On June 24, 2024, the United States Forest Service (USFS) chose to criminally indict my husband and I, instead of seeking resolution to a boundary issue they first made us aware of on March 29, 2024. On April 30, 2025, our family stood on the steps of the USDA building in Washington D.C. as Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollings announced that the criminal charges brought against us were dropped.
Much has happened since March of 2024, and we thank Tri-State Livestock News (TSLN) for working hard to share our story over the last year, during which time we could not speak to the press. Our inability to speak in combination with the unheard-of actions taken against us, and a piece of property and situation that is difficult to explain resulted in a lot of questions. With the dropping of the criminal charges, I can now speak, and TSLN has offered me this space to answer frequently asked questions by their readership, and others.
This issue occurred on the Cheyenne River in very eastern Custer County, South Dakota. An alleged hunter turned in a, “No Trespassing,” sign on a section of fence not on the boundary line. This was on the west boundary between our private property and USFS allotment. (We still have not seen that original complaint, and question its existence).
On March 29, 2024, USFS Special Agent Travis Lunders told us that while responding to that complaint, he then went over our private property, checked out a spring we developed, and eventually made it to the east boundary between our private land and USFS allotment. He determined that fence was also not on the boundary.
He said we needed to meet with our District Ranger, Julie Wheeler. We held that meeting on May 1, 2024 and discussed options for resolution. At that time, the field was planted to hay barley, and Julie said a resolution decision should be made before that crop needed harvested – around July 1.
Five days later, Travis Lunders conducted a survey, in spite of telling us May 1 that a survey takes several months to over a year to get done. We have yet to see the results of that survey. At that time we became concerned and reached out to elected officials. Senator Rounds’ staff agreed it was an odd situation, and asked to attend the next meeting. We attempted to reschedule to work with Rounds’ staff’s schedules, at which time Julie Wheeler stopped responding to our communication.
Then, on June 24, 2025, Travis Lunders served us with separate criminal indictments for theft of government land.
For the questions, I am going to focus on the eastern boundary between our private and USFS allotment land. The west fence, where the, “No Trespassing,” sign was found, was completely signed off on by the USFS in 1993, which is when it was moved to its current location. It remains unclear if it is also being questioned, or if the indictments against us were solely based on the eastern boundary.
Q: Why wasn’t the fence on the boundary line?
A: Fences in western states are often not on the boundary line, particularly in areas of rough terrain like the area where this occurred. Fences are in practical locations where they can be built, and maintained. In our instance, the USFS has around 25 acres on our side of the fence, and we have around 20 acres on their side of the fence. We have always managed their acres on our side, and we have always allowed our acres on their side to be treated as public property.
Q: Why wasn’t the fence just moved to the actual boundary line?
A: Multiple reasons. First, the fence was in a position recognized by the USFS, and as an allotment owner, we cannot just move fences without working with the USFS. Secondly, it had been in the same location with the same management practices occurring since at least 1950. We never altered management practices on the acres in question, never moved the fence, and never had a USFS employee tell us they had a concern, issue, etc… before March 29, 2024. Immediately upon hearing they may an issue, we sought to resolve it.
Q: When were we first notified of an issue?
A: We first heard of a, “potential boundary issue,” on March 29, 2024. To this day we have not received a written notice of complaint and/or issue. We remain in good standing with the USFS. They approved our 2024 grazing permit, and our 2025 communication shows no potential issues at this time.
Q: Why were you charged separately with criminal felonies?
A: We may never know the answer to this. Several attorneys have said someone, somewhere, decided to destroy us instead of seek resolution with us. A handful of people had to either be involved, or turn a blind eye, for us to be indicted.
Q: What will happen to the people who did this to you?
A: Again, we don’t know. Our priorities were to first get the criminal charges dropped. Now we are focused on resolving the actual issue. Then we will look into what our options are for determining exactly who did what, and how we can respond.
Q: How often does this happen?
A: It both has never happened, and happens all the time. Let me explain. Overzealous, unnecessary and un-neighborly actions by federal agencies toward private property owners is not new. For decades they have undermined the very people for whom they work. However, to our knowledge, no one, let alone a husband and wife, have been charged with criminal felonies over a boundary dispute.
Q. Did we pay to use the land in question?
Yes. We pay to use our USFS allotment as a whole. That allotment includes the acres in question, regardless of where fences are located.
Q: Do you farm the land in question?
We do farm on the land in question, as has every generation of Charles family. The management practices haven’t changed since Maudes purchased property on three sides of the acres in question in 1910. The USFS transferred the allotment through two generations of Maudes with those management practices occurring. Charles did nothing new on them. When the USFS came to our house on March 29, 2024, they said they had nothing to show we could, or couldn’t, farm them. They were simply seeking information. From that point on, we willingly worked with the USFS to determine if there was an issue, and if so, how to best resolve it.
Q: What is the “25 acres of grazing land” in the indictment?
We don’t know. It can be one of three things. First, it can be a wording thing on the indictment to prevent confusion (something we don’t understand). Second, it can be the acres on the west side of our private property and USFS allotment. Third, it could be that they were attempting to say we stole the land for both grazing and farming.
Q: who is responsible for the fence upkeep on federal land?
On boundary fences, we as the adjoining private property owner are 100-percent responsible for fence upkeep. USFS does not build or maintain boundary fences. Internal fence maintenance on USFS fences is the allotment owner’s responsibility. Complete rebuilds of internal fences are a cost share conservation project between the allotment owner and USFS. Typically, the allotment owner does the labor and the USFS covers some to all materials.
Q: How much have you been billed in attorney fees?
We are currently finalizing this, and it is also worth noting our issue is not over. If the resolution process does not wrap up quickly and smoothly, we will likely have additional attorney fees. My best estimate is that we have spent around $50,000 in attorney fees to-date.
Q: Have you received enough donations to cover those fees?
Yes, we have. Thank you to everyone who helped us financially! We very much appreciate it.
Q: If you HAVE received enough to cover the fees…what are you doing with the excess money?
For the time being, we are just hanging tight to see how and if everything is resolved. If we are nearing the end of this, we do anticipate having funds left over. We are prayerfully considering what to do with them. At this time, Charles and I both like the idea of donating some funds to organizations that helped us, and putting the rest in an interest generating account that we can pull from to help other people. In agriculture, we are generally cash poor, and to able to give cash to others in need resonates with both of us.
In closing, I want to explain how we got to the point of getting the criminal charges dropped, something that only happens in five percent of criminal charges. Not only was what we faced unheard-of, the outcome was also extremely rare.
Charges would have never been dropped if not for the initial efforts of TSLN Editor Carrie Stadheim, The Fence Post Assistant Editor Rachel Gabel, and former TSLN Digital and Special Sections Editor Maria Tibbitts.
When they learned about our case, they didn’t even pause when they realized we were unable to speak about it. They dug in and worked extremely hard to figure out what was happening to us. To find and print the facts. To work through all the crazy gray area.
If they had not written the initial articles, our case would have been shoved under the rug and through the court system, as those who brought charges against us designed it. If they had not worked with a level of journalism skill and ethics that is unmatched, their results would have fallen on deaf ears.
But, they are the best. Their stories were based on undisputed facts. They didn’t cut corners or leave room for error. They stayed the course from the moment this began to today. Their work spread and caught the attention of other media outlets, who built upon the solid foundation they laid. That is how awareness of what was being done to us reached Washington D.C., and the ears of those in positions to end the criminal charges.
I have no doubt our opposition was unaware of the caliber of women they came up against. Folks outside of rural America are often ignorant to the skills possessed by those of us in small towns and production agriculture. They fail to realize that we do this because we love the life, not because we are too dense to succeed at anything else. But, I knew what these women were capable of.
They were my voice when I was silenced. They spoke truth in a loud and clear voice. And, because of them, we were heard.