Same here. My tenants have either agriculture or grazing rights only on leased ground. Nothing else. Hunting and fishing rights retained by us.
Same here. My tenants have either agriculture or grazing rights only on leased ground. Nothing else. Hunting and fishing rights retained by us.
My only input/question would be; What is the landowner doing about it? The way I see it, and I'm pretty sure the way the law would see it, is that this is something the landowner needs to be involved with in regards to reporting and/or enforcing.
Two leasees in a dispute? Nothing will get solved until the person who actually owns the land decides to do something.
Sorry about late add. I seem to be quite busy lately. Most leases, as far as I am aware, only grant surface. Mineral and hunting is exclusive to the land owner. This isn't really a disagreement... yet.
I have written documentation from the landowner. I'll talk to the person on the lease again and make sure he understands that he does not have the authority to hunt or pass out rights to hunt. Guess that's the best I can do.
I have written documentation from the landowner. I'll talk to the person on the lease again and make sure he understands that he does not have the authority to hunt or pass out rights to hunt. Guess that's the best I can do.
With it being trust land the local sheriff's office has very little authority. We can only really act to keep the scene safe until BIA units arrive. BIA has authority but normally in cases like this, they'll consider it a civil issue and decline to get involved except to keep the peace, prevent harm.
If they chose to act, it would take a long time to filter through the tribal courts and the outcome would be in question since that particular tribe has been in state of disarray for quite sometime. (It's getting better but it's not settled down yet). If they acted outside the tribal court, it would require the U.S. Attorney to adopt relevant state statutes (recreational tresspass) and frankly I doubt they'd do the paperwork for a misdemeanor....
Best of luck, but if your landowner is not willing to step in and lay down the rules this is going to be a continuing problem.
Best of luck, there's some good areas up there with a nice deer herd!!
Nothing screams poor craftsmanship like wrinkles in your duct tape
If they chose to act, it would take a long time to filter through the tribal courts and the outcome would be in question since that particular tribe has been in state of disarray for quite sometime. (It's getting better but it's not settled down yet). If they acted outside the tribal court, it would require the U.S. Attorney to adopt relevant state statutes (recreational tresspass) and frankly I doubt they'd do the paperwork for a misdemeanor....
Best of luck, but if your landowner is not willing to step in and lay down the rules this is going to be a continuing problem.
Best of luck, there's some good areas up there with a nice deer herd!!
Nothing screams poor craftsmanship like wrinkles in your duct tape
I've been dealing wirth this for 10-15 years now. Pawnee tribe. BIA leases land to rancher, who may run X amount of cows, and cultivate X part of property. Pawnee Tribe has their own GW, and also a license to buy, even if you're married to one of the landowners. My Oklahoma hunting license means zero on BIA managed land.
OK GWs are hesitant to tackle some of the concerns with tribal hunting land, as a lot of this hasn't been hashed out in court.
I would call the tribe in question, and see what their laws/policies are.
In my case, we've had two different guys lease the land over the years. One was a really good guy that took care of the place, but kept it locked up tight, (we could still hunt, lessee has no say in that) - but the other guy is a first-rate scumbag. He's had buddies hunt there illegally, and I've had deer stands disappear during his term. He attempted to run me off when we first met, thinking his ag rights gave him authority over all.
Good luck, make sure you have the correct licensing, and written permission from the landowner. Hopefully you can establish a good relationship with the rancher, that'll make life much more pleasant.
OK GWs are hesitant to tackle some of the concerns with tribal hunting land, as a lot of this hasn't been hashed out in court.
I would call the tribe in question, and see what their laws/policies are.
In my case, we've had two different guys lease the land over the years. One was a really good guy that took care of the place, but kept it locked up tight, (we could still hunt, lessee has no say in that) - but the other guy is a first-rate scumbag. He's had buddies hunt there illegally, and I've had deer stands disappear during his term. He attempted to run me off when we first met, thinking his ag rights gave him authority over all.
Good luck, make sure you have the correct licensing, and written permission from the landowner. Hopefully you can establish a good relationship with the rancher, that'll make life much more pleasant.
I would disagree. Yes, there's been a couple of hassles, but it's been totally worth it.
This is exactly what we are trying to do. We aren't uppity and really do not care to piss people off. I believe this is under CNA jurisdiction. I'll have to check around.
FWIW, other information is the landowner lives on the east coast. Reiterate, we have exclusive written permission. We are also tribal enrolled, just not in an oklahoma tribe. For all I know, CNA doesnt really have much in the way of wildlife management and I believe they still hold to the practice of Native American on native American land can hunt as they wish, no season etc (of course, we do not do that. Multiple reasons, but mainly the hassle of confusion by local game enforcement possibly not understanding that).
At any rate, thanks for the replies guys. I'm sure we will get it worked out. As it is, I just check land data and it looks like an oil lease was just applied so hunting on the parcel being leased may be a wash (although I have scene many deer not far from active drill sites).
Similar threads
