Montana corner crossing law hb235

[300stw]

a link from bowsite on the montana corner crossing law, good read,, thoughts,

http://forums.bowsite.com/tf/regional/thread.cfm?threadid=207514&MESSAGES=20&state=Mt

 

[Broz]

Pretty much impossible to cross a corner with out trespassing on at least one of the two private corners. A good GPS will get you close but most are running 10 to 20 feet accuracy. I don't see how this can happen without legal survey's and obtained easements for a proper point of entry. Then there will need to be compensation to the private property owners for use of their land.

Jeff

 

[MontanaRifleman]

I think it's a great idea and signed the petition last week. It will open up a lot of public land that is bottle necked in checker board tracts. Public land that only private party's have access to. I have wanted to see this for years.

 

[MachV]

Have been told some wyoming prosacuters are recogniseing GPS corner jumping, meaning some counties will prosecute corner jumping as tresspassing and some will not.
To my way of thinking the landowners should be taxed on everything they land lock=not paid a tresspass fee.......For walkins.

 

[Broz]

The view is very much different from either side of the fence.

Jeff

 

[whitely]

Pretty much impossible to cross a corner with out trespassing on at least one of the two private corners. A good GPS will get you close but most are running 10 to 20 feet accuracy. I don't see how this can happen without legal survey's and obtained easements for a proper point of entry. Then there will need to be compensation to the private property owners for use of their land.

Jeff

On the other hand, how can one really "know" where the corner is, unless its marked with a verified survey. I've seen surveys based on ancient divisions, where there were simple math errors that propagated for around 100 years (my friend was involved in a very costly court case about this).

If its public land, then the public should be able to access that land.

 

[Broz]

If its public land, then the public should be able to access that land.

I agree. But there needs to be legal access obtained or granted. At this time, when we are all concerned about loosing our freedoms, do we feel it would be right to force private property owners to allow free access across private land to get there? It is not the property owners fault that the state or BLM acquired parcels of ground that was surrounded by private land on 4 sides. That's why I say a legal access point need to be surveyed and obtained for access. Also there needs to be corner markers put up where ever there are no fences. Proper proceedures need to be followed, not just a have at it mentality.

Jeff

 

[Mike 338]

I like access as much as anyone but I'm with Broz on this one. I don't let anyone walk through any part of my backyard so they can get to a vacant lot and I don't like the government telling me my property is mine up to the point that their buddies want to use it.

Hunting is declining for a lot of reasons but not being able to trespass isn't one of them.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

I agree. But there needs to be legal access obtained or granted. At this time, when we are all concerned about loosing our freedoms, do we feel it would be right to force private property owners to allow free access across private land to get there? It is not the property owners fault that the state or BLM acquired parcels of ground that was surrounded by private land on 4 sides. That's why I say a legal access point need to be surveyed and obtained for access. Also there needs to be corner markers put up where ever there are no fences. Proper proceedures need to be followed, not just a have at it mentality.

Jeff

I agree Jeff, that it needs to be done right with the rights of the land owners maintained and protected. But at the same time, the rights of the general outdoor using people should also be considered. There are numerous huge tracts of checker board public land that is completely unaccessable to the public. This essentially gives the private landowners complete power over this public land that they didn't pay for nor pay taxes on. Something about that just isn't right. I think we need to come to some sort of arrangement that best benifits and maintains the rights of everyone. I personally think the best thing to do would be land exchanges to eliminate the checker boards. That way, there would be no perceived trespass on private land and the public would have rightful access to public land.

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Just found out that the Montana House Judiciary committee voted the bill down. Too bad. Didn't really think it had much of a chance anyway.

 

[Broz]

I agree Jeff, that it needs to be done right with the rights of the land owners maintained and protected. But at the same time, the rights of the general outdoor using people should also be considered. There are numerous huge tracts of checker board public land that is completely unaccessable to the public. This essentially gives the private landowners complete power over this public land that they didn't pay for nor pay taxes on. Something about that just isn't right. I think we need to come to some sort of arrangement that best benifits and maintains the rights of everyone. I personally think the best thing to do would be land exchanges to eliminate the checker boards. That way, there would be no perceived trespass on private land and the public would have rightful access to public land.

Mark, I know again I agree. I have some first hand dealings with this from both sides. The process to purchase the land, so they could buy accessable land, is incredibly hard or they will not sell it at all. The offer was made to trade land (good elk and deer hunting land that had access from national forest and other BLM) but that was not to their liking and they told us the process would take 5 to 10 years. Are you starting to see the problem? Not to mention it is completely up to the land owner to enforce the "no trespass law" at their expense. Much of this land is not marked at all. Some of the points (corner tip to corner tip) are not even accessible due to the terrain. Thick brush, rock cliffs etc. These instances are real. This is why I say it needs to be handled correctly. You can't expect the private property owner to allow the public to travel around obstacles on private land to access. And lets remember, these are 4 corners coming together to a pin point. Now as long as it was surveyed we could step across that point. But could you drag an elk or deer across it without getting on the private land? What about terrain again and bringing out game? Can you see where this could promote trespass if there is not a proper point of entry?

Jeff

 

[Broz]

Just found out that the Montana House Judiciary committee voted the bill down. Too bad. Didn't really think it had much of a chance anyway.

That is unfortunate. But the way this was written I do believe it didn't have much of a chance. They need to look at each piece of property and deal with it one at a time. Or 10 at a time, but each is different and has different access problems. Sell some to fund other land purchase, trade locked land for land with access, sell some to buy access. Buy an easement what ever it takes. But don't expect a blanket law to legalize trespass to happen easily.

Jeff

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Mark, I know again I agree. I have some first hand dealings with this from both sides. The process to purchase the land, so they could buy accessable land, is incredibly hard or they will not sell it at all. The offer was made to trade land (good elk and deer hunting land that had access from national forest and other BLM) but that was not to their liking and they told us the process would take 5 to 10 years. Are you starting to see the problem? Not to mention it is completely up to the land owner to enforce the "no trespass law" at their expense. Much of this land is not marked at all. Some of the points (corner tip to corner tip) are not even accessible due to the terrain. Thick brush, rock cliffs etc. These instances are real. This is why I say it needs to be handled correctly. You can't expect the private property owner to allow the public to travel around obstacles on private land to access. And lets remember, these are 4 corners coming together to a pin point. Now as long as it was surveyed we could step across that point. But could you drag an elk or deer across it without getting on the private land? What about terrain again and bringing out game? Can you see where this could promote trespass if there is not a proper point of entry?

Jeff

That is unfortunate. But the way this was written I do believe it didn't have much of a chance. They need to look at each piece of property and deal with it one at a time. Or 10 at a time, but each is different and has different access problems. Sell some to fund other land purchase, trade locked land for land with access, sell some to buy access. Buy an easement what ever it takes. But don't expect a blanket law to legalize trespass to happen easily.

Jeff

You make a lot of good points. There is no easy solution. After some thought, it's probably best this bill didn't go anywhere because as you say, A blanket law really isn't a good idea. It should be worked out in a case by case basis. Still a bummer from Joe Public's point of view, but it's true that much of the land would still remain inaccessible due to terrain.

On the offer you mention to buy accessible land, who was it that wasn't interested?

 

[Broz]

On the offer you mention to buy accessible land, who was it that wasn't interested?

BLM, We may try again to trade, and know that the offer was acre for acre in the same area only a few miles apart. The land offered was indeed accessible through a section of currently accessible BLM and also from the back side through national forest. Elk and mule deer are on it a large majority of the time including both archery and rifle season.

So, equal land trade. The only difference being the BLM would acquire accessible land for non accessible land in trade. It would be interesting if you would call the BLM and ask them about trading like this or selling un-accessible land to purchase accessible land. I would like to hear what they say to someone else.

Jeff