Corner Jumping

T

TOPGUN

Long Time Member
Messages
10,631
I just read a thread on the website OYOA that Big Fin (Randy Newberg) runs and found this particular post very interesting with the quote from Bob Wharff of Wyoming SFW toward the end. I guess it sort of shows where SFW hangs it's hat!!!

GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT
GREEN RIVER - Douglas hunter Bill Kearney always suspected it wasn't illegal to corner jump over private land while hunting. Now he has a state opinion backing up his contention.
The Douglas sportsmen was acquitted of trespass charges in April after he used a Global Positioning System (GPS) device to step from one parcel of public land to another while hunting in Albany County in September 2003. The practice is known as corner jumping or corner crossing.
The case prompted the Wyoming Game and Fish Department to seek a State Attorney General opinion reviewing the agency's long-standing assumption that corner jumping is illegal.
The AG opinion released by the department said corner jumping from one parcel of public land to another in order to hunt on the other public parcel does not violate Game and Fish regulations.
The opinion said corner jumping does not violate agency rules because, to be convicted, the rules require a person must hunt or intend to hunt on private property without permission. Corner jumping, however, may be a criminal trespass under state law, the opinion said.
"I'm just delighted with (the opinion) and think it's great ? it was certainly worth spending the money and challenging this in court," Kearney said.
"A real positive aspect of the opinion is with the increasing pressure from hunters and sportsmen and rockhounds and whoever ? it's a good thing that could result in public access to large tracts of public lands," he said.
"The Game and Fish can now use its license fee money and not waste their time dealing with people legally accessing public lands in court."
Corner jumping describes the practice of stepping over the corner created where four sections of land meet in order to reach a cater-corner parcel of public lands.
Kearney stepped from one parcel of public land to another. The parcels met at a corner where two pieces of private land also meet.
Game and Fish Director Terry Cleveland said the opinion means the agency will change its method of handling corner jumping complaints.
"If somebody calls us and tells us there's corner jumping occurring, we'll simply tell them we don't have the authority to do something about it," Cleveland said in a phone interview.
"If they call us on a trespass situation and we get out there and find it's a corner jumping complaint ? then we'll tell them they should take it up with the county sheriff or the county attorney," he said.
Bob Wharff, executive director for Wyoming Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, said while he fears the ruling might chip away at private property rights, it could lead to more open and frank discussions about access to public lands.
"Even the best GPS units that are available are only accurate to three meters and three meters doesn't get you close enough to say you're actually jumping from corner to corner," Wharff said in an interview.
"I think it's a dangerous precedent that the opinion sets ? we're all for access, but I'm real nervous about private property rights and the erosion of those rights," he said.
"But on the other hand, we may see that there's going to be a little bit more willingness for landowners to come to the table and talk about access ? and ultimately help us broach some of those roadblocks (to access) that may have been there in the past."
Southwest Wyoming bureau reporter Jeff Gearino can be reached at (307) 875-5359
 
Topgun,
I suspect that rulings like this will become the norm. Look at how "stream access" laws have evolved in most every western state over the last few years. The evolution is toward more access not less.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 10:58AM (MST)[p]

ColoradoOak---At 64 years old I'm lucky to remember my name a lot of days, so it's hard to know if I've commented on a certain subect on a particular site if it's more than a day or two prior, LOL!!! After hitting that link I do remember the thread well now though. I do know that I've been on the SWF's rearend more than once this year about different subjects and I don't even live out where they are! I will say that a good buddy of mine in Sheridan thinks they do more good than bad in Wyoming and has told me to lay off!!! That's hard for me to do though because at my age I'm pretty well set in my ways and thinking on certain things, especially when it involves my passion of hunting.
 
To add to all that discussion, I think we should be careful not to totally alienate landowners, as the G&F is currently doing a fair job of maintaining and, indeed, gaining more private acres to hunt in the form of Walk-in and HMA. But, all of those areas depend on positive relationships between hunters, landowners, and the G&F. You're pretty hard-up when you have to resort to corner-jumping to hunting in Wyoming.
 
Pretty hard up?

Have you ever looked at a map of Wyoming, Montana, etc.???

Corner crossing would open more than just a couple sections of access here and there.

Good grief.

Bob Wharff is a tool...and no friend of the average sportsman. You can always count on him and SFW to remain in the pocket of the well-heeled, landowners, and outfitters.

Real champions of the average sportsman.
 
Good grief is right Buzz! If it were allowed without worry of being arrested for trespassing, it would open up so many acres for us to hunt that it would probably also ease the number of poeple wanting to use the HM and WIHA acreage! I think the post before yours was actually made by the SFW in disguise because it sounds identical to what Mr. Wharff was quoted as saying in that article I posted!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 01:00PM (MST)[p]I believe the point of this thread is not to bring up corner jumping again, but to expose the position of SFW in regards to their continued "we're for the hunter" mantra, when in reality, their actions show they are for continued donations to pad their salaries, hunts, and travel. What better venue than the most polarizing topic in hunting, the Wolf Reintroduction.
Did they not lobby against the Wolf Rider, then when passed claim victory?

To add to TopGuns post, Randy posted a very good comment regarding corner jumping:

"The only reason I know of to prohibit the public from crossing where corners meet is to deny access to public lands. If there are other valid reasons to deny such public to public access, I have yet to hear a compelling argument."

If you believe Randy's assertion, then read the SFW comment, SFW does not appear to have the "hunters" interest at heart. Rather unfortunate as I have been looking for a good organization to support.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 01:50PM (MST)[p]It really does show how two-faced they seem to be! Mr. Wharff actually came on this site's thread earlier this year when the corner jumping issue was being addressed in the Wyoming Legislature and posted that we should all stick together to get it resolved. Then he mentioned who the Wyoming members should contact to register their views with to speed up the process to get it resolved in our favor. Now I turn around and read what he was quoted as saying on that thread in the OYOA site. I wonder if in truth that maybe the SFW was even a group that lobbied the Committee to drop it from their agenda like they did and not even let it out of that committee to the entire Legislature assembly for discussion. It's no wonder that I've been reading so many posts by members on this site that are disgruntled with the SFW and the actual interests it appears they are really representing. It sure doesn't appear to be us everyday sportsmen that have to rely mostly on DIY adventures for lack of funds to access costly outfitters leases, CMUs, etc.
 
Nope, in all my years of hunting Wyoming, I never have looked at a map . . . I'm not really sure how to read one.

Seriously, I can understand those instances where a corner-jump would open up a ton of country on which you could hunt, but to jump section-to-section is relatively futile in my view, especially given the hang-ups regarding corner markers, fences, and the accuracy of GPS units.

Supporting the G&F and their effort to open up more country beats pissing landowners off and getting in trouble with the law.

There are plenty of areas where the public is heavily fractured, but possible to get into without corner jumping.

And, if corner jumping were legal, cut and dry, would you expect most hunters would be able to find corners they went searching for?
 
I can answer your last question from my perspective and it will definitely differ from your viewpoint on the issue itself. First, yes, with the modern GPS equipment and chips for them that show land ownership, I think many people could find those corners with that equipment. I even have one such spot where I know the exact corner already because there is a survey marker at the ne corner of that legally accessible state land and it touches the sw corner of approximately 2000 acres of otherwise landlocked BLM land. The adjoining properties to the nw and se are part of the ranch I have mentioned in the past where the rancher is a complete ahole and has tried to have us ticketed even when we abide by the law and stay on other legally accessible public lands around his property. It pisses me off because that BLM land I am talking about generally holds a large number of elk that I can watch through my binoculars from a high spot on accessible BLM land almost every day I hunt out there. I can guarantee with 100% certainty that even if corner jumping is declared legal that the rancher will raise a stink if he sees anybody on that BLM because he will say it was accessed by using his deeded property illegally. However, I think I have found how to get on there legally next year, as I thought all of the land adjoining the north side of that BLM was his when, in fact, the new platbook shows there is a small parcel that adjoins it for 1/4 mile that is owned by another rancher who already allows me access to his other small piece of property a couple miles from there. I will be in touch with him shortly to see if he will allow access through his property to get onto that BLM legally. I would love to go into that BLM land in the future and take a big bull off it and then rub it in that ahole rancher's nose, LOL!
 
I agree with topgun. With the new GPS stuff that's out there staying off of private land is pretty easy. And I have been really supprised to find so much public land that has corner survey markers.
 
If a corner is present...any gps will allow for very easy location of same.

So, you dont read maps, and dont know how to use a GPS?

Also, if a landowner is so concerned with someone jumping a corner...maybe they should have the corner surveyed in. If not, then the accuracy of a hand held GPS would be better than the corner that isnt there.

As always, theres one in every crowd that thinks the entire onus of this issue lies at the hands of sportsmen. It also comes at no shock that the same type of person, also feels like the public taking ownership of, and utilizing PUBLIC lands is somehow a slap in the face to a landowner???? Really? Its a slap in the face of the public for a landowner to deny us access. I've grown more than tired of that attitude and thought process.

Time for sportsmen to stand up for their rights and their future legal access to public lands. Theres a vast difference between working in partnership with Land Owners and letting them run rough-shod over the publics right to access public land.

I'm of the belief that corner jumping will become legal...mainly because so many are tired of the "land baron" attitude that private landowners show in regard to keeping the public off public lands.

It needs to stop...and it needs to stop now.
 
Nivpce rant buzz. Ya need to send that on to our legislatures.

"Courage is being scared to death but saddling
up anyway."
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 06:49PM (MST)[p]Understand that I would like to see corner jumping legalized as well guys . . .

Yes, I can read a map and use a GPS. Hell, I can even get by with a compass. With regard to GPS, I found at least one instance this year where the downloadable software featuring surface management data for the Garmin Oregon was flat wrong, showing a section of public when in fact it is private land. The people who sell the software evidently use any old map they can get their hands on . . .

Not all corners are marked with a pin or a fence, throwing a huge monkey wrench into using any recreational GPS available today to corner jump . . .

I guess I just have a more realistic view on the matter. G&F is going to side with landowners most of the time and I don't see that changing anytime soon. This is totally based on personal experience in the field. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't support a landowner who tried to block legal access to public lands, but when it comes to that landowner allowing access or not, they're more likely to entertain the idea if hunters are respecting current laws.

Now, you go start an organization to "take back the public land", throw in your own time and money, and maybe I'll join you by donating a few bucks of my hard-earned cash. While I wait for that to happen, I'll just find a place to hunt where I don't have to worry about corner jumping.
 
"I guess I just have a more realistic view on the matter. G&F is going to side with landowners most of the time and I don't see that changing anytime soon. This is totally based on personal experience in the field. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't support a landowner who tried to block legal access to public lands, but when it comes to that landowner allowing access or not, they're more likely to entertain the idea if hunters are respecting current laws."

I certainly disagree with most of what you have stated in that paragraph. The realistic view is that we, the public, are getting screwed out of use of OUR public lands by a lot of ranchers throughout the country! Also, the F&G in Wyoming has already said they won't prosecute anybody for corner jumping and would let the individual counties and sheriffs deal with it. It also sure sounds like you are supporting the landowner side of this because they are certainly blocking our access to these public lands for no other reason than greed and keeping it for their own personal use! Therefore, I especially think that the last sentence of the paragraph is a real crock of baloney! The majority of ranchers that I see and know about all act like all the public land where they live is theres and only for their use. I'm respecting all the laws and I think most people are too, but it sure isn't getting us any closer to using landlocked public lands unless these ranchers can get money for allowing access!
 
Himtnhuntr,

I dont believe you're up to speed on this issue...I really dont.

For example, there was a recent case, just this October/November in Albany County where Judge Robert Castor found in favor of a hunter that did indeed corner jump.

Its also NO secret that the WYG&F will not issue a citation for corner jumping...as no hunting violation has taken place. So for you to say that the G&F is siding with the landowners is flat WRONG.

Once again you are putting the onus clearly on the hunter when a coerner pin isnt present. My contention is that if a pin doesnt exist, the landowner will also be at the mercy of a hand-held GPS unit to prove trespass. I use a GPS nearly every day for work, I understand that there is inherent error with them. However, its also clear that in any court case, the landowners would be required to prove beyond any REASONABLE doubt that the intent of the hunter was to trespass. If a hunter is using the best available technology where corners arent marked, it would extremely difficult to make a trespassing ticket stick. In particular when they had a track log saved to their GPS showing they didnt cross any private land. Intent is a big part of the picture in any court case. Any hunter that is using the best technology available would clearly be showing no intent to either trespass or hunt on private...rather the opposite.

I've also heard from some very reliable sources that many county prosecutors will not hear a corner crossing case in both MT and WY...and in neither state will a warden issue a citation.

Corner crossing will become 100% legal, mainly because we're already just about there now. Not only should it be legal, it should be encouraged.

I'm tired of MY PUBLIC land being a playground for the select few.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 09:48PM (MST)[p]If there is no pin, it should be illegal. Your chances of hitting the exact spot are 1 in a 100,000. I believe based on the odds of hitting the exact corner, there is in fact intent to trespass....that is if you know the accuracy of your GPS unit.

Since you use a GPS everyday for work do you think you are hitting the actual corner in the scenario where there is not a pin or a fence post? You will probably say no, so wouldn't then there be intent to trespass?

I've played the corner jumping / 1/8 section splitting game before the landowner maps were available on GPS and I try my very best to stay on public. When you are talking about a few feet one way or another, I've found myself on the wrong side more than once and if confronted would admit my mistake. I immediately went right back to public, but it is not as easy as it is being made out to be.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the future. This is a tough one for me to decide on and should be a tough one for all of us to decide on. Public access versus landowners rights is a big issue. We want to get this one right and it is great that it is being discussed here as well as in the court of law.
 
Too many words...
Most won't contest the point of corner, or bother with it, UNLESS its Bull Time at the spot and the money depends on You being out of there, as a non-client.

Rump
 
No there isnt an intent to trespass...thats why I'm using the best available technology. Matter of fact, its just the opposite. If I didnt care, and had intent to trespass, I wouldnt bother looking for the corner monument or buy a GPS and ownership software. I'd just say, "fug it...close enough".

If a landowner is not happy with the accuracy of a modern hand-held GPS, then the landowner should have to survey in the corner. If not, then you live with the next best alternative.

Also, fence corners are NOT very accurate at all, many times placed for convenience due to topography, etc.

I'm still not sure how crossing a corner is in any way an infringement of private property rights....it just isnt there. Recent court cases/judges agree.

On the other hand, I can think of no reason for a landowner to not allow a corner to be crossed OTHER than to deny the public their right to use public land...period.
 
I disagree as you are not using the best available technology (you are using a $200 piece of technology). I think that the person trying to access the landlocked piece of property should be the one that has to survey in the corner with the best available technology, not the landowner (if the landowner did then you could just corner jump it). Crossing exactly on the corner might not be an infringement (depending on how you view a persons right to the air space immediately above their property), but crossing anywhere else except the dead on exact corner most positively is an infringement. Since I believe that crossing anywhere except at the exact corner is in fact an infringement on private property rights, then I believe using a $200 piece of equipment to get you within 10-20 feet is in fact illegal (because you know that you are not at the exact corner). I think it should be considered illegal because the chance of you getting lucky and hitting the corner is probably close to hitting the lottery.

Landowners should be able to deny the public the right to use their land to access public land, that is their right. I'm sure many of landowners have paid a pretty penny for that right.
 
As I've stated, I hope the corner jumping thing becomes widely excepted, cut-and-dry legal. I hope more and more cases are ruled on the side of hunters. I hope hunters press the issue and thousands of acres are opened up for hunting.

I have no reason to support the landowners in this case. I don't own a ranch or hunt private lands, save for WIA and HMA.

Albany County is an excellent example of the corner jumping issue because there is so much checkerboard country. I hadn't heard of the case recently, so it's good to hear of some rulings on the side of hunters.

I can just forsee some issues when every joe on the street starts to try their hand at corner jumping.


















\
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 10:48PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 10:43?PM (MST)

If the corner isnt there, or legally surveyed in...how is the landowner going to prove I trespassed?

Just curious.


Like I stated, the landowner would own the burden of proof that you did trespass...any first semester law student will tell you that.

Also, the public isnt landlocked, there is a common corner with other public land.

Big difference.
 
BuzzH.

That is definitely a good question and is really the only chance you have. Everyone knows you trespassed (you do, the rancher does, and the judge does), but it can't be proven so you are OK.

He wouldn't own the burden if there was a law that made it illegal. It could be illegal based on it being basically impossible to accomplish or on the fact that he owns the usable airspace above his property (which you trespassed through).

His second option would be to subpoena your GPS and acquire the GPS corrections for that time and show that the corrections were larger than the accuracy range of the GPS, so you had to be off the corner.

Third option would be to bury a stake on the corner and show that you did not cross at the stake.

It is interesting and I am ready to corner jump, but if asked in the court of law if I trespassed or not in this scenario, I would answer: "I am not positive, but I do believe that I did in fact trespass".
 
Pollard noted that Castor's decision is not binding in any other Wyoming county. Racines added that the judge did not even give a reason for his decision, which makes the basis for his finding unclear.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 11:19PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 11:18?PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 11:12?PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 11:06?PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-11 AT 11:05?PM (MST)

Its not binding, but still sets legal precedence that could be argued as case history in other counties/courts/jurisdictions.

That happens all the time in courts all across the U.S.

Also, you didnt answer the question of how a landowner would prove trespass if a corner doesnt exist?

Never mind...saw your reply...obviously there isnt a specific law that makes corner jumping illegal. Further, the "air space" arguement has conflicting court cases as well.

It would be darn tough for a landowner to currently prove you trespassed while crossing from one corner to another...whether a corner pin exists or not.

The burden currently is on them to prove their case in a court, and I have no idea how they could prove it without some serious photographs/video evidence.

Corner crossing is going to be become legal, and the smart landowners would be well advised to start reaching agreements with the public regarding this type of access. If not, they're going to be sorry.
 
nripepi---You sound like a rancher with those arguments you're posting, LOL! Do you, by chance, own land where this would be an issue? I can't believe you would think that if there is no corner marker that it would favor the rancher when he wouldn't have any better idea or way to say where the corner is than the person with a good GPS. That person, by use of the GPS technology, IS trying to obey the law by using it, and if he misses the unmarked corner by a few feet, how is it going to be proved in court? I believe your thinking is backwards and it's exactly why the Washakie County Prosecutor wouldn't do anything when that ahole rancher wanted to have us ticketed for trespassing. In that instance, we aren't even talking about a corner boundary marker, but rather way down a N/S boundary line that was not marked by signs, a fence, or survey markers. That is very typical of the majority of boundaries and why a person can't just look at a paper map and know where they are by using a vehicle odometer, for example. I have met more than a few hunters out in Wyoming that only had a surface map and were trying to use their vehicle odometer to find public land. You might be able to do that to access large tracts, but you are asking for big trouble doing that for the numerous smaller tracts. I actually met 3 nonresident guys out there this year that had doe antelope permits and they stopped at my camp to ask if they could hunt the area. In fact, they had read the map wrong, were on the wrong road and were 7 miles from the road that separated the unit they had the tags for from where we were. There is hardly any public land near the road they thought they were on and it doesn't hold any antelope. Later in the week they stopped back all disconsolate about having to eat those tags and were complaining about the lousy F&G, etc! I really didn't feel a bit sorry for them with their very obvious complete lack of preparation for their hunt.
Anyway, IMHO there is absolutely no reason not to allow corner jumping unless you are a greedy rancher and want to continue to control what isn't yours in the first place! This is about as big a crock as the other rancher out there who wanted us to stay away from the unmarked property lines of his ranch where it bordered state land. We had the boundary marked in our GPS and were well back from it a couple times when he stopped us to claim we were on his deeded land. When we showed him we knew exactly where we were he made the assinine comment that "Well, you're in my buffer zone!", LOL!
 
I've got what may be a stupid question. People are always talking about "air space" being part of the land owner's property. Does that mean that any plane, helicopter, etc. is trespassing when they fly over private property? Just how far up in the air do they own?
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-11-11 AT 11:03AM (MST)[p]>I disagree as you are not
>using the best available technology
>(you are using a $200
>piece of technology). I
>think that the person trying
>to access the landlocked piece
>of property should be the
>one that has to survey
>in the corner with the
>best available technology, not the
>landowner (if the landowner did
>then you could just corner
>jump it). Crossing exactly
>on the corner might not
>be an infringement (depending on
>how you view a persons
>right to the air space
>immediately above their property), but
>crossing anywhere else except the
>dead on exact corner most
>positively is an infringement.
>Since I believe that crossing
>anywhere except at the exact
>corner is in fact an
>infringement on private property rights,
>then I believe using a
>$200 piece of equipment to
>get you within 10-20 feet
>is in fact illegal (because
>you know that you are
>not at the exact corner).
> I think it should
>be considered illegal because the
>chance of you getting lucky
>and hitting the corner is
>probably close to hitting the
>lottery.
>
>Landowners should be able to deny
>the public the right to
>use their land to access
>public land, that is their
>right. I'm sure many
>of landowners have paid a
>pretty penny for that right.
>



This is the exact type of attitude that causes people, including me to hope corner jumping becomes accepted practice. The days of buy up 40 acres to control 200,000 acres of public land would be over.
 
I got news for you guys', there are gps units and signals that will get you accuracies of less than 5 centimeters ( 2 inches) all day long so being in the right place isnt that hard to do.

If you know the area you want to hunt is/would be great, its nothing to research where the corner is, calc it, and walk right to it from the public side.

The days of these rancher/LO issues where public lands are blocked are surely coming to an end.
 
Pretty sure I just glanced over an article in the paper just this last week.Seems that this will get discussed and brought to a final determination(maybe)in the upcoming legislative session(maybe).Until then,take your chances on corner jumping.Pretty sure we all know how it will end up if our legislature decides the outcome.On a side note,please do not attempt to contact Mr.Gearino.Jeff is no longer with us...
 
Surveyors use such GPS units, but I believe you need a license to have one . . . Can you tell us where we can get an affordable recreational GPS that can get one within 2" of a property corner?
 
It is what is considered "usable" air space (think building or skyscraper...) not flying over. I think that will probably be what decides this in the court of law. It should be interesting none the less.
 
Nope. I don't own any land where this would be an issue and hunt 99% public ground myself. I am rooting for corner jumping to become legal like everyone else on this forum, I just see it as trespassing myself, especially without a corner stake or monument, because 99.99% of the time you would be trespassing.
 
You dont need a license for survey or mapping grade gear.

What you need is a hand held with built in receiver that accepts vrs, or cmr, rtcm real time corrections. You could tie into a corrected base station using a cell phone or the sim from your phone and you are set.

There is also a service called omnistar and another called RTX that are satelite based corrections meaning you diont have to have any base station, and the GPS signal received will already be corrected. This is the 5cm correction i was referring to.

Trimble Navigation offers collectors that will work. I expect Garmin and the like to follow soon. The geoxh and xr will get you there right now.

They are a bit pricey, but my point being we will be there with a garmin soon. Heck with the prices we pay for scopes and binos, these units arent sounding too bad.
 
You would need either cell service (not easy in most of these areas), satellite service (probably expensive for most hunters), and an expensive GPS (should get cheaper in the future). My point is that the every day hunter is going to have a Garmin with preloaded maps ownership maps and they are not going to be able to find the exact corner, their chance of being right is very very very bad.

That brings us to the actual accuracy of those preloaded maps. Many of them are 1:100,000 ownership maps, some could be from 1:24,000 maps and everyone that I have seen has a disclaimer about their accuracy. The company in question downloads GIS shapefiles from state offices (that created files from BLM maps) and then converts them and loads them on Garmin Mapsource software. There is so much room for error in this process. I bet they are not within inches or even a few feet of being accurate, heck they might be off by tens of feet. To be accurate, the corners need to be surveyed by a licensed crew.

I stand by my statement that the hunter or public game office needs to survey in the actual corner, put a stake in the ground, and then corner jumping might be legal depending on the air space argument/decision. Why should the landowner have to take this cost on, especially by doing so he would then allow access and a bunch of headaches with the average Joe not being able to read his GPS unit or Joe shoots an animal on the border and it runs of the section on to private?

I am rooting for corner jumping and I would do it in a second if there was a monument or marker there, but if there wasn't I know I couldn't find the exact corner without spending some money.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-11 AT 09:30AM (MST)[p]nripepi stated:
"Why should the landowner have to take this cost on, especially by doing so he would then allow access and a bunch of headaches with the average Joe not being able to read his GPS unit or Joe shoots an animal on the border and it runs of the section on to private?"

I don't believe anybody has said that the landowner should have to mark the corner, but the same could also be asked as to why the hunter should have to pay to have it marked! If the landowners would get off this greed trip of considering the public lands as their own and let people access these checkerboard lands there would be no problem. What you stated about somebody shooting an animal that could then go onto the private property is no different than if they were hunting the legally accessible part and it crossed the line. That really doesn't wash and is just another excuse in this debate. Actually, what is the big deal if the hunter is off the corner by say 10' or so if he's trying his best to stay off the private land and the newer GPS stuff we are using now will definitely allow that kind of accuracy? If there isn't even a fence there to designate the boundary, the hunter would just be on the private land for a couple seconds and would be doing absolutely no damage to that property. I'm all for private property rights, but I really don't believe that this has much to do with that as compared to just barging across a piece of land for quite a ways to get to public land! Then that is certainly intentional trespassing and should be dealt with appropriately. Just MHO on this subject!
 
The reason it is a BIG DEAL is because it is ILLEGAL! It is illegal to step foot on private ground (in most states that is) even if you are only 10 feet on the wrong side of the property . It is their right to not allow you to cross their land. The land that they pay taxes on, the land that they or their relatives bought at some point in time, maybe the land that they paid a lot of money for because they thought they had tied up access to public ground!

If I were able to purchase some land, I might look at some that had public access locked up or hard to access as well. I am sure that would be one of the things I looked at and the price would be higher for such land. This is a big issue for both sides (private ownership laws and public access) and it is important that we come up with the correct answer for each scenario.

Point well taken with regards to there is no difference in hunting these lands as others close to the border of private, definitely not an arguable defense, but that is the reason that this is being contested because it will become an issue if everyone starts hunting checkerboard pieces of property.

Maybe I am the only one (other than some landowners) that feel strongly about this issue on, no pun intended, this side of the fence. Maybe I am wrong, I just think it should be considered trespassing and illegal unless there is a monument/stake on the corner.

Anyone else agree with me or am I way in the minority on this issue?
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-11 AT 10:23AM (MST)[p]You are in the minotity on this issue.

First of all, I can tell you for a fact, that the WYG&F is currently using GPShuntingmaps, and the garmin 76s...same with Montana. I hunted a piece of state ground for antelope this year and was checked by a G&F warden Rod Lebert. He and I both had the EXACT same GPS and chip. He also told me that in a dispute over ownership, he would use his GPS to make a decision on who was right...period.

Further, while being checked a neighboring landowner stopped and guess what??? He's also using the same exact gps and the same exact gpshuntingmaps chip.

That landowner made the comment that he is finding all kinds of things he didnt even know about in regard to fences, corner pins, etc.

I'm still of the opinion that if a landowner doesnt want people trespassing, then they should be the ones surveying in the pin. Its no different when their fuggin' livestock trespasses on MY private property. The livestock owner is not obligated to build me a fence to keep his cows out...quite the contrary...I have to pay for, and build a fence to keep his cows out.

The same thing applies to this. When corner jumping becomes legal, if there is no pin, then disputes will be settled by a sheriff or a warden in the field using a hand-held gps...just like what is happening NOW. If the landowner wants to go through the trouble and keep people/trespassers to the exact corner...then he'll have to pay to survey in the pin.

The courts are already finding in favor of corner jumping and landowners are largely NOT prosecuting for it...stop and think about why that is.

Also, this case will not be decided on the usable air space arguement...theres tons of case history of that argument holding about as much water as a colander...
 
If they put up a pin, then I believe that would make it legal. There is no incentive to put up a marker for the landowner because it would make it legal and it would cost him quite a few dollars. I think the BLM/State/USFS or private person should have to pay for the pin if they want to cross in that spot.

I am as hopeful as everyone here that it will become legal, I just don't see how it should be legal without a marker on the exact spot. With the instrument in that you, the landowner, and the WY G&F are using, I guarantee that everyone will actually be trespassing when corner jumping. It is the perfect instrument for them to use in the case of being squarely on or off private property (that is what WY G&F is probably using it for), but it is not acceptable to use that for corner jumping because of the error.

I'll get off my soapbox now and just watch from the sidelines as this all plays out. I hope it happens, but I am skeptical.

I think only New Mexico has open range rules? Not sure on that, but you shouldn't have to fence out cattle.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-11 AT 11:36AM (MST)[p]Right on BuzzH! That is the exact reason that Tom DeSomber, the WY F&G Warden/Biologist out of TenSleep wouldn't touch the situation a couple years ago that I described earlier. He knew that we were using the latest GPS equipment along with that CD ROM that I had bought right from the F&G online store when they first offered it for sale. The only thing I think I'm going to do differently out there in the future is have the track log turned on so that from now on the new Garmin GPS I bought last week will show everywhere I've been. I usually don't turn tracks on because I know the areas, but as you mentioned in a recent post, that track log would definitely show exactly where you were at all times and should absolutely erase any question about trespassing if something arises. I appreciate that comment because it's a way I never thought about to further prove your innocence if a bad situation arises. Incidentally, congratulations on your awesome seasons and all the great critters you took this Fall!!!

nripepi---Everything you keep posting siding with the landowners point of view is definitely greed on their part (maybe yours too with that comment you just made regarding if you were looking for land it might be places bordering public property)and is exactly what we are talking about. If they don't know their corners and boundaries, and I guarantee that a lot of them don't, then how are they going to have any standing in a trespass dispute if they don't mark their boundaries and the hunter has the GPS equipment we are talking about to try and stay legal? The simple answer is that they won't and that's why Buzz made mention that the courts are finding in favor of the hunter in these cases where they are just trying to abide by the law. It appears that we may not have to worry any longer about getting a ticket from a F&G agent on this issue, but the worry is still there if some rancher has the County Sheriff and/or Court in his pocket! Incidentally, what Buzz mentioned about having to build a fence to keep cattle off your land is the way it is in Wyoming. I know that for a fact because I was helping a couple that own property out where I hunt redo a fenceline because the neighbor's cattle were coming through it to drink in their ponds. Even though the fence is the boundary separating the two private properties, the law requires only them to build/maintain the fence if they don't want those cattle coming onto their land! I guess if cattle are thought of that way I would wonder why we aren't held in just the same way, LOL! You stated in your last post: "It is the perfect instrument for them to use in the case of being squarely on or off private property (that is what WY G&F is probably using it for), but it is not acceptable to use that for corner jumping because of the error." My question to you is this. If they and you think the GPS they are using is accurate enough to solve a boundary line dispute, then why isn't it accurate enough for a corner jumping issue? The simple answer again should be NONE because if it's off 10', let's say, on the corner dispute, it is going to be off the same +/- distance on the full boundary line too!!!
 
Track Logs are not required. A person does not have to prove they didn't trespass! The state is obligated to prove a person did. If a deputy writes a person a ticket or makes an arrest it would then become the state's liability to prove the violation. In Wyoming a third party (in this case a land owner) can issue a ticket through a deputy and the State would depend on the third party (i.e. landowner) to prove the allegation. The landowner would be required to have his corner surveyed to prove the trespass in court. A guess or estimation would not stand up to the legal requirements!

I think it has been discussed earlier but there is no corner jumping law that I know of. There are trespassing laws. I have contacted both the county attorney's and the Sheriff's where I hunt. I try and hash everything out before the hunt but things can happen. Long story short it is not a hunter?s responsibility to PROVE anything. If a land owner wants to try and hold a piece of public ground hostage than they will need to pay to have their corners surveyed. The problem then becomes that the corner is surveyed and corner jumping becomes easier.

The Wyoming Supreme court needs to settle this. Any group, organization or person that tries to stop people from accessing public is in the wrong IMO.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-11 AT 11:47AM (MST)[p]Utah400Elk---I agree with you 100% on everything you just stated in your post, but having that track log would be one more reason that the rancher wouldn't want to press charges in the first place! What you mentioned about the rancher (third party) having to prove you were trespassing is exactly why the Prosecutor would not touch the case when the rancher wanted to have a ticket written against me and my buddies for allegedly trespassing. The Prosecutor, in a quick meeting, asked if there were fences, signs, or survey markers to designate the private property boundaries. The answer was no and that's why I was using my GPS and map from my CD ROM to avoid trespassing. He flat out stated that if the sheriff issued a ticket that he and his staff would not take it to Court if the defendant(me)entered a not guilty plea, which is exactly what I told him I would do---end of case right there!
 
"Squarely on" to me means more than 100 yards, could be 50 yards, 25 yards, 10 yards...it is not good enough to solve a boundary dispute of less than 5 yards and should not be used in the case you stated.

I have no intention of buying any property in the next 10-20 years, but if I hit the lottery it would be one variable that would be part of the process (What kind of access is there to the bordering public ground...). If you were to buy property, wouldn't that be a question as well?

The latest court case was decided because there was a pin in place and the person stepped directly over the pin. If there was not a pin, then it might have been different. I just feel that if there is no pin, then it is trespassing. Within 10 feet isn't close enough for me. Maybe it is close enough for everyone else though.

I can't comment on the livestock issues in Wyoming, I think the rancher should be the responsible party to fence his livestock onto the property he owns or leases. I believe that in Utah and Colorado the rancher is responsible to have the livestock fenced...I could be wrong though. If I am, I think there should be a law that requires the rancher to be responsible in this case.
 
Topgun. quick question for you? Were you corner jumping or just accessing public through a small 1/4 or 1/8 section? Just curious as these are very very different issues.

Thanks.

Nino
 
Topgun

Track Logs would help prove you didn't trespass but don't like them. I don't turn on my track logs because I lost a GPS a few years ago. I have stopped hunting the area because the next year there was a few people who appeared to be following my old track logs. I am sure it was probably a coincidence but I have since changed what info I put into my GPS. If it's lost I don't want people to find it and follow my hard work to get to know an area. That is the same reason I don't mark GPS spots (i.e. wallows, water, trails etc.) I have a hard time even GPS marking my kill sites and delete them when I do just a soon as I get the animal out. Long and short...I know where I am at all times and know the laws very well.

To add a little fuel to this fire...
I talked with a Special Agent form the US Forest service about Elk Mountain and access to the top of the mountain (the BLM land). He told me he had previously been a Wyoming Gamer Warden and admitted that certain game wardens are granted access to private property if they "help" enforce the trespassing laws. He stated it was a conflict of interest and that he never did it but was a common practice in Wyoming. He also said a person could fly into the top of Elk Mountain legally but stated that person WOULD be arrested by Game and Fish for trespassing even though they were on public ground and had lawfully accessed it. He did say that the person arrested would have a hell of a court case ending in a nasty civil suit.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-11 AT 01:45PM (MST)[p]nripepi---The deal I mentioned involved a large tract of state and BLM land that we were hunting on that is accessible from the county road we camp and drive on. We were coming back to our truck on the BLM land and were accused of being on his private property, which lies to the east of where we were walking. The boundary is a good mile or more going straight N/S, so there was no guessing on our part by using our GPS. The guessing was on the rancher's end of it and that's why the Prosecutor basically told him to go jump in the lake! You still seem to keep coming up with stuff that is not making much sense IMHO. If they are using a GPS in any alleged trespassing issues as was mentioned, they must figure that it's close enough whether it's 10' or 100'. I'm sure it's a lot closer to 10' in accuracy and if that's good enough for them, then IMHO it should also be good enough for the corner situation, unless it has been surveyed and marked previously. Then there should be no doubt.

Utah400Elk---Sorry you lost your GPS! I lost my spotting scope from my pack on a trail years ago that only one other guy used that day. When he passed me coming out as I had backtracked to where I had stopped for the day and where I was sure it had fallen out I asked if he had seen it. I know he found and kept it, but there was no way of proving it when he said no. Some people are just scumbags as I would never keep anything like that if I knew who was looking for it.
Regarding your second paragraph, I can say that what you mentioned is very true. The Game Warden who patrols the area where I hunt told me he has to stay in pretty tight with the private property owners in order to do all his game studies, which represent 70% of his duties according to a recent article in the Wyoming Wildlife News that the F&G puts out 6 times a year. That is why it's a little scary when I hear from others that he has issued trespass tickets to nonresidents just based on some ahole rancher's accusations. It's definitely a conflict of interest to take the word of someone over someone else just to keep access to the land for his duties, but it sounds like that's exactly what he was talking about.
 
10 feet is not good enough for corner jumping unless you are Carl Lewis, then it still might not be good enough. If you are off by 10 feet, you would be in fact trespassing when you went across the corner. I stand by that statement.

10-100 feet is plenty good enough for the situations you described and is how they should be using the current easily available technology, I just don't feel it is accurate enough to allow corner jumping without a marker/monument/stake. I'm glad your situation was easily resolved with the GPS/Card and I'm glad the Game Officer had one as well. Sorry that I was unclear before.

Nino
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-11 AT 03:00PM (MST)[p]There is no possible way in hell for a landowner to prove trespass without an established corner...period.

If the corner isnt fit...you must acquit.

A few other things...if you access a piece of BLM land via a flight, you can not be ticketed/fined, providing you have the proper permits from the BLM. Not sure on the status of state land. Forest Service would probably be the same as BLM.

Also, while I'm sure wardens try to maintain good working relationships with private landowners, they have authority to access private to enforce game and fish laws if they have reason go believe there are violations happening. They also have the authority to search camps, vehicles, etc. WITHOUT A WARRANT, if they believe a violation has happened.

Wardens have a lot more latitude and authority than a Sheriff...and rightfully so.
 
BuzzH---We aren't going to win this debate with him when he states that 10' is probably good enough for a lengthy boundary issue, but not for a corner situation. WTF is the difference when we are talking trespass in both situations if the property lines/corners aren't surveyed and marked accordingly? I give up!!! Yes, Wardens do have a lot more authority than a Sheriff. I also had more than a State Trooper did when I was an Investigator for the State of Michigan because, just like a Warden, I didn't need search warrants to do my investigations and I could seize property without a warrant if it did not meet requirements of the law. The one difference I'm talking about out in Wyoming is where 70% of the GW's job is game studies in his biologist role. The land owners don't have to let him on their property to do those functions like they do if he suspects game law violations are occurring.
 
I hear you with the biology part...but its actually pretty easy to do counts without landowner permission.

Even though some landowners think so, last time I checked, it wasnt against the law to LOOK at my public wildlife on private.
 
Yep, but it's also a lot easier when they let Tom ride his horse on the 100,000 acre ranch that I hunt near to do game counts because they don't use flying much now due to the costs and dangers involved. That's why I mentioned earlier in a post that one time he told me he needs to stay on good terms with those big, influential ranchers to do his work better.
 
Topgun.

I never ever said 10 feet was good enough for a lengthy boundary debate (please read through my posts and let me know where I said that), I said it was good enough to tell if you were on public by 10-100 yards which is plenty good enough for most instances (corner jumping excluding). In order to actually jump a corner correctly, you have to be within 1 or 2 feet in accuracy which is not possible with the technology you are using. It is fine for walking down a 1/4 section, but not to get to an actual corner. It is just not possible without a pin. I myself have have walked 1/8 L shaped sections prior to the available maps on GPS units...you physically can't jump a corner with a Garmin and preloaded maps, you are 99.9% of the time actually trespassing.

The difference (and I would ask you to not cuss at me next time) is that landowners are not required by law (in most states) to post or fence out trespassers. It is illegal to step onto private property, there is no difference if you are on private property for 10 feet, 100 feet, or 100 yards.

I will not give up on this debate because I believe I am correct in cases where there is not a pin and you are not using survey accuracy equipment. It is debatable if a charge in the court of law can be proven beyond reasonable doubt, but it is not debatable to me that you actually trespassed in that instance. Since I believe a trespassing offense is highly likely (9999 out of 10,000 times) to occur, I believe that it should be illegal except in the case where there is a stake/monument or survey accurate equipment is used where you can prove you are within a foot accuracy.

I am glad we are having this debate and I am glad we have been pretty reasonable with regards to name calling. I understand where everyone is coming from and I want access just like the rest of you, but I want to do it right 100% of the time. I don't want to say 10 feet is close enough when I believe it is not.

Thanks for taking the time to read my point of view.

Nino
 
nripepi---Please read the second paragraph of your post #51 as it is exactly what I stated you said about my boundary line dispute and now yiou are saying that I'm wrong! Also, please tell me where I cussed at you.
 
It is possible, but I agree probably not easy.

Options for the landowner:

1. Subpoena in your GPS and download the track file going in and out across the corner. Acquire the exact corrections for the time when you crossed the corner. Apply those corrections to your track and show that you crossed on to private property.

2. When you walk into the corner at 7 AM it shows on your map that you crossed directly on the corner. When you walk out at 7 PM and the corrections sent out are 20 feet in the other direction from where you crossed. Your options are cross in the same spot you crossed when you walked in and it would show on your GPS that you are 20 feet away from the corner. Walk to the corner on your map and it would show you are 20 feet from where you crossed in the morning. If you chose option 2, you would have to had either trespassed on the way in or the way out or maybe both! If you chose option 1, you would have to argue that your first choice was indeed the correct spot (tough to convince a person of that if you were off by 20 feet in the 2nd instance).

3. A landowner could survey in the corner, but not put up a monument or stake, but instead survey in spots to set-up a series of trail cameras in the vicinity of the corner. These would be on his property different distances away from the actual corner only known by his survey. He would then have pictures of where you crossed the corner and could prove that you actually trespassed.

4. You could survey in the corner and set-up proximity detection systems that record the location of everyone crossing within a certain distance.

Maybe I am crazy, I think I might be. I don't have anything to gain at all in these scenarios, I want to corner jump as much as Topgun and Buzz.

Sorry for the long winded response, but when you said there is no possible way, I think you might be wrong.
 
I misread your post before #51 to say that you were 1 mile from the border, not actually on the border. I apologize for that.

If you are saying that you were standing dead on exactly on the border according to your GPS, then you actually are not sure if you were 10 feet on the right side or 10 feet on the wrong side and actually trespassing. If you were staying 100 feet away from the border and walking a long it, then you would be fine. This scenario is similar to corner jumping, but definitely different in the fact that you would not actually have to walk right down the border to be legal (you could walk on the public side and be fine).

When WTF is directed directly at a person, I take it as cussing. No big deal.

I know that you and Buzz help many people on this site and you just want fair access. I respect that.

Take care.

Nino
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-11 AT 09:45PM (MST)[p]Seeing as how I was in law enforcement for over 30 years I can tell you that your #1 option is probably out the window because asking the Court to subpoena my GPS for your use would be asking me to testify against myself. If I knew there was anything on the device that would incriminate me I would either not have mentioned that I had used it, or the evidence would have been erased form the device or the device "lost" before it was ever subpoened. However, I could use it in my defense if I wanted to and thought that it would help my case. Then if I did that it would open the door for you to look at it to see if what I was stating in my defense was accurate. Since #1 is pretty well out, that also throws out your #2 usage of the device! In your #3 scenario if there are no pictures of the corner pin on the photos, how is the rancher going to show that the pictures show a person trespassing? Just taking his word that it does is the same argument that we have been saying that the Courts will not accept because it has to be indisputable evidence! #4 also isn't going to get you anywhere because the defendant could argue that it was an animal or some other person that set the detection system off! You're not crazy, but you are as hard-headed as I am when you think you're correct on something. IMHO that's not bad, but you have to remember that in a Court of law YOU have to prove the person guilty and follow the law as to how you do it. Unless you can do that by having an actual survey and very possibly an actual picture of the person doing the illegal deed you will most likely lose if you don't have the Judge in your pocket. Finally, anybody that gets a ticket for this alleged infraction should enter a not guilty plea and ask for a jury trial because I can pretty well say that a jury would never find the person guilty because of everything we've been talking about here. You would not even be allowed to sit on that jury because the first question you would be asked as a potential juror is if you have any knowledge and/or predisposed feelings about this type of issue! You would have to say you do and you would be tossed out of the potential jurist pool pronto!
 
What about in cases where a fenceline isnt the correct boundary, but rather put in for convenience?

That happens all the time as well. I know of several places where I would pound a deer/elk/antelope on the other side of a fence that is posted...mainly because the corners are in, and the fence is not on the section line.

Further, on some of these places, the landowners are POSTING public land at their fencelines that are way off.

IMO, they are in violation and should be cited.

At the end of the day, a landowner is going to have one hell of a time proving you trespassed unless the corner is in, period. Even if he has a track log on his gps showing you did...based on what? His word? A picture doesnt mean crap, pretty tough to prove where you were actually at. Any gps is going to get you really close to a corner, close enough that a picture would be as worthless as screen doors on a submarine.

The only way for a landowner to prove trespass is to have a visible corner put in...which would then solve the whole issue, because there would be no doubt of the pin...or your location.

As has already been stated...there is no reason to not allow corner crossing other than to deny the public their right to use PUBLIC land.

No other reason...period. Anyone with a single firing brain cell knows thats the case. They are using MY PUBLIC LAND as their personal playground. This crap has got to stop...and it will.
 
So you are saying that I don't have a brain cell?

What if I said I have a PhD in Geographic Information Systems? Would I then have a brain cell?

I bet I am not the only one without brain cells with an opinion on this issue.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-11 AT 10:11PM (MST)[p]nripepi---BuzzH didn't say that, just like I didn't cuss at you in any of my posts directed to you! Anyway, if you or anyone else doesn't have any brain cells, they sure aren't going to have any thought process to have an opinion on ANYTHING, LOL! BuzzH did bring up several more things in his last post that are definitely true. Unless the land is surveyed and the fence is placed directly on the boundary, and not for convenience to the landowner, then they should be cited if there are any signs indicating the fence is the boundary, period. Case in point is the fence I mentioned that I was helping rebuild to keep out the cattle. The new survey showed that the old fence was off from 10 to 20 feet east along it's entire 3/4 mile N/S run, but it was in favor of the other landowner whose cattle are crossing it. I'll bet he won't contest the new fence as it goes up, but he will be pissed when his cattle can't get water because his parcel no longer has water on it. It's amazing that whoever built that fence many decades ago came so close to the actual boundary, but where that old fence was didn't have any big rocks or boulders to go over. Maybe they even knew the exact boundary and built the fence at their convenience like BuzzH mentioned! Who knows? In closing for the evening I would just like to ask you what makes you feel that the private property landowner has any more rights to his place than we do to OUR public lands because that's what it sounds like you have been saying all along? Think about that one and I'll be back on sometime tomorrow when I getdone putting up the tree and all the outside decorations. Until then, peace everyone!
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-11 AT 10:27PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Dec-12-11 AT 10:20?PM (MST)

nripepi,

I said, ANYONE with a single firing brain cell can figure out why landowners are so opposed to this. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it.

Trespass isnt even a remote concern...WTF is stepping over a corner going to hurt, in particular from one corner of PUBLIC land onto another corner of PUBLIC land? How is a landowner going to be caused harm or damage? Theres no damage there...none. Air space is a fuggin' joke of an argument, a pin not being there is another joke.

Its all about their continued desire to keep the public off public land and their desire to continue to use MY PUBLIC LAND as their personal playground.

Its not 1970 anymore...technology and times change...even if they dont want it to.

You can continue to argue all day long...but the direction this is headed is more than clear...and the courts are agreeing.

On top of that you're arguing a point that doesnt exist...there is no specific law in Wyoming or Montana that makes corner crossing illegal, whether or not there is a corner marker.

You keep saying, "I think it should be illegal if there isnt a pin."

As a hunter of public land, I'll not be asking for your advice on what should and shouldnt be legal in regard to corner crossing. You've more than demonstrated that you fully support a landowner having not one ounce of responsibility when it comes to something as important as their "property rights".

Put all the expense and the onus on the hunting public...the gift to landowners that just keeps on giving.

I'm done giving...the hunting public has been used enough.
 
Again, corner jumping is NOT illegal. There are no laws that I have found that prohibit corner jumping. Trespassing is illegal but the burden of proof is on the states. Topgun is right, there is no way a landowner can subpoena a person?s GPS to prove a trespassing case. In order for a Game warden to view your GPS they would need a search warrant.

I am not advocating trespassing, just so that I am very claer. All hunters should know where they are at all times. If a person is not detailed and disciplined enough to know where they are they should avoid anything that is even close to private property. However, if a person is willing to put in the time, study maps, go to the County Assessor?s Office, etc, than there is no reason to shy away from the state/federal lands that are near private property. I am tired of landowners trying to keep people off state and federal land. I hope that one day all of that will come to an end.
 
We all can just agree to disagree on this issue.

It sounds like the argument when there is not a pin in place is that close enough is close enough and that they can't prove I trespassed (even if I did) or they are not allowed to subpoena my GPS.....it sounds like you might be in agreement that you did actually trespass when there is not a corner pin...not positive on that, but it sounds that way, but it doesn't matter.

I am an exact 100% right kind of guy, I don't want there to be any doubt.

If an act is nearly 100% illegal, take any act, but it can't be proven in the court of law, then the only option to lawmakers is to actually make a law that it is illegal. It sounds like that is the only option and I have no problem with landowners voicing their opinion on this issue and I have no problem with those that want to access the public property voicing their opinions. I have no problem with corner jumping when there is a pin present.

If I were to write the law, I would say:

Corner jumping is legal only when a surveyed pin is visibly marked at the corner and the person accessing the property crosses directly over that pin to the opposite piece of property.

I just read between the lines that since I am the only one here in disagreement that the brain cell statement was directed at me and anyone that is on the side of the fence that corner jumping is not cut and dry. I take the two WTFs directed at me as cussing as well, no big deal as I stated, but that is how I interrupt the acronym.

I am glad everyone posting is so engaged on these issues and passionate about their views. I don't want there to be any questions at all of where I am and I know from using many a GPS that the accuracy is just not there for a Garmin with preloaded ownership maps. Heck you might end off by 100 feet some of the time, is 100 feet close enough for you all?

The reason this is such a big deal is that it is an exact point in space. If there were not set-off distances from property borders (maybe some counties don't have any?), then you could basically wall the public off. Set-up two buildings (one on each parcel) and butt them up together with a few inches in between them and there would be no way to jump the corner. What if landowners set-up 10 foot posts 2 inches on their side of the corner? What happens then? This is a real issue and it has been debated for a long time and will continue to be debated in and out of the court systems. The correct answer is not an easy one.

Where there is a block of public ground blocked by one access point on a corner, that is not that big of a deal to get surveyed in and marked...but the real issue I see is checkerboard property. I think we should be blaming the federal government for dividing up the land in that way. Those who bought these properties back in the day surely knew there was a benefit to them, and is the reason they should be allowed to fight it if they believe they are in the right.

Hope we can all stay on good terms and thanks for the opportunity to debate. After the courts have made a decision, we can all come back on here and debate some more.
 
Yes 100 feet is close enough if a pin doesnt exist and a landowner doesnt care enough about his property rights to install one.

Good work on now placing the blame on the Federal Government...going to blame Santa Claus next?

Do you know why the Government GAVE AWAY the checkerboard properties?

I'll give you a hint...ACCESS!
 
The federal government is absolutely to blame on this deal. The big checkerboard pieces were given to railroads as part of a subsidized land grants in the mid to late 1800s while they were developing westward railroads. This land held little value at the time and for some reason the federal government thought that the process would increase the property value of their other holdings that they didn't give away, thus making it worth it for everyone involved. It was put to a stop in the late 1800s after they figured out it was a bad idea. That is why I blame the federal government, they should have thought about what they were doing before dividing up 100s of millions of acres into checkerboard patterns. No we have to deal with it and it is hard to come to a conclusion with regards to public access to public property while respecting private property rights. They should have divided up the land in bigger blocks versus the checkerboard they did.

100 feet off the corner to me is clearly trespassing. You have stated and I have stated that there is not an incentive for the landowner to install a pin, so why should he do it? It would allow legal access and it would cost him a lot of money. If the government wants to allow access to these pieces of public property, they should pay to install the pins.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-13-11 AT 10:35AM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Dec-13-11 AT 10:33?AM (MST)

Think about the checkerboard pattern and why the land was given that way...

So the railroads would always have access...VIA A CORNER to the next piece of land they owned.

Good enough to run a rail line...but not good enough to allow the same access to public land???

There is an incentive to landowners to survey the pin, to keep the evil trespassers off their property.

I have no incentive to do so...I'll use my handheld gps and call it good where a corner pin isnt established. Remember county attorneys are not taking the cases...wardens arent citing for it...and the burden is on the landowner to prove trespass. Courts are NOT finding in favor of landowners on these issues. There is on law specific to corner crossing, whether or not a pin is established.

For the record, do you know how many areas there are that dont have pins present?

I can tell you that I've found hundreds...in places that you would think wouldnt have them. Pretty rare to not find a pin.
 
I don't think that is the reason. My understanding is that the Federal government did not want the railroad to own large swaths of land and they wanted to increase the value of their land through the checkerboard process. By putting it in a checkerboard pattern, the railroads then had an incentive to lay a good track so that the value of their property would increase and they could sell it and make a profit. The federal government thought that the value of their property would actually double based on the arrangement and then they would be able to sell it off and make a profit. It obviously did not work that way. I don't think it was done for corner jumping access reasons. The federal government did not anticipate owning these lands 140 years later.

Without a pin it is actually trespassing, but you could definitely be right that it will not hold up in the court of law. So you are saying that most of these corners actually do have a pin?
 
You cannot legally run a railroad through a corner, you would need a much bigger area than that. The railroads were given very large right of ways as part of the arrangements. These checkerboard pieces were given as a subsidy and many ended up upwards of 20-40 miles from the actual railroad line.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-13-11 AT 12:33PM (MST)[p]Why do you keep saying that without a pin it is trespassing when there is no such law? That is strictly your idea and you're incorrect if you just think that and can't show where it is on the books. I will say nothing on the RR comments because I'm not up on that at all. The subsidy comment does make some sense to me, though I have no idea if that's correct. By the way, I would agree with BuzzH that in my hunting out there I'm finding more and more corner and boundary survey markers every year. Most of them are also not on the fence lines that were probably put up decades ago to show the boundaries. I think that's where the cvomment by BuzzH is spot on about them putting them whereever they wanted to out of convenience!
 
There are many of laws that state that if you step onto private property it is trespassing. Correct?

It doesn't matter if you are 1000 yards on private, 100 yards, 10 yards or 1 yard. In every instance it is trespassing, correct?

You might very well be correct that it cannot be proven in the court of law, but I think even if it can't be proven it is still actually trespassing. Without a pin you are 99.9% of the time going to step onto private ground utilizing a Garmin GPS with preloaded ownership maps, thus it is trespassing to me. I hope my thoughts are clear. Maybe you don't consider it trespassing if you can't be found guilty in the court of law, but I do. You can all kinds of things that are illegal where you might not be found guilty in the court of law...tax evasion, stealing, robbing, mugging, murder....
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-13-11 AT 12:57PM (MST)[p]"There are many of laws that state that if you step onto private property it is trespassing. Correct?"
Answer---Yes

"It doesn't matter if you are 1000 yards on private, 100 yards, 10 yards or 1 yard. In every instance it is trespassing, correct?"
Answer---Yes

"You might very well be correct that it cannot be proven in the court of law, but I think even if it can't be proven it is still actually trespassing. Without a pin you are 99.9% of the time going to step onto private ground utilizing a Garmin GPS with preloaded ownership maps, thus it is trespassing to me. I hope my thoughts are clear. Maybe you don't consider it trespassing if you can't be found guilty in the court of law, but I do. You can all kinds of things that are illegal where you might not be found guilty in the court of law...tax evasion, stealing, robbing, mugging, murder...."

This is where we can't seem to get it across to you that just because you think something is something doesn't mean it's necessarily so! If any of those misjustices you mentioned are not proved against someone in a court of law and they are then found not guilty through due process, then they are only "alleged" to have violated a law. Thinking something and proving it in Court beyond a reasonable doubt using existing law are two completely different things. I imagine your way of thinking is exactly what the rancher thinks in these situations. That's why we keep saying that if they don't want you on their land they should be the ones to mark their property and then the trespasser has no way out of it. If the property isn't marked then you are as much in the right as the property owner who is "alleging " you were on his place because he doesn't even know where his property line or corner is. That's exactly the scenario in the case I mentioned and why the Prosecutor wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole, since it was a he said she said situation that he knew he couldn't win beyond a reasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt is what you keep missing in this debate! I guess technically you are probably right in that we may be setting foot on a small piece of the unmarked private property, but if it isn't surveyed and marked, then the landowner is no more right (or wrong) than we are.
 
That is fine, it doesn't mean that a crime hadn't occurred though, just that it wasn't proven beyond reasonable doubt. You can do all kinds of things that are illegal, but it would be impossible to prove in the court of law. Should those things be legal then?

I still don't understand why you couldn't subpoena a GPS as evidence in a trespassing case. Maybe there is a reason, it just seems to me that you could if you got a warrant for it. maybe you can't?

I still don't know what happens if a landowner builds a 10 foot fence on his property line that butts up to each other on the corner. Can you climb the fence post if capable? Same things happen on city parks where properties abut each other in cities with buildings...

If it is legal why should there be a law that makes it legal then? It just isn't clear at all and that is why there are discussions ongoing in and out of the courts.

I'm jumping off my soapbox over a corner. take care all.
 
I have read the back and forth on this issue with real interest. As an attorney, I was wondering when someone was going to actually discuss the practical application of current trespass laws in Wyoming. As much as it pains me, Buzz H is right when he says:

"County attorneys are not taking the cases, wardens aren't citing for it, and the burden is on the landowner to prove trespass."
I would also add that judges or juries are not convicting for it. Unless you are prepared to plead guilty to a trespass, I believe that most trespass citations will just go away.

Nripepi raises the point that it is still a trespass even if the law will not pursue you for it. I suppose that is true in the abstract, but most of us live in the real world. I suppose that there are many reasons why this is the current status of trespass and corner jumping in Wyoming. I believe the following as a few of the reasons why:

1) The law is evolving towards access to public ground. You can see this in stream access laws in the west. You can also see this as more courts are declaring rights of way to be public. You can also see this as more conservation easements are being acquired to give the public access to private property.
2) The technology with the GPS makes it virtually impossible for a property owner to just claim someone was on his property when the alleged trespasser can produce a GPS showing he was not. This is a proof issue that creates reasonable doubt.
3) There are now many absentee landowners in Wyoming and the west who own property but don't actually live on it year around. They aren't able to prove a case for the prosecution because in many instances they just aren't there.
4) There is virtually no statutory duty in Wyoming to post your private property, identify its corners, fence it or to do anything that indicates where your private property adjoins other private or public property. In Idaho, you have an affirmative duty to post private property with signage or fluorescent orange posts or paint before you can pursue someone criminally for trespass. If Wyoming were to place this affirmative duty on landowners, you might see an uptick in trespass complaints and prosecution. I don't think that the ranchers want to be bothered with the hassle and cost of establishing and marking property lines and corners.
5) Most states now have statutes to prevent private landowners from posting public land or from harassing people who are lawfully on public land. If the landowner turns out to be wrong on the issue of where the line or boundary is, they may be putting their own head in the legal noose.

Because I have been told by Buzz H in other posts that I have only "one firing brain cell", feel free to ignore my thoughts on this subject.
 
Do you ever hear a reporter say someone is a murderer or thief BEFORE that person is found guilty in a Courtroom? Absolutely not!! That is why they always use the word "alleged" or "suspected" any time they report something on the TV or radio or write a newspaper article until the case is concluded. If they didn't do that, their azz would be grazz in a heartbeat with a slander suit filed against them. You cannot say something or someone IS something or someone without indisputable proof whether you like it or not. Good debating with you and have a Blessed Christmas and a Happy New Year!!!
 
"As much as it pains me, BuzzH is right when he says:"

I had to laugh at that one liner, as I've also had my go arounds with BuzzH on the wolf issue, but the man is very intelligent and knows his stuff on a lot of different things. Most of the time, and especially on this issue, I agree with him bnecause he's right, LOL!!!

We appreciate your lawerly input on the subject, so thanks, and I hope everyone has a great new year and maybe this issue will be resolved in the Legislature or courts in 2012.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-13-11 AT 05:00PM (MST)[p]nripepi---I went back and read everything I said in that thread and I can't find anywhere that I said such a thing! I did agree, and still do, that most of the GPS equipment that hunters are using will not get you right on the button (the corner), but they will get you close, just like we are stating in this present thread. Nowhere do I believe I have said that you couldn't physically cross the corner and I don't really even know what you mean by that statement. If I did say that, I would appreciate it if you would either C/P it here or give me the post number and thread where it is located. I have said that to be perfect and not be on the private property you would need to have a survey marker. Minus that marker we are guessing a little bit, as is the property owner. That's exactly why it's up to the private property owner to mark his boundary if he really thinks he has any chance to prosecute an alleged trespasser the way things are swinging in favor of the public now in these types of cases.
 
Post 28 you state:

nripepi---I think you are correct in that no matter what you pay for a GPS unit, none are going to get you right on the button for that corner and that's what is needed to step from one piece of public ground into the other without touching either of the private sections.

You stated that you could not step from public to public with the current technology.

In this thread, post 74 you answered my question:
"It doesn't matter if you are 1000 yards on private, 100 yards, 10 yards or 1 yard. In every instance it is trespassing, correct?"
Answer---Yes

So if you must step on to private ground using your GPS and no corner stake, then that is trespassing according to your two posts.

If that is indeed true, then why don't you think a law can be written to outlaw crossing a corner where there is not a pin? You basically said it is in fact trespassing as I have stated many times.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-14-11 AT 07:42AM (MST)[p]I thought you said you were done with this thread! Read my last post slowly and I hope you will comprehend that I have never disagreed that the person "MAY HAVE TRESPASSED" unless there is a corner marker in place. If there isn't, then the landowner has no legal standing to press charges of alleged trespassing just on his guess as to where the boundary is, especially if the person has a GPS to get them close and is trying to stay off the private property. These ranchers are now screwed the way things are turning because if the land is marked then we know right where to cross. If it isn't marked, more and more agencies aren't issuing citations, especially if the alleged trespasser has a GPS and is using it in an attempt to stay legal. As was stated earlier, some of the agencies are now even using the same GPS equipment available to sportsmen to resolve situations when they arise. My GPS and corresponding waypoints taken from a map printed from my CD ROM were what the Prosecutor used to determine that he had no case. If these wealthy landowners haven't even been able to get a definitive law written speaking to corner jumping where the corner is marked, how in the world do you think that it will ever happen with unmarked property? No way Jose!!! The only way I can see how they could keep a person from corner jumping is to do what you mentioned and that would be for the landowner(s) to put posts, or even buildings, at the corner on their private properties that would greatly, if not completely, hinder the person getting from public to public. If that were done it would certainly be obvious as to why, so I can't see that as really being a viable solution for them either.
 
Question for mightyhuntery:

How did it evolve from a situation of a 66-foot public right-of-way down every section line to no public ROW? I would assume the Government had no problem granting the checkerboard pattern because the remaining property could be accessed through the ROW. I can see where driving down a section line that does not have at least a two track could be prohibited due to potential damages. But how about hoofing it on your two feet? In the past navigating an unmarked section line would have been very difficult, but now with GPS very easy.

Then for everybody else: an unmarked property corner is a theoretical thing. Even if a Professional Land Surveyor says this is the corner but doesn't mark it according to the laws of the state it is theoretical. The landowners don't typically know where the corners are any more than the guy with the hand held GPS. In many cases less so. Even after the surveyor marks the corner an adjoining land owner may dispute with another surveyor and the issue may have to be ejudicated.
 
"Surveying is all grey. Never black and white". I totally agree. And given this fact I don't know how a person could or at least should get prosecuted for trespassing as a result of corner jumping.

If I(civil engineer not LS)took my Trimble professional grade equipment out, performed due dillegence researching and finding monuments and then established what I beleived to be the corner with a simple x marks the spot and then used this spot to access some public land I would not be any more right than the guy with the hand held unit in the eyes of the law - because the corner has to be monumented by a licensed Land Surveyor. Yet I would probably be inocent. You shouldn't prosecute. And because I am in the eyes of the law no different than the guy with the hand held unit he shouldn't be prosecuted either.

With the absence of a monument the odds are you trespassed. I don't think that should be good enough to prosecute, "the odds are".
 
So....based on the opinion, what is the difference between crossing a corner, or crossing a section, as it pertains to G&F trespass?
 
Will be an interesting topic for a few years to come I am sure.

And yes the information in a GPS could he obtained with a search warrant and used against you but you would either have to agree to the search or they would have to have a warrant. To obtain a warrant they would have to have probable cause to believe that it had evidence pertaining to the crime charged. Hard to do unless you are telling them you have been keeping a track log because they can't assume you are. It can be used against you the same way a BAC test can be used against you at trial. I have used search warrants to opbtain a BAC in vehicle homicide cases when the driver refused to give a sample and I had probable cause to believe alcohol was involved.

And the myth that wardens have "special" powers to search is just that...a myth. They are bound by US Spreme Court findinds like all law enforcement. Now, maybe your state will not allow local, state, or deputies to enforce G and F laws but that doesn't give the warden "special" powers. In my state I enforced wildlife laws and the wardens enforced traffic and criminal law as needed. Yes they can as ALL law enforcement per the US Supreme Court, search without a warrant....but only under special circumstances. Enforcing G and F law is not one of them. Under ALL of those circumstances one thing has to be present...they must have probable cause to believe that evidence of the crime they have knowledge of is contained in that car etc. That is a lot more than a hunch that maybe there is something in the car for some crime they don't even know about. That's search class 101 in a nutshell.

Having said that I have had nothing but great run ins with wardens in CO and WY the past couple years. I have heard some bad stories but I've never had one. Very polite, professional, and helpful. Maybe its all in attitude out as well.
 
MaineFlatlander---What you mention in your first paragraph is true and basically what I said, or meant in previous posts. I also know that F&G Wardens can enforce other types of laws when needed. However, most do have power to search anything and everything when you are out in the field hunting and fishing to see if you are within the law. I believe you give up the right to them needing a search warrant when you buy your license to hunt or fish. However, they would need a warrant to go on a premises to do a search if, say, someone gives them a "hot tip" that you had poached a deer, for an example. They also have check stations set up at certain times during the season in Wyoming and ALL persons with a hunting license that are going or coming (depending on whether you are just going out or done for the day)must stop at that station to be checked if it is on the side of the road you are driving on. That is different than if a LEO pulls someone over for speeding, a light out, etc. and then smells pot or sees joints out on the seat or console in plain view. The stop is made when he sees a traffic violation and then if he sees or smells what I mentioned when he approaches the vehicle he may detain those persons and do a search. Also, in regards to a LEO enforcing G&F laws, our Michigan hunting licenses even have a statement on the back that says you must show the license and the ID used to purchase said license to a F&G Warden or any LEO. Maybe you would not call some of what I mentioned "special powers", but I believe that's why most people do.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-11 AT 10:07AM (MST)[p]Maineflatlander,

You're wrong about the authority granted G&F LEO's...they can search without warrant your camp, car, wagon, atv, etc....everything except a permanant residence.

TOPGUN is 100% right.

I've seen it done...countless times.

87-1-506. Enforcement powers of wardens. (1) A warden may:
(a) serve a subpoena issued by a court for the trial of a violator of the fish and game laws;
(b) search, without a warrant, any tent not used as a residence, any boat, vehicle, box, locker, basket, creel, crate, game bag, or package, or their contents

If a highway patrolman pulls me over and asks to search my vehicle...I'd tell him to pound sand and get a warrant. He'd be required to do just that.

Not so with the G&F.
 
To each his own. "Basically" right has served me well over 30 years of direct law enforcement having never had a warrant overturned or denied nor having a "probable cause" search thrown out. Stopping at a road check is WAY different than allowing them to search everything just because they want to. I have always said yes because I want to help them enforce the laws. One time(In my own state) the warden was a true ahole walking up demanding to serch a small cooler on the front seat before he even said hi. I said "no" because of his crappy attitude He then told me he was a warden and had a right. I said only with permission, warrant, or probable cause(because it was a car not a house) he became made and a second warden came over after hearing his voice raised. The second warden knew me and I told him what was up. He looked at the first warden and all I said was teach him how to be polite and he will get permission every time. Be arogant and get sued to death and cases thrown out of court. I then showed them the empty cooler and drove off.... People believe what they want- special power to stop and search because you are/were hunting. Pure MYTH. Have a great holiday seasom and even better next year!!!
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-11 AT 11:51AM (MST)[p]

MaineFlatlander stated: "People believe what they want- special power to stop and search because you are/were hunting. Pure MYTH."

So you're saying the law that is on the books in most states, just like the one that BuzzH C/Pd in his post is myth huh? You must be impossible to reason with or prove something to when you make a goofy statement like that, even though your previous posts sounded like pretty reasonable arguments!!! If you've been a LEO for so many years as you've stated, I can't believe you are so far off base on this debate regarding F&G Warden powers that ARE on the books in black and white as to what they can do legally without a warrant. I had the same basic power as an MDA Investigator for the State of Michigan until I retired in that I could inspect a business licensed by MDA, just like Wardens can do with a person that has a hunting/fishing license, other than at a residence. Also, what would you have done in the case of the Warden in your post that you say was an ahole and you refused to show him your cooler? Without intervention of the other Officer, it sounds like it could have escalated to where you would have been cuffed and taken in for refusal to follow F&G laws on the books. I doubt if it had gone to court that your: "Well, he didn't ask nicely!" would have cut the mustard. It is always better to present a good appearance and demeanor to the public as a LEO IMHO in order to do a job effectively and not raise people's blood pressure, as well as yours!
 
The law is not myth. Never said that. I have sen that numerous times. It doesn't pass the Supreme Court test. Not even close. If you read the law I don't remember it saying, "anyone licensed to hunt fish" but it might. Some do. Pretty neat for a local-deputy-state to have a warden around. Stop a car and just have them search it because they can. Really?? My state has a law that any trooper can stop any car at any time for no reason other than to inspect the license, registration, inspection, and to preform an inspection of the car. It is still on the books today. The courts said "no" many years ago but its still there in black and white.

And your right. I'm a liar. Never went to college in law, never retired from it, and not currently employed in it. I was just bluffing.

BTW. While reviewing recent US Spreme Court rulings on serch and Siezures I missing the one that said Fish and Game Wardens were an exception to their rulings. Please forward that case to me I'd love to read it. As you know Constitutional law "changes" every year. The biggest, in my opinion, to vehicle searches in recent years was in 2009?in Gant vs AZ. A true blow to LE. But then again I'm probably bluffing and just made up a case name to sound cool. (That case isn't a warden case either)
 
I never said you're a liar or questioned your credentials!!! You stated it was pure myth, so what is it then? You're now saying the laws are there in black and white, but if I understand you correctly, you ARE also saying that it's not enforceable according to Supreme Court rulings and that makes it a myth---correct or incorrect? That's amazing, as I would think there would be all kinds of lawsuits where F&G Wardens are doing what we are talking about and the laws that are still on the books and being used to this day would be stricken down and removed! Do you have a law degree and were you a practicing attorney at any time to be what sounds like such an authority on stating that we are incorrect in what BuzzH and I have posted? If not, it sounds like your posts are from a layman with no more standing than ours. I'm not trying to be a smartazz or anything, but just trying to find out where you're coming from on this because these laws are being used every day of the year and in probably almost every state.
 
Maineflatlander,

I doubt you'll be finding any case law on a warden searching a camp, car, etc...at the Supreme court level, likey not even at a district court level.

It wouldnt ever make it that far, judges rarely side with poachers.

The law is there, I provided it...if you dont believe it...thats fine.

All I know is that if you're out riding around in a truck and a warden believes you're a hunter, have been poaching, etc. they can legally search your vehicle without a warrant. They can also walk right into your tent and search that as well, without a warrant.

The law is what it is.

Feel free to know it all...
 
Wardens don't have any more authority than a police officer. Buzz I don't know you from adam but the statute you posted is a Montana statute not wyoming and on 12, 6, 2011 you posted, at this link http://onyourownadventures.com/hunttalk/showthread.php?t=249028&page=2, the following:

SW...if you're interested...Montana Law codes 87-1-502, 45-6-203, 75-10-212 may answer your questions.

A wardens authority is mostly found here, no distinction to private or public land, not left out by accident.:

87-1-506. Enforcement powers of wardens. (1) A warden may:
(a) serve a subpoena issued by a court for the trial of a violator of the fish and game laws;
(b) search, without a warrant, any tent not used as a residence, any boat, vehicle, box, locker, basket, creel, crate, game bag, or package, or their contents upon probable cause to believe that any fish and game law or department rule for the protection, conservation, or propagation of game, fish, birds, or fur-bearing animals has been violated;
(c) search, with a search warrant, any dwelling house or other building;
(d) seize game, fish, game birds, and fur-bearing animals and any parts of them taken or possessed in violation of the law or the rules of the department;
(e) seize and hold, subject to law or the orders of the department, devices that have been used to unlawfully take game, fish, birds, or fur-bearing animals;
(f) arrest, in accordance with Title 46, chapter 6, a violator of a fish and game law or rule of the department, violation of which is a misdemeanor;
(g) enforce the disorderly conduct and public nuisance laws, 45-8-101 and 45-8-111, as they apply to the operation of motorboats on all waters of the state;
(h) as provided for in 37-47-345, investigate and make arrests for violations of the provisions of Title 37, chapter 47, and of any rules adopted pursuant to that chapter relating to the regulation of outfitters and guides in the state;
(i) enforce the provisions of Title 80, chapter 7, part 10, and rules adopted under Title 80, chapter 7, part 10, for those invasive species that are under the department's jurisdiction; and
(j) exercise the other powers of peace officers in the enforcement of the fish and game laws, the rules of the department, and judgments obtained for violation of those laws or rules.
(2) The meat of game animals that are seized pursuant to subsection (1)(d) must be donated directly to the Montana food bank network or to public or charitable institutions to the extent reasonably feasible. Any meat that the department is unable to donate must be sold pursuant to 87-1-511, with the proceeds to be distributed as provided in 87-1-513(2).

History: En. 26-110.3 by Sec. 13, Ch. 511, L. 1973; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 9, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 13, Ch. 417, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 26-110.3; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 694, L. 1983; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 336, L. 1991; amd. Sec. 3, Ch. 523, L. 1997; amd. Sec. 16, Ch. 429, L. 2009.
__________________
"...the world outside, which my brother and I soon discovered, was full of bastards, the number increasing rapidly the farther one gets from Missoula, Montana." -Norman Maclean

"They were still so young they hadn't learned to count the odds and to sense they might owe the universe a tragedy"
-Norman Maclean

The missing piece of the puzzle in Montana is listed in your post...They still need probable cause. That is the same as any other police officer they can search those areas with PROBABLE CAUSE. A Fish Cop dose not have any more authority than a cop. Sorry
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-11 AT 02:44PM (MST)[p]Wyoming has the same law...and NO I'm not going to bother looking it up.

I can tell you from experience...probable cause is having a hunting license.

Or a dog kennel in the back of your truck on opening day of pheasant season.

Or a tent set up during any legal season.

....or...you get the picture.

Show me where a sheriff has the right to search the contents of a hunting vest...a tent...a container in your vehicle, a cooler, etc. without a warrant.

Why do you suppose there is a different law code in each state defining exactly what a warden can do WITHOUT a warrant if its "exactly the same as any other leo"?

Think about it....
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-11 AT 02:45PM (MST)[p]This is the Wyoming statute (found at Wy 32-6-109):

Search with or without warrant; confiscation and disposition of wildlife.



(a)� Any person authorized to enforce the provisions of this act may seize and take into custody any wildlife which has been unlawfully taken or which is unlawfully in possession. Any wildlife so confiscated may be sold to the best advantage and funds received credited to the Wyoming game and fish fund.



(b)� Any person authorized to enforce the provisions of this act may search without warrant, any camp, camp outfit, pack, pack outfit, pack animal, motor vehicle, boat, wagon or trailer for any wildlife which he has PROBABLE CAUSE believe was taken or is possessed unlawfully.



(c)� Any person authorized to enforce the provisions of this act may search with a search warrant any place or property for any wildlife which he may have probable cause to believe was taken or is possessed unlawfully.

I don't know MaineFlatlander but I do know search and seizure (and it appears as if he does to). Probable cause is needed for a warrantless search. The G&F has the same exigency clause as any other police officer in the U.S. Sorry but the G&F does not have any more authority than any other police officer.

Have a Nice day
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-11 AT 02:52PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-11 AT 02:48?PM (MST)

LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-11 AT 02:47?PM (MST)

See above...why are there different law codes defining what a Warden can do without a warrant if its the exact same thing as any other LEO?

Makes no sense...

Check the code regarding same for sheriff/highway patrol...

See if they need a warrant to search a tent on public land...
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-11 AT 02:58PM (MST)[p]If a game warden were to search a car simply because of "a dog kennel in the back of your truck on opening day of pheasant season.

Or a tent set up during any legal season.

....or...you get the picture." They would be in violation of the 4th amendment. That is very simple.

To answer your questions "why there are different law codes defining what a Warden can do without a warrant if it's the exact same thing as any other LEO". That is very simple...In order for any law enforcement officer to have any authority it has to be written into a statute. That is what gives them the authority.

Also the Wyoming statute is written for "Any person authorized to enforce the provisions of this act" This would include county sheriffs deputies Highway Patrol etc. In Wyoming there in not a seperate staute for Wardens and LEOs.

I don't even begin to argue with you that they do search without probable cause of a violation. That is a different story. One good lawsuit and that would change.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-16-11 AT 03:04PM (MST)[p]You'd think if it was exactly the same...the authority wouldnt change because of the agency behind the badge.

Seems "odd" they need to reinvent the wheel between a warden, city cop, highwaypatrol, etc. if they all have the exact same authority.

It appears there is a distinction in the authority between LEO's as written in the law code...

Sure sounds that way to me.

No, they wouldnt be in violation of pulling you over with a dog kennel in the back of a truck on opening day of pheasant season.

The dog kennel creates probable cause to believe you were hunting pheasants...giving them the authority they need to pull your a$$ over and search your vehicle for pheasants...

Ask me how I know...???
 

Similar threads

F
Lasal cow elk hunt
Replies
2
Views
421
just_a_hunter
J
BuzzH
WY NR application fee increase proposed
Replies
79
Views
4k
jm77
jm77

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

709C48E4-29D6-403B-A13D-C6E5F0215263.jpeg
IMG_1410.jpeg
3876144D-13AD-4601-AE25-92E1643C2B4D.jpeg
Screenshot_20201117-185425_Instagram.jpg
20221030_212726.jpg
3FE4E434-316C-4128-AC9D-D84CA01FED26.jpeg
Dads deer 3.jpg
20240904_162459.jpg
DSC02129.jpeg
025.JPG
2021 Arizona Buck
CC43C1BD-C9FB-42FC-86D4-AE850A4E7559.png

Wyoming Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Badger Creek Outfitters

Offering elk, deer and pronghorn hunts on several privately owned ranches.

Urge 2 Hunt

We focus on trophy elk, mule deer, antelope and moose hunts and take B&C bucks most years.

J & J Outfitters

Offering quality fair-chase hunts for trophy mule deer, elk, and moose in Wyoming.


Yellowstone Horse Rentals - Western Wyoming Horses
Back
Top Bottom