How accurate are FilledTag hunt plans?
In outside reviews of 7 test plans in 4 states (October 2026), all 99 big game pin checks and all 744 sampled route points were on public land, 585 of 598 points in 3 end-to-end orders were public on county or federal records (the other 13 had no record or could not be checked), one test plan broke a state rule and changed how plans are made, and in our own check of 30 random points the land status FilledTag's map shows matched the agency record at 28 of 30.
Data updated October 23, 2026. Reviews dated 21 to 23 October 2026; the 30-point check was run on 23 October 2026.
A hunt plan says where to park, camp and sit. If a pin is on private ground, nothing else in the plan matters. So every plan is checked against land records the planner did not use to build it, and the results of those checks are below, with the failures. This page is about how plans are checked. It does not describe how spots are chosen.
What is checked, and against which records?
- Ownership at every pin (parking, camp, water, morning and evening seats) and at points sampled along every walking route, against the Bureau of Land Management's Surface Management Agency layer, the Forest Service's ownership layer, USGS PAD-US and, where the county shares it, the county's parcel record.
- Closed and restricted ground: tribal land, closed municipal watersheds, weapons-restriction areas, and the state's own list of lands taken out of its access programs, where the state publishes one.
- State rules that place a camp or a truck, such as New Mexico's 300-yard rule around man-made water holes (2026-27 rules, page 29).
- Parking on a public road, against the state's road layer, and walks that stay on the offered parcel or the road right-of-way.
- The words: hunting hours, licence and limits as the agency prints them.
What did outside reviews of test plans find?
Each review was run separately from the planning engine, with its own code, against sources the engine did not draw its ground from.
| State | Test plan | What was checked | Result | Issues found |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Montana | General elk, hunting district 380 | 34 pin checks (parking, camp, water, seats and midday spots) and 73 sampled route points against National Forest and BLM ownership; distance to the nearest weapons-restriction area | 34 of 34 pins on National Forest; 0 of 73 route points off National Forest or BLM | None. Nearest restricted area 15 to 25 km away. |
| Montana | General elk, hunting district 123 | 39 pin checks and 108 sampled route points, same checks | 39 of 39 pins on National Forest; 0 of 108 route points off | None |
| Montana | General elk, hunting district 324 | Nothing to check | The test run produced no area under the limits that test used, so there were no pins to audit | Not audited |
| New Mexico | Elk rifle draw hunt, GMU 34 (3 areas, 8 seats each) | Every pin against land ownership and New Mexico's rules | Failed one rule | A camp was 115 m from a mapped pond. New Mexico forbids camping or parking within 300 yards of a man-made water hole (2026-27 rules, page 29). Changed: New Mexico plans now keep camps and parking 300 yards from mapped ponds and reservoirs, and say that wells and troughs not on the map were not checked. |
| Washington | General modern firearm elk, GMU 460 | 14 pins against USGS PAD-US and the unit line, and 361 sampled route points against National Forest land and the closed municipal watershed next door | 14 of 14 pins Forest Service land inside the unit; 0 of 361 route points off National Forest; 0 in the closed watershed | None |
| Washington | General modern firearm elk, GMU 516 | 12 pins and 202 sampled route points, same checks | 12 of 12 pins Forest Service land; 0 of 202 route points off National Forest | None |
| South Dakota | Pheasant, one county, 6 covers | 66 checks: every pin and parking spot against GFP's live 2026 hunting atlas deletions, BLM tribal land, SDDOT road lines, the exact parcel outline, BLM SMA and PAD-US; season hours, licence and limits as printed | 66 of 66 checks passed | One cover is School and Public Lands on GFP's 2025 map, but BLM's layer shows it private and PAD-US does not hold it. Held for a person to confirm on GFP's atlas before any plan is sent; dropped if it is gone. |
| South Dakota | Pheasant, a second county, 6 covers | The same 66 checks | 66 of 66 checks passed | Two covers sit on one Walk-In Area that PAD-US marks as a closed federal easement (an easement on private land, not a closure). Two Game Production Areas are "restricted access" in PAD-US but open to public hunting on GFP's map. All noted for a person. |
Pin checks count each pin once per time it appears in the plan. Route points are sampled along each walk. Sources: BLM Surface Management Agency, USDA Forest Service basic ownership, USGS PAD-US, South Dakota GFP's 2026 hunting atlas and SDDOT's road layer, each asked live on the review date.
What did end-to-end orders show?
Three orders were run through the real order system to a finished plan (never sent to anyone), and every pin and sampled route point was checked against county parcel records and federal ownership.
| State | Order | Points checked | Public on record | The rest |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Montana | General elk, hunting district 380 | 245 | 241 | 4 could not be checked |
| New Mexico | Elk draw hunt, GMU 34 | 294 | 285 | 7 with no parcel on record, 2 not checked |
| Washington | General elk, GMU 516 | 59 | 59 | All 12 pins and 47 route points on county and federal records. The first run failed on a settings error before any plan was made; the rerun is the one counted. |
Totals: 585 of 598 points public on record, 13 not confirmed either way. A point with no parcel on record is not counted as public. Every plan in these states is held for a person to check before it is sent.
What went wrong, and what changed?
- A camp too close to a pond (New Mexico). Found by review, 115 m from a mapped pond. Plans in New Mexico now keep camps and parking 300 yards from mapped ponds and reservoirs. Wells and troughs that are not on the map are not checked, and the plan says so.
- Land records that disagree (South Dakota). A School and Public Lands cover is on the state's map but missing from PAD-US and shown private by BLM. It is held for a person, and dropped if the state's atlas no longer shows it.
- Missing property lines (Colorado). A tester stood on a property line the map did not draw. Colorado's state parcel map held 44 of 64 counties on 21 October 2026. The map and app now also ask 10 counties' own parcel maps; the counties that publish none online still have no lines.
- A wrong state name. Building this page found that the website map named state land "State of Colorado" in every state but Idaho. It now names Colorado, Wyoming and Idaho state land by state and says "State land" elsewhere.
- A failed run (Washington). The first end-to-end order failed on a settings error before any plan was made. It was fixed and rerun.
Does the land status on FilledTag's map match the agency records?
At 28 of 30 random points, yes. We picked 30 points at random (10 each in Colorado, Idaho and Montana, from a fixed seed so the same points can be asked again) and compared the land manager FilledTag's map shows with the owner on the county parcel record, or, where there is no parcel record, with USGS PAD-US.
| Point | Coordinates | FilledTag shows | Agency record | Record used | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CO-01 (Colorado) | 37.4710, -103.3620 | Private: Private | Private | PAD-US (no public fee record there) | Yes |
| CO-02 (Colorado) | 40.7894, -108.7890 | Public: Bureau of Land Management | Public: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | Moffat County parcel record | Yes |
| CO-03 (Colorado) | 39.0525, -104.6957 | Private: Private | Private | PAD-US (no public fee record there) | Yes |
| CO-04 (Colorado) | 37.8893, -106.3499 | Public: State of Colorado | Public: STATE LAND BOARD | Saguache County parcel record | Yes |
| CO-05 (Colorado) | 39.0080, -103.2927 | Private: Private | Private | PAD-US (no public fee record there) | Yes |
| CO-06 (Colorado) | 38.0204, -105.5128 | Private: Private | Private: private owner (name on record, not repeated here) | Custer County parcel record | Yes |
| CO-07 (Colorado) | 37.5351, -106.7758 | Public: National Forest (Forest Service) | Public: USFS / Rio Grande National Forest | PAD-US | Yes |
| CO-08 (Colorado) | 38.9116, -105.8768 | Private: Private | Private: private owner (name on record, not repeated here) | Park County parcel record | Yes |
| CO-09 (Colorado) | 40.5986, -103.8935 | Private: Private | Private: private owner (name on record, not repeated here) | Weld County parcel record | Yes |
| CO-10 (Colorado) | 39.7301, -107.6548 | Public: National Forest (Forest Service) | Public: WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST | Garfield County parcel record | Yes |
| ID-01 (Idaho) | 45.7906, -115.4067 | Public: National Forest (Forest Service) | Public: USFS / Nezperce National Forest | PAD-US | Yes |
| ID-02 (Idaho) | 42.4171, -111.6889 | Private: Private | Private | PAD-US (no public fee record there) | Yes |
| ID-03 (Idaho) | 46.1876, -114.7130 | Public: National Forest (Forest Service) | Public: USFS / Nezperce National Forest | PAD-US | Yes |
| ID-04 (Idaho) | 43.6751, -113.1678 | Public: Bureau of Land Management | Public: BLM / Upper Snake Field Office | PAD-US | Yes |
| ID-05 (Idaho) | 46.0203, -115.2794 | Public: National Forest (Forest Service) | Public: USFS / Nezperce National Forest | PAD-US | Yes |
| ID-06 (Idaho) | 42.6247, -114.8048 | Private: Private | Private | PAD-US (no public fee record there) | Yes |
| ID-07 (Idaho) | 47.9064, -116.7301 | Private: Private | Private | PAD-US (no public fee record there) | Yes |
| ID-08 (Idaho) | 42.0981, -111.1757 | Public: Bureau of Land Management | Private: private owner (name on record, not repeated here) | Bear Lake County parcel record | No |
| ID-09 (Idaho) | 42.3766, -116.0247 | Public: Bureau of Land Management | Public: BLM / Bruneau Field Office | PAD-US | Yes |
| ID-10 (Idaho) | 44.1442, -113.4495 | Public: Bureau of Land Management | Public: BLM / Upper Snake Field Office | PAD-US | Yes |
| MT-01 (Montana) | 46.1484, -108.5340 | Private: Private | Private: private owner (name on record, not repeated here) | Musselshell County parcel record | Yes |
| MT-02 (Montana) | 46.8182, -111.1869 | Private: Private | Private: private owner (name on record, not repeated here) | Meagher County parcel record | Yes |
| MT-03 (Montana) | 47.5677, -115.2315 | Public: National Forest (Forest Service) | Public: USDA FOREST SERVICE | Sanders County parcel record | Yes |
| MT-04 (Montana) | 48.9921, -110.4617 | Private: Private | Public: STATE OF MONTANA | Hill County parcel record | No |
| MT-05 (Montana) | 48.8122, -106.4831 | Private: Private | Private: private owner (name on record, not repeated here) | Valley County parcel record | Yes |
| MT-06 (Montana) | 45.2216, -110.7044 | Public: National Forest (Forest Service) | Public: USDA FOREST SERVICE | Park County parcel record | Yes |
| MT-07 (Montana) | 48.8378, -113.8293 | Public: National Park Service | Public: NPS / Glacier National Park | PAD-US | Yes |
| MT-08 (Montana) | 45.1429, -111.9314 | Public: National Forest (Forest Service) | Public: USDA FOREST SERVICE | Madison County parcel record | Yes |
| MT-09 (Montana) | 48.7334, -108.6301 | Private: Private | Private: private owner (name on record, not repeated here) | Blaine County parcel record | Yes |
| MT-10 (Montana) | 47.9038, -111.9431 | Private: Private | Private: private owner (name on record, not repeated here) | Teton County parcel record | Yes |
The 2 that did not match:
- ID-08. FilledTag's map shows Bureau of Land Management ground, and PAD-US agrees. The county parcel record names a private owner. Two agency records disagree, and the map shows both lines; we count it as a miss.
- MT-04. FilledTag's land colour (from BLM's layer) shows private ground. The county parcel record names the State of Montana, and PAD-US places it in a state wildlife management area. The Montana parcel record the app reads names the state as owner, but the land colour is wrong here.
Sources, asked on 23 October 2026: BLM Surface Management Agency (national layer); State of Colorado public parcel map (Office of Information Technology, county assessor records); State of Idaho public parcel map (13 of 44 counties, service edited 21 April 2025); Montana State Library cadastral parcels (layer edited 13 October 2026); USGS PAD-US 4.1 fee managers (service edited 4 June 2025); USDA Forest Service basic ownership. Points without a parcel record and outside PAD-US are counted as not public. Private owners' names are not repeated here. The full record: accuracy-parcel-check.json, and the script that made it is in the site's code.
What did nobody check?
- The ground itself. A line on a map is not a fence or a sign, and county records can be months behind a sale.
- Live fire orders, forest closures and road closures. Each plan names the office to check before you go.
- Wells and stock tanks that are not on the map, and whether a county road is passable in snow.
- County parcel records in South Dakota, where no statewide parcel service was used.
Phone tests
Field tests of plans and the app on phones are being run now. Their results will be added here when they are done, the failures with them. None are shown yet, because none are finished.
Read more
What hunters say about FilledTag · What we promise hunters · The free hunting app · A sample plan