el vaq,
I definitely sympathize with you there. Considering all the time, miles and money you exhausted, I would be disappointed if the rumor were true as well.
I would think if the rancher was having a problem with the hogs, the owner would have contacted W.U. to open up more spots and extended hunting season for members to help with the problem.
I have actually experienced just the opposite. There are two ranches I now hunt exclusively that used to be leased to spot-and-stalkers in order to make money for the rancher and keep the hog depredation to a minimum. The ranchers found it to be more trouble than it was worth.
I recently met a neighboring rancher that brought in WU just to help him with the hog problem, but is looking forward to the day when the contract expires. Dealing with WU hasn't been a hassle, and the guests on the ranch have all been respectful of the walk-in only rule, but they haven't been as effective as he would like at reducing the hog population. He is already uncomfortable with six strangers being on his property at once during the limited season they have established, so opening up more spots and extending the season is out of the question in his case. While he and I were looking for one of my dogs that had gone onto his property, he asked for help with his lion and bear problem, and hinted around at wanting me to take care of his hog problem once the WU contract is up. He lives on this property and has owned it for generations.
Compare his perspective about the family ranch to the one about his rice property 40 miles away that he bought in the 80's. He has had it leased to WU for many, many years and will continue to for as long as they want it.
I am not sure of the general circumstances of most WU ranches, but I would think that those with an absentee landowner would be far more conducive to your needs rather than a rancher who must make his living from his land, and has neither the patience for spot-and-stalk mitigation of hogs nor the willingness for several parties to wander on his land. In addition to trying to influence this sort of property selection, I would suggest talking to WU management about trying to arrange some sort of agreement with the landowner/rancher that limits the extent to which they can engage in the sort of action that is rumored to have happened at the ranch in question. Secure the hunting rights, and you typically would negate the rancher/landowner's ability to take this matter in their own hands. I can't imagine why WU would not already have this agreement made with the landowner, but it is worth asking them about it.
I definitely sympathize with you there. Considering all the time, miles and money you exhausted, I would be disappointed if the rumor were true as well.
I would think if the rancher was having a problem with the hogs, the owner would have contacted W.U. to open up more spots and extended hunting season for members to help with the problem.
I have actually experienced just the opposite. There are two ranches I now hunt exclusively that used to be leased to spot-and-stalkers in order to make money for the rancher and keep the hog depredation to a minimum. The ranchers found it to be more trouble than it was worth.
I recently met a neighboring rancher that brought in WU just to help him with the hog problem, but is looking forward to the day when the contract expires. Dealing with WU hasn't been a hassle, and the guests on the ranch have all been respectful of the walk-in only rule, but they haven't been as effective as he would like at reducing the hog population. He is already uncomfortable with six strangers being on his property at once during the limited season they have established, so opening up more spots and extending the season is out of the question in his case. While he and I were looking for one of my dogs that had gone onto his property, he asked for help with his lion and bear problem, and hinted around at wanting me to take care of his hog problem once the WU contract is up. He lives on this property and has owned it for generations.
Compare his perspective about the family ranch to the one about his rice property 40 miles away that he bought in the 80's. He has had it leased to WU for many, many years and will continue to for as long as they want it.
I am not sure of the general circumstances of most WU ranches, but I would think that those with an absentee landowner would be far more conducive to your needs rather than a rancher who must make his living from his land, and has neither the patience for spot-and-stalk mitigation of hogs nor the willingness for several parties to wander on his land. In addition to trying to influence this sort of property selection, I would suggest talking to WU management about trying to arrange some sort of agreement with the landowner/rancher that limits the extent to which they can engage in the sort of action that is rumored to have happened at the ranch in question. Secure the hunting rights, and you typically would negate the rancher/landowner's ability to take this matter in their own hands. I can't imagine why WU would not already have this agreement made with the landowner, but it is worth asking them about it.
