Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Idaho to fix problem of blocked access to public land?

[quote] At the time, some legislators echoed concerns from the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation, Idaho Cattle Association and representatives for DF Development, a company owned by Texas billionaires Dan and Farris Wilks, that the bill would open landowners up to constant litigation. /quote]

This is probably at the heart of the current problems, a couple of Texas Billionaires that have purchased hundreds of thousands of Idaho land and want to have and are buying Texas type law in Idaho.
It's known they were "quietly behind the scenes" of restrictive state laws affecting hunters passed in the last couple of years or so.

And you are TRH level insane. Giving you benefit of the doubt there, and assuming you're not being a malicious twat.

I simply posed the question that if that landlocked portion of public land caught fire, should the public who are barred access pay to put it out. Then you go out in left field with it.

Texas arrived. Lol.

I'm really not getting into a pissing match with you.

I can plainly see what you posted.

You suggested that private property owners that don't allow trespass across their land be denied fire fighter protection.

I took nothing into left field.

Why don't we just drop this nasty little side issue.

Always

I'd be happy to, but you reword things to make it sound different and I take umbrage with that.

You betcha.

This Texan has years of experience with ranching BLM, Nat'l Forest, boundaries and legal issues of easements, rights of way, and of course private property.

What do offer, besides the usual welfare hunter dialog?

Local News report

https://www.ktvb.com/article/news/l...rest-service-road-in-idaho/277-600647575

- Comes strolling in with a fence under one arm and a corn feeder under the other.

With a fugg you Idaho people and your laws, we have the money to buy the influence to change rules and regulation so ya'll can be more like Texas forever enough to benefit us in the short term

That looks like more of a case of who owns that particular road, and maintains it it. As well as legalities involved with whether there was an actual easement or right of way ever established.

Of course everyone could always pool their resources and file for historical usage.


Personally, if I wanted to own private property and have nobody I didn't approve of crossing my land, the last place I would buy land is in a state that has lots of public land that could affect my private property. I'd buy property where there could never be a question when I lock a gate.

First responders work for government entities, so they are allowed to trespass in order to do their jobs. They aren't trespassing for their personal benefit.

It isn't one property but many and private/public land here is a hodge podge patchwork with roads through both that have been open and some maintained with public funds for many decades.

Then surely the state will do it's job and protect the interests of the public?

I know you don't just go close a National Forest Road down and not get in trouble with the Federales too...

Be curious to see how that road is listed in the USFS Travel Management Plan.

I get a kick out of the "rancher and ag types" . Usually the ones that talk property rights when blocking access, are the ones with their faces up to their ears in the public tough.

It's been 20 years but I have traveled that road, after a quick look at a map I believe the FS numbers are 297 and 374

We (Oregon) also have several timber companies, holding in some instances, hundreds/thousands of square miles often checker boarded among public sections. These are the product of deals with the first railroads as an incentive to put in rails through empty country with no real cost to the government. Over time those properties were sold to timber barons. Up into the early 1970's, the public was pretty much allowed free access for hunting/fishing endeavors on those lands.

With the advent of the radical environmental movements, those companies began finding tequipment burned, absent oil/fuel, or otherwise seriously sabotaged. Quite an issue when 20 people suddenly can't do any work on a Monday morning. The only solution was locked gates. Some properties are effectively locked for perpetuity. Some have negotiated deals whereby the state provides funding for seasonal patrols in exchange for hunting/fishing access, and some rent/lease access directly if one will visit their office, register, and pay a fee for lock combinations.

Last fall, via guide/outfitter services, I did most of my elk season on timber company lands. In that instance the guide had full access and could run free. The public is allowed, but has to walk past locked gates.

Oregon also set up what is called an access and habitat board with a fair sized budget. That group's challenge is to foster access to inholdings and large deeded sectors. As an example, landowners often have to deal with opened gates and subsequently wandering stock. If the state will fund a couple entry/exit cattle guards, they'll agree to free public access. Others may want to do some habitat improvements (burns, seedings, juniper or sage control) and will grant access with assistance there.

Our county (Harney) is constantly being challenged with access cases when new owners lock gates, The county will rifle through past records and maps looking for evidence of historic public use and finding evidents will typically side with the public. In many instances, a volume of public testimony (i.e. grand dad and friends used that road for 72 years and they're essentially country right of ways or historic livestock trails) will also hold up. Some of those roads? have not seen equipment in decades but will show up on maps and in GPS records.

Fortunately, about 70% of this country (10,000+ square miles) is public land, and I've not asked for permission in the last 45 years. It's one of the benefits of living in the Or, Nv, Id, Wy region and one of the reasons I came here.

On fishing, any stream of substance is open to the public as long as one remains within its high water marks or floats. Again, one may not venture across deeded acres without permission, but can come in from up/down stream access points like public roads or adjacent friendly landowners.

Corner jumping is also OK here.

No one can own an ocean beach in Oregon, so again, find an allowed access point or a boat, and one can get there.

Again, it's a bit sad when substantial inholdings are held hostage, but I side with the tax paying property owners. Win the big lottery, and I just might become one of the [bleep].

Lastly, I've seen and know of several instances where adjacent property owners have put up posted signs on public land gates in an effort to restrict access. They're pretty effective against folks from out of the region. Locals though, call the bluff and barge right on in with no issues.

There are many examples of private land owners harassing and putting up fencing and barb wire across navigable streams in an effort to keep fishermen from floating through their “private stretches”. Many claim they have to because people are trashing their places and causing problems by leaving garbage, poaching, trespassing beyond high water marks, etc.

OTOH, there are many reports of fishermen who aren’t doing anything wrong and well within their legal rights being harassed by belligerent, entitlement minded landowners simply because the fisherman had the audacity to fish through “their” waters.

There was a case a few years back reported in many fly fishing mags of singer Huey Lewis - who is a fly fisherman - blocking access to a stream that had historically been open to the public. If I recall, he had made improvements to said stream at considerable cost to himself claiming the stream wasn’t a stream at all but merely a man made ditch and so he had the right to block it off because many were coming in and trashing the place. Someone challenged it - maybe a local sportsman’s group - and last I heard it was going to court. I don’t know what all ended up happening. It may be ongoing for all I know.

This is an ongoing problem with no easy answers. I am a firm believer in public access to public lands and waters, but some of the slob hunters/fishermen don't make it easy on the rest of us.

Farming and ranching are high risk operations and government programs are there to help them continue to operate in a mostly unfriendly market. Farm and ranch government subsidies benefits most people by helping to keep food prices down and quality high. Farmers and ranchers have the highest degree of risk and usual the lowest ROI of anyone in the chain of events that happens between the producer and the consumer.