A Federal judge in WY ruled today that 4 hunters did not trespass on private property when they crossed corner to corner from public land to public land ( BLM ) where the two opposing corners were deeded land belonging to a prick that wanted 7million in damages . Today is a Great Day .

Seems logical. If corner crossings were ruled illegal, that would be a strong argument for an easement, I would think. That would cost the landowners some land.

It is a complicated area and has big implications on many fronts including drones. And Montana law is different than Wyoming. But I agree that it is an important ruling.

A WY state judge ruled in favor of these hunters a year ago (approx) . I have been waiting for this to get to a federal court assuming fed preemption over any state law concerning federal (public) land . As it stood before this ruling , I could be charged with criminal trespass even if I pole vaulted or was launched via catapult over corners of deeded (private)land and public domain without ever setting foot on private property .

Not sure how I feel about this

Also with all the other nonsense today SCOTUS found this to be important?


Ether way doesn’t matter, cops will ether go after you or “civil matter” it, and they have no duty to do anything (per SCOTUS) plus qualified immunity, if you “disrespect” or “trespass” their buddies land the process will be the punishment

So kinda a pointless ruling real world

NineThreeKilo wrote: So kinda a pointless ruling real world

Not so sure it's pointless. Following the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, some Native Corporations chose their land allotments in checkerboard patterns. This was a clear attempt to lock up more land than they were actually allotted. If this decision came out differently, there would be vast amounts of public land that would be essentially off-limits. This has very practical impacts on outdoorsmen in Alaska. And given the paucity of public land in many states, I'd bet it has an impact elsewhere as well.

Checkerboard allotment is interesting on Native Claims land. I drove through a section of the checkerboard allotment given the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad between Gallup, NM and the Navajo Reservation. The checkerboard section (square mile) allotments given the RR were so other than RR owned business could develop adjoining the track on every other section on each side.

Manifest Destiny, in the lower 48 anyway, had to do with the conquest of Mexican and Native land through war, treaty, and treaty violation by the United States. Checkerboard allotments to railroads tended to violate treaties wherever railroads went in the territories that became states west of the Mississippi River. It is interesting how little many present owners of land obtained by the United States in violation of various treaties know about the moral validity of their claims. History has long legs. Occasionally we actually attempt to form a more perfect union. Of course completely perfect is unattainable this side of providence.

What's the relevance to general aviation? Interesting case but you guys know the rules.

Edit: I remember this story now as it started with some dude flying a Husky over private land to go hunting (thanks for the email KG.)

I would caution to keep discussion as relevant to flying as possible without departing into popular tangents.

The same landowner who filed a criminal trespass complaint against the four hunters also acosted a couple who flew their R44 (legally) over the landowner's mega spread and immediately landed in a clearing on a land locked Federal parcel. It is illegal to spot elk from aircraft in Wyoming... so they did no circling or flying that could be construed as against hunting regs or any related law.

The land owner & an employee stormed into the Federal parcel and demanded the couple leave immediately and never overfly his ranch again. Since the landiwner's 4 wheelers made lotsa noise and disturbance the elk were long gone by the time his tirade was over.

So here's the tie to GA: The landowner claimed his ownership over the boundary corners had no limit in height. He argued the same when he ran off the people in the R-44. Had the landowner prevailed in either his criminal complaint or his civil complaint against the 4 hunters where would GA be in flying 500' or 1000' iaw FAA regs?

This is a much more interesting and consequential case that that olive ranch in CA where the deep pocket rich guy had his attorney(s) intimidated flight schools, ag spray companies, and sight seeing balloon ops who legally overflew the dude olive ranch. In CA no case law was created. The olive ranch owners folded when a local attorney entered the fray (probono).

The Wyoming corner crossing case is much more useful for GA.

PapernScissors wrote:The same landowner who filed a criminal trespass complaint against the four hunters also acosted a couple who flew their R44 (legally) over the landowner's mega spread and immediately landed in a clearing on a land locked Federal parcel. It is illegal to spot elk from aircraft in Wyoming... so they did no circling or flying that could be construed as against hunting regs or any related law.

The land owner & an employee stormed into the Federal parcel and demanded the couple leave immediately and never overfly his ranch again. Since the landiwner's 4 wheelers made lotsa noise and disturbance the elk were long gone by the time his tirade was over.

So here's the tie to GA: The landowner claimed his ownership over the boundary corners had no limit in height. He argued the same when he ran off the people in the R-44. Had the landowner prevailed in either his criminal complaint or his civil complaint against the 4 hunters where would GA be in flying 500' or 1000' iaw FAA regs?

This is a much more interesting and consequential case that that olive ranch in CA where the deep pocket rich guy had his attorney(s) intimidated flight schools, ag spray companies, and sight seeing balloon ops who legally overflew the dude olive ranch. In CA no case law was created. The olive ranch owners folded when a local attorney entered the fray (probono).

The Wyoming corner crossing case is much more useful for GA.

For the R44, wonder why they didn’t record it and send it to the fish cops, harassing hunters is a no bueno

(a) No person shall with the intent to prevent or hinder the lawful taking of any wildlife: (i) Interfere with the lawful taking of or the process of lawfully taking any wildlife; (ii) Engage in any activity intended to threaten or otherwise affect the behavior of any wildlife. (b) A violation of subsection (a) of this section constitutes a low misdemeanor as punishable as provided in W.S. 23-6-202(a)(v).


I wish aviation would be more proactive, especially AOPA EAA etc, I’d give them money if they used it for lawsuits

Min altitudes are different for RW too

Great review of the case by the defense lawyer on Meateater you tube channel. Look for “Corner Crossing lawyer speaks out”. Worth the time.

Brian M: +1