Page 3 of 26 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 257
  1. #21
    Eastmans' Staff
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    160
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 127 Times in 56 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    That's a good question. I am certainly no legal expert, but is seems like the court systems don't really want to go there so to speak. I think they rationalize it in the fact that you as a land owner do control the immediate airspace above your land and in order to corner hop you would have to cross/trespass that airspace even if you knew exactly where the corner is because a personal cannot make themselves two dimensional/infinitely thin. I'm not really sure what I think about that explanation but that is how it was explained to me by a WY G&F game warden when I asked. What do you guys think?

    -G
    N. Guy Eastman
    Publisher
    Eastmans' Hunting Journals

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Reno, Nevada, United States
    Posts
    2,105
    Thanks
    55
    Thanked 154 Times in 116 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 3 Times in 2 Posts
    I think if they control the land, they should own it not just 50%. I sure would like to own just half of my lot. I see no reason why we cant borderhop, its our land.

    What do you see the biggest problem is with protecting our land?

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    North Umpqua River, Oregon
    Posts
    2,303
    Thanks
    400
    Thanked 490 Times in 306 Posts
    Congratulations
    38
    Congratulated 48 Times in 7 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Guy View Post
    That's a good question. I am certainly no legal expert, but is seems like the court systems don't really want to go there so to speak. I think they rationalize it in the fact that you as a land owner do control the immediate airspace above your land and in order to corner hop you would have to cross/trespass that airspace even if you knew exactly where the corner is because a personal cannot make themselves two dimensional/infinitely thin. I'm not really sure what I think about that explanation but that is how it was explained to me by a WY G&F game warden when I asked. What do you guys think?

    -G
    Perhaps this is an area Game and Fish could work on with landowners and create legal crossing points.
    Grand Slam #1005 + 2: Dall (1986 Yukon), Fannin/Stone (1987 Yukon), Bighorn (1988 Colorado Unit S-26), Stone (1995 British Columbia), Desert (2001 Nevada Unit 161), Bighorn (2009 Wyoming Unit 5)

  4. #24
    Eastmans' Staff / Moderator
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    995
    Thanks
    53
    Thanked 581 Times in 209 Posts
    Congratulations
    1
    Congratulated 21 Times in 8 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Umpqua Hunter View Post
    Perhaps this is an area Game and Fish could work on with landowners and create legal crossing points.
    I would love to see a solution to this. The hardest part is that there will be people who don't do a good job following the rules when a land owner generously opens up their property. This makes it tougher for access purposes later.

  5. #25
    Eastmans' Staff
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    160
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 127 Times in 56 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    That is a very difficult issue to deal with, here in WY as well. The state controls the wildlife, the feds control the land and where it gets really sticky and political is where the fed Gov controls the endangered species which usually trump everything and are being used to control everything else. The ESA is probably the most dangerous and threatening legislation to ever be produced in regard to the Western lifestyle that we all enjoy. Elections have consequences guys, even down to your local Sheriffs.

    A swing toward state's rights at the federal level sure would help out with a lot of these issues.

    G-
    N. Guy Eastman
    Publisher
    Eastmans' Hunting Journals

  6. #26
    Eastmans' Staff
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    160
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 127 Times in 56 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Without a doubt, politics, mostly at the Federal level. -G
    N. Guy Eastman
    Publisher
    Eastmans' Hunting Journals

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    north idaho
    Posts
    303
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 37 Times in 25 Posts
    Congratulations
    6
    Congratulated 8 Times in 3 Posts
    no new wilderness, we have enough already. I would love to see another designation that came out that still allowed access, and protection but not wilderness.

  8. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    15
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    Congratulations
    0
    Congratulated 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Corner crossing would be a moot point if the proposed public land sell-offs were to occur. Before we can talk about providing better access to public lands, we need to put this anti-federal land hoopla to rest. While there's many of great ideas, programs and organizations out there that are working on the issue of public land access, it's all a waste if the land we're trying to get access to ends up being sold off.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    north idaho
    Posts
    303
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 37 Times in 25 Posts
    Congratulations
    6
    Congratulated 8 Times in 3 Posts
    if the lands in the state are controlled by the state, who pays for the fighting of forest fires. I think an average year in Idaho is around 80 million dollars. That is a lot of money to be taken out of state budget. You would have to take the money from, schools, roads or social services. it does turn into a catch 22 when talking state lands and federal money.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    North Umpqua River, Oregon
    Posts
    2,303
    Thanks
    400
    Thanked 490 Times in 306 Posts
    Congratulations
    38
    Congratulated 48 Times in 7 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ScottR View Post
    I would love to see a solution to this. The hardest part is that there will be people who don't do a good job following the rules when a land owner generously opens up their property. This makes it tougher for access purposes later.
    I wonder about something like F&G installing signs at the corner crossing points. No sign…it's illegal to cross. The surveys are done in many areas and the survey hubs are in place.
    Grand Slam #1005 + 2: Dall (1986 Yukon), Fannin/Stone (1987 Yukon), Bighorn (1988 Colorado Unit S-26), Stone (1995 British Columbia), Desert (2001 Nevada Unit 161), Bighorn (2009 Wyoming Unit 5)

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •