Landowner issues

[lunkerslayer]

Right next to wishunew lake in Steele county

 

[gst]

I found a plat book and were i accessed the lake is a section line, i think the landowner just wanted his own little lake and was a real a-hole about it!

"The board of county commissioners, if petitioned by a person having an interest in theadjoining land or a portion thereof, after public hearing and a finding by the commissioners ofpublic benefit, may close section lines or portions thereof which are not used for ten years, arenot traveled due to natural obstacles or difficulty of terrain, are not required due to readilyaccessible alternate routes of travel, or are intersected by interstate highways causing thesection line to be a deadend, providing the closing of the dead-end section line does not depriveadjacent landowners access to the landowners' property. After the section lines are closed, theymay be used to the benefit of the adjacent landowners."


The above emboldened language applies to a lake or slough crossing a section line. The section line can be closed thru the procedure listed. AS far as I know there is no requirement to post sections lines are closed as there is if determined to be minimum maintanance.

Just because it is a section line does not mean it is open to public use.

 

[NDSportsman]

IMO no section line should be allowed to be closed because of a slough over it or some other temporary obstacle. The next drought could leave it high and dry and passable again. Hopefully township boards are looking at the big picture rather then bowing to someone's current whim.

 

[Walleye_Chaser]

I personally know a land owner that tried getting a locked gate put up on a section line that turned into a slough over the years....all the locals pretty much told him to go F himself! He's just a known asshole that doesn't like people driving on to get to the lake during hard water...dumbass.

 

[gst]

IMO no section line should be allowed to be closed because of a slough over it or some other temporary obstacle. The next drought could leave it high and dry and passable again. Hopefully township boards are looking at the big picture rather then bowing to someone's current whim.

It is not the township boards decision if you read the law. It is the county commissioners after a public meeting is held.

The public (who votes for the county commissioners) is given the ability to weigh in and influence the decision.

All that was shared was the actual law so people can learn a bit if they wish.

 

[Fisherman25]

the spot I marked here is where I was asking the game warden about... this is the west side of the lake... the east side has an access point that I did not know about at the time nor was it plowed out... I was told it is illegal to access the lake at that point because 1/2 of the road technically belongs to the land owner even though it is a public road and at the point you leave that right of way if there is 1 blade of grass that you cross you are trespassing... it is similar to the "corner crossing debate" where if there is 2 sections posted out of the 4 corners if you cross at the corner you are trespassing on the 2 posted sections because you crossed their air space

What warden did you talk to? Larson? Gullickson lives right there, he would have been a good resource to talk with about it.

 

[NDSportsman]

It is not the township boards decision if you read the law. It is the county commissioners after a public meeting is held.

The public (who votes for the county commissioners) is given the ability to weigh in and influence the decision.

All that was shared was the actual law so people can learn a bit if they wish.

Township board or county commission my point still stands. Again this isn't something that should be done because someone thinks it's a good idea at the time. There are long lasting future ramifications.

 

[You]

use your maps and check out 6 miles sw of lehr nd. the intersection of 83rd st se and 45th ave se. with the current high-water cycle, 83rd terminates into a 10ish hectare slough (it passed through in the past), anyhow, if you're heading w on 83rd st se, don't miss your corner north onto 45th ave se because SOMEONE (maybe someone from the yard by that intersection?) placed a large piece of antiquated machinery dead center of the road......

hmmmm. I could use a new truck....and a couple quarters of land....

 

[Walleye_Chaser]

use your maps and check out 6 miles sw of lehr nd. the intersection of 83rd st se and 45th ave se. with the current high-water cycle, 83rd terminates into a 10ish hectare slough (it passed through in the past), anyhow, if you're heading w on 83rd st se, don't miss your corner north onto 45th ave se because SOMEONE (maybe someone from the yard by that intersection?) placed a large piece of antiquated machinery dead center of the road......

hmmmm. I could use a new truck....and a couple quarters of land....

I see that...must be some giant perch in that slough!

 

[gst]

Township board or county commission my point still stands. Again this isn't something that should be done because someone thinks it's a good idea at the time. There are long lasting future ramifications.

So having an open public meeting where YOUR concerns and input can be voiced and heard is not a good idea?

Remember if there are significant impacts to the community these county commissioners are elected by everyone in the county right?

Perhaps there are long lasting future ramifications of keeping some section lines open to travel that end in lakes or sloughs or ravines or coulees ...............as well?

I am surprised there is no requirement of posting road closures when section lines are closed.

- - - Updated - - -

use your maps and check out 6 miles sw of lehr nd. the intersection of 83rd st se and 45th ave se. with the current high-water cycle, 83rd terminates into a 10ish hectare slough (it passed through in the past), anyhow, if you're heading w on 83rd st se, don't miss your corner north onto 45th ave se because SOMEONE (maybe someone from the yard by that intersection?) placed a large piece of antiquated machinery dead center of the road......

hmmmm. I could use a new truck....and a couple quarters of land....

24-06-28. Obstruction of section lines prohibited - Exception - Certain fences notconsidered obstructions - Obstructions and traffic safety hazards - Penalty.1. A person may not place or cause to be placed any permanent obstruction within thevertical plane of thirty-three feet [10.06 meters] of any section line or within the right ofway of any highway, unless written permission is first secured from the board of countycommissioners or the board of township supervisors, as appropriate. The permissionmust be granted where the section line has been closed pursuant to section 24-07-03or where the topography of the land along the section line is such that in the opinion ofthe board of county commissioners or board of township supervisors, as the case maybe, the construction of a road on the section line is impracticable.2. A person may not place or cause to be placed any obstruction or traffic safety hazardwithin the vertical plane of thirty-three feet [10.06 meters] of any section line or withinthe right of way of any highway, unless written permission is first secured from theboard of county commissioners or board of township supervisors, as appropriate.3. Subsection 1 may not be construed to prohibit construction of fences:a. Along or across section lines which have been closed pursuant to section24-07-03 or which have not been opened because construction of a road isimpracticable due to the topography of the land along the section line, but suchfences are subject to removal as provided in section 24-06-30.b. Across section lines which have not been closed pursuant to section 24-07-03 ifcattle guards are provided in accordance with chapter 24-10 where fences crossthe section lines.4. The construction of fences pursuant to subsection 3 may not be considered anobstruction of section lines and any person who damages any fence or who opens andfails to close any gate constructed under subsection 3 is guilty of an infraction.5. Subsection 2 does not apply to a railroad company performing maintenance and repairwork of railroad track, crossings, or other railroad facilities.

24-06-29. Removal of permanent obstructions - Removal of obstructions and trafficsafety hazards - Cost.1. If a person places or causes to be placed a permanent obstruction within the verticalplane of thirty-three feet [10.06 meters] of any section line or within the right of way ofany highway, the board of county commissioners or board of township supervisors, asappropriate, when a public highway is opened, shall notify the owners of adjacentproperty to remove the permanent obstruction. Written notice by registered mail to therecord owner of the adjacent property mailed to the owner's last-known address and toany other persons in possession of the property constitutes valid notice. If the ownersfail to remove the permanent obstruction within thirty days after the notice is mailed,the board of county commissioners or the board of township supervisors, asappropriate, shall remove the permanent obstruction. The cost of removal must beentered the same as taxes against the adjacent property and paid in the same manneras taxes.2. If a person places or causes to be placed an obstruction or traffic safety hazard withinthe vertical plane of thirty-three feet [10.06 meters] of any section line or within theright of way of any highway road surface, the board of county commissioners or boardof township supervisors, as appropriate, shall issue a written order to the person whocaused the obstruction or traffic safety hazard to be placed there to remove theobstruction or traffic safety hazard. If the person notified fails to remove the obstructionor traffic safety hazard as soon as practical after the notice is received, the board ofcounty commissioners or board of township supervisors, as appropriate, shall removethe obstruction or traffic safety hazard. The person responsible for placement of theobstruction or traffic safety hazard is responsible and may be billed for any costsincurred by the county or township for removal of the obstruction or traffic safetyhazard.3. Subsection 2 does not apply to railroad facilities.

 

[Duckslayer100]

Totally hypothetical situations, but instead of a slough what if it was a big ROCK on a section line...


#$%^&>

 

[NDSportsman]

So having an open public meeting where YOUR concerns and input can be voiced and heard is not a good idea?

Remember if there are significant impacts to the community these county commissioners are elected by everyone in the county right?

Perhaps there are long lasting future ramifications of keeping some section lines open to travel that end in lakes or sloughs or ravines or coulees ...............as well?

I am surprised there is no requirement of posting road closures when section lines are closed.

I think you just like to argue over anything. I suppose your OK with anything as long as it suits your agenda. Like I said section lines were set up for a reason and those reasons are just as valid today as they were 100 years ago and as they will be 100 years from now. Things change gst and what gets done today can not easily be undone tomorrow.

 

[Captain Ahab]

...and the wet blanket arrived.

 

[gst]

I think you just like to argue over anything. I suppose your OK with anything as long as it suits your agenda. Like I said section lines were set up for a reason and those reasons are just as valid today as they were 100 years ago and as they will be 100 years from now. Things change gst and what gets done today can not easily be undone tomorrow.

I simply believe local govts (the people they represent) should have a say in what happens locally be it at the township, county, city, state level.

There were some pretty smart fellas a few years back that thought that way as well.

The public gets a say in helping these elected officials make these calls.

- - - Updated - - -

...and the wet blanket arrived.

Yeah the actual facts relating to an issue from the century code are kind of a "wet blanket" to supposition, accusation and swags.

But then most don;t whine about it.

 

[NDSportsman]

I simply believe local govts (the people they represent) should have a say in what happens locally be it at the township, county, city, state level.

There were some pretty smart fellas a few years back that thought that way as well.

The public gets a say in helping these elected officials make these calls.

I agree and like I said hopefully these people can see the forest for trees and realize they won't always be the ones currently here and having to deal with the decisions that were made by them in the future. Kind of like your opposition to perpetual easements.

 

[gst]

Ha unsigned "bad rep" for simply sharing the state laws on an issue........
Someone is a whiney little bitch with no balls to sign their name today.

Thread: Landowner issues
Jerkwad


- - - Updated - - -

I agree and like I said hopefully these people can see the forest for trees and realize they won't always be the ones currently here and having to deal with the decisions that were made by them in the future. Kind of like your opposition to perpetual easements.

Perpetual being the very large difference here. A section line can be reopened thru the same process it was closed. Perpetual easements not so much.

Todays lawsuit happy society is much different than the past. So indeed things change. My bet is townships and counties will be named in lawsuits when someones kid gets killed driving into a lake on an unmarked section line even if state law protects them.

We have a pasture that a crik crossed thru. On one side of it there used to be a road and a bridge maaaaaaany years ago on the section line. The bridge loooong since washed out and there is a 8 foot drop into about 7 feet of water at times.

So are you saying that section line should "never" be closed?

Ha more whiney ass chicken shit unsigned bad rep........

Thread: Landowner issues
Loser !

 

[Obi-Wan]

Give one example where closing a section line benefits the general public

 

[gst]

Give one example where closing a section line benefits the general public

Give one example where I suggested it would. Not every action that is sometimes necessary "benefits" the general public.

- - - Updated - - -

I simply posted relevant state law so people would know section lines can be closed and the process in how it can be done. Got a problem with it, take it up with the legislature instead of whining about it on a internet site and posting chickenshit unsigned bad rep.

- - - Updated - - -

"We have a pasture that a crik crossed thru. On one side of it there used to be a road and a bridge maaaaaaany years ago on the section line. The bridge loooong since washed out and there is a 8 foot drop into about 7 feet of water at times. "


I'm betting that if it was your high school kid out driving around at night with his buddies maybe having a beer or two that ran off this drop off and was killed there would be people calling for that section line to be closed for the "benefit of the general public".

 

[Livetohuntandfish]

I agree with gst completely, but on another note if I were the land owners who had a bunch of people driving across their land to fish I'd be pissed and do the same. Some people have respect but most don't. I know the one lake that is being talked about and you guys bitch about Wisconsin guys coming in in hoards..... scooby was over run overnight... went from a hidden gem for a few locals to I bet being fished out by next winter... this is the reason I fish for northerns in the winter. Not because I like them but I'd rather sit on a lake with a couple locals then have to put up with a bunch of idiots that have thousands invested in gear and have a brain the size of a quarter!

 

[Zogman]

I agree with gst completely, but on another note if I were the land owners who had a bunch of people driving across their land to fish I'd be pissed and do the same. Some people have respect but most don't.!

Agree! who said "We have met the enemy and he is us" or something like that?