We, the People are Losing Access to Public Land

In May 2023, the US District Court found that corner crossing on foot without physically contacting the private land did not constitute unlawful trespass. The private landowner filed an appeal in June, but the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals found a jurisdictional defect because the trial in the District Court might not have resolved all issues. I don't know where the appeal stands at this point.

PRRosewrote:

In May 2023, the US District Court found that corner crossing on foot without physically contacting the private land did not constitute unlawful trespass. The private landowner filed an appeal in June, but the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals found a jurisdictional defect because the trial in the District Court might not have resolved all issues. I don't know where the appeal stands at this point.

Screw that, the property owners who enclose public land should all be required to provide a reasonable route for the public to access those lands through their property 

corner-crossing-land-access-wyoming-lawsuit

Allen Sandersonwrote:

corner-crossing-land-access-wyoming-lawsuit

My Irish blood boils over these greedy landowners

Allen Sandersonwrote:

corner-crossing-land-access-wyoming-lawsuit

Thank you! no pay wall here: https://archive.is/tjywS

Also important to note this quote from the article:

a federal district court ruled last year in the hunters’ favor, saying corner-crossing on foot, without touching or damaging private property, is not unlawful trespass.

In March, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court ruling in favor of the hunters who were being sued by a landowner for corner crossing to obtain access to public land. Last week, the Supreme Court denied cert (meaning the Supreme Court would not review the decision), so the decision in favor of the hunters is final.

In the states covered by the 10th Circuit (Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming), you can corner cross to access checkerboarded public land, whether or not state law would consider corner crossing to be trespassing, so long as you don't t physically touch the private land (the hunters had used a ladder to straddle the corner).

One small victory for those hunters, massive victory for mankind. 

PRRosewrote:

In March, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court ruling in favor of the hunters who were being sued by a landowner for corner crossing to obtain access to public land. Last week, the Supreme Court denied cert (meaning the Supreme Court would not review the decision), so the decision in favor of the hunters is final.

In the states covered by the 10th Circuit (Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming), you can corner cross to access checkerboarded public land, whether or not state law would consider corner crossing to be trespassing, so long as you don't t physically touch the private land (the hunters had used a ladder to straddle the corner).

thank you for the update!

Nkane 1wrote:

Recreation.gov's nonrefundable lottery fees should be unconstitutional. I don't know if it is or not but it's bad policy for sure.

from the NPS's page on the North Pines camping lottery: https://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/lottery-pilot.htm?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=North+Pines+Campround+Early+Access+Lottery+Update&utm_campaign=2022+Nov+28+-+Yosemite+Early+Access+Lottery 

Last year they received 22,033 applications for 640 slots. At $10 a pop, that's a direct transfer of $213,930 from people who got nothing at all for their money straight to a corporation. I assume Recreation.gov is raking in similar amounts from other lotteries around the country. I'm writing my congresspeople.

ETA: here's my email to Barbara Lee (I'll do one to my senators too):

Dear Rep. Lee,

I'd like to direct your attention to the recent phenomenon of non-refundable lottery fees for access to our public lands. The National Park Service has contracted with Recreation.gov, a subsidiary of Booz Allen Hamilton, to conduct lotteries for access to campsites and trails where demand outstrips supply. This isn't a bad idea per se, but Recreation.gov is charging a non-refundable $10 fee for access to the lottery. In the case of the North Pines pilot program last year, the success rate was 2.9%, meaning 93% of the 22,000 applicants got absolutely no value for their money, a transfer of over $200,000 directly to a private corporation. These funds no NOT go to the Park Service. I find this system outrageous. I hope your office looks into it. 

It's not just that a private company is taking a (giant) cut. It's that the stated purpose of these lotteries is to make access to public lands more equitable. But the only people who have $10 to throw at a 3% chance of winning a campsite are people with plenty of disposable income. These programs will make access to the outdoors whiter and richer while padding a giant company's accounts. We can do better.

Sincerely,

Nat Kanwe

Berkeley

Sucks to be poor

rec.gov is a PRIVATE entity, owned ultimately by Blackrock and Carlyle Group., who own Booz Allen Hamilton ... this is Nature INC. , which we told you was coming when they started the "Adventure Pass", ...short-sighted people said it "was only $5", it helps the forest" not wanting to understand the larger implications. This "timed entry" needs to be defeated... it was always about revenue and never about conservation.