|
Points:
Month (0)
/
Year (0)
|
|
| Who is my State Representative? | |
|
Our Sponsors and Partners:
Monthly Points Leaders
Yearly Points Leaders
|
115 results found Next Page >Showing results 1 through 10
Sort your results:Existing Search Criteria:Refine Your Search:Search Results:cheap hog huntsSummary:
West on I20 to Trent, TX to Dos Plumas Ranch (www.DosPlumasRanch.com) South on I45 to Centerville, TX to Danny Smith's www.hoghunting.com Yearling Spikes?Summary:
This is from an article I posted on the site about 2 years ago:
The other school of thought comes from one of the, no, the greatest deer manager of all time, Al Brothers. In a time when deer populations were managed like cattle and shooting does was thought to be a cardinal sin, Mr. Brothers applied his real world experiences from the field and co-authored a book called, Producing Quality White-tails, changing the way we look at deer management today. His management strategy was based on 3 principals: letting bucks grow old, planting food plots, and keeping buck doe ratios as close to 1:1 as possible. What Mr. Brothers strategy has over the archaic dogma that TPWD is now using to set harvest regulations in parts of Texas, is that his strategy can actually be applied by ranchers, hunters, and deer managers to create deer populations with more bucks and bigger racks. Until the day that deer walk out from the woods with their age, weight, and a record of what they have been eating and will eat in future seasons tattooed on their backs, the indiscriminate killing of young deer, thought to be inferior, is not practical for managing deer genetics, unless of course these deer live their entire lives in a variable controlled pin, living off an ample ration of pedigree. If you are managing an average Texas lease, between hunter error and environmental variation, there are just too many variables too implore the Kerr WMA’s harvest strategy on your ranch.
Weather and ClothingSummary:
Unfortunately, Horn Hunter hit the nail the head. Probably will be a little warm, but at this point there is really no telling. I was in Abilene hunting last year in early December. When we got to the ranch it was warm and dry. When we left it was cold and rainy. You'll just have to check the weather before heading out. Good luck. What ranch are you hunting? Buck Round-Up
Summary: Here is a 5 1/2 year old 8 point shot at McGee Ranch in Goldthwaite, Texas.
Christmas mountains public land proposed sale updateSummary:
QuorumReport.com APPARENTLY LACKING THE VOTES FOR PRIVATE SALE OF CHRISTMAS MOUNTAINS, LAND BOARD GIVES PARK SERVICE 90 DAYS TO COME UP WITH OFFER Patterson cites lack of consensus on Board The School Land Board this afternoon formally adopted Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson’s proposal to give the National Park Service 90 days to come up with a proposal superior to a pair of private bids for the Christmas Mountains Ranch in Far West Texas. The three-member board, however, chose to leave the two qualifying bids on the table for the 90-day period. That marks a shift from Patterson’s original plan to accept a single bid today and then allow the NPS to match that bid. The significance of the move was not immediately clear. In a press avail yesterday, Patterson distributed what he said would be the motion he intended to present today to the Land Board. It included a motion to "award the bid which best meets the original conservation goals of the gift deed." He listed 12 criteria that a winning bid must contain, including plans to win local support, build a network of trails in the property, give youth organizations access and provide for non-commercial public hunts. The final proviso was to give the National Park Service and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department 90 days to exceed the private bid. The motion made by board member Todd Barth only addressed that last criterion -- giving the National Park Service 90 days to present its proposal. TPWD was left out of the adopted proposal, a tacit acknowledgment that their continued involvement in the sale of the Christmas Mountains is highly unlikely. Barth and the third board member, David Herrman, did not talk to media after the meeting to explain their positions. Patterson would only say that the board did not have consensus on the issues surrounding the sale, including Patterson’s insistence that the NPS allow hunting in the Christmas Mountains. Luke Metzger of Environment Texas said that he viewed the development as positive for opponents of Patterson’s plan to sell the 9,300-acre tract of land to a private entity without getting the approval of the group that originally gave the land to the state. In public comments before the vote, every speaker supported leaving the Christmas Mountains Ranch in public hands instead of being sold to a private entity. Because the land is adjacent to the Big Bend National Park, most speakers argued that it made more sense to sell the land to the NPS. Patterson told members of the press after the vote that he was not swayed by the speakers’ comments. "I take comfort from that, that a bid is not yet accepted," Metzger said. "Clearly, (Patterson’s) vote hasn’t changed but others may have different ideas." It’s long become apparent that Patterson and his opponents have been talking past each other on this issue. Patterson is convinced that a private operator is the best choice for preserving, conserving and ensuring public access to the land. He interrupted the first speaker this morning to repeat his pitch on why he believes the private bids for the Christmas Mountains are superior to anything that NPS could propose. He broke into the testimony of several subsequent speakers to ask them if they would reconsider their stance if they knew the private bidders were committed to conserving the land. Such assurance stems from an ideological position – the private sector is better equipped to manage most things better than the government. In an op-ed piece on the proposed sale penned in September, Patterson wrote, "More than any other American, (Ronald) Reagan understood that government is not the solution to the problem – in many cases it is the problem. The Christmas Mountains are no exception." While private conservation of land is by no means a new concept, Patterson has come up against one major sticking point. The original deed that gave the Christmas Mountains to the state in 1991 stipulated that the original landowner, the Virginia-based Conservation Fund, must approve the sale of the land to anyone other than the NPS or the TPWD. Patterson chose to cut the Gordian Knot by deciding that any requirement to get Fund approval for a sale amounted to prior restraint and was unlawful. The land is not well-served by keeping it under the stewardship of the General Land Office, he said. That’s because his agency cannot spend the money to provide proper upkeep and management of the land. Selling to a private bidder is important to the bigger goal of properly conserving the Christmas Mountains, he said. "We can hang ourselves on the language of these five words," he said, or the state can take steps to conserve these lands in perpetuity. Metzger and his counterparts in the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, though, are troubled by Patterson’s determination to ignore part of an agreement that allowed for the transfer of private lands to the public sector for the purpose of conserving the land. They fear a chilling effect in which other private philanthropic groups will be less likely to give land to the state of Texas. Other speakers echoed that theme today, saying the state of Texas needs to keep its word. "If we made a promise, we should keep it," said Craig Nazor of Austin. "To say we won’t honor our promises because the other side can’t enforce it – to my mind, that is like a bully." By this afternoon, Patterson was softening his stance, saying that he would seek the "support" – note the careful avoidance of the word "approval" – of the Conservation Fund for selling the land to a private bidder if the NPS does not put forth a good proposal. "As promised, I will seek the Conservation Fund's support for this plan. And I believe I'll get it. I look forward to meeting with Fund officials and discussing the future of the Christmas Mountains," Patterson said in a statement released this afternoon. "The Conservation Fund is committed to conservation. So am I. We need to work together on this issue, not against each other. Conservation is conservation, no matter whose name is on the title. Whether by a private owner or the Park Service, the Christmas Mountains will be preserved for future generations of Texans." The issue of hunting, though, remains unresolved and could still undermine any attempt by NPS to put forward an acceptable proposal. Patterson is insisting that the NPS allow hunting in the Christmas Mountains as part of any proposed sale. NPS officials have made it clear in recent news accounts that they can’t allow hunting in the Christmas Mountains despite Patterson’s argument that they have the discretion to do so. One thing is now for sure. The Christmas Mountains will spend at least one more Christmas in Jerry Patterson’s custody.
From the Texas Land Commissioner himself...
Summary:
Keeping Our Land Public How hard can it be? The state's General Land Office is planning to sell the Christmas Mountains Ranch to a private land-management company, though at least one environmental organization wants to see the land remain in public hands. It started as a minor administrative error. The General Land Office was selling off the Christmas Mountains in Brewster County, a stretch of undeveloped land in far West Texas, with the proceeds going to the School Land Board. But on the sale map the boundary line was drawn half a mile within the real limits, and so on Sept. 18, the bidding process had to start afresh. Now it has become an argument over how the GLO deals with donated wilderness. In 1991, the Virginia-based Conservation Fund gave Christmas Mountains Ranch to the state. But it was no festive gift: 9,270 acres of mountain and scrub, mostly unreachable except on foot, and so covered in salt cedar and other invasive plants that it was unlivable for most species. "The land was parked at the GLO," said Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, "and when I say parked, it was put there to ensure it wasn't subdivided or developed." The land came with significant easements built into the deed, intended to keep it as pristine as possible. Patterson said that while the land was publicly owned, "it was never intended to be a public area. It was intended to be a preservation area. Preservation and parks are mutually exclusive." The decision to sell the land now, he added, was part of an ongoing inventory process and not market-driven. "Half a million dollars for an outfit that makes half a billion a year is not that much money," he said. However, according to Environment Texas' Legislative Director Luke Metzger, there should be no sale, as the Conservation Fund meant for the land to stay in public hands. "It's a slap in the face to the original landowners and makes Texas look bad," he said. In the first round, the GLO received six bids from private firms and individuals around the country, and the two largest both came with lengthy land-management and conservation plans. Southwestern Holdings Inc. of Houston offered $509,828 and proposed amalgamating the land with nearby Cibolo Creek Ranch, which it owns and partially runs as a practical land-restoration laboratory. The company proposed simple renovations and brush clearance, intended to increase deer, elk, and quail populations and hunting when animal head counts are higher. The largest bid, $652,000 from AT Land Co., proposed turning the property into a natural wildlife reserve for ecological, geological, and historical academic researchers, with hunting only for population control. "It would be a travesty to continue the status quo, so we're trying to balance preservation and restoration and limited public access that's appropriate to these goals," said Patterson. "Selling it to a private party that can work with the deed restrictions and easements is the best way of doing it." Which raises the question of why the federal government or the state of Texas couldn't manage the land. The Conservation Fund originally offered the land to the National Park Service in 1991, to add to the adjacent Big Bend National Park. However, according to James Doyle, legislative specialist with the NPS Intermountain Region, the offer was turned down, "because it would have required legislation by Congress to add that much land." The GLO offered NPS the land in 2004, but it again declined, saying the easements should provide sufficient protections. Patterson said he would not reoffer NPS the land because the GLO had restrictions of its own. "I would not sell it to them unless they allowed limited public access and appropriate public hunting, and national parks are off-limits to hunting," he said. This still leaves the state of Texas. In 2005, the GLO offered the land to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, but they declined. Still, Patterson has not ruled out a sale to TPWD. "I spoke to them as recently as [Sept. 18]," he said, "and told them 'I can offer you a good deal on it,' but they don't want it, because it's not good for a park." According to Scott Boruff, chief operating officer for TPWD, the agency's hands are tied. Six years ago, the underfunded department was mandated by the legislature to draw up a long-term strategic plan and make a list of priorities. "We have 440,000 acres out in far West Texas that we have trouble managing because of funding," said Boruff, "so the decision was made to not take on more land there. The Legislature had not given us any appropriations anywhere in the state of Texas, and we had no cash available to buy it." For Environment Texas, this is another example of privatizing the small portion of Texas that is publicly held. "We see the sale as part of a pattern of poor land management by the GLO, emphasizing profits over protecting our natural heritage," Metzger said. "Only 5 percent of Texas is public land. All the polls show people don't think that's enough, so this is a step in the wrong direction." State Selling Off Christmas MountainsSummary:
Highest Big Bend bid $652,000 Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau AUSTIN — The top bidder for 9,270 acres of state-owned wilderness property near Big Bend National Park ruled out tourism or resort development for the rugged mountainous land that the State Land Board may sell over the donor's objections. State officials Tuesday will consider six bids for the Christmas Mountains land ranging from $10,500 to $652,000. "Under no circumstances would we open the Christmas Mountains to the public. The human traffic would be limited to scientific and educational study, management of the animal population, maintenance of roads for safety, emergency access and erosion control," according to the highest bid, from Louis A. Waters and family. Waters is the retired chairman and CEO of Houston-based Browning-Ferris Industries and BFI International. He also has developed 10,000 acres of Hill Country as a sanctuary for rare and endangered species and is the principal owner of a 25,000-head feedlot in Starr County. John Poindexter, chairman of Southwestern Holdings, has bid $509,828 for the property, according to proposals obtained by the Houston Chronicle. None of the remaining bids exceeded $261,000. Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson declined to discuss the bid proposals. Poindexter, owner of the 30,000-acre Cibolo Creek Ranch, proposes to combine that with the nearby Christmas Mountains Ranch and convey both properties to a charitable foundation after he dies. Because of strict deed restrictions on the Christmas Mountains property, Poindexter noted in his proposal that "cultural activities and tourism" are not feasible. The area's proximity to the Big Bend National Park and the Big Bend Ranch State Park "suggest the potential for limited outdoor classroom, ecosystem and endangered resources education through interpretive programs," Poindexter said in his proposal. Two years ago, state park officials rejected the Houston businessman's $2 million offer for more than 46,000 acres of Big Bend Ranch State Park after an outpouring of opposition. Patterson has expressed confidence that the state will sell the property, near Terlingua. The Conservation Fund donated the land to the state, anticipating that it eventually would end up with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. Officials from the Conservation Fund have declined to publicly discuss the state's proposed sale of the Christmas Mountains. But they have expressed their sentiment in letters to Patterson obtained under the state's Public Information Act. "We feel strongly that the state's intended sale of the Christmas Mountains sends the wrong message to foundations like Rick King Mellon, one of the few in the country which have focused substantial resources on land and water conservation to assure perpetual protection of these assets in the public domain," Conservation Fund Executive Vice President Richard Erdmann wrote in a July 16 letter to Patterson. "Should this sale proceed, the Richard King Mellon Foundation has informed us that it would find it very difficult for it to consider the state as a potential beneficiary of any future conservation contributions on its part," Erdmann said in the letter to Patterson. 115 results found Next Page >Showing results 1 through 10
|
|
COPYRIGHT © 1998-2009 Texas Hunting & Texas Fishing Network, All Rights Reserved
|
|
Email this page
