American Prairie Reserve Purchases 14,000 Acre Ranch

[tzone]

You got to watch out for those Minnesota guys. They are definitely of questionable character.

Most of em.

 

[fmnjr]

America’s answer to the Serengeti is spreading in Montana

In the contest between wildlife and ranchers, the bears have the upper paw

www.economist.com

 

[corndog1]

Not true. According to the FWP 2019 Hunting Access Guide, Region 6 Block Management Areas 26 and 42, both APR lands, allow elk hunting.

Wrong

 

[corndog1]

Wrong

My bad I was wronging the guy that said you can't hunt elk there.

 

[Straight Arrow]

My bad I was wronging the guy that said you can't hunt elk there.

Don't be whipping the double negatives on me ... but thanks for the clarification.

 

[BuzzH]

I'll say one thing about apr...Gila was/is full of crap. Best thing to happen to the breaks is apr buying up those ranches, no doubt in my mind.

 

[Nemont]

They have allowed some elk hunting on the Blue Ridge this season. At least maybe nearly every elk in the country will no longer just move onto the Blue Ridge and stay there all hunting season. I have no love for the APR but their money is as green as anyone else's. I think Carlson's knew the APR could write a check without having to worry about financing and offered it to them then they got paid. Kind of the American way with private property and such.

Nemont

 

[mtmiller]

 

[TheTone]

I wish I had an “evil” group like them buying up the prairie around me and opening it to hunting. Instead I get to watch decent habitat chunked up into home sites, hooray!

 

[OntarioHunter]

I don't have a problem with APR. Better them acquiring Montana land than Cabelas slicing those ranches up into 150 acre useless private hunting preserves. Or eastern dudes from Maryland or Delaware purchasing and locking up the properties then pretending to be local "ranch families" to get elected to state and federal office. But hey, look at the party they're running for. They could strip naked, cover themselves with cow shit, dance down the streets of Helena at high noon, and they'd still get elected.

 

[Gila]

Isn't it too early to tell? Uncharted territory. Especially in the Breaks. No where else on Earth like that place. We'll see. mtmuley

That’s been my claim as well. There is an inherent danger of a private “non-profit” organization that manages wildlife. Wildlife is a public resource and should be managed by the public. That means the Montana fish and game and the Fish and Wildlife Service. Public land should be managed by all of the stakeholders: Ranchers, anglers, hunters, hikers...etc. Like I said before, they do not necessarily promote hunting opportunity. But then one needs to understand exactly what hunting opportunity really is. Just because they let someone harvest an elk or two doesn’t mean they promote hunting opportunity.

There is talk that they want to have “high-end” safaris like they do in Africa. Does that mean that their “high-end” donors are the only ones that get to hunt? Approx. 80% of their donors are not from Montana. What and who is a donor? A share-holder? A stock-holder? Or what? Linking public lands, great. And exactly how do they plan to do that? Can you drive through APR’s Reserve at your leisure to get to BLM lands? Who is in control of APR’s wildlife management and how do they intend to pay for that management?

Bison free of bovine DNA...great concept. Bring down the fences so the Pronghorn can migrate...great concept. Reintroduce wolves....great concept. Reintroduce cougar...great concept. Manage based on climate change on APR lands....great concept. How does APR plan to conduct hunting as a wildlife management tool? Does the public have any say in their wildlife management? Who are the donors, and how does APR get donors? Are there promises to keep? Are any donors political organizations? Are donors special interest organizations? Basically, which organizations support them and where does the money come from? So many questions that no one has asked, yet we the people need those answers. Wildlife should not be bought or sold because “We the people“ own that wildlife.

 

[Straight Arrow]

It seems odd that the APR, as a huge open space, wildlife conservation effort, presently with great opportunities for hunting, ecology education, and many other outdoor recreational activities, is the focus of so many skeptics pontificating about wildlife management, public access, and grazing issues ... when most of the large privately owned pieces of wildlife habitat don't even consider such public access and worthy efforts on behalf of wildlife. It seems even hypocritical and overly pessimistic regarding a private property nonprofit conservation and grassland protection program (with all the private property rights which we hold dear and strive to protect).

The "save-the-cowboy" skepticism doesn't even pass the common sense smell test. The above questions are flavored with a negativism that would more appropriately and perhaps productively be aimed at lands and operations owned by the Wilks bros.

The APR is not going away and likely will grow and thrive in the future. So would it not be more healthy in every way to promote and support, rather than suspiciously question and throw aspersions at this worthy endeavor to conserve wildlife and grasslands?!

 

[mtmuley]

It seems odd that the APR, as a huge open space, wildlife conservation effort, presently with great opportunities for hunting, ecology education, and many other outdoor recreational activities, is the focus of so many skeptics pontificating about wildlife management, public access, and grazing issues ... when most of the large privately owned pieces of wildlife habitat don't even consider such public access and worthy efforts on behalf of wildlife. It seems even hypocritical and overly pessimistic regarding a private property nonprofit conservation and grassland protection program (with all the private property rights which we hold dear and strive to protect).

The "save-the-cowboy" skepticism doesn't even pass the common sense smell test. The above questions are flavored with a negativism that would more appropriately and perhaps productively be aimed at lands and operations owned by the Wilks bros.

The APR is not going away and likely will grow and thrive in the future. So would it not be more healthy in every way to promote and support, rather than suspiciously question and throw aspersions at this worthy endeavor to conserve wildlife and grasslands?!

Asking questions isn't suspicious. Just because I don't jump in feet first to what the APR is doing doesn't mean I condemn it. mtmuley

 

[TheJason]

This thread is hilarious.

 

[mtmuley]

This thread is hilarious.

It ain't the only one. mtmuley

 

[BuzzH]

That’s been my claim as well. There is an inherent danger of a private “non-profit” organization that manages wildlife. Wildlife is a public resource and should be managed by the public. That means the Montana fish and game and the Fish and Wildlife Service. Public land should be managed by all of the stakeholders: Ranchers, anglers, hunters, hikers...etc. Like I said before, they do not necessarily promote hunting opportunity. But then one needs to understand exactly what hunting opportunity really is. Just because they let someone harvest an elk or two doesn’t mean they promote hunting opportunity.

There is talk that they want to have “high-end” safaris like they do in Africa. Does that mean that their “high-end” donors are the only ones that get to hunt? Approx. 80% of their donors are not from Montana. What and who is a donor? A share-holder? A stock-holder? Or what? Linking public lands, great. And exactly how do they plan to do that? Can you drive through APR’s Reserve at your leisure to get to BLM lands? Who is in control of APR’s wildlife management and how do they intend to pay for that management?

Bison free of bovine DNA...great concept. Bring down the fences so the Pronghorn can migrate...great concept. Reintroduce wolves....great concept. Reintroduce cougar...great concept. Manage based on climate change on APR lands....great concept. How does APR plan to conduct hunting as a wildlife management tool? Does the public have any say in their wildlife management? Who are the donors, and how does APR get donors? Are there promises to keep? Are any donors political organizations? Are donors special interest organizations? Basically, which organizations support them and where does the money come from? So many questions that no one has asked, yet we the people need those answers. Wildlife should not be bought or sold because “We the people“ own that wildlife.

I'll just say what everyone is thinking.

You're just flat talking out of your ass.

Your questions have been answered in the many American Prairie threads.

You're not looking very hard if you can't find the answers to the questions you're asking.

Fact is, you're looking for a conspiracy theory reason to downplay the good AP does for wildlife, habitat, public access, hunting, etc. etc.

Best thing to happen to the breaks in my lifetime is American Prairie...and there is no arguing that, period.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Asking questions isn't suspicious. Just because I don't jump in feet first to what the APR is doing doesn't mean I condemn it. mtmuley

Good on you to keep open mind. 'Did not see questions from mtmuley.

"above questions" referred to Gila's questions in post "above" mine. This thread does express some "suspicious questions" (questions suspicious of the intentions of a private property owner APR) reflecting skepticism.

 

[BuzzH]

Asking questions isn't suspicious. Just because I don't jump in feet first to what the APR is doing doesn't mean I condemn it. mtmuley

Asking questions that have been answered, truly are dumb questions.

In particular when one could avoid looking like a clown by simple research.

 

[mtmuley]

In particular when one could avoid looking like a clown by simple research.

Classy. mtmuley

 

[OntarioHunter]

Okay guys, ceasefire.

Actually, of all the "Save the Cowboy" signs I have seen in Montana the last couple of hunting seasons, exactly zero of those ranches allowed public hunting. All were posted liberally. As a hunter of public animals I really don't see any reason to object to APR. Nothing to lose and everything to gain.