Question about land, as it relates to bugging out

[FAL rifleman]

I am curious about a legal aspect of bugging out. Let's say that someone takes a couple of weeks off of work, and decides to do a dry run, and roughs it in a remote location.

If one is standing at a point on the earth's surface that is inside the U.S., and that point is not in a municipal/county/state/federal park or forest, nor in an Indian reservation, nor in a military base, nor on private property, then what is the official designation of the land that contains that point? Second, what are the legal ramifications for living on such land for an indefinite period of time?

[canid]

then it would be undesignated BLM land, or otherwise designated BLM and. all of our land is either publicly oned [one government or aother] or privately owned [one individual, group or corporate entity]. there may be some other cases not provided for in this.

my advice would be to use BLM lands of known use, such as national forest.

[Sourdough]

I am curious about a legal aspect of bugging out. Let's say that someone takes a couple of weeks off of work, and decides to do a dry run, and roughs it in a remote location.

If one is standing at a point on the earth's surface that is inside the U.S., and that point is not in a municipal/county/state/federal park or forest, nor in an Indian reservation, nor in a military base, nor on private property, then what is the official designation of the land that contains that point? Second, what are the legal ramifications for living on such land for an indefinite period of time?

Most Federal Lands not in the Parks is managed by BLM. You need a permit for extended stay. We in the guiding business spend a lot of time and money on permits. There is a small window If you move your camp every few days. On most state lands you need permits for extended stays.

You would never leave a mess that might cost thousands of dollars to clean up, but some do. As a bush pilot I have been shocked to see the damage done by extended residence.

[wildWoman]

I live in Canada but maybe it's similar in the States. Here you can camp for free for twwo weeks on public land, however, there is no definition to what moving your camp means. Theoretically you could set up camp and move it an inch every two weeks.
You may also want to check into staking a placer claim, if that works in the area you're intersted in. Up here, it allows you to live on it over the summer.

[canid]

in natioanal forest, it's limited to 14days aswell, at one time i heard that you had to move 5 miles and could not return for 90 days. i am not sure about the accuracy the numbers.

[FAL rifleman]

So the default designation, in the U.S., for land that does not fit into any other category is public land under Bureau of Land Management control?

The laws about how long one can stay in one spot do remind me of something that I read about people in the Southwest who, to avoid squatting, would move their camp a couple hundred yards every week or so. I have also read about people who squat in the Southwest and use aerial camouflage nets so that they cannot be detected from the air. Has anyone ever heard of anything like this?

[Sourdough]

So the default designation, in the U.S., for land that does not fit into any other category is public land under Bureau of Land Management control?

The laws about how long one can stay in one spot do remind me of something that I read about people in the Southwest who, to avoid squatting, would move their camp a couple hundred yards every week or so. I have also read about people who squat in the Southwest and use aerial camouflage nets so that they cannot be detected from the air. Has anyone ever heard of anything like this?

We all own the Federal lands, Some lands are more fragile than others. I look at it this way, "WE HUMANS are THE SKIN CANCER on the EARTH, And I am not a hardcore Greenie.

[Rick]

I don't get the camouflage nets scenario. Who's going to be looking? And if they are, why aren't they using forward looking IR?

[FAL rifleman]

I don't get the camouflage nets scenario. Who's going to be looking? And if they are, why aren't they using forward looking IR?

Presumably, they are worried about being harassed for squatting (in other words, living on public land for too long a period of time without moving their camp). They may also simply enjoy the feeling of living somewhere where Uncle excrement-head doesn't know where they are.

I have actually just recently read up on evading thermal imaging (TI) detection:

http://theindependentamerican.freeyellow.com/therm.html

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread297970/pg1

Thus, a good combination of optical and TI camouflage techniques to disguise your camp and your person would be ideal.

[Sourdough]

I have actually just recently read up on evading thermal imaging (TI) detection:

http://theindependentamerican.freeyellow.com/therm.html

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread297970/pg1

Thus, a good combination of optical and TI camouflage techniques to disguise your camp and your person would be ideal.

Why, do some people only look for ways sneak around, and feel that they are special, and the laws are for other people but not them. Why...? Why can't you just play by the rules. If your Bugout-mobile is impounded, and you are in prison for criminal trespass when the SH*t really hits the fan, you are going to be super bummed>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[FAL rifleman]

Why, do some people only look for ways sneak around, and feel that they are special, and the laws are for other people but not them. Why...? Why can't you just play by the rules.

We are posting on a survivalist message board, afterall. :rolleyes: For many people, survivalism entails effectively dealing with the crappy reality that one's government has forced upon him.

Besides, they often don't even play by their own rules.

The bottonline is, if I want to live in privacy and not have anyone know where I am, what business is it of yours?


If your Bugout-mobile is impounded, and you are in prison for criminal trespass when the SH*t really hits the fan, you are going to be super bummed

What is the punishment for squatting (assuming you're even caught, and then, if they do more than just tell you to move)? Somehow, I doubt that it is years in some maximum security prison. :rolleyes:

[nell67]

We are posting on a survivalist message board, afterall. :rolleyes: For many people, survivalism entails effectively dealing with the crappy reality that one's government has forced upon him.

Besides, they often don't even play by their own rules.

The bottonline is, if I want to live in privacy and not have anyone know where I am, what business is it of yours?

No politics on the forum please.Any questions about that can be answered in the forum rules.

[Sourdough]

You started this stating a "DRY RUN"......To test your equipment"....????

[FAL rifleman]

No politics on the forum please.Any questions about that can be answered in the forum rules.

Are you a moderator?

If you are, then isn't the prohibition against discussing politics a two-way street, or is it okay to discuss politics as long as one does it from a pro-government standpoint?

I ask because hopeak is the one who went down this tangent, and yet you quoted my response to his derail of this thread, instead of the derail itself (when you quote someone's post, you are specifically addressing that person), thereby implying some sort of double standard in favor of state worship.

[FAL rifleman]

You started this stating a "DRY RUN"......To test your equipment"....????

To practice survivalist skills and test equipment.

[nell67]

No I am not a moderator,but that does not change the fact that the rules state no politics.
The rules are there ,plain and simple.

[FAL rifleman]

No I am not a moderator,but that does not change the fact that the rules state no politics.
The rules are there ,plain and simple.

And this applies to me, and not to hopeak?

By the way, what does talk of ways to avoid government detection have to do with politcs? It only becomes about politics when someone demands that a man explain himself when he says that he wants to avoid government detection. There is a difference between the HOW (nothing to do with politics) and the WHY (may potentially involve politics, but also philosophy).

If you are not a moderator, why do you take it upon yourself to (mis)interpret the rules?

[nell67]

It applies to everyone on the forum

[FAL rifleman]

It applies to everyone on the forum

Then why did you quote my post, and not hopeak's post, when I was the one discussing the HOW of evading detection (which has nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with physics and other sciences), and hopeak made it into the WHY of evading detection (thereby making it about politics)?

[nell67]

Nah,you started back in your reply to Ricks post.

[FAL rifleman]

Nah,you started back in your reply to Ricks post.

Post # 9 is devoid of political content. It does pertain to philosophy (the value of privacy and indepdence, etc.). If you don't know the difference between philsophy and politics, then that is your problem, not mine.

[Sourdough]

FAL Rifleman, I am sorry..... I was just trying to be helpful and answer your question. I think I failed, (at being Helpful) I do that a lot.

[FAL rifleman]

FAL Rifleman, I am sorry..... I was just trying to be helpful and answer your question. I think I failed, (at being Helpful) I do that a lot.

Your reponse appeared to be a value judgement of my personal philosophy of privacy and independence.

[Sourdough]

FAL RIFLEMAN, Feel free to camp anywhere, I just don't care. You Win.......

[Rick]

FAL - You can see life anyway you want to. That's your business of course. I don't happen to see the government that way. Hopeak and I are a great deal similar in our philosophy. Presumably because we've been around a while and mellowed out a bit.

You said in Post 11 that this is a survivalist message board. That's not quite true. It's a wilderness survival skills board. There is a difference but there are folks on here that are survivalists and a lot that aren't.

Enjoy the spirited and witty repartee but don't take it personally. We bicker back and forth all the time. No one on here wears a bulls eye.

Re: Your original question. I suppose if it's a SHTF situation and you are bugging out then I doubt anyone's DNR is going to be overly concerned even if they know you've pitched a tent or debris hut or whatever in their (our) forest. If it's bad enough, there probably won't be anyone to care. Rangers are probably bugging out with their family, too.

If you bugged out because of some natural disaster then I suspect they would be understanding of that as well. Unless you started laying a foundation.:D

We have some DNR types on here that could speak to this fairly well I would think.

[Rick]

Here's are some articles on squatters:

http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.Article?article_id=5998

http://www.wesh.com/news/9267392/detail.html

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE6DB113CF932A25756C0A9649582 60&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

These articles might make you rethink your move to some national forest land. There are people already living there.

[canid]

i live in natioanl forests from time to time. i only occasionaly run into others, mobile homeless, rainbow family etc. most of the people i see are overnight campers and day visitors [and depending on the time of year, deer/elk hunters].

[Sarge47]

We are posting on a survivalist message board, afterall. :rolleyes: For many people, survivalism entails effectively dealing with the crappy reality that one's government has forced upon him.

Besides, they often don't even play by their own rules.

The bottonline is, if I want to live in privacy and not have anyone know where I am, what business is it of yours?



What is the punishment for squatting (assuming you're even caught, and then, if they do more than just tell you to move)? Somehow, I doubt that it is years in some maximum security prison. :rolleyes:

1st, you are required to read the rules before "jumping" into this site! No politics allowed, and for the record this is NOT a "Survivalist" site, it's a "Wilderness Survival" site. I think your buddy just left here over this, and do NOT, repeat, NOT insult the members, clear?:cool:

[FAL rifleman]

1st, you are required to read the rules before "jumping" into this site!

I did read your rules.


No politics allowed,

I did not discuss politics, as I already explained. I discussed philosophy, and hopeak is the one who discussed politics. How many times do I have to repeat this?


and for the record this is NOT a "Survivalist" site, it's a "Wilderness Survival" site. I think your buddy just left here over this, and do NOT, repeat, NOT insult the members, clear?:cool:

What buddy? What insult(s)? You insulted me by calling me "Rifledude" and by being a "super moderator" (someone who SHOULD be fair and impartial :rolleyes:) who chose to address me, rather than the individual who got this thread off track. I suggest that you re-read this thread, in order, to see who became uncivil first, and who derailed this thread.

In case you have not noticed, I am a new member, and if this how you welcome people---by blatantly picking sides and accusing member A of something that member B did, and by taking a hostile tone---and you don't want me here, then I will leave. I will not feed anyone's ego by submitting to his/her childish games on his/her little kingdom in cyberspace. If indepedent thinkers who do not follow the herd are not welcome here, then I will make sure to spread the word that this is the case, thereby saving you the hassle of having to deal with too many of us, and also reducing the number of times that you have to be offended by the presence of people like me.

At the very least, you could have made a general post, addressing no one in particular, reminding people to follow the rules and stay on topic, but you chose not to, and to single me out instead. Let me guess, if some random member used profanity against me, out of the blue, you would reprimand me, and not that individual, because you have a problem with me? :rolleyes:

[FAL rifleman]

Here's are some articles on squatters:

http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.Article?article_id=5998

http://www.wesh.com/news/9267392/detail.html

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE6DB113CF932A25756C0A9649582 60&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

These articles might make you rethink your move to some national forest land. There are people already living there.

Well, I WOULD consider simply buying remote land, but the problem is that I think that it is impossible to do so without the federal government knowning about it (NOTE: I am not discussing politics here, only legalities and logistics). Before computers, perhaps only the county or state kept a copy of the deed, but now, land purchases probably immediately go into some federal database. If I had my way, one would receive a title deed containing a special security code proving its authenticity, as well as the boundaries of the land, but WITHOUT one's name on it. A copy of said title deed would be kept in some government vault. This would allow for anonymous property ownership.

It violates my personal PHILOSOPHY to be in a static position that some other individual, or group of individuals (other than those living with me), knows about. Does anyone happen to know of a way to anonymously own property in the U.S.?

[Smok]

may be a company or Corporation ??

[FAL rifleman]

may be a company or Corporation ??

So there would be a record that corporation xyz owns whatever land you're on, and you're the sole shareholder in this corporation. There would be a record somewhere of who the sole shareholder of corporation xyz is.

[Smok]

or a church

[Sarge47]

I did read your rules.



I did not discuss politics, as I already explained. I discussed philosophy, and hopeak is the one who discussed politics. How many times do I have to repeat this?



What buddy? What insult(s)? You insulted me by calling me "Rifledude" and by being a "super moderator" (someone who SHOULD be fair and impartial :rolleyes:) who chose to address me, rather than the individual who got this thread off track. I suggest that you re-read this thread, in order, to see who became uncivil first, and who derailed this thread.

In case you have not noticed, I am a new member, and if this how you welcome people---by blatantly picking sides and accusing member A of something that member B did, and by taking a hostile tone---and you don't want me here, then I will leave. I will not feed anyone's ego by submitting to his/her childish games on his/her little kingdom in cyberspace. If indepedent thinkers who do not follow the herd are not welcome here, then I will make sure to spread the word that this is the case, thereby saving you the hassle of having to deal with too many of us, and also reducing the number of times that you have to be offended by the presence of people like me.

At the very least, you could have made a general post, addressing no one in particular, reminding people to follow the rules and stay on topic, but you chose not to, and to single me out instead. Let me guess, if some random member used profanity against me, out of the blue, you would reprimand me, and not that individual, because you have a problem with me? :rolleyes:

The post I posted WAS a generic-type post. Sorry if I don't measure up to your standards as a S.M. but that's not for you to say. If you keep insulting members you can leave. If anyone uses profanity towards you or anyone else they get BANNED! Not the recipient. We're a pretty tight group here, so please keep that in mind. The fact of the matter was another member sent me a complaint about you and that's why I posted to you the way I did. You also remarked to one of the ladies here that she wasn't the Mod, well the mod is speaking. Also it's customary for new members to introduce themselves in the introductions section BEFORE posting. If you want to leave, then leave...You know where the door is, right!:cool:

[Sarge47]

Well, I WOULD consider simply buying remote land, but the problem is that I think that it is impossible to do so without the federal government knowning about it (NOTE: I am not discussing politics here, only legalities and logistics). Before computers, perhaps only the county or state kept a copy of the deed, but now, land purchases probably immediately go into some federal database. If I had my way, one would receive a title deed containing a special security code proving its authenticity, as well as the boundaries of the land, but WITHOUT one's name on it. A copy of said title deed would be kept in some government vault. This would allow for anonymous property ownership.

It violates my personal PHILOSOPHY to be in a static position that some other individual, or group of individuals (other than those living with me), knows about. Does anyone happen to know of a way to anonymously own property in the U.S.?

I don't really think the Feds care a whole heck of a lot for your...or my PHILOSOPHY! They only care about property taxes and who to go after to get them. Also there's "Eminent Domain" to consider. That's to say that after you go through all the trouble of buying the perfect place the Feds, or in some cases, even large Corporations can do whatever they want to your property. I don't think of this as "political", just facts about land ownership, which is a term I use loosely. If, and this is only one man's opinion, Americans would get off their collective lazy duff and stand up for their rights then we'd see a change. But that's not going to happen because people never unite like they use to, they just keep to themselves more & more.:cool:

[dilligaf2u2]

As stated! BLM lands need a permit.

As for doing a dry run for bugging out? Just think, When you are truly bugging out, all the others are doing the same. I would use this time to research bugging in as an option. Waiting till all the others are out of the area before you run off over a cliff with the rest of the lemmings.

If you have desided that bugging out is the way to go. I would spend my time looking for the most out of the way area you can find. Drive out a ways, Dump (Park) the car, pack into where you can stay without detection. So why get a permit? You mare loking for somewhere you can not be found.

Don

[Nativedude]

"Well, I WOULD consider simply buying remote land, but the problem is that I think that it is impossible to do so without the federal government knowning about it. . . .It violates my personal PHILOSOPHY to be in a static position that some other individual, or group of individuals (other than those living with me), knows about. Does anyone happen to know of a way to anonymously own property in the U.S.?"

Well FAL, I agree with you on your philosophy. As far as I am concerned, the gov't. is far too involved in our lives and personal business. It is absolutely ridiculous that every square inch of land is owned by . . .someone! Big brother thinks that they have to keep us in check. The old case of them thinking that they know what is better for us than we do for ourselves!

This land was free before the European settlers came here, but as with everything else, once they see something, they think that they have to OWN or POSSESS everything in sight. It's all about greed and control!! :mad:

I live O.T.G. (off the grid). I am a homesteader. I live free! No hassles! Nobody looking over my shoulder! Nobody telling me what I should or shouldn't do!

[Nativedude]

". . .just facts about land ownership, which is a term I use loosely. If, and this is only one man's opinion, Americans would get off their collective lazy duff and stand up for their rights then we'd see a change. But that's not going to happen because people never unite like they use to, they just keep to themselves more & more.:cool:"

You've got that right Sarge. . .you hit the nail right square on the head !! ;)

[Rick]

I'm a bit confused, I guess. I generally am. My land is recorded with the county. I pay taxes on my land. The county has to know who owns the land (owner of record as Hopeak said) so they know who to send the tax bill. Here's where I'll blow your mind. I LIKE to pay taxes. That money goes to schools, libraries, road maintenance, pays police, fire and EMT salaries. It covers the clean(er) water I drink and handles the sewer problems I don't have to worry about. That money does a LOT. And it does a lot for kids. It also pays for parks and wilderness areas (at least in my county) and programs that help kids get into those wilderness areas. I know it's not perfect and things could be better, cleaner, more wooded but if you aren't happy with it then you get involved to change it for the better. From the inside out. That's my philosophy. Get involved. We are the government not some all seeing big eye to be feared.

[Sourdough]

The taxes would still have to be paid even if the true owner was unknown. However there are parts of Alaska that do not have any tax on Real Estate. They tax industry like, commercial fishing. I think FAL Riflemans issue was more with Government telling him what he could and could not do with the property.

[Rick]

Wareagle posted this link in another thread. I think it's worth reading. It does a very nice job of explaining the problems of wanting to bug out. Thanks, WE!

http://www.alpharubicon.com/prepinfo/backpackfever.htm

[Sourdough]

Wareagle posted this link in another thread. I think it's worth reading. It does a very nice job of explaining the problems of wanting to bug out. Thanks, WE!

http://www.alpharubicon.com/prepinfo/backpackfever.htm

Very good article; However it begs this question: What must the quality of peoples lives be, "that" they are looking forward to TSHTF....????? Would one not have to see himself as unfairly Repressed...???

That TSHTF would give them a fresh start; perhaps in a more level playing field...????? I would be interested in your thoughts, maybe this should be a new thread?

[Sarge47]

Very good article; However it begs this question: What must the quality of peoples lives be, "that" they are looking forward to TSHTF....????? Would one not have to see himself as unfairly Repressed...???

That TSHTF would give them a fresh start; perhaps in a more level playing field...????? I would be interested in your thoughts, maybe this should be a new thread?

I think you've hit upon a great idea, ho, why don't you start it up?:cool:

[Rick]

I guess it's all in the definition. I see TSHTF as a tornado, hurricane, wildfire. That sort of stuff. I can certainly concede terrorist threat (home grown or otherwise). Kansas City, New York, Washington, LA, Seatle all taught us that much. But I put economic damnation just below getting smacked in the kisser with a meteorite. All possible, some not likely.

I have my BOB packed, not because I know something will happen but because I know it could. Sort of like car insurance or home insurance.

Life, like the wilderness, should be enjoyed and shared and taught to our young uns. There have always been folks standing on the corner with the sign, "The End is Near" and there always will be. It's a lot more likely to come in the form of a drunk driver than from the men in black, whoever that might be.

As for the fresh start, paranoia will exist even after TSHTF. They'll just shift their focus to something or someone else.

[Sarge47]

I guess it's all in the definition. I see TSHTF as a tornado, hurricane, wildfire. That sort of stuff. I can certainly concede terrorist threat (home grown or otherwise). Kansas City, New York, Washington, LA, Seatle all taught us that much. But I put economic damnation just below getting smacked in the kisser with a meteorite. All possible, some not likely.

I have my BOB packed, not because I know something will happen but because I know it could. Sort of like car insurance or home insurance.

Life, like the wilderness, should be enjoyed and shared and taught to our young uns. There have always been folks standing on the corner with the sign, "The End is Near" and there always will be. It's a lot more likely to come in the form of a drunk driver than from the men in black, whoever that might be.

As for the fresh start, paranoia will exist even after TSHTF. They'll just shift their focus to something or someone else.

I'd have to agree with you on this, I think what the real "Survivalists" are looking for is TEOTWAWKI. I also think that if you look deep enough you'd find out what triggered that "desire", as hopeak puts it. Obviously these type of people think they're going to come out on top, that nothing bad will happen to them as a consequence when there really is no evidence to justify such thinking. Fact of the matter is they could take a bullet just as easy as anyone else, and with the break-down of civilization, law-enforcement as we know it would cease to exist and we'd be back into the days of the Wild West. The other type is the person who wants to hide out from everyone. This type of person seems to me to be "reclusive, introverted, and perhaps Paranoid" as well. Can you imagine an armed group made up of such folks? :eek:

[Sourdough]

Sarge, I started a new thread. I really would like to understand their view of things, their feelings about things.

[FAL rifleman]

Sarge, I started a new thread. I really would like to understand their view of things, their feelings about things.

Link, please.

[nell67]

Here ya go FAL

http://www.wilderness-survival.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1473

[Sarge47]

Sarge, I started a new thread. I really would like to understand their view of things, their feelings about things.

Go for it, as long as everyone "plays nice" I've got no problem with it. :rolleyes: We have several "Survivalists" on this site; all who have brought something constructive to the table, it might prove to be a good idea.:D I commend you for the thread!:) Vol-Remy should have a field day with this. Another thought, if we do face TEOTWAWKI, what do we see happening to civilization? Enquiring minds want to know!

[Rick]

Gosh, we've had so many TSHTF scenario's throughout our history:
Revolutionary War
Shays Rebellion
The year without a summer (1816),
The Great Chicago Fire
The Great San Franciso Earthquake
The Civil War
The Great Depresion
The Great Dustbowl
911
Katrina

We seem to weather every storm pretty well regardless of the cause or type.

EDIT: I guess I should have added slavery and the near genocide of the indigenous peoples of this country. For them, it was TEOTWAWKI.

[Sarge47]

You forgot one, the day Elvis died!:rolleyes::D:eek:

[nell67]

You forgot one, the day Elvis died!:rolleyes::D:eek:

Oh my God,my grandmother cried like a baby when she found that out!

[Rick]

Well, thank you, ma'am. Thank you very much......Are you gonna eat that jelly doughnut?

[Nativedude]

A perfect example of the gov't. getting too involved in our lives is Dick Proennecke.

When the gov't declared the area where he (Dick) lived as "Twin Lakes National Park" they were going to take his home from him. It took Mary Alsworth (wife of Babe Alsworth{his pilot for many years}) to use her Native American rights to claim the land (as part of her legal land allotment). She then gifted it to Dick. Had it not been for Mary, he would have lost everything!!

Here was a guy, living his dream, free and untroubled. In steps the gov't., after all the years he had lived there, and says "were taking your land!" :mad:

I, for one, think that is pure BS!! How many others here think it's BS as well?

[Sourdough]

A perfect example of the gov't. getting too involved in our lives is Dick Proennecke.

When the gov't declared the area where he (Dick) lived as "Twin Lakes National Park" they were going to take his home from him. It took Mary Alsworth (wife of Babe Alsworth{his pilot for many years}) to use her Native American rights to claim the land (as part of her legal land allotment). She then gifted it to Dick. Had it not been for Mary, he would have lost everything!!

Here was a guy, living his dream, free and untroubled. In steps the gov't., after all the years he had lived there, and says "were taking your land!" :mad:

I, for one, think that is pure BS!! How many others here think it's BS as well?


I don't think Dick ever really wanted to "OWN" that land, I think that what he did was his dream. He had a dream, he made it real, he recorded it which is wonderful. But "OWNING" and having control of the land was not part of what he wanted to experience. At any time Dick could have filed for a Federal Homesite (5 Acres), even many years after the cabin was built. He could have filed for a Federal Trade and Manufacturing site (15 acres). He had fully completed all (100%) of the requirements. No, I don't think that is who he was. It was not about the land, it was about the experience. Dick was a nice person, I did not know him well, as I did not build my place in the Lake Clark National Preserve till 1984.

[Nativedude]

I don't think Dick ever really wanted to "OWN" that land, I think that what he did was his dream. He had a dream, he made it real, he recorded it which is wonderful. But "OWNING" and having control of the land was not part of what he wanted to experience. At any time Dick could have filed for a Federal Homesite (5 Acres), even many years after the cabin was built. He could have filed for a Federal Trade and Manufacturing site (15 acres). He had fully completed all (100%) of the requirements. No, I don't think that is who he was. It was not about the land, it was about the experience. Dick was a nice person, I did not know him well, as I did not build my place in the Lake Clark National Preserve till 1984.

You are absolutely correct Hopeak, Dick did not want to own his land. His philosophy was "none of us owns this land. . .we are here for a short time, and should enjoy what is here while we can!"

What I was saying is the fact that he (Dick) WAS living the life he wanted to live, just as I, and others I suspect, choose to do. . .FREE! Free from the gov't. (out from under their thumb), free from bills, free from stress, free from others (be it neighbors, etc.) telling us what we can and cannot do, free to live as WE see fit!! Then along comes the gov't. and tells Dick that they are going to take everything he has built and take away his freedom of choice on how to live.

He was there before the gov't. came along. They had NO BUSINESS trying to strip him of his life!! :mad: IMO, they (the gov't.) has no business telling any of us how to live!!