Appeals Court Rules That Corner Crossing Is Legal in at Least Six States

Yahoo

18-03-2025

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Western U.S. today ruled that corner-crossing, or accessing public land at a common corner with private land, is legal and protected by federal law.
The legal challenge to corner-crossing was pushed by a group of four Missouri hunters who in 2020 and again in 2021 had accessed a section of BLM land by crossing a corner shared on two sides by private land owned by Iron Bar Ranch. The ranch owner had the hunters charged with both criminal and civil trespass, citing their momentary presence in the airspace above the private land — the hunters had used a ladder to cross the corner.
The Wyoming Carbon County court found the four hunters innocent of criminal trespass charges in 2022 and a U.S. District court threw out the civil case in 2023, but the Iron Bar appealed. It's that suit that the Appeals Court ruled on today.
Across the West, where millions of acres of public and private land intermingle in a checkerboard pattern, with alternating sections of public land connected only at the corners, the legality of accessing those land-blocked public sections has been an open question, with states declining to rule out of deference to private landowners.
In the original civil suit the ranch claimed the men caused more than $7 million in damages.
'Iron Bar Holdings has a right to exclusive control, use, and enjoyment of its Property, which includes the airspace at the corner, above the Property,' wrote prosecutors in the civil suit.
Today's ruling applies only to the states within the Denver-based 10th Circuit Court of Appeals — Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming — but the precedent could make corner-crossing legal in other states, too.
Circuit Judge Timothy Tymkovich, writing for the majority, cited the long history of Western land management, including provisions of the Louisiana Purchase, westward expansion fueled by the Homestead Act of 1862, Wyoming's range wars between cattle and sheep owners, and even John Adams' colonial-era defense of the sanctity of private property rights. Ultimately, though, the judges ruled that no laws were broken by the Missouri hunters.
'The Hunters never made contact with the surface of Iron Bar's land,' wrote judge Timothy Tymkovich, who today joined with two other circuit judges to uphold a decision reached by Wyoming federal judge Scott Skavdahl in 2023. 'There is no evidence the Hunters made physical contact with or damaged Iron Bar's property.'
The court ultimately based its decision on a provision of the 1885 Unlawful Inclosures Act (UIA), passed by Congress to 'harmonize the rights of private landowners and those accessing public lands.' The court concluded that based on case law and language in the law, 'any inclosure of public lands is prohibited, and no one may completely prevent or obstruct another from peacefully entering or freely passing over or through public lands.'
'The western checkerboard and UIA reflect a storied period of our history,' wrote Tymkovich. 'Whatever the UIA's merits today, it — and the case law interpreting it — remain good federal law.'
Read Next: How Seriously Should We Take the Sale of Federal Lands? Very Seriously, Experts Say
Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, which had joined the lawsuit as a 'friend of the court' in support of the Missouri hunters, today called the appeals court ruling 'Another huge win for corner crossing! This decision upholds the right to access millions of acres of public land.'
The case could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. However, unlike circuit court appeals, the Supreme Court is not required to hear the appeal, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.