Mount Lindsey Closure
Forum rules
- This is a mountaineering forum, so please keep your posts on-topic. Posts do not all have to be related to the 14ers but should at least be mountaineering-related.
- Personal attacks and confrontational behavior will result in removal from the forum at the discretion of the administrators.
- Do not use this forum to advertise, sell photos or other products or promote a commercial website.
- Posts will be removed at the discretion of the site administrator or moderator(s), including: Troll posts, posts pushing political views or religious beliefs, and posts with the purpose of instigating conflict within the forum.
Re: Mount Lindsey Closure
Email from the ranch
- Attachments
-
- A0FFAAD2-B9D0-4F03-840E-0EE06F6935A0.jpeg (214.97 KiB) Viewed 4119 times
- greenonion
- Posts: 1892
- Joined: 10/3/2012
- 14ers: 50 1
- 13ers: 2
- Trip Reports (0)
- montanahiker
- Posts: 272
- Joined: 8/30/2015
- 14ers: 38
- 13ers: 185
- Trip Reports (0)
Re: Mount Lindsey Closure
Well that's ambiguous. Does that mean "You're trespassing now so you can't sue us" or "You're trespassing and we'll bring charges against you if we catch you"? I'm guessing it's the first one but they are hoping that posting the sign leads most people to assume the second one considering the other private lands in the area.Anyone who does enter is trespassing and does so at their own risk.
There's more to life than 14ers. There are 13ers.
- two lunches
- Posts: 1328
- Joined: 5/30/2014
- 14ers: 37 2
- 13ers: 59
- Trip Reports (0)
Re: Mount Lindsey Closure
my assumption is that the ambiguity was strategic. removes the accountability of the ranch to follow through on any written "threats". quotes because it's hardly a threat to imply there will be consequences for breaking the lawmontanahiker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 3:07 pmWell that's ambiguous. Does that mean "You're trespassing now so you can't sue us" or "You're trespassing and we'll bring charges against you if we catch you"? I'm guessing it's the first one but they are hoping that posting the sign leads most people to assume the second one considering the other private lands in the area.Anyone who does enter is trespassing and does so at their own risk.
again, maybe y'all don't trespass and give everyone the best opportunity for a clean resolution
“To walk in nature is to witness a thousand miracles.” – Mary Davis
- highpilgrim
- Posts: 3186
- Joined: 3/14/2008
- 14ers: 58
- 13ers: 84 1
- Trip Reports (1)
Re: Mount Lindsey Closure
Ninja attire and a red headlamp will get er done.
Call on God, but row away from the rocks.
Hunter S Thompson
Walk away from the droning and leave the hive behind.
Dick Derkase
Hunter S Thompson
Walk away from the droning and leave the hive behind.
Dick Derkase
- Mountainsroam_2012
- Posts: 86
- Joined: 8/25/2018
- 14ers: 58
- 13ers: 37
- Trip Reports (0)
Re: Mount Lindsey Closure
Damn man I bet that messed with your head climbing that day??SteveBonowski wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 6:39 pm I did Lindsey back in the mid-1990s. It's the only 14er I did during my active "bagging career" (1982-2018; finished the 55 in '99) that featured a dead body about 100' down and east of the summit ridge. Somebody had fallen; rest in peace; and the sheriff hadn't gotten the body out yet.
- HikerGuy
- Posts: 1406
- Joined: 5/25/2006
- 14ers: 58
- 13ers: 426 8
- Trip Reports (9)
Re: Mount Lindsey Closure
It turns out that I was bit off with my analysis. The above statement is not entirely accurate, there was more to it than I was reading. The original judgement found CRUS did not apply and therefore Nelson was not considered an invitee under CRUS which if he was would have made the CLPA moot. The US appealed the verdict to the 10th Circuit Court. The circuit court found that CRUS did apply, which means Nelson was an invitee and therefore CLPA did not apply. However, once the circuit court found that CRUS did apply, it meant that the lower court had to reexamine the rest of the CRUS statute that was not initially considered because that threshold had not been met in the original decision. So, upon reconsideration the lower court found that an exception in CRUS did apply (the US was willful or malicious failure to guard or warn against a known dangerous condition likely to cause harm) and damages were awarded. The US appealed again to the circuit court and the new findings of the lower court were upheld. Westword actually has a pretty good summary of how the case unfolded.yardman wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 8:56 pmExactly!HikerGuy wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 4:02 pm Here is the case text for the Nelson vs. US case. The judgment ultimately was made using the Colorado Premises Liability Act ("CPLA"). Basically, Nelson was found to be an invitee vs. trespasser and was subsequently awarded damages. By posting signs the ranch can claim that you are not an invitee, but rather a trespasser. A trespasser may recover only for damages willfully or deliberately caused by the landowner.
So, this issue with CRUS is way more nuanced than I first believed it to be. The ranch's knee jerk reaction to put up the no trespass signage is understandable, but I have a feeling it does not protect them unless they enforce it. If they do not have plans to enforce no trespassing and they really don't mind folks summiting Lindsey, they would be better off placing signage that tells folks to stay on trail and be aware of dangerous conditions that may exist. I imagine this is what CFI will be working with them on.
-
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 9/7/2018
- Trip Reports (0)
Re: Mount Lindsey Closure
Thanks
Re: Mount Lindsey Closure
Just because there is a sign, it doesn't mean you are trespassing. They have to prove you KNOWINGLY were unlawfully present. And how do you prove someone knew? The most ironclad way is you find them unlawfully present, you serve them with a trespass notice and then the next time you catch them you can prove they were knowingly there. Even then, it's like a class 1 petty offense. If you give them the "I didn't see the sign" treatment there is very little they can do.montanahiker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 09, 2021 3:07 pmWell that's ambiguous. Does that mean "You're trespassing now so you can't sue us" or "You're trespassing and we'll bring charges against you if we catch you"? I'm guessing it's the first one but they are hoping that posting the sign leads most people to assume the second one considering the other private lands in the area.Anyone who does enter is trespassing and does so at their own risk.
It was like every one's head on the dot com was blowing up when bross or whatever closed this summer. And it was probably routinely getting hiked each and every day.
This isn't me advocating for people to break the law, regardless of how difficult it may to be enforce. Or how small the penalty may be. I think the landowners don't care, because they never really have in the past. They're just scared of the legal liability. I respect their rights to close the mountain, there are just too many other peaks which are way cooler for me to really care about a mountain that will be open sometime in the future.
Re: Mount Lindsey Closure
I'm curious, what are your living arrangements? I presume it's some sort of fixed abode, aka private property. But I'm sure you'd be okay with it if I "squat" there next time I visit Colorado. After all, I have as much right to be there as you do, correct?12ersRule wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 7:30 amPtglhs wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 1:19 am I hope a few thousand people hike up there and pee on the sign before summiting. "Please respect the private property closure" is a siren song of the oppressed embracing the chains which shackle them. Why should we respect it? Do the 'owners' respect our ambition to recreate on land which they aren't using? Owners respect very little save their own avarice. By what right does anyone claim ownership of the earth? We have reified private land ownership, cordoned off the commons, and commodified nature. I shall respect the private property rights in the alpine as much as they respect human dignity, which is to say not at all.
Totally agree. BS to claim ownership of the earth. Gotta love how people are consistently voting against their own best interests and idolizing people just because they're rich.
=============================================
https://listsofjohn.com/m/Candace+Skalet
https://peakbagger.com/climber/climber.aspx?cid=29263
https://listsofjohn.com/m/Candace+Skalet
https://peakbagger.com/climber/climber.aspx?cid=29263
-
- Posts: 777
- Joined: 11/19/2017
- 14ers: 3
- 13ers: 1
- Trip Reports (2)
Re: Mount Lindsey Closure
good tip for anyone attempting to be the first to climb all the 14ers dressed like a ninja.
just don't forget to bring these for the more technical peaks.
"The decay and disintegration of this culture is astonishingly amusing if you're emotionally detached from it." - George Carlin
- supranihilest
- Posts: 719
- Joined: 6/29/2015
- 14ers: 58 42
- 13ers: 709 1 8
- Trip Reports (112)
- Contact:
Re: Mount Lindsey Closure
Who knew that Louis Bacon resided on top of Mount Lindsey or even anywhere close. A residential structure is not the same as a 170,000 acre ranch and your argument is like comparing apples to a 170,000 acre ranch. Hiking one of the most unique pieces of land in the entire world is not the same as squatting in a residential structure and your argument is like comparing apples to squatting in a residential structure.Candace66 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 10, 2021 6:03 pmI'm curious, what are your living arrangements? I presume it's some sort of fixed abode, aka private property. But I'm sure you'd be okay with it if I "squat" there next time I visit Colorado. After all, I have as much right to be there as you do, correct?12ersRule wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 7:30 amPtglhs wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 1:19 am I hope a few thousand people hike up there and pee on the sign before summiting. "Please respect the private property closure" is a siren song of the oppressed embracing the chains which shackle them. Why should we respect it? Do the 'owners' respect our ambition to recreate on land which they aren't using? Owners respect very little save their own avarice. By what right does anyone claim ownership of the earth? We have reified private land ownership, cordoned off the commons, and commodified nature. I shall respect the private property rights in the alpine as much as they respect human dignity, which is to say not at all.
Totally agree. BS to claim ownership of the earth. Gotta love how people are consistently voting against their own best interests and idolizing people just because they're rich.