BLM question

[gadawgs]

I'm sure this topic has been covered many, many times but I am new to Colorado(3 weeks)so I have to ask. How can there be public lands that are completely landlocked by private land without an easment for the public to access? It just seems unfair to us-the taxpayer-to have land we paid for but cannot use. I'm sure there is a logical explanation but it baffles me.

Also I went the other day to attempt to look for sheds just past the Colowyo mine north of Meeker and the signs said the land is closed to access from Feb 2 to Aug 31 so I didn't go onto the land. Is that correct that no one can use the land until the designated dates? I understand the reasoning if it is true but I would think you could access those lands in the summer and not disrupt the wintering wildlife but what do I know? Thanks for any help.

 

[Califelkslayer]

Not sure why but I know Montana has spring/summer closures to allow elk to calf undisturbed.

 

[scoutdog5]

Second question first, you were undoubtely looking at State Trust lands. These lands are held in trust for the state school fund, and by law must mwximize income for the fund. The state land board leases them to various users. In Colorado, the fish and game dept leases a lot of these, but only want to pay for time they would be used for hunting, which is why the dates are what they are. Most of them are leased for grazing livestock during late spring and summer, and the lessee controls access during that time.

Your first question has no good answer, except that this is how property law developed over time. The unfortunate thing is that many of these landlocked pieces originally had county road access, due to the large number of homesteaders. As property was consolidated into fewer, larger ranches, a lot of counties stopped maintaining these roads, and public access was lost.

I would like to see some of the habitat stamp funds used to purchase right-of-ways to some of these parcels.

Scoutdog

 

[gadawgs]

That makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up for me. It is a bit overwhelming trying to learn everything when all you have known is hunting back east.

 

[mtnmayhem]

I was once told that landowners could not block access to national forest or BLM land. Whether that is true or not I don't know. I know of a guy who I thought was blocking access for a long time with his ranch but I eventually found another way in miles from his property so he wasn't technically "blocking" all access. Good question though, I would like to know some regulations regarding this subject.

 

[FamilyMan]

You were told wrong. Landowners that have BLM completely surrounded can absolutely block access to it. The only exception is if there is a public road through the private that leads directly to the public land. And I do mean directly, not withing 100 feet, or even 10 feet. This happens all the time. Some states also have worked out agreements with some land owners, so you can check with the DOW in the state you hunt.

Mark

 

[timwlarsen]

That's a kick in the pants. Like buying land plots on the moon. Nice, but without access it doesn't mean much.

 

[gadawgs]

I think it is a total waste of taxpayers money. They should make the landowners either buy the property and have replaced by land with access or make the landowner provide an easment. But then again it is not the landowners fault so I guess I don't have an answer.