Take a look at this place

Help Support CattleToday:

Neat place, that would be fun in my opinion. Lot of money to run 100 cows, could own a place here that would handle 100 cows for half what there asking for that place. I wish the forest service still leased land here, they stopped it on all but 2 places in 2006.
 
Looks like a neat place.
It appears to be pretty remote........not for my taste unless I had a big family way out there to enjoy it.
 
I won't argue semantics
You are buying a 120 acres, the house and the lease or a permit graze 100 hd per yr for a fee
That's what your buying.
Depending on how you approach the purchase whether it be borrowing money to purchase the property vs buying out of pocket as an investment.
Too many variables to say whether either is a wise choice
BUT .......
If the US Forest service decides to reduce or withhold your allotted permits then you have a house sitting on a 120 acres in the desert and you're screwed.
 
Lots of land leases, grazing allotments for sale on public land. And yes someone is trying to sell rights to public lands. Who owns public land? Everything about this stinks to me but there's no easy way to this problem.
 
I like it. Not entirely sure what the house, and improvements are worth. I don't know if they have a PVA office, and even if they did, I doubt you could trust their value on it. A little snooping at the courthouse, could find some comps.
 
highgrit":14ocraji said:
Lots of land leases, grazing allotments for sale on public land. And yes someone is trying to sell rights to public lands. Who owns public land? Everything about this stinks to me but there's no easy way to this problem.

I lease some land from the state of Oklahoma
The leases are auctioned off for a 5 year term as no one has the rights to the land unlike the US Forest Service and BLM land
The problem is there is only me and two other neighbors that have access to the property.
On other more accessible property no one wants to spend any money for needed improvements.
You make too much of an improvement and someone will outbid you for it and you lose it.
I won't go into who owns the public lands and open that can of worms.
The biggest concern is losing your investment as has happened to some and seems to becoming more common
 
Bigfoot":3fp4asbu said:
I like it. Not entirely sure what the house, and improvements are worth. I don't know if they have a PVA office, and even if they did, I doubt you could trust their value on it. A little snooping at the courthouse, could find some comps.

I've only been through that area once that I remember. It's sits at a higher elevation so it has a milder summer climate and colder winters with only 10-12" of precipitation
It's a pretty remote area so the value of the home I would say in far less than what it cost to build it.
The largest value of the property is the 100 head permit.
 
cross_7":lk8cenml said:
I won't argue semantics
You are buying a 120 acres, the house and the lease or a permit graze 100 hd per yr for a fee
That's what your buying.
Depending on how you approach the purchase whether it be borrowing money to purchase the property vs buying out of pocket as an investment.
Too many variables to say whether either is a wise choice
BUT .......
If the US Forest service decides to reduce or withhold your allotted permits then you have a house sitting on a 120 acres in the desert and you're screwed.
All you're guaranteed is a house and 120 acres....nothing to do with semantics. If you have the money to pay cash for this place I question how you got it if this is any indication of your past investment strategies.
 
TexasBred":16g4yns0 said:
cross_7":16g4yns0 said:
I won't argue semantics
You are buying a 120 acres, the house and the lease or a permit graze 100 hd per yr for a fee
That's what your buying.
Depending on how you approach the purchase whether it be borrowing money to purchase the property vs buying out of pocket as an investment.
Too many variables to say whether either is a wise choice
BUT .......
If the US Forest service decides to reduce or withhold your allotted permits then you have a house sitting on a 120 acres in the desert and you're screwed.
All you're guaranteed is a house and 120 acres....nothing to do with semantics. If you have the money to pay cash for this place I question how you got it if this is any indication of your past investment strategies.

I agree, everything else can be taken for no "real" reason
 
Even her in CA you can run cows cheaper than that and not have to rely on having the government as a landlord.
I might give them what the house and acreage is worth but I wouldn't fork over much for the grazing permit with the direction our government has been headed lately.
 
It looks great if you have the money, and are looking to expend your livestock like raising sheep and goats.
 
1. USFS is a TON easier to deal with than the BLM. Both are government no doubt but an Arizona or New Mexico ranch with USFS ground is waaay different and less worrisome at the moment than a Northern California or Nevada ranch with lots of BLM.
2. There are better ranches to be bought in that region, albeit, most at that price point will have more like a hired man home or none at all.
3. All said and done I wasn't overly impressed.
 
js1234":2v7ehnr0 said:
1. USFS is a TON easier to deal with than the BLM. Both are government no doubt but an Arizona or New Mexico ranch with USFS ground is waaay different and less worrisome at the moment than a Northern California or Nevada ranch with lots of BLM.
2. There are better ranches to be bought in that region, albeit, most at that price point will have more like a hired man home or none at all.
3. All said and done I wasn't overly impressed.

I've been looking and I haven't found much
 
Top