This is an interesting story/situation for numerous reasons. Like the ethics or safety of trapping close to homes or on private property or the ethics of the fact that it is a trooper. These points are being debated over on the Trapping Forum so I don't want to belabor them too much. For what its worth, the few troopers that I have some personal knowledge of go to great lengths to stay way on the high side of the legal when hunting. This almost gets to the point of handicapping them when moose hunting as if it doesn't have the required number of browtines, they won't shoot til it is darned near 60".
The part of this story that I found surprising was the definition of trespassing. As you all know, it takes awhile to begin to get comfortable with all the regulations. I moved here 15 years ago from Idaho and I remember one of the things I "learned" early was how the trespassing laws were different. What I thought I had learned was that it is totally incumbant upon the hunter to know if they are hunting on private land and get permission. When I left Idaho, if private property wasn't marked as such, you could legally go hunt there. At the time I remember thinking how crazy this was given the expanse of the state and the size of some of the swaths of private land and the lack of fences. Now this article indicates that it really is more like the lower 48 where the owner really does need to mark their land in some legally defined way.
I don't know that I really have a question per se but I just find it interesting that there is such a strong culture here of staying away from the private land posted or not. I remember reading posts on this forum stating as if it were the law that marked or not, it was the hunters sole responsibility avoid hunting on private land even if unmarked.
I posted here instead the Trapping forum for the larger number of people who will see it and perhaps comment.