Neighborly Beef

On Friday I called the tenant farmer whose many cattle have visited our land from both of the farmland properties he rents adjacent to three sides of us, and that evening he stopped over. I pointed out the many tree saplings we’ve planted and staked along our property and again said that we are concerned about the cattle damaging our gardens.

Instead of offering any assurances of fence mending, apologizing, or asking about–let alone offering to compensate us for–past or future damages, he pointed out that the first problem to deal with is that our saplings (average height: 12 inches) are too close to the fence (maybe in about 30 years).

As for fixing the fences, he said, “That’s a long-term proposition, and I don’t know how long I’ll be renting here,” he said. “Let me ask you this: Would you be willing to share the costs? That’s how it’s done, for boundary fences.”

“But I don’t need the fence,” I said.

I let the two landowners know of the conversation, and consulted a man at church who seems to have experience with such nitty gritty details of life.

“Sometimes you just have to be nasty back,” he said. “We had a problem with cattle getting onto our land, once, and so we rounded up the escaped cattle and took them to the livestock sale. You might have to have a heart-to-heart with the farmer and tell him you’re going to shoot the cattle if they get in your garden. He’s responsible for keeping them contained.”

But I’m not so sure he is–both practically speaking and legally. From our state’s code: “When any fence which has been built and used by adjoining landowners as a division fence, or any fence which has been built by one, and the other afterwards required to pay half of the value, or expense thereof, under the provisions hereinbefore contained, and which has thereby become a division fence between such lands, shall become out of repair to the extent that it is no longer a lawful fence, either one of such adjoining landowners may give written notice to the other, or to his agent, of his desire and intention to repair such fence, and require him to come forward and repair his half thereof, and if he shall fail to do so within thirty days after being so notified, the one giving such notice may then repair the entire fence so as to make it a lawful fence, and the other shall be liable to him for one-half of the expense thereof.”

This is not at all promising; we may have to shell out in order to support our neighbor’s commercial cattle ventures even though we have no need for a fence…unless this following code provides us a loophole: “Adjoining landowners shall build and maintain, at their joint and equal expense, division fences between their lands, unless one of them shall choose to let his land lie open or unless they shall otherwise agree between themselves.”

And then there’s this, from our county’s code: “The boundary lines of each lot or tract of land or any stream in the country are hereby declared to constitute a lawful fence for the purposes of [the section of the state code cited above].”

Which part of the code applies? The farm extension agent I called yesterday assured me that it’s the farmer’s responsibility to keep his cattle in, and if his cattle damage our property we can sue for damages or even hold the cattle “for ransom,” but he added that there is “a legal expectation that both parties contribute” to the maintenance of an existing boundary fence.

We’re caught in a catch-22: Trust the neighbor’s sense of responsibility to keep in his cattle. That means that when they escape to our land and destroy our garden, we can demand damages in court (animal control won’t get involved; they say it’s a civil matter). But the suit will then be thrown out because we didn’t help maintain the fence.

Basically, we’re required to pay to support our neighbor’s business.