Hunt Talk Radio - Look for it on your favorite Podcast platform

Wyoming Corner Crossing Defense Fund

Buzz,

Where have you heard this before?

The Federal Government controls the land where the corner crossing happened. They also control the air space above the ground. How in the hell is a county/state decision going to solve the situation or problem? If everyone on here and on other message boards believes this decision helps them for access to land-locked Federal Public Land it does not. As stated, before the whole situation was handled wrong. The proper authorities were not there. Somehow it finally got there. Buzz I am sure you will take credit. Just to let you know we have a mutual friend in Wyoming. I have not talked to him in a year or so. He speaks highly of you. MY opinion differs. I will be sure to let him know on my next visit to please exclude you from it. I love how you patted yourself on the back on the Rokslide forum. You sir are TRULEY a piece of work. I only offered my advice based off of 32 years of Federal Law Enforcement experience. I have no idea of what you based yours on. Narcissist behavior, maybe? There were criminal activities executed on both sides that involve Federal land/Private land and the use of it. Also, do some more research on what Federal Law Enforcement Officers have the power to enforce if they so choose. By the way, 90/10 will not work. The population changes year by year. Giving residents more does not solve your problem. Money comes from non-residents. Revenue drives the train. Tags get reduced on the Biologist findings. Population drives the desired harvest. Low population less resident/non-resident tags. Makes the draw harder and does not leave them out of the game. Like you did? Revenue is the venue to manage wildlife for opportunity. You support KILLING that? Where is the money coming from if you get 90/10 established on all other game? Nothing better than killing an agency, I guess? Did you ever do research to see how many jobs will be lost? What do you have then? Help me with that? Embarrassing, yes. On who's part? Spend some time thinking on this Bud.

Here is your response to me.

Dude...stop.

Its getting embarrassing for you now.
My background is in Federal Law enforcement and I'm here to help.
 
So every plane ever has to do a combat landing to ensure they’re not flying below 500ft over private property?
You and wlm are both wrong and not understanding. Air molecules get further apart as you increase altitude. At 10k which is the altitude for the area of the case there is a large reduction in aircraft performance. A drone or non high performance aircraft is going to have a hard time lifting off at 10k feet with any useful load and be able to operate OGE without a runway available
 
You and wlm are both wrong and not understanding. Air molecules get further apart as you increase altitude. At 10k which is the altitude for the area of the case there is a large reduction in aircraft performance. A drone or non high performance aircraft is going to have a hard time lifting off at 10k feet with any useful load and be able to operate OGE without a runway available
Pretty sure we get it, reread what you first quoted tell us what that has to do with air density or 10,000 feet.
 
It was argued in the Motion for Dismissal that Federal law preempts state criminal trespass law though it appears the Circuit Judge will hold trial.View attachment 217372
From what I could glean, the court set a hearing in April on the motion.
The insiders might have more info on the current procedure.
 
You and wlm are both wrong and not understanding. Air molecules get further apart as you increase altitude. At 10k which is the altitude for the area of the case there is a large reduction in aircraft performance. A drone or non high performance aircraft is going to have a hard time lifting off at 10k feet with any useful load and be able to operate OGE without a runway available

just while we're snarkily pointing out where people are "wrong" ;)

1648657118234.png
 
If anyone is going to develop or fund the development of drones able to lift humans and their gear... hah! Bezos - haha! Amazon is already advertising such in futuristic movies, etc. :) My little DJI Mavic Platnium lifts 5#'s. That's a heavy weight though in time...

Seems to bend a bit off topic though take a darn spring board! Haha!

Intermission:


Back to our scheduled thread.
 
Just get a very tall zipline between corners, high enough to not offend Billionaires and go "weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee"!!!
 
Me realizing that Wyoming is known for selling surface rights separate than mineral rights. Blm claims are also pretty cheap.

Edit. In hindsight if this is true and they DON'T own the mineral rights it would be a good fix to start digging new "wildlife migration tunnels" under private.
 

Attachments

  • tunnels-5c35a5.jpg
    tunnels-5c35a5.jpg
    114.2 KB · Views: 13
Last edited:
You and wlm are both wrong and not understanding. Air molecules get further apart as you increase altitude. At 10k which is the altitude for the area of the case there is a large reduction in aircraft performance. A drone or non high performance aircraft is going to have a hard time lifting off at 10k feet with any useful load and be able to operate OGE without a runway available
Griff, as an example, currently has drones that can lift over 150lbs, and has tested them up to 14k feet. capacity diminishes as altitude increases. They are working on drones, with the goal, of 1000lb capacity.

I'm sure one of those could, if built, could lift a person 200ft vertically, 50ft, horizontally, at any altitude applicable for western hunting.

Point though that I was making is the altitude trespass argument doesn't make sense to me as in other activities 50 to 100ft doesn't seem to be considered a trespass.
 
Griff, as an example, currently has drones that can lift over 150lbs, and has tested them up to 14k feet. capacity diminishes as altitude increases. They are working on drones, with the goal, of 1000lb capacity.

I'm sure one of those could, if built, could lift a person 200ft vertically, 50ft, horizontally, at any altitude applicable for western hunting.

Point though that I was making is the altitude trespass argument doesn't make sense to me as in other activities 50 to 100ft doesn't seem to be considered a trespass.
That's cause the elk aren't 50-100' in the air.
 
@338win how you like them apples
 
@338win how you like them apples
I hate to be the Debby downer but the flaw here is use of motorized vehicles off road on public land. Maybe if you land it on thr landlocked blm road that passes thru?
 
You and wlm are both wrong and not understanding. Air molecules get further apart as you increase altitude. At 10k which is the altitude for the area of the case there is a large reduction in aircraft performance. A drone or non high performance aircraft is going to have a hard time lifting off at 10k feet with any useful load and be able to operate OGE without a runway available
What about a really good pogo stick? Could it get high enough?
 
I hate to be the Debby downer but the flaw here is use of motorized vehicles off road on public land. Maybe if you land it on thr landlocked blm road that passes thru?
Helicopters?
 
They can't land
On BLM?

How does the entire hunting industry in Alaska work?

Or heli skiing industry.

or all folks including BigFin who did it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ollin Magnetic Digiscoping Systems

Forum statistics

Threads
114,030
Messages
2,041,802
Members
36,437
Latest member
PalcoMike
Back
Top