Stealth Camping?

[wackafew]

I don't think anyone would like someone camping in their back yard without asking? I guess I could be wrong. Just saying.

 

[x39]

Most likely I'd fire a couple rounds into the trees above their heads from a couple hundred yards away until they got the message and left.

Wouldn't it be more reasonable and less dangerous to all involved to politely tell them to leave?

 

[j williams]

I mean, people have a sense of entitlement nowadays that would make a third gen welfare queen blush.

:thumbup::thumbup:

 

[hayseed1]

I have no desire to camp on your land nor am I telling you what to do with it,I have heard alot of bull about how easy it is to shoot people,Usually from blowhards who have never held a gun on anyone let alone fire on them.I'd be willing to bet touching a few off over someones head will get you in a whole lot more trouble than trespassing will get them into in any neck of the woods.
You can come to my place and camp,I dont' dislike other people all that much.The neighbors won't shoot you for stepping on the porch either,as long as your peaceful.

 

[kgd]

The thread drift is happening for 4 reasons.

1) Its ultimately about ethics and ethical threads always lead to opposing opinions <-- as they should and a good discussions about ethics are a symptom of a healthy society

2) There are cross arguments going on because of two different scenarios - private versus public lands. It would appear that some of the back and forth is aimed at cross purpose responses, or people are not using that thing called a 'quote' feature in order to clarify what and who they are responding to.

3) There is mixed understanding of the purpose of the descriptor 'stealth' - is avoiding detection a function of circumventing legal ramifications? Is it avoiding joe-public because people are annoying but no laws are being broken? Is it because people are making subjective judgement about the nature of a broken rule - e.g. spitting in public is breaking the law but not on the same par as rape and murder. Similarly, camping in a no-camping zone is not on par with poaching big game.

Personal Opinion time: I'm not a religious man, but the bible does state 'The meek shall inherit the earth'. This prophecy would appear to bear much truth in the world I live in.

 

[moonwilson]

Wouldn't it be more reasonable and less dangerous to all involved to politely tell them to leave?

If I'm behind a rifle, on a ridge, behind cover, there is absolutely no danger to me. If I have to confront some jerkweed/s in person, then who knows. They might decide to give me a hard time. I have absolutely no obligation to be nice to anybody on my land without permission.

 

[Cpl Punishment]

That's what I am talking about. I mean, the land is the People's land.

And the private property situation is a totally different thing, I agree.

Same here.
Private property IS a man's kingdom. Land ownership was a right just as sacred to the founders as any of the other rights they enumerated.

You think stealth camping on public land is OK?

YES! Because (this applies to the United States, I won't speak for the laws of any other countries):
1.) It is PUBLIC land, not the king's land. I am of the public and I have a right to be on MY land.

2.) It's paid for with MY taxes. Since MY money goes to pay for it, I am part owner of it along with everyone else that pays money.

People need to stop acting as if the US is a monarchy.

Also, most National parks and Forests, you are allowed to camp in. You can even live there, but you can't stay in one place more than 2 weeks.

The only land around here I can't camp on are Wildlife Management Areas. I don't have a problem with that because the WMAs are private property leased by the State. Essentially, the State pays the private landowners to not develop the land, so that game will thrive there, and we can hunt there during hunting season, and stay off it between seasons so that the game can replenish itself.

 

[silenthunterstudios]

If someone is trespassing on your land, then they conciously decided to break the law by trespassing. If they are going to leave quietly, that's great and the hoped for outcome. I hope I never have to confront anyone. All are welcome, if they play by the rules.

1. Ask the owner before you enter their land
2. Follow the owners rules
3. Do a little something for the owner in thanks for their allowing you to be on their land

Simple as that. You don't have to kiss anyones ass, you don't have to demean yourself. If you don't like the owners rules, then leave. In my opinion, those three guides are how a civilized society should work. A little something for the owner doesn't mean an extravagant gift etc. It means helping out clearing brush trails, making a nice pie or dinner, offering sharpening services, gunsmithing services, helping out at harvest time.

When it comes to private land, it is just common courtesy. 99.9% of these owners are not out looking for a confrontation with anyone, or looking to catch trespassers. A game warden is looking for someone breaking the law. A private property owner is not.



Public land, the law is the law. If you disagree with the law, then petition the courts to change the law.

 

[hollowdweller]

Also, most National parks and Forests, you are allowed to camp in. You can even live there, but you can't stay in one place more than 2 weeks.

I had an old guy beside me at a campground about a month ago. I was up and I could see he was up and alone so I struck up a conversation with him.

He said that his lease had expired in the spring and he put all his stuff in storage and was planning to spend the entire summer and fall camping at difft campgrounds in WV. He seemed to be having a great time!:thumbup:

 

[Gautier]

Much as I anticipated, there seem to be polarized opinions on the subject. Like KGD said, discussion is good though, so long as it's kept civil and reasonable. Shooting, or shooting at people who may or may not be aware of trespassing doesn't really seem reasonable to me.

I mean, how many young people, "punks" or otherwise are really familiar with survey and property lines?(for that matter how many adults understand the difference between trespass and criminal trespass?) What if it's just some boy scout who was on an orienteering course on a neighboring property that lost his way? Shoot first and ask questions later? What if that deer rifle you've had stored since last season has got knocked around, the scope has unsighted, and you end up putting a round through a kid's head? Reasonable, responsible, justifiable? I think not.

Now I understand that the concept of land ownership is something that is an emotionally charged issue for a lot of people. It's very closely tied to the American definition of "freedom". That only free men can truly "own land"(really another subject entirely). As such, it evokes an emotional response, more often than a logical one.

The public land issue is another ball of wax, but not completely dissimilar. Sure, it may seem be a sense of entitlement to some that the PUBLIC thinks they can use PUBLIC LAND as they wish within reason. If they can't, then they should really call it something else though, shouldn't they? In what way is thinking you have the right to own PRIVATE land any less of a sense of entitlement though? Apples and oranges, maybe, but fruit is fruit and land is land.

People pay for their private property; the land, the property taxes, the upkeep. The same people, and everyone else, pays for public land's upkeep and such, with taxes. So why do you pay for one thing, and reap all the benefits, but pay for another and get very little in return? Sounds like a justification for stealth camping on public lands to me.


Gautier

 

[Don Rearic]

It amazes me how people can talk about legalities and then talk about firing rounds over people's heads until they get the message. Here is the wake up call, it's not 1974, it's not the 60s, the Korean War or World War One is not raging and the days of the cowboys and indians really are over. What you are talking about is assault with a deadly weapon. I'm thinking you stay longer in the detention center for ADW than trespassing. But, hey, if and when it happens, have at it!

And if you actually hit someone, I know you wouldn't because you're perfect and all, but if you did, it wouldn't really matter if you could lawyer your way out of it because he is not your friend and he'll take your property just like the guy he was defending you from would.

Sanity people. It's not the brightest thing to go on someone else's property and I was speaking primarily of public lands, but it's also really STUPID to shoot in the direction of someone, period. No excuses. They are not presenting the threat of serious bodily injury or lethal force to you. If they are? Different story! I'd be right there with you then.

What we're talking about now? No.

As for changing laws about anything the government wants...it's popular to say that. But it doesn't work anymore. Nine times out of ten, the politician wanting to get into office says or promises one thing and then when s/he or it gets in there, they do what they want to do. That's how we are in such a terrible mess nowadays. So it's really fantasy to say such things. I know that is the way it should be, that's the way the system is designed to work and I agree with you on that and I wish it did work that way more often than not...but we have lost our way and there is no going back.

 

[silenthunterstudios]

Sounds like a justification for stealth camping on public lands to me.


Gautier

I have to disagree that it is a justification for stealth camping. If you disagree with posted laws in your local park, talk with the game warden, the park manager/ranger in charge etc. I understand, if you have the concept of breaking the rules firmly in place in your mind, you don't want to give away your plans to the authorities. I also do not think that trespassing is up there with rape and murder, or stealing even. However, the rules are the rules. Join a large enough group, start one of your own, join a petition etc. The current situation is messed up I will admit.

Back to the private land discussion, if you have permission from one landowner, you should basically ask where you can and can't go. That should prompt at least a basic hand drawn map from the owner (not too outlandish in my opinion), and will know if their next door neighbors are "kindly to strangers".

Of course, you shouldn't shoot anyone on sight, especially for trespassing. However, the facts of the situation are clear. Someone out there may very well shoot at you.

As for the guy camping in WV, while his stuff remains in storage. I am kicking myself now, for not doing that ten years ago. Just take off from work, and live in PA at different parks/forests for the summer and fall.

 

[Gautier]

I have to disagree that it is a justification for stealth camping.

By justification, I don't mean "good reason", I mean "excuse". People can justify anything, especially to themselves, that doesn't make it a good explanation. Sorry for the semantics and rhetoric, just wanted to clarify. :thumbup:

I'm not saying that their justification makes it legal, and accordingly doesn't make it right(malum prohibitum). I'm saying that to a lot of people, they'll want to know why a law is in place if it limits their freedoms, and most aren't going to be happy with "because I say so". At that point, most people will weigh the risk versus the reward of breaking that law if they feel the law itself is more of a detriment than the risk it would be to break it. If such a risk should come to bear, I expect the person to take accountability for their actions, they knew the risk and made their decision, the onus to deal with the consequences is on them.


Gautier

 

[Don Rearic]

To be perfectly blunt, if someone is doing anything "stealthily," they're probably not going to get caught anyway. While The Landed Gentry are debating the legality and morality of assault with a deadly weapon vis a vis trespassing on a computer, the dude on the property is sitting out there looking at the flickering blue light from the house way off in the distance, thinking to himself, "I wonder what that fella is watchin' on HBO?"

 

[kgd]

I have to disagree that it is a justification for stealth camping. If you disagree with posted laws in your local park, talk with the game warden, the park manager/ranger in charge etc. I understand, if you have the concept of breaking the rules firmly in place in your mind, you don't want to give away your plans to the authorities. I also do not think that trespassing is up there with rape and murder, or stealing even. However, the rules are the rules. Join a large enough group, start one of your own, join a petition etc. The current situation is messed up I will admit.

You can do both things, petition for changing rules and ignoring things. Rules are rules, but rules aren't necessarily laws and it is here that we have a little more noodle room than implied by the arguments in this thread.

As Gautier said, if you break the rules, you should be prepared to suffer the consequence. In my area (and on public lands), that usually means being given a speech by the park warden and being kicked out of the park. He's not going to shoot me nor does he have the authority to actually issue me any kind of fine. He may make me listen to his displeasure. I'll suffer that and will even be gracious enough to apologize to him and perhaps offer to teach him the fine working art of fire by friction.

I think the aspects of private land and asking owner permission is a good one and that may involve some bartering of services or labor. There are also many good points raised in these posts about people getting lost and wondering onto land accidentally. Its happened to me before and I'm sure land owners are familiar with this occurring often enough.

 

[moonwilson]

"Stealth Camping" on public lands, I have no problem with that.

"Stealth Camping" on private land, particularly in the hills of Appalachia, is a bad, bad idea.
I can assure you I'm not the only landowner with this sentiment:

Realistically, on our property, catching somebody "stealth camping" is extremely unlikely. We're way too far back in the hills, you'd have to go pretty far out of your way to wind up at our place by accident. Very rarely does anyone drive up the road without us knowing it- you can hear a car coming a long time before it gets there. If the neighbors notice a strange car, they'll call my dad to ask who it is. In that part of the world, you don't show up unnoticed or unannounced- our nearest neighbors still don't have indoor plumbing. Fifth or sixth generation, poor farmers take their privacy seriously. We do occasionally find signs of folks who have wandered on to the farther corners of the place, most likely poachers.

 

[Md 25v]

I work for the DNR here in Md. I'm not with Nat Rec Police (NRP) or anything like that but as a conservation biologist I run into this kind of thing with fair regularity. I can remove people from the parks but I have no citation or arrest powers. I am however in radio contact with Nat Rec Pol and can detain (unofficially) any persons who need to be arrested until they arrive.
I find that there are two main types of people that camp unlawfully on park property and each type elicits a different response. The first type would probably include some of the guys posting on this thread. They are the guys I find far off trails, usually while doing radio telemetry work, that are trying to avoid other people on the trails crowding their outdoor experience and practicing leave-no-trace and often have picked up other people's trash as their own way to give back to the park. I usually talk to these guys a bit to make sure they aren't actually up to anything and then go on my way. I have asked a few of the NRP guys what they do and have found out that most of the time the officers will choose to look the other way as long as no harm is being done and proper land stewardship is being practiced. I like that approach and try to act accordingly.
The second group are the troublemakers. That's anyone from teenagers making uncontrolled fires and getting drunk a few yards from trails to well armed and concealed poachers setting camps deep in the backwoods. I'll kick the kids and drunks out when I find them, which is more often than I would like, but when I find poacher's camps I get a GPS location and get NRP on the way because dealing with those kinds of "stealth campers" is well beyond my responsibilities.
All in all I think there is a nice compromise here, even if it's unofficial, between the NRP and those "camping" illegally based on the effect they are having on the park. I have even had a couple "stealth" campers ask for my email and alert me of GPS positions that they have found active poaching and poacher's supply dumps.

 

[savagesicslayer]

Funny thing is I have ALWAYS camped this way.I do it not to violate peoples land I do it for privacy.There are so many roads and trails around here that it's very hard to camp close by with privacy.If I'm out with my friends or girlfriend I don't want half a dozen drunk bikers stopping at my campfire looking for a party.I have camped close enough to the trails to be able to read the labels on their tanks without being found.we had a few good laughs watching them biking around in circles looking for the campfire.(Dakota fire pit with a blind).

 

[kgd]

I work for the DNR here in Md. I'm not with Nat Rec Police (NRP) or anything like that but as a conservation biologist I run into this kind of thing with fair regularity. I can remove people from the parks but I have no citation or arrest powers. I am however in radio contact with Nat Rec Pol and can detain (unofficially) any persons who need to be arrested until they arrive.
I find that there are two main types of people that camp unlawfully on park property and each type elicits a different response. The first type would probably include some of the guys posting on this thread. They are the guys I find far off trails, usually while doing radio telemetry work, that are trying to avoid other people on the trails crowding their outdoor experience and practicing leave-no-trace and often have picked up other people's trash as their own way to give back to the park. I usually talk to these guys a bit to make sure they aren't actually up to anything and then go on my way. I have asked a few of the NRP guys what they do and have found out that most of the time the officers will choose to look the other way as long as no harm is being done and proper land stewardship is being practiced. I like that approach and try to act accordingly.
The second group are the troublemakers. That's anyone from teenagers making uncontrolled fires and getting drunk a few yards from trails to well armed and concealed poachers setting camps deep in the backwoods. I'll kick the kids and drunks out when I find them, which is more often than I would like, but when I find poacher's camps I get a GPS location and get NRP on the way because dealing with those kinds of "stealth campers" is well beyond my responsibilities.
All in all I think there is a nice compromise here, even if it's unofficial, between the NRP and those "camping" illegally based on the effect they are having on the park. I have even had a couple "stealth" campers ask for my email and alert me of GPS positions that they have found active poaching and poacher's supply dumps.

Well said, thanks for your perspective. My experience is that your words run true with many of the folks in similar positions of authority as yourself to whom I've encountered.

 

[Don Rearic]

Well said, thanks for your perspective. My experience is that your words run true with many of the folks in similar positions of authority as yourself to whom I've encountered.

Ditto, can't really NOT applaud that attitude and outlook on the problems we all face when we are out in the woods.