Commission looking into closing State Trust Land

[cactusjack]

If you look at the agenda for the meeting being held this Friday,  read down in the executive meeting minutes.  During the closed session 

 

Legal Advice.  The Commission may vote to meet in executive session in accordance with A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3) for the purpose of discussing and consulting with legal counsel for legal advice regarding the Commission's authority to close state trust lands to hunting and to close roads providing access to state trust lands.

 

What do we think about that?  Our land? 

 

[cactusjack]

Here is the entire agenda

January-24-2025-Commission-Meeting-Agenda.doc (1).pdf

[WalkingW]

   Thank you for the post. Most people do not realize what effect this will have on them! Not only will it close down the almost 9.2 million Acres of Arizona state trust lands but access to the federal lands behind that state trust lands! Just for an idea for size of Arizona state trust lands they are over 7 times bigger than the entire state of Delaware! 
  My question is why would they want to seek legal council to see if they can close down the Arizona State Trust land or access through it???

  The Arizona State Land Department is who is in charge of our state trust lands not the azgfd. 
   
    I have seen our Azgfd commission do a lot of things I do not understand these last few years. It is almost like they are against the one that support them. I have spoken to a couple of old commissioners and they do not know what they are doing. 
   
     One thing is for sure if the hunters do not stop their fighting amongst each other we are going to continue to lose! They are using the selfish nature of people to split them apart to make them weak.
  
    If you have the opportunity please go to the meetings and have a voice. I understand that it is tough when they do not listen but it gives you the ability to say something to your congressman and senators. 
  
    

 

[bigorange]

10 minutes ago, WalkingW said:

My question is why would they want to seek legal council to see if they can close down the Arizona State Trust land or access through it???

I read it as seeking counsel about authority to close hunting on State Trust land, not closing access...but yeah I don't understand the part about closing roads since that doesn't seem to be AZGFD authority. Agree though, this could be huge impact depending on what the actual intent may be.

[Chef]

Closing hunting is where it affects me the most.

[wildwoody]

Is this because of hunting or over usage by side by sides, just a ?

[Flatlander]

I assume this is in reference to figuring out if they have the authority to close state trust lands accessed with a hunting license as the permit. It sounds like they are trying to figure out a way to shut down some of the rampant side by side trail making on trust lands accessed, like around Florence junction, Mobil and maricopa.

It’s been on a few agenda recently but I haven’t listened to the commission meetings when it is discussed.

Someone should ask for a debrief on it.

[Sky Island junkie]

I’m sure this just applies to recreational such as hunting, atv travel etc. and not cattle grazing which is their main source of revenue, which is a pittance.  I think I read somewhere that none of our tax money goes to state trust land? I could be mistaken though. Man that’ll be a hard pill to swallow!

[stanley]

1 hour ago, WalkingW said:

   Thank you for the post. Most people do not realize what effect this will have on them! Not only will it close down the almost 9.2 million Acres of Arizona state trust lands but access to the federal lands behind that state trust lands! Just for an idea for size of Arizona state trust lands they are over 7 times bigger than the entire state of Delaware! 
  My question is why would they want to seek legal council to see if they can close down the Arizona State Trust land or access through it???

  The Arizona State Land Department is who is in charge of our state trust lands not the azgfd. 
   
    I have seen our Azgfd commission do a lot of things I do not understand these last few years. It is almost like they are against the one that support them. I have spoken to a couple of old commissioners and they do not know what they are doing. 
   
     One thing is for sure if the hunters do not stop their fighting amongst each other we are going to continue to lose! They are using the selfish nature of people to split them apart to make them weak.
  
    If you have the opportunity please go to the meetings and have a voice. I understand that it is tough when they do not listen but it gives you the ability to say something to your congressman and senators. 
  
    

 

Pretty big stretch to assume they are going to close down 9.2MM acres of land.   As has been said, it is likely to ensure they have the legal authority to take action as/if deemed appropriate.

 

[bigorange]

10 minutes ago, stanley said:

Pretty big stretch to assume they are going to close down 9.2MM acres of land.   As has been said, it is likely to ensure they have the legal authority to take action as/if deemed appropriate.

 

we can only hope...and also remember the intent of state trust land is for the state to sell it off if/when funding is needed, so there's definitely no guarantees.

[Flatlander]

10 minutes ago, bigorange said:

we can only hope...and also remember the intent of state trust land is for the state to sell it off if/when funding is needed, so there's definitely no guarantees.

The intent of trust lands is to fund our school systems by using it to generate revenue. Selling land only provides a one time benefit. So finding other revenue streams is more beneficial: I.e. selling access through permit and license sales. Closing state trust lands to public access demonetizes the land thus eliminating its intended use. This would be the legal argument against closing the land. 

[bigorange]

4 minutes ago, Flatlander said:

The intent of trust lands is to fund our school systems by using it to generate revenue. Selling land only provides a one time benefit. So finding other revenue streams is more beneficial: I.e. selling access through permit and license sales. Closing state trust lands to public access demonetizes the land thus eliminating its intended use. This would be the legal argument against closing the land. 

Very good point...I was over-generalizing.

[cactusjack]

Just spitballing here, but limiting access to certain leased land would make those leases more desirable.

If you own land and post it, but now you can keep people off leased state trust land too. How much more could they charge for those leases? 

They are looking at closing it to hunting and closing access roads. 

This dovetails with Land Owner Tags.  The leased land would not increase the quantity of tags, but would stop joe public from hunting those "private" areas 

[cactusjack]

Im not an attorney, but I have had multiple concussions so my brain has been bruised enough to understand some of their ways.  My hairbrained comments are below each item.  

 

b. Litigation and Legal Advice. The Commission may vote to meet in executive session in accordance with A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3) and (4) for the purpose of discussing and consulting with legal counsel for legal advice in order to consider its position and to instruct legal counsel regarding the Commission’s position concerning the legal strategy recommendations from the Department’s legal strategies team.

      Circular legal speak,  asking the attorneys if whatever shenanigans the legal strategies team has concocted will get them sued  

 

c. Legal Advice. The Commission may vote to meet in executive session in accordance with A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3) for the purpose of discussing and consulting with legal counsel for legal advice regarding the Commission's authority to close state trust lands to hunting and to close roads providing access to state trust lands.

      Closing off select land to the public doesn't hurt their $$$$$. We pay the same.  They can now charge more for the now "private property" leased state trust land

f. Legal Advice. The Commission may vote to meet in executive session in accordance with A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3) for the purpose of discussing and consulting with legal counsel for legal advice regarding a proposed petition to amend Commission rules related to the lawful methods of take and seasons for taking wildlife.

     Crossbow and OTC 

g. Legal Advice. The Commission may vote to meet in executive session in accordance with A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3) for the purpose of discussing and consulting with legal counsel regarding trespasses and other unauthorized activities on Commission-owned Wildlife Areas.

       Robbins Butte, Powers Butte are 2 that came to mind, I see illegal dumping out there. Dont see this one as sketchy

i. Purchase or Disposal of Real Property and Legal Advice. The Commission may vote to meet in Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S § 38-431.03(A)(3) and (7) for the purpose of discussion or consultation with Department staff in order to consider its position and instruct its representative regarding the purchase or disposal of real property and for the purpose of discussing and consulting with legal counsel for legal advice

            I wonder are we buying or selling?

         the legal definition of real property is land and anything that is affixed to, growing on, or built upon the land.  

        Are b, c and i connected?  Are these connected to the rumors for a push for landowners tags? 

[RNGRDOG]

10 minutes ago, cactusjack said:

 

        Are b, c and i connected?  Are these connected to the rumors for a push for landowners tags? 

You can ask them tomorrow at the Commission meeting.