Proposed Access Agreement on Boquillas Ranch

[Don Martin]

If you are an elk hunter and think you are going to want elk on the Boquillas Ranch in Unit 10, you might want to read this article I wrote and have posted in other forums.

 

Fellow Sportsmen:

I'm sure by now you may have heard about a proposed access agreement by the Arizona Game & Fish Department for the Boquillas Ranch.

This agreement, if it is signed by all the parties (AZ G&F Commission, Navajo Nation, Cholla Land & Cattle Co.) will define the way access is granted on this 750,000 acre ranch from now through 2015.

NOTE: AS OF THIS TIME THE DOCUMENT HAS NOT BEEN SIGNED! My understanding is that since this document was passed out at the Commission meeting on Saturday, there have been three revisions to it!

So there obviously have been some changes made in the document, but I don't know what they are.

This is what I wrote for our local newspaper about what I know about this story.

" I’ve said it many, many times before in past articles I’ve written in the Miner about sportsmen and the almost unfettered access they have enjoyed on the Boquillas Ranch. And I hate to point my finger at some of my friends and say, “I told you so,” but guess what? It’s finally looks like it is going to happen. It is like a tsunami on the horizon.

It’s coming and it appears that barring some kind of major meltdown, there nothing much that can happen to stop it from changing the hunter access on the 750,000 acre Boquillas Ranch in Unit 10.

What is going to bring this change is outlined in a 13-page Department document entitled “Cooperative Stewardship Agreement For Recreational Access.”

I had learned from various sources that for some time the department was actively working on an agreement with the Navajo Nation, who owns the almost 500,000 acres of privately deeded lands within the ranch boundaries. Discussions were also held with the Cholla Land and Cattle Company, which currently leases the ranch from the Navajo Nation and runs the livestock operation there.

But it wasn’t until I learned last week there was an item on the agenda for the G&F Commission on 1-11-2013 meeting which addressed a written proposal and a power point presentation to the Commission about this issue that the contents of the document became public knowledge.

As information on what had been presented became public, it was apparent that some sweeping changes were being proposed by G&F. I spoke with Region 3 Supervisor Tom Finley at the G&F awards banquet last Saturday night (1-12-2013) and requested a meeting with him on Monday to go over the document.

Subsequently I met with Finley (1-14-2013) and was given a copy of the document. As I read through it I have to admit I was shocked at what I was reading, and had many questions for Finley.

Our over two hour conversation was cordial and pleasant and the long time departmental employee was very open and honest when it came to answering the questions I asked.

Finley told me a lot of history about the access issues on the Boquillas Ranch, some of which I did not know.

For instance did you know that there has not been a signed access agreement between the Navajo Nation and the Department regarding sportsman’s access on the ranch for many years?

“Each year we just kind of held our breath and hoped that things would stay the same,” Finley said.

Finley pointed out that the department had conducted projects in years past on the Boquillas to help mitigate issues caused by wildlife and/or sportsmen.

There was the grading of some ranch roads using department equipment, funding for cleaning out stock tanks, habitat improvement projects, placing informational signs on ranch access points, and patrolling of the vast ranch during hunts by officers. There was also a sign in/sign out system put in place to see who was utilizing the ranch.

And let’s not forget how the Mohave Sportsman Club held an annual ranch cleanup up out there for 21 years!

But despite all of that, it finally came to the point where the Navajo Nation said they were going to close down the ranch.

Finley said, “I got a call last fall from an official with the Navajo Nation and was told that the tribe intended to close down the ranch to hunters effective January 1, 2013.” Finley noted that as private landowners the ranch can control access and does have the authority to close the ranch down if they wanted.

But the call came with an offer for G&F to meet with tribal officials and the Cholla Land & Cattle company and once more try and write up an agreement that would continue to allow sportsman access on the ranch.

Finley said he was given the assignment by G&F Director Larry Voyles and Deputy Director Gary Hovatter to write up the proposal.

“It has been a challenge for sure,” Finley said. “I feel like I have a big bull’s-eye on my chest.”

Finley stated several times that sportsmen need to understand that the document has not been signed by all the parties, that it is actually going through a third revision.

And Finley noted that the bottom line was that the Navajo Nation could legally at any time, close the ranch to hunter access. “They are already empowered to do what they want, as far as access on their private property is concerned.”

Despite all those admonitions I think it is going to be a done deal. My take on this is that it is not if this agreement will be signed, it is only when.

So let me get right to point and list some of the things that may be of interest to you as a sportsman who want to hunt on the Boquillas.

Remember, this information is off the draft that was presented to the Commission. And as Finley noted, there are other revisions that already have been made. So some of these actions may be subject to change.

First of all the ranch is going to start charging what is called a Recreational Impact Fee. That fee will be $60 for a recreational user over 18 years of age. The fee for guides is $200. I should note here that these permits are for each hunt. So if a sportsman has drawn two big game tags and wants to hunt on the Boquillas both times, they will have to pay for TWO separate RIF fees.

Also anyone who helps or assists on big game hunts will also have to pay the $60 RIF fee. There are a number of exceptions especially when it comes to youth hunts, and disabled hunters.

There are currently listed 26 ranch rules. I don’t have enough room to list them all.

Here are a few. The ranch will not be open year around. Rule 5 of the 2013 Ranch Rules state: “Access by Recreational Users to the Big Boquillas Ranch will open 10 days prior to the archery-only pronghorn hunt opening date (late August) . Access before that date is prohibited on the Big Boquillas Ranch, unless otherwise expressly authorized in writing by the Lessee.”

Under Rule 6, “Access by Recreational Users to the Big Boquillas Ranch will close 5 days after the conclusion of the December antlerless elk hunt. Access after that date is prohibited on the Big Boquillas Ranch, unless otherwise expressly authorized in writing by the Lessee.”

That means no January archery deer or javelina hunts. There will be no general javelina hunts in February, or spring turkey hunts on the ranch. The ranch will not be open for prairie dog hunting in the summer until mid August. Organized predator hunts may be allowed on a case by case basis.

Here are just a few of the other ranch rules that may be in force this year.

Under Rule 14. “The use of trail cameras, scouting cameras or any other automated remote device camera systems is prohibited on the Big Boquillas Ranch.

Rule 15 states, “The construction of or use of blinds or tree stands (commercial or otherwise) is prohibited on the Big Boquillas Ranch.

Rule 16 states, “Hunting within 100 yards of a water source is prohibited on the Big Boquillas Ranch.

Other proposed rules state that, “The use of any substance to attract wildlife (baiting) is prohibited on the Big Boquillas Ranch. (rule 20)

“All spotlighting is prohibited on the Big Boquillas Ranch.” (rule 25)

Now many may feel that these rules are unreasonable. But think of what the alternatives are.

One is the Boquillas ranch could be completely shut down to all sportsman access.

The other option, which may be called “elitist” is what is going on the ORO Ranch right now. In that situation you must call the Outfitter (Chad Smith) who controls access to the ranch, and you must pay fees according to what you have a tag for.

And those fees are not chump change, especially for elk. I was told that fees from $8-10 thousand dollars for elk seem to be the going rate there.

Same thing also happens closer to Kingman on the X Bar One Ranch in Unit 18A. Again you have to contact the ranch owners and pay fees, depending on what tag you have drawn.

At this point there are many, many more questions that are going to have to be answered for sportsmen who I feel aren’t going to particularly embrace this proposal. In the end I bet after all the whining and griping by sportsmen, they’ll pay the fees and continue to hunt out there.

I’ve suggested to Findley that some kind of public outreach should be done to let sportsmen know why this has all been proposed.

Times have changed and so has the rules for access on large blocks of private lands.

Wildlife and sportsmen no doubt cause an increase in ranch operations. The Cholla Land and Cattle company says they spend $500,000 annually for maintenance on the Boquillas. However there is no way that all of that can be attributed to wildlife and/or sportsmen.

But it may be reasonable that a private landowner can obtain some compensation—and I don’t mean landowner tags—for allowing access on their lands.

Right now, sportsmen from all over the nation are applying for antelope and elk tags in Arizona. There are almost 2,500 elk tags proposed for Unit 10, and 145 antelope tags.

Know that if you apply for any of those tags and draw them, there is a very good chance that at least some and maybe all of the rules outlined here are going to apply.

If you want a copy of the original document, it is a public record and Region 3 should provide it for you.

If you have concerns, questions, or suggestions, contact Finley at his department e-mail address of tfinley@azgfd.gov "

Well there you have it. I'm not saying if this is good or bad. I do know that shutting it down will cause a lot of issues with tag revenues for the Department and will cause a lot of grief to sportsmen who have already applied for antelope or elk tags in Unit 10. And it will cause issues for the Cholla folks as left unchecked, the elk population will absolutely explode. I do know that the Cholla folks do want elk hunters there.

Each and every one of us will have to make a decision if we think this is a good or bad idea and if we want to continue to hunt on the Boquillas. If we do, then we'll be paying fees and abiding by the agreed upon ranch rules.

Then there is the question about what may be a be the trickle down effect for other AZ landowners who might want to implement the same or similar "deal" with the Department.

And what about the State Trust Lands (250,000 acres) that are mostly surrounded by the almost 500,000 acres of private land?

Like I said many, many questions will need to be answered.

I do have the complete report on a pdf file. If you would like it, send me an e-mail at awoguide@citlink.net and I'll be glad to send it to you and can read it in its entirety for yourself.

I am putting this out here not to stir up a firestorm. It is here because I think the public has a right to know what is going on with this very important issue of access on the largest ranch in northwest Arizona.

Don Martin

[Flatlander]

I have never hunted unit 10 a day in my life, but this is a true disappointment to me. Arizona has long been a shining example in the West of private landowners and sportsmen working together. Game and Fish has done a great job of maintaining good relationships with private land owners and not giving in to those seeking landowner tags. Slowly it looks like we are watching these opportunities erode.

 

Thanks Don for taking this head on and getting people informed. I have admired your efforts in many arenas for a lot of years, the work you do for AZ sportsmen is commendable.

[Don Martin]

Thanks,

 

Don

[joe hunter]

Don, what's the cause for this ? Is it just the times we live in or are the owners not likeing what they see ?

[jim]

Will the game and fish cut the tags like they did in that other unit whenit got locked up? With those type of restrictions that many tags in the rest of the unit will be a nightmare.

[motoxno53]

Sent an email to Finley... Where else can we send an email to voicing our opinion?

[cosninocanines]

Copy of my reply in the javelina forum to this topic.

 

Unfortunatly this does have the possibility of snowballing, could be Unit 5b and the Hopi ranches before long. Wildlife management will really be strained and the hunting pressure adjacent to these areas will increase. The wildlife will respond by crossing the fence as they do on the Navajo Depot and Grand Canyon National Park. I appreciate the folks at G&F working on these issues and hope that a balance can be found.

 

We all should follow the example set by the Mohave Sportsmen and donate our time in some usefull way to help the ranchers. I worked on the Boquillas clean-up last year after driving miles and miles our little group picked up very little trash because there was very little trash to pick up. We covered a lot of country during the archery antelope hunt and again little or no trash to be found.

[PackerMenges]

I think this is a touchy topic. It comes down to private land rights and what those mean to each one of us. It is their right to control access, if they decide to shut it down well that is their choice..just as you have the right on your property to allow on whomever you want or don't want. In my mind, it would be good for the Navajo Nation to realize the opportunity they have here to shine and work with the AZG&F and allow hunters to hunt. At the same time, since this is their business, I wont hold it against them if they get "capitalistic" per-say, and take the RO's or the X-1's approach and capitalize more on their investment. This is America, there are situations in which it seems as if it is the classic big man vs the small man, and when it comes to private property access this is a pretty good case study. It doesn't make sense that they would shut it down due to the fact that the elk herd would simply compound in numbers and the ultimate damage on that particular ranch without wildlife management would be very detrimental to the ecosystem. I am also doubtful there is that much demand in which they will be able to charge 8-10 grand for that many hunters to effectively manage the herd. With that said there might be more at play here, this could be the case that does in fact lead to possible land owner tags, a forcing of the hand...?....these are just thoughts. Arizona has a giant grip of public land that will be accessible no matter what and the public draw system will always first and foremost be for the public lands. It is ultimately a privilege to hunt on someone else's private land and we should always be thankful to those who afford us this opportunity based on a hand shake. I think the ranch cleanup and the other activities done on the diamond a is a great gesture. In the meantime, fight the good fight but move forward with caution due to the fact that private land and access laws effect all of us and in this particular situation it is easy for us to end up arguing with our own individual convictions.

[DesertBull]

It is their right, without question, to shut down deeded land that they own. Not so sure about shutting down land they lease or just own grazing rights. The public should have access to land that is leased, even if it means you have to walk a long ways to get there. The rule about corner hoping the fence needs to be re-visited.

[PackerMenges]

The checkerboarded land pattern plays heck on public access to public lands. Unlike the RO which is a Spanish Land Grant and is basically entirely deeded, the boquillas through the southern portion is made up of townships that are evenly dispersed between deeded and state land. In the middle portion it is predominantly deeded townships, and in the northern portion you have some of both. Corner hopping is unviable in my mind simply due to the vastness of the ranch. You would kill yourself walking it (at least I would) and also eat up so much time that it becomes a pipe-dream to even consider. (at least for me)

 

A possibility is to propose that they continue to allow access to the southern portion of the ranch, they shut down the central part and only allow access to the northern portion by way of the cataract and espee (if that is even possible). This would provide them with an area to charge however much they wanted for hunts while still allowing the public to help manage the herd size.

 

It is a great study and I am interested to see how this all plays out. I also agree with some of the comments above in the sense that as this gets rolling look for the snowball effect to occur on the other checkerboarded ranches throughout northern arizona in which the tribes have bought.

 

I do know one thing, I would rather the tribes buy these ranches than the dang land developers. It makes me sick to see these majestic ranches be torn apart and divided into 40 acre ranchettes. If anyone is interested in a conversation about starting a fund to propose a buy back program of these 40 acre subdivisions let me know. Yes were talking mega money, but anything is possible. I believe in working landscapes, we live in a day of sound science and proven management techniques in which wildlife and cattle can work together and if done right can enhance an ecosystem...which ultimately benefits us all and is simply better for the land.

[rthrbhntng]

Packer,

A better tool for stopping the 40 acre ranchettes is to find landowners that want to and the funds to purchase a conservation easement. Cheaper than buying outright and still retains access, benefits the ranch owner and thier family, benefits the public if done right, benefits wildllife. If it is a matter of economics for the rancher or landowner rather than greed this can work well. There are many tax benefits to conservation easements.

There are groups in Arizona looking for opportunities to fund conservation easements for wildlife and access through conservation easements.

Steve, Arizona Elk Society

[PackerMenges]

Sorry for getting off topic here everyone,

 

Hey Steve! Yes I am familiar with various types and structures of conservation easements and I think they can ultimately be a great thing to preserve the land if the verbiage is structured right. I think the right land owners with a true appreciation for the land and the vision to foresee the generational benefits of the easement are great to take this proactive approach to conservation. People have to be careful though and make sure the limitations in the easement are balanced and the land owner and the agency should share a similar idea of the vision they each have for working landscape in question. The bundle of rights is tricky and detailed attention needs to be paid to what is limited and what is not.

 

I am in reactive mode to these 40 acre ranchettes though. Quality hunting, ranching, and recreating on these tracts of land has been all but eliminated. I think there could be a potential market out there for this type of buy back program if the people at the helm present a logical approach and fair priced offer. Once the land is acquired a conservation easement could be considered. It would take years to implement and who knows how much money... Probably my own pipe-dream here but I am pretty passionate about this particular subject.

[THE RIFLEMAN]

That rancher dosn't like the elk and elk hunters..... Unless he is making money off the elk by way of an outfitter .... Thats why he shut off motorized access to all but ranch employees and the outfitter in the nothern part .... It wil cost more than $60 in short time it will be $10000 + to hunt there!!!! That outfitter the rancher is in cahoots with is probably droolin! The indians got that land by mistake when one of their leaders purchased it with embezled $$ .... The state should just take it back and pay them what it cost them! ... Before you know it there will be a casino up there!

The upside of the access fees is that it may cut down on the number of non hunters out helping their buddy who has a tag or just out roaming around! That is one of my pet peves about elk hunting ....Nothing more annoying than having some dork out bugling to get video's for his pal who has a tag & spooking off the bull you are trying to arrow!

I also heard that the closure was also in response to the daylong/nightime coyote hunt in 10 ...The rancher dosn't want a bunch of bozo's out shooting up the hills at night!

[CouesFanatic]

The northern part was not closed off . One road that goes to the north part was.

[105Coues]

I agree that the AZF&G should stop issuing tags for that area , redefine the borders for 10 and outlaw any hunting on the Boquillas! They should not let our state turn into a money game state. If they cater to the extortionists, there will only become more of them.