BLM Ranger Grilling Boondocker

[AreWeLostYet]

16:13
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxJGl_MBz3w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxJGl_MBz3w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxJGl_MBz3w
[color=var(--yt-endpoint_-_color)][font=Roboto, Arial, sans-serif][color=var(--yt-primary-text-color)]Feds Try to Harass me for Camping!

[/font][/color]

[/color]

 

[rvwandering]

This entire way too long tirade by Gavin could have been avoided if he had just gone to website for the Crornan Ranch Trailhead and read the information - https://www.blm.gov/visit/cronan-ranch-trailhead

"What you need to know:
(1.) Cronan Ranch is a Day-Use area only. No overnight camping.
(2.) Only non-motorized recreational activities such as hiking, mountain biking, horseback riding and other similar passive activities are allowed.
(3.) Portions of this trail system border private property. Please respect the rights of private property owners by staying on designated routes at all times.
(4.) Please be aware that there are mountain lions and rattlesnakes in the area.
(5.) Fireworks are prohibited.
(6.) Fuelwood cutting and collection is prohibited.
(7.) A Special Recreation Use Permit is required for all commercial, organized groups, or competitive activities. "

 

[AreWeLostYet]

Or he probably could have read a sign at the road leading to the area. But too many taking to public land these days got caught up on the 'live on public land' frenzy being stirred up on youtube these days. They think that if the are not allowed to park anywhere on public land, that they should be. Like the guy who got killed picking a gun fight with a couple of BLM rangers near Grand Junction CO a few months back. I saw a t-shirt on a guy recently that read "Public Land Owner". Many claim a personal right to public land these days. They see no communal responsibilities in ownership and stewardship of the land. If they're economically desperate, they may be taking their "last stand" like that guy near Grand Junction rather than fall into the abyss.

 

[tx2sturgis]

Generally speaking, if they don't want me there, I don't want to be there.

By 'they' I don't mean some neighbor who claims I'm a problem...that person would not be on the same level as the agency in charge of the land, which in this case, apparently, was purchased by a consortium of agencies. (using our tax money, no doubt)  

I don't see the problem with them camping there, but multiply that times 500 people in a small area, and now you have a problem.

I wonder if the supervisor came back by with a badge on his shirt, and a gun on his hip, and made this guy move. 

Like he said, you should pick your battles.

 

[AreWeLostYet]

The BLM guy was obviously not coming back with a gun "all tactical". He was easy going and said he was going to let it be - for now. Now if it had been a Forest Service Law Enforcement officer (which are always heavily armed), things might have turned out different.

 

[bigskybob]

If you want to live hassle free,you've got to own your own land.

 

[highdesertranger]

" Now if it had been a Forest Service Law Enforcement officer (which are always heavily armed), things might have turned out different. "

why would you say that? can you back up your accusation. I run into BLM and FS law enforcement all the time and I have never ever had a bad encounter.

you need to back up your accusations with first hand accounts. I don't mean another one of your BS youtube videos. highdesertranger

 

[crofter]

Or he probably could have read a sign at the road leading to the area. 

He says that there is no sign, and the BLM employee concurs on that point, saying that the no camping restriction is part of their management plan.  I agree that no camping areas should be posted, and if the agency is serious about enforcement, the agency should employ someone to check (more workamping jobs !). 

The management plan listing the restrictions may not be that available to the general public, although someone here was able to find the camping restriction online. The BLM employee did not state why camping was restricted. My guess would be overuse or possibly trash left. The parking lot there looked pretty full.

Sometimes uses of the public land do not overlap that well, like camping and concentrated grazing.  I don't really like going for a hike where a herd of cows has just been trailed through. Kinda smelly and messy. And cows can be injured by consuming the trash left behind by campers. 
Nother reason to clean up sites, might save a few for future camping.     ~    crofter

 

[RVTravel]

And owning your own land out of city limits of more restrictions.

 

[AreWeLostYet]

" Now if it had been a Forest Service Law Enforcement officer (which are always heavily armed), things might have turned out different. "

why would you say that?  can you back up your accusation.  I run into BLM and FS law enforcement all the time and I have never ever had a bad encounter.

you need to back up your accusations with first hand accounts.  I don't mean another one of your BS youtube videos.  highdesertranger

I was responding to a post noting that the BLM guy was not armed. USFS I have seen have been literally "loaded for bear" since in places they have to deal with marauding bears in campgrounds. They also might be called upon by local law enforcement to apprehend outlaws in the wilds. Many have several long arms right behind their car seat in addition to their sidearm which they always carry.

Additionally, Bob has commented that the USFS has, in general, been more difficult to deal with than BLM. BLM manages wasteland,whereas USFS guards a valuable asset - forest products (lumber-trees).

 

[highdesertranger]

you are implying that we should be afraid of FS law enforcement.

Bob has never implied that we should be afraid of FS law enforcement. you are taking him out of context. just like these videos you are posting, only telling half the story that promotes your agenda. highdesertranger

 

[John61CT]

Being heavily armed has no bearing on professionalism, respect for their role as public servant.