# 'Residential' camping and squatting on Public land



## Coywolf

Not sure if I should put this is squatting, orwilderness survival....it seemed better here.

Hey all, I am creating this thread to see what people's experiences have been with the recent push by the Forest Service and BLM to limit 'Residential camping'.

As I have noticed recently, the FS and BLM have been sending officers into the wild and trying to run people out that exceed the '14 day stay limit, in any 30 day period' laws. They have labeled this 'Residential use'.

What I have learned is that you are only able to 'recreate' on public land if you have a physical address elsewhere, and you are simply using theland as a recreational use. I have been talking to some people about this, and apparently LEO are seeking to find serial 'offenders' and throw the book at them, this means jail time, probation, fines, community service, and a complete and total ban from federally owned lands for any period they see fit.

I've only started running into this recently, as they have always had this law, but it was rarely enforced. It's a ducked up attempt to criminalize homelessness and our rights as citizens to access theland we pay taxes for these agencies to manage. 

I will update this post when I find all of the 36 CFR laws attaining to this in detail.

Until then in looking for peoples experiences with this, and input on the issue in general. I am considering contacting advocacy groups and local representation to get more info.


----------



## Deleted member 24029

Ah! A thread with very good timing....
Thank you, Wolf. I'll do research on this end, as well...


----------



## RoadFlower33

this is basically what rainbow advocates for i think. what you need is an old timer rainbow with knowledge of the history and currant affairs as well. seems to me like those ppl are always doing something in court.


----------



## Sameer

I have been living on public land for 8 years. In Arizona if it works out quite well. Flagstaff in that area for the summer and the southern deserts of Arizona for the winter. For the winter the area from Quartzsite to Indio and the Imperial valley California.. Flagstaff for the summer includes Winslow and even Cortez Colorado. I have never had a problem with a ranger. 14 days is not an unreasonable expectation for living on public land. after two weeks you will want to move on to see new beautiful places and there are many many. The truth of the matter is most states don't have heavy enforcement and even the feds don't have the money to enforce strict compliance. sometimes I stay longer than 14 days if there is no law enforcement like here in Ehrenberg. I have used the same campsite for more than 20 days. In Flagstaff I was in the same campsite for two and a half months. No enforcement. The 14 they're camping rule is a good one. I say that even though I violate it all the time. To me it keeps the land from being used up and sometimes trashed. The 14 day rule is just a humbug and not a problem. And the rangers are just doing their job. There are many places in the Southwest where there is no enforcement on public land.


Living on public land respectfully has afforded me the ability to live in the most beautiful places.


----------



## mouse

I live in a van and spend most of my free time boondocking in BLM/NF "dispersed camping" areas. 14day stays in a geographical area are the typical policy, although they are set by each ranger district. It's not like you have to stop camping, you usually have to move the prescribed distance away. Some overused areas are 7 days, and I saw one that was 21 days somewhere. The specifics for any particular district are available online or at the ranger station. I decamp on the 13th day for reprovisioning/relocation. 

Ways to attract the wrong kind of ranger attention:

leave garbage and belongings flung around
shit on top of the ground and leave it there
build structures
burn stuff where burning or firewood gathering is not allowed. 
overstay the dispersed camping time limit. If this seems egregious, reframe it something like this: "I can squat here for up to two weeks at a time and no one will bother me!" 
scream, party, or otherwise annoy other campers
I don't expect everyone to "leave the camp better than you found it" but I do pick up litter and trash I find in my area. Yes, I was a boy scout.

As far as recreation, my DL shows my legal residence which was the last place I lived in a house. I use a mail forwarding service to get crtical mail stuff. When on BLM land I decamp on the 13th day for relocation and reprovisioning. My camps are neat and camp-like and I have zero issues with rangers. I wave at them and they wave back.


----------



## Coywolf

So what I have heard from the district I work on, they are trying to root out people they believe are homeless, and either drive them out, or build a case against them. This is regardless of the camps creating resource damage, moving a certain distance, or even moving to another forest completely. 

The Leo's are attempting to build profiles from multiple forests, to determine liscense plates, names, and vehicle descriptions of people that are seen to be 'residential' users of public land, in order to get them banned from public land.

From what I have gathered, this does not necessarily have to do with preventing over usage of the land, more to drive people who are homeless off of it. I'm sure the people who do destroy the land get worse penalties, but from what I have heard sickens me what they say about people who just 'cant find a place to live'.

I work in a very high use district though, so I'm not sure if this is like this everywhere.


----------



## Coywolf

Just as a heads up to people on this thread that might not already know, but I've been a Park Ranger for about 8 years now, this is why I find this very alarming, and am compiling the laws used to make such cases in order to get an understanding of what is behind this.


----------



## Coywolf

Also, this has been explained to me that the '14 days in any 30 day period' laws are starting to be applied to ALL public land, regardless of if you move to another area or not. The forest LEO here stated that the only way you could fight such a charge is to provide some sort of proof you were off of public land between your stays, like gas receipts or motel receipts.


----------



## WyldLyfe

That sucks @Coywolf, were do they want you to go? here iv pulled up in national parks before, camped ect.. never had an issue, never had anyone pull up an tell me or the people I was with to move along, but we never seen any park rangers too though to say anything anyway.. the forests are large. Honestly that law your talking about is bullshit Coywolf, keep this updated though cause sometimes stuff that happends in usa can be copied over here.. take care out der, do ya best to stay undercover with it.


----------



## roughdraft

Coywolf said:


> Also, this has been explained to me that the '14 days in any 30 day period' laws are starting to be applied to ALL public land, regardless of if you move to another area or not. The forest LEO here stated that the only way you could fight such a charge is to provide some sort of proof you were off of public land between your stays, like gas receipts or motel receipts.



ahh now I see. fuckin wow, what a mess

Welcome to your public lands - Enjoy your stay! (of fourteen days STRICTLY and don't forget to bring in your original gov't issued blah blah blah and no we will not recieve a faxed from aunt jane)


----------



## mouse

I'm not still not particularly worried that rules-obeying folk will be banned. In some areas the campers are mainly retired wealthy folk in huge 5ers. Those folk belong to Escapees which has a legal/lobbying arm. If those people start to get banned then I'll start to worry. 

If folks want to share what districts are problematic I'll start tracking it in a wiki as I do with city bans. 

I have a running google search for news articles about dispersed camping. So far all the areas I've seen closed (to everyone, not just rulebreakers) were closed due to overystaying, trashing the place, crapping on the ground, etc. . I used to teach kids that had been kicked out of school districts. I'd tell them "you can get away with a lot more if you don't attract attention to yourself." Some listened, most didn't.


----------



## Coywolf

Ya, definitely always want to pay respect to the land and not trash it, or cause resource damage, I've been preaching that for forever, but this seems like a new kind of monster. I've posed the question of whether the Leo's are going after people who just trash the lands, and I've got the response that 'It is anyone who breaks the law'.

So, I'll be paying attention to this, especially because I am now a vandweller on public land.


----------



## Sameer

I've never had a problem in 8 years. Rangers have looked at my driver's license and see only a PO Box. 
When I first began living on public land, estimates were 3 million people were doing the same in RVs and various vehicles. Now the estimates are six million. A lot of retired people. Am I a tourist or a traveler or homeless? I am all the above. Many people without resources do not have respect for the land and it ends up trashed. I don't see a movement to remove homeless people from public lands unless they're violating the 14-day rule. They trash the land. The land gets worn out from camping. Go to Washington and Oregon or campgrounds just about anywhere close to a metropolitan area or even a small town and you will find the land full of trash and used toilet paper everywhere. 
Living on public land successfully is possible. I've done that everywhere in the Southwest 8 years. One of the posters or above has a good list what to do to avoid problems with those who take care of the public lands. It's a really good list. Managing our public lands is something that the government that quite well. The forestry service does a good job too. These public lands are held in trust for the people. Millions of us in RVs and various other vehicles live on these lands successfully. It really boils down to this... Be smart and respect the land. It can provide a Wonderful Life living in the most beautiful places.


----------



## Sameer

Coywolf said:


> Also, this has been explained to me that the '14 days in any 30 day period' laws are starting to be applied to ALL public land, regardless of if you move to another area or not. The forest LEO here stated that the only way you could fight such a charge is to provide some sort of proof you were off of public land between your stays, like gas receipts or motel receipts.


Receipts are a key to success. When in Flag I would shop at Walmart in Winslow. A great receipt


Coywolf said:


> Just as a heads up to people on this thread that might not already know, but I've been a Park Ranger for about 8 years now, this is why I find this very alarming, and am compiling the laws used to make such cases in order to get an understanding of what is behind this.


I actually don't see this happening and see less enforcement in places like Flagstaff which are popular. 
I have to be honest and say that as an advocate for living on public land I see no effort from any agency to Target anyone specific or any specific group if they are following the rules of 14 day stays. 
Public land is a great alternative for someone who chooses to not live in a sticks and bricks or cannot afford a permanent home. You have to have resources meaning money or a small monthly income. You have to follow the rules on public land. In reality public land is available to live on for those who have the resources and the skills. Millions of us do it very successfully. My experience with the forestry people is that they are out to solve problems. Many people are not suited to live on public lands because they do not respect the space.


----------



## Sameer

Coywolf said:


> So what I have heard from the district I work on, they are trying to root out people they believe are homeless, and either drive them out, or build a case against them. This is regardless of the camps creating resource damage, moving a certain distance, or even moving to another forest completely.
> 
> The Leo's are attempting to build profiles from multiple forests, to determine liscense plates, names, and vehicle descriptions of people that are seen to be 'residential' users of public land, in order to get them banned from public land.
> 
> From what I have gathered, this does not necessarily have to do with preventing over usage of the land, more to drive people who are homeless off of it. I'm sure the people who do destroy the land get worse penalties, but from what I have heard sickens me what they say about people who just 'cant find a place to live'.
> 
> I work in a very high use district though, so I'm not sure if this is like this everywhere.


Millions and millions of acres of public land to enjoy and live on respectfully following the rules. Millions of people do this successfully. With only a post office box as their address. Millions and many types of vehicles. It is not ILLEGAL to not have a home and live on public land. You just have to be nomadic. It is not illegal to live in an RV or other type of vehicle or even a tent full-time. Millions do it. With absolutely no problems. None. I have to think a commonsense way. Forestry service and others are just protecting the land.


----------



## Deleted member 21429

I have not camped on blm land but I do know that the BLM is moving its headquarters from Washington DC to Colorado and that might mean stepped up enforcemant and/or restrictions. Forgot the name of the town in Colorado but a quick search should provide it if you are interested. ~ peace


----------



## Coywolf

Sameer said:


> Millions and millions of acres of public land to enjoy and live on respectfully following the rules. Millions of people do this successfully. With only a post office box as their address. Millions and many types of vehicles. It is not ILLEGAL to not have a home and live on public land. You just have to be nomadic. It is not illegal to live in an RV or other type of vehicle or even a tent full-time. Millions do it. With absolutely no problems. None. I have to think a commonsense way. Forestry service and others are just protecting the land.



It is, very much illegal to live 100% on the time on public land. Especially Forest Service land. I know this, as I've been a Forest Protection Officer and have watched Forest Service Leo's write tickets to people for it.

I dont agree with the 36 CFR laws that make 'residential' use on public land a crime, but they exist, and our Forest's LEO is currently building cases against people for doing it, trying to get them banned from public land in general.

I'm making people aware of this, because most, like you, seem not to know about it. So just be careful out there. This seems to only be happening in high use areas. Mainly to protect the land and lock out people who are abusing it

However, mentioning that you are homeless, or do not have a residential elsewhere, can prompt an LEO to remove you from camping on public land, without violating a stay limit, because you are essentially using it as a residential use.


----------



## Sameer

Public lands are not for residential living. After 14 days you move somewhere else. It's what MILLIONS of us do. There are no cases to be built. It is not illegal to have a PO Box for an address or live in any vehicle. It is not illegal to not live in a house or apartment. There are over six million people who have either dropped out of society or retired and are taking advantages of public land without any issues whatsoever from rangers, Forest districts, BLM people, you name it!
8 years no problems not in Flagstaff Cortez Colorado from Blythe to Reno.
The people who manage our public lands are not my enemy. The people who enforce on public lands are not my enemy or anyone's enemy. if there is an effort to get the people who trash public lands off the public lands I'm for it and ticket their asses. 
Millions of us are doing this successfully moving from National Park to National Park and BLM land to BLM land every 14 days. We are just not going to buy into that those who manage the land and enforce the land are our enemy. Our public lands are managed well and taken care of well. 
A program that has worked for decades and decades. Maybe in your district you have this kind of attitude coywolf.... Maybe your district needs an attitude adjustment...what you have described as the attitude towards those using public lands in your district is unhealthy and illegal. You should not be persecuting homeless people. What you describe I have not experienced living on public land from any agency.
Understand I'm not criticizing your premise. It's quite popular today the pit the government against the people. It creates a good discussion.


----------



## Sameer

Coywolf said:


> It is, very much illegal to live 100% on the time on public land. Especially Forest Service land. I know this, as I've been a Forest Protection Officer and have watched Forest Service Leo's write tickets to people for it.
> 
> I dont agree with the 36 CFR laws that make 'residential' use on public land a crime, but they exist, and our Forest's LEO is currently building cases against people for doing it, trying to get them banned from public land in general.
> 
> I'm making people aware of this, because most, like you, seem not to know about it. So just be careful out there. This seems to only be happening in high use areas. Mainly to protect the land and lock out people who are abusing it
> 
> However, mentioning that you are homeless, or do not have a residential elsewhere, can prompt an LEO to remove you from camping on public land, without violating a stay limit, because you are essentially using it as a residential use.


My friends and I would like to come into your district and camp. We would show your district the error of its ways. You are stewards of the land and nothing more. We would gladly reinforce the fact that you are powerless over us and our lifestyle. I am talking about the district you working and not you personally. It would be a great pleasure to do this.


----------



## Coywolf

Look, I get it. This should not be illegal, however, under US code 36 it is. I'm just trying to get this out there so people can be educated if they get a ticket or something for this.

It is a way to criminalized houselessness and I think it is disgusting. I agree, you shouldn't be able to set up essentially private property on public land, that is not what it is for.

I've never heard of this being pursued anywhere else. Why it is being pursued here is probably because some of these people are trashing the land.

Simply moving a few miles away seems to no longer be a way to appease these LE officials. They are communicating between forests and BLM lands, so it's a 14 day limit anywhere in the US in any 30 day period. If they can catch you.

I get your point, I'm with you, but dont dent this isint legal, because they sure have found a way to make it legal to bust people. I am still trying to compile these laws, I'll post them when I get them together.


----------



## Coywolf

And please, stop saying 'you'. I have nothing to do with enforcing this, nor do I want to. It is an internal conflict we me that these people are even doing this, and in trying to find a way to transfer out of this district as soon as possible.

The day I start busting homeless people, will be the day my soul has been completely and totally lost.


----------



## Coywolf

Also, please let me restate, again, that I currently live in my van on public land. So I am also affected by this.


----------



## Coywolf

Ok folks, I am here to update this thread with some even worse news. This is becoming worse than I expected...and I think all of you should read this.

So THIS just happened:

Camping/campfire ban expanded in Flagstaff, AZ

This article is about a camping ban around Flagstaff, AZ. You can no longer camp anywhere near town. This is supposedly to prevent abandoned campfires from starting wildfires and them threatening town. Since fucking when did a ban stop people from having illegal fires?

This is going to give police and the USFS free reign to start going into the forest and citing/doing warrant checks on houseless people who have nowhere else to go BUT camp in the forest. Some people say I'm paranoid but hang in I'm not done...

Our district has developed an app, that every field employee uses, to log vehicle liscense plates along with GPS coordinates and photos associated with campsites, in order to log and enforce 14 day stay limit laws.

This was in a trial period for the past few months, and the LEO has already ticketed, ran off, or arrested many people who were over staying their welcome.

Ok, ya, why is this so bad, you ask? People are fuckkng up, right?

Wrong.

The division that runs this app just had a meeting with the other districts in the forest in order to present this app and get funding to make this app forest wide.

Then something incredibly scary happened. Out forest is talking about presenting this to the region, who in turn may present it to our Washington Office.

People REALLY like this app. And they feel it may be a way to enforce the 14 day stay limit COUNTRY-WIDE. Moving a mile, or 3 would no longer be an option. 

You stay 10 days in the Willamette, you get logged. You go to the Deschutes, stay 3 days, get logged (by any forest service employee, not just LEOs. Everyone has this app) 

Then you stay 5 days in the Shasta-Trinity. All of a sudden you have a Federal LEO rolling up on you, asking if you have a permanent address, if they can search your vehicle, and checking for warrants. Then you get a Mandatory Appearence ticket which can get you banned from public land for an indefinite amount of time. Where the fuck can you legally go now?

Look, my point is, this is fucking dangerous. The people I work with are super stoked on it, and SEVERELY dislike homeless people. To the point they are the butt end of many sick jokes.

I need to get this out there.


----------



## obey no one

interesting stuff, love the camping wiki. I spent about a month in flag area this summer, camped all over, had no problems. I did see an area near williams where people never seemed to move. I kinda wondered about that, but i also kinda figured people in williams wanted the tourist money, and scaring off travelers is not a good way to do that.
I just picked up a older hitchhiker this weekend and camped with him on blm land near quartsite.

I wonder how they could possibly enforce this. how can they know if i am just traveling for a period or am really homeless. and how do you define homeless since that label might apply to me, but also i work and have access to financial resources, i don't really feel homeless.

I will say that i got a very bad vibe from park rangers near prescott, and just didn't go back
Also a park camp host (where i paid $10 to stay) was kinda acting weird, and i was pulled over by cops in maricopa shortly after leaving. I wont be going back that direction.

I generally never stay anywhere more than a couple days at most, and mostly prefer either totally abandoned areas (where no one would even see me there in the first place), or spots where there are lots of campers and rvs so i kinda blend in to the crowd.

thanks for the info would be very interested in any updates.


----------



## Deleted member 27846

Any idea what the supreme court ruling against homeless penalties has to do with this? 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...supreme-court-living-street-crime/4403793002/

I've been camping all year round - mostly in CA state parks for the past 8 years or so. I just recently had to pay my second illegal camping ticket in 5 years.. it cost like $300. Right before the supreme court ruling


I'm worried about getting perma banned from CA state parks.. but right now I'm about to move onto CA national forest land while attending college

When I went to scope out my spot, I saw some folks with a big ass house tent.. right near the trail entrance but across a river.

Is it realistic to live full time on national forest land without a vehicle? There's essentially no license plate to scan? There's also no cell signal.. how are they pulling GPS coordinates out of their asses?


----------



## Coywolf

Ok, just to clarify some things, as I did kinda make it seem 'end of the world-ish'

Of course you will still be able to get around this, and it is still in its infancy, so it will be a while before this becomes a thing nationwide.

But think about it. More people are living outdoors, and in vehicles, due to capitalism fucking them financially.

This fight is a fight for humans to have a universal right to exist, house or not. Camping in municipalities is already illegal almost everywhere. That recent supreme court ruling was actually a blow to law enforcement, and a win for houseless people. It surprised the hell out of me.

What this app does, is it allows LEO's to collect liscense plates, vehicle descriptions, names, DOB's, addresses, pictures of you and your camp/vehicle ect. From contacts they make in the forest. Regular employees can use it to, just by observing how long you are staying at a campsite, or in a forest in general.

They can search by plate number, name, ect, and make comments to that they saw you at 'X' GPS coordinates, on 'X' date, and take a picture. It will tell them other employees spotting you and on what dates, and the nature of the contact. Its almost exactly the same as police running your name and getting back your arrest record....except for this you dont have to have done anything wrong. Hence my concerns with the legality of this.

YES you can still get around it, pretty easily, but what I am saying, is that this sets a precedent, and if we as citizens allow it to continue, this is some big brother bullshit on lands that taxpayers pay to access and camp.

Another scary thing about the forest I work on in general, is that we are the first to be doing this, and the people who devoped this's boner is fucking raging at the thought of running houseless people off of the forest, and public lands in general.

Now to answer your questions @Highway One :

Yes it is possible to live on public land full time, just be smart about it. There are many threads on StP about it in the 'where to sleep' forum, and in other areas. I made a thread:

Public lands and YOU! Why you should give a shit. | Squat the Planet - https://squattheplanet.com/threads/public-lands-and-you-why-you-should-give-a-shit.31224/

That talks about public land if you want to read it.

Basically you should move your camp every 2 weeks or so to a different area to avoid being harassed.

And as far as no cell signal, FS employees dont need cell signal to use thos app or GPS.


----------



## WyldLyfe

Ok so last night was my first night ever getting caught in a national park by park rangers, I'll share how it went. So we roll up to this place which id never been at before, at the entrance theres a toll area which also never seen before at parks, but seeing as it was kinda late in the afternoon there was no one there and there was no boom gates so we drove on through.. we drive around this place, its nice and stop at some beach area hang around for a bit planned to camp there but then noticed a sign that said "penalties apply" for camping out there, I had just gotten paid and thought ya know what I don't wanna lose my cash to this so lets find a more secluded spot.. we drive off and do.. or so we thought, it didn't have any sign so thats kinda like, you can act like you didn't know if you were to get caught ya know, anyway firstly we see like six wombats walking around, cute, and some one else off in the distance doing what obviously seemed to be rubber tramping outta his van.. so we park our car sorta in the same area but a bit away from him. We jump in the back of the car on the mattress ready to do the thang thang, me an my gf.. then some head lights roll up and theres a nock at the window.

We get out, two park rangers theres one woman one man, tell us we ain't allowed to be there, they take down the car registration and give us a ticket.. not a fine, well not a big one like the police do they gave us some ticket for a "camping spot" that we had to go to, and also the ticket said we had to pay $30 dollars for it, now thats not much seeing as I expected at least a $100 dollar fine or something.. but the thing is they took the car rego so if we didn't pay that $30 dollars in the morning when the area opened up to pay then the address were the car registration is linked to would get a fine, maybe a bigger one.. make sense? so we went to this "camp spot" ... it was like all these people cramped into a small area while the park is massive... there was also a little police station type building right next to the camp area.. wack.. it was all so monitored and regulated, an they had there whole souvenir shop and cafe right there too... and tour guide info up on the walls... this is some peoples idea of camping? it was like just a money making thing for the most part it seemed. paid ticket an Left in the morning. picture of beach area with sun.


----------



## jimi

Coywolf said:


> Ok, just to clarify some things, as I did kinda make it seem 'end of the world-ish'
> 
> Of course you will still be able to get around this, and it is still in its infancy, so it will be a while before this becomes a thing nationwide.
> 
> But think about it. More people are living outdoors, and in vehicles, due to capitalism fucking them financially.
> 
> Thia fight is a fight for humans to have a universal right to exist, house or not. Camping in municipalities is already illegal almost everywhere. That recent supreme court ruling was actually a blow to law enforcement, and a win for houseless people. It surprised the hell out of me.
> 
> What this app does, is it allows LEO's to collect liscense plates, vehicle descriptions, names, DOB's, addresses, pictures of you and your camp/vehicle ect. From contacts they make in the forest. Regular employees can use it to, just by observing how long you are staying at a campsite, or in a forest in general.
> 
> They can search by plate number, name, ect, and make comments to that they saw you at 'X' GPS coordinates, on 'X' date, and take a picture. It will tell them other employees spotting you and on what dates, and the nature of the contact. Its almost exactly the same as police running your name and getting back your arrest record....except for this you dont have to have done anything wrong. Hence my concerns with the legality of this.
> 
> YES you can still get around it, pretty easily, but what I am saying, is that this sets a precedent, and if we as citizens allow it to continue, this is some big brother bullshit on lands that taxpayers pay to access and camp.
> 
> Another scary thing about the forest I work on in general, is that we are the first to be doing this, and the people who devoped this's boner is fucking raging at the thought of running houseless people off of the forest, and public lands in general.
> 
> Now to answer your questions @Highway One :
> 
> Yes it is possible to live on public land full time, just be smart about it. There are many threads on StP about it in the 'where to sleep' forum, and in other areas. I made a thread:
> 
> Public lands and YOU! Why you should give a shit. | Squat the Planet - https://squattheplanet.com/threads/public-lands-and-you-why-you-should-give-a-shit.31224/
> 
> That talks about public land if you want to read it.
> 
> Basically you should move your camp every 2 weeks or so to a different area to avoid being harassed.
> 
> And as far as no cell signal, FS employees dont need cell signal to use thos app or GPS.


Holy shit that is terrible, but good to know.. I'll start spreading the word. Keep us updated.


----------



## WanderLost

Thanks for the heads up @Coywolf. Its good to know someones looking out for homeless rights. It seems pretty bleak when I'm urban camping, cuz there's basically nowhere thats legal to sleep.
It seems like rights are lost little by little and go unnoticed over time, so i get why you'd bring this to our attention.


----------



## Rune

How can homelessness be lawfully criminalized if they cant provide each and every person with a place to live long-term?
Youre just begging for loopholes to try to enforce this kind of thing.
Its so laughable..
anyway.. if the law wants to inconvenience people in such an important matter, its just for show, considering how they cant even agree on what an acre actually is, much less what trespassing is.

If you ask me, the real difference is:
Did they destroy something someone else needed/built AND keeps maintained current to the time of the trespass?
Was someone actually hurt due to the trespassing?
Was something actually stolen due to the trespassing?
Then it would be criminal trespassing.

If someone just wants to complain about something or just doesnt like being bothered so want to make a big fuss about it and intimidate another person, to me, thats a karen wanting to call it a civil trespass. Unless its a *legitemately important* facility or dangerous to be there, this is one of those things that will always remain a gray area and the most charismatic and crafty lawyer will probably win the case.
[ive literally had an entire police force called on me for stepping a few feet on someones property in my neighborhood to pet a CAT. Theyre just trying to intimidate people. They cant actually put me in jail for petting a cat unless they are TRYING to make the law untrustworthy.]

If youre homeless, you should at least have access to public lands.
If they try to force you off, theyre really just being assholes.
Im about to be forced homeless. Is someone going to give me land to sit on of my own to avoid this situation? Theyre more likely to give me the run-around until I conform to their ways.
Im not hurting anyone by being homeless. Honestly, the people trying to tell me Im not worth a safe and stable home environment are in the wrong here.

OH.. and.. how about the topic of how the land, wildlife, and property on it is treated in general..
If they abuse the land theyre on, if I sit on it and make it better, I AM NOT LISTENING TO ANYONE THAT WANTS TO FILE A COMPLAINT.
I am not going to sit by and let people destroy the land AND try to push me off of it. If the land needs healing, and I can help, then Im not going anywhere.
Screw the law, I have green hair. [sorry for that old, terrible meme, it just popped into my head and Im laughing because its kind of appropriate.]

I will acknowledge public housing is SUPPOSED to be a solution, but when I looked into it, people get mistreated there, AND kicked out anyway.. so whats a human being to do when they arent allowed to live anywhere without threat of being kicked out?

Home is a concept anyway.
Everything is liable to change, can fall apart. Doesnt mean it always will, but because it can, nothing is completely reliable or secure.

Pick up a piece of dried mud. Take it with you everywhere. Theres your home. Theres your piece of land.
But then again, the more you handle it, the more its going to crumble in your hands. Some of the sand will brush off. Its always changing, whether on the ground or in your hands. It might not even be noticable.
When home is a concept and the land changes of its own accord, trying to hold people to laws over it is insulting.

If they really want to make a big to-do about this, they better be willing to not just PROPERLY enforce birth control to everyone, but also to be 100% accurate at making sure any people that become parents are 100% GOOD parents.
but see how people are going to respond to that.
Its a catch 22, and it more likely always will be.

[also, they stole America from people who actually loved and sustained the land.. so yeah.. its hypocritical of them to try to act high and mighty about this and say theyre maintaining ethical principles.]


----------



## coyote mogollon

Ya it’d be useful to find out which areas in particular are cracking down. I’m ‘camping’ on BLM land here near Moab, which has a fairly small homeless population, and only a few venture out into the wilds . The lowdown I hear from folks in the know is that if you trash a place out ya they’ll fuck with you. Hoping this is the case, and actually support folks who don’t respect wilderness areas being warned and or fined. That said, more and more of us are hard pressed to find any little scrap of space we can find to….simply live.


----------



## Coywolf

Rune said:


> If you ask me, the real difference is:
> Did they destroy something someone else needed/built AND keeps maintained current to the time of the trespass?
> Was someone actually hurt due to the trespassing?
> Was something actually stolen due to the trespassing?
> Then it would be criminal trespassing.



Uhhh, you obviously have never been caught on a freight train. The definition for 'Criminal Trespassing' is 'Knowingly or willfully illegally entering or being upon property'.....so basically anything with a sign or 'common knowledge' that a property doesn't allow trespassing will get you criminal trespassing. Public land agencies posting signboards and having info on their websites against residential use is plenty enough PC for a ticket/arrest from LEOs.

Do I agree with it? Fuck no. But then again I don't agree with alot of the vullshot the US government does.



Rune said:


> if the law wants to inconvenience people in such an important matter, its just for show, considering how they cant even agree on what an acre actually is, much less what trespassing is.



Lol, it isint a show if they can issue you a ticket that can result in a federal warrant. Just being real here.



Rune said:


> If youre homeless, you should at least have access to public lands.
> If they try to force you off, theyre really just being assholes.
> Im about to be forced homeless. Is someone going to give me land to sit on of my own to avoid this situation? Theyre more likely to give me the run-around until I conform to their ways.
> Im not hurting anyone by being homeless. Honestly, the people trying to tell me Im not worth a safe and stable home environment are in the wrong here.



Yes. I agree with you. 100%. But how long have you lived in the USA? This shit happens on the regular, and it seems no amount of "WTF are you doing, this is immoral!" Can stop it

Best chance we all have is to avoid being in the cross hairs....because this shit is only going to get worse.


----------



## RayvnHearsMusic

That is false. Trespassing as an arrest "reason" requires an "official trespass notice" to have been issued against you personally by the police. Additionally, if you are invited to enter for any reason (asking a different employee if you can order today, telling your friend to come over and smoke weed after the non-live-in landlord demanded a tresspass notice to your friend because he smokes weed, etc.), then arrest is immediately illegal as is literally stated by a dozen-plus officers on PoliceOne.


----------



## Coywolf

RayvnHearsMusic said:


> That is false. Trespassing as an arrest "reason" requires an "official trespass notice" to have been issued against you personally by the police. Additionally, if you are invited to enter for any reason (asking a different employee if you can order today, telling your friend to come over and smoke weed after the non-live-in landlord demanded a tresspass notice to your friend because he smokes weed, etc.), then arrest is immediately illegal as is literally stated by a dozen-plus officers on PoliceOne.



You are talking about squatting. That is a different story. A notice in the public record, or adequate warning and signage is lawful PC for issuing a trespassing citation or arrest on federal property. Rail lines aren't technically federal property, but they are treated a such being infrastructure. Public lands are federal property.

Criminal trespassing and 'trespassing' are different. All you have to do is tell the person they are trespassing, in any form, and a next offense makes it criminal trespassing, class B/C misdemeanor in most states. Doing so with a weapon (which can be anything) or with "malicious intent" (which can also be anything) can bump it up to a class A.


----------



## TheTexasRoadrunner

Probably one of the best areas iv done this in is crystal beach just east of Galveston on the peninsula. They let you camp on the beach for free for a few weeks then you gotta move a certain feet to a new.location. there's two dollar stores.to.dumpster dive.from , a library with free wifi and a food pantry.


----------



## NewMexicoJim

The Gila NF in New Mexico has only 2 LEO for over 3 million acres. They haven't the time nor desire to chase off folks like this unless they are reported as a nuisance or have set up a permanent camp where others are prone to see it. They have full plates and this is a pretty minor issue in their minds. Even if there were some kind of mandate, there would be little time for enforcement.
There are also millions of acres of BLM land in the SW and I have a feeling that they are pretty much the same, maybe even more lax. I have never seen a BLM LEO anywhere. BLM and FS land is leased to ranchers who may report you if you are standing out somehow but as a rule, I doubt there is any widespread effort to kick people off because of this issue. There may be limited efforts in places with heavy use but as long as you move every two weeks, you can stay in this area forever without being hassled.


----------

