Auctioning access to hunt private land

[jm77]

Josh Coursey and Muley Fanatics are partnering with the Wyoming Land Trust to explore a new idea: raising money for the land trust by auctioning hunting access on private land. If I understand correctly they want to procure a Commissioner's tag for administrative costs. Lots of questions to be answered here and one must wonder if this could have an effect on the Access Yes program. Presentation starts at 2 min 30 sec.

 

[elks96]

Abso

Josh Coursey and Muley Fanatics are partnering with the Wyoming Land Trust to explore a new idea: raising money for the land trust by auctioning hunting access on private land. If I understand correctly they want to procure a Commissioner's tag for administrative costs. Lots of questions to be answered here and one must wonder if this could have an effect on the Access Yes program. Presentation starts at 2 min 30 sec.

litely not a good idea. They just will not let up on having transferable land owner tags.

It will absolutely compete with access yes.

It is going to be the one shot hunt, just for private land access….

 

[elks96]

If they were smart what they would do it modify the HMA system and allow people who have a tag for a particular species and specific unit. Then everyone who has an eligible tag could pay a fee to enter a lottery draw for access to that land. A flat fee that takes everyone eligible and all the money raised from the lottery drawing goes back into the property/owner for keeping land open. Spread this out as a small amount from a ton of people rather than some huge amount from a wealthy person.

Even with access yes we could do something similar and have things like the opening weekend open only to the lucky lottery draws and then the 2nd week everyone with a tag.

The point we already have 2 access programs that can accomplish the same end goal without creating a new exclusive rich man’s tag program.

 

[fullcry]

They ABSOLUTELY should have transferable Land owner tags.Its their land.They should be able to have a say in getting tags.

 

[DoubleDropMuley]

They ABSOLUTELY should have transferable Land owner tags.Its their land.They should be able to have a say in getting tags.

Mmmmmm NOPE!!!

 

[Conrad8899]

They ABSOLUTELY should have transferable Land owner tags.Its their land.They should be able to have a say in getting tags.

No

 

[nfh]

Hmmm. I think there is a end goal of personal gain.

 

[SS!]

They ABSOLUTELY should have transferable Land owner tags.Its their land.They should be able to have a say in getting tags.

 

[SS!]

Hmmm. I think there is an end goal of personal gain.

Yep

 

[jm77]

Abso

litely not a good idea. They just will not let up on having transferable land owner tags.

I'm not sure where you came up with transferable LO tags out of any of this.

Back to the topic at hand, I hope

 

[Togwotee]

I love it. the same WY residents that think they're entitled to all the tags in the state also think they're entitled to hunt private land free.

The solution is landowner tags. here the more acres you have the more LO tags you get up to 9. you can do whatever you want with them but they're only for your deeded land. you own the land and pay the taxes on it, the game grazes your grass and eats out of your haystack. but the entitled crowd will never go for that.

 

[yotebuster17]

They ABSOLUTELY should have transferable Land owner tags.Its their land.They should be able to have a say in getting tags.

“Transferable” is a slippery slope. As a landowner I feel that it is a right to have an opportunity to hunt on your own land within reason. The problem with transferable tags is they assign a dollar amount to that opportunity and thus add it to the land. This creates the competition. In my home state of ND I am entitled to one free buck tag each year outside of the draw, but there’s the two big kickers. 1: it’s only valid on my land (ie ranch only) 2: it’s not transferable. They are very protective of these two things because the second you change that, it makes it a commodity. A few transferable ranch only deer tags on my place would add a bunch of revenue to the place if it were owned by someone who didn’t want to keep it for their personal and family hunting, but that’s when the slope really starts to get slippery.

 

[Chesterwyo]

I love it. the same WY residents that think they're entitled to all the tags in the state also think they're entitled to hunt private land free.

The solution is landowner tags. here the more acres you have the more LO tags you get up to 9. you can do whatever you want with them but they're only for your deeded land. you own the land and pay the taxes on it, the game grazes your grass and eats out of your haystack. but the entitled crowd will never go for that.

The game grazes in the meadow on the ranch while the cows and sheeps graze the grass on the public land down to the dirt. For fractions of a penny on the dollar for what it should cost.

 

[jm77]

I love it. the same WY residents that think they're entitled to all the tags in the state also think they're entitled to hunt private land free.

I'd like you to point out where a Wyoming resident said they are entitled to hunt private land for free.

You've become nothing but a loudmouth here. It's unfortunate when something arises that has the potential to hurt residents and NR alike and you have to turn to days gone by. The issue on this thread has nothing to do with LO tags.

 

[El Gringo]

They ABSOLUTELY should have transferable Land owner tags.Its their land.They should be able to have a say in getting tags.

Owner ship of the ground, in no way implies ownership of the wildlife. Transferable tags are meant to compensate landowners for damage caused by the wildlife, that’s owned by the citizens of the state. I’m not against it, but it shouldn’t be an absolute for landowners either, IMHO

 

[wytex]

JM any contact info for those trying to get this started? Time for some emails to them I think.

 

[jm77]

JM any contact info for those trying to get this started? Time for some emails to them I think.

[email protected]
Marissa Taylor- Wyoming Stock Growers Land Trust ( I cannot find contact info for her)

 

[BuzzH]

It just amazes me the level some people will stoop to, just to turn a quick profit off our wildlife.

They never think of the ramifications that these types of deals will have on average R and NR hunters, existing access programs, wildlife issues (harboring, etc.).

All they see are dollar signs...pathetic.

 

[mulecreek]

At this point aren’t they just looking to get their hands on a commissioners tag? Then have a raffle for the tag and access to some private land. Presumably land in the Wyoming Land Trust program. Not sure why I would care where the dude that wins the raffle tag hunts. Seems like a better use of Commission tag revenue than some others like a softball team or music festival. Other than not being a fan of Comm tags not sure I should care about this. Am I missing something?

 

[jm77]

At this point aren’t they just looking to get their hands on a commissioners tag? Then have a raffle for the tag and access to some private land. Presumably land in the Wyoming Land Trust program. Not sure why I would care where the dude that wins the raffle tag hunts. Seems like a better use of Commission tag revenue than some others like a softball team or music festival. Other than not being a fan of Comm tags not sure I should care about this. Am I missing something?

From what I gather, the WSGLT wants to set up, with the help of MFF, a program to auction access on private land like auctioning off Commission tags. They are asking for a Commission tag to cover administrative costs to set it up. What's not clear is if they want to get Commission tags to go along with the properties, but I don't think so. Obviously, this is in the infant stage and who knows what the outcome could be.

 

[idahohuntr]

From what I gather, the WSGLT wants to set up, with the help of MFF, a program to auction access on private land like auctioning off Commission tags. They are asking for a Commission tag to cover administrative costs to set it up. What's not clear is if they want to get Commission tags to go along with the properties, but I don't think so. Obviously, this is in the infant stage and who knows what the outcome could be.

There is no shortage of demand for private land hunting access. Why would they need a commissioner's tag to cover administrative costs? I would think they could cover it with auction proceeds. Furthermore, this would seemingly compete with state access programs - and isn't there already a website (landtrust?) that is essentially an airbnb of private hunting lands? Strikes me as something fishy going on or a solution looking for a problem.

 

[mulecreek]

The way I read this is they want to auction off access to their land but the problem is there is no guarantee that the hunter will get the tag. They even mentioned in their presentation that they would target non residents. They need the comm tag to sweeten the deal and provide a guaranteed tag. Their work conserving ag land appears to not be free so they are looking for a fund raising event.

Got no idea if there is a greater sinister end goal. I sure don’t see it that way so far. Having a hard time seeing how one comm tag and one access raffle would harm Access Yes. Could it devolve into something more, sure but not convinced that is the goal.

 

[jm77]

The way I read this is they want to auction off access to their land but the problem is there is no guarantee that the hunter will get the tag. They even mentioned in their presentation that they would target non residents. They need the comm tag to sweeten the deal and provide a guaranteed tag. Their work conserving ag land appears to not be free so they are looking for a fund raising event.

Got no idea if there is a greater sinister end goal. I sure don’t see it that way so far. Having a hard time seeing how one comm tag and one access raffle would harm Access Yes. Could it devolve into something more, sure but not convinced that is the goal.

Have you gone over to the Dark Side?

It's not for the G&F(wildlife) to fund the WSGLT. Their main goal is to protect ranching and ag lands through conservation easements. There is no guarantee of increased habitat improvement.

And honestly, do you think they want to auction just one property a year? IDK

 

[SS!]

All you need to know is coursey is involved. He is the don peay of Wyoming

 

[grosventrehunter]

Owner ship of the ground, in no way implies ownership of the wildlife. Transferable tags are meant to compensate landowners for damage caused by the wildlife, that’s owned by the citizens of the state. I’m not against it, but it shouldn’t be an absolute for landowners either, IMHO

So does this mean I get to hunt cattle that ruin public land?

 

[nfh]

The other issue is this opens the door to so such more. Not sure what that looks like but I don't want to think about it

 

[mulecreek]

Have you gone over to the Dark Side?

It’s possible. I’ve been in an awful good mood this week, maybe my judgement is clouded.

It's not for the G&F(wildlife) to fund the WSGLT.

Comms tags are used for all sorts of dubious causes. This one isn’t even in the bottom 25%.

Their main goal is to protect ranching and ag lands through conservation easements. There is no guarantee of increased habitat improvement.

I’ll take an easement over development. If this helps them with that process then isn’t better than development?

If there was a guarantee of thing’s getting better in order to be given a comm tag Coursey would still be selling cars.

And honestly, do you think they want to auction just one property a year? IDK

IDK either. Nothing is stopping them from auctioning multiple properties right now. If the proposal was all the comm tags or special licenses that they got to use then I would have beef. As it is I’m not losing sleep.

 

[DoubleDropMuley]

Woah now we’re talking some big dollars going away!! Good for them !!

 

[jm77]

IDK either. Nothing is stopping them from auctioning multiple properties right now. If the proposal was all the comm tags or special licenses that they got to use then I would have beef. As it is I’m not losing sleep.

Not losing sleep here either. Yet.

 

[hossblur]

I love it. the same WY residents that think they're entitled to all the tags in the state also think they're entitled to hunt private land free.

The solution is landowner tags. here the more acres you have the more LO tags you get up to 9. you can do whatever you want with them but they're only for your deeded land. you own the land and pay the taxes on it, the game grazes your grass and eats out of your haystack. but the entitled crowd will never go for that.

I'd support that fully if the opposite was true. In exchange for public grazing you allow 1 hunter per 10 cows/ sheep on your land.

 

[wstrntines]

Woah now we’re talking some big dollars going away!! Good for them !!

View attachment 140023

Utah needs to do the same.

 

[LIK2HNT]

Just asking a question.
Why are landowners compensated for wildlife damage, but if an animal runs out of front of your vehicle you pay for damages?
Wasn’t the wildlife there before they purchased the property.

 

[dwalton]

Coursey is a snake oil salesman of the worst kind!