We just lost 50% of the access to the Cape Cod Canal

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Clogston29

its going to be a tough fight to keep access if they decide that they are serious about preventing trespassing. if the railroad owns the property and there are not established legal right of ways (which would require standard, ADA compliant pedestrian railroad grade crossings with gates) they can do whatever they want on their land. Amtrak, CSX, etc. are all very strict on trespassing - you have to take a training course just to walk on their property as a contractor. the "i've always cut through here" argument really will not hold any water. they've always had the right to keep people out, they can decide to do it whenever they want. i was actually always surprised that cutting across the tracks was tolerated along the canal.

The only way to change it is to cause enough outrage to bring bad PR to Cape Rail. These battles are not won in the courts as the corporations have too much money. These battles are won in the newspapers, on the radio and in the news.

Unless the business is losing money or politicians might lose an election, the little guy can't win.

As Clogston mentioned, they are completely in their right to enforce trespass laws since they own the property. The difference is if enough people get outraged that they are forced to go back to turning a blind eye.

[Back Beach]

Great, just great....this means the few remaining peripatetic fisherman must either become canal bikers or take up golf....you know the kind I mean, 3-4 rod holders, fuzzy dice on the handle bars, missing seats, sissy bars, and the like.

I'm moving to Greenland.

[Clogston29]

another way to look at it is that they have a legal responsibility to enforce trespassing on their land as their operations (running trains down rail) endanger anyone on their property. if someone were to get hit by a train or fall while crossing the rails and get seriously injured, i would think that they could be found criminally negligent and responsible for knowingly allowing the general public to pass through their property, which contains known dangers.

an argument could be made that they should provide passage through their land to the canal as a service to the community, but I don't think it could be forced on them - especially if existing right of ways exist and the access road runs between them. and again, if they did it would have to be provided in a safe and ADA complient(read expensive) way.

[tattoobob]

If there land isn't posted with signs saying NO TRESPASSING then they can't enforce the laws of fine you