Should Utah Consider A Purple Paint Law For Property Owners?

Some states are implementing Purple Paint Laws to help property owners, but Utah is not one of them. 

Should Utah reconsider adding a Purple Paint Law? 

The point of this law is to identify property with little hassle for the property owners. They can paint trees on the edge of their property in purple to landmark. It's essentially a no trespassing sign. There are 22 other states in the U.S. that have implemented this law including Utah’s sister state, Arizona.  

One reason that this law is helpful is that it allows property managers with large plots of land to easily mark their property. With purple paint there is no need for signs or a ton of boundary tape, World Population Review said. 

There could be an environmental aspect to it too depending on the paint used. It would mean leaving less of a mark on the land and for those who are more environmentally conscious, this is a great option.  

However, there are a few drawbacks to the Purple Paint Law. Purple isn’t something that everyone knows means to not trespass so it could be more confusing than a simple sign for no trespassing.  

If you do have purple up on your trees around your property and your state doesn’t implement the law, like Utah, then legal matters can become quite dicey.  

I think the Purple Paint Law would be a great addition to Utah since there are quite a few property owners who have large plots of land. There are a ton of farmers and ranchers in the state, and they would probably benefit the most.  

However, purple would need to be more widely seen as a no trespassing sign for this law to work in Utah.