I haven't looked to closely at it but it doesn't look terrible.
Its pure horseshit...Pronghorn and elk hunting opportunity would be greatly reduced.
Not sure why I should be posting this and the only reason is because someone else made the OP and wanted an update. So, here it is.
1. This is in the very early stages, but Q has hired a firm out of Denver/Golden to help facilitate the trade. The presentation was given by a Q employee.
2. About 120-130 probably in attendance, most locals but some from Rock Springs, Laramie, etc.
3. Most in attendance did not seem to like the trade, in person/person conversations I had with some of the folks there, none were in favor.
4. The hunting was a big issue, concentrating elk was a big issue, some issues with BLM leases for grazing.
5. Sounds like if the BLM won't play ball the Q may make a run at a land package through Congress. There is issues with valuation in the differences in the land in question. In no shock, the land Q would acquire is clearly way more valuable, better quality habitat, has more wildlife...no question.
6. Q did seem to want to address the issue of hunting their private if the exchange were to happen. First thing, there is
NO way the public will be hunting bull elk on Q property if the exchange goes through. There is some desire to have the public help to control cow elk, essentially use hunters as a management tool, but excluding them from any kind of bull hunting. Pronghorn seem like a possibility, deer a maybe. But, there really aren't many deer in any of that country.
What my opinion is, the Public Hunter is going to get the chit end of the stick. We're trading really good pockets of hunting throughout the whole area that we have now, for lower quality hunting in the West side. My comments were basically, I'd rather take my chances with what we have now, than to trade it away for a maybe deal to hunt cow elk, maybe pronghorn, and maybe deer. I also reminded the crowd that once this deal is done, its like firing a rifle, that bullet ain't coming back...several in the audience said, "I agree with him!"
Even if Q did live up to their end of the bargain to allow hunting through the HMA program, they can take that away at the snap of a finger, anytime they want. Plus, I'm not convinced that this isn't a play for the current owner to block it up, which would greatly increase the value, and then sell it right away at a significant profit. Gone with a new owner would also be any access per the whim of the new owners.
Personally, I don't like it at all, its not anywhere close to a fair trade in value, access, or hunting quality. The habitat that would be acquired is nowhere near the same quality as what Q would get.
Obviously some may feel differently, but I've hunted a lot of that country and IMO/E its not a good deal for public land hunters.
I can try to answer any questions if anyone has any.
