SEELEY LAKE - On March 16, a meeting was held at the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Office in Missoula to discuss the issue of whether the Rice Family should have vehicular use of the Cottonwood Lake Road for year around access to their property. Those in attendance were John Rice representing the Rice Family, John’s fiancée Lizzie Lescantz, Andi Bourne co-editor of the Seeley Swan Pathfinder, Seeley Lake Ranger District Ranger Rachael Feigley, USFS Region 1 Realty Specialist Mark Petersen and Lolo National Forest Supervisor Timothy Garcia.
The meeting opened with the USFS representatives stating that they were there to answer all my questions related to yearlong vehicular access to Rice property. My opening statement was that I wanted this matter cleared up while I was alive for the sake of my heirs.
The USFS position seems to be that easement rights granted to the previous owner Northern Pacific Railroad [which became Burlington Northern, then Plum Creek] were not transferable and therefore I had no easement rights. The Forest Service also contends that since 1994 the Forest Service and the railroad had an agreement that would close the road to vehicular traffic from Dec. 1 – April 30.
My contention is that there is a word that is mentioned in the easement called reciprocal, which to me means apples for apples, not that you can drive on my property but I have to use a snowmobile on yours.
The other word that is mentioned repeatedly is successor. That to me means that I should have all the rights and privileges that the railroad retained through their reciprocal agreement.
The third word this brings to mind is intent. I believe the reason the word successor is repeatedly mentioned is that the intent was the successor retain those privileges.
With respect to the agreement between the railroad and the USFS to close the road to vehicular traffic from Dec. 1 – April 30. The Forest Service was asked to produce this agreement as it was not a part of the original easement agreement nor was it a rider to this agreement and therefore not a part of my deed. I have now been informed by the USFS that they cannot find any written agreement but that I should have been aware of a verbal agreement and that because of the time duration I have no right to protest.
The railroad did grant the USFS the right to police roads through their property, such as for collecting fees from users for road maintenance but not for permanently restricting the use.
Along with this they mandate that the USFS provide a safe road, which I feel they will fail to do if they allow gravel trucks to share it with recreationalists. There is absolutely no reason for the Forest Service not to trade property on Highway 83 to avoid all this conflict.
I have provided the USFS with a formal notice that I will not be a part of any agreement which denies my family’s year round use of the Cottonwood Lakes Road to our property whenever and by whatever means they deem appropriate.
I was retired from the Burlington Northern Railroad in 1982 due to an injury. My 58-year-old brother was retired from construction last year as a result of back problems. Then there is our 90-year-old mother and lastly my 42-year-old son who was born with spinal bifida, is paralyzed from the waist down, has steel rods down his spine and recently has had a leg amputated. None of us can ride a snowmobile to have access to our property five months out of the year.
However, this does not just involve my family or just the Cottonwood Lakes Road but represents the thousands of miles of public access roads that have been unjustly closed to the general public for too long. I appeal this matter to the court of public opinion before I proceed on the legal trail.
Reader Comments(0)