PEAX Equipment

Wyoming Corner Crossing Defense Fund

He has pulled them before though, and if he does….
If the hunters (residents of another state) have a claim against the ranch owner or employees in an amount greater than $75,000 they can make a counterclaim that in its own right would survive in fed court even with the owner dropping his claim. Of course depending on the specifics of the counter claim - all the issues we wish to be settled may not be on the table at that point.
 
For @wllm1313 and others...

FAR 91.119
Note part (c), "... over open water or sparsely populated areas" the "aircraft may not be operated closer to 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure." There is no mention of private property so you could interpret that as being able to use the airspace regardless of ownership as long as you aren't endangering life or property. However, lawyers make their living interpreting things in novel ways.


1648914852380.png
 
It's nice to see this kicked up to the federal level. I am assuming that is a good thing. We can always get one of these new tethered products to assist in our corner crossings.

 
If the hunters (residents of another state) have a claim against the ranch owner or employees in an amount greater than $75,000 they can make a counterclaim that in its own right would survive in fed court even with the owner dropping his claim. Of course depending on the specifics of the counter claim - all the issues we wish to be settled may not be on the table at that point.
The emotional distress, mental duress, trauma and anxiety, (wink…..wink):rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: caused by the ordeal and the physical injury of that barricade at the corner causing hip, back, nerve and lasting pain and suffering alone would be millions. Hell, those hunters will likely own that entire ranch and then some after this ordeal is all said and done. Maybe then they can open it all up to the Access Yes program.:sneaky::sneaky::sneaky:
 
I was looking at OnX today and realized that my birthing parent owns some property (A) that corners with national forest (B). If I ever decide to hunt there, I had better research corner crossing in Idaho.


FB7FA35C-7383-4539-99C6-CDA905865C33.jpeg
 
The emotional distress, mental duress, trauma and anxiety, (wink…..wink):rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: caused by the ordeal and the physical injury of that barricade at the corner causing hip, back, nerve and lasting pain and suffering alone would be millions. Hell, those hunters will likely own that entire ranch and then some after this ordeal is all said and done. Maybe then they can open it all up to the Access Yes program.:sneaky::sneaky::sneaky:
Civil assault for the harassment. Would be an easy claim to add if WY tort law includes that claim.
 
When I read the latest article that discussed the landowners past lawsuits and combined that with the shenanigans that go on in Wyoming I felt like the chances this case has a positive outcome for hunters were well below 100%.

Did I miss the article about the past lawsuits?
 
The State Court hearing on the motion to dismiss was scheduled for April 8.
Would be interesting to know how that played out?
 
For @wllm1313 and others...

FAR 91.119
Note part (c), "... over open water or sparsely populated areas" the "aircraft may not be operated closer to 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure." There is no mention of private property so you could interpret that as being able to use the airspace regardless of ownership as long as you aren't endangering life or property. However, lawyers make their living interpreting things in novel ways.


View attachment 217746
I’ve never understood this; It’s 100% lawful to fly a powered parachute with no minimum altitude restrictions - as long as you aren’t flying over large groups of people. But without that device on your back you can’t penetrate the airspace of private property with a part of your body in the minds of some individuals.
 
Anybody else think it's interesting the prosecution is filing motions saying the release of evidence is prejudicial?

Normally it's the defense making those arguments saying their client won't get a fair trial.
He‘s lost his marbles as he didn’t even know how Angus got that video. He just asked the secretary for a copy and paid her $5 for the disc copy. Hilarious. Sounds like he’s more mad at his own chit in his own bed, maybe he should look in the mirror first before pointing fingers. A very good thing Angus is well organized to stuff it down his throat.
 
What a mess. Isn’t carbon county basically the only county in WY that has publicly come out and said they would write citations for criminal trespass? Now the state game wardens and the state itself has said it will not write tickets for trespassing/poaching correct? Why is carbon county so admit on this issue?
 
What a mess. Isn’t carbon county basically the only county in WY that has publicly come out and said they would write citations for criminal trespass? Now the state game wardens and the state itself has said it will not write tickets for trespassing/poaching correct? Why is carbon county so admit on this issue?
Succumbed to pressure from a rich dude that doesn't understand the word no.

I bet the county attorney wishes she never took this issue on.
 
Leupold BX-4 Rangefinding Binoculars

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,251
Messages
1,952,424
Members
35,098
Latest member
Trapper330
Back
Top