Enlighten me on corner hopping

Can one of you westerners give me an explanation for why "corner hopping" is illegal in most (I think) western states? Has it come up in court much? I'd be interested in knowing the argument against it, as it would seem like it should be legal, as long as the person can reliably locate the corner, which is now possible with GPS, etc. Just curious. Thanks!

Because it is a law..........

the law is based on you will be crossing the 'air' above the corner land

get ready for the naysayers,,,,,,,,,
it seems outdoor recreationists do not have the knowledge or skills to identify a corner, (a place or angle where two or more sides or edges meet.
landowners on the other hand can identify exactly where a corner is and never put a fence in a wrong place, or some corners do not have fences to denote a boundary.
if said recreationist crosses at the meeting place of 2 sides the person is assumed to be trespassing on the opposing private, or they are imposing on the airspace above the meeting place.

landowners in Montana like to keep these parcels landlocked for their personal enjoyment, financial gain, ect with Montana trespass laws, and laws regarding marking private property, its easy to see a corner crossing law will never be passed here,
other states trespassing laws can make corner crossing legal if the landowner doesn't sign there land appropriately,
anyway the can of worms is open, yet again,,,,

You can research it for days on here. In the access guide it "recommends" not corner crossing. I don't know of anyone that has been cited for it.

another thing I will mention,,,,, locally I have seen a handful of places that state land corner or state and blm corners have a post driven at the corner spot, on either side of the post there is a small sign, I think one says public land and one says blm, I will get a picture next time I am over there, to me the state or blm or both are inviting crossing at the corner, these are places with no fences just a marker post that an agency has installed,,,,

Some Judges in our neck of the woods have dropped charges against some accused of corner crossing. If you have a great GPS that is very accurate, say a surveying program on it, you can get away with it but it is not encouraged. Our state land board does not consider corners as public access points.

mtmander said:

Because it is a law..........

the law is based on you will be crossing the 'air' above the corner land

Click to expand...

Does anyone know if it is an actual law? I'm not sure it is specifically addressed by law.

Related... but out there, does anyone know to what altitude your property extends? I've heard 100ft. thrown around and obviously there is limit as planes can fly over your property. Could the state get around private locked public lands but simply building a few huge ladders/stairs on key corners? The build these kinda things over highways why not on corners over private lands that won't grant access.

RobG said:

Does anyone know if it is an actual law? I'm not sure it is specifically addressed by law.

Click to expand...

It is not an actual law.

There are two aspects; Criminal Trespass and Civil Trespass. Both are governed by different concepts under law. I've hired attorneys to advise me on such and the same opinion comes clear from all legal minds I have engaged for adviace.

Criminal Trespass - This is state criminal statute that defines what a crime is. In Montana, and in most other states, their criminal statute does not specifically define whether or not corner crossing would constitute a Trespass violation under their definition of Criminal Trespass. Criminal violations come with citations, court appearances, and the state/county will be prosecuting you if they think they have a strong enough case.

Civil Trespass - This is a property rights issue, focused on whether or not you infringed on the property right of the adjacent landowners. Most all attorneys I have spoken to have opined that swinging your foot over the landowner's air space at that infinite intersection of the properties would constitute Civil Trespass. The same as when the neighbor kid kicks the football onto you lawn and comes over and retrieves it without permission. Technically, the kid has committed a great act of Civil Trespass than you would if you swung your foot across the airspace over the landowner's property.

With Civil Trespass, it is not a crime as defined by state statute. So, this is the landowner claiming you infringed on his property rights and he, not the State/County attorney, must take you to court to demonstrate that he was damaged and prove the amount of damages that he incurred. So, even if he prevailed under a Civil Trespass case, what would be the damages he could claim? Most attorneys tell me the court would award $0 damages and give a royal butt chewing to any attorney who wasted the court's time with a case that had $0 in damages.

Because of this distinction, the fringe in the Montana Legislature (and maybe other legislatures), introduced a bill to create a minimum damage under Civil Trespass while hunting. That would be the only civil offense I know of in Montana where state statutes provides a minimum damage, even if the damage was far less. They proposed the minimum damage awarded to the landowner be $1,500. Rather than the court deciding the damages, as is the protocol for all other civil claims I know of, the Legislature wants to make an exception for one single civil action - the possible act of civil trespass while hunting.

Some of you attorneys can chime in and add more to this.

wllm1313 said:

Related... but out there, does anyone know to what altitude your property extends? I've heard 100ft. thrown around and obviously there is limit as planes can fly over your property. Could the state get around private locked public lands but simply building a few huge ladders/stairs on key corners? The build these kinda things over highways why not on corners over private lands that won't grant access.

Click to expand...

Again, air space rules for air traffic are usually exempted under Criminal Trespass statute. And it would be a waste of time of a landowner to make a civil claim against air traffic, as his damages would be zero.

The ladder issue would be the same as swinging your foot over the airspace as the corner - vague under criminal statute and pretty clear violation under civil code.

Could the state get around private locked public lands but simply building a few huge ladders/stairs on key corners?

Click to expand...

Seriously? 'Don't mean to come across disrespectful, but a series of tall ladders is a bit far-fetched.

1. Most of the checkerboard corners in question involve federal public lands, not state lands.
2. The State of Montana (with DNRC overseeing state owned lands) is strapped already with huge infrastructure repair, replacement, and upgrade problems.
3. In the opinion of most, the issue is a legal issue that should be resolved and put to rest on a national level.

Straight Arrow said:

Seriously? 'Don't mean to come across disrespectful, but a series of tall ladders is a bit far-fetched.

Click to expand...

Not terribly far-fetched.

Randy do you know the status of the bill you mentioned ?


"Because of this distinction, the fringe in the Montana Legislature (and maybe other legislatures), introduced a bill to create a minimum damage under Civil Trespass while hunting. That would be the only civil offense I know of in Montana where state statutes provides a minimum damage, even if the damage was far less. They proposed the minimum damage awarded to the landowner be $1,500. Rather than the court deciding the damages, as is the protocol for all other civil claims I know of, the Legislature wants to make an exception for one single civil action - the possible act of civil trespass while hunting.

Some of you attorneys can chime in and add more to this."

Randy,

The bill that you mentioned that was 'introduced'. Did it go anywhere, or die?

I corner cross all the time out hiking and scouting and every now and then will do it as a short cut on the way in to a hunting area of mine, especially when its still dark out, but can't find the courage to do it much while hunting and especially when its my only option, in case I was successful.
I guess I'm leery of small town Eastern Montana game wardens being friends with the rancher and having an animal confiscated. Even if it didn't go anywhere criminally, it would not be worth it to have the meat and head taken.

SO, basically, it is not a Law, but will be a giant pain in your cheeks if the landowner presses the issue. Then you could get a $1500 judgment against you, not including court costs, attorney fees and your valuable time to travel to court houses and sit through a bunch of BS. I have been tempted a few times and as much as this topic chaps my hide worse than almost anything, it's just not worth it to me to have to travel back to a courthouse to argue the issue in order to try to make a point.
On the other hand I have heard some politicians make comments about preserving OUR public lands and helping to gain and keep access to them. Changing this ridiculous "rule" could be THE biggest win ever in terms of making public lands available to all of us, not just the one or two ranchers that own the land that borders a parcel of BLM land. Maybe these politicians should be held accountable for their comments and promises and be asked to do something about this?
Thanks for testing my blood pressure AGAIN!

Not terribly far-fetched.

Click to expand...

Nor very high.

Thanks Fin, I didn't know how that worked. I was surprised that the attorneys agreed that it would be trespass so I looked up the definition of trespass. I can see how the act of entering the airspace very low above the ground could be considered an "infringement upon an owner's legal right to enjoy the benefits of ownership." Following that logic a ladder would be even more of an intrusion.

Although I assume there could be additional restrictions by law, the FAA sets minimum flight altitudes well above anything that could prevent the owner from enjoying his land.

Regulations (FAR) Part 91 prescribes the rules governing the operation of aircraft.
Sec. 91.119 - Minimum safe altitudes: General.
Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:
(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.
(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.
(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
(d) Helicopters. Helicopters may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph(b)or(c)of this section if the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface. In addition, each person operating a helicopter shall comply with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the Administrator

Click to expand...

I'm not saying ladders are a solution I'm just curious if they would be legal in the hypothetical, seems like they would fall under into the same category as taking a helicopter into federal lands. I was more just wondering if there was a precise elevation or not that had to be observed. I know Randy has used the helicopter method before so he might be able to shed light on this.

Also I know in Vermont there are tons of ladders like the one Oak posted that allow the public to cross private lands to access public lands and trails... assuming there is probably an easement or those landowners just aren't A-holes... but that is where i got the idea.

wllm1313 said:

I'm not saying ladders are a solution I'm just curious if they would be legal in the hypothetical,

Click to expand...

We were typing at the same time - a structure would surely constitute more of an infringement than a foot momentarily entering the airspace so if a foot is illegal a ladder would also be.

My 2 cents, we help manage the wildlife on a 10, 000 A ranch that has some adjacent state sections, no vehicle access but walk in from the highway and corners. If we find people on the state we do not say squat as long as they stay on the public. The corners meet but have no markers. If hunters respect the private land then I think the landowners should respect the hunters. We find many trespassers and do not treat them the same. Many times I have unlocked the gate on private to let the public hunters retrieve their game without walking in. This gets me some respect and in turn helps with the trespassing problem. If you corner jump just respect the private adjacent.