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

American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

earthhope.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 199 posts

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#71

Post by hangonhn »

dessimus wrote: post #61
geye1234 wrote: post #20

The UK has a much more intelligent (though far from perfect) approach to land use. It has public rights of way (if on foot, horse or bicycle) crossing the whole country. You can walk from one end of Britain to the other without trespassing, and without using roads (much). Many of these paths are very, very old, in a few cases Roman or pre-Roman, although more are medieval. Until recently, they were based on common la…

>The American eighteenth-century enlightenment approach is an attempt to make everything tidy: it's based on the rationalist idea that a thing is its definition and nothing more. So private property is private, that means nobody else can use it: case closed. You may be unaware, but the American legal system allows for property owners to be held civilly responsible for the actions of uninvited individuals, including c…

IANL. Under American law, if the owner doesn't enforce exclusion the land can become public through implied dedication if the public continues to use it over time.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#73

Post by [deleted] »

pixelpoet wrote: post #70
jacobolus wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit: this conversation is a waste of time. retracting my comment

It's not that I don't understand what they want to express and how they use the phrase. I'm arguing that it's a poor phrase for the job, when "one of the few" exactly and necessarily implies that, while "one of the few" doesn't necessarily. In fact it's even more vacuous ("nothingburger") because sometimes it's not even clear which way the person means it; if I say "I'm one of the only people to do a handstand on a T…

[deleted]

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#74

Post by rafram »

aftbit wrote: post #63
rafram wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two very, very different situations. The UK is a small, densely populated country without large areas of true wilderness. Over 90% of the country's land is private. The one area of the UK where there are large expanses of land without many inhabitants is Scotland (due to the Clearances), but the land there is still mostly owned by large land barons, and so Scotland has a more permissive law that allows non-destructiv…

I'm gonna roll to doubt this. I live in a planned suburb with lots of cul-de-sacs which leads to long car-centric paths without sidewalks to walk through. Most of my neighbors (and myself) are very comfortable with people cutting through or around their yards to bypass this. I've gotten explicit permission to cut through when I'm walking my dog from the neighbors that own the most valuable shortcuts, but I wish there…

> I've gotten explicit permission to cut through when I'm walking my dog from the neighbors that own the most valuable shortcuts, but I wish there were a custom or law that covered this instead of needing to rely on the kindness of strangers.

If enough people cross their land over a long enough period of time (varies by jurisdiction) without permission, that creates a "prescriptive easement," which is essentially what you're asking for. Some decent info here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easement#By_prescription

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#75

Post by shayway »

pixelpoet wrote: post #70
jacobolus wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit: this conversation is a waste of time. retracting my comment

It's not that I don't understand what they want to express and how they use the phrase. I'm arguing that it's a poor phrase for the job, when "one of the few" exactly and necessarily implies that, while "one of the few" doesn't necessarily. In fact it's even more vacuous ("nothingburger") because sometimes it's not even clear which way the person means it; if I say "I'm one of the only people to do a handstand on a T…

Is your objection to the use of 'only' to refer to multiple things, or specifically the phrase "one of the only"? Would you consider "I am only five minutes late" to be valid?

(edit - for the record, this was in response to the first paragraph only, as the others were edited in afterwards)

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#76

Post by k33n »

em-bee wrote: post #65
k33n wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's so much biased journalism that you really have to read things twice before using words like "evil". > locked out of ONE OF THE ONLY western access roads So not locked out. And accessible from all 4 orientations. (edit: lol, break the rules and downvote all you want. this site loves dishonest journalism if it confirms their wrong biases)

not completely locked out of access to the area, but locked out of using one of the only available road to that area.

So not locked out of the area by any stretch of the imagination and no evil was done.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#77

Post by HardCodedBias »

HardCodedBias wrote: post #72

500/acre, am I reading that correctly? IDK anything about Montana, but that feels inexpensive.

Ah it looks like only 22k acres was deeded.

~1500/acre is very normal for Montana farm/pasture land.

It is undisclosed how much American Prairie paid, it will be interesting to see if that ever gets disclosed.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#78

Post by dogman144 »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #42
dogman144 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still going, and we can call the guy keeping it going by his public records name - Fred Eshelman, pharma wealthy North Carolinian owns the notoriously checkerboarded Elk Mountain in Wy, which if you ever drive I80 past Laramie Wy it’s the big mountain on the south side going west. owns 6000 acres of checkerboard land that’s effectively 20,000 acres with a notorious ranch manager. Lost his case in Fed courts in Wyomin…

Sometimes the checkerboarding is the result of indian reservation agreements. For example, Palm Springs is technically like this.

Well, often in the west the big square in an undesirable desert is the reservation, and the checkerboard is the 1800’s railroad.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#79

Post by potato3732842 »

throwawaysleep wrote: post #40
potato3732842 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what happened when that doctrine was ported to America was that they used that doctrine to incrementally take the natives land and started a war in only the span of one generation.

Americans happily signed treaties with the natives and reneged. The law didn't matter as the law was ignored.

I'm talking about King Phillip's war a century and a half before most of the treaty violation stuff started happening in earnest.

Re: American Prairie unlocks another 70k acres in Montana

#80

Post by whatever1 »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #62
whatever1 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you did not fight for it you don’t have ownership rights. The state owns the land. The rest of us are mere users of it. For the many downvoters do this thought experiment: the neighbor country attacks and takes over your country. What is your ownership title worth? Exactly 0. Hence it was not yours to begin with.

For the N years between now and the neighbor country conquering, the title is worth the value I can get from the legal rights it gives me within the legal system of my country. That's more than zero, even if it doesn't last forever.

You can bet on a price but it’s not yours. Unless the state defends it and agrees that the piece of paper you call title is binding.

To the conqueror your paper means nothing.

Post reply on HN