[Vision2020] LMT -- Everyone hears this tree fall
Art Deco
deco at moscow.com
Thu Jan 26 11:04:19 PST 2006
Mark, Phil, Dan, et al,
I agree with Mark that part of the problem is Idaho's trespassing statutes.
Idaho is one of the last open access states. Except for agricultural land
in cultivation, unless private is posted in a particular manner, anyone who
has not received a private no trespassing notice in the last year can
trespass with impunity.
In recent years the sheriff's office has greatly stepped up its enforcement
in certain county areas, an action almost all of we property owners on
Moscow Mountain greatly appreciate. In the case of some motorized
recreation, users can be cited with vandalism/damage to property if they
cause ground and/or tree damage even on unposted property.
Changing Idaho's trespass laws is a huge undertaking and one for which the
legislature has shown little interest in addressing in the past.
When I lived in Boundary County, which was then experiencing the same kind
of motorized recreation/unsafe hunting problems that we see in Latah County
now, a number of us proposed a tiered state trespassing statute. Briefly:
1. Unarmed, non-motorized trespassing would continued to be allowed
unless the land was posted. The posting requirements would be changed so as
to not be such a burden to the landowner.
2. Armed and/or motorized trespassed would only be allowed if clearly
posted for such or with the permission of the landowner.
3. The third violation of 1 above in a ten year period would be a felony;
the second violation of 2 above in a ten year period would be a felony.
4. Certain civil actions would be simplified in order for landowners to
collect damages for trespass and/or damage.
The rational for such a tiered system is based on the amount of damage or
threat to safety each kind of trespass generally engenders and/or for which
history documents abuse. The legislators in that area of northern Idaho at
that time, although in agreement with the proposed changes, would not
proposed them since the reaction from motorized users groups and hunters
would be extremely adverse to their re-election chances.
I wonder if our current legislative representatives would be willing to try
something like this now.
Wayne A. Fox
1009 Karen Lane
PO Box 9421
Moscow, ID 83843
(208) 882-7975
waf at moscow.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Solomon" <msolomon at moscow.com>
To: "Phil Nisbet" <pcnisbet1 at hotmail.com>
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] LMT -- Everyone hears this tree fall
> Phil,
>
> I agree entirely that a private landowner can and should dictate what
> types of uses are allowed or not allowed on their land. The sad reality is
> the explosion in use of ATV's dirt bikes, 4WD's, snowmobiles, etc has led
> to increasing damage to both public and private lands. Paying to play is
> fine but if the underlying need for payment as put forward by potlatch is
> to address motorized recreation abuse, then why ask for a public handout
> when law enforcement and education can and does work.
>
> As an example, private property owners on Moscow Mountain were faced with
> the same dilemma: escalating motorized rec abuse of our lands. What did we
> do? We met and coordinated an information/education campaign combined with
> requests to the sheriff for increased law enforcement presence. While the
> problem hasn't entirely gone away, it is dramatically less of an issue
> than it was as little as two years ago.
>
> The major gap in the enforcement issue is the lack of teeth in the state's
> trespass laws. Except in unuusal circumstances, even if the landowner or
> sheriff catches a 4WD or ATV behind an obviously locked gate, there is
> nothing they can do unless the property is legally posted and even then it
> is a civil issue requiring the landowner to prove property damage.
>
> It's easy to see why motorized recreation abuse on private lands continues
> to be a problem.
>
> Then there's the historical issue of how Potlatch essentially stole their
> lands from the public domain, but that's another story we don't have to
> get into here.
>
> Mark
>
>
> At 9:56 AM -0800 1/26/06, Phil Nisbet wrote:
>>Mark
>>
>>Any landowner has at least some sort of right to allow or not allow access
>>to their property. You do not get instant access to the farmer's fields to
>>drill holes or to recreate. People can not use your ground up on Moscow
>>Mountain as a target range without your approval. So why exactly should
>>Potlatch or Bennet or any timber company who owns land be required to
>>grant the things that the rest do not gratis?
>>
>>If a farmer or you post your property off limits and another party comes
>>to you asking to use your land for some purpose that you deny to the
>>general public, you have every right to expect that person asking for the
>>use of your lands to pay you. You can also chose to allow some uses on
>>your land and not to allow others.
>>
>>Frankly if the public funds aspects are that big a problem, maybe the land
>>in question should be closed to public use. No pay, no play and they can
>>always do what ever deal with individual recreationists who want to put up
>>funds themselves.
>>
>>Extra law enforcement does not repair damaged roads, destroyed trees or
>>pick up garbage left by people using another persons land as if it were
>>their own. Even if they bust some of the people creating problems, those
>>folks never recompense the property owner for the harm done, they pay a
>>fine or do jail time and the money goes to the government, not the land
>>owner.
>>
>>Phil Nisbet
>>
>>>From: Mark Solomon <msolomon at moscow.com>
>>>To: "Area Man (Dan C)" <areaman at moscow.com>, <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] LMT -- Everyone hears this tree fall
>>>Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 08:59:37 -0800
>>>
>>>This is the letter I sent to the Tribune and our local legislators after
>>>reading the article Dan posted below. DANG, is right!
>>>
>>>Mark Solomon
>>>
>>>It is very interesting to note that when Potlatch spokesman Mark Benson
>>>discussed solutions to the problems of motorized recreation abuse of
>>>Potlatch lands with the Legislature, the solutions he proposed all
>>>centered on how much money Potlatch could lift out of public treasury
>>>into their own wallet. Glaringly missing from the proposals was the one
>>>that not only makes the most sense but would benefit all private forest
>>>landowners: pass laws that would give local law enforcement the ability
>>>to arrest, prosecute fine and jail people who destroy gates, mud bog,
>>>pioneer trails, destroy seedlings and otherwise damage private property
>>>with off-road motorized vehicles. It is time for the Legislature to
>>>update the trespass laws to meet this very real threat to public access
>>>to private land. The public at large should not be paying for the very
>>>real damage caused by motorized recreation abusers. Potlatch should be
>>>seeking solutions to the problem, not balancing their checkbook with the
>>>public treasury.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>At 7:48 AM -0800 1/26/06, Area Man \(Dan C\) wrote:
>>>>I'm all for private property rights, but DANG! This could affect a lot
>>>>of people.
>>>>-----------------------
>>>>Everyone hears this tree fall
>>>>
>>>>By DEAN A. FERGUSON of the Tribune
>>>>
>>>>BOISE -- Potlatch Corp. could lock up 670,000 acres in the heart of
>>>>north central Idaho, ending a 102-year legacy of free public use.
>>>>The company's land holdings include 54,000 acres in the St. Joe River
>>>>Basin that could be protected from development if a deal to buy
>>>>development rights is finalized.
>>>>
>>>>Closing the 670,000 acres from Coeur d'Alene to Orofino is a real
>>>>option, Potlatch spokesman Mark Benson told a joint meeting between
>>>>House and Senate environment and resources committees Wednesday.
>>>>
>>>>"The bottom line is public use of private forest land is on the
>>>>increase," Benson said.
>>>>
>>>>Potlatch Corp. loses about $300,000 a year to people who destroy
>>>>seedlings with snow machines and four-wheelers, wreck roads with
>>>>mud-bogging pickup trucks and leave a trail of litter and busted gates.
>>>>
>>>>There are other options to closing the land, Benson said.
>>>>
>>>>The company could lease access to private or state interests, sell
>>>>access permits, or sell conservation easements to retain public access
>>>>and stop development.
>>>>
>>>>Sen. Gary Schroeder, R-Moscow, organized three days of hearings at the
>>>>Statehouse to deal with the "emerging issue" of access.
>>>>
>>>>"Private land has value," Schroeder said. "People are willing to pay for
>>>>sporting access."
>>>>
>>>>The issue arose on the East Coast 15 years ago and has finally arrived
>>>>in Idaho, Schroeder said. He hopes the state can find ways to keep open
>>>>lands the public has used for hunting, berry picking and exploring for
>>>>generations.
>>>>
>>>>A couple of lawmakers expressed surprise to hear that a deal in the St.
>>>>Joe Basin was in danger of collapsing.
>>>>
>>>>"If we want to help with this easement program, how much money would it
>>>>take to match the 25 percent nonfederal match to finish the St. Joe
>>>>project?" asked Senate Minority Leader Clint Stennett, D-Ketchum.
>>>>
>>>>The deal needs $2 million in private or state money to match $8 million
>>>>in federal money, Benson said. He added, however, that Bush
>>>>administration cuts make federal dollars through the U.S. Forest Service
>>>>tougher to come by. For that money, the easement would effectively tie
>>>>up a total of 80,000 acres of Potlatch Corp. land, Benson said.
>>>>
>>>>Schroeder told the Lewiston Tribune he would support an effort to find
>>>>the money, possibly looking for it in the Idaho Department of Fish and
>>>>Game budget.
>>>>
>>>>By closing Potlatch land, the company also might cut off access routes
>>>>into public land, noted Sen. David Langhorst, D-Boise, who is a hunter
>>>>and fisherman.
>>>>
>>>>Benson didn't have the figures but pledged to let lawmakers know how
>>>>much public land the closure of Potlatch Corp. forests would seal off.
>>>>
>>>>"We could spend $2 million to build an equestrian center or $2 million
>>>>to secure 80,000 acres for Idaho hunters, fishermen and families for
>>>>perpetuity," Langhorst said.
>>>>
>>>>Langhorst was referring to Gov. Dirk Kempthorne's proposal to pay $2
>>>>million for about 30 to 40 acres of land next to J.R. Simplot's Boise
>>>>mansion, which was donated to the state. The land includes a horse barn.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Benson said Potlatch is not close to a decision about how to deal with
>>>>the issue of access to its forests. He also said the company's new
>>>>status as a real estate investment trust has no bearing on the outcome
>>>>of the decision.
>>>>
>>>>It's a decision that will include consideration of the company's
>>>>102-year heritage, the company's neighbors and the company's
>>>>shareholders.
>>>>
>>>>"We believe we get one chance to do this right," Benson said.
>>>>----------------------------------------------
>>>>Tread lightly, Moscow,
>>>>
>>>>DC
>>>
>>>_____________________________________________________
>>>List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the
>>>communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net
>>>mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
>>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
>
> _____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the
> communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list