Hacker News Reader

Comment by googlryas | Hacker News Reader

Should it be illegal to put up 'no trespassing' signs when there is clearly a longstanding public easement?

Something being blatantly illegal never stopped anybody from taking from the public easement. There's a pretty infamous little county road that the locals stole near Silicon Valley.

http://blog.sfgate.com/bicycle/2016/03/22/road-thieves-of-th...

Thanks for that link. I'm just starting to explore the biking roads around here and the history is interesting.

Nice to know that you protect public way just by enjoying it!

I don't have much hope for that if there's not even anything done for people effectively doing the same on land they do not own [0].

[0]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/02/california-w...

I think it should be illegal. At the same time, it would be nice if the Forest Service would place signs on these trails clarifying that access is allowed and list the contact information for the proper authorities. That would, however, be expensive and the land owners would no doubt remove the signs.

Removing the signs would be theft of government property, and is punishable by up to one year in jail.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/641

Edit: I'm happy to hang out in an old pickup truck with a coffee and a shotgun and wait for someone to steal the signs. Just point me in the right direction and give me a number to call with the forestry service, national parks, or the bureau of land management when someone snags a sign.

That implies enforcement, which is mostly right back to where we are now. I really wish it were so simple.

You would really need a camera to watch the sign. Solar powered with satellite up-link. Then a camera to watch the camera. So, not really practical when there is nobody around 99.99% of the time.

they cant even catch people breaking into hundreds of cars a year at popular trail heads... under staffing is a PITA.

Some of these are intentionally deemed "not easements" by the government because it would make them responsible for maintenance.

I once called the Bureau of Land Management about repairing a dirt roads they liked to use that crossed private land. They made it crystal clear that it was an "abandoned mining trail" and not actually a road or easement, which in their mind relieved them of any obligation.

That just means that a private mining company built the road to access a mining claim. Once the claim is abandoned, no one has the obligation to maintain it.

If you used it to access your land, you could start maintaining it.

I imagine it is, but they put up the signs on the fences on both sides of the road, which is their property and it is illegal to trespass. IANAL, but on undeveloped land in the US you have to put up 'no trespassing' signs generally before enforcing people not to trespass on your land.

I reality the ranchers(in reality they are usually rich sport ranchers that live in a city and recently bought the property) don't even need the closed gate in most cases. If you are in the middle of nowhere going down a dirt road and you come up to a fence that crosses the road with a cattle guard and on both sides of the road it say no trespassing, what do you do?

Interestingly, some states don't require signs - purple paint will do.

http://ijr.com/2016/02/535003-purple-paint-texas/

Assuming a 'no trespassing sign.'

Closed gate with no lock, can't pass.

Closed gate with locked lock, can't pass.

Closed gate with unlocked lock, can pass.

"Closed gate with unlocked lock, can pass." Never seen one of those.

Usually a cattle guard means no gate at all.

Probably, but I've seen a few signs that we're polite and clear about what was public and what was private.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com