Amongst all the other issues we face as trappers, hunters and fishermen, this one is a particular thorn in my side and many others as well. Back when the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee okayed a provision in the 2015-17 budget to safely cross the tracks in its budget review awhile back, most of us thought our governor would accept its recommendations. Didn't happen.

There have been threats of tickets and from what I've heard tickets have been issued. The public meeting in Stoddard I attended two years ago sure didn't make it look like the railroad would allow a simple crossing of the tracks where there was no crossing. Some of us have given up on accessing these areas and some of us continue to do so. I continue to cross where necessary to access public lands and waters and will choose jail time over paying any fines. There will come a day when I am no longer able to trap, and I hope that when the day comes I can look back at my life and say at least I tried.

To those of you who insist this is a safety issue and the law should be followed just because our governor decided so, I ask you to reflect on your driving habits. Where the speed limit is posted at 55 mph, do you drive over that speed limit? If/when you do, are you breaking the law? Are you placing yourself and others in danger by your reckless speeding? Or do you assume you know what you're doing and that law is for others? I would wager my crossing the tracks after looking both ways is much less dangerous than you driving over the speed limit on our highways, and faster than the posted speed limit on the freeways.

Whatever.

So we have a new candidate for governor. Tony Evers. A democrat. Yes, by golly, a democrat. Hang in there, at least read this post to the end.

So I called their number posted on the internet and put the question about crossing the tracks to access public lands and waters to hunt, fish and trap. Twice I called. Each time I gave them my name, phone number, address and email address. I received no phone call back yesterday.

This morning I checked emails and received this, apparently yesterday:

Good afternoon, Michael,

I am a policy advisor to Tony and received your inquiry regarding the railroad track issue. The railroad lobby fought hard for the law you are referencing under the auspices of limiting their hypothetical liability. I don't mean to trivialize the issue, but if we can trust hunters to walk around safely with loaded weapons, I think we can trust them to look both ways when they get to a railroad track. Not surprisingly, there's no evidence of anyone being injured trying to cross a railroad track to access public lands.

As Governor, Tony will work with conservation leaders in the Legislature to address the issue. Returning reasonable access is a common sense approach.

Thank you for writing in,

Matt Wallock
Team Tony

Now I realize this presents a conundrum for some, maybe many of you. I'm just sharing information here. At least it's a breath of fresh air to read something that actually makes sense from a politician's spokesperson.

Who knows? Maybe our present governor will have a change of heart if this gets out there and realizes it might cost him votes.

I trust no politician. There's nothing binding "Team Tony" from doing absolutely nothing on this issue.

I posted this on the Strictly Trapping forum, and will post again here for those of you who aren't up to speed on this issue. It's a Pat Durkin article from 2015 that will sort of sum up where we're at today with this issue:

Thanks to Gov. Scott Walker’s veto pen, hunters and anglers can be ticketed as trespassers when crossing railroad tracks to reach public lands and fishing areas; and 11 nonprofit conservation organizations will have a tougher time building trails, and protecting fish and wildlife habitats.
The vetoes surprised some folks who thought they made their case when the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee backed their efforts during its budget review in May and June. Given the JFC’s GOP majority, they thought Gov. Walker would accept its recommendations. Besides, the guv often says he wants to increase hunting and fishing opportunities, and forge partnerships between the private and public sectors.
Pfft. Even though the railroad-trespass exemption would cost nothing, and the combined $1 million in grants to nonprofit groups amounted to mere budget dust in the state’s $72.7 billion spending plan for 2015-17, Gov. Walker vetoed the items.
Let’s look at the railroad-trespass veto first. Safe to say, hunters and anglers have been crossing railways to hunt and fish since train tracks were first laid about 150 years ago. But only recently has a railroad company, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, started patrolling its 214 miles of tracks bordering the Mississippi River to chase off anglers who dare cross, no matter that many folks are walking from paved parking lots the state built for fishing/hunting access.
Have any hunters or anglers been hit by a train? No. Have conductors had to blast their train’s horns at some hunters and anglers? Apparently so. But let’s concede most hunters and anglers know to look both ways for a train, which are far more predictable and less hazardous than rivers, lakes, firearms, treestands and frozen ponds.
Marc Schultz, chairman of the La Crosse County Conservation Alliance, and chair of the county’s delegation to the Wisconsin Conservation Congress, said it’s hard to reach vast stretches of the Mississippi River bottoms without crossing railways. Further, designated crossings are often so far apart that people will effectively be cut off from most public hunting and fishing areas if the BNSF enforces Walker’s veto.
“This state revolves around natural resources,” Schultz said. “These lands and water are the major components of our recreation. We’ve crossed railroad tracks all our lives to reach those resources. They’re culturally ingrained in us.”
That’s why Schultz supported the JFC when it inserted language in the budget to let people walk “directly across the tracks of any railroad.” The JFC added, “This activity would not be considered trespassing and could not be prevented by the railroad.”
Gov. Walker, however, rejected the change, writing: “I am vetoing this section because I am concerned that allowing people to walk across railroad tracks outside of a designated crossing impairs public safety.”
Hmm. If we’re fretting about safety, why raise the speed limit to 70 mph? Why trust people to safely travel 173 feet per second while driving a relatively soundproof vehicle, but assume they’ll be irresponsible daredevils when crossing an 8.5-foot-wide train track on foot?
Schultz is more diplomatic. “I think the governor made his decision on bad information,” he said. “We’re not giving up.”
Meanwhile, Gov. Walker also axed $1.02 million in annual grants that 11 nonprofit organizations have regularly converted into volunteer labor, public access and other contributions that multiplied the state’s investment by four- to tenfold.
The governor explained his veto this way: “I object to earmarking these funds for specific conservation organizations without requiring accountability in the use of these funds.”
Accountability? You’d think the guv would be careful about uttering that word after his Wisconsin Economic Development Corp. awarded $500,000 in unsecured loans to a struggling construction company, and made at least 27 awards totaling $124.4 million to companies without doing formal staff reviews.
In contrast, the groups receiving the far smaller conservation grants have long track records of accomplishments. Most also must make matching contributions, and document their efforts with the Department of Natural Resources quarterly or annually, depending on the grant’s requirements.
For instance, the River Alliance of Wisconsin has been receiving grants of roughly $70,000 annually since 1999, and helps more than 130 river and watershed citizen-run organizations. It files quarterly reports and meets quarterly with DNR staff to review its work. Walker deleted its JFC-approved annual grant of $62,300.
The Gathering Waters Conservancy has received annual grants since 1996 to help citizens preserve, protect and enhance their land and water resources, which often means opening more lands to hunting and fishing. Walker deleted its JCF-approved grant for $124,500.
The Natural Resources Foundation has received annual grants since 2000 to boost private-sector investments and educational efforts on state-managed natural resources, and files an annual report with the DNR. The NRF raises money from donors and members, conducts wide-ranging field trips, and provides grants of its own to the DNR and other organizations. Walker deleted its JFC-approved grant of $75,700.
The Ice Age Trail Alliance has received annual state grants since about 1995 to create, support and protect the state’s 1,000-mile portion of the Ice Age National Scenic Trail, which passes through 30 counties. The trail is managed in a partnership with the National Park Service, and trail work is done by volunteers organized and supervised by the Alliance. Walker deleted its JFC-approved grant of $66,800.
The vetoes shocked Ruth Oppedahl, executive director of the NRF. She said her organization has donated more than $3 million to the DNR to manage state natural areas, and felt gratified that the JFC understood the value of its efforts.
“We had a very positive response from the Joint Finance Committee,” Oppedahl said. “They got the message that for every dollar we receive from the state, we reinvest anywhere from $4 to $10 each year. We’re still here, but this has been a surprising couple of days.”
Denny Caneff, executive director of the River Alliance, said he wasn’t surprised. “It’s petty,” he said. “The DNR didn’t request these cuts, but we kind of saw it coming. With the Walker administration, you’re always wondering. If you say anything about them, you’re setting yourself up to be cut. So even though Joint Finance restored our funding, we knew it might not get past the governor, and it didn’t.”
Patrick Durkin is a freelance writer who covers outdoors for Press-Gazette Media.

I wish you had more support over there in WI. My buddy moved there from MN and about quit trapping due to WI laws.

unfortunately, railroad is private property and can be posted just like any other private land.

Also unfortunately, with respect to crossing railroad tracks, our governor had a chance to reverse this here in Wisconsin.

agree with this except for one small detail.
I don't find it unfortunate that private property can be posted.
I own land and I don't want Joe Public mucking around on it.

For me this is an issue of Private Property Rights.
I know alot of you are upset about this cause your access to public lands are limited.
You wouldn't care if your ox wasn't getting gored.
Private Property rights trump your access to public land.

As far as Tony Evers, Elimination of private property rights sound like communism.

We're talking about crossing railroad tracks, DD.

Apparently you have no need to access public lands and waters that are now off limits due to inaccessibility.

Nice job with the analogy on a politician that has the guts to take this issue on.

So, let me get this straight !!!!!

If the State of Wisconsin has , for example; 500 acres of State owned land for hunting, trapping and fishing, and ALL four sides are bordered by train tracks; the Railroad can PREVENT ACCESS TO THAT STATE OWNED LAND ???????

Could they prevent access to that State owned land , if there was a creek that runs through the State owned land ; and the railroad had a bridge crossing that creek ? All anyone would have to do, is walk down the middle of the creek under that bridge, and they would be on the State land .

The railroad will put in a crossing for people to safely cross the track.This will include flanger markers and whistle boards for the train.
All you have to do is request a crossing and pay for it.

yes

providing the creek can be accessed legally, then that state land could be accessed legally by walking under the tracks at the bridge crossing

Take a look at this map, specifically from La Crosse northward along the Mississippi River valley. The railroad tracks present a wall to accessibility to the Upper Mississippi Wildlife Refuge where there are no crossings or the crossings are few and far between. South of La Crosse is the same.

There are places along the highway where parking places were built for folks to park their car, walk across the tracks, and hunt, fish or trap on the other side.

send the bill to the governor

The railroad don't care who pays for it as long as its paid for.

for sure

If the government accepts the liability for the crossing,no problem then for the railroad or the citizens.
I'm surprised the right of way is not fenced.

We have the same problem here with the Railroad blocking access to private property. Farmers and other property owners that own land on both sides of the tracks , and have old rail crossings put in decades ago. Suddenly, the Railroad decided to park their rail cars through the whole Town during Deer Season. Some Maple Syrup producers have been cut off from accessing their Maple Trees. All those years, they had access to their land, now they can't get to their property. Pay taxes on and they can't get to, and can't sell it because nobody can access it.

Wouldn't it be much simpler to just remove any liability to the Railroad by anyone crossing the Railroad Tracks? Take the ability to sue the Railroad out of the equation. If someone gets hurt crossing the tracks , it's their fault , not the Railroad.

" but if we can trust hunters to walk around safely with loaded weapons, I think we can trust them to look both ways when they get to a railroad track. Not surprisingly, there's no evidence of anyone being injured trying to cross a railroad track to access public lands."

The problem with that quote is that Tony Evers does not trust ANY civilian to walk around safely with loaded weapons. F rated on 2nd Amendment.

So what's the solution Corky? Scott Walker isn't going to budge. Too much money coming his way.

I don't think you can take away anyones right to sue.This is why due diligence is required these days to be able to defend yourself.

I'm sorry. I don't have a solution. I am in your corner and have written/contacted the Governor's office and several legislators that I know personally on this issue even though I am not personally affected. It fell on deaf ears. Best thing to do is keep plugging away until someone takes an initiative. I know that on the overall issues affecting sportsmen Walker is the far more desirable candidate even if he is dead wrong on this one.

In 1963, Wisconsin’s Recreational Use Statute, Sec. 895.52, eliminated the liability of landowners when they open their property to public recreation.

The same could be done with railroad property with respect to directly crossing the tracks to access public lands and waters.

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/895/II/52

Yes sir this is correct,
That how railroad looks at it also here
Like boco said kind of surprising it's not fenced off.

Call Tammy.

I really don't see the big issue just cross the freakin tracks. I don't think the RR Is going to give a crap. They do have to catch you you know.

Xing is only $250000. get your fish& game to spring for it.

We call them fishing accesses it's widely disputed deal here too lol

Private property rights and states rights have got to be guarded.

I work for a railroad they will not let any employees trap on there right away unless directly for them( ie ) (beaver damage)

I am not surprised that Tony Evers doesn't care about private property borders, He said at the debate last night that if he was Governor he would give drivers licenses to illegal aliens. I don't believe I will change party affiliations because of this. Mushrat you would vote for the devil over Scott Walker cause he took control of the schools away from the unions and gave it back to the people.

1) Use emanate domain to seize private land to put in your rail road tracks

2) No longer allow the crossing of said tracks as they are now "private property"

3) When someone tries to get the state to help them with access issues you have caused talk about the importance of protecting private property...

Very interesting look at it, thanks.

You just can't let this go, can you Diggerman. The people have control of the schools? Why don't you start a separate thread on that and see where it goes.

The issue is crossing railroad tracks, snowflake.

If Walker wasn't on the Koch nipple we wouldn't be having this conversation. He had an opportunity to right the wrong, but he's bought and paid for.

IF . . . this issue comes to the public, Walker senses he may lose sportsmen votes, there's a chance he might reverse his position and support what his legislature asked him to support four years ago.

Maybe.

I have RR tracks crossing a nearby public Marsh. Not saying I do it but to get to one of the good areas I would have to straddle the tracks and cross them illegally(not saying I do). T. Evers will tell you anything you want to hear.

What politician doesn't?

I remember when we used to hunt the railroad tracks.

I dono how you would do this, but try to get the topic brought up in a debate. Maybe if the walker administration see's the sportsman weighing thier odds with differant candidates it will heighten the concern. Kinda late for this cycle, but it cant hurt. And maybe it will start the movement for the next cycle if nothing else.

I'm with the Beav,..put your ear to the track,iffin you don't hear anything,cross over and get to trappin'
Thousands cross the southern tracks everyday,nutin' seems to happen to them!

If the state wanted you on that land they would create a road to access it, Obviously the state does not want you on their land.
Have some one else ask that candidate to maintain the prohibition to crossing tracks he will get an answer opposite what you got. In either case the candidate will do nothing.

Obviously you don't know what you're talking about.

"The state" built parking areas for folks to park in before heading over the hill. You can't drive down the hillside.

They should have budgeted for a crossing at the same time.Maybe they will yet.

I'm in the camp that says "if they used imminent domain" to get the property to put in the tracks, then they either should put in a crossing or just allow crossing at certain points like the parking areas

If they didn't use imminent domain to get the property, than they should be called out for preventing access by sportsman and other groups and find a way to hurt their pockets, because money talks period

JMO

They took the land from the Indians for the railroad.

All the crossings for vehicles have a stop sign, that's it. I think the Corps of Engineers and the barge companies want to lock out sportsman and limit access so they can do whatever they want with little oversite.

Imagine the cost though.

Yeah, but I have a trapping buddy in LaCrosse Co that got a warning for doing just that. He doesn't even know how they figured out he did it. I think there was a photo. Perhaps a hidden camera. He warned me recently about the seriousness of this law. I had no idea. I've crossed tracks before, we all have. A landowner was recently giving me a tour of his land he wants me to trap. He said, "just walk across this short tressle." We did. I told my buddy and he scared me by alerting me to how strict RR R.O.W. law is now. Yikes. Sounds like a lot of fisherman are effected in some areas of the state too.

......that's true and private crossings here in west run around 5000 per year.

...I don't think the governor wants or needs to cross there.

You guys that say just go ahead an cross or have state build a crossing just don't get it. You can't believe is it not fenced?? miles of fence threw the federal refuge?? Feds would probably fight that for wild life movement but not for sportsman..

As Muskrat has said there are parking lots in some of the more popular spots built years ago. Those lots used to be full of cars during ice fish season. Now they only have people who park and watch the birds on the river. You park in the lot go down a steep bank, where some of the sportsman clubs paid for steps. Then down a path and cross the tracks onto the ice. It is not allowed any more. One of these lots is about two miles from my house go by it all the time. The rail road did have a security guy regularly checking these lots.
There is also rail road tracks threw a good part Black River State forest land in Jackson co. I don't know how much they look at or patrol that RR track. We had places we hunted there where crossing just at a crossing and hiking into would add miles to a walk. That is all State forest land..

I've talked to and e-mail some of my reps don't really get much more than we are looking at it..

Mac

I bet 2% of citizens know about these strict regs. Maybe only 1%.

The stupidest RR incident I've heard of is a pair of snowmobilers that used an active RR bed as a shortcut 1 night. 1 of their skis got stuck in the tracks. They called someone to come help yank them out. This could have been very bad. I suspect lawmakers hear of some of this occasional stupidity, and a few idiots ruin it for everyone.

I don't think the issue is that the state doesn't want people using public lands.

[quote=Canvasback2]We have the same problem here with the Railroad blocking access to private property. Farmers and other property owners that own land on both sides of the tracks , and have old rail crossings put in decades ago. Suddenly, the Railroad decided to park their rail cars through the whole Town during Deer Season. Some Maple Syrup producers have been cut off from accessing their Maple Trees. All those years, they had access to their land, now they can't get to their property. Pay taxes on and they can't get to, and can't sell it because nobody can access it. [/quote/}.....canvas if those crossings have been there for decades they are more than likely "grandfathered in" and those crossing have to be kept opened and maintained by the railroad...check the roadcrossing sign post and see if it has a little blue sign on it....it will have the crossing code on it along with a phone number.....report it!

Was the law changed after the parking lots were built or did they build them knowing they cause a problem?
Was there a specific law that gave the right to trespass at those points that was later revoked?

It appears as though someone built those parking areas just to provoke a problem? Are they on public land or the RR?

I can remember back when we all stood on the tracks and shot geese on the Horicon marsh.

I thought RR's were under Federal regulations. Guess I was wrong?

the last 10 years or so out west the railroad has stepped up there patrols and enforcing the trespass laws. mostly because of the nations railway systems are considered terrorist targets. and yes there seem to be more idiots getting runover and getting there cars stuck on the tracks....every train engine has a camera on it and films trespassers and the vehicle lic plates number....LEO is called immediately and the dispatcher informed by the train crews....there was a time when railroad never enforced the laws but those days are over.

The parking lots were built back in the 70s as I recall. The locations were so popular to fisherman at that time that cars were a hazard parked along shoulder of the highway. There was a law or rule that allowed people to directly cross the tracks at a 90 degree angle. Everyone has know for years it was private property and you could be fined for walk down tracks or loiter. People actually did back then and no one said anything.

I honestly think sportsman got screwed by the people protesting the oil trains. I really think when they gave the RR grief about a second track threw a piece of Marsh here. All the old ladies in their Prius complaining about the number of oil trains that were going to kill us all. Then they were running around with the cameras taking pictures of the long trains. They were calling 911 about drips of oil on tracks at crossings..Had photos of Rail road bridges with cracks in cement or cracked timbers. I heard that if you get caught on tracks it's a fine. Get caught taking pictures along the tracks really big fine..

Mac

yes RR's are under federal regulation and have there own LEO and swat teams paroling lol

So this must be way more than just a Wi issue. I was thinking someone implied the governor has messed this up.

not sure about the issue there....but the railroad has really stepped up there security since 9/11. including yearly training classes for every employee on dealing with trespassers and explosive devices awareness.

Homeland Security and the US department of transportation combine in what's called "co-sector" security. This includes both cyber and physical security of the RR systems. They delegate down to regional and state levels (hence the training).

yup

It was a lot to read in that first post. Here ya go, from Pat Durkin's article in 2015.

Thanks to Gov. Scott Walker’s veto pen, hunters and anglers can be ticketed as trespassers when crossing railroad tracks to reach public lands and fishing areas; and 11 nonprofit conservation organizations will have a tougher time building trails, and protecting fish and wildlife habitats.
The vetoes surprised some folks who thought they made their case when the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee backed their efforts during its budget review in May and June. Given the JFC’s GOP majority, they thought Gov. Walker would accept its recommendations. Besides, the guv often says he wants to increase hunting and fishing opportunities, and forge partnerships between the private and public sectors.
Pfft. Even though the railroad-trespass exemption would cost nothing, and the combined $1 million in grants to nonprofit groups amounted to mere budget dust in the state’s $72.7 billion spending plan for 2015-17, Gov. Walker vetoed the items.

Please tell me why a PRIVATE landowner should have to allow trespassing on his property?

Just that simple.

It does not matter that he used to allow it, it doesn't matter that there is public lands on the other side, it does not matter if the State or Fed Gov't will dissolve the landowner of liability claims, it does not matter how the landowner acquired the land.

Once the land is owned by a Private entity that entity has rights, one of which is to control who goes on his property.

Of course if there was once a legal document (easement) allowing passage/use that would be different.
Absent that the public does not have a right to trespass.

Just that simple.

I get it, you used to get away with it cause the RR looked the other way or didn't care for years, even decades.
But now he does.

Its part of the reason America is better than a lot of countries, PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS.

You're absolutely right, DD. To heck with the thousands of sportsmen and women that used to access these public lands and waters to hunt, fish and trap.

No need to change, eh buddy?

It's all about PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS.

Darned good thing it doesn't affect you, right? You must be president of your local Looking Out for Number One chapter.

Muskrat have you or the sportsman talked with the railroad? thought of paying for a crossing? in some cases the crossing can also benefit the railroad giving them access for them to set on and off the tracks with there hyrail trucks. the railroad is a business and crossing are expensive to maintain. Why leave it to the government to fix it for you?

yup, and have attended a meeting, end result: lip service



who has that kind of money?



Who else will fix it? "The government" fixed the landowner liability issue years ago. The same could be done for directly crossing railroad tracks to access public lands for the purposes of hunting, fishing and trapping.

Interesting isn't it? Go back through this thread and count the number of posts that give positive advice on how Wisconsin citizens might change this ruling to once again allow us to access these public lands and waters for the purposes of hunting, fishing and trapping.

Now count the number of posts that point out any number of reasons why we should give up and accept the fact that these public areas are now off limits.

I've read it here before and have come to believe it. Trappers are our own worst enemy.

The Looking Out for Number One club is alive and well on this forum.

Think this Wisconsin citizen hunts, fishes or traps on any of that public land that is now inaccessible? President of the Looking Out for Number One Club and no doubt actively recruiting.

which railroad did you talk to? BNSF or UPRR? and about the money, you said it effected thousands of sportsman. sooooooooooooooooo if you pooled your money it would only cost 1 or 2 dollars each per year for a crossing! however if it was me I would not want to trap or hunt a place that has thousands accessing it. but I can see your point and hope you reach an agreement with RR. I agree with you on being able to access public land but not at the private property owners expense.

Who would assume liability for an "incident" with someone crossing the tracks? Normally an incident with a train is fatal. I doubt anyone on the railroad side of the issue is gonna back down on a safety issue.

Zim

yes your correct that is a big issue with the RR. but not impossible to resolve.

Zim, legislation could be drafted to mirror Wisconsin 895.52 with respect to liability for crossing the tracks to access public lands and waters for the purposes of hunting, fishing and/or trapping. If liability can be lifted for recreational purposes on private property, why can't the same be done for crossing the tracks, which are also private property?

https://www.lwm-info.org/DocumentCenter/...mmunity-statute

I wouldn’t consider the RR your “typical” landowner. Owns a shoestring of property with the ability to tie up thousands of acres. That’s just BS.

Deny a citizen of what’s rightfully theirs while they inconvenience me as I wait patiently to pass when they block the road. Double slap in the face.

Sorry but they should compromise and be absolved of any liability to sportsmen crossing.

This is why Libertarians are confined to the internet and hold no power or large sway on policy. Corporations use eminent domain to seize land or have it given to them by the states or feds, they use millions of dollars for "campaign contributions" and spend millions more on lobbyist to make sure their agenda is put to the forefront. When the Railroads went broke it was the U.S federal govt who used OUR tax dollars to step in and bail them out, now when citizens ask OUR GOVT to come to our aid and fix a simple problem the railroad and those who support this yell about "individual freedom" and "private property rights". Give me a break, this is corrupt and should be fixed.

Muskrat sometimes preaching is not option to take,
Sometimes you have to lead by example start at the RR, next legislators, governors office,so on etc.
We deal with the government shutting down road and trail that been open and now are getting closed .
Really nobody cares if there's grizzly in your back yard, but the Grizzley in everybodies back yard now something will get done. (Apparently they are not yet in every bodies back yard yet as they are once again listed)
That's why America is great there is time to speak then there is a time to act.

I attended the meeting in Stoddard two years ago and spoke my piece. So did many, many others.

We thought we had it back in 2014 when the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee okayed a provision in the 2015-17 budget to safely cross the tracks in its budget review. Unfortunately, Scott Walker vetoed it.

Now I'm waiting for the November election results to determine the next course of action. If Walker wins, well, back to the drawing board. If Evers wins, we've now got a commitment from "Team Tony" to reverse things. As posted at the beginning: As Governor, Tony will work with conservation leaders in the Legislature to address the issue. Returning reasonable access is a common sense approach.


I expected more out of Walker when he took office with regard to our natural resources and hunting, fishing and trapping opportunities. Pat Durkin neatly summarized the last eight years in his most recent column:

https://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/sto...men/1682625002/

If someone walks down the middle of a busy Highway and gets struck and killed by a truck going the speed limit, does the State become liable for the death , because they own the Highway ? No. If someone decides to walk down the middle of a busy highway and they get killed, it is the fault of the person that got killed ; not the driver that hit them or whoever owns the Highway. The only exception would be , is if the driver was drunk; and then I believe that they would not be completely at fault because the person that got killed should not have been walking down the middle of the road in the first place !

Here is another example:


Let say you have a State road in front of your house. Decades ago, the original State road was on your property, but they decided to move the road over so that it could run straight. The State puts the new road in and leaves the old section of road intact on your property. The catch is this:

The State NEVER officially abandoned the old section of road or the right of way on your property. The old road deteriorates over the years, and one day you trip over some exposed rebar in the concrete road.


Is the State liable for the injury suffered in the slip and fall over the deteriorated concrete road , which the State still technically owns ?


I say no.

This is one of the most sensible statements concernng the matter.
I scott walker won't budge, he is no friend of sportsmen nor the general public who own thess public lands. Run the bum out.

Start your campaign in the news media, attract the attention of more people. Use petitions and seek a referendum. You might get more traction by emphasizing access for non-hunting activities like nature hikes or bird watching. Appeal to the voters and the politicians will come to you.
If sportsmen want this let sportsmen fix it, socialism in the form of letting the "state" fix your problems and fiance your hunting access by use of taxes on non-hunting citizens is a negative in the long term, because in the end it is just socialism. "Big Brother babysit us"
Hunters and trappers are a tiny minority and we should not expect politicians nor corporations to make special rules for us at their expense, if we want public support we need to sell our wants to the public not to an assistant to a politician, whose job will end when the election is over.
Team Tony did not commit to anything, the comment can be taken to mean "if we can not trust these people to look both ways before crossing the track, then we can not trust these people to carry guns", I'd be careful with placing faith in such people.
I doubt that the "state" actually wants to keep you from using that public property, I think that there is not enough people wanting that access to stir up anything other than indifference on the part of the politicians and it becomes a matter of "why spend the money".
Shoot for one crossing in every 3-5 miles, or a access road trough the public land from crossing to crossing and parking areas on it.

....state ground and highways are not private property...the railroad is. there is a difference!

I must be right, you can give no logical reason why you should be able to trespass on private property.
Your only justification is you used to be able to.

You claim I'm looking out for number one but its you who whats to trespass.
Your recreation is more important to you than a basic simple right that all Americans enjoy.
The right to own and control access to private property.

Again, One LOGICAL reason why you should be able to trespass on private property.
There is none, Socialism/communism is what you seek, no private property rights.

So a Republican governor sides with big business over sportsmen...

...and you're surprised?

Jim

He shouldn't be surprised. But if he had a D gov, he would be even more screwed.

I see a republican gov that is for private property rights while a possible dem one wants to take them away.

Dang Double D, you missed a golden opportunity to share these ideas with the fellas that assembled at that meeting with the railroad honcho in Stoddard two years ago. The room must've been full of Communists that night, as sportsman after sportsman got up and vocalized their feelings about being shut out of the public lands and waters that they, their fathers, grandfathers, and in some cases their great grandfathers had accessed for so many years.

Tell you what, buddy. There comes another meeting like that, I'll give you gas money to come on down and explain to these river boys why they're all Communists in your mind. I'll even buy you the first beer afterwards at the local tavern where we can sit down and share thoughts and ideas. Yuppers, I'll even throw in bucks for your motel room that night.

What say ye?

How much do these companies pay to tresspass through the property we all own? Maybe they should be charged for every ton of goods they haul throuht these lands.

And your point is?

That property rights trump everything else?

In most cases the landowners whose property is bisected for railroad ROWs have no choice (short of protracted litigation with a well-heeled adversary) but to accept the railroad's offer when their property has been taken in condemnation. And they had no choice at all but to watch the RR take their land. In Alaska large tracts of public land are inaccessible due to the Alaska Railroad's prosecution of "trespassers" who just want to cross the tracks to access public fishing and hunting lands.

Government gave the RRs power to take a strip of land from previous owners. Government could make the RRs allow reasonable access to the public, and could protect the RRs from liability, if government decides it's appropriate.

But with the governor being a Republican, there's not much chance he'd side with the people against a big corporation.

Jim

Railroads have been heavily subsidized, they have routinely seized private land, they are allowed unusual ownership plots to accommodate their tracks and now that they are blocking others from simply crossing their tracks they are screaming "private property rights" and the libertarians are eating it up. You guys that think someone is a good person with your best interest in mind because they have a R in front of their name on a ballot are a lost cause.

We will trade Walker Governors. Don't cry Jim!

...that number is in the millions paid in property taxes and leases!

So, they pay for the land and pay taxes on all the land the tracks occupy? If so, that's good. If the tracks lock the public out of land we own, the company should pay all property taxes for the land we cannot use. But there is a simple solution to allow the owners(all of us) to get to the land we own that is blocked by the tracks, but it all depends upon who in politics is beholding to the railroad. .

My bordering neighbor owns just over two hundred acres. His land is split almost down the middle by railroads tracks. If the railroad can stop him from crosing those tracks, more than eighty of his acres would have no right of way for him to use to get to that land. What about his property rights?

Interesting. If he wants to trespass across the tracks to access his own property, then by Dirty D's definition he must be a Communist. But wait, no, he already owns property, so can't be a Communist. But he wants to trespass across private property. So that makes him a Communist.

Help us out here Dirty D. Is he a Communist or not?

I have a question.
When Railroad tracks cross a public road are cars, trucks, people who cross these guilty of trespassing or does the Railroad own the roadway and give the state or county a variance to put a road across their railroad tracks?

It's only because Litigation has taken the place of Common sense. Or litigation results have gone against common sense.

You have given a perfect explanation for so many of the problems that crop up so often.

......if he owned (or if that land has always been 1 owner parcel) the land before the railroad went threw they have to furnished a crossing and maintain it...furthermore the railroad is responisable for ALL the fences to!!!is the railroad trying to block him now? or you just whining?

.....no it is a PUBLIC crossing....normally the railroad owns and maintains the crossing 4 feet from the nearest rail.

They are not blocking him. I said "IF they could." But the way some are responding it sounds as if they COULD. If they cannot block his crossing be cause he is the current land owner, the same should be true for those of us who own the PUBLIC lands that any track passes through.

you need to distinguish the difference between private land and PUBLIC land......there is a difference! and so are the laws! if someone buys ground on both sides of the railroad tracks and there is no previous right of way easement over the tracks you will have to pay for a crossing to be put in and maintaned .....but there is no guarantee that they will. and there not obligated by law to do so. do you homework before you buy.

how do you gain access to other public land surrounded by private property other than railroad???????? ...you don't without landowners permission!

I trespass.

why didn't I think of that!

I'm agreeing with Dirty D on this one if it's PRIVATE property, you have no right to trespass for any reason what so ever. If you want to then you have to go through the easement process that's the way it is, and you must protect the rights of the landowner because once you start to loose them it's very hard to get them back. Good example my folks have a river flowing through our property, when they bought the farm the seller said the river was public property. We used to get only a few canoers through every summer and that was fine, but now it has gotten to the point that I'm kicking off of our property a dozen plus people every weekend damaging our property so I did some looking and found out the river is not public property it is private and we own and pay taxes on it! I took this info to my local LEOS and was told there is nothing they can due about the trespassing because so many people just don't know or understand the law and it's been going on for so long that it will be almost imposable to stop it. I'm all for making more public access to public lands but you have to do it thought working with the land owners and easements not by disregarding private property rights. ok rant over.

Dirt's a Communist?

Only when I'm in Wisconsin. I try to blend in.

P.S. For all the lawyers, you don't allow trespassing. Trespassing is entering property without permission. You can't give someone permission to trespass. Carry on!

However, maybe Jim can lawyer up on this one. If the railroad tells you not to cross the tracks and doesn't enforce it, and you do cross the tracks, does that not relieve them of liability in case you get hurt on their property? Kind of a Wink! Wink! deal.

Then again Jim left out the fact that the Alaska Railroad is owned by the State of Alaska. So,I guess you could blame the State of Alaska for preventing Jim from accessing his public land.

"If the railroad tells you not to cross the tracks and doesn't enforce it, and you do, does that not relieve them of liability in case you get hurt on their property?"

Why would you want to enforce the RR's trespassing policies for them? lol

Under AK law, a landowner does owe a duty of reasonable care that extends even to trespassers. If an owner pursues hazardous activities on his land, and doesn't use reasonable care to protect others, he might be liable. If the plaintiff can convince a jury to award damages.

But the legislature could grant the RR at least partial immunity from lawsuits.

Jim

I done some internut research Jim and it seems unlikely that the railroad would get sued if they put up some liability signs at these crossings. Stuff like "Danger No trespassing." Then somebody would actually have to get hurt, which is highly unlikely. I saw nothing that the railroad has to police this. You were warned and now you assume the liability for your own actions. Guys can go fishing and the railroad can maintain their property rights. Win,Win. Well except for the lawyers.

However in the tin foil area BNSF is Buffet's railroad and he was Obama's buddy and probably ain't a Walker fan.

Form an organization dedicated enough to get it changed. If your will is stronger they will cave.

Tactics to include:
* rent a dozer and create a safe crossing("oops, wrong address")
* car trouble at a crossing 10 min before the train is scheduled (every day)
* dump truck load of gravel on the tracks
* protests at the crossings
* protests at the companies that use that rail company

Most are likely to end up with fines or jail, but maybe the railroad will give in.

I'm on your side with this. Railroad is no differant than a transmission line. If the railroad cant make reasonable ways for people to cross its continuous barricade it's time to show them where to stick it.

mutt you go first...I will follow you.lol...but it might be cheaper to pay for a crossing! lol

Sure would be a shame if the railcars started a fire in that area in the spring and the wildfire crews couldn't get there to put it out.

I like violence as much as the next guy, but probably you would get a better reaction with some protest signs at a crossing, having your sad children holding fishing poles and whining about how the children are being robbed of their heritage. Set this up with the local television station. 20 whiners should be enough just narrow the camera view so viewers don't know how few you are.

Big companies hate bad press.

All across the the NW mountain states they have "trespass fees", so in some states I guess you can rent some one permission to trespass. I've always thought trespass was a crime, but ...

just heard a rumor they are putting tracks at the mexican border to stop the herd of immigrants.

great news!we can also use the freight trains to haul them free cell phones ..food stamps ..and voting packets!

Hey Muskrat, you following.....

https://www.jsonline.com/story/spor...change-railroad-crossing-law/4692862002/

Look who led the effort, the irony.

Yuppers, been in the works for awhile now. Let's hope they can work together and fix the problem.

This isn't really a liberal vs conservative issue.

Its a local vs the rest of the state and lobbiest issue.

Tho writers and sponsors are from the region affected.

The rest of the state doesn't care.

Glad to see that this issue is back in the news and it is the hope of many Wisconsinites that the law is changed to benefit the sportsman for once!

Chris

I still believe some of the reason this no crossing the tracks came about. Was in retaliation to all the greenie type people here along the river complaining about the oil trains..Maybe now that they have quit their campaign to stop the trains.. Them politicians can get us back across the tracks..
I did see a guy go across the other day looked to be going trapping..Where he was parked is a good chance that rail road Dick will check him. He might have crossed at the road grade by where he was parked.. Sled tracks in snow kinda din't look that way??

Mac