Kevin Rooney
New member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2003
- Messages
- 3,667
- Reaction score
- 354
Methinks the chances of dug and RoySwkr meeting on the Mt Cabot trail are pretty slim.
RoySwkr said:In a similar situation, the RI state highpoint is on land owned by Brown U. with a ROW over someone elses land. The owner tried to keep hikers out and finally held some hikers at gunpoint and called the police, who came and arrested THE LANDOWNER for using inappropriate force - he was not in any danger and could have just photographed them and called the police. He now has a felony conviction and cannot own guns any more.
Double Bow said:Referring to "The Landowner" is a bit misrepresentative here. The current landowners have opened up access to the highpoint and have NEVER had issue with visitors. Let's not give the impression that they are felons! They are very nice people and we ought to do our best to stay on good terms with them and act respectfully out of appreciation for their letting us on their private property.
Ah yeah, that's the same article I read. Damn fine newspaper.spencer said:I read an article in the Deuce County Press paper that Walmart is going to buy the land as part of its new efforts to console fish resources and the trails anti-proximity to the fish hatchery is their first step.
spencer
The ROW case he lost was to an abuttor not a hiker, he has also lost 2 cases with the town planning board according to what the alleged abuttor told me.forestnome said:If the landowner is ordered by the court to allow access, then access must be enforced. At some point, this landowner freely entered into this agreement, either by buying or inheriting the land with an easement in place, or by applying for an easement.
Since this part of the trail is not on NF land, they cannot close it. The signs were apparently put up by other local landowners who didn't mind hikers parking and walking on their property but did mind being disturbed by people asking where the trail was.Much more importantly, The USFS needs to remove the trailhead and close the trail and post a sign there stating that the trail is closed. It seems to me that the FS, by having a trailhead and a trail sign and a parking, lot is luring unaware hikers into a known potentially dangerous situation.
One thing that we all agree on is that the situation should be publicized, whether you choose to stay away or engage in civil disobedience is up to you. KR - I have not hiked this trail since the situation arose, I just feel that people should be given the full facts and let them decide for themselves rather than just saying the trail is closed.I'd bet a very small percentage of the hiking public is aware of this.
forestnome said:This case interests me far beyond the Mt Cabot Trail. I plan on buying land in the near future that abutts the WMNF, and I plan on allowing access to the public (ecept ATVs and snowmobiles), effectively adding to the NF. It's a tradition in NH to not post land. I'd like to know the reason a landowner would have for denying a ROW to the public.
Enter your email address to join: