|
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 2,427
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 2,427 |
"Aim right, squeeze light" " Might as well hit what you're aiming at, it kicks the same whether you miss or not" NRA Life, GOA
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,557
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,557 |
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. I agree with you but I’d go a step further and say they shouldn’t be allowed to lock it up at all. There should be an easement to every piece of public property. It should be understood when you buy a plot of land adjacent to public land. I had one on my property in Michigan. Guy with a trucking company in town owned 30 acres behind mine. Only way to his property was down the dirt road bordering my land and the guy next to me which also served as the access to my my driveway but it was all on my property. There was a gate on it, but I couldn’t just lock the guy out if I wanted. If I did choose to - which I didn’t- he was well within his rights to cut the lock in order to access his plot.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,557
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 3,557 |
BTW, there’s some rich [bleep] rancher in the boot heel of NM who is doing the same thing as these Wyoming guys. He’s buying up every piece of private property he can around the public parcels in order to lock out the residents. And he’s having some pretty good success. It’s wrong in my opinion and needs to be addressed.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 260
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 260 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,141
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,141 |
I think corner crossing should be legal, and if my private land corner adjoined two public parcels that were corner to corner I'd build the corner gates for acess. But if you want to travel down a road through private land, that's another issue.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,920 Likes: 3
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,920 Likes: 3 |
Corner crossing is illegal if you don't have permission to be on private land. Don't like it, buy the land you want to cross or negotiate a trespass fee.
The low altitude airspace being part of the property is just the way it works. Then it should be no problem for you to point out the specific statute and language in statute saying corner crossing is illegal. Good luck with that. It's Wyoming 6-3-303. It's impossible to cross the corner without illegally entering the property of one (or both) of the other corners. If proper notice has been given (and the picture of the signs shows that it has been), it's trespassing which is why he was arrested and charged and will be convicted if he doesn't plea out. Read the statute, no mention of airspace in title 6-3-303...point out where air space is mentioned or implied. Its not there....I'll save you the suspense. 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/
Last edited by BuzzH; 04/29/22.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,479 Likes: 3
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,479 Likes: 3 |
Corner crossing is illegal if you don't have permission to be on private land. Don't like it, buy the land you want to cross or negotiate a trespass fee.
The low altitude airspace being part of the property is just the way it works. Then it should be no problem for you to point out the specific statute and language in statute saying corner crossing is illegal. Good luck with that. It's Wyoming 6-3-303. It's impossible to cross the corner without illegally entering the property of one (or both) of the other corners. If proper notice has been given (and the picture of the signs shows that it has been), it's trespassing which is why he was arrested and charged and will be convicted if he doesn't plea out. Read the statute, no mention of airspace in title 6-3-303...point out where air space is mentioned or implied. Its not there....I'll save you the suspense. 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/Outstanding!
Dog I rescued in January
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 8,852
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 8,852 |
That is a bit of common sense. Finally.
Adversity doesn't build character, it reveals it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,138
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,138 |
This is a very big deal for public land use. Almost 6 million acres are at stake. This will set precedent.
Last edited by jmp300wsm; 04/30/22.
If you find yourself in a hole....quit digging
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,455 Likes: 2
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,455 Likes: 2 |
Greedy ranchers - AKA [bleep].
I prefer classic. Semper Fi I used to run with the hare. Now I'm envious of the tortoise and I do my own stunts but rarely intentionally
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 405 Likes: 1
Campfire Member
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 405 Likes: 1 |
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.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 1,330
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 1,330 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,920 Likes: 3
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,920 Likes: 3 |
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. The elk mountain ranch filed a civil suit against the Missouri4...Fred is the gift that keeps on giving. Case has been sent to federal court...that will set precedent. I can hardly wait.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,990
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,990 |
Is it gonna set precedent for NR in the PUBLIC WILDERNESS LAND to hunt without an outfitter?
Last edited by sherm_61; 05/01/22.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 1,330
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 1,330 |
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.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,990
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,990 |
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?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,990
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,990 |
Explain to me why its o.k to corner cross somebodys private land to hunt public but a NR doesn't even have to corner cross private to hunt federal wilderness land to hunt unless you have an outfitter. Its still denying hunters access to public land unless they have an outfitter. Or is it you wanna pick and choose what Public land to open up.
Last edited by sherm_61; 05/01/22.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 716
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 716 |
You can hunt wilderness in Wyoming- just not for big game.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 1,330
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 1,330 |
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.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,990
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,990 |
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. So setting precedent isn't law? Continue to beat a dead horse is correct, its exactly what your doing. If you can't see the difference not much I can do to help.PUBLIC LAND IS PUDLIC LAND RIGHT YES OR NO?
|
|
|
|
575 members (10gaugeman, 160user, 10ring1, 10gaugemag, 12344mag, 55 invisible),
2,495
guests, and
1,252
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,193,056
Posts18,501,122
Members73,987
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|