Corner crossing case

Cahunter805

Cahunter805

Long Time Member
Messages
3,348
This case could very well be one of great importance. It’s also been verified that the hunters crossed legally using a ladder and the rich landowner was very upset.
www.gofundme.com

Corner Crossing Legal Fee Fundraiser, organized by Wyoming BHA

This hunting season four hunters, Brad Cape, Phillip Yoemans, John Slowensky and Zac… Wyoming BHA needs your support for Corner Crossing Legal Fee Fundraiser
www.gofundme.com
 
This will be the first time that I know of that someone was charged with criminal trespass for corner cross. These guys did it right using a ladder to go over t-posts, signs and chain put there to interfere by the landowner. Game warden watched them cross over. Winning this case will send a clear message that we can access our public lands.
A457E679-BD52-4466-9639-FE868CBE247B-1.jpeg
 
Thanks for sharing. Donation sent.

I respect the rights of private property owners, but they better start respecting the rights of public land too.

Nobody gets to prevent access to public land by using the tactics shown above. I hope these guys hold the line and get the precedent needed to legalize corner crossing forever.
 
jm77 said:
Rich landowner flooded their office with calls, they must have been tired of hearing the complaints.
Click to expand...
Is it anywhere in state statute that corner hoping is illegal? I thought this was a gray area that is not decided in WY? I know in Colorado the landowners have some air space deemed their and going over is still illegal.
 
This is wrong. Period. Donate if you can, whether or not you live in Wyoming or support BHA. This ruling could very well carry over into all Western States. I believe all public land hunter/fisherman should help fund this effort.

If you can’t afford $20, give $5 or $10, it all adds up and......... it sends a very important message to all involved.
 
2lumpy said:
This is wrong. Period. Donate if you can, whether or not you live in Wyoming or support BHA. This ruling could very well carry over into all Western States. I believe public land hunter/fisherman should help fund this effort.

If you can’t afford $20, give $5 or $10, it all adds up and......... it sends a very important message to all involved.
Click to expand...
You can bet on it. This case is going to have support on both sides and sportsman need to band together on this issue.
I can understand if a landowner has a chunk of public well within the boundaries of their property. They didn’t create that issue necessarily it was more than likely the federal government many years ago.
What I strongly dislike is when the public/private is at a clear corner and they are trying to keep the public from accessing our public lands all the while they use it for their personal gain and act as if it’s theirs to control.
 
elks96 said:
Is it anywhere in state statute that corner hoping is illegal? I thought this was a gray area that is not decided in WY? I know in Colorado the landowners have some air space deemed their and going over is still illegal.
Click to expand...
No, corner hopping is very very grey. This is the criminal trespass statute. Another issue is a Civil trespass complaint will likely be forthcoming. This needs full attention of all public land hunters.
“
General Criminal Trespass
To be guilty of criminal trespass, a person must enter or remain on the private property of another either: (1) knowing he is not authorized to do so; or (2) after being notified to depart or not to trespass.1 Under this statute, notice is given by (1) personal communication to the person by the owner or occupant, by law enforcement, or by an agent of the owner or occupant; or (2) by posting signs that are "reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders."2 Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor punishable by six months' imprisonment, a fine of not more than $750.00, or both.”

Obviously the key here is “Entering” private lands. Is stepping over a corner pin or a ladder stand entering private land? Some courts have held the landowner has reasonable use of the airspace above his lands. On the opposite side when you float a river in Wyoming a momentary portage or step on the stream bottom is NOT considered trespassing. About 20 years back a similar case was dismissed in Albany county but was not considered precedent setting.
 
Donation sent. I think they need to win this and get the hard and fast ruling on the books, so it is no longer indefinite, or someones opinion.

We used to hunt antelope over by Muddy Gap on some public, and the landowners there had a lot (100K or more) of checkerboard property. The only sign they had at the ranch was "Hunting By Permission Only". They gave everyone permission, and the only thing they cared about was knowing who was on the property. People wouldn't even bother to stop and ask, and most just did as they pleased and went anywhere. Digging pit blinds for antelope, when you have cattle all over was the main reason to be careful. That was what made the ranchers mad.
 
grosventrehunter said:
We, as sportsmans, definitely need some good case law on this.
Click to expand...
While winning the case would definitely send an important message, unfortunately, the only way it could actually create case law that can be cited in future cases is if the hunter actually loses this case and wins it on appeal in some higher court later.
 
Don't know that it needs to go that far, to have an appreciable impact. If they win their case, and there is enough support to sway the Commission, they can simply create a general regulation allowing that it is acceptable for hunters to cross at corners, and the present Wyoming Statutes already allow for them to make that decision. Then it is up to the private landowners to challenge it, and p[ay their own expenses and legal fees!!
 
Blank said:
Don't know that it needs to go that far, to have an appreciable impact. If they win their case, and there is enough support to sway the Commission, they can simply create a general regulation allowing that it is acceptable for hunters to cross at corners, and the present Wyoming Statutes already allow for them to make that decision. Then it is up to the private landowners to challenge it, and p[ay their own expenses and legal fees!!
Click to expand...
If the hunters win, couldn't the landowners lobby their legislators to pass a law specifically outlawing corner crossing?

I just don't trust politicians to do the right thing when campaign donations are in question.
 
Blank said:
Don't know that it needs to go that far, to have an appreciable impact. If they win their case, and there is enough support to sway the Commission, they can simply create a general regulation allowing that it is acceptable for hunters to cross at corners, and the present Wyoming Statutes already allow for them to make that decision. Then it is up to the private landowners to challenge it, and p[ay their own expenses and legal fees!!
Click to expand...
The Commission doesn't have the authority in statute to regulate trespass. If this case is won by the defendants, no prosecutor will try it again.
 
jm77 said:
Rich landowner flooded their office with calls, they must have been tired of hearing the complaints.
Click to expand...
Donated. Pretty sure this DA said they would prosecute when they ran for office and last year there were warnings on multtiple websites including MM that the DA would prosecute. It will be interesting for sure...the definition of enter (going into a place) is going to come up for sure.
 
WapitiBob said:
It's going to rely on that definition.
Click to expand...
And then the defintion of into!

Into definition: expressing movement or action with the result that someone or something makes physical contact with something else

Since you are not making physical contact with the grond surface, we are back to physical contact with the air space. Is that such a thing, physical contact with the air?
 
Donated. Thanks for bringing this up. Can't believe someone is willing to try this in court. I hope it is a big win for public access!!
 
Southpawshooter said:
A person can float on water over private property and not be trespassing, but if they disturb the air while corner jumping it’s criminal trespass? What’s the difference?
Click to expand...
Water is even more peculiar than just floating over it, it also allows momentary portage.

”State law only allows you to leave your craft for short portages around non-navigable obstacles. Anglers are not allowed to wade fish or fish from a bank or island without permission if the stream bank, island, or streambed is privately owned. Wading, bank fishing, or anchoring without permission is trespassing.”

It might be analogous to air in that in a craft you fall under different rules as flying over land has a separate statute. The airspace though can be controlled. if you try and build anything permanent like a billboard sign or a structure that hangs out over your land and into your neighbors, that is a trespass. Physically you could never step across a corner pin and not physically enter into the airspace above that corner pin without actually penetrating the geometric plane above of the concerned landowners. The question though is what harm are you doing to that landowner? These big boys like to have their cake and eat it too with these big ranches and landlocked public and checkerboard public lands. The other issue though is how accurate is that corner pin when many of the survey markers were set in the 1950s and 1960s in Carbon county that I have personally seen. They are 3 feet long steel posts with a brass cap which stick out of the ground about 18 inches. This is long before GPS days and even GPS has errors built into the system which the military controls the accuracy though they have stated they will not purposely create a large error rate on purpose as many ships, aircraft and even private citizens rely on it for navigation, but would they be so generous if they knew the Chinese and Russians were using it for navigation in a hostile action or war? This is also why many other large militaries around the world have built their own systems. The point is, without a set survey pin marker, you likely have zero chance of stepping over a corner and not trespassing and even then it’s controversial. I also think I would bet $5 this case will get dismissed but it won’t be the end of the issue for corner hopping with corners not surveyed and not set with a corner pin. Perhaps something for future Access Yes funds by sportsmen.

F0A83A26-8C50-434E-94E7-9D9DB3C8A2A5.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Each state is a little different. Here in Colo it's illegal to corner hop. Some states it's legal to take a chute plane from public and fly over private....land in public to hunt. It's been a well known fact for years in Carbon County Wyo that game wardens, sheriffs, and DA's overlooked corner hopping. Suddenly this changed with new personnel?

Some states it's legal to hike and fish below the high water mark in stream....some it's illegal to set foot on land below water..while others it's legal to walk in a stream as long as you don't set foot on private land outside the stream. Some states it's illegal to hunt state land and some it's legal. Some states it's legal to hunt land unless there are posted signs.

Here's what it says in the Wyo 2021 big game hunting regulations booklet: Permission to Hunt, Fish, Trap or Collect Antlers or Horns. No person shall enter upon the private property of any person to hunt, fish, trap or collect antlers or horns without the permission of the landowner or person in charge of the property. The license must bear the signature of the landowner, lessee or agent of the landowner on whose private property the person is accessing or other legitimate proof as evidence that permission to hunt has been granted.

What I'm saying is that each state sets it's own rules and regs. Hopefully once this court battle is over in Wyo something will be mentioned in the WG&F hunting and fishing regulations. JM mentioned in his post that the WG&F doesn't have authority to regulate trespass but something could be mentioned? In the Colo regs it mentions that trespassing is one of the top 10 most common hunting violations. It goes on to explain what trespassing is. I'm pretty sure the same thing could be done in the WG&F regulations.

With that said, it certainly would be a win-win for public land outdoorsman in Wyo if the hunters win! The sad thing about this is if they loose they will likely loose hunting rights in all Western US states for up to 5 years. Just because the hunters win the case in Wyo doesn't mean Colorado will follow suite.

There are thousands upon thousands of checkard-board acres of BLM in southern Wyo that have pretty much been locked up to the public for years. The ruling would finally put an end to this question in Wyoming. This may even possibly change things in Colorado and other states?
 
I guided on the ranch that is posted in the picture 40 years ago. Elk Mountain Outfitters at that time had over a million acres tied up and we ran a lot of hunters. Took some really nice bucks off that mountain. Today one man from the East Coast or mid west has bought all the ranches around the mountain and it sees very little hunting. What BHA is doing has been tried before and I believe has gone to court several times. I remember the first time it happened a big fist fight broke out and went to court with the landowners winning with no crossing corner pins through air space and I believe there was another case with a helicopter landing and hunting. I will see if I can dig up the information.
 
jims said:
The sad thing about this is if they loose they will likely loose hunting rights in all Western US states for up to 5 years. Just because the hunters win the case in Wyo doesn't mean Colorado will follow suite.
Click to expand...
They won't "loose" hunting rights if found guilty. They are charged with criminal trespass, not related to Title 23 G&F violation. The penalty is up to $750 or up to 6 months jail.
 
One of the problems we had here in Idaho was that the misdemeanor fine was so small that people would trespass deliberately, and just pay it! All the landowners pressured representatives to get the wording changed, and now it reads like this :

"A first conviction of trespass on private property carries a mandatory one-year revocation of hunting/fishing/trapping licenses in addition to misdemeanor fine and seizure of animals taken on private property."
 
hawkbill said:
What BHA is doing has been tried before and I believe has gone to court several times. I remember the first time it happened a big fist fight broke out and went to court with the landowners winning with no crossing corner pins through air space and I believe there was another case with a helicopter landing and hunting. I will see if I can dig up the information.
Click to expand...
You believe it's gone to court, but you don't know. The only corner cross case I have ever verified, everyone knows about. It was Kearney v State of Wyoming in 2004. The difference is that Albany county case was a G&F trespass and of course the hunter was found not guilty. I spoke with someone from Rawlins yesterday who made a similar claim like you did. It turns out, the case he spoke of where landowners "won" was about being able to drive over a corner.

Please, if you have verifiable information about a true corner cross case that went to court, I would be very interested to get the details.
 
jm77 said:
Nothing like trying to trash someone without knowing all the facts.
Click to expand...
Even the willingness to accept this case and throw sportsmen under the bus is knowing enough. Besides it’s been widely reported she has repeatedly stated she would attempt this when almost every other county in the state knew it was a political quagmire. She can sleep in her own bed with those she has chosen and we will remember this come voting time.
 
Well, considering you nor anyone else in WY actually know if corner crossing is legal or illegal, I give her props for having a backbone and representing her constituents who would like to see this resolved.
I think WY landowners, who are also sportsmen, will remember.
 
WapitiBob said:
Well, considering you nor anyone else in WY actually know if corner crossing is legal or illegal, I give her props for having a backbone and representing her constituents who would like to see this resolved.
I think WY landowners, who are also sportsmen, will remember.
Click to expand...
Let’s see if you think the same way if those hunters are convicted. Anyone with any awareness at all know who she represents in this case. I’m just disappointed the Game Warden didn’t cite the Sheriff and ranch employees for hunter harassment.
 
Does anybody here think it is fair and just for a private landowner to use neighboring public property as their own private hunting reserve?

If corner crossing is deemed illegal, I'd like to see WGFD pass a law closing hunting seasons on public land not legally accessible by the public. If landowners want to hunt their property, that's fine; but they shouldn't get to be the only ones to hunt property that belongs to all Americans equally simply because they own deeded land across the fence.

That simply doesn't pass the smell test of reasonableness.

The whole "airspace" argument is garbage. I dare her to file charges against somebody for standing on the public side of the fence and waving their arm over the barbed wire. It's literally the same thing. IMO it's okay to vote against an elected official for prosecuting individuals for an act that seems, on it's face, to be a harmless and faultless action.
 
Last edited:
WapitiBob said:
Well, considering you nor anyone else in WY actually know if corner crossing is legal or illegal, I give her props for having a backbone and representing her constituents who would like to see this resolved.
I think WY landowners, who are also sportsmen, will remember.
Click to expand...
A lot of constituents would like people prosecuted for a myriad of actions that aren't illegal. A prosecutor is expected to use discretion in those instances. Caving to the whims of an unjust public isn't wise prosecution, it could lead to prosecutorial misconduct.

To be clear, I'm not saying that's happening here, just that caving to the demands of the public generally isn't good policy for a prosecutor who wields such enormous power.
 
The “airspace” issue is interesting in this case. The photo shows a chain that must be crossing public “airspace”. Seems they should have written a ticket for all involved and then let the courts settle it. I will be donating for sure. I am tired of landowners posting county roads, legal access and even public land. Hunter harassment is at an all time high. Yet I don’t know a single instance where they are charged. Everyone yells about anti hunters but the only harassment I have endured came from other hunters and ranchers trying to keep me out of 100% legal areas. None of these situations were at corners, I reported them all and yet not a single follow through.
 
I suppose I could be told to just mind my own damn non-Wyoming business but..... so be it.

I understand the air space arguement, there has to be some right to legally control the use of air space, above private property, giving the owner the ability to construct a building on this land, move equipment, grow trees, even walk on their privately owned property, etc. etc. This from a logical and absurdly practical understanding of privately owned property. Any thing short of this kind of legality would be madness. The same understanding would have to be, that this right has to end some where reasonable when it comes to how far above the earth’s surface the right extends. Think of the very tall buildings in some city’s etc. but........... it makes just as much sense that the air space right does not nor can not extended out in to space indefinitely. That would again be as absurd as claiming private land has no right to air space over private land.

If that is true and logical, it would seem equally as necessary to articulate a practable rule regarding the conflicted condition regarding the air space at intersecting and touching sections of private property. The Corning Crossing agrument is not the only circumstance where trespassing can and does occur. By using the air space ownership arguement, anytime you wave an arm across a property line, in a city or in the county, your legally trespassing. Think off the tens of thousands of times a day that people enter private air space and trespassing without corner crossing........ yet technically do the same thing people do when crossing at a corner.

The purpose of the trespass should take no precedent.

What landowners are doing, is using a technicality to take advantage. The air space laws were established to give landowners reasonable and practical rights to us their land....... these laws are now being used to abuse the law to take advantage of owners of their public land. It’s clearly an abuse of the air space law.

Using the air space law to prevent access of public lands is wrong. It has nothing to do with a conflict between public land and private land owners. It’s abuse by individuals, one on one. It was never the intent of those who ruled on the original air space law that it be used the way these land owners are using it and if they are unwillinging or unable to see that, then it’s past time to allow a rational judicial system to spell it out for them, high time.
 
If I remember correctly, most airspace/air rights originated back east. I know of one older ruling that had to do with a large sign. The sign pole was on the sign owners property, but the sign itself hung over an adjacent property. The landowner sued and won. The courts ruled that the individual who had the sign hanging on his property owned the airspace as high as the highest building on the property. This means that if his house/barn/etc is 40 feet tall, the owner owns the airspace 40' high on said property. It's been years since I read the case, so some of the details may be lacking.
 
grosventrehunter said:
If I remember correctly, most airspace/air rights originated back east. I know of one older ruling that had to do with a large sign. The sign pole was on the sign owners property, but the sign itself hung over an adjacent property. The landowner sued and won. The courts ruled that the individual who had the sign hanging on his property owned the airspace as high as the highest building on the property. This means that if his house/barn/etc is 40 feet tall, the owner owns the airspace 40' high on said property. It's been years since I read the case, so some of the details may be lacking.
Click to expand...
Hard to use air space when only land is mentioned in the criminal trespass statute. Don't you agree?
 
If the public flies from public over private land in a chute plane and then lands on public land is it considered trespassing in Wyo since he flew over private air space?
 
jims said:
If the public flies from public over private land in a chute plane and then lands on public land is it considered trespassing in Wyo since he flew over private air space?
Click to expand...
No as you are specifically exempt by state statute. You would normally due to FAA regulations fly at least 500 feet above the surface but it’s not required in sparsely populated areas like Elk Mountain.

“An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.”
 
highfastflyer said:
No as you are specifically exempt by state statute. You would normally due to FAA regulations fly at least 500 feet above the surface but it’s not required in sparsely populated areas like Elk Mountain.

“An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.”
Click to expand...
Cite your sources google!!!!!!!!!
 
Pretty much all limited Wyo units have the same strong 3 pt genetics so it's a moot point! I actually saw a low flying plane while I was hunting one of those 3 pt units last season spending a great deal of time circling and circling...and circling every square inch of open rimrock country. It was obvious he wasn't just traveling through but was looking for the few prized 4 pts that exist. He was flying around 100 yards above the ground. Not sure that's legal?
 
In an unpopulated area he was legal at that altitude but not a smart pilot to remain so low in rural country with varying terrain. If he was circling he was likely scouting which has been illegal since about 2017 from Aug 1 to Jan 31. If you ever see that again try and get the tail number and video them circling then pass to the Game Warden.
 
I got both photos and video of the plane including his tail numbers. I looked it up when I got home. He flew right over me! I’ve heard they do this every year and don’t get enforced upon. I know for a fact he was trying to locate big bucks.
 
jims said:
I got both photos and video of the plane including his tail numbers. I looked it up when I got home. He flew right over me! I’ve heard they do this every year and don’t get enforced upon. I know for a fact he was trying to locate big bucks.
Click to expand...
Start calling wardens and find somebody that will enforce it
 
jims said:
I got both photos and video of the plane including his tail numbers. I looked it up when I got home. He flew right over me! I’ve heard they do this every year and don’t get enforced upon. I know for a fact he was trying to locate big bucks.
Click to expand...
I also heard they don’t enforce corner hopping.:oops::oops::oops:
 
Little disappointing they haven’t raised more money. Guys must be broke after the last pint night.
 
Last edited:
highfastflyer said:
In an unpopulated area he was legal at that altitude but not a smart pilot to remain so low in rural country with varying terrain. If he was circling he was likely scouting which has been illegal since about 2017 from Aug 1 to Jan 31. If you ever see that again try and get the tail number and video them circling then pass to the Game Warden.
Click to expand...
I thought this day would never come, but HFF and I actually agree on something. If you see something, say something!
 
I have run across a few corner crossings. A few of them has less then 10' from being accessible. I am fully aware of the laws involved in this and abide by them, but it's wrong from the perspective that public land should be accessible to the public.

How in gods world did this ever get started by locking out access? Why was land not made accessible? I am sure there is an "old" story to this mess.
 
DH56 said:
I have run across a few corner crossings. A few of them has less then 10' from being accessible. I am fully aware of the laws involved in this and abide by them, but it's wrong from the perspective that public land should be accessible to the public.

How in gods world did this ever get started by locking out access? Why was land not made accessible? I am sure there is an "old" story to this mess.
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org

Checkerboarding (land) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
DH56 said:
I have run across a few corner crossings. A few of them has less then 10' from being accessible. I am fully aware of the laws involved in this and abide by them, but it's wrong from the perspective that public land should be accessible to the public.

How in gods world did this ever get started by locking out access? Why was land not made accessible? I am sure there is an "old" story to this mess.
Click to expand...
Mostly it was changing cultural attitudes. In the past people were more agreeable to allow strangers to hunt and access these public lands. Over the years though attitudes and cultural values changed and the land became more and more concentrated in large ranches who would not grant access. One of the final straws the governments attempt to build a road across a corner and they were defeated in Court. Now it’s a standoff and will eventually only be resolved by paying the landowners for an easement across each corner. A slow and cumbersome process.
 
grizzly said:
Does anybody here think it is fair and just for a private landowner to use neighboring public property as their own private hunting reserve?

If corner crossing is deemed illegal, I'd like to see WGFD pass a law closing hunting seasons on public land not legally accessible by the public. If landowners want to hunt their property, that's fine; but they shouldn't get to be the only ones to hunt property that belongs to all Americans equally simply because they own deeded land across the fence.

That simply doesn't pass the smell test of reasonableness.

The whole "airspace" argument is garbage. I dare her to file charges against somebody for standing on the public side of the fence and waving their arm over the barbed wire. It's literally the same thing. IMO it's okay to vote against an elected official for prosecuting individuals for an act that seems, on it's face, to be a harmless and faultless action.
Click to expand...
I'd love to see that! Having WGFD close those lands would provide a nice safe haven for the animals :). Oh man, that would really piss off those land owners. How ironic would that be.
 
Flyjunky12 said:
I'd love to see that! Having WGFD close those lands would provide a nice safe haven for the animals :). Oh man, that would really piss off those land owners. How ironic would that be.
Click to expand...
Don’t give two shi!s about wanting to piss landowners off. Not looking to get even, just want the nonsense regarding preventing public access to public land to stop. If they, who ever they are, want to negotiate a road across private to public or some other kind of vehicle access, great, but at the the very least, stepping across a corner, from public to public has got to clarified and be legal to cross at a corner.

At my age and physical condition, I’ll never do it nor never need to or want to for that matter...... the principle is the issue for me. I hate bullies and manipulators, in business, government or love. This has been abused by a group of ag business bullies and apparently supported by agenda driven politicians and has evolved at the expense and legal rights of public land owners.
 
2lumpy said:
Don’t give two shi!s about wanting to piss landowners off. Not looking to get even, just want the nonsense regarding preventing public access to public land to stop. If they, who ever they are, want to negotiate a road across private to public or some other kind of vehicle access, great, but at the the very least, stepping across a corner, from public to public has got to clarified and be legal to cross at a corner.

At my age and physical condition, I’ll never do it nor never need to or want to for that matter...... the principle is the issue for me. I hate bullies and manipulators, in business, government or love. This has been abused by a group of ag business bullies and apparently supported by agenda driven politicians and has evolved at the expense and legal rights of public land owners.
Click to expand...
I understand and agree with what you are saying.....my response was more tongue in cheek.

All public lands should be just that....land that the public has access to and can use, period.
 
I’m surprised one of these cases is finally going to court. Hopefully it goes in favor of securing a way to access public land.
 
So, they’re up to $50k. What’s the money going toward? Better lawyers?

With the potential for a ruling in the evil landowners favor, I would hope it’s not just so we can feel good.
 
elks96 said:
Actually any funds that exceed the needs will be donated to Access Yes in WY. The fund that allows us access to hunt private lands.
Click to expand...
Thanks, and good. $50k buys a lot of trespassing lawyers. The concern is always that it will subsidize overhead.
 
Bluehair said:
Thanks, and good. $50k buys a lot of trespassing lawyers. The concern is always that it will subsidize overhead.
Click to expand...
Likely this will never go to Court. The landowners have far too much to lose, and the public we just stay status quo. Which means the Lawyers keep 10K for paperwork and 40K, the largest donation ever made will go to Access Yes. A total win for public hunters.
 
If they don't settle this in a trial and the case ends up dismissed then that is much like a typical ruling wherein the state is saying that they won't prosecute this type of case.... but hold the right to prosecute this type of case in the future. Either way, its a win-win-win scenario for us. We can either put this topic to rest and not corner cross, or we can corner cross. hopefully we get it resolved before next season as there are many lands I would like to access via the corners.
 
The DA and the judge should be looking at this case from a legal vs illegal perspective however if they happen to see the gofundme participation they could deduce there is a significant amount of public interest and apparently a significant amount of public support, if not for the corner crossers.... that have been charged then at least the public’s desire for the courts to clarify and solidify a rule of law. I would not be surprised if the system allows this to move up to a higher or even the highest court, in as much as this issue is beyond the State of Wyoming. Ag business and public land access is becoming more and more of an issue in all western States. Whereas federal public land is a federal entity, there should likely be a federal law controlling all access. I’m not sure that is necessarily a good thing but in this case it may lean more toward public support than individual landowner support, especially where so much of these private lands a now controlled my mega business interests rather than the old days, where hard working individuals owned these ranches. Then landowners seemed to be much more in harmony with the public.

Guess we’ll have to watch it play out. It is gratifying that so many folks have donated to this issue. That is actually a very unusual circumstance and it demostrates that a lot of the public care about a reasonable and common sense solution.

I’m may decide to make another humble donation, if I see continued effort and progress by the folks who are heading up this effort.
 
What needs to happen if they're to set any type of precedent is to lose at the district court level and then appeal the Wyoming Supreme Court and win. Then it becomes case law for the entire state. At that point, you'll see a bunch of greedy ranchers try to change it via statute which may or may not happen...
 
This is a Great go fund me cause but I’m afraid that these ranchers and corporate landowners of the checkerboard lands have way more than 50k in cash sitting under their mattresses to fight this from ever happening. I hope the public wins this because we have the right to access public lands through the corner junction the same as they do at any of their property lines. The way I see it there is no trespass if one foot starts on public land and the other foot ends on public land. I have never agreed with this law nor why there is any check board areas to begin with. I’m guessing it was not the BLM’s intent to keep the public off the public land. Pretty sure that came later with the adjacent private land owners. Just my thoughts and I hope they win for all of us.
 
So if the case happens to be dismissed what happens at that same fence crossing next year? Will the landowner have the same signs and chains, call the authorities a gob of times, sheriff write tickets, cases get dismissed again with no change?

My guess is that if the case is dismissed the same signs and chain will remain in the same spot. Will there be even more hunters showing up to cross that same fence? Probably! Will the sheriff be hounded several times with phone calls from angry landowners to write tickets and will the sheriff actually write tickets? Who knows because the question hasn’t been answered and is still open to debate. If the original case is dismissed will more hunters in Wyoming that have heard about this case be crossing corners all across the state?

On the bright side, if the public hunters win this case it will totally open new public acres. It will likely create headaches for sheriffs and landowners across Wyo battling to determine whether to enforce trespass vs legally corner crossed areas.

Landowners and outfitters will suddenly be competing with public hunters to harvest game on this previously landlocked areas. The landowners and outfitters carry a lot of clout in Wyoming and hopefully this doesn’t come back and nip public hunters in the but!
 
More media coverage by both Eastmans and Outdoor life.

www.outdoorlife.com

Public Raises More Than $50,000 to Defend Hunters Ticketed for Corner Crossing in Wyoming

When four non-resident hunters were charged with criminal trespass for corner crossing in Wyoming, the public responded by raising funds.
www.outdoorlife.com www.outdoorlife.com

blog.eastmans.com

Corner Crossing Conundrum In Wyoming - Eastmans' Official Blog | Mule Deer, Antelope, Elk Hunting and Bowhunting Magazine | Eastmans' Hunting Journals

Corner crossing is one of the most controversial topics out there right now. Let’s define corner cro
blog.eastmans.com blog.eastmans.com
 
Blue hair please read what grizzly posted. You don’t even have to read the entire thing. Speed things up and read what he circled in red.
 
highfastflyer said:
Another bounce today with the new meateaters podcast today. Approaching 60K. I hope this gets dismissed and all that money goes to Access Yes. Hell, maybe even the Elk Mountain Ranch will sign up. https://www.themeateater.com/listen/meateater/ep-303-all-up-in-your-airspaceView attachment 62418
Click to expand...
Just got to watch the Task Force as once they get transferable landowner tags Access Yes will not stay competitive. I actually hope it goes to court and the case determines that it is legal and paves the way for all of us to access these lands. Until then everyone will be risk being the next "example"
 

Similar threads

gr8fuldoug
SHOT Show Day 2
Replies
7
Views
449
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
SHOT Show Day 3
Replies
0
Views
233
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug
Industry News and Updates
Replies
0
Views
183
gr8fuldoug
gr8fuldoug

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

15E05645-E857-4F4E-A137-4511538CF4AD.jpeg
Great Looking Velvet Archery Muley for COZY25
Rob's Elk3 (2).jpg
IMG_0524.jpeg
IMG_4275.jpeg
Whitetail Hunt 2018
20230917_094859(0).jpg
IMG.4.jpg
119EDA85-14CA-4F36-AB00-551264437ED1.jpeg
20230917_085358.jpg
20210402_130617.jpg
Beautiful Stick-n-String Score!

Wyoming Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Badger Creek Outfitters

Offering elk, deer and pronghorn hunts on several privately owned ranches.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, antelope and moose hunts and take B&C bucks most years.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, and moose in Wyoming.


Yellowstone Horse Rentals - Western Wyoming Horses
Back
Top Bottom