Horrible Land Exchange Back Again… Help fight!

[WYelker]

we already fought this and had massive public opposition to the exchange. Well they are bringing it back up for reconsideration.

Please help and provide your opposition.

 

[Addicting]

Is there any more info on this? Link?

 

[375H&H]

I live right next to this proposal, I hope it does not pass. The state land they mention is far more valuable to sportsmen and wildlife than the land they are considering trading for (more wildlife, water, flora etc).

Unless the state works to connect it to larger public land chunks, the Columbus Peak Ranch will come back again and again asking for it since they surround it.

 

[JM77]

If I remember right, Wy BHA fought this exchange. @BuzzH

 

[BuzzH]

If I remember right, Wy BHA fought this exchange. @BuzzH

We're still fighting this exchange. I talked with Pete Kasab, our BHA co-chair about it last week. He's also on the working group that's been trying to negotiate a compromise.

In the meantime if you're opposed call the 5 elected officials and let them know you're not in favor.

 

[375H&H]

Also, one of the reasons I heard for this exchange was for natural gas to be brought to Dayton/Ranchester. That has turned into an absolute mess so really no reason to support this from that angle either.

 

[perma]

Sucks to go to bat for this when WYGF doesn’t favor our needs….

Proposed land exchange raises questions of access, value, process

DAYTON — A proposed land exchange near Dayton has recreationists and hunters concerned about future access to areas along the face of the Bighorn Mountains, and has given rise to

www.thesheridanpress.com

“While the Wyoming Game and Fish Department’s letter of review for the proposed exchange says the state “parcel does not contain any crucial wildlife habitat,” approximately three dozen individuals who attended a town hall meeting organized by Rep. Cyrus Western, R-Big Horn, May 7 disagreed.”

 

[375H&H]

Sucks to go to bat for this when WYGF doesn’t favor our needs….

Proposed land exchange raises questions of access, value, process

DAYTON — A proposed land exchange near Dayton has recreationists and hunters concerned about future access to areas along the face of the Bighorn Mountains, and has given rise to

www.thesheridanpress.com

“While the Wyoming Game and Fish Department’s letter of review for the proposed exchange says the state “parcel does not contain any crucial wildlife habitat,” approximately three dozen individuals who attended a town hall meeting organized by Rep. Cyrus Western, R-Big Horn, May 7 disagreed.”

To be honest, they are correct in that land is not crucial wildlife habitat. It is just more valuable to hunters/recreation than the proposed land.

That article is ok, but certainly paints a picture like the face of the bighorns is not accessible, which is also untrue.

Just want to make sure the comments that we submit are valid and hold water so that the argument to keep the land is the strongest.

 

[WYWINCHESTER]

How about a map of the effective area people can see?

 

[BuzzH]

Biggest thing to consider is that the State loses access to a reservoir with fish. We also trade a place where it takes some work to reach that acreage versus the land that would be gained being a drive up, hop out, and shoot something if it's there.

Also the land that would be acquired will most likely be sold off by the state for a housing development and subdivision.

 

[perma]

Also the land that would be acquired will most likely be sold off by the state for a housing development and subdivision.

That was in the initial application that was submitted to the state on the govt website, I believe.

 

[Gr8bawana]

Well, it is being proposed by the people who were voted into office.

 

[WYelker]

The Game and Fish Representative that was at the BOW meeting got an ear full about the Game and Fish position on the issue, and the report the submitted. Not that they were wrong in what they said, but that the report required by the land commission is generic, simple and does not adequate address the concerns of wildlife and recreational users…. The comments made to the rep were the Game and Fish can create their own report that would still address the generic concerns of the land board, but also can dive into much greater detail about important things.

The Rep agreed that the land boards report is weak at best, and thought that the Game and Fish could do a much better job when evaluating these issues…

The biggest kicker for me is the water and the lake. Sorry but as we move forward the water, the riparian habitat etc. is far to valueable…

 

[WYelker]

We're still fighting this exchange. I talked with Pete Kasab, our BHA co-chair about it last week. He's also on the working group that's been trying to negotiate a compromise.

In the meantime if you're opposed call the 5 elected officials and let them know you're not in favor.

Do you happen to have any more detail or better information on this? Even the old information from when it was tabled?

 

[TheTone]

We're still fighting this exchange. I talked with Pete Kasab, our BHA co-chair about it last week. He's also on the working group that's been trying to negotiate a compromise.

In the meantime if you're opposed call the 5 elected officials and let them know you're not in favor.

What is there to compromise on? Sounds like the compromise is to say no and tell the ranch too bad

 

[BuzzH]

Well, it is being proposed by the people who were voted into office.

Nope, the landowner submitted the proposal...not the land board.

 

[BuzzH]

What is there to compromise on? Sounds like the compromise is to say no and tell the ranch too bad

We were compromising to keep access to the lake and State control of the acre feet of water that the state currently controls as well as a much smaller swap in general. Also asking for current appraisals, they are wayyyy out of date.

 

[USMC123456789]

Is there any more info on this? Link?

Columbus Peak DA Final.pdf

drive.google.com

It is a horrible exchange.

 

[USMC123456789]

we already fought this and had massive public opposition to the exchange. Well they are bringing it back up for reconsideration.

Please help and provide your opposition.

View attachment 269994View attachment 269994

Last week I sent a respectful email to all of these people voicing my opposition to this land exchange and have yet to receive a response from a single one of them.

 

[WYelker]

Last week I sent a respectful email to all of these people voicing my opposition to this land exchange and have yet to receive a response from a single one of them.

I sent mine and got confirmation that it was received from only one…