While discussing the issue of property rights. I would like to direct you the Habitat, where I an others have a thread, about the dust storm in Kansas and Oklahoma. I am sure that those farmers tilled the sod, believing that the storms would follow, and a decent growing season. While I do not want a debate on hunting access rights. It is indemic that the result of a few have a devastating consequences on all the rest of us. We hear from the ag lobby that none this can happen, because we are light years ahead of the past. While access to hunting is debatable, surely the discussion about legislation to control, (I know government control, is every farmers dread), to control what they do on the land. There is quite a possibilty that we will be a drought period for the next 10 years. We do this again repeatedly, a lot of these farmers will be busted, sell their ground which played out to the government, due to along period of abuse and a predictable weather cycle. When the government owns it, hunters, fishermen, birdwatchers, will trod the property with the permission of the landlord. If you don't think it will happen got to SW Kansas, see the Cimmaron Grasslands. That was the epcicenter last time, all divided into private parcels.
Land prices...thoughts on future of WIHA
- Thread starter nwkansnative
- Start date
Whats the story on the Cimmaron Grasslands? I never have looked up how the govt came about owning that parcel or what its history is.
Homesteaded like all the great plains, tilled to ruin, farmers bankrupt, broken spirit, abandoned it, it was taken over by the Federal government and the works projects restored the health, basically grass coverage, and tree cover hear and there. There are the same "national grasslands" in the corners of Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Colorado, all have the same heritage. Double down with new modern equipment, and use the ground like it gets worked in say Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, we will have the same result. Those counties never recovered, lost almost all their population, we may see this farther east this time.
would higher "WIHA" payments to landowners be a driving force to higher land prices? I can see realtors pushing sales to potential buyers/investors as such?
M. R. Byrd
Well-known member
Dodge City likely will be in the next time. The human existence here as is now is only because of the groundwater. Without the groundwater or with limited amounts this whole area over the Ogallala aquifer will collapse economically. My prediction is that Dodge City will be headed to ghost town status before a person would burn the mortgage on a new thirty year home loan.
onpoint
Active member
I have been watching and entertaining the thought of selling the place we have now and buying a pieces of property. I have been watching several parcels for two three years. I believe them to still be over priced but a better buy then most. More then once I have seen a property actually have the price increased, even though it didn't sell under the Org. lower price for a year, even two. Sometimes more property has been added, sometimes not. Also, I'm seeing more and more land being advertised as investment land, not hunting land or a actual place to live and farm. They are so over priced that the person using it as a place to live, are no longer a target in it's sale because nobody could afford to live in such a rural place, find work and make such high payments. Kind of going in reverse from the American dream of owning your own land and home.
I don't wish any ill towards families living in the Dakotas but a long term drought may be whats needed to get land prices down to a level that regular folks can once again fulfill the American dream of owning a piece of ground or live in a rural area of these states. Maybe if the drought is bad enough and long enough. These land hog types will be forced to break these parcels back up and sell them off or the banks may be forced to when they get these lands back under repossession.
I don't wish any ill towards families living in the Dakotas but a long term drought may be whats needed to get land prices down to a level that regular folks can once again fulfill the American dream of owning a piece of ground or live in a rural area of these states. Maybe if the drought is bad enough and long enough. These land hog types will be forced to break these parcels back up and sell them off or the banks may be forced to when they get these lands back under repossession.
need rain? What happened after the last "dust bowl" out your way?
M. R. Byrd
Well-known member
The dynamics are quite different than in the dirty thirties. Much of this area was clean farmed with one way plows. Today there are farming methods that keep crop residue that will reduce wind erosion and water erosion. Chemical tillage reduces soil moisture losses also.
In the dirty thirties there was limited irrigation utilizing the Ogallala aquifer. Today the aquifer is the major player. It is a water mine and it will run out.
Garden City 1972, 1988, 2011
At a recent water meeting in Garden City, one large operator stated that he would be willing to look at reducing his pumping from twenty-four inches to eighteen inches if others would. Take a look at the map and realize that the natural recharge to the aquifer is about a half an inch a year. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to do the math. Trouble looms on the horizon.
A good case study on this would be the wheatland electric land S of the Holcomb Power Plant. When I lived there I had permission (when they still allowed hunting) on this property. When Wheatland took over the 40 some odd square miles S of their main complex, they allowed some farming and irrigation circles to be turned on but most were eventually shut off. The KDWP was supposed to try to rehab the land back to grasslands and planted many of the old crop lands, however the drought started when they did this.
http://kdwpt.state.ks.us/news/layou...R-COMPANIES-ENERGIZE-KANSAS-SAND-SAGE-PRAIRIE
Turning off the sprinklers in this area decimated the wildlife. Im sure some lesser Prairie Chickens survived, but 3 years ago was the last time I was there and there was nary a pheasant or quail when I used to be able to spend a day and if I could shoot I would likely get my limit of both. Im sure that area looks like a moonscape now. Even if the area had natural grasses, the birds need a water source. Guzzlers wont be enough. The sprinklers and the irrigated farmland did more for wildlife in that area (as all of them left the corners in CRP than seeding it back to natural habitat will do. Leaving it natural, the only thing that will survive is the occasional Prairie Chicken, maybe some scaled quail and a few roadrunners.
It doesnt help the aquifer that Colorado keeps most of the water from the Arkansas in their state. I dont think most would believe that there is a 50-100 mile stretch of the Arkansas river that is virtually dry most of the time. Its my understanding that until the 50's or so (?) that the river was running all of the time. As you pointed out I believe the irrigation in the area became more widespread and lowered the water table....Im sure Colorado implemented some changes at this time as well.
I didnt live in SW KS long, but developed a love for it. Dont want to see it turn into a ghost town but the drought certainly needs to take a turn or it could head that way in a hurry.
Last edited:
RK Special K
New member
To end the "access friction", the federal government simply needs to purchase easements over private ag land to allow hunters access to the game that inherently is theirs. No different than utility easements, etc. This would simply be a hunting easement. Hunters can hunt and farmers can farm. Problem solved - next.
If it is worthwhile, and I say, IF. It would be cheaper to buy a long term easement than hazzard the cost of an increasing tab in the future. I will give hats off to the D.U. organization, they bought land, or were given land in the 30's. What do you suppose that land will cost now? What would the "lease" payment be? Pheasants forever will have to have old folks like us buy ground, die, and will it to them to make a dent. The quail picture is dismal. If we have birds, we will lose the hunting population first. Land prices are ridiculous, it is far and away, overpriced. No economist would invest in it. It is near its all time high, just like gold, I would not buy either now, I sold my gold, I am considering selling some ground. I suspect I could buy it back cheaper in the next 10 year window. History will prove it to you. When land prices drop, and commodity products are used in the same sentence as "loan guarantees" we will see.
RK Special K
New member
The basic principle is this: Wild game animals are not owned by private landowners - they are part of the public domain. One can debate that an implied easement already exists to allow the public to obtain what is theirs. This principle DOES NOT apply to just any recreation on private property.
Assuming a need to purchase these easements, the money would come from reducing or eliminating "foreign welfare" and redirection of revenue to things that directly benefit us AMERICANS.
I'm not for any additional taxes or borrowing.
Assuming a need to purchase these easements, the money would come from reducing or eliminating "foreign welfare" and redirection of revenue to things that directly benefit us AMERICANS.
I'm not for any additional taxes or borrowing.
Rather than having the Feds create a new level of and source for bureaucratic ineptitude in buying some easement to help a hunter
or a voter, be nice to see most of this big chunk of mystery money allocated to improving age class diversity in the NFs to help the critters first....as but one of the many examples for better bang for the buck and the birds or...for whatever species or habitat.
If one wants to dream, that is.
I would guess tho that there would be a certain amount of land where a lack of roads in a comparably immense landscape could benefit from the idea of an access easement. Hopefully one geared past only hunting use to make the idea an easier sell and to speak less selfishly to the Public. Especially the non-hunting Public who are approachable and far different than the anti-hunting Public.
Where access has been lost most hurtfully, to species and hunter both, may be in the loss of Corporate acreage. Most said that in and east of the UGLs it would never happen but everything from deer Leasing to TIGs and more have found old access agreements abandoned.....with many species put at risk and new hunters finding the cost of access unworkable.
Buying easements would play no role in this greater and greatest issue as one must have a destination for an easement.
Learn to intelligently manage what we have, work to hold onto traditional public access, never ignore programs like the WIHA that work well(other than for the cranky local hunters) and avoid throwing non-existent cash at wild ideas are some of the best considerations.
or a voter, be nice to see most of this big chunk of mystery money allocated to improving age class diversity in the NFs to help the critters first....as but one of the many examples for better bang for the buck and the birds or...for whatever species or habitat.If one wants to dream, that is.
I would guess tho that there would be a certain amount of land where a lack of roads in a comparably immense landscape could benefit from the idea of an access easement. Hopefully one geared past only hunting use to make the idea an easier sell and to speak less selfishly to the Public. Especially the non-hunting Public who are approachable and far different than the anti-hunting Public.
Where access has been lost most hurtfully, to species and hunter both, may be in the loss of Corporate acreage. Most said that in and east of the UGLs it would never happen but everything from deer Leasing to TIGs and more have found old access agreements abandoned.....with many species put at risk and new hunters finding the cost of access unworkable.
Buying easements would play no role in this greater and greatest issue as one must have a destination for an easement.
Learn to intelligently manage what we have, work to hold onto traditional public access, never ignore programs like the WIHA that work well(other than for the cranky local hunters) and avoid throwing non-existent cash at wild ideas are some of the best considerations.
RK Special K
New member
These easements would, of course, be valid only during open hunting seasons. I would further restrict them to foot traffic ONLY. No camping, no permanent blinds, no tree stands, no baiting - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING except hunter, weapon, and ammo.