Wyoming Corner Cross: landowner claims Millions in damages

[Dan-o]

What seems to be forgotten is that this issue--monopolizing public land in the checkboard for private gain--has already been addressed by the laws and policies of the USA and upheld by the supreme court.  The range wars were fought over this very issue.  The law addressing this (unlawful inclosure act) is old and was put in place for grazing, but its still on the books.  This lawsuit will decide if this federal law is applicable in this case and similar cases.  This isn't a matter of opinion, it is a matter of law.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/43/1061

It should be illegal to put any law on the books that starts with a sentence that long.
I took a lunch break midway through that first sentence.

I'm gonna try to read the rest.

[Knocker of rocks]

I have a hard time understanding what that (the legal citation) says in real terms.

I think everyone agrees I can’t drive a hovercraft over your front lawn. But airplanes can fly freely. Where does a hypothetical pole vaulter lie in all of this?

[fireweed]

Here's the recent amendment
§1063. Obstruction of settlement on or transit over public lands
No person, by force, threats, intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosing, or any other unlawful means, shall prevent or obstruct, or shall combine and confederate with others to prevent or obstruct, any person from peaceably entering upon or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land subject to settlement or entry under the public land laws of the United States, or shall prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through the public lands: Provided, This section shall not be held to affect the right or title of persons, who have gone upon, improved, or occupied said lands under the land laws of the United States, claiming title thereto, in good faith.

[Dan-o]

Here's the recent amendment
§1063. Obstruction of settlement on or transit over public lands
No person, by force, threats, intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosing, or any other unlawful means, shall prevent or obstruct, or shall combine and confederate with others to prevent or obstruct, any person from peaceably entering upon or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land subject to settlement or entry under the public land laws of the United States, or shall prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through the public lands: Provided, This section shall not be held to affect the right or title of persons, who have gone upon, improved, or occupied said lands under the land laws of the United States, claiming title thereto, in good faith.

I'm honestly not sure how that settles or addresses corner crossing.

Not trying to be argumentative.

That just seems to address that you can't wall off public land?

Am I missing it?

[Knocker of rocks]

That’s my take too.

[outdoorsdad]

This has been a problem for as long as I can remember and I'm approaching 70.  All of us should be donating to these legal expenses. I just did!

[LDennis24]

Here's the recent amendment
§1063. Obstruction of settlement on or transit over public lands
No person, by force, threats, intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosing, or any other unlawful means, shall prevent or obstruct, or shall combine and confederate with others to prevent or obstruct, any person from peaceably entering upon or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land subject to settlement or entry under the public land laws of the United States, or shall prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through the public lands: Provided, This section shall not be held to affect the right or title of persons, who have gone upon, improved, or occupied said lands under the land laws of the United States, claiming title thereto, in good faith.

I'm honestly not sure how that settles or addresses corner crossing.

Not trying to be argumentative.

That just seems to address that you can't wall off public land?

Am I missing it?

No you're not, it doesn't mean anything about this situation. It's just the only thing close to a law preventing the guy from building a fence you can't put a ladder over that people can find to justify the fence situation. But again, the Wyoming case didn't involve a fence. If it was an all encompassing law, then isn't the federal government breaking it every time they lock the doors on a public place or have a fence around a park with a curfew or a park with a gate that closes certain times of the year? Or winter range for that matter? 

[LDennis24]

So here's an example. This is over by Ellensburg. So according to the scholars on Hunt Washington I can just walk into this public land and tell the landowner to piss off. I have a legal right to cross his land due to the Unlawful Inclosures Act... 

[cem3434]

The Eaton Ranch completely surrounds the public land in question, so there is no legal access to those parcels you have pictured.  Comparing corner crossing where there is legal access to at least  one parcel allowing you to get to a "corner crossing" situation versus waltzing across someone's private property is comparing apples to oranges.

Ask stupid questions and you'll get stupid answers.

[Platensek-po]

Here's the recent amendment
§1063. Obstruction of settlement on or transit over public lands
No person, by force, threats, intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosing, or any other unlawful means, shall prevent or obstruct, or shall combine and confederate with others to prevent or obstruct, any person from peaceably entering upon or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land subject to settlement or entry under the public land laws of the United States, or shall prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through the public lands: Provided, This section shall not be held to affect the right or title of persons, who have gone upon, improved, or occupied said lands under the land laws of the United States, claiming title thereto, in good faith.

I'm honestly not sure how that settles or addresses corner crossing.

Not trying to be argumentative.

That just seems to address that you can't wall off public land?

Am I missing it?

No you're not, it doesn't mean anything about this situation. It's just the only thing close to a law preventing the guy from building a fence you can't put a ladder over that people can find to justify the fence situation. But again, the Wyoming case didn't involve a fence. If it was an all encompassing law, then isn't the federal government breaking it every time they lock the doors on a public place or have a fence around a park with a curfew or a park with a gate that closes certain times of the year? Or winter range for that matter? 

Didn’t they use a ladder to cross over a fence??? It’s amazing how you continually seem to confuse public lands with private. The government entities that manage the public lands can and do absolutely control access. You cannot as a private individual prohibit others from accessing public land. As in you can’t fence off or block public land. If you own land that completely surrounds public land you can fence your land and prohibit access to it which would bar access to the public land unless through easement or air travel. At the corner crossing half the “air” is private and half is public. It’s saying that these hunters while passing through that mutually owned space committed trespass. All while crossing from public land to land. 

[LDennis24]

The Eaton Ranch completely surrounds the public land in question, so there is no legal access to those parcels you have pictured.  Comparing corner crossing where there is legal access to at least  one parcel allowing you to get to a "corner crossing" situation versus waltzing across someone's private property is comparing apples to oranges.

Ask stupid questions and you'll get stupid answers.

You give stupid answers regardless. So then, what does the unlawful inclosures act have to do with it? What does it mean? It means nothing. You can only access public land that already has an access point. So if he builds a fence at the corner ten feet high you can cross as long as you don't touch his fence. Climb his fence and you are trespassing. This old law written for homesteading doesn't mean squat.

[LDennis24]

Here's the recent amendment
§1063. Obstruction of settlement on or transit over public lands
No person, by force, threats, intimidation, or by any fencing or inclosing, or any other unlawful means, shall prevent or obstruct, or shall combine and confederate with others to prevent or obstruct, any person from peaceably entering upon or establishing a settlement or residence on any tract of public land subject to settlement or entry under the public land laws of the United States, or shall prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through the public lands: Provided, This section shall not be held to affect the right or title of persons, who have gone upon, improved, or occupied said lands under the land laws of the United States, claiming title thereto, in good faith.

I'm honestly not sure how that settles or addresses corner crossing.

Not trying to be argumentative.

That just seems to address that you can't wall off public land?

Am I missing it?

No you're not, it doesn't mean anything about this situation. It's just the only thing close to a law preventing the guy from building a fence you can't put a ladder over that people can find to justify the fence situation. But again, the Wyoming case didn't involve a fence. If it was an all encompassing law, then isn't the federal government breaking it every time they lock the doors on a public place or have a fence around a park with a curfew or a park with a gate that closes certain times of the year? Or winter range for that matter? 

Didn’t they use a ladder to cross over a fence??? It’s amazing how you continually seem to confuse public lands with private. The government entities that manage the public lands can and do absolutely control access. You cannot as a private individual prohibit others from accessing public land. As in you can’t fence off or block public land. If you own land that completely surrounds public land you can fence your land and prohibit access to it which would bar access to the public land unless through easement or air travel. At the corner crossing half the “air” is private and half is public. It’s saying that these hunters while passing through that mutually owned space committed trespass. All while crossing from public land to land.

I don't confuse public with private. I'm confused with everyone claiming this Inclosures Act protects them in some way. It absolutely doesn't. If it were true, and it makes no exception for government entities to close off public land then how can any government body close off public areas? How can they control it if this act is the law? Explain that using your super brain. What's amazing is that you claimed the fire dept and police are a socialist program! That's ridiculous.

[cem3434]

The Eaton Ranch completely surrounds the public land in question, so there is no legal access to those parcels you have pictured.  Comparing corner crossing where there is legal access to at least  one parcel allowing you to get to a "corner crossing" situation versus waltzing across someone's private property is comparing apples to oranges.

Ask stupid questions and you'll get stupid answers.

You give stupid answers regardless. So then, what does the unlawful inclosures act have to do with it? What does it mean? It means nothing. You can only access public land that already has an access point. So if he builds a fence at the corner ten feet high you can cross as long as you don't touch his fence. Climb his fence and you are trespassing. This old law written for homesteading doesn't mean squat.

I didn't reference the unlawful inclosures act, so check your facts before you make stupid statements. I'm glad you think I give stupid answers because it shows the level of your intelligence and your inability to process simple information. Your example is nothing close to the case on question, so carry on ranting about chit that is irrelevant...unless you're Dennis trying to prove a point.

[huntnfmly]

Dennis cem was referring to your example map you gave that had nothing to do with corner crossing so grow up and try to comprehend when someone points out the flaw in your example
Have a good day

[LDennis24]

Dennis cem was referring to your example map you gave that had nothing to do with corner crossing so grow up and try to comprehend when someone points out the flaw in your example
Have a good day

You guys are the reason I hope the landowners win this issue. I have no problem with people accessing public land. I have a problem with people who don't pay attention. I WAS POINTING OUT THE FACT THAT PEOPLE SAYING THE UNLAWFUL INCLOSURES ACT GUARANTEES THE RIGHT TO ACCESS PUBLIC LAND DOESN'T APPLY HERE! Go back to the post from Dan-O and Knocker of Rocks. I was responding to them asking how it applies. I SAID IT DOESN'T! You guys need help I think. Seriously. Dan-O said, I don't see how this applies to corner crossing, so I said it doesn't. It just has a blanket statement about not enclosing land so I put a pic of some land that is clearly enclosed. The act makes no exception for that parcel, so it obviously relates to something else. Can you really not see what I'm talking about? Really?