|
Boundary Waters Quetico Forum :: Listening Point - General Discussion :: What constitutes
|
| Author | Message Text | ||
| cowdoc |
|
||
| riverrunner |
That is my standard answer. I haven't ran into the problem in the BWCA but I been asked for my wilderness permit out west out side various wilderness areas. I just say I am not in the wilderness. Once you cross the line you need a permit. Kind of like speeding you can do 55 all day your not speeding do 56 your speeding. |
||
| riverrunner |
quote cowdoc: ". The canoe registration is simple......if your canoe is in Minnesota, it needs to be registered......in or out of water. This rule seems to have been recently changed for non-residents from states with no required registration." That would be interesting so if traveling through MN to ND and do not have my canoe register I can get a citation. Or a MN resident that hasn't had his boat in the water for years parked along the garage could get a non registration citation. Could you please give the citation in the that says so. If so MN really has become the state that allows nothing. |
||
| mhart |
|
||
| mhart |
|
||
| A1t2o |
Some people follow the letter of the law and some follow the spirit of it. If you got checked before entering then he was following the spirit of it, but I'm sure he could have found a way to screw you over if you outright lied to him. Those kinds of guys are usually happy to allow you to self issue a day permit to make you legal, except for when you lie to them or waste their time. The guy that follows the letter of the law is the one that I am more concerned about. They will be more likely to follow you around and wait for you to either make one mistake or see just how much you will incriminate yourself before saying or doing anything about it. I'd rather have the guy warn me against doing something illegal than have him wait until he is able to issue a ticket. |
||
| bottomtothetap |
quote fsupp: " bottomtothetap: Was also curious about what seemed to be two different jurisdictions: their canoe (MN DNR?) and our permit (USFS?). Thanks! very specific and informative. |
||
| fsupp |
|
||
| fsupp |
Minnesota Rules, part 6110.0600 6110.0600 EXPIRED VALIDATION DECAL. All expired or otherwise invalid state validation decals shall be removed from the watercraft for which they were issued or completely covered by placement of the current decal so that only the current decal is visible. 6110.0400 MARKING OF NONMOTORIZED CANOES, KAYAKS, PADDLE BOARDS, PADDLE BOATS, AND ROWING SHELLS. All nonmotorized canoes, kayaks, paddle boards, paddle boats, and rowing shells shall display decals furnished by the Department of Natural Resources for such watercraft. These decals shall be securely affixed on each side of the forward half of the watercraft for which the decal was issued, in such a position as to provide clear and legible identification. If it is impossible to display the decals on the forward half of the paddle board so as to provide clear and legible identification, both decals must then be affixed to the stern of the paddle board. |
||
| bottomtothetap |
Well, I did (actually I didn't--but that's another story and not the only "glitch on this trip--see the lost and found about my cameras) This means back to Ely to get the maps while the rest of the guys wait at the entry for a couple hours for me to get back. In the mean time they did take their time in getting most of the gear from the parking lot to down near the river. When I return, they described that they were glad that I left with one of them the tear-off stub you get from your permit with multiple canoes. They said a ranger came by and asked to see our group's permit. They showed him the stub and explained that I had the main permit but had gone back to town to retrieve the maps. They also said this ranger(Not sure if it was USFS, DNR or who) cited another party since the canoe they had did not have a current license. I'm wondering why if we had not left yet and had not "entered" the wilderness did our party have to show its permit. Or, if somehow we had officially entered, did my going back to Ely and returning to the entry #14 constitute illegal exit and re-entry? The guys didn't say that the ranger was worried about me and that he seemed fine with their explanation of where I was. Furthermore, if the non-licensed canoe was still on dry land (which it was) why did the license issue matter? Also, aren't BWCA entry permits and canoe licenses two different jurisdictions? All seems quite confusing? What does constitute "entry"? What rules apply? |
||
| cowdoc |
quote riverrunner: "quote cowdoc: ". The canoe registration is simple......if your canoe is in Minnesota, it needs to be registered......in or out of water. This rule seems to have been recently changed for non-residents from states with no required registration." Travelling through you're fine. Don't make me quote the exact wording......cuz I don't care. Bottom line, if you take a canoe to MN with intent to paddle it at sometime, it's suppose to be registered. Again, looks like they changed this recently which is good for us Wi residents |
||
| bottomtothetap |
quote A1t2o: "The way I see it, the guy was just trying to do his job in following the spirit of the law. Entered or not it was clear what your plan was, and the whole "the guy who went back to town has all our paperwork that makes us legal" part is a pretty big red flag for officers unless you are clearly just sitting around and waiting for someone. They just want to check you and be on their way. If your whole group was there and just said the guy with the permit was not there at the moment, but didn't have any trace of paperwork, you can bet that he would have stuck around made sure. Or if he thought you were lying about it then he could have potentially given you a ticket if you had even one foot in the BWCA. To be clear, I am not offended that a check was made and understand that the person was just trying to do their job. We had nothing to hide, did not lie about anything and had no reason to. We DID have the proper permit (the tear off stub, which is exactly for these situations--when part of the group is separated from the main permit holder) and the guys were able to produce it upon request. While being checked on previous trips, I had never experienced it in this way before--before actually starting the trip--and was curious on what protocol or guidelines are followed by officials. I wanted to get a better grip on if what we had done constituted "entry", that my return to Ely for supplies did not also define an illegal exit and re-entry. Was also curious about what seemed to be two different jurisdictions: their canoe (MN DNR?) and our permit (USFS?). I was pretty sure I'd get a good deal of feedback and that's why I posted. These types of questions usually spark lively discussion. Would be really cool if someone in authority sees this and responds with "official" interpretations. As a result of the OP, I am learning that in MN wherever you are or whatever you are doing with your watercraft, on the water or not, it better be licensed! |
||
| fsupp |
#### The State of MN and the federal government both exercise jurisdiction over the BWCA. The Act creating the BWCA wilderness in 1978 (quoted at length below) states that it does not affect the State's jurisdiction over the waters, fish, and wildlife within the wilderness, and it also authorizes cooperation agreements between the State and the federal government concerning the enforcement of federal and state regulations. In addition, under the assimilated crimes act, 18 U.S.C.A. § 13, the federal government can enforce state criminal laws in areas within federal jurisdiction, such as the BWCA. I hope that responds to your question. JURISDICTION OVER FISH AND WILDLIFE SEC. 14. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as affecting the jurisdiction or responsibilities of the State with respect to fish and wildlife in the wilderness and the mining protection area. JURISDICTION OVER WATERS SEC. 15. The Secretary [of Agriculture, ed.] is authorized to promulgate and enforce regulations that limit or prohibit the use of motorized equipment on or relating to waters located within the wilderness in accordance with the provisions of this Act: Provided, That nothing in this Act shall be construed as affecting the jurisdiction or responsibilities of the State with respect to such waters except to the extent that the exercise of such jurisdiction is less stringent than the Secretary’s regulations promulgated pursuant to this section: Provided further, That any regulations adopted pursuant to this Act shall be complementary to, and not in derogation of regulations issued by the United States Coast Guard. The Secretary is authorized to enter into cooperative agreements with the State of Minnesota with respect to enforcement of Federal and State regulations affecting the wilderness and the mining protection area. COOPERATION WITH STATE SEC. 16. (a) The Secretary shall cooperate with the State of Minnesota and any political subdivision thereof in the administration of the mining protection area and in the administration and protection of lands within or adjacent to the mining protection area owned or controlled by the State or any political subdivision thereof. Nothing in this title shall deprive the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof of its right to exercise civil and criminal jurisdiction within the wilderness and the mining protection area and impose land use controls and environmental health standards on non–Federal areas within the wilderness and the mining protection area, or of its right to tax persons, corporations, franchises, or other non–Federal property, including mineral or other interests, in or on lands or waters within the wilderness and the mining protection area. |
||
| Rustycards |
|
||
| billconner |
I don't think it unusual if you are carrying gear and canoes to the water in BWCA that even if you hadn't crossed the line, they ask for permits. I suppose if you refuse, and had not entered, you'd have a successful defense, but forget your trip. |