Live data from Hacker News

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

bloomberg.com

121–130 of 177 posts

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

#121

By coincidence, "Freedom to Roam" came up in a recent HN thread: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam the general public's right to access certain public or privately owned land for recreation and exercise. The right is sometimes called the right of public access to the wilderness or the "right to roam". In Scotland, the Nordic countries of Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, the Baltic countries of Estonia…

I used to do a fair bit of hiking and mountaineering in Scotland and England and the only time I was ever challenged by a landowner (while eating my picnic lunch) was in Somerset where he claimed that I might spread Swine Fever to his pigs from the Pork Pie I was eating.

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

#122
post #56

Business idea: Charge a fare to take people into the federal land via helicopter loudly flying over private land.

The inverse concept (helicopter over public land to access a private inholding) has been tried by the Sievers :

https://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/lawsuit-seeks-to-build...

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

#123
post #110

This is a complicated topic. I used to own the lower part of a mountain valley (out west but not in Montana). There were two dirt "roads" into the valley, both immediately against the titled property; the rest of the valley was Federal (BLM) land encircled by mountains that were effectively impassable. Americans generally have a right to use and temporarily occupy these Federal lands without permission, so if I put u…

Interesting topic. Could you talk a bit about the state laws that regulate incorporation? For instance, depending on the state, could you incorporate and then ask the state for assistance in requesting authority to maintain the federal roads? Also, how is federal ownership of the land different from if a private entity owned it? If the roads were privately owned, would you still run into the same issues?

This is very complicated and varies from State to State. Incorporation requires meeting some base criteria, such as sufficient population size in the proposed incorporated area (usually a few hundred people), and often requires an official act of an elected body. How responsibilities can get allocated technically (i.e. what is legally possible which includes some unusual arrangements in some States) and how those responsibilities get allocated in practice is equally complicated. Generally though, for Federal land, the State has limited authority. They do have indirect authority by virtue of the resources that they do control, such as water, that gives the States practical leverage. Federal land cannot be taxed by the State, so the Federal government subsidizes State property taxes in those States where most of the land is Federal because it is nearly impossible to build a property tax base when 90+% of land in a county is Federal. Not only is there not much property, the fragmentation of the land prevents it from achieving an economically productive critical mass.

Federal land has one important difference from private land or even State land: the regulations regarding management and use are pretty disconnected from the realities of the lands under management or the population that lives there, aggravated by the fact that these decisions are primarily made by people that have live very far away from where most Federal land is located and have no experience with those regions.

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

#124
If you own land and let people traverse it without any control, it does eventually become a public right of way. The government has pushed this, effectively taking control of private land.

The only sane response is to exercise control of your land by putting up signs, fences, etc.

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

#125

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…

    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.
Which ones? I just did all the 14ers this year, and didn't have problems with access to any. (Culebra was one I paid for a reservation)

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

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

That is a shame. I think Culebra Peak has always been private access. At least it when I was bagging them back in the 1990's. What are the other four that are problematic now?

Like to know too - considering I visited them all just this past summer.

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

#127
post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guidance is really the job of the parks services. The problems come when the burdens get thrust upon the landowners.

Elsewhere in these comments are people saying that landowners will remove (public) signage(!), which might impact what the parks people can do? Maybe a well-publicised term for a private easement that people recognise is treated in a particular way? I like that in the States, National Park means something, BLM means something, etc. Our designations in Australia don't seem as clear. We have Crown land, but I have no i…

I agree as long as the rules are enforced and landowners aren't forced to deal with the consequences of people that break them.

Really this is called "sharing" and it's sad that it's causing so many problems.

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

#128
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main function of the modern government apparatus is to divide up the commons and parcel them out for private ownership. Coase was just another power-supplicating priest.

Your understanding of Coase is pathetic and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Please don't post like this regardless of how lame another comment was. It only makes this place worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Edit: I'm sad to see that you've posted nastily uncivil comments before this too. We ban accounts that do that, so would you please read those guidelines and err on the side of civility when posting here?

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

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Local representatives don’t get to counter the almighty EPA, which writes and enforces all of the environmental regulations affecting this kind of thing.

Sure, but they have some influence with the EPA. They will at least be able to get a meeting with someone reasonably high up at the EPA and if that fails they can introduce legislation to force the EPA to change the regulations.

Rural Americans don't tend to think that the government is a functional entity and that going through that chain will net anything.

They may have a valid point since only money talks in government these days.

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

#130
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.

The main function of the modern government apparatus is to divide up the commons and parcel them out for private ownership. Coase was just another power-supplicating priest.

Would you please stop using HN for ideological battle? It's emphatically not what this site is for:

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN