Test Real Life Yellowstone? Test

Commodity Marketing

Tools

Real Life Yellowstone?

Test
GDR
Mar 5, 2021 | 19:48 1 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/public-private-access-minnie-stoney-lake-ranch-appeal-court-merritt-1.5938741?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar



Douglas Lake Ranch, just won a court battle to keep people from fishing in Lakes on the ranch. Good for them, anything to help set property rights. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Mar 5, 2021 | 19:52 2 I’m all for property rights but is it right to deny access to public property? Reply With Quote
    Mar 5, 2021 | 20:34 3
    Quote Originally Posted by GDR View Post
    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/public-private-access-minnie-stoney-lake-ranch-appeal-court-merritt-1.5938741?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar



    Douglas Lake Ranch, just won a court battle to keep people from fishing in Lakes on the ranch. Good for them, anything to help set property rights.
    You are aware natural bodies of water belong to all Canadians, right?

    Once again, follow the money. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • GDR
    Mar 5, 2021 | 21:42 4
    Quote Originally Posted by jwab View Post
    You are aware natural bodies of water belong to all Canadians, right?

    Once again, follow the money.
    Yes but they have to get there first and if there is no public road allowance to get there it's kinda a problem. Would it be ok to cross your land however and whenever I want to access a lake? Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Mar 5, 2021 | 22:03 5 Welfare cowboys are alive and well I see ,lease holders here doing basicly same thing here , fu-ckup the road allowances and wont let you on deeded land to get to rivers. Don't know if BC is surveyed like alta ,with road allowances or just surveyed roads. Either way if they are caught fishing on crown lakes they should be penilized for trespassing same as public on deeded lands.
    How much of douglas Lake is leased from the crown AKA PUBLIC LAND. Reply With Quote
    Mar 6, 2021 | 08:36 6
    Quote Originally Posted by GDR View Post
    Yes but they have to get there first and if there is no public road allowance to get there it's kinda a problem. Would it be ok to cross your land however and whenever I want to access a lake?
    That’s why we have government, there are some laws that are necessary, this being one of them.

    You may own the land but must realize you have to provide public access.

    Easements exist everywhere, why should this be different?

    This country belongs to all of us and banning access from public lands or waters goes against the rights of its citizens.

    Private property is another story, so I understand, however if you own land surrounding public land you should have to provide access.
    Last edited by jwab; Mar 6, 2021 at 08:47.
    Reply With Quote

  • Mar 6, 2021 | 10:15 7 Being in this sort of situation at one time it is a pain in the butt dealing with “the public” on your property accessing public land. It is a good faith contract between both parties for access but there are some who don’t respect private or public property. Reply With Quote
    blackpowder's Avatar Mar 6, 2021 | 10:28 8 If the queen wants to access her lake she needs a right of way across my land.
    Why should the public be different from a pipeline. Reply With Quote
  • 2 Likes


  • Mar 6, 2021 | 11:04 9
    Quote Originally Posted by blackpowder View Post
    If the queen wants to access her lake she needs a right of way across my land.
    Why should the public be different from a pipeline.
    And such, one should be provided.

    I wouldn’t want to deal with the public either, it’s simply a law that should have been upheld. You know when you purchase the property you’ll have to deal with the public.

    But if you have enough money apparently you can change that too.

    How would everyone feel if the wealth of the world owned all privately held property around public areas and denies access, this is just a smaller scale situation. Don’t laugh it could happen, government certainly isn’t going to help stop it.

    Ethics and government are polar opposites.
    Ethics and money about the same. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Mar 6, 2021 | 11:41 10 So it’s okay for natives to restrict access to lakes on right of ways across their property but not for other land owners? Not disputing public access just duplicity in how law is followed. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Mar 6, 2021 | 13:35 11
    Quote Originally Posted by WiltonRanch View Post
    So it’s okay for natives to restrict access to lakes on right of ways across their property but not for other land owners? Not disputing public access just duplicity in how law is followed.
    I’m not sure how the rules apply to reserves. If it’s crown it should be accessible. What’s “right” and what happens are most often two different things. Reply With Quote
    Mar 6, 2021 | 13:44 12 Alberta website info

    “Agricultural leaseholders must allow access as long as it poses no harm to the land or to their investment in crops, livestock and property.”

    “ The public can access the beds and shores of public water bodies by:
    public roads
    road allowances (developed or undeveloped)
    bridge locations

    Crossing public land
    Uplands may have to be crossed to reach a Crown-owned water body or watercourse. In these cases, permission from the landowner or Crown land leaseholder should be obtained.
    It is not trespassing to travel below the ordinary high water mark of rivers and streams bounded by private land.”

    Note the word “should” in the second set of quotes. Reply With Quote
    GDR
    Mar 6, 2021 | 13:58 13
    Quote Originally Posted by jwab View Post
    And such, one should be provided.

    I wouldn’t want to deal with the public either, it’s simply a law that should have been upheld. You know when you purchase the property you’ll have to deal with the public.

    But if you have enough money apparently you can change that too.

    How would everyone feel if the wealth of the world owned all privately held property around public areas and denies access, this is just a smaller scale situation. Don’t laugh it could happen, government certainly isn’t going to help stop it.

    Ethics and government are polar opposites.
    Ethics and money about the same.
    I do understand your point and dont entirely disagree. Anglers as a group likely better than hunters and campers. But where is the line, technically any wetland on your property as long as it's not seasonal still qualifies to it's high water mark. So should you provide access through your crop for bird watching, camping, why not a campfire on the banks?

    Some people are responsible users, most are not. Garbage, gates left open, property damage just a few of the main concerns. I actually have a "river" accross my land and has never been an issue here but most of the year I can jump accross it so not really the best fishing or boating river.

    There are some land titles in Alberta that do actually own the water body, depends how they were written. There was something different about Hudson Bay company land too in regards to water ways.

    Perhaps I dont see things the same as most, but I would prefer to see much more public access land and parks in general than we have now while at the same time giving private landowners the right to restrict entry. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Mar 6, 2021 | 19:30 14 Any watercourse or waterbody shown in the color Blue on the original Crown Grant sketch, in BC and AB, was exempted from title (remains Crown).
    Was up to the land officer at the time to provide for access (parcel boundaries shown in color Red) if deemed in the public interest. The Crown today (ie Government) always has expropriation powers if they need to be exercised ‘in the public interest’. Reply With Quote
    Mar 6, 2021 | 21:25 15 Drop in from above with an airplane!! Peoplekind on the surrounding shores will quake in wonder when they realize they can’t do anything but give you the finger Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Mar 7, 2021 | 07:55 16 If everyone could just close off access at will, can you imagine the road grid? Here in southern Sask there is pretty much a road of some sort every mile and the grid roads are uninterrupted and straight. I am not sure how RM’s with large pastures and native grass plan roads. Reply With Quote
    LEP
    Mar 7, 2021 | 08:29 17
    Quote Originally Posted by sumdumguy View Post
    If everyone could just close off access at will, can you imagine the road grid? Here in southern Sask there is pretty much a road of some sort every mile and the grid roads are uninterrupted and straight. I am not sure how RM’s with large pastures and native grass plan roads.
    Access is assured because a 66ft road allowance is surveyed on the 1 by 2 mile grid. It actually isn’t the landowner’s land even though they may farm it. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • Mar 7, 2021 | 10:09 18 [QUOTE=jwab

    Crossing public land
    Uplands may have to be crossed to reach a Crown-owned water body or watercourse. In these cases, permission from the landowner or Crown land leaseholder should be obtained.[/QUOTE]

    Kind of two conficting things in that website that adds to ftustration for both parties. It says “crossing public land” then goes on to say you should get permission from the “landowner” or leaseholder.

    If we are talking about crossing public land is the landowner not the Government, as you can’t be a landowner of public land can you? Reply With Quote
    makar's Avatar Mar 7, 2021 | 10:19 19 As i understand it the ranch land in question is deeded not leased. https://globalnews.ca/news/7680205/b...y-wins-appeal/ Reply With Quote
    Mar 7, 2021 | 10:48 20 https://www.mmlc.ca/article24.htm

    Apparately the rules in BC and maybe every where look to include public access across deeded land if the road or trail existed when the deed was sold. Hope the above link worked.

    One of the contentious parts if the story is that the Douglas Lake ranch has built special buildings and is selling fishing vacations on these 2 lakes. Reply With Quote
    Mar 7, 2021 | 10:53 21 If the prairie provinces have the same land titles as BC, it would appear that if you bought crown land from the government and it had a public access road on it, then that will stay as part of your deed. Lots of grazing leases have been purchased over the years and it appears that all oil and gas roads are public property forever on those quarters, even though you may now hold a deed. Reply With Quote
    Mar 7, 2021 | 11:00 22 Poor boy,

    I guess they will provide access to their facilities. The only way in will be their way.
    Last edited by sumdumguy; Mar 7, 2021 at 11:43.
    Reply With Quote
    makar's Avatar Mar 7, 2021 | 11:02 23 Hope the ranch is run better than the dealerships. Reply With Quote
    Mar 7, 2021 | 14:17 24 271000 deeded acres,1023000 crown, for a total of 1.2b mill acres and owned by an American, And they think they have the right to restrict public assess to the fishing and hunting,. As that's big part of there business. Reply With Quote
    LEP
    Mar 7, 2021 | 14:39 25
    Quote Originally Posted by poorboy View Post
    If the prairie provinces have the same land titles as BC, it would appear that if you bought crown land from the government and it had a public access road on it, then that will stay as part of your deed. Lots of grazing leases have been purchased over the years and it appears that all oil and gas roads are public property forever on those quarters, even though you may now hold a deed.
    That's interesting. Usually an oil and gas company pays for access. It is a private agreement. Said oil and gas company builds and maintains to whatever standard they require.

    Not sure how that allows the public to use it. Reply With Quote
    makar's Avatar Mar 7, 2021 | 19:40 26
    Quote Originally Posted by Horse View Post
    271000 deeded acres,1023000 crown, for a total of 1.2b mill acres and owned by an American, And they think they have the right to restrict public assess to the fishing and hunting,. As that's big part of there business.
    There is lots to this story, looks like they built up the lake levels and stock them themselves. I have no problem with anyone controlling access on deeded land. My home is cut in half by a river and i will be damned if anyone thinks they have the right to drive through my yard and fields to get to it. Reply With Quote
  • 2 Likes


  • Mar 7, 2021 | 20:10 27
    Quote Originally Posted by makar View Post
    There is lots to this story, looks like they built up the lake levels and stock them themselves. I have no problem with anyone controlling access on deeded land. My home is cut in half by a river and i will be damned if anyone thinks they have the right to drive through my yard and fields to get to it.
    Driving through your yard is a stretch but if you have a river running through there must be an assess point some where else besides your yard.
    How much would you like to bet that they run the whole shebang the same deeded or lease,its more of a tourist attraction than a ranch. Who built the highways for the tourists to get there ,im guessing the crown did. Reply With Quote
  • 1 Like


  • makar's Avatar Mar 7, 2021 | 20:29 28
    Quote Originally Posted by Horse View Post
    Driving through your yard is a stretch but if you have a river running through there must be an assess point some where else besides your yard.
    How much would you like to bet that they run the whole shebang the same deeded or lease,its more of a tourist attraction than a ranch. Who built the highways for the tourists to get there ,im guessing the crown did.
    That's the issue, there is so much to this story we are not hearing, and bc is totally strange in how they do things. And it's not my problem how to access a river, drive 40 miles upstream and float down, i own to the high water line. Reply With Quote
    makar's Avatar Mar 7, 2021 | 20:41 29 As always the bigger issue is president, lake in bc or my river, same urbanites shitting on you. Lease land in my view different ballgame. And because a rich yank is involved should not matter if i owned it. Reply With Quote
    makar's Avatar Mar 7, 2021 | 21:28 30
    Quote Originally Posted by Horse View Post
    Driving through your yard is a stretch but if you have a river running through there must be an assess point some where else besides your yard.
    How much would you like to bet that they run the whole shebang the same deeded or lease,its more of a tourist attraction than a ranch. Who built the highways for the tourists to get there ,im guessing the crown did.
    Pretty sure no highway to the lakes in question paid by road / fuel tax. No one is fencing off a highway, let's keep things in prospective, not defending Douglas lake, despise them as a dealer, but looking at the big picture on a smaller scale this soon could be us. If they are in the wrong let the courts sort it out.
    Last edited by makar; Mar 7, 2021 at 21:46.
    Reply With Quote