10-18-2016, 10:00 AM
(10-18-2016, 06:28 AM)rangersfan Wrote: I really like the majority of the local LRT reporting it's good for a laugh.
You read the title and and the first few paragraphs and it sounds like trails were ripped up etc.
Which they were.
Quote: Then the article stumbles to the heart of the matter, the land surrounding the track is all private property and the need for a crossing wasn't identified during the consultation phase as previously discussed. In fact if a crossing is put in place ( which I think should be done) it will be the first crossings for these residents that was technically not trespassing. Don't get me wrong I definitely understand the need for a crossing and the inconvenience this would cause for the local population.
Is a trail that connects to a properly framed entry through a fence on to private property "trespassing"? It sounds like an "entrance" to me.
It is important not to discount what was there before as illegal. They were informal, but accepted public paths. No one ever made them "official", but that does not mean they had not gained implicit recognition by various landowners in the area.