Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 177 posts

Re: The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

#71

Post by davidw »

barsonme wrote: post #63
davidw wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 4) Work with city and county county officials to assist with their environmental policy. (This one has been my favorite to watch take off.) This one is so ripe for bipartisanship: https://www.brookings.edu/research/reforming-land-use-regula...

It's been so awesome to local politicians from across the political spectrum message us and say, "Hey, what we're doing isn't working, do you have advice?" People are so much more invested in their own community and open to tangible solutions.

Are you familiar with Strong Towns?

https://www.strongtowns.org/

They're good people, non-partisan, and also very much in line with "something isn't working":

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2015/1/7/americas-suburb...

Re: The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

#72

Post by oasisbob »

njarboe wrote: post #48
googlryas wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should it be illegal to put up 'no trespassing' signs when there is clearly a longstanding public easement?

I imagine it is, but they put up the signs on the fences on both sides of the road, which is their property and it is illegal to trespass. IANAL, but on undeveloped land in the US you have to put up 'no trespassing' signs generally before enforcing people not to trespass on your land. I reality the ranchers(in reality they are usually rich sport ranchers that live in a city and recently bought the property) don't eve…

Interestingly, some states don't require signs - purple paint will do.

http://ijr.com/2016/02/535003-purple-paint-texas/

Re: The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

#73

Post by maxerickson »

makomk wrote: post #10

Wow. I'm pretty sure the idea of public rights of way as a legal right of access across private property predates the entire US. That's a hell of a thing for the government to try and eradicate for the benefit of private landowners.

It just wasn't ever well established in the US. States generally give themselves the right to build roads though.

Re: The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

#74

Post by jonknee »

StudentStuff wrote: post #67
schmichael wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are lots of groups specific to regions and activities, so a bit of searching about specific activities/places you enjoy should yield some good organizations. For example https://www.accessfund.org/ does a great job of representing rock climbers. https://gorgefriends.org/ are a group representing the Columbia River Gorge along the Oregon/Washington border.

The "Friends of the Gorge" are no friend you'd want. Every interaction I had with them was NIMBY, how dare you not smother the small towns along the gorge to death BS. Most of 'em would see to it that the Gorge goes back to having no wind mills, roads or dams unless its directly used by them for wind surfing or skiing. Bunch of rich, elitist assholes who've come in from Portland and Seattle to fuck up the Gorge IMO.

NIMBYism is a little different when your backyard is a protected National Scenic Area. Stopping development is pretty much the whole point.

Re: The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

#75

Post by davidw »

24gttghh wrote: post #53
davidw wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. What kinds of things has your group accomplished? I'm not a conservative, but the Sierra Club will never see a dime from me until they lay off mountain bikers. It seems so stupid to antagonize a group that could share about 99% of what they want to accomplish.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the Sierra Club only opposed mtn biking in designated Wilderness Areas, which only make up 36M out of 192M NFS acerage.[0] (That's 145,000 km^2 out of 780,000 km^2) Those areas really should just be left alone as much as possible. The White Mountain National Forest doesn't even like expanding or maintaining the leantos in much of their Wilderness Areas, so it's not like…

They've been pretty consistently anti MTB over the years.

There are absolutely wilderness areas where there should not be bikes, but it should be decided locally, just as certain trails outside of wilderness areas are, justly, hiker only.

For instance, this is a Wilderness area east of Bend, Oregon. It is not, however a "wilderness" - indeed many of the trails are former jeep roads:

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.0008533,-121.0058259,13154m/...

And don't forget: you can legally ride a string of horses into a Wilderness area, shoot an elk with a rifle and pack it out. To my way of thinking, riding a bike around is not nearly so impactful.

Re: The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

#76

Post by marshf »

jandrewrogers wrote: post #70
takk309 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in a small rural area and learned very early that a no trespassing sign means that it is likely to get a warning shot sent your way if cross the line. The signs were not up to just discourage non-locals. I am sure some areas are different but that is my experience in Montana.

That's a fair point. There are some areas where "no trespassing" applies to everyone . A good example of this is in the Nevada gold fields. If you don't respect those signs, you'll be staring at the business end of a gun. But again, if you talk to one of the locals they will tell you that. I always made a point of doing that, most people don't.

As someone who works in the Nevada gold fields, I can say this is blatantly untrue. This isn't the wild west, you won't find armed guards up here. In general the security is no higher than the average oil refinery.

Anyone with a to mind to could easily drive into an active mining area on BLM land

Re: The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

#77

Post by barsonme »

davidw wrote: post #71
barsonme wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been so awesome to local politicians from across the political spectrum message us and say, "Hey, what we're doing isn't working, do you have advice?" People are so much more invested in their own community and open to tangible solutions.

Are you familiar with Strong Towns? https://www.strongtowns.org/ They're good people, non-partisan, and also very much in line with "something isn't working": https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2015/1/7/americas-suburb...

I personally am not, but will definitely run it by some people. At first blush this looks really neat. Thanks for sharing!

Re: The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

#78

Post by typeformer »

brightsize wrote: post #50
typeformer wrote: post #40

I grew up in Livingston MT just a 20 min drive from the Crazies, I know these trails, and this is one if the saddest things I have ever read on HN. Now I live on the West coast but I miss Montana all the time and visit whenever I can. To be honest, I really can't fathom how terrible things have gotten politically with the likes of the despicably corrupt Zinke and Gioforte. Personally, I watched everything change so f…

>Perhaps, I can write a geat Montana story about a forrest service ranger, who leads a double life cutting fences, torching wasteful mansions and getting into conflicts with poachers, extractors, and rich asshole "rancher" and developers. This brings to mind Edward Abbey's book The Monkey Wrench Gang . I can't recommend his books enough, especially Desert Solitaire .

Yeah, I've read and enjoyed both!

Re: The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

#79

Post by tiggybear »

wavefunction wrote: post #44
typeformer wrote: post #40

I grew up in Livingston MT just a 20 min drive from the Crazies, I know these trails, and this is one if the saddest things I have ever read on HN. Now I live on the West coast but I miss Montana all the time and visit whenever I can. To be honest, I really can't fathom how terrible things have gotten politically with the likes of the despicably corrupt Zinke and Gioforte. Personally, I watched everything change so f…

You get some rich people from somewhere else who move in and throw all local culture and tradition away. It's happening in Colorado. Every Fourteener (14,000+ foot mountains) used to be publicly accessible but we got some greedy folks who moved in and shut down that traditional access to at least five of them so far. If I ever come into a sizable fortune my plan is to acquire these lands and turn them over to the pub…

Just find the pharmaceuticals these greedy assholes are dependent on to stay alive, buy up the manufacturing rights, shut down production, and get rid of some of the world's problems. Could probably could get a kickstarter going, I'd donate.

Re: The fight over preserving public land takes a twist in Montana’s mountains

#80

Post by takk309 »

jhauris wrote: post #52
takk309 wrote: post #30

I live in Bozeman and have made many trips to the Crazy Mountains over the years and can say that this article hits the nail on the head. This isn't just an issue in the Crazies either. Almost every mountain range in the region has some sort of land access issue. In the Bridger Range, just west of the Crazies, the Forest Service choose to reroute a trail to avoid a legal battle. Other examples include places that the…

Are there places they can't reroute the trail? That seems like the natural solution.

If you look at the map in the article, you will see the checker boarding. That usually means that if you move a trail off of one section, it ends up on another section. Sometimes it is a matter of the length of trail that needs to be rerouted. The example I gave in my previous comment was a short section of road and it was a reasonable solution.[1] In the situation in the Crazies, most of the range is surrounded by private land. It is a unique situation.

[1] https://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/news/environment/fores...

Post reply on HN