wildwoody Report post Posted February 12 5 hours ago, Explorer said: Not trying to offend anyone but as a Gen x who grew up in small town AZ, faith was what mattered. Not right or wrong. Right or wrong is faith. Heaven and heck. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted February 12 Question, say you owned alot of land, not leased. The damage wild animals can cause damage to grazing and water supply, fences and more. So short of maybe a few bucks for a cow being killed by a wolf if you can drive it how do they get any restitution or should they. So is the question sell an animal or charge for access, is there a difference. Your thoughts Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Explorer Report post Posted February 12 Would you rather have the problem taken care of for free by some honest sportsman or make a profit and still turn it in as a tax right off? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Explorer Report post Posted February 12 Agriculture taxes don't only apply to leased land.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Explorer Report post Posted February 12 Make 10k for a bull elk when a beef is only worth 2-3? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bojangles Report post Posted February 12 Montanas block management also seems to work well, at least last time I watched Warden. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stillatmaxpoints Report post Posted February 12 The landowner does not own the game animal but they do supply water and browse and grazing for wildlife, water is the key, most of the units in northern Az especially the coconino plateau was devoid of water and wildlife in the 1800's until the ranching ventures developed waters for livestock, early explorers verify that. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Explorer Report post Posted February 12 7 minutes ago, stillatmaxpoints said: The landowner does not own the game animal but they do supply water and browse and grazing for wildlife, water is the key, most of the units in northern Az especially the coconino plateau was devoid of water and wildlife in the 1800's until the ranching ventures developed waters for livestock, early explorers verify that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Explorer Report post Posted February 12 Same could be said for humans. Like I said before ..not the kings deer Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CatfishKev Report post Posted February 12 Just now, Explorer said: 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Explorer Report post Posted February 12 Just now, CatfishKev said: No but if you open a food bank you'll quickly see how fast they become your problem, lol When you have to much God said you should share Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yotebuster Report post Posted February 12 I can’t imagine owning a 5-10k acre ranch my whole life and getting to elk hunt on it once or twice in my life. “Transferable” is where it gets dicey. I think ranch only, non transferable tags are a good thing, when you make em transferable is where money comes in and issues arise. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wildwoody Report post Posted February 12 Bro your not preaching to us, we get the bible and its words, my king is the lord but this isn't about that. Yes the landowners do not own the wild animals, but wild life can be a blessing or dammed nation. Destroying grass, trees , water and everything they share with agriculture, yes you pay taxes on owned or leased land. So my question was "I wasn't making a point like you think you are". So how should they be reimbursed or even should they be. They could put up a high fence and problem solved maybe wild life can't get in . Not sure if they still teach history in school, but T. Roosevelt tried to keep the Bab for him and his friends. Never got hunted and the deer ate the trees clear to 8'+ and starved and dwarfed . They had to get cowboys to heard them up and run them into the grand canyon do to over graze. Only an example. Only my opinion , means nothing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Explorer Report post Posted February 12 16 minutes ago, wildwoody said: Bro your not preaching to us, we get the bible and its words, my king is the lord but this isn't about that. Yes the landowners do not own the wild animals, but wild life can be a blessing or dammed nation. Destroying grass, trees , water and everything they share with agriculture, yes you pay taxes on owned or leased land. So my question was "I wasn't making a point like you think you are". So how should they be reimbursed or even should they be. They could put up a high fence and problem solved maybe wild life can't get in . Not sure if they still teach history in school, but T. Roosevelt tried to keep the Bab for him and his friends. Never got hunted and the deer ate the trees clear to 8'+ and starved and dwarfed . They had to get cowboys to heard them up and run them into the grand canyon do to over graze. Only an example. Only my opinion , means nothing Yeah I read the deer hunter by Zane Grey.hqve the original copy in orange. Facts are that. This is not Robin Hood and the Kings deer will and should never exist. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Explorer Report post Posted February 12 Welcome to Jimmy johns hunting camp Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
