Chino Grande Ranch 19B

[CEI]

Terry,

 

I agree with you on the land swaps, but do you think it will ever happen? Look at 18A (Double O & Denny) & 10 (Seven's), they will sell off the private stuff to a developer & then still be able to graze cattle. 90% of the Ranches around Kingman have done this same thing! It's slowly but surely eating us away...

 

Is there away for the conservation groups, G&F, State Land & the ranchers to all gather in a huge conference room & have a sit down. (I am a little ignorant & this may have already happened.) Bottom line is if they all subdivide, they won't hand a beautiful ranch down to their kids & our kids won't be able to hunt this country. The Game & Fish will lose revenues or probably not because they will increase the price of tags to make up for the difference (supply & demand). So, I personally see the ranchers & hunters as the one's losing, because we can't work together. We have bad apple's on both sides that make this tougher than it should be!

 

I ain't against the rancher & I hate to see them dang subdivisions worse than keeping the gate locked. I mean we can access those places now, but in the long run it's killing habitat & our kids & grand kids won't be hunting there. It almost seems like the ROOTS are in too deep & it's a domino effect.

 

This is the only thing they could do it sucks but I would rather people have no tag than go through what happened 2 years ago.

[deersandbeers]

http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=91935

 

I guess this is the price we have to pay for clean energy.

[Tines]

I dont have much time to read through all of the posts so if I repeat someone, forgive me.

 

I hunted much of the ranch and other portions of 19B last year. I got to see 3 antelope bucks taken. One archery and two rifle bucks. This has little, if anything, to do with a couple of boneheads that "ruined it for the rest of us". This has everything to do with the Game and Fish issuing more tags than what they SHOULD have last year. Sound familiar to your unit next door? Probably.....

 

The Game and Fish knew that they were dealing with "normal" 19B issues (i.e. access, huntable animals, etc...) but THEY chose to ignore many of them. Resulting in what might become a pretty sad deal to those who applied to 19B this year or those who planned on it in the future.

 

It's simple: Don't take advantage of landowners. Especially if you're the Game and Fish and you offer more tags than what you originally agreed upon.

 

Opening morning there were 6 other trucks parked on a buck that I helped a guy shoot. We had to resort to plan "F" because it was such a zoo. Having watched this buck for a few days before the hunt started and knowing that this buck and his does USUALLY hung out in a certain area, we snuck into what I thought was within "range" of where the herd might be. It was a gamble but I knew this buck had no chance as soon as it got light. As soon as it was light enough to glass, I found the herd right where I thought they'd be. We only had to sneak another 100yds closer to make the shot. At the time, I thought it was pretty cool knowing that the rest of the hunters were just getting out of their truck as we shot. It didn't take long for me to realize how poor quality the hunt was about to become.

 

We then drove over to help another buddy try to kill a buck found during the pre-season. It wasn't much different than where we hunted as there were 4 other trucks/hunters hunting that buck. Persistance paid off as we were able to kill that buck too. This hunt was an absolute disaster as soon as daybreak came. I've never seen so many hunters in my life. And, unlike coues deer, the mass majority of huntable antelope were in just a few square miles.

 

I realize that there are lots of rifle antelope hunts "similar" to this one. You're dealing with many hunters who've waited a long time for a tag and want to take a good buck. And because there aren't 80"+ bucks behind every juniper, you can't get around multiple hunters camped on a good buck...

 

Lets compare three units: 10, 19B and 7 for rifle antelope. Last year they offered more tags in these units than any other. I assume that sheer numbers of animals are why G and F issue so many of these tags (40-60 permits). But to compare 19b to units 7 and 10 is a complete JOKE!!! Bottom line is this. There are many units out there with comparable number of animals. But very few offer the same amount of HUNTABLE numbers.

 

Game and Fish dropped the ball on 19b, not any of us or some rancher......

[atforest]

AZMThunter,

Yes that is what was said. Second choice would become first choice.

 

so what happens like many of us that never put a 3rd chose in for lope due too all tags gone in 1st & 2nd rounds, will they allow us to add a new 2nd chose before the draw?

 

By them removing a 1st or 2nd chose "19b no longer" G & F should be entitled to allow all applicants to add a new alternitive hunt number.

 

 

Thats why i always fill in all 5 choices, you never know what may happen. G&F should not entitle that to anyone. Its was that persons choice to only put in 2 choices instead of 5.

 

Actually, it would not matter in this case. The commission voted to set the number of tags available for these 2 hunts to zero. So the draw will proceed as usual and your hunt choices will stay the same. If you have one of these hunts as your 1st choice the draw system will see there are no tags available and it will move to your 2nd choice; it will not move your 2nd choice to your 1st choice and your 3rd choice to your 2nd choice. Same logic applies if you have one of these hunts as your 2nd choice, the end result in this case would be that if there are no tags available for your 1st choice then you will not get drawn since your 2nd choice was set to zero before the draw even started; it will not move your 3rd choice to your 2nd choice. Then aside from the Hopi hunts, it is mathematically impossible to be drawn for a 3rd, 4th, or 5th choice for antelope.

[buglethemin]

Why does something like this always seem to happen with G&F, delaying our draw, changing our hunts, lawsuits. Not too long ago it was the lawsuite from an out of state outfitter claiming that the non resident cap was unconstitiutional, delaying and changing our draw. A year or two ago the Cabelas employee dropping off a box of applications after the 7pm deadline. This of course. It seems every other year a problem arises and delays everything or changes everything.

[111]

I'm assuming this will make the draw odds for antelope a bit tougher for all units. It may not show up in the draw odds being that it would have had to of been a 1st or 2nd choice anyway. Overall that's 65 additional tags that would have been drawn having a chance at a different unit.

 

I'm curious of how many on cw.com applied for 19B as a first or second choice, and what you applied for as your other unit? Or who applied for 19B rifle and then 19B archery which will leave you out of the antelope draw all together?

[Rembrant]

The Game Dept. is managing our hunts for “opportunity”; there are a lot of permits all over the place, but that is a different subject.

The deal in Chino is that a rancher wants to close a major part of a quality unit that is comprised of a whole bunch of public land, for his own reasons.

The screwy thing that reeks of underhandedness is that they announced this closure two days before the perceived release of the antelope draw results.

Was the rancher thinking the draw was complete and too late for the Game Dept to change the results? Not my job to know what people are thinking, because I’m not a mind reader, but what this rancher did doesn’t look good.

Suspicious people like me wonder why someone would mess with a system that has worked for decades by denying the public access to public lands. People quite often are motivated by money, yet they state they are closing the ranch to pursue solar energy.

OK, fine, they are pursuing solar energy – that’s what they say. We’ll take ‘em at their word. I don’t know why the ranch has to be closed for that reason, but that’s what they say.

This leaves the Game Dept. with a dilemma. This long standing big game draw system now has a wrench thrown into it at the eleventh hour. Not a good situation considering the quality of this unit, the rarity of an antelope tag, and the passion of the people that want a tag in this special unit.

So the Commission votes to issue zero tags for the unit. The rancher doesn’t want antelope hunters on the ranch because of ‘solar energy’ reasons, so the Commission in effect, agrees with the rancher and abolishes the hunt so they can do their solar energy thing.

This is a stroke of genius.

If the rancher wants no antelope hunters on the ranch (like he says) then the Dept. is bending over backwards to accommodate them, at risk of much criticism from sportsmen.

But, if the rancher is underhandedly trying to make a bunch of money by “privatizing” public land for a select few that can afford a high guiding fee, they now have no tags to work with.

And people say the commission has no balls.

This won’t solve the problem ongoing; there are some good suggestions in this string on how to do this, but I appreciate the Commission stepping up to the plate and playing hardball.

 

Mike

[BRYCE CANYON]

The Game Dept. is managing our hunts for “opportunity”; there are a lot of permits all over the place, but that is a different subject.

The deal in Chino is that a rancher wants to close a major part of a quality unit that is comprised of a whole bunch of public land, for his own reasons.

The screwy thing that reeks of underhandedness is that they announced this closure two days before the perceived release of the antelope draw results.

Was the rancher thinking the draw was complete and too late for the Game Dept to change the results? Not my job to know what people are thinking, because I’m not a mind reader, but what this rancher did doesn’t look good.

Suspicious people like me wonder why someone would mess with a system that has worked for decades by denying the public access to public lands. People quite often are motivated by money, yet they state they are closing the ranch to pursue solar energy.

OK, fine, they are pursuing solar energy – that’s what they say. We’ll take ‘em at their word. I don’t know why the ranch has to be closed for that reason, but that’s what they say.

This leaves the Game Dept. with a dilemma. This long standing big game draw system now has a wrench thrown into it at the eleventh hour. Not a good situation considering the quality of this unit, the rarity of an antelope tag, and the passion of the people that want a tag in this special unit.

So the Commission votes to issue zero tags for the unit. The rancher doesn’t want antelope hunters on the ranch because of ‘solar energy’ reasons, so the Commission in effect, agrees with the rancher and abolishes the hunt so they can do their solar energy thing.

This is a stroke of genius.

If the rancher wants no antelope hunters on the ranch (like he says) then the Dept. is bending over backwards to accommodate them, at risk of much criticism from sportsmen.

But, if the rancher is underhandedly trying to make a bunch of money by “privatizing” public land for a select few that can afford a high guiding fee, they now have no tags to work with.

And people say the commission has no balls.

This won’t solve the problem ongoing; there are some good suggestions in this string on how to do this, but I appreciate the Commission stepping up to the plate and playing hardball.

 

Mike

 

So Mike, I am confused. Is it the same as the Foster Ranch shooting range or different...

 

"It's a great property that will serve the purpose. And it is PRIVATE PROPERTY that will not lay under the jurisdiction of the city, forest or monument.

Who benifitted from the sale of the property? The owner did. And we did.

Who was the property owner? I'm guessing an American citizen excersizing his free rights.

Who was the broker? Another guess - a realestate person making a living in a free enterprise system."

[azcoues]

I put in for unit 10 1st then 19b second and thats it so i am hoping for a 10 tag this really sucks cuz back in the day and i say 10 years ago when i shot my antelope in big chino i only saw 7 different hunters in 3 days and had alot of bucks to myself but know its a joke trucks crowded up in one spot at daybreak for a chance at the so called prescoutin good buck,man that just sounds like your goin dove huntin everybody just there.

[AZMThunter]

http://www.dcourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=91935

 

I guess this is the price we have to pay for clean energy.

 

I find it more than a little ironic that the ranch has applied to SLD for a road right-of-way across the state land while denying the same on their privately held land.

 

Is foot-only traffic also banned on the ranch? Even just to cross to public land? This is the first time I have really looked at the checkerboard / cornerpost crossing issue. what a mess.

[Rembrant]

Bryce Canyon,

It is way different. The difference is private vs. public.

Foster Ranch is a solid piece of private property where the owner is providing access to the public.

The Big Chino is checkerboard private/state (public) land that the leasee is closing to the public.

I don't know the breakout of the Chino Ranch; how much is state vs. how much is private. Most Arizona ranches are a private acerage with the house barn etc., and most of the ranch is leased Forest Service/ State Land.

The Big Boqillas in unit 10 is checkerboarded State land/ Private (Navajo). In this state, the leasee is leagally able to deny access to anyone even though half of the land (or more) may be public.

Usually the acess road goes through the front yard of the ranch and that is where access is denied. Sometimes the private is 10 or 20 acres and the blocked off public land behind it can be thousands of acres.

So if its legal, is is right or wrong? I lean toward the idea that it is wrong to deny public land to the public. There's nothing wrong with using your assets in making money. But I wouldn't use your assets to make my money, at least not without paying you for the opportunity.

Not everything that is legal and moral is neccesarily right.

This is why I think the Game Commission is being bold.

What do you think BRYCE CANYON, How would you sort this out?

Thanks for asking.

 

Mike

[SirRoyal]

I'm in rare form tonite

I read the Prescott Courier's report . Its all garbage . This is all about money and interesting enough nothings been decided about the solar energy placement its all speculation!!!!

 

If it was about the solar deal why not quarintine of that solar area to keep the hunters out and they can hunt the rest ?

 

They closed it in 2009 to hunters because of a SLOB hunter, Warned the dept about 2010 but went ahead and let them hunt there. SO DUH THE WARDEN FOR THIS UNIT MUST OF HAD A CLUE OF WHAT WAS COMING IN 2011. And as usual the hunters know last and suffer the most.

 

I think its away out for CV and now that the ranchers have Steve Pierce. I think it stinks of politics and thier trying to make way for landowners tags, which would be good for guides and bad for Joe Hunter, THATS ME AND YOU!

[Will K]

No tag for me....19B was my first choice...

[DesertBull]

I'm in rare form tonite

I read the Prescott Courier's report . Its all garbage . This is all about money and interesting enough nothings been decided about the solar energy placement its all speculation!!!!

 

If it was about the solar deal why not quarintine of that solar area to keep the hunters out and they can hunt the rest ?

 

They closed it in 2009 to hunters because of a SLOB hunter, Warned the dept about 2010 but went ahead and let them hunt there. SO DUH THE WARDEN FOR THIS UNIT MUST OF HAD A CLUE OF WHAT WAS COMING IN 2011. And as usual the hunters know last and suffer the most.

 

I think its away out for CV and now that the ranchers have Steve Pierce. I think it stinks of politics and thier trying to make way for landowners tags, which would be good for guides and bad for Joe Hunter, THATS ME AND YOU!

 

From what I read, they want to put their solar crap on public land. I guess that is so when it goes belly up, they can just leave all the crap there and not clutter up their own land.

[DubTee]

I don't think selling electricity is going to go belly up any time soon, if they have the capital to get the solar thing running, those solar panels might as well be collecting dollar bills streamed down from the sun. I'm not saying it is right to put that stuff on the non-private land, but I sure wouldn't want guns anywhere near an operation like that given the frequency of shot up signs all over the AZ wilderness. If they do put the solar up, I'm sure the ranch will have antelope hunters on it eventually, through the draw w/ trespass fees and guides, or landowner tags or something. There will be a pile of great goats in there if there is no hunting for any length of time, someone will realize those goats have dollar signs on them as well and will work something out to get hunters in there. When there is economic incentive, things usually get worked out.