A subcommittee of the Bayfield County Tourism Board invited residents who have property along the corridor to voice their concerns about the possibility of using portions of the old Chicago Northwestern Railroad right-of-way as a cross-county snowmobile and ATV trail.

County Board member Kenneth "Bucky" Jardine told the audience that the subcommittee had three previous meetings with town officials, property owners south of U.S. Highway 2, and those interested in using the corridor as a recreation trail.

The subcommittee will present minutes from all four meetings to the Tourism Board at an undetermined date before reporting to the full Bayfield County Board on June 29.

"The purpose of this meeting is to listen," Jardine said.

To anyone listening Wednesday night, the response from the audience was one of resounding opposition.

Allowing snowmobiles and other motorized vehicles to travel along the corridor would degrade the area's natural environment, decrease property values, create safety risks and increase the possibility of trespassing, littering, and vandalism, residents said.

Nevertheless, a recent State Supreme Court decision has shown that at least some former railroad corridors can be reverted back to the government, regardless of what private property owners want.

Many of the residents who spoke Wednesday said they had always believed they owned the portions of corridor running through their property and would never have bought the land if they thought a motorized vehicle trail was planned.

Several people, including two former and one practicing attorney, said they would be willing to pursue legal action against Bayfield County to maintain their property rights and otherwise prevent the establishment of an ATV trail.

As the first of many speakers, resident Michael Jackson summed up many of the legal, environmental and quality-of-life concerns echoed by other residents.

In 1992, Jackson said his family won a lawsuit granting them full ownership of about a half-mile of lakeshore land off State Highway 13. Until hearing about Bayfield County's latest efforts last week, he thought the matter had been resolved in his favor.

"Basically, as we're far as we're concerned, it's a dead issue," Jackson said. "We're willing to listen to you, but it comes as a complete surprise that you're even doing this."

Even if his family failed to prove ownership of the corridor, Jackson said he would fight the recreational trail on environmental grounds, since his land includes wetlands in the Sioux River Slough that are home to nine species of rare birds.

Like many other residents, Jackson said he was angry with the county board for not notifying property-owners sooner about the corridor issue, and wanted to know what exactly the county was planning to do.

"Part of the reason you live out in the country is the privacy aspect, which is something you would lose with this," Jackson said.

Jardine said neither the tourism board nor the county board have any concrete plans to go ahead with a trail, and added that committee members have their own individual opinions on the topic.

"When I speak, I speak for myself, not for the committee," Jardine said.

One of Jackson's closing statements drew applause from the audience and seemed to capture the spirit of opposition at the meeting.

"We will do anything to prevent ATVs from going across any part of our property," he said.

Fred Pinkerton, who owns a summer home two miles south of Bayfield, said the old railroad corridor runs very close to his driveway and would present an unreasonable safety risk if ATVs were allowed to travel there.

Pinkerton said his situation is one of many facing residents who bought their property in "good faith" and don't want to forfeit any of their land.

"Up in our country, you're going to get a legal fight every 200 feet," Pinkerton said. "Be totally aware that all my neighbors are ready to go to court."

Former attorney and property owner Claudia Hoogasian said the county would be blocking the only entrance to her property if it turned the corridor into a recreation trail — an issue that came up with several other residents.

"You're going to fight with people who have brought up the property value and brought up the tax base in Bayfield County," she said. "We're not going to go down without a fight."

Hoogasian promised to keep up a legal defense of her property indefinitely.

"Since I'm a retired attorney, I can harass you for the rest of my life," she said.

Resident Christine Austin told a horror story of how the existing Tri-County Corridor ATV trail has affected land she purchased five years ago.

Austin said she has ongoing trespassing problems, which she has been unable to prevent with signs or fences because riders keep knocking them over. In addition, the vehicles tend to congregate in the area on her property, and have torn up a hillside that she spent $1,000 to landscape.

Bayfield County law enforcement officials tell her they don't have enough officers to patrol the corridor, she said.

"I realize that hotels and bars earn money, but I think it's at incredible expense to the property owner," Austin said.

Resident Greg Radke was one of many homeowners living off Houghton Falls Road who said he bought his home in 1994, provides his own garbage removal, water, and snowplowing services, and just wants Bayfield County to leave him alone.

In addition to intruding on his property, Radke said a recreational trail would damage areas of the county now untouched by ATV users.

"I just purchased an ATV in September," Radke said. "I was surprised by the number of trails available and shocked by the environmental degradation they caused."

Resident Bob Olson asked the committee if the county was willing to spend $200,000 or more per lawsuit when he believes the county board's job is to represent the best interest of taxpayers.

"If it does become your property — Bayfield County — give it back to us," Olson said, eliciting applause from the audience.

County board member Brett Rondeau said the subcommittee's purpose was to look at all sides of the issue before reporting to the full board.

"Just as there's this group that's totally against it, there's another group that's totally for it," Rondeau said.

Before the meeting ended, resident Don Exstrom, who has dealt with similar issues since the railroad abandoned the right-of-way in the 1970s, warned committee members that the ownership issue may never be definitively solved in court.

"It's just a mess," Exstrom said. "I don't even know why you would want to get into it."