
Private landowners blocking access to public lands in the American West - fmihaila
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jan/21/public-land-battle-private-landowners-montana
======
electricslpnsld
You don't even have to go to Montana. Some of my neighbors in Oakland have
been beefing with a local restaurant/nightclub that keeps blocking off access
to public waterfront and sends beefy rent-a-cops to intimidate people in the
public space.

~~~
gamblor956
Please name the restaurant. I have some connections with Oakland City Council
and they can take a look into this.

~~~
electricslpnsld
Eve's Waterfront. Neighbors have complained that they've gone as far as
blocking off the San Francisco Bay Trail during bigger events at night.

Edit: Interesting, I dug up some zoning documents from the restaurant, and the
Bay Conservation and Development Commission specifically called out the
actions they are doing now (blocking the trail, blocking public access decks)
as violations on page 4.

[1]
[http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/ceda/documents/agen...](http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/ceda/documents/agenda/oak063115.pdf)

~~~
nielsbot
Man it would be a real shame if the Oakland Department of Public Health
received a spate of complaints and found unsanitary conditions in the
kitchen...

~~~
alex_hitchins
Would it also not be likely illegal (?) and as unethical as their action?

~~~
nielsbot
It was not a serious suggestion. Sorry HN. I suppose you could get in trouble
for misusing city resources? Assuming that didn't actually have any
violations.

~~~
alex_hitchins
Thank you. While I believe their actions are disgraceful, it only adds fuel to
their fire. My belief is we need to find a way to understand their concerns as
best we can to show them their fears are un-grounded. Even if it was in jest
which I fully appreciate, to the 'other side' it looks like what it was.

------
beedogs
Wow, so, when you're wealthy in America, you can literally murder someone _in
cold blood_ and only get probation for it?

"He shot and killed his neighbor, Timothy Newman, a man who had repeatedly
challenged Campbell over his access-blocking proclivities. Campbell first
claimed it was self-defense because Newman threatened him, but last year he
finally pleaded guilty to negligent homicide. He’s now on probation, under a
20 years suspended prison sentence."

~~~
paulddraper
"Murder in cold blood" is not "negligent homicide".

It's premeditated homicide, i.e. first degree murder.

~~~
beedogs
Which makes me wonder why he was only charged with the latter; it's clear he
committed the former.

~~~
danielvf
The story here is not as simple as the article sounds.

The short version is Timothy Newman, the man who ended up dead, had armed
himself with a gun, gone to Campbell's property with the intent of "adversely
possessing" it, and draw his own gun on Campbell before Campbell fired at him.

Now this probably would not have made it to a trial, had not Campbell said to
multiple people in the weeks before that he was going to “put Newman down” the
next time they met.

There was a murder trial. The jury at this trial were instructed to decided
between preplanned murder or innocent, did not believe either was correct, and
returned no decision, resulting in a mistrial.

In lieu of a second trial, the 20-year suspended sentence was worked out
between the prosecutors and the defendant's lawyers. As part of that Campbell
paid Newman's wife one million dollars, and Campbell was never to go on the
disputed property again (effectively giving up control of it).

The wild west is a crazy place, and justice is not always obvious.

------
maxxxxx
That's a thing that bothers me generally in the West. In theory there is a lot
of open country but in reality there are huge areas of grazing land fenced in
with no way to get through which makes hiking very difficult. In Britain and
Germany they usually don't completely block off their land but there are
trails going through.

~~~
trhway
and in Nordic countries there is
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam)

~~~
DonaldFisk
and in Scotland there is [http://www.outdooraccess-
scotland.com](http://www.outdooraccess-scotland.com)

------
alkonaut
The contrast between the "stand your ground" and "no trespassing" of the US on
one hand, and my "Freedom to roam" on the other, is pretty stark.

------
mrarjen
I remember reading an article regarding this some time ago as well. It's
mostly due to some new rule that when the public has been able to access
private land for an amount of time unhindered the state can claim it their
own. This has caused most to fence up in order to keep their land.

It's completely understandable, and this is mostly just Government trolling to
land owners and causing inconvenient situations to the public wanting to
access public grounds.

~~~
sideshowb
Who would write a law like that? In the uk long term use can establish a
public right of way, but it still belongs to the landowner.

~~~
Brockenstein
Because there's no perfect solution. If a piece of land has that much utility
the government could take ownership (possible compensate the owner) and be
responsible for maintaining and upkeep.

I mean your example in the UK, I can't believe every landowner that has a
public right of way on their property is thrilled about it, especially in
cases when they went to do something with their property and the government
told them no because of the right of way. What good is owning that property
one might wonder? If it's that important to everyone why not have the
government purchase it and maintain it?

Every landowner might have a different opinion of what the best solution is.
Good luck writing a law that appeases them all.

~~~
sideshowb
Here the local authority is responsible for upkeep (though in practice they
may not have the budget). Landowner responsibility is pretty much just don't
block it or put anything dangerous there.

------
js2
Bloomberg piece on same topic discussed here a few months ago:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15552574](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15552574)

------
stevenwoo
No mention of the local (to ycombinator) dispute with Vinod Khosla.

[http://www.hmbreview.com/news/martin-s-beach-open-
again/arti...](http://www.hmbreview.com/news/martin-s-beach-open-
again/article_1a82aeb6-af88-11e7-9e78-9b8317e4101c.html)

I'm surprised people never protested at his office on Sand Hill Road.

~~~
jacquesm
This sort of abuse of wealth is absolutely revolting, but how do you deal with
parties that have amassed enough power to basically thumb their noses at the
rest of the populace?

The casualness with which such a rich asshole deprives thousands of people of
their rights without any fear for consequences is absolutely disgusting.

~~~
mschuster91
> The casualness with which such a rich asshole deprives thousands of people
> of their rights without any fear for consequences is absolutely disgusting.

>> "He shot and killed his neighbor, Timothy Newman, a man who had repeatedly
challenged Campbell over his access-blocking proclivities. Campbell first
claimed it was self-defense because Newman threatened him, but last year he
finally pleaded guilty to negligent homicide. He’s now on probation, under a
20 years suspended prison sentence."

Just WTF? This is absolutely insane. Other people end up in the chamber for
such things (not that I like the death penalty or other excessive punishment,
quite the opposite). The sign that if you're rich enough you can get off with
murder is a threat to the core stability of society.

~~~
jacquesm
[http://www.ktvh.com/2016/05/joseph-campbell-pleads-no-
contes...](http://www.ktvh.com/2016/05/joseph-campbell-pleads-no-contest-in-
the-shooting-death-of-tim-newman)

Plea deals when you're rich are a completely different thing than when you're
poor apparently.

------
mirimir
And Zuckerberg in Hawaii. Sure, I get that he values his privacy. But damn,
the juxtaposition of privacy with Facebook's founder is highly ironic.

~~~
nikmobi
Didn't that lawsuit end up being entirely misconstrued [1, 2]? IANAL, so I
can't verify the legitimacy of the sources there but it made sense to me. I'm
interested if someone more aware of the situation and laws has insight.

[https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/comments/7bwh7q/mark_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/comments/7bwh7q/mark_zuckerberg_sued_native_hawaiians_for_their/dplnhf4/)
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/comments/7bwh7q/mark_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Documentaries/comments/7bwh7q/mark_zuckerberg_sued_native_hawaiians_for_their/dplj8xl/)

~~~
craftyguy
I'm not so sure that random comments on reddit are a good source of credible
information. I suppose the same could be said about random comments on HN
without credible sources.

~~~
mirimir
The matter was widely reported in January 2017.

~~~
craftyguy
Still waiting for those credible sources!

~~~
mirimir
Here's a CNBC article about his reconsideration:

[https://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/25/facebook-ceo-mark-
zuckerberg...](https://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/25/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-
reconsidering-hawaii-property-lawsuits.html)

And here's his statement about having done so:

[https://web.archive.org/web/20170130025034/http://thegardeni...](https://web.archive.org/web/20170130025034/http://thegardenisland.com/news/opinion/guest/mark-
zuckerberg-and-priscilla-chan-we-are-dropping-our-
quiet/article_e80fc17c-e4b1-11e6-bc5c-9308d8f880f4.html)

OK?

------
jessaustin
Who is Zinke? Is she someone like Madonna, whom we readers should know from
her single name in its single mention in TFA? Try harder, editors!

~~~
jedberg
Montana's former Congressman. It said so... about four words later.

~~~
jessaustin
Sole mention of "Zinke":

 _Still, Gianforte was elected months later in a special election to replace
Zinke as Montana’s congressman._

Yes I know I could have just Googled it. I don't actually care who Zinke is,
or what her or his first (last?) name might be. My comment was about
journalistic standards. Sorry to confuse you.

~~~
jedberg
Yes I understand that your criticism was about journalistic standards.

My point was that they didn't violate any standards, by telling you who Zinke
is right after mentioning his name.

~~~
jessaustin
Apparently they left something out? TIL he's Interior Secretary involved with
several of the controversies discussed in TFA? b^)

------
joshuaheard
Part of the problem is that the federal government is the largest landholder
is most of the Western states
([https://goo.gl/images/vsw7rK](https://goo.gl/images/vsw7rK)), so conceivably
there are a lot of adjacent private lands. How do you determine access? If I
have a property that borders federal (public) land, must I grant access?

The other problem then, is that all this land is managed by bureaucrats in
Washington DC. A better solution would be to give the bulk of this land to the
states who are closer to the local residents and can more effectively manage
the property. Limited easements should then be purchased from willing sellers.

~~~
dawnerd
> If I have a property that borders federal (public) land, must I grant
> access?

Depending on if there's an easement on your property, yes. These kinds of
things are _usually_ spelled out clearly in real-estate deals. A lot of
homeowners on the beach think they own the land up to the water but that's not
always the case despite them trying to block access. No one has to necessarily
cross their property to get there either.

~~~
tmh79
> A lot of homeowners on the beach think they own the land up to the water but
> that's not always the case despite them trying to block access.

In California, it is literally never the case, by state law.

~~~
dawnerd
In Ventura there was some people trying to fight that near the marina. If I
remember correctly one of the homeowners tried to build a fence/wall to the
water.

Also remember something similar happening in Malibu.

