TheJason
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2024
- Messages
- 18,560
Unless there is lucrative financial gain at stakeNobody really cares if your shoulders infringe on the corner of their land, or even if your foot stepped on their land for a second.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unless there is lucrative financial gain at stakeNobody really cares if your shoulders infringe on the corner of their land, or even if your foot stepped on their land for a second.
Bingo!Unless there is lucrative financial gain at stake
Here is an example from WY where the owner needs to corner hop public in order to reach some of there's. Private has a blue line.I don’t know of any private landowner who has to “corner hop” to gain access to their private, I’d suppose there are some, just none I know of.
No I 100% get that I was saying in my hypothetical example above. Corner crossing becomes illegal but if a landowner doesn't allow than they can't access the public via corner crossing. (That was tongue and cheek)A private landowner corner hop his/her equally entitled public land to gain access to the other private land? Because s/he's a landowner does not lessen the right to public access.
Not correct...Here is an example from WY where the owner needs to corner hop public in order to reach some of there's. Private has a blue line.
View attachment 259803
And here is the area you lease several areas you need to corner hop the public to access private.
View attachment 259804
??? Please explain? I 100% get its corner hopping the public but I didn't specify it was corner hopping neighbors private.Not correct...
There are access laws in Wyoming specific to private lands, no hopping required.??? Please explain? I 100% get its corner hopping the public but I didn't specify it was corner hopping neighbors private.
and there in lies the rub......There are access laws in Wyoming specific to private lands, no hopping required.
id like to know more about such laws in terms an 8th grader could understandThere are access laws in Wyoming specific to private lands, no hopping required.
To your point, FAA controls airspace above 400ft. So basically society has determined that private property rights regarding airspace end at some point, for the ease of travel. Now, a new problem is drones. MT is starting to get more rules on drones, but it seems that below 400ft, drones are fine unless they harass or impede the landowner. I don't know of any lawsuit from a landowner for someone flying a drone over their airspace (might be one, I just can't find it). So now we have two things can corner cross, drones and cattle?If I called up the local PD to complain about someone violating my airspace, they would tell me to put down the crack pipe.
id like to know more about such laws in terms an 8th grader could understand
I’d like to see these guys play by the same rules as us during hunting season they don’t need to be driving on our public lands be the clients would love hiking all thisHere is an example from WY where the owner needs to corner hop public in order to reach some of there's. Private has a blue line.
View attachment 259803
And here is the area you lease several areas you need to corner hop the public to access private.
View attachment 259804
The exchange of assets gets messy. We all need to just corner cross next fall in hopes one of us goes to court. It's the best place for this decision to get made in MT.Previously, @Eric Albus advocated for consolidation of checkerboard lands by means of adjacent landowners being able buy public lands at a lower than market value.
If we are going to consider that as a viable option, perhaps we should also consider having the government buy private lands in those areas at a lower than market value by implementing imminent domain?
Or, maybe we should look at land swaps that compare lands of equal value instead of favoring one shareholder over another?
Really, no more than one person in a thousand has a clue to what the corner crossing issue entails? I think the awareness is considerably higher than that.
I NEVER stated at below market valuePreviously, @Eric Albus advocated for consolidation of checkerboard lands by means of adjacent landowners being able buy public lands at a lower than market value.
If we are going to consider that as a viable option, perhaps we should also consider having the government buy private lands in those areas at a lower than market value by implementing imminent domain?
Or, maybe we should look at land swaps that compare lands of equal value instead of favoring one shareholder over another?
I NEVER stated at below market value