Both sides have their story.
And it's all over a fence, a tree and public use of land.

John Ellsworth: "Mr Johnson approached us last summer, the board of directors, we met with him. He asked if he could put a gate there and we denied him."

Rick Johnson: "I thought I had the permission of the canal company and the agreement of the canal company."

Last friday after the fence was put up it came down.

Rick Johnson: "A lock on my gate had been cut open, and the gate had been cut off an laid on the opposite side of the canal bank."

John Ellsworth: "In order to put a fence or gate on canal property you have to have written permission from the canal company."
And the owner says he put it up for a reason.
Rick Johnson: "That if anybody were to injure themselves while crossing my property I could be held liable for that."

But rafters have been coming here for as long as anyone can remember.
And the fence may or may not be on an easement owned by the canal company.
So he put the gate back up again and says he sent a certified letter with keys to a lock for the gate.

Rick Johnson: "I haven't put the lock on until I receive a certified copy of the receipt."

But the canal company claims the keys have yet to arrive.
And the owner says this tree was cut down because of the controversy.

Rick Johnson: "I know they did this maliciously. They did this maliciously because they don't like my gate."

John Ellsworth: "It was a dead tree hanging out over the feeder and was gonna fall down."

The owner says he'll continue to fight for his right to keep the public off his land.
The canal company says they don't want a gate blocking their access to the head gate on the canal, and that rafters have been coming here for almost 100 years.

He would like the public to decide the issue.