Historic river access on Gallatin closed off

[R.K.]

Friend of mine sent me this article this morning. Essentially, the public has been using a specific access point for over 100 years, then rich out of staters buy the place and try to block the access. The traditional access is, in fact, barely on private land, and no good river access remains due to the bank slope.

Not sure if there’s a fight here that’s worth fighting, but it’s worth spreading the word about.

In a Tale as Old as the West, Wealthy Californians Moved to Montana and Blocked Historic River Access

In 2021, lifelong Montanan and duck hunter Matt Treinen was ticketed for criminal trespass at a river access he'd used since he was a kid.

www.outdoorlife.com

 

[jpcoll01]

I grew up in KY where there is almost no public land and everyone in the west just know...we got it wrong. It's too late for the east but something has to be done in the West to keep access in place. With all the politics it's hard to know who to support to help fight this fight. Is it BHA? They seemed to jump in on the corner crossing deal and I gave to the defense fund.

 

[Gerald Martin]

After reading the article I have conflicting feelings about the situation.

Previous residency of a landowner is irrelevant in determining the parameters of a landowner’s rights. The “rich Californian” angle makes for saucy reading but also illustrates an ingrained bias that seems sympathetic to the mentality of folks who may have gotten accustomed to a privilege granted by a prior landowner to walk across his private property in areas where public access wasn’t convenient below the high water mark. Just because one landowner always allowed it doesn’t mean another one does and it is within the landowner’s legal right to close access to the high water mark.

“We’ve always used this path” isn’t part of the parameters defined for legal access under the stream access law when the path isn’t within the high water mark even if the high water mark isn’t as convenient or safe for walking.

 

[Gerald Martin]

I grew up in KY where there is almost no public land and everyone in the west just know...we got it wrong. It's too late for the east but something has to be done in the West to keep access in place. With all the politics it's hard to know who to support to help fight this fight. Is it BHA? They seemed to jump in on the corner crossing deal and I gave to the defense fund.

This isn’t taking legal public access away. This is a landowner closing portions of his property where a prior landowner allowed the public to walk when the legal access wasn’t as convenient as a path above the high water mark.

 

[Straight Arrow]

My jackleg fence along the Gallatin River west of Gateway and near fishing access parking is built away from the riverbank so that fishermen and other recreationists may walk the bank. As a hunter and angler all my life, I have always appreciated permitted access. However, my neighbor, originally from somewhere other than Montana, is touchy about anyone stepping on their soil.

Having lived along this beautiful river frontage for over forty-eight years, I have not had any real problems with folks accessing and enjoying the river. In fact, we have a couple adirondack chairs along the bank to relax and meet fly fishers from all over the world.

I do understand why it's important to stress respect for private property and to limit trespass, but I don't appreciate the contentious attitude and downright rudeness of some of the wealthy a$$hats moving here ... and, by the way, of some of the resident a$$hats who have been blessed to live here all their lives. Do unto others ... 'Just sayin'.

 

[SAJ-99]

The “rich Californian” angle makes for saucy reading but also illustrates an ingrained bias that seems sympathetic to the mentality of folks who may have gotten accustomed to a privilege granted by a prior landowner to walk across his private property in areas where public access wasn’t convenient below the high water mark.

Had the same reaction only I was surprised it was “rich Californians” and not “liberals from California” that were the problem.

 

[seeth07]

wow, I was expecting this to be something as obvious trespassing but per the map created, we are talking about a few feet difference between the easement and the high water mark

 

[HerkHunter]

As @Gerald Martin and @Straight Arrow said before, there’s a fine line here to teeter on. I understand why people are upset about access being taken away, but also respect the landowners rights to their own property. My take on it is long winded but just wish all this could be resolved:/

 

[antlerradar]

Looks to me like the public right away weaves in and out of the high water mark. If I was an access group I would get some very large and colorful signs to show where fisherman can legally access the river. I would bet that sportsman and the landowner could come to an agreement quickly.

 

[Nameless Range]

My jackleg fence along the Gallatin River west of Gateway and near fishing access parking is built away from the riverbank so that fishermen and other recreationists may walk the bank. As a hunter and angler all my life, I have always appreciated permitted access. However, my neighbor, originally from somewhere other than Montana, is touchy about anyone stepping on their soil.

Having lived along this beautiful river frontage for over forty-eight years, I have not had any real problems with folks accessing and enjoying the river. In fact, we have a couple adirondack chairs along the bank to relax and meet fly fishers from all over the world.

Far as I can tell from the article, the landowners are within their rights. We need to understand and respect what a high water mark is and isn't.

That said, @Straight Arrow's take above is the spirit slowly being extinguished across Montana that we need to remember and continue to praise as a public good. It does not follow that trespass is wrong so much that it should be prohibited by those being trespassed against. One can own property, as I do, and let the public use a portion of your property for a public good, as I do. There's the economic arguments of established use, and prescriptive rights, and the erosion of one's own equity as a concern, and here's to those who still hold certain values - the experiences of others - above the negligible corrosion of their own possessions.

The decisions landowners make with public access - they're personal decisions we must respect in a legal sense, but we should continue to praise some and revile others in the court of public opinion.

 

[Moserkr]

Is the property boundary legally wrong? Nope, by the map it looks spot on. But is it morally wrong to block off access with a fence that ends nowhere, separating public from public because the width of your property is a few feet between the two? Yes.

That said, theres still public access as stated, its just overgrown and steep. A chainsaw and a shovel would fix that right quick.

CA is full of entitled people, rich and poor. I see both every day.

 

[Stone_Ice_1]

This isn’t taking legal public access away. This is a landowner closing portions of his property where a prior landowner allowed the public to walk when the legal access wasn’t as convenient as a path above the high water mark.

I just read the article on another site. And while what you say may be true I don't see anywhere in this article where they provided a map to the public of where they COULD access it. Seems a simple solution to just post maps at the points where people were accessing the property showing where they could legally access it. It doesn't appear they did that or even tried. They tried to block off access completely. For example the duck hunters at the beginning got in at the bridge, walked up the river and they still called them in for trespassing. They wanted all people off of all the land and wanted the illusion that they public couldn't access it.

 

[MThuntr]

A chainsaw and a shovel would fix that right quick.

actually that could violate Montana law too...modifying the bank would violate Montana 310 laws. I know it happens everyday and goes largely ignored but this being a publicly contentious location it definitely wouldn't go unenforced.

 

[Deleted member 48080]

 

[noharleyyet]

Appropriate gored bullock parable...

 

[4ohSick]

She also called the cops on a guy legally parked on the side of the county road watching the sunset. While I agree that private property rights need to be respected, it goes both ways and public easements need to also be respected.

 

[4ohSick]

It also sounds like we're about 2 years away from a prescriptive easement if the open, hostile use continues, at least by my understanding of that law.

 

[seeth07]

Is the property boundary legally wrong? Nope, by the map it looks spot on. But is it morally wrong to block off access with a fence that ends nowhere, separating public from public because the width of your property is a few feet between the two? Yes.

That said, theres still public access as stated, its just overgrown and steep. A chainsaw and a shovel would fix that right quick.

CA is full of entitled people, rich and poor. I see both every day.

I wonder if a local organization can propose to do that work though. If its on the easement, you would need permission from the owner of the easement/roadway which sounds like is the county in this case. If its work within the high water mark on the river, I believe the ownership you would need permission from would be the state?

 

[SAJ-99]

The decisions landowners make with public access - they're personal decisions we must respect in a legal sense, but we should continue to praise some and revile others in the court of public opinion.

Didn't Gianforte as a private citizen sue the state over an access point on the East Gallatin? That guy was elected governor. I agree that what ever the "spirit" is or was, it gets harder to find every day. That said, I don't know it is specific to Montana. We all have become more protective of the safe space we create to try to avoid the shittyness of the world we live in.

 

[noharleyyet]

Didn't Gianforte as a private citizen sue the state over an access point on the East Gallatin? That guy was elected governor. I agree that what ever the "spirit" is or was, it gets harder to find every day. That said, I don't know it is specific to Montana. We all have become more protective of the safe space we create to try to avoid the shittyness of the world we live in.

...then there's that day when you walk outside and discover the cable company trenching your back yard.