Wilks Bros Proposed Exchange
- Thread starter MThuntr
- Start date
sweetnectar
New member
If you don't use a helicopter or an airplane to hunt then it looks like a win win.
Thanks for posting up the link.
Thanks for posting up the link.
theat
Well-known member
I don't use a helicopter to hunt and I think its a lose lose. From what I understand, a road can easily be build circumventing the property they bought in the breaks and still access all the public lands beyond.
It is my opinion that they bought the breaks property specifically to keep the road accessing the public lands closed. I think they assumed that by denying access to such a huge piece of public lands they could use that access as political pressure to get the BLM to give them the Durfee Hills lands.
It is my opinion that they bought the breaks property specifically to keep the road accessing the public lands closed. I think they assumed that by denying access to such a huge piece of public lands they could use that access as political pressure to get the BLM to give them the Durfee Hills lands.
Last edited:
sweetnectar
New member
Don't you mean a win loose? (Win for Wilks, loose for you?)
Did you even read the proposal? Snowy Mountain land and access off of Red Hill road on the south east end of the snowies plus the breaks access part...or are you missing that or what am I missing?
Did you even read the proposal? Snowy Mountain land and access off of Red Hill road on the south east end of the snowies plus the breaks access part...or are you missing that or what am I missing?
Hem
Well-known member
loose means not tight. lose means you don't win.
Straight Arrow
Well-known member
sweet nectar, if you are referring to the 40 acre RMEF purchase off Red Hill Road to access the Snowies, then that is a distinctly separate deal, not related to the Wilks' proposed deal.
I thought the Wilks proposal was to swap the acreage with the access road to the Breaks for the Durfee Hills acreage now public land that is landlocked within the Wilks' ranch southeast of Lewistown.
But I have not read the fine print of the proposal, so correct me if I'm wrong.
I thought the Wilks proposal was to swap the acreage with the access road to the Breaks for the Durfee Hills acreage now public land that is landlocked within the Wilks' ranch southeast of Lewistown.
But I have not read the fine print of the proposal, so correct me if I'm wrong.
theat
Well-known member
Don't you mean a win loose? (Win for Wilks, loose for you?)
Did you even read the proposal? Snowy Mountain land and access off of Red Hill road on the south east end of the snowies plus the breaks access part...or are you missing that or what am I missing?
Its a "lose lose"
for the public. 1 If this goes through, we would lose a great elk hunting spot.
2 This proposal would also provide incentive to other wealthy landowners to purchase lands with access roads, close them off to the public, then propose a trade of access for whatever they are ultimately after. Not a good precedent to set.
Last year the RMEF and FWP secured an access route to FS lands off of Red Hill Road. Nice try by the Wilks to sweeten the pot, but they are a year too late.
Topgun 30-06
Active member
Don't you mean a win loose? (Win for Wilks, loose for you?)
Did you even read the proposal? Snowy Mountain land and access off of Red Hill road on the south east end of the snowies plus the breaks access part...or are you missing that or what am I missing?
You're missing the point that people don't want to lose over 2000 acres called the Durfee Hills and that a road can easily be built to access the breaks land that the Wilks are blocking.
I'm suspect the money can be found that would provide the funds needed to secure access to the Bullwhacker lands, preferably via a purchased easement from one of the private landowners who control one of the many access points. If no landowner would sell an easement, the money could be used to build the alternative route on BLM lands
If indeed the Bullwhacker access can be obtained without trading any land, this proposal really comes down to the remaining pieces in the submitted proposal. Basically, trading the Durfee Hills for the other lands that are being offered.
Would the public feel it is a good deal to trade the Durfee Hills for those other lands?
If indeed the Bullwhacker access can be obtained without trading any land, this proposal really comes down to the remaining pieces in the submitted proposal. Basically, trading the Durfee Hills for the other lands that are being offered.
Would the public feel it is a good deal to trade the Durfee Hills for those other lands?
sweetnectar
New member
Hahaha that is some fun stuff right there.
Maybe it will be a Wilks lose public wins....It depends on who that land is more valuable to.
Bivy
Member
I oppose this exchange. However, I am a fortunate individual with the opportunity to access the landlocked parcel on an annual basis.
Here are some factual points:
-The 'Durfee's' CAN hold a lot (A LOT) of elk, but it is far from a sure thing! Throughout the rifle and archery season the BLM may only hold small, relatively inaccessible herds.
-Red Hill Rd. has multiple BLM/Forest Service access points (Uhlhorn, Lost Peak, South Side, and the new RMEF purchase.
-The RMEF purchase didn't open up a landlocked piece of ground. The East Fork BIg Spring Creek drainage has always been open for those who wanted to work for it. Access was available from Greathouse Peak, but limited by topography elsewhere.
-I assume the Red Hill Rd property mentioned for trade is their 'Janet Lewis Parcel'. The public ground is easily accessible to the west with less than 1.5 mile walk from a public access point.
-The Little Snowies Forest Service is also completely accessible coming from the east rather than Red Hill Rd. A 2-mile walk will take you to the west boundary line of the Little Snowies FS.
I would support a trade for comparable elk habitat in the Littles Snowies Area that would be accessible to all. An equal piece of ground in the Lower South Fork Flatwillow Drainage comes to mind.
Here are some factual points:
-The 'Durfee's' CAN hold a lot (A LOT) of elk, but it is far from a sure thing! Throughout the rifle and archery season the BLM may only hold small, relatively inaccessible herds.
-Red Hill Rd. has multiple BLM/Forest Service access points (Uhlhorn, Lost Peak, South Side, and the new RMEF purchase.
-The RMEF purchase didn't open up a landlocked piece of ground. The East Fork BIg Spring Creek drainage has always been open for those who wanted to work for it. Access was available from Greathouse Peak, but limited by topography elsewhere.
-I assume the Red Hill Rd property mentioned for trade is their 'Janet Lewis Parcel'. The public ground is easily accessible to the west with less than 1.5 mile walk from a public access point.
-The Little Snowies Forest Service is also completely accessible coming from the east rather than Red Hill Rd. A 2-mile walk will take you to the west boundary line of the Little Snowies FS.
I would support a trade for comparable elk habitat in the Littles Snowies Area that would be accessible to all. An equal piece of ground in the Lower South Fork Flatwillow Drainage comes to mind.
Lawnboy
Well-known member
I would be for this option as well. Trade for equal acreage and habitat on the n bar. There are a few options that already have a BLM piece touching from a public access road.
MThuntr
Well-known member
I could go for an exact swap for chunking up those little 40s and 80 acre parcels of BLM for stuff that gains ground access to the larger chunks of FS and BLM.
I still need to see the exact exchange parcels but I will likely oppose this plan and continue to oppose dealings with Wilks Brothers. Public land is not theirs to deal with as they deem fit
MTlionchaser
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2013
- Messages
- 177
Not for it. If we are doing a swap lets do it apples to apples. Guys that hunt the snowies don't want some land traded for that's not in the snowies. There is a road in Bullwhacker already. Its just not accessible by vehicle. Makes for better hunting. If the Nbar wanted to give us 2000 acres of Janet Lewis then we would be making out. The public shouldn't get screwed cause some one has more money. This is just my opinion.
katqanna
Well-known member
This just came up on my facebook feed from PLWA.
Robbie Seymour commented on a link PLWA shared.
Robbie wrote: "A coworker and his brother drove up to the NBAR ranch headquarters when the wilks brothers were still somewhat new to the area and were met before even getting out of their pickup. They said to them, "Hey we know it's a long shot, but we figured everyone; assumed you didn't let hunters on and no one bothered to ask, so we thought we would just come talk to you. We would be more than willing to help out on the ranch by fencing or chopping wood or whatever you needed if you let us hunt." Shortly before this he and his brother were debating whether or not to even go ask. They said, "What's the worst that could happen." They Wilks' response was short and to the point. "No, and we'll see you in court." They wrote down their license plate number and left. The Wilks brothers pressed trespass charges! Trespassing for driving into their driveway and asking to hunt! I was in the area last year hunting on some bordering public when I had a 6-point bull coming toward me, only to be run off of public ground by someone in a helicopter, which later landed on the NBar ranch. These are not people who embrace Montana values. We should not be in any discussions with these people. We should be introducing them to a little thing called eminent domain. The land they are denying access to is land purchased for the people and by the people, yet only two people benefit from it? This isn't right. Not to mention they are considering trading land that isn't even comparable. 99.999% of the population wins in this case if we use eminent domain. The Wilks brothers own 200,000 acres. I think they can let the public use public lands without seeing a negative impact."
Robbie Seymour commented on a link PLWA shared.
Robbie wrote: "A coworker and his brother drove up to the NBAR ranch headquarters when the wilks brothers were still somewhat new to the area and were met before even getting out of their pickup. They said to them, "Hey we know it's a long shot, but we figured everyone; assumed you didn't let hunters on and no one bothered to ask, so we thought we would just come talk to you. We would be more than willing to help out on the ranch by fencing or chopping wood or whatever you needed if you let us hunt." Shortly before this he and his brother were debating whether or not to even go ask. They said, "What's the worst that could happen." They Wilks' response was short and to the point. "No, and we'll see you in court." They wrote down their license plate number and left. The Wilks brothers pressed trespass charges! Trespassing for driving into their driveway and asking to hunt! I was in the area last year hunting on some bordering public when I had a 6-point bull coming toward me, only to be run off of public ground by someone in a helicopter, which later landed on the NBar ranch. These are not people who embrace Montana values. We should not be in any discussions with these people. We should be introducing them to a little thing called eminent domain. The land they are denying access to is land purchased for the people and by the people, yet only two people benefit from it? This isn't right. Not to mention they are considering trading land that isn't even comparable. 99.999% of the population wins in this case if we use eminent domain. The Wilks brothers own 200,000 acres. I think they can let the public use public lands without seeing a negative impact."
Bivy
Member
I highly doubt charges were pressed. I imagine they were denied access, and the combination of anger and 'telephone' has exaggerated the incident.
Also, as somebody who spends at least 30 days a season on public bordering the N-bar, I do not believe they are hazing elk... Well...they aren't conducting active hazing to the point where parties can be prosecuted. All it takes is one hunter capturing hazing on camera for an investigation! But with all the phones and cameras in hunter pockets nobody has documented this.
They fly their helicopters, but, in my opinion, it is mainly to locate elk and conduct surveillance.
I don't support these guys, but I'm also not going to slander them with propaganda.
Also, as somebody who spends at least 30 days a season on public bordering the N-bar, I do not believe they are hazing elk... Well...they aren't conducting active hazing to the point where parties can be prosecuted. All it takes is one hunter capturing hazing on camera for an investigation! But with all the phones and cameras in hunter pockets nobody has documented this.
They fly their helicopters, but, in my opinion, it is mainly to locate elk and conduct surveillance.
I don't support these guys, but I'm also not going to slander them with propaganda.
Carnage2011
Well-known member
I actually met one of the wilks brothers last year near the bullwacker road. I didn't know who the guy was at the time, but he was surprisingly friendly. We talked about hunting and Montana in general. During our conversation I asked him about hunting their ranch. He told me that they were allowing access to anyone who held the tag for that part of the breaks (elk and sheep) but that was it. I asked about the people that fly into the public land in the middle of the N bar and whether or not it affects them. He said that it didn't bother him that the people were hunting there, but that people were leaving there stuff there for days on end even if they weren't hunting at the time. He said that they spent a fair amount of time cleaning up after people last year. I'm completely opposed to this land swap because I don't want to see easier access into the Breaks, but my only run-in with the WIlks' was pretty good. Maybe I caught him on a good day or maybe his brother is different, but I really felt like he was a descent guy.
Carnage2011
Well-known member
That is not the answer I got from this guy at the gate.
I was about 1-2 miles West of the road when I ran into him. I had just come out of the breaks after some scouting. I accessed from a different road (the one I talked to you about) and he pulled over right next to me. I assumed he was a local until I talked to him for a few minutes....like I said, he seemed like a good guy. However, I never decided to hunt that area and therefore didn't get to the gate (it looks like the border patrol) haha. What are your thoughts on this land swap mtmiller? I assume you have a fair amount of knowledge on this?
Similar threads
