Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The last thing I want is some random camping in my backyard. FUD. Freedom to Roam laws only allow camping a fair distance away from inhabited buildings.
how is "a fair distance" specified?
It depends on the country.
A navigation app that illuminates public land within privately held property
41–50 of 189 posts
Re: A navigation app that illuminates public land within privately held property
#42this is very common in the west. Its one of several ways to "own" more property than you paid for. If your property completely encloses 1000 acres of public land, that land is as good as yours (with the exception of building things, but many of the property owners in these cases are taking people hunting on the land, so no permanant structures would be built anyway.) Another common thing is land leases. I don't know how many ranches I've seen for sale around here (NM) that state something like 1000 acres, but when you look closer, its 200 acres, with a BLM lease on the other 800 acres. That doesn't grant them exclusive use of the land (to the best of my knowledge), but they frequently act like it does--placing "no tresspassing" signs, confronting people, arguing its their land. (and while you are paying for those leases, it is CHEAP. something like $2 per acre per year.
Re: A navigation app that illuminates public land within privately held property
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hesitate to engage with this comment, but this 'method' is the same that was used by the hunters with the ladder. The sticking point is that, sure, they're not stepping foot in the corner-adjacent lots, but they are still crossing into the property via the air. This would be the same issue with the helicopter. Consider a property line not just a line on the ground, but an invisible wall extending from that line on…
I guess there must be some upper limit, otherwise normal commercial air traffic at 10k meter / 30k feet would be in serious trouble. As long as the public land is large enough that you can land the helicopter far enough away from the private property to not expose yourself to other problems (some kind of noise limit maybe?), it seems like it should be doable right? Fly over the property at 3000 feet and land on publi…
As they should be.
Re: A navigation app that illuminates public land within privately held property
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
Freedom to Roam laws only allow passing through, not littering. Do you foresee people who would litter illegally, but would not trespass illegally?
I can foresee that encouraging the roaming brings along some amount of littering among the inconsiderate.
Re: A navigation app that illuminates public land within privately held property
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The last thing I want is some random camping in my backyard. FUD. Freedom to Roam laws only allow camping a fair distance away from inhabited buildings.
Quoted post unavailable.
No, what’s “ugly behavior” is posting FUD.
> The vast majority of people don't have inhabited buildings in their back yards.
If a building is uninhabited, the yard attached to it is hardly “my backyard”, as ‘bergenty’ wrote.
Re: A navigation app that illuminates public land within privately held property
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I hiker I definitely disagree with the notion that no roads = no access. I've been plenty of places you could not construct a road without some pretty hefty engineering. And note that this article is about a case where there were no roads but the hunters were there anyway. I'm definitely on the side of the corner-crossers, you don't get to control public land by land-locking it. I'd say the owner of the land that…
> I'd say the owner of the land that land-locks it gets to within reason decide the route that is permitted Suppose that the public land is sandwiched between two private owners. Which of those private owners must grant the access? Worse, suppose that that chunk in the middle wasn't originally public land, but is later purchased by the state. At that point, the previous owners - having done nothing on their own - are…
That would be a 4th Amendment concern, not a 5th.
Re: A navigation app that illuminates public land within privately held property
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Freedom to Roam laws only allow passing through, not littering. Do you foresee people who would litter illegally, but would not trespass illegally?
I can foresee that encouraging the roaming brings along some amount of littering among the inconsiderate.
Even though this is not a significant problem in countries which has such laws?
Re: A navigation app that illuminates public land within privately held property
#48Someone with big balls should set up a company that flies people in and out of these areas by helicopter. Would probably make a fortune from libertarians
I hesitate to engage with this comment, but this 'method' is the same that was used by the hunters with the ladder. The sticking point is that, sure, they're not stepping foot in the corner-adjacent lots, but they are still crossing into the property via the air. This would be the same issue with the helicopter. Consider a property line not just a line on the ground, but an invisible wall extending from that line on…
The FAA has defined “navigable airspace” here: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/pham_htm...
That cites another FAR, 91.119: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.119 which lays out the general rules for fixed wing traffic and some exceptions for helicopters.
Over most unpopulated areas, it’s 500’ from surface, structures, vehicles, or people, unless lower is needed for takeoff and landing.
Re: A navigation app that illuminates public land within privately held property
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The last thing I want is some random camping in my backyard. FUD. Freedom to Roam laws only allow camping a fair distance away from inhabited buildings.
Quoted post unavailable.
Well those types of campers are already in the US without freedom to roam so its not like the situation would change at all.
Re: A navigation app that illuminates public land within privately held property
#50> Mr. Eshelman ... Discussing the case in an email statement to The Wall Street Journal this month, he said “forcible trespass” was a safety issue and could affect the property value.
Clearly the property, trying to hem in public land, was over-valued.