Topgun 30-06
Active member
Not unless it was on his own private property. He couldn't legally build a new bridge on public land with or without gates to use as his own and restrict others.
A Big Win for Sportsman!
- Thread starter shoots-straight
- Start date
Not unless it was on his own private property. He couldn't legally build a new bridge on public land with or without gates to use as his own and restrict others.
Toadslayer
Member
But technically it was HIS property right next to that county bridge, correct? Then he could have made his own access with his own money on his own property.
Topgun 30-06
Active member
Yes, if that is the case! It appears his undoing was blocking off the legal public bridge, whether it was there or burned in that fire, and then going in and doing anything with what wasn't his own private property after the fire destroyed the bridge. I still don't see how they could force him to build a new span unless they can prove he burned the other bridge to eliminate public access. I also wonder why he cleaned up the burned bridge and hauled everything away the way it shows in the pictures.
Last edited:
theat
Well-known member
PLWA does a lot to keep public roads that the public has used for decades open for future generations of outdoorsmen.
From the info available, I have a hard time believing there was any fire at all...no report of a fire, no evidence of a fire at the site, landowner is able to remove the supposedly burnt bridge on a public road before any of the public or county personnel are able to see the damage. Sounds pretty fishy to me
From the info available, I have a hard time believing there was any fire at all...no report of a fire, no evidence of a fire at the site, landowner is able to remove the supposedly burnt bridge on a public road before any of the public or county personnel are able to see the damage. Sounds pretty fishy to me
Last edited:
I imagine this was an honest slip of the keyboard, but I hope you realize PLPW and PLWA are quite different.
SS, I have donated money to PLWA for years:
Public Lands/Water Access Association, Inc.:
http://www.plwa.org/
Its moto: Keeping the public on public lands & waters
they do excellent work in Montana, IMO. I had followed the bridge suit through the press and PLWA's news releases over the years but was NOT aware of the supreme court ruling. Thanks for bringing the good news to my attention. The newspaper article could have been much more comprehensive and fair.
I'm heading for Helena on Monday. Hope to see lots of other voters there to support the corner to corner bill.
Public Lands/Water Access Association, Inc.:
http://www.plwa.org/
Its moto: Keeping the public on public lands & waters
they do excellent work in Montana, IMO. I had followed the bridge suit through the press and PLWA's news releases over the years but was NOT aware of the supreme court ruling. Thanks for bringing the good news to my attention. The newspaper article could have been much more comprehensive and fair.
I'm heading for Helena on Monday. Hope to see lots of other voters there to support the corner to corner bill.
D
Deleted member 20812
Guest
I'm listening to my two youngest boys right now. One minute they are playing nice together and the next they are screaming at each other and one ends up crying.
This kind of reminds me of whats going on in my house right now
and you have this insatiable urge to grab each by the hair and levitate them to their rooms?
174in
Well-known member
I just want to hear stories of guys killing $hit thats why im here.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
The guys in the Montana Senate F&G committee killed SB 151. How's that for killing $hit?
174, you just a wildlife killer or are you a sportsman?
PLWA killed blocked public access to public land ... try to see that as a good thing.
Hunting will start again soon ... stay tuned.
174, you just a wildlife killer or are you a sportsman?
PLWA killed blocked public access to public land ... try to see that as a good thing.
Hunting will start again soon ... stay tuned.
webejmn
New member
In my opinoin. If the county had paid with our tax dollars for the up keep of that damn bridge for so many years then it should be there for us to use. Just my opinion, But i am a dumbass. Whats right is right. Yes I am BACK!
There is an article on the PLWA website on the case. http://www.plwa.org If you want to see details on this case and details on other cases they are fighting for us. VERY GOOD ORGANIZATION!
