A three-judge federal panel ruled in favor of hunters charged with civil trespassing for crossing into public land segments in Wyoming's checkerboard territory. The dispute, brought by landowner Fred Eshelman, highlights the broader issue of public access rights versus private landownership. The case attracted significant national media coverage, primarily due to its unusual nature, as many hunters were unaware that corner crossing could even be contested. Public access advocates rallied around the hunters, emphasizing the importance of these rights amidst hunting and land-use debates.
A landmark ruling clarifies corner crossing legality for hunters, affirming public access rights to certain lands versus private property enforcement, igniting debate on land use rights.
Brad Cape described the case's absurdity, stating, 'Nobody in my part of the world knew that corner crossing was an issue,' highlighting a widespread lack of awareness.
The civil trespassing charges against the hunters attracted national attention, prompting discussions on land access and the implications for public and private rights.
Fred Eshelman's claims emphasized the financial stakes of property access, asserting that losing elk land access could devalue his estate by $9 million.
Collection
[
|
...
]