Monadnock & NES needs your help

So, WTF now?

The article claims the club can't put a new range in a different location because the town outlawed new ranges. But the club used to have a range in a different position... How would the law possibly affect it going back to its old location? Or a location that is the first part of the current 200 yard range?
 
So, WTF now?

The article claims the club can't put a new range in a different location because the town outlawed new ranges. But the club used to have a range in a different position... How would the law possibly affect it going back to its old location? Or a location that is the first part of the current 200 yard range?

Yeah, I wonder if they could rejigger the range to an arrangement that doesn't encroach on the neighbor's property. It wouldn't be building a new range, just modifying the one that's already there.
 
Yeah, I wonder if they could rejigger the range to an arrangement that doesn't encroach on the neighbor's property. It wouldn't be building a new range, just modifying the one that's already there.

Yep I think the shorter pistol range is still on the property. The original range sure was although I didn't care much for that arrangement... It felt odd shooting parallel to cars I can see driving by to the left. I like it further back.
 
How long has the range been there on the so called neighbors property in question?

Under "Adverse Possession" if the club has been operating/treating/maintaining that property as its own for the last 20 year then it can be argued that it belongs to them

Almost 100 years... 80?

Obviously with the latest ruling, they didn't care about the adverse possession thing.
 
Almost 100 years... 80?

Obviously with the latest ruling, they didn't care about the adverse possession thing.

I thought the issue was with the more recent changes to the range. I don't have firsthand knowledge though so I could be wrong.
 
Unless the defense raised the question of adverse possession the court would never offer it......if its been maintained by the club for more than 20 years then its a potential path forward legally speaking

I was not at the hearing but I can't imagine they aren't already aware of it.
 
So by reading the article one could "assume" that a property survey showed the neighbors indeed owned the property in question?

When this all started, like a year ago, I had gone online and looked up the property boundary maps. The maps appeared to show a rather odd shaped property of the Perry's, with this rectangular shaped tab thingy just extending out from their larger property right through the middle of the 200 yard range. It looks rather ridiculous and I can't imagine why anyone would divide up land in this shape or how you would put the land to good use if it is like that. It is not as if anyone could ever build another house there and run a driveway to it.

But that's all I know... I can't speak for any of the legal arguments or how the club used that section of land prior to the new range being built.
 
The case was an adverse possession claim as the range has had an existing archery course around the old and current range since the 1950s. The current neighbor has owned the property for more than 20 years and never made a claim despite hundreds of archers and tens of target stands present. This is a tough blow as it will also effect the Town's case against the range for environmental impact.
 
So by reading the article one could "assume" that a property survey showed the neighbors indeed owned the property in question?

Yes. The survey confirmed the L shaped extension was part of the neighboring plot. Though that piece of land had been used for both the original range, new range and archery course. The archery course has been in place since the club was created.
 
What you have is the court siding with the neighbor, despite the fact he spent 20+ years NEVER WALKING HIS OWN PROPERTY.

Because if he had done so he would have seen the target lanes, targets and no trespassing signs the range had posted. Not to mention the 8 years or so of gun fire on the extension.
 
Money aside, this should be a slam dunk case to appeal to the NH SC as there is already established precident that is favorable to the club and contrary to judges decision

I have not read the decision for the case from the judge. To this juncture it has been 18 months of legal no man's land for the club fighting two cases simultaneously. The clear intent by the neighbor was to bleed the club dry by stringing out everything. Lawyers for this type of case are very expensive for a small club who's many members joined specifically because the range was a low cost family option. The loss of NES shoot revenue is also high once the injunction to stop all shooting was put in place.

The reality is the range did not provoke any of this response from the beginning. The neighbor blindsided the range with the town and environmental claims and the range was forced to pursue adverse possession. The range would happily have negotiated for the land and did in fact make an offer that far exceeded market value AND gave equal land in return along the northern boundary. The neighbor used that good faith time to backstab the range.
 
Last edited:
The issue is squeezing blood from a rock, not lack of desire to take action. Our legal system is not built around justice. Its built around who can pay the most people the highest rates for the longest period of time.

Right now the neighbor is effectively using the town and town's budget as a weapon against the range. That's how this started.
 
The issue I have with the town is the range has been there 70 years. the idea a resident can 1) purchase a piece of land without walking it and 2) live directly next to a range for 20 years and then try to claim fowel play is on its face absurd. But here the law is protecting that very behavior.

I get the map shows it's his property. What isn't clear is how he, the previous real estate agents, the current owner and the town can somehow all be aware of a 70 yo range and still come down on it like a ton of bricks.
 
The issue I have with the town is the range has been there 70 years. the idea a resident can 1) purchase a piece of land without walking it and 2) live directly next to a range for 20 years and then try to claim fowel play is on its face absurd. But here the law is protecting that very behavior.

I get the map shows it's his property. What isn't clear is how he, the previous real estate agents, the current owner and the town can somehow all be aware of a 70 yo range and still come down on it like a ton of bricks.
As much as I'm saddened by this situation, let me explain why your objections may not be reasonable.

>40 yrs ago I bought my house in MA, it is wooded on 3 sides and there is a gully in between me and my backdoor neighbor. Since we are both corner lots I asked my backdoor neighbor if he knew where our property lines were along the side street . . . he said no and "would it be a problem if you or I picked up an empty beer can on the other one's property . . . and that is how we've lived for all those years. The bank had the property surveyed but the surveyor didn't put any markers in the ground.

As for my house in NH, I have no idea where the boundaries are here either. It is deeply wooded on 3 sides also and the prior owner told me that there are no markers. Most interesting is that there are stone walls in the woods all over the place in this development (that is 40 yrs old) but the original plans for the development don't show them, the deeds don't mention them, etc.

No way I'm looking for ticks walking the properties looking for boundaries that don't exist.

If it were me with a range encroachment, I'd negotiate that landlocked piece of land with the club. However, if the neighbor is an a-hole that wants to ban all guns, then that person would do what is being done here and pull out all stops to shut the club down, using the courts, the town bylaws, writing new bylaws, etc. We know what type of person owns that property. [sad]
 
Shitty news.
Maybe showing up at the next meeting and throwing plans for 300 units of low income housing on the table, which there isn't shit they could about stopping might be the dick slap of reality some people might need.
Be careful what you wish for , you might just get it.
 
If it were me with a range encroachment, I'd negotiate that landlocked piece of land with the club. However, if the neighbor is an a-hole that wants to ban all guns, then that person would do what is being done here and pull out all stops to shut the club down, using the courts, the town bylaws, writing new bylaws, etc. We know what type of person owns that property. [sad]

Yep, I was thinking that. If I was the owner of the neighboring property, I would just offer it to the club at fair market value, or less if I liked the club. Keep in mind fair market value for land locked unbuildable land isn't worth all that much.
 
The issue I have with the town is the range has been there 70 years. the idea a resident can 1) purchase a piece of land without walking it and 2) live directly next to a range for 20 years and then try to claim fowel play is on its face absurd. But here the law is protecting that very behavior.

I get the map shows it's his property. What isn't clear is how he, the previous real estate agents, the current owner and the town can somehow all be aware of a 70 yo range and still come down on it like a ton of bricks.

Was it recently purchased? I got the impression that the land was owned for generations by the neighbors, and that the big fancy house he built there was relatively recent. That Perry name seems to go way back in time to when the club was founded... I figured it was in the family the whole time, so they'd certainly know there's a range there. But, I'm just guessing wildly... I don't have any actual specific knowledge of those details. I'm guessing anti-gun family with old money... that name is around the town and neighboring towns in a bunch of places. To throw a hissy fit over a tiny 6 acres of unusable land with all their other land holdings just shows what antis they are.
 
Shitty news.
Maybe showing up at the next meeting and throwing plans for 300 units of low income housing on the table, which there isn't shit they could about stopping might be the dick slap of reality some people might need.
Be careful what you wish for , you might just get it.

Yep. I see Section 8 and Somalians in that towns future. Wait until the goats start free ranging then those neighbors might start missing the sound of freedom ringing out...
 
Was it recently purchased? I got the impression that the land was owned for generations by the neighbors, and that the big fancy house he built there was relatively recent. That Perry name seems to go way back in time to when the club was founded... I figured it was in the family the whole time, so they'd certainly know there's a range there. But, I'm just guessing wildly... I don't have any actual specific knowledge of those details. I'm guessing anti-gun family with old money... that name is around the town and neighboring towns in a bunch of places. To throw a hissy fit over a tiny 6 acres of unusable land with all their other land holdings just shows what antis they are.

So, they acquired the property in 1997. The record says transferred, but doesn't say from who or how much. Family perhaps, not sure. Then, they build in 2004. So, they had 7 years between purchase and building house to figure out there was a range there and second guess their decision to build a house. And, that's well over 20 years they've been there somehow not noticing there's a club using part of the land, with whatever markings and other signs of activity at the border (I have not seen them but I trust they are there).

This judge's ruling sounds like a huge miscarriage of justice.
 
Yep. I see Section 8 and Somalians in that towns future. Wait until the goats start free ranging then those neighbors might start missing the sound of freedom ringing out...

I'm not exactly sure how that would work though. This isn't MA where they can force section 8 housing all over the place. They will have zoning ordinances that have minimum road frontage and acreage that will be quite large... not sure exactly the amounts. Probably at least 2 acres per property.
 
I agree the adverse possession is a shit course to take, but at some point you're left with few options because the other party is going scorched earth in the legal system you detest. The options are act within the legal framework you live under or give up and let the other side win. It's a shit sandwich created by unreasonable people and supported by government entities that are quick to absolve themselves of any responsibility, even though they clearly knew exactly what the status quo was for decades.

You think the assessor didn't know the plot lines? How many times were field cards updated for both properties with overhead images?
 
I agree the adverse possession is a shit course to take, but at some point you're left with few options because the other party is going scorched earth in the legal system you detest. The options are act within the legal framework you live under or give up and let the other side win. It's a shit sandwich created by unreasonable people and supported by government entities that are quick to absolve themselves of any responsibility, even though they clearly knew exactly what the status quo was for decades.

You think the assessor didn't know the plot lines? How many times were field cards updated for both properties with overhead images?

I don't know, but I think they would have done that work prior to the satellite images showing the location of the new range. Prior to that, the imagery just looks like woods. Things like foot paths and signs in the trees would be invisible. But, they should certainly be visible from the ground, if anyone had actually... oh I dunno... effing walked their own property once in 20 years.
 
Advice I would give to every range. Record everything you do in email. Detailed minutes of every meeting. Every single activity you do take pictures and record who was there, email them to the board. Have a central database of ALL photos relating to the range, organized by at least year, if not by month. This means asking for submissions from participants and saving any news articles.

Have an event? Draw the course or area used, take pics, record number of participants, names of all staff who helped.

I cannot over emphasize the drawing of areas used. Print a map and highlight it. Take a pic.

We never recorded exact dates of trail maintenance and what EXACTLY was done. I.e. we cut these saplings down here. We used hedgetrimmers and machetes to cut brush here. So the court would not acknowledge as viable evidence that our minutes said generically the archery course was setup. They wanted pictures, maps and details of what exact trail maintenance happened on exact dates by named people. Obviously that kind of mundane detail was never taken.
 
Last edited:
Its the right idea......but the fact that its been used as a range for 70 years may impede that

What it wouldnt impede is the creation of a dirt bike/atv/snowmobile park that hosted lumberjack competitions every weekend (imagine screaming chainsaws all day).....paintball competitions......truck pulls (coal rolls all day long) and anything you can imagine that would be distasteful to a panty bunched neighbor

then paint any/all buildings pink with green polka dots

Maybe if someone contacted the NRA and the NH Affiliate GONH to see if they would help fund the challenge from LaPierre's wardrobe fund the challenge would be easier

If they must revert to some legacy range position that's much smaller, I'd support a 50 yard 50 BMG competition. Extra points for the competitor with the loudest muzzle blast.

Wayno's sock budget would probably be enough for a legal defense fund.

Advice I would give to every range. Record everything you do in email. Detailed minutes of every meeting. Every single activity you do take pictures and record who was there, email them to the board. Have a central database of ALL photos relating to the range, organized by at least year, if not by month. This means asking for submissions from participants and saving any news articles.

Have an event? Draw the course or area used, take pics, record number of participants, names of all staff who helped.

I cannot over emphasize the drawing of areas used. Print a map and highlight it. Take a pic.

We never recorded exact dates of trail maintenance and what EXACTLY was done. I.e. we cut these saplings down here. We used hedgetrimmers and machetes to cut brush here. So the court would not acknowledge as viable evidence that our minutes said generically the archery course was setup. They wanted pictures, maps and details of what exact trail maintenance happened on exact dates by named people. Obviously that kind of mundane detail was never taken.

Even though my local club has well over 500 acres, that's a good idea. At least once all of the 'features' should be well documented. Improvements should be documented to be improvements of existing features, not indicated as 'new'. And for gawd's sake, anything truly new needs to be properly permitted so that local banana republics controlled by moonbats are unable to cook up a reason to shut down a range.
 
If they must revert to some legacy range position that's much smaller, I'd support a 50 yard 50 BMG competition. Extra points for the competitor with the loudest muzzle blast.

The satellite images show the pistol range berm over to the left, which is at least 50 yards, as still on the property. So, that doesn't encroach on the neighbor's alleged property. What's the hold-up now for the range being usable, some wetlands nonsense, or was it the building permit thing?
 
Sad news, I loved the Monadnock shoots. I was hoping to bring a couple new-ish shooters whenever the legal stuff was resolved. Still enjoy the videos I've got of me shooting full auto AK, grease gun, MP5, etc. Those days were awesome. Bummer.
 
Back
Top Bottom