Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game WY Corner crossing case

I may be wrong but I was under the impression that a WY game warden can cite you for trespassing with the intent to hunt. That is a $450 fine.
These hunters were not cited under title 23 or by the game warden who watched them cross. They were charged by the DA for criminal trespassing which isn’t even a hunting violation.

https://www.wyoleg.gov/InterimCommittee/2019/01-2019060313-04Trespass-CornerCrossing.pdf

Trespass on on posted land is a 250$ fine, posted is up to 750$. During hunting season trespass calls are generally handled by the game warden if available, and sheriff's deputy's if not. Sometimes they both arrive on scene at or about the same time.
Game Wardens were given state police powers several years ago by the legislature.

good input. thanks

ribka, I just wish that sportsmen and landowners could find common ground, and that the trouble makers on both sides could go find some other rock to crawl under. Being able to use "public" lands for recreational purpose is important, but can not trump private property rights.

I'm from the East and don't really understand all this, but is crossing a corner interfering with any landowner?

Well yes and no. The problem comes in the large tracts of checker board land where there may or may not be survey marks, and due to the lower quality of grazing lands large tracts sometimes as large as a town ship are unfenced. The biggest problem comes from usually because each section isn't fenced, the water and best wildlife habitat is on the private land, and not every one carries a GPS to know that fat deer they just shot was several hundred yards on to the private lands. Or the trail roads they're on actually meander back and forth from the public to private.
It's a mess, and conflicts can and do arise. Sometimes inadvertently and sometimes on wilful purpose.

Thank you for the info.

Just curious. What’s your take on this case and are you familiar with the elk mountain area?

Against my better judgement...I'll clarify a bunch of the pure BS that is being posted on this thread in regard to the corner crossing issues.

1. The 4 guys that corner crossed used a ladder to cross the corner this year. They crossed the corner last year as well, informed both the GF warden and County Sheriff of their intentions they never received a citation last year. They again informed the warden and sheriff this year of their intent to cross again, which they did. The reason for the ladder is that the EM Ranch put a chain between the t-posts at they corner, which was done to prevent public access at the corner. Further, its an illegal posting of public land as the land behind that sign is public, no debate about that.

2. They were harassed by the Elk Mountain Ranch staff/employees while hunting including being followed while hunting (Elk Mountain guys driving cross country on BLM and State ground). They were also stopped on the county road multiple times by Elk Mountain employees.

3. They did kill elk and deer and were told they could not pack the last half of one elk off that public ground where they crossed the corner. The warden retrieved the last half for them.

4. The EM ranch called the County Attorney 15 times the day the deputy sheriff issued the citations for criminal trespass.

They were not given a ticket under title 23 as there was NO INTENT to hunt private via stepping from one piece of public land to another piece of public land. That is consistent with the GF Department policy of being instructed to NOT cite hunters for corner crossing. The AG under Governor Freudenthal, Patrick Crank wrote a legal opinion regarding title 23 specific to corner crossing (that corner crossing was NOT a Game and Fish violation of title 23). Further, a memo was sent out by then GF Director Terry Cleveland stating that corner crossing would not be enforced by the GF under title 23 statute.

So, that leaves the corner crossing issue to the Sheriff's office and County Attorneys IF, and that's a big if they want to enforce it under title 6 criminal trespass or title 10 civil trespass. Civil trespass is not going to be written as the landowner has to prove "damages" to his property via the trespass. Since stepping from one piece of public to another piece of public, in NO WAY damages the adjoining landowner the result of a court case would be a claim of ZERO in punitive damage. Only real option is to cite for title 6 trespass. There has been NO cases of anyone corner crossing in Wyoming ever being cited for corner crossing (guys like to argue that there has been, but in the exhaustive searches myself and many others, including attorneys have done, its simply not true). All the cases we've looked at definitely involved trespass, not corner crossing (hunters short cutting the corners, etc.) I'm in full support of citations for trespassing, both title 23 and 6, property rights are important to me and most everyone I know.

But, that's not to be confused with simply placing your foot from one piece of public to another piece of public land...that does not constitute trespass as defined in title 6 statute. There is NO mention of air space, only that a person remains on "land or residence" so the age old argument of landowners owning air space, in reference to title 6 appears to be, best case, on shaky ground.

Since there is no clear and specific law on corner crossing being a violation of either statute (6 or 10) a group of sportsmen along with WYBHA made the decision to support the hunters who crossed the corner. All 4 have retained council and all 4 attorneys seem confident in a favorable outcome defending their clients.

Public access and our right to legally access that public land is no less of a property right, than those of any private landowner and why this needs to be fought in court.

Another part of the strategy we used, to show that there is nothing but good will toward landowner/sportsmen relationships, any money left over from the gofundme account will be used to fund our GF Department AccessYes program. A program that WYBHA has financially supported every year since becoming a chapter, to the tune of thousands per year. A program that has improved and maintained landowner/sportsmen relationships for a couple decades. No question that cooperation and collaboration is the best avenue to increase access to private lands and landlocked public. However, Sportsmen in Wyoming will not be bullied by landowners that show no regard for our ability to access our public lands either. I'm aware of 3 active cases of landowners harassing hunters in Wyoming this fall, all of whom did nothing wrong and legally accessed public lands. That needs to stop, and I'll do everything I can to see that it does.

We will also provide a detailed accounting of all expenditures from the gofundme account as this is sportsmen that are funding the defense of the 4 hunters. There will be no money going to WYBHA, our entire board is volunteer and nobody is compensated on our board.

Flame away....

Thanks for posting the info Buzz.

805 MY take on the case prior to Buz'z post was need more info. Yes I am somewhat familiar with the Elk Mountain area and most of the rest of that checker board corridor from Laramie Peak to the Utah border.
Now that Buzz has presented a pretty good explanation is, what the Elk Mountain ranch did is a blatant violation of the law, and as such should loose their blm, state and forest leases. I'm betting that the Elk Mountain ranch isn't really owned by a ranching interest, and that chances are pretty good the employees harassing the hunters are part of an outfitting organization that should loose their outfitters license.
What they have done here is set landowner/sportsman groups on fire and on the fight and it need not of ever happened.
The Elk mountain/Hanna area has been a hot bed of trouble for decades, starting way back when the safari club leased it and posted all the private and public land.
Bad deal all the way around.

The Black Hills in NE wyoming is another place that has been a problem for quite some time, and I'm really surprised that the fabled 3 Forks in the Little Snake valley hasn't erupted more than it has.
As a side note I had an interesting conversation with a camo clad young fella looked to be straight out of the Outdoor channel driving a pickup with some outfitters logo on the door about whether a person could be turned in for trespassing for simply stopping on the side of a county road and looking at the map while others the vehicle were glassing the country side.... He left in a huff, and for some reason or other I didn't ever get a text or phone call from the local law enforcement that was supposedly going to be notified....

Any idea how much cash will be donated to the state chapter's efforts by the mothership in Bozeman?

Sounds like a legit case that might have implications and set precedence across the entire state.

I just glanced at the mothership's social media, so I could be wrong but I didn't see any press release or call to action to help the cause. I did see some black Friday sales..


Not flaming or being derogatory, just curious as it sounds like a legitimate case.

Are there any laws against the landowners harassing people on public land. If so, I hope they ae enforced

+1 I’m curious as this case goes on if there might even be some tickets handed out to others involved in this. I also think EM should be held accountable for their actions.

Pending...and I reached out to the Chief Game Warden regarding to make sure he's aware of the 3 cases I'm familiar with. Seems to be foot-dragging when its a hunter harassment case, and an instant ticket when a hunter is suspected of trespassing.

I heard through the grape-vine one ranch manager (not elk mountain case) was issued 1 citation for wildlife harassment and 5 citations for hunter harassment. The other 2 I haven't heard back.

Wyoming Chapter is largely flying solo on this one with lots of others paying close attention but not putting their toes in the water.

So far, extremely proud and happy to see many individual Sportsmen stepping up. I think that's the way this needs to happen, sends a more broad and meaningful message when several hundred individuals stand up for their public lands.

So is Wyoming BHA comely independent ot the mother chapter or just this specific corner crossing case.
None of the fund raising you do goes to the mother chapter.

The whole problem of corner crossing and access to public lands in general are completely tied together. Around here , the whole issue is in need of clarification and the rules need to be followed as far as access goes. Its not just corner crossing , but the whole thing is needed to be looked at. The corner crossing case that is now going can have wide spread effects.

money sent ,,,,, the lack of hunter harassment charges against landowners, employees, ect needs to be held in a higher regard by LE,

is it necessary to have lawsuits against LE for not doing there job in those cases? i have been personally told no way, by a local game warden in montana he would not cite a person for the harassment charge, and i had witnesses and video,,,,

Depends on the fund raising.

For this case, BHA both the WY Chapter and National are receiving nothing for the corner crossing case. Like I said, 100% of the funds are going to defend the 4 hunters any balance remaining will go to the WYGF Department via an AccessYes donation.

We also received a GF Commission license from Commissioner Gay Lynn Byrd last year, we raised $47K with that tag through a raffle, which IIRC, was the most money ever raised via a single commission tag. We used 100% of that money for a perpetual easement to public lands on the Southwest side of Raymond Mountain in Lincoln County Wyoming, specifically into Groo Canyon. I have worked on Raymond Mountain for my day job, and access was a nightmare...that easement was crucial for public access to the Raymond Mountain WSA. Investing in perpetual easements for public land access is definitely a high priority for the Wyoming Chapter.

Of course the AccesYes program has always been another high priority of WY Chapter funds, even though the walk in and HMA participants come and go from the program, and its not perpetual, it opens up a ton of private land access to hunting and fishing for Sportsmen, (about 4 acres per dollar spent) and provides compensation to the private landowner participants. Great program and my wife and I are in the top few individual donors to AccessYes.

For other events, we have an MOU with national on splits for fund raising and membership dues are split with national as well.

There are very well-established ways that the government could solve this problem (many mentioned here, such as condemnation), but what BHA is doing is typical misleading bullcrap.

When you own land, you also own air rights (not to the heavens, of course, but a good amount of airspace above the land). That is the real issue here.

Imagine it this way...let's say that this is a typical checkerboard tract where you have one parcel, private, that comes to a point with another private parcel (further assume that each private parcel is owned by the same entity) and on either side of that point are two parcels of public land. Assuming that there aren't local zoning issues that would prohibit this, the private landowner has the right to put it tall walls around the perimeter of his two parcels. He wouldn't be allowed to have the walls on the public land, but the only place that would be implicated is that invisible point where his two parcels touch and the public land flanks.

Let's say he built 60 foot high walls around his land (yes, this is very unlikely, but I am using this right to point out the issues). If a person standing on the public land next to the point where the private parcels, and the walls on them, meet the public land, he'd have to trespass, however slightly, on the private walls to get into the public land. It may be minor, but it's still trespassing.

This is the nature of land rights. BHA simply doesn't like private ownership of land and is doing everything it can to use lawfare to beat private landowners into submission (or run up their legal bills so high that they have to give in).

I've been frustrated by prohibitions on corner crossing in western states, but the answer isn't to engage in lawfare. It's to get the government to either condemn enough land to allow for safe passage between public parcels, buy easements, enact new laws, etc. BHA, and its represenative posting here, are lying about their true interests in the case.