# No Trespassing purple paint



## MSUFW07 (Jan 22, 2009)

I was just on Bowsite.com and they were talking about the Amish trespassing on the site owners property in Ohio. Someone posted that Michigan has a purple paint law. I didn't think that MI had a paint law. Does MI have a paint law or was this poster wrong? 

This is the website and the post about the law: 

https://www.psrb.com/2018/06/see-purple-check-the-property-lines-to-avoid-trespassing/
*
For property line identification...I know some states have a color code for what color paint to use when marking the trees. In Michigan, purple is the no trespassing color. Here is a pretty good article talking about these paint laws.*


----------



## multibeard (Mar 3, 2002)

Sadly a paint law never got passed

I liked the white/sivler paint law in VA when I was hunting there on public land there years ago. Even in dim light of dawn you could see the boundries with out the mish mash of signs we have in Michigan. Along the roads there were no signs just paint on the trees. Very pleasing to not see all of the signs


----------



## anagranite (Oct 23, 2010)

I know ohio uses yellow paint for their Nation forest boundaries. Better than signs that get shot up.

Maybe the Amish should get OnX


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

MSUFW07 said:


> I was just on Bowsite.com and they were talking about the Amish trespassing on the site owners property in Ohio. Someone posted that Michigan has a purple paint law. I didn't think that MI had a paint law. Does MI have a paint law or was this poster wrong?
> 
> This is the website and the post about the law:
> 
> ...


The purple paint no trespassing law in the link you posted is for Indiana, not Michigan.


----------



## 22 Chuck (Feb 2, 2006)

Paint will be on trees 30 yrs from now.. I guess that is what the owner wants.

We had a BIG invasion from gypsy mouths in late 80s. Neighbor put band of axle grease around trees. When it rains you can still see those bands, now 30+ yrs later. Paint may not do as well but I bet close to that.


----------



## Magnet (Mar 2, 2001)

I like the way S. Carolina does it...... It is assumed closed, unless posted open.
Takes the burden away from the landowner.... the way it should be.


----------



## Lucky Dog (Jul 4, 2004)

Magnet said:


> I like the way S. Carolina does it...... It is assumed closed, unless posted open.
> Takes the burden away from the landowner.... the way it should be.



Correct.
The burden should not be on the land owner to stop trespassing.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

Magnet said:


> I like the way S. Carolina does it...... It is assumed closed, unless posted open.
> Takes the burden away from the landowner.... the way it should be.


Yeah but s carolina has almost no state owned lands. Most of their open properties are federal land or some sort of agreement with various private land owners. Makes it easy to do when you can make the owners who participate mark their lands for you. 

How in the world could we possibly mark every piece of land or shoreline open to hunting in this state? It isnt feasible and it would just make things more confusing.


----------



## on a call (Jan 16, 2010)

Hmmm...Ohio Amish have land that holds deer ????


----------



## Magnet (Mar 2, 2001)

DirtySteve said:


> Yeah but s carolina has almost no state owned lands. Most of their open properties are federal land or some sort of agreement with various private land owners. Makes it easy to do when you can make the owners who participate mark their lands for you.
> 
> How in the world could we possibly mark every piece of land or shoreline open to hunting in this state? It is feasible and it would just make things more confusing.


It is feasible and it would eliminate confusion..... It would be difficult to use "confused" as an excuse like trespassers often do here now. It's either posted "Open" or its not open.... very uncomplicated.
The national forests are already marked as well as state game areas and a lot of other properties managed by the DNR. It wouldn't be that difficult or expensive to finish the job. Landowners have the freedom to post their property as "Open" if they choose to do so. Easy peasy.


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

Personally I would like to see the onus put on everyone. Know where you are at all times law. Felonies for serial trespassers would also be a great addition. You become a felon after your third infraction.


----------



## Jiw275 (Jan 1, 2015)

As I asked sullyxlh, when you bought your land did you have the land surveyed?


----------



## Nostromo (Feb 14, 2012)

Magnet said:


> I like the way S. Carolina does it...... It is assumed closed, unless posted open.
> Takes the burden away from the landowner.... the way it should be.


Well, Merry Christmas and I'll leave you with this. South Carolina has a long history of favoring "property owners" over the goals, and beliefs of the the United States. Namely the right of individual to enjoy freedom and to roam.


----------



## Jiw275 (Jan 1, 2015)

Jiw275 said:


> As I asked sullyxlh, when you bought your land did you have the land surveyed?


Luv2hunteup, sullyxlh did not answer either.

Merry Christmas to you and yours.


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

Jiw275 said:


> As I asked sullyxlh, when you bought your land did you have the land surveyed?


One side only. I’m the woodlot attached to AG land so no signage is required by law to prosecute a trespasser if I so desire. The only trespassing issue I’ve had is bear hound hunters starting their hounds on the surveyed side.


----------



## Magnet (Mar 2, 2001)

Nostromo said:


> Well, Merry Christmas and I'll leave you with this. South Carolina has a long history of favoring "property owners" over the goals, and beliefs of the the United States. Namely the right of individual to enjoy freedom and to roam.


Merry Christmas!

Agreed. S. Carolina favors property owners over trespassers.... just as it should be.


----------



## Jiw275 (Jan 1, 2015)

Luv2hunteup said:


> One side only. I’m the woodlot attached to AG land so no signage is required by law to prosecute a trespasser if I so desire. The only trespassing issue I’ve had is bear hound hunters starting their hounds on the surveyed side.


But why did you have it surveyed? There was no need due to your point you should know the bounds.

Slippery ain’t it?


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

Jiw275 said:


> But why did you have it surveyed? There was no need due to your point you should know the bounds.
> 
> Slippery ain’t it?


Because I wanted to know where my corners are in this 1/2 mile stretch plus I also wanted to petition the county road commission to abandon their right of way rights. The road Commision had not lived up to their commitment of maintaining the right of way on a 3/4 of a mile stretch road since they removed the wooden bridge ~50 years ago. I also wanted power and needed to grant an easement to the power company. Both worked out so it was well worth the cost of the survey. One fenced post was off by ~4’ and the other was off by 43’. My property was fenced off to separate cattle and sheep loafing area from active hayfields close to a century ago by the same owner. 

I have not put up a single no trespassing sign since there is no need. 40’ deep ravines with steep banks down to the rivers makes walk-in traffic real tough plus provides a nice buffer on the two sides I can’t see from camp.


----------



## Jiw275 (Jan 1, 2015)

Luv2hunteup said:


> Personally I would like to see the onus put on everyone. *Know where you are at all times law.* Felonies for serial trespassers would also be a great addition. You become a felon after your third infraction.


I will stop after this one. You hired a surveyor determine one of your property lines. 

And yet for others the onus is on them to make sure they know where your property lines are. And if they err three times they become felons. *And yet you hired a surveyor to determine your property line which according to you, you should already know.*

I understand you may be frustrated due to trespassers. However there are many of us hunting that pay for apps like OnX to not trespass on private property. Which we would be unable to do without signage.

Consequently I disagree with your statements regarding know where you are laws and about felonies regarding trespassing. Good luck to you.


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

Jiw275 said:


> I will stop after this one. You hired a surveyor determine one of your property lines.
> 
> And yet for others the onus is on them to make sure they know where your property lines are. And if they err three times they become felons. *And yet you hired a surveyor to determine your property line which according to you, you should already know.*
> 
> ...


Knowing about where a property line is not knowing. That’s why a survey is hired. When in doubt, why take a needless chance? Would you grant a legal easement without knowing where you start or end? Would you ask the county to abandon a road right away without knowing where you were at? Would you build a pole barn without knowing where the road easement is? A survey answered all the questions about where you are at. When in doubt do not proceed. Trespassing is no different if you don’t know where you are at, do not proceed. 

You were in the building trades. Would you risk starting construction without using drawings that were issued for construction? I doubt it, you would stop and find out.


----------

