Landowner claims BLM is his private property

[Khunter]

New member but here is my experience with OnX. In Colorado it will show State School lands as public. Unless the CPW has them leased for fishing and hunting then they are not open to the public. This has caused numerous trespass issues near a place we hunt turkeys. Bottom line is each state is different in the way the School Board lands are managed.

Onx does list if public access is allowed for state trust parcels in Colo, at least for some, see attached 3 examples marked public hunting alowed or not allowed . Not saying they do a complete/accurate job but they do label them:

 

[Badlandcat]

topgun.
Have you ever seen railroad tracks listed as private property on OnX?

I've seen one entire homested - actively being used - shown as public on OnX. So I think there might be a few errors.

In Montana there is homesteads on state land, the lessor has the lease until they choose to give it up. DNRC won't disclose what they pay for the lease.

 

[bisblue]

The reports do matter. I work for a land management agency, and while one angry letter does not always get allot of traction, when a few come in, things start happening.

 

[jjubran]

Sat in on a Game and Fish public advisory meeting last week and one landowner was displeased because everyone "has that OnX Maps and they know exactly where they are". A Game and Fish employee asked isn't it a good thing that they know where they are to which the landowner responded no because they know where they can hunt FS land next to his place. I had to avoid bursting out laughing.

That is hilarious!

 

[JakeInVegas]

I ran into a similar issue while doing a junior archery mule deer hunt two years ago. We used OnX to identify a parcel of public land surrounded by private. As we were driving on a public access road we encountered the private land owner on an ATV. He flagged us down and informed us that this was posted private property and that hunting was not permitted. I informed him that we had no intention of hunting on his property and we would make sure to leave any gates as we found them. We also let him know that we would be careful not to disturb any livestock near water sources. I verbally indicated the area we intended to hunt and pointed in that direction. He insisted that it was all private land. I pulled out OnX and showed him that it was BLM. He did not like this and insisted that the only way to access this land was to cross his land. I then showed him our intended path to access the parcel while staying on public land the entire time. He was pissed and stormed off down the road. Thanks OnX.

 

[Khunter]

I ran into a similar issue while doing a junior archery mule deer hunt two years ago. We used OnX to identify a parcel of public land surrounded by private. As we were driving on a public access road we encountered the private land owner on an ATV. He flagged us down and informed us that this was posted private property and that hunting was not permitted. I informed him that we had no intention of hunting on his property and we would make sure to leave any gates as we found them. We also let him know that we would be careful not to disturb any livestock near water sources. I verbally indicated the area we intended to hunt and pointed in that direction. He insisted that it was all private land. I pulled out OnX and showed him that it was BLM. He did not like this and insisted that the only way to access this land was to cross his land. I then showed him our intended path to access the parcel while staying on public land the entire time. He was pissed and stormed off down the road. Thanks OnX.

Only thing better than nailing a liar is nailing said liar in a string of lies.

 

[homers]

To be honest, right of way can be confusing and most hunters, anglers will turn around at a Private Property sign out of respect for the landowner. I wish the state would make the rules simple and force landowners to post correctly. There are landowners who know that public has the right of way, but put up a gate, post no trespassing, private property signs, in an attempt to keep public land to themselves.

 

[Dakotakid]

To be honest, right of way can be confusing and most hunters, anglers will turn around at a Private Property sign out of respect for the landowner. I wish the state would make the rules simple and force landowners to post correctly. There are landowners who know that public has the right of way, but put up a gate, post no trespassing, private property signs, in an attempt to keep public land to themselves.

MT has this problem pretty bad. The bill to make it a fine for blocking public access would have been better if it made it a fine for improperly posting public roads. The no trespassing sign on the cattle guard should not be on the easement.

 

[MITCHMO]

Just as another point of view on landowners being a pain with public roads....
This thread is so old I may have already posted this rant but here you go. I am a landowner that owns on both sides of a public seasonal road. That road is the most miserable thing I can even begin to explain. The amount of people that are on that road dumping trash, doing drugs, or causing problems is unreal. I can’t get the police to help with any of it. I wish more than anything I could block it off or stop people from driving back there. In the end, it has nothing to do with hunting. Not even a little. When your daughter finds piles of needles, or you find a dead body on the way to school, walk up on a drug deal going down, find people bumping uglies, have people vandalizing your property, and dumping mountains of couches, mattresses, and tires, you get a little angry with the general public. The best part is that I’m in a small town in northern Michigan, not some crap hole where that’s expected behavior.

 

[jbseamus83]

ozmontana

Did good. Keep after it. Hope you recorded on your phone.

My biggest issue is BLM self contained within private. My issue, not yours.

Always, if you are wronged, complain. Your the man and THANK YOU.

I completely agree with you. I don't know exactly how to solve these issues outside of what organizations like RMEF are doing to secure access to these areas, but I ran into this in WY this year where there was a great deal of BLM and State land that was unaccessible due to some private land, but you could see the animals on the public land. No one gets to use that land except the private land owner who has created an island of thousands of acres of "public land" that he essentially gets to hunt as though it is private. Again, I don't know exactly what to do about it. I'm not that smart, and I believe in the right to own land and do with it what you want, but to have so much area in our country that is supposed to be ours, but is inaccessible seems wrong.

 

[thusby]

Had a guy with with a few thousand acres try to run me off the BLM 80 acre section next to the road this year. It’s all an entitlement mindset. They don’t lose any sleep at night.

 

[Khunter]

Had a guy with with a few thousand acres try to run me off his 80 acre section next to the road this year. It’s all an entitlement mindset. They don’t lose any sleep at night.

huh? he tried to run you of the land he owns is how I read this...

 

[thusby]

Fixed it, it was a BLM section. Thats what I get for chiming in after happy hour.

 

[2ski]

MT has this problem pretty bad. The bill to make it a fine for blocking public access would have been better if it made it a fine for improperly posting public roads. The no trespassing sign on the cattle guard should not be on the easement.

I think people need to understand that the no trespassing signs are indicating that the unfenced areas beyond the cattle guard are not public. It's not telling you the road is private. I know it can be confusing but I don't think it's always an intentional attempt to lock off public access. I've seen this on roads going to campgrounds. It's just telling you that you can't get off the road. Because with no fences on the side of the road wheres the sign going to go except at the first cattle guard.

 

[Dakotakid]

This is the statute, it is often not complied with.
NBAR has not always been good about complying.
(3) To provide for effective posting of private land through which or along which the public has an unfenced right-of-way by means of a public road, a landowner shall:

(a) place a conspicuous sign no closer than 30 feet of the centerline of the roadway where it enters the private land, stating words substantially similar to “PRIVATE PROPERTY, NO TRESPASSING OFF ROAD NEXT ․․․ MILES”;  or

(b) place notice, as described in subsection (2)(a), no closer than 30 feet of the centerline of the roadway at regular intervals of not less than one-fourth mile along the roadway where it borders unfenced private land, except that orange markings may not be placed on posts where the public roadway enters the private land.

 

[Westelker]

To Mitchmo...sounds like it your neck of the woods you have much bigger problems than hunters trying to get public access to do some hunting. The road is NOT your problem. If "your" road was blocked those "fine" Michigan citizens would find another road, problem not solved.

As for some of the other comments in this thread: I have experienced several times in CO where a land owner (owns one or both sides of a road, NOT the road) will post a no trespass sign or signs on a gate post or gate on a BLM or NF easement road. This is wrong. These landowners are deceptively and fraudulently attempting to stop the public access to public property. What they should do is put up their own post (s) and sign (s) at the side of the road (as mentioned above by Dakotakid), on their property and leave the public access gate alone. Seems to me the law hasn't the resources or desire to enforce what is right. I think it's very intentional on the land owner's part to attempt to block the public from passing through a public easement. What other reason could it possibly be? Trespassing is wrong and illegal posting is wrong too!

 

[Rzrbk]

I used to duck hunt on navigable waters by launching my canoe from a bridge on a State highway. I hunted navigable waters (below high water mark) within a Preserve. The land on the other side of the road belonged to a private landowner. This landowner harassed me every time I arrived. He'd drive the road till I came back in my canoe and proceed to tell me he owned the highway and all land on both sides. He'd ask me for my permission letter to access navigable waters. He'd get up in my face and once starting hurling crude insults at my wife in an attempt to draw my ire. Finally, one morning he called the game wardens while I was upstream shooting a limit of ducks. One of the wardens walked upstream to find me as I was returning to my truck. Thirty or more wardens and eight or nine vehicles were waiting on me as I returned to my vehicle. They lined the bridge, watching in anticipation as I pulled the canoe under the bridge, shouldered it and walked up to load it on my truck. The wardens harassed me for 20-30 minutes as they checked me for everything under the sun. They strongly encouraged me to go hunt elsewhere despite agreeing I had every right to be there. There is a public right-of-way along the highway and also below the high water mark of navigable waters. I wrote a letter to their supervisor asking why the State was discouraging hunting in a lawful area. I never got a response. I continued to hunt there till I left the State due to a job relocation.

I believe that many of these families that inherit large tracts of farmland over generations become disconnected from Americana and believe they are like Kings that are above the common man. There's no need to get an education when you inherit the kingdom, so you end up in discussions with kinglike ranch owners who don't have the intellectual capacity to engage in conversation and feel privileged enough to do/say anything in their power to discourage you and I from being anywhere near them. That said, I tend to like most ranchers.

 

[archer8800ft]

I don't think you're taking it too far at all. On two occasions I have reported private land owners for trying to deny my access to public land. They had even put up No Trespassing signs. It took some time, but authorities took down the No Trespassing signs and said to let them know if anyone ever tries to stop me from accessing that land again.

 

[A Guy Out West]

You did what we all should do. This kind of thing goes on here in Oregon too. It’s un-nerving when confronted by a land owner that seems positive you are on his land. It makes you second guess yourself and wonder if he is right.

 

[Beignet]

MT has this problem pretty bad. The bill to make it a fine for blocking public access would have been better if it made it a fine for improperly posting public roads. The no trespassing sign on the cattle guard should not be on the easement.

It’s confusing indeed, and I always try to err on the side of caution. Here’s an example as I recall (it’s been two years or so), X marks a gate, I would’ve liked to have poked around that State Land parcel to the left in the image. There was no other road in to access it. Should’ve I have legally been allowed to open the gate and go through (closing it behind me, of course).