Charges in bison killings

Posted by buzzman on May 8, 2008 at 5:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hawn-hope you have lots of $ and like jail food-you should not have wasted all that meat but texans have a habit of want and waste anyway

Posted by nmbronco1 on May 8, 2008 at 6:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The key to this article is the last paragraph - the bison were not killed on Hawn's property. In essence, trespassing on other property was involved, and killing bison is tantamount to killing cattle. The money Hawn will now spend on attorneys and fines would have been much better spent on building a better fence. Indeed, he'd have spent pennies on the dollars the attorneys will bill him for.

Posted by Froward69 on May 8, 2008 at 7:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I Want to go shoot some longhorns. that said, Texans do not grasp the concept that only an electric Fence will keep Bison from roaming through. So he had them killed rather than investing in a suitable fence. being neighborly and calling the owner to come over and retrieve the bison became too much of a burden. Texas is missing a second idiot.

Posted by gs on May 8, 2008 at 7:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Looks like justice is moving along the right way. Taking a little bit long to be done though.

Posted by titancain on May 8, 2008 at 8:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I can't wait till the neigbors barking dog escapes from his yard, enters into my yard and I can shoot it. Long live republicans property rights advocates! LOL!!!

Posted by PonchoVia on May 8, 2008 at 9:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Has anything good come out of Texas?

Posted by dawnmarie01 on May 8, 2008 at 9:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Finally!! It's about time charges were filed. And stop using the word 'hunt', RMN - there was no hunting involved - just plain slaughter.

Posted by happymike44 on May 8, 2008 at 10:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This guys total disregard for the law is unbelieveable.This jerk decided since they are on my property just kill it.Wonder what took so long to file the charges.For what he is going through all he had to do was reinforce the fence and problem solved.Sounds more like a guy who does what ever he wants to do no matter what.My advice to Mr Hawn if you were having problems then you should have simply moved.If that was not a option for you.Then you should have spent the money for a new fence.I had a neighbor who used my yard as a shortcut all hours of the day and night.I really did not want a to build a fence but had to. Why because this idiot would not listen to reason.So up went the fence with the latch installed inside so he could no longer walk through my yard at night to go home.He was furious and even had a attorney threaten me with a lawsuit.Told him and his lawyer if he sued me I would counter sue him for the cost of the new fence.Let my attorney talk to his attorney and it was amazing how they both worked out the agreement he would not sue me. That I would not sue for the cost of the fence he forced me to put up with his actions.We don't talk anymore no big deal for me.Also the other thing was he could be charged with trespass I had no qualms about putting this drunken heinz in jail.

Posted by Steve on May 8, 2008 at 10:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hawn said in his letter "My repeated efforts, and that of my attorney, to enlist the aid of the former owner of the buffalo, have failed."

So it sounds like he tried several times to get the owner to keep them off his land.

I'm not picking sides, and I have no experience with how ranchers manage livestock issues like this, but it sounds like he did try to discuss the issue with the owner of the bison. What was Hawn supposed to do if the owner wouldn't respond? Why should Hawn spend his money to keep somebody else's bison of his property? Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the owner to keep them on the property where they belong?

Posted by animalrights on May 8, 2008 at 10:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I hope this murdering scum goes to jail for the rest of his evil, cowardly, pathetic life and is at the receiving end of a gun.

Posted by cableboy764 on May 9, 2008 at 1:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I was pretty angry at this Texan until I read the article. Now I'm more upset with the bison owner who couldn't or wouldn't take care of his own livestock and repair his fences. It seems from the article that Downare was not too worried about his bison until they were shot and he figured he should make a buck or two. The felony charges wont stick.

Posted by mrfxx on May 9, 2008 at 3:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

For cableboy764 and others who choose to blame the owner of the bison, please remember that Colorado law (probably from the days when cattle roamed much more freely and farmers' property rights were considered secondary to ranchers rights to have grazing land) puts the responsibility on the land owner who does NOT own the livestock to protect their property by putting up appropriate fencing. The Texan had been notified of that on more than one occasion - and decided it was cheaper to find people to slaughter the bison which knocked down his decorative but ineffective fence. Unfortuanately, the Texan neglected to mention that they should only kill the bison if they were still on his property (which MIGHT not have resulted in charges being filed - I am not really clear on that, since I have also read that it was the Texan's responsibility to return the animals to the owner). The story immediately made me flash back to a movie called "Bless the Beasts and Children" in which penned buffalo were shot to death as part of a so-called hunt - and the shooters actually thought they were hunting!

I think that the vast majority of us are offended that the animals were slaughtered AND the carcasses were allowed to rot when there are people in the state who are going hungry and who are not vegetarians.

Posted by nuclied on May 9, 2008 at 6:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sounds like the Bison owner had fair warning. I live in Texas and tell you it would have been a much different situation here. The Bison would still be dead, but the bison owner would have also been fined...mmmmmm....bison burgers....

Posted by fiesty on May 9, 2008 at 6:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"being neighborly and calling the owner to come over and retrieve the bison became too much of a burden"

Froward- that's not true. It's documented that in addition to putting up a fence (addressing the whole stupid "free range" argument), Hawn contacted Downare several times, and even called the sheriff. Nothing was done. He was understandably upset about the owner not being responsible or responsive. Not to mention that you couldn't use your own land with bison running around- mite bit dangerous, don't you think? "Okay, kiddies, go out and play, but no hollering or playing with the bison..."

While I don't agree with what he did, and believe the charges are justified, DOWNARE needs to be charged as well! Let's see, failure to control an animal, neglect/abandonment of an animal, property damage, and trespassing would be a good start. If Hawn is going to be held accountable legally for his actions, so too should Downare.

Posted by jbowen43 on May 9, 2008 at 7:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Apparently, the law says that regardless of the type of livestock you neighbor has YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE for building a fence to keep them from damaging your home. So if the neighbor stocks sheep YOU must build a sheep fence. If your neighbor has elephants then YOU must build an elephant fence. Don't you think it's time to change the law? The law was written by ranchers for ranchers. In those days ranchers killed bison they didn't raise them as a hobby.

Posted by HolierThanThou on May 9, 2008 at 7:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Colorado is a fence-out state, which means if you don't want livestock walking across your land then you fence them out.

Naturally, it's easier to fence them out of an acre than to keep them out of a square mile of land. But if you own a lot of land then chances are that you can easily afford to hire hands to keep the fence in good repair.

Wild animals such as elk and bison bust through fences. They probably do it either by pushing on it or in a panic when they're being stalked or chased. That means you must keep your fence in good repair if you want it to continue discouraging those beasts from coming around. What part of this did Jeff Scott Hawn not understand?

Bison are indigenous to South Park. It's a natural place for them to roam and thrive. Evidently, there are some Texans who refuse to respect our mountains, our wildlife, our livestock, or our law. The ones who do are welcome. The ones that think they can disrespect us, steal our property, and disturb our peace had better stay home. Our sheriff is the least of their worries.

Jeff Scott Hawn is a cruel impatient criminal. He is now welcome to return to Park County. We have a jail that is well suited for the likes of him. The only quibble I have about this case right now is that the judge set his bond too low. As rich as that boy is, I would have set it at five million dollars.

Posted by airbornebigfoot on May 9, 2008 at 7:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

happiness is a texan headed south, with an okie under each arm.

Posted by breckrider on May 9, 2008 at 7:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

typical texans. i'm rich and i can do what i want to do. hey douchebag hawn, enjoy the park county jail, i heard people lose their limbs in that jail. and nuclied,that's why this isn't texas. and if people think the felony charges won't stick, you don't know park county very well.

Posted by GetaReal on May 9, 2008 at 7:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

fiesty - Don't you know that Froward knows all. Second, better check the law in Colorado, or at least read all the post above. In Colorado it is the responsibility of a land owner to keep animals off his property and not the responsibility of the animals owner. I say this as a land owner who has exercised due diligence and learned what my responsibilities are. Now if we could just get most of the people who post here to do the same we would all be better off.

Oh yeah, Haven't you clowns figured out that Bush ain't running. The politics of hatred can only lead to criminal behavior.

Posted by fiesty on May 9, 2008 at 7:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

HolierThanThou - while Colorado may have laws that make it a "fence out" state, you are forgetting we also have laws regarding controlling your animals. Downare is also guilty here of failing to obey the law.

I agree with jbowen43. It's time to change the law. It's freakin ridiculous that because a neighbor wants to keep X animal(s), that I might have to go broke trying to protect my property. Morally and legally, it's the OWNER'S responsibility to control their animals; containment is obviously a part of being under control. This law is archaic and needs to be repealed.

If my dog were to break out of my yard, into someone else's yard, and bite someone, I would be responsible. Why then is Downare not responsible for his bison damaging someone else's property?

Posted by ProffBob on May 9, 2008 at 8:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Colorado is an OPEN RANGE state. (ie see the movie by the same name) It puts the responsibility on the land owner to keep cattle/buffalo off of your property.
This was wrong on so many levels. There was enough blame here to arrest more than one.
If a criminal has a note in his pocket saying it is ok to break into my house, and kill my dog, is it ok? Shouldn't the criminal (ie. buffalo killers)also be seeing the judge for their punishment?

Posted by Froward69 on May 9, 2008 at 8:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

thank you getaReal, I do not think I know it all. However I do admit to listening and attempting to understand alternate points of view. Like say what intelligence agency's would tell me. rather than like our current prez and most republicans, who would fire and replace those who would tell them their point of view is wrong. going instead for "Yes men", who will blindly follow failure as a policy.

I for one would enjoy bison roaming across my property. like the view of the snowy peaks, the colors of the aspen or the green carpet of the forest. to me they would add to the feel, flavor, rustic nature, and VALUE of the land I bought.

Posted by fiesty on May 9, 2008 at 8:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Interesting. I just looked up the colorado statute which requires that dogs and other pet animals (not limited to dogs and cats and instead includes any animal owned or kept by a person for companionship or protection or for sale to others for such purposes) be under control at all times and defines "control", which may vary from time to time, place to place, and animal to animal. Exceptions include wildlife (obviously), dogs working herds, and livestock. This is utterly insane since it says the livestock owner doesn't have to control his animals AT ALL! I guess I will get all my dogs classified as working dogs or livestock so I don't have to control them...

So while they can't get Downare for not controlling his bison (STUPID), they can still get him for property damage; I found nothing exempting him for the damage his livestock causes.

http://www.animallaw.info/statutes/st...

Posted by Froward69 on May 9, 2008 at 8:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

fiesty, Bison ARE wildlife. in this case they were part of an owned heard. the fact still remains that Bison being the noble free range animals they are. pretty fences do not control them, nor does barbed wire. Only an ELECTRIFIED fence does the job in any meaningful way. even then once the circuit is broken, Bison will roam straight through with out any regard to who's name is on the deed to the property.

Posted by happymike44 on May 9, 2008 at 8:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Well feisty you have a darn good argument there.But still the guy did not need to bring in a group of exterminators to rub out the bison.By the way the bison were here long before the white man.So I still think Mr Hawn should put his money where his big mouth is and just pay for what he has done.He is very lucky it is not the 1890's he would have been given a community sponsered neck tie party.This would have solved the whole problem.So Mr Hawn glad to see a texan behave in a right neighborly fashion.I lived in the south for a bit.Still do not care for the rude misbehaving drunken red neck.So hope you do not get a lot of animal friendly people on the jury.Because it could go rather badly for you.Remember when in rome behave like a roman.So Mr Hawn try to behave and act in a civilised manner it is not really that hard.Just shut your big mouth and put that big texas ego away and remember this is not texas okay.

Posted by buffsblg on May 9, 2008 at 9:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Fiesty

I am not a big defender of the bison owner and there are certainly livestock owners who take advantage of their neighbors poor fences to obtain free forage. That said, I support prosecution for a number of reasons.

1. The landowner had other relief. He filed a lawsuit and had the right to seize the animals and sell them for the damage. Instead of sticking with the legal steps HE HAD STARTED he instead hired shooters (this is not hunting). Even if you have some honest grievance, if you take the law into your own hands you have crossed the line.

2. Apparently most of the animals were not on his land. He was not just looking to protect his land, he got mad and decided to go after whatever animals he could find. He might have a moral right to protect his property, but no one gave him or the shooters the right to go on other people's land to do their killing. You rage against trespassing, but that is exactly what the shooters did.

A change in the free range law might be appropriate, but Hawn did not have a right to ignore the laws on the books. I am not one who thinks he needs to be locked up forever, but a few thousands of dollars in fines, restitution and a few hundred of hours of public service at an animal shelter would be fine.

Posted by Spencer on May 9, 2008 at 9:08 a.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by rip_vw32 on May 9, 2008 at 9:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Guys, having raised buffalo you have to know 1 thing. There is NO fence that will keep them in short of an electrified one that will kill them the instant they touch it. PERIOD. I have seen them jump straight up 6 feet in the air.... A 2000lb + animal that does that will go through ANY fence. The trick is to make it flexible (like out of wire/cable), and keep them discourged from wanting to get to the other side, because if they wnat to go... they'll go.

First, this is a free range state, makes it possible for a rancher to move his live stock across non-fenced in properties from pasture to pasture even if those pastures that he owns are not next to each other. This is still a needed law just for that fact.

Second, Bison are considered live stock, Elephants are not. You need a permit for an elephant (or any other exotic animal for that matter ) and part of the permit process involves insuring adequate fencing/pens/cages for the animals.

Third, And this is for those Texans bitching on this forum... In Texas it is still a hangable offence for stealing livestock, and horses... How is that any different than having them killed on the livestock owner's land? Hawn is getting off way easier here than in Texas.....

Posted by fiesty on May 9, 2008 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

happymike44 / buffsblg - I didn't say that the buffalo killer wasn't wrong; I specifically stated earlier that I don't condone what he did, and that he broke the law so prosecution was justified. The point I'm making is that the bison owner isn't innocent either, and should be prosecuted too.

The sad thing is that because both men screwed up, the buffalo died. THEY are the innocent victims here.

Posted by breckrider on May 9, 2008 at 9:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

why should the law be changed . i have a better idea, why don't all of you that live in your crack and crime infested cities not worry about laws that affect us that live in the mountains. the laws were passed by RANCHERS for RANCHERS. not city folks. fiesty and others like him/her obviously don't understand why these laws are in place. hey we don't really care what goes down in denver, we don't live there and don't try to justify laws that are passed for cities, so stay out of our business. hawn was wrong for what he did, and he deserves to go to prison. just because he might be somebody special in texas doesn't make him special here.

Posted by Diff on May 9, 2008 at 9:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

STRING HIM UP!

Posted by Purpose4mylife on May 9, 2008 at 9:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Is it just me or is that picture of the Bison heads on the flatbed just disturbing??? Eww!!

Posted by johnson on May 9, 2008 at 10:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

From the Denver Post:
"According to the warrant affidavit, three bison were killed on Hawn's ranch; eight on Bureau of Land Management property; four on U.S. Forest Service property; 14 on the property belonging to Catherine L. Primm; and three on the property of Robert Lemm."
Seems like all this talk about Hawn's rights to shoot the bison on his property are irrelevant. Of the 32 killed, only 3 were on his place. You folks talking about changing the "fence out" law probably don't live on ranches. I do, and the law makes perfect sense to me. I have a fence that was built by myself and the neighboring cattleman. It keeps his cattle off my place and my horses off his. That's what neighbors do. We don't call our Denver lawyer from our home in Texas to solve the problem.

Posted by Bob299 on May 9, 2008 at 10:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

All the texan bashin' made my day.

Posted by ParkHillPosse on May 9, 2008 at 10:22 a.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by fiesty on May 9, 2008 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

breckrider - that's right, just to be a rancher automatically should entitle you to no personal accountability. Just being a rancher means no responsibility to take care of livestock- whether it be containment, feeding, or medical treatment. (We can get rid of those pesky animal neglect and abuse laws.) Further, ranchers understand that NOABODY should have property rights- who cares if you go on someone's land and destroy stuff, steal it, arson, and the like. I mean, only city folk worry about such things!

Posted by buffsblg on May 9, 2008 at 10:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

hey breckrider

Instead of launching a "city folks should shut up" rant why not explain why the law should stay as it is. My family started ranching in this state in 1910 and I have worked on ranches in the past so while I live in the suburbs now I still have some grasp of the needs of ranchers. It seems to me that some modernization of the law might be appropriate. I am willing to listen to logic for the other position but not to be called names because you do not like where I live.

by the way Fiesty, I agree we are not far apart, but I just felt there were additional facts you had not addressed.

Posted by Spencer on May 9, 2008 at 11:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I've seen 2 (and only 2) major accidents on snowpacked roads in the mountains. Both accidents were caused by drivers from Texas driving like fools. Hauling a snowmobile at excessive speeds and again excessive speeding on Wolf Creek Pass. (those poor souls are no longer with us)

Posted by PaddikJ on May 9, 2008 at 11:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

As usual in the blogosphere, otherwise known as the idiocracy, there's a lot of foaming at the mouth based on precious few facts. The News certainly hasn't helped, apparently having made little effort to glean the facts of the matter. It would help to know:

1. How many times did Hawn actually try to discuss the situation with his neighbor?

2. How many times did Hawn actually contact the Park County Sheriff's office?

If he made a good faith effort to get the matter resolved through these channels and found no relief, than I'd say he was within his rights to take things into his own hands, at least for the animals that were on (and damaging) his property.

I realize the above is an unfashionable notion in today's insane politically correct climate where animal rights trump human rights - if I found a coyote in my back yard gnawing on the remains of my cat, and shot it, I could very well go to jail.

I'm also aware of Colorado's antiquated fence law, and don't really give a rip: If it's your animal, it's your responsibilty. Per-i-od. What part of that simple proposition is confusing to you bar-stool cowboys?

Posted by urnfndbag on May 9, 2008 at 11:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Texans are more annoying than illegal immigrants. deport them. Except this guy, put him in jail and see whether he's a steer or other.

Posted by urnfndbag on May 9, 2008 at 11:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"I'm also aware of Colorado's antiquated fence law, and don't really give a rip: If it's your animal, it's your responsibility"

No. it's not. It's the law, it doesn't change on the fly.

Posted by SaddleTramp on May 9, 2008 at 11:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)

According to the arrest warrant, even the neighbor where most of the bison were shot was "disgusted" with Hawn for leaving carcasses all over her property. Hawn apparently had a real hair up his bum about these animals. He tracked them onto 2 other private ranches and BLM and US Forest Service property. Kinda throws his excuse of them being on his land out the window. Hope they get the guy for trespassing also. And please stop calling these guys "hunters". Shooting bison is like shooting parked cars. No sport involved.

Posted by ParkHillPosse on May 9, 2008 at 12:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It's amusing how the Rocky site staff is removing comments that are not explicit or offensive, but merely anti-Texan. Methinks the Rocky must have numerous Texicans on its editorial staff. Take a joke, losers.

Posted by PaddikJ on May 9, 2008 at 12:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"No. it's not. It's the law, it doesn't change on the fly."

Well, duh. Thanks for clearing that up. The less obtuse among you probably noted that my comment was based not on the law, which I think I stipulated, but on another unfashionable notion: Personal responsibility - which in a sane society would be the bedrock of all jurisprudence.

"Take a joke, losers."

Methinks ParkHillPosse can't tell a joke from knee-jerk regional chauvinism, which means he/she really hasn't much to lose. Mark Twain got it right: You have know what's not funny before you can know what is funny.

BTW, if Hawn & his minions really did go on a shooting rampage on Federal property & his neighbors' property, as the warrant alleges, then he clearly deserves to be tossed in the clink. I wasn't taking sides; I was just noting that the amount of opinion is, as always in the blogosphere, inversely proportional to the amount of hard fact.

Posted by rip_vw32 on May 9, 2008 at 2:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow... for a bunch of know-it-alls some of you really understand nothing about ranching.... MOST people that are ranchers in the mountains I know have a few parcels of land they use for grazing... Some down low for the winter months, Some up high for the summer months. In order to get a herd (more than say 20) of animals to the high ground for the summer you herd them up there.. now, most people I know of don't own the land in between their separate parcels, so the need to cross over other peoples property is a common issue. Answered by the fencing animals out law (part of this was also to ensure animals fenced in had access to food and water if a farmer or rancher was unable to reach his heard, and the neighbors had no fencing, providing a solution to animals starving or dying of dehydration. not that hard to understand). There are a few people on here that really need to get a clue as to personal responsibility, and exactly what it entails. The rancher who owned the Bison, did what was required by law. Hawn, didn’t like the result. By the way, unless Hawn was endangered by the animals, as they are livestock, he CANNOT shoot them even if they are grazing (I mean destroying) on his property. That law pertains only to wild animals. Build a better fence… that is personal responsibility

What’s that saying? Oh ya, “Good fences, make good neighbors” Lucky it wasn’t my animals… I might feel my life was threatened by them, and then thank God for Colorado’s “Make My Day Law”….

Posted by rip_vw32 on May 9, 2008 at 2:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Oh ya, one more thing... it's not about animal rights "genius". It is about lively hood, and lost money, and lost food... It is a business, and an expensive one to boot..... Man, some of you are real Brainiacs... so sad....

Posted by terra on May 9, 2008 at 2:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I live in Austin, and there are plenty of jerks in Texas, just as there are in other states. Many of us value the environment, and respect all living creatures. Colorado is a beautiful state, but it has it's own problems...just as we do. That said, this guy should have the book thrown at him...maybe that would teach him that he's not above the law. I'd hate to know that I had the blood of 32 bison on my hands...I wouldn't be able to sleep at night. But guys who live in mansions on the lake often care little about anything except for what they want. Whatever gets in their way gets taken out.

Posted by buffsblg on May 9, 2008 at 4:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Terra

Thanks for the post. We make fun of Texans like you do of Okies. This guy is a jerk and his state is of course irrelevant except that he epitomizes the cliche of a rich Texan thinking his money makes him special. As you probably can figure out from some of the posters on here, Colorado also has a fair share of jerks.

Posted by theQ on May 9, 2008 at 5:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

About a year in jail for every bison he killed sounds about right.

Posted by seebox on May 9, 2008 at 5:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

All of the argument over this issue makes all the sense in the world depending on what side you look from.

What strikes me is that someone from Texas buys property here in Colorado. Who in the world would buy such a small amount of property that 32 bison would make that kind of devestating damage to the landscape. I live in cattle country east of Colorado Springs and cattle don't hurt the environment to the degree they needed to be executed.

What it all comes down to is the property owners had personal problems and the one jerk found a way to "get to" the other. Pathetic action of of owner is a reflection of what is truely in his heart.

GO HOME YOU PATHETIC TEXAN

Posted by American100 on May 9, 2008 at 8:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm an animal lover. I understand hunting certain animals is necessary, but I wouldn't pull the trigger.

I know a buffalo rancher and spoke with him recently about this.

He is on the side of the hunters believe it or not.

He said buffalo are the most diffcult and destructive of all ranch animals.

He blames the owner for not being responsible.

Posted by PaddikJ on May 10, 2008 at 2:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow, indeed, Mr. Genius.

You're right, I don't know from ranching; but ranching isn't the real issue here. The real issue is taking responsibility. Let me spell it out real plain and simple:

I have animals (or a car, or children). It's my responsibility to keep them under control, and not damage anyone else's person or property. If I happen to make my livelyhood off of my animals, it's not my neighbors' problem or responsibility. If that means I have to build a fence, so be it.

My neighbors have animals (or a boat, or children). It's their responsibility to keep them under control and not damage anyone else's person or property. If my neighbors' happen to make their livelyhood off of their animals, it's not my problem or responsibility. If that means they have to build a fence, so be it.

And, if I need to move my animals across my neighbors' property for some reason, I will approach them <em>before</em> I attempt that, and we'll come to some sort of agreement.

Problem solved. There - was that simple enough?