WY Corner crossing update

Why would any hunter who went through the effort to find a marker want to post its location for others who didn't put in the work? Once it is easy guys it won't be worth knowing...
 
After this ruling, I think law enforcement will be reluctant to get involved in corner crossing disputes unless there is a flagrant violation with strong evidence to support it. Before this ruling for these hunters the Sheriff initially didn't want to give the hunters a citation in the 1st place. It wasn't until after Eshelman used his influence on the county attorney and she instructed the Sheriff to issue the citations. They didn't want to cite the hunters then, and probaly much less so now.
 
After this ruling, I think law enforcement will be reluctant to get involved in corner crossing disputes unless there is a flagrant violation with strong evidence to support it. Before this ruling for these hunters the Sheriff initially didn't want to give the hunters a citation in the 1st place. It wasn't until after Eshelman used his influence on the county attorney and she instructed the Sheriff to issue the citations. They didn't want to cite the hunters then, and probaly much less so now.
I think the opposite will be true. Leos finally have clarity and the technology is easy to use so they will hold people accountable who don't do it right.
 
I think the opposite will be true. Leos finally have clarity and the technology is easy to use so they will hold people accountable who don't do it right.
It'll be interesting to see which of us is right and either way I'm happy about this ruling and mystified it took this long to get here. Before the ruling, if you were in one of the adjoining public sections, you either crossed a private boundary or crossed at a corner, both of which were considered tresspassing. Now if you're on the public adjoining section, you may have crossed at or near a corner, which is fine. I don't see investigating these sorts of matters will be a high priority for law enforcement. From a civil, landowner standpoint, I don't think you'd ever be able to recoup the legal costs and time to sue people over this.
 
It'll be interesting to see which of us is right and either way I'm happy about this ruling and mystified it took this long to get here. Before the ruling, if you were in one of the adjoinging public sections, you either crossed a private boundary or crossed at a corner, both of which were considered tresspassing. Now if you're on the public adjoining section, you may have crossed at or near a corner, which is fine. I don't see investigating these sorts of matters will be a high priority for law enforcement. From a civil, landowner standpoint, I don't think you'd ever be able to recoup the legal costs and time to sue people over this.
I'd tend to agree with ben. If I were called to this type of complaint and the landowner couldn't show me the corner monument with clear evidence of a trespassing violation, I'd be telling him it was a civil matter. Just an assumption, but I doubt many landowners could actually find the corner marker, if one even exists at all.
 
Montana game wardens were told almost 15 years ago that if a landowner called in a corner crossing case, to refer them them to the county attorney.

Like I've said a few times, if the hunter mucks it up badly—then that's a completely different story.
 
Why would any hunter who went through the effort to find a marker want to post its location for others who didn't put in the work? Once it is easy guys it won't be worth knowing...
You think people would have learned their lesson already, but everyone wants to be a hunting hero. Blows my mind, put in some of your own damn effort and do chit on your own instead of relying on the hardwork of other people or looking for some cheat code.

Sent from my SM-S921U using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top