Nith Valley Sledder Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 Having a minimum fine of $500 put in place like they are asking is a good thing. It eliminates a judge from passing out $75 fines due to no minimum threshold in place now. This still doesn't change anything from what we currently have. The offenders have to be charged and convicted first. Nobody wants to do that. Trail patrol don't want to make the time investment to follow a charge thru to completion. If they lay a charge and don't follow up they can be held liable for costs. The police won't do anything unless they catch somebody n the act. Snowmobilers are hard to catch. They come and go very quickly. Unless Stop or OPP are patrolling problem areas it is hard to stop. That is why the landowner stops it by removing the trail from his property. It is the easiest solution for him as he doesn't get satisfaction any other way. Sucks to be us! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viperules700 Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 If it passes you would just have to charge a few people and post it in the magazines. Signs and word would get around to change behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 Might be an answer coming soon though, for farmland trespassing! Ontario federation of Farmers (OFA) is seeking to raise the trespassing limit from 200 to 5000. Theoretically if this passes and club had pictures of the sled trespassing the owner of the property could then press the charge. Putting up signs saying go outside of stakes, 5000 fine! That would help don't you think? Need to charge a few people and post it in the magazines and around the net. Wouldn't take long for people to get the message. That may well help. As long as the owner of the sled is the one that gets the fine instead of simply saying that wasn't me on the sled. You can't tell for the helmet etc. People start getting dinged $5K may make them think twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02Sled Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 Generally, fines paid in Ontario aren't dispersed to the damaged party. However, the Trespass to Property Act already allows for up to $1000 in damages to be collected from the trespasser. I can't see the OFA's request going anywhere. Fines (not damages) in excess of a few hundred bucks is excessive. EDIT: just read the linked article. The OFA isn't looking for a max fine of $25k. They want to raise the limits on damages to $25k. That is not unreasonable. Why would you say in excess of a few hundred bucks is excessive. I will bet there are some that will say for a few hundred bucks I will take my chances just like they do riding without a trail permit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbill Posted March 6, 2015 Share Posted March 6, 2015 Having a minimum fine of $500 put in place like they are asking is a good thing. It eliminates a judge from passing out $75 fines due to no minimum threshold in place now. This still doesn't change anything from what we currently have. The offenders have to be charged and convicted first. Nobody wants to do that. Trail patrol don't want to make the time investment to follow a charge thru to completion. If they lay a charge and don't follow up they can be held liable for costs. The police won't do anything unless they catch somebody n the act. Snowmobilers are hard to catch. They come and go very quickly. Unless Stop or OPP are patrolling problem areas it is hard to stop. That is why the landowner stops it by removing the trail from his property. It is the easiest solution for him as he doesn't get satisfaction any other way. Sucks to be us! I have gotten a conviction on someone that I caught and would do it again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nith Valley Sledder Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 I didn't say it couldn't be done. Only that it takes more effort than most people are willing to undertake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volunteer2 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Trail Closed.jpg This image is making the rounds. Photos are effective....hopefully riders will 'get it'. The OFSC has many 'single message' campaigns ( e.g. buy where you ride). Perhaps "Ride between the Stakes" or "No trespassing" could be the 2016 message. saw this yesterday so went down the road. At intersection 263 there were no closed signs. There was a follow road to trail sign. We were heading away from area but just wondered if people were entering area at 263 or was the trail closed up further. I guess I am just trying to get my bearings since the area could survive the meltdown and march break riding will happen. Pls thx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volunteer2 Posted March 7, 2015 Share Posted March 7, 2015 Trail Closed.jpg This image is making the rounds. Photos are effective....hopefully riders will 'get it'. The OFSC has many 'single message' campaigns ( e.g. buy where you ride). Perhaps "Ride between the Stakes" or "No trespassing" could be the 2016 message. As to the single message campaign I like that idea. The Federation prob will download this idea to the Districts but they should make it more present in the literature they print. Maybe specific examples of the amount of trails lost due to this issue could be researched and made public. Signage then could be posted. Road running is part of our sport since trails can't be everywhere but I am sure clubs could figure out the amount of road running KM due to landowner revoked permissions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sledjunk Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 Having a minimum fine of $500 put in place like they are asking is a good thing. It eliminates a judge from passing out $75 fines due to no minimum threshold in place now. This still doesn't change anything from what we currently have. The offenders have to be charged and convicted first. Nobody wants to do that. Trail patrol don't want to make the time investment to follow a charge thru to completion. If they lay a charge and don't follow up they can be held liable for costs. The police won't do anything unless they catch somebody n the act. Snowmobilers are hard to catch. They come and go very quickly. Unless Stop or OPP are patrolling problem areas it is hard to stop. That is why the landowner stops it by removing the trail from his property. It is the easiest solution for him as he doesn't get satisfaction any other way. Sucks to be us! Unfortunately, STOP is powerless to help with this. STOP can only enforce the MSVA, not the Trespass to Property Act. That means that if STOP come across ATV's on the trail, they cannot lay a charge. The OPP (or any police) can lay trespass charges, as can TP, but as mentioned, it can be a significant time investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volunteer2 Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 The Stop Officer will have to put on their Trail Patrol hat for that situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.