This is so obviously a place where existing laws around easements should apply that it's laughable that it's made it this far. Someone can't block your access to your house by buying up your neighbors properties.
completely agree. the answer here is so stupidly obvious, that it shouldn't even need a trial.
even if some public land was fully blocked in by private land, the public still has every right to access that land. If that means moving through private land to get to it, so be it. If the owner dont like it, they can sell and buy some other land that is less public-adjacent.
One solution would be to exercise eminent domain. The state or federal government claims a couple square feet of land wherever one of these corner crossings exist so that there's enough space for a footpath. For each of these, the landowner is sent a check for the fair market value of the land, which in most cases is probably about a dollar or so. Problem solved.
If there's too much paperwork involved in eminent-domaining every one of these, you could have a system where members of the public can request corner access, and some agency can invoke eminent domain in priority order based on the number of requests for each corner.
What happens if a public land manager buys a land locked parcel?
Private owners are generally expected to understand and establish easements.
I'm generally in favor of something like a right to roam, though I expect (many) people would ignore the part where they should be respectful of the land they are crossing.
What happens if anyone buys a surrounded parcel? Generally there is a way to get an easement across private land to access other land. Maybe the legislature could help, and force an automatic easement process across any land where the owner doesn't want people crossing without permission.
This is so obviously a place where existing laws around easements should apply that it's laughable that it's made it this far. Someone can't block your access to your house by buying up your neighbors properties.
Despite such a view of the law on easements, there may not be any conservation easements.
There are 8.3 million inaccessible acres of public land in Wyoming. [1]
HB0103 would tweak that legal gray space the defendant’s attorney is using and clearly change how trespassing is defined when it comes to corner crossing. Specifically, the bill would amend the definition of hunter trespass that currently states that “no person shall enter upon” private property, according to WyoFile. [2]
Rather awkwardly (for your point) this isn't an issue of "them" blocking your access to your property, it's instances of "them" denying your crossing of "their property" and incidentally blocking your access to land you don't own.
FWiW I'm on the side of freedom to roam and implicit RoW (Right of Way) access to public land .. but it's not that clearcut in various US states.
Arguably public land is land that belongs to all of us, collectively. It is only land you "don't own" in the sense of land that you don't privately have exclusive title to.
It's actually pretty settled that you can walk on and hunt on this land. Yes, that includes Australian citizens here legally under one of many frameworks. The question is entirely if it's trespassing to cross into it.
The question is actually pretty limited to: is it trespassing for part of your body to pass over a corner of private land?
Just for the record I think its ridiculous, and I would love to see the legislature pass a law allowing people the right to cross the most direct route across private property that is blocking access to public property. I wish for once that the rich and powerful would get something like this to backfire.
Comments
This is so obviously a place where existing laws around easements should apply that it's laughable that it's made it this far. Someone can't block your access to your house by buying up your neighbors properties.
completely agree. the answer here is so stupidly obvious, that it shouldn't even need a trial.
even if some public land was fully blocked in by private land, the public still has every right to access that land. If that means moving through private land to get to it, so be it. If the owner dont like it, they can sell and buy some other land that is less public-adjacent.
One solution would be to exercise eminent domain. The state or federal government claims a couple square feet of land wherever one of these corner crossings exist so that there's enough space for a footpath. For each of these, the landowner is sent a check for the fair market value of the land, which in most cases is probably about a dollar or so. Problem solved.
If there's too much paperwork involved in eminent-domaining every one of these, you could have a system where members of the public can request corner access, and some agency can invoke eminent domain in priority order based on the number of requests for each corner.
What happens if a public land manager buys a land locked parcel?
Private owners are generally expected to understand and establish easements.
I'm generally in favor of something like a right to roam, though I expect (many) people would ignore the part where they should be respectful of the land they are crossing.
Shouldn't anyone buying a landlocked parcel get an easement?
What happens if anyone buys a surrounded parcel? Generally there is a way to get an easement across private land to access other land. Maybe the legislature could help, and force an automatic easement process across any land where the owner doesn't want people crossing without permission.
Moreover, why doesn't the concept of an easement apply to these corners?
Despite such a view of the law on easements, there may not be any conservation easements.
There are 8.3 million inaccessible acres of public land in Wyoming. [1]
HB0103 would tweak that legal gray space the defendant’s attorney is using and clearly change how trespassing is defined when it comes to corner crossing. Specifically, the bill would amend the definition of hunter trespass that currently states that “no person shall enter upon” private property, according to WyoFile. [2]
[1] https://www.wyomingnews.com/wyomingbusinessreport/industry_n...
[2] https://www.gohunt.com/content/news/new-bill-broadens-corner...
Rather awkwardly (for your point) this isn't an issue of "them" blocking your access to your property, it's instances of "them" denying your crossing of "their property" and incidentally blocking your access to land you don't own.
FWiW I'm on the side of freedom to roam and implicit RoW (Right of Way) access to public land .. but it's not that clearcut in various US states.
Arguably public land is land that belongs to all of us, collectively. It is only land you "don't own" in the sense of land that you don't privately have exclusive title to.
I'm Australian, does US public land also belon to me?
Does US law garantee the right for any member of the US public to walk, spoil, graze cattle, etc. on any undeeded land?
If so, does that law also grant the right of access across land owned by others?
The very reason that these corner cases are unresolved is because there is no clear answer here (yet).
It's actually pretty settled that you can walk on and hunt on this land. Yes, that includes Australian citizens here legally under one of many frameworks. The question is entirely if it's trespassing to cross into it.
The question is actually pretty limited to: is it trespassing for part of your body to pass over a corner of private land?
Just for the record I think its ridiculous, and I would love to see the legislature pass a law allowing people the right to cross the most direct route across private property that is blocking access to public property. I wish for once that the rich and powerful would get something like this to backfire.
No one's talking about someone blocking my access to someone else's private property.
We're talking about someone blocking access to another, corner-adjacent parcel of my land.
Also your land, if you're a US citizen. That's land we do own.