It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: RogueWave
I read the legislation and to me it isn't completely clear if they are talking about public land, or not, although it is implied.
" Open land " means land outside the exterior boundaries of any incorporated city, town , subdivision
(a) A person is guilty of trespassing to unlawfully collect resource data if he:
(i) Enters onto open land for the purpose of collecting resource data; and
(ii) Does not have:
(A) An ownership interest in the real property or, statutory, contractual or other legal authorization to enter or access the land to collect resource data ; or
(a) A person is guilty of trespassing to unlawfully collect resource data if he:
nor do they explain if "open land" when not private, is considered public land.
originally posted by: RogueWave
a reply to: interupt42
I'm not an American, I am just wondering if they stayed clear from the term "public land" on purpose.
I don't believe leaving out private property from the definition was a mistake on their part , but rather done on purpose.
If a farmers land that is contaminated sits right next to a public park then its possible to take samples from the public park and find contaminated samples.
This would lead to opening an investigation on why the public park is contaminated which then would lead to the farmers land which sits right next door. So They purposely defined open land as they did to prevent such an event and to cover public land as well.
Like I said in my initial post , yes they did leave it vague enough on purpose.
I don't believe leaving out private property from the definition was a mistake on their part , but rather done on purpose.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: CallYourBluff
This is about farmers/ranchers using and grazing on public land and the gov preventing anyone from documenting possible harmful effects of it. So the gov is defending the people to stay and use the land.
How is that spot on to what David is saying?