Posted on 11/12/2001 7:50:38 PM PST by Got a right to Life? . . Huh?
DENIO, Nev. — In his book, “1984,” George Orwell described a situation where cameras were situated on every post along with the warning, “Big Brother is watching you.”
The high desert wilderness between Cedarville and Winnemucca, Nev., is the last place people would suspect Big Brother would be watching.
John DeLong, a life-long area rancher, was checking his range recently when he noticed something out of place.
“I’ve been here all my life and know what the land looks like. My first thought was it might have been something connected with terrorism,” said DeLong.
He stopped his truck and walked over to an area that just didn’t look the same as it had a day or two earlier and made a discovery.
Camouflaged in the sagebrush was a camera lens with wires leading to a buried video camera. Assuming the camera had a motion or infrared sensor, DeLong went to the Bureau of Land Management in Winnemucca and told them he was the one on their film.
DeLong asked Roger Farschon, acting Black Rock Desert-High Rock Canyon Emigrant Trails National Conservation Area manager, why the camera was there. He was told it was part of an ongoing criminal investigation. According to Farschon, since the Conservation Area was formed nearly 150 wilderness signs have been stolen.
DeLong was assured by Farschon it was only one hidden camera.
“As long as I’ve lived here I’ve never seen anyone damage those signs,” said DeLong. “I drive by that location four or five times a week and can’t remember them ever being disturbed. People pretty much leave things alone and respect each others property here.”
Not long afterward, Bob Schweigert, a range management consultant, was monitoring range lands when he noticed something unusual just inside the wilderness boundary of the South Jackson Wilderness Area. He uncovered a camouflaged lens and a buried video camera. Schweigert noted it had a Department of Interior property sticker.
Both men were surprised to find a second camera because they had been told there was only one. They, and others, wonder how many more cameras are hidden.
When asked a second time about the cameras, Farschon answered, “This is an ongoing investigation and we are not allowed to comment.”
Several ranchers question whether the $12 to $15 price of the signs justifies the use of $2,000 surveillance cameras. Others are concerned because both cameras were pointing towards private property. Every rancher interviewed was concerned that if they said too much their grazing permits might be taken away.
Schweigert has filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking data about the past and present locations of all cameras, buried and unburied, on, inside or immediately outside the 10 newly created wilderness and the conservation Area.
“I find it absolutely reprehensible that the Department of Interior should assume Nevadans are criminals, and therefore implement clandestine surveillance of our activities on what were once public lands, but which the Department of Interior now clearly considers to be federal lands, “said Schweigert.
Maxine Shane, a BLM public affairs specialist, said the cameras were part of an ongoing criminal investigation, but would not comment on the investigation.
Therefore, Search warrants must be issued by a judge, with the appropriate signed affidavits, showing cause for the warrant(s).
While the Dept. of Interior and the Court may not wish to comment on the information contained in said warrants, or disclose information on the nature of the "criminal investigation", they are required to show that a warrant or warrants have been issued in compliance with the law and the Constitution of the United States.
Since the cameras are pointed at private property, the law is the answer.
Demand to see the Warrants.
Re: D.O.I. Hidden Surveillance Cameras gale_norton@ios.doi.gov
Dear Secretary Norton,
It has come to my attention through an article in the Herald and News that hidden cameras are being used for surveillance of remote "wilderness signs." I felt that you should know that this is becoming a news story in some conservative circles. Your agency should be prepared to produce the constitutionally required warrants for these implied searches.
As a Bush appointee, I have confidence that you will handle this breach of the public trust with professionalism. I can only assume that you had no prior knowledge of these Big Brother tactics and would not approve them. If there are other cameras monitoring the public at large in similar clandestine fashion, (i.e. without warrants), the D.O.I. ought to reconcider the public relations implications and constitutionality of said activities.
Thank-you for considering my humble opinion on the matter.
Should I expect to be monitored now?
{& if your thirsty, don't be afraid to ask them to get you a drink of water("what part of protect & serve do you not understand?")}.
University ofCitizens for Better Government
There are laws restricting the video taping of others without their knowledge or concent, especially on their private property. You could video tape your mail box, but you could not as a public agency include a vast area of private property in the frame without a warrant.
It would be simply a data base giving the location of every single camera (no matter what kind or purpose). I envision a site that anybody can log onto and enter data. I further envision a bunch of "Baker Street Irregulars" armed with cheap GPS locators and digital cameras (portable). I don't care if it's a highway camera, a 7-11 camera, red-light camera, or one buried in leaves.
Just a big data base, verbal location and presumed purpose.
Wanna bet how long such a site would be permitted to operate?
--Boris
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.