DesertBull Report post Posted January 25, 2016 I should buy a few acres on each side I-10 and gate that sucka off for my own private use. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
5guyshunting Report post Posted January 25, 2016 I think carolina is owning a bit of az right now! 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
azbugler Report post Posted January 25, 2016 I think carolina is owning a bit of az right now! Hard to disagree but the night is young.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
208muley Report post Posted January 25, 2016 I bet outfitters will pre buy most of the allotment on the hd hunts. If you wanna hunt the Bo you are gonna have to book with an outfitter. Un intended consequences I'm sure but you can bet deep pocket outfitters will be all over this... I know I would be if I was an outfitter.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.270 Report post Posted January 25, 2016 I think 208 has it figgerd. That's the first thing I thought when I read it but didn't say it outright because I always get acused o' bein' anti outfitter. When I truly ain't. Lark Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
208muley Report post Posted January 25, 2016 Do the math, 35 slots for early archery times $500 = $17500. That ain't that much money... One outfitter can buy the whole allotment..... Charge 10-12k or more for AZ " private land" hunt and make $350,000 or more. Pretty good ROI if you are an outfitter. And that's just one hunt. Do the math for the rest. Sad deal... 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sneaker Report post Posted January 25, 2016 I have heard nothing that would indicate that the BO would allow a secondary market to be created. Sounds like it is a one for one deal. If they wanted to do that, they could charge that high amounts themselves. Most of the residents that draw the tag would not be willing to pay $10k. Most don't even pay for a guide. There is only a market where there are willing buyers. I don't like $500, but I'm sure they will sell all their access passes for that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
111 Report post Posted January 25, 2016 AZGFD needs to separate the Boquillas into it's own unit with zero to very few tags. Elk would overgraze making it tough to run a ranch. Would it be possible for AZGFD to allow no hunting on private property that is either locked, or charges a fee to hunt? That would pretty much end this deal... 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ThomC Report post Posted January 25, 2016 The county needs to reevaluate the taxes on that land. It is now more valuable. It is not grazing land anymore. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yotebuster Report post Posted January 25, 2016 AZGFD needs to separate the Boquillas into it's own unit with zero to very few tags. Elk would overgraze making it tough to run a ranch. Would it be possible for AZGFD to allow no hunting on private property that is either locked, or charges a fee to hunt? That would pretty much end this deal... When I read the political posts on here it's pretty obvious this forum is loaded with republicans. When I read a post about private land (rights) on here a bunch of democrats pop out of the woodwork. I'd even go so far as to use the "S" word. You can't get much more left then thinking that you have any right whatsoever over someone else's property. Holy crap!!! That is the most left wing socialist thing I've ever heard in my life!!! "Hey everybody! Let's hold these American landowners at ransom until they do what the government wants of them!" Good lord. I was concerned that the liberal hippies were dumb enough to vote for Bernie Sanders, now we've got CWT members getting more extreme then he is!! This is sickening. 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
supasnyper Report post Posted January 25, 2016 agree with yoteboster Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jim Report post Posted January 25, 2016 270 had the best idea yet make them pick a half. I don't have a problem with a land owner doing what they want with all private land. That is not the case with this ranch. They are grazing on public land with no cost to them and not allowing access to the land. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
trphyhntr Report post Posted January 25, 2016 AZGFD needs to separate the Boquillas into it's own unit with zero to very few tags. Elk would overgraze making it tough to run a ranch. Would it be possible for AZGFD to allow no hunting on private property that is either locked, or charges a fee to hunt? That would pretty much end this deal... there ya go, take that ranchers lively hood because he is a landowner in arizona elk country. wait wtf, and you want azgf to ban hunting on private ranches because they locked their stuff to the public. dude you got it all messed up, too many bernie sanders ads popping up on your facebook or something Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Str8Shot Report post Posted January 25, 2016 AZGFD needs to separate the Boquillas into it's own unit with zero to very few tags. Elk would overgraze making it tough to run a ranch. Would it be possible for AZGFD to allow no hunting on private property that is either locked, or charges a fee to hunt? That would pretty much end this deal... When I read the political posts on here it's pretty obvious this forum is loaded with republicans. When I read a post about private land (rights) on here a bunch of democrats pop out of the woodwork. I'd even go so far as to use the "S" word. You can't get much more left then thinking that you have any right whatsoever over someone else's property. Holy crap!!! That is the most left wing socialist thing I've ever heard in my life!!! "Hey everybody! Let's hold these American landowners at ransom until they do what the government wants of them!" Good lord. I was concerned that the liberal hippies were dumb enough to vote for Bernie Sanders, now we've got CWT members getting more extreme then he is!! This is sickening. Yotebuster ... If a Government is trying to do the right thing ( representing the people ) to secure and allow access to PUBLIC LANDS( not Private) via Roads that many have had municipal tax $$$$$ upkeep and or make , How is that Socialist ? A True Blooded American Ranch owner in this kind of situation would Allow access to All His or Her Fellow Americans that Have the right to Use PUBLIC LANDS while only charging to gain access to his or her plots of PRIVATE LAND ... In the confines of a Private ranch ( that makes up over half of the Unit when you add the public land they are using and locking most others out of, and is Leased Not Owned by the parties involved in this money grab) There is over 200,000 acres of land locked Public land. That land lock Land is 1/3 - 1/2 of the 38 % of public land in the Unit... I feel it is Un-American to Hold our Public Lands Hostage and Profit off of Land and Wildlife that Every Tax Paying American Hunter should have equal access to... They can do what they want on their Private Land but the charge is not just for their private land it is also for access to Land owned By all that should be Free for all to Use or No-one to USE ... All the Tax Payers of the state Own the Wildlife and They are wanting to run this like a Private Hunting Ranch in Texas and Have the Tax Payers and Sportsmen Pick up all The bills... Pretty Fudging Un-American in My Eyes! p.s. I agree with Lark's idea ... 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.270 Report post Posted January 25, 2016 First, the Bo isn't grazing public land for free. They have to pay fees for the public land. Nobody has said anything about taking away livelihoods or any other bs like that. dakota boy needs to stay in dakota. This checkerboard crap has Az messed up all over the state. Not just on the bo. The conflict is having to pay for access to public land. Land that tax payers fund part of the road maintenance on also. And probably the fencing. This is a problem all over northern Az. From state line to state line. The bo has been a wreck since the tribe bought it. The tribal chairman went to prison over the purchase. Then the tribe tried to make it part of the rez. I don't even know who owns it now. Doesnt really matter. It ain't right for taxpayers to be kept from using public land. Like I said earlier. Deed half of the public land to bo, then bo deeds half of their private in the checkerboard lto the gov't. Then they have a solid chunk of private and the public has a solid chunk of public land. They still get to lease the same amount of land they're leasing now. Run just as many cattle. They just can't lock up the public land. Might have to make some concessions for wells and homes and other structures. Whatever the fix. It ain't right for taxpayers to have to pay a private company for access to public land. checkerboard started in the later 1800's. To help a&p fund the railroad they were deeded every other section (square mile-640 acres) for 40 miles on either side of the rail road. This is what is left. It's been about 135 years. It's time for the public to get access to their land. Lark 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
