Landlock public land

Well, I have to somewhat disagree here bowedark, as I'm not sure I agree that all landlocked land should be accessible by the general public. Courts have already rendered decisions in this matter and I must admit, I have a hard time allowing the government the power to tell property owners they have to allow the public to enter THEIR property to enter another.

I'm not sure what the answer is. Perhaps any future land sales that deny access to public land must have an easement road prior to closing of escrow. However, who is going to pay for it, the perspective buyer? Then you run the risk of the property never changing ownership, as the cost is too high to buy.

Hey I guess we can always rent a helicopter and have them set us down on the public land. :)

It seem to be that the West is only part of the nation where you find the biggest problem of the landlocked <more public land in the west>. Most of the eastern states have laws against landlocking properties.

There are many cases where the state or county has built roads and maintain them that have not been recorded at Courthouse or one reason or another, which gives the power to individual that it is and becomes private land.

There are a lot of out there do actually owed properties that extend to the middle of the road, intern that is an easement.

Which almost all this reverse back to the cattle industry.

I surely don't have the answers but it is unjust for a privilege few to have the rights and control of public land.

If it's public land is usually controlled by federal, state or land bureau as far as in grazing rights< how many cattle and how long>
I don't think you can fly and hunt the same day, so that not going work.

I can see both sides of this one. It's hard to find a balance between the two. In most cases the landowners would let people cross as long as they went straight through and didn't destroy the fences and closed the gates. When people didn't respect the landowners property and trased it the landowner has no choice but to say NO TRESPASSING.

Now everybody is mad at the landowner because he shut them out and the landowner is mad because even though they didn't have to let people go through their land they did and it got ruined and now they have to fix it. We used to go phesent hunting on my brothers farm back in the 80's. Back in the days when there were still birds to hunt. Every year it was the same thing. Spend the first two of three hours getting peppered with shot from people driving down the roads and jumping out to shoot the birds that were running along the road so they would jump them and start shooting. Then they wonder whe all the fence posts are painted red and the are no trespassing signs everywhere.

I've had a couple of places that I hunted closed down because of this very reason. Yeah it makes me mad but not at the landowner. I'm mad at the slobs that had to ruin it for all of us.

I know that there are people that just want to keep all of that public land to themselves but I don't think that most of them are this way.

We have had the same thing here.used to be the landowner had no choice but let people cross to get to public land but the last few years the landowners have been fighting to change it.some of the best place to hunt are getting closed down due to no access.this doesn't upset me as I see where the landowners are coming from because of trespassers hunting private instead of staying on the trails/roads to the public land.in some places there are even signs that state you are going through private land stay on road but you still get the few who don't care.luckily I have a good standing with alot of the landowners where I hunt and can get access to these areas whether it be that I have to walk not drive across their land or sometimes they give me a ride.this year I have an opportunity to take my daughter to a 15,000 acre tract of land that has not been hunted in about 15 years for her first antilope buck.this land borders montana so it should have a couple record book bucks! Part of this being able to access this land is alot of fencing this summer.

We've had a chat going on this over at bowsite...it's under Colorado hunting the eastman way.....

txhunter58, I think hit the nail on the head by saying that the lessee must be required to allow the public access to the public land.

When is the last time anyone even asked permission from the landowner to cross their land? Not on opening morning at 5 AM but during the summer? Most landowners I've met have no problem providing you ask well in advance giving them all the details of vehicle, number of hunters, time, day, week, month, etc. Try using common sense and see where it gets you. Usually a lot further and quicker than a class action law suit.

ABert, Go to Craig & Meeker Colorado and spend a little time going ranch to ranch asking for permission to, not hunt but cross their private land to get to some of your public land. Try it and then come in here and post. This is not Florida, This is North Texas!

Hiker,
Craig and Meeker are the center of pay-to-hunt in Colo. The ranchers get paid by the outfitters, so no, you aren't going to cross their land. I have lived in north Texas, although quite a few years ago. Back then, in the 70's and 80's, the farmers and ranchers had no problem letting us hunt ON their land, providing we did litter or ruin the land in any other way. I believe now quite a few of them are renting their land to hunting brokers for pheasant, quail, dove and deer. You can't blame a landowner for trying to make money off his land. But to CROSS the land is another matter. Don't group all landowners that way. I know of some landowners in Colorado where I hunt that allow you to cross their land, providing you close the gate behind you and don't hunt the private land. All I'm saying is try TALKING in a rational way to these folks. The ones getting paid by outfitters are not going to allow it. The others, who knows???

I didn't mean to group all landowners into this...I know there's still a few out there who will let us on and I appreciate them. When they let me on, I do my best to take care of their land. If I see litter, I pick it up, if a gate is open, I leave open, if it closed, I leave it closed. If a wire broken, I'll try to repair it.

"Craig and Meeker are the center of pay-to-hunt in Colo. The ranchers get paid by the outfitters, so no, you aren't going to cross their land." ABert, we are losing more and more land every year.

If it's public land we as the citizens of the USA should be able to hunt, fish and hike it.

maybe because some of these places are pay to hunt we should ask G,F,and P if some of our tag money can go to these landowners for a access road or use an existing road to these public lands.I know here in S.D. the wardens have been talking to alot of the landowners to see if this is a possibility.

MuleyStalker,
I believe you may have hit the nail on the head. In Colorado, in recent years, the state has offered limited tags to landowners to allow the public to hunt on their land. Some of these landowners then turned around and offered the tags to the highest bidder. The state is now looking at the program and trying to fix what they started. I can't blame a landowner for making a buck, but when that buck is to the highest bidder, then I have a problem. I do like the idea of the state paying for access roads to public land and believe the landowners should be made to comply. On the other hand, I believe the landowners should be able to recoup an losses due to damage to their land. Who should pay? The state? I think there should be a fund set up to reimburse the landowners for any damages caused by hunters from the sale of hunting licenses. I already pay for rescue services if I ever need them, as does anyone who hunts in Colorado. Just makes sense to me.

Yes I agree that is why the idea for compensation to the landowner for the rights to cross. As for paying damages if the person is caught or turned in by another hunter then that person should have to pay as well as write a full apology to the landowner.As well as community service to the landowner to fix the damage caused (such as helping to fill ruts they may have created).

Hmmmm, Sounds like an interesting topic.

Anyone who has hunted Montana knows there is still a lot of prime public hunting ground controlled by land owners and outfitters In so much of Mt the only roads going in are the ranchers driveways, then from the ranch site trails branch off to all this BLM and State lands. Making access roads is not going to happen. Who's going to pay for it? Your talking about millions and millions of dollars in a econimy that not doing so great.

But on the brite side, MT has this very popular and successful Block Management program, piad for by NR licenses. Its openened millions of acres that weren't accessable even a couple of years ago. Trouble is its getting harder to draw licenses.

"But on the brite side, MT has this very popular and successful Block Management program,"

How can I find out what units have the most Block Mgmt acres?

Thanks,
Jeff

Hiker, congratulations on drawing the big combo. I can help a lot on hunting Montana! I don't know where to start. Tell me have you hunted MT, which region are you heading for. What do you like to hunt, Mountains, badlands, prairie, buttes or breakes. Do you know about the block management. Do you want to hunt Elk and deer at the same time?
Do you want to hunt on your own or pay?

pm me if you like.
Wayne

Wayne, I appreciate your willingness to help. What eastern part of MT would be a good muley/whitetail area with public land or have a lot block management area? or is there any good public land or block management elk areas in the middle or eastern part of MT that has muleys/ whitetail too?

You think that the DOW or the BLM would try to negotiate some kinda of resolution to allow access for hunter Colorado and other states need to follow in the footsteps of Montana and start a block managment system

:1 Alls that’s needed is one road in, can't be that difficult but there are ulterior motive abounding by not letting anyone in, they get it all to them self’s and some guide on the public locked land...

wow never seen this post , looks like an old one---- and a very touchy one too!!!! my 2 cents------------ it's public land not very hard to determine what that is supposed to mean!!! land for the public. i know their is going to be coplaints as to the high prices of tags these days but lets face it if we want things like this to ever change we have to help pay for it. instead of saying "who will foot the bill for us" how bout how much will it cost each hunter averaged out! maybe an extra 5-10 bucks a person{increased on their liscence sale} could go to paying for easments! but I agree a lot of times it's are" slob" hunters that have caused this problem, and us responsible hunter are trying to fix it. landowners should be able to make money on their land and public hunters should be able to hunt public land!!!!!! of course their are landowners that love it the way it is , it makes their property bigger and more valuable to an outfitter or just opens more land for themselves. so we have SOME hunters that are the problem and SOME landowners that are the problem. but nobody is going to just give up their tresspass rights just to be a nice guy! maybe we all can pitch in a LITTLE BIT more to help change this!! like i said just my 2 cents

believe it or not there are some land owners that will let you cross thier land , they are in a small minority though . we cross a one mile stretch of private land every time we hunt off of road 433 in unit 49 in colorado . all that is asked of us is that we stay on the road and close the gates behind us . i believe there was talk to some effect of a hunter walk in access program for big game in the state of colorado , not sure of the details or where the talks are at on this program .

Ok what about corner crossing BLM land to BLM land I know in some states it is a major NO NO and illegal check out this artcle recently in the Denver Post


Beware of "fault" in footprints
By Charlie Meyers
Denver Post Outdoors Editor
The Denver Post
Article Launched:04/04/2007 01:00:00 AM MDT

A recent column about sportsmen's difficulties with laws regarding trespass prompted an outpouring of response, mostly from people who felt victimized by poorly marked delineation of public land.

But the one that takes the cake comes from Denver-area resident

David Potter, whose experience while hunting with partner Craig Bullock in Moffat County last archery season is every hunter's nightmare. What follows is an excerpt of his account.

"Our plan was to corner cross at the BLM coordinates to get into the 10,000 acres of 'locked' BLM land without touching the private land. While hunting on the previously land-locked BLM land, we saw two other hunters walking a trail that appeared to be on private land.

"After seeing a lot of elk but not getting any opportunities, we headed back to the truck following the same route. Waiting about 50 yards from the truck was a Moffat County deputy sheriff who introduced himself as Skip Duncan.

"He said the manager of a nearby ranch saw footprints on his property north of County Road 32. We told him we were never near there and showed him our maps, GPS's and even the track log for that day. We also showed him the folder we created from the data on the local BLM website that contained the GPS coordinates for each corner. I also mentioned that we saw two other hunters and maybe it was them.

"After the deputy confirmed via the GPS's that we were not there, he gave us everything back and wanted to know where we were camping in case he had more questions. About 20 minutes into dinner, the deputy arrived at our camp. He said the ranch manager now said the footprints were in a different area south of the county road and also stated that corner crossing is illegal so he wanted us charged with trespassing while hunting. (Under a bill pushed through the Colorado legislature by the Farm Bureau, this is a 20-point offense that might revoke hunting and fishing privileges.)

"We again mentioned that our GPS's confirmed we were not on private property and that we crossed from BLM land to BLM land per the official BLM coordinates and we showed him a copy of the local BLM website that states 'there is no federal or state law against corner crossing.' He took some pictures of the bottoms of our boots and stated that the ranch manager said he had 400 head of elk he was managing for paying hunters. We told him this small strip of private land does not own the elk that inhabit the previously inaccessible public BLM land. At that point, the deputy stated, 'It looks like GPS technology has finally caught up with the landowners here,' and left without ticketing either of us. Then exactly three months to the day later, Craig received a summons to appear in court five working days later. There wasn't a single shred of evidence we were the ones that trespassed, only the statement from the ranch manager that he'd seen footprints on his property and the statement from the deputy, who conveniently left out the parts about the manager changing his story or the other two hunters.

"Regardless, Moffat County District Attorney Bonnie Roesink still decided to press charges for trespassing while hunting. My name was on the original complaint, but I hadn't been summonsed yet. Craig had to drive four-plus hours and get a hotel room. The deputy DA offered a plea bargain to 'no hunter orange.' I find that amusing since it was archery season."

A synopsis: After the hunters hired a local attorney, all charges were dropped. Potter's assessment of the event seems accurate enough.

"Basically it was an attempt to scare people away from BLM land so the private owners can reap the dollars associated with trespass fee hunts.

"Apparently in Moffat County you don't have to be trespassing to be charged with it. All the owner needs is footprints on his property and the closest person the sheriff finds is charged and the DA is good to go with that.

"In this case our GPS saved us, but it still costs us a lot of cash and time to defend ourselves against baseless charges when you have landowners who dictate what they want to the sheriff and DA."

Charlie Meyers can be reached at 303-954-1609 or cmeyers@denverpost.com.

that is a crummy story but it happens alot, i have another story that is too funny about these types of land owners:: so i have a buddy who is a die hard " find a secret place to himself "guy. he does a lot of research to find areas just like stated before, places that is pretty much landlocked but if you do it just right there is legal acsess. so any way bow season arives and he goes hunting there, lots of nice bucks by the way, any way didn't kill anything so he heads out. he had his exact path maked on the gps. [ one of the property lines was not even fenced] when he gets to the truck the landowner and the sheriff are waiting. no problem though cause he has the gps track log and his foot tracks to prove he never tresspassed! the sheiff see's it and realizes there has been nothing to write a ticket for a proceeds to leave. the landowner flippes out and says there is now way he did not tresspass and starts using every fowl word he can to tell my buddy he better not ever catch him on his place OR ELSE!![ so here is where it gets good] my buddy, A VERY HOT HEADED FELLOW, tells him he better shut the&^%$& up or he has 10 buddies with rifle tags that will be right there opening morning , INCLUDING THE SHERIFF ,[who was his cousin]that was right there!!!! he never had another problem with that landowner!!

I believe we have to protect individual property rights. But, I believe there should be access to public land as well.

The value of public land should not be an asset to private ownership just by virtue of bordering that public property. Meaning, why should private property owner get a fee to allow access (not to his property) to public land? I don't and most of you don't.

What do I mean? We all live with road easements,utility easements everyday on our own properties no matter where they are.

Do you think that the private landowner that has public land landlocked by his property would be mad if the governement said he could no longer use the public road he uses to get to his property. I think he would pitch a @#&*@ if he found a toll gate he had to pay to enter his own land off public land. Why should they have both ways?

I do not think it unreasonable to have a public easement even if it is a path 3' wide with a fence bordering it paid by the government (us) if wished by property owner.

Most utility and road easements in your yard are 10'-20' wide.

I'm for protecting private property rights but having an easement across private property really doesn't violate the land owner. In fact in many places where I live there are already roads thru public land that for some reason quit being access when it hit's private property. Then instead of being called a public asccess road they become a private ranch road. Well I might buy that but when some of these roads re-enter public land they remain private ranch roads. Now something seem's wrong about that to me.