<div dir="auto"><div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> If you drive into a checkerboard<br>
area of private/public land, there are no Forest Service signs at the<br>
limits of private land.<br></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">In my neck of the woods, USFS owned land is signed fairly frequently with small yellow property markers at the boundaries.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Privately owned land within a NF declared boundary is not under any protection by the USFS, therefore tagging the administrative boundary as 'protected_area' will lead to inaccuracies. The land areas that are actually protected from development/have active resource management are only the lands which the federal government owns within these administrative boundaries.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I think using the administrative boundaries is a good & practical first approximation, but the goal should eventually to be to change over to the actual land owned by the Fed and operated for conservation by the USFS. </div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
</blockquote></div></div></div>