Loading...
You are here:  Home  >  29 Palms  >  Current Article

Hi-Desert Star: Marines lend a hand to desert tortoise

By   /   April 28, 2012  /   60 Comments

    Print       Email

Saturday, April 21, 2012 | By Courtney Vaughn, Hi-Desert Star

JOSHUA TREE NATIONAL PARK — For the third year in a row, Nature Valley has paved the way for restoration work around Joshua Tree National Park.

The National Parks Conservation Association, the Bureau of Land Management and 30 local volunteer Marines lent a hand to restore vital desert tortoise habitat Saturday, April 14, in an area plagued with illegal off-road-vehicle trails. The work was made possible with the help of grant funding from Nature Valley.

Working in an area dubbed the Saddle, volunteers used vertical mulch to eliminate spur roads. Seth Shteir of the National Parks Conservation Association said the area is home to nearby permitted off-roading trails, but some riders venture off designated trails and make new ones, often destroying tortoises and their habitat. The desert tortoise is an endangered species.

“Nature Valley has a campaign called Preserve the Parks. Over the past several years they’ve raised $800,000 for restoration projects for America’s parks,” Shteir said.

Full story Hi-Desert Star

    Print       Email

About the author

Branson Hunter

(This story was posted by Cactus Thorn contributor Branson Hunter)

"The ends do not justify the means." If you use illegal mean to accomplish a legal and even desirable result, the good result does not make the bad means you used justifiable.

60 Comments

  1. Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

    It’s my understanding that the BLM allows camping as far as 300 ft. to either side of a legal trail. I’m not suggesting there isn’t problem at the location but I am wondering if the 300 ft. camping allowence is true then is wholly accurate to report the activity as “ILLEGAL”. I’m wondering too if there is/was any effort to mitigate the problem with signage.

    Where exactly is this area “the saddle”? Desertrider would like to take a look.

    Can it be seen on Google Earth?

    • desertrider desertrider says:

      Mike you pay for the gas, I’ll pick you up and we can both take a look.
      Funny about the legal trail though, because the COW’s claim there are no legal trails in the basin.
      I also wonder about so-called “wildlife corridors” is there signage that the wildlife can read so they don’t stray off the designated route?
      Apparently the wildlife around my place didn’t get the memo because they seem to travel any which way they care too.
      “wildlife corridors” (said with sarcasm) funny how they always claim “wildlife corridors” just about everyplace OHV’s appear or there is always the all important “riparian area”.

      • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

        Slow down and you might see a few animal trails. The majority have been paved over.
        The indians and early settlers followed the animal trails which became wagon trails followed by the railroads followed by the highways and the dirt bikers.
        You are at the bottom of a long list, not the top.

        • Mark Clemons Mark Clemons says:

          funny they are referred to as OHV and yet they want designated parks and trails, now that is real adventure, real trail blazers. lol

          • desertrider desertrider says:

            First off, the animal trails are everywhere, last time I heard the Indians were taking credit for the route the 10 takes they didn’t say anything about the animals.
            Why did they follow the animal trails, is it because they they were clear?
            Who did the research on that tid-bit of information?
            Or does that come from the same place “wildlife corridors” come from?
            What the hell does a position on your list have anything to do with anything.
            You claim the animals don’t need us, but when every some wild animal gets itself in some kind of bind we are supposed to rescue it.

            As far as “wanting” designated parks and trails, we are being forced that way, I don’t want them, I want to explore as I did before. I was/am perfectly content exploring with my family the backroads.
            Maybe I can dispel your ignorance Mark, OHV means Off Highway Vehicle, to most the highway meaning roads that are paved. They are not called TV Trailblazing Vehicles, even though we are accused of that all the time, apparently you haven’t been following the OHV issue, but but feel you can comment out of school.
            Funny how the “99%” protestors claim they want equal access but when you get down to it they just want a free ride on the backs of the working, real trailblazers they are, must be real hard to sleep in a tent in a city park. lol

            • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

              Would you quit whining already? If you want to make a mess of the place just quit excusing it or claiming others are making stuff up to control you. It’s all yours to do what you want. Stop making stuff up. You argue with your own preconceived ideas.

              The washes are access points. Blocking 100′ of wash can be very effective. What is the complaint if you are not using them to start with. Are you? Sorry I forgot…It’s all yours to trash any way you chose.

            • desertrider desertrider says:

              It’s a wash Terry, the water that runs down it does more damage than any OHV.
              Whats with the attitude, did I say I wanted to make a mess? To the contrary, I do believe I said I am perfectly content exploring the backroads. It was Mr. Clemmons that was attempting to demean us because we don’t use our OHV’s to trail blaze.
              What happened Terry you move down the hill and get your panties in a bunch?
              Maybe you need to go on a hike, maybe you should hit the “bump and grind”.
              But please stop leaving your water bottles and snack wrappers on the trail.

            • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

              Your whole argument rests on some fictional character.
              As for the “hikers” on the “bump and grind” They are no better.
              Instead of demanding access to a sensitive area, they too could put out the effort to avoid it. Pure laziness on their part.
              Of course you passed the whole reasoning of blocking an entrance to an area by comparing yourself to water going down a wash. Whatever works for ya. It’s not that you don’t get it, it’s that you play dumb to influence your argument. You are playing aren’t you?

        • Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

          Na, not likely Terry:
          Wildlife corridors and wildlife trails are not the same thing! Deer for instance and sheep will establish trails and travel them (like off-roaders eh?). But critters like quail, rats, snakes, and so on, and cats tend to kind of chart their own course and they do it just to piss us off!

          • Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

            I wish My posts would end up where I try to put them!

          • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

            Most critters follow each other. When humans came by with all their garbage and gardens, many animals starting following the humans. Nature is very simple minded. We add the complexity.
            I know somebody will come on here saying ” animals good,humans bad”. To preempt, that isn’t it at all. It’s that we have the power. We are not a simple minded species. It’s on us to help keep the balance. Not by managing them, but by managing ourselves.
            While some of us may try to do it on an individual level, there’s them others that don’t. While many of us who use the back country do have a protocol that we follow, many don’t. That is something we all have in common, whether we use a mechanical means or walk. Many of us do both. I have a 4x. I certainly don’t walk when I can drive. When I get to the end of the road, I don’t demand a new one. I walk. It’s not really that big of a deal.

    • Stanley Stanley says:

      The area being the “saddle” is in the Gold Park area on the North boundary of the park. It is also a maze of washes. The number one being the Gold Park wash. I guess I was up there the day after the “restoration”. All the vertical mulch that I saw were in the washes. As soon as it rains hard the vertical mulch and trails, roads, and whatever will be erased. Washes are rejuvinated by rain. The one trail I did see obliterated is not even 100 yards long and has been there for over 50+ years. It is in a “wash”. The saving the tortise is open to thought. I never in all my years in the desert have seen a tortise burrow in a wash, and I have seen well into the hundreds. The ground is too unstable for their burrows.

      There was more damage done by the uprooting of dead plants for the vertical mulch. That shade is now gone for the desert animals and won’t be replaced in the exact same area the animals have known to love.

      What a waste.

      • desertrider desertrider says:

        You are right Stanley, they claim the the washes as riparian and that all the animals make their homes in the unstable ever changing washes. They had to figure some way to curb OHV use in places where it wasn’t hurting anything.

    • What was dubbed Illegal were the trails, not the activity.:)

  2. Stanley Stanley says:

    It really isn’t about protecting anything. It is about control. The enviro’s know what is good for us and we better well except it. I totally like some of the signage that is put up. You can only read it if you are walking. Anything over 10 mph and you will miss it. The whole saddle and Gold Park area’s are filled with carsonites which in my opinion makes people want to ride these trails. I have seen more tire tracks on them now than before they were installed, and they look ugly. It is ruining my view shed.

    I am going up there in a few for a little trail ride.

  3. Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

    Stanley:
    Thanks, but where exactly is the Gold Park area?

    Terry:
    You lost me friend. What do you mean the washes are access points, how are they access points – access to what? And what do you mean by blocking, what is it that is being blocked and how is it so?

    Desertrider:
    I’ll let you know when I get the gas money together. I’ll have to re-finance the house.

    Mark C:
    It is not the OHVers that are proposing all the closures and other restrictions. Yea, maybe “OHV” is not the most descriptive term anymore. How about RUV, restricted use vehicle?

    • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

      In regards to Stanly’s comment about blocking 100′ of wash.
      If it is a gateway point, it will do a lot of good in blocking illegal traffic. Strategically, while far from an idea situation, tearing up a small amount of desert to save a larger portion does make sense.
      Whether you happen to agree with the closure is a different matter.
      Restricted Use Vehicle? Doesn’t that apply to all vehicles? All machinery for that matter.

      • Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

        Please Terry, what is a “gateway point?

        • Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

          Terry:

          Animals do not live in desert washes, period, and any meager vegetation managing to take hold will not live there for long either.

          Dry washes are nearly shade less, they are far too sandy for burrowing, they flood regularly and they afford no protection from the 50-70 mph winds that we get.

          But, every flooding and every sand storm does serve to reconstitute the desert’s washes as smooth natural highways, perpetually renewed so as to be easily traveled by foot, paw, hoof… or wheel.

          There is not a more ecologically sound way for man, beast or machine to traverse our deserts than to utilize the washes. At least that’s the way I see it, am I wrong?

          • Washes are important. Wildlife migrates, feed, rest and reproduce in washes. They are an important part of the eco system in the desert.

            • Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

              I thoroughly disagree with your statement Branson!

              For starters, no one here has ever implied that washes are not important. On the contrary, I explained above, washes serve as renewable “natural highways” for a number of species (though certainly not all).

              Furthermore, survival is a never ending, life and death game of hide and seek for all desert wildlife Branson and contrary to your nonsense, most tend not to R&R, dine or honeymoon in wide open spaces like washes.

              But the idea that Peter Rabbit would be even more romanticaly inclined there, is an amusing thought.

          • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

            IF they would stay in the washes. Not much challenge in that.

            • desertrider desertrider says:

              “IF they would stay in the washes” then it would be OK with you Terry?
              Problem is it wouldn’t be OK with Branson because then Peter Rabbit’s amorous activities would be hampered,
              Heck Branson won’t even let people ride the “Sugar Bowl” because someone in the park might be able to see them.
              The washes tend to flow to dry lakes can we ride in them? Would that be OK with you? Because it’s not with others.
              It would be nice if hikers stayed on the trail also, when they stray off, their foot divots make a place for weed seeds to congregate and choke out indigenous vegetation.
              Or am I “resting on a fictitious character” again?

            • Dan OBrien Dan OBrien says:

              Most off-roaders take their dumps in their toy haulers or in approved camp grounds or if close enough at home…. hikers on the other hand shit along the trail, leave their deposits and paper to poison the little creatures… no wonder about all those evasive species…. Hiker’s leaving “seed Deposits” along the trail… Hikers are all nasty… and if they tell you that they pack it out… they are nasty liars. If one is guilty then they are all guilty.

            • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

              When hikers cross over into sensitive areas, they can cause problems. Cutting switchbacks is a big problem. The forest service will use similar tactics to those of the marines. I guess I should be on here crying about they’re picking on me.
              Hikers just don’t have the same ability to create damage. Few go up the same hill over and over. At least not in the same day.
              I’ll prove it to you. I’ll loan you my backpack and you take the role of a hiker. I’ll bring the bike and we’ll have a tug of war and see who wins. Machines just have more power and can easily be much more destructive.
              Yes, the washes do lead to the lake beds and the low hills. They lead out to the plains where there is animal life, I.E. tortoises. It’s nice that you are finally admitting that fact. It’s easier to control 1 spot in the wash than the whole area. Much cheaper and it helps keep your fees down, but really whatever.

            • desertrider desertrider says:

              Terry I am glad you admit hikers have impact also.
              I guess, one of the issues I have is that you and Branson generalize that all who use OHV’s trail blaze every time they ride, you have to know that is not true, just like I know most hikers don’t cut new paths.
              No thanks on the backpack though, I have my own. There is no dispute that the machine has the capability but on the roads and trails that capability is not an issue.
              Washes to lake beds to plains where the animal life is. What does that have to do with riding on the existing roads and trails?
              I have been riding for over 30 years and have never run over a tortoise or other critter on my motorcycle. It’s pretty easy to see the ground.
              It seem we go round and round on this issue all the time, yet it seems your only answer is for me/us to stop, there is no compromise there is no offer of reasonable solution.
              As far as you are concerned all off-roaders want to tear up virgin land and kill wildlife, but really whatever.

            • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

              You think we generalize.
              Most people are very respectful and then there’s them others. You don’t see them, but you find their droppings.

  4. Stanley Stanley says:

    Mike, come into 29 and go up Utah trail. It is the road that leads to the National Park. Go left on Baseline, follow it to Sahara, take a right and it takes you to the Gold Park access road. Go up about 2 miles on the dirt road and you are in the BLM limited use area of Gold Park. Pretty easy.

    I did go up for a trail ride. I can see that some of the newer trails need to be closed but some of the older ones need to remain open as they have been there since I was a kid in the 60′s, so they were probably built in the 40′s-50′s. The signs up there now are very confusing. You can go up a legal trail and loop around into a closed area without knowing it. The illegal offroad diatribe from the Hi-Desert Star is just sensationalism on their part.

    As far as riding in washes that would be the best place for vehicle tracks. One good thunderstorm and you wouldn’t even know there was any OHV activity there. That’s common sense so throw that out of the equation.

    • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

      It’s also common sense that nobody hardly stays in the washes so bring that into the equation.

      • desertrider desertrider says:

        Off course nobody stays in the washes but that doesn’t mean they blaze a new trail out either as you are trying to imply. Exit at the next trail or road out, there it has been brought into the equation.
        Comparing myself to water going down the wash? You tell me what the difference is. The part of the wash where the water flows is usually if not always soft sand that will not hold shape, it also will not hold vegetation therefore forms it own trail.
        But that would not make any difference to you anyway, you have passed judgement, nothing aside from my/our cessation of OHV use would suffice… I guess I’m just dumb huh?
        Demanding access to a sensitive area? They are all sensitive areas, all wildlife is on the brink according to someone. That is the problem some guy comes out says this is a sensitive area this or that is endangered, it’s over.
        Hell now even domestic animals are on the list, how many municipalities are considering or have banned pet stores from selling puppies and kittens because they may come from mills? Knee-jerk reaction to a problem, no common sense thought, but I digress.

        • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

          I’m sorry. I guess we are all picking on you. In my knee jerk reaction I never noticed the marked exits that you were using. I only noticed the tracks going up the hills creating new erosion spots.
          Honestly, you stay in the bottom of the wash? Out of your respect for other species or not to be seen?

          • desertrider desertrider says:

            “erosion spots”, “wildlife corridors”, “riparian areas”, “endangered”, “sensitive”, “threatened”…And the list goes on.
            I stay in the wash as long as I need to and exit at an exiting trail or road, because that is what I do, that is what 99% of off-roaders do.
            Why would I care about being seen?

    • Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

      Thanks for the directions Stanley, I just Googl-earthed it. I do know somthing about the area after all. I hunted birds there once… like about 40 years ago. Yea, lots of washes. I’ll get out there and see what all the scandel is about as soon as I can. Thanks!

      • Mike, are you saying washes are not important part of the wildlife eco system in the desert?

        • Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

          Eh Branson, can’t you come up with a slam that is not quite so f…ing STUPID?

          • Hawkins, all I’m saying is that washes are an important part of the wildlife eco, while You talk trash.

            • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

              It’s just much easier to forget that when trying to excuse oneself.
              While they are somewhat capable of self repair, the washes do not completely heal.
              The water is always changing direction and is influenced by tire ruts or misplaced footprints.It’s give and take.
              To say there is no damage is a false argument. Why even start there?

            • desertrider desertrider says:

              Yes nature is on the brink, holding on by a thread, all because of uncaring humans.
              We should all give our homes and/or property to MDLT (Mojave Desert Land Trust) restore the land, curl up into the fetal position on the restored land and wait for the grateful wildlife to come give us a kiss for giving back their land (that’s if they take a break from their amorous exploits in the local washes).

            • Dan OBrien Dan OBrien says:

              Terri…. that is the single best yarn of the week. LMFAO…. Next I guess you’re going to Tell us the one about the Priest, the Preacher and the Rabbi walk into a bar with a grizzly bear.

            • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

              So tell me different. Water doesn’t follow ruts? Water doesn’t flow where switchbacks are cut?
              While you’re laughing, explain yourself or rather, excuse yourself.
              You lie to your friends and I’ll lie to mine, but lets not do it together.
              If you want to discuss the topic, get real. When tire meets sand there are deep ruts. You have to deal with it. Instead you expect everybody else to.
              I guess the bottom line with such attitudes is tough shit. It’s happening. Start boo hooing about the animals and nobody’s gonna listen. Your sport is disappearing, not because of us, but because of you. I don’t really care. It won’t be missed. Just keep crying to yourselves cause nobody else cares either.

  5. 29Transplant says:

    I live off Two Mile, between Adobe and Mesquite Springs, within city limits.
    Been here 11 years now.
    When OHVers stop riding through my residential area on privately owned yet to be developed land, I will have some respect for them and their plight.
    It is loud, it kicks up dust, and its flat out rude.

    • Dan OBrien Dan OBrien says:

      I’ve been here 28 years… raised two boys. I know the difference between “off-Roaders” and Teen aged boys on dirt bikes. OHVers or Off-roaders have grownup toys that are often more expensive than any house between Adobe and Mesquite Springs Road. Irreverent teen aged boys with Dirt Bikes are not OHVers…. they are Teen aged boys doing what teen aged boys do without Adult Supervision.

      Off-Road Recreation is as respectable and respecting of private property and the environment as any desert recreation. To say or think otherwise denotes an ignorance of life in the Mojave Desert.

      Kids do kid things sometimes using adult toys. Your beef 29 Transplant is not with Off-Roaders your beef is with your neighbors. Have you thought about talking to them? Have you talked to their parents?

      I have had the same kinds of activities in our neighborhood…. I have always made a friendly visit to their homes and taken the time to welcome them and set some perimeters. IT HAS ALWAYS WORKED. Give it a try.

      • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

        and kids do kids things with grown up toys on BLM land. You think they just ride around your block?

        • Dan OBrien Dan OBrien says:

          ??????? Terry to indict an entire segment of our desert society for the stupidity of a few teen aged hoodlums is crazy.

          Using COW logic, Because there is graffiti all artists are criminals. We need to shut down the 1st Amendment and arrest anyone with a spray paint can. I’m thinking deportation of all artists in Joshua Tree would be a good start… I wonder will Canada take them back?

          The problem is no one talks to each other anymore… The first thing everyone wants is more government control. Closing off lands does nothing to solve the problem. Passing more laws just makes more law breakers. We don’t need another park or wilderness. We need people talking to one another and government out of our business.

          And by the way it is not BLM land… they do not own a single acre of land it is called the Bureau of Land Management. They manage the peoples land. I don’t like the way they manage my land. I think they should be disbanded and the management of the land should be transferred to the states. But that is another issue for another thread.

          • Terry Elam Terry Elam says:

            What gives the states rights over the counties or townships or the individual? Why stop there?
            It is those few “hoodlums” that are being defended here.
            They block the access to protected land and tears start flowing.
            I don’t much like government either, but to believe we can simply talk out the issues, well we certainly wouldn’t need a military or police force then would we?

        • Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

          Quit calling it “BLM land”!!! IT IS OURS!!!

    • Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

      Situations like you describe do occure 29Transplant. I’d like to grab the squirts by the nap of the neck myself and hold their undevided attention while I explain how thoughtless behaviour ruins it for everyone including them! But Dan is right, there is a much bigger picture than you seem to be seeing.

      Where did you live before coming to 29?
      Where you live now is not a very congested neighborhood is it? Are you on a dirt road?
      Were dirt bikes already being ridden in the neighborhood when you moved there?
      Is there any signage on the vacant properties that are being used, do you know the owners and do they even care?
      …uh, just saying…

      • Mike Hawkins Mike Hawkins says:

        By the way 29Trensplant, We do have a very efficient County Off Road Code Enforcement team and while they have no jurisdiction within your City limits, they can still be quite helpful and they might catch these kids if they are going to an unincorporated area to ride. Call them, they do a good job.

  6. 29Transplant says:

    They arent my neighbors, they cross two mile to get here.
    Adults in 4wd trucks also.
    Nice try though.
    BTW those teenagers you blame, learned it somewhere.

    • Dan OBrien Dan OBrien says:

      I Calling Bull shit 29Transplant… You seem like the typical pilgrim that comes to our basin thinking that you are going to change 100 years of desert lifestyle. I know the people of this town and they are good folks and if you are having a problem, I’m willing to bet it is because a lack of communication on your part.

      I’ll bet money you have never tried to have a meaningful dialog with the people you are complaining about. You tell us where you live and what days they are there and the good members of this Blog will stand with you and we will talk with the folks you seem to be having problems with…. I will wager that once they know what the complaints are they will work with you to find comity.

      And please don’t insult us here by declaring that you fear exposing your anonymity. We are all adults here.

  7. 29Transplant says:

    No one said there are not good folk here, I love it here.
    I dont know where these people live, they are not my neighbors, they cross two mile to get here so there is no talking to them.
    I have decided enough is enough and from now I will simply call the sheriff when they are out there though.
    Not much else I can do.
    Call the land owner and request he fence it off.
    (shrug)

    • Dan OBrien Dan OBrien says:

      Well you go ahead and make those calls to the SO and call wolf until the SO never responds to a call where you really need them. The more you call the more the SO considers you a crank. Don’t believe me? Ask them.

      Communications is the answer. Not Balkanization. I don’t know what it is with you folks coming up from the city but you sure are afraid of your own shadows. I’ve never had a problem talking with a stranger.

  8. Stanley Stanley says:

    We all will get the big picture soon enough with all the closures. Welcome to the Reservation.

  9. 29Transplant says:

    I came from, WA St, 29, WA St, San Diego, Camp Pendleton back to 29 and I havent left and refuse to leave, I love it out here.
    We just started having an issue a few years ago, prior to that it was only when it rained due to a wash where Lazy Joe curves to meet Mesquite Springs.
    I wish it were kids in my neighborhood, it would be easily handled. I assume it would be easily handled.
    I dont call it congested, the road is paved. There are no signs on the land.
    I spoke with the owner of the land a handful of years ago, we wanted to buy 20 acres of it. He wouldnt sell, Mirmar was closing, he had inside information, he was going to build a walled in housing development and get rich @@ same ole story. Not sure if the land has the same owner but if so his only concern at that time was money to be made.

    I did not know about a code enforcement team, thank you for the tip.

    I did speak with a neighbor tonight who informed me its been spring break, we havent had an issue, we are relieved. Perhaps we will get some peace and quiet this spring/summer.

    I will come back and update if it ever rains again!
    (laughing)

  10. 29Transplant says:

    29 Palms is a city (not just name) compared to where I grew up.
    City folk, that was cute.
    Us rural folk know its cry wolf.

  11. Dan OBrien Dan OBrien says:

    Penal Code Section 602

    602. Except as provided in subdivision (u), subdivision (v), subdivision (x), and Section 602.8, every person who willfully commits a trespass by any of the following acts is guilty of a misdemeanor:

    (a) Cutting down, destroying, or injuring any kind of wood or timber standing or growing upon the lands of another.

    (b) Carrying away any kind of wood or timber lying on those lands.

    (c) Maliciously injuring or severing from the freehold of another anything attached to it, or its produce.

    (d) Digging, taking, or carrying away from any lot situated within the limits of any incorporated city, without the license of the owner or legal occupant, any earth, soil, or stone.

    (e) Digging, taking, or carrying away from land in any city or town laid down on the map or plan of the city, or otherwise recognized or established as a street, alley, avenue, or park, without the license of the proper authorities, any earth, soil, or stone.

    (f) Maliciously tearing down, damaging, mutilating, or destroying any sign, signboard, or notice placed upon, or affixed to, any property belonging to the state, or to any city, county, city and county, town or village, or upon any property of any person, by the state or by an automobile association, which sign, signboard, or notice is intended to indicate or designate a road or a highway, or is intended to direct travelers from one point to another, or relates to fires, fire control, or any other matter involving the protection of the property, or putting up, affixing, fastening, printing, or painting upon any property belonging to the state, or to any city, county, town, or village, or dedicated to the public, or upon any property of any person, without license from the owner, any notice, advertisement, or designation of, or any name for any commodity, whether for sale or otherwise, or any picture, sign, or device intended to call attention to it.

    (g) Entering upon any lands owned by any other person whereon oysters or other shellfish are planted or growing; or injuring, gathering, or carrying away any oysters or other shellfish planted, growing, or on any of those lands, whether covered by water or not, without the license of the owner or legal occupant; or damaging, destroying, or removing, or causing to be removed, damaged, or destroyed, any stakes, marks, fences, or signs intended to designate the boundaries and limits of any of those lands.

    (h) (1) Entering upon lands or buildings owned by any other person without the license of the owner or legal occupant, where signs forbidding trespass are displayed, and whereon cattle, goats, pigs, sheep, fowl, or any other animal is being raised, bred, fed, or held for the purpose of food for human consumption; or injuring, gathering, or carrying away any animal being housed on any of those lands, without the license of the owner or legal occupant; or damaging, destroying, or removing, or causing to be removed, damaged, or destroyed, any stakes, marks, fences, or signs intended to designate the boundaries and limits of any of those lands.

    (2) In order for there to be a violation of this subdivision, the trespass signs under paragraph (1) must be displayed at intervals not less than three per mile along all exterior boundaries and at all roads and trails entering the land.

    (3) This subdivision shall not be construed to preclude prosecution or punishment under any other provision of law, including, but not limited to, grand theft or any provision that provides for a greater penalty or longer term of imprisonment.

    (i) Willfully opening, tearing down, or otherwise destroying any fence on the enclosed land of another, or opening any gate, bar, or fence of another and willfully leaving it open without the written permission of the owner, or maliciously tearing down, mutilating, or destroying any sign, signboard, or other notice forbidding shooting on private property.

    (j) Building fires upon any lands owned by another where signs forbidding trespass are displayed at intervals not greater than one mile along the exterior boundaries and at all roads and trails entering the lands, without first having obtained written permission from the owner of the lands or the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession.

    (k) Entering any lands, whether unenclosed or enclosed by fence, for the purpose of injuring any property or property rights or with the intention of interfering with, obstructing, or injuring any lawful business or occupation carried on by the owner of the land, the owner’s agent, or by the person in lawful possession.

    (l) Entering any lands under cultivation or enclosed by fence, belonging to, or occupied by, another, or entering upon uncultivated or unenclosed lands where signs forbidding trespass are displayed at intervals not less than three to the mile along all exterior boundaries and at all roads and trails entering the lands without the written permission of the owner of the land, the owner’s agent, or of the person in lawful possession, and

    (1) Refusing or failing to leave the lands immediately upon being requested by the owner of the land, the owner’s agent or by the person in lawful possession to leave the lands, or

    (2) Tearing down, mutilating, or destroying any sign, signboard, or notice forbidding trespass or hunting on the lands, or

    (3) Removing, injuring, unlocking, or tampering with any lock on any gate on or leading into the lands, or

    (4) Discharging any firearm.

    (m) Entering and occupying real property or structures of any kind without the consent of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession.

    (n) Driving any vehicle, as defined in Section 670 of the Vehicle Code, upon real property belonging to, or lawfully occupied by, another and known not to be open to the general public, without the consent of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession. This subdivision shall not apply to any person described in Section 22350 of the Business and Professions Code who is making a lawful service of process, provided that upon exiting the vehicle, the person proceeds immediately to attempt the service of process, and leaves immediately upon completing the service of process or upon the request of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession.

    (o) Refusing or failing to leave land, real property, or structures belonging to or lawfully occupied by another and not open to the general public, upon being requested to leave by (1) a peace officer at the request of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession, and upon being informed by the peace officer that he or she is acting at the request of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession, or (2) the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession. The owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession shall make a separate request to the peace officer on each occasion when the peace officer’s assistance in dealing with a trespass is requested. However, a single request for a peace officer’s assistance may be made to cover a limited period of time not to exceed 30 days and identified by specific dates, during which there is a fire hazard or the owner, owner’s agent, or person in lawful possession is absent from the premises or property. In addition, a single request for a peace officer’s assistance may be made for a period not to exceed six months when the premises or property is closed to the public and posted as being closed. However, this subdivision shall not be applicable to persons engaged in lawful labor union activities which are permitted to be carried out on the property by the Alatorre-Zenovich-Dunlap-Berman Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975 (Part 3.5 (commencing with Section 1140) of Division 2 of the Labor Code) or by the National Labor Relations Act. For purposes of this section, land, real property, or structures owned or operated by any housing authority for tenants as defined under Section 34213.5 of the Health and Safety Code constitutes property not open to the general public; however, this subdivision shall not apply to persons on the premises who are engaging in activities protected by the California or United States Constitution, or to persons who are on the premises at the request of a resident or management and who are not loitering or otherwise suspected of violating or actually violating any law or ordinance.

    (p) Entering upon any lands declared closed to entry as provided in Section 4256 of the Public Resources Code, if the closed areas shall have been posted with notices declaring the closure, at intervals not greater than one mile along the exterior boundaries or along roads and trails passing through the lands.

    (q) Refusing or failing to leave a public building of a public agency during those hours of the day or night when the building is regularly closed to the public upon being requested to do so by a regularly employed guard, watchperson, or custodian of the public agency owning or maintaining the building or property, if the surrounding circumstances would indicate to a reasonable person that the person has no apparent lawful business to pursue.

    (r) Knowingly skiing in an area or on a ski trail which is closed to the public and which has signs posted indicating the closure.

    (s) Refusing or failing to leave a hotel or motel, where he or she has obtained accommodations and has refused to pay for those accommodations, upon request of the proprietor or manager, and the occupancy is exempt, pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 1940 of the Civil Code, from Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 1940) of Title 5 of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code. For purposes of this subdivision, occupancy at a hotel or motel for a continuous period of 30 days or less shall, in the absence of a written agreement to the contrary, or other written evidence of a periodic tenancy of indefinite duration, be exempt from Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 1940) of Title 5 of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code.

    (t) (1) Entering upon private property, including contiguous land, real property, or structures thereon belonging to the same owner, whether or not generally open to the public, after having been informed by a peace officer at the request of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession, and upon being informed by the peace officer that he or she is acting at the request of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession, that the property is not open to the particular person; or refusing or failing to leave the property upon being asked to leave the property in the manner provided in this subdivision.

    (2) This subdivision shall apply only to a person who has been convicted of a crime committed upon the particular private property.

    (3) A single notification or request to the person as set forth above shall be valid and enforceable under this subdivision unless and until rescinded by the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession of the property.

    (4) Where the person has been convicted of a violent felony, as described in subdivision (c) of Section 667.5, this subdivision shall apply without time limitation. Where the person has been convicted of any other felony, this subdivision shall apply for no more than five years from the date of conviction. Where the person has been convicted of a misdemeanor, this subdivision shall apply for no more than two years from the date of conviction. Where the person was convicted for an infraction pursuant to Section 490.1, this subdivision shall apply for no more than one year from the date of conviction. This subdivision shall not apply to convictions for any other infraction.

    (u) (1) Knowingly entering, by an unauthorized person, upon any airport operations area, passenger vessel terminal, or public transit facility if the area has been posted with notices restricting access to authorized personnel only and the postings occur not greater than every 150 feet along the exterior boundary, to the extent, in the case of a passenger vessel terminal, as defined in subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3), that the exterior boundary extends shoreside. To the extent that the exterior boundary of a passenger vessel terminal operations area extends waterside, this prohibition shall apply if notices have been posted in a manner consistent with the requirements for the shoreside exterior boundary, or in any other manner approved by the captain of the port.

    (2) Any person convicted of a violation of paragraph (1) shall be punished as follows:

    (A) By a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100).

    (B) By imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding six months, or by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, if the person refuses to leave the airport or passenger vessel terminal after being requested to leave by a peace officer or authorized personnel.

    (C) By imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding six months, or by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, for a second or subsequent offense.

    (3) As used in this subdivision the following definitions shall control:

    (A) “Airport operations area” means that part of the airport used by aircraft for landing, taking off, surface maneuvering, loading and unloading, refueling, parking, or maintenance, where aircraft support vehicles and facilities exist, and which is not for public use or public vehicular traffic.

    (B) “Passenger vessel terminal” means only that portion of a harbor or port facility, as described in Section 105.105(a)(2) of Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations, with a secured area that regularly serves scheduled commuter or passenger operations. For the purposes of this section, “passenger vessel terminal” does not include any area designated a public access area pursuant to Section 105.106 of Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

    (C) “Public transit facility” has the same meaning as specified in Section 171.7.

    (D) “Authorized personnel” means any person who has a valid airport identification card issued by the airport operator or has a valid airline identification card recognized by the airport operator, or any person not in possession of an airport or airline identification card who is being escorted for legitimate purposes by a person with an airport or airline identification card. “Authorized personnel” also means any person who has a valid port identification card issued by the harbor operator, or who has a valid company identification card issued by a commercial maritime enterprise recognized by the harbor operator, or any other person who is being escorted for legitimate purposes by a person with a valid port or qualifying company identification card. “Authorized personnel” also means any person who has a valid public transit employee identification.

    (E) “Airport” means any facility whose function is to support commercial aviation.

    (v) (1) Except as permitted by federal law, intentionally avoiding submission to the screening and inspection of one’s person and accessible property in accordance with the procedures being applied to control access when entering or reentering a sterile area of an airport, passenger vessel terminal, as defined in Section 171.5, or public transit facility, as defined in subdivision (u), if the sterile area is posted with a statement providing reasonable notice that prosecution may result from a trespass described in this subdivision, is a violation of this subdivision, punishable by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500) for the first offense. A second and subsequent violation is a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for a period of not more than one year, or by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.

    (2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if a first violation of this subdivision is responsible for the evacuation of an airport terminal, passenger vessel terminal, or public transit facility and is responsible in any part for delays or cancellations of scheduled flights or departures, it is punishable by imprisonment of not more than one year in a county jail.

    (w) Refusing or failing to leave a battered women’s shelter at any time after being requested to leave by a managing authority of the shelter.

    (1) A person who is convicted of violating this subdivision shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year.

    (2) The court may order a defendant who is convicted of violating this subdivision to make restitution to a battered woman in an amount equal to the relocation expenses of the battered woman and her children if those expenses are incurred as a result of trespass by the defendant at a battered women’s shelter.

    (x) (1) Knowingly entering or remaining in a neonatal unit, maternity ward, or birthing center located in a hospital or clinic without lawful business to pursue therein, if the area has been posted so as to give reasonable notice restricting access to those with lawful business to pursue therein and the surrounding circumstances would indicate to a reasonable person that he or she has no lawful business to pursue therein. Reasonable notice is that which would give actual notice to a reasonable person, and is posted, at a minimum, at each entrance into the area.

    (2) Any person convicted of a violation of paragraph (1) shall be punished as follows:

    (A) As an infraction, by a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100).

    (B) By imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, if the person refuses to leave the posted area after being requested to leave by a peace officer or other authorized person.

    (C) By imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars ($2,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, for a second or subsequent offense.

    (D) If probation is granted or the execution or imposition of sentencing is suspended for any person convicted under this subdivision, it shall be a condition of probation that the person participate in counseling, as designated by the court, unless the court finds good cause not to impose this requirement. The court shall require the person to pay for this counseling, if ordered, unless good cause not to pay is shown.

    (y) Except as permitted by federal law, intentionally avoiding submission to the screening and inspection of one’s person and accessible property in accordance with the procedures being applied to control access when entering or reentering a courthouse or a city, county, city and county, or state building if entrances to the courthouse or the city, county, city and county, or state building have been posted with a statement providing reasonable notice that prosecution may result from a trespass described in this subdivision.

    (Amended Sec. 207, Ch. 296, Stats. 2011. Effective January 1, 2012.)

  12. It seems to me that this issue needs a bit of a break-down, dividing the issues appropriately:

    1) The damage to habitat of endangered species.

    2) The annoyances of having off-road vehicles on or near one’s property.

    To the former, I’ll simply say remind that Extinct Is Forever, and that’s a lot longer than we’ll be riding anything.

    To the latter, I wonder on a regular basis why it is that there are not better mufflers installed on that kind of machine, so that everyone else doesn’t have to be bothered in a mile radius of that bike or ORV/OHV.

    Beyond that, it’s the simple matter of that people ride such machines because they want the freedom of not being bound to a road, a trail, a track, etc. They want to be trailblazing, per se. IMO, designating areas for that purpose would be functional, because they could then try to avoid endangered species, and because wildlife GENERALLY tends to avoid areas with a lot of commotion (at least when it comes to breeding grounds.)

    Good on the USMC for pitching in. Their efforts are appreciated!

    • desertrider desertrider says:

      SWriter,
      On issue one damage to habitat of endangered species? Who says they are endangered? Is their data correct? It is coming out more and more that data is being falsified on many environmental issues.
      On issue two, annoyances? having them on your property (assuming that you don’t want them there) would be an issue. Near your property?
      Extinct is forever, dinosaurs are extinct, nature is ever changing.
      I am in agreement with you however on the muffler issue, in fact stood up at an ORBA (Off Road Business Association) meeting I was attending and pointed out that fact to the manufactures, most manufacturers are now making quiet mufflers (that is mufflers that meet or exceed the state 96db. requirements which for some anti OHV people is not sufficient).
      In time as riders begin to understand, I think you will hear a difference.
      As far as your assertion of why people ride such machines I think you are way off its not about not being bound, most don’t want to be trailblazing.
      Existing dirt roads and trails are completely suitable for 99% of off-roaders.

  13. desertrider desertrider says:

    So Terry then tell me, what about the road that goes to your house or the land your house is on, did they not disrupt the land and I am sure some wildlife.
    Did the wildlife give up and die or did it do what life in general does? Adapt, move on.
    Nature is in and of itself random. Water does not always flow the same paths, rut or footprint not withstanding. Mostly it depends on the amount of water that falls from the clouds and if you have been around for even a little bit, you know that is also a random happening i.e sometimes a lot of water falls from the clouds and sometimes small amounts fall.
    Nature is very resilient and tough, it goes with the flow, it adapts, it is random, wildlife will follow a path regularly, however if that path is disrupted for whatever reason (sometimes even nature will disrupt nature) the wildlife adapts and forms another path.
    The theory that wildlife needs corridors is one of the biggest crocks of crap, I spent some time in a city in Arizona not to long ago, it was not rural by any definition, there was wildlife everywhere, at night the Coyotes roamed the neighborhoods in more numbers than I have seen or heard in the basin ever. Nature adapts, nature is not hanging on by a thread, humans are part of nature and we are not that powerful,nature is.
    You guys seem to think nature is in a perpetual state of sameness, it’s not it is ever changing or the “dinosaurs” would still be here.

Social Media Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
UA-9539515-1 e0a5d0bb00574423a5afb96d6b854248