Latest on corner crossing

[wapitibob]

"Further, Skavdahl said he had to consider that the four men would “be effectively barred from accessing the landlocked public land on which they enjoy hunting” if Eshelman’s civil suit succeeds.

“Such access to public lands has value to Defendants, who traveled from Missouri to Wyoming to engage in recreation on public lands, and that value must be included when determining the amount in controversy for this case,” the judge wrote."

 

[Billy Goat]

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.

FLPMA repealed the homestead act (1976), there was good reason the remaining lands weren't ceded, many didn't have access. Yes BLM existed before that, but it's goal was different, it managed Federal lands but in the interest of reserves. It reserved land for grazing, mineral, and oil. The Taylor Grazing Act ended open grazing on the Federal lands, guess what that did? Gave access to it only to lease holders who happened to have the adjoining land and could use it. Who else could access it?


You think that the Taylor Act wasn't simply an act to lock others out of the public lands? Prior to the FLPMA recreation had nothing to do with the mission of the BLM.

 

[Clarkdale17]

I'm sure a lot of ranchers who utilize BLM land with no public access will be real thrilled with Eshelman pursing this case if the federal courts rule in favor of the hunters and set a precedent for corner crossing

 

[BuzzH]

FLPMA repealed the homestead act (1976), there was good reason the remaining lands weren't ceded, many didn't have access. Yes BLM existed before that, but it's goal was different, it managed Federal lands but in the interest of reserves. It reserved land for grazing, mineral, and oil. The Taylor Grazing Act ended open grazing on the Federal lands, guess what that did? Gave access to it only to lease holders who happened to have the adjoining land and could use it. Who else could access it?


You think that the Taylor Act wasn't simply an act to lock others out of the public lands? Prior to the FLPMA recreation had nothing to do with the mission of the BLM.

UIA became applicable so that access could not be denied...and nothing you think you know about this case or resource policy makes any sense.

 

[BuzzH]

I'm sure a lot of ranchers who utilize BLM land with no public access will be real thrilled with Eshelman pursing this case if the federal courts rule in favor of the hunters and set a precedent for corner crossing

He doesn't care...he's the stereo typical rich dude.

 

[wind gypsy]

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.

There are plenty of places with checkerboard where the private sections need to be accessed through BLM. If that BLM sold to private it seems there could be a pretty clear scenario where a private section's access relied on another private landowner to grant access? No idea if there are laws preventing such a sale.

Getting a little complicated for my simple mind.. would the current access through BLM be a condition of the lease (that would no longer exist) or could a prescriptive easement be claimed? 'spose it depends.

 

[InkedElkSlayer]

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.

Pretty good analogy. If you explained it this way to a group of 7 random people in WY, MT, etc. What do you think they’d say?
Some may say both guys could CC. Some may say that neither of the 2 landowners could CC. I doubt any of them would say that landowner A could CC, but Landowner B can’t.
Only difference is if the 7 opinions would change if they knew that Landowner A is “private” and Landowner B is “the Government”. Explained as Buzz’s example with anonymous landowners, how can 1 guy CC and the other guy can’t?

 

[Billy Goat]

There are plenty of places with checkerboard where the private sections need to be accessed through BLM. If that BLM sold to private it seems there could be a pretty clear scenario where a private section's access relied on another private landowner to grant access? No idea if there are laws preventing such a sale.

Getting a little complicated for my simple mind.. would the current access through BLM be a condition of the lease (that would no longer exist) or could a prescriptive easement be claimed? 'spose it depends.

I don't know what the best way forward is exactly. Likely Eminent Domain.

 

[SWFLhntr]

So will Eshelman withdraw the civil suit? Or is he just going to plow ahead?

 

[BuzzH]

So will Eshelman withdraw the civil suit? Or is he just going to plow ahead?

THAT'S the question.

But based on his past history of litigation, I would be inclined to believe its full steam ahead.

But, who knows?

 

[307]

THAT'S the question.

But based on his past history of litigation, I would be inclined to believe its full steam ahead.

But, who knows?

Is there a countersuit of some sort so that a legal decision will be required since that is the actual end goal of this whole deal?

 

[Btaylor]

I don't know what the best way forward is exactly. Likely Eminent Domain.

Mutually agreeable easement terms would be better imo but it seems highly unlike the private owner in this case would ever be agreeable. In that circumstance, I have no issue with ED for a minimal access easement but it really should be a last resort.

 

[Billy Goat]

Mutually agreeable easement terms would be better imo but it seems highly unlike the private owner in this case would ever be agreeable. In that circumstance, I have no issue with ED for a minimal access easement but it really should be a last resort.

Yes, I made a quick however incomplete response.

I meant that it would take ED as an end result to actually happen. In a lot of instances easements would likely not be granted.

 

[BuzzH]

Is there a countersuit of some sort so that a legal decision will be required since that is the actual end goal of this whole deal?

That's to decide down the road.

One thing that happened in the criminal case is that all 4 hunters filed paperwork through their attorneys to have Carbon County DA's office pay for their travel expenses getting to the trial and back. So their mileage, hotels, etc. were reimbursed. Apparently there is Wyoming law that allows for that (no not attorney fees though, dang it!)

While on a zoom meeting with them, the Missouri4 let us know they would be putting that money back into the gofundme account.

 

[z987k]

Little quad copters that are packable to lift you over the corner, are all it takes to fix this.

You do own the airspace over your land but the entire public has an easement to it. Otherwise you couldn't fly aircraft and helicopters over private land.

 

[Wyobohunter]

Little quad copters that are packable to lift you over the corner, are all it takes to fix this.

You do own the airspace over your land but the entire public has an easement to it. Otherwise you couldn't fly aircraft and helicopters over private land.

I know you are goofing but… it’s not legal to use aircraft for hunting in WY.

Edit: looks like I’m wrong about that so long as you are only using the aircraft for transport and not spotting/finding game with it.

 

[wvincent]

Little quad copters that are packable to lift you over the corner, are all it takes to fix this.

You do own the airspace over your land but the entire public has an easement to it. Otherwise you couldn't fly aircraft and helicopters over private land.

No, this is the future.
I see that 10' corner fence and call your bluff.

 

[CJ19]

No, this is the future.
I see that 10' corner fence and call your bluff.
View attachment 412934

Already being marketed as a tool for mountain rescue too.

 

[2ski]

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!

Good idea but you generally can't drive on public land off road. So how are you going to dig the post hole unless by hand?

 

[Customweld]

Little quad copters that are packable to lift you over the corner, are all it takes to fix this.

You do own the airspace over your land but the entire public has an easement to it. Otherwise you couldn't fly aircraft and helicopters over private land.

I’m not sure how Wyoming works, but in Idaho, it is illegal to use aircraft for transporting anything unless it’s at an established airstrip. I know this is a Wyoming discussion but I just thought I’d throw that out.