When purple paint apparently ain’t

[Mike]

Biked past an interesting signage situation the other day. A former farm with a strip of trees bordering the road was clearly posted via purple paint on many of the trees; however, at one apparent end of the purple painted line of trees was a “No Hunting” sign. Near the other end was a car parked in a pull-off shaded by low hanging pine branches. Just visible from the proper angle was a new looking “Approved Trout Water” sign immediately above a swath of purple paint. Some WCO’s seem to use such signs as proxies for “fishing permitted” signs either because the agency runs out of fp signs or because the WCO doesn’t want to post two signs. Anyway, the parked car is what caught my original attention thinking that there might be an angler on the stream about 200 yds away and then I spotted the sign above the car. I thought this had been a stocking point in the past and now I suspect that it still may be one.

 

[Bonzoso]

I have found these signs confusing. Why post them on private property when there are posted indications of no trespassing. In addition I have seen them on private property not posted where no signage of trespassing is in view. Years ago I decided to fish on a piece of industrial property just off a Pa state route. There was no posted signage but I could see "Approved trout water" signage on the property, at the stream. from the roadside pullout. This was apparently just an uncovered storage area with no buildings and no personnel on the property, overgrown weeds and a dirt/gravel parking area. Anyway after fishing for awhile, a WCO approached me and asked about the fishing and then advised me that the area was private property and asked me to leave. I apologized and immediately left without further issue. I thought about it afterword and realized I probably should not have assumed anything by the signage but ever since I've thought it was very confusing to put that sign there. It was not an old sign and the property could have been mistaken by anyone to be just abandoned roadside land that no one was concerned about.

 

[mute]

This definitely kills me. Depending on the day where theres private propery\paint along with stocked trout water signs ive fished it and have been fine. Yet on another day ive been chased out that its not actually publicly stocked and its all private property.
I get an ATW sign doesnt mean publicly accessible property, and just signifies that said section of water is inside the start to end section of said ATW water body. But if said section is truly NOT publicly available, dont post ATW signs there. It infers to the brain that fish are stocked there for public interaction.

 

[McSneek]

Why I am in favor of special regulations. No question about if fishing is permitted. i doubt you can buy a can of purple paint In York County. It’s on all the trees.

 

[caddisflyer]

I see the Fishing Permitted signs very often right next to no trespassing signs. I usually figure the fishing is permitted but who knows. The whole trespassing signage thing needs to be revisited by lawmakers. Purple paint, unsigned signs and people posting land they do not own is causing a lot of confusing situations along with game and fish comm. signs.

 

[Oregon_OwlII]

Back in the day, Perkiomen Valley TU had a restoration site in which the owner allowed fishing (we even had him on Adopt A Stream), but subsequently posted No Hunting signs. We asked him about it and he stated that he wanted to charge people for private hunts, but that the fishing was still accessible. Mike, I would try to find the owner in this case if you wanted to fish there and see if fishing is permitted.

 

[Troutmeister]

It is confusing when you see "Approved Trout Water" signs and then no trespassing signs.
I even see this along DHALO stretches. Then you have a lot of places that are posted up tight but there are fishing permitted signs.

 

[Prospector]

I see a lot of posted signs and purple paint that is only intended to stop people from hunting the property. It’s not 100% but Landowners in different locations of the state seem to generally agree on what is customary in their neck of the woods.

Obviously the best thing to do is ask but purple paint leaves you very little info on who the landowner is. When I ask I have been told countless times “it’s only posted for hunting”. Deer, bear and turkey are things they want to pursue on their property without interference.

At my camp I have road frontage that blocks access to the Allegheny National Forest. I don’t post it so that people can cross my property and enjoy the public land. It’s a bit of a tightrope because I don’t want someone to get up in the treestands on my property or put up their treestand on my property. I also don’t want someone to drive on my gas/oil road and park their vehicle on my property. I’ve walked the tightrope by putting up Private Drive and No Parking signs by the one well pad instead of the harsh No Trespassing signs. I have virtually no trouble. Word gets around.

 

[Maurice]

It is not confusing at all. Posted property with the black and white signs means No Trespassing but fishing is permitted by the grace of the landowner. If the F&BC signs are present it means stocking is likely occurring in the area or stretch of stream by the agency itself or a cooperative nursery. If the landowner is taking the time to paint the trees or hang the signs and doesnt want fishing they will take down the signs indicating fishing is permitted. they own the land, they know what the signage is and in our watershed we work closely with them to keep the signage clear so as to keep fishing privileges in tact. You can bet your boots that the property owner knows that there is fish on their property and if they continue to allow those signs indicating fishing permitted to hang then they allow fishing.

Also, once the Black and white signs are gone, so is the stocking and the access. Whether there are wild trout in there or not. Think about that. And once the stocking is gone, so are the black and white signs, indicating, if posted, that so is the access. Unless you have a special permission.

If you confront a situation as Mike describes, I would fish it. If confronted and asked to leave, I would explain to the property owner the above criteria and confusion they are conveying. Be polite and it can be a step toward a future access situation. Then contact the local watershed steward "TU" and explain the situation. Once again you can throw those boots in the pot toward betting they know the situation. Often its a matter of a visit and a soft negotiation. Some more clear signage indicating their wishes.

 

[mute]

It is not confusing at all. Posted property with the black and white signs means No Trespassing but fishing is permitted by the grace of the landowner. If the F&BC signs are present it means stocking is likely occurring in the area or stretch of stream by the agency itself or a cooperative nursery. If the landowner is taking the time to paint the trees or hang the signs and doesnt want fishing they will take down the signs indicating fishing is permitted. they own the land, they know what the signage is and in our watershed we work closely with them to keep the signage clear so as to keep fishing privileges in tact. You can bet your boots that the property owner knows that there is fish on their property and if they continue to allow those signs indicating fishing permitted to hang then they allow fishing.

Also, once the Black and white signs are gone, so is the stocking and the access. Whether there are wild trout in there or not. Think about that. And once the stocking is gone, so are the black and white signs, indicating, if posted, that so is the access. Unless you have a special permission.

If you confront a situation as Mike describes, I would fish it. If confronted and asked to leave, I would explain to the property owner the above criteria and confusion they are conveying. Be polite and it can be a step toward a future access situation. Then contact the local watershed steward "TU" and explain the situation. Once again you can throw those boots in the pot toward betting they know the situation. Often its a matter of a visit and a soft negotiation. Some more clear signage indicating their wishes.

Everything you said makes sense and i agree logically with except the first sentence

It is not confusing at all. Posted property with the black and white signs means No Trespassing but fishing is permitted by the grace of the landowner.

That seems like a big assumption and interpretation between any humans brain. Where is the written definition of that scenario that a a PFBC sign, overrules a land owners no trespassing sign and desire to have no one on their property?

 

[caddisflyer]

When in doubt just follow Woody Guthries advice.

 

[Maurice]

there are only two reasons a property owner who doesnt allow fishing would leave up signs allowing fishing.

1, they allow fishing
2. They are looking for confrontation about fishing access.

 

[troutbert]

there are only two reasons a property owner who doesnt allow fishing would leave up signs allowing fishing.

1, they allow fishing
2. They are looking for confrontation about fishing access.

3. They want that stretch to be stocked.

 

[Maurice]

3. They want that stretch to be stocked.

Thats just a #1 with a cynical twist.

 

[PennKev]

No signs: I fish it.
Fishing permitted signs: I fish it.
Fishing permitted & posted signs: I fish it

Number of times I've been accused of trespassing by a landowner in over 30 years of fishing all over this state:

ZERO.

 

[tomgamber]

Just ask.

 

[Maurice]

No signs: I fish it.
Fishing permitted signs: I fish it.
Fishing permitted & posted signs: I fish it

Number of times I've been accused of trespassing by a landowner in over 30 years of fishing all over this state:

ZERO.

^^^^ This

 

[Mikey2006]

No signs: I fish it.
Fishing permitted signs: I fish it.
Fishing permitted & posted signs: I fish it

Number of times I've been accused of trespassing by a landowner in over 30 years of fishing all over this state:

ZERO.

I probably get caught trespassing at least 50% of the waters I’ve tried it on, wish my luck was that good

 

[mute]

No signs: I fish it.

So it's expected that every property is publicly inviting unless there's a big ole no trespassing sign?

With this logic I'm picturing walking right through someone's front yard, past their kids swingset, shimmying around their pool to get to the water body behind their house is OK because the landowner doesnt have a giant yellow sign at their mailbox saying otherwise?

 

[tomgamber]

So it's expected that every property is publicly inviting unless there's a big ole no trespassing sign?

With this logic I'm picturing walking right through someone's front yard, past their kids swingset, shimmying around their pool to get to the water body behind their house is OK because the landowner doesnt have a giant yellow sign at their mailbox saying otherwise?

And there it is. The common sense part. Or lack of...