# Montana greed



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... rs-montana
Let this one soak in. Then you will understand why they want to turn over public land to the states. You will then understand why some of our past members hate people like Randy Newbury who promotes hunting public land. If public land is lost where are we guaranteed the freedom to walk on sod and hunt? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features ... -your-land


> Herein lies the big challenge for the landowners and their
> : Survey after survey has shown that the public hates the idea that someone can lock taxpayers out of public land, and that they're suspicious of transferring control of such tracts to private enterprise. Nevertheless, Anderson and PERC deny that their position is out of step with public opinion, even casting it as pro-access.


----------



## Sasha and Abby (May 11, 2004)

Maybe the government should PURCHASE some right of way to get to inaccessible pieces. Just because it has always been accessed does not mean it is legal. I would not want someone walking across MY property and most of you would not either...

PLAINSMAN - we might have to disagree on this one... interesting topic...


----------



## Sasha and Abby (May 11, 2004)

I had a VERY SIMILAR problem here. I bought a 30 ac tract surrounded by a NATIONAL PARK... it was LOADED with deer, turkeys and hogs... and had a trespassing problem.

The old owner did not care about people (local blacks that live nearby) walking across the property to get to a little stream half a mile back to fish... I DO!!!! They disrupt the animals I am working to attract. They could walk in another way that was a few hundred yards longer, but were too LAZY to do this, so they continued to cut across MINE - even after many POSTED signs and warnings... It stopped after I made an EXAMPLE out of several habitual trespassers in court. Now, all the hard work and money I have spent on MY PLACE are beginning to pay off. We are seeing more game and no trespassers/poachers.

People had been doing it for many years with no problems.

I am not on of the RICH that people hate or are envious of... I saved my money and bought something that was a diamond. I suspect it is the same with the guy from MT.

I'm all for public land...


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Some of these had agreements over 100 years old. Some of those ranchers are driving roads built by the Forest service, and now block those roads. Two years ago they passed a bill of no corner hopping because part of your body passed over their property even if your feet didn't touch the ground. They are cutting off access so they can charge to reach public land. Many stayed have laws allowing people access. There are laws prohibiting a landowner from blocking access to private land, and this is no different. They had to pass those laws because large ranches were trying to squeeze out smaller ranchers. It's like watching one of the old westerns about greedy ranchers and water rights.

These are not small tracts of land where a trail will scare the game away. I have been around one of the ranches they talk about. Ten miles wide and 35 miles NW to SE. The road block is pure greed. There are no section line laws so a hunter is out of luck there also. One ranch is so large that the only way in now is over a snow covered pass. Snow covered early and you could find yourself blocked in.

Sash and Abby I totally understand not wanting someone to cross your land when you have maybe 200 acres or 300 acres and they can walk the perimeter. We are talking thousands of acres and 70 to 100 miles around with a car and another 10 to 20 mile hike.

Another place that I hunt I don't know what the guy was doing with the helicopter, but the cows had been removed from the public land yet this helicopter would make a high sweep to the north then run from west to east towards his ranch at tree top level with the helicopter. I suspect he was chasing the elk off public onto his, but no way to prove it. I understand he has got into trouble before. To top it off locals say he has been fined, but is on the game and fish advisory board. I don't know for sure it's just what you hear in the restaurant. Intentional or not he was moving elk. To fast and to far for a bow shot.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Plainsman.

I know what you are talking about with "western" states and especially some of these ranchers. I have seen ranchers who have the "grazing rights" on public land go do a cattle drive only days before the elk season and push all the animals (not just their cows) onto their property where they sell hunts. This is the crap that needs to be monitored some how.

I also understand about the access and how some of these ranchers who also sell hunts cut off access and think they own all the land.

You can look on youtube all day and see these hunter/rancher confrontations. Some times the hunter is in the wrong but many times it is the ranchers who think they "own" or run the public land.

The corner hopping stuff needs to be addressed 100%. What I mean is the state needs to come in and eminent domain about 100 sqft of land to make the access so the "corner" isn't a corner anymore. So it is a swath or a path to adjoin those lands. We are talking pennies on the dollar here. Because at most even if fair land value is 10,000 an acre you are only talking about 1,000 max!!! Then if the rancher baulks at that price... take them to court and show that 1,000 is over and above fair market. Court will side with the state and might cost them less. That takes care of that issue.


----------



## Sasha and Abby (May 11, 2004)

Thanks Plainsman for the enlightenment... I now see your side of the argument. You too, Chuck... good topic. I will be following this to gain more insight.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Your right chuck. I support multiple use and think grazing is a good management tool. Ranches are getting huge, in Wyoming you can drive for half an hour on pavement and still be on that ranch south west of Gillette. Can't remember the name of it now. Completely encloses a big mountain and a large fishing reservoir. When ranches get huge there are less people on the land. I am always amazed that some ranchers want to crap on people when they are outnumbered 100 to 1. They should be thankful for what they have and stop trying to take from all the rest of us. They could lose what they have. Taking over wildlife refuges with firearms isn't smart. They found a small area where people were just as crazy as them so the jury found the Bundy's not guilty.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Plainsman....

I totally agree that grazing is a great management tool to keep grasses and other things in check on public land. It does great benefit for everyone. To the farmer and to the public and to the state to keep "management" costs down on that piece of land.

What needs to be done... .and this is hard when I am fisically conservative. But this is where government needs to get bigger. They need more man power at these things to help regulate the public lands. They need to set up stuff to say that the rancher who has grazing rights needs to have cattle off the land by a certain date. Now granted it wouldn't keep ranchers doing "drives" so to speak after that date. But the example I used is off limits to Off road vehicles... but the rancher gets away with it for the "cattle drive" because he has it written in the agreement that he can use it for his farming practices.... well after that date... he could not. :beer:

This is an issue and were the government needs to expand in some areas. But like everything Fish and Wildlife... funding is the hard part. The government would rather waste money elsewhere.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Good points Chuck. I might also add that if they fail to follow regulations they loose their grazing rights. They pay by the AUM which is animal unit month. I think right now it's around $2.68 per month. However, they get from five acres to 100 acres and more for that $2.68 per month. Ranchers overgrazed some areas so bad that after 100 years they have not recovered. For example from Great Bend National Park in SW Texas to 100 miles north there is hardly a spear of grass. They overgrazed so bad that it will be hundreds of years to recover. Because of things like that ranchers actually asked the gov to step in and regulate grazing. Now a few years later they forget the purpose and sneak in extra cattle they have not paid for. That and guys like Bundy in Nevada didn't pay his rent for 19 years. 
It is so dangerous for BLM employees in Utah right now that they go to the field buddy system and will not let anyone go alone. They also have formed a law enforcement unit for protection. We see that as far off, but because some people don't want to follow rules and threaten people who we hire to enforce them one Fish and Wildlife office right here in North Dakota has bullet proof glass, and they must push a button to let you in. 
A man by the name of Funicum was shot in Oregon last year when they took over a Fish and Wildlife Service refuge with firearms. Local ranchers want the land back. However their ansestors were paid much more than the land was worth. You can't sell your land to a neighbor and 60 years later demand it back from his children. However, they think they can push the gov into that. Bundy was found not guilty because a local jury is as crazy as he is. I remember Hannity had him on TV one night and was holding him up as some kind of conservative hero. When he got the real story he dropped him like a hot potatoe. Bundy spoke in Montana this week-end. Some local conservatives were heard saying they wish he would stay away because he makes them look crazy too. Reports from people like him say everyone agreed and clapped for him. Groups like the Back Country Hunters and Anglers said there were a lot of people there opposing his position. Will we ever know the truth? These people want all public land sold off to private interests. The old Sagebrush Rebellion started this and like some other organizations the name changes but with the same goals. Now it's called The American Land Council. Trying to come off as a normal everyday and even professional group, but they are the same crazy people as yesterday. They say they would improve access to public land if private interest own it. If you have a wallet so fat it lifts you a foot of your car seat? :rollin:

Edit: I forgot to mention even two of our past members and members of Fishingbuddy and Nodakangler have members that claim the FBI murdered Funicum. There are two problems with that claim. One the Oregon State Police shot Funicum. Two he reached into his jacket and when they checked he was reaching for a 9mm. Minutes before this he dared police to shoot him and even said shoot me right here putting his finger on his forehead. His mental state didn't help when he reached in that jacket. After getting stuck running a rod block he run for the trees for cover. An Oregon State Police officer stepped out of the trees cutting off his escape. As he turned two more had him cut off from returning to his vehicle. At that point he went for his gun. Long long ways from Murder. I would call it arrogance induced suicide on Funicums part.

These people endanger our second amendment by making us all look crazy.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

> Two years ago they passed a bill of no corner hopping because part of your body passed over their property even if your feet didn't touch the ground.


This gives you a pretty good idea about who controls the state. The G&F should have been fighting this tooth and nail but with all the big ranch money you can bet somebody got paid off because the idea itself goes against common sense. I just read an article in F&S where guys are helicoptering in to some areas. Problem is that's too pricey for the average Joe. If I were a Montana sportsman Id make sure this issue came up in every legislature session. You might not get it changed but you'd make sure the ranchers doing it were paying big bucks to have it stay that way.

You can bet those ranchers would be screaming bloody murder if somebody bought land upriver from them and cut their water access off. I see no difference.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I forget what I post where, but when you mention helicopters did you know that ranchers want control of air space above their ranch? I forget what they asked for something like 10,000 feet. That would mess up many small plane flights. Their excuse for this was that people are spying on them. I have two questions, are they sane, and what are they hiding.

A ranch hand in Montana said he was assigned to an area of the ranch. If he went to another area he would be fired.

Another reason ranchers get their way is one of the worst I think is on the Game Fish and Parks bored. The name I think is one of those guys in the article.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

LOL.... The airspace. That is all federal regulated. So good luck with that.

But on that note.... One big thing you will soon see getting fought is the use of Drones. Because they can fly around. So I would bet dollars to donuts that they will so require licensing to fly drones. It might be something as simple as a snow mobile license.... or it could get as extensive as a pilots licenses. Because if the government can figure out a way to make a quick buck.... they will. But like I said just wait and see about this one.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

Id love to see about 1000 sportsmen get together and just start walking across one of these corner points. They are not gonna be able to arrest everybody.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

Ok here is a valid question..... How wide is a property line on the ground ??? 1/4" , 1/2", 4" And what constitutes trespass. a physical presence on the ground itself? Violation of airspace above any portion of that ground?

If a cow pokes its head through the fence and grazes on land the rancher is not paying for is he liable for damages ? it cuts both ways.....


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

A number of states have a right-to-access law. This prevents legal landlocking. I really like ND having section line access laws.
When the people of Montana care enough, they will pass laws ensuring access.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

dakotashooter2 said:


> Ok here is a valid question..... How wide is a property line on the ground ??? 1/4" , 1/2", 4" And what constitutes trespass. a physical presence on the ground itself? Violation of airspace above any portion of that ground?
> 
> If a cow pokes its head through the fence and grazes on land the rancher is not paying for is he liable for damages ? it cuts both ways.....


As it stands they own airspace for a few feet in elevation. Further than I can jump. Also they proposed air space for a few thousand feet because they say drones are spying on them. The truth is they ate ticked that some with money have gone in and been dropped off with a helicopter. And didn't pay them. I think if they deny access then they should be denied access to the same public land, leased by them or not.


----------



## Sasha and Abby (May 11, 2004)

I have looked into the "getting dropped off via chopper" route several times... it is VERY IFFY. Most reliable and responsible pilots will NOT drop off hunters unless it is at a airstrip inside BLM land... there are lots of people who know about this and do it. IF someone sees or hears you getting dropped off this way anywhere else, the pilot could lose their license.

I know I would be ****** if I was hoofing up a mountain, and saw someone getting dropped off at the top when I was halfway up.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I have had a similar situation. I hunt with relatives on their land. There is this nice little 3 or 4 acre wetland surrounded by 6 or 7 acres of aspen and brush in the center of the section right where the quarters come together. It belongs to a cousin of theirs where I also have permission to hunt. A neighbor who farms four miles southwest has more often than once passed me in his pickup driving off the trail while I walk in on the old fence line.
Same neighbor has the whole clan out in about six or seven vehicles while his brother flies and radios deer position. That was years ago, but still illegal. No one wants to turn on a neighbor. The brother crashed his plane and wiped himself out. They still hunt surrounding a section where they see anyone walking and often off The trail on posted land.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

Plainsman said:


> dakotashooter2 said:
> 
> 
> > Ok here is a valid question..... How wide is a property line on the ground ??? 1/4" , 1/2", 4" And what constitutes trespass. a physical presence on the ground itself? Violation of airspace above any portion of that ground?
> ...


One solution might be an accessible lease price and a non accessible lease price to the ranchers with the non accessible being about 10 times more.

Another thing to consider. The only real way to know a property line is to have it surveyed and marked. I doubt any large rancher has had this done for ALL his property. *** such in many areas they are assuming the location of the line. So if you are right near the line how does law enforcement determine if you actually were on the line or not. Unless they are using survey grade GPS they cannot determine that for sure. Standard GPS is just not that accurate.


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

Wow, an excellent non partisan discussion (except where appropriate to the outdoor discussion) of public lands, access, property rights and ownership issues! Way to go, guys, keeping feces hurtling out of it!

I like Dakotashooters suggestion of 1000 sportsmen, hunters, fisherpeople, birders and hikers jumping across the corners! Send notices to all the local and National News Services, Outdoor writes, etc. Even assuming a well intentioned good sincere crowd, somehow barring the semi pro rabble rousers that destroy credibility out of it, there might be nothing come from this, but sometimes it doesn't hurt to shake the tree and see what falls out, would take pretty massive organization for an event like this. This statement is coming from a guy who is usually in the landowners corner, BUT not when simple greed and legal empowered nastiness comes between public access to OUR land and being locked out! That sort of thing ****** me off!!!

IMO there has to be some compromise worked out, legislatively or thoroughly hatched out over coffee, leaving politicians and attorneys out of initial discussions. Do the legalese stuff later under a representative watchful committee, so no shenanigans get pulled!


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

I have not followed this in it's entirety so this may have been covered. I farm a piece of land that is on a section line. No road and has never been one. I just take into account every year I will seed it in the spring and in the fall people will drive through it. Section lines are owned by townships. I believe it is approximately 33' each way from center line.

Apparently Montana must be different. Suppose there is no way to do it legislatively with pull ranchers have with legislators. I like to call it Ted Turner syndrome. Ranchers eat crow on that one every day. Takes hours to get around his bison ranch.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

north1 if every person had an attitude like yours this would be a better world. I wish you lived closer just so I could visit and enjoy the company of a good person. Hunters will always support farming as long as there are people like you. I had to put old gst on my ignore list on nodakangler because he was changing me into a person I didn't like. Best wishes and God bless you.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

With some ranchers I'm not even sure its about the land......They have plenty of that. Its about the power and control..........


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

dakotashooter2 said:


> With some ranchers I'm not even sure its about the land......They have plenty of that. Its about the power and control..........


 You may have a point. I like old western movies. Often in those movies the villain is a rancher just like you explained. Only a show, but it reflects their history. Building dams to cut off water from a neighbor, diverting water to drive out a neighbor, burning out neighbors who dared to raise sheep, hiring killers to shoot sheep herders, the real list in history is astounding.


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

It is interesting you bring that up Plainsman. The introduction of barbed wire fences and the free range war seems to be a forgotten time in this countries history. You could get hung just for possessing a pair of wire cutters.

Is North Dakota that different with respect to section lines than other states? I mean it is well known fact the county owns the land of section lines unless the township goes through all the hoops it takes to proclaim them abandoned. It is common knowledge in my area.

Another area maybe some hunters aren't aware of to hunt is railroad lines. Thousands of miles of them throughout the state. Many of them used very little and there are thousands of miles of them that have been abandoned. Also abandoned lines owned by out of state entities that ignore them. Never heard of any problems with lightly used lines either.

Now you may say, there is not much land involved but I disagree. Approximately 100' wide and miles upon miles long. I have pointed many upland game hunters to a 10 mile long branch line track that runs by some land I farm. It is used very little. They all invariably say it is the best upland game hunting in my area. Why?

1. Ag land which provides food on both sides.
2. Good cover that is never hayed.
3. Trains carry ag produce which tends to leak out and provide another food source.
4. Predators tend to shy away from railroad tracks.

Given more time probably come up with a lot more reasons.


----------



## oldfireguy (Jun 23, 2005)

:x North Dakota is my only encounter with a state that has access along section lines as a guarantee. I have lived and hunted in MI, WI,MN and MT. Minnesota and Michigan have laws that guarantee landowners right to access routes to their property. I do not know about others. Minnesota required written permission to hunt railroads at one time ( effort to restrict hunting crowd).
The public in Montana and other Western States will need to find the political support and change law if they want access to some public lands.


----------



## Sasha and Abby (May 11, 2004)

excellent reply north 1 
I had forgotten about tracks...


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> 4. Predators tend to shy away from railroad tracks.


 Back in the 1970's when we used jeeps with cable and chain between them to flush hens to look at nesting habitat some of the most waterfowl productive land was the right away along I94. I think the lack of predators was the reason for that too.

Yes, born and raised in North Dakota perhaps spoiled me for hunting. I think it was 1958 or somewhere in there that my brother and I seen our first posted sign. We were a little perplexed what it was all about.


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

Ot that it matters, but doesn't the landowner own the land right up to the adjacent landowner BUT there is an automatic public "conveyance" access for ? 33 feet ? on each side of the line. That can't be blocked unless the county closes it for good reasons after public hearings and input. Seems that's what I found out when they widened our main rural county road and had to extend 5he easement to ? 66 fee5 each side. I had to go around with a notary and have each landowner sign the increase from 33-66 feet.

Railroad lines, abandoned or active!?! Seems that's not so clear. A lot of them have been vacated and sold or given back to the original landowners. Some were owned by railroads and maybe sold, some just had 99 year easements across private lands and were given back. Some are not posted, some are incorporated by fences into landowners private property and are off limits. I think if they are not posted and not fenced off you might be OK but are on your own. If the landowner kicks you off he's probably the owner now......
I'm not an attorney but I recall that active rail lines are technically private and though not posted are off limits for trespassing or hunting, tc. Probably for legal liability more than anything else but I don't know.

Yes, Plainsman, it's well known that some of the best nesting habitats for waterfowl and ground nesters are near busy public roads, as predators seem to learn they get their butts shot there. A good reason not to hay road grades or at least delay haying them and ditches though a lot of cattlemen would disagree. I have mixed feelings.....
Too bad we didn't have a state sponsored CRP or lookalike, guaranteeing public access, etc. Plots is OK but pretty So So. Even if we could buy or long term lease a bunch of relatively small good habitat areas. Hate to beat a has been drum but too bad measure 5? A few years ago wasn't passed in some form. Or the bad stuff in it taken out and rewritten or something. IMO hunters cut their own access throats with that one, but maybe I'm wrong and public access hunting will not eventually pretty well disappear. We all hurt with diminishing public access but it seems most hunters don't belly up to the bar with billfold open much anymore. We all quote Pittman Robertson and teach it on hunter ed but I'd bet my pension that a similar thing would NEvER fly now.


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

It is true that on section lines with no road it is a public conveyance, but gravel and prairie roads are 33' each side of center line.

Abandoned railroad lines have the tracks and cross ties removed and were purchased by out of state land holding companies. We farm land along one. Roger Stalback of Dallas cowboy game is part of that group of owners. They want an exsorbanent amount of money for it. Takes a lot of money to level off the dirt to farm it again so most farmers just let it remain. Never in 30 years has ANYONE from the group had anything to do with its upkeep.

Railroad branch lines may get used a couple times a month. Never heard anyone having a problem hunting them in my lifetime of living in my area(49 years).


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Depends on the state you live in.... But you need permission to be on railroad lands.

Like Habitat stated it is for liability reasons. Now in ND if it isn't posted... I believe you are good to go.... active or abandoned.

In MN you need written permission. I cant remember when it happened but someone sued the railroad for getting injured on it while hunting. I think they slipped and broke a leg or something. They wanted the "med pay" part to be taken care of....well that is what got the whole "written permission" thing going. I used to hunt the tracks all the time in MN. It was basicly in my back yard. But now not so much.

But again with the Rail Road.... make sure you know your state laws before venturing. But yes they are game havens and nice little jewels to hunt.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

If you ask permission to hunt RR property, first it will take you 2 years to get an answer, and then that answer will be NO. RR attorneys are sticklers about liability. Theoretically you can hunt them in ND because they are not posted BUT if they ask you to leave and you don't they can get you for trespass and if you get injured don't expect to get anything out of the RR or if you cause damage they will hang you out to dry.

FWIW In ND a farmer CAN restrict hunting on a section line if he owns the property on both sides of it...... He cannot legally, completely restrict access but can restrict vehicle access.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Are you sure they can restrict vehicle access?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Checking into many of these land closures they are varied. Some are young people who have taken a ranch over given to them from their parents. Some are wealthy investors from Texas, California, and other states and respect only money. Some are people who have built houses on two acres and they built it on century old trails. I think some of the laws passed in Montana violate agreements and laws governing access to public land. It's going to get nasty. It will be large groups of people vs landowners who slide money to politicians behind the scene. The politician will try balance votes and money and talk out of both sides of mouths of their two faces.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

dakotashooter2 said:


> If you ask permission to hunt RR property, first it will take you 2 years to get an answer, and then that answer will be NO. RR attorneys are sticklers about liability. Theoretically you can hunt them in ND because they are not posted BUT if they ask you to leave and you don't they can get you for trespass and if you get injured don't expect to get anything out of the RR or if you cause damage they will hang you out to dry.
> 
> FWIW In ND a farmer CAN restrict hunting on a section line if he owns the property on both sides of it...... He cannot legally, completely restrict access but can restrict vehicle access.


Nope, can't restrict vehicle access as section lines are considered public roads.

NDCC: 24-07-03. Section lines considered public roads open for public travel

As stated hunting can be restricted if posted on both sides, access can only be controlled if the landowner successfully petitions the township and county commission to close the section line.


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

That is spot on huntin1. I suppose if you are buds with both township board and county commission most anything can be rammed through. In my experience and area it is not common practice and public access to section lines remains intact, for the most part. Maybe it is a difference in mentality between ranchers and farmers?

Case in point. My father owns one quarter of crp. It borders a section line that a prairie trail leads up to but it ends there. Never has been a road linking it to another township road. Rancher that has pasture on other side of quarter approached me about driving across it to check his cattle. Thought it strange as he can access it from other points. Told him I can't stop him from using section line. Checked crp last fall and noticed he had put posted signs on crp with his name on it right across section line. Promptly removed signs and related to him that he has no right to limit access to others especially by placing posted signs on other people's property. Sometimes being nice leads to getting a big pile of duty placed on your head. I don't get it. Greed? Power? Middle finger to your fellow citizens?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

north1 I have a relative with a neighbor like that. He posts land where he asked permission to post and was told no. He guides some Pennsylvania deer hunters, but can't get a guide license because he can't pass the first aid test. He told one of his relatives he would give them $100 per deer shot on their property. My friend and I have seen them take deer there, but he claims they have shot none. He has shot deer within 100 yards of my relatives house. Once with the dog right behind the deer. He is the one who had a brother spotting from his airplane. Same guy drilled it in a couple years later and didn't survive. Off the trail every year if you watch him. Hunts posted land every year. Often with five to seven vehicles run around a three section area like Indians around a wagon train. Most the other neighbors are very good except for the crazy one who things everyone is sneaking in on his land. We moved out camp because he was angry we could see his land from where we camped. He is going to shoot someone someday. My hunting buddy and I have not walked for 15 years, but he come tearing into camp one day claiming he seen our tracks on his land a half mile away. We knew who walked in there, but kept our mouth shut because they were on a section line and owned the land on the other side of the section. Crazy man. He needs a long white coat with sleeves that tie in the back.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

Plainsman said:


> Are you sure they can restrict vehicle access?


Sorry What I meant was is that it is my understanding that if the road/section line terminates/dead ends the landowner can restrict vehicle access. Where through passage would not be possible with a vehicle. If access is available to both ends I don't believe they can.


----------

