Yeti GOBOX Collection

73 ranch sold

You can find an appraiser to support any price you want but that’s a whole different topic.
Yes, you will get different values from different appraisers. No, you won't get "any price you want" in these large land transactions. Maybe in some "wink-wink" residential appraisals, but not large land transactions. Just too much risk and liability being created based on the values arrived at.

When I was a kid some of these lands were selling for $200/acre. Now $2500/acre for prairie land? APR has had a significant impact on land prices in that area wouldn’t you agree? If we can’t agree on that than I think we are probably not going to agree on anything APR related
This is an interesting claim. Like you, I remember when these properties were selling for grazing values, which was supported by an income or cash flow appraisal methodology. Almost like buying commercial rental property.

Then along came the wave of amenity buyers over the last 30 years. That came with expansion of elk numbers, expansion of billionaires, the realization that Montana has yet to be chopped up like many other states, and a variety of other amenity realizations.

The Wilks Brothers are one of the largest buyers of anemity ranches in the area. They bought at prices people thought were crazy at the time, that turned out to be great investments on their part. Did we hear/read of them have a "significant impact on land prices in that area?" What about Jim Kennedy? What about Stan Kronke, Bruce Rauner, David Luschen, Ruper Murdoch, and other billionaires who have priced some of the multi-millionaires out of the mountain ranches of western Montana and forced these millionaire buyers to central and eastern Montana?

Fact is, the prices paid by APR, or Wilks, or Kronke, are willing buyer-willing seller transactions. Those transactions benefit the seller. I'm not aware of any instance where the seller is beholden to his neighbors or the general real estate market of Montana ranches, to accept a lower price for some altruistic reason. Good for the seller. Does that drive the market? Yes, such being the nature of how real estate gets appraised/sold.

For the folks who have worked their butts off for generations to hold on to these lands, and whose parents and grandparents before them, I am happy. Their kids see how much risk is involved in agricultural production and what limited upside exists. They don't want to "come back to the farm," leaving these working families few other options. I hope they get the best possible price for the generations of hard work to build these ranches.

I struggle to follow the logic that these families should not sell for the best possible price or that the buyers, whether billionaires or non-profits, are somehow the bad guys for wanting to acquire these properties. If we want to talk about how tax policy impacts some of this, I hope someone starts a thread on such, because many of the comments in this thread do not reflect current tax laws and tax policy.
 
APR has not given me any reason to doubt their intentions and the role that hunting plays on their property.

You and others have shown nothing but contempt for an organization that has enrolled 60+K acres of their property to open hunting via BM. They also have given hunters access across their property to formally landlocked public, large blocks of landlocked public lands at that. They allow hunting on nearly all of their property via controlled access. They about give away bison hunting opportunities every year to anyone that applies (no fee to apply).

Their ground is wayyyyy better managed than surrounding private and public lands. They place high value on wildlife and wildlife habitat versus maximizing profit producing livestock. Their employees live in Montana. They employ their own land managers, wildlife biologists, they manage game correctly. They manage the land correctly.

Yet, all they get is a bunch of BS lies and unfounded conjecture from guys like you.

If you can find another group that does things better, allows access across their private ground to public, allows hunting, and manages better...or even comparable, then support that group. I'll support them with you.

But, what I won't do is listen to a bunch of untrue BS and flat out lies being told by a couple knuckleheads on this thread.

The best thing to happen to that part of Montana is the APR, and that's a fact.
Naive?!!! Get real! Likely I've been to more real life "rodeos" than you can even imagine.

Your "example" is apples to watermelons. We're just gonna have to agree to disagree. The math, reasoning, and logic set education I have experienced is clearly unfamiliar to you, thus we will probably have trouble agreeing on anything, especially if it involves deriving conclusions from factual information structuring logical analysis and forming a conclusion relative to the reality about APR.
I have no problems with the APR as it sets now and wasn't trying to say that they are up to no good. As long as their livestock are treated just like every other rancher's cattle are I'm fine with it. I also fear the organization falling into the wrong hands and think we need to pay attention and not just assume that because they started with good intentions that it can never happen.
 
I have no problems with the APR as it sets now and wasn't trying to say that they are up to no good. As long as their livestock are treated just like every other rancher's cattle are I'm fine with it. I also fear the organization falling into the wrong hands and think we need to pay attention and not just assume that because they started with good intentions that it can never happen.
As if the BLM's intentions are lily white?

Ask anyone who has ever tried to prioritize land access, hunting, fishing and wildlife/wildlife habitat on BLM lands about how great they are to work with. Ever been involved in a RMP revision? Real agile way to make management changes.

I'll take my chances with APR.
 
... not just assume that because they started with good intentions that it can never happen.
And it's possible that North Korea could send a nuke to the Georgia vs Alabama halftime show ... but current factual information and analysis do not support that conjecture.

Yeah, I know, I know ... apples to watermelons!
 
And it's possible that North Korea could send a nuke to the Georgia vs Alabama halftime show ... but current factual information and analysis do not support that conjecture.

Yeah, I know, I know ... apples to watermelons!
Not as much as you think. If we keep as close an eye on the APR as we do on North Korea I'm happy.
 
I don’t listen to social media influencers like Rinella. You are right about the fed appraisal process.

You can find an appraiser to support any price you want but that’s a whole different topic. When I was a kid some of these lands were selling for $200/acre. Now $2500/acre for prairie land? APR has had a significant impact on land prices in that area wouldn’t you agree? If we can’t agree on that than I think we are probably not going to agree on anything APR related
12,000 deeded acres at $200/ac puts it at a price of $2,400,000. Im going to go out on a limb and say that no one complaining about the purchase at the Winnett bar could afford the land themselves. That size severely limits the amount of buyers. I would rather APR get it than some other billionaire who keeps it a hunt club.
 
12,000 deeded acres at $200/ac puts it at a price of $2,400,000. Im going to go out on a limb and say that no one complaining about the purchase at the Winnett bar could afford the land themselves. That size severely limits the amount of buyers. I would rather APR get it than some other billionaire who keeps it a hunt club.
You might be surprised about that. 12000 deeded acres at $1500/acre puts it at $18,000,000. Now your statement is spot on however.
 
The Climbing Arrow Ranch recently sold for $136 million at over $1800 per acre, unprecedented at the time. Reliable report is that the historic longstanding cattle operation will cease, as the ranch will be only recreational for the wealthy hunters of trophy deer and elk ... highly likely with no public access or hunting opportunity at all.

Why all the focus on bashing the good things done by the APR and no one seems upset about the CA? The cowboy legacy of Montana does need some "saving" from the changing Big Sky, but the APR is not the culprit.
 
You might be surprised about that. 12000 deeded acres at $1500/acre puts it at $18,000,000. Now your statement is spot on however.
Yes, I would be very surprised.
Funny thing about the "save the Cowboy" signs is most ranches are huge operations. Get big or get out. That squeezes out the little guy as much as anything.
 
Yes, I would be very surprised.
Funny thing about the "save the Cowboy" signs is most ranches are huge operations. Get big or get out. That squeezes out the little guy as much as anything.
Well you shouldn't be suprised. 12,000 acres will run 400 head easy just on the deeded and cash flow at a $2.4 million price and thats ignoring all the BLM lease. But alas that kind of price is a thing only old farts talk about. That ship sailed long, long time ago.
 
I don’t care who someone sells their land to. It’s their land…they can do whatever they want. Sell to APR, the Mormon church, or Nancy Pelosi. I do not care. I fully expect the person selling to try and get the most out of their land. It is nice when a new owner buys something and allows some hunting, however, I never expect it. APR may be a good thing…or may not. No one here really knows what that will look like in 50 years.
 
Well you shouldn't be suprised. 12,000 acres will run 400 head easy just on the deeded and cash flow at a $2.4 million price and thats ignoring all the BLM lease. But alas that kind of price is a thing only old farts talk about. That ship sailed long, long time ago.
I'm not talking about the financial viability of the land, rather I'm making a generalization about the typical clientele at the Winnett bar that complains about the APR. ;) There was a previous discussion on the sale to BLM. It seems selling to the APR eliminates a lot of the problems local county officials had with the previous sale. I'm sure they are fully on board now (sarcasm).

https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/ma...on-the-musselshell-river.305691/#post-3167128
 
I don’t care who someone sells their land to. It’s their land…they can do whatever they want. Sell to APR, the Mormon church, or Nancy Pelosi. I do not care. I fully expect the person selling to try and get the most out of their land. It is nice when a new owner buys something and allows some hunting, however, I never expect it. APR may be a good thing…or may not. No one here really knows what that will look like in 50 years.
The year 2072. Winnett, MT.

9ae1c4b2-city-21033-16c1b1c620d.jpg
 
I don’t care who someone sells their land to. It’s their land…they can do whatever they want. Sell to APR, the Mormon church, or Nancy Pelosi. I do not care. I fully expect the person selling to try and get the most out of their land. It is nice when a new owner buys something and allows some hunting, however, I never expect it. APR may be a good thing…or may not. No one here really knows what that will look like in 50 years.

The year 2072. Winnett, MT.

View attachment 206125

Nature Conservancy has been around 70+ years...

I don't think there is a future where the APR gets sold off to make a bunch of little ranchettes... to @BirdManMike's point, the surrounding ranches... definitely possible.
 
Don't know anything about this, but what does APR do with respect to predator issues - when their neighbors are experiencing livestock depredation? How does APR respond to fence damage to neighbor's fences when there is damage done by their livestock? Does APR graze bison on adjacent public land and if so are they subject to normal grazing rates, or do they push for their livestock being classified as wildlife? You can pick your friends, but you can't pick your neighbors (but you can try).
 
Don't know anything about this, but what does APR do with respect to predator issues - when their neighbors are experiencing livestock depredation? How does APR respond to fence damage to neighbor's fences when there is damage done by their livestock? Does APR graze bison on adjacent public land and if so are they subject to normal grazing rates, or do they push for their livestock being classified as wildlife? You can pick your friends, but you can't pick your neighbors (but you can try).
On the 2 Crow BMA coyote hunting is explicitly prohibited.
 
Does APR graze bison on adjacent public land and if so are they subject to normal grazing rates, or do they push for their livestock being classified as wildlife?

Consider the source. It is long on hyperbole and speculation and short on facts. I'm not even sure what the AG is arguing about from the letter. APR has classified their Bison as livestock and are subject to the same rules as if someone's cattle broke a fence. Of course, everyone anti-APR is sure they would like to reclassify them as wildlife. Every story needs a little sprinkle of conspiracy.
 
Not sure the use matters much to me. Seems like if they built a church it makes you feel better but whatever perceived impact (driving up land cost or whatever) would be the same. I think you are mixing not making a profit with being a non-profit. One is bad business the other is a tax status with the IRS. 😃

Pretty sure anyone could buy the land, treat it as a working ranch and the land cost would be deductible for tax reasons as a business expense. But, you know, not tax advice. 😉
Not confusing at all, Just saying if you don't want to pay taxes, don't make money.
Not a tax accountant, But I don't think you can depreciate the cost of land.
 
Back
Top