Hey, I mean this in as kind a way as possible, but I actually don’t think the government should pay for the fence line!

If you wouldn’t even pay for it yourself, as pretty much the sole beneficiary and someone who could afford it but would rather the money go elsewhere, why would it make sense for other taxpayers to pay for it?

Isn’t the premise of “you may as well own that land” the entire appeal of living next to public land anyway?

▲

jerf an hour ago | parent | next [-]

My family used to live next to state land. The state can be very pissy about its land. If the fence line is on the state land, which it almost certainly is barring a surveying error when it was put up, it is entirely possible that if he fixed it, he would actually get in trouble with the state. Hopefully not actual legal trouble... but only hopefully, certainly not a "oh they would never bother". Oh they most certainly do sometimes decide to bother about the most random things.

My default presumption, without checking with them directly, is not only that it would not be allowed, but that this is also very much not a "better to ask forgiveness than permission" situation either. Even just asking the question can draw attention from them you may not want.

The ready accessibility of the land is advantageous in some ways, but as neighbors the state can be quite nasty. Your other neighbors don't tend to have anywhere near the regulatory firepower to make sure you comply with what they want.

▲

estearum 37 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I think they’re suggesting building their own fence on their own property and eating the cost (as the sole beneficiary) of maintaining it through tree falls.

▲

_heimdall 36 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

I'd also assume the fence is on state land if its theirs to maintain. That doesn't stop someone from putting up their own fence on their side of the property line though.

▲

jerf 13 minutes ago | parent [-]

You couldn't integrate it into theirs, so you'd be looking at having to fence in the entire space you want the dogs in because the gap you'd leave would have to be big enough for a dog.

Which is hardly the end of the world, but it can definitely grind the gears to be spending thousands when you could fix the problem for several hundreds, if not perhaps several tens, of dollars if they wouldn't be assholes about it. But I would absolutely advise anyone in that situation to spend the thousands and not bank on the state not being assholes about it.

I can also add that you can't even be sure that if you got away with it for years that you will continue to get away with it. The particular issue that my father got into a bit of hassle with the state about is that he accidentally put a pole barn across the state line. Didn't mean to, but he misread the survey markers. Fortunately, they let him remediate it at his expense without pursuing the matter any further legally... but it means they did, after several years of it being there, come through a with a survey team and verify that nobody on the border was crossing into their land, and anything they found they made the residents fix no matter how many years the deviation had been there. All the laws about such thing between two citizens mean nothing to the state.

	▲	troupo 10 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> You couldn't integrate it into theirs, so you'd be looking at having to fence in the entire space Oh no. Tbe preposterous idea of putting a fence around your own property.

▲

IanCal an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Hey, I mean this in as kind a way as possible, but I actually don’t think the government should pay for the fence line!

Which is a fine option, but it should be something agreed to by both parties. You can't just hand over a cost like that, and if you buy property with some kind of agreement this choice is baked into the original price. It makes perfect sense for the government to uphold agreements it has made.

Secondly - if they did own the fence line, it'd be on the government to come and fix it when one of their trees breaks it, surely?

	▲	estearum 36 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Did the government agree to maintain a fence…?

▲

empyrrhicist 39 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Isn’t the premise of “you may as well own that land” the entire appeal of living next to public land anyway?

If you start actively managing it (removing invasive species, dead trees etc.) the state can take a more active interest at any time and sue/fine you into oblivion.

▲

slingvora an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]