On the Subject of Land Exchanges
- Thread starter WT_in_MT
- Start date
sweetnectar
New member
Brett French (who wrote the article) may have missed some info. Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding is that BLM land can not be exchanged for access only....there can't be a decrease in acreage as well. So if this property was to be exchanged or traded it would have to include acreage equal to or greater then the 2700 acre "Durfee parcel."
So an exchange would go something like this: Wilks get landlocked 2700 acre Durfee parcel. Public gets 2700+ acre parcel in the Breaks equal or greater in value plus road access to 50,000 acres of BLM in the Breaks. Not Wilks get 2700 acre Durfee parcel, public gets access to 50,000 acres of BLM as the article suggests....which would be illegal.
Thus by leaving information out of the article people would be more likely to be for a petition based off speculation and rumor.
So an exchange would go something like this: Wilks get landlocked 2700 acre Durfee parcel. Public gets 2700+ acre parcel in the Breaks equal or greater in value plus road access to 50,000 acres of BLM in the Breaks. Not Wilks get 2700 acre Durfee parcel, public gets access to 50,000 acres of BLM as the article suggests....which would be illegal.
Thus by leaving information out of the article people would be more likely to be for a petition based off speculation and rumor.
This makes more sense - hopefully it is correct. Original article started my blood to boil.
Check out the map.
I have done a lot of research on this topic and there are more and more things coming to light. These new bits of information tell me this idea needs to be deferred until a lot more due diligence is completed.
One important bit of information is that a road can be built just east of the private ground that would give us access to the currently inaccessible 50,000 acres of BLM ground blocked off by the Bullwhacker situation. The road would be less than two miles and be completely on public land, eliminating the current situation where a landowner can block off access.
The cost to build that road has been estimated to range from $300K to $600K. It would then provide access to those 50,000 acres of BLM. That seems to be a pretty low price for public access to 50,000 acres of great hunting ground. About $6 to $12 per acre.
Yet, we are being asked to trade 2,700 acres of premium elk ground for a ranch that holds the key to accessing the 50,000 acres. If we did not have the option of building an alternative route, the trade idea would have more merit.
To boil it down to the most simple terms, we have two ways to access the 50,000 acres of BLM ground.
1. Do we want to spend $300K-$600K for that access, or
2. Do we want to trade 2,700 acres?
In effect, we would be selling/trading the 2,700 acres in the Durfee Hills for $300K to $600K. In that scenario, the Durfee Hills are valued at $111 to $222 per acre (300K/2,700 or 600/2,700).
If the BLM wants to sell me the Durfee Hills for $222 per acre, I will be at the state BLM HQ office on Monday morning, with cash, gold, furs, or whatever form of payment they would want. Yet, there seems to be a lot of political pressure to sell/exchange it to a powerful group for that value.
Seems if we built an alternative Bullwhacker road on the BLM, the value of the ranch the Wilkes Brothers bought to use as trade bait is worth a lot less without being to hold us hostage for that access. When those ranches go up for sale, a big part of the value, often the biggest part of the value, is fro the advertised exclusive access it provides by cutting off public lands. Not our fault the Wilkes Brothers paid more than market value for that land and the BLM access it currently blocks.
Seems we have a pretty easy solution, without giving the Durfee Hills for a song and a dance. I think some of us could drum up some matching funds to help the BLM cover the cost for that alternative route. Then, we get the 50,000 of access, plus we keep the Durfees.
I would advocate that we should have been investigating this alternative route long before the Wilkes Brothers bought the N-Bar and the Pronghorn Ranches that completely surround the BLM land. Those kind of access issues should be a target of our efforts, regardless of pending land exchanges.
One other thing to note. I became aware of the fact that just prior to the Wilkes Brothers purchasing the Pronghorn Ranch (south and west side of the BLM land) the Forest Service and the prior owner entered into reciprocal easements. Those happened just prior to closing and were not recorded.
The fact that the easements were not recorded does not make them null and void. I am trying to find out what those easements look like. Do they allow public access? Only administrative access? Unrestricted or no restrictions?
Seems rather peculiar that the facts related to these easements on parcels near the Durfee Hills has been kept out of this discussion. It was only by concern of a USFS employee that I came to know of these easements that were signed in 2011 or 2012?
A lot of things related to this exchange that is being left out of the discussion. The Wilkes Brothers really want these Durfee Hills parcels. We would be crazy to trade them under the scenario most think is being proposed.
We can get a far better deal than what is being kicked around at this time.
One important bit of information is that a road can be built just east of the private ground that would give us access to the currently inaccessible 50,000 acres of BLM ground blocked off by the Bullwhacker situation. The road would be less than two miles and be completely on public land, eliminating the current situation where a landowner can block off access.
The cost to build that road has been estimated to range from $300K to $600K. It would then provide access to those 50,000 acres of BLM. That seems to be a pretty low price for public access to 50,000 acres of great hunting ground. About $6 to $12 per acre.
Yet, we are being asked to trade 2,700 acres of premium elk ground for a ranch that holds the key to accessing the 50,000 acres. If we did not have the option of building an alternative route, the trade idea would have more merit.
To boil it down to the most simple terms, we have two ways to access the 50,000 acres of BLM ground.
1. Do we want to spend $300K-$600K for that access, or
2. Do we want to trade 2,700 acres?
In effect, we would be selling/trading the 2,700 acres in the Durfee Hills for $300K to $600K. In that scenario, the Durfee Hills are valued at $111 to $222 per acre (300K/2,700 or 600/2,700).
If the BLM wants to sell me the Durfee Hills for $222 per acre, I will be at the state BLM HQ office on Monday morning, with cash, gold, furs, or whatever form of payment they would want. Yet, there seems to be a lot of political pressure to sell/exchange it to a powerful group for that value.
Seems if we built an alternative Bullwhacker road on the BLM, the value of the ranch the Wilkes Brothers bought to use as trade bait is worth a lot less without being to hold us hostage for that access. When those ranches go up for sale, a big part of the value, often the biggest part of the value, is fro the advertised exclusive access it provides by cutting off public lands. Not our fault the Wilkes Brothers paid more than market value for that land and the BLM access it currently blocks.
Seems we have a pretty easy solution, without giving the Durfee Hills for a song and a dance. I think some of us could drum up some matching funds to help the BLM cover the cost for that alternative route. Then, we get the 50,000 of access, plus we keep the Durfees.
I would advocate that we should have been investigating this alternative route long before the Wilkes Brothers bought the N-Bar and the Pronghorn Ranches that completely surround the BLM land. Those kind of access issues should be a target of our efforts, regardless of pending land exchanges.
One other thing to note. I became aware of the fact that just prior to the Wilkes Brothers purchasing the Pronghorn Ranch (south and west side of the BLM land) the Forest Service and the prior owner entered into reciprocal easements. Those happened just prior to closing and were not recorded.
The fact that the easements were not recorded does not make them null and void. I am trying to find out what those easements look like. Do they allow public access? Only administrative access? Unrestricted or no restrictions?
Seems rather peculiar that the facts related to these easements on parcels near the Durfee Hills has been kept out of this discussion. It was only by concern of a USFS employee that I came to know of these easements that were signed in 2011 or 2012?
A lot of things related to this exchange that is being left out of the discussion. The Wilkes Brothers really want these Durfee Hills parcels. We would be crazy to trade them under the scenario most think is being proposed.
We can get a far better deal than what is being kicked around at this time.
Carnage2011
Well-known member
This exchange seems fairly pointless to me. I've spent some time in that section of the Breaks and it is accessible. There is a road that runs down into it (not very far). It's a matter of people being lazy more than anything....the bullwacker road runs a long ways down in the breaks. The other access only runs 1-1.5 miles and therefore requires that the public must walk farther to reach their destination. As far as I'm concerned we should leave it exactly how it is. It's all accessible and it's weeding out the road hunters....PERFECT!
Topgun 30-06
Active member
Be very careful on anything that involves the BLM and land exchanges. Back in the 90s when I was just starting to hunt in Wyoming they exchanged over 2,000 acres of prime BLM land that was all very accessible with a bigshot rancher for garbage land he owned. The Wyoming G&F even wrote a letter that I have in my file imploring them not to make the exchange because it was not favorable for the public, which is why they exchange lands in the first place. We lost all access to a prime trout stream and acreage that I can look out over and see hundreds of elk. Then another intended land swap with the guy was placed in the newspapers about 10 years ago, as required, and a friend sent it to me because it involved BLM land that was again already accessible and that we frequently hunted. We both decided to write letters of protest, which have to be looked at and the swap held up whenever anyone does that. We were both sent letters that we were being turned down because they did not believe our reasons were adequate for not making the swap. We then took advantage of the way swaps work and again sent letters of protest regarding the denials in to the DC Office to the Administrative Law Judges for a final decision on the matter regarding being turned down in the initial appeal. The Federal law requires that the swap be delayed until the final decison comes out and while that was in the works we found out that the BLM went ahead and did the swap and the deeds were signed and the land exchanged. Shortly after that we both received letters stating that the initial ruling had been overturned and we had both won our appeals at the DC Judge level. However, the only way we could get the exchange reversed would have been to go to the Federal District Court and spend thousands of dollars of our money to fight it, which was out of the question. The head Judge wrote a scathing letter to the head of the BLM in Cheyenne, but also sent us a short letter of apology stating that what the BLM did was wrong and what we would need to do for any possibility to get the land back. In any case, you guys out in that area need to watch for things like that closely because they will do just about anything they want, regardless of the law, and to this day it's my firm belief that money went under the table to the top BLM guy in exchange for completing that illegal swap and probably also for the initial exchange in the 90s because both lands were already accessible to the public and the swaps were not in the public interest!
Last edited:
Or the Wilkes Bros will be making decisions on who is allowed to use open roads south of their property. You can still be a road hunter, but you will need $$$ or the last name Wilkes.
Carnage2011
Well-known member
That is a very valid point mtmiller. I didn't think about that.....it'll be interesting to see how this works out.
As Randy mentioned, there is the possibility of a road along the east side of the Wilkes' on public land. I walked it half a dozen times last year. There are a couple other routes as well, but this one may be the least expensive and least impact.
Never saw another person back there while hunting or scouting. Double edged sword. Great to be down there only competing with those willing to put in the effort. If they closed all roads south of Wilkes' private and they can't dictate who has vehicular access to public land, I would be fine with as is.
Not a bad place to spend some time.
Never saw another person back there while hunting or scouting. Double edged sword. Great to be down there only competing with those willing to put in the effort. If they closed all roads south of Wilkes' private and they can't dictate who has vehicular access to public land, I would be fine with as is.
Not a bad place to spend some time.
Topgun 30-06
Active member
Love those smiles on both you and you dog there mtmiller!!!
Always, awesome pics! Nothing better than roaming the land with your dog. The clarity of your pics are amazing!
Oh, right - the article.. Always good to learn a bit more from the content shared and the articles linked. Thanks.
Oh, right - the article.. Always good to learn a bit more from the content shared and the articles linked. Thanks.
Isn't there access by a 2 track road just to the north of the river coming from the west into this same area already? If I remember correctly there is a forest service cabin just to the north of the river from this same access road.
If this is correct - there already is access for those willing to work at it.
If this is correct - there already is access for those willing to work at it.
Private land access with permission needed. Cabin is BLM.
Not the first time you've related that story on there. That is an exceptional chain of events...
Topgun 30-06
Active member
1_pointer---Sorry for the repeat. At 66 years old I can't remember my own name half the time any more, LOL! I think I have what they call "sometimers disease"!!!
Eric Albus
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,674
I do not hunt there, but carnage makes a great point...keep the road closed and eliminate the "road hunting".
katqanna
Well-known member
Moody asked me to post this for him. Central Montana Hunters for Public Access created a petition at Change.org. I made the maps so you can see the two areas side by side - the Wilks Ranch with the Bull Whacker Rd that has been cut off and the BLM Durfee Hills in the middle of another Wilks ranch.
Last edited:
Any of you who want to see this land exchange delayed until we can have a better analysis of all options available, go to the link below and let them know your thoughts.
Petition Link here
Anytime the government is being pressured to do something in a hurry, odds are the public hunter is not going to get a good deal from whatever is being concocted. This seems to be one of those deals where the BLM is being asked to "hurry and get it done" before the hunters can get a full grasp of what is going on.
Petition Link here
Anytime the government is being pressured to do something in a hurry, odds are the public hunter is not going to get a good deal from whatever is being concocted. This seems to be one of those deals where the BLM is being asked to "hurry and get it done" before the hunters can get a full grasp of what is going on.
