So, my son and I hunt on VA national forest land (as we did recently with my dad [grandpa]).  We backpack in and hunt until the end of the hunting day on Saturday (about 5:00pm on Saturday).  When we are done, it is dark and we head back to our campsite and hang out and then sleep in our tents.  We pack up and head down and out on Sunday, when hunting still is illegal on public land.  

“It shall be unlawful to have in possession … any firearm which is not unloaded and cased or dismantled on all National Forest lands statewide … except during the period when it is lawful to take bear, deer …”  http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/hunting/regulations/publiclands.asp#nationalforests

So, on Sunday morning, my young son and I are backpacking out on a Sunday after spending the night in the NF hunting.  We must carry our rifles out.  On Sunday, that appears to be a technical violation of the law unless the rifles are “dismantled” whatever that means

Also, if we hunt until the end of the hunting day on Saturday, technically we must have “dismantled” rifles beginning the minute the hunting day is over.  I have a CCL and a concealed handgun, but that is irrelevant to carrying a rifle.  Are we okay if we remove the bolt and ammo from the rifles on our way back to camp?  Can we do the same on the way the next (Sunday) morning on our way back to the trailhead?  

The laws are silly compared to places like Colorado where you can carry a rifle in the NF period.  

Here, I feel like I am okay, but technically may be violating a law and exposing myself to jail time while hunting with my 8-11 yr-old sons just by camping on the night of a hunt and backpacking out the next morning.  

Dumb laws or am I missing something?

Any thoughts?

From your quote of the law it says "unloaded and cased" OR "dismantled".

If your worried about it just go with the unloaded and cased option, it's stupid but  you wouldn't be breaking any laws.

My understanding is that unloaded and cased is A-OK anywhere in the state, regardless of the season.  No?

Some small game such as grouse and quail are still in season, making the possession of a rifle LEGAL in the NF.

Check your small game seasons

Thanks for the responses.  

As noted, I'm talking about backpack hunting with young sons and (me) an old daddy.  We carry all we can.  We can't carry hard cases for our rifles.  So, the question is whether removing the bolt makes a rifle "dismantled."  

Vatopa, we're hunting during hunting season, but there is NO hunting on Sundays on public land (as silly as that is) which is the issue I discussed.  It's not an issue of November/December versus some other month.  The issue  is that we camp after backpacking and hunting and have to carry our sinful rifles out on a Sunday when (no matter what the season is) no hunting is allowed.

I have spent many years doing just what you have described.  I never once had any issues and I have run into the park wardens many times.  We have camped for over a week on many occasions that included Sundays in the forest and were never questioned.  

Under your logic, the Sunday's during deer/bear or any season would be off season and guns would be outlawed. So one could not even enter the NF until after daylight on the Mondays.  

If I remember correctly,  Deer ends on a Saturday, but Bear continues for several weeks. So you are still "in season"


Best advice: don't over think it to much, and just do not wander into the national park without getting a permit first.

No requirement for the cases to be hard cases, a simple gun sock that ties shut is considered a case.

Also taking a bolt out of a bolt action rifle or an AR should be sufficient for disassembly as the gun is no longer in a ready to fire mode.

One father was prosecuted and sent to jail about 10 years ago for driving on the Blue Ridge Parkway with a concealed handgun when he was just on the (National Park property) highway with no ill intent.  I don't want to "over think" it, but I don't want to be carted off to jail (even a 1/1,000 chance) if an over-zealous prosecutor comes after me when I'm with my sons.  

There is NO, ZERO, hunting allowed on public land on a Sunday--it doesn't matter whether it's deer, bear, or anything else.  Deer season ends on a particular Saturday and bear season continues, but there is no hunting ANYTHING on a Sunday on public land in Virginia--nothing.  It's not my logic, it's the law.  Sometimes the law is enforced; sometimes it is not.  It's stupid.  

"[J]ust do not wander into the national park without getting a permit first."  I have all the permits one can have.  There is no permit to have a firearm in a NF on a Sunday.  

I think their rules have changed within the last ten years though to allow only ccw. I seem to remember them once allowing open carry only but maybe I'm mistaken.

National parks now follow local concealed carry rules.
In Virginia that would be a concealed handgun.

Long guns are NOT covered by the concealed carry rules.

Correct.  My point just was that, under the different pre-2009 law, a guy was prosecuted for having a concealed handgun in his vehicle while driving on the Blue Ridge Parkway when he had his concealed carry permit and he thought it was totally legal (he did not realize that the highway blacktop was national park property).  Thinking it was legal, he openly told the cop that he had a firearm when a cop asked him after pulling him over for something like a broken tail light.  It was a technicality with no intent to break the law, yet the guy went to jail and his family had to do without him for a few years if I remember correctly.

I'm not concerned about the applicability of those national park rules.   I'm just concerned that that case illustrated generally that just because you're not doing something "wrong" doesn't mean you won't go to jail in Virginia.  Accordingly, I am trying to figure out whether removing the bolt make the rifle "dismantled" within the meaning of the law.  My son carries out his rifle too.  I don't want him breaking the law as well.

FWIW, I know that the law banning concealed carry on NP lands for people with a concealed carry permit was overridden in 2009.  But just to show how aggressive the cops and prosecutors can be in punishing people who make an honest and harmless mistake involving the carrying of firearms somewhere forbidden on federal lands in Virginia, the case I mentioned above is: United States v. Gettier, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25122 (W.D. Va. Mar. 25, 2008).

Below are excerpts of the March 2008  decision:

Defendant Damon J. Gettier (“Gettier”) was charged with possession of a loaded weapon in a motor vehicle on the Blue Ridge Parkway (“Parkway”) and failure to obey a traffic control device, in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 2.4(b) and 36 C.F.R. § 4.12, respectively. Section 2.4(b) provides that “[c]arrying or possessing a loaded weapon in a motor vehicle, vessel or other mode of transportation is prohibited . . .” Section 4.12 states that “[f]ailure to comply with the directions of a traffic control device is prohibited unless otherwise directed by the superintendent.”

A trial was held on February 7, 2008, at which the facts were largely undisputed. After the close of evidence, Gettier moved for a judgment of acquittal on two grounds. Gettier first argues that because the restriction on possessing a loaded weapon in a motor vehicle on the Parkway is not posted on signs at the entrance of the Parkway, he cannot be held criminally liable for violating such restriction. Second, Gettier argues that the absence at trial of the National Park Service Ranger who issued his citation prejudiced his right to a fair trial. The court took Gettier’s motion under advisement to maturely consider the issue. After studying applicable law, and for the reasons set forth in this Memorandum Opinion, the Court must reject Defendant’s arguments and enter a finding of guilt on the violation of 36 C.F.R. § 2.4(b) and 36 C.F.R. § 4.12. A sentencing hearing will be set. …

On January 4, 2008, Rangers Ryan Parr and Thomas Lewis of the National Park Service (“NPS”) observed a vehicle enter the Parkway near milepost 112 in the Western District of Virginia. The vehicle made a right turn onto the Parkway, but, according to the testimony of Ranger Parr, failed to signal and did not come to a complete stop at the stop sign before executing the turn. The Rangers proceeded to pull Gettier’s vehicle over on national park property. Ranger Lewis approached Gettier’s vehicle and Gettier promptly informed him that he had a loaded weapon in the vehicle and a Virginia concealed weapons permit. Ranger Lewis asked Gettier to step out of the vehicle and requested permission to search the vehicle. Gettier consented to the search of the vehicle, and Ranger Parr executed the search. Gettier told Ranger Parr that he had a Kimber .45 caliber semi-automatic pistol in the center console of the vehicle, and Ranger Parr retrieved the weapon. Gettier told the Rangers that the weapon was “cocked and locked,” meaning that the weapon was ready to fire. ..  Ranger Parr testified that the weapon was in a leather holster with the hammer back, hence being “cocked,” but that there was a strip of leather between the hammer and the firing pin which would need to be removed before the weapon would fire. …  Ranger Lewis then completed a search of the vehicle and also found a fully-loaded .38 caliber Smith and Wesson handgun in the passenger seat pocket. Gettier told the Rangers that he had forgotten that the second weapon was in the vehicle. The Rangers explained to Gettier that loaded firearms are not allowed in motor vehicles traveling on the Parkway, at which point Gettier began arguing that such a restriction conflicted with his Virginia concealed weapons permit. Gettier then demanded a court date. Accordingly, Gettier was issued a Violation Notice for both charges with a trial date of February 7, 2008.

At the trial in this matter, only Ranger Parr testified as to the facts of the criminal violations. Gettier argued that his right to a fair trial was prejudiced because the majority of his initial conversation occurred with Ranger Lewis, and not Ranger Parr. Further, Gettier testified that he drove the length of the Parkway in Roanoke and Bedford Counties and never once observed a sign informing the public of the prohibition against carrying or possessing a loaded firearm in a motor vehicle on the Blue Ridge Parkway. Gettier also testified that he did not know whether he came to a complete stop at the stop sign before making a right turn onto the Parkway or whether he used his turn signal before making the turn. Gettier did testify that he was aware of the prohibition against hunting in a National Park, in spite of the fact that no signs are posted alerting the public of that restriction. …

Gettier argues that both charges against him should be dismissed because his Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial was prejudiced by the absence of Ranger Lewis. …  Ranger Parr testified that Ranger Lewis had been transferred to Missouri. …  At multiple junctures during the trial, Gettier argued that he could not effectively present his defense to the charges without the presence of Ranger Lewis. Gettier never made any argument as to why Ranger Lewis’ presence was of such import, beyond that Ranger Lewis approached the vehicle, initiated the conversation with Gettier, searched his person, and issued him the citation.

... Because Gettier has failed to make any showing that Ranger Lewis’ testimony would be favorable to his defense, much less vital, the court cannot find that Gettier’s right to compulsory process, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, has been violated. Washington, 388 U.S. at 16. Further, Gettier’s failure to avail himself of the process established by the court to compel the attendance of any witnesses he chooses to subpoena or to request a continuance to do so also renders his argument meritless. …

Gettier next argues that he cannot be convicted of carrying or possessing a loaded weapon in a motor vehicle in a national park because he did not have adequate notice that such activity was in violation of federal law. This argument also lacks merit.

In United States v. Lofton, 233 F.3d 313, (4th Cir. 2000), the Fourth Circuit decided a case very similar to the one at bar. In Lofton, the defendant was charged with violating another provision of section 2.4 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 36 C.F.R. § 2.4(a)(1), prohibiting “possessing, carrying, or using a weapon, trap or net within lands owned or administered by the National Park Service.” 233 F.3d at 315. This charge arose when law enforcement officers heard shots being fired and saw Lofton carrying a shotgun in Oxen Cave Park, a park located in Maryland and administered by the National Park Service. The defendant in Lofton argued, as Gettier does here, that the park was required to give notice of the prohibition against carrying weapons therein. Id. at 316. The Fourth Circuit rejected Lofton’s argument, holding as follows:

“[S]ince regulation 2.4 does not require that parks give notice of the weapons prohibition, nor does it make carrying weapons illegal only in parks where such notice is given, the absence of any such notice is irrelevant. The publication in the Code of Federal Regulations of the general ban against the carrying of weapons in national parks provided sufficient notice to [the defendant] of the criminality of his conduct.”

Id. As Lofton is controlling precedent in this jurisdiction, Gettier’s notice argument fails pursuant to the ruling in that case.

At the center of this case is Gettier’s concern that he is a law abiding citizen who owns firearms and is allowed to carry them in his car on the highways of Virginia pursuant to the Second Amendment and a concealed weapons permit issued under Virginia state law. Gettier contends that he should have the same right to possess loaded guns in his car when driving on the Blue Ridge Parkway. Defendant argues that the Blue Ridge Parkway is, in one respect, a road much like other roads in Virginia, bearing traffic which many travelers use as a highway between, for example, United States routes 460 and 220 in the Roanoke area. But the Blue Ridge Parkway is not just a highway. While the Blue Ridge Parkway is in one sense a road, it is also a national park dotted with hiking trails, scenic overlooks, campgrounds and other attractions used by countless visitors. As such, the Parkway is subject to federal law and regulation just as any other national park. To protect the safety of persons visiting our national parks, the Department of the Interior has issued regulations concerning weapons, traps and nets in national parks. As the Fourth Circuit said in Lofton of the identical concern raised here, “[w]hile carrying a shotgun might under proper circumstances be perfectly legal according to Maryland law, it is not allowed in national parks, except under certain limited conditions not present in this case.” 233 F.3d at 317. As regards Gettier’s notice argument, Lofton controls this case and compels denial of [*12] the motion for judgment of acquittal.

It is worth noting that the regulation of weapons in national parks set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations is not an absolute ban on possession of a weapon in such a park. Under 36 C.F.R. 2.4(a)(3), “[t]raps, nets and unloaded weapons may be possessed within a temporary lodging or mechanical mode of conveyance when such implements are rendered temporarily inoperable or are packed, cased or stored in a manner that will prevent their ready use.” Further, persons may obtain permits under 36 C.F.R. § 2.4(d) to carry or possess firearms in a national park such as the Parkway “[t]o provide access to otherwise inaccessible lands or waters contiguous to a park area when other means of access are otherwise impracticable or impossible” and for other purposes specified in the regulations. As such, the regulatory scheme balances the interests of public safety of visitors to national parks with a person’s ability to possess a weapon therein. Obviously, this case does not involve a permitted use under the regulations, and it is plain that having a loaded “cocked and locked” semi-automatic pistol in the center console of a motor vehicle on the Parkway violates 36 C.F.R. § 2.4(b).

For the aforementioned reasons, Gettier’s motion for a judgment of acquittal is denied. The United States has proven that Gettier violated 36 C.F.R. § 2.4(b) and 36 C.F.R. § 4.12 beyond a reasonable doubt, and the Court finds Gettier GUILTY of the offenses as charged. The Clerk is hereby directed to set this case down for sentencing and to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion to defendant and counsel of record for the United States.

ENTER: This 25th day of March, 2008.
/s/ Michael F. Urbanski
United States Magistrate Judge

The National FOREST and National PARK are two completely different animals.    The forest is open to hunting, and the park is heavily restricted.

What I referenced above about a permit is only for the PARK. If you go to the ranger station for the National PARK you can get a special permit to transport and carry an unloaded gun/rifle across park grounds in order to hunt forest lands.   Do not enter the PARK without that permit.

Your court case involves the park, not the forest.  

Maybe you should call the forest service for an answer.

The parks still don't allow ccw, correct ? I haven't been in Shenandoah Natl Park in years because of their stupid rules.

Since January 2009, you are allowed to carry in national parks if you have a concealed permit that is valid the state containing the park.

I know the difference between the Park and Forest requirements.  As I said several times, the purpose of the mention of the Park case was to show that federal prosecutors are not necessarily going to be lenient and not put you in jail just because you are "innocent" in a real sense.  The federal prosecutor and federal judge in that case are not specific to Park land.  And if you get busted on National Forest land for a technicality, you could get the same prosecutorial and judicial treatment.

I may call the Forest Service, but what they say on the phone may not help too much.  They could bureaucratically say don't hunt then, which is shitty.  Or they could say "you're okay," which is nice but won't help me stay out of jail when someone else disagrees when I say that, "but someone on the phone said ..."

Gun sock and a cable lock?

Strap it to your pack.

It's cased in the sock and the cable lock prevents it from being operable.

I'd think if your rifle is slung/strapped to the pack and the bolt is packed away it would def show you're not looking to hunt. But that is common sense.