Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mercier
Not really.
Hunting and fishing were a means of sustenance at the time... and fish/game a common ownership.
Our other outdoor recreational activities are modern... and really not characteristic of a conservative-leaning populous.
Posting is not limited by the size of a property... but smaller properties use other means to denote the restriction. ''Secured premises'' being the most noted.
It is consider wrong, possibly criminal, to climb over closed fences and gates.
Your posting with the chain should be sufficient enough for anyone paying attention to realize that you do not wish them there. The name and address requirement is so that someone wishing to access the property, but respect your wishes, can write to you and request written permission that would be valid for law enforcement to determine that you have allowed them there.
|
I agree that you’re going to lose if you go over a gate or under a chain, but the posting statute is pretty straightforward. Some states simply require that you mark your trees with purple paint, within a certain distance between the marked trees. Similar legislation was suggested in NH a few years ago and failed. Signs have to be replaced and can easily be removed. Posting your name and address can lead to harassment. But, really? If someone posts a sign saying that they don’t want people on their property should they really have to take the opportunity, perhaps multiple times, to say that they really meant what is written on the signs? Fish & Wildlife says it is common curtesy to request permission before entering unposted land. It’s possible to find out who owns property in NH, and F&W seems to be saying that this is a small effort to expend to go onto another’s property.