GangGreen - 5/14/2011 13:08 Of course the fence is of value to him. It keeps livestock out of his crops. It is actually arguable that the crop farmer is the PRIMARY beneficiary of the fence, since the reason it is there is to prevent damages to the neighbor's property. At issue is whether or not he should be expected to bear any cost for that benefit. If the livestock owner was able to be held liable for the damage that his property (the cattle) causes to others then the fence has 0 value to the crop farmer. The only reason the fence has any value at all to the crop farmer is because the law doesn't allow the crop farmer to hold the livestock producer liable for the damage. Basically it is blackmail, pay money for the fence or the cattle will eat your crop. | 
Kookier
