FWP being systematically dismantled

Having been on the phone for a couple days, don't even get me started on the Type 2 BMAs. Technically, it's considered public access. :rolleyes:
I never understood why BMAs include BLM land, instead of just the private land... So if you can't get access to the type 2 BMA, you are excluded from accessing that piece of BLM. Basically makes more public land private.
 
I never understood why BMAs include BLM land, instead of just the private land... So if you can't get access to the type 2 BMA, you are excluded from accessing that piece of BLM. Basically makes more public land private.
I think its just the MT land that bends you over like that. BLM is open if accessible regardless.
 
I especially like the Type 2 BMAs you can't ever get on, that have State land within the boundaries, that are accessible by a public road, yet you need BMA permission to hunt them. Total crock.
Thats completely beyond my understanding - i noticed some areas like that. Is there any means to report type 2 bma corruption?

Who knew that you had to farm sportsman/taxpayers to make it as a poor put upon multi-millionare landowner.
 
FWP does not reimburse landowners for game damage with $$. The closest it comes is materials (stack yards, fence). Per statute that landowner has to allow free public access and the bio/warden that work on a particular complaint need to document that.

Also, a landowner may qualify one year and not the next, things change year to year.
Can you direct me to the statute? I cant find it. Weird that materials are exempt.
 
In the spirit of this BS, tonight I'll be camping on BLM that touches a road, smack dab in the middle of an unreachable type 2 BMA that says "No Camping" in the rules. I'll be the guy burning pallets and crushed cans next to my tent.
Yes! My biggest mule deer came off a piece of blm that was part of a type 2 but had road access. The landowner got all butt hurt and called the game warden. Game warden showed up and told me about landowner relations…blah blah blah. I went home with a nice buck!
 
Yes! My biggest mule deer came off a piece of blm that was part of a type 2 but had road access. The landowner got all butt hurt and called the game warden. Game warden showed up and told me about landowner relations…blah blah blah. I went home with a nice buck!
Good thing it was BLM. Had it been state, he'd have rightly kicked you off his state land even though you had a state land use slip you paid for with your license.
 
Yes! My biggest mule deer came off a piece of blm that was part of a type 2 but had road access. The landowner got all butt hurt and called the game warden. Game warden showed up and told me about landowner relations…blah blah blah. I went home with a nice buck!
I would report this to your local blm office. BLM Leo should have a talk with that warden. Block management or any state program has no impact on federal land access. That warden should know that.

Edit: for clarity, as long as you have legal public access to said fed land without crossing deeded or state
 
I would report this to your local blm office. BLM Leo should have a talk with that warden. Block management or any state program has no impact on federal land access. That warden should know that.

Edit: for clarity, as long as you have legal public access to said fed land without crossing deeded or state
The warden never tried to write me a ticket or anything similar. He was just saying that it’s good for landowner/hunter relations if we get permission from them. I explained that it was federal land and no permission was necessary and he agreed but felt it would be a good gesture since it was technically in block management. This was in 2015 and that warden has moved on since.
 
The warden never tried to write me a ticket or anything similar. He was just saying that it’s good for landowner/hunter relations if we get permission from them. I explained that it was federal land and no permission was necessary and he agreed but felt it would be a good gesture since it was technically in block management. This was in 2015 and that warden has moved on since.
The warden is probably right but I did this once and the landowner requested I not access the federal land. Out of respect I didn’t but that was also the last time I did that with the exception of my immediate neighbors around our family ranch
 
The warden never tried to write me a ticket or anything similar. He was just saying that it’s good for landowner/hunter relations if we get permission from them. I explained that it was federal land and no permission was necessary and he agreed but felt it would be a good gesture since it was technically in block management. This was in 2015 and that warden has moved on since.

if good relations is asking for landowner permission to access federal public land with legal public access then i don't want good relations.

that's a lopsided "good" if you ask me.
 
The Bair Ranch BMA borders some state parcels that would only be accessible via corner otherwise. Their BMA rules say specifically that a hunter isn't allowed to use the BMA to access the state sections. Effectively closing off all access. Mildly infuriating to be sure. Didn't even bother with trying to use their BMA as I didn't want them to get any money from the FWP from my signing in.

Even more infuriating was when their "ranch manager" tried to tell us we couldn't hunt another state section that was accessible from the road because they held a grazing lease and an outfitter held a hunting lease for the section. I politely told him he was full of it and that neither precluded me from using the section as I saw fit. I hollered at DNRC when I got back from that trip and was told they'd remind Bair of land use rules.

In fact, I encourage everyone to go hunt the chit out of section 18 in Wheatland County.
 
You might want to start demanding accountability then. The people inside are definitely calling Temple and GG out for their bullshit.

How do you feel about temple getting rid of many research bio’s and reassigning them to positions in the parks department? How about him trying to take money out of habitat funds and allocating them to parks?

What would it take for you to actually take off those red glasses and see what’s going on?
there have been no research bios assigned to the parks and outdoor recreation division. the research unit is under the chief of conservation policy.
 
The Bair Ranch BMA borders some state parcels that would only be accessible via corner otherwise. Their BMA rules say specifically that a hunter isn't allowed to use the BMA to access the state sections. Effectively closing off all access. Mildly infuriating to be sure. Didn't even bother with trying to use their BMA as I didn't want them to get any money from the FWP from my signing in.

Even more infuriating was when their "ranch manager" tried to tell us we couldn't hunt another state section that was accessible from the road because they held a grazing lease and an outfitter held a hunting lease for the section. I politely told him he was full of it and that neither precluded me from using the section as I saw fit. I hollered at DNRC when I got back from that trip and was told they'd remind Bair of land use rules.

In fact, I encourage everyone to go hunt the chit out of section 18 in Wheatland County.

We did hunt that BMA in 2020. Walked in and waited for some whitetail bucks to come off the state sections that were "inaccessible", then ranch employees drove in and started hunting the inaccessible state land and spooked the deer off.
 
We did hunt that BMA in 2020. Walked in and waited for some whitetail bucks to come off the state sections that were "inaccessible", then ranch employees drove in and started hunting the inaccessible state land and spooked the deer off.
No kidding? Even slimier than I thought. Pretty sure that the family that messed with us drove three vehicles across other state parcels to “check their cattle” only did so when they saw us walk off in that direction. Even tried to feed me a line about my not being allowed to open a gate on state land.

Anyway, back to OP’s topic. Sure, things at the top of FWP aren’t as bad as they absolutely could be right now, but the outlook also doesn’t look great. Randy’s line about the “spoils of victory” sure hit the nail on the head.
 

This part speaks specifically to the public hunting requirements.
"(2) The department may provide game damage assistance when public hunting on a landowner's property has been denied because of unique or special circumstances that have rendered public hunting inappropriate."

Seems like this leaves a lot of intreptretation by the dept - generally i feel like thats a good thing.... but I am curious what "unique/special" situations are.
 
Last edited:
"(2) The department may provide game damage assistance when public hunting on a landowner's property has been denied because of unique or special circumstances that have rendered public hunting inappropriate."

Seems like this leaves a lot of intreptretation by the dept - generally i feel like thats a goof thing.... but I am curious what "unique/special" situations are.
One unique/special circumstance that comes to mind is granting a local airport a kill permit for deer, or say there’s a landowner otherwise within city limits or there’s too much housing nearby to safely allow public hunting. That landowner may be given materials or a kill permit depending on the species/circumstance.
 
Gastro Gnome - Eat Better Wherever

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,668
Messages
2,028,990
Members
36,275
Latest member
johnw3474
Back
Top