Railroad right of way

January 3, 2011

I have a couple questions, and I am looking for documentation, not just opinion, on these things.

1) In terms of active railroad tracks, there was a comment posted on a cache that I placed near a railroad (not 150 feet away as suggested by the website, but clearly not near the tracks or crossing) along the side of a paved road. The comment was that it was against federal law to place geocaches near active railroad lines. When I looked online, under the Federal Railroad Administration website, I found nothing to this effect. As for my state, PA, the FRA website has the following document which states PA doesn't have any laws specific to railroads, beyond normal trespassing ones (which I am not in violation of by being down the road from the tracks).

2) It was also stated that "A Geocacher has been arrested, jailed, had to go to court and paid a large fine for placing a cache near an active railroad line. The local bomb squad destroyed his cache." (Skeetsurfer quote) Does anyone know the details of this? If trespassing was not involved, what law was broken? Again, I'm looking for documentation, not just "Not a good idea".

Thanks.

4.8k · January 3, 2011

1. You are correct. The law that is usually applied has to do with trespassing on railroad ROW.

2. The incident that is most often cited involved a cache near a railroad tunnel in Northern California. One of the charges against the cache owner was for tresspassing, but I believe they were ultimately convicted for some other offense. I don't know if actual jail time was involved or not.

38.2k · January 3, 2011

In response to #2, here is some reading for ya

1.8k · January 3, 2011

I have a couple questions, and I am looking for documentation, not just opinion, on these things.

2) It was also stated that "A Geocacher has been arrested, jailed, had to go to court and paid a large fine for placing a cache near an active railroad line. The local bomb squad destroyed his cache." (Skeetsurfer quote) Does anyone know the details of this? If trespassing was not involved, what law was broken? Again, I'm looking for documentation, not just "Not a good idea".

I can't speak to your first point very well, but I suspect the 2nd point refers to the saga of Tunnel Vision "1909" (GC1A1C). The relevant info you're asking for can mostly be culled from the listing for GEO-COURT (GC5350). I'll quote in part:

"The sentence was then read. It goes as follows: 1 year jail time, 1 year on probation to stay out of any kind of trouble, 1 year license suspension in the state of California, and to pay all the expenses incurred for the bomb squad... With all the fines and fees attatched to all of this, the grand total was $2030.00, which we had to pay right then and there. To be kind, for the moment, the judge told him he would drop the 1 year jail time. He was not to be near the train tracks ever again unless he was on the train."

January 3, 2011

Ok, but obviously there was a lot more involved in that than simply placing a cache. Vandalism was also involved. Thanks for the links. Any other ones?

I guess what I'm going for is how can you say it's unsafe to place a cache somewhere that it is perfectly safe to drive a car, park a car, or other similar things? The one I'm looking at placing is at the edge of a parking area, 80-100 feet away from the tracks themselves, but definitely not nearby them, and would come with many warnings that it has nothing to do with and isn't nearby the tracks.

19k · January 3, 2011

Ok, but obviously there was a lot more involved in that than simply placing a cache. Vandalism was also involved. Thanks for the links. Any other ones?

I guess what I'm going for is how can you say it's unsafe to place a cache somewhere that it is perfectly safe to drive a car, park a car, or other similar things? The one I'm looking at placing is at the edge of a parking area, 80-100 feet away from the tracks themselves, but definitely not nearby them, and would come with many warnings that it has nothing to do with and isn't nearby the tracks.

Safety is not the reason for the RR guideline (nor for any of the guidelines). Trespassing laws are the basis.

1.8k · January 3, 2011

Ok, but obviously there was a lot more involved in that than simply placing a cache. Vandalism was also involved. Thanks for the links. Any other ones?

I guess what I'm going for is how can you say it's unsafe to place a cache somewhere that it is perfectly safe to drive a car, park a car, or other similar things? The one I'm looking at placing is at the edge of a parking area, 80-100 feet away from the tracks themselves, but definitely not nearby them, and would come with many warnings that it has nothing to do with and isn't nearby the tracks.

I don't know of any other situations where a geocacher was convicted of criminal trespassing and given a multi-thousand dollar fine, a suspended 1-year jail sentence, loss of his driving privileges for a year and a ban from approaching railroad tracks. That's the only example that's coming to mind I'm afraid.

I'm not of the opinion that placing a cache 80-100 feet away from railroad tracks is unsafe. I am of the opinion that permission from the RR is required, and that a grumpy judge can be a bit of a bummer. If you contact the RR and get permission, I suspect that the local reviewer would willingly publish the cache.

3.4k · January 3, 2011

I am perplexed by the placement of geocaches on old tracks, even along rail-trails. In the Monterey, CA, vicinity is an old RR right of way. No tracks, but the right of way still exists (despite the local residents efforts to obtain it as a park.)

One thing which bears attention - land which is still property of a Railroad may again become an operating railroad. To wit, Californian's have voted in favor of High-speed rail, which could expand branches and spurs in the future. Laws granting certain rights to railroads were written in the 1800's, doing the government's utmost to encourage expansion of rails, and thus carriage of people and goods throughout the country, so remain quite powerful to this date. Land and unused rails belonging to railroads should be treated with the respect due private property and with an eye toward what the worst hysteria DHS could cook up. Best to keep clear.

Now.. If you find an interesting trestle, bridge or tunnel, there's certainly motivation for a cache, but perhaps the starting point of a multi where the final is a safe distance away - a popular ploy where parks ban caches, but the final could still be placed outside them.

4.8k · January 3, 2011

I suspect it may take a bit more than finding a friendly railroad official to say yes, since there are multiple government agencies that have oversight responsibilities. Homeland Security might be at the top of that list, but I might be mistaken.

4.2k · January 3, 2011

I suspect it may take a bit more than finding a friendly railroad official to say yes, since there are multiple government agencies that have oversight responsibilities. Homeland Security might be at the top of that list, but I might be mistaken.

And really, wouldn't it just be easier to find a different location?

9.3k · January 3, 2011

Sorry FireRef, I can't offer any helpful advice for your situation, as I don't deal with Federal law that often. My only direct experience with rail road right of ways involved trapping wild hogs. Volusia County gave me permission to remove wild hogs from a property they acquired. At the time, the only reasonable access to the property was to drive to a RR crossing, then head north along the RR about 300 yards, then crossing the tracks, entering the property. I found a guy who identified himself as a Captain of whatever law enforcement agency had precedence at the time, (I don't remember what they were called. Rail Road Police doesn't sound right...), and he issued me a letter granting permission to be on the right of way, warning me if I got stopped, and didn't have the letter, I would be arrested.

I don't know if his threat was valid, as I'm not one to argue when someone tells me a particular activity is illegal. I suppose if enough hyperbole was applied, (But Officer, I must go down the right of way. Lassie said young Timmy fell down a well!) I might debate the legality of an issue, but if all that is at stake is a film can in a shrub, I'll take their word for it.

January 3, 2011

I suspect it may take a bit more than finding a friendly railroad official to say yes, since there are multiple government agencies that have oversight responsibilities. Homeland Security might be at the top of that list, but I might be mistaken.

And really, wouldn't it just be easier to find a different location?

Of course - it's always easier to bow to people's requests not to do something somewhere, even when it's nothing more than someone having a problem with it (not a legal issue or anything like that). But the point of this game, or one of them, is the "location" aspect, and I want them to be close to this area to see something I hold near and dear. If I have to move it down the road (I found a spot 152' away from the track), I can - but that's not the point.

January 3, 2011

I think I would call the RR, and ask them how wide their ROW is. I would think if you were past that ROW you should be okay. If you're not on their ROW you can't be trespassing, right?

10.1k · January 3, 2011

One of the problems is that railroad right of way is not consistently 150' (or whatever). Out west, large land grants were awarded to railroads to encourage them to run the rail lines. Back east, this is seldom true. Example I've used before:

Interesting little park along the river, maintained by Rockaway River Conservancy. Right of way appears to be about 50', according to Google. Heck, most of New Jersey Transit does not have 150' right-of-way! I have not found a good hiding place in that park (It floods, and is frequented by people who visit the local food kitchen.) So, I have no idea what my reviewer would say about it. But right-of-way varies considerably. If the cache is on the road, I would wonder about railroad right of way.

15.3k · January 4, 2011

Even "out west" there are parks, bike/pedestrian paths, and other public spaces along railroad lines, less than 150' from the tracks. I've found a few caches in places like this. Usually they make it clear in the cache description that the cache is not on the railroad ROW and that there is no reason to trespass on the railroad ROW.

January 4, 2011

Now.. If you find an interesting trestle, bridge or tunnel, there's certainly motivation for a cache, but perhaps the starting point of a multi where the final is a safe distance away - a popular ploy where parks ban caches, but the final could still be placed outside them.

Note however that in the case of a trestle, bridge, or tunnel, that landmark is almost certainly on RR property. Even a virtual stage of a multi should not be on private property, nor encourage a seeker to cross private property. Thus this differs from the case of a park which bans caches, where access is allowed but cache placement is not.

Edward

January 4, 2011

Sorry FireRef, I can't offer any helpful advice for your situation, as I don't deal with Federal law that often. My only direct experience with rail road right of ways involved trapping wild hogs. Volusia County gave me permission to remove wild hogs from a property they acquired. At the time, the only reasonable access to the property was to drive to a RR crossing, then head north along the RR about 300 yards, then crossing the tracks, entering the property. I found a guy who identified himself as a Captain of whatever law enforcement agency had precedence at the time, (I don't remember what they were called. Rail Road Police doesn't sound right...), and he issued me a letter granting permission to be on the right of way, warning me if I got stopped, and didn't have the letter, I would be arrested.

I don't know if his threat was valid, as I'm not one to argue when someone tells me a particular activity is illegal. I suppose if enough hyperbole was applied, (But Officer, I must go down the right of way. Lassie said young Timmy fell down a well!) I might debate the legality of an issue, but if all that is at stake is a film can in a shrub, I'll take their word for it.

Yes, the correct term would be RR Police.

The Steaks

9.2k · January 4, 2011

In Texas, the law in question is called "INTERFERENCE WITH RAILROAD PROPERTY". You can be charged with this if you simply enter a RR ROW without authority to do so (though in reality, you'll probably just get a warning the first time), or if you tamper with or place an obstruction on the tracks or anywhere within the ROW. It's that part which concerns geocaching. Most judges will accept the railroad's opinion of whether or not something is an "obstruction", but it's pretty clear that leaving a cache could easily be considered tampering with the property.

Severity of the charges can range from a misdemeanor to a 3rd degree felony, based on the circumstances.

4.2k · January 4, 2011

I suspect it may take a bit more than finding a friendly railroad official to say yes, since there are multiple government agencies that have oversight responsibilities. Homeland Security might be at the top of that list, but I might be mistaken.

And really, wouldn't it just be easier to find a different location?

Of course - it's always easier to bow to people's requests not to do something somewhere, even when it's nothing more than someone having a problem with it (not a legal issue or anything like that). But the point of this game, or one of them, is the "location" aspect, and I want them to be close to this area to see something I hold near and dear. If I have to move it down the road (I found a spot 152' away from the track), I can - but that's not the point.

If I recall, the location you picked out was really darn close to the active tracks. Did you ever do the leg work to prove that it wasn't in the ROW?

2.1k · January 4, 2011

It really depends on the area and what the tracks are used for.

Example. I live in Durango CO, we've got a sightseeing train (coalfire narrow gauge) that is owned by a local guy. He allows everyone to cross the tracks at just about any point, but not to climb on the RR Bridges, the train and the ROW are his. So caches can be close to the tracks but not on them (duh?).

When I lived in New Mexico the train and ROW was owned and managed by a company that didn't allow any access. They probably don't allow caches within 150 feet of the tracks for good reason.

14k · January 4, 2011

I'll add another real world example to the thread...

After I had my first cache published the next attempt was in a small town park that was next to RR tracks. Entrance into the park was off a road, cross the tracks, and into a small parking lot. I place the cache near a Gazebo on the other side of the parking lot from the tracks. From the hiding spot there is a spectacular view of one of the Finger Lakes. The location was about 100' from the tracks (I was a newbie at the time...don't criticize). After submitting the cache for review the Reviewer responding and asked if the RR tracks were active and to describe the area. I told him/her that the tracks were used about twice a day and describe the location of the hide relative to the parking lot, the RR tracks and lake shore.

In response, the reviewer indicated that it could not be published due to the proximity of the tracks and included a link to the "GEO-COURT" incident described earlier in this thread. He/She also indicated that it *could* be published if I provided written permission from the RR company (Norfolk-Southern Rail Road) *and* from the town park department.

Although, I was pretty disappoint about not being able to place a cache in a very scenic location (which also happens to be a popular spot for launching a kayak....I was going to call it Park-n-Paddle) I didn't pursue obtaining permission.

The way I see it, Geocaching requires three subsets of people to exist. Obviously Geocache hiders and Geocache seekers are required, but the most important group of people are land managers. Except in the unique case where a cache is placed on the property of the cache owner, the physical place where all other geocaches are located is managed by someone that, like it or not, has the authority to deny/allow use of that space for the game we enjoy. Some land managers may condone and even encourage the use of the land they manage for geocaching. Others may deny the activity entirely. There is also subset that may be sitting on the fence someone. They may know about geocaching and that the property they manage is used for the game, but it might not take much (scorch earth hunts, trespassing after hours in a park, etc) to convert them for allowing geocaching to denying it. Still another subset are those that are unaware that the property they manage is being used for geocaching, but if they find out, they're probably going to take a position based on how we, as geocachers, play the game.

When dealing with land managers we can try to work with them, and have wonderful success stories like the allowance of geocaching in a National Park in Washington State or we can challenge their authority. I have a pretty good idea about which approach is likely going to be the most effective for the longevity of the game.

January 4, 2011

I suspect it may take a bit more than finding a friendly railroad official to say yes, since there are multiple government agencies that have oversight responsibilities. Homeland Security might be at the top of that list, but I might be mistaken.

And really, wouldn't it just be easier to find a different location?

Of course - it's always easier to bow to people's requests not to do something somewhere, even when it's nothing more than someone having a problem with it (not a legal issue or anything like that). But the point of this game, or one of them, is the "location" aspect, and I want them to be close to this area to see something I hold near and dear. If I have to move it down the road (I found a spot 152' away from the track), I can - but that's not the point.

If I recall, the location you picked out was really darn close to the active tracks. Did you ever do the leg work to prove that it wasn't in the ROW?

Darn close was 80 feet down the road from the active tracks - probably back about where the third car would stop if the gates were down. It was at the end of a small parking area, well back from and not in any way associated with or to be confused with the tracks, down a drain grate (hanging tied to it). Public roadway. Not sure who I would ask for permission, except maybe the county. It certainly is not owned by or maintained by the railroad.

As for right of way, no - I didn't. I certainly think that if the railroad owned the property that far back, they would be responsible for maintenance on the road there, the sides, cutting down brush, etc. They don't.

1.8k · January 4, 2011

I certainly think that if the railroad owned the property that far back, they would be responsible for maintenance on the road there, the sides, cutting down brush, etc. They don't.

I'm not sure that's how right of way works. I believe the RR can work out permissions with other individuals or institutions (including a municipal government) regarding land that falls within their right of way, without relinquishing those rights in general.

8.9k · January 4, 2011

I certainly think that if the railroad owned the property that far back, they would be responsible for maintenance on the road there, the sides, cutting down brush, etc. They don't.

Lack of maintenance shows lack of ownership?

January 4, 2011

I certainly think that if the railroad owned the property that far back, they would be responsible for maintenance on the road there, the sides, cutting down brush, etc. They don't.

Lack of maintenance shows lack of ownership?

They certainly don't come plow the roads in the winter - so maybe I could sue them if I get into an accident on the public road, 100 feet from the active railroad track but clearly in the general vicinity of it, and win because it is their land and they're not maintaining it?

I don't believe it is theirs.

And it doesn't matter if it is. I have permission to drive my car across it. I have permission to be in that area, walking, biking or driving. I highly doubt there is any regulation for what activities are permitted in the grade crossing area except for stopping on the tracks or in between the gates or lights when the signals are active. (or interfering with a train, the tracks, or the signals). So placing a cache 70-80 feet from the tracks, and 50 feet from the signals, on the side of a public roadway, doesn't seem like any kind of violation of any trespassing laws of any kind related to the railroad.

Edited January 4, 2011 by FireRef

14k · January 4, 2011

I certainly think that if the railroad owned the property that far back, they would be responsible for maintenance on the road there, the sides, cutting down brush, etc. They don't.

Lack of maintenance shows lack of ownership?

They certainly don't come plow the roads in the winter - so maybe I could sue them if I get into an accident on the public road, 100 feet from the active railroad track but clearly in the general vicinity of it, and win because it is their land and they're not maintaining it?

I don't believe it is theirs.

And it doesn't matter if it is. I have permission to drive my car across it. I have permission to be in that area, walking, biking or driving. I highly doubt there is any regulation for what activities are permitted in the grade crossing area except for stopping on the tracks or in between the gates or lights when the signals are active. (or interfering with a train, the tracks, or the signals). So placing a cache 70-80 feet from the tracks, and 50 feet from the signals, on the side of a public roadway, doesn't seem like any kind of violation of any trespassing laws of any kind related to the railroad.

There seems to be a simple solution for this. Instead of speculating on whether or not is seems like trespassing laws are being violated you could contact that the RR company and ask if they'd mind if you placed a cache 70-80 from the tracks.

Groundspeak specified 150 feet as a the minimum distance for which a cache can be placed relative to railroad tracks. I don't knot if they consulted with RR companies prior to coming up with that number but that's what reviewers have to work with. When a reviewer looks over a cache submission and sees a set of railroad tracks on a map that appears to be 150 or closer from the submitted coordinates they're going to ask for more details. For example, I'm sure someone could come up with some exceptions where there was a significant physical barrier between the tracks and the hide. But like it or not, 150' is the number that we all have to work with. I can't help but think that if GS changed that number to 75' you be trying to place a cache 60' from the tracks and trying to get an exception.

4.2k · January 4, 2011

So given two options: prove your case and show that it's not on RR property and complain on the forums... you took the one that won't actually get you any closer to your cache being listed?

8.9k · January 4, 2011

So given three options: prove your case and show that it's not on RR property , contact the railroad and see if they mind and complain on the forums... you took the one that won't actually get you any closer to your cache being listed?

Slight fix...

7.9k · January 5, 2011

...a spectacular view of one of the Finger Lakes...

Sounds like a worthwhile cache, and that you SHOULD have pursued the permission aspect to get it published.

January 5, 2011

The following is taken from the Michigan Railroad Code:

462.273 Walking, riding, driving, or being upon or along right-of-way or yard; permission required; “right-of-way” defined; being upon, entering, or damaging buildings, rolling stock, or equipment; applicability of section; violation as misdemeanor; penalty.

Sec. 273.

(1) Except in the case of a right-of-way designated as a demonstration snowmobile trail in section 82126 of part 821 (snowmobiles) of the natural resources and environmental protection act, Act No. 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being section 324.82126 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, a person shall not walk, ride, drive, or be upon or along the right-of-way or yard of a railroad company operating its lines within this state, or go upon or cross the right-of-way or yard at a place other than a public or private crossing, unless having first obtained written permission from the owner or occupant railroad, its agent or servant.

The entire section of the Code can be found here:

http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-462-273

Your state laws may vary, but are likely very similar.

7.9k · January 5, 2011

...at the end of a small parking area, well back from and not in any way associated with or to be confused with the tracks, down a drain grate (hanging tied to it)...

Without any additional information, it sounds like a thoroughly forgettable cache.

Is it some sort of historical location?

Is it really a location worth fighting over, or is it just your sense of entitlement to hide your cache where ever you want unless the Supreme Court says otherwise?

January 5, 2011

...at the end of a small parking area, well back from and not in any way associated with or to be confused with the tracks, down a drain grate (hanging tied to it)...

Without any additional information, it sounds like a thoroughly forgettable cache.

Is it some sort of historical location?

Is it really a location worth fighting over, or is it just your sense of entitlement to hide your cache where ever you want unless the Supreme Court says otherwise?

Thank you for your judgment of my choice of what I consider to be a good cache. You're welcome to forget it, and I would ask that this thread be closed, since some suggestions have been made, and at this point, I'd rather not have to endure people violating the civility (and TOS) of the forums by insulting what I consider to be a cache worth having and insulting me personally by references to a "sense of entitlement" I do not have.

2.1k · January 5, 2011

I certainly think that if the railroad owned the property that far back, they would be responsible for maintenance on the road there, the sides, cutting down brush, etc. They don't.

Lack of maintenance shows lack of ownership?

If that's true, there's a free house available in my neighborhood.

20.7k · January 5, 2011

The following is taken from the Michigan Railroad Code:

462.273 Walking, riding, driving, or being upon or along right-of-way or yard; permission required; “right-of-way” defined; being upon, entering, or damaging buildings, rolling stock, or equipment; applicability of section; violation as misdemeanor; penalty.

Sec. 273.

(1) Except in the case of a right-of-way designated as a demonstration snowmobile trail in section 82126 of part 821 (snowmobiles) of the natural resources and environmental protection act, Act No. 451 of the Public Acts of 1994, being section 324.82126 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, a person shall not walk, ride, drive, or be upon or along the right-of-way or yard of a railroad company operating its lines within this state, or go upon or cross the right-of-way or yard at a place other than a public or private crossing, unless having first obtained written permission from the owner or occupant railroad, its agent or servant.

The entire section of the Code can be found here:

http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-462-273

Your state laws may vary, but are likely very similar.

You failed to post the most important part of that law; the definition of ROW:

(2) For purposes of this section, “right-of-way” means the track or roadbed owned by a railroad and that property owned by a railroad which is located on either side of its tracks and which is readily recognizable to a reasonable person as being railroad property or is reasonably identified as such by fencing, the existence of railroad tracks, or appropriate signs.

Clearly, the location as described by FireRef does not fall within the scope of this law.

January 5, 2011

This topic has been derailed first by changing the scope from a request for legal documentation showing the rights of the various railroad companies to a debate about a particular cache placement, and then by the introduction of personal attacks such as

...or is it just your sense of entitlement to hide your cache where ever you want...

. The topic is being closed.

Railroad right of way

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment