A public-access group is asking lawmakers to make several changes in a proposed corner-crossing bill when the lawmakers meet Aug. 19 in Casper to consider the draft legislation.
Now that a federal appeals court has ruled that corner crossing is legal in the checkerboard area of Wyoming, some legislators want state law to reflect that decision. Enacting a new law could eliminate confusion regarding the court ruling, which involves lengthy, complex legal arguments.
Corner crossing is the act of stepping diagonally from one piece of public land to another where they meet with two pieces of private property. Corner crossers do not set foot on private land, but they do pass through the airspace above it.
The draft bill under consideration on Aug. 19 by the Joint Travel, Recreation, Wildlife and Cultural Resources Interim Committee says what corner crossing is not — a trespass. Backcountry Hunters and Anglers urged legislators to write and consider a different version establishing corner crossing as an affirmative right.
“We should not be threatened nor charged with trespass if a toe were to inadvertently touch private land.”
Backcountry Hunters and Anglers
The draft bill to be debated in Casper — “Corner crossing clarification” — “suggests more of a ‘negative’ right,” BHA states in comments filed with the committee. The bill would say corner crossing is not trespassing under laws grouped under the titles of “crimes and offenses” and “Game and fish.”
Instead, BHA suggested another measure be written as an “affirmative” bill under the “state lands” title of Wyoming laws. The group pointed to a bill drafted in 2011 as a model. The bill did not become law.
“The language of the 2011 [bill] establishes an ‘affirmative’ right to access,” the BHA wrote. A similar measure today would clarify that “Wyoming’s public land users have the right and the ability to access our public land, and then ensures that in doing so we would not be subject to trespass charges when lawfully accessing public land.”
2020 eruption
The conflict over corner crossing erupted in southern Wyoming in 2020 where land ownership is patterned like a checkerboard of alternating public and public property. That’s when four Missouri hunters corner crossed to hunt public land surrounded by the Elk Mountain Ranch.
Carbon County Sheriff’s Office cited the four for trespass, but a jury found them not guilty. Elk Mountain Ranch owner Fred Eshelman also sued Brad Cape and his three friends in civil court in 2022 for trespassing.
Courts ruled against Eshelman, saying an 1885 law prevented him from blocking the hunters’ access. Eshelman has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the case and overrule the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals decision against him.
Looking for new Wyoming legislation, the hunters’ group also recommended other changes to the committee’s draft bill, including allowing incidental trespass in cases where landowners have not surveyed their property but pursue trespass charges nevertheless.
“The choice of a private landowner to not [survey] cannot be used as a reason to keep public land owners off public land,” the group wrote lawmakers. “If we do our part by properly accessing public land at the corner where the two parcels meet, we should not be threatened nor charged with trespass if a toe were to inadvertently touch private land in the process.”
BHA also believes the committee’s draft bill should not include language about property damage.
“By adding property damage into these sections, the Legislature would be conflating property damages with criminal trespass,” the hunters say. “These are two different crimes, and should likely be handled separately.”
The group wants the committee to consider drafting a second bill and postponing final action on the current bill until lawmakers meet again in November. The committee could then discuss both options, BHA said.
By November’s meeting there may be more developments regarding Eshelman’s Supreme Court petition, BHA said. It is possible the U.S. Supreme Court will have decided by November whether to take up the case or simply let the 10th Circuit decision stand.
Sheriff Bakken to follow law
As hunting season began Friday, the Carbon County sheriff said he will follow the appeals court’s OK of corner crossing. Sheriff Alex Bakken’s office cited the hunters in 2021 for trespassing even though they did not set foot on Eshelman’s ranch.
Bakken posted a community update on Facebook on the opening day of archery season that outlines his department’s policy. “One of the most common questions we have been receiving from the hunting public is how we are handling corner-crossing,” the sheriff wrote.
“Until further clarification is received, the Carbon County Sheriff’s Office will be operating under the United States Court of Appeals-10th Circuit Decision in the case of Iron Bar Holdings v. Cape,” Bakken wrote.
Iron Bar Holdings LLC is the name of Eshelman’s company that officially owns the 20,000-acre-plus ranch on the wildlife-rich Elk Mountain.
Bakken stopped short of describing what corner crossing is or where the ruling applies, instead providing a link to the court’s decision. In that 49-page decision reached in March, a three-judge panel stated “Iron Bar cannot implement a program which has the effect of denying access to federal public lands for lawful purposes.”
Folks, join BHA, TRCP, WOC and I’m sure there are others. There is power in numbers. It’s not that costly.
Corner crossing should be legal, no land owner should be able to land lock public lands.
I fail to understand why the private property owners would have more rights that the public to cross over from public land to public land. They are not hurting the private property owners other than, it stops the private owners from basically owning the public property without paying for it, they pay for the right to graze it and if they decide to sell the ranch, somehow they are allowed to include the public land with that sale and profit from that. They pay pennies on the dollar to lease the public land compared to leasing private property already. Corner Crossing should be legal.