Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Wyo corner crossing update

Wasn’t trying to be a smart ass. I just thought it was an important distinction. A right granted by government can be taken away by one. A right endowed by one’s Creator cannot. Best wishes.

Let him build his fence, then when hunters build a sufficient device or ladder to get across the corner which puts them not touching his itty bitty point of contact, tough sheit for Mr. Eshelman. Better yet, that county has a one man one vote law just as does the whole USA. The counties involved could put a surtax on large land holdings with one price for the first 1000 acres and pay through the nose for anything over that. Progressive taxation is legal and tax exemptions are legal. The power to tax is the power to destroy and it should be considered with this ass of a man.

When you get down to it just imagine how small the point of contact is when two corners meet.

I should have been corrected on my wording.

Didn’t plan on coming is this a invite🤣

I’m good with the ladder thing. Same as with a helicopter.

Using taxation to destroy an individual or seize his property seems like the worst side of socialism. Class envy, or covetousness, can drive a lot of behaviors. How could one support this and then oppose liberals for the redistribution of wealth?

Okay it is this simple.

Why have corner crossings been unavailable for the last 150 years? For prospecting, for grazing, for home steading.

Pretty simple, because it is a violation of private property rights, a taking of the owners' deeded properties, thus against the law.

The law under discussion was written to keep land barons from running home steaders off of public lands, often times which the land baron had previously used for grazing. Range wars were fought and people died over such disputes.

The last sentence clearly states, the land owner is under no obligation to let such persons cross his property.


Every one of you guys (except Buzzy) bitch and moan about modern judges legislating from the bench. Justifiably so.

Until you personally have something to gain from the change in ruling. Then great! Legislate on!

What a bunch of hypocrites!

As I have said many times here. You have every right to be on such lands. You don't have a right to cross private land to get there. Fortunately, modern technology gives us means to do the former without doing the latter.

If it is important enough to you.....hire that helicopter.

If there is so much landlocked terrain, and so incredibly much game on those lands? Hell, a whole new industry could grow up around charter flights, and outfitters to cater to the hunters.

Such charter service already exists for many wilderness areas.

Otherwise, if you want to cross a man's property, pay what HE asks for the privilege. Just as you would expect on your own property at home.

I don't care if a man owns 10,000 sq feet, or 10 million acres, whether it is valued at $10/acre or $1,000,000/sq ft. Every sq ft is just as sancrosanct.

I fully expect the Supremes to reverse this decision. If it gets there before Biden and his ilk can pack the courts.

I can hardly believe what I read. You are comparing a corner crossing to a drone taking pictures of kids at a pool and taking pictures into their bedroom. Packing pictures of little kids and flying drones 20' from a house is so different from corner crossing . Flying a drone and taking pictures is stalking and harassment ... And to call a guy a socialist for corner crossing is just foolish. How bout I say land owners that complain about people corner crossing are stealing public land to use for themselves. I think my last statement is very close to what some land owners are trying to do. They clearly want public land for themselves and that right there is socialism.. The entitled think they get more than they deserve. Sounds Bernie Sanders mentality to me. SOME land owners have an entitlement thought mentality. One poster here did say some hunters flew on to public land ... It is legal ,, but the land owners had a fit, thinking it was also their airspace and it isn't, especially if they are not low from the ground. Mark my words, there will be people shot over this issue.

Buz plz don’t kid yourself

I can hear it already ,, I don't know what it is like,, or I would change my mind if it happened to me... Ok, let me tell you to the people that think this way. I own a piece of land in NW Wis. It is in Price co. It is at the end of Down River Road. I own the end of the road, the land across the road, and likely the trail where hunters walk to the public land. It is on the corner of the property.. I pick up hunters junk every single year , they spin doughnuts and drive ATV's where they shouldn't. Most of the maps say I own the land there, but some don't . To pay a surveyer , and try to keep these people off would be a stretch. I won't even bother . It is a small corner about 50'x50'... SO there, I am not one of these [bleep] to try stopping public land hunters,, and there is a chance I could keep hunters from accessing several thousand acres. It is not worth the fight and I could very well loose in court anyway. SOme of the hunters are the same as the Wyoming land owners , they think they can do what they want cause " they have been here for XXXX years . I bet many of the Wyoming land owners will ignore the court decision and harass the hunters .

I don't think you will get the votes of Justices Gorsuch or Barrett and without them you are sunk.

How much contact is there where corners meet?

Large landowners run roughshod over the public in my state also. For instance the wealthiest family in Louisiana has land holdings containing 100s of thousands of acres. On a 3000+ acre tract near me where they have destroyed the Parish (county) roads with loads of over 80,000 pounds they pay a little over $200 a year in road maintenance tax. I was at a dumpster for a short time recently and 7 log trucks exited the parish road. But don't try to use one of their roads if they cave in a culvert and block you.

Loaded 18 wheelers do thousands of times the damage to roads as does grandma's car but she has to weave and dodge the damage to get to her little 40 acre homestead.

For the record, I own a couple of hundred acres of timber, and over 100 acres of pasture in addition to what we lease, so I'm not against land ownership but large landowners should have to pay their share and should be forced by whatever means to facilitate reasonable travel. One place I own has 3/4 mile of navigable water frontage and I have a deed to the middle of the bayou but I wouldn't dream of trying to prevent boats or swimmers or whatever from using it.

Typically a fence on a property line has the cost legally split by the adjoining owners.

What would be mildly entertaining is if there is a federal law mandating any land seized for public purposes that is not used for public purpose must be offered for sale to the original owners/their heirs for the original acquisition price.

The teeth gnashing is already starting here in NM by LO’s and reservations that have been following this closely. Between this and the recent ruling in NM regarding stream access, LO’s stand to lose millions in property values.

How?

Yeah, they better have some really damn good surveyors.

The level of relief I feel knowing that four guys from Missouri were able to hop a fence in Wyoming so they could shoots them some deers without legal repercussion is so overwhelming.

LOL

Because without hyperbole, strawmen, and a real good imagination it’s impossible to argue against corner crossing on otherwise landlocked sections of public land.

The what ifs, and red herrings is all there is. Unless a guy wants to argue Tejas style where it’s all private and you pay a trespass fee to take your kid to catch bluegills or shoot a gopher.

RE: the statement in bold

If corner crossing, the simple act of stepping over a point of land and perhaps violating a few square inches, perhaps a square foot of air space constitutes a "taking" of property could it not be said conversely that the act of using, in a proprietary manner, the public property on the other side of the corner crossed is a "taking" of public lands for private use?

And, re: the law having been established for 150 years and now you think an activist judge has overturned it. I do not recall seeing an answer to my statement earlier in this thread that laws are not really "settled" in perpetuity and mentioned the recent overturning of NY laws in the Bruen case. There are many, many more cases in which previously established laws have been overturned. You and I may not agree on the wisdom of the overturning of some of those laws, however the fact is they were overturned thereby making "settled" law now unsettled.

On the stream access issue, until last year, anyone who owned river/stream front property without public ground access had exclusive use/access to the water. Many of theses properties spent a bunch of money on fisheries projects and had world class fishing and profited from leases and or had water to themselves. People paid a premium for exclusive use that they no longer have.

The corner crossing issue is the same, people paid a premium for exclusive use of XXX amount of acres that they may now have only X. A lot of these properties were paying a low lease fee for the public ground, but in essence we’re able to utilize it as private. I know of 2 places that this will open up large tracts of public ground that outfitters are now paying a trespass fee to cross the deeded and pretty much have exclusive use of the public ground. The outfitters still have the advantage of the road systems that the public hunter wont have, but one of the properties I guarantee he won’t be in there alone anymore.

Don't know anything bout the stream issue, but the corner crossin properties haven't lost a dime.