Trophy bull and a trespass charge

[Hnthrdr]

I love it when guys get creative to block the only access into chunks of blm….

View attachment 943709View attachment 943710

What a dick move

 

[3forks]

I work with a lot of ranching groups and this is not the majority and it's getting old hearing this dead horse continued to be beaten.

My family has a background in ranching and I’m highly sympathetic to the ranching industry. I may be painting with a broad brush, and if you’re seeing more ranches using public hunting as means to mitigate hay loss due to wildlife, I’m glad to hear it. However, to say that the majority of ranches don’t do this is a stretch in my opinion, and what I described is still a very common practice.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

What state doesn't have a court with equity powers?

Which court in Wyoming has equitable powers to resolve this issue? And which people have standing to bring that case?

I am simply asking for the authority under Wyoming law. Not arguing what “should” or “shouldn’t” be the case.

The fact that this is an issue that has been ongoing for a while indicates that there probably isn’t an easy judicial solution for it.

 

[def90]

Is it illegal to use fixed wing or rotorcraft as transportation in WY? A quick google search turned up a law that's not really clear on transportation to and from a hunt. It says the same about automobiles, so I assume that law does not apply to transportation.

Pretty sure me and a friend can afford a 6 mile R44 flight. No trespass required.

A lot of states do not allow you to hunt an area within a 24hr period of you flew over it. Anyone getting a helo lift in would have to wait a bit before hunting.

 

[plebe]

A lot of states do not allow you to hunt an area within a 24hr period of you flew over it. Anyone getting a helo lift in would have to wait a bit before hunting.

 

[JohnJohnson]

All you boys wanting landlocked public land to not be allowable have a pretty fine socialist idea. Pretty fine.... lol

Because to make a prescriptive easement where none currently exists would be pretty socialist IMO.

Call me comrade then.

 

[KenLee]

Which court in Wyoming has equitable powers to resolve this issue? And which people have standing to bring that case?

I am simply asking for the authority under Wyoming law. Not arguing what “should” or “shouldn’t” be the case.

The fact that this is an issue that has been ongoing for a while indicates that there probably isn’t an easy judicial solution for it.

Wyoming District Court for the area where property is located

 

[alexnelon]

View attachment 943868

So Wyoming has no statute for hunting after you fly, only that you can't use aircraft intentionally for scouting.

Looks cut and dry to me.

 

[Burnsie]

Wondering? - Would this land owner be as aggressive with his attempts to prosecute for trespassing if the trespassers were not hunters - ie: some hikers or bird watchers crossing his land getting to the public land. If he is pursuing the charges more on the basis that he is pissed off that the hunter shot "his" prized bull elk on said public land, then that tells you all you need to know. In both cases the trespassing is obviously wrong/illegal, but would they be treated the same?

 

[wind gypsy]

You guys are talking about flying into 1 section islands of state land that are managed for max revenue generation to fund schools. Some states dont even allow hunting on such state lands but we're talking about eminent domain to force access to them?

I'm all for pushing to unlock landlocked public lands but these particular parcels seem pretty low on the totem pole.

 

[gbflyer]

If I had a big ol’ ranch in Wyoming that guarded a bunch of public, I wouldn’t let anyone through it. 99.999% here wouldn’t either.

 

[wind gypsy]

Wondering? - Would this land owner be as aggressive with his attempts to prosecute for trespassing if the trespassers were not hunters - ie: some hikers or bird watchers crossing his land getting to the public land. If he is pursuing the charges more on the basis that he is pissed off that the hunter shot "his" prized bull elk on said public land, then that tells you all you need to know. In both cases the trespassing is obviously wrong/illegal, but would they be treated the same?

I own a little land primarily for whitetail hunting. I put a lot of time and money into improving it. I'd be more upset about hunters trespassing and impacting the fruits of my $/labor more than someone picking flowers. If they trespassed to hunt my neighbors id still be unhappy. Not pursuing it is likely to invite more trespassing.

It's a tricky thing.. The wildlife belong to the state, not landowners. But they sure as hell benefit a lot from landowners providing habitat and restricting access to them to a degree. They'd be in a lot worse place if everything in eastern WY was public and accessible without changing hunting regs.

 

[Steve300xcw]

If I had a big ol’ ranch in Wyoming that guarded a bunch of public, I wouldn’t let anyone through it. 99.999% here wouldn’t either.

no shit ! Most the guys on here would call it in if somebody was in their front yard, let alone a patch of dirt like that

 

[3forks]

I look at it like this, if the hunter in question had to have trespassed to access the property, he should get the book thrown at him.

The recent ruling in Wyoming that corner crossing is legal in that state and the other 6 that fall under the Tenth Circuit Court is a big win (well see if the appeal is heard by the Supreme Court) for hunters/the public, but corner crossing is not what seems to have occurred in the issue we’re discussing.

Ranches, landowners, and organizations opposed to corner crossing see this kind of alleged trespassing as one and the same. Obviously it’s different, but unless the law changes in regards to the public accessing state owned landlocked properties without corner crossing, we shouldn’t be essentially condoning what appears to be someone obviously trespassing by saying he should just keep his mouth shut and let’s see if he can get away with it.

The circumstantial evidence of what occurred can lead to only one conclusion, and I’m sure the warden wouldn’t have written a ticket if he wasn’t confident in his decision based on the evidence. All of us armchair lawyers and legal experts seem to forget that circumstantial evidence can be enough for a criminal conviction if it can point to guilt leaving no other reasonable explanation for the facts.

 

[alexnelon]

If I had a big ol’ ranch in Wyoming that guarded a bunch of public, I wouldn’t let anyone through it. 99.999% here wouldn’t either.

Correct. Trespassing is a crime and should be fully prosecuted.

Killing a legal bull on public land in an open unit where you have a valid tag is not poaching.

I don't care how many laws were broken on the way, it doesn't create poaching where there would be none otherwise, and no one should be prosecuted for things that are not illegal.

 

[highcountrymuley]

Where are the memes?

 

[wind gypsy]

Correct. Trespassing is a crime and should be fully prosecuted.

Killing a legal bull on public land in an open unit where you have a valid tag is not poaching.

I don't care how many laws were broken on the way, it doesn't create poaching where there would be none otherwise, and no one should be prosecuted for things that are not illegal.

Poaching, not poaching. It's Semantics.

If states dont tie trespassing to hunt into hunting violations, a $200 misdemeanor isn't going to discourage the act much and you're going to push landowners into using these civil suits that people are upset about to discourage trespassing.

What if he found the bull 2 days prior with a drone but shot it during legal hrs, with a legal weapon, with the appropriate tag on public? Still not poaching? In either case he wouldn't have shot it on public if he didn't break the law first.

 

[gbflyer]

Correct. Trespassing is a crime and should be fully prosecuted.

Killing a legal bull on public land in an open unit where you have a valid tag is not poaching.

I don't care how many laws were broken on the way, it doesn't create poaching where there would be none otherwise, and no one should be prosecuted for things that are not illegal.

I don’t see anywhere in the linked article where he is being prosecuted for poaching.

 

[wind gypsy]

I look at it like this, if the hunter in question had to have trespassed to access the property, he should get the book thrown at him.

The recent ruling in Wyoming that corner crossing is legal in that state and the other 6 that fall under the Tenth Circuit Court is a big win (well see if the appeal is heard by the Supreme Court) for hunters/the public, but corner crossing is not what seems to have occurred in the issue we’re discussing.

Ranches, landowners, and organizations opposed to corner crossing see this kind of alleged trespassing as one and the same. Obviously it’s different, but unless the law changes in regards to the public accessing state owned landlocked properties without corner crossing, we shouldn’t be essentially condoning what appears to be someone obviously trespassing by saying he should just keep his mouth shut and let’s see if he can get away with it.

Agree with the quoted. If people want to accept actual trespassing because a guy was going to/from public, it paints a poor picture of that side when it comes to corner crossing which I see as something that should be legitimate access.

 

[2buffalo]

If I had a big ol’ ranch in Wyoming that guarded a bunch of public, I wouldn’t let anyone through it. 99.999% here wouldn’t either.

Agreed. But I would bet that most of the people on here defending trespassing don't own a pot to piss in so they want something for nothing. Typical socialist idealism.