It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


i was almost arrested for.........apples.

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 10:22 PM
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

once again, this area is not designated for anything.
it is just national forest.

the only restriction is that in new mexico you are not allowed to change the old aquaducts in any way.
i think i already mentioned this..

again, on the map this os nothing but normal national forest.

[edit on 24-8-2010 by rubbertramp]

posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 10:25 PM
apple, pear, cherry and berry smoothies.
a touch of real vanilla ice cream, and a dash of chocolate sauce.
man, it's a amazing what can be made with illegal fruit.

posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 10:31 PM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Were they your trees? Nope.
Was it your fruit? Nope.
Was it on your property? Nope.

As others have mentioned its theft. Theft is theft, no matter the value of the item, no matter if it was going to waste in your opinion. Its no different then you hopping the fence on a farmers land and starting to help yourself to his crops:

Capt. Scott Andress, of Miami-Dade's agriculture patrol unit, said organized thieves have been attacking Homestead crops at a steady pace for years. In an effort to protect their harvests, farmers now alert Andress when their crops are in season and officers patrol at night, when the produce is most vulnerable.
"Professional thieves will bring a crew out with them. They will drop these individuals off in the middle of the grove and they will drive out of the area," Andress said.
Heightened patrols have led to the arrests of about a dozen suspects, including one found in Rodriguez's crop last year. Since then, Rodriguez said he has been hit twice, and the thieves stole more than $10,000 in crops.

As a matter of fact we are having a problem with someone doing exactly the same thing on a piece of our families property. Someone has decided to help themselves to fruit from one of our trees, without permission. It started out small, maybe a bagful at a time gone, but now they will come out and pick the tree clean when people are away at work. We found it out that it was one of the neighbors using it to make jam. I guess that her jam got so popular that now she has to pick the entire tree to fill the requests for it. So she is basically trespassing, stealing, and making a profit off of something that is coming from our land and tree. You can bet your butt, that if I catch her out there doing it, she will be going to jail as well.

Whether you wish to accept what you did is a crime of not, it is.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 10:45 PM
reply to post by defcon5

this is what surprises me. you are comparing a daypack full of fruit to this?

Capt. Scott Andress, of Miami-Dade's agriculture patrol unit, said organized thieves have been attacking Homestead crops at a steady pace for years.

maybe i didn't explain well enough the the 'homestead' i'm talking about is abandoned, has been for a hundred years.
the homesteads spoken of in your article are occupied small farms.

the discussion in my point of view is whether fruit can be picked in a small quantity on national forest land.
no other designation, no historical site, no national park, not a state park.
not anything anybody has mentioned in the entire thread.
it is national forest land. the green on most maps.
not the yellow, blm
not the tan, indian land
not the dark green, wilderness areas and other designated parks.
not the white, private land.
am i missing any colors?

[edit on 24-8-2010 by rubbertramp]

posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 11:18 PM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by rubbertramp

Again, the amount that you stole makes no difference, you still stole anothers property. It really does not matter how it was marked on the map, because unless it said: ‘rubbertramp's property’, you stole something that did not belong to you. PERIOD…

You can try and justify it any way you want, but theft is still theft regardless of whether it was Petit Theft or Grand Larceny. If you cannot see that “only a day pack full of stolen fruit” is the same as “Only a truckload of stolen fruit” or even “only one fruit”, as all three are theft, then there is nothing anyone here can do to change your mind as you obviously have an askew moral sense of what theft is.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

[edit on 8/24/2010 by defcon5]

posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 11:23 PM
So did you go again or no?

posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 11:30 PM
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

That's not right is it? The OP did not kill anything nor did he squander any resources, in fact it should be said that he took no more than a single meals worth of fruit for himself.

I think you are forgetting something called survival of the fittest. Man is but another animal upon this planet, the "king" animal so to speak, but an animal none the less.

I'm reminded of a story, its called. "The Animal called Man"...

Man was walking through the forest one fine summer afternoon enjoying nature and all the wonderful things the planet Earth has to offer. Man just like any other animal on planet Earth has what are called instincts. Instincts are sub-conscience, very hard to control urges or 'feelings', like how a baby knows it is hungry and needs to eat. These instincts are the reason for this tale. As Man continued on his journey that afternoon he came across a patch of wild fruit trees.
"What a find!" exclaimed Man as he took in the splendid sight of apples, pears and many different kinds of berries. Then Man's instincts kicked in, without thinking Man was already reaching for the biggest juiciest apple on the tree, after all its not everyday you can come across unguarded ripe for the picking food. In the forest Man knows that everyday is a fight for survival, just as Man will eat the apple the black bear would hunt and kill Man. Such is nature. When Man had eaten his fill he knew what he had to do next.
"Good thing I have a trusty pouch sewn into my butt flap." Man thought to himself as he gathered a few more pieces of fruit for later...

I'm no writer so I'm just gonna stop here as I'm sure its both lame and painful to read, but I hope it helps get the point across...


Mod Note: Replace large quote with "Reply tag"

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 2010/8/25 by GradyPhilpott]

posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 11:38 PM
reply to post by rubbertramp

Whether it is posted or not, it is your responsibility to know the law. I'm sure its not posted that you cant go cutting down all the trees you want, in order to heat your home. But that would also be illegal and I would guess you wouldnt assume you could because its not posted.

Its not posted at every public water way that you need a license to fish and that you can only keep so many fish of a certain size, but again I would guess that you wouldnt assume that you could catch and keep all you wanted with no license or regard to the regulations.

While it may seem somewhat fascist for DNR or forest people to regulate these public goods. These rules are in place for a reason.

There are people who exploit natural resources and they aren't just giant corporations. People poach animals out of season, this can destroy populations. These rules are in place to ensure that these resources are maintained and available for future generations.

If it werent for hunting and gathering laws, you would see local populations of animals and plants completely destroyed. You many not be exploiting it as one individual but as asktheanimals noted, if 100 more people did the same thing, there wouldnt be any fruit for the local animals.

The local animals, eat the fruit and defecate the seeds so more fruit trees can grow. Its part of the cycle.

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 12:01 AM
Please delete

[edit on 2010/8/25 by GradyPhilpott]

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 12:24 AM
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

I read about the old homestead and agree that there may be special rules for that area although I'm unsure why you're making reference to rocks. Is there anything in particular I should be looking at in the link you provided?

I'm aware the OP didn't get arrested for taking apples; he didn't get arrested period. I've followed this thread from the beginning and I've decided different than you his character and intent. I didn't interpret him as being a smart ass but rather surprised of the questions and was acting in a jovial manner and was compliant to their request. They apparently did let him keep the apples as he stated he was eating one while typing a post a few pages back. That in itself is questionable as one usually isn't allowed to leave with items that are deemed illegal.

Unless you're referring to the same area with the same ranger and sheriffs, the blanket statement of them being fair and honest is useless as stereotyping works both ways. He certainly could be portraying himself in a different light than what actually happened but, like stated, I've determined his character by what he wrote and how he responded to others. I absolutely can be wrong but until I see otherwise I'm sticking to my assumptions. It's noteworthy to state that I often side with cops during these stories because I don't often agree with the way people act or their attitude. I entered this thread with the same thought but was persuaded otherwise.

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 12:54 AM
reply to post by Three_moons

No, I mention rocks because you posted this;

Cibola National Forest FAQs

With the exception of lands administered by the National Park Service, invertebrate fossils, rocks, plants, fruits and berries may be collected for personal use on most public lands. For specific rules, consult the appropriate agency.

And rocks are specifically mentions as something you can collect for personal use on most public lands, but which common sense tell you would not be appropriate on historic sites.

I am not judging his character in general. I dont know enough about him to do that. I am judging his own report of his behavior. Not everyone is raised to behave the same around their elders/other authority figures. So I am not surprised that you and I may have a different take on whether or not he was being "jovial" or a "smart ass." In my upbringing, when you are told by an elder/authority that you are doing something wrong, you listen, learn, and move on. You dont start asking, "where is it posted that I cant do this" and act so "jovial" you end up in handcuffs.

I didnt say they were "fair and honest" I said I have spent a lot of time in the wilderness in NM, and the rangers are not in general a bunch of thugs running around harassing people. That statement was in part motivated by a comment by the OP about his appearance and braided hair possibly having something to do with his treatment. In some states? Maybe having long braided hair would get you in trouble with the law. In NM? Tons of hikers and outdoors people match that description, it is highly unlikely he was singled out for his appearance.

We see his attitude differently. I see someone gloating about eating "illegal fruit" and how sweet it is. I see someone who when told not to do something was laughing and asking "Where does it say that?" "Is it better to let good fruit go to waste?" Etc. Instead of just saying, "sorry, I didnt know, I wont do it next time." I see someone who also said he would take packloads out for other people if he could. I am seeing someone pretty defiant. And my guess is, the officers did too, and thats why he ended up getting cuffed for a while.

A lot of it may be upbringing. Different people from different regions think differently about what is appropriate behavior. Differently from you, I normally would NOT support the police for slapping the cuffs on someone for taking fruit. But the feel I get from his posts is that it has more to do with him and his behavior than the ranger/sheriffs and the apples. We can just agree to disagree on whether it was his behavior or if the sheriffs/ranger were just foaming at the mouth to cuff and release an apple thief.

Mod Edit: Removed several quotes from the post immediately above this post. Replaced with a "Reply to" tag.

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

Examples of what would cause a warning for an excessive quote are:

Quote the post immediately before yours: This makes no sense, and quoting the entire previous post above yours will result in a slight warning.

[edit on 2010/8/25 by GradyPhilpott]

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 01:17 AM
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

You really are scared of "the man" aren't you? Let me guess, you work in some sort of government/law enforcement role don't you? Forests are public land, meaning land held in trust for the public aka the people. There is a hierarchy you know... It is as follows;

The People => Government => Citizens

I'm pretty sure I can see where you fit in there. I, myself just so we are clear am a holder of the officer of 'the people' and I really couldn't give two licks about what *my* corrupt piece of scat SLAVE government has to say about some apples growing on land that belongs to me in the first place.

Learn your place, slave.


posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 02:11 AM
People happen to be animals too - lol - and people are actually a natural creature. Amazing, huh?

I have never understood why we plant Bradford pears along our roadways and other sterile fruit.

We could plant fruit, figs and nut trees instead.

People would NOT fight over them. Just do it quietly, and whoever benefits, benefits.

Around here, I see a lot of poke growing in empty lots and on roadsides. Sometimes I see someone walking with a bag picking it.

I haven't seen ANYONE fighting yet. There's nut trees in the park, and I've seen people and animals gathering a few nuts here and there. Haven't seen any skinny squirrels and no one is fighting.

Johnny Appleseed is supposedly one of our heroes, but we do him a great disservice these days.

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 03:30 AM
reply to post by rubbertramp

This strain of wolves is very aggressive and very large they are from Canada. You can believe what you want the reality is there are hundreds of accounts of thier aggressiveness there is no sensationalism here we have been living with it now for several years.

It has gotten so bad the state legislature wants the governor to declare a state of emergency concerning the wolves. Here is a PDF to the legislation:

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 09:25 AM
reply to post by defcon5

Again, the amount that you stole makes no difference, you still stole anothers property.

actually you are wrong. i didn't steal anything. there are a few here that understand. there has been a link and the info concerned posted.
this is the catch, public lands. this is supposed to mean the land of the citizens of the united states.
personally, i don't steal from anybody, i do not trespass, etc.
i will live off the land when enjoying extended pack trips etc.
so, now that many here are actually clued into the law, do i deserve an apology for being accused as a thief?

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 09:32 AM
reply to post by LooseLipsSinkShips

so, yesterday i walk into the forest service office, with the pack i used for collecting. i walk up to the counter, a nice woman is sitting there.
i hold up the pack, 'mam, i'm wondering if i'm allowed to pick fruit at the old homestead up trail # *&. she wasn't sure where this was, so i showed her on the map. she looks at the map, then, me, and say,' as long as it's a bit for personal use, yes.'
she explained problems with people trashing areas etc..
i asked if they had any printouts containing the info, and she put together a pamphlet along with some other papers that explain briefly along with directions etc....
i am now armed with the info i was searching for and will be heading back up there in the morning.
i didn't mention the ranger and sheriff, figure that's between them and me.
in other words, they didn't confiscate my fruit because i was not in the wrong.

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 09:38 AM
For a country that was built with a new frontiers and pioneer attitude, US land laws are ridiculously strict. Land of the free my butt.

In the supposedly socialistic government-controlled hellhole called Finland that I live in, the laws are quite a bit more reasonable. Not counting the couple of strict nature reserves, you're allowed to travel, camp and pick berries, mushrooms and such in any land you like, be that public or private. As long as you clean up afterwards, don't destroy anything, stay clear of houses, gardens and farm fields, close any gates you travel through and in case of private land, don't light any open fires without land owner's permission. (link)

At least the other nordic countries and some others have similiar laws.

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 09:40 AM
reply to post by defcon5

Actually technically it is his property, it's yours too. It's in fact every American's property.

He didn't really do anything wrong, maybe just a little by trying to take it out, and that is in itself a gray area and I would have to say the cops were probably stopping him checking if he was a pot grower.

It's like when I used to go into the National Forest, and collect antler, nothing wrong with it at all, as long as I wasn't doing it in the National Park it was copacetic.

I don't think that he has done anything wrong at all. It's not like he is clear cutting the forest, strip mining or anything.

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 09:41 AM
reply to post by hawkiye

This strain of wolves is very aggressive and very large they are from Canada.

this is intense. i spent 10 years on and off living in a cabin in the middle of the montana woods. grizz and wolves, only problem being the bears would tear stuff up at times.
the wolves pretty much just ignored humans.
honest question, are you beginning to believe that the wolves have been getting more aggressive as time goes by, or do you think the behavoir you explain is normal for them?

[edit on 25-8-2010 by rubbertramp]

posted on Aug, 25 2010 @ 09:45 AM
reply to post by MacAnkka

actually, according to the law, finland and the states are very similar.
ignore most of what is on this thread if that is what you are judging by.
in finland, do you need a permit to cut firewood, like here?

edit to add, there is no permit needed to collect firewood to burn in a firepit while camping.
it is not considered theft.

[edit on 25-8-2010 by rubbertramp]

[edit on 25-8-2010 by rubbertramp]

new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in