30A Dos Cabezas access issues

[Tommygun]

My baby sister (10 years old) did not get drawn for the Jr. hunt this year, so I thought I would get her an over the counter tag for Thanksgiving so she could still go hunting. I hunted 36B last years, but with every thing going on at the Mexico border I did not want to take any chances with her safety. I thought further up north would be less risky so I got her a 30A tag hoping to hunt the Dos Cabezas area.

 

After talking to many different hunters and reading posts on this site I understand that access to the Dos Cabezas is extremely limited - so I did not scout in the Dos Cabezas, but rather decided to spend time and focus on other areas. The problem is that the other huntable areas are still very close to the Mexico border that I was trying to avoid in the first place. While scouting the other areas G&F recommended we talked to border patrol about our safety concerns and their advise was "make sure every one in your hunting party is armed." Not the kind of thing I wanted to hear when I will be responsible for my little sister's safety.

 

Does anyone have any knowledge of the Dos Cabezas road access situation? According to game and fish there are two roads "available": Hurtado Ranch and Mascot Mine. They say to get permission were needed. Is that what they mean by available? Meaning it is only "available" if you get permission? Who do you contact to get permission? I read a news article that the Cochise Board of Supervisors was addressing this access issue back in March, but I cannot find any info on what the outcome was.

 

I can appreciate a rancher not wanting to grant access to the public because of the vandalism that so often occurs. It just stinks that responsible sportsmen are the ones left holding the bag. I guess G&F should open a season for vandals and gang bangers-Then I'd finally get to use my 11 bonus points!

 

I am new to the forum. I have been following it pretty much daily for over a year now and am now making my first post. I am not asking for any honey holes or even where to scout, just wondering about roads and access.

 

Thanks in advance-Great forum!

[More D]

8-10 years ago i got a left over tag just to go hunting. thats what i did, i went hunting.

 

the only access then was from the east side of dos cabezas. the one road up one canyon held 4 camps. we all seemed to have draw left over tags with the exception of one guy who wanted to hunt there. he had scouted out a nice 90 some inch if i remember and took him the first day after back pack camping way up the mountain. there were three guys who would seem to shoot all day long. one of them took a spike after 50+shots in 3 days.

from the west side there was a guy who i swear was sitting buy the sign in book who enjoyed telling hunters "you cant hunt for the first 2miles, after that go ahead" you'd drive two miles exactly and there would be the first of may signs saying the same thing. "no hunting for xx miles"

 

i made 3 scouting trips down there. i seemed to see mulies up high and once a wt buck chasing after a heard of mulie does.

 

it was an adventure. still got to hunt.

[mason a]

Chuck Brooks closed the huartado road 3 years ago, The klumps closed mascot mine road many years ago. Used to be able to walk up the road, but now they wont even let you walk on there road , They do let a couple of sheriff buddies up there to hunt , but they are quick to bust you if you walk anywhere near private property.

[COUESAZ]

Klumps and sheriff budies. I did not know those could be said at the same time. I would recomend you do not go hunting if you are going to try the klumps. Old man klump died from what I hear. But he still has a couple crazy sons left. Stay clear of those closed areas.

[mason a]

Klumps and sheriff budies. I did not know those could be said at the same time. I would recomend you do not go hunting if you are going to try the klumps. Old man klump died from what I hear. But he still has a couple crazy sons left. Stay clear of those closed areas.

 

Actually , chuck brooks is the one who lets the sheriff up on coopers peak to hunt , your right the klumps probably want nothing to do with any law enforcement.

[Tommygun]

Thanks for the suggestions. That is the information I was looking for. I'll spend my time elsewhere. I learned a valuable lesson from this experience- take the footnotes to the hunting regulation seriously. When it says access is an issue, they aren't kidding.

[wardsoutfitters]

chuck and the clumps are charging trespass fees to our blm lands... must be nice to own a small piece of land and call the whole mountain yours!!!!!!!!! I'm tired of the land locked areas and we all need to do something about it !!!!!!!

[Shawn]

chuck and the clumps are charging trespass fees to our blm lands... must be nice to own a small piece of land and call the whole mountain yours!!!!!!!!! I'm tired of the land locked areas and we all need to do something about it !!!!!!!

+1

[audsley]

I've tried taking this issue on but haven't been able to get a lot of other hunters excited about it. Seems like hunters get upset when this happens but go on about their business once they find another place to hunt.

 

There are some pretty big names who have been taking advantage of their official positions to hunt where the rest of us can't. Meanwhile the problem is getting worse all the time. Now more closures are on the horizon in Unit 32. It's just going to keep on getting worse until the peasants pick up the pitchforks and storm the capitol.

 

Here's an idea. How about going to Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife and asking for a law that says there can be no hunting on any public lands that aren't open to the general public, and that any federal, state or local government employee or appointed official caught hunting on public land that is not generally open to ALL of the public is guilty of a misdemeanor, and that conviction is grounds for dismissal or removal from office for any appointed or elected official of the state.

 

And why AzSFW? Because they're the big dog sportsmen's organization that represents hunters in this state. There are some other efforts going on nationally with respect to public access to public lands, but at the state legislature and with the commission, where things can be made to happen fast, AzSFW is the horse to ride.

 

 

[billrquimby]

Larry:

 

I would prefer to attack the access problem by putting a lessee's public land leases in serious jeopardy if he denies access to that land to the public. This would make it more than a sportsman's issue and improve a bill's chances for being passed in Congress and state legislatures.

 

Bill Quimby

[wardsoutfitters]

Here's what we have to do !!!

We have to get a law passed that reads no land owner will deny access to state , federal , or blm lease lands. If that land owner denies access than they will lose the right to the lease of the property.

I'll also tell you what pisses me off, Is as I drive into areas there are AZGFD signs posted all over private land stating no hunting or trespassing, How about posting the state, federal and blm lands so we know exactly where we can hunt , It is up to the land owner to post their property , it shouldn't be up to the game and fish to do it for them.

 

[mason a]

chuck and the clumps are charging trespass fees to our blm lands... must be nice to own a small piece of land and call the whole mountain yours!!!!!!!!! I'm tired of the land locked areas and we all need to do something about it !!!!!!!

 

A few years back the klumps , said they would give me and a few of my hunting buddies access for 1000$ cash, He said we would be hunting areas that haven't been hunted in years , The area we were going to be hunting on was wilderness, He only controlled the access to the road , because some of his land crossed the road , that accesses the entire mnt, So its basically not accessible, unless you want to do a lot of hiking

[audsley]

I'd like to attack the problem that way too, but so far neither the state nor the federal govt is willing to make public access a condition for grazing permits.

 

The game and fish commission tried to get this accomplished for state trust land permits under Gov. Hull, but her administration refused to support it. People in the forest service have tried to do the same thing with federal grazing leases but the agency's top management refuses to go along with it. Lease agreements stipulate that lessees must allow access to forest service employees for purposes related to administering the grazing lease, but not for anything else. Some leaseholders only let forest service personnel in for reasons related to the grazing lease, while denying access to forest service employees working on wildlife, recreation, mineral or other issues.

 

Some of us tried getting something started in the legislature a couple of years ago, but nobody understood it, including some of the lobbyists for utilities and other recreation groups. The horseback riders opposed it, saying they would prefer to cut deals with individual ranchers rather than improve access for the entire public.

 

It's very easy for landowners to make it look like big government is pushing them around and trampling on their property rights, and they do whatever it takes to make that argument, including the outright lie and false accusations of criminal wrongdoing against officials trying to perform their duty to the public and stop the theft of public lands by private parties. These are public lands ranchers, which means they must share the land with other users under the multiple use concept. That's one reason why they pay less per acre for grazing fees than on private grazing land.

 

Meanwhile, your license and tag money is being used to do "habitat" improvements on lands leased by the very ranchers who don't allow you access to your public lands. How does everyone feel about that?

 

 

[billrquimby]

I'd like to attack the problem that way too, but so far neither the state nor the federal govt is willing to make public access a condition for grazing permits. ... Meanwhile, your license and tag money is being used to do "habitat" improvements on lands leased by the very ranchers who don't allow you access to your public lands. How does everyone feel about that?

 

 

 

I don't like it at all, but we will never begin to attack the access problem by keeping it a sportsman's issue. It is not just us who are being denied the right to visit our public lands. We need to take advantage of the superior numbers of other outdoor recreationists. The Interior, Agriculture and Defense departments will not change lease requirements until forced to do so. To do this, we need a champion in Congress, backed by a large number of outdoor groups with varied interests.

 

Incidentally, Larry, the ambivalence of hunters and their reluctance to do anything worthwhile to open up public lands to the public is nothing new, and it is matched only by the selfishness of those who are able to find ways to hunt where others cannot.

 

I spent much of my 27 years at the Tucson Citizen campaigning for public access to public lands. I even did a series of eight Page 1 feature articles in the mid-1980s that spotlighted specific problems in southern Arizona, including two different areas where ranchers had closed many historic roads that had been maintained for years by taxpayers in Pima and Pinal counties. By closing all the other roads, the ranchers forced everyone to enter state land past their houses "so they could keep track of who is going on 'their' ranches."

 

The result? I was able to get the locks off the power line road across the Mustang Mountains, which had been totally closed to the public for at least 15 years. Period. End of story.

 

What happened after that was the Game and Fish Commission, wanting to placate grazers, unofficially adopted a policy of cooperation with leaseholders that has resulted in our having to log in and out of state lands on those two ranches. Later, it created a staff position responsible for working with leaseholders and landowners on access problems. I don't know about now, but early on it seemed to me that hunters were getting the short end of the landowner-relations stick.

 

Since retiring from the Citizen in 1994, I haven't followed the commission's or department's issues as closely as I once did, but it seems to me there are more locked gates than ever.

 

Bill Quimby

[audsley]

Bill,

 

There's a group in Tucson that's doing exactly what you suggest, although we haven't exactly set the world on fire.

 

We meet every two months at the Game & Fish Region V office. We have representatives from the following:

 

Southern Arizona Hiking Club. This one is very important, and their president is very active with us.

 

Cochise County Trails Association. Similar to SAHC except in Cochise County.

 

Tucson Rough Riders - 4WD club.

 

A Tucson equestrian club I can't recall the name of.

 

Hunters.

 

We had a mountain biker and a guy from a mineral prospecting organization show up, but they didn't stick. Green Valley Hiking Club can't seem to get a representative to our meetings even though they have members who have expressed interest, and they problems with access just like the rest of us.

 

The name of the group is Arizona Public Lands Access Coalition (AZPLAC). We elected not to have the group speak as a united voice but instead to carry information back to our respective groups, so you won't see letters or hear public presentations from AZPLAC. This way bodies like the G&F commission, state land dept., forest service and BLM getting multiple letters instead of just one, and we don't have to negotiate wording among the various groups. We weigh in on national forest plans, travel management, wilderness designations, Pima County conservation lands and so on.

 

Southern Arizona is the poster child for a growing national problem. At the national level, there's a coalition that's working on "Keeping Public Lands Public." It includes the NRA, Nat. Wild Turkey Federation, Ducks Unlimited and about 40 other groups. I'm hoping they will continue being active and get something accomplished at the federal level. They managed to get a bill that would have provided a pot of money to buy permanent easements through private ranches. Unfortunately, that effort got rolled into a larger bill that has no chance of passing, so they'll need to try again.

 

Here in southern Arizona, more than 2/3 of the roads leading into Coronado National Forest cross private lands that can be blocked by ranchers, developers, mine owners or whoever owns the land. We're gradually being crowded into those areas where there is still access while much of our public lands become inaccessible to the public and instead serve as private playgrounds for landowners and their families, friends and business associates, or for guides contracting with the landower who controls the access to the public lands beyond his gate.

 

And someone's earlier comment about law enforcement officers getting to hunt where the general public can't is no joke. It's happening.