Going Feral: Boycott

An interesting, and frankly shocking to a degree, post by a co-blogger.  First the post, then some comments here.

The Post.  Going Feral: Boycott:    

Boycott

  

Cpt. Charles Boycott was an agent for remote land owners in Ireland who was regarded as particularly severe.  During the Irish Land War the Land League  introduced the boycott, directing it first at Cpt. Boycott. They refused him everything, even conversations.  The concept was introduced by Irish politician Charles Parnell, noting:

When a man takes a farm from which another has been evicted, you must shun him on the roadside when you meet him, you must shun him in the streets of the town, you must shun him at the shop-counter, you must shun him in the fair and at the marketplace, and even in the house of worship... you must shun him your detestation of the crime he has committed... if the population of a county in Ireland carry out this doctrine, that there will be no man ... [who would dare] to transgress your unwritten code of laws.

Charles Stewart Parnell, at Ennis meeting, 19 September 1880.

Maybe it's time to take a page from the Land League.

This comes up in the context of a Reddit post on Fred Eshelman's Iron Bar Ranch, his toy ranch in Carbon County about which he's zealously pursuing litigation in trying to keep people form corner crossing.  So far, he's losing, having had the local Federal District Court first, and then the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals endorse corner crossing as legal.  As we've noted here:

Eshelman is a pharmacist by training who has done very well, economically, in that field. So well that North Carolina's school of pharmacy, which he donates to, has named that school after him.  His bio appears on their site:

Fred Eshelman, PharmD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fred Eshelman is the founder of Eshelman Ventures LLC, an investment company primarily interested in private health-care companies. Previously he founded and served as CEO and executive chairman of Pharmaceutical Product Development (PPDI, NASDAQ) prior to the sale of the company to private equity interests.

After PPD he served as the founding chairman and largest shareholder of Furiex Pharmaceuticals (FURX, NASDAQ), a company which licensed and rapidly developed new medicines. Furiex was sold to Forest Labs/Actavis in July, 2014.

His career has also included positions as senior vice president (development) and board member of the former Glaxo, Inc., as well as various management positions with Beecham Laboratories and Boehringer Mannheim Pharmaceuticals.

Eshelman has served on the executive committee of the Medical Foundation of North Carolina, was on the board of trustees for UNC-W and in 2011 was appointed by the NC General Assembly to serve on the Board of Governors for the state’s multicampus university system as well as the NC Biotechnology Center. In addition, he chairs the board of visitors for the UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, one of the top pharmacy programs in the United States. In May 2008 the School was named for Eshelman in recognition of his many contributions to the school and the profession.

Eshelman has received many awards including the Davie and Distinguished Service Awards from UNC and Outstanding Alumnus from both the UNC and University of Cincinnati schools of pharmacy, as well as the N.C. Entrepreneur Hall of Fame Award. He earned a B.S. in pharmacy from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,  received his Doctor of Pharmacy from the University of Cincinnati, and completed a residency at Cincinnati General Hospital. He is a graduate of the Owner/President Management Program at Harvard Business School.

Indeed, the fact that Eshelman is very wealthy apparently was referenced by one of his employees in the initial confrontation with the Missouri hunters, which isn't a very wise thing to do as it looks bad.  Indeed, it looks bad right away, and then again in court.

So, Iron Bar Holdings is Fred Eshelman, very wealthy pharmaceutical personality.

The Reddit post, which was linked into an out of state news article, provoked a series of responses on how locals shouldn't accommodate Iron Bar economically, the posters apparently being unaware that he's a wealthy out of state landowner that doesn't, for example, hit the feed store in Rawlins.

But I wonder if they were on to something?

Iron Bar is employing locals, and those locals are serving to oppress Wyomingites.  There's no real reason to accommodate them. They probably do go to the feed store in Rawlins, probably stop by Bi-Rite in that city, and probably go into town there, or maybe Saratoga, from time to time.

Why accommodate them?

They're serving the interest of a carpetbagger and have chosen their lot. There's no reason to sell them fishing tackle or gasoline, or take their order at the restaurant.  

Beyond that, as I've noted before, in his lawsuit Eshelman is making use of local lawyers.  His big guns are, of course, out of staters, but he still needs some local ones.  Originally that person was Greg Weisz, who now works for the AG's office in the state. Megan Overmann Goetz took over when Weisz left.  Maybe she had to, as when a lawyer goes into the state's service, he leaves the work behind.  Both of them are of the firm Pence and MacMillan in Laramie.

I don't know anything about Weisz, but a state website disturbingly places him in the Water and Natural Resources branch of the AG's office, noting:

Gregory Weisz

Greg joined the Water and Natural Resources Division in January 2024 after almost thirty years in private practice. While in private practice, he focused on real estate transactions and litigation, easement law, water law, general civil litigation, agricultural law, and natural resources. At the Attorney General's office, he represents many Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality agencies including the Land Quality Division, Industrial Siting Division, Solid and Hazardous Waste Division, Storage Tank department, Abandoned Mine Lands Division, and DEQ itself with general legal issues. He graduated with an undergraduate degree in Natural Resources Management and a law degree from the University of Wyoming. His prior work experience included private forestry consulting, oil & gas exploration, water treatment, ranch labor, and forest products manufacturing.

Lawyers very strongly believe that the justice system is great, and that by serving client's, they're serving truth, justice, apple pie, and motherhood.  That allows them to stand themselves.  And to some extent, it's true, particularly in the criminal justice system.  The entire system depends on the accused getting representation, which is in everyone's best interest.

But that's not true of Plaintiff's cases.  Plaintiff's lawyers make a big deal of how they serve the little man, but much of it is a crock.  And in something like this, Weisz was serving the interest of a wealthy carpetbagger.  Maybe he believes in the cause, but that doesn't mean that people have to accommodate him, then or now.  Now there are questions that Wyomingites in particular and public lands users in general have a right to demand of Weisz, most particularly does he believe in  Eshelman's cause.  If he does, do we want him in the state's law firm, the AG's office?

Beyond that, for the Wyoming lawyers actively representing Eshelman, why accommodate them. They can be comforted by chocking down their service to a bad cause by liberal doses of cash.  Locals don't have to accommodate them, however.  Laramie and Cheyenne are not far from Colorado, they can buy their groceries there.

I know that if I was shopping for somebody to provide legal services, I'd shop elsewhere if I found my law firm was representing somebody trying to screw public land access for locals.

But it doesn't stop there.  All three of Wyoming's "representatives" in Congress voted against what Wyomingites overwhelmingly believe. That ought to be enough to vote them out of office.  But people don't need to wait until then.  All three are still showing up, I bet, at Boy Scout, sportsmen's and other events.  Quit inviting them. And if they do show up, do what Hageman did at the State Bar Convention last year, walk out on her if she speaks as she did to a speaker.

Is this extreme?  It is.  But these efforts never cease.

When being an employee of Fred Eshelman means you have to drive to Ft. Collins in order to buy a loaf of bread, it won't be worth it.  When Escheman can't get a plumber or electrician to come to his house, or anyone to doctor his cattle, or give him a ride from the airport, it won't be worth it for him. When lawyers have decide if that one case is worth not getting anymore, I know what decision they'll make. When John Barrasso quits getting invitations to speak, he'll know what to do.

There are limits, of course, to all of this.  You can't hurt people or property. If somebody needs medical service, they should get it.  If somebody is stuck in a blizzard and you come upon the, they should get the ride.  But you don't have to serve them at the restaurant or agree to fix their pickup truck.

Or, so it seems to me.  It would at least seem worth debating.

Boycott.

The comment.

Hobby ownership of substantial amounts of property like this ought to be banned.  If you own agricultural land, your primary income should be derived from it.

This could very easily come to be the case if states, including my home state of Wyoming, adopted agricultural corporation laws providing that only bonafide agriculturalist could own agricultural property, which I'd set at any amount of real property not used for industrial use which exceeded five acres in size.  That'd help preserve farm and ranch land from being busted up, and it would mean that the people who owned agricultural land were actual agriculturalist.  In order, let's way, to hold stock in such a corporation, no less than 65% of your income would have to be derived from agricultural pursuits.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2025 Wyoming Legislative Session, Part 4. The Feudal Masters Bill.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2025 Wyoming Legislative Session, Part 4. The ...: 

One craptacular one to watch:

2025

STATE OF WYOMING

25LSO-0361

 

 

 

HOUSE BILL NO. HB0109

 

 

Trespassing-suspend hunting license.

 

Sponsored by: Representative(s) Allemand and Campbell, K and Senator(s) French and Ide

 

 

A BILL

 

for

 

AN ACT relating to game and fish; prohibiting hunters who are convicted of trespassing on private land from purchasing hunting, fishing and trapping licenses as specified; requiring rulemaking; and providing for effective dates.

 

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

 

Section 1.  W.S. 23‑3‑305(b) is amended to read:

 

23‑3‑305.  Hunting from highway; entering or traveling through private property without permission; penalty; hunting at night without permission prohibited.

 

(b)  No person shall enter upon, travel through or return across the private property of any person to take wildlife, hunt, fish, collect antlers or horns, or trap without the permission of the owner or person in charge of the property. Violation of this subsection constitutes a low misdemeanor punishable as provided in W.S. 23‑6‑202(a)(v) shall result in the person losing hunting, fishing and trapping license privileges for two (2) years from the date of the violation in addition to the penalties. For purposes of this subsection, "travel through and or return across" requires physically touching or driving on the surface of the private property.

 

Section 2.  The game and fish commission shall promulgate all rules necessary to implement this act.

 

Section 3.  

 

(a)  Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, this act is effective July 1, 2025.

 

(b)  Sections 2 and 3 of this act are effective immediately upon completion of all acts necessary for a bill to become law as provided by Article 4, Section 8 of the Wyoming Constitution.

 

(END)

1

HB0109

This bill is bullshit.  It's notable that of the two persons whose names I recognize, both are from ranching families, at least kind of.  One ran on "less government, more freedom" (Ide). This bill is for more government and less freedom.

Going Feral: Hog Wash

Going Feral: Hog Wash:

Hog Wash

That's how the conservation group Center for Wester Priorities characterized a three-page letter written by Wyoming populist legislator Bob Ide which asserted that the sale of the Marton Ranch in Natrona County to the Federal Government required the state legislature's permission.

A University of Wyoming professor confirmed that state law did not support Ide's position and frankly, it's abundantly clear that the claim is not only extreme, but baseless.

Lex Anteinternet: "How can you represent. . . "

Lex Anteinternet: "How can you represent. . . ":

"How can you represent. . . "

Elk Mountain.

Every lawyer has been asked that question at some point.  Usually it's "how can you represent somebody you know is guilty?"

Usually, amongst lawyers, it's regarded as kind of an eye rolling "oh how naive" type of question.  For lawyers who have a philosophical or introspective bent, and I'd submit that's a distance minority, they may have an answer that's based on, basically, defending a system that defends us all.  Maybe they have something even more sophisticated, such as something along the lines of St. Thomas More's statement in A Man For All Seasons:

William Roper : So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

Sir Thomas More : Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

William Roper : Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

Sir Thomas More : Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

That's about the best answer that there may be, and frankly the only one that applies to civil litigation.  We can console ourselves that in representing the interests of the potentially liable, we protect the interest of everyone.

But what about plaintiff's lawyers?

Frankly, the excuse is wearing thin.  

I.e., I don't believe it for a second.  It's all about cash.

And this is a real problem.

The question is what to do about it.

Well, frankly, the average person can't do much.  But you don't really have to accept it, either.

Shunning has a bad name in our culture.  Indeed, one English language European source states:

More specifically, shunning or ostracising is a form of abuse. It is discrimination and silent bullying. Unfortunately, often people who have been shunned also face other forms of abuse, ranging from death threats and physical assaults to murder.

And there's a lot of truth to that.

At the same time, it was and is something that is often practiced to varying degrees in religious communities.  Indeed, up until the revision of the Code of Canon Law in 1983, Catholic excommunications were of two types, vitandus and toleratus, with vitandus requiring the Faithful to cease all normal connections with the excommunicated.  It was very rare, but it could happen. Since 1983 that distinction does not exist.  Some Amish, however, still have such a practice, and they are not alone.

Realizing this is extreme, I also realize, as I've seen pointed out twice, that land locking rich magnates cannot do it without local help. They always hire somebody, I've heard them referred to as "goons" to be their enforcer, and when they need legal help, they hire a Wyoming licensed attorney.  Indeed, in this instance, remarkably, the plaintiff did not use a Denver attorney, which I thought they likely would have. 

And this has always been the case.  Wyoming Stock Growers Association stock detectives were sometimes enforcers back in the late 19th Century, and they were hired men.  In the trial of the Invaders, a local Cheyenne attorney was used, but then again, that was a criminal case, which I do feel differently about.

Elk Mountain is basically mid-way, and out of the way, between Laramie, Rawlins and Saratoga.  People working for Iron Bar Holdings have to go to one of those places for goods and services.  There's really no reason the excluded locals need to sell them anything.  Keep people off. . .drive to Colorado for services.

And on legal services?  I don't know the lawyers involved, so I'm unlikely to every run into them. But I'm not buying them lunch as we often do as a courtesy while on the road, and if I were a local rancher, and keep in mind that outfits like Iron Bar Holdings don't help local ranchers keep on keeping on, I'd tell that person, if they stopped in to ask to go fishing or hunting, to pound sand.

If this sounds extreme, and it actually is, this is what happened with some of the law firms representing Donald Trump in his effort to steal the election.  They backed out after partners in their firms basically, it seems, told Trump's lawyers to chose Trump or the firm.

And there are many other examples.  Lawyers bear no social costs at all for whom they represent in civil suits.  People who regard abortion as murder will sit right down with lawyers representing abortionists, people seeking a radical social change will hire lawyers to advance the change, and the lawyers fellows feel no pressure as a result of that at all.

Maybe they should.

Or is that view fundamentally wrong?

Lex Anteinternet: Corner Crossing Upheld in a victory for sportsmen,...

Lex Anteinternet: Corner Crossing Upheld in a victory for sportsmen,...: 

Corner Crossing Upheld in a victory for sportsmen, public lands, and Wyomingites in general

I've posted on this a number of times, most recently here, where I gave the details:

The Invaders

The Oil City News broke the story of the Federal District Court having issued its ruling, last Friday, although not until yesterday. Not surprisingly, the declining Tribune didn't get it into their Sunday edition.

At any rate, the Federal Court held corner crossing is not trespass.

Ultimately, I'm sure, there will be an appeal, but this is a major victory for sportsmen, the public lands, and Wyomingites.

 

Going Feral: Lex Anteinternet: The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. Landing. Corner Crossing and Chasing Mountain Lions

Going Feral: Lex Anteinternet: The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Ses...: 

Lex Anteinternet: The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. Landing. Corner Crossing and Chasing Mountain Lions

Lex Anteinternet: The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. Landing. (Vo...: 

The bill that may legalize corner cross, SF56, passed:

ORIGINAL SENATE 

FILE NO. SF0056

ENROLLED ACT NO. 60, SENATE

SIXTY-SEVENTH LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WYOMING

2023 GENERAL SESSION

AN ACT relating to game and fish; expanding the prohibition for entering private property without permission for hunting purposes to also prohibit traveling through the private property; and providing for an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1.  W.S. 23‑3‑305(b) is amended to read:

23‑3‑305.  Hunting from highway; entering or traveling through private property without permission; penalty; hunting at night without permission prohibited.

(b)  No person shall enter upon, travel through or return across the private property of any person to take wildlife, hunt, fish, collect antlers or horns, or trap without the permission of the owner or person in charge of the property. Violation of this subsection constitutes a low misdemeanor punishable as provided in W.S. 23‑6‑202(a)(v). For purposes of this subsection "travel through or return across" requires physically touching or driving on the surface of the private property.

Section 2.  This act is effective July 1, 2023.

Mountain lion chasing season was established, which I think was a poor idea.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. Posting public lands.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. The road ahe...: 

February 19, 2023

Governor Gordon Takes Action on 8 Bills on Saturday, February 18

 

CHEYENNE, Wyo. –  Governor Mark Gordon took action on eight bills on Saturday, February 18. The Governor signed the following bills into law today: 

Enrolled Act # Bill # Bill Title

 

HEA0015 HB0035 Day-care certification requirement amendments

HEA0016 HB0082 Defendant mental illness examinations-amendments

HEA0017 HB0160 Drivers license veterans designation replacing DD form 214

HEA0018 HB0147 Unlawful trespass signage-taking of wildlife

HEA0019 HB0019 State Indian Child Welfare Act task force

SEA0023 SF0078 Apprenticeship and job training promotion in schools

SEA0024 SF0176 Solid waste disposal districts-consolidation

SEA0025 SF0041 Skill based amusement games-authorized locations.

 

With this, posting public land to deter hunters is now illegal.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. The road ahe...

Lex Anteinternet: The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. The road ahe...:   

February 10, 2023

The gun 'em down trespass bill, which had passed the House, died in the Senate., not making it out of committee.

Speaking against the bill as voices of reason were conservation groups and a rancher, who noted that he had dozens of trespassers per year and though the bill was a bad idea.  

The person whose thoughts lead to the introduction of the bill, a person who provides church security in Buffalo, admitted that if somebody was dangerous they already did what was necessary to escort a person out, although that really fits into a different category.  It perhaps demonstrates why this bill was unnecessary at best.

Bill would allow ‘physical force’ to ‘terminate’ suspected trespass

Bill would allow ‘physical force’ to ‘terminate’ suspected trespass

Lex Anteinternet: The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. Corner Crossing.

Lex Anteinternet: The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. End of the f...: SF 180 would make decriminalize corner crossing.

SENATE FILE NO. SF0180

Corner crossing-trespass exception.

Sponsored by: Senator(s) Rothfuss and Gierau and Representative(s) Chestek, Provenza, Sherwood and Yin

A BILL

for

AN ACT relating to crimes and offenses; providing an exception to the offenses of criminal trespass and game and fish trespass regarding incidental contact associated with crossing two (2) adjacent parcels as specified; and providing for an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:

Section 1.  W.S. 6‑3‑303 by creating a new subsection (d) and 23‑3‑305(b) are amended to read:

6‑3‑303.  Criminal trespass; penalties.

(d)  For purposes of this section, a person does not commit criminal trespass if the person incidentally passes through the airspace or touches the land or premises of another person while the person is traveling from one (1) parcel of land that the person is authorized to access to another parcel of land that shares a common corner with or is immediately connected to the first parcel and that the person is authorized to access.

23‑3‑305.  Hunting from highway; entering enclosed property without permission; penalty; hunting at night without permission prohibited.

(b)  No person shall enter upon the private property of any person to hunt, fish, collect antlers or horns, or trap without the permission of the owner or person in charge of the property. Violation of this subsection constitutes a low misdemeanor punishable as provided in W.S. 23‑6‑202(a)(v). For purposes of this subsection, a person does not commit trespass under this subsection if the person incidentally passes through the airspace or touches the land or premises of another person while the person is traveling from one (1) parcel of land that the person is authorized to access to another parcel of land that shares a common corner with or is immediately connected to the first parcel and that the person is authorized to access.

Section 2.  This act is effective July 1, 2023.

As is probably obvious, that's a Democratic bill and will likely go nowhere in this legislature.