Damn carpetbaggers!

[Whitpirate]

Mobilization of the small guys seems necessary to try and put some sunshine on this. Sad when a common man has the book thrown at him and individuals like this blatantly steal public resource and everyone is talking about how to make it no big deal. I'm willing to drive over during my deer hunt (NR) and drive through his yard. I'll just point to the map and say I didn't know...... gotta get out I'm lost.

 

[katqanna]

Some were wondering how they could have this built without the Forest Service knowing. The house was built in 2001, 4761 sq. ft.
Source

Schlueter explains that she and her husband had spent years talking about building such a home, so when it came time to do the actual work the couple had an architect translate their ideas onto paper and turn it over to Dürfeld.
“They take the plans and actually build the log portions in Canada, then take the whole thing apart and bring it down on 18-wheelers,” she explains. “They had a crew of five or six guys there for a couple weeks that put it together and put in the windows. They come back later with the logs for the roofline.”

Another article about the contention and GVLT.

“In 2006, a month after the Forest Service declared an easement in the area, Stan issued a non-easement,” the former manager pointed out. “I’m wondering, how could someone drop a house on a LMR trail easement and 166B? How could this have happened? Why is the house there? Why didn’t Gallatin Valley Land Trust, who was protecting it, do anything?”

 

[noharleyyet]

But the bottom line is, if rights have been encroached, what are you going to do? Itís still going to come down to a negotiation.”

Big stakes poker allusion. Fitting.

 

[bigskyblueman]

It's impossible the Forest Service was unaware of this home, given the years it has existed. Benign neglect, incompetence, or misconduct, whatever the case may be, they didn't do their job, by allowing this arrogant, gold plated bully to usurp our public land. The home should seized and deeded to the public as a hunting lodge that the Forest Service has to maintain. Poetic justice.

 

[katqanna]

I just got off the phone with Lisa Stoeffler at the Forest Service. She is in charge oft this process concerning the road and trail. She is sending the packet of information and a better map concerning this process. There is no time frame on a decision at this time. She confirmed the public access points from 166B and 166D to the Forest. The 166B road, does have 60 foot easement. During the comment period in the spring, the GYC did not submit any comments.

I asked if there was any hunter/sportsmen representation, as far as public access that spoke up at meetings or submitted comments and she said not, that some of the commentors were hunters, but that a public access hunting concern was not brought up. I explained my perspective of this, and brought up public hunter access to the GNF from the current road they hold an easement to.

Since this is not a MEPA process, there may still be a chance for the public access hunters to weigh in on this so the road is not privatized.

 

[bigskyblueman]

So, this is on the market for 30 million. Some unsuspecting out of state buyer gets it during this dispute, and now there is another party involved. Wondering if the Forest Service can or would block the sale or if they have the power to place a lien on it first. The realtor ought to be aware of the situation. If I find who that is , I'll do my civic duty and make sure they do know.

 

[DaveHawk]

I am thinking hard about ways to re-size him for a much bigger asshat. Not sure 3XL would even suffice for someone who does this sort of stuff.


Evidently the air or water in DC does something to people. I hope GYC is jumping up and down, screaming like hell, as they do with some other issues, and hopefully calling their former pal and telling him to keep his nose out of this.

The best thing Baucus could do is come out very strongly against any backdoor dealings, given Kuehl was once his chief of staff, and is now the guy who the "Austin Ambassador" has employed to work the political angles to this deal. If this deal gets struck, the long list of public land projects Max has helped get funding for would have a very foul smell, tainting what would otherwise be a very positive public land and access legacy.

Here is DC it's all about the money grab. They see how fast this country is being given away and where it is heading and want enough money to sustain them for life when they leave. Whoever forks over the big bucks gets what they want.

 

[katqanna]

Here is the Information and map of the easement area.

The easement is held by the Gallatin Valley Land Trust. This is a permanent easement. I have spoken with the GVLT before about another easement and they would not send a copy of the easement. They said I would have to go to the county courthouse to get a copy, so tomorrow I am going to get a copy of this to read the language and specifics. The Easement # 306101002.EAS.847.

I spoke with some US cabin companies that build large homes like this. I wondered if the Canadian company was chosen to avoid US laws. They build wherever. SOP is the cabin/home companies make the home owners sign a document stating the home owners are responsible for all easements and liability. So Monday I am also checking with the building inspection that signed off on the foundation and other aspects of the construction, because they would have made sure that everything was up to snuff or not.

BDC Editorial - Big Sky road easement has broader implications

 

[Straight Arrow]

I am also checking with the building inspection that signed off on the foundation and other aspects of the construction, because they would have made sure that everything was up to snuff or not.

In rural Montana the only permits and inspections required are for electrical wiring and wastewater treatment regarding residential construction. You will find no other public construction records, unless required by home owner association covenants, and then they may not be available to just anyone.

That is one reason why situations similar to this one go undetected until way too late.
Rhetorical question: Do you really think this a$$Hat would be required to dismantle and/or relocate his 8,000 sf little "cabin in the woods"?.

 

[katqanna]

Straight Arrow, thanks for saving me some time.

I went to the Courthouse and got the legal documents for all the easements here, sent them on to the legalese people. The Forest Service was granted easement rights on November 28, 1967 by the Corcoran Pulpwood Company.

But it states, if the forest service "didnt use it for a period of 5 years, or portions thereof, this area would be freed from said easement or parts thereof, as fully and completely as if the easement had not been made." This document is dated 2006, which is 5 years after he built the house in 2001. It looks like he squatted, blocked the road from use, then filed this document stating, "Now Therefore, in consideration of the above, the undersigned owner of Section 21 hereby claims that Section 21 is FREE of the easements created by the Corcoran Easement and the United States has no easement rights across Section 21 arising out of the Corcoran Easement."

 

[Dave N]

On the other side of the argument, it's kind of hard to use it when it's purposely blocked off. Illegally, in my mind.

 

[bigskyblueman]

Contacted Sen. Baucus, Sen. Tester, and Rep. Daines respective offices by phone today and requested their staff contact the Forest Service and protect the public access rights in this matter.

 

[katqanna]

Now that I have had some time to look at this pdf posted above, pages 3-5 are the original easement from Corcoran. You can blow it up to read it better. The last paragraph states,

"The rights, privileges and authorities herein granted are for the use and enjoyment of the Grantee for any and all purposes deemed necessary or desirable in connection with the control, management, and administration of the National Forest, or the resources thereof, and, insofar as compatible therewith, use by the general public, and the rights, privileges authorities herein granted shall continue as long as used for the purposes granted, but if for a period of five years the Grantee shall cease to use the roads, or parts thereof, for the purposes granted, or shall abandon the same, then, in any such events, the premises traversed thereby shall be freed from said easement, or parts thereof, as fully and completely as if this indenture had not been made. In the event of such nonuse for the period stated the Regional Forester shall furnish to the Grantor a statement in recordable form evidencing such nonuse."

The Courthouse did not show such a nonuse document on file, nor have I heard that Schlueter has such a document, but I will double check on Friday when I go back to see about a document the Forest Service filed in 2006.

 

[Cottonwood]

Let them eat cake

It's quite a place ... check it out.

http://www.stonebusiness.us/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=718&Itemid=67

 

[katqanna]

I wanted to know what was filed by the Forest Service before Schlueter filed his non-easement. The Forest Service filed on April 26th, 2006. This document is a Notice of Easements for National Forest System Roads No. 166B and No. 166D. They state, Whereas, the United States claims an interest in and to certain National Forest System roads located in Gallatin and Madison Counties, MOntana, currently designated by the USDA Forest Service ('Forest Service') as 'West Fork Loop Road No. 166B' and 'Basin Road No. 166D' as generally depicted on vicinity map, attached hereto as Exhibit A."

This document then proceeds to list all their perpetual easements that have been granted and by whom, as well as exhibits that involve 166B and 166D: Corcoran Pulpwood Co. (land the Schlueter has); Marie H. Ankeny; Robert and Patricia Donovan; Lone Peak, Inc.; The McDougal Foundation, Inc.

"Whereas, since the granting of said road easements to the United States, and/or reserving the right to use said roads, the Forest Service and its assigns, including the public at large, has held, and continues to hold, the right to use West Fork Loop Road No. 166B and for Basin Road No. 166D.

Now Therefore, in consideration of the above, the United States hereby continues to claim said easements as rights of the United States, to be used for any and all purposes deemed necessary or desirable in connection with the control, management, utilization and administration of National Forest System Lands, and the Public is hereby put on notice of the above-cited easements."

 

[bigskyblueman]

I received an email from Sen. Baucus office yesterday confirming they are aware of 166b and believe the public should retain that access. Have not heard back from Rep. Daines or Sen. Tester offices yet.

 

[Dave N]

Might not work out real well, but for someone who feels strong enough about it and wants to spend the time to be involved later, how about someone just tossing the barricade aside and go ahead and drive on through? IF anyone is home they will MAYBE notice a vehicle from the mansion they call a cabin. They may come out yelling but just say that you followed the road. If they say it's private property tell them to call the law. If it ever ends up in court from you fighting the trespassing ticket then there SHOULD be a decision made one way or the other. Time involved, a possible trespassing ticket, and maybe some lawyer's fees if you don't know a buddy to help out for free. Kind of sucks to have to take it to that extreme but it just might get something settled. Dunno, I'm a flatlander that WISHES he had the life you Western guys have!

 

[Bangtail]

Any update from the Forest Service?

Now that I have had some time to look at this pdf posted above, pages 3-5 are the original easement from Corcoran. You can blow it up to read it better. The last paragraph states,

"The rights, privileges and authorities herein granted are for the use and enjoyment of the Grantee for any and all purposes deemed necessary or desirable in connection with the control, management, and administration of the National Forest, or the resources thereof, and, insofar as compatible therewith, use by the general public, and the rights, privileges authorities herein granted shall continue as long as used for the purposes granted, but if for a period of five years the Grantee shall cease to use the roads, or parts thereof, for the purposes granted, or shall abandon the same, then, in any such events, the premises traversed thereby shall be freed from said easement, or parts thereof, as fully and completely as if this indenture had not been made. In the event of such nonuse for the period stated the Regional Forester shall furnish to the Grantor a statement in recordable form evidencing such nonuse."

The Courthouse did not show such a nonuse document on file, nor have I heard that Schlueter has such a document, but I will double check on Friday when I go back to see about a document the Forest Service filed in 2006.

Anybody using that road should constitute use of easement. Being the easement is in place for the public.

 

[katqanna]

Bangtail, thanks for reminding me. There was a guy that had filed a foia that I was referred to and received a lot of info. I was waiting for him to get back with me when he got back in state. Forest Service told me that I would have to officially file a foia - their procedure, to be able to release certain information. I have been so busy with the elk brucellosis stuff this last week that I forgot to touch base with that guy or file my own. I think I would rather file.

 

[MT_elk]

I used to bowhunt this area. Key words: used to.