The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting American Big Game Hunting Outfitters squeezing out the average man!!Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Outfitters squeezing out the average man!! | Login/Join |
| <sure-shot> |
Mr Atkinson, Wyoming's outfitter required in wilderness law stinks. It's unconstitutional and discriminates againest tax paying citizens! | ||
|
| <jeremy w> |
I hunt in a wilderness area every year. Fortunately I am able to serve as a "guide" for a couple nonresident friends however, it is simply a legality as I don't "guide" them in any way. It is worth note that our main and usually only competition are a handful of outfitters. The law is an obvious boon to the Wyoming guides and outfitters association. I feel for the non residents who have the balls to try a self guided hunt yet are held back by the "guide" law. Obviously if I were a big time outfitter or outfitting rancher type like some then I probably would argue the other way. Or at least pretend not to notice the problems with the system. [This message has been edited by jeremy w (edited 05-01-2002).] | ||
|
| <JOHAN> |
Forum Leaders and regulators the americanos are fighting again. This seems to be a round up for a civil war going on. | ||
|
| one of us |
There are many facets to this issue, just as with any other. Where I grew up in North Idaho all the land was essentially open for hunting and a "NO TRESPASSING OR HUNTING" sign was virtually unheard of. This was not necessarily the case in central Idaho where the big ranches were. As time went by and more and more people moved into North Idaho things began to change. This created a lot of friction due to the attitudes of the parties involved. I recall one incident where an old timer was accosted by the new landowner. "I don't recognize you", the hunter said, "where you from?" "I came here from Sacremento",the landowner replied. "Well that tears it. You got no property rights in Idaho, boy!" In Alberta,in the southern foothills,there are many areas which are closed off by ranchers who block unused road allowances. They are not in theory able to profit by offering hunts but some do try to charge for access. Others are also outfitters and block access to the public. Here locally there is one parcelof land on the Flathead river that is foriegn owned but not occupied. The "NO HUNTING" signs seem to serve primarily as sighting in targets to locals. As a landowner I admit to being a little bugged by the onslaught every fall. And I have to admit I'm a little peeved that there are so many hunters here that I can't hunt in my own backyard. Too crowded! On the other hand, in the areas where the outfitters work, I don't really think they have too much impact on game populations and most seem to accept the fact that local hunters can and do hunt in the same areas. All in all I prefer to have ranchers charging for hunts on their land than to have these ranchlands bought up by overpaid urbanites who will endeavor to stop all hunting. Regards, Bill. | |||
|
| one of us |
NM has some of the most complicated license regs that i've ever seen. the state is divided into mngmt units, some of which (for deer) are open to hunting via over-the-counter tags, while other areas require drawings. antelope and elk require drawings. but even with an OTC deer tag, you have to get your tags validated for a certain "season", usually a 3 day weekend, sometimes longer or shorter. i will be one of those out-of-state hunters this fall, should i get drawn. next year, i'll have saved up enough to pay the outfitter fee for that antelope tag. and given that i'm out of state, i want an outfitter in order to improve my chances of getting a nice buck - living in the dallas area, i don't have time to go out to NM and scout out for antelope. in texas, we have a LONG deer season, and anyone can get a license (all OTC). but we are a private land state, and you have to lease the land. i'm paying $1500/gun to hunt year (1300 acres/3 hunters). i've hunted public land in east texas, and done ok some years - but its easily worth it to me to pay the cash to have more opportunities to see and shoot deer. my biggest beef with regards to land access though is the high fence situation here in Texas. personally, i don't think it should be legal for a landowner to fence in deer - they are a public resource. the deer should have the opportunity to travel freely, across miles of landscape in order for me to have a chance at them. | |||
|
| <Lobstick River> |
Bill, Ranchers cannot block government road allowances here in Alberta. Some may have fenced across it but just call the county office and you will be going down that road in no time. | ||
|
| one of us |
The subject of outfitters squeezing out hunters,is just one of many problems faced on public lands and is just a trickle down effect. All this bullshit about Ranchers being stewards of the land is a joke. If a rancher doesn't own enough land to run his cattle on year round,then he needs to get rid of some cows. When you consider that only 3-5% of the entire beef production in the U.S comes from public land,nobody is going to miss them if there not on public land. Not to mention the Millions of tax dollars that will be saved,by not having to accomadate and manage cattle on public lands. If you look into how these public leases work,you'll find that these ranchers are paying well below what market value is,as compared to what they'd pay for private leases. What's even worse,is most western states put this lease revenue,back into public schools and ranchers,lobbying for dirt cheap leases are basically screwing the educational system of america out of money,so they can run cattle. What's worse,is when you look at who leases the most public lands,you'll find that Hilton(the owner of the Motel chain) and the True family(owners of True Oil company)are the leading leasees of land in the western states,none of whom are hurting for money,but instead use cattle as a tax write off, all at the expense of the public. Then you have the case of ranchers feeding the wildlife year round and taking a lose. Well thats another bullshit story. Not only do ranchers get cheap leases,but they also get paid back money by the state and feds,for wildlife damages caused to their leases and their privately owned properties,and if there is any type of surface mining taking place on the lease,they get money for loss of grazing areas due to that. Even though the land belongs to all of us. Take cheap leases,being compensated for any type of losses encountered on the lease and then add outfitting. If you own land and border land locked state lands that have good hunting,it's nothing for a rancher to make 18 grand to 21 grand on a hunting lease or better yet,the rancher gets his own outfitters license and guides 20 or 30 hunters,at from $2000 - $4500 a person for antelope and deer and easily double that price for Elk hunts. Then add to all of this that the leases last on average ten years. Then after they get tired of doing this,they just sell out to some land developer for millions and walk away. | |||
|
| <Indiana Tone> |
I think "greed" seems to be striking a blow and F#cking things up as usual. Might get worse before it gets better. | ||
|
| <jeremy w> |
I think what RMK says about sums it up. At least around here (in WY, I don't know anything about SD). [This message has been edited by jeremy w (edited 05-02-2002).] | ||
|
| one of us |
I think what RMK says is mostly a load of horse manure ............  | |||
|
one of us |
Not wanting to side with any "one" person I offer only something to think about. Access to public land has gotten more and more difficult each year. I live in Oregon and the public land is rather abundent. However, in the past few years thousands of miles of roads have been closed. I read (desperatly seeking the article again) somewere that there was a proposel to clse an additional 30,000 miles of roads this year. Now thats on public land. The state claimed that it was to expensive to keep them up. I belive a couple of envirnmentlist groups also backed this. An attorney (hunter) did some poking around and found that the cost of closing the roads would average roughly $8,000 more then it would take to keep them up. The over all all savings was around a 1/2 a million dollars. Now with blows like this being served to the local hunters, I see the point of the starting post. On the other hand I see the land owners rights. I disagree with guide required hunting, as it is just not right. I have paid for guides before, only because of their access, for no other reason. I really do hate middlemen. We all do have choices as stated by another member. However those choices are not always the same. Money unfortunalty plays the biggest role here. If you have lots you dont have to worry. If you have enough to get by, with little to spare, your choices can really be limited. Hunting is turning into a rich mans sport, and the average hunter will have to do what he can to keep up. The way I combat these problems is to teach my children to respect the outdoors and be a responsable person. They are the people that will run this country in the near future. I just hope that they still have a place to go and teach their children as I have taught them. JAG | |||
|
| <allen day> |
What this argument basically boils down to is that some guys seem to think that they've got the right to hunt anywhere they want in their home state for free. It doesn't matter that a rancher or farmer has to pay to graze property or keep up his own place: If he pays a single dollar to keep his place up or his leased operation going, he's already beaten most of the freebee bids by exactly that amount. Hell, I used to farm and raise horses myself (I still raise horses), and I was astounded at how many guys wanted to graze stock or hunt my property for free. They didn't contribute anything, mind you, but somehow they figured they had the right use the property, simply because they wanted to, and they didn't want to pay a dime to do so, or so they thought. They were wrong on all counts, and the courts saw it exactly the same way. Get this straight: Hunting is a privilage, not a right. If a rancher wants to charge a fee of some sort to hunt his place - whether he owns or leases it - that's his right as a businessman, and I'd do it myself. He has the right of possession, not you, even with property he leases but does not own. Europeans have live under this set of rules for generations, and we are just now starting to live it here under a more widespread basis; they have in Texas (90% private land) for decades. Get used to it, because there's more to come, everywhere. The great days of freeloader-style hunting are closing fast....... AD [This message has been edited by allen day (edited 05-02-2002).] | ||
|
| one of us |
You're right allen the europeans do live under far worse conditions and they exact far more control on their citizens. That's exactly why a hand full of the first americans kicked the fuckers out of america a few hundred years ago through revolution. As for hunting being a privalege and not a right. That's the same feelings that kings had in europe and resulted in people coming to america,where wildlife belongs to every citizen and is managed for the benefits of the citizen by the state,not for the benefit of the state. When the latter occurs you end up with the current abortion we have going on in wildlife management. I believe their are very few hunters or other outdoorsman,who believe that they should have free access to private land without paying or being given permission by the land owner. What they do believe in,is free access to public lands,which collectively they pay more money into,then every cowboy bob out there who has lobbyed so they can pay pennies on the dollar for some state land lease and in return can profit from it ten times over at the expense of the tax payer. Considering that allen has openly admitted to relying on outfitters to do his hunting for him,since his time is so precious.It stands to reason that allen would be all for the outfitter,which is evident from his post. | |||
|
one of us |
Don't like the high prices in NM? Go someplace else! Personally I wouldn't give you $1,000 for an antelope tag. In any state. I tagged a nice 14 1/2" antelope in Wyoming on public land, mid season, and a do-yourself hunt.(no guide) That cost me $275 for the tag, 360 or so for the plane ride another 200 for my share of the 4wd vehicle rental, and another few hundred for incidentals. (food, fuel, bribes, etc) My next hunt will not be anywhere in the US. When you look into it, you'll find that it is cheaper to go to Afrika or eastern europe on many hunts than the western USA. Talk to some people at Safari International. You'll be surprised what you can get for comparable or even less money. ------------------ | |||
|
| one of us |
Personally , I think there are a FEW resident hunters of some of the Rocky Mountain states that are just plain spoiled whiners . They have access to millions of acres of BLM or FS lands , more than they could ever scratch the surface on , yet they are always complaining about not enough land to hunt , and worried about the one quarter section that might be landlocked by private ground so they can't get on it . They can hunt bull elk for little more than nothing , hell , it costs me more for the federal stamps to shoot a duck on my own place than a resident elk license in some of these states . Still , they ain't got enough , and think they should be able to access any private land as well for nothing . These characters , or fellows like them , don't know you all year long . Yet , a week or two ahead of hunting season , they are suddenly your best buddy , all smiles and handshakes , and wanting to buy you beers . As soon as they got their hunting done , though , it's back to business as usual , bad mouthing farmers and ranchers every chance they get . And they wonder why a guy doesn't jump for joy when you see them coming down the driveway ........ | |||
|
| <allen day> |
RMK, since you see fit to ignorantly shoot your mouth off (an old habit of yours, apparently) and speculate about my activities, I'll let you in on something: I started going on do-it-yourself deer and elk hunts at age fifteen, and after I finished school this sometimes took in two or three states a year up until last season, and mostly all on public land. So that makes nearly thirty years of pitching tents, splitting wood, hauling horses and tack, and keeping all this sundry gear and remuda stored, re-stored, maintained, and purchased etc., etc., year after year. So contrary to your ignorant speculations, I've lived both sides of this issue (guided versus unguided / private versus public land, etc.) for one hell of a long time, and I'll stand by my opinions. If those opinions don't happen to fit your pistol, that's just too bad. AD | ||
|
| one of us |
Sdgunslinger,there aren't near enough whiners out there. Any restriction placed on public lands,by private individuals is worth complaining about and taking actions against regardless of it's size in acreage. When the public fails to stay aware of dealings with state lands,you end up with all kinds of problems. An example would be about four years ago,when the BLM arranged to sell thousands of acres of public lands,under the table for pennies on the dollar to ranchers who had bordering land. If it hadn't been for a couple of these whiner assholes and a sympathetic lawyer donating time,the deal would have went through,with the public none the wiser. As for Allen,you're the one that has made the statements about relying on outfitters nowdays. If you have in fact hunted for yourself on western lands,then you must be pretty two faced to think it's alright for outfitters to take over,now that you can afford one,fuck everyone else,right allen? Elsewhere you've stated that you're an amatuer historian and B grade western movie enthusiast. Well allen judging by your arguement in this thread, don't know shit about history,but your views on land ownership goes right along with some Black and White western. | |||
|
| one of us |
Sdgunslinger, I wonder were the "whiner' thing came from. Are you telling me that becasue a person was born and raised in a place with lots of public land, and has hunted there for their entire life, and tries to defend that they are whiners? I cant imagine that is what you mean. If you were told that the lands you had hunted for your whole life was being closed, or you had to pay double the normal for a tag, or have to hire a guide to hunt the same land, you would be OK witth that? I doubt it. No as far as thinking that we have should have access to private land, well that is just plain ingorant to assume that. I dont care if its hunting land, farmland, or a city block, if it's private land it's private land. People can whine about that all they want. Still it comes back to the dollar. Like I have said, I have no problem paying some farmer to hunt his land, its his, but when a huge corperation comes in and buys hundreds of thousands of acres, or guides snag all of the tags and double the price, thats abit harder to swallow. Not trying to stir the pot, JMHO. Happy hunting | |||
|
one of us |
RMK, I don't know about WY but I lease some state land here in Missouri. Yes I pay less than the average, however there are several reasons for this first I personally provided all labor in the fence building and maintanance, I must follow all stocking rates, and I have strict in and out dates. Think about this you can hunt for free on the same land I pay to graze. It's public land as much yours as mine but I pay twice taxes and rent. As far as guided hunts I have mixed emotions and tend to disagree with mandates, but the dummys that I helped to pack out after a blizzard in CO one October would have probably saved money if they had had one after they got through paying me.  ------------------ | |||
|
| one of us |
333OKH When I moved here (40+ yr. ago) ther was not a mule deer to be found. They have been protected from hunting and have moved into the farmland for easier pickings. If my cattle go onto your property and cause damage I am liable. If the 'people's' wildlife cause damage that's OK. I am employing a much simpler solution which involves a 300 Weatherby. It seems to be working.Mark | |||
|
| one of us |
You said it Mark! I hope these guys complaining about farmers and ranchers eat only what they themselves have raised or hunted. ------------------ | |||
|
One of Us |
Well, the world is, simply, a much more complicated place than it used to be. Increased affluence, leisure time, mobility and information have shrunk the world and given hunting access to all kinds of people from all kinds of places with all sorts of motivations. Joe-rancher, who never had an economic opportunity, let alone an economic incentive, to lease his ground to an outfitter, has suddenly found a way to support his farming/ranching "habit" (that's what it really is, cause' there's NO money in it!). Certainly this isn't Europe where individual landowners "own" the game. Yes, in the USA, the "people" "own" the game. However, the rancher/farmer "owns" the land which the game inhabits. Traditionally in this country, property rights are more important, period! It's my feeling that hunting priveledges and laws should be tilted towards the residents of a given state. Generally they are. All of us also reap the benefit of a subsidised farm and ranch economy which keeps prices low for we consumers. If a landowner can make a few bucks I'm all for him. The financial burden of that property is his alone, not mine. As a US citizen I have unlimited access to millions of Federal acres. I often go "way" back into this ground. It's shocking how few people have the gumption to use or take advantage of this generous opportunity. I've never had a problem finding game on public ground or finding hunting access. Like anything, if you want it bad enough, you'll find a way! BA | |||
|
| one of us |
I agree totally with what you've said Elcaballero.The problem is,the western states like wyoming and montana are still ruled heavily by Ranching and alot of the dates you speak of simply don't get followed. Now that you have milder winters,you'll find cattle grazing on national forest well after the first of october and the deadline for removal of cattle is September 1. It gets reported to the USFS and the answer is "you're not the first to call us." Missouri has plenty of other industry,so agriculture doesn't have such a grip on politics as it does in the west. Your statement about paying to improve fences and structures on your lease,I don't doubt it. In places like wyoming,the game and fish,BLM and forest service,provide 95% of all these improvements on public lands. They all have areas with pallet after pallet of fencing supplies,which gets used on public lands in an effort to control livestock.Not to mention the Wyoming Game and Fish had to recently resort to subcontracting all of its maintenance crews,because it was getting to exspensive using state employees,to fix primarily riparian areas and creek banks that had been damaged by grazing livestock. The fencing that is done by the leasee is usually rustic to say the least. One common joke about state lands,is you can tell you're on state lands by the condition the fence is in. If you've got wire stapled to sagebrush or anything else remotely resembling a fence post,it's probably state land.Most of the good fences on state land only occur in areas where public access is simple. Another common practice is using state land as a dump, I've hunted plenty of public lands that were covered in still born calves and dead cattle period,with drag marks leading right to private land,so there is little doubt where they came from. The subject of lease prices is also an issue. In the majority of states,the state advertises the blocks of land that are available for lease and puts these on display in newspapers and in courthouses, throughout the state. In wyoming and Montana,they don't and it actually violates public information acts. Lately with state lands being available to anyone,not just ranchers,the ranchers have tried even harder to keep these lease dates and prices secret. Which leads to another solution,and that is get groups of sportsman together and lease up these lands. This will result in several things. First it takes it out of the hands of those who have screwed it up in the first place,secondly it's bound to make the price of the lease increase with more public awareness and make it so future leasee's pay fair market value. Third,you find out just how much overgrazing was taking place on a piece of land,when the livestock aren't present and how much more wildlife use that property now. The post about using a .300 weatherby on the peoples wildlife when they do damage to private land without reimbersement,is a wet dream. Ranchers and farmers get animal damage checks from the state and these payments are public record. Not to mention,all big game licenses in wyoming have an animal coupon that is redeamable for cash by all landowners who allow that animal to be killed on their private land.Which also leads to abuses,in which ranchers claim carcass coupons for animals killed on public lands which they aren't entitled to claim money for,yet do. | |||
|
| one of us |
Allen Day, the leases we are talking about are GRAZE leases on BLM land. They give the leasor only the right to run stock on the land. He has NO control over it. One of the big rubs with graze leases has been the rancher floods the allotment with enough stock to eat the grass down to the roots since they have no committment "to the land". I see no reason for a rancher to be able to charge me to hunt on land that he has only a graze permit for. FYI: I think its a real hoot to read these cyberspace pissing contest. Two (or more) posters talking about how big their balls are and how much money they have and how much shit they've done. When, in reality, they both may be a teenaged girl having a lark. Am I the only person in cyberspace that doesn't have advanced degrees from an Ivy League college, isn't filthy rich, doesn't own, fee simple, a fortune 500 business, doesn't have an extensive knowledge of the law, plus a staff of lawyers, does not own at least one of every rifle ever made, etc, etc?????????????? | |||
|
| Moderator |
quote: Apparently, you are. George ------------------ | |||
|
| <allen day> |
beemanbeme, I was not talking about BLM land in my post. I was talking about privately held property that was owned or leased by a rancher or farmer. OF COURSE BLM land belongs to the public at large, and technically ranchers are supposed to grant access and allow users to cross property that they own or have the right of possession to (leased private land), but the law in this case gets a little complicated. It's not nearly as cut & dried as you think it is. But basically, it sounds like since you don't care for some of the counterpoints that are being made then you're perfectly willing to try and discredit those who don't quite agree with you (I reference you last paragraph), which is a predictable, knee-jerk tactic that's pathetically transparent to everyone. RMK, I don't take a tact of "screw everyone else", and I never have. On occasion, I've paid hunting fees on private land off and on since 1979, as well as "hunted for free" on public land. It hasn't been an all-or-nothing-at-all proposition for me by any means. I don't begrudge any property owner the right to charge for hunts on his own property or private property that he leases, provided that he conducts business within the boundries of the law. The free enterprise system is what makes this country work, and it makes everyone else's source of employment possible. Risk and reward go hand-in-hand, and if a rancher runs the risk of managing his operation, then he deserves some reward for that risk, and that includes charging hunting fees. In truth, these private land hunting leases benefit everyone. If a rancher manages for the optimum benefit of game animals that inhabit his property, then he is directly contributing to the wellfare of wildlife at large - even on public property that is adjacent to the private property that he is managing and charging to hunt on, but of course that aspect of this discussion gets ignored or is not understood in the first place. AD | ||
|
| one of us |
Allen this discussion was never about private land,it was about the public being prevented from using public land,by private individuals. As for public lands that enjoy the benefits of being joined to private lands,that have exstensive management programs in place. I'm sure it happens occasionaly,but the vast amount of times,its just like beeman said,public lands get treated like their stolen. Run it into the ground and leave it till next year. That leads to another problem,I'm sure ranchers do have wildlife tearing up haystacks and everything else,what do you expect when every bit of grass is grazed down to the dirt. | |||
|
| one of us |
My thoughts, ORGANIZE! Here in Maine we are always fighting battles. The only way to get your point across is to carry a BIG stick. Many votes will equal power. Sportsman Alliance of Maine,(SAM) Anyone can join, those with lots of expenible income, and those who can barely afford shells. All members are polled on issues. They will then spend the time that you do not have available, and will speak to the Legislature. They speak in the language that they understand. Work with us or next election someone else will. We have lottery tags in Maine, for our Moose hunt,10% are available to Non-residents. 6 are available to the highest bidder. Not to bad out of approximatly 1500 Tags. Again ORGANIZE. We are all HUNTERS, unfortunatly a dieing breed. We may all need the well heelled hunters in the big city to help us all sustain our passion. Same Trigger, Same Feel, Same Results Good Luck | |||
|
| Moderator |
quote: Actually, the original poster was complaining about outfitters locking up private land. The thread was diverted to the topic of denial of access to public lands later. George ------------------ | |||
|
| <jeremy w> |
I fail to grasp the logic of not allowing hunting on your land and then having to resort to a ".300 Weatherby" to shoot deer you don't want on your land. If you lived around here, as said before, you could disallow hunting and collect animal damage checks if charging for access gets to be too much work. | ||
|
| one of us |
RMK, I was going to just shut-up but one more thing. Ranchers that abuse land whether private or public piss me off too. First of all there are too many people like me that are trying to make it and improve land. I cannot even begin to tell you here about all the conservation projects I am involved in that is utilizing grazing to improve wildlife habitat (mostly for Prairie Chicken) and land quality in general. Second and most of all when ranchers abuse their leases and land use rights they give us all a bad name. The hunters get mad and the greenies get mad and ALL ranchers suffer for it. Thanks for the good debate. No matter what anyone says a cow managed correctly CAN improve land. ------------------ | |||
|
| one of us |
Elcabellero,it's a fact that cows managed correctly can improve the land. One example is high intensity short duration grazing. The problem is the average rancher in the western states,is interested in high intensity long duration grazing and that shit screws up the land. Not to mention a rancher would actually have to put up extra fence and get off his nuts long enough to rotate cattle back and forth. | |||
|
| one of us |
Response then question: My life seems to have progressed from farmer to Marine to freeloader. Sobering! Where I now live I can't hunt much. Leases are $6-$10 bucks an acre depending on your quarry. So I guide. It's depressing not being able to take my kids out and may move back to where I had 10000 acres on handshakes and throwing hay bales and catching stray livestock. Wish it could be that way again. Question: Just read interesting article in Progressive Farmer about subsidies/CRP/quotas/allotments etc.... I also just reviewed my states tax laws on agricultural exemptions or "green belt" laws. It's funny, but hunting is not considered agricultural. Therefore, if the land is used for recreational purposes for profit it would seem that some sort of pro rated taxation and subsidy cut should occur based on percentage of income. Thoughts? Again, I've fought for landowner rights, chased poachers, trapped nuisances, etc..., but now that I'm a freeloader, I may have to rethink my opinions. Matter of fact, in the last 5 years, I've charged most of the landowners for taking game off their land. I am a depredation trapper/hunter with licenses, tags, etc.... Maybe charging the landowner for removing nuisance game is another idea. Forget the subsidies-make a cash deal up front. | |||
|
| one of us |
An Outfitter that has a piece of public land only means that he can set up his camps and hunt that area on a commercial basis...He cannot keep the general public off that land, no way no how...I wonder how this stuff gets started. Aquavit, you need to stop in at your nearest U.S. Forrest Service Office and have a long talk with the Forrest Supervisor, you been had. U.S. Forrest and BlM, over 80% of the Pacific Northwest can be hunted by any U.S. Citizen during hunting season and with a legal hunting license at no charge other than a camping fee in some cases... State hunting licenses have become quite high in recent years thanks to the local bureaucrats money grabbing paws and it is going to bite them in the a$$.... I have never had a problem hunting in Colorado, N.M., Idaho, Montana, Nv. or Ariz. ------------------ | |||
|
| one of us |
I don't post my land.There is no mule deer season here, in the area we live. My complaint is that I pay intrest and taxes on land which the 'people's' wildlife freeload. Then I see idiots complaining about landowners. Population has chased wildlife from urban areas to private farmland and we pick up the feed bill. If the wildlife is owned by the state for the good of all, then all should be feeding it.Mark | |||
|
| one of us |
Every time the state pays a rancher for crop loss or animal damages,the public flips the bill. Their are also plenty of documented cases,where public land gets posted by ranchers and outfitters,to deter the public from hunting. Last year the BLM passed new laws against this and is trying to enforce it. You're right ray the outfitter doesn't have the right to keep the public off of public land,but there are plenty of illegal ways that they use to accomplish this. Every year you have reported incidents where a landowner or it turns out an outfitter tries to tell a hunter that they are on private property. Last year I had one of the dickheads try to tell me that since they had the grazing lease they only had to let big game hunters on and since I was shooting prairie dogs,I was breaking the law. The kicker was,I happened to be shooting dogs with a Sheriff's deputy,who after listening to this asshole tell us all about our wrong doings,identified himself and wrote down this guys name and filed a report with the BLM.of course the guy coward down and claimed it was just a big misunderstanding. Since the widespread use of GPS,there is little doubt where a person is on state lands and law enforcement is more then willing to use this evidence in determining if a person was in fact trespassing. | |||
|
| one of us |
A couple of years ago I was hunting mule deer in eastern Washington on state land managed by the Dept. of Natural Resources and leased out for grazing. I happen to be a land surveyor for the DNR so I'm capable of reading maps and knowing where I am on that map. This was one section of state land (one square mile) and just the very southeast corner of the section meets up with the county road, so that is the only point you can access the state land without crossing private. Well, it was mid-morning and I was pretty much done hunting for the day, when the rancher comes driving up in an old pickup and proceeds to tell me that I'm on private property and he's going to call the sheriff, blah blah blah. I politely told him that I had a map and I knew where the property lines are, and at that point I was right smack in the middle of the section, not even close to being on private property. Still, he insisted that it was his land and he pays taxes on it. I told him no you don't pay taxes, you pay to lease it. He even said well I CHARGE people to hunt on this land. I told him to go ahead and call the sheriff and I'd be happy to talk to him. Well, I finally walked the half mile back down the hill to my truck, and I never did see the sheriff. I guess he was bluffing all along. I thought about turning him in, but figured there was really no point in that. Anyway, this type of thing DOES happen. I've gone back and hunted that land since then, and we've killed a few nice bucks, and never had another problem with the old guy. | |||
|
| one of us |
George, et al, While this thread started about private land, out west it isn't that simple. Its not about ownership, its about control. If you control access to 100,000 acres of BLM land, its like you have your own little fiefdom. It doesn't make any difference how much land you own, its how much land do you control. I could cite numerous examples of blocked acces to public land but I'll spare you. Suffice it to say, it happens quite often and it is getting worse. Wyoming has a hot line that you can call if some two by twice squatter tries to jerk you around about public land. As posted above, we need more whiners so that the question of access to land we own can be settled. Settled now because the situation isn't going to get better. Allen Day, here's a little more knee jerk info for you. You posted that hunting is a priviledge. I'll speak slowly so even you can understand: You are full of shit! What 3rd world nation did you flee?? I do indeed have a right to hunt on my land. (read BLM) Its one of the rights a whole bunch of good men have paid the ultimate price to ensure. One last question, are you really a teenaged girl that's just in here to jerk folks around? | |||
|
| one of us |
Hmmm---beeman , what planet do you live on ? There is NO RIGHT TO HUNT ! Where in the world did you get that idea ? Tell me , which ammendment in the Bill of Rights spells out the right to hunt ? How come you have to have a license to hunt most anything , even on YOUR OWN PRIVATE PROPERTY , if it's a right ? | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Hunting American Big Game Hunting Outfitters squeezing out the average man!!
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia
| View $GS_USERNAME's Public Profile |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Buddies |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Ignore List |
| Invite $GS_USERNAME to a Private Topic |
| View Recent Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
| Notify me of New Posts by $GS_USERNAME |