WY corner hopping is trespass

[Big Fin]

According to this article, WY state officials say corner hopping is trespassing. Wonder which officials in WY have made this assertion? Hmmm, Office of State Lands and Investments.

If anyone has more insight, please share.

A court case a few years ago said just the opposite.


http://billingsgazette.com/news/sta...cle_0848ffe6-200c-11e1-8b59-001871e3ce6c.html'

 

[MNHunter]

I simply can't figure out why corner hopping would/should be illegal...

 

[tarheel]

How about if you stand in public and take a whiz onto private; how would that be handled? Are the landowners that desperate to keep their property inviolate or is it the state?

 

[BRI]

If there is a monumented corner from a professional surveyor then I agree, how can a person be trespassing. But in my opinion, if there is no monumented corner a person can't guarantee 100% they are not trespassing. Recreational grade GPS are not accurate enough to determine this. I use GPS daily with my job. One of the big uses is to try to identify corners and run property lines. I rarely ever find an actual corner and have it be where the GPS map software shows it should be.

I've heard that wardens in Montana are no longer ticketing for corner crossing. And the only way you would be prosecuted is if the landowner pressed charges through the sherrif and county prosecutors. I've also heard the county prosecutors have come out saying they have bigger things on their plate than to mess with that. Anyone else heard anything similar?

 

[Lawnboy]

A court case a few years ago said just the opposite.


http://billingsgazette.com/news/sta...cle_0848ffe6-200c-11e1-8b59-001871e3ce6c.html'

That was my understanding as well. Pretty hard to change once they have ruled in court the opposite isn't it?

I have a friend who is a Wyoming corner hopper but he actually goes through the hassle of videoing them crossing at a metal pinned corner. He uses horses but doesn't take them past the corner because he can't guarantee they will step across exactly. Seems like a lot of work but he's doing it like it should be done to technically cross at the true corner and then documenting that crossing.

 

[jlmatthew]

Doesnt make any sense to me if your going from public to public. Personally I think landowners should be required to post their land where they border public land.

Landowners have way too much say over public lands, just like when Big Fin wanted to helicopter into land-locked public land here in Colorado but the ranch had him denied

 

[Oak]

I'd like to hear Wharff's opinion/stance. Funny that he was quoted in the article, but he didn't give the SFW stance.

 

[BuzzH]

I know that a Judge in Albany county (Robert Castor) recently ruled in favor of a guy that had corner crossed from public to public.

Not sure what that means legally??? But, I bet you'd have a pretty good case at least in Albany County.

Case here:

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regi...f1e-597f-aa75-45265f171456.html#ixzz1UU0yDpQD

 

[Big Fin]

I'd like to hear Wharff's opinion/stance. Funny that he was quoted in the article, but he didn't give the SFW stance.

I wondered the same thing. My money would be placed on the bet that they support this finding, but I might be wrong.

So much crap. The odds are already stacked against the guy who just wants to hunt the public. He is not wanting to hunt the adjacent private, merely get to the public. These rules are for NO OTHER REASON THAN TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HUNTER OF THE PUBLIC GROUND. A complete crock of BS.

One of these days I am going to do a show where we corner cross at marked corner pins. I will video everything and then we can sort it out with the County Sheriff, the DA, and the person who might try to stop us. Might do it here in MT where it will be cheaper for my legal costs that are sure to follow.

 

[mdunc8]

Have any of you guys had any trouble with corner crossing here in Montana? I haven't done it just because I was under the impression that it wasn't legal. However, someone at the forest service office gave me the impression that it might be. Actually I think they're words were that is wasn't "definitively illegal". I think I'll wait for Fin and his legal team to test the waters before I start doing it myself.

 

[Ben Lamb]

AS I've always understood it, it's not just the foot that is counted in corner crossing. You also have the immediate airspace. So if your body breaks the space that is directly over private land (airspace, IIRC, is defined as private up to the highest building on the property), you are trespassing.

It's a convoluted mess. I'll donate $10 to the Big Fin legal defense fund if he gets on this.

 

[BuzzH]

I've read the air space debate as well...and there is no clear definition of that. There are conflicting court cases as to that particular argument as well.

I think that the landowners where this could potentially be an issue would be wise to start working with sportsmen and the various agencies.

I can almost gurantee that there will be laws changing in the near future regarding corner-crossing and those laws will favor the sportsmen. All signs are pointing that way already with wardens being told not to issue citations, court cases being found in favor of corner jumpingm, etc. The public is going to start demanding access to THEIR PUBLIC LAND.

I have a feeling from what I'm hearing out of Montana...Fin will have a tough time finding anyone willing to prosecute him for corner jumping.

 

[awapiti]

AS I've always understood it, it's not just the foot that is counted in corner crossing. You also have the immediate airspace. So if your body breaks the space that is directly over private land (airspace, IIRC, is defined as private up to the highest building on the property), you are trespassing.

It's a convoluted mess. I'll donate $10 to the Big Fin legal defense fund if he gets on this.

What if there is no building on the private property? I should be good to go then, right?

 

[Topgun 30-06]

Private property is private property, regardless of whether there are buildings on it or not! I think BuzzH is pretty much on the button with his assessment of this subject. It would appear that wildlife officers in both Montana and Wyoming have been told within the last couple years not to issue tickets for corner jumping. However, I've also heard that in certain counties in Wyoming where the ranchers have the County Sheriff and/or Prosecutor in their pockets that the ranchers will press those parties to have tickets written by the former and backed up in Court by the latter. It's about time that this issue is settled and the lawful hunter who has done his homework with the latest GPS equipment and knows exactly where he is be allowed to hunt OUR lands. I even had a situation two years ago in Wyoming where a rancher who is known as one of the biggest aholes in the county tried to have tickets written on our party for supposedly trespassing on his deeded property when we were on BLM land. The F&G Warden I know well was called to the scene and would not touch it and it didn't involve corner jumping, but rather that we were said to be just inside the deeded, unmarked land. The deputy sheriff called to the scene was going to write tickets until I was so adamant that we were not on the private property that she held off and the County Prosecutor was contacted and a meeting was set up with him. I went in and showed him our maps printed off my computer and the actual GPS waypoints for the property lines off the CD ROM I had purchased right from the F&G website. He asked if the property line was marked with signs or fences and it was not. The rancher did not even have a legitimate survey of the property and was merely going by a topographic map of the area and stated that his water tank that we walked by had to be on his private property. The Prosecutor was obviously upset that his time was being taken on the case, even if by chance we were on the private property a few yards since we were trying to be legal with our maps and GPS equipment. He came right out and told the rancher and deputy that he would not prosecute the case if tickets were written when I said I would fight it in Court. Most of the time nonresidents will just pay a ticket of this type whether they are guilty of a violation or not because of the time and expenses involved in going to court if you enter a not guilty plea. It is high time this type of stuff was eliminated so the hunter who is trying to abide by all the laws and rules can go about his hunt without worrying about a ticket or jail time for what amounts to be a bunch of BS where ranchers are trying to control OUR land as if it was theirs. With the newest GPS chips out there now that actually show the land ownership on the screen, there really should be no reason for a person to be cited for trespassing unless they do it intentionally well away from a corner.

 

[SWMontana1]

These rules are for NO OTHER REASON THAN TO KEEP THE PUBLIC HUNTER OF THE PUBLIC GROUND. A complete crock of BS.

One of these days I am going to do a show where we corner cross at marked corner pins. I will video everything and then we can sort it out with the County Sheriff, the DA, and the person who might try to stop us. Might do it here in MT where it will be cheaper for my legal costs that are sure to follow.

Actually the private easement laws are in place becase why should the general public have access to land (even if it is public land) when private land owners are the one who maintain and pay for the road the lead through their land to these public lands.... if the states want to make it so the roads are public and everyone should be allowed to these land locked public lands than the state/goverment should pay for the maintenance of these roads and the public should pay for it too.... As a private land owner with public land behind my land, I am unwilling to allow people to cross to that land on MY road because I pay for the maintanence and services of that road (grating, new culverts during the spring) about $5,000 a year!!

 

[Oak]

Actually the private easement laws are in place becase why should the general public have access to land (even if it is public land) when private land owners are the one who maintain and pay for the road the lead through their land to these public lands.... if the states want to make it so the roads are public and everyone should be allowed to these land locked public lands than the state/goverment should pay for the maintenance of these roads and the public should pay for it too.... As a private land owner with public land behind my land, I am unwilling to allow people to cross to that land on MY road because I pay for the maintanence and services of that road (grating, new culverts during the spring) about $5,000 a year!!

You're not talking about the same thing as Big Fin. He's talking about crossing corners from public land to public land, where no private land is actually touched.

 

[WapitiBob]

We're not talking about driving down a private road to access public property. Nobody that has a clue about property rights would argue against you. We're talking about crossing from public to public without ever touching private.

On another note, Legislation was introduced last year in WY to specifically make corner jumping legal. The Bill didn't get thru the process in time and as far as was indicated, it will be re introduced for the 2012 session.

I need to type faster

 

[Ben Lamb]

Actually the private easement laws are in place becase why should the general public have access to land (even if it is public land) when private land owners are the one who maintain and pay for the road the lead through their land to these public lands.... if the states want to make it so the roads are public and everyone should be allowed to these land locked public lands than the state/goverment should pay for the maintenance of these roads and the public should pay for it too.... As a private land owner with public land behind my land, I am unwilling to allow people to cross to that land on MY road because I pay for the maintanence and services of that road (grating, new culverts during the spring) about $5,000 a year!!

I don't think anyone is talking about taking a private road and making it public. However, there are numerous cases in MT alone that indicate a common practice of taking county roads and doing everything including chaining them to make public land inaccessible. We tried to get something passed this last legislative cycle, but it was killed in committee rather strangely. There's a lot of grey area on the roads issue, and from what I've seen, the guys continually trying to shut down access to public land are fighting those of us who are simply trying access our public land. I know of one cooperator in the Big Hole who kept their land in Block Management because it was the only reasonable access to the NF in their area.

 

[sweetnectar]

The only good I can see in this is that it increases the incentive to do something about the checkerboard problem. If government can get its poop in a group they can start swapping land, purchasing access, selling off land locked/off limit public land and only buy accessible land, and plain old get to work on fixing the problem. Unfortunately land exchanges with government get too complicated with this and that law having to be met and becomes a disincentive to do anything.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

So SWMontana1, are you saying that if the government paid for the road upkeep going through your ranch that you would grant easement through there to allow the public access to the public land that is landlocked? If your answer is yes, I would suggest you contact Fin and let him get the ball rolling to open that land for our use! You might say okay, but the big problem is that most private land owners take advantage of what you are saying and won't grant access even if the government would take care of the access road(s), which obviously gives complete use of the land for hunting for free. Their only cost would be if they graze animals on that land and then the Feds or State that owns it charges per animal unit per month, which is also quite a cheap price IMHO! I wish in those instances the government would use the "eminent domain" clause that would allow them to take control of the road(s) if an agreement can't be reached.