A National Scenic Trail with a No trespassing sign

Posted by: PerryMK

A National Scenic Trail with a No trespassing sign - 10/05/13 11:17 AM

This was not on federal land and as far as I can tell not related to the gov't shutdown.

I have been attempting a section-day-hike of the Florida National Scenic Trail. I do this by self-shuttling, usually by electric bicycle and car but occasionally with a friend. I've done a little over 100 miles so far.

Today I was hoping to hike the FNST from US221 east for about a 10-12 miles stretch. This is in the Florida Panhandle just south of Madison, east of Tallahassee. I drove 1.5 hours from my home, then biked 40 minutes and found the Florida National Scenic Trail has a "No Trespassing without permission of owner - Violators subject to arrest or fine" sign. This strikes me as oxymoron-like, a National Scenic Trail with a No Trespassing sign. There was no owner listed but somewhere on the sign it had Florida Farm Bureau written on it.
Of course I opted not to trespass.

In case anyone knows the owner, it's the Florida Trail going east from US221, just south of Madison and about an hour east of Tallahassee.

I have No Trespassing signs on some of my property so understand the rights of property owners. I don't get why they would allow a trail though.

While I was out there I went ahead and scouted the next couple of access points. I didn't see any more No Trespassing signs.
Posted by: PerryMK

Re: A National Scenic Trail with a No trespassing sign - 10/05/13 01:53 PM

I posted my dilemma on a Florida Trail forum and was informed that Florida Trail Association members are permitted to cross the private lands. I then checked the FTA website and on their membership brochure it states that crossing private land is permissible for members only. Now I know.

A National Scenic Trail with a No Trespassing sign still strikes me as oxymoron-like.
Posted by: billstephenson

Re: A National Scenic Trail with a No trespassing sign - 10/05/13 02:54 PM

Yeah, that's a tough one. I've never put "No Trespassing" signs on our property. It didn't have them when we bought it and I saw no reason to put them up. Still haven't. I did put up "Hunting by Permission Only" signs, but that was really a compromise with my wife who did want "No Trespassing" signs up.

For me, it really boils down to rather the restrictions were put in place as a result of actual problems or to prevent imagined problems that never really existed.

I can imagine all kinds of problems that trespassers might cause on our property. My wife can imagine even more. But none have really occurred. Somebody stole my amazing as seen on TV stick it anywhere light bulb that I stuck in an outhouse down there. It was pretty easy to steal, it was probably kids, and they probably used it to light their way back home, but that's it. That's not worth putting up "No Trespassing" signs. I'd rather those local kids were hiking down there than have nothing better to do.

My guess is that no one would have bothered you, especially if you had your daypack on, were alone, and stayed on the trail. If I were the owner I'd be looking out for groups of teenage boys lugging boxes of beer, but I'd think nothing of seeing you out there alone, or small groups carrying packs.

So I probably would have went. I'm a stickler about not trespassing, but knowing my intentions were pure I think I'd have gone ahead and done my hike. And knowing what you know now I'd surely go back and do it.

I know you have a lot of maps and info on those trails, so I'm guessing that your maps didn't indicate that section was restricted. That's certainly an omission worth noting. A local "Trail Guide Book" author here, Tim Ernst, makes a point to mention private land borders near any of the routes he describes and I've always appreciated that.
Posted by: PerryMK

Re: A National Scenic Trail with a No trespassing sign - 10/05/13 03:17 PM

I put up No Trespassing signs after finding ATVs decided to tear up my property. It should be unnecessary as there is no question that this is private property (several consecutive lots in a neighborhood of 2-3 acre lots). They probably figured it didn't matter or just didn't think. Now they know. I have no idea who they are and maybe its better that way.

I've learned that there are a number of sections of the FT that are on private land. None are marked on the maps.
Posted by: billstephenson

Re: A National Scenic Trail with a No trespassing sign - 10/05/13 05:54 PM

Originally Posted By PerryMK
I put up No Trespassing signs after finding ATVs decided to tear up my property. It should be unnecessary as there is no question that this is private property (several consecutive lots in a neighborhood of 2-3 acre lots). They probably figured it didn't matter or just didn't think. Now they know. I have no idea who they are and maybe its better that way.

I've learned that there are a number of sections of the FT that are on private land. None are marked on the maps.


I would do the same thing. I'm not a huge fan of ATVs anyway, and what happened to you is why. Our land isn't very accessible, so that's not been a problem. I have some neighbors who ride back there but they've helped me build trails and they just crawl along on their ATVs.