Wilderness Unlimited

[richdav]

Does anyone have any experience with Wilderness Unlimited hunting club. I meet with someone about membership but would like to hear about it from someone else before I fork out money. Any information would be great.


Richard

Read More

 

[Jamie6.5]

Semi-licensed criminal elitists.
They have been known to "extend" their posting signs beyond legitimate parcel borders so it appears legally open roads and trails are included in their no trespassing areas.
What they represent scares me, as the more hunters move towards private hunting areas, the further we get from our roots. If they get their way, hunting will become a sport for rich elites only.

 

[baxter]

Jamie6.5 is talking out of his you know what. Why would WU jeopardize its leases on more than 120 properties by violating game and land laws? As a former member I know that the properties are too highly valued to even contemplate anything like this felonious activity J accuses them of.
And Jamie6.5, I'll mind slap you: the act of accusing anyone or entity of a baseless felony is libel per se, that is, remedies (I believe treble damages) are automatic without any burden of proof being neccessary. You can bet WU will hear about this.

So if I were you, I would recant your comments ASAP, specifically in this forum, or you could face a slam-dunk law suit. As to the club itself, I would go to their facebook page to see what it's members say. I moved away and suspended my membership, but pay to remain an inactive member.

 

[Jamie6.5]

The freedom of information act is my friend. The problem you have, is that it isn't libel when it's true. The BLM and USFS Forest Service offices/officers in many units on the east side are more than familiar with WU, and some of the guys doing the "patrolling" for WU.
If you are really looking to stop people saying this, you'd head on over to i-fish dot net.
There are a dozen or so threads over there with people's rants about WU's members' ethics and practices, from members, former members and public land hunters.

The land may be privately owned, but the animals aren't. Some "members" seem to get those issues confused. For those that desire the European style landowner-only type of hunting, then I suppose you might like it. If you believe that $1,000+ to hunt deer and elk (above what you'll spend on apps, time off, gear, fuel etc.) is okay, then go for it.

But don't tell me/us that there haven't been plenty of public access complaints concerning WU on the east side, because it isn't so. Public access to public land is important, and when WU clouds the issue they are not the hunting public's friend.

It sounds like you're just another Kalifornian jumping in on a Northwest hunting board, telling Oregonians how it's supposed to be.
Stay home and fix your own issues with your state's game and hunting.

 

[ZachS]

Jamie6.5 is talking out of his you know what. Why would WU jeopardize its leases on more than 120 properties by violating game and land laws? As a former member I know that the properties are too highly valued to even contemplate anything like this felonious activity J accuses them of.
And Jamie6.5, I'll mind slap you: the act of accusing anyone or entity of a baseless felony is libel per se, that is, remedies (I believe treble damages) are automatic without any burden of proof being neccessary. You can bet WU will hear about this.

So if I were you, I would recant your comments ASAP, specifically in this forum, or you could face a slam-dunk law suit. As to the club itself, I would go to their facebook page to see what it's members say. I moved away and suspended my membership, but pay to remain an inactive member.

You're even more full of crap than I am....

 

[TonsOfOregonBrass]

You're even more full of crap than I am....

I didn't think that was possible, but amazingly it is. Cu-dos to baxter.

 

[Cougfan2]

You're even more full of crap than I am....

ZachS, you made my day. LMAO!

 

[baxter]

I checked out i-fish.net and maybe 15 posts supported the club, the only guy who complained about locked gates was a tresspasser according to another poster, and another poster familiar with the property said WU has a right to lock the gate since the BLM did not have a easement through the property to get to the public land.
In California I know there are lots of "landlocked" BLM properties, so if you have an issue you should take on the Feds, not WU. Or buy a helicopter.
As to the Freedom of Information Act, it sounds like you have documented proof-that is, published government articles or reports- that WU "changes property lines" or improperly impedes access by "locking gates" Care to share these? How about phone numbers and names of those in the government that will back you up?

Either way I always get the feeling people who don't like WU think the club is for rich people or is "elitist" like you claim. I think for what you pay and the variety of land they have, its affordable especially if you have a family with children who like the outdoors.
Of all the members I've met in four yeas, I only know of one who was not working or middle class, and he was a Public Defender, hardly a rich man.
You'll pay a little less to join a hunting club on a single ranch with some friends, maybe, and probably pay more for a duck blind than a WU membership charges. But, you wont get both ducks and big game on you and your friends ranch, most likely . So i don't get the idea that WU is elitist. Also, people with questionable backgrounds get rejected by the club and a lot of those have an axe to grind.

I look forward to you providing me with the FIA sources.

 

[Jamie6.5]

I've had two run-ins with WU folks. Both involved "misplaced" no trespassing signs. Mysteriously the police they called didn't show up, and by the next day the signs had moved to where they belonged. Oh yeah, apologies all-around for the "mistakes."
When I asked about them/their tactics at the BLM headquarters in Lakeview, I was told that officials were aware of the problem(s) and were working on it. We had a similar experience talking with the state police, when discussing open areas shown on the map.

Mine aren't the only experiences like this, and if you only got that limited info off of i-fish you didn't look very hard, as there are many hunters on that board that share the experiences I have had.
I never said they locked gates that they weren't supposed to, but it sounds like you are probably aware of at least one, as I never said that. Although that might explain a couple of locked gates that I know weren't supposed to be that way.

Maybe you believe in "pay to play" like they do in Europe. But this is Oregon, and we have lots of public land, and public land grazing leases, both BLM and USFS. When WU members or employees make "mistakes" posting land they're not supposed to, it hurts the image of hunters and landowners.
As for my FIA resources? I am saving those for the "mind slap!!"

 

[Jamie6.5]

Oh and BTW, if I ever catch them herding game again, under the guise of herding a rancher's strays, I will have my video cam ready.

 

[baxter]

You really believe in mouthing off without any back up. "Saving the info" what a load of BS. So twice you found WU members or personnel walking around with signs or saw them placing them somewhere? Seems a little odd you would be so lucky..oh and the police did not "show up", what did you do wait for all those hours and also was there "the next day" for the signs return. If you had as much luck finding things wrong with WU as you do hunting you would be Boone&Crocket famous.
You wont give me names,dates phone numbers only "BLM headquarters" and "state police" I doubt you have one shred of documentation from FIA, you really boxed yourself in with that one.
i-fish.net has specific info on the property issue you reffered to, so don't tell me I wasn't looking in the right place. Nevertheless as a random review, 99% of the comment were favorable about the club.

My friend, dont you think you sound a bit "elitist" with your boasting about Oregon's public land and how you feel you have some sort of exclusive on finding places to hunt for free? Places like that exist in every state, most in the west are better than yours.
Your bashing of "Kalifornians" notwithstanding, your smug attitude reeks as much as any "European" estate owner.

 

[baxter]

Oh, and I might add your story about WU alledged herding game is an old one that's been on the web for a long time. Now it appears you were the lucky one who also saw this too?
You insult everyone on this forum's intelligence, it's becoming painful to converse with you. You talk heroically about doing what's good for hunting, Mr. High and Mighty , but can't even state your case without lying. Get back on your Meds before responding, please.

 

[CaughtSteelin]

Me personally am not a member. But have heard from former members to stay away.

AND after reading what "baxter" has to say. I would not want to be a apart of something with a person like that. Let alone hunt next to him.

We shouldn't have to pay to go play...

 

[baxter]

Jamie's silence on this matter is proof enough that people have an biased agenda against sport clubs like WU and either exaggerate or tell outright lies about the club's problems. Less and less people are hunting, and lack of quality access is one of the prime reasons, and Jamie's "stories" hurts the sport he purports to be helping.
Despite what Jamie says about all the public land in his great state of Oregon, and Steelin's opposition to "pay to play" do you think WU would have the success it has had if people didn't need it? Clearly something is missing in hunting public lands. Like security and managed game. When was the last time you left your truck unlocked without worries on public land? Or how many times an ATV came roaring by while you were stalking around?

You all should support hunting no matter where it happens, we are a sport that is in trouble. If there are issues, state the facts, not smear the company just because they incovenience you with a locked gate or some other isolated incident.

 

[Jamie6.5]

If there are issues, state the facts, not smear the company just because they incovenience you with a locked gate or some other isolated incident.

What if my silence was proof that I had other things to do?? Would that be okay with you? Do I need your permission?
Nope.
The OP asked for experiences and I gave mine. You paid big bucks to this company but claim I am the one with the agenda,... Come on now,... How's that work??
Now you are here to call me a liar,... Uh maybe, but maybe I was just inconvenienced, uhhhh maybe someone made a mistake, uhh, maybe that gate shouldn't have been locked,... Etc. etc. etc. etc. Sounds like "an agenda" to me!!
So lets say every one of the "120 properties" has 2 "isolated incidences" per year. That makes for 240 "inconvenienced" public land hunting parties that wouldn't have been so if WU wasn't around, and didn't have members and lessors with questionable ethics.

The same story one gets from the people in the field. ONE hunt ruined is one too many. Especially if the public land hunter waited 5, and sometimes 10 years to draw that tag. It cost that hunter preference points, maybe lots of them. But to you and WU, it's only and "isolated incident" or an "inconvenience."
Get a clue.
Like I said, I stated my experience and opinions.
You stated your opinions, and called me a liar because,... I didn't have a video cam and 2 lawyers with me?
Here's an idea:
Stay in Kalifornia and fix your own hunting laws/policies, and I'll stay here and work on mine.

I stand by my experiences and will continue to do so.
In addition, I don't believe in "pay to play" hunting, and think it is bad for Oregon.
Anytime one person pays more to use a public resource, they tend to feel they have more right to it. That's human nature.

Want to "mind slap" me for my beliefs? For relating my experiences?
In court? Help yourself.
You have been unsuccessful here, so you might as well call your lawyer.

 

[baxter]

Same ol' stuff Jaime. Put up or shut up, with names and numbers. Your "experiences" are clearly false considering you won't back them with facts and the way you are the Forrest Gump -part of everything that ever happened in the world- of hunting forums.

As to your xenophobia, I don't have to stay in CA, either, my grandparents/mother were born in Klamath Falls, but regardless, what you say about the club affects its operations everywhere.

"Have a nice day"

 

[Jamie6.5]

There is no xenophobia. I just don't like the policies that WU uses, the tactics it's members have used, (as witnessed by many Oregonians) or our game and game laws exploited by big money.

So in defense of your agenda, you come in here and make all 6 of your posts about how it's only a minor inconvenience, and anyone with a bad experience associated with WU is a liar.

Have a nice day yourself.

 

[baxter]

Sorry, I never said any of those things about "anyone", just you, my lucky friend. So, you like "Kalifornians" now? I don't get the K part anyway. Am I supposed to be insulted?
Please explain. By the way, if I remember correctly, WU has about 50-60 waterfowl properties -flooded rice mostly- all without "gates" so your math doesnt work as far as "inconveniences" on 120 properties.

 

[Cougfan2]

Mods, please shut down this pissing match. It isn't accomplishing anything.

 

[SargentMac]

Richard, I will say that I believe any organization that has such a polar reputation between two people (and not much reputation from anyone else reading) is probably an organization you should be doing some serious research on before joining.

I recommend that you personally speak with your trusted gun shops, hunting friends, and local agencies regarding WU. I'd also like to know what attraction you see in joining WU. If it's a difficulty in finding hunting areas, I'm sure you would receive a ton of feedback, from other members here, of new locations to check out.

I'm sorry I can't be of more assistance to you as I am not familiar with WU, but I hope you decide to do your research and that you are happy whichever way you decide.