¶2 David D. Everist appeals pro se from the conviction and fine imposed for leaving refuse, debris, and litter on U.S. Forest *709 Service property, in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 261.11(b). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
¶3 Everist contends that the district court erred by denying his motion to dismiss because the Forest Service lacks jurisdiction to regulate the use of his land. The district court did not err because the Forest Service properly acted within its authority to regulate the surface use of forest lands. See United States v. Goldfield Deep Mines Co. of Nev., 644 F.2d 1307, 1309 (9th Cir.1981); see also 16 U.S.C. §§ 478, 551.
¶4 Everist also contends that he is entitled to just compensation because the regulation amounted to a regulatory taking. The record reflects that no constitutional taking occurred. See Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 544 U.S. 528, 538-39, 125 S.Ct. 2074, 161 L.Ed.2d 876 (2005).
¶5 AFFIRMED.