Crazy Mountain Trespassing case
- Thread starter Apparition
- Start date
Hem
Well-known member
Yep, I was shaking my head after reading the recent article about Sienkiewicz getting dismissed.
What further annoyed me regarding the article is that it never stated the name(s) of the persons/parties that were on the other side of the dispute.
What further annoyed me regarding the article is that it never stated the name(s) of the persons/parties that were on the other side of the dispute.
This may be a blessing in disguise for this gentleman. The opportunity to become a form of lobbyist in this field may fulfill a personal passion and based on his experience I believe he would be a valued political draft, number one pick. Pro public land organizations, Wildlife organizations, outdoor recreation organizations, might be a valuable add.
Labman
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2015
- Messages
- 486
When I was deployed to the Middle East back in the spring of 2014 I wrote full page, hand written letters to 14 different landowners on the East side of the Crazies asking for permission merely to cross and access the public. All were sent off with self addressed stamped envelopes, I got a response from 1, with a no. So, I walked in from the West side and spent 14 days in there. If I would have shot an elk it would have been a chore getting him out, but I didn't. Also called him and asked if I could come in and pull camp from the East after a huge storm made the trail from the West impassable. He called me a son of a bitch and hung up on me, and I was as polite as can be. Mac White can say what he wants to a journalist, I know who he really is.
katqanna
Well-known member
Hem, they didn't state names because they don't have them yet. They could name the names, and people think, "so what?" But what I have been working on to get out, hopefully tomorrow, is that A, B, and C, alleged and did 1,2,3 - refuted by this evidence..., I feel, is far more important than just slinging a name out, and far more responsible.
They didn't get what they wanted from Mary Erickson last summer, so they shopped for another official to do their bidding and then they orchestrated the take down of a good man, a good public trust servant for their greed.
Rather than unleashing an angry mob at some names, better to reveal why and how they did it, and arm the public with means to fight back.
RobG
Well-known member
Hi Folks,
Sorry for being out of touch for so long; I had some family issues come up. Now that they are settled I’ll give an accounting as I promised.
The donation to the Sweet Grass Community Foundation to settle the case came out of my own pocket. I’m not happy that this was the best option I was given; I wish I could have found a more aggressive attorney to get it thrown out, but the fact of the matter is that not many attorneys were interested in such a minor case. If you need to do something similar, I’d recommend lining up a criminal attorney first if you think going past a no trespassing sign will help (such as bringing the issue to a head or gaining standing to sue).
My first priority for the remaining $4057.78 is protecting trail #136/115 or alternatively the Low-Line trail on the west side of the Crazy Mountains. If these trails require litigation we will have to raise considerably more money.
Please be patient. We are in a holding pattern right now. Landowners from both the west and east side of the Crazy Mountains are negotiating with the Forest Service and other interested parties. I’m waiting to see how that turns out before allocating any money to any cause.
I want to plug a few groups that have been helpful:
For groups stepping up and incurring costs, the leader is Park County Environmental Council (http://envirocouncil.org). I hadn’t even heard of this Livingston group when they contacted me offering help “in any way they can.” Since then they have actively engaged the landowners, trail users, and the Forest Service to try and negotiate a solution. They are skilled organizers with vision. I allocated $100 of your donations to them to show appreciation for actively trying to find a solution. They recently co-wrote a guest view that is making the rounds in the newspapers. I don't know if a collaborative approach will work, but it is a better approach than suing the piss out of everyone.
A close second is Backcountry Hunters and Anglers (http://www.backcountryhunters.org/). They have been supportive and actively engaged since I learned of the disputed trail a year ago. Trust me, they are taking a serious look at this and I support their decision to stay out of the Sienkiewicz/Daines brouhaha without a clear understanding of the facts. This is a new area for them so they are slow and need “encouragement,” but they could wind up being the premier group in protecting our trails from unlawful closure.
On your watch list should be Friends of the Crazy Mountains and Montana Wildlife Foundation. FOCM is a new group primarily concerned with a similarly contested trail on the west side of the Crazies and MWF is a Montana Powerhouse that has recently got involved. Both groups could become extremely important in improving access. I disagree with PLWA claim that they need money to fund their level of engagement at this time, but that could change.
I would be remiss without mentioning Kat QannaYahu of Enhancing Montana’s Wildlife and Habitat (www.emwh.org). I have a different style of publicity than she does, but there is no denying she is an incredible researcher and she made a big difference with the information she has gathered for this issue. As you know, she is a one woman ass kicker who works entirely on donations. It is rumored she is the only person Chuck Norris fears.
Once again, please be patient regarding the remaining money. As I mentioned we are in a holding pattern, waiting to see how negotiations with the landowner are going. I’m pretty sure the landowner is holding this trail hostage in exchange for a land swap, and I feel we should sue his butt on principle, but an amicable solution is far better than litigation.
My biggest concern at this time is what is occurring at the national level. There is a push to prohibit the Forest Service from defending these trails. We need to force Daines into taking a position on this and see if he really believes that public land should remain in public hands, or if landowners can privatize it at their pleasure. More on that later.
Sorry for being out of touch for so long; I had some family issues come up. Now that they are settled I’ll give an accounting as I promised.
| Total Contributions | $ 7895.00 | Includes $500 contribution by me |
| Total PayPal Fees | ($ 237.22) | About 3% plus $0.30/transaction |
| Attorney’s Fees | ($ 2500.00) | Karl Knuchell |
| Website, FOIs, research (Kat) | ($ 500.00) | By Enhancing Montana Wildlife and Habitat |
| Park County Environmental Council | ($ 100.00) | Donation |
| Settlement | ($ 500.00) | Paid for by my $500 donation |
| Remainder | $ 4057.78 |
The donation to the Sweet Grass Community Foundation to settle the case came out of my own pocket. I’m not happy that this was the best option I was given; I wish I could have found a more aggressive attorney to get it thrown out, but the fact of the matter is that not many attorneys were interested in such a minor case. If you need to do something similar, I’d recommend lining up a criminal attorney first if you think going past a no trespassing sign will help (such as bringing the issue to a head or gaining standing to sue).
My first priority for the remaining $4057.78 is protecting trail #136/115 or alternatively the Low-Line trail on the west side of the Crazy Mountains. If these trails require litigation we will have to raise considerably more money.
Please be patient. We are in a holding pattern right now. Landowners from both the west and east side of the Crazy Mountains are negotiating with the Forest Service and other interested parties. I’m waiting to see how that turns out before allocating any money to any cause.
I want to plug a few groups that have been helpful:
For groups stepping up and incurring costs, the leader is Park County Environmental Council (http://envirocouncil.org). I hadn’t even heard of this Livingston group when they contacted me offering help “in any way they can.” Since then they have actively engaged the landowners, trail users, and the Forest Service to try and negotiate a solution. They are skilled organizers with vision. I allocated $100 of your donations to them to show appreciation for actively trying to find a solution. They recently co-wrote a guest view that is making the rounds in the newspapers. I don't know if a collaborative approach will work, but it is a better approach than suing the piss out of everyone.
A close second is Backcountry Hunters and Anglers (http://www.backcountryhunters.org/). They have been supportive and actively engaged since I learned of the disputed trail a year ago. Trust me, they are taking a serious look at this and I support their decision to stay out of the Sienkiewicz/Daines brouhaha without a clear understanding of the facts. This is a new area for them so they are slow and need “encouragement,” but they could wind up being the premier group in protecting our trails from unlawful closure.
On your watch list should be Friends of the Crazy Mountains and Montana Wildlife Foundation. FOCM is a new group primarily concerned with a similarly contested trail on the west side of the Crazies and MWF is a Montana Powerhouse that has recently got involved. Both groups could become extremely important in improving access. I disagree with PLWA claim that they need money to fund their level of engagement at this time, but that could change.
I would be remiss without mentioning Kat QannaYahu of Enhancing Montana’s Wildlife and Habitat (www.emwh.org). I have a different style of publicity than she does, but there is no denying she is an incredible researcher and she made a big difference with the information she has gathered for this issue. As you know, she is a one woman ass kicker who works entirely on donations. It is rumored she is the only person Chuck Norris fears.
Once again, please be patient regarding the remaining money. As I mentioned we are in a holding pattern, waiting to see how negotiations with the landowner are going. I’m pretty sure the landowner is holding this trail hostage in exchange for a land swap, and I feel we should sue his butt on principle, but an amicable solution is far better than litigation.
My biggest concern at this time is what is occurring at the national level. There is a push to prohibit the Forest Service from defending these trails. We need to force Daines into taking a position on this and see if he really believes that public land should remain in public hands, or if landowners can privatize it at their pleasure. More on that later.
Last edited:
Similar threads
