Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Native Land and tickets....?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dkwarthog
    replied
    Originally posted by SkinnyD View Post
    Some folks are mixing up individual landowners and big stinkin businesses. Joe Landowner with his 160 acres along the Porcupine is much different than the corporation to which he belongs. Imagine if Wal-Mart owned 10.howevermanymillion acres of land in remote Alaska. We'd be raising all kinds of hell to hunt on it. Regional Corp = Business. Wal-Mart = Business. Regional Corp = Wal-Mart. I think that's Ptolomy's Theorem.

    Ding, Ding, Ding.....

    Anyone rational would have a hard time arguing with that logic. Except the SCOTUS, those wacky folks have decided that a Corporation can be considered an individual, at least when it comes to campaign contributions. Thats spelled M...U...R...K...O...W...S...K....I..... :shot:

    Leave a comment:


  • strangerinastrangeland
    replied
    Spot on with that , Skinny D:topjob:

    Leave a comment:


  • SkinnyD
    replied
    Some folks are mixing up individual landowners and big stinkin businesses. Joe Landowner with his 160 acres along the Porcupine is much different than the corporation to which he belongs. Imagine if Wal-Mart owned 10.howevermanymillion acres of land in remote Alaska. We'd be raising all kinds of hell to hunt on it. Regional Corp = Business. Wal-Mart = Business. Regional Corp = Wal-Mart. I think that's Ptolomy's Theorem.

    Leave a comment:


  • La Pine
    replied
    Well, I feel that Hunting is a sport of ethics. If the land is posted because the owners don't want you hunting on the land they own, than thats that. If you tresspass they should arrest and fine you.

    Leave a comment:


  • tlingitwarrior
    replied
    Originally posted by tccak71 View Post

    I know this thread has gotten a little heated regarding private & Native land, but I do believe MOST hunters begin their query for a hunting spot by looking at the map and GETTING ON HERE if need be and finding out who owns the land. At least I hope most do, otherwise that'd be irresponsible. Negligence doesn't fly that well in this day & age as info is readily available.

    Tim
    Well at least there's more than a few who think so! First question ~ is this any bull or 50 & 4. Second question ~ whose property am I hunting on. Third question ~ do I bring the new 325 wsm or perhaps the big dog 375h&h since it shoots so nice and does so little meat damage.

    I'm done.

    Leave a comment:


  • tccak71
    replied
    Originally posted by tlingitwarrior View Post
    So every known access point needs posted?

    So here is the scenario. I'm looking at a map of eastern alaska range or whatever range. I find a lake that seems promising for a hunt. My first step is to see who owns the property before i schedule my flight. I guess that's just me. From the sounds of arguements in this thread, if i follow, guys dont feel thats necessary, it would be fine to land under the assumption its open and hunt unless there is a post on said lake and precisely at the area of the lake they hunt.
    TW, the Ahtna post the crap out of their land; don't think anyone could claim negligence about trespassing (at least on the Ahtna lands I've been on).

    I know this thread has gotten a little heated regarding private & Native land, but I do believe MOST hunters begin their query for a hunting spot by looking at the map and GETTING ON HERE if need be and finding out who owns the land. At least I hope most do, otherwise that'd be irresponsible. Negligence doesn't fly that well in this day & age as info is readily available.


    Tim
    Last edited by Brian M; 03-20-2011, 19:05.

    Leave a comment:


  • rimfirematt
    replied
    Originally posted by tlingitwarrior View Post
    So every known access point needs posted?

    So here is the scenario. I'm looking at a map of eastern alaska range or whatever range. I find a lake that seems promising for a hunt. My first step is to see who owns the property before i schedule my flight. I guess that's just me. From the sounds of arguements in this thread, if i follow, guys dont feel thats necessary, it would be fine to land under the assumption its open and hunt unless there is a post on said lake and precisely at the area of the lake they hunt.
    Yeah, landowners are responsible for posting land. Again, I cant find it, but I have read it. I promise.

    The scenario you are describing is probably true for most guys in Alaska. Especially if they were raised here. Thats how I was raised here. If it not posted, and you dont hurt nothing, then go ahead.

    Personally I dont do that anymore. Well I did a little bit along the susitna a couple of years ago. Land wasnt posted but I dont know if it was private or not. Not interested in dealing with drama while Im out hunting. So thats why you see the likes of me in no brainer common folk places like hatchers pass, Eureka, knik ect.

    Last year we were hunting around willow and my dad who is a surveyor made us all maps of land ownership. Only because of his maps were we able to know the difference. There wasnt sign one put up on any of the land we were hunting on. Would he have done that 20 years ago? Heck no. But he also isnt into the drama everyone wants to perform these days.

    Leave a comment:


  • tlingitwarrior
    replied
    Originally posted by rimfirematt View Post
    I also tried for a few minutes trying to find the law that deals with properly posting private property. Couldnt find it, but I know its out there. Ive read it before. A good example of how to do it properly is the way Eklutna inc has posted their land. The signs are of the proper size, proper information, proper height and at the proper intervals. Whatever that corp is around denali has done it right too.

    One sign out in the middle of nowhere dont count.
    So every known access point needs posted?

    So here is the scenario. I'm looking at a map of eastern alaska range or whatever range. I find a lake that seems promising for a hunt. My first step is to see who owns the property before i schedule my flight. I guess that's just me. From the sounds of arguements in this thread, if i follow, guys dont feel thats necessary, it would be fine to land under the assumption its open and hunt unless there is a post on said lake and precisely at the area of the lake they hunt.

    Leave a comment:


  • .338WM
    replied
    Originally posted by tyrex13 View Post
    If you'll read my post, all I disagreed with was where the burden of proof was. Tlingit stated that it was the land users responsobility to know who owns the land and my opinion is that unposted private property is generally fair game for hunting unless I have other information. It appears that the law agrees with my opinion. I always respect no trespessing signs and fences.
    You are correct, the land must be posted in order to restrict/prohibit so called "trespass", there is however, particularly where the Feds are concerned, a responsibility on behalf of the "visiting party" to know where they are. There have been a few documented cases as such relating to Denali Natl. park for example; those examples however, or more correctly I think, relate more directly to the availablilty and general common knowledge of easily obtainable maps and information etc.

    It has been well established that the burden of proof is the responsibilty of the prosecution, common sense and respect for the law eliminates, or at least mitigates the the former. Had there not been a posting on the land which I mentioned earlier, I would not have departed until I was ready, if I had been approached and challenged I likely would have asked for proof of claim or a trooper to intervene, then acted accordingly and appropriately.

    Ultimately, the responsibity lies with the landowner to post their property against trespass if they wish for it not to occur.

    Leave a comment:


  • rimfirematt
    replied
    I also tried for a few minutes trying to find the law that deals with properly posting private property. Couldnt find it, but I know its out there. Ive read it before. A good example of how to do it properly is the way Eklutna inc has posted their land. The signs are of the proper size, proper information, proper height and at the proper intervals. Whatever that corp is around denali has done it right too.

    One sign out in the middle of nowhere dont count.

    Leave a comment:


  • tyrex13
    replied
    (1) notice against trespass is personally communicated to that person by the owner of the land or some other authorized person; or

    (2) notice against trespass is given by posting in a reasonably conspicuous manner under the circumstances.

    (c) A notice against trespass is given if the notice

    (1) is printed legibly in English;

    (2) is at least 144 square inches in size;

    (3) contains the name and address of the person under whose authority the property is posted and the name and address of the person who is authorized to grant permission to enter the property;

    (4) is placed at each roadway and at each way of access onto the property that is known to the landowner;

    (5) in the case of an island, is placed along the perimeter at each cardinal point of the island; and

    (6) states any specific prohibition that the posting is directed against, such as "no trespassing," "no hunting," "no fishing," "no digging," or similar prohibitions.

    A good example of reasonably conspicious is the signage around JBER here in Anchorage. You can see it from the Glenn HWY.

    Leave a comment:


  • tlingitwarrior
    replied
    Originally posted by tyrex13 View Post
    If you'll read my post, all I disagreed with was where the burden of proof was. Tlingit stated that it was the land users responsobility to know who owns the land and my opinion is that unposted private property is generally fair game for hunting unless I have other information. It appears that the law agrees with my opinion. I always respect no trespessing signs and fences.
    So then i'm curious, what constitutes properly posted property?

    Leave a comment:


  • strangerinastrangeland
    replied
    Right on, Tyrex:topjob:



    For what its worth, people here, on their alottments, do not post, and freely use each others lands without proplems, usually. Ive never been driven off from anywhere while doing my thang........

    If its posted, I stay off as well, and some lands certainly are, whoever their owner could be....

    Leave a comment:


  • tyrex13
    replied
    Originally posted by strangerinastrangeland
    snip

    Right on, Tyrex:topjob:
    If you'll read my post, all I disagreed with was where the burden of proof was. Tlingit stated that it was the land users responsobility to know who owns the land and my opinion is that unposted private property is generally fair game for hunting unless I have other information. It appears that the law agrees with my opinion. I always respect no trespessing signs and fences.

    Leave a comment:


  • tyrex13
    replied
    Originally posted by strangerinastrangeland View Post
    AS 11.46.350 , as listed by Tyrex is the definition of "emergency use of premisis"(11.46,340), for life and safty, in extream need., NOT a right to tresspass.

    Lets try and stick to the truth here.

    Criminal Tresspass in the first and second degree are defined in AS.11.46.330 and AS.11.46.320.

    If you enter a property that is posted, you are committing a crime.........Criminal tresspass.
    If you remain on the property after being warned, or do serious damage, it go's to First degree.

    Native Alaskan owned land were NEVER "Public Property" and they proved that in Court, hence their return in tital to their rightfull owners.

    What sickens me , and this IS NOT the first thread is that such slanderous crap against fellow citizens of a differing color/race/culture could be allowed on these forums by Brian M., our moderator.
    Race should never be a factor in any discussion here, 'cause if I promoted anti whatever, Ni**er, J*w , K**e's, Po**k, Blonds, ect and such, Id probly get banned, but bashing Native Alaskans is a ***kin' free for all on this forum.

    Prehaps Mike S. needs to come up with a new forum rule against racisim or our monitor enforce them , if they allready here. Not for "Keeping a discussion on track" but remove and close posts because they are obviously Racist.

    Ive got the sicko's pegged from what they write themselfs, after a couple years here I have this fairly well figured, and Im know its not the last either.

    You predjudices peices of **** should wake up and get over it. You are Un-American and a shame to your fellow citizens.

    Private property is private property, its no joke.
    I also agree, +1. I will respect proper and legal No Trespassing signs.

    Leave a comment:

Footer Adsense

Collapse
Working...
X