WY Outfitters Want More NR Elk Tags

[Joe Schmo]

welcome to the new era of hunting !!!!
It has turn into a similar sport like golf. Only the wealthy get to play on the best courses available. While the rest of us working smucks get to hunt the burned up greens & fairways .....

Save what you woulda spent on greens fees and buy tags and access...problem solved

 

[HuskyMusky]

Give ALL the tags to non-residents, or just make everyone have the same odds at drawing them... at the non-resident fee of course...

While I'm only half serious, I could only imagine if residents had to pay $1000+ for an elk tag, what that would do to the non-resident drawing odds... lol. Not to mention the HUGE increase to Revenue for the state.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

Not true, in CO, if the CDOW doesn't lease the hunting rights on State land, the public can not hunt them.

As to WY, there are no federal BLM lands that allow a lease holder to deny access that I'm aware of.

Accessible state lands are ALL open to the public, with the exception of cultivated row crops on State land. Currently ONLY the cultivated portion of a section is off limits to hunting, you can hunt the portion that doesn't have row crops. Also, even row cropped State lands are open for hiking, bird watching, everything but hunting and fishing. For the record there are about 16K-18K acres of road accessible State lands that are row cropped and off limits to hunting and fishing. Just last week, myself and another WYBHA board member had a meeting with the OSLI office to discuss opening that up to walk-in only hunting and fishing.

You can also fly into State land now and hunt there the same day you fly. Before JM77 and I got the aircraft regulations changed, it was impossible to legally fly into State land and hunt it because of the 24 hour wait and NO CAMPING rule on State lands.

I meant to say Blm & National Forest land, not state.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

As to WY, there are no federal BLM lands that allow a lease holder to deny access that I'm aware of.

I know of several large cattle ranches that lease BLM land adjacent and in their deeded land that post EVERYTHING with no trespassing signs. I know of several pieces of BLM that has non leased BLM next to it with No trespassing on the leased land.

 

[JimP]

It is all in how the lease is constructed and worded if they can post the land or not. Some cattlemen want nothing to do with hunters so they will word the contract to the effect that they have exclusive rights to the land and can keep other out. While others really don't care and allow hunters onto their leased property.

But I have also seen ranchers and private property owners just stick signs up on BLM and Forest Service land thinking that they can get away with it and until someone calls their bluff or reports them they will continue to get away with it.

The last time that I was stopped by a property owner who claimed that I was on their land I just told them to go ahead and call the sheriff and that I would wait right where I was standing until he showed up to write me a ticket. Needless to say he backed down, come to find out the land that I was walking through on a public road had been deeded back to the BLM a number of years before.

State school trust lands are pretty much the same way. I know that in Utah the DOW pays the state a fee to allow hunters to hunt the trust lands. I am not sure if Colorado does this or not. I might have to do a little bit of research on this to see if they do.

 

[mallardsx2]

I would "Randy Newburg" those "ranchers" and fly in with a helicopter and rain on their parade... lol I bet you that would get some feathers ruffled...Nothing ticks me off more than people who think they own public ground.

 

[mallardsx2]

I ran into this issue in Nebraska. Got into quite a heated conversation with the State about it. The takeaway that I got was that the "State School Trust Land" was leased to ranchers and they could do whatever they wanted with the hunting rights because they had the land leased form the state. This really ticks me off.

It is all in how the lease is constructed and worded if they can post the land or not. Some cattlemen want nothing to do with hunters so they will word the contract to the effect that they have exclusive rights to the land and can keep other out. While others really don't care and allow hunters onto their leased property.

But I have also seen ranchers and private property owners just stick signs up on BLM and Forest Service land thinking that they can get away with it and until someone calls their bluff or reports them they will continue to get away with it.

The last time that I was stopped by a property owner who claimed that I was on their land I just told them to go ahead and call the sheriff and that I would wait right where I was standing until he showed up to write me a ticket. Needless to say he backed down, come to find out the land that I was walking through on a public road had been deeded back to the BLM a number of years before.

State school trust lands are pretty much the same way. I know that in Utah the DOW pays the state a fee to allow hunters to hunt the trust lands. I am not sure if Colorado does this or not. I might have to do a little bit of research on this to see if they do.

 

[JimP]

I ran into this issue in Nebraska. Got into quite a heated conversation with the State about it. The takeaway that I got was that the "State School Trust Land" was leased to ranchers and they could do whatever they wanted with the hunting rights because they had the land leased form the state. This really ticks me off.

The idea of the State School Trust Lands was so that the state could do what ever they wanted to do with them to earn money for the schools in the state. Where I am at there are a few business that are on these lands. Business that have build buildings and are contributing to the local economy. In one area the school district decided that they needed a parking lot. Guess what happened. The business that was on the trust land closed and they then bulldozed the building and paved it over. It is now a parking lot that sits vacant for the majority of the year.

 

[BuzzH]

I know of several large cattle ranches that lease BLM land adjacent and in their deeded land that post EVERYTHING with no trespassing signs. I know of several pieces of BLM that has non leased BLM next to it with No trespassing on the leased land.

If there is a legal easement, then hunt it, nothing they can do about it.

Just because someone is illegally posting BLM doesn't mean you cant hunt it.

 

[BuzzH]

It is all in how the lease is constructed and worded if they can post the land or not. Some cattlemen want nothing to do with hunters so they will word the contract to the effect that they have exclusive rights to the land and can keep other out. While others really don't care and allow hunters onto their leased property.

But I have also seen ranchers and private property owners just stick signs up on BLM and Forest Service land thinking that they can get away with it and until someone calls their bluff or reports them they will continue to get away with it.

Not on BLM or FS...they cant word a "lease contract" to keep hunters and other recreationists out, assuming a legal easement exists. No landowner has exclusive rights on BLM or FS. They are paying for the right to graze it and nothing more.

The kind of misinformation being spread here is really troubling.

 

[JimP]

It seams like they do it all the time with mining leases on both BLM and Forest Service land.

Something else that needs to be checked is the patchwork of State School Trust Lands. They are all over the place on BLM lands.

 

[BuzzH]

It seams like they do it all the time with mining leases on both BLM and Forest Service land.

Something else that needs to be checked is the patchwork of State School Trust Lands. They are all over the place on BLM lands.

Nope, it has to be a patented claim and then no longer shows as public on most maps.

State school sections are primarily sections 16 and 36 in most of the Western States and why they are spread out all over a township.

Of course lots of swaps, trades, sales, etc. have scattered, and in some cases, consolidated ownership patterns too.

Not all state lands are the same either depending on the individual mandates of the State lands (some are state school trust lands, others can be WMA's, etc.).

 

[NDHunter]

I was in central Wyoming a few years ago antelope hunting and saw this sign. I had turned off a county road which was on BLM and turned onto a different gravel road, got about a half mile down the road and there it was. The county road was on BLM and the road I turned onto was BLM. Never crossed any private. I can't imagine it was legit.

 

[alaska2go]

Save what you woulda spent on greens fees and buy tags and access...problem solved

don't play golf

 

[Stig87]

You don?t ?have? to pay $1,000+ for an elk tag, that?s a choice.

 

[shootbrownelk]

I know of several large cattle ranches that lease BLM land adjacent and in their deeded land that post EVERYTHING with no trespassing signs. I know of several pieces of BLM that has non leased BLM next to it with No trespassing on the leased land.

I think I know the place you're referring to Cowboy. They put some new signs up this year....If you're meaning in Wyoming.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

I think I know the place you're referring to Cowboy. They put some new signs up this year....If you're meaning in Wyoming.

I am sure you do.

 

[nv-hunter]

Not on BLM or FS...they cant word a "lease contract" to keep hunters and other recreationists out, assuming a legal easement exists. No landowner has exclusive rights on BLM or FS. They are paying for the right to graze it and nothing more.

The kind of misinformation being spread here is really troubling.

The only way they can post blm land is by damage being done to resourses or safety issues. Call the local sheriff if you you find posted blm land. This is a huge issue of reaching public land and with enough voices we can get leases modified to allow access to blm written into the permit.