Green dot changes and access changes FYI

[jdb]

There is a Jeep trail from above the ewe neck that drops in there but it is a hard core trail and would probably take a whole day just to make it around there

[Oh Mah]

   That's all it will take for a legal access.Less hunters in there because of this change more hunters in the others though.

[jdb]

Unless you have a Jeep specifically built for off road you won’t make it in there

[Oh Mah]

  I do.

[grundy53]

Thanks.

So another way,There has to be some other way in right?They can't have land locked public land by law right?

There is no law against having land locked public land. There are millions of acres of public land that are land locked in the western states.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Oh Mah]

Oh really?You say where and i'll show you litigation on it.Difficult doesn't count either,Any access makes it accessible.

[Oh Mah]

Just an fyi,I am not gonna go through all the laws on this as there are many but i will point out a few facts for you.Land owners have always and will always have the rights to get to their property.You agree right?

[Skyvalhunter]

Ok I am game, sure why not

[Oh Mah]

Well it is the law isn't it?To have access to your land.

[Stein]

No, you don't automatically have the right to access your land.  You could buy a piece of land surrounded by other private land and have no access.  That is why there are access easements, it isn't automatic and only in place if the easement exists.

The west is full of landlocked public land that you can't get to without a jetpack, parachute or helicopter.

[Oh Mah]

I read that article also,It said that access was made very difficult.There are laws in place and have been for several years that give property owners the very easements you are talking about.Please point to 1 case where a person bought land that they cannot access.

[Stein]

I read that article also,It said that access was made very difficult.There are laws in place and have been for several years that give property owners the very easements you are talking about.Please point to 1 case where a person bought land that they cannot access.

Murphy v. Burch (2007) 156 Cal. App. 4th 1434.

From another source:

"An easement by necessity arises by operation of law only if two strict conditions are met: (1) there is a strict necessity for the right-of-way such as owning a landlocked parcel with no access to a public right of way; and (2) at one time, the landlocked parcel and the parcel over which the right-of-way is sought, were owned by the same person(s). The exception to this rule is where the landlocked parcel was patent deeded by the federal government to the current owner or to his or her predecessor in the chain of title."

So, if you wanted to access a piece of landlocked public ground, you would need to go to court to assert the easement of necessity and pay all the costs to get that through - assuming you could convince the judge.  The part about the landlocked land and piece you want to cross needing to once be owned by the same landowner seems to exclude just about all public land.  I don't see anywhere where a guy can simply trespass and be anything other than a trespasser.

[SuperX]

you have rights to access your privately owned land, if there is no other right of way (and a river is considered a right of way in my personal experience), but you have no rights to access public land as you don't own it so there is no way to show a compelling need.  EDIT: Stein nailed it

[Oh Mah]

This case proves my point doesn't it?Cal. law implied easement.

"WHILE THE GRANTOR MIGHT NOT EXPRESSLY GRANT DEED OR RESERVE RIGHTS OF ACCESS,SUCH RIGHTS WILL BE LEGISLATIVELY OR JUDICIALLY IMPLIED.

She lost the case as so many do with the Supreme court,She did not bring the right argument.She won at first because it is the law as i stated.

Public land is owned by the public same way private land is,We pay the taxes for the land no different than a private party does.The Gov. can impose rules for the use on the public land but cannot stop the public from accessing it.Yes you are right on the rest that you said. Public land has many owners,in each state,In WA. you and i own the public land along with all other citizens of this state.

[Oh Mah]

After reading through all of it and the next appeal as well,I will admit that the courts see it differently at least in California but only because the land in question was purchased by the Fed.Had it been purchased by a private party what i said stands. 

Tip: Don't buy land from the gov. without easement.

Fact: If it's purchased by a private party the law is simple,Easement is or will be implied.