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

I get private property rights and how private property owners get pissed when their land is trashed by jack asses that don’t respect their property. But when they land lock parcels of land intentionally or limit access due to piss poor state land management and take advantage of it such as the checker boarding out west that pisses me off. As someone who depends on public land access to hunt that flat out sucks and I shouldn’t have to pay a “trespass fee” to access public land. Public land is all of ours to enjoy via Pittman-Robertson and Dingell Johnson. Those who landlock public land and don’t allow access should be taxed accordingly for the property they are locking up.

Typical BHA ignorance (or just plain stupidity)....like Llama_Bob pointed out, the WY code states that land ownership includes the air rights. When 6-3-303 refers to land, and doesn't provide a specific definition of that term, the term is defined by reference to where the ownership rights pertaining to land are defined elsewhere, which is 10-4-302.

You'd think that the guy who is inciting violations of law and proudly stating that he's going to win the case would know the basics of what the case entails.

I'll enjoy watching BHA get shot down and may even start poking around the docket to see if there's an opportunity for an amicus filing to support the EM ranch. Not that I like being blocked from hunting, but it's their land and their right to prohibit trespassing.

As for this bozo's claim that there is no civil action for trespass without damages, that's idiotic. First, damages can be as low as $1, (and I'd argue that the landowner's damages are more than that, at least the cost of having to set up security to prevent trespassing in the future) and the landowner can get an injunction against the trespassers and those who were complicit, and a jury can award punitive damages if it thinks that some scumbags are engaging in unlawful acts that need to be punished even if there is no substantial monetary loss. Were I counsel to the ranch, I'd file for an injunction against BHA for being the deep pocketed instigation behind the trespassers.

Lord, I loathe BHA Marxists. They're as stupid as they are arrogant.

Jury didn't agree with you ..now to see if a federal judge does in the civil case

https://wyofile.com/not-guilty-corner-crossers-cleared-of-all-charges/

This is a very big deal for public land use. Almost 6 million acres are at stake. This will set precedent.

This case involved state charges in one specific case, as far as I know. How does this set precedent for Federal land access in all future incidents? My guess is that we haven't heard the last of these cases. More sportsmen are likely to test the law now that this case has been won. Eventually, we may see a ruling in a Federal court that sets precedent but that will probably be many years down the road.

Is it gonna set precedent for NR in the PUBLIC WILDERNESS LAND to hunt without an outfitter?

2 completely separate issues. Not even close to the same.

Isn't public land public land, so what's different?

Well the wilderness law is existing state law, corner crossing is not. If you can’t see the difference there is not much I can do to help. Feel free to continue to beat that dead horse.


Great work BHA.