Indian Creek Trail Access in Question

[Southern Elk]

Can anyone shed any light on this? The west side of the Madison Range is already difficult enough to access and now there's a chance we could lose Indian Creek Trailhead. Does anyone have any idea if the ranch legally has a chance of getting it closed? I'm sure it's been there for the public to use for a long time.

http://www.madisoniannews.com/public-access-in-question-wonder-ranch-sues-for-quiet-title/

 

[RobG]

That would stink to close that one. It is a real nice hike in the summer. These signs were there last fall.

 

[Southern Elk]

Thanks for the info Rob. Does anyone know anything about legal precedent in issues such as this?

 

[Bambistew]

Not sure on the precedence... hence I believe this is the reason its going to court. I would presume it would be considered a "taking" of property, but not sure. I think established public roads outside of easements/ROW at some point (20 years or something) become public property. Luckily there will still be access to Main Indian, be it a much longer route. Re-routing the trail will be a tough one through that section its darn steep and cliffy.

At one time most all the CB ranch was owned by my family. The old homesteads just to the south of the Indian Creek trailhead are of my gg uncle's, his other brother was on the main creek,a and their other brother, my gg grampa, homesteaded on bear creek, the house is just to the east of the Bear Creek Schoolhouse (about 400 yards), my uncle still owns the surrounding property, about 800 acres. His "winter" ranch was in Jeffers, where my uncle lives today. Unfortunately when my grama died her husband sold the Bear Creek house, luckily the only thing he had title too... many family heirlooms were lost in that sale as well, some we found at the local antique store, some were never recovered.

I've spent many days hunting, hiking and fishing in all that country, be a shame to lose access.

 

[Southern Elk]

Bambistew,

Do you know anything about the Wonder Ranch? Looks like they just own that small parcel in the picture above. I'm curious about how long they've owned the land?

 

[Bambistew]

I don't remember the whole back story on that piece. But that place has been there for a long time, I believe it is a homestead.

I haven't been in Ennis for a long time and don't keep up much with who owns what anymore. Not sure if the "kids" of the owners now have it or what. I can see their contention though. Lots of traffic right through their front yard. We are related to the Wonder's, but not sure if its the name sake of the ranch or if was changed later, or a completely different family. Same side of the family as the brothers. I believe all that property changed hands in the 50's/early 60's. I believe thats when Cynthia bought the CB place. She was an interesting ol lady. Avid fisher woman, humble, and super nice lady. Her grand daughter I believe now owns it. Last I heard she was trying to sell it, but not sure if they still are. I would love to buy it, if I hit the lotto.

 

[RobG]

Bambistew,

Do you know anything about the Wonder Ranch? Looks like they just own that small parcel in the picture above. I'm curious about how long they've owned the land?

From what I've read the current owners are from Texas, but those may be the "kids" as Bambistew says. I don't think they do any ag on the place - it just looks like a summer home every time I walk through their front yard on the trail. They also complicate access up south Indian Creek.

I believe the reason why the FS sign said you didn't need permission is that by asking permission you are setting precedent that permission was required to gain access... or something like that.

 

[Southern Elk]

I would love to buy it, if I hit the lotto.

You and me both.

 

[RobG]

I believe the reason why the FS sign said you didn't need permission is that by asking permission you are setting precedent that permission was required to gain access... or something like that.

After poking around I am certain this is the case.

Has anyone heard any updates on this lawsuit?

 

[Southern Elk]

I've been wondering about the outcome as well. The article from the local paper said that the trial would last 5 days or so. They never posted an update that I saw.

 

[katqanna]

This is a bench trial and was heard in Helena, even though it is from the Butte division. It is being decided by Judge Haddon. I was told that there may be another hearing about middle to end of September to consider the additional information the judge requested of the attorneys. The clerk stated that a decision might be rendered by October at the earliest.

The case number is CV-14-57-BU-SEH. The clerks office in Helena is 441-1355, but the decision will be registered with the Butte division, which is 497-1279.

I was given information on a public account that provides access to documents, you have to pay, through PACER, Public Access to Court Electronic Records, which I saw last night when I was looking this up. I will be registering for this, as I feel it will be a great tool for documents. The gas it costs to drive to Butte would be more.

 

[RobG]

Thanks Kat.

 

[Southern Elk]

Thanks Kat! Great work as always!

 

[katqanna]

You're welcome, thanks for asking. I had not even seen your original post. Later I will look into the court documents, have to finish this guys book for the publisher and an article first. Still trying to get all the pieces together for the new newsletter software, learning 3 new software programs at one time (I have been waking up in the middle of the night with problem solving/eureka moments). In about a week I should have some brain space, unless someone else gets to it before then.

 

[katqanna]

Judge to tour site of Madison Valley trail dispute

http://www.emwh.org/archive/news/10 9 2016/Oct 9 2016.html#p=1

 

[MT_elk]

I just saw this in the billings paper. Will be interesting to see how it turns out.

 

[katqanna]

Oops, I was working on the newsletter when the news article came in, pasted the the wrong thing, should have been a link and quote from this article. Too late to edit it now, sorry (not a rickroll, I promise). I cant remove that post, Randy, maybe you can?

Judge to tour site of Madison Valley trail dispute

A site tour is planned on Monday to examine a trail into the Lee Metcalf Wilderness in southwestern Montana that is ground zero for a lawsuit by a private landowner against the U.S. Forest Service.

Wonder Ranch LLC, of Dallas, sued the Forest Service in 2014 arguing that the agency had no right to claim an easement along the Indian Creek Trail, which crosses a portion of the ranch’s 80-acres. The owners of the ranch are identified in court documents as Chris Hudson and Eugenia (Hudson) King...

The Forest Service placed a claim on Wonder Ranch’s deed in 2011 after the ranch owners put up a sign declaring use of the route was by permission only.

“We objected, they did not remove the signs, so we filed a statement of interest,” said Jan Bowey, appeals and litigation coordinator for the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest. “That’s what the lawsuit is about.”

 

[katqanna]

Just checked with the District Court, the case was decided today, Judge Haddon ruled for public prescriptive easement, the Forest Service won, according to the clerk on the phone, right before they closed.

I tried to get a copy of the order, but Pacer did not validate my charge card address, so they are mailing the bloody activation code by snail mail, 7-10 business days. I will call the court back tomorrow morning and see if I can get a copy emailed, since Pacer won't be active for me to get it right away.

As soon as I get it I will post it.

EDIT: News article just came online
Federal judge rules popular hiking trail in Madison Range is public; landowner's lawsuit contended otherwise

A federal judge on Monday issued an order that keeps a popular hiking trail near Ennis open for public access – contrary to an out-of-state landowner’s contention that it wasn’t public.

The case concerns the Indian Creek Trail in the west foothills of the Madison Range. The trail provides public access into the Lee Metcalf Wilderness.

The Wonder Ranch claimed that the trail, which traverses its 80-acre parcel south of Cameron, was used by the public because of the landowner’s “gratuitous’’ permission, and that no public right of access existed.

Judge Sam E. Haddon, in a 35-page ruling filed in Butte district court, disagreed.

He said the court found that ample precedent exists in Montana law to uphold the Forest Service’s and public’s prescriptive right of access for Trail No. 328, and that the right had been established no later than 1973...

Judge Haddon noted that use of the trail had in fact long-predated Wonder Ranch’s ownership of the property, as evidenced by an 1888 USGS map depicting the trail, a 1940 Forest Service map designating the trail with its current administrative number of #328, and many years of grazing, outfitting, and crossing permits.

Based on the court’s order, such uses include trail maintenance, Forest Service inspection of hunting camps, hiking, horseback riding, and leading strings of pack animals, as well as other historic uses of the trail that regularly occurred during this period. The court noted that the location of the trail “has remained unchanged since before the statutory period of prescription” and therefore will become the officially recorded location of the public easement.

“Today’s ruling upholds an important historic route of access to one of the most beautiful parts of Montana, and in so doing vindicates a core Montana value: public access to public land,” said U.S. Attorney for the District of Montana Michael Cotter. “Hats off to the trial team and United States Forest Service staff for preserving the public’s access on a trail used historically by Native Americans, settlers, loggers, ranchers, commercial guides, and recreationists.”

 

[Southern Elk]

Great news! Thanks for the update Kat!

 

[The Hedgehog]

Wonder ranchers will certainly be voting for Greg Gianforte.