If it was true that access would lead to more success that substantially, then much more people would already be going Randy Newburg's helicopter access to land locked lands method....
FWP lies about Corner Crossing
- Thread starter Elky Welky
- Start date
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
The price and coordination of that deters 99% of the public.
Carnage2011
Well-known member
There is a reason that private leases are sought after. Less pressure, more game, more mature animals.
I’d venture to guess that hunt isn’t what it once was unless people got fed up with increased pressure and decided to something different. I know my friends that have done fly in hunts in other places have seen substantial increases in pressure in the last ten years
mtnkid85
Well-known member
I wonder what the technicalities surrounding “Wardens will continue to report corner crossing cases to local county attorneys to exercise their prosecutorial discretion.” actually means? Are CAs more likely to look at a case if its "reported" by a warden rather than a landowner? Or is it simply, that a warden who's called out will actually report it, where a landowner may or may not go through the bother?
Undoubtably this feels like a significant shift within the department, which I must add, goes right along with all the other significant shifts we've seen over the past few years.
Undoubtably this feels like a significant shift within the department, which I must add, goes right along with all the other significant shifts we've seen over the past few years.
Elky Welky
Well-known member
It's a clever way for the dpt to acknowledge that even though FWP desperately wants to (without actually having the authority) will the law into being something that it is not, it is actually at the discretion of prosecutors to choose whether or not to bring formal charges. And even then, prosecutors get to choose whether or not they have sufficient evidence to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt.
mtnkid85
Well-known member
I get its them wanting something to be, thats not, and maybe thats all it is. But, what Im wondering is if a CA will look at the case any differently, just because the warden is now involved?
The way I'm interpreting is from Colorado stand point and different approach than warden occupation. But typically officer issues citation/arrest, "county attorney" chooses to prosecute it or not. County attorney does not ever see a case unless a charge is involved already, or if the officer calls for recommendation.
Typically there's "letter of the law"(as its written) and "spirit of the law"(as it intends). What I mean is often a call may be made to ask attorney. "Letter of the law says to charge Subject for crime X, but spirit of the law tells me not to charge, will you prosecute the case/do you want me to charge crime X."
"spirit of the law" has a bit of interpretation from attorney to attorney / officer to officer. It seems FWP believes "spirit of the law" is no corner crossing is allowed, and just hopes they find a prosecutor to follow through with prosecution... As is the stated prior in this discussion the law is currently a grey area, so I guess FWP decided the grey area is it's not legal. But if "letter of the law" is truely grey area then I would say good luck prosecuting beyond a reasonable doubt... as Wyoming just found out.
Typically there's "letter of the law"(as its written) and "spirit of the law"(as it intends). What I mean is often a call may be made to ask attorney. "Letter of the law says to charge Subject for crime X, but spirit of the law tells me not to charge, will you prosecute the case/do you want me to charge crime X."
"spirit of the law" has a bit of interpretation from attorney to attorney / officer to officer. It seems FWP believes "spirit of the law" is no corner crossing is allowed, and just hopes they find a prosecutor to follow through with prosecution... As is the stated prior in this discussion the law is currently a grey area, so I guess FWP decided the grey area is it's not legal. But if "letter of the law" is truely grey area then I would say good luck prosecuting beyond a reasonable doubt... as Wyoming just found out.
Last edited:
TheJason
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2024
- Messages
- 18,616
As has always been the case, for any violation of the law.
FWP deserves plenty of ire, but I highly doubt they thought this message up without direction from Jersey Greg.
TheJason
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2024
- Messages
- 18,616
Not necessarily.
Bambistew
Well-known member
I'ma follow Guy Eastman's advice and just pay for private land access.
Last edited:
And will probably be governor once Gianforte terms out.
First, there are two laws in Montana regarding corner crossing. One is civil based on trespass being a strict liability tort and the other is MCA 45-6-203(1)(b).
Under the civil trespass any time any person enters your property without your permission even if they do not physically damage your property they may be liable for trespass. No matter how small a portion of your land they touch for even a brief moment…they may be liable for trespass. The strict liability damage for civil trespass is the presence on the property not any pecuniary loss.
Under MCA 45-6-203(1)(b), a person commits the offense of criminal trespass to property if the person knowingly…enters or remains unlawfully in or upon the premises of another.
Premises is defined as “real property” under MCA 45-2-101(60).
It is not just about “airspace” which you can trespass upon. An example would be Andy throwing a ball over and across Bob’s property to Chris. That is a trespass by Andy and Chris because the ball is passing through Bob’s airspace even though Bob is not suffering any pecuniary damage.
The issue that I see is that property lines are definite and infinitely thin in actuality, while GPS and fence lines are blurry. Which means that while you may not intend to step foot onto someone’s property you likely will when you cross a corner.
Simply knowingly “entering” someone’s property is enough under the statute. Thus, if you knowingly cross a corner and your gps takes you one, two, three, or more feet onto someone’s property then you may be civilly or criminally liable.
As a Montanan I’ll skip my rant about out of staters…
Corner crossing is not as gray as some think. As of right now anyone that enters someone else’s property no matter how ephemeral their time is, they may be criminally charged or civilly liable. Also, trespass allows for attorney fees. So, if you are civilly liable you’ll have to cough up for the land owners lawyer too.
That is just my interpretation.
I support corner crossing. I also support the right to exclude people from your private property.
Good Luck
Under the civil trespass any time any person enters your property without your permission even if they do not physically damage your property they may be liable for trespass. No matter how small a portion of your land they touch for even a brief moment…they may be liable for trespass. The strict liability damage for civil trespass is the presence on the property not any pecuniary loss.
Under MCA 45-6-203(1)(b), a person commits the offense of criminal trespass to property if the person knowingly…enters or remains unlawfully in or upon the premises of another.
Premises is defined as “real property” under MCA 45-2-101(60).
It is not just about “airspace” which you can trespass upon. An example would be Andy throwing a ball over and across Bob’s property to Chris. That is a trespass by Andy and Chris because the ball is passing through Bob’s airspace even though Bob is not suffering any pecuniary damage.
The issue that I see is that property lines are definite and infinitely thin in actuality, while GPS and fence lines are blurry. Which means that while you may not intend to step foot onto someone’s property you likely will when you cross a corner.
Simply knowingly “entering” someone’s property is enough under the statute. Thus, if you knowingly cross a corner and your gps takes you one, two, three, or more feet onto someone’s property then you may be civilly or criminally liable.
As a Montanan I’ll skip my rant about out of staters…
Corner crossing is not as gray as some think. As of right now anyone that enters someone else’s property no matter how ephemeral their time is, they may be criminally charged or civilly liable. Also, trespass allows for attorney fees. So, if you are civilly liable you’ll have to cough up for the land owners lawyer too.
That is just my interpretation.
I support corner crossing. I also support the right to exclude people from your private property.
Good Luck
Schaaf
Well-known member
I think we're all working under the assumption here that you need to do the homework and find the survey marker.
If a fence is knowingly off and errs on the side of the public land to an unnecessary extent, well thats what fencing pliers are for.
Last edited:
JM77
Well-known member
Gee, I wonder who the newbie is lobbying for?
perma
Well-known member
What a first post.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
I always find it funny that out west there is belief that private property is sacrosanct, and this belief is ubiquitous.
Cities… good luck living in an urban area and not having folks all over your property, hell your house comes with all sorts of easements ie the sidewalk.
Culture… this notion of trespass is evil is purely western, in lots of states you can hunt private without permission, folks have to post to keep people out, if it’s not posted it’s fair game.
Most of Europe has right to roam laws and as long as you aren’t hunting or camping you can go wherever you want.
Not only is this a western thing but in my experience a Rocky Mountain thing, I’m in OG and worked all over the country. The Rockies are the only place I’ve worked where landowners, who’ve signed leases and surface use agreements lose their shit over access. Listen, we paid you 500k for the lease you’re getting 20% royalties, you already agreed that we get to build pad sites and/or roads (which we paid you damages for) and yet you are going to call the office screaming because a surveyor showed up unannounced.
Never happens in OK, TX, WV,PA etc.
I get private property rights but I also can’t help but roll my eyes at folks in WY, MT, CO…
Last edited by a moderator:
I’m not “lobbying” for anyone. When I saw someone state that there are no laws on corner crossing I chimed in. I knew I was kicking a porcupine. Private property in this country is sacrosanct. The founding fathers gave private property very high and specific protections. The Fifth Amendment illustrates that.
The fact is that civil and criminal trespass are the law and can be enforced. If people choose to allow others on their property while others don’t that is each of their perogative.
Urbanites have the same rights as rural landowners. If someone in Billings is having people walk across their property they may enforce it civilly or seek criminal trespass. No where in MCA 45-6-203(1)(b) is there an exception for people within municipalities or urban areas.
Trespassing has many iterations…it is not exclusively a stranger letting themselves into your house and plopping on your couch with one of your beers…Just because we want what others have does not mean we can break the law.
Again, I support corner crossing. However, until the legislature makes an exception to trespassing then do it at your own risk. I’m a middle class guy that can’t afford all the nice things. If you have deep pockets and want to be the test case then more power to you.
Good Luck
The fact is that civil and criminal trespass are the law and can be enforced. If people choose to allow others on their property while others don’t that is each of their perogative.
Urbanites have the same rights as rural landowners. If someone in Billings is having people walk across their property they may enforce it civilly or seek criminal trespass. No where in MCA 45-6-203(1)(b) is there an exception for people within municipalities or urban areas.
Trespassing has many iterations…it is not exclusively a stranger letting themselves into your house and plopping on your couch with one of your beers…Just because we want what others have does not mean we can break the law.
Again, I support corner crossing. However, until the legislature makes an exception to trespassing then do it at your own risk. I’m a middle class guy that can’t afford all the nice things. If you have deep pockets and want to be the test case then more power to you.
Good Luck
