Camping Outside Designated Sites in Wilderness Area [RESOLVED]

[WBouldin]

In a bit of dilemma as I plan out this years trip. The wilderness area in question is an area I have backpacked in a couple times but not during hunting season and I have always stayed in the designed camp sites they have marked out. The permit (and the association that issues them) requires you stay in the designated areas and stay on all trails.

Internet research and calls to a game warden in the area say during hunting season you can do whatever you want. Armed with that, I contacted the Association and they maintain their position and stated a hunting tag doesn't change the rules. Its CA so I am assuming the Association is being Anti but wondering if anyone has run into similar situations elsewhere.

I'm willing to deal with this mess as the warden stated their are some nice animals in these parts as they are not easy to get to and he believes most are dissuaded by the rules (or appearance of them).

 

[npaden]

Do you have to still get a permit to use the area if you have a hunting license?

The rules in some states (New Mexico is one) apply differently if you have a hunting license vs. if you don't have a hunting license. i.e. you can't go on state leased lands unless you have a hunting license and then it is only for the licensee and one other individual.

My initial thought is that if you still have to get a permit you are probably stuck following the rules of the permit. If you don't have to get a permit because you have a hunting license I would think the rules relating to the permit wouldn't apply since you aren't even required to get one.

 

[WBouldin]

Do you have to still get a permit to use the area if you have a hunting license?

The rules in some states (New Mexico is one) apply differently if you have a hunting license vs. if you don't have a hunting license. i.e. you can't go on state leased lands unless you have a hunting license and then it is only for the licensee and one other individual.

My initial thought is that if you still have to get a permit you are probably stuck following the rules of the permit. If you don't have to get a permit because you have a hunting license I would think the rules relating to the permit wouldn't apply since you aren't even required to get one.

I should have clarified - this is sort of the point of contention. Wardens says the license is the permit, Association says its not and you still need one (and to follow its rules).

Would make since if you don't need the permit that you wouldn't have to follow the rules. They use the permits to make sure your reserved camp site will be available so If you weren't camping at a site that could be reserved (dispersed) then it wouldn't really matter.

 

[TOGIE]

what is this "association" you speak of? is this federal land? is it federally designated wilderness?

i'm confused.

 

[kwyeewyk]

Have you contacted the agency that manages the wilderness (presumably Forest Service)?

 

[Dsnow9]

What regulating/law enforcement body would cite you if you didn’t have a permit from the association. Contact them as well and see what they say

 

[Dave N]

Guess a lot would depend on who would issue the ticket. I might be persuaded to listen to the warden during hunting season.

 

[Straight Arrow]

If it is a designated Wilderness Area, as established as a result of the 1964 Wilderness Act, then the federal agency (typically USFS) has authority over camping and has different rules for different areas. The state game warden has absolutely no authority regarding camping, only state hunting regulations.

I advise doing some homework and determining the rules for this wilderness area.

 

[Straight Arrow]

I contacted the Association

"Association" seems a strange / inappropriate term to describe the agency setting rules for a designated Wilderness Area.
Just exactly what agency by name did you contact? It also seems strange to assume the agency with authority over Wilderness would be "anti".

 

[Dsnow9]

"Association" seems a strange / inappropriate term to describe the agency setting rules for a designated Wilderness Area.
Just exactly what agency by name did you contact? It also seems strange to assume the agency with authority over Wilderness would be "anti".

It is California…

 

[Beignet]

I did some quick Google FU and it looks like (at least) one of the National Forest districts has outsourced access permits for a specific federal wilderness area to a non-profit association.

I appreciate groups that protect, preserve, and maintain wilderness areas and all that, but the thought of them controlling permit access to public lands chaps my arse. Especially when the USFS themselves issues permits for a neighboring wilderness area in the same district.

I'd call the USFS office in question for clarification about your hunting permit giving you the ability to roam freely. I think most of us on here are not going to be familiar with the odd nuances of that one specific wilderness area in California. Also ask them why in the h-e-double-hockey-stick does a non-profit control permits for use. Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[Moserkr]

If the access is controlled and heavily patrolled, Id look for another way in. But the permits are to keep the limited campsites and trails uncrowded. If you are not using the trails or campsites, the permit doesnt even apply to you. You are outside the quota at that point, and those types of people who stay on the trails are sheep. The non-profit can only report you, they have no judicial rights of LE.

I hunt multiple different CA wilderness areas. Staying on the trail and camping in designated spots is for granola eaters. Grow a pair and go hunt is my advice. They should be more concerned with the mtn bikers in the wilderness I run into every year, not someone practicing LNT principles. If you hunt the wilderness correctly, no one will ever see your camp or you until you are on a trail heading in/out. Even our relatively little wilderness areas are vast enough to disappear.

Reminds me that I have an ex that got mad at me for leaving a "designated" trail and bushwhacking through some plants. Keyword ex.

 

[WBouldin]

All good thoughts here. It’s designated wilderness and the permit only applies to those parts on Forest Service. The pieces on BLM do not fall under the permit rules. The PCT runs through it and that trumps the permit as well. You need a permit for PCT if hiking more than 500 miles i think but section hikers don’t need one and therefore this language would seem to indicate using it for some other designated use (national trail, hunting, etc.) would trump the rules. Calls to the forest service in question go unreturned and many numbers are dead (Verizon wireless cannot be completed as dialed issue). I’ll let you all know whatever else I am able to find out.

All things indicate that my intended use wouldn’t impact permit people so it really shouldn’t matter. Just would feel better hearing from them and having a name/agency I could cite if there was ever an issue.

 

[WBouldin]

“It also seems strange to assume the agency with authority over Wilderness would be "anti".

One association “representative”s response was “yes you need a permit for that. It would be best if you left the animals alone though - people enjoy seeing them”

One person, I know but just a data point.

 

[Dougfirtree]

I'm generally a follow-the-rules kinda guy, but this is sounding more and more like one of those situations where you're never going to get the "permission" you're seeking because the company who is managing permits is not going to tell that it's ok. I suspect the warden is correct and you should just do your thing (responsibly).

 

[TOGIE]

if i'm reading between all the lines here correctly it is my assumption that the warden and association are both entirely irrelevant in this question and issue.

the laws and rules of the specific wilderness area as provided by the federal government and enforced by its local ranger district are the only thing that matter.

so, what are the laws and rules regarding use, access, permits, and dispersed camping promulgated by the federal government for this specific wilderness area?

 

[WBouldin]

if i'm reading between all the lines here correctly it is my assumption that the warden and association are both entirely irrelevant in this question and issue.

the laws and rules of the specific wilderness area as provided by the federal government and enforced by its local ranger district are the only thing that matter.

so, what are the laws and rules regarding use, access, permits, and dispersed camping promulgated by the federal government for this specific wilderness area?

Everything on the FS website defers to the association for rules/regulations in regards to activities in the wilderness. Hoping once someone from the USFS contacts me back that I will get clarity as they should be the ultimate authority.

The issue is the only two parties I can get in contact with (that should know) have opposite takes.

 

[huntnpack]

You can’t hunt by staying on the trail. Any hunting at all would seem to defy this associations rules. I’d be doing the same. Looking for some sort of confirmation/reinforcement for hunting there, but if I didn’t get it, it probably wouldn’t stop me after talking to the warden.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

All good thoughts here. It’s designated wilderness and the permit only applies to those parts on Forest Service. The pieces on BLM do not fall under the permit rules. The PCT runs through it and that trumps the permit as well. You need a permit for PCT if hiking more than 500 miles i think but section hikers don’t need one and therefore this language would seem to indicate using it for some other designated use (national trail, hunting, etc.) would trump the rules. Calls to the forest service in question go unreturned and many numbers are dead (Verizon wireless cannot be completed as dialed issue). I’ll let you all know whatever else I am able to find out.

All things indicate that my intended use wouldn’t impact permit people so it really shouldn’t matter. Just would feel better hearing from them and having a name/agency I could cite if there was ever an issue.

No experience in CA but I hunted two different areas in MA that required federal access permits in addition to your hunting license.

Both had rules that trumped state wildlife rules, only hunt on specific days, can't be on property after such and such hour, you have to take your deer to a check station before you can shoot another even though state reg is 2 for that zone, etc etc.

Permit application was through this agency and not the state.

I'd see if you can see how hunting is handled in the Forest/Wilderness management plan.

Both the areas I hunt in MA had "Stay on trail policies" but these only apply to non-consumptive users, but you could not camp in these areas either way.

If I was in your shoes and couldn't get more info I'd follow the rules for camping but not worry about trails. Also see if you can find rules for "dispersed camping, off PCT".

 

[RevJim]

Whether they "allow" you to camp IN a designated or OUT, there is benefit in talking with the Game Warden. He can give you "up to date " info on "bear activity", "flood warning", etc.