Rancher/outfitter close public road in eastern MT

[Eric Albus]

Ya’ll are forgetting about prescriptive use, what it is, and why it’s a thing.

A gas tax road is a solid showing for the judge to grant a prescriptive use easement.

Want to know one of the reasons why prescriptive use is a thing? Some view it as a takings of private property. Others view it as reversing a takings of public property. Back in the day, when neighbors were neighbors, and roads were just simply roads to places for people to travel and not a tool to control exclusive access to public land, documentation wasn’t always kept - it wasn’t needed. Ya just drove the road.

Not saying that’s the case here, but just saying even if there’s not a perfected easement that doesn’t mean the road shouldn’t be public.

What bothers me the most here is the stupid excuses as to why the gate is there. It’s obvious that it’s to block access to the public land and any other excuse is BS. Just look at the map. At least be honest about it. If the dude just said “I put the gate there because I can and it stops everyone but me from accessing that public land”, how would you feel? Would you support that Eric?

If the road had been open to the public year round for access the last 10 years I’d say there would be grounds for a prescriptive easement. According to my source it hasn’t been open to the public.
If it was “open to travel” 40-50 years ago when nobody really cared, it was by permissive easement, meaning the landowner at that time didn’t care. Granting neighbors to come and go as needed is different than allowing the public unfettered travel.

Times change just like ownership.

I’ve looked at OnX, there is plenty of good legal access, and if I was still young and cared to hunt I’d pray that it stay as is. There’s an outside chance something might get old enough to grow up and interest me in hunting it.

Looking at OnX it appears the road has always been there, and current owner hasn’t had the property that long as I understand this debacle.

 

[Eric Albus]

So shouldn’t the gate be left open till the weather turns? I mean if the issue is people getting stuck why lock it up only during hunting season?

It’s the landowners decision to allow access thru his private land, and his alone. His decision as when to lock unlock his gate.
Just like you make a decision to lock or not lock your homes or cars door daily.

There is plenty of good easy legal access to this ground anyway. People are only complaining because it’s not the easiest way.

 

[Treeshark]

All the attention the road closure brought to the place was far more damaging to the hunting and the landowner/outfitter than having the road open.

Good call. I can’t be the only one looking at a route in from West Snow Creek Road near Chalk Butte just out of curiosity…

Looks like a great spot for Montana Mule Deer Unit 700 or Montana Elk hunt near Jordan Montana.

If Montana outfitters are working this area, you know the Unit 700 deer and elk hunting near Jordan Montana in the Seven Blackfoot Wildeness Study Area has to be excellent.

 

[DP_PublicLands]

If the road had been open to the public year round for access the last 10 years I’d say there would be grounds for a prescriptive easement. According to my source it hasn’t been open to the public.
If it was “open to travel” 40-50 years ago when nobody really cared, it was by permissive easement, meaning the landowner at that time didn’t care. Granting neighbors to come and go as needed is different than allowing the public unfettered travel.

Times change just like ownership.

I’ve looked at OnX, there is plenty of good legal access, and if I was still young and cared to hunt I’d pray that it stay as is. There’s an outside chance something might get old enough to grow up and interest me in hunting it.

Looking at OnX it appears the road has always been there, and current owner hasn’t had the property that long as I understand this debacle.

Boy I’m glad not everyone thinks like you - lots of jumping to conclusions here. I’m glad that people that have the public’s interest at heart are looking into this and will make a case for it being a public road if warranted.

I’ll tell you what needs to stop if it is a private road - all travel on the BLM road past his property. Exclusive motor vehicle access to public property is incentivizing these road closures. Either everyone can drive a road on blm or no one should be able to.

 

[Eric Albus]

Boy I’m glad not everyone thinks like you - lots of jumping to conclusions here. I’m glad that people that have the public’s interest at heart are looking into this and will make a case for it being a public road if warranted.

I’ll tell you what needs to stop if it is a private road - all travel on the BLM road past his property. Exclusive motor vehicle access to public property is incentivizing these road closures. Either everyone can drive a road on blm or no one should be able

It’s a very simple case, either the road is public or it is not.
Knowing the Outfitter in question, as well as I do, would have given his landowner the advice of do not even think of closing it if it’s a public road.
Everybody wants to blame the big bad Outfitter in this. None of us have any control over what a landowner does with their property. We are working for them not vice versa.

 

[DP_PublicLands]

It’s a very simple case, either the road is public or it is not.
Knowing the Outfitter in question, as well as I do, would have given his landowner the advice of do not even think of closing it if it’s a public road.
Everybody wants to blame the big bad Outfitter in this. None of us have any control over what a landowner does with their property. We are working for them not vice versa.

100% not true. Most access issues are far from simple. In fact, many take years or research and a lot of lawyers.

I can point you to dozens of cases that ended up with roads being proved public, only after years of research and legal battles. It’s sad they have to end that way.

 

[Treeshark]

Everybody wants to blame the big bad Outfitter in this. None of us have any control over what a landowner does with their property.

The article makes it sound like the decision to construct the gate and the decision to lease the land to the outfitter was made at the same time.

It’s hard to imagine that timing being purely coincidental, right? I wonder if the lease amount $ would be negatively impacted if the gate was removed?

 

[mtmuley]

It’s hard to imagine that timing being purely coincidental, right? I wonder if the lease amount $ would be negatively impacted if the gate was removed?

Hmmmmmm... mtmuley

 

[El Jason]

About 25 years ago we had a similar cased near me.

Keith wishes he had that one back. I heard that straight from his mouth.

 

[brockel]

The article makes it sound like the decision to construct the gate and the decision to lease the land to the outfitter was made at the same time.

It’s hard to imagine that timing being purely coincidental, right? I wonder if the lease amount $ would be negatively impacted if the gate was removed?

You mean the same one that’s part of a group on this forum that put a proposal together that includes hunter distribution in its reasoning? Seems like locking up thousands of acres of public land makes that distribution even worse.

 

[Treeshark]

You mean the same one that’s part of a group on this forum that put a proposal together that includes hunter distribution in its reasoning?

 

[Forkyfinder]

You mean the same one that’s part of a group on this forum that put a proposal together that includes hunter distribution in its reasoning? Seems like locking up thousands of acres of public land makes that distribution even worse.

Taking 30k acres and making them mostly unhuntable will do damage to hunter crowding way more than waving hands, lengthening seasons, and ending the "rut" hunt.

 

[brockel]

Taking 30k acres and making them mostly unhuntable will do damage to hunter crowding way more than waving hands, lengthening seasons, and ending the "rut" hunt.

Especially when 700 was already dealing with the overflow from 410 going to a draw

 

[Forkyfinder]

Especially when 700 was already dealing with the overflow from 410 going to a draw

This is a prime example why it needs to all be LE.

 

[TheTone]

If it remains gated I home the blm puts a gate or giant berm at the property line

 

[Forkyfinder]

If it remains gated I home the blm puts a gate or giant berm at the property line

If it remains gated - i will do my best to mobilize a forky/cow killing army.

I'll pay for boat rental if i can get at least 10 hunters.

 

[antlerradar]

Keith wishes he had that one back. I heard that straight from his mouth.

Keith though he had leverage when he didn't. Seven Blackfoot might be too rough for a similar solution. Erik is right though, It all depends on if this is a public road.

 

[Forkyfinder]

All of this is completely contingent on the prosecuting attorney.

If the road is indeed public - i hope there are prosecutions/charges.

45-6-101. Criminal mischief, MCA

archive.legmt.gov

It is a crime - and if this roads indeed public - the public should push for a prosection.

High time that the freeloaders locking up public land get something besides told to reopen the gate.

 

[El Jason]

While the loss of total access doesn’t rival that of the Quietus Rd caper Keith Bales tried to pull off, the remedy is there if necessary. Some good folks with the Montana Wildlife Federation might recall this endeavor.

I don’t know if the terrain allows it or the access warrants it. It’s been a couple decades since I was in the area in question.

Petitioning a road to be removed from the gas tax inventory is not criminal mischief. Nor is gating it after it was removed. It’s incumbent upon the agency/public to show a prescriptive easement exists.

 

[Forkyfinder]

It’s incumbent upon the agency/public to show a prescriptive easement exists.

A definition of crim mischief - (b) without consent tampers with property of another or public property so as to endanger or interfere with persons or property or its use;

Definition of perscriptive easement - (1) A prescriptive easement is a right to use the property of another that is acquired by open, exclusive, notorious, hostile, adverse, continuous, and uninterrupted use for a period of 5 years.

Seems like if youve been whining about all the trouble youve had with encountering with alleged poor drivers getting stuck over an unspecified time - the easement would be self evident according to the definition and as such interefering with "property or its use"? Interested in hearing how thats incorrect?