Colorado corner crossing bill proposed

[Crowmangler]

Nice to see a representative actually representing their constituents instead of just sending more $$ to Ukraine.

Rep. Brandi Bradley, a Republican from Littleton, has proposed House bill 1066, a law that would eliminate the possibility of trespassing charges against corner crossers and prevents landowners from erecting fences within 5 feet of the corner.

Crossing from one parcel of public land to another in Colorado creates a private-property conundrum that’s proven tough to fix

A Colorado lawmaker hopes her corner-crossing plan will help legal passage between adjacent public parcels while protecting property rights

coloradosun.com

 

[Dilligaf12t]

Excellent

 

[Ucsdryder]

Let’s effing goooooooo!!!!!!

 

[def90]

Colorado can't get river/water access law right, I'd be surprised if this got through.

 

[southLA]

“prevents landowners from erecting fences within 5 feet of the corner.”

Never understood why this wasn’t a thing to begin with. To have inaccessible public land is quite the head scratcher.

 

[WCB]

So you are in favor of taking land away from a land owner? Cause that is what you are doing. Also what about the fences that are already established. Going to pay for the land owner to move them back 5ft? As long as the fence is on the landowners property there should be ZERO limit as to distance from adjoining properties.

 

[Crowmangler]

Respectfully, I don't want to take any land away from an owner, I'd just like to place my right foot on public land, step my left foot across to the other piece of public land & continue on my way to hunt on public land.
Essentially what is happening now is the private land owners are taking away our land because we can't access it.
I know this is not the same scenario but all across the country there are zoning laws that limit how close a property owner can put a fence or any other structure relative to their property line. That doesn't mean they don't still own the land.

 

[dirtytough]

The 5’ rule is BS.

 

[goathunter]

So you are in favor of taking land away from a land owner? Cause that is what you are doing. Also what about the fences that are already established. Going to pay for the land owner to move them back 5ft? As long as the fence is on the landowners property there should be ZERO limit as to distance from adjoining properties.

I have an easement on my property, I don't think anyone's "taken away my land"

 

[Dos Perros]

I don't know why the state doesn't just allow those little ladder things they have at fishing accesses.

 

[goathunter]

I don't know why the state doesn't just allow those little ladder things they have at fishing accesses.

Agreed. Or don't make them add anything and you'll just have to climb over the fence within 5' of the corner. So long as it isn't purposely blocking access.

 

[Szwampdonkey]

So you are in favor of taking land away from a land owner? Cause that is what you are doing. Also what about the fences that are already established. Going to pay for the land owner to move them back 5ft? As long as the fence is on the landowners property there should be ZERO limit as to distance from adjoining properties.

Nope, just from erecting a fence to prevent the public from a easing public. Just so you know, there is a ton of land building code that already exists. For example, you can’t build a new garage within 3 feet of your property line, stuff like that. It’s no different. No one is taking anyones land get a grip.

 

[wytx]

Yes , taking that 5 ft is taking private land. Not allowing a LO to fence his ensore property is in essence taking that part of their land.
Walking over the corner is fine.

 

[Bubblehide]

So you are in favor of taking land away from a land owner? Cause that is what you are doing. Also what about the fences that are already established. Going to pay for the land owner to move them back 5ft? As long as the fence is on the landowners property there should be ZERO limit as to distance from adjoining properties.

This is not proposing an entire fence be moved. This is proposing only a 5' setback at the corner only. In essence this would create a 10' gap at the corner; I imagine it's this wide to provide for vehicle and equipment passage, primarily for maintenance reasons.

 

[BDWMT]

The public land hunting hunters vs the large land owners and outfitters…. Money will win this fight unfortunately, the wealthy and influential minority.

 

[Szwampdonkey]

Yes , taking that 5 ft is taking private land. Not allowing a LO to fence his ensore property is in essence taking that part of their land.
Walking over the corner is fine.

Well, many don’t think walking the corner is fine hence the need for a change. So what’s your solution to the problem?

 

[roadrunner]

Does this apply to tribes with land that is not deeded treaty reservation lands? The SUIT comes to mind...

 

[Ratbeetle]

Yes , taking that 5 ft is taking private land. Not allowing a LO to fence his ensore property is in essence taking that part of their land.
Walking over the corner is fine.

Are you ok with the public climbing the LO fence?

 

[Ucsdryder]

Agreed on the 5 foot rule. This is going to bog down the bill. How about “crossing within 5 feet of the corner on either side is legal”. That way no losing land, no moving fences, etc.

 

[Ucsdryder]

Are you ok with the public climbing the LO fence?

Technically the LO fence is on public, correct? If it crosses a corner, assuming a “corner” can’t be owned by a land owner if 2 sides are public. That was a mouth full but I think it makes sense.