State governor oversight in National Forest?

TradAg02

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Nov 28, 2017
Messages
135
With many politicians extending their reach beyond their elected powers, it has me questioning a state governor's ability to impose restrictions on the use of national forests within their states.

As an example, the Montana governor is imposing a 14 day quarantine on all non-residents. In simple terms it states that any nonresident must quarantine for 14 days prior to engaging in outdoor recreation. I believe that it is broadly being interpreted as any outdoor recreation within the state. While I have no problem accepting the governor's ability to apply restrictions to state land or within the state's municipalities I am unclear as to how a state governor may extend his power to federal land?

I am not well versed in politics, but have recently seen several instances where locally elected officials have been called out for overstepping their authority and am wondering if this isn't another such instance?

Please keep any comments constructive. I respect each governor's desire to protect their citizens, but like to see them to do so within the parameters provided by their elected position.
 

USMC-40

WKR
Joined
Nov 22, 2016
Messages
545
Location
NW Missouri
I think there are many examples of gov't overreach during this, but, I do think the governor has the ability to limit or mandate certain things on people entering his state. So in theory you would have to enter Montana to access the federal land within the state, so therefore the Governor of MT could impose restrictions that are not necessarily applied to the federal land. Make sense?

On a separate but related note we really need to watch our civil liberties being infringed on. Im not using this case as an example, but more of a general thought. I have heard that in California the PD's and SO's are using warrantless entries to separate known COVID-19 patients, regardless of age.
 
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
957
Location
NEW JERSEY
With many politicians extending their reach beyond their elected powers, it has me questioning a state governor's ability to impose restrictions on the use of national forests within their states.

As an example, the Montana governor is imposing a 14 day quarantine on all non-residents. In simple terms it states that any nonresident must quarantine for 14 days prior to engaging in outdoor recreation. I believe that it is broadly being interpreted as any outdoor recreation within the state. While I have no problem accepting the governor's ability to apply restrictions to state land or within the state's municipalities I am unclear as to how a state governor may extend his power to federal land?

I am not well versed in politics, but have recently seen several instances where locally elected officials have been called out for overstepping their authority and am wondering if this isn't another such instance?

Please keep any comments constructive. I respect each governor's desire to protect their citizens, but like to see them to do so within the parameters provided by their elected position.

A governor has no power on Federal Land. Case in point I live in NJ and our Governor has banned bear hunting. He only had the power to do so on state owned land. Private and Federal lands we can still hunt.

That being said I live next to the Gateway National Recreation area and the Federal Government closed it on the same day our Governor issued the stay at home order and opened it back up this past Friday. So they may mirror the National Forests like they did the recreation areas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
OP
TradAg02

TradAg02

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Nov 28, 2017
Messages
135
I think there are many examples of gov't overreach during this, but, I do think the governor has the ability to limit or mandate certain things on people entering his state. So in theory you would have to enter Montana to access the federal land within the state, so therefore the Governor of MT could impose restrictions that are not necessarily applied to the federal land. Make sense?

In the above example, Montana allows individuals to travel through the state so that argument wouldn't hold.

Locally we have had several instances where the state attorney general has had to step in when county and city officials overstepped their reach. In my simple mind, having a governor dictate what occurs on federal land is no different than a city mayor dictate what occurs in a state park.
 
OP
TradAg02

TradAg02

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Nov 28, 2017
Messages
135
A governor has no power on Federal Land. Case in point I live in NJ and our Governor has banned bear hunting. He only had the power to do so on state owned land. Private and Federal lands we can still hunt.

That aligns with my thinking, but again, I don't have much legal or political experience. I wonder why no one has challenged this in Montana or how one would even go about challenging it?
 

CorbLand

WKR
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
6,556
A governor has no power on Federal Land. Case in point I live in NJ and our Governor has banned bear hunting. He only had the power to do so on state owned land. Private and Federal lands we can still hunt.

That being said I live next to the Gateway National Recreation area and the Federal Government closed it on the same day our Governor issued the stay at home order and opened it back up this past Friday. So they may mirror the National Forests like they did the recreation areas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He could ban bear hunting on Federal Land as States manage wildlife, doesnt matter what ground its on.
 
OP
TradAg02

TradAg02

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Nov 28, 2017
Messages
135
He could ban bear hunting on Federal Land as states manage wildlife, doesnt matter what ground its on.

While I understand and agree with this statement. For the sake of this thread, I'd like to leave bear season out of this as much as possible. In the Montana example the restriction indicates "outdoor recreation."

I'm really just questioning whether or not a governor in the example above overstepped.
 

CorbLand

WKR
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
6,556
While I understand and agree with this statement. For the sake of this thread, I'd like to leave bear season out of this as much as possible. In the Montana example the restriction indicates "outdoor recreation."

I'm really just questioning whether or not a governor in the example above overstepped.
I was just stating that a Governor does have authority of a right designated to a State. This is kind of the same situation. A State can limit what you do in their State, thus a Governor would have the right to limit you coming there and hunting or what ever you want to do, if the State has the right to manage it.

Think of it this way. You have the right to travel where ever you want in the US but you have to abide by the rules of the State you are in. Even though the land is Federal, it is still housed within the State.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
957
Location
NEW JERSEY
[/QUOTE]
He could ban bear hunting on Federal Land as States manage wildlife, doesnt matter what ground its on.

At least in our state he said that he didn't have the power to overturn the NJ Division of Fish and Game rules on anything other than state owned land. It may be different in other states. I don't know.
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
1,889
Location
Colorado
County Sheriff's can implement restrictions over Federal Land within their respective Counties for Emergencies and public safety right? A Governor can't do the same? I'm legitimately curious because I just assumed that was the case.

Obviously nobody is enforcing these restrictions very strictly regardless. I am seeing a ton of out of state trucks here in Colorado and these people are still camping, fishing, and hunting. Colorado BHA just posted some pictures of a couple dudes that came from Mississippi to Turkey hunt in the San Juans, but I'm not supposed to travel more than 10 miles from home? Lol.
 
OP
TradAg02

TradAg02

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Nov 28, 2017
Messages
135
County Sheriff's can implement restrictions over Federal Land within their respective Counties for Emergencies and public safety right? A Governor can't do the same? I'm legitimately curious because I just assumed that was the case.

Obviously nobody is enforcing these restrictions very strictly regardless.

While I wouldn't want to test a sheriff's abitly to enforce a law on federal land, if that law is ultimately deemed as an overstep by the governor, I'd assume any penalties would have to be dropped.

I assume that law enforcement is busy enough with real criminals, that enforcement of a stay at home or quarantine order isn't a high priority.

Still looking for someone with actual knowledge on the subject. I didn't have much luck with google.
 

bobr1

WKR
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
363
Eh.....I really don't like talking politics but I'll put in my two cents. Look, the reality is Montana has a very sparse population and very limited infrastructure, including hospitals and medical staff (even lower now as most hospitals have had to furlough hundreds of medical staff). During tourist season the amount of people that visit GNP or YNP are many times more than the state population. The shut down has put a strain on the local economy but people here understand that they would rather lose money or business than a family member. I live here and had no problem with them shutting down stuff because it really didn't effect me as I tend to be mostly outdoors solo. I mean can you really tell me you could come through the state and get to national forest land and then stay there for 14 days without stopping for food, supplies, and gas on your way in or during your 14 day period? There's a reason we only have like 460 cases right now instead of 350,000 in New York. We have a lot less people and locals are taking it fairly serious. One of the reasons they closed GNP is they were having out of state camper vans camping illegally in the park from places like CA, NY and NJ. Bullock was elected to protect his people and his state, so he is doing what he thinks is best for the people, not non residents who's hunting or vacation plans got hampered. I had vacation plans cancelled too but it is what it is, life goes on. I can guarantee that the second wave here is going to be much worse when they start opening up the parks and hotels and it's going to be from non residents.
This might not answer you directly but that is why it was done, and I would say the Governor has the legal and rightful authority to manage the states lands that encompass National Forest especially during a state of emergency.

End rant.
 

5MilesBack

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
15,527
Location
Colorado Springs
I assume that law enforcement is busy enough with real criminals, that enforcement of a stay at home or quarantine order isn't a high priority.

I wouldn't assume that at all. Just look at the woman in TX that got thrown in jail for opening her salon. They had already released several real criminals from that jail because of the virus, but they throw a mom who's a business owner into the same jail. THAT's the world we're living in these days. Ya, sure, we all have the right, freedom, and liberty from government over-reach afforded to us by the foundation of this nation........but until you go through the entire process of fighting those over-reaches........they're still there because there's no penalty to stop them. Just look at Flynn and the millions of dollars he's spent on his defense, and his rights were absolutely trampled. In the end, we still lose even if we win......and they know that. Because even if the government loses on a legislative decision, they still don't lose anything.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
952
Location
Colorado
The TX lady got exactly what she deserved.
She violated the law, got served with a cease and desist letter, and tore it up.
So, she was arrested for contempt and was fined 7k and spent a week in jail.
Good.

Maybe if folks showed up like those armed militia fools in Lansing, things would really get heated lol!
 

wytx

WKR
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
2,057
Location
Wyoming
Pretty sure when the President declared a national emergency, public health, lots of things changed as far as our rights.
 

jmez

WKR
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
7,403
Location
Piedmont, SD
How ironic. I could drive to MT park in a remote area, and spend a couple weeks in the woods by myself. The best chance I would have of coming into contact with any MT residents and spreading the dreaded Covid, would be those that sought me out to cite me for ignoring a quarantine. Can't make that shit up.
 

three5x5s

WKR
Joined
May 21, 2013
Messages
1,114
Location
Central Ky.
The TX lady got exactly what she deserved.
She violated the law, got served with a cease and desist letter, and tore it up.
So, she was arrested for contempt and was fined 7k and spent a week in jail.
Good.

Maybe if folks showed up like those armed militia fools in Lansing, things would really get heated lol!

Instead of opening her salon, Maybe she and her employees should have just stolen $749.00 everyday from Mr. Creuzot. No jail time for that.

Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot announced policy reforms last month that he said would be “a step forward” in ending mass incarceration in Dallas. His plans include decreasing the use of excessively high bail amounts and no longer prosecuting most first-time marijuana offenses.

But part of his plan included a decision not to prosecute thefts of personal items under $750 that are stolen out of necessity. Immediately, Creuzot came under fire from state officials and police leaders who said the policy was irresponsible and would encourage criminal activity.
 

jmez

WKR
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
7,403
Location
Piedmont, SD
The TX lady got exactly what she deserved.
She violated the law, got served with a cease and desist letter, and tore it up.
So, she was arrested for contempt and was fined 7k and spent a week in jail.
Good.

Maybe if folks showed up like those armed militia fools in Lansing, things would really get heated lol!


Can't say she got what she deserved if others that violated the law were released from jail.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
952
Location
Colorado
Instead of opening her salon, Maybe she and her employees should have just stolen $749.00 everyday from Mr. Creuzot. No jail time for that.

Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot announced policy reforms last month that he said would be “a step forward” in ending mass incarceration in Dallas. His plans include decreasing the use of excessively high bail amounts and no longer prosecuting most first-time marijuana offenses.

But part of his plan included a decision not to prosecute thefts of personal items under $750 that are stolen out of necessity. Immediately, Creuzot came under fire from state officials and police leaders who said the policy was irresponsible and would encourage criminal activity.


Would have been cheaper than getting a 7k fine.
 
Top