Ruling in hunting trespass case starts new precedents

A little over a week ago, the decision on the civil “Corner Crossing Case” from Wyoming came out in favor of the four Missouri hunters. If you recall they had previously won the criminal case alleging they trespassed by swinging parts of their bodies into the airspace of private land.

After being found not guilty of trespassing in criminal court, the owner of the Elk Mountain Ranch claimed that when they crossed from one parcel of public land to another at a corner, he lost over $7 million dollars in value of his property. He subsequently sued those four hunters for that amount in civil court.

If you are a western state big game hunter you have been following this since the beginning. At stake for us with these cases is access to 8.3 million acres of public land in western states, that in situations like this have previously required hunters to either rent a helicopter, pay exorbitant trespass fees, or just not have access. The same applies to hikers, campers, photographers, fishermen, etc.

This dates back to the 1800’s when the federal government encouraged railroads to push west by deeding land to the rail companies in a checker board pattern. The government retained control of the red parcels and the railroad got the black. Eventually the railroads sold the black squares to private buyers for ranches and such. Fast forward to the last 30 years and the land is changing hands.

Newer landowners, from the east and western coastal states were motivated by ads saying things like 15,000 acre ranch 5,000 deeded. Their ranch actually only covers 5,000 acres but blocks access to the other 10,000. The idea that you can’t step across a corner without crossing over the airspace of the private parcels might seem foreign in Wisconsin, but out west it isn’t. It has been used to deny access to public land, so it can be enjoyed exclusively by a few.

I think you can see that the owner of said ranch in Wyoming didn’t lose over $7 million when the hunters won the criminal case, he overpaid when he only purchased the 5,000 acres. He attempted to preserve the little perk he paid over $7 million for - owning land that the layout effectively blocked access to public land.

The judge was clear that private property owners have exclusive rights. In his judgement he stated that the four hunters used the method of access that would minimize the disturbance to the private landowner. To review they carried a ladder to the corner crossing placing one side on each of the public land parcels so as not to step foot on the private parcels at the adjoining corners.

The decision will most likely be appealed and currently only begins to set precedent for Wyoming. Either way, groups like Backwoods Hunters and Anglers are heralding this as something to build on, and for that reason it is a big success. There’s a history to this. The hunters accessed the parcel for two years, and were harassed by the manager of the ranch both years. The ranch called law enforcement several times, and on all of those occasions the officers felt the hunters were within the law. Use of motorized vehicles is prohibited on the public land in question, but the ranch employees were observed driving vehicles on that land multiple times while harassing the hunters. Law enforcement responded to political pressure and cited the hunters with trespass. The criminal courts said they did not trespass and were within their vested rights as citizens to access public land. The civil case judge spoke to this as well.

The trailheads are getting more crowed as the population continues to grow; partial relief comes from ensuring the public has access to public lands – it’s a vested right for all of us. The old owners of private lands in these areas often weren’t worried about corner crossers. But the new owners often feel they paid for the exclusive rights to the public’s land - your land and my land; which they didn’t purchase.

The four hunters have been through a lot in this process having to defend themselves in a Wyoming court twice. And when you are being sued for $7 million dollars, saying “it’ll be OK, honey” probably doesn’t cut it. The hunting public and organizations have rallied to cover their legal expenses, which runs close to $250,000.

It’ll be a long, slow process to defend our access rights to public land.

Through a

Decoy’s

E

ye