Latest on corner crossing

[BuzzH]

Honesty, if I owned the land in this case, this is exactly what I would've done if I wanted to keep people out. On each of the opposing private sections, dig in posts so they're 8 feet or so out of the ground and just a few inches inside the corner and extend it out 10 or so feet along my property lines. Then put up about 8 strands of barbed wire. Make sure there is a few inch gap at the corner between the two fence sections so I'm not on BLM land. Doing this would've saved this guy a whole pile of trouble. This is what I'm gonna do when I win the lottery. I will also add a big laminated picture of Shawn Michaels doing the "suck it" gesture on each fence to rub it into all you poors!

Not legal from what I understand.

 

[william schmaltz]

Not legal from what I understand.

Interesting. I was obviously joking and wouldn't want to see that, but seems kinda messed up. What would make that illegal on private land? I suppose every state has their own little odd laws. I have little 8 foot fences around my apple trees to keep moose out. Doesn't hardly seem any different. In that case, I would plant apple trees on the corners and built an 8 foot tall barbed wire box around each. Become ungovernable, dammit!

 

[BuzzH]

Interesting. I was obviously joking and wouldn't want to see that, but seems kinda messed up. What would make that illegal on private land? I suppose every state has their own little odd laws. I have little 8 foot fences around my apple trees to keep moose out. Doesn't hardly seem any different. In that case, I would plant apple trees on the corners and built an 8 foot tall barbed wire box around each. Become ungovernable, dammit!

UIA.

 

[BuzzH]

Point of clarification...it's Iron BAR Holdings not Iron Mountain.

 

[Bighorner]

Man, I'm pretty excited .I just got of the phone with my aunt Liz C . She said with new public access to 2.44 million acres in Wyoming she was gonna talk to some of the state legislators about making all of it a "non-resident only " hunting area to help with some of the tag and overcrowding issues. Who says politicans don't work for you. I take back everything I've said. I just wanna say one thing "You guys are the best!". Not that I wanna start any rumors, but tell your friends

The dead horse you are looking for is on page 6.

 

[Bighorner]

I guess I am a little biased, I own about 150 acres in West KY. Nothing to me takes precedence over private property rights. In my opinion, I should have the right to allow anyone on my property and by the same token not allow anyone on my property at my sole discretion.

Regardless if harm is meant or done. The person that pays the taxes should have the final say.

Just to play devil's advocate, how many miles of deeded and taxed land do you cross on your way to you 150? I bet it is a a lot. It's legal easements, some were created but the state, some counties, some private easement, some where willing some where adversarial, most where for profit and at the same time a more common good.

I own half the dirt under the street in front of my house. I am taxed on it. I have zero say as to who gets to us it. The same way the 15 guys a drive past cant stop me from getting to my place.

There are a lot of forms of ownership in land. I completely agree that land ownership needs to be defended, but the other side of that coin is public land is held in trust which is also a form of ownership which also must be defended. I think it's great the courts are taking this

We forget that the time we are here is temporary.

 

[BuzzH]

Judge orders corner-crossing suit to remain in federal court - WyoFile

Skavdahl had ‘little difficulty’ finding that Missouri hunters met the burden of proof to keep the action where federal public-land access laws apply.

wyofile.com

 

[Zeke6951]

Flyjunky and Stick&string: I am pretty sure we do not pay taxes on NF or BLM land. We do pay through our income taxes for the administration and maintenance of said lands. I stand to be corrected, but I don't think public lands are on the tax rolls. I don't even think public lands out west (the ones in question) were bought and paid for with tax money. If I am not mistaken when the railroads were built in the west the government gave alternating sections along the rail route to the railroad as an incentive to complete the rail line quickly. The sections not given to railroads were open to homesteaders or for sale at low prices to anyone interested in settling the west. The railroads sold some of their lands to willing buyers. Those sections that were not homesteaded or sold remain the property of the government.
BuzzH: I can't show you the law that says it is illegal to CC. I am not a lawyer nor do I care what you do in Wy. I do care what you do on or over my property. I don't care if you are or are not impacting my property it is still mine and I would like to think it is my decision as to whether or not you are impacting my property when you cross my land.
Not trying to be argumentative, but to me, and some others, private property rights trump public property rights.

 

[Zeke6951]

Bighorner: I agree with every thing you said above. There is a road through my property and I too pay taxes on the whole road for the 1/2 mile or so that it passes through my property. That was understood before I bought the property. Now if the county wants to come in and force me to let someone use one of my field road so they can easily get to the back side of another property to hunt, we may have a lawsuit. If the person come to me and talks about it we may can work something out. probably not.

 

[Bighorner]

Not to be argumentative either, but what would your stance be if instead of private and federal land, it was my land and yours. I decided that I would not allow you access to your section of land no matter how willing you were to give me access to mine. How would you view your land that you were taxed on, but could not access, not even by foot, for a second, threw a shoulders width of air space?

And I mean that in sincerity. How would you move forward?

 

[Bighorner]

Bighorner: I agree with every thing you said above. There is a road through my property and I too pay taxes on the whole road for the 1/2 mile or so that it passes through my property. That was understood before I bought the property. Now if the county wants to come in and force me to let someone use one of my field road so they can easily get to the back side of another property to hunt, we may have a lawsuit. If the person come to me and talks about it we may can work something out. probably not.

And I complelty agree with what you are saying. I think it's just fair to try and look at things from a couple different ways. One of those ways a being the beneficiaries of access across deeded land that we pretty much take for granted because it's always been that way.

 

[Billy Goat]

Not to be argumentative either, but what would your stance be if instead of private and federal land, it was my land and yours. I decided that I would not allow you access to your section of land no matter how willing you were to give me access to mine. How would you view your land that you were taxed on, but could not access, not even by foot, for a second, threw a shoulders width of air space?

And I mean that in sincerity. How would you move forward?

Kinda sounds like oceanfront property in Arizona.

If you buy land without access, well that's on you.


Fact is, these are lands that weren't intended for public access, and were at times intentionally land locked. An act of congress made them public, without much thought to access. Likely wasn't exactly a high priority at the time, but looked good on paper.

 

[Wyobohunter]

Hey could we at least do " EARLY - human wilderness "so I could at least use a self bow and do a little flint knapping and then climb the fence without breaking the law

You’d only be allowed to communicate in grunts and clicks.

 

[Wyobohunter]

nor do I care what you do in Wy. I do care what you do on or over my property.

Well, since your property is not in WY I guess it’s safe

 

[BuzzH]

Flyjunky and Stick&string: I am pretty sure we do not pay taxes on NF or BLM land. We do pay through our income taxes for the administration and maintenance of said lands. I stand to be corrected, but I don't think public lands are on the tax rolls. I don't even think public lands out west (the ones in question) were bought and paid for with tax money. If I am not mistaken when the railroads were built in the west the government gave alternating sections along the rail route to the railroad as an incentive to complete the rail line quickly. The sections not given to railroads were open to homesteaders or for sale at low prices to anyone interested in settling the west. The railroads sold some of their lands to willing buyers. Those sections that were not homesteaded or sold remain the property of the government.
BuzzH: I can't show you the law that says it is illegal to CC. I am not a lawyer nor do I care what you do in Wy. I do care what you do on or over my property. I don't care if you are or are not impacting my property it is still mine and I would like to think it is my decision as to whether or not you are impacting my property when you cross my land.
Not trying to be argumentative, but to me, and some others, private property rights trump public property rights.

You got some things right, some things wrong.

Most large tracts of land were purchased by the Government, as for the case of Wyoming a majority of it was purchased via the Louisiana Purchase. So, yes, tax money most assuredly was used to purchase Wyoming.

Public lands are NOT taxed, but States received Sections of the public estate via their enabling acts at Statehood, (usually sections 16 and 36, and some additional sections here and there). Also States do receive revenue from the Federal Government Lands via PILT (payment in lieu of Taxes).

The railroads were given every other section for westward expansion, the remaining Federal lands were not meant to be homesteaded or sold. The private sections given to the Railroads were the incentive, they could sell them to raise revenue to fund their railroads. But, the intent was NOT to raise funding for the railroads on the REMAINING public lands in the checkerboard.

The reason you can't show me a law to make corner crossing illegal is because one doesn't exist.

As much as you want to lay claim to your private property rights trumping public property rights it is absolute nonsense. Property rights are property rights no matter the owner.

Lets look at it a different way...say you own kitty-corner sections of private, I own the other sections. I decide I want to corner cross, stepping from my private property to another piece of my private property over a shared corner.

Are you trying to tell me that I can't, based on the wrong assumption that somehow your private property rights are more important than my private property rights? Again, that's absolutely nonsense. The same as its nonsense to assume, just because you own private property, that you hold the upper hand with ANY other landowner at a shared corner, including federal, county, city or state lands.

Stepping from one piece of public land to another piece of public land over a shared corner is not trespassing. The US Citizens own the land, all of us, and never was your private property violated.

Its simple, and I believe if the civil case is heard, there will be no more gray area and public land owners are going to gain access to OUR land.

 

[BuzzH]

Well, since your property is not in WY I guess it’s safe

Maybe, maybe not...

 

[BuzzH]

Kinda sounds like oceanfront property in Arizona.

If you buy land without access, well that's on you.


Fact is, these are lands that weren't intended for public access, and were at times intentionally land locked. An act of congress made them public, without much thought to access. Likely wasn't exactly a high priority at the time, but looked good on paper.

I don't think so...prove me wrong, I'm willing to listen.

 

[Billy Goat]

I don't think so...prove me wrong, I'm willing to listen.

Which part?

The part they weren't meant for public access?

Ain't that where you always tell people to do their own research?

It's the FLPMA that made them public the way we view them now, but I'm sure you already know that. Previous to that much of it was still open to homesteading, however lots of access was blocked, so it couldn't be. Thus allowing adjoining owners to lease grazing, I'm sure you can see how that works.

 

[Gutshot007]

You’d only be allowed to communicate in grunts and clicks.

Great! According to my wife this would be done with little to no effort. Unt, unt. All joking aside I hope this blows the cover of this issue wide open . I don't know if people really can wrap their heads around another 2.44 MILLION acres of access. I can't tell you guys ( I'm some of you have experienced this) how many times I have hunted public land from county ,state, and federal where adjacent landowners had an attitude that it was just a " little extra part" of their private land . Not even corner crossing situations. I had a guy posting state land where I bowhunt 2 years ago. Have seen minimal maintenance roads blocked. Atv trail's from private going right on to state land through the woods. Not even a designated trail. All kinds of little things to try and diswade one from going on to public land. Obviously these are small scale examples , but it's along the same lines. Really ? Going across a corner in your "airspace"and now you feel violated

 

[BuzzH]

Which part?

The part they weren't meant for public access?

Ain't that where you always tell people to do their own research?

It's the FLPMA that made them public the way we view them now, but I'm sure you already know that. Previous to that much of it was still open to homesteading, however lots of access was blocked, so it couldn't be. Thus allowing adjoining owners to lease grazing, I'm sure you can see how that works.

The part about lands being intentionally landlocked...never heard that whopper.

FLPMA was passed in the mid 1970's wasn't it? The FS and BLM existed long before that. Taylor grazing act in the 1930s.

You're saying prior to 1976 lands in the lower 48 were still being homesteaded?

From what I've heard attorneys claim is that access to remaining federal lands after the homestead act, railroad land grants, etc...is that access easements were never ceded to the remaining federal lands.