Good Doggy of Hallowell, ME Of course the invisible fence option would require the fitting of the necessary collars for the boundaries to be truly respected. Some observers may find this all to be somewhat "shocking"! If that is the case, maybe the wooden fence isn't so bad after all!!report abuse

Good Doggy of Hallowell, ME Although I have always thought fences make good neighbors, I have pondered this issue and believe I have an equitable solution. Instead of the wooden fence, perhaps one of those invisible fences which people use to keep Fido at home is an option.report abuse

Andrea Lapointe of Hallowell, ME In regard to our property issue, when we bought our lot in 1989, we had a purchase agreement that conceded the boundary between our property and the railroad was unspecified. The preceding owners were suppose to netotiate a boundary agreement, but were unsuccessful. I did deed research and found that the original deed from 1880 specified that the track was our monument. When the track went through in 1850s the land was severed into two sections. The owners of our house bought the section on the east side of the track and merged it with their principal lot. The merged lot tranferred down the chain to us without any encumberances or easements. MDOT bought the railroad tracks in 1991. According to an ICC decision, MDOT bought the physical assets only; the railroad retained the permanent right of way. If you read the entire MDOT dead carefully and not confuse it with the telecommunications easement, this is clear. Unfortunately the tax maps do not show that we own to the track. To add on to our house we needed something from MDOT. They offered to give us a deed release. We were suspicious, so with the deed release we filed an affidavit that said we were not giving up title, right and interest in the land next to the tracks. When MDOT filed their complaint, they severed the affidavit from the deep release. The judge was mislead. Even though the page numbers were consecutively numbered, the judge thought we filed the affidavit later to recharacterize the deed release. We were set up. MDOT is relying on a quit claim deed that references a right of way map created by the rail road in 1916 that says the right of way is a minimum of 45 feet from the center line on both sides. Think about all the property that is within 45 feet of the centerline, including the new Maine Savings Bank. The problem is that this 1916 map has numerous errors. Our lot is shown as bordering on Second St., which it does not. It shows that we own on both sides of the track, but not.report abuse