guilty of a class B misdemeanor.

 

[travishunter3006]

You are wrong.


Utah requires that private land be posted if one wishes to exclude others from it. The exceptions to this are cultivated fields and areas with fencing designed to restrict access...


Just because my front yard isn't posted doesn't mean you can come shoot deer on it.


If a landowner owns a piece of land deep in the national forest then he will be required to post and mark it according to the law. But if he also owns an alfalfa field in the middle of town he DOES NOT have to mark it because it's cultivated.


76-6-206.3. Criminal trespass on agricultural land or range land.
(1) As used in this section:
(a) "Agricultural or range land" and "land" mean land as defined under Subsections (1)(d) and (e).
(b) "Authorization" means specific written permission by, or contractual agreement with, the owner or manager of the property.
(c) "Criminal trespass" means the elements of the crime of criminal trespass under Section 76-6-206.
(d) "Land in agricultural use" has the same meaning as in Section 59-2-502.
(e) "Range land" means privately owned land that is not fenced or divided into lots and that is generally unimproved. This land includes land used for livestock.
(2) A person is guilty of the class B misdemeanor criminal offense of criminal trespass on agricultural or range land and is liable for the civil damages under Subsection (5) if, under circumstances not amounting to a greater offense, and without authorization or a right under state law, the person enters or remains on agricultural or range land regarding which notice prohibiting entry is given by:
(a) personal communication to the person by the owner of the land, an employee of the owner, or a person with apparent authority to act for the owner;
(b) fencing or other form of enclosure a reasonable person would recognize as intended to exclude intruders; or
(c) posted signs or markers that would reasonably be expected to be seen by persons in the area of the borders of the land.
(3) A person is guilty of the class B misdemeanor criminal offense of cutting, destroying, or rendering ineffective the fencing of agricultural or range land if the person willfully cuts, destroys, or renders ineffective any fencing as described under Subsection (2)(b).
(4) In addition to restitution, as provided in Section 76-3-201, a person who commits any violation of Subsection (2) or (3) may also be liable for:
(a) statutory damages in the amount of the value of damages resulting from the violation of Subsection (2) or $500, whichever is greater; and
(b) reasonable attorney fees not to exceed $250, and court costs.
(5) Civil damages under Subsection (4) may be collected in a separate action by the owner of the agricultural or range land or the owner's assignee.



AND





76-6-206 (Effective 07/01/14). Criminal trespass.
(1) As used in this section, "enter" means intrusion of the entire body.
(2) A person is guilty of criminal trespass if, under circumstances not amounting to burglary as defined in Section 76-6-202, 76-6-203, or 76-6-204 or a violation of Section 76-10-2402 regarding commercial obstruction:
(a) the person enters or remains unlawfully on property and:
(i) intends to cause annoyance or injury to any person or damage to any property, including the use of graffiti as defined in Section 76-6-107;
(ii) intends to commit any crime, other than theft or a felony; or
(iii) is reckless as to whether his presence will cause fear for the safety of another;
(b) knowing the person's entry or presence is unlawful, the person enters or remains on property as to which notice against entering is given by:
(i) personal communication to the actor by the owner or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner;
(ii) fencing or other enclosure obviously designed to exclude intruders; or
(iii) posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders; or
(c) the person enters a condominium unit in violation of Subsection 57-8-7(8).
(3) (a) A violation of Subsection (2)(a) or (b) is a class B misdemeanor unless it was committed in a dwelling, in which event it is a class A misdemeanor.
(b) A violation of Subsection (2)(c) is an infraction.
(4) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that:
(a) the property was open to the public when the actor entered or remained; and
(b) the actor's conduct did not substantially interfere with the owner's use of the property.

 

[Stonefly]

Before throwing out the "in my front yard BS you might look into the distance from an occupied building rule. unless your front yard is 600' beyond your home The other Trespass laws are meaningless, as far as shooting and takeing protected wildlife. Unless it is the property owner defending livestock or property.
It might be hard for people outside Utah to understand the rules about trespassing. In Utah we have a huge amount of public land compared to other states. There are also strips, spots, and chunks of private land that are " Scattered" in and around this public land. Some of this land has been private for generations and is not developed or even fenced. The Forest service and BLM fence area's of public land and section it for graising leases, and sometimes to seperate it from private. The state has also deeded significant amounts of land to the school districts. What I see with this land is unless there is a profit in it for the district, they do nothing with it at all. All this is so that people outside, who have never had this circumstance, can see that in Utah you can drive on a country road for 20 miles, Never see a fence or a property line, and may be passing Forest service,BLM, and any amount of other private sections. And never know where the ownership changes or begins.
Now as for the story in the paper. Why would the hunter have his bow drawn? I for one would not believe this to be a fact, And cosidering the source of the story "Trib" don't believe it. Why would the referance to pets and farm animals come into play in the story unless thier "the Trib" agenda is a factor. The Trib Was the paper that the Lib. Rocky " Squirrell" Anderson teamed with to try and close hunting along the Wasatch. The "Trib" played a major roll in closing the black powder hunt on the Wasatch.
Now as for the hunt in Highland, It may be a surprise to some of you but I do not agree with it, And hope it goes away. I don't think anything good about this hunt will be reported. I beleive there will be lies and made up stories to make sport hunting look bad, and will be reported to the public by hacks like the Trib. Just let the Deer keep eating the peoples landscape and smashing in the fronts of all the Beamers on the hiway in Highland. And give no more Ammo to the tree hugger freinds of th Trib.

 

[Matapatos]

I could see if the resident is walking up the hill and the hunter can't see him, hears him coming not knowing its a person and draws his bow in preparation for it being a deer... Not a good situation. It seems like Highland has set forth regulations and the hunter did not comply... We can't pull crap like this if we want the Wasatch Extended to continue. It seems like this is a letter to the editor, so it may be word for word from the resident, but the Trib doesn't have a problem with stirring the pot...

 

[trophymuley]

LAST EDITED ON Dec-09-13 AT 01:51PM (MST)[p]It is understandable and expected that a hunter be aware of all the regulations with trespassing and follow them, but honestly this post in the tribune sounds like your typical anti hunter, "my neighbor said" exaggerated bs. Take the basics of it and that is most likely your story. The guy was trespassing. He was asked to leave so he did. Period. This whole bit of, he was aiming his bow at him..... I call exaggerated bs. A majority of these anti hunting city folk couldn't tell the difference between a full drawn bow and a bow at rest. It is a perfect example that every move we make as hunters is under observation. Making one wrong move of not knowing you are on private land (whether he knew it or not) turns into all hunters being trespassers who are out to shoot "large dogs, goats, donkeys, horses, cows ? oh, and children" you know since we are all dumber than knuckle dragging apes incapable of telling the difference between a deer with antlers and a small child. Needless to say it could have been avoided by simply following the rules.

Haters are going to hate, anti will always be there so "hide your kids and hide your wives! Cuz were hunting everything out here!"
"I've hunted almost every day of my life, The rest
have been wasted"

 

[Zeke]

Chances of this encounter happening like stated: ZERO

While the story is entertaining, it's probably long on embelishment!

The Trib is no friend of the hunter!

Zeke

 

[swbuckmaster]

first off there are only a certain few guys that can hunt the does in alpine. You have to be a friend of Brian Cook

Second they are baiting them in on city property and hunting them with tree stands so this dude would have been illegal!

It was probably some dumb tard extended hunter thinking its his right to hunt does out of extended boundaries and out of season. The doe hunt ended on the last day of November!

who farted?

 

[Dconcrete]

It's actually important to understand a few things here. 1st, this area is NOT in the zone where they can hunt. There are 12 guys that were able to participate. The lady who wrote this is the same lady who contacted animal rights organizations about this hunt. She also riled up all of her neighbors about this when in fact, this subdivision isn't even in the zone. The entire
Story is a total fabrication. This didn't happen. The mayor of highland was going to e contacting the tribune yesterday I believe. And furthermore, as far as Scott weatherspoon goes, I don't believe this ever happened. At all!! And I don't believe it was anyone trying to participate in the extended and was not only out
Of boundary, but out of season. It's very important to understand who this lady is and the smear campaign that she's launching on hunting in general.

 

[Zeke]

>It's actually important to understand a
>few things here. 1st, this
>area is NOT in the
>zone where they can hunt.
>There are 12 guys that
>were able to participate. The
>lady who wrote this is
>the same lady who contacted
>animal rights organizations about this
>hunt. She also riled up
>all of her neighbors about
>this when in fact, this
>subdivision isn't even in the
>zone. The entire
>Story is a total fabrication. This
>didn't happen. The mayor of
>highland was going to e
>contacting the tribune yesterday I
>believe. And furthermore, as far
>as Scott weatherspoon goes, I
>don't believe this ever happened.
>At all!! And I
>don't believe it was anyone
>trying to participate in the
>extended and was not only
>out
>Of boundary, but out of season.
>It's very important to understand
>who this lady is and
>the smear campaign that she's
>launching on hunting in general.
>

Sounds about right!

Like I said: ZERO chance it ever happened!

Zeke

 

[O_S_O_K]

Damn Tree Huggers!


"The problem with quotes on Internet Forums is that it is often difficult to verify their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln