At least you get to hunt their......

I've been told the same thing on a couple of the properties that I hunt. These days I can't blame the landowners for taking this approach.

people are sue crazy

Regardless if you had "permission" or not they could still be liable. Just like when burglars break in and get hurt and they sue the owners.

Here in MN, permission to hunt does not make the land owner liable for injury to the hunter he gave permission too.

Go to the local office supply store and get a "Hold Harmless Agreement" once you both sign and have it notarized. This will releive all liability from the home owner and you will be able to have written permission.

My hunt club "lease" we all sign one because the landloard wants to assure he is not going to be sued. Your bank should notorize it for free.

In Virginia, concerns about legal liability forhunters prompted theVirginia General Assemblyto adoptVirginia Code Section 29.1-509 in 1982. This law exempts landowners who provide "recreation"(aka: hunting) opportunities to the public from liability or injury, or damages providing:

landowner does not charge a fee other than that necessary to cover taxes and
there is no gross negligence or "willful or malicious failure to guard or warn against a dangerous condition, use or structure" on the property.
[ul][/ul]
This code helpsproperty ownerswith liability, butlandowners should always consider insuring the property subject to casualty and obtain comprehensive liability insurance.

something smells fishy!!

You are lucky that you can still hunt there. About 10 years ago on a farm I had permission to hunt on, a hunter fell and broke his femur. I guess he called one of those lawyer firms that advertise on TV and sued the land owner. I got a call from the land owner before the season was even over saying that I could not hunt there anymore. I understood, although it took a while, the land owner's position but man was I pissed at that hunter. 2 years later, similar thing happened on another farm.

The problem I see with release forms is that they really don't mean a hill of beans in court unless there is some form of state code releasing liability. Lawyers will just pick them apart.

The fact that land owners should buy insurance just to cover this type of liability really hurts a hunter's chance of getting permission.

Illinois used to have a standard form of waived liability for protection of landowners but it was ruled unconstitutional when somebody's kid got hurt sledding and the guy sued. The new way things were interpreted was that if you gave no permission you at least had some protection but if you gave permission to one person you were liable for all people, hence the reluctance of many landowners to give any permission.. The Farm Bureau and Ag newspapers published a bunch of stories about it last year and it scared off a lot of farmers from giving permission. And I won't even say what the lawyers and insurance agents will tell you when tou talk to them about it.

If you are looking for someone to blame, don't blame the lawyers.. Blame your neighbors and coworkers who look at these cases as jury members, see a kid with a broken leg and an insurance company/land ownerwith a big bank account and don't care if the lawsuit is baseless or not.