I just got back from Colorado to visit family and look for some land. The area I'm looking at is Teller County, Fairplay, Florsisant region. Some of the land I looked at, backed up to Federal land, could be BLM or National Monument, or National Park.
Should I buy land that backs up to federal land, can I take a hike with a side arm across the federal land? Can I target shoot on federal land. What's the upside and downside of having the federal government as a next door neighbor?
Jim

I just got back from Colorado to visit family and look for some land. The area I'm looking at is Teller County, Fairplay, Florsisant region. Some of the land I looked at, backed up to Federal land, could be BLM or National Monument, or National Park.
Should I buy land that backs up to federal land, can I take a hike with a side arm across the federal land? Can I target shoot on federal land. What's the upside and downside of having the federal government as a next door neighbor?
Jim

arkypete,

As a general rule, it's ok for you to hunt and carry and target shoot on BLM and National FOrest land. But you need to make absolutely sure what the land has been designated. You cannot carry, much less shoot in National Parks or National Monument property! BLM property is sometimes leased to ranchers for grazing; the ranchers sometimes get to feeling that they "own" the leased land and can get a bit testy about you wandering around shooting pine cones near their megabuck cattle. The downside of buying property next to federal land is the old "emminent domain" issue. If the feds decide they'd like your land to be included, they'll offer you "fair market value" for it and then take it. Also, if the property lines are not well marked, and the hunting public is allowed on the federal land, you may wind up with a bunch of accidental trespassers wandering around on your place, not knowing they've strayed from the federal land. The upside is that you probably do not have to concern yourself about a group of investors coming in and "developing" the federal property.

As I said earlier, spend a LOT of time making DARNED sure you know EXACTLY how the adjacent federal land has been designated!

gunwriter

arkypete,

As a general rule, it's ok for you to hunt and carry and target shoot on BLM and National FOrest land. But you need to make absolutely sure what the land has been designated. You cannot carry, much less shoot in National Parks or National Monument property! BLM property is sometimes leased to ranchers for grazing; the ranchers sometimes get to feeling that they "own" the leased land and can get a bit testy about you wandering around shooting pine cones near their megabuck cattle. The downside of buying property next to federal land is the old "emminent domain" issue. If the feds decide they'd like your land to be included, they'll offer you "fair market value" for it and then take it. Also, if the property lines are not well marked, and the hunting public is allowed on the federal land, you may wind up with a bunch of accidental trespassers wandering around on your place, not knowing they've strayed from the federal land. The upside is that you probably do not have to concern yourself about a group of investors coming in and "developing" the federal property.

As I said earlier, spend a LOT of time making DARNED sure you know EXACTLY how the adjacent federal land has been designated!

gunwriter

GunWriter
Thanks.
I have no problem with with fellas wandering around my land by accident or with them needing to cross my land to get off the Federal land as long as no bullet holes appear in my auto or house.
I'm thankful you noted the difference between National Park and National Forest, I would have thought they were the same thing.
Jim

If I recall there was a problem with BLM and semi autos. A rancher, one was leasing the ground, was charged for haveing a semi auto (mini 14) in his vehicle and he went through **** over it. Check before you get betweena rock and a hard place. :eek:

Here in Arizona the national forests and BLM swap land with developers. The developers go out and buy up X amount of almost worthless desert scrub land and then swap it for more desirous federal or state lands adjacent to metro areas. An example is an aggregate mining plot just on the northern edge of my town. The land is leased from the national forests with the old 1873 mining clause, whereas the gov't gets $1.35/ton for the rock the quarry charges $30-$40/ton. The mining company bought a several hundred acre ranch in the middle of the national forest up by Camp Verde and want to swap it for the mined area when the quarry shuts down in a few years. They back up to a nicer city addition and want to build upscale homes on the property. Due to their mining activity, they are required to restore the land anyway, so they figure it will be worth megabucks when finished. Adjacent landowners are protesting, but the gov't is giving serious thought to the land swap.

Sometimes there is what I refer to as a buffer zone around National Park land, which is describe as National Park Perserve. On the Perserve, hunting is legal (as long as there is not another conservation system unit in its designation) and I believe, you can carry a firearm during non-hunting times. I don't know if you would be allowed to go out and practice shooting though. Many times you will see the Park or it's office listed as "Park and Perserve". Every National Park in Alaska has these differing units. There are also Designated Wilderness Areas and Natural Research Study Areas, which is as close to locking out the public from public land there can be. Be very careful around those National Parks.

Sometimes BLM and USFS lands will have the same Natural Research Study Areas and this designation is extremely restrictive of what activities can take place. Hunting is not allowed in most instances, and foot access is through only approved corridors.