I saw this sign while approaching a hiking trail.

Is this legal and enforceable?
I attached a pic of the sign I read and I thought this stuff was addressed and determined to be unconstitutional. Am I wrong on this? Anyone with info please post. FYI- This sign was located in what I thought was Flagler County (why the sign reads St. John's I don't understand) off of the entrance road to "Princess Place" along the right away for the FPL high lines.
Thanks all, have a great evening and a better tomorrow.

Beats me. The statutes covering this are pretty obtuse about their actual legal authority. I'm not sure this can circumvent state law concerning CCW permits unless it states that such areas are exempt.

Truth of the matter is, anyone can make up a sign to say anything they want, but that doesn't necessarily mean that anyone reading it has to obey what it says.

I don't think it applies to concealed carry with a permit. I would ignore the sign. Michigan has many laws prohibiting firearms on public lands during archery season but none of them apply to concealed carry.

Rich Z said:

Beats me. The statutes covering this are pretty obtuse about their actual legal authority. I'm not sure this can circumvent state law concerning CCW permits unless it states that such areas are exempt.

Truth of the matter is, anyone can make up a sign to say anything they want, but that doesn't necessarily mean that anyone reading it has to obey what it says.

Click to expand...

Bob K said:

I don't think it applies to concealed carry with a permit. I would ignore the sign. Michigan has many laws prohibiting firearms on public lands during archery season but none of them apply to concealed carry.

Click to expand...

I don't think I'd just ignore the sign.
That could be costly in a number of ways and may even cost you your CCP.
Ever seen what happens when FWC or DEP makes and arrest for violations of fish and game or DEP laws...it's ugly.

So, lets start here:
This section outlines the jurisdiction and authority under which the WMD's operate.
Each "district" governs several counties.

https://www.flrules.com/gateway/ChapterHome.asp?Chapter=40C-9

and here:

http://floridaswater.com/about/index.html

The groundwork for managing water resources was laid in the early 1970s when Florida’s voters and lawmakers recognized the importance of managing the state’s water resources in a way that would benefit everyone. Through passage of the Water Resources Act (Chapter 373, Florida Statutes), the water management districts were created in 1972 for this purpose. In northeast and east-central Florida, that responsibility falls to the St. Johns River Water Management District.

Click to expand...

Then we'll go here:
http://floridaswater.com/rules/pdfs/40C-9.pdf

These sections address the firearms limitations.

40C-9.250 Firearms and Similar Equipment. The possession or use of firearms or similar equipment is prohibited except (1) for hunting purposes; (2) as authorized by a Special Use Authorization; or (3) as authorized for District-initiated land management activities. Firearms and similar equipment includes shotguns, rifles, muzzle loading guns, pistols, revolvers, air guns, gas guns, blow guns, bows, crossbows, spear guns, or other devices capable of mechanically propelling an arrow, spear, or other projectile.
Specific Authority 373.044,

Click to expand...

40C-9.170 Hunting. Hunting is allowed only by permit on certain District Lands as indicated in the Land Management Plan for those District Lands. Hunting on District Lands is also regulated
10
by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
Specific Authority 373.044, 373.113, 373.1391 FS. Law Implemented 373.088, 373.093, 373.096, 373.099, 373.139, 373.1391, 373.1401, 373.199, 373.59 FS. History--New 1-16-94. Amended 5-11-94, 7-30-01.

Click to expand...

As you can see, both state and federal authorities have jurisdiction on managed lands.

And this is the enforcement body (State LEOS):

(4) "Department" means Florida Department of Environmental Protection.

Click to expand...

Yes, they're badge totin' gun wearin', I'll put you in jail type, certified LEOS.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...g=&URL=0300-0399/0379/Sections/0379.3312.html

Powers of arrest by agents of Department of Environmental Protection or Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

Click to expand...

I know there was something about CCW holders and restrictions in the news in the last couple of years, but I don't recall the details, and at 1am, I'm not inclined to look them up :lmao:
It may have only addresses sinage on public properties (ie: businesses and such), but I'm not sure.

A call to the number on the sign would be a good place to start.
See what thier position is, get thier references (authority), then go from there.:thumbsup:
Since these laws were enacted in 1994, there have probably been significant changes that effect them and the permit holders.

hth,

gb

The St. Johns water manigment dist seams to think they own all things in north and central Florida that might get wet.

fletcher4u said:

The St. Johns water manigment dist seams to think they own all things in north and central Florida that might get wet.

Click to expand...

Same with SWFWMD down here:nonod:

I'm hoping these are some of the agencies Scott pares back to basics.:thumbsup:

Sign - Conservation area

Please do not take this as a suggestion or advice on my part, and I'm not saying what my decision would be, but merely some thoughts to consider before entering any wildlife refuge / conservation area;

depending on where you are and how rustic an area may be there are alot of bad possibilities of encountering ...

snakes
bears
pigs..(check out pig hunts on you tube if you think they aren't a threat)
alligators
any rabid racoons, otters, dogs, etc, etc...the list goes on

You may be out of cellphone range!

Also let's not forget that...
Bad guys are not worrying about what a sign may read and they may be armed.
Good folks are sometimes attacked by these dangerous aholes for purposes of robbery, rape, or murder. :ack2:

Also to consider...Law Enforcement,
If you do encounter a LEO, this is still America! If you have a CCP and your weapon is CONCEALED, he or she will not be searching you without lawful probable cause! God Bless America :thumbsup:

Again, these are only a few considerations that must be thought about before venturing too far off the beaten path, sign or no sign.

So what do you do?
Leave your gun in the vehicle?
Carry your gun into the area?
Turn around and don't enter?

Your decision! :banghead:

C6Flatfoot said:

Please do not take this as a suggestion or advice on my part, and I'm not saying what my decision would be, but merely some thoughts to consider before entering any wildlife refuge / conservation area;

depending on where you are and how rustic an area may be there are alot of bad possibilities of encountering ...

snakes
bears
pigs..(check out pig hunts on you tube if you think they aren't a threat)
alligators
any rabid racoons, otters, dogs, etc, etc...the list goes on

You may be out of cellphone range!

Also let's not forget that...
Bad guys are not worrying about what a sign may read and they may be armed.
Good folks are sometimes attacked by these dangerous aholes for purposes of robbery, rape, or murder. :ack2:

Also to consider...Law Enforcement,
If you do encounter a LEO, this is still America! If you have a CCP and your weapon is CONCEALED, he or she will not be searching you without lawful probable cause! God Bless America :thumbsup:

Again, these are only a few considerations that must be thought about before venturing too far off the beaten path, sign or no sign.

So what do you do?
Leave your gun in the vehicle?
Carry your gun into the area?
Turn around and don't enter?

Your decision! :banghead:

Click to expand...

I'm happy to see that there's at least one more of us on the board that feels this way:thumbsup:

The wildllife issues (both 2 and 4 legged) are a real concern. If you've never hunted or been around wild boar (call 'em pigs if you wanna....porky was a pig! These mofo's will eat your arse alive!) you're in for an "interesting experience to say the least.

In "theory" you can't shoot a 'gator either.....right
Just don't do what some of these dumbarses have done in the past and keep "trophies!":lmao:

The 2 leged kind...well, again, he's right on target (no pun intended).
The Ocala National Forest is a prime example.
Over the years, they've had thier share of 2 legged troubles.

I'd still rather be tried by 12....blah blah blah.....:thumbsup:

The only thing I might take exception to, is the search.

While you're absolutely correct on the "search", as a leo if/when I encountered anyone in a remote area (campers, hikers, etc), I would as a rule do a "pat down" for my safety.

If you're packing, they're probably going to find it (unless it's packed away in the middle of your duffel bag or something. Then, it's pretty worthless to you as a means of self defense.

Once it's found, the next step is totally on the officer.

I know what I have done, and depending on the circumstances, would do.
All I can say is, there would be no necessity for paperwork
Get the wrong one though and you might have an issue

TOOOOOO many variables in this hypothetical encounter to argue about being patted down, and when an officer would do so, but we both know that any officer with some time on the job follows his or her training, legalities, and immediate circumstances, as well as his or her gut feelings about a pat down. I'm sure you didn't pat down anyone unless your hackles were raised and you felt a concern about your safety or contraband.

We could have a great chat and go on and on about it, but it was only meant as a consideration.

You may be correct because most LEOs who work in the wilderness or wildlife areas are usually on their own and far from a back up. This factor alone may make them more apt to pat down persons they encounter. I never worked in a position like that so I don't know how I would conduct myself. It would be interesting to get an opinion of a retired LEO that worked in this rural capacity.

Any outcome of the encounter would ultimately depend on the circumstances, and interactions of the LEO and the person(s) involved.

Good thread and food for thought.

Isn't a pat down a form of search that itself requires probable cause?

C6Flatfoot said:

TOOOOOO many variables in this hypothetical encounter to argue about being patted down, and when an officer would do so, but we both know that any officer with some time on the job follows his or her training, legalities, and immediate circumstances, as well as his or her gut feelings about a pat down. I'm sure you didn't pat down anyone unless your hackles were raised and you felt a concern about your safety or contraband.

We could have a great chat and go on and on about it, but it was only meant as a consideration.

You may be correct because most LEOs who work in the wilderness or wildlife areas are usually on their own and far from a back up. This factor alone may make them more apt to pat down persons they encounter. I never worked in a position like that so I don't know how I would conduct myself. It would be interesting to get an opinion of a retired LEO that worked in this rural capacity.

Any outcome of the encounter would ultimately depend on the circumstances, and interactions of the LEO and the person(s) involved.

Good thread and food for thought.

Click to expand...

Absolutely bro:thumbsup:
Way too many variable.
Was meant as something else to consider, not an arguement.
If it came across that way, my apologies.

You're pretty much dead on on the pat downs. Usually suspected something.

When I started and up until I went to Street crimes, Special Operations and Motors, I worked a lot of remote area.

Far east side of our county, and the most remote reaches both north and south.
They didn't call it "Fort Lonesome" for nothing

As a Deputy Sheriff, our closest backup was sometimes 30 minutes or more away...if there was one at all.

YOu had to rely on your instincts and training, and a good does of BS and luck didn't hurt either

Take care and stay safe:thumbsup:

If you ignore what the sign says, good luck...Remember that you are on their property...

I guess I've just never fully understood this concept of "private" state property. After all, who provides the money for the purchase and maintenance of such properties? So the bigety wigeties in state government can use OUR money to buy these private playgrounds for their own private use and tell us unwashed masses to keep our grubby paws out? Or make stipulations about how WE can utilize the land but they are exempt from those same regulations? I can understand if it's some high security records storage facility of some sort, but raw undeveloped land?

I guess the people that make the rules can make whatever rules they pretty damn well want to..... :shrug01:

als2052 said:

If you ignore what the sign says, good luck...Remember that you are on their property...

Click to expand...

Who's property?

Unless I'm in a place that specifically prohibits carry, like a bar, I'm packen. If I'm patted down or searched that's when the attorney takes over.

als2052 said:

If you ignore what the sign says, good luck...Remember that you are on their property...

Click to expand...

Yep!:thumbsup:

Rich Z said:

I guess I've just never fully understood this concept of "private" state property. After all, who provides the money for the purchase and maintenance of such properties? So the bigety wigeties in state government can use OUR money to buy these private playgrounds for their own private use and tell us unwashed masses to keep our grubby paws out? Or make stipulations about how WE can utilize the land but they are exempt from those same regulations? I can understand if it's some high security records storage facility of some sort, but raw undeveloped land?

I guess the people that make the rules can make whatever rules they pretty damn well want to..... :shrug01:

Click to expand...

You're over dramatizing it.
This is nothing new...

Bob K said:

Who's property?

Click to expand...

While it "may" be considered "public land", we've allowed our government to apppoint/elect a board to govern it.
As such, they make the rules for it's use.

As we've seen with Federal lands, the rules have changes for those licensed to carry:thumbsup:
If the state can't see fit to follow suit, then I'll just avoid thier land.

Chances are very good that this will never be an issue for those of us here.

Unless I'm in a place that specifically prohibits carry, like a bar, I'm packen. If I'm patted down or searched that's when the attorney takes over.

Click to expand...

And it's quite possible you may find yourself relieved of said license.
It just depends.

You can be patted down for just about any reason. Most of the time, we're going to say our safety and that of the citizen (so we know you're not going for a knife or other weapon later).
Probably BS, but it'll hold up in court

As for the attorney, there's still that whole, bookiing, mug shot, bail and bunking with bubba for the evening thing that you have to get past first.:lmao:

I'll pass

First thing I'm going to say is "what sign". Second thing I'm going to say is "illegal search". Just between us they are not going to deprive me my right to self defense. You know me and I am a law abiding citizen and also have the utmost respect for law enforcement but I'm carrying, screw the sign, end of story.

Rich Z said:

Isn't a pat down a form of search that itself requires probable cause?

Click to expand...

Not really.
They're not the same and do not require the same level of probable cause.
As a matter of fact, a pat down, doesn't require PC at all.

Rich Z said:

Beats me. The statutes covering this are pretty obtuse about their actual legal authority. I'm not sure this can circumvent state law concerning CCW permits unless it states that such areas are exempt.

Truth of the matter is, anyone can make up a sign to say anything they want, but that doesn't necessarily mean that anyone reading it has to obey what it says.

Click to expand...

Bob K said:

First thing I'm going to say is "what sign". Second thing I'm going to say is "illegal search". Just between us they are not going to deprive me my right to self defense. You know me and I am a law abiding citizen and also have the utmost respect for law enforcement but I'm carrying, screw the sign, end of story.

Click to expand...

I spent a little time on the phone today, with Mr. Steve Miller (what a cool name huh:thumbsup and a very nice lady named Karen, of the St. Johns WMD.

They indicated that another person (Mike) called and spoke with thier legal hounds yesterday. I assume it was our Mike, but I haven't seen a response on the board.
Mr. Miller forwarded a copy of the email response provided in reference to Mike's request (redacted).

We all wen't round and round for quite some time, and I found them to be very helpful, polite and patient when dealing with a citizens request.:thumbsup:

So, in response to the above two (2) quotes:

Mr BXXXXXXX

Below the email I referred to, about the case in which you are interested. Also attached is a copy of the current version of 40C-9.

Statute on rule development which we discussed:

In reference to Rich's concerns:373.1391(6)

The districts have the authority to adopt rules that specify: allowable activities on district-owned lands; the amount of fees, licenses, or other charges for users of district-owned lands; the application and reimbursement process for payments in lieu of taxes; the use of volunteers for management activities; and the processes related to entering into or severing cooperative land management agreements. Rules promulgated pursuant to the subsection shall become effective only after submitted to the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives for review by the Legislature not later than 30 days prior to the next regular session. In its review, the Legislature may reject, modify, or take no action relative to such rules. The districts shall conform such rules to changes made by the Legislature, or, if no action is taken, such rules shall become effective.

As to enforcement:

Here is reference to who can/shall enforce:
373.609
Enforcement; city and county officers to assist.
It shall be the duty of every state and county attorney, sheriff, police officer, and other appropriate city and county official, upon request, to assist the department, the governing board of any water management district, or any local board, or any of their agents in the enforcement of the provisions of this law and the rules and regulations adopted thereunder.
History.
—
And the coup d' grace:

Here is the statute defining the penalty
373.613
Penalties.
Any person who violates any provision of this law or any rule, regulation or order adopted or issued pursuant thereto is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

Click to expand...

In ufurther conversation with Mr. Miller, it seems they are and have been, keenly aware of the issue, and wanted it changed this year; however, our new Governor, Rick Scott, has places what essentially amounts to a freeze on new rule making for about a hear and a half to 2 years.

Considering all they have to do to amend the rules, public notice process, legislative sessions, the house.....blah blah blah, it'll be at least 1.5 years before this gets changed.

That said, they are aware of the rule, are being pro-active :thumbsup::hurray:, working to amend thier rules.

As for the property in question, I spoke with Karen about that particular piece of land.

It appears it borders the WMD land and that there is a public access road that runs between one property and the management area.
A long as you are on the road, you're golden!
Step off the road, and you're illegal.

One other point is, where in many cases, WMD and WMA (Wildlife Management Areas) overlap, WMA rules override WMD.
You really want to be careful there.

As for this and many other WMD only controlled properties, my "guess" would be, and it's nothing more than that, a guess, "if" you were caught on thier property doing nothing more than traversing it, had no other issues and were up front and professional with the security person or LEO, nothing would happen other than to tell you "you can't do that for now" and ask you to quietly leave the property.

But I wouldn't bet my license on it

BTW-For the record, they use off duty FWC officers (who better to patrol the "woods":thumbsup for property security and rule enforcement.

A little research goes a long way toward making a sound and reasonable decision.

Hope some of this helps.

GB

Bob K said:

First thing I'm going to say is "what sign". Second thing I'm going to say is "illegal search". Just between us they are not going to deprive me my right to self defense. You know me and I am a law abiding citizen and also have the utmost respect for law enforcement but I'm carrying, screw the sign, end of story.

Click to expand...

There's no illegal search.

Shadow said:

Not really.
They're not the same and do not require the same level of probable cause.
As a matter of fact, a pat down, doesn't require PC at all.






I spent a little time on the phone today, with Mr. Steve Miller (what a cool name huh:thumbsup and a very nice lady named Karen, of the St. Johns WMD.

They indicated that another person (Mike) called and spoke with thier legal hounds yesterday. I assume it was our Mike, but I haven't seen a response on the board.
Mr. Miller forwarded a copy of the email response provided in reference to Mike's request (redacted).

We all wen't round and round for quite some time, and I found them to be very helpful, polite and patient when dealing with a citizens request.:thumbsup:

So, in response to the above two (2) quotes:



In ufurther conversation with Mr. Miller, it seems they are and have been, keenly aware of the issue, and wanted it changed this year; however, our new Governor, Rick Scott, has places what essentially amounts to a freeze on new rule making for about a hear and a half to 2 years.

Considering all they have to do to amend the rules, public notice process, legislative sessions, the house.....blah blah blah, it'll be at least 1.5 years before this gets changed.

That said, they are aware of the rule, are being pro-active :thumbsup::hurray:, working to amend thier rules.

As for the property in question, I spoke with Karen about that particular piece of land.

It appears it borders the WMD land and that there is a public access road that runs between one property and the management area.
A long as you are on the road, you're golden!
Step off the road, and you're illegal.

One other point is, where in many cases, WMD and WMA (Wildlife Management Areas) overlap, WMA rules override WMD.
You really want to be careful there.

As for this and many other WMD only controlled properties, my "guess" would be, and it's nothing more than that, a guess, "if" you were caught on thier property doing nothing more than traversing it, had no other issues and were up front and professional with the security person or LEO, nothing would happen other than to tell you "you can't do that for now" and ask you to quietly leave the property.

But I wouldn't bet my license on it

BTW-For the record, they use off duty FWC officers (who better to patrol the "woods":thumbsup for property security and rule enforcement.

A little research goes a long way toward making a sound and reasonable decision.

Hope some of this helps.

GB

Click to expand...

Shadow said:

There's no illegal search.

Click to expand...

OK, just a couple of comments:

1. Thanks for all of the research. :thumbsup:

2. Didn't know it wasn't considered a "search".

3. I agree that everyone needs to be respectful.

4. I am going to carry regardless.

If "patting down" is not considered a search, then what is the PURPOSE of it? Just some friendly hands on contact between one consenting adult and the other not so consenting?

I know it is claimed that it is for the safety of the officer(s), but seriously when does the concern for officer safety trump constitutionally guaranteed protections for us citizens? Sounds to me that "UP" is simply being redefined as "DOWN" just to conveniently bypass our legal rights concerning searches and seizures.