WY Corner crossing update

[DoctorJJ]

43 U.S. Code § 1061 - Inclosure of or assertion of right to public lands without title

www.law.cornell.edu

Here is what I came up with. I’m not a lawyer but I would suppose the original land owners in the corner crossing would be arguing that they haven’t constructed any enclosure and therefore aren’t restricting access and aren‘t claiming exclusive use of the public land.

 

[Fordguy]

Do you have a link for that act?

I read through the act during the Iron Bar corner crossing trial, but all I've got at the moment is a reference to the act from the Wyofile.

Case history makes it clear: Locking out the public is illegal - WyoFile

The law provides humans, animals and wildlife access to federal public lands, Parsons opines. Court challenges have clarified this.

wyofile.com

 

[Fordguy]

43 U.S. Code § 1061 - Inclosure of or assertion of right to public lands without title

www.law.cornell.edu

Here is what I came up with. I’m not a lawyer but I would suppose the original land owners in the corner crossing would be arguing that they haven’t constructed any enclosure and therefore aren’t restricting access and aren‘t claiming exclusive use of the public land.

Possession- effectively the purchasing private or.trqding a few.private parcels for.public land with the intent to keep people.from accessing public land could.easily.be interpreted as inclosing.
I realize that there are properties that completely surround public lands, without corners available for crossing.
That doesn't make it ethical or just for a landowner to enjoy exclusive access to property that he or she doesn't own exclusively. As demand for.access to public lands increases and more people become aware of the situation I expect there to be more legal challenges.

 

[DoctorJJ]

Possession- effectively the purchasing private or.trqding a few.private parcels for.public land with the intent to keep people.from accessing public land could.easily.be interpreted as inclosing.
I realize that there are properties that completely surround public lands, without corners available for crossing.
That doesn't make it ethical or just for a landowner to enjoy exclusive access to property that he or she doesn't own exclusively. As demand for.access to public lands increases and more people become aware of the situation I expect there to be more legal challenges.

Oh, I agree. There should not be one square inch of public land that isn’t legally accessible by the public, IMO. Land that is public that is surrounded by private should have an easement or the government and the property owner should have to come to some type of swap agreement to exchange land that is accessible.

 

[Gobbler36]

The attitude of these guys in this video is beyond infuriating to think that is land we rightfully have access to and they think they are entitled to!
they are pieces of shit