Rail Trails to Block Traditional Hunting Access

[appraiser]

It would have been permanently closed with about 7 feet of clearance at high tide, wiping out most boating west of Rt 1.

.

The Coast Guard would never allow that

 

[Jose]

Why isn't GOAL threatening lawsuits to block each and every one of these projects using the same tactics (EIS, endangered species, etc) that the libtards use on us???

There is NO way these projectes are exempt from environmental impact statements of some kind or another.

 

[ArmedMainer]

There is NO way these projectes are exempt from environmental impact statements of some kind or another.

You are correct. I worked on the one in Mansfield, MA and one on Cape Cod and both of them had to do environmental impact studies before they could start digging. Alot of the old bed has to be hauled away and clean fill has to be brought in to prep the area before the paving begins. I've seen a few studies that have shown these rail trails actually bring in quite a bit of money for businesses within the towns that allow these areas to be changed into trails. One million dollars per mile only further proves Massachusetts is capable of screwing up a free lunch. I personally think these trails should be closed to foot and bike traffic Monday through Saturday for the six or seven weeks of hunting season so hunters can use the area.

 

[terraformer]

Every rail trail I know of in MA is built on a railroad ROW. Simply looking at the trail makes this obvious.

Not Peabody at least. Most of that is utility ROW.

 

[terraformer]

Why isn't GOAL threatening lawsuits to block each and every one of these projects using the same tactics (EIS, endangered species, etc) that the libtards use on us???

There is NO way these projectes are exempt from environmental impact statements of some kind or another.

$$$$$$ Not enough dinero. Also he may not want to stoop to that level, although here he wouldn't be stooping, there are significant env issues even if these are existing rail ROWs.

 

[the_doctor]

If these Rail Trails are the old railway (ROW = right of way) the railway (Most) signed a clause that if they ever stopped using that ROW the land that the ROW in-compassed should by contract in most cases back ot the original owner of the land before the Rail company took the land over.

SO in essence the Rails Trails people should have nothing to do with the ROW.

No.

Right of Ways are condemnations which traverse over people's lands. Cease to use the Right of the Way and it reverts back to the original owners and ceases to be.

However, federal statute allows railroads to railbank right of ways.

There was a recent case about another line which had no railroad activity and for which the railroad did not have the permission to povide power. The railroad had been removed for 50 years and the power company had encroached upon the original landowner's rights.

bill

 

[Blitz1]

The whole point of these trails is they are going on top of already stabilized rail bed and should be a quick, cheap repaving. I can't imagine $1mil per mile fits that bill. I wonder if these sections are not on existing rail bed.

But why bother to pave it? Why not just leave it as a dirt trail?

Oh and it gets even better... I was invited to sit on one of the local rail to trail boards by the Chairman od the Board of Selectmen where I used to live.... I declined after learning among other things that the MBTA would not allow any sort of soil testing before the sale of the rail bed, and as part of the sale the Town of Wakefield would be on the hook for any contamination found on the tracks, and the removal and disposal of the rail road ties, which are coated with all sorts of nasty chemicals. Last I heard they were going to just pave over them if they could.

Oh that's why.

 

[cekim]

But why bother to pave it? Why not just leave it as a dirt trail?

Yeah, they really should do it that way...

Re: nasty chemicals[sad2]

So, er uh, the ties sitting there for decades leaching out suddenly become a problem when you are about to pave over them?

Seems like at best it would only be a problem if it weren't paved...

Classic "one size fits no one" government think...

 

[Jose]

$$$$$$ Not enough dinero. Also he may not want to stoop to that level, although here he wouldn't be stooping, there are significant env issues even if these are existing rail ROWs.

Find the GD money. And what is this shit about not "stooping to their level"? That's why our side loses every single time!!!

 

[terraformer]

But why bother to pave it? Why not just leave it as a dirt trail?



Oh that's why.

And paved paths are easier for biking (road warrior types) and they are easier to maintain. A dirt path will erode and pit very quickly.

 

[arlow]

also: can you define what a "state or hard surfaced highway". I have never thought of a trail as a highway of any sort.

per wiki: "A highway is a main road intended for travel by the public between important destinations, such as cities."

This is not going to be a main road.

State or hard surfaced Highway

PART I. ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT


TITLE XIX. AGRICULTURE AND CONSERVATION


CHAPTER 131. INLAND FISHERIES AND GAME AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES

Chapter 131: Section 58. Shooting upon or across highway; hunting near dwelling


Section 58. A person shall not discharge any firearm or release any arrow upon or across any state or hard surfaced highway, or within one hundred and fifty feet, of any such highway, or possess a loaded firearm or hunt by any means on the land of another within five hundred feet of any dwelling in use, except as authorized by the owner or occupant thereof.

This pertains to any improved paved or concrete vehicular road. Dirt roads to not apply. Paved bike trails do not apply.

Further Chapter 269, Section 12D: (a) Except as exempted or provided by law, no person shall carry on his person on any public way a loaded rifle or shotgun (b) Except as exempted or provided by law, no person shall carry on his person on any public way an unloaded rifle or shotgun, unless such rifle or shotgun is enclosed in a case.

This section has omitted the most important section pertaining to hunters.

PART IV. CRIMES, PUNISHMENTS AND PROCEEDINGSIN CRIMINAL CASES


TITLE I. CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS


CHAPTER 269. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE


TAMPERING WITH IDENTIFYING NUMBERS OF CERTAIN FIREARMS

Chapter 269: Section 12D. Rifle or shotgun loaded with shells or cartridges; unloaded rifle or shotgun; carrying on public way prohibited; exceptions; punishment


Section 12D. (a) Except as exempted or provided by law (see bolded text below) , no person shall carry on his person on any public way a loaded rifle or shotgun having cartridges or shells in either the magazine or chamber thereof. For purposes of this section, “loaded shotgun or loaded rifle” shall mean any shotgun or rifle having ammunition in either the magazine or chamber thereof, such ammunition including a live cartridge, primer (igniter), bullet or propellant powder designed for use in any firearm, rifle or shotgun and, in the case of a muzzle loading or black powder shotgun or rifle, containing powder in the flash pan, a percussion cap and shot or ball; but the term “loaded shotgun or loaded rifle” shall not include a shotgun or rifle loaded with a blank cartridge, which contains no projectile within such blank or within the bore or chamber of such shotgun or rifle.

Whoever violates the provisions of this subsection shall be punished by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $5,000 or by imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than two years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and may be arrested without a warrant; provided, however, that if such rifle or shotgun is a large capacity weapon, as defined in section 121 of chapter 140, such person shall be punished by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and may be arrested without a warrant.

(b) Except as exempted or provided by law (see bolded text below) , no person shall carry on his person on any public way an unloaded rifle or shotgun, unless such rifle or shotgun is enclosed in a case.

Whoever violates the provisions of this subsection shall be punished by a fine of not less than $100 nor more than $1,000, and may be arrested without a warrant; provided, however, that if such unloaded rifle or shotgun is a large capacity weapon and is carried simultaneously with a fully or partially loaded large capacity feeding device, such person shall be punished by a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or by imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than ten years, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and may be arrested without a warrant.

This subsection shall not apply to drills, parades, military reenactments or other commemorative ceremonies, color guards or memorial service firing squads, so-called, as permitted by law.

(c) Upon a conviction of a violation of any provision of this section, such rifle or shotgun shall be confiscated by the commonwealth and, upon written order of the court, such weapon shall be forwarded to the colonel of the state police, who may dispose of such weapon in the manner prescribed in section 10.

(d) The provisions of this section shall not apply to the carrying of a loaded or unloaded rifle or shotgun on a public way by (i) any officer, agent or employee of the commonwealth or any other state or the United States, including any federal, state or local law enforcement personnel; (ii) any member of the military or other service of any state or the United States, including members of the national guard, reserves and junior reserve officer training corps; (iii) any duly authorized law enforcement officer, agent or employee of any municipality of the commonwealth; provided, however, that any such person described in clauses (i) to (iii), inclusive, shall be authorized by a competent authority to so carry a loaded or unloaded rifle or shotgun on a public way and such person is acting within the scope of his duties or training; or (iv) a person who is lawfully engaged in hunting and is the holder of a valid hunting or sporting license issued pursuant to chapter 131. This section shall not apply to the operation of a shooting gallery, licensed and defined under the provisions of section 56A of chapter 140, nor to persons using the same.

 

[Chris]

You are 10x more likely to be injured using a so-called bike path than using the public street. The places are exceptionally hazardous.

They are trying to pave the line that runs from Berlin to Waltham. It is part of a long term plan to get one from Amherst to Boston.

I am a fairly fast rider and when new, the trails are nice and smooth. So, I'm doing 25+ mph on a "BIKE PATH" and get yelled at by the jerks walking their babies for going too fast. So, why do they insist on calling them bike paths and not allow bikes to be used as designed? I rarely use them now.

Get ahold of the report that was produced by the people in Weston that got the trail project shut down. They did a great job producing a Brady Campaign style report of all the possible bad things without managing to list a single good point. If it was good enough to produce a sound defeat in a crunchy town like Weston, it is sure to work elsewhere.

 

[dixidawg]

State or hard surfaced Highway



This pertains to any improved paved or concrete vehicular road. Dirt roads to not apply. Paved bike trails do not apply.





This section has omitted the most important section pertaining to hunters.

Where does it say paved or concrete? I have had several discussions woth several EPO's who interpret that to include a gravel road. Or at least a specific gravel road that I frequent.

 

[arlow]

Where does it say paved or concrete? I have had several discussions woth several EPO's who interpret that to include a gravel road. Or at least a specific gravel road that I have frequent.

I could defintely see see gravel roads being included. I did not think about gravel or other things similar like seashells. Rock is hard, gravel is rock, hard surface. LOL I think the operative term that I have heard is "improved". Simple dirt roads the surface is natural and unimproved. Once gravel is dumped apon the dirt the surface has been improved.

 

[dixidawg]

Yup.

We have a gravel road that goes through a WMA. It is (or was at one time) a town road. It is really beat. NOBODY uses it, except guys hunting. And EPO's who wait on it for guys coming out of the woods. Then they give the hunters crap for not unloading 150ft from a "road". I guarantee they will do the same thing on this paved PUBLIC rail/bike trail. Once the rail trail becomes "public" it becomes open to EPO interpretation as to "improved surface", "highway", etc.

Not to mention that there will be no hunting within 150 feet on either side of it, so we lose a 100 yard swath of hunting grounds for it's entire length that it abuts the WMA.

 

[arlow]

Yup.
I guarantee they will do the same thing on this paved PUBLIC rail/bike trail. Once the rail trail becomes "public" it becomes open to EPO interpretation as to "improved surface", "highway", etc.

Not to mention that there will be no hunting within 150 feet on either side of it, so we lose a 100 yard swath of hunting grounds for it's entire length that it abuts the WMA.

A bike trail is not a road. It is not a highway. It is a trail, whether it is paved or not is irrevelant. However that does not mean there would not be a new law or an ammendment made to address it.

 

[TNHunter]

Existing regulation; 304CMR 12.19 contains language that prohibits hunting within 150 feet of any DCR Bike Path.

 

[freedom2012]

DCR = Department of Communists Railroaders

 

[TNHunter]

DCR = Department of Communists Railroaders

Good One!

 

[the_doctor]

You are 10x more likely to be injured using a so-called bike path than using the public street. The places are exceptionally hazardous.

They are trying to pave the line that runs from Berlin to Waltham. It is part of a long term plan to get one from Amherst to Boston.

I am a fairly fast rider and when new, the trails are nice and smooth. So, I'm doing 25+ mph on a "BIKE PATH" and get yelled at by the jerks walking their babies for going too fast. So, why do they insist on calling them bike paths and not allow bikes to be used as designed? I rarely use them now.

Get ahold of the report that was produced by the people in Weston that got the trail project shut down. They did a great job producing a Brady Campaign style report of all the possible bad things without managing to list a single good point. If it was good enough to produce a sound defeat in a crunchy town like Weston, it is sure to work elsewhere.

I agree.

They put hazards such as poles in the middle of the ROW.

Didn't someone fall and suffer brain damage after connecting with one of those poles on the Lexington trail?

They cost a lot of money. At least they want to have paved asphalt around here. Out in IL and other places they have crushed stone because they want the horses to use the BIKE TRAIL as well.

To be honest we really should have some bike highways. Actual separate limited access through routes for bicycles would have use. The Minuteman trail shows that there is a commuter demand.

Yet, the Hippies talk a game, but never want to walk it.

bill