Can someone enlighten me ?
Contributors to this thread:Massachusetts
From: lunker
12-Feb-20
What does this mean
What does this mean
From: hickstick
12-Feb-20
is it state or town land? Many towns have bylaws or ordinances that govern the use of conservation land. ie in my town, anyone can use it for any legal purpose...next town over any town owned open land is designated as conservation land and you cannot hunt on it, but you can mountain bike, hike, etc.
From: Jebediah
12-Feb-20
I would assume if there’s restricted conservation, beyond that point you’ll find pollution, unregulated development, and so forth.
From: lunker
12-Feb-20
I THOUGHT it was private guess I'll have to dig alittle
From: lunker
12-Feb-20
Found this 300 yrds on the other side of this sign
From: lunker
12-Feb-20
Found this 300 yrds on the other side of this sign
From: lunker
12-Feb-20
Franklin
From: Sosso
12-Feb-20
Notice how you kept pushing beyond the boundary. Anyhow, my first thought was "There's good deer in there, and 50' to the right or the left and I never saw the sign."
From: Jebediah
12-Feb-20
Conservation restriction, I believe, is a mechanism by which property owner can avoid paying taxes on land for an agreed-upon number of years, with the stipulation that the property not be developed during that time (like ten or fifty years). Otherwise, I think the landowner has control over how it’s used. For example, I used to have permission on some property that was a conservation restriction. But that’s not my stand in your picture. And I have no idea why that sign is needed.
From: Arrownoob
12-Feb-20
A conservation restriction is an often times permanent restriction against development. It can be private or public. I have joined the “open space committee” in my town to help homeowners find ways to preserve their large open space so I’m learning about different restrictions (there’s an ag restriction, too.) THe restriction results in lower property taxes. There are laws that require record keeping and maintaining of the property. Most restrictions have an endowment of about $10k that pay for the upkeep of the property. You will need to check mass gis, onyx, or walk into the town hall and ask about it. Check town by laws. Talk to conservation commission/officer they are usually helpful. Seems like a good find!
From: lunker
12-Feb-20
Sasso I went way in .On the way in I didnt see them,until I went near the houses. That pic of the stand was taken on the way out about 600 yrds from where I came in .All in all lots of deer trails lots of scrapes ,only 1 rub (SURPRISING) that pick of the stand was near houses and was a double wide ,prob father and son. I went way deep to a spot I found on the map ,get there u guessed it 2 stands,but they were very old .1 of the 2 were man made .No sheds !
From: Loner
12-Feb-20
Often conservation signs will specify no hunting or no dirt bikes etc. I'm not sure of the legality of signs that are non specific. Perhaps worth a call to town office .
From: Proline
12-Feb-20
I'm pretty sure if that was town land the sign would indicate that. There is nothing on that sign saying who owns the land so I think someone is playing games.
From: Sosso
12-Feb-20
Makes sense. Most of deer hang close to the houses.
From: lunker
12-Feb-20
That's what my buddy said but the poles and the sign seem legit I saw prob 6 or 7 of them
From: Proline
12-Feb-20
I suppose it could be private land that someone did get a conservation easement on to lower taxes like Jeb mentioned and the signs are just notifying abutters. Not sure though. I have seen something like once up in NH.
From: lunker
12-Feb-20
I looked at the property months ago and got the name of the private land owner dont remember the name but do remember he was a big time developer owning property all over the place so if anyone knows how to get a tax break I'm sure he would
From: Arrownoob
13-Feb-20
Sometimes the developer makes a deal with the town. They buy 60 acres and reserve 20 acre for open space. The rest is divided into lots. Often times the open space is the donut hole in the middle of houses.
From: lunker
13-Feb-20
That sounds about right .The otherside is in the prosess now prob 75 to 100 homes . Prob 400 to 500 thousand dollar homes stacked like cordwood.Its really quite ugly
From: Wapiti or Bust
13-Feb-20
Linker. I’m in holliston so I’m down in Bellingham/ franklin a little bit. Did you know fishing is allowed on town land, but only catch and release? If I lived in town I’d question that. Both at the town level and through mass wildlife. This would be done as a way to move the needle a bit and test the case that towns can or cannot over ride MA state law.
From: Jebediah
13-Feb-20
Wapiti I told the story on here before pertaining to hunting and local vs state law, maybe a little related. In something like 2010, and various years thereafter, AG Office (Maura Healey, interestingly) has required that some towns remove their “written permission” bylaw, saying that MGL 121 (or whatever it is, state law) is the sole authority governing where hunting can or cannot be done. But this pertains to private property, as opposed to town property. So maybe the comparison isn’t so good. But I’ve already typed it in, so here goes...
From: Wapiti or Bust
13-Feb-20
Jeb yes I remember that was a good one. You put a letter up, too. Towns like nolfolk has these rules in place I did a ton or research when I got started a couple years ago. I’ve settled into some good spots not trying to stir up trouble that much anymore.
From: Jebediah
13-Feb-20
Holy cow, I have no recollection of a letter. That’s scary. I wonder what the letter said.
From: Wapiti or Bust
13-Feb-20
Maybe it was someone else. It was a letter from Healy or some communication that she disapproved of towns circumventing state law.
From: Dale Rheaume
13-Feb-20
Likely the letters were posted by me as we fought "written permission" in Attleboro early last year, and prevailed with the evidence that their effort was futile. Yes, the AG (both Martha and Maura) did strike out language in town bylaws and city ordinances that infringed on MassWildlife jurisdiction; however, only when introduced as new language "amendments" under review. The AG reviews all amendments to city and town legislation. The towns and/or cities where "written permission" is required (don't remember which ones) are very old bylaws/ordinances, and AG does not act on those that got past the goalkeeper in prior years or administrations. I still have all the letters in the vault if anyone is interested.
From: Jebediah
13-Feb-20
Very interesting Dale. I had wondered why it got nixed from some towns and not others.
From: Dale Rheaume
13-Feb-20
Dale Rheaume's Link
Jeb, here's the link to AG letter to Needham.
This excerpt says it all... "However, the existing text in Section 3.1.12 (which was not amended by vote under Article 24) imposes a requirement that “No person...shall hunt by bow and arrow on any private property except with the written consent of the property’s owner or legal occupant.” Because this text is not currently before us for review and approval, and because it was previously approved by this Office many years ago, we have no authority to disapprove and delete this text."
From: Jebediah
13-Feb-20
Thank you, I hadn’t seen one of that type. I have one in my desk at work—same letterhead and format—from 2015 pertaining to (I think) Westport, where they did kill the permission requirement. Likewise, in 2009 I believe they killed the permission requirement in Sherborn. But then just last year Sherborn got around it by inserting a permission requirement for discharge, that applies to both guns and archery. So it amounts to a hunting permission requirement, without using the word “hunt.”
From: Dale Rheaume
13-Feb-20
Correct Jeb!
