Representative Image (AI-generated)
A 640-acre property is of little practical use if its owner cannot legally reach it by vehicle. In its September 23, 2026, decision in Wagonhound Land & Livestock Company, LLC v. Little Medicine Creek Ranch, Inc., available on Justia, the Wyoming Supreme Court upheld the creation of the private road and the $61,200 compensation awarded to the neighbouring ranch. However, the route eventually crossed state trust land and required passage through approximately 1,700 feet of the neighbouring ranch’s private property. The viewers estimated that the private road would affect 680 acres of the neighbouring ranch. Using comparable property sales and an earlier appraisal report, they calculated a reduction in value of $90 per acre. This resulted in a total compensation award of $61,200, which the district court approved. The court also noted that the ranch had not presented evidence disputing the viewers’ calculation of the affected acreage or the $90-per-acre reduction.
It therefore agreed that Wagonhound had established the necessity for a private road. Because it was shorter, more direct and more practical than the alternative suggested by the ranch, they recommended Wagonhound’s proposed route. That problem became the centre of a dispute between two Wyoming landowners after Wagonhound Land & Livestock Company sought access to an isolated parcel surrounded almost entirely by a neighbouring ranch. After negotiations failed, the company approached the court to establish a private road across the neighbouring property, but the ranch challenged the move and disputed the compensation. However, it overturned two restrictions imposed on the road, finding that they lacked sufficient supporting evidence. The ranch argued that an existing two-track route across BLM land provided Wagonhound with access. The Wyoming Supreme Court found that the existence of a rough track across public land did not, by itself, establish legally enforceable access to a public road. There was no evidence that the general public had used the route, and access to it was effectively controlled by the surrounding private property. The ranch also proposed the Parsons Creek Route, suggesting Wagonhound could obtain permission to construct a bypass across public land. However, that road did not physically exist. BLM employees also questioned whether the proposed route was accessible, while witnesses described parts of it as little more than a trail. The court concluded that neither option provided legally enforceable vehicle access to a public road. The district court appointed three independent viewers and appraisers to examine possible routes and assess the impact on the neighbouring property. The alternative would require construction across a rocky ridge and could make winter access difficult. Little Medicine Creek Ranch challenged the calculation, arguing that the assessment did not account for potential operational losses, including livestock health problems linked to dust, additional staffing expenses and reduced hunting opportunities. However, the Supreme Court upheld the award. It explained that Wyoming’s private road statute requires a before-and-after appraisal to determine the reduction in the value of the affected property. It does not provide compensation for indirect future business losses.