Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Dan Andrews

No Trespassing

Recommended Posts

i know exactly where your talking about because i caught a 39 inch pike there and i wont say the road name because people have told me not to but there is not ONE SINGLE SIGN ON THE BRIDGE OR BEFOR IT THAT SAY NO TRESPASSING

Edited by Rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well they werent there when i was fishing there and i dont think they are there now either so you cant get in doo-doo for fishing in an area that use to have no tresspassing signs cuz i fish there with my father and he doesnt fish where its illegal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest canadadude
this time dude you are wrong on two parts fishing at the for falls is both tresspassing and a fishing violation look it up in the regs but im pretty sure your not aloud to fish with in 50 or 75 feet of a fish ladder or obstuction

and if you are fishing in a no tresspassing area you can be charged with poaching and fishing from the bridge is not tresspassing there is not one sign on that bridge tommy clearly said he ignored the signs

Sorry C.O Rob didn't know I was dealing with an expert.........perhaps you should have alittle talk with the local C.O before shooting off :lol::lol:.......get your facts straight

Edited by canadadude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest canadadude
see i have talked to them and it is a violation and tresspassing as well fishing at the for falls so yes i am right

ya right :lol::lol::o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Rockfish
well they werent there when i was fishing there and i dont think they are there now either so you cant get in doo-doo for fishing in an area that use to have no tresspassing signs cuz i fish there with my father and he doesnt fish where its illegal

The signs do ocassionally get ripped off and then replaced sometime later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry C.O Rob didn't know I was dealing with an expert.........perhaps you should have alittle talk with the local C.O before shooting off :lol::lol:.......get your facts straight

Well John the guy said he did ask a CO. Why not call yourself or use the "ask a CO" forum and verify it for yourself? Or are you afraid of what they might tell you. I remember you getting quite upset with Rob Mac and flip flopping on the issue like a catfish on the ice when ever it comes to the four falls. Find out once and for all. Make the call yourself to both a CO and the City(landowner).

We all know where your talking about. Can someone go check for signs? Even if there is a sign that is grown over, if you know it's there, you then need to ask permission.

Please keep the tone down guys. If your going to argue try to stick to the facts and don't get personal by name calling etc. Thanks Rick for making some edits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest canadadude
Well John the guy said he did ask a CO. Why not call yourself or use the "ask a CO" forum and verify it for yourself? Or are you afraid of what they might tell you. I remember you getting quite upset with Rob Mac and flip flopping on the issue like a catfish on the ice when ever it comes to the four falls. Find out once and for all. Make the call yourself to both a CO and the City(landowner).

We all know your talking about faywell or something like that Drive. Can someone go check for signs? Even if there is a sign that is grown over, if you know it's there, you then need to ask permission.

Please keep the tone down guys. If your going to argue try to stick to the facts and don't get personal by name calling etc. Thanks Rick for making some edits.

Give me a break I talk to the CO weekly!!! I know more about the laws down there then most Chillie,.....Heck I ride by his house dailly I got his and other's, personal cards to report infractions!!!!! The dudes knows me on a first name basis and always ask me first what is going on in the area and the 4 falls!!!! I get upset with others who don't ask all the questions and get all anglers opinions and then say there representing us thats why I get upset!!! As for flip floping on the issue it's because there are alot of different opinions from different fisherman esspecially the one who enjoy the 4 falls area and perhaps some of my first ideas were changed after acctually converseing with other local users!!! You got a real short memory on who started getting the CO's to patroll port!!! Give me a break Dan!!!! :lol::lol: .........I'm not going to let you or anyone else upset me, with your comments, I know what's going on!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John you use allot of (!!!) and :lol: :lol: . This makes me think you are upset. As far as your relationship with the CO I don't care if your married to him. Did (for the record) he ever tell you that fishing the 4 falls is not trespassing or allowed or even not poaching?

The reason I pointed out your getting upset with the 4 falls issue John is because (yes) you did change your mind a few times and sometimes argued we should all be able to fish there but sometimes you argued they should shut it right down so in my eyes you shouldn't get mad at others opinions either way. Now the CO doesn't own it so if there are no trespassing signs, then you are trespassing if you fish there without permission. I haven't figured out if it's poaching just yet.

John what I've gained from your post is you think it is legal to fish the four falls and theres no reason everyone rubbing elbows on fisherman's pier shouldn't be able to go fish there tomorrow. Now spare me the drama laden reply please and just for the record, without any swearing or :o:lol: tell us your opinion on the legalities of fishing the 4 falls. I don't care if the cops did kick you out, don't care what the CO didn't say and I don't care how long you or any other peaceful non littering longtime angler has fished there. In your mind is it legal for everyone to fish the 4 falls or not?

2 simple questions John. Relax man. If you have a heart attack you won't be going drifting tomorrow :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest canadadude

Where in my posts do I make any suggestions about it being legal to fish the 4 falls!! It's a NO TRESPASSING AREA, you can't fish there, walk there, sun tan there or even fart in there or your breaking the law period!!! If you are caught in there you are fined for Trespassing period!!!!!! It has nothing to do with what activity your doing in that area it's illeagal to trespass there, never seen guys in a boat get fined so perhaps it may be legal to fish there as long as your not standing on the property and if your not past the dangerous water marker, which does continue over to the 4 falls area!! By the way I havn't fished that area since I was 15yrs old, where I fished in the fall was behind the resteraunt and have never been bugged by anyone for that area!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is it not still illegal to fish within 75 feet of a dam,obstacle or barrier???? if so, that even means your line cannot go within that distance of the area as well..if you caught and kept a fish from within those boundries then you would be poaching no matter what..tresspassing, no tresspassing whatever...so if you took that same area in question (4 falls) and then drew an imaginary line from the other side of the harbour, from the area where you cannot legally fish because of the MNR guidlines for any dam,obstacle or whatever..so that would be like the fence..or the white bouy, straight across the harbour....would that not make that whole area out of bounds anyways, and anyone fishing within the 75 feet of that area would be poaching..no matter how much you guys argue about this :blink::Gonefishing:

Edited by jwl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest canadadude
is it not still illegal to fish within 75 feet of a dam,obstacle or barrier???? if so, that even means your line cannot go within that distance of the area as well..if you caught and kept a fish from within those boundries then you would be poaching no matter what..tresspassing, no tresspassing whatever...so if you took that same area in question (4 falls) and then drew an imaginary line from the other side of the harbour, from the area where you cannot legally fish because of the MNR guidlines for any dam,obstacle or whatever..so that would be like the fence..or the white bouy, straight across the harbour....would that not make that whole area out of bounds anyways, and anyone fishing within the 75 feet of that area would be poaching..no matter how much you guys argue about this :blink::Gonefishing:

That is not totally true when it comes to the 4-falls area much the same as fishing the Dunville Dam or Caladonia Dam!! I mean if that is true then there would be No Fishing off the Dunville dam or in fact fishing around any waterfall in the Province!! I keep hearing of this law but to the best of my Knowledge the Dam, obstacle or barrier must have a certain designation as a fish obstacle!! This is a very grey area to enforce!! If this law is true why is fishing at the Dunville Dam allowed? when the CO's frequent this area lots and the dudes fish right off the side are they poaching aswell? I know the fish ladder is out of bounds but the Dam seems to be open!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the Dam in Dunville is not classified as a fish barrier, I know this from working with the MNR past spring on the walleye enhancement project...there where issues surrounding the VHS virus and such..and the Dunnville dam was not classed as a fish barrier....in that area..the first designated fish barrier is the dam in Caledonia, so they declaired the Grand River from lake Erie to the dam in Caledonia VHS possitive..in Dunville, migratory fish can go up and over the dam, and also go down as well...I have seen rainbows go up and over, it's pretty cool and a big tease at the same time, and we captured a few walleye that had been previously relocated after tagging,we got one that was tagged in like 2000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually Jack it was a barrier and we were partly responsible for having it disregarded concerning the VHS scare mainly due to the fact that salmon and rainbow trout can be seen jumping it. It is in fact considered a fish barrier to many species such as the walleye. Thank Rob Culp from the Dunnville Hunters and Anglers Club for making common sense prevail there.

During the walleye reg meetings in Dunnville and Caladonia a couple of years back we pointed out the guys in the MNR's power point fishing against the dam in a slide promoting fishing. They were embarrassed to have missed that one and said they would remove the slide.

I doubt you'll find a CO who would ever enforce that rule in Dunnville, like in Port D there are rules that serve as a blanket coverage but aren't necessarily protecting anything in every instance. Same as the trespassing issue. However if there is any argument at all, the rules should be followed until permission is confirmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest canadadude
the Dam in Dunville is not classified as a fish barrier, I know this from working with the MNR past spring on the walleye enhancement project...there where issues surrounding the VHS virus and such..and the Dunnville dam was not classed as a fish barrier....in that area..the first designated fish barrier is the dam in Caledonia, so they declaired the Grand River from lake Erie to the dam in Caledonia VHS possitive..in Dunville, migratory fish can go up and over the dam, and also go down as well...I have seen rainbows go up and over, it's pretty cool and a big tease at the same time, and we captured a few walleye that had been previously relocated after tagging,we got one that was tagged in like 2000.

Hey Jack thats the same answer I got concerning the 4- falls area :lol: .....I talk alot with the CO's in the area an the one thing they told me was not to make our conversations known on the internet!!!!! so what I know concerning the area of Port D I like to keep under my hat :) .......in fact knightfisher I'm not impressed with your post although I relise your not promoting the 4-falls fishing but keep the MNR stuff under your hat, trust me it's better that way :D:worthy: .....I no that law is there but it definitly is a gray area unless posted!!!! :Gonefishing:......Like I said the area has to be classified as fish barrier before you have any chance of making the 75' rule work in a court of law!!! :blink:

Edited by canadadude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see how this gets a little confusing for sure...here are a couple examples of people who have talked with CO's, and worked with CO's as well as volunteering with the MNR, and helped to have an influence on certain things as well :Gonefishing:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest canadadude

I do have a concern for the area since it is my so called refuge and I keep up on everything going on in Port D, I don't post it all due to the publicity of the internet which at times can hurt the over all goal, I hope you understand :Gonefishing: .....But I would like to Thank the MNR for all the help and such they have done for Port D in the last year, we have a great fishery here and I'm so glad you have taken such an interest :blink::lol: My only hope is that with us anglers and the MNR we can keep this excellent urban fishery as vibrant and excellent as we have expierenced in the past :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Write up in T.O.Sun about it.....Sat.'s paper . It was tailor made to make the fishermen look real bad ! Lots of parties involved , spending some money for meetings and passing new laws . This may be a test case to see what effect the night time fishing ban has . It may inflame rather than quell the violence ......maybe a better idea to have a few more C.O's around .....?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Asking for permission to access a property to hunt/fish is not a hard thing to do. Sure, you might get turned down half the time or more, but in my experience full-time farmers don't have any objections in principle to hunting/fishing. If a real farmer turns down my request, he does so politely, and its usually because he or his friends/family already hunt there. The only time I have had anyone respond with a negative attitude was from a "rural non-farm resident" (I thought it was the farmhouse, but it wasn't).

Earlier this year I drove by a property that I had hunted in years past and I noticed a new name on the mailbox, as well as bright orange no-hunting signs posted all over the place. The situation did not look good at all, but a fews weeks later I knocked on the door and, armed with a nice bottle of wine, introduced myself to the new owner. He turned out to be a super nice guy and once again, I'm good to go!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make sure he takes down ALL the signs before Jan 1st or your screwed for the year!

It's amazing the anti hunting attitude these days and people have been duped into thinking that way or had a run in with the "bad apple" of the bunch. When you approach them with manners but don't try and BS them, most do come around. That's if they have an open enough mind to let you get a word in.

Wine eh? I'll have to try that. I found offering the hippy's some organic vegetables works too :Gonefishing:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Make sure he takes down ALL the signs before Jan 1st or your screwed for the year!

Sorry Chilli, please explain, why must the signs come down if I have his permission? Is there something in the Trespass to Property Act or Landowners Liability Act that I should know about? Despite the signs, the property is still hunted by his relative during the deer season and will now also be hunted by me from January 1 to the end of February (for rabbits).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earlier this year I drove by a property that I had hunted in years past and I noticed a new name on the mailbox, as well as bright orange no-hunting signs posted all over the place.

OK I can't find this anywhere in writing but I remember it being taught at both the Silverdale and John Kellaway's OHEP classes that if an area is posted "NO HUNTING" even the owner can not hunt that property. No trespassing signs allow the owner to determine who can do what with permission granted but a no hunting sign applies to everyone including the landowner.

Now as for taking down the signs before Jan 1st, I inquired by calling John Kellaway before making this post. I learned that if a property was posted NH as of Jan 1st, it would apply for the entire year even if the signs came down part way through. John told me he had no recollection of this rule and perhaps I heard it at the other coarse location.

If I can find this rule written I will return with a post however John recommends we ask owners to replace the "No Hunting" signs with "No Trespassing" signs as this will allow some negotiating with landowners.

http://www.firearmseducationschool.com/

http://www.silverdalesports.ca/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest canadadude

Chillie is right to hunt the property legally it cannot be posted NO HUNTING it can be posted NO TRESPASSING and still be hunted if your granted permision from the owner. NO HUNTING stops even the owner of the land from legaling hunting his own land, this is the law it may sound absurd but your better off to have the owner post his land NO TESPASSING and this still keeps it legal for you to hunt, as long as you have his permission!! The Red Dot sign means NO TRESPASSING and has nothing to do with your right to hunt as long as your allowed on that parcel of land!! If your friend has posted his land no hunting and is allowing you the right to hunt perhaps you can talk him into changing the designation to no trespassing and help him out posting the area!!!! I mean talk to the guy it seems you have a great realationship going now and it only means changing a few signs in the area and your good to go B) now as far as the Jan 1st law it would be tough to prove such a thing in court and would not worry about that!!! But if it's posted NO HUNTING and you hunting there given permission or not you are in violation!!!

Edited by canadadude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...