Corner Crossing: A Small Act with Big Implications

It’s hard to overstate how big this one is. For decades, public-land users dreamed of stepping from one piece of public ground to another without fear civil and legal consequences, and private landowners feared the day would come when it would become official lawful. Well, that day has mostly arrived. The Supreme Court of the United States has officially let stand the Tenth Circuit’s ruling that “corner-crossing” is legal. What started as a handful of hunters and a ladder on Wyoming’s Elk Mountain Ranch has now reshaped access laws across millions of acres of public and private land. Whether you hunt, fish, own, sell, or invest in land, this is a turning point that deserves your full attention.

In Iron Bar Holdings, LLC v. Cape (No. 23-8043), the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on March 18, 2025, that stepping from one patch of public land to another at a common corner, without stepping on the private parcel in between, is not trespass under federal law. (ca10.uscourts.gov) Just as important, the Supreme Court declined to hear the landowner’s appeal in October 2025, meaning the ruling now stands as precedent. (montanafreepress.org) That decision now applies in the six states under the Tenth Circuit’s jurisdiction: Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, Kansas, and Oklahoma. (spokesman.com)

What Exactly Is “Corner-Crossing”?

When two public-land parcels meet only at a corner, and the adjoining sides are private, stepping from one public piece to the other without touching the private land is “corner-crossing.” Historically, this has been considered, without precedence, to be illegal trespass, as it was viewed as a violation of private airspace.

In the Iron Bar case, hunters in Wyoming used a ladder to cross from one Bureau of Land Management (BLM) parcel to another at the shared corner, ensuring they never touched private land. (hcn.org) The landowner argued they trespassed through his airspace and claimed millions in lost property value. (spokesman.com) The hunters ultimately won the case and subsequent appeals establishing precedent for legal corner crossing.

Why the Law Went This Way: The Unlawful Inclosures Act

A key part of this ruling lies in the 1885 Unlawful Inclosures Act (UIA). Congress passed the UIA to stop private landowners from fencing off or monopolizing access to public lands left over from the Homestead era. The Tenth Circuit ruled that the UIA still applies today, meaning private landowners cannot use state trespass law to block lawful passage to public lands when no private ground is touched. (nrahlf.org)

Arguments for Both Sides

I have long been a proponent of corner-crossing. As a public-land hunter myself, there are many parcels I have dreamed of accessing, but I know the situation is far more complex than most proponents realize.

First, I am concerned that many people will bend the law, not respecting landowners, and lazily cross “close enough” or use imprecise apps to cross where they think the corner is rather than at a surveyed monument, creating conflicts with landowners who are, in many cases, already at odds with sportsmen which may hurt the sportsmen community. Subsequently there will be bad actors on the private side as well who go through great lengths to prevent legal corner crossing or harass those who do it.

Second, I agree with the owner of Elk Mountain Ranch that this will dramatically affect his property values. As a ranch broker, I know firsthand the premiums that inaccessible public lands have added to the value of a property, and I know in some situations this ruling could potentially cost landowners millions in equity.

Third, I think it’s important to know how public lands came to be and that we may not be as entitled as we think. Most of the lands we now call “public” were never intended for widespread recreation. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands originated from the General Land Office and the U.S. Grazing Service, created to manage leftover lands that no private homesteader wanted. When the BLM was officially formed in 1946, its mission evolved to include recreation, conservation, and multiple use, but that was a later development, not the founding purpose. State Trust Lands, like those in Montana, were established at statehood not for hiking or hunting, but to generate revenue for public schools through agricultural, grazing, and commercial leases. Even National Forests, originally managed under the Forest Reserve Act of 1891, were created to protect timber and watersheds, recreation was a secondary consideration added later.

So, while I personally support public access, it’s important to remember these lands weren’t set aside for recreation in the first place. They were established as economic and resource tools for the federal and state governments, often not even funded by taxpayers, but by ranchers, farmers, and commercial users of the land.

I think it’s important to put ourselves in the landowner’s shoes and consider if a law were created to make it legal for someone to walk your in-town lot line, cutting straight along your side yard from one public street to another, how would we feel? With this in mind, it’s easy to understand the tension and why empathy matters on both sides of the fence.

Ultimately, both sides have a point, and a reason to fight for their perspective side.

What This Means in Montana & Other States

If you’re in Montana or another Ninth Circuit state, the law hasn’t changed yet. Corner-crossing remains in a legal grey area not technically illegal, but not implicitly legal as well. But the Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene sends a strong signal. It’s likely only a matter of time before this issue reaches other jurisdictions. For landowners and investors, that means staying informed and adaptable.

What Should Buyers and Sellers Do

If you’re looking to buy a property that has checkerboarded public lands, know that public access via corner-crossing may now be legally supported in Tenth Circuit states, and soon, possibly others. That means the “locked public land premium” and the extra value tied to exclusivity may decline and affect the overall privacy and enjoyment of certain properties. Thus, buyers should make their offers accordingly and especially be diligent in their decision making in non-Tenth Circuit states where the market may not show an immediate impact.

For landowners, whether you have owned the land for generations, or purchased it assuming the public could never access those interior public parcels, your valuation may and is likely to decrease. This is the unfortunate consequence of this law being codified. 

A best option may be to explore a land swap with the government to essentially block out both the private portion and public portion of your land. Although it may be too late to do so, as public land advocates may successfully fight this action, especially if the checkerboarded option provides the public with better recreation. However, there may be a case in which this is beneficial to both parties and would prevent future conflicts and preserve some of the last market value.

The law may have less impact on certain checkerboarded properties, as legal corner-crossing will ultimately take some serious effort on the part of the public and may be especially difficult or impossible if the corner is in extreme terrain, under a pond, or in another situation that makes it impossible to find a monument or survey.

Final Thoughts

This issue touches two values I hold closely, public access to public lands and protecting private-land ownership, both of which are iconic American values. I believe corner-crossing should be legal, but I feel the weight of this opinion knowing firsthand the likely equity that will be lost by many landowners as a result as well as the conflicts that will undoubtedly arise from the few bad actors and abusers of these new laws on both sides. It is important as sportsman to do our due diligence and follow the rule of the law to the letter and I think further clarification from legislature and enforcement must be implemented to make sure all parties are acting responsibly in this new reality. Even with the Supreme Court ruling, this will likely be a debate that rages on for years, if not decades, and the outcome will transform the real estate market and landscape forever. As a sportsman and public land hunter, I celebrate a win for those of us who want to pursue our passion across all public lands, while as a real estate broker I lament with those whose financial legacy has been impacted.