Boquillas new rules / permit structure out

[pirogue]

The grazing fee's fluctuate, depending on cattle price for a year. The cost of infrastructure development and maintenance of ranch improvements for roads, water and fence's etc is much higher per animal unit than the grazing fee's. The cost to raise a calf to a point he is marketable on todays market with today's expenses can be anywhere from $500.00 to $800.00 per head, depending on the ranch, that would be about $60.00 per cow and calf per month to maintain that animal unit not complaining that is just real world cost on todays market, and everyone has to deal with it. The point is elk utilize just about as much feed and water as a cow does, so they have to be figured into the expense cost for the ranch. That is not an issue if there is not a large herd of elk on the ranch, say 4 or 5 hundred, but when you get into the thousands, that is a cost that any business would could not tolerate. Simple example if you were in the restaurant business and you owned the building(private property) or say you leased the building and 30 to 40 percent of the the people came in and had a meal and beverage than just left with out paying for anything, i suspect you probably would not like the outcome.

The trespass fee is just to help off set some of these expenses.

 

Private land on the ranch is about 500,000 acres, 99.9 percent of the water for wildlife and cattle on private and state trust lands is owned by the ranch. The road system on the ranch is owned and maintained by the ranch.

So are you saying a hunter who pays the trespass fee will never encounter an inaccessible gate that is needed to access trust land, and the trophy fee is only required if the harvest is made on private land?

[cramerhunts]

The bottom line is one that Lark continues to bring up and it doesn't seem to be getting through to some is that we are being locked out of land we have every right to be on once we buy our hunting license every year. The state trust land is exactly that and it's being controlled by the ranch instead of by the state. Oh wait for a large fee I can access it assuming I'm one of the first in line to get my permit. Oh wait it gets even better though because that money will pay for my impact to the land or is it so I can have a quality hunt? Speaking of which I guess that is for the ranch to decide how many hunters in the field dictate the quality of a hunt? Also for them to decide how I hunt and what methods I use during that hunt.

 

Wow I'm confused, I've read everything from too many elk on the land to too many hunters in the field with everything in between all being dictated from people that have no right to do so for all of the state trust land that lies within the area that is locked off.

 

It doesn't matter what excuse is used because they are still just excuses. Private land is private land but unfortunately that's not what this is.

[.270]

Cramer, THANK YOU!!!!! You ain't the only one that gets it, but you dam sure put words to it very well. Max reminds me of a story friend of mine that got sent to prison told me. He said the guys holding him down said "shut up, it don't hurt that bad". I think that's what some guys would like to say while they're telling us how good they are being to us. Lark

[brian390]

The boquillas is just money hungry, period. They seem to dictate how we should hunt and how much it should cost to hunt. I'm done with the boquillas and would never pay 500 dollars extra to hunt a high demand hunt. I just put in for other more quality so called high demand hunts in other units that are free. If the boquillas owned all the land that they charge to hunt I might feel different but they don't.

[longshooter]

I think it's great. I'm all for this change. $500 is well worth it to me for a premium hunt. A lot cheaper than out of state and rez tags.

[cramerhunts]

I think it's great. I'm all for this change. $500 is well worth it to me for a premium hunt. A lot cheaper than out of state and rez tags.

Ok let's ignore the state trust land issue for a second and look at your reasoning for liking this. So for a premium hunt say early archery you wait 11-15 years to draw the tag, you get drawn but for what ever reason you don't get one of the 50 access permits since its first come. Now your stuck with the other 75 tag holders hunting outside the ranch. Still a good deal? The $500 shouldn't even come into the equation, you've already paid for your tag and license which gives you the right to hunt all of the state trust land that you now can't access.

 

I guess I'm lost on how this could be great.

[TOBY]

Pretty simple

[trphyhntr]

I think it's great. I'm all for this change. $500 is well worth it to me for a premium hunt. A lot cheaper than out of state and rez tags.

i saw it like that before i knew that bo isnt on a huge piece of private. my dude, you wont like it when other places follow suit and were locked out of everywhere we want to hunt. next after that the government starts locking gates and charging to hunt on National Forest.

 

prepare your anus

[eagle#eyes]

Has or will AZGF chang the total amount of tags for unit 10?

[C. Cordova]

Jay Scott / stillatmaxpoints

 

Is it so far fetched to assume that, given the opportunity, some outfitters would love to monopolize almost an entire unit? I understand you defending your friend, and I respect that. I am not making any accusations, just observations. If what I have implied is not true then my apologies to Lee, but from an outsiders perspective, it looks pretty fishy.

[coueswt]

I called the Kingman office and was told Friday was the first they heard or seen the new rules. They were surprised as we were. I find this hard to believe but that is what I was told. It didn't sound like tag #'s would change either this year.

[MattMan]

First and foremost, I don't think a lease holder for State Trust Land should be able to lock it up and treat it as private. Period, checker boarded or not. You don't want to allow free access to those holding a Hunting License or State Trust Access Permit, you shouldn't be able to lease it. Lease the trust sections to someone else, and make the private landowner provide provide prescriptive access easements to the new lease holder. You want to keep the new lease holder's livestock of of your private sections, fence them. Its an open range state, and it's YOUR responsibility to keep them off. Have a nice day.

 

Here are some points to ponder.

 

State Trust Land differs from other public land. It is NOT "public land" managed for the use of the public. It is land held in trust to maximize revenue for the beneficiaries of that trust. There's a list of beneficiaries. Education, UofA, Mental Hospitals, etc. There was a time when there was NO hunting allowed on trust lands, period. No one wants to go back to that. I don't know when it changed, but some old timers have told me it used to be totally off limits. Those trust lands used to say no trespassing, and didn't mention anything about hunting. I've seen a couple of old rusty ones. No mention of G&F.

 

The lease holder for Trust Lands usually has a lease for grazing. That's it. State Land is NOT private land, period. There are many areas of checker board trust locked up, and the lease holder treats it as private. In some other smaller units it's better than half of the unit. If someone with some bucks were to push the issue, I think the angle of not managing the property in accordance with the lease as written, and denying other users reasonable access for legitimate use, might work. I also doubt the State Land Department is getting their piece of the pie from the access fees. That's possibly another violation of the lease. They're technically sub-leasing the trust land for a purpose other than they leased it for. Selling something that ain't theirs so to speak.

 

The State Land Department could also amend leases as they come up to require the new lease holder to allow for reasonable and free access to trust lands for recreation and hunting purposes to individuals holding a License or State Trust Land Access Permit. They control the bidding, writing, issuance, etc. for the leases. The agency to push the issue with is the State Land Department, NOT Game and Fish. They have no control over the State Land Department. None.

[Elitegt500]

Anyone know where the 90000 acres of private land is Exclusive Pursuits has "exclusive access" of in unit 10 according to their website?

[AZJR]

I participated as a Hunter Assist on a bull elk hunt last year and was required to enter the hunter I was asisting's name and permit number on the Big Bo application. How can any of the outfitters that are going to get the 40% of the HD pass allotment know "their hunter" is going to draw? They can't. So what will happen is that the outfitters will each get some number of tags and if you want to hunt guided you'll get a tag from them and have to pay whatever outfiter/guide fee the particular outfit demands for their hunt package. That will be a very expensive proposition I suspect.

 

Those DIY hinters that will contend for the 60% of ranch access passes are going to have to have some type of "draw" to make it fair that all get an equitable crack at one of the ranch passes IMO. I have a family member with 22 BPs and friends at or near max BPs, all would pay the $500 but none would pay a guide as all know the ranch really well. It will be interesting to see how many folks appy for GMU 10 HD permits with no guarantee they will be able to secure a ranch pass?

[Sneaker]

Website says first come. Is that to the door of their office, cell phone call, or email?? Are proxies allowed? If its door, I can set up a small proxy service and have any number of people to the Seligman office door within an hour, for a fee of course:)