Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mercier
Actually the statement ''Private Property'' does not legally qualify under the statute.
While the written agreement provides the AMC with some management authority over the property, the signage is less than required by statute. RSA 635:4 is pretty specific in that it must state what is not allowed - such as ''No Trespass without the written permission of the AMC".
The SFPNHF has some pretty distinct signage used around their properties, and those they manage, along with even more explicit signage at what would constitute a natural point of entry.
The statute is very hard to prosecute... and an island probably would make it worse... since the "first" offense is seldom even bothered to be ticketed with the violation.
I have found over the years that there will always be that certain percentage of the population that will push the limit beyond common courtesy... which is why we probably have a statute in the first place. Those will be the ones that you'll have an issue with.
|
You don't know what the full written agreement does (or does not) provide.
The AMC cannot grant island use privileges to third parties.