A dilemma about granting permission.

[FarmerDave]

Here is something to discuss on the slow days of summer.

The first couple year at the farm, I was not granting permission to very many people to fish in my main pond. The main reason was I had invested a couple hundred bucks into stocking channel catfish and a few hybrid bluegills. I wanted the newly stocked fish to get larger before anyone fished them heavily. Well, I think I was only asked once by a couple teens, and I did turn them away at the time with an explanation (and hinted about the pond in the woods where I invested far less). Now that the population is where I want, and it is time to harvest some of the larger fish, and more people are asking, I have been letting a few neighbors fish there. So far they have all been adults. On Saturday, a next door neighbor with at least 3 kids asked me if he could bring his son over and fish for those hybrids, Word has gotten around about my hybrids. I probably only have a couple dozen left in there, but they are large and aggressive (and stupid). Here is the dilemma. I don't mind granting permission to this guy, and I think it is great he wants to bring his kid over to fish. I enjoy seeing the young ones fishing, but don’t want them to fish there without adult supervision. But we are next door neighbors. What will stop this kid from sneaking over to the pond by himself to fish or catch frogs when his father is at work? This kid is way too young to be at the pond unattended. What if he gets hurt, or worse. I was a kid once. I know how this works. I mean, once he has fished there, and caught fish, he is going to want to come back often. I think a lawyer would call this pond an "attractive nuisance?" I may have opened myself up to problems. What would you have done?

Of course I said he could bring his kid over to fish, but I am having second thoughts about not adding conditions. Did I do the right thing? I think maybe I should have stressed that the kid is not allowed over by himself until he gets older, but I think the guy understands that by the way he asked the question in the first place.

I have a 5 strand fence around the pasture where the pond is located with strands 2 and 4 that can be electrified and the controller packs a wallop. (It was put there for cattle, not children) So far, the father has his kids convinced that it is electric. So far that has kept them in their own yard. But I haven’t turned it on since moving there except for a few minutes to make sure it works.

I’m probably worrying about nothing. But things are different from when I was a kid. People were less sue happy back then, or so it seemed. I can see why some people refuse to let others on their land.

By the way, the pond in the woods is as low as I have ever seen it. I’m betting it is down at least 4 feet. It must be deeper than I thought.

 

[Maurice]

FarmerDave wrote:
Here is something to discuss on the slow days of summer.

.........Of course I said he could bring his kid over to fish, but I am having second thoughts about not adding conditions. Did I do the right thing? I think maybe I should have stressed that the kid is not allowed over by himself until he gets older, but I think the guy understands that by the way he asked the question in the first place.

Dave,

I think your answer lies in this paragraph. I'd go over to his house (the appearance of a special trip makes a point) and tell him exactly how you feel about his kid being there alone. Tell him he is welcome to bring his kid any time. but he can't be there alone.

That was an easy one.....next?

Maurice

 

[Bruno]

1. Define the rules to your neighbor

2. Find out if the kid to swim. I am always amazed to find out that kids can't swim. I started mine at 6months. At three he handles himself pretty well in the water. He rides the tube now behind the boat. No swim = No play

3. Talk to the kid- Kids understand more than we adults think. Treat him with that respect and he will retun it.

My .02

 

[FarmerDave]

I forgot to add that thes people just recently bought that house and moved in, so I really don't know them yet. But they are related to another neighbor who I do know.

 

[Maurice]

FarmerDave wrote:
I forgot to add that thes people just recently bought that house and moved in, so I really don't know them yet. But they are related to another neighbor who I do know.

nevertheless

 

[JackM]

Dave, can't profess competence in Ohio Law, but generally, while you can never assure that you won't be sued for some tragedy, the best way to protect yourself from landowner liabilities is to be in a position that the injured party was not an "invitee" (on the land with your permission). Trespassers have the least rights in landowner cases. Permission to be on the land is not an all or nothing proposition. You can condition your permission on adult supervision being required. You might also emphasize to anyone to whom you grant permission that the permission is specific to them and they cannot suggest to others that you don't mind people using your property. I would make both of these issues very clear. If it wouldn't disturb the asthetics, consider NO TRESPASSING signs near the ponds as well. For what it is worth, liability for injuries for drowning in natural waterways are pretty rare. Even children are presumed to know that a lake, pond, river or stream carries a risk of drowning.

 

[rrt]

"Back in the day" you wouldn't have had to worry about this too much. But, nowadays, things are different, and you must protect yourself. The state did recently pass a law protecting landowners who leave their properties open for recreation, and that should be helpful. I think Jack M. did say things the best, though. Parental supervision would be quite helpful, IMO.

 

[ryanh]

Two perspectives.

When I was a kid; I was a constant pain in the but to my neighboring farm. I would keep all that I caught. I stole corn and chickens when I camped out and was a general bad kid. then he got a bull and i left him alone.

As an adult;
Neighbor asked if he and his kid could turkey hunt on my land. I said sure thanks for asking. About a week later there are 4 kids in my yard building forts and jumping bikes. They thought I offered them cart blanch to the joint! I defined the terms of my permission and they been good since.

So you either get an angry bull or you set YOUR conditions cause this kid's gonna live it up on your farm. Next thing you know your neighbors son will have a bunch of his buddies over on your property for a camp out and hybrid sunfish will be on the menu.

 

[Gone4Day]

I don't know about Ohio, but nearly every state has a law protecting landowners from liability when they allow people to use their land for recreation. Just a few years ago this law was tested in PA. As I recall, it was a hunting accident where an individual with permission to hunt on a farmer's land shot at a deer and missed. The stray bullet hit a pregnant women parked along side the road. Since the women was not on the farmer's property, her lawyer filed suit against the farmer on the grounds that the law did not protect him because the injured women was not on his property. The legislature quickly amended the law to clarify the ambiguity. Although the farmer was eventually absolved of liability, he was still out about $10k defending himself.

The advice you got is good stuff though. Make the ground rules clear to the parents and the kids. No better time to teach them respect for private property then when they're young.

 

[Coughlin]

Dave,
I think Maurice got it right.
Coughlin

 

[jazz]

Gone4day,the case you mentioned in Penna happened in my area.The landowner and his Insurance co. settled the case for some undisclosed amount.The woman in question was hit by a bullet that traveled one half mile.There should not be any rifle hunting allowed in that area because of the terrain and number of homes.Now the state has passed a "better" law to protect landowners from liability.I'm a landowner and my property is "posted",no fishing ,hunting,berry picking,etc. except with express permission.