Page 2 of 2

Re: Church Trail obstruction (this is a feeder to winter tra

Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:24 am
by john
Update from the hearing and judge's position.
The Judge granted the preliminary injunction, so we can start using the
trail again. Someone needs to clear away whatever is being used to block
the trail, though.

The Judge also explained that there was clearly enough evidence presented
for him to rule in favor of an RS2477 right of way. He explained that if
he was forced to make that ruling, it would open up the trail to more than
just the dog teams, hikers, 4-wheelers, etc. who use it now...traffic that
she may not want. He also explained that if he were forced to make that
ruling, he would also rule that she reimburse us for our attorney's fees.

The Judge has scheduled another hearing for November 16th. He's expecting
that there will be some sort of settlement before then. In other words,
Cat can compromise and grant a prescriptive easement for certain types of
traffic and a certain trail width, and if we agree to it, the issue is
settled and he will not need to make a final ruling. So, now we wait some
more, but at least we can use the trail as is, where is.

Re: Church Trail obstruction (this is a feeder to winter tra

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 7:18 am
by larry morris
I talked to Tom Hancock about this before the verdict-opinion. He said there were many more waiting on the outcome of this before they proceeded.

Re: Church Trail obstruction (this is a feeder to winter tra

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2012 1:29 pm
by john
With the number of views and the impact, I'm sure there are/were a lot of folks waiting to see what happened.

I can understand the owners concerns, being private property and all, however, the trail was a known entity when she purchased it and I'm glad for the position the judge took.

Were losing to many trails as it is and saving them needs to be an issue we stand for.

Creating a new trail where one didn't exist on private lands I could understand being an issue for owners, but removing them when their known to exist hurts everyone.

Re: Church Trail obstruction (this is a feeder to winter tra

Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:34 pm
by hvhavel
Got an update:

This trail has been ruled on. Judge decided the trail is "where it is, as it is" and is non-restrictive in use.

Two additional notes: the trail has been seriously damaged by four wheeler traffic (rutted) and the bridge near where it connects to winter trail has been burned out - so be careful if you are using it this winter.

Re: Church Trail obstruction (this is a feeder to winter tra

Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 8:51 pm
by mit
Was this the trail that had a letter to the editor in the paper last week?

Re: Church Trail obstruction (this is a feeder to winter tra

Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:57 am
by hvhavel
I believe so. I have only spoken to one side of the discussion and what was in the NewsMiner letter did not coorspond to what I heard - but as I said, I've only talked to one side.

Re: Church Trail obstruction (this is a feeder to winter tra

Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 8:54 am
by john
hvhavel wrote:Got an update:

and the bridge near where it connects to winter trail has been burned out - so be careful if you are using it this winter.
Do we need to look at a bridge project to fix it ?

Re: Church Trail obstruction (this is a feeder to winter tra

Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:44 pm
by hvhavel
She doesn't think it is needed - once there is snow it shouldn't be so bad.

However, she did mention that a bridge on wintertrail over the potlatch creek near the dike is now at an angle - mushers are using it without much problem, but she isn't sure about snowmachines.

Re: Church Trail obstruction (this is a feeder to winter tra

Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 1:30 pm
by Darrell
The bridge over potlatch creek is the first club project that I remember. that was a while ago!