Corner Crossing (is any hunter against it?)

[Billinsd]

I think the legal question is less “is corner crossing legal” It’s is corner crossing trespassing.

Well if it's trespassing it's not legal, it's illegal. Trespassing=illegal. The question is the same, it's just worded differently.

The general argument is for the group that thinks corner crossing is legal, defines property rights in two dimensions. This group also seems to argue that it is morally wrong to restrict access to public land.

Seems like it. I fall into this group, however, I have empathy for the landowners.

The argument “against” corner crossing as it stands currently is that property rights are on 3 dimensions and that it is physically impossible to cross from corner to corner without legally trespassing on the private property on the adjoining corners.

Right and some are saying it is a "right" to protect their land, which I disagree with, however, am empathetic with them wanting to protect their land.

I believe everyone here would love to/ or currently loves to cross corner to corner ..

Well, no, everyone here would not love to corner cross, some are very against it. I'd say "most" are in favor of it.

it’s just how we gain or codify that right into written law..

First you have to look at a particular state. Then you need to find out if there are laws against corner crossing, like Montana. Then work to reverse that law. You need a pro public land group like the BHA to support and drive this. Look at California. In San Diego county. Decades ago corner crossing was legal. I think it would be a waste of time to codify that into law, and it would be a lot of work and money. It's already legal. This needs to be done on a case by case situation, starting locally, and by the state. The landowners seem to be strong and very influential with politicians (and there is nothing wrong with that). So, who will support making corner crossing legal where it is now illegal? Big and local public land access organizations. What is their stance?

 

[bigdesert10]

There is a lot of public land that we do not have a right to hunt. National Parks. Public Streets. City Hall. Wildlife Preserve. The Washington Monument. Sure it is all different (and some of those examples may be incorrect), but my point in that is that there are more reasons to have public land than for hunters or other recreational activities.

We may not have the right to hunt those places, but we have a right to access them. Also, this point is irrelevant because we DO have a right to occupy AND hunt the land in question.

 

[87TT]

Easements to public land should be mandatory period. That includes totally landlocked public land. If they can take your land by emanant domain for a use that is better for the public like a real estate development that generates more taxes, then an easement for the public benefit should be ok too.

 

[wapitibob]

As mentioned earlier, rather than hash things out on the internet, I simply call the people in charge and get the answers directly. It's real easy to do and then you'll know what to expect relative to your state and situation.

 

[bigdesert10]

The general argument is for the group that thinks corner crossing is legal, defines property rights in two dimensions. This group also seems to argue that it is morally wrong to restrict access to public land. Something that I believe is also not codified in law.

It is actually codified in law. See 43 CFR 4140.1 (b)(7). I would further contend that denying others' rights to something to which one has no legal claim is morally wrong.

 

[Billinsd]

Easements to public land should be mandatory period. That includes totally landlocked public land. If they can take your land by emanant domain for a use that is better for the public like a real estate development that generates more taxes, then an easement for the public benefit should be ok too.

I'll vote for you!!!

 

[Pro953]

We may not have the right to hunt those places, but we have a right to access them. Also, this point is irrelevant because we DO have a right to occupy AND hunt the land in question.

Interesting. I guess I am not sure how it would really apply to this conversation as it states “persons performing the following prohibited act ON” The argument is not that a private land owner is applying a gate across a public road or telling someone they must leave public land, it is the private property itself is the barrier. “For me” the only question is, is the act of corner crossing trespassing.

If you are saying that you have the right to trespass to access public property then it should not matter
If it’s a corner cross or direct across though private property as both would be trespassing.

If the argument is you always have the legal right to access of public property does that supersede landowner rights or do landowner rights supersede the right to access public property.

Again. Not looking for a pissing match. It’s a interesting conversation and just sharing my perspective.


For those interested here is the regulation bigdesert was referring to - https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/43/4140.1.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pro953]

Well if it's trespassing it's not legal, it's illegal. Trespassing=illegal. The question is the same, it's just worded differently.

Well, no, everyone here would not love to corner cross, some are very against it. I'd say "most" are in favor of it.

Hi Bill,

Poor wording for on my part for both. I am distracting myself when this argument while sitting at a trade show at the moment.

For point one, while I may have not worded my statement very well. Is the question not, “is corner crossing trespassing?”

For statement two, it was a poor choice for me to say everyone, I only speak for myself. I am guessing those that are against corner crossing have interests that would be impacted should corner crossing be used as access on many parcels. My assumption is most of the group here fall into the “corner crossing is legal” or “I would like to access this public land though corner crossing, but I do not think it’s legal, if it’s was I would hunt it tomorrow!” crowd. But again assumptions and speaking for more than just myself is dangerous!

Best,
Phil




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nickofthewoods]

Easements to public land should be mandatory period. That includes totally landlocked public land. If they can take your land by emanant domain for a use that is better for the public like a real estate development that generates more taxes, then an easement for the public benefit should be ok too.

Agree with this 100%. I would also be curious to see an annual expense report detailing the allocation of funds spent by the Feds while managing landlocked parcels that nobody can use.

 

[BuzzH]

I would be shocked if there were setback requirements for a retaining wall or fence. Setbacks are for buildings. Now in the Cities sometimes they have setback for other items, but you will rarely, if ever, find a setback for a fence or wall on rural property. (Keep in mind this is not a structural wall for retaining soils.) It is that OWNERS right to keep trespassers off his/her land and they have EVERY right to build a wall.

If you want to corner cross, get permission from the owner. Simple as that. Owner says "no" then we best not do it.

Better start studying up on fencing statutes...every State in the US has pretty specific laws on fencing.

I will not ask to cross a corner from public to public...ever. I don't need permission from anyone to access my public lands via corner crossing.

 

[wapitibob]

But Buzz, the internet lawyers are telling you it’s trespassing.
Perhaps they’ll educate the Wyoming attorney general.

 

[Backpack Hunter]

Easements to public land should be mandatory period. That includes totally landlocked public land. If they can take your land by emanant domain for a use that is better for the public like a real estate development that generates more taxes, then an easement for the public benefit should be ok too.

Eminent domain should not be legal.

 

[Billinsd]

Hi Bill,

Poor wording for on my part for both. I am distracting myself when this argument while sitting at a trade show at the moment.

For point one, while I may have not worded my statement very well. Is the question not, “is corner crossing trespassing?”

For statement two, it was a poor choice for me to say everyone, I only speak for myself. I am guessing those that are against corner crossing have interests that would be impacted should corner crossing be used as access on many parcels. My assumption is most of the group here fall into the “corner crossing is legal” or “I would like to access this public land though corner crossing, but I do not think it’s legal, if it’s was I would hunt it tomorrow!” crowd. But again assumptions and speaking for more than just myself is dangerous!

Best,
Phil




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hear you on distracting yourself from something while on this forum. It can be difficult to convey my demeanor in text. I'm trying to be very precise. As I've aged, and since I spend a lot of time "enriching" my kids education, I've become more precise with my arguments and anal with grammar, lol. It's super important to me that people understand what I'm saying and I can be super demanding of others. Life isn't the way I'd like it to be, and I'm a sinner myself. Yes, I completely agree with what you have written. Thanks Bill

 

[Billinsd]

Eminent domain should not be legal.

Only in extreme circumstances, like building dams, lakes, highways, etc. However, never to build houses, malls, etc. That's my opinion and opinion only.

 

[Billinsd]

Better start studying up on fencing statutes...every State in the US has pretty specific laws on fencing.

I will not ask to cross a corner from public to public...ever. I don't need permission from anyone to access my public lands via corner crossing.

You may if the state you are accessing our public lands has a law against corner crossing.

 

[BuzzH]

You may if the state you are accessing our public lands has a law against corner crossing.

Its not illegal in any state I hunt...so no, I wont be asking anyone to cross from public to public.

 

[87TT]

Only in extreme circumstances, like building dams, lakes, highways, etc. However, never to build houses, malls, etc. That's my opinion and opinion only.

First off I don't believe in emanant domain either in most instances but the supreme court has already upheld it for the things I mentioned. That said, if landowners want to be greedy and try to block the public from the public's land, then an easement should be taken.
Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

 

[Billinsd]

Its not illegal in any state I hunt...so no, I wont be asking anyone to cross from public to public.

I wouldn't either.

 

[ScopeScar]

It should be legal at least in parts of the country where it is a result of the section and township grid that has blocks of public land scattered about. All public land should have reasonable access both to any particular block but also between contiguous blocks including corner-touching blocks.

In WA it should not only be the duty of the Commissioner of Public Lands to publish a map of all public lands within the state, but also to have a up-to-date web accessible GIS of public land which includes how the public can access all parcels of public land. It should be the mission of the Commissioner to acquire access where needed and to provide information about access via the internet. When you vote for Land Commissioner this is the top issue you should consider. As far as I've ever seen none of the candidates even mention it, mostly it's just phony babble about how they won't use public land at all for even it's intended purpose.

Checkerboard public/private land patterns must not be an excuse to block access between public parcels. Private owners however should not be held liable for persons injuring themselves or ruining their clothing when crossing a (normal practice installation of) barbed wire fence at a corner, or ill advised crossing when livestock is present.

 

[Rich M]

But Buzz, the internet lawyers are telling you it’s trespassing.
Perhaps they’ll educate the Wyoming attorney general.

Hi Bob - I'm not sure your angle here. It is illegal in WY to corner cross, at least that's what the GW told me when I talked to him.