NZcaver wrote:BrianC wrote:The legal issue here is, Does the State, Fed, local jurisdiction have a legal defense? All closures are due to hypothetical science, not reality. It would appear that no agency wants to fight a loosing battle against someone with good intentions.
I would say that a person who knows a cave is closed but decides to enter on a recreational trip anyway - especially during hibernation time - would not be considered as having 'good intentions.'
Playing Devil's Advocate for a moment, I suspect a person's legal defense is more likely to succeed or fail based on their own motives and the circumstances of the incident, rather than by trying to challenge the science (or lack thereof) behind the closure orders overall. But I'm no lawyer either, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
Exactly the point , a challenge of the science would make some reluctant to try a case.
Years ago an old road had been closed by the new owner of the property. The road had been established for 100 years and had been traveled on and off the entire time. The beauty of the area is enchanting for family outings. My family and friends had been escorted off the road by an officer after he had been called by the new owner. I did everything short of committing another crime, to have the officer arrest me. He would not fall for it and we did leave only because I didn't want the potential conscience issues on me, because the property had become a drug hangout and the locals were becoming uneasy with many of the people congregating there.
I HAD considered trespassing a closed cave (obviously a non bat cave) only after alerting the media of the trespass before and during the trip, just to cement the reason for the occupancy. It would be a legal battle that would have had a reasonable outcome if it had happened near the start of the closings, but probably would have no good outcome now.