The ranch owner suing hunters for trespassing through his airspace to access public land says he would drop his damage claim of some $7.75 million if a judge rules in his favor in a landmark corner-crossing case.

Elk Mountain Ranch owner Fred Eshelman made that statement through attorneys in a filing in federal court in Casper on Wednesday. He has sued four Missouri hunters for stepping over a corner of his 22,045-acre ranch without setting foot on his land.

“Mr. Smith marked a waypoint at geographic coordinates that place him on real property owned by [Eshelman’s] Iron Bar Holdings, LLC.”

Attorneys for Fred Eshelman

“[P]ursuit of money damages against the individual Defendants in this case detracts from important legal issues,” Eshelman’s new filing states. “[I]f the Court rules in favor of [Eshelman], declares the Defendants’ actions as being actionable trespass, and restrains further trespass, then [Eshelman] will withdraw money damage claims … in the interest of justice and judicial economy.”

The hunters say they never touched Elk Mountain Ranch ground as they stepped from one piece of public land to another in an area of checkerboard-pattern land ownership in Carbon County. The Missourians believe the airspace above such four-corner intersections is shared with the public and that federal laws bar Eshelman from blocking public passage across them, according to court filings.

Eshelman also asserted Wednesday, apparently for the first time, that one of the hunters actually set foot on ranch land. The ranch owner’s legal team used coordinates subpoenaed from the onX company that makes the GPS hunting map app to make the claim.

In a flurry of court filings Thursday, attorneys began arguing how to deal with that new assertion.

Eshelman, a wealthy North Carolina resident, has claimed that if corner crossing were permitted, the resulting public access to public land would devalue his 22,045-acre ranch by some 25% to 30%. That would amount to between $7.75 million and $9.4 million, according to WyoFile calculations made from his civil complaint and associated documents.

New claim

In a skirmish that’s gone on for 2 1/2 years, the Missouri men have maintained that they never touched Elk Mountain Ranch land and therefore did not trespass.

In both 2020 and 2021 the hunters traveled on a public road to public land administered by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management where they camped. They then hiked to a checkerboard corner adjacent to another public land section which they crossed onto.

A map filed among court papers purports to show where one hunter marked a GPS waypoint on Elk Mountain Ranch land, depicted in light green. (U.S. District Court)

By using the onX GPS map and hunting app on cell phones, they located other checkerboard corner survey monuments and stepped over them. By that method, the men hunted some 3,000 acres of public land that could only be reached by corner crossing, trespassing or with Eshelman’s permission.

Until this week, Eshelman wanted Wyoming’s Chief U.S. District Judge Scott Skavdahl to declare the hunters trespassers, then send the matter to a jury that would only determine damages. Now he would be satisfied if the judge only rules that corner crossing is trespassing and “restrains further trespass.”

Both parties want Skavdahl to make a summary judgment, they said in motions. The hunters want Skavdahl to dismiss the civil lawsuit entirely.

Among other arguments, hunters say a federal law prohibits Eshelman from keeping the public off public land and that law supersedes Wyoming property and trespass statutes that might indicate otherwise. Both sides claim that historical and legal precedents and practices back their cases.

The new claim about hunter Smith states that he marked a place he stood in 2020 in the onX program on his cell phone. Eshelman’s team obtained data from onX and ran the coordinates through the onX program and another one, according to an affidavit.

“Mr. Smith marked a waypoint at geographic coordinates that place him on real property, owned by [Eshelman’s] Iron Bar Holdings, LLC,” the affidavit states. The waypoint “proves he trespassed,” Eshelman’s latest filings state.

Smith denied on Thursday that he ever set foot on Elk Mountain Ranch land, according to a court declaration.

The hunters had at least two separate onX programs, according to court filings, including the one used by Smith. They used the program to mark several places they hunted and hiked, including spots near the common corners they crossed and places where they killed elk or deer.

Angus M. Thuermer Jr. is the natural resources reporter for WyoFile. He is a veteran Wyoming reporter and editor with more than 35 years experience in Wyoming. Contact him at or (307)...

Join the Conversation


Want to join the discussion? Fantastic, here are the ground rules: * Provide your full name — no pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish and expects commenters to do the same. * No personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats. Keep it clean, civil and on topic. *WyoFile does not fact check every comment but, when noticed, submissions containing clear misinformation, demonstrably false statements of fact or links to sites trafficking in such will not be posted. *Individual commenters are limited to three comments per story, including replies.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. If you can’t corner cross then you couldn’t legally float down a river inches over private land. In addition yo are allowed to get out of your boat and push it if you hit bottom, how would it be different then climbing a fence that was built over a corner and restricting your movement freely from one public section to another. The waypoint that was placed on private land is clearly within GPS error, and there’s no way the landowner could prove they trespassed to make that waypoint. Their is no damage to the private property owner because the law has not changed.

  2. So Eshelman is promising to be “nice” and not make these men pay some nonsense damage he alleges they caused? Good try hoping to pull the wool over our eyes. But, even us local yokels have figured out this is an ‘out-of-state-rich-guy-all-hat-but-no-sweat-pretend-cowboy’ SLAPP-like suit, designed to intimidate others by using one’s bounteous wealth and entitlement enhanced by a paucity of neighborliness.

    It also shows why wealthy wanna-be westerners come to the Rockies to create their empires. They wouldn’t dare try these intimidation tactics in the Appalachian spine. While they looked down their royal noses at the paysans, barrels of ten penny nails would magically appear strewn across their entrance driveways. We don’t do that in our state.

    For being neighborly is important – that’s one of our best traits. These entitled outsiders either can’t or refuse to understand why we value community and make a conscious effort to get along with those who live in or visit Wyoming. Actions by individuals like the plaintiff give our state a black eye, discouraging visitors who want to enjoy public lands, and making it difficult for Wyoming guides and outdoor businesses to attract and bring in tourist dollars, a significant funding source for our state economy. Who wants to bring your family to hike or camp in Wyoming then end up in an expensive legal action because some wealthy individual claims you’ve trespassed? The implications for this action go far beyond one person’s ego.

  3. I have regularly set waypoints marking locations or animal locations via onX that were on private or inaccessible areas. Waypoints don’t prove presence at that location, its regularly used to reference a point of interest, i.e. where elk are and waiting for them to cross into/on to public land.

    As a whole, I believe corner crossing should be allowed. Its public land and the public has a right to access it. The checkerboard created during railroad and interstate development times didn’t have the foresight to identify the damage and loss of access to publicly owned land due to greedy landowners that want to claim and restrict access to something that they own no more than a general united states resident. We need to fix the corner crossing argument for good, and hopefully soon!

  4. Unless Smith admits to physically being on that exact waypoint they have no case, you can set a waypoint sitting on a beach in Mexico anywhere in the USA. Owning Airspace is Ridiculously Abserd and complete stupid Selfishness beyond Absolute Evil.

  5. You don’t have to be on the location to set a way point. I can set way points on my laptop on my sofa.

  6. Seriously this is a horrible person that is so petty about corner crossing. The Elk Mountain Ranch is trying to prohibit the public from access to public land and make the public land their own property. Enough with the excessive greed. Wyoming is a fantastic place that has public property and what they should do if they are so concerned is make a designated pathway for crossing. That way they could be a good neighbor instead of greedy and mean.

  7. Harold Comes-Last is correct and the attorneys are going to look foolish if they don’t understand OnX. Without tracking information the marking of a waypoint does not mean the phone or the hunter was at that way point. Sitting in my kitchen I can put a waypoint in the middle of the White House. It is actually pretty easy to accidentally touch the screen and mark a waypoint on the OnX map without being there.

  8. It seems landowner Eshelman is sensing strong public animosity against his claim of property devaluation so will drop that claim, but he still wants to retain sole access to BLM lands enclose by his ranch and the “airspace” in proximity thereto. From the map shown above in regard to Waypoint 2 (if correct), it would appear that there is an overlapping corner of the private and BLM properties leaving a gap that suggest NO ranch “airspace” would be violated by its crossing. The bottom line by landowner appears to include arrogance and nitpicking.

  9. Just a little research will reveal that grazing permittees do not have the right/permission to control who can legally access federal (public) land. The operative word is “legally” the public cannot cross private ground without permission but can gain legal access on public roads, crossing from State Trust lands (WY), and probably other senarios I’m not aware of. There are a few exceptions regarding permitted buildings and mining operations on federal land for the safety of the public.

    I like the stance of the Farm Bureau, very professional and neighborly. “Farm Bureau supports the multiple-use mandate of federal land management and opposes legislation and federal regulatory actions that reduce public access to our nation’s shared lands.”
    Willy Cunningham

  10. GENERAL KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL: Wyoming State Statutes contain provisions for petitioning the various County Commissioners to establish access to ” land locked ” parcels of land which otherwise do not have access. This is a formal process which is initiated by presenting a signed petition to the commissioners at one of their regular meetings. The actual process spelled out in the statutes includes appointing viewers who inspect the properties and recommend to the commissioners the best choice for establishing access – that is, the route. This is followed by an appraiser establishing a value to compensate the landowner who is giving up the new easement and a survey by a licensed surveyor which defines the exact location and dimensions of the route. All of this is conducted in open public meetings and should be advertised in the legal notices in the local paper. I don’t have the actual statute in front of meet so if you have interest please look it up yourself. Does anyone else have knowledge about this matter which you would like to share????

  11. Not clear in the article, or perhaps simply not clear to me, is how accurate are the OnX waypoints? If Smith was within a few feet of the Iron Bar ranch, but not on the ranch, is OnX precise enough to say?

  12. Ranchers do not lease the land, but only the grass, which they get for about 1/10 the going price for leased pasture. This difference is more than enough to compensate them for damage caused by hunters. I think the NRA and other organizations should spend more of their money educating hunters and fishermen on respectful treatment of both private and public lands. BLM should be spending more of its resources tracking and punishing those who harm the land. Damage by a small percentage of recreationists rightfully causes property owners to be angry, but they should NOT be allowed to monopolize publicly owned land.

  13. Since when do private land owners own the “Airspace”? That means every time Delta Airlines flys over my property I can sue them? The waypoint issue is bollocks! This whole thing is rediculous. Stop wasting the courts time. The public should have access to public land, period!

    1. David, If we didn’t own some of the “airspace” above the land we own, we couldn’t even build a house on it. If that were the case we would need permission from the FAA to use their “airspace” for anything above the dirt.

  14. This sounds like a blackmail attempt on the part of Eshelman. If corner crossing were legal, the only harm to Eshelman would be that he couldn’t keep public land for his exclusive use.

  15. If the hunters are not doing harm to the ranch let them pass or the public will turn on them make there life more difficult cut off any government support farmers get

  16. Would the landowner say the hunters trespassed on his property or airspace if the hunters gained access to publicland via helicopter??

    1. Mr. Miller. This land owner had his ranch Forman harass hunters that did access land by helicopter. The husband/wife team is going to testify to that fact. Ranch hands then ran off the elk from BLM land to ranch lane. The hunters made complaint of wildlife harrassment to DO/game wardens but they failed to enforce state laws on such.

  17. This is an all or nothing case about land locking public lands from public by wealthy greed. To bribe a Judge with an option of dropping $7.75 million settlement for court economics is flat out bribery of a federal government employee, this type of action needs delt with in a severe way. Hunters harvest were nothing but legal.

  18. Our three representatives should be contacted on this issue. I would bet that they’re not on the publics side. Make it a “come to Jesus” moment for them.

  19. Mr. Eshelman is working very hard to become the most reviled and despised landowner in Wyoming. He could, after all, have chosen to be a good neighbor. He is a wonderful example of why we need higher taxes on rich people.

  20. Seems to me that Fred is getting nervous that not only he may lose, but lose big. If these hunters win, that opens up corner crossing from here on out and he won’t be able to stop anyone. Just because a hunter puts a marker down mean ZERO towards trespass. I can drop a marker on my OnX right smack in the middle of his ranch from my living room. That doesn’t mean I was actually there. His point is moot unless they show tracking data that says it wasn’t just a drop. Even then, as others have mentioned, the accuracy is not 0.0, but several feet.

  21. Public access does not apply to private ground in any way shape or form. Whether it’s 1K acres or 1. There is a reason easements are written in plain legal language. You have every right in the world to use public land, just as we do to defend our own from infringement. I’m a tiny, disabled Grammy lady with PTSD. I’m not going to sue anybody, I promise. Though I would encourage one to get right with Jesus, and/or the insurance folks should you choose to come creeping where you do not belong. I already share with wolf, bear, bobcat, etc..and some rural assault geese. If you want to share a mountain, too, buy your own place, get permission first, or only access public ground.

  22. I have used onX many times. Sometimes it is accurate, Sometimes not. I have stood still and I’m still moving around, according to onX.
    German works better.

  23. This is TOTALLY RIDICULOUS!! ANOTHER RICH….. OUT OF STATE LAND OWNER..That is using OUR Public Lands as ‘His Own’… keeping WY Hunters & Out of State Hunters w/Legal License- away from Hunting on WY Public Lands!!
    WHY do we let these people get away with this?!?! He’s using his money to use /bend the legal system for his advantage!! ITS NOT HIS LAND! If the Hunters & Hikers CAN’T use it… then neither should he be allowed to!!!!
    This NEEDS TO STOP!!!

  24. His phone was over private land when he saved the way point. This dies not mean his foot was under the phone at that time. His phone and feet could easily be 2′ apart as he hit the save way point button also the accuracy of satellites is measured in feet not inches so their is no proof that the GPS was over private land at the time. It’s public land and should be for use by the public.

  25. The landowner should not be able private access to public lands, as that’s illegal.its stated in there how much devalue his land would be if he lost,which is why he is sueing for 7.7millon which is absurd.he bought land thinking the public came with and it don’t so his loss.

  26. Eshelman’s attorneys shouldn’t get away with this assertion because Geo locators are not precise which could be proven in court.

  27. Gps accuracy, varies upto 60 feet! So the waypoint on ranch land would have to be, lets say, way inside the ranch! I dispute that a waypoint could be accurate enough to pinpoint trepassing on a property line!

    The Ranch Owner could erect fences to contain cattle & therefore limit any & all access, unless there is precedent setting case law stating otherwise.
    As for Airspace, many people have made millions of dollars buying & selling Airspace in large cities, thus find buildings needing to be redeveloped and buy the Airspace above the existing building. When a developer comes in and want to build a taller building he must purchase the Airspace Rights/property from the owner.
    Sounds like overall the Government played games and could lose.
    I side with the property owner in favor of land owner rights.

    1. There are no fences, because Eshelman grazes cattle on the BLM lands. He is allowed to be all over public land that he treats as his own, for the low price of 1.35 per aum. Him and his cronies treat public land as their own by driving atv’s all over it, chasing game away from law abiding hunters.

      We should not be siding with a Pharmaceutical oligarch treating land that WE own as his private property.

  29. All public lands in a checkerboard should designate a 20′ easment at the corners. The easment would allow public access and for ranching leases of public lands a crossing point for livestock. If easments are not an option then their should be no public lands located inside of private holdings with the elimination of checkerboards. The millionaires could buy the public lands they surround or look at land swaps to eliminate the checkerboard.

    1. The (in this case) billionaires would love to have a chance to buy the public land. They have unlimited money and we have a limited supply of land, we should not give up an acre.

  30. The OnX GPS isn’t has a significant margin of error and could record a point being off by tens of meters. Judging by that picture the hunter could have been standing on the public land and been the star placed incorrectly just because of the gps constellation at that moment.

  31. The judge should protect the owner’s land rights…by seizing the land corners to create public walking trails, citing the principal of imminent domain. Then the judge can open up an inquiry into whether that path should be 5 ft wide or probably 50 feet to accommodate heavy equipment that might be needed for fire prevention and such.

    Rich people need to be put in their place. A person placing a single step on his property is also pretty irrelevant. The judge should toss the landowner a nickel, bang his gavel and call it case closed. Stepping on his land, especially accidentally, is pretty irrelevant. Hunters hunting on his land would be another matter.

    1. In England they have walking trails on private land. I dont know about them being used to get onto private land to hunt though.

    2. In todays world homeless people set up camps and communities on private land , green spaces, public lands, parks, in peoples yards and other property that they do not own and sometimes the rightful owner spends thousands of dollars and months if not years in the court system trying to get them evicted. One story I remember was a man who lived in a house for 22 years and it was sold twice with him living in it and the lawful owners were unable to get the police to evict him or remove him for trespassing. I agree that the public should have access to land locked public land but lawful property owners have rights to own and possess their property that must be enforceable by law enforcement and the courts otherwise everything belongs to the government and individuals have no ownership rights. How to find that balance is getting more difficult as our society becomes more divided between the haves and the have nots. I don’t have the answer and I suspect most of us won’t like the answer when it becomes enforceable law.

  32. I am in favor of public lands in public hands. I hope the hunters prevail in this case. However, I too have seen the destruction people have caused to public lands as well. I would hope when the hunters win this case, a new effort comes from the BLM, national forest, state trust, game and fish to educate public land users on respectful use of the public’s land.

  33. For way to long wealthy people got away with land locking public hunting grounds then using it for their pay to play for their personal gain..buying very high price lawyers to lobby government to make laws that benefits them only.. public means everyone can hunt or use and must have Access to it..
    Therefore it would literally turn the case against the complaint for using public land to sell hints on.,thus violating the laws themselves

    1. In this case, the Government created the problem in the first place by selling land to Rancher’s in a Checkerboard pattern virtually land locking parcels. Technically there is no access to these Government BLM / American Citizen owned parcels without crossing private land. They, the Government should obtain easements allowing access and eliminate the controversy.

  34. Single point GPS observations have a location accuracy of 5-10m (15-30′), so unless verified by survey garage GPS, onx location is approximate.

  35. The owner of the land never should have based his property value on any part of public land. Shame on him for keeping the public land as part of his own property. We as the public should be able to access our public land….. Even if it is crossing at a corner.

    1. I also wish that they wouldnt allow public land grazing leases to be considered in the acreage of a property. All too often I see ranches being listed as 1 acreage, when 90% of that total is land that the public owns.

      It would be like if your neighbor uses your bathroom occasionally and decides to list it in the square footage of his house when he sells it.

  36. It is a issue that need to be solved. That private land owner is valuing his property on the idea that the public can’t utilize there land. The private land owner new when he bought checker boarder land that the public was untitled to public land.
    The GPS program that modern technology brought to the table and can be used by the public with ease by all outdoors person. Not just hunters!! Hikers, photographer, bikers etc.
    Airspace really! Airspace is and should be out of the picture. In my time is life long Wyoming resident. The GPS accurate programs is the root of this problem. It has done nothing more than help anyone!! Navigate and use and access our land public land.

    1. The only value he lost comes from not being able to steel the people’s land.

  37. This argument seems comparable to long ago previously settled ones along the coast. Access to beaches cannot be denied and provision is granted to persons wishing to avail themselves thereof .

  38. I’d be willing to bet that most of these comments are from folks that do not own land bordering public land. I do and it’s shameful the way the public treat the public lands. As for the air space, there are laws about how high you have to be over private land because you know….. who wants a drone flying around your home it yard?
    I don’t agree with this landowner but remember I if the government “opens” up private ground it basically legalizes trespass everywhere, including your back yard. That’s why you’ll never see forced easements

    1. I do own a small ranch, I post my property so I can choose who uses it. However, land easement is necessary and all people should be held accountable for littering and damage to any property… public or private

  39. This is clearly a wealthy individual that thinks he owns our public land. It’s a shame that we the people are locked out of the millions of acres of public land. The article states that the men located the corner monuments. Those monuments are USGS certified. Whether they stepped, jumped or set a ladder over a fence, as long as they didn’t touch his land air space should be irrelevant. Unfortunately, the farming & ranching business has a massive lobby presence across this country. Every rancher and farmer does not want to see this case thrown out. I’d also be willing to bet this asshole gets some sort of government subsidies as well. Somehow, there needs to be a common sense approach to allow the public to access at least some of this land. I,( and may others ) could go on about this for eternity. But just like everything in this country nothing gets done because of money, greed & egos

    1. There should realistically be very little private land. That said, the hunters also don’t own the animals they were planning to take down

  40. This happened to me and my brother in October of 1972 in the same place. At that time the land owner was Henry Chesebouro. All this is about is Safari Club International guiding hunters for outrageous prices on the entire mountain and not wanting there hunters and guides to have to compete with other hunters. Sports Afield published a comment by me in there magazine in 1973. This is so corrupt and unfair! When plane’s fly across are the trespassing too. Take it all the way to the U.S Supreme Court.

    1. I agree, common sense laws don’t exist anymore simply due to lobbying government, outlaw lobbyists and overturn those laws that benefits big business…such as this elk mountain… FYI my cousin works for this guy…and I think it’s truly rotten how they operate

    2. The ranch owner is attempting to restrict access. This is illegal both federally and in state and common law. Walton v Dana is the controlling case.

  41. Eshelman should absolutely be ashamed of himself. God will have his vengeance on this greedy sinful man. The Public Land is not his and there definitely needs to be a sliver of access. The American people cannot stand for this type of un-American behavior.

  42. The judge should rule in favor of the hunters. It’s clear that their intent was to do right. Eshelmans claim to value is in fact inflated based on his denial of access to public lands.

    Furthermore its clear imminent domain should be claimed. Marked access be cleared and established for public to access without harassment. Normally I would say this but its clear he does not live there so there’s no real threat to him other than his perceived value in the land based off his landlocked hostage taking of public resources.

  43. If the judge rules in favor of the land owner on corner crossing it will open up a whole new realm.
    I will be able to sue aircraft flying over my property!
    I will be rich just like the land owner !

  44. BAN all private land ownership other tgan whatbus becessary firbobes PERSONAL RESIDENCE!
    The LAND belongs to us all.

  45. Since, one can float over another’s land in Wyoming and portage around obstructions in those streams, then the same would apply to a ladder; and, very likely the ladder would not be neccessary on the same legal principal used to justify the portage.

  46. Thousands of Public acres all over the United States are being held back from citizens. This has to be stopped. I hope this judge does the right thing and rules against the rancher.

  47. Who surveyed the location all five section corners involved in defining these property lines. A fence is not a property line. Wyoming may be one of those, no touch creek bottom, no trespass states; and, if it is does that same principle apply. The plaintiff needs to build higher fences.

  48. The real questions are how high does a landowner own above his land and can a land owner claim damages due to someone else using puvlic land.

    1. Any drone operator knows that the United States Government has exclusive sovereignty of all airspace of the United States.. how is this even an issue?

  49. I use OnX and when I walk my property there are times it shows me 20 to 25 feet from where I am actually standing by my surveyed land markers and times when it is dead on. I do not know how they can determine the accuracy of the app on the day in question, unless he was deep inside property lines AND they have a witness or photo proving it.

    You should not be allowed to open a lawsuit based off of pure speculation and gain access to someone’s personal gps, kind of disturbing.

  50. The reasoning the guy has for the $7M claim is based on the premise that if he no longer possesses full control, effectively ownership, of this public land, the value of his ranch loses that much value. This is literally acknowledging that he is claiming ownership of public property for exclusively his own benefit. That public land is NOT his. The principle is that simple. And marking waypoints is easy from anywhere. It doesnt mean you were on that spot. This case needs to be distilled down to that very core issue.

  51. So if you’re fortunate enough to buy several sections of ground, you buy one get one free basically if you buy enough. I came across the crap when I hunted unit 7 Laramie Peaks. Shame on the government for ever letting this happen in the first place. I think of it as if it were farm ground in Nebraska. If you checkerboard farm ground would that mean the farmers with the inside squares couldn’t get to their ground legally to farm it?

  52. Handheld GPS is not accurate enough to either prove or disprove the hunters committed trespass. The waypoint coordinates could be anywhere from 0′-30′ from the physical position the hunters were at when they recorded it.

  53. I don’t blame the rancher one bit! We had a ranch. People we’re always demanding, and even suing for easements! Constantly wanting to trespass on your land. We also had a lot of trouble with hunters & fisherman casing of place, then trespassing on our land when they thought we weren’t home, or thought we were asleep. We had a lake full of Bass, Trout, … and bull frogs, which we raised for our own enjoyment. If we ever fished, we practiced catch & release. And we had a lot of dear on our land too. And the trespassing hunters & fisherman would tell all their hunting & fishing buddies too. We could never get the sheriff’s office to do a darn thing! They kept fishing our lake dry of any fish! They even snuck out at night, and gigged all our frogs. We didn’t have the technology back then like these ranchers have now. If he sues them for money damages, more power to him! That will teach these rich city SOBs not to go to the country, and try to use their money & power to walk all over & take advantage of ranchers, farmers & growers.

    1. Read that article again..this ranch owner is from North Carolina he’s not a local. He bought up land to encircle public land to effectively double his ranch size. If anyone is being a rich SOB it’s the ranch owner.

    2. That is a whole different thing to what’s happening here. Much of the land in this area of Wyoming is in a checkerboard pattern of public land/private land. The only way to access public land is to corner cross. I used to do it all the time with my kids when we lived there-just out enjoying nature (certainly not “rich city SOB” as you suggested). Otherwise the public land is landlocked, effectively giving sole control of thousands of acres of public land to the private land owner.

  54. This wholly unmeritorious Case on the part of this ignorant/arrogant rancher reads like a bad episode straight out of Yellowstone. His claimed damages a completely nil and the licensed Hunters have an excellent case if they wanted to serve this A-Hole a credible Cross-Complaint for Malicious Litigation, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, as well as Civil Harassment. Any half way reasonable Federal Civil Jury in that part of our Country would consider it their Sacred Duty to award the Hunters both Compensatory and Punitive Damages in their Verdict against this clown as a result of his vendetta against their lawful hunting Rights.
    In California, where one of the few things our State government actually got right, against the coastal property owners high end Attorneys it was a Helluva fight, but Thanks to our Coastal Commission, we forced beach side property owners to unblock and unlock existing Public Easements, allowing inland beachgoers to at last access illegally closed walkways/pathways to their rightful heritage State coastlines. You had unlawful property owner generated incidents take place, whereby they’d have a Private Patrol operator roll up and illegally inform you’re Trespassing on coastal land only local residents could enjoy. If this erroneous rancher originated from my State, please accept my humble apologies on behalf of nearly 40 million Californians otherwise glad to see him go.

  55. The global positioning system is controlled by the Fereral Government. They also control the accuracy of said system thus fluctuating its accuracy on a frequent basis. This is done as a means to protect our country. A GPS signal is considered accurate even when it’s off by feet or yards, which it always is unless the United Sates uses it in a war. It is abundantly clear that these hunters did every thing they could to not trespass. This case is will have devasting effects on the future of the people of the United States who want to use the public lands that they own. As it stands now, private land owners control the people’s rights. This must change once and for people. It is time to cut the head off of this out of control beast. It should not be the land of the rich. It should be the land of the people. Three foot walk through easements should be the norm.

  56. 2004 Deer gun season in NW Wis- 6 hunters/land owners shot & killed by habitual trespasser!!
    Unfortunately I was on
    The call ! Year before
    That I responded to a Trespasser pulling a knife on the land owner ! I & many LE folks could cite
    incidents by the hundreds ! Again,
    Stop trespassing ,
    Road hunting, & poaching!!! And stay away from property lines !!!! Cutting property corners is unethical no matter the
    Hunters wishes to hunt a particular area. Change the laws- go meet Ranchers , get your hands dirty a few days helping with chores, (even though Mr Eshelman’s Ranch is or was non working)
    We used to go out & meet Ranchers & donate some labor and have a hunting spot for years ! Playing hopscotch to access a
    Restricted property.-
    Really ??? How did they get the deer out ?

  57. Garmin only classes my +- 100meters. Usually much more accurate but it is not military grade accuracy. Rancher greedy selfish in my opinion

  58. BLM is public lands and should not be land locked by any means just like rivers. 1= Federal laws protect right to access of public lands. 2= And if air space were made off limits how high does this go. It could stop airplains from flying overhead. 3= Money interest will as planned isolate all BLM lands just like England. Because absolute power absolutely corrupts. 4= Another small detail is a Democracy is controlled by a majority or the people. Not personal interest groups. And if judges can subvert these tenants, ignore our rights, or be bought off they need to be removed. We have voting, forums, power of the press, law suits, and many coarses of LEGAL action. I DO NOT ADVOCATE unlawful procedure’s.

  59. The private landowners would prefer to use the wild game that is managed by government game managers and feeding from public land as well, to set high values on their private properties claiming the wild game as their domestic animals attached to their private property. They’ve gotten away with misrepresentation often, and wish to lock it up. Seldom will you find interest in the environment and natural spaces as rich people seek happiness with pirated possessions.

  60. Retired Wi Deputy Sheriff & LTE DNR Warden 30+ yrs. Wi Beef cattle ranch owner. We had similar cases in our area mostly over fishing on small lakes surrounded
    By private property.
    Rulings here always seem to favor the land owner! No technology even in todays society ,
    In the hands of a layman, can guarantee splitting 6″ of turf Accurately!
    Trespassers, people who have to continually crowd property lines are a distasteful lot &
    Certainly not the type of hunters I would like to be near!! Land owners pay huge taxes for their privacy not to mention property costs these days ! Give property lines a wide girth and get permission if possible to access private property! To go hunting in another state & pull this stunt just to shoot a deer suggests a lot about these “hunters” !! Hunt where you are legal- NOT sneaking around private property lines !!!

  61. Hi Agent Anthony Dominguez here. This is so common practice of fee owned land owners in California. Where the congressional statute says congress decided to allocate the uneven numbered sections of land serving! To the even numbered sections.

    Most sober men would not act like the Ranch owner.

    All u have to do is obtain a chain of title all the way back to when the federal government decided to sell some of the un even numbered sections to home steader. The restrictions are clear if your with in 22 miles of any Rail road un even numbered sections are serving.

    It was never mentioned in this case what sections the Ranch land occupied.

    Also the international Right of way Association will help you.

    Please see the case I last won. Anlex V Brubaker Mann Inc.

    California. It’s all over the web

    Sincerely? Anthony Dominguez
    Desert Castle Realty/Mineral Division
    DRE# 01707239
    760 524 7913

  62. The government should declare an access easement 24′ wide, 12′ on each side.
    Then no further issues and the absentee rancher will learn a lesson

  63. I was looking to buy land and I see this grid thing with BLM like they own everything? The checkerboard subject? Does that mean if I purchased land in Arizona in the middle of the checkerboard and was surrounded buy land owners on all four sides then the subject comes up about trespassing,SOO HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET ON YOUR OWN LAND AND AREN’T THERE RULES OF EASEMENT? now probably what is going on is we are enviably going into WWII, and the government is willing to sell this land be side it wants to fund a war, then you buy the land and the real war starts here on homeland, and yes the government did steal the land from the indigenous people/indians, and never paid for it, soo the government is selling land they stole, and the indigenous people should reclaim THIER land and file a law suit against the government for all this, I guess no matter what you can not ever outright own a piece of land because bottom line is BLM claims they own it all standing behind the banks that will take a house or land back you thought they sold you, and as it turns out BLM holds deeds and you just don’t get a deed unless you have paid in full which is part of the scheme to get it back while BLM and the GOVERNMENT to TAKE IT OVER “EMINENT DOMAIN” sum of it YOU NEVER OWN ANYTHING and this is where they should eat THIER own words and give the land back to the indigenous people/indians, have you ever heard of the “JUBILEE” all land gets returned back to the first one, or however you may fall into place with ownership, GOD IS WATCHING, MONEY IS NOT EVERYTHING BECAUSE WHAT JESUS HAS TO OFFER CAN NOT BE BOUGHT WITH MONEY, AND THAT WILL BE HONESTY, REPENTANCE, and CHANGE, next someone will complain about how much air a person sucks in to breath in a days time, the government will try to taxt you for breathing, and that’s what the sell of land is about, accumulation of money, which is the root of all evil, one day we may all be having to hunt for our own food and not just for fun, might have to go on land where the animals are living, has anyone decided to sue the animals for trespassing, they do it everyday 24&7, and are we not free in this land? or is this some of the communism we don’t want, Commerce started WWII and US (us indigenous people fought to free those hurt by communism) we did it with the CODE TALK, now why if that worked that we contributed the VICTORY we can not have a say in this because the LAND HERE IS STILL OURS? IT IS! Let us have the say.

  64. Just as my property has a easement for utilities etc to use to gain access to poles etc, this property owner should have an easement placed on his property for any person to access that public property. The property owner should be forced to surrender enough land ” in the publics best interest ” just like they must do anytime a new road is being built/widened…This property owner has NO right to keep people off public land. Use eminent Domain to provide access to all public property!
    By using OnX, it proves that the hunters had NO intention to trespass on the property owners land. They were going above and beyond to respect his property. You can mark a way point by touching the screen of the device you are using, not the land you are at.
    It is plain and simple to see that the property owner tries to keep a monopoly on the public land so he can charge exhorbant fees for hunters to gain access to the public property. That is straight up BS! The ruling by the judge in this matter should go to the hunters! With the caveat of providing access to public property. Property values DO NOT depreciate because a person walks next to it, but the INCOME DERIVED from the monopoly being busted up will be lost!

  65. These men did not break the law. Furthermore, Mr. Eshelman needs to find more appropriate ways to occupy his time by becoming more civil with his fellow man.

  66. I personally believe that BLM, The NATIONAL FOREST SERVICE, and the ranch owners should be sued for ever deliberately setting up the Checkerboard Land Lease system because it was a deliberate act to prevent the public from having public access to land that belongs to the public! Do these ranchers sue airlines and balloonist for crossing their airspace? If not, why are they picking on a few hunters?
    BLM and the National Forestry Service should have set up crossing points at each corner, and set up roads and parking space to access ALL the Public Land.
    Instead, they rigged up this checkerboard system to deprive the public of their right to access public land, and to give ranchers hugh, free land sections.
    This is done in many States.

    1. The checkerboard was created to incentivize the construction of the transcontinental railroad to help support the federal government during the Civil War. There was no malicious purpose; every other section along a designated right-of-way corridor was given to railroad companies and the Feds retained the other section. The RR could then sell those sections to recoup their costs and encourage settlement of the western states.

  67. This waypoint evidence means nothing. This map shows no tracking, no bread crumb trail showing where someon, with gps in hand, actually traveled over and beyond the boundary line. A waypoint can be created by staying motionless and scrolling on the phone screen, and with a tap drop your waypoint on an area of interest. I wouldn’t even consider this evidence, I’d call it absolute meaningless garbage from the Eshelman law team. This is a BS case and it looks like Eshelman finally realized he stepped into it and now wants to bribe and negotiate. Don’t be surprised if he drops this completely. If Eshelman does and this matter doesn’t get settled once and for all then this opioid zillionaire and banch of sellout henchman can and will pull this same garbage on other hunters in the future. Stand tall, the Missouri Foursome, you’ve GOT THIS!

  68. This is a horse manure suit. There are no real damages. Private owners should not be permitted to isolate public lands.

  69. I stand with the non resident hunters. There are thousands and thousands of acres of PUBLIC land in Wyoming that is landlocked and surrounding landowners act like THEY own it. THEY DON’T!!! And if the state of WY wants to continue to accept all $ from the public for hunting/recreationist as there #1 state income I think they should stand with the public land enthusiasts and make a formal legal solution that sides with the public❗❗❗

  70. I woke up here in Texas today and within 10 minutes had three spots in New Mexico pinned without ever getting out of bed.
    Mr. Crabby Dude needs to get a grip and stop wasting the courts and taxpayers time.

  71. If the public can’t use the blm land in question then trespassing includes the ranch owner also. NOBODY but government agencies using eminent domain may access it, period! Also, as others have said waypoints are not that accurate.

  72. The owner of said land is an embarrassing individual to try n keep Americans off public land so as to unlawfully hold it for his own use! Hope the judge rules against him n thoroughly reprimands him!

  73. Maybe a large group of hunters should hire a helicopter to drop off one hunter on each parcel of public land, that would be more than enuff to scatter the elk herd so everyone has a chance of a successful hunt, not just the people willing to pay 10 k plus for a guided hunt on the ranch in question!

  74. What part of New York did the land own er say he was from.If he is claiming crop damage, he should lose his frivolous suit and have to pay defendants legal fees, just saying.

  75. Hey Eshelman attorneys, in regard to the waypoint no. 6, try to get onX to verify and guarantee the accuracy of their software in conjunction with a GPS unit. Good luck with that! I use onX regularly and it’s only as good as the data compiled to create the mapping and the accuracy of the GPS system. I’ve seen anywhere from a 2 foot accuracy to over a 100 yard difference at a known point vs. what onX was telling me. You can also screen scroll the cursor and lay down or ‘pin’ a waypoint from anywhere. What’s missing from your smoking gun map is evidence of the breadcrumb tracking that would show, for example, the GPS unit physically being from moved from the BLM across and onto the Eshelman property. Again, pinned waypoints mean nothing and your whining about waypoint no. 6 doesn’t prove a thing and is irrelevant to the upcoming trial. What is relevant is, the Missouri 4 physically located corner markets and crossed over without ever touching the Eshelman property. Even after Eshelman’s coward/employees put up illegal obstructions, the 4 were undaunted and used a ladder to cross over, again without touching Eshelman property.

  76. The Waypoint that Eshelman is crying about, No.6, could easily be pinned on the phone from anywhere. There is no tracking or bread crumbs showing a hunter leaving BLM and going onto private. It’s all about scrolling the cursor on the OnX screen. For whatever reason, the hunter decided to pin a waypoint at the location on private. 1) you could actually and physically put yourself at this location and enter ‘waypoint’ or 2) on the screen of your phone with the OnX software, scroll the cursor to that location and enter ‘waypoint’. Heck, I’m sitting about 400 miles away from this exact location and on my phone just created a waypoint on Eshelman’s property. Will his goon squad raid my house shortly? Bring it on, Fred. But here’s the real deal, this case is about Corner Crossing, *NOT* some alleged and unprovable trespass at Waypoint #6. If and that’s a big “if” there actually was trespassing across property line at Waypoint #6, this still has 0% relevance with the actual case at hand. Eshelman knows he’s on a sinking ship and is now throwing all sorts of excrement at the wall to see what’ll stick. It looks like Fred’s squad of suit clad attorneys wants to now treat this case as arbitration, but meanwhile, Fred has already been tried in the court of public opinion and Eshelman should be preparing himself to be tarred and feathered and drummed out of town.

  77. The faa has already made it very clear that a property owner has no specific special rights to the air space above their property unless it’s an area obviously intended to have some sort of vertical structure like a house. This guy can’t and didn’t intend to put a structure in that spot. So he has no claim to any airspace above that area at all.

  78. I am a cattle rancher from Missouri. I spend $15,000 to $20,000 a year fixing fence and putting my cattle back in their pastures because some hunter (great conservationists) cut my fence to go get a deer or turkey they shot on my property without permission. Than they cut the fence so they can ride the ATV on my land and get their game. Sad patr is they are to lazy to call and say they cut my fence.

  79. while the hunters feet did not touch private land,their bodies most certainly did! Airspace is preserved for flying machines and not Human foot traffic! I am a real sportsman 60 plus years old and native to Montana,and would never consider trespassing in the corner to corner method as that would violate the principals of sportsman ship.
    I am not a land owner just an outdoor enthusiast.

  80. You can mark waypoints sitting in your living room. That is no evidence that he was on the private property.

    On one hand I do believe land locked public land should have a way in!! Change sucks!
    Truth is, Tax payers own this public land!! The fact a rich man wants it all for himself is the real Truth here!! My gosh. What happened to a good cowboy??
    A real cowboy rancher would want you to have access to hunt or fish in a taxpayer owned property adjacent to his!!! This is a case of arrogance and Greed!!!
    Like if it wasn’t bad enough we took the land from the Native Indian in the first place, And the fact its probably owned by BLM!! Is another catche. Look what happened to the Bundy bunch!!!!
    In my opinion the Federal government has a responsibility to make sure theese places have some sort of Access!!! Otherwise we all loose!! As rightful Americans!! And also if there were no access, That in a way, States in itself that the Government stole the land, from all taxpayers!!!
    Just like me, and my farm, I would not want a gravel plant next to my ranch!! But who am I to say, that if it was rightfully bought? That they couldn’t do what they wanted with there own property!!! But clearly this is about money and greed!!

    1. If all hunters were respectful it would be great. but ruffly 75% are the asholes and cuase some sort of damage ,I spend 2 weeks a year fix up the stuff they mess up

      1. Roy. Farr. I disagree whole heartedly with your claims. On hunters and amount of time “fixing” what they tore up. All these claims of cut fences etc are generally BS. Farmers/Ranchers are absolutely horrible on fence maintenance/Repair. Live stock and wildlife are hard on fences to start with. Fence posts break off. Weather it’s self is hard on fences. It is generally these issues that lead to down fences and wandering livestock. Amount of time spent on normal fence maintence does take up lot of time. Farmers ranchers are generally very lazy. And maintenance is expensive. Plus no government subsidies for fence maintenance

  82. Cell phone OnX. These waypoints could of been set from the comfort of home in Indiana, Iowa or…..Missouri. The waypoint #6, supposedly showing trespass. First off, GPS’s can be off 100’s of feet and sometimes 100’s of yard and regardless, the court issue is not a simple trespass over the property line, the sole object is the corner crossing. Waypoint #6 has exactly zero bearing in the trial. Eshelman is getting desperate, here, very desperate. A friend of mine owns a fairly significant landholding within the checkerboard belt of Wyoming. He, like Eshelman, enjoys (at least in his mind) controlling the inner sections of BLM. But, from this friend says, is not only Eshelman going to lose and lose big, all of the other losers are going to be the other landowners who controlled their public land squares. He wishes Eshelman would of let a sleeping dog lay. As for little ole’ me, the moment Eshelman loses this case I’m going corner cross onto what was once ‘his’ secret little BLM parcels and I hope that Ranch Manager Steve Grende comes on out and tries to show what a big man he is.

  83. The court Should check with the FAA to see what is considered airspace that is controlled and airspace that is not. How high up is the rancher claiming that he owns airspace. In my opinion he does not on the air space anymore than he owns the rivers

    1. I believe it’s BLM who is at fault they need to provide access to this public land. Private property owners no matter how rich or poor they are have a right to limit access on or through their property, it’s THEIR LAND and being old school where I come from we ask permission first and introducing ourselves and hand shaking on deals and your word is your worth so you keep to it no matter what, that’s the real cowboy way!

    2. It’s 500′ or 1000′ above the highest object in the property iirc. The difference depends on the type of airspace such as being located near an airport.

    3. In Wyoming can’t you cross private land by staying in a waterway?
      No creeks or small rivers coming of that mountain?

  84. OnX and similar programs depend on the mapping info from county assessors and are only designed for their assessment and taxing purposes. They are not survey accurate nor are USGS quad maps. I’ve seen them up to 5 chains or 100 yds off.
    Secondly, if Eshelman’s specious argument were carried to its logical extension, no one could fly over his property either. In my home in fairly hilly farm & forest land in the Midwest, the settlement history goes back to the 1700’s. Going to neighbors or a store on foot or horses and wagons always stayed on trails that were always laid out on ridges or bottoms. There was little concern for easements because there was a neighborly understanding that everyone needed those trails and roads. In America today, there is a growing separation between those with more money and those with less. The wealthy get wealthier and the middle class gets poorer. We see in our area, folks moving out of the cities or liberal states to buy a chunk of rural ground, and the first thing they do is try to gate off all those accesses that have been in use since the first settlement days. Investor typessuch as Mr. Eshelman, who can afford to purchase huge tracts that would likely include areas of state or federal lands can use them as part of their own personal hunting ground. It widens the divide between legitimate hunters and ranchers, a trend which shouldn’t be the case if Christian values always governed behaviors.

  85. I personally would like to be able to cross over to access State and Federal lands to hunt, fish and recreate. It is very obvious that opposing parties cannot claim full rights to each corner and therefore each must compromise something in order for there to be an equal settlement. This issue will not resolve easily. My initial thought is to charge a fee to those who want to use the crossing and pay the land owner that amount. Access should be limited those on foot to minimize the human impact. I am fully aware there are many more details needed to complete this process so maybe this could be a springboard for more ideas.

    1. I don’t think public should have to pay a fee to access public land. But in the spirit of compromise I’d rather it be a fee than a lottery🤔

  86. Owner want to control the public land like it was his own. If he wins the court fight then government should put an easement right through him using eminent domain. Or, let the rancher purchase the public land that is not public. I understand both sides, but it comes down to what is public land?

    1. No , I do not believe the government should sell land!! That us, the taxpayer owns!!!! You sir. Do not have a good idea!!
      The government makes the money on the purchase!!! Not the taxpayers!!!! Well. Unless the government were to send each and every American a check!! From that purchase!!

  87. The land owner is the person who is in the wrong. The hunter’s did not trespass on his land. He is being petty about it. If he claims the airspace above his property he should have to pay taxes on it. All he is doing is denying the public the right to use public land. He wants to use the public land as his own private hunting reserve. Especially if he allows other hunter’s access to the public land. Public land belongs to the public and not to him. The courts need to set a precedence in this case so that public land is accessible to the American people who all in one way or another have a vested interest in the United States public lands.
    That is my opinion on the matter. I am a hunter and I believe that no one should be denied the opportunity to hunt on public land.

  88. Is this $7M ‘offer’ some type of bribe? Eshelman obviously owned the Carbon County Attorney as well as the Game and Fish Department, is he trying to ‘buy’ the federal court? Oh, btw Game and Fish, thanks for selling us residents out when you sided with Eshelman and let his henchman run rampant with the hunter harassment garbage on elk mt ranch

  89. This land owner was collecting a trespass fee without anyone knowing and hunter found a way to th blm ground without paying him an now he’s mad

  90. So, now it’s a demand thsmat the judge rule it is trespassing or he’ll proceed with a $7.75 million lawsuit?
    Similar corner crossing arguments here in MT.
    But isn’t this current move by the rancher treading awfully close to extortion?
    This needs to play out in the courts. We need a line drawn to separate greed and selfishness from locking the public out of their land.

  91. These are our public lands. When property owners restrict you from accessing these lands, they are taking away your rights to land that is effectively owned by all of us.

    I see two separate arguments here, one being about the corner crossing, and one being about clear cut trespass. Assuming that assertions made so far are true, the corner crossing should be allowed in order to access the public lands. However, if it is true that they went onto his property as indicated by waypoint 6, then the owner should be entitled to recover actual damages from that. The devaluation of his property from public access to adjacent property doesn’t make sense to me, because he should have been obligated to allow that access to the public the entire time.

  92. Private Individuals don’t own public land and can’t keep the public off, this NC resident, not a Wyoming resident needs stop

  93. Note to Fred Eshelman: this case is about CORNER CROSSING…whether the alleged trespass across property line (Waypoint 6) occurred or not is NOT relevant. The hunters found permanent corner markers and did their “corner crossing” legally and without touching your land (example: Waypoint 2)…and Fred, let me remind you, these same marked corners are where you constructed your illegal signage. Not to be dissuaded, the hunter’s “laddered” over your purposeful and man-made obstructions. As a “plus” for your side, Fred, apparently you have the Wyoming Game & Fish bought and paid for as your ranch management staff was able to constantly haze and harass these hunters on public land (Wy Hunter Harassment Statute No. 23-3-405 ) with no threat of getting cited. Fred, your dire desperation is showing here and you and your well heeled stable of shysters will apparently do or say anything to get off the subject, which again, is Corner Crossing. Since you’re getting desperate enough to be making “offers”….here’s an Offer for you: When you get your behind whipped in Court, how about that $7 Million figure you’ve spewed out should come out of your own pocket – $7 Million EACH to the four hunters. And…….get the hell out of Wyoming as we don’t want or need your type here.

    1. The trespass issue is a separate issue and shows how desperate he is. The fact that this is even an issue shows how poor political representation is in Wyoming. They are public lands, paid for by the public. The fact that you can’t cross a corner that is EQUALLY owned, without touching his property is ludicrous. This joker acts as if the public land is for his sole use. If he thinks public access devalues his property, fine. Bill him for all the years of him using it for his sole use at the evaluation he uses for his land. Make corner crossing legal and he will no longer be billed.

  94. This is one of many ways, big ranchers keep illegal control of public land. It’s why I had to stop hunting in CO. & Wyoming
    They have the right to control their land. But they control public land. So no place to hunt. = no hunters.

    1. Can’t the parks counter-sue the rancher for violating their invitee’s airspace?🤔
      The greed old bastard & his realty guy are probably in cahoots together trying to figure out how to sue the government because they certainly have much deeper pockets than a few hunters. Reminds me of robbers who blocked off rivers & wouldn’t let people pass unless they payed a toll!

  95. I’m not sure, given the accuracy of gps, that one can assert that a way point on the border was in one parcel or another. Is there a claim that the waypoints were so far into the property that the margin of error for gps is exceeded by the way point position?

  96. Re: the waypoint alleging one of the hunters set foot on the private land. To what degree of accuracy is the onX app? When the waypoint was set, what was the map scale?

    I have learned when using onX, I have to enlarge the map as much as possible in order to accurately mark a waypoiint.

  97. Eshelman is what’s wrong with this country. It isn’t the Kings deer! It’s public land and he’s a crying batch! Way to go hunters! It’s your right to that public land that we all pay for. Stay the course!

  98. The ranch owner does not own The air he is a control freak if it does like it get the hell out

    1. This scenario seems a little farfetched. Caught it by chance, landowners cannot claim rights of any flight over private property. No way, no how. Military and the fed by special jurisdiction. Nuts is nuts.

  99. Under the landowners argument, every airplane that traverses his airspace is full of trespassers. Every State has property rules that prevent permanent structures from being built on property lines, just for this reason….so neighbors can’t restrict egress and access to one’s own property. This rancher is essentially trying to take ownership of public land and his claim of devaluation is absurd…his property value isn’t determined by added access to that which he doesn’t own. If the hunters used a jetpack, balloon, catapult or ladder to clear the corner, that’s no different than a plane at 30,000 feet.

  100. Obviously these people have no understanding of Onx or any other mapping system. I can drop a pin from my living room in Oklahoma.

    1. You are exactly right. I’m a professional Land Surveyor in Oregon, Washington and Idaho. You can set a waypoint on anything you want to hike to or get a bearing point from. Hikers set waypoints on mountain tops or private property structures to triangulate there location. Tim Rouse

  101. Waypoint 6: Its important to note that approximately 60% of rural fences in Wyoming are not on line and cannot be depended on to determine actual property boundaries. It appears to me that Smith was using the OnX to determine an actual boundary, and once he determined his position, immediately retreated from the Waypoint 6 location. Intent matters, and there’s a really good possibility that Smith’s intent was to determine the actual location of the ranches property line when he used OnX. His intent was to avoid trespassing on ranch surface. If so, he utilized the proper procedure and demonstrated no ill intent.
    Example: Kirby Seiber of Zurich found and excavated Big Al the Jurassic Allosauros within the fenced boundary between private land and BLM land and believed he was on private surface. However, the BLM subsequently surveyed the actual property and found the fence was far off; and therefore, the dinosaur was on BLM surface. Mr. Seiber therefore surrendered the dinosaur to the Federal government which placed it in the Museum of the Rockies in Montana. Mr. Seiber at no time exhibited intent to collect a dinosaur off of BLM land – he just made an honest mistake assuming the fence represented the true property line when it did not.
    The Missouri hunters apparently exhibited intent to locate the actual property line by utilizing OnX and any trespass was normal whilst trying to locate the actual property line. Again, intent matters.

  102. If the public cannot cross !the corners then the land owner should not be able to charge the public a fee to hunt the public property!

    1. Of course the eshelman lap dog would agree with the proposal.

      I hope the hunters prevail and they are able to press charges for hunter harassment

      1. This has been an ongoing dilemma, and I think it comes down to the basic definition of “Public Lands” similar to River access, if you are in the water you can navigate up and down the river to the high water mark, without trespass violations, in Montana. I would suspect that this would equally apply to airspace?? So does a landowner has the right to claim airspace … I think not!!!

        1. Go in and read Wyoming State Attorneys own opinion on corner crossings. 2004 is when it was State AG was asked for opinion on Corner Crossing “Tresspassing”. It is unenforceable.

          1. larry,ggod point.
            this is now in the federal court’snot the state court’s.
            also the attorney generals opinion was just that not case law.

            p.s.he was also a democrat,which would make his opinion bias.

    2. The opposite also figures here. It’s been the case in Utah where a private party will buy a private, isolated inholding surrounded by public land and threaten to develop the land. The government is required to build and maintain easements for access across the public land. The upshot is to force the government to buy the inholding at exorbitant prices or trade it for much more land somewhere else. The private parties in these cases are gaming the system with support from corrupt congress members.