Happening in Oregon but Issue is Alive and Well Here in S. AZ

[Jawa512]

This last fall I hunted 30A. In my preparation for this hunt, I learned like many before me large parts of promising sets of mountains had some major access issues. I am the curious type so I began to research the heart of the issue. It appeared that serious questions existed especially in reference to individual rights in relation to federal law and federal management of public land. Yep I am speaking of the Klumps.

 

The Klumps contended their family had been using the land in question long before it came under the jurisdiction of the federal government. Once the feds began to impose environmental constraints on the Klump's grazing rights, well the battle began. Old man Klump gave the feds a one finger salute, ended up being held in contempt, and served prison time over the issue of cattle grazing on federal land. The fire gradually cooled and this issue ended but the loser was the user of federal public land. The Klumps locked access gates.

 

The next time this issue came up the fire burned a lot hotter. In Nye County Nevada a cattle rancher named Cliven Bundy went to battle with federal land managers over grazing fees on public land. In the end, Bundy was ordered to remove his cattle but he disobeyed the order. The federal government acted next to forcibly remove his cattle. A battle cry went out. Armed support arrived in Nevada. In the end, Bundy's supporters took strategic armed locations and sent the feds away with their "tail between their legs." I haven't found how this case was resolved except for that the feds acquiesced.

 

Here it goes again in Oregon.

 

A ton of questions come up here but in reference to what has been going on in AZ.

 

Do you think that rancher has a right to lock a gate that provides access to a forest service road that crosses his private property but then allow his "good old boys" or other's of his choice access? At first, I responded with a resounding NO until the question was put in the context of do I have the right to close a pedestrian gate across my private property that allows access to a public park behind me and choose who I allow to cross my land if I want to? You bet your bottom dollar I do! That said, we pay our taxes to manage all that land up there. There are too many stories of someone hiking around the closed off land to get to that good spot only to be passed on the forest service road on the other side by "good old boy Billy Bob" in his Dodge Cummins 2500 with the 100 class deer in the bed of the truck he drove right to.

 

Then there is a whole different issue of "what in the heck are the Feds doing on more issue than one in this whole mess?"

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/oregon-sheriff-says-refuge-occupiers-trying-to-overthrow-government/ar-AAgjul1?li=BBnbfcL

[azbirdhunter88]

Yes I think they do have that right. People trash areas now days and the rancher is left to clean it up. I personally know the klumps so know why they do this. If people respected property a little better it wouldn't be an issue.

[azslim]

if the number of small ranchers that have been put out of business by BLM, FS, etc. was known it would surprise you. They take them down piecemeal, bankrupt them with bs lawsuits and regulations. Some of these are families that have been taking care of the land for over 100 years. There are many in Sr Mgmt positions in the Govt that want all hunting, fishing, logging and ranching shut down on public ground.

[mattys281]

I think its horse crap that any entity can deny the public access to public land. There should be easment access between lots or something. I know of a couple roads that got closed not because of disrespect, but because the land owner was written a check to put the lock up.

[azbirdhunter88]

There are so many places to hunt in this state that you don't need to go through ranches and such. Hunt different areas.

[mattys281]

I agree that one of the best things about az is the abundance of public land. Still doesnt change the fact that its a horse crap practice to block public access to public land. I lost a good hunting spot this way. Technically I could still walk in, but its about an 8 hour hump vs. The former 2 hour drive. So I go somewhere else and the chit bag guide gets his spot.

[Str8Shot]

There are so many places to hunt in this state that you don't need to go through ranches and such. Hunt different areas.

Shut Up ! That is a Douche Bag comment ... Any Public :Land ( Owned by ALL including the Game ) that is land locked by any party should be be closed to Hunting For ALL ... I have over 6 generations of family in this state and there have been hundreds of thousands of acres of once accessible Public land in good units Locked up .... most of it over the last 25 years and much of that by ranches that were sold to out state individuals and/or companies. The Bulk of the roads through these units were cut dozed and maintained by federal and state tax dollar for the better part of the previous century.... If access to a single individual to public land Via these roadways it should be available to all.. period !

[AverageJoe]

Since when do fences or gates keep anyone out? I thought everyone in this state just drove ariund gates? They do during shed season at least. Why stop for hunting season?

[.270]

First off, the 3 things you mentioned have nothing to do with each other. Nothing. The Klumps lost the majority of their grazing. Blm brought in Cowboys and rounded up their cattle and sold them on a lot of their lease. Wally got thrown in the klink for refusing to remove cattle from one of those places. I've hunted all over places where they used to graze with no problems. Wally is a very strange person and as a group they have some wierd ideas and have committed some atrocious crimes.

The Cliven Bundy situation began because his grazing lease was cancelled and he refused to remove his livestock from land that'd been in his families control for over 100 years. Nothing to do with locking gates. He never stopped anyone from using public land.

This deal in Oregon has to do with arson. Sounds like the gov't has overstepped again in some areas, but if these guys wouldn't have started the fires, they wouldn't be in trouble.

As far as locking gates, that's the way it is. That's one of the benefits/problems of owning land. Lark

[oz31p]

First off, the 3 things you mentioned have nothing to do with each other. Nothing. The Klumps lost the majority of their grazing. Blm brought in Cowboys and rounded up their cattle and sold them on a lot of their lease. Wally got thrown in the klink for refusing to remove cattle from one of those places. I've hunted all over places where they used to graze with no problems. Wally is a very strange person and as a group they have some wierd ideas and have committed some atrocious crimes.

The Cliven Bundy situation began because his grazing lease was cancelled and he refused to remove his livestock from land that'd been in his families control for over 100 years. Nothing to do with locking gates. He never stopped anyone from using public land.

This deal in Oregon has to do with arson. Sounds like the gov't has overstepped again in some areas, but if these gupys wouldn't have started the fires, they wouldn't be in trouble.

As far as locking gates, that's the way it is. That's one of the benefits/problems of owning land. Lark

Their are reports that the fires were started on public land to conceal poaching evidence.

 

Be careful who's wagon you hich yourself to.

[.270]

I guess i don't understand what wagon you're talking about. I don't think I've taken a side in the Oregon deal. Sounds to me like these got caught breaking the law. There are some other circumstances involved, but as far the fire, it sounds like that's cut and dried.

Str8, where are these hundreds of thousands of acres of public land that are locked up?

And again, private land is just that, private. Compared to other states, Az is much more open. We are real lucky here. Ever hunt Colorado or new mex? Lark

[AverageJoe]

The Oregon deal has nothing to do with the original crime. The FACT is the government is sending them to prison AGAIN for a crime they already served a sentence for. Doesnt anyone understand how against the constitution that is??? You cannot be tried and sentenced twice for the same crime. That is the reason for the standoff. Just too bad the Hammonds are gonna bend over and take it rather than stand up for what is right.

[.270]

Exactly. They were convicted, served the sentence, were out for awhile, then some blm folks got a judge to say they didn't serve enough. So now they're headed to prison again. The entire story is real long. It's another deal of gov't agencies pushing around landowners. I don't understand the arson part or why they would did it. Way to much to discuss here. But it has NOTHING to do with locked gates. In this case, the public land surrounds them and the gov't has them locked in. Read guys, don't just sling. Lark

[azbirdhunter88]

I have property/land and people are always leaving my gates open or cutting them to get through. So I see and understand for them wanting to lock them up. I'm all for it.

[trphyhntr]

i think its up to block access to public land. but if i had my own ranch i would lock it up and hunt it year round