Locked gates on private or leased property

[gotcoues]

I'd like to get some feedback on some ideas and I welcome all responses positive or negative.

 

One of the issues that AZSFW has claimed they will address with our precious tags is locked gates. It is my understanding monies will be used to pay trespass fees so ranchers/land owners will open locked access gates or open up their land to hunting and fishing. I would definitely be opposed to this idea and the reason is, I believe if you "pay to play" like this, it will just be a lucrative incentive for others to lock their gates as well. Also, would we sign legal ten year agreements, annual agreements? I can definitely see the price going up and up and up on a crappy deal like this.

 

I would like to be educated on the principals of tax credits for grazing cattle. Growing up a city boy I am not here today to make ignorant assumptions but rather discuss ideas and again, educate myself. I'm not a big fan of subsidies for anyone and would very most likely vote down the idea for any given situation. With that being said, I would like to take a look at how much money we're talking about in the cattle grazing tax breaks. If I am correct in saying that a private ranch owner with a massive tract of land can get a whopping discount on their tax liabilities because of the subsidy, isn't it fair as a taxpayer to ask for hunting and fishing privileges on their land with a valid license in exchange for the above? Ultimately, anyone who gets a subsidy is benefiting from your everyday taxpayers. Why shouldn't there be a legal trade off?

 

Another idea floating around my lumpy head is this, I have always heard from other hunters that they offer up some free labor to help out in exchange for permission to hunt. I have personally tried this method with a friend in Unit 29. We approached the rancher/s and said we would like to give something back so we can earn hunting privileges. We also happened to be at a restaurant in Tucson at the same time as a couple of these family members were and ended up picking up the tab for their lunch that day. My point is we put in some serious effort to conceive some sort of a relationship with these guys and we were totally shot down. We spent lot's of time in the area and learned that family or close friends were allowed to hunt their property and even found out a Game and Fish Warden was allowed to hunt their property, apparently he kept a close eye out for them and their property.

 

What if we took this idea a bit further and tried to develop bigger and better relationships we these type people. Maybe organized events by G&F or critter groups that ranchers could sign up for and get real assistance. 15/25 people would show up to work for a weekend and really give the rancher a helping hand rather than a couple guys showing up and perhaps being more of an inconvenience than an actual help.

 

I hope I can pull some feedback from you guys and gals on this issue. Because I am adamantly against a Sheep tag or any other tag being pimped off to pay a rancher to unlock his gate.

 

Justin Leitner

520-240-8796

canyondrywall@msn.com

[coueshunter]

Justin, I think you coming up with ideas/plans is great.....we need to look into tax credits like big companies get to relocate here......we need to make it worth the ranchers time but not create hunter fee access situation...keep researching/looking into ideas.......allen Taylor....

[DesertBull]

paying ranchers to open gates is a bad idea. Once one of them gets paid, the rest of them will lock gates and wait for their check too. It's just another form of welfare and opens the gate (no pun intended) for landowner tags.

 

And if they are just leasing the land, they should not be locking the gates in the first place.

 

Just my opinion

[coueshunter]

desertbull....i am thinking there may be a way to give a tax break/incentive from state or county to the landowner who participates in a program for public access......don't want to use wildlife funds, just an idea that may have merit....sure can't hurt to look into ........allen

[DesertBull]

How about providing all the materials and labor for erecting fence on both sides of the road that crosses their DEEDED land, posting it as no trespassing and hammering anyone that violates the law. BIG rewards for turning people in that trespass.

 

How about if the landowner locks the gate, he pays a fee for road maintenance and/or is not eligible for grazing rights on land that the road accesses?

 

Instead of GIVING them money, take it away.

[audsley]

This is a complex subject.

 

AGFD is the lead agency for opening and closing roads on state trust land.

Lands in a private/state trust checkerboard pattern are especially frustrating because they enable landowners to tie up several square miles of state trust land just by locking a gate on their own private square.

 

Every hunter should own a colored map showing what is private, BLM, state trust or national forest land. Hunters who encounter locked gates on non-private land should contact the regional AGFD office. Have a good description of the location (GPS coordinates can be helpful) and any sign that might be posted. A picture is not be a bad idea. You might not get an immediate response, but someone at AGFD will eventually call you back.

 

The best experts on public lands access in Arizona are Matt Walton at Region V Game & Fish and George McKay at Coronado National Forest in Tucson.

 

Many of the roads we've used for years to reach state trust and federal lands go across private lands at some point. The courts have ruled that county funds can be expended to maintain the private road sections as long as the public is allowed to use them. If the landowner decides to stop letting the public use his section of road, he then becomes responsible for the maintenance. But that's something to look into because county officials can illegally grant special favors to landowners by continuing to maintain roads that are not generally open to the public.

 

As for earning our way through private property by offering labor and materials or other good deeds, for more than 20 years now AGFD has been operating a landowner relations program to help ranchers while also benefiting wildlife. The Habitat Partnership program provides funding for projects that benefit both livestock and wildlife. One of the program's principal aims was to earn hunter access. Sadly, ranchers have come to view these efforts as just more entitlement programs for them, and some ranchers are receiving benefits while denying the public access. (AGFD does not make public access a firm requirement for receiving the benefits.) In other words, what you're suggesting has been in place for a long time. While I have no doubt that landowner relations/habitat partnerships have done some good for access, there isn't much left to gain from this approach. Many ranchers simply aren't interested, and some, especially those with antelope on or behind their property, are able to extract benefits without giving access because AGFD and sportsmen's conservation groups feel the future of the wildlife is too important to let them vanish even if they can't be hunted by the general public, at least for now.

 

Someone mentioned sheep. In Unit 32 this last fall, there were 3 permits for sheep that are basically concentrated in two general areas. A rancher whose private land blocks one of these areas wanted $500 to allow a hunter to drive over the road across her property to reach the sheep on federal lands. All 3 hunters declined and went to the other area instead, and all 3 managed to take nice rams. But that might not be the case next year.

 

Someone mentioned Unit 29. I listened to an antelope hunter tell me about his Unit 29 hunt this past fall. He asked three different ranchers for permission to cross through their locked gates. One said sure, no problem. Another said absolutely not. The third said he would allow three hunters through and no more, and since this fellow was among the first to ask, the rancher wrote down his name and said he could come through on opening day but not until then. There would be no pre-season scouting.

 

On opening day, the hunter wanted to access the area he hadn't been able to scout. But when he called asking the rancher to unlock the gate, the rancher told him he had since learned that the ex-Mayor of Douglas and his son had antelope tags for 29, and the rancher wanted to reserve his ranch for their exclusive use in case they wanted to hunt there.

 

And we all know about the Chino Valley ranch that caused 65 antelope hunts to be cancelled because ranch management decided to lock off the road crossing its private lands, which resulted in locking the general public out of several square miles of state trust land as well.

 

Anybody mad yet?

 

Finally, AZSFW and the lure of access money has been mentioned. In my dealings with AZSFW, I've formed the opinion that Suzanne Gilstrap truly understands the issues as she has put in considerable time and effort getting a handle on it. But she is only a contract employee with AZSFW and prioritizes what the money men want prioritized. At the same time, I've formed the strong impression that the money men couldn't care less about access for the average sportsman. To the contrary, they seem to be lining up behind SFW guru Don Peay, who openly and explicitly lobbies for the privatization of wildlife. Peay recently called public ownership of wildlife "socialism" and said wildlife should belong to landowners, not the public. Similarly, Jerry Weiers, AZSFW's go-to guy at the legislature, posted on this forum that landowners are locking out hunters because we trash their lands and act irresponsibly. All this tells me that AZSFW has not pressed the case for sportsmen's access in the most important discussions, probably because public access isn't a problem for the money men behind AZSFW. Their interests lie elsewhere.

[Bugler]

It's frustrating. I read maps a lot more and if a ranch owner is leasing the land I will without a doubt cross the fence on foot to hunt. I don't drive on their private land or road I search for access where I can walk in. Some areas like in 32 and 31 I've played heck getting to where I wanted to go had a few arguments in the past too . I understand about people littering their ranch and that's bad but I don't do it and that leased land is as much mine and yours as it is theirs.

I don't know if something could be worked out as it seems money is all anyone wants.

[gotcoues]

I agree on the leased land issue, this to me is a no-brainer. The lease should state all people with valid hunting and or fishing license are allowed at the very least, probably a lot more than that.

 

As far as the private lands I think it boils down to the tax credits they are receiving for their property if they graze cattle. It should come with more than a price of x amount of cattle per square mile.

 

If I own a large tract of huntable land and I choose to lock it off and keep it all to myself for any reason, I should be allowed no questions asked PERIOD. But, when I have my hand out wanting tax breaks because owning that large amount of property is expensive, then I should be willing to give something back in return.

 

As far as access to get to public land through private, I thought there already laws on the books to address this issue. I thought it was illegal to "land lock" something. You have to provide a permanent easement at "fair market value" to whomever needs it.

 

I also think they idea of someone charging money to use their road to access the sheep behind their property is repulsive at best. Some sort of law prohibiting being able to profit directing in that manner should simply be put on the books. That kind of garbage will get very contagious as time goes on.

[mason a]

Here is the scenario, A rancher owns a big ranch and owns the access to all the land that he has fenced off, but when you look at the map you realize it is checker boarded , Each colored square representing 1 square mile , what keeps me from stepping over that fence and hunting that 1 square mile that is public property? Now take it a step farther with a good map and gps i can tell you exactly where the corner is and leisurely step over the corner of that checkerboard and stay on public land for miles after all it is public land.

The feed back that i have gotten on that is , they call that (butterflying, or leapfrogging the corners )and they claim there is an easement in the favor of the landowner to access those corners, I don't see why its not the other way around were we as the hunter cant have a few extra feet in those corners easement wise.

It is my understanding the reason why they created those checker boarded areas in the beginning was to always preserve access to the average person wanting to have access to use OUR land after all it is public land.

They think by them buying a ranch with 50,000 deeded acres they have 100% control of the other 50,000 public acres because they fence it ,post signs, and control all access points. What a deal , Buy 50,000 acres get 50,000 acres free.

[Coach]

I brought this up on a similar thread, but it bears repeating. The men and women of this state that hunt and fish have a HUGE supply of materials and manpower that, I beleive they would be willing to donate for access around private property. We can't ask AZG&F to do all the work to create easements around private property, but how many hunters do you know with back hoes, graders, dozers, water trucks...everything needed to go right around the ranches that sit at the only access point to hundreds of miles of hunting country.

 

If we could create a group that worked with G&F to legally create new roads around private property into the vast country that is being blocked, I know without a doubt that people would be willing to donate their time, work, equipment and sweat to sucure that access, without asking for a dime from the state. I also think that through donations we could reimburse our the guys with the equipment for at least their fuel and time.

 

Look, we all have to pay-to-play whether it's the Tonto Pass, Reservation fees, parking and boat ramp fees at most lakes, and we don't have a choice in that matter. What if we picked an area, one at a time, and asked for donations of time, money, equipment and labor to just go right around these isolated pockets of private property that have blocked off thousands of acres of our land?

 

Seems to me like it would work.

[mason a]

I brought this up on a similar thread, but it bears repeating. The men and women of this state that hunt and fish have a HUGE supply of materials and manpower that, I beleive they would be willing to donate for access around private property. We can't ask AZG&F to do all the work to create easements around private property, but how many hunters do you know with back hoes, graders, dozers, water trucks...everything needed to go right around the ranches that sit at the only access point to hundreds of miles of hunting country.

 

If we could create a group that worked with G&F to legally create new roads around private property into the vast country that is being blocked, I know without a doubt that people would be willing to donate their time, work, equipment and sweat to sucure that access, without asking for a dime from the state. I also think that through donations we could reimburse our the guys with the equipment for at least their fuel and time.

 

Look, we all have to pay-to-play whether it's the Tonto Pass, Reservation fees, parking and boat ramp fees at most lakes, and we don't have a choice in that matter. What if we picked an area, one at a time, and asked for donations of time, money, equipment and labor to just go right around these isolated pockets of private property that have blocked off thousands of acres of our land?

 

Seems to me like it would work.

 

I agree ,We all can donate something for the cause , $ ,time labor, organizational skills , I have friends with backhoes, and other equipment.. Legally if we could organize something to make a road to access that public area, i'm definitively in there are lots of areas where the road only needs to be a few hundred feet.

Coach , that is a great idea , we all know people with big heavy equipment .

[Elkhunter1]

I brought this up on a similar thread, but it bears repeating. The men and women of this state that hunt and fish have a HUGE supply of materials and manpower that, I believe they would be willing to donate for access around private property. We can't ask AZG&F to do all the work to create easements around private property, but how many hunters do you know with back hoes, graders, dozers, water trucks...everything needed to go right around the ranches that sit at the only access point to hundreds of miles of hunting country.

 

If we could create a group that worked with G&F to legally create new roads around private property into the vast country that is being blocked, I know without a doubt that people would be willing to donate their time, work, equipment and sweat to sucure that access, without asking for a dime from the state. I also think that through donations we could reimburse our the guys with the equipment for at least their fuel and time.

 

Look, we all have to pay-to-play whether it's the Tonto Pass, Reservation fees, parking and boat ramp fees at most lakes, and we don't have a choice in that matter. What if we picked an area, one at a time, and asked for donations of time, money, equipment and labor to just go right around these isolated pockets of private property that have blocked off thousands of acres of our land?

 

Seems to me like it would work.

 

I agree ,We all can donate something for the cause , $ ,time labor, organizational skills , I have friends with backhoes, and other equipment.. Legally if we could organize something to make a road to access that public area, i'm definitively in there are lots of areas where the road only needs to be a few hundred feet.

Coach , that is a great idea , we all know people with big heavy equipment .

 

Coach you stated this on my posting about the locked gate on state trust land and I mentioned this to Mat Walton of G&F when I met him at the CAT meeting with the US Forest Service. I understand there is a lot of hoops that have to be jumped through, ie zoning, planning, erosion control, and permits plus others I can't remember BUT he was receptive to the idea of the volunteer manpower and equipment. I will be talking with him in the next week and I will mention it again.

[Coach]

Thanks Elkhunter1, for taking this idea public. I'm ready with labor and donations and have contacts with people who have the resources. We're all ready and willing, if we can get cooperation with G&F. I think this idea has a lot of merit and promise.

[Elkhunter1]

Thanks Elkhunter1, for taking this idea public. I'm ready with labor and donations and have contacts with people who have the resources. We're all ready and willing, if we can get cooperation with G&F. I think this idea has a lot of merit and promise.

 

 

My dad taught me that sometimes you just have to do things for your self. He also mixed in that you may have to nudge some people to hear the ideas being said. I will nudge again.

[coueshunter]

coach, I like this idea. count me in to help....I can also help run down any red tape/political issues we may face.....let me know.....allen Taylor.....