Private (trespasser hunts) than end up on open public lands...

[Deleted member 40315]

I have to say that over the past few months my research from multiple websites has turned up multiple hunts that are “private or trespasser access” that start on private lands only to advertise access to public lands where herds of elk, deer, and other various species hide due to hunting pressure and/or seasonal migrations. I might be late to the party or stirring the pot but I get bothered by this extortion of “my public lands” when they are clearly being held hostage by private access ways. you can look these hunts up on gohunt or any web based hunting search engine. I think that’s not right when private land owners are able to create profit off of public lands owned by tax payers when it comes to restricted access but what bothers me even more is the fact that a “private hunt” isn’t on private lands at all...it’s actually advertised to be successful on public lands.....I feel this is dishonest. Only my opinion. I know there are people out there that have been making a living on this way of life for possibly generations....I don’t think there are enough people/public citizens that know your doing this. As a new hunter, that’s what’s wrong with the hunting community...every hunter wants more hunters to be involved or get more hunters to be involved. Actions like these hunts are discouraging to me when my public lands are held “hostage”. I’m probably stirring the pot but I figured it out real fast and I think it’s a shame. Guess that brings up “corner-crossing” in Colorado as well (which is still illegal)...??? Anyways.....I wanted to talk more about the private land hunts that are fully guided and end up on public lands access. I think it’s a shame when DIY hunters have rights to these lands but we aren’t granted access to them because the access is restricted; and private land owners are making a profit off of them and their restricted access. It’s very frustrating. That’s my two cents. Thanks for listening.

 

[MTGomer]

The United States General Land Office issued these land patents and did not reserve unto itself for the benefit of the citizens, ingress and egress access rights.
Your issue is with your government land locking itself, not the private property owner.

 

[Trial153]

Unfortunately the cats out of the bag. All things wildlife has been monatized. We have no one but ourselves to blame.

 

[SD_Prairie_Goat]

I have to say that over the past few months my research from multiple websites has turned up multiple hunts that are “private or trespasser access” that start on private lands only to advertise access to public lands where herds of elk, deer, and other various species hide due to hunting pressure and/or seasonal migrations. I might be late to the party or stirring the pot but I get bothered by this extortion of “my public lands” when they are clearly being held hostage by private access ways. you can look these hunts up on gohunt or any web based hunting search engine. I think that’s not right when private land owners are able to create profit off of public lands owned by tax payers when it comes to restricted access but what bothers me even more is the fact that a “private hunt” isn’t on private lands at all...it’s actually advertised to be successful on public lands.....I feel this is dishonest. Only my opinion. I know there are people out there that have been making a living on this way of life for possibly generations....I don’t think there are enough people/public citizens that know your doing this. As a new hunter, that’s what’s wrong with the hunting community...every hunter wants more hunters to be involved or get more hunters to be involved. Actions like these hunts are discouraging to me when my public lands are held “hostage”. I’m probably stirring the pot but I figured it out real fast and I think it’s a shame. Guess that brings up “corner-crossing” in Colorado as well (which is still illegal)...??? Anyways.....I wanted to talk more about the private land hunts that are fully guided and end up on public lands access. I think it’s a shame when DIY hunters have rights to these lands but we aren’t granted access to them because the access is restricted; and private land owners are making a profit off of them and their restricted access. It’s very frustrating. That’s my two cents. Thanks for listening.

South Dakota has an interesting solution for this. In SD you can't guide on public land, only private lands. I would assume reading the rules that this is not applicable to federal lands (BLM, forestry service, and the grass lands)

 

[beginnerhunter]

I feel ya but not sure what the alternative would be. If you are talking about landlocked public land then sure, it sucks. Groups like TRCP, BHA, RMEF, OnX, etc are trying to increase public access to these areas. But I dont think there's much legislative appetite for forcing public access across private land (where it doesn't already exist).

Now, if you're talking hard to access public land, well, I think that's part of the fun. And I think the "Charlie Daniels of OnX" would agree.

 

[Buffs35]

South Dakota has an interesting solution for this. In SD you can't guide on public land, only private lands. I would assume reading the rules that this is not applicable to federal lands (BLM, forestry service, and the grass lands)

View attachment 123873

Funny how Wyoming takes the exact opposite approach.

 

[Pucky Freak]

States decide how to address this issue, so if your state doesn't allow access to public lands and you want it to be different than it's up to you to get involved politically to try and get it changed. I feel the federal government should entitle all U.S. citizens ingress and egress to all federalpublic lands but let's be realistic, there is no way this will ever happen. There is simply too much profit made off public lands and those who make the $ pay lobbyists to ensure politicians keep it that way forever. Many States in the East have laws such as section line crossing or mandatory public access points for all or the vast majority of public lands which is great but the overwhelming majority of public land is in the West where so much of it is locked up.

 

[bpitt]

Funny how Wyoming takes the exact opposite approach.

Yep, I can't even big game hunt in wilderness areas of Wyoming...but I can flyfish, small game hunt, hike, camp...just no hunt the big game, unless I got a guide. Talk about a blatant scam...

 

[FamilyMan]

I see it the other way. I have absolutely no right to demand access across private land, even if it is to get to public land. Simple private property rights.

If the guy was smart enough to purchase land that provided exclusive access to more land that he didn't have to pay for, well that's just being smart. You and I are free to do the same thing. My two-cents.

 

[efw]

I see it the other way. I have absolutely no right to demand access across private land, even if it is to get to public land. Simple private property rights.

If the guy was smart enough to purchase land that provided exclusive access to more land that he didn't have to pay for, well that's just being smart. You and I are free to do the same thing. My two-cents.

Yep and no one is being forced on one side of the transaction or the other. You don’t like the terms don’t sign the contract.

Now a third option Randy talks about is easements being purchased by hunting-oriented non-profits like RMEF. That’s a solid free market solution I give money to annually.

Definitely agree too that Wyoming’s outfitter welfare program (prohibition of non-residents big game hunting on designated Wilderness areas) is a crock, but the people of that state leave it that way. If they wanted it different they could vote it out.

I’m still sending them fat checks I love hunting Wyoming...

 

[BWALKER77]

Yep and no one is being forced on one side of the transaction or the other. You don’t like the terms don’t sign the contract.

Now a third option Randy talks about is easements being purchased by hunting-oriented non-profits like RMEF. That’s a solid free market solution I give money to annually.

Definitely agree too that Wyoming’s outfitter welfare program (prohibition of non-residents big game hunting on designated Wilderness areas) is a crock, but the people of that state leave it that way. If they wanted it different they could vote it out.

I’m still sending them fat checks I love hunting Wyoming...

If I was a Wyoming resident I would be perfectly fine with the prohibition of non residents in wilderness areas.
Western states like Colorado, Wyoming and Montana are being overwhelmed by hords of people. Both from non residents and from increases in residents.
And FWIW I was born and raised in MI and lived in Marquette county from 1995-2017. Had enough and moved to Montana. I appreciate your desire to hunt the western states. I did so for years. I have also seen Montana decline greatly since the early 90's as it pertains to hunting.

 

[Carl 9.3x62]

If I was a Wyoming resident I would be perfectly fine with the prohibition of non residents in wilderness areas.
Western states like Colorado, Wyoming and Montana are being overwhelmed by hords of people. Both from non residents and from increases in residents.
And FWIW I was born and raised in MI and lived in Marquette county from 1995-2017. Had enough and moved to Montana. I appreciate your desire to hunt the western states. I did so for years. I have also seen Montana decline greatly since the early 90's as it pertains to hunting.

Yeah we don't complain.

 

[Deleted member 40315]

The United States General Land Office issued these land patents and did not reserve unto itself for the benefit of the citizens, ingress and egress access rights.
Your issue is with your government land locking itself, not the private property owner.

After more research, you are spot on.....the negotiations of this access was not thought of. That's why people need to stay active in government. If it goes unnoticed over time the severity of this perpetuates further and that's exactly whats happening here. When I look at a hunt(s) posted for basically auction on the web, I see them listed as "private" but then description(s) state that the hunt leads to public land access where herds have migrated due to various reasons onto public lands (also in the description states the public land is "land-locked or restricted by access"). This public land is where the refuge of herds go. I cannot for the life of me understand why the person that negotiated these contracts for the governement didn't think about public access; unless there was something else in the works between lawmakers and regional private land owners (Wink Wink). But hey! "We need more Hunters these days!" Really? Stop yelling this facile arguement if people are going to make these laws for our "public lands"......the Jig is up on that one...OnX has exposed this one for sure. I expect this to end in the next 10-20 years. Younger hunters that know how to use technology for "good" (I know there are people laughing right now lol!, but there are actually some of us that know how to use technology for the betterment of improving society) are going to bring this to light over time. It's a problem yes and the solution will take some time but it will be resolved eventually. You are right my argument isn't with any one guide or hunting outfit; it's with the lawmakers that screwed this on up for the tax paying citizens. Thanks for listening and again just thrown my two cents out again.

 

[Deleted member 40315]

If I was a Wyoming resident I would be perfectly fine with the prohibition of non residents in wilderness areas.
Western states like Colorado, Wyoming and Montana are being overwhelmed by hords of people. Both from non residents and from increases in residents.
And FWIW I was born and raised in MI and lived in Marquette county from 1995-2017. Had enough and moved to Montana. I appreciate your desire to hunt the western states. I did so for years. I have also seen Montana decline greatly since the early 90's as it pertains to hunting.

Interesting perspective, I agree with some of your conclusions but look at population increases over the next 25-50 years. Statistical data shows an overwhelming population increase to not only metropolitan areas but wilderness as well. Humans are gonna populate; its a fact lol! (https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/population) I understand the lifestyle of tranquility in the wilderness but in the next 25-50 years to map is getting smaller and smaller. Your gonna have to move to Alaska into the Arctic circle to get space open and wide if you want distance anymore (especially in the future with population increases statistically speaking). I respect Wyoming's stance on traditional values and practices; the attitude and practices are going to be hard fought with population shifts and ideology changes (unfortunately). Politics are part of it; I get that. That's why I only hunt certain states right now; it comes down to availability as well as financial opportunity. Western states are going to see the financials of their decisions from year to year. If the cents don't make dollars, then time to change the rules. Unfortunately, it has to be this way to finance these programs. I get frustrated on the public land access because I already contribute to society (working and actually paying taxes). I like public to be public, that includes access. Does it always work out that way? Not always due to specific circumstances. I would encourage other hunters to know that restriction of non-residence in their states is an idea but legislature would never go for that one; too much income lost. Economics runs that show; gotta have money to keep programs running and lets face it, our government is not the greatest at running their accounting books with taxpayer's dollars contributing every year. Everyone is frustrated, stay involved. Keep an ear to the wind for changes and new policies. Stay active in government issues, especially if your a hunter these days. It's the best way to make a difference and have your voice heard. -Just my two cents.....thanks for listening.


*Figure 2 is a great graph on population increases for the U.S. by 2050. (https://census.gov/content/dam/Cens...-pop-proj-2000-2050/analytical-document09.pdf)

Reference
Ortman, J. M., & Guarneri, C. E. (2009). United States population projections: 2000 to 2050. United States Census Bureau, 1-19.

 

[FamilyMan]

After more research, you are spot on.....the negotiations of this access was not thought of. That's why people need to stay active in government. If it goes unnoticed over time the severity of this perpetuates further and that's exactly whats happening here. When I look at a hunt(s) posted for basically auction on the web, I see them listed as "private" but then description(s) state that the hunt leads to public land access where herds have migrated due to various reasons onto public lands (also in the description states the public land is "land-locked or restricted by access"). This public land is where the refuge of herds go. I cannot for the life of me understand why the person that negotiated these contracts for the governement didn't think about public access; unless there was something else in the works between lawmakers and regional private land owners (Wink Wink). But hey! "We need more Hunters these days!" Really? Stop yelling this facile arguement if people are going to make these laws for our "public lands"......the Jig is up on that one...OnX has exposed this one for sure. I expect this to end in the next 10-20 years. Younger hunters that know how to use technology for "good" (I know there are people laughing right now lol!, but there are actually some of us that know how to use technology for the betterment of improving society) are going to bring this to light over time. It's a problem yes and the solution will take some time but it will be resolved eventually. You are right my argument isn't with any one guide or hunting outfit; it's with the lawmakers that screwed this on up for the tax paying citizens. Thanks for listening and again just thrown my two cents out again.

Not sure how you expect this to be resolved over the next 10-20 years. The designation of what land is public occurred long ago. Private land is (for the very most part) going to remain private. When the private changes hands (inheritance or sale) the control of the public it surrounds changes hands with it. It's not like the government can (or should) come in and start changing the rules for private property ownership for lands surrounding public land. This happens on all over the west and is by no means new.

The only solution is the one that efw recommends above, acquiring access easements from private property owners. I doubt that many would be interested in this, but I could be wrong. Chances are they paid a premium for the fee-title land that they purchased because of the very fact that it borders (or surrounds) public land, and there would appear to be very little incentive for them to then turn around and grant public access to that public land. We may not like that, but that's the way it is. Private property rights trump your "right" to access public land.

You could always helicopter in to the isolated public land, if you have the coin. Better bet would be to focus your attention and energy to the millions of acres of public land that you do have easy access to.

Good luck, and Happy Hunting.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Not sure how you expect this to be resolved over the next 10-20 years. The designation of what land is public occurred long ago. Private land is (for the very most part) going to remain private. When the private changes hands (inheritance or sale) the control of the public it surrounds changes hands with it. It's not like the government can (or should) come in and start changing the rules for private property ownership for lands surrounding public land. This happens on all over the west and is by no means new.

The only solution is the one that efw recommends above, acquiring access easements from private property owners. I doubt that many would be interested in this, but I could be wrong. Chances are they paid a premium for the fee-title land that they purchased because of the very fact that it borders (or surrounds) public land, and there would appear to be very little incentive for them to then turn around and grant public access to that public land. We may not like that, but that's the way it is. Private property rights trump your "right" to access public land.

You could always helicopter in to the isolated public land, if you have the coin. Better bet would be to focus your attention and energy to the millions of acres of public land that you do have easy access to.

Good luck, and Happy Hunting.

I agree with folks restatements of the status quo, but if “we the people” wanted it different there are many levers. For example, could make renewal of all grazing leases to include easements via adjoining land; could make receipt of federal farm aid dependent on provisions of easements to public land; could prevent adjacent land owners access to adjacent Federal land unless access easement granted; Feds could prohibit hunting access to all in landlock areas, including adjacent owners and their outfitters; declare the enhanced value of a property derived from preventing access to public lands a financial “wind fall” and place an annual tax on that imputed value; next time there is a tax law redo, find a tax incentive to easement grants, etc, etc, the government has amazing leverage to change behaviors and choices by its citizens. [too much leverage if you ask me]

If we aren’t see movement on this issue it is not because the land grants a hundred years ago forever cast our lot - it is because the public has not demanded access to its lands in a way that has moved the politicians to act.