Amrak photo policy - Who is misinformed?

electricron wrote: I disagree. Take a look at these photos, and suggest to me where the UP property line begins and where TXDOT property line ends.

Ok- that's easy. I don't have the time to do all of these photos, so I'll do your first one. It looks like these pictures were taken in Texas, so... The Texas Criminal Trespass law is a comprehensive law which makes it a criminal offense to enter property - without consent - with notice by virtue of the fact that fencing is installed in such a manner to obviously exclude intruders. (inclusive) The answer to your question is that anywhere between those fences alongside the railway and adjacent to the highway, you would be trespassing on RR ROW. (I might add that what you have pictured is also a limited access highway, apparently similiarly fenced, so in addition, you would most likely be criminally trespassing as a pedestrian anywhere on that roadway or shoulder as well inside the outer fences.) I see a fence beyond the far left side shoulder at the access road, and I suspect that there is another fence that I can't see behind the trees on the far right side shoulder. If the jurisdictional authority is different from the railroad to the highway, you would be trespassing on railroad property between the fences on both sides of the RR ROW and you would be trespassing as a pedestrian on highway property between the RR's fencing and the highway fencing by the two shoulders that I mentioned.

State of Texas says...
§ 30.05. CRIMINAL TRESPASS. (a) A person commits an
offense if he enters or remains on or in property, including an
aircraft or other vehicle, of another without effective consent or
he enters or remains in a building of another without effective
consent and he:
(1) had notice that the entry was forbidden; or
(2) received notice to depart but failed to do so.
(b) For purposes of this section:
(1) "Entry" means the intrusion of the entire body.
(2) "Notice" means:
(A) oral or written communication by the owner or
someone with apparent authority to act for the owner;
(B) fencing or other enclosure obviously
designed to exclude intruders or to contain livestock;
(C) a sign or signs posted on the property or at
the entrance to the building, reasonably likely to come to the
attention of intruders, indicating that entry is forbidden;
(D) the placement of identifying purple paint
marks on trees or posts on the property, provided that the marks
are...
(my emphasis, italics, underlining, and abbreviation- PJ)

A non-continuous guard rail isn't a fence. It isn't obviously designed to exclude trespassers, nor contain livestock. Guardrails are designed to keep cars on the road.
There is no notice legally since these isn't a fence, posted signs, nor written or oral communication that the property is private in any of the photos I posted earlier.
Even with a fence, ranch owners usually post one of the following signs too.

electricron wrote:

BuddSilverliner269 wrote:Ron, you dont need to have signs, barriers or anything else to know that its private property and that you dont belong there.If its not at a station platform, you dont belong there and I would have to say that thats a no brainer.

I disagree. Take a look at these photos, and suggest to me where the UP property line begins and where TXDOT property line ends.

Beyond 3rdrail's excellent explanation of the risk of trespassing in the middle of a divided highway, there is also a line of red-tipped markers between the left guardrail and the track. Those are almost certainly right-of-way markers, though I can't quite see them on the other side in that picture. Since the only people with any right to be within the guardrails are TxDOT employees and UP employees, it's a non-issue. Likewise with I-25, all of which is NMDOT property, so the concept of a solely railroad right-of-way is incorrect to begin with. Both pictures were probably taken from overpasses anyway. As for the third, the photographer is being safe and responsible about where the picture is taken from. "Don't do stupid things" and "don't tick off the railroad" seem to be the best rules to follow.

electricron wrote:There is no notice legally since these isn't a fence, posted signs, nor written or oral communication that the property is private in any of the photos I posted earlier.

Since this is an Amtrak photo policy thread (in an Amtrak forum) I'm not sure what your pictures have to do with the topic. Amtrak's photo policy clearly states "A restricted area is any area not open to or occupied by the public, or is open to or occupied by the public on a limited basis. Signage, building design and physical barriers, i.e. fencing, bollards, etc., may also distinguish a restricted area from a public area." Note the word "may" ... not "will". Here you have written notice that their restricted area is private property.

There exists in the appropriate forum for Railroad Photography & Video here at Railroad.net a thread on Trespassing & filming questions. I'll try not to rehash the arguments made there in this forum.

Suffice it to say you may want to check local and state laws before assuming that an area is open to pedestrians. Texas law (Title 7 Sec. 545.065) allows pedestrians to be banned from limited access highways such as the one shown. (Google helped me find that!) I'm more concerned with the laws where I live so I'll leave it up to you to to seek legal advice for Texas (or wherever you wish to photograph). I'd love to see you walk down one of those medians or roadways and explain to an officer that what you're doing is legal.

One more word on these non-Amtrak photos ... photos from bridges. Is there a sidewalk or pedestrian access on the bridge? Is the pedestrian access on the side of the bridge where the photo was taken? In my state it is illegal to walk in a roadway when a sidewalk is provided. Check local laws.

The third photo is probably the safest to say it did not involve trespassing, although I do not know the "stopping standing parking" rules or pedestrian access along the side of Harry Hines Blvd. For these three actual photos I don't see the railroad objecting. But there are other authorities.

Sorry, but only a complete fool would think that entering the UP r-o-w in the top photo, signs or no signs, barriers or no barriers, would not be trespassing. You would think that most users of this forum would simply understand that railroad right-of-ways outside of stations or crossings are private property.

(The red markers, by the way, delineate a buried telephone or gas line. )

RDL 879 wrote:Sorry, but only a complete fool would think that entering the UP r-o-w in the top photo, signs or no signs, barriers or no barriers, would not be trespassing. You would think that most users of this forum would simply understand that railroad right-of-ways outside of stations or crossings are private property.

(The red markers, by the way, delineate a buried telephone or gas line )

RDL, me and you think that way, but apparently in this stupid litagous world, people need visual reminders that trespassing is trespassing. We need signs and fences to show that its private ROW. Come on......Regardless of the that, we are talking about this situation of John Almedea at eddington Station, and although the video that he shot the day he was questioned by a track foreman didnt appear to be trespassing, he has done it before and I know this for a fact from what I have seen him do before my very own eyes running out in front of trains to set his camera up. Many engineers at Septa know this guy just because of this kind of situation. Also I know that he has trespassed in many of his videos having been qualified or was qualified on the territory and being an engineer, you have to know every foot of the ROW.....

Let's think about this from top to bottom:
1.Trespassing is any entry on property owned by others.
2. Signs are not required because ignorance of the law is not a defense.
3. If you are not on your own property or public property, you are either invited in (think Walmart or Denny's) or trespassing (think railroad ROW or private office).
4. The railroad has not invited you past the station or revenue rolling stock.
5. Ergo, if you are on railroad property not a station or revenue rolling stock, or where someone instructs you to leave while acting as agent of the railroad, you are trespassing. Same goes for interstate highways - most states pass laws that pedestrians and small vehicles are not to operate on interstates.

Tadman wrote:Let's think about this from top to bottom:
1.Trespassing is any entry on property owned by others.
2. Signs are not required because ignorance of the law is not a defense.
3. If you are not on your own property or public property, you are either invited in (think Walmart or Denny's) or trespassing (think railroad ROW or private office).
4. The railroad has not invited you past the station or revenue rolling stock.
5. Ergo, if you are on railroad property not a station or revenue rolling stock, or where someone instructs you to leave while acting as agent of the railroad, you are trespassing. Same goes for interstate highways - most states pass laws that pedestrians and small vehicles are not to operate on interstates.

Thanks tadman very well put. Thank you

justalurker66 wrote:Since this is an Amtrak photo policy thread (in an Amtrak forum) I'm not sure what your pictures have to do with the topic. Amtrak's photo policy clearly states "A restricted area is any area not open to or occupied by the public, or is open to or occupied by the public on a limited basis. Signage, building design and physical barriers, i.e. fencing, bollards, etc., may also distinguish a restricted area from a public area." Note the word "may" ... not "will". Here you have written notice that their restricted area is private property.

Texas Eagle runs on the MoPac tracks, Texas Eagle and Heartland Flyer run on TRE tracks occasionally, Texas Eagle will soon permanently,and the Southwest Chief runs on NMRX tracks for the foreseeable future.

I'm not arguing there shouldn't be any restrictions at all from railroad corridors, I am arguing that at least signs, preferably fences, should be in placed to define the corridor's border. I also think it is perfectly okay to place a camera 1 inch off railroad property to take videos or photos. If the border isn't marked physically, by signs or fences, who's can honestly state whether the cameraman was on railroad property or not?

Can you even honestly define the border between your yard and your neighbors if there were no fence or markers in place?

Number 1 I would say the barrier on the side of the road is where TXDOT ends.

Number 2 on the right would be the guard rail and on the left, either where the gras begins or where the small fence is.

Number 3 doesn't have enough of the area to tell.

gprimr1 wrote:Number 1 I would say the barrier on the side of the road is where TXDOT ends. Number 2 on the right would be the guard rail and on the left, either where the grass begins or where the small fence is. Number 3 doesn't have enough of the area to tell.

So, if I were to pull off the highway onto the grass so I can safely change a right flat tire, I'm trespassing? Would you rather I stand in the fast left lane to change the tire and get ran over by a truck or car?

By the way, in the first photo, the distance between the pavement is 75 feet or so at a minimum, the UP ROW is only 50 feet wide maximum. At least a good 12 feet inside the pavement belongs to TXDOT, a public ROW. TXDOT owns enough land to add an inside lane to the freeway. But, it's not marked so well so all can see.

And that's my point, the corridor needs to be marked so all can see where the property lines are......

electricron wrote:I'm not arguing there shouldn't be any restrictions at all from railroad corridors, I am arguing that at least signs, preferably fences, should be in placed to define the corridor's border.

And after that is funded will the railroads have money to run trains? Around here signs and fences are put up where the problem is the biggest (just like the "fence" along the US-Mexican border). I've seen sections with a no trespassing sign every 50 ft where locals like to cross and sections that were fenced on both sides of the right of way. But most of the lines are not distinctly fenced.

Norfolk Southern owns the Amtrak used line through my town and about a month or two ago they had a major enforcement of the no trespass rules, arresting many people who thought the path along a railroad was public property. NS here has signs at grade crossings on their access roads and an occasional sign where locals like to illegally cross.

BTW: It seems that you want written restrictions in place to let you know where you can't go. Are you assuming that without a written restriction you can go there? Can you show written permission for you to be on railroad property? Even on a platform at a station?

I also think it is perfectly okay to place a camera 1 inch off railroad property to take videos or photos. If the border isn't marked physically, by signs or fences, who's can honestly state whether the cameraman was on railroad property or not?

Common sense isn't as common as one would hope. Lets start from the track. If you are standing on an active track to take a photo are you trespassing? How about an apparently unused siding - can you stand between the rails on that track? Can you be between crossing gates and the track? Can you be on land that was obviously modified by the railroad for railroad use (access roads, embankments)?

In the actual video in question the camera is within feet of the train on ground that has been cleared by the railroad for it's use. If that isn't railroad property or right of way perhaps you should sue the railroad for clearing land that isn't theirs. Some things are obvious.

You have not disclosed how the pictures in your post were taken. My assumption is that the first two are from public bridges where pedestrians are permitted and the third is from a highway where stopping or pedestrian access is permitted. As I stated, the railroad would not likely have a problem with those photos but someone else might.

Can you even honestly define the border between your yard and your neighbors if there were no fence or markers in place?

The marker is buried but a survey was done a couple of years ago and I can reference from objects that remain where that marker is. We mow a foot or two of each other's yard but an exact line to the inch isn't the question.

The photographer here is so far over the property line or right of way line that calling a survey crew is silly.

Common sense is what is needed. I would not define trespassing as simply being on another's property as that would mean I would trespass every time I went to the store. The definition would have to include "without permission" or "beyond the permission granted". Most railroads don't enforce trespass all the way up to their property lines or right of way lines. They are more concerned about trespass in areas where people shouldn't be. Close to the tracks. In areas the railroad has cleared for it's use. In areas where they store property. Around critical equipment.

Railfans spend a good portion of their lives (perhaps the best portion of their lives) on railroad property. The smart ones do it without trespassing.

We could argue semantics about what qualifies at "trespassing" until we're blue in the face, but it doesn't change the facts.

Unfortunately we live among an "ignorance is bliss" mentality, but personally I will call anyone out who claims they "didn't know better."

Folks, we can argue this matter all we want to, but I'll refer you to the above posting I made. Ignorance of the law is no defense. Period. You can make any analogy you want, show them pictures of TRE or NMRX and start arguing about signs, but when you get confronted by police and/or ticketed, they're going to tell you exactly what I tell you: Ignorance of the law is no defense. If you really want to make them laugh (or angry, more like it), tell the police how the law really works. Tell them what you learned at St. Copious of Northern, uh*. You will get a ride in the railfan seat of a police cruiser. Ask 3rdRail, I believe he was a cop.

*St. Copious of Northern, uh, is the law school Danny Noonan tells Chuck Schick he's attending after college in Caddyshack.

i know of a few location in ct that are public parking lots that are less than 20feet from the tracks. in new haven at the fire acedemy the end of the lot is 10 feet or so from the rail head. it is an open spot seeing how it is also serves as a local fishing spot and the fd and pd are ok with the lot being used