Taking rock from BLM... actually part of my Grandpa's building?

[Rock knocker]

It certainly isn't prehistoric. It certainly isn't an antiquity. That leaves historic. I'd be very surprised if that old structure is on the list of historic places. (Hint, if it were there would almost certainly be a plaque and it would probably would have been restored by now. I've dealt with preservationists before, they are like a dog with a bone once something gets designated as historic.) In other words, I don't think the law cited applies in this instance. Even if it did, it is at most $500 and I suspect a judge would throw that out in a heartbeat given the family attachment. I'm with those who say just take the personalized building stones

Being a listed historical place has nothing to do with it. I agree that he should have just taken off with a rock or two. Now he has plastered the world wide web with his wifes photo and their wish to violate the law.

Furthermore, seeing as you are unlikely to be a JD, your guesses what the penalty would be is pretty specious. He could lose his car, a bunch of money and get a federal felony conviction. The moment he made his post he screwed up.

 

[95XL883]

Being a listed historical place has nothing to do with it. I agree that he should have just taken off with a rock or two. Now he has plastered the world wide web with his wifes photo and their wish to violate the law.

Furthermore, seeing as you are unlikely to be a JD, your guesses what the penalty would be is pretty specious. He could lose his car, a bunch of money and get a federal felony conviction. The moment he made his post he screwed up.

I don't mean to be argumentative but your own quote stated the penalty was a fine up to $500 and/or 90 days of jail. Or did I misread that?

 

[95XL883]

Being a listed historical place has nothing to do with it. I agree that he should have just taken off with a rock or two. Now he has plastered the world wide web with his wifes photo and their wish to violate the law.

Furthermore, seeing as you are unlikely to be a JD, your guesses what the penalty would be is pretty specious. He could lose his car, a bunch of money and get a federal felony conviction. The moment he made his post he screwed up.

Being historic has a lot to do with it. The law specifically states it has to be historic, prehistoric or an antiquity. Clearly it is hot prehistoric or an antiquity. I have had experience restoring a place formally recognized as historic. The preservationists get very picky. (For example, they were making a big stink about the exact design of munions in door windows on an old firehouse. We pointed out to them that every photo that could be found showed there were no doors. They kept making the argument and making up restoration requirements without anything to back up their claim. They finally settled down when we suggested that we should duplicate the munions of the windows in the upper floors.)

 

[Rock knocker]

Being historic has a lot to do with it. The law specifically states it has to be historic, prehistoric or an antiquity. Clearly it is hot prehistoric or an antiquity. I have had experience restoring a place formally recognized as historic. The preservationists get very picky. (For example, they were making a big stink about the exact design of munions in door windows on an old firehouse. We pointed out to them that every photo that could be found showed there were no doors. They kept making the argument and making up restoration requirements without anything to back up their claim. They finally settled down when we suggested that we should duplicate the munions of the windows in the upper floors.)

None of that has anything to do with public lands and taking of artifacts

 

[Rock knocker]

I don't mean to be argumentative but your own quote stated the penalty was a fine up to $500 and/or 90 days of jail. Or did I misread that?

You misread

 

[radios1]

in any case, what's there is the property of the descendants, and they can do what they want with it.. there is still a line of ownership there.. and proof is engraved on the rocks..

 

[Rock knocker]

in any case, what's there is the property of the descendants, and they can do what they want with it.. there is still a line of ownership there.. and proof is engraved on the rocks..

Untrue.

If my grandfather scratched his initials in Grand Coulee during the construction, does that make it mine?

 

[Groo]

There was also a statement that another lived there after the Ancestor, so any claim of ownership is gone out the window.

 

[Rock knocker]

They never had title. If I lived at a house 70 years ago, could I come back years later and dismantle the siding or remove flowers.

 

[95XL883]

You misread

I read it properly . I was just being polite. The law you cited specifically says historic, prehistoric or antiquity. The old cabin is none of those. It also specifically states the max penalty, if it applied, is up to $500 and/or up to 90 days. So, wish the op well.

 

[Rock knocker]

I read it properly . I was just being polite. The law you cited specifically says historic, prehistoric or antiquity. The old cabin is none of those. It also specifically states the max penalty, if it applied, is up to $500 and/or up to 90 days. So, wish the op well.

Wrongo. That was in 1906. The penalty has been adjusted for inflation

 

[Slowpoke Slim]

I'd say it took the OP a long time to find his Grandpa's Pet Rock, that he lost all those years ago.

And that would be all I'd say about that.

Enjoy those family keep sakes.

 

[MossRoad]

Wrongo. That was in 1906. The penalty has been adjusted for inflation

So what's the current penalty? It might be a reasonable risk for the OP if he knows the possible outcome. Kinda like a speeding ticket. You know what to expect if you get caught. Like Dirty Harry said, "you've gotta ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?" :laughing:

 

[Rock knocker]

Up to a felony

 

[MossRoad]

Up to a felony

So is speeding if you do it right.

 

[radios1]

Untrue.

If my grandfather scratched his initials in Grand Coulee during the construction, does that make it mine?

if he scratched his name on a rock he owned, THAT would be his for the taking..

 

[MossRoad]

if he scratched his name on a rock he owned, THAT would be his for the taking..

Oh it would not. Geez. If you leave a part of the house, like a brick in the wall, it's no longer yours.

While pretty much no one would care if the OP went out there and picked up one rock with his father's name on it, it most likely is not a legal thing to do on BLM land. But who really cares? If it was my relative's writing, I'd pick it up and be gone and take my chances with the mercy of the officer that might stop me. It's not like he's picking up a piece of Lincoln's boyhood home, or the Appomattox Courthouse. It's an abandoned shed-like structure of no historical significance, except to the OP's family.

 

[radios1]

Oh it would not. Geez. If you leave a part of the house, like a brick in the wall, it's no longer yours.

While pretty much no one would care if the OP went out there and picked up one rock with his father's name on it, it most likely is not a legal thing to do on BLM land. But who really cares? If it was my relative's writing, I'd pick it up and be gone and take my chances with the mercy of the officer that might stop me. It's not like he's picking up a piece of Lincoln's boyhood home, or the Appomattox Courthouse. It's an abandoned shed-like structure of no historical significance, except to the OP's family.

WHAT?. if you leave a watch with your name on it, it's not yours anymore either?. because WHY.. think of it this way, paintings taken by the ****'s are still considered the property of the heirs of the owners, and get returned to the heirs.. same difference.. just because you lose possession of something , even for a very long time, doesn't make it the property of someone else.. and the OP didn't clarify how the property became the property of the BLM anyway.. that makes a big difference!..

 

[Rock knocker]

WHAT?. if you leave a watch with your name on it, it's not yours anymore either?. because WHY.. think of it this way, paintings taken by the ****'s are still considered the property of the heirs of the owners, and get returned to the heirs.. same difference.. just because you lose possession of something , even for a very long time, doesn't make it the property of someone else.. and the OP didn't clarify how the property became the property of the BLM anyway.. that makes a big difference!..

The fact that grandpa scratched his name on a stone that he built as a squatter has no equivalence in **** looting. One was theft, the other was abandonment.

 

[Sigarms]

While pretty much no one would care if the OP went out there and picked up one rock with his father's name on it, it most likely is not a legal thing to do on BLM land. But who really cares? If it was my relative's writing, I'd pick it up and be gone and take my chances with the mercy of the officer that might stop me. It's not like he's picking up a piece of Lincoln's boyhood home, or the Appomattox Courthouse. It's an abandoned shed-like structure of no historical significance, except to the OP's family.

Delete all other responses from this thread and just leave this one. Most common sense answer.

That said, just got me thinking about actual historic homes... How much of the structure would be "original"?