Trespassing

[1948berg]

When travelling in USA you can see the sign "NO TRESPASSING" almost everywhere. This led me to beleave that the rights of landowners was very strong in USA. In todays paper there is an article of how strong private ownership is protected in different countries
IPRI - International Property Rights Index
where Norway gets the top score, and USA is on the 14th place.
In my forest i cant deny anybody access, people can camp whereever they like, and walk or ride as they like.
Can anybody explain to me why USA gets that low score?

 

[deereguy]

My guess would be private property rights, the insurance industry, and the need for people to be in everyone else's business. Our insurance company has declared us an "attractive nuisance", because we have a pond, woods, pasture with animals and surrounded on 4 sides by subdivision (houses every 70' or so).

 

[jpm]

deereguy would that make the subdivisons a "unattractive nuisance"?

 

[davemhughes]

As time goes on it will get worse also. Eventually I believe we will have "some" (key word) sort of land redistribution take place in our country. It seems that down through history in one way or another the landless population becomes envisioned as themselves being the have nots and the land owners as the haves. Sometimes its been a justified reasoning but sometimes it has not. Through force, social change, and politics is seems to always eventually occur. In the end I guess we never truly own the land, we are just stewards. Not saying it right or wrong, but just is.

 

[shvl73]

In my forest i cant deny anybody access, people can camp whereever they like, and walk or ride as they like.

What is the advantage to owning property, if I can use yours? If that were the case here, the people with recreational vehicles would love it. Unlimited places to ride!
I have had an issue with hunters walking right by my house, two people on bikes on my front lawn and snowmobile tracks across my field, up and down my driveway and turning around at my back steps. I now have the whole property posted and have put up some fence to keep motorized toys out.

 

[rox]

Gunnar,

WHY can't you deny access to your own property? If you fenced it would you then be able to deny access? Can you explain a little more about your laws?

 

[DocHeb]

None of us actually own land - we only rent it from the government with payments of taxes. If you don't believe this, just try not paying your rent for a couple years. This gives many people the idea that if the government owns the land, and the government is "of-the-people, by-the-people, for-the-people", then it follows logically that many feel they can use anything of the "government's" for themselves.

Many people have had hardship induced by rent (tax) manipulation by government in attempts at social engineering. There have also been significant "property taking" cases within the US in the past twenty years using the theory of "eminent domain", which is the theory that if it is for the common good your property may be seized. This has gone so far that individual's private property has been seized, only to be given to private developers so projects that increase the the government's tax revenues can be built. Significant backlash has occured in these instances, and some cases have gained nationwide attention. These cases were so egregious that there does seem to be movement towards restriction of these "eminent domain" theories.

All of the above, combined with a declining amount of personal responsiblity and courtesy in the USA leads to problems. We're not perfect, but we don't want to hear about it from outsiders.

 

[GaryM]

I read through some of the report and found this part particularly interesting:

Thus, it must be emphasized that, based on these sources, the country ranked worst in the IPRI is not necessarily the one with the weakest PR but the one that is perceived to be the worst of those countries included in the Index. Nevertheless, the authors appreciate expert surveys to be a good and reliable source of judgment related to a country’s de facto characteristics compared to focusing only on what is “written in the books”.

Please note the use of the word perceived. And the report is based on surveys. Seems to be not worth much at all in the real world.

 

[MikeD74T]

I think that if you examine that document's basis you'll see it as as both somewhat biased and dubious re: land ownership vs usage rights. I believe the US & Canada scores are relative to the amount of land not in private ownership. I once saw a map that depicted the US as 90% private owned east of the Mississippi River and 90% public (government) owned to the west. Much government land is leased to private individuals or corporations with the right to exclude others. Based on your statement about public access to your land I guessing that Norway has high private ownership without rights of exclusivity thus generating the "high" score. Without making judgement, I also suspect that if not much land is posted in Norway you may be sensitized to "no trespassing " signs and see more than there really are. In northern NH there is a small percentage of posted land, but because it is often posted every 50' it looks like a lot more. Also in NH land is open to some public uses by law unless otherwise posted. "Flatlander's"( south of NH mountains) from many areas think their lawn is sacred but the bigger properties of others should be open to access. When they come north they bring the signs with them. MikeD74T

 

[RayH]

I think Mike hit the nail right on the head.
Also a good point about the signage. Most people from "out of town" dont realize that for "no trespassing" signs to be legal, they must be posted within X number of feet from each other. This means that one piece of property will have several signs. It gives the appearance that the whole country is posted.