In 2016, we sold 11 southeastern properties totaling 16,000 acres. Each property presented unique challenges requiring an intimate knowledge of the land, as well as our client’s individual goals. We are grateful for the opportunities to work on these diverse landscapes throughout the South.
Hall and Hall’s Southeastern Affiliate, Elliott Davenport, recently brokered the sale of Blue Springs Plantation. The historic 7,235 acre property near Albany, GA had not changed hands in 50+ years and includes some of the most productive wild quail hunting ground in all of South Georgia.
Surrounded by neighbors that include Nonami, Pineland and Wildfair Plantations, Blue Springs is trophy recreational land that provides excellent whitetail deer and turkey hunting, in addition to its quail opportunities. The plantation has miles of frontage on the Flint River – an ecologically important and spectacular free flowing river.
The main house is a quintessential southern plantation home that was first built in the early 1930s by William C. Potter, following a design by Hentz, Adler & Shutze of Atlanta, Georgia. Edward Vason Jones was commissioned to design a wing for the gun room, wine cellar and library in 1957.
For more information on the sale, contact Elliott Davenport at 423-364-2092.
On October 5th, American TV executive Craig Piligian and his actress/dancer wife Lucinda Piligian purchased the historic Reno County, Kansas Yaggy Plantation at auction for $5.325 million. Piligian is the President and CEO of Pilgrim Films & Television and best known for creating The Ultimate Fighter, American Chopper and Dirty Jobs series for Discovery Channel. In 2001, he won an Emmy Award as co-Executive Producer of Survivor.
The 1,260-acre property was once the largest shipping point for fruit between the Missouri River and California. In fact, at one time it had as many as 50,000 apple trees and a million catalpa trees – which were sold for fence posts and railroad ties.
The two homes, which are accessed from a quarter-mile tree-lined drive, still reflect the period. The south home was built first, in 1892, as a manufactured Sears and Roebuck home that was shipped in by rail. The north house, built around 1905, has a similar floor plan, with five bedrooms. The home was refurbished in 2005.
“There were 100+ in attendance and 25 registered bidders,” said Scott Shuman of Hall and Hall Auctions. ”There was constant and lively bidding on a variety of tracts and combinations, yet the property sold to a single bidder.
To read the full story of the sale click here.
By: Justin Bryan
There is no question that the demographics of rural land ownership continues to change. Where we were once largely an agrarian society with each of us having some ties to a farm or ranch, it is no longer the case as more of us completely live an urban life. Yet the desire to own a farm or especially a beautiful ranch, is still very much in the minds of most of us.
For many new ranch owners, they desire the property but prefer to avoid the ownership of their own livestock herd and/or coping with grazing leases. It’s not that they don’t understand the value of livestock, they just choose not to oversee the issues involved with livestock. Instead their goals tend to revolve around increasing the abundance and health of native vegetation, being able to view a diversity of wildlife, and reinvigorating riparian/stream and fishery ecosystems. In other words, their primary use of the land is managing it for wild things.
Historically in Texas, appraisal districts and appraised land operating with a livestock business qualify for a tax rate lower than other properties. These are known as 1-d-1 appraisals. A 1-d-1 valuation rate was not in place for those ranch owners who possessed little interest in livestock yet valued and actively invested time, money and labor into the enhancement of rangelands, forests, deserts, wetlands, wildlife, and fisheries.
Understanding that the demographics of rural land ownership in Texas was and is changing, and more importantly to support the continued landowner efforts to ecologically care for these properties, the Texas voters approved Proposition 11 in 1995. This amended 1-d-1 of the Texas Constitution thus: “to permit productivity appraisal for land used to manage wildlife.” This was followed by House Bill 1358, “adding wildlife management as an agricultural use that qualifies the land for agricultural (productivity) appraisal.” At that point, if the primary use of the land is managing for wildlife, the land could potentially qualify for the 1-d-1 valuation rate. The passage of Proposition 11 opened the doors for landowners to maintain the 1-d-1 valuation rate by actively managing for wildlife and without the responsibility of livestock.
REQUIREMENTS TO QUALIFY WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT USE
- The land must have been qualified and appraised as 1-d-1 agricultural land in the year prior to conversion to wildlife management use.
- Land must be used to generate a sustaining breeding, migrating or wintering population of indigenous wild animals.
- The indigenous wildlife populations must be produced for human use.
APPLICATION TO QUALIFY FOR WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT USE
- The landowner must submit a wildlife management plan to the chief tax appraiser in the county between January 1 and April 30 of the tax year.
- The landowner must perform 3 of the 7 management practices each year.
- Habitat Control (Management)
- Erosion Control
- Predator Control (Management)
- Providing Supplemental Supplies of Water
- Providing Supplemental Supplies of Food
- Providing Shelter
- Making Census Counts to Determine Population
For more detailed information or assistance with the agricultural tax valuation for wildlife use, feel free to contact us at Hall and Hall Farm and Ranch Management Services: Justin Bryan ([email protected]).
Additional information regarding the wildlife valuation can be found at: http://comptroller.texas.gov/taxinfo/proptax/pdf/96-354.pdf or http://forages.tamu.edu/PDF/Wildlife%20Management%20as%20Agricultural%20Use%20for%20Property%20Tax%20Valuation%20in%20Texas.pdf
The Crow Indian Reservation contains 2,296,000 acres in parts of Bighorn and Yellowstone County. The ownership of surface acres includes the Crow Tribe (455,719, 20%), individually allotted Indian trust (1,035,850, 45%), and private fee acreage (804,431, 35%). The pattern of surface ownership generally is “checkerboard” with interspersed tribal, trust and fee lands.
Over the years, this has created a great opportunity for ranch owners to lease both the tribal and the individually allotted acres in what is arguably the best grass country in Montana. An example of this is the Miller Cattle Company, a ranch which runs on approximately 14,270 deeded acres and 8,400+/- leased acres just minutes north of Crow Agency. This ranch is currently listed with Hall and Hall for $12,850,000.
Located approximately 60 minutes’ drive east of Billings, this 800-plus AU balanced ranch lies in Montana’s finest ranching country. Running on approximately 22,670 acres, of which 14,270± are deeded, the ranch is conveniently located 10 minutes from Crow Agency adjacent to U.S. Highway 212. The ranch features high-quality and well-kept residential and agricultural improvements, productive farm ground, improved pasture, ample stock water, strong native grasses and a strong recreational component based upon good populations of pheasants and upland birds.
It features three comfortable homes from 1,400± to 3,200± square feet to go along with the very complete operating facilities. Excellent interior ranch roads allow for easy access to approximately 1,700± acres of tilled ground and nearly 2,000 acres of improved pasture. Multiple pastures and year-round live water enable efficient pasture rotations throughout the year. The Miller Cattle Company combines all the features needed to own and operate a full-scale cattle operation in the finest grass country in Montana.
By: Justin Bryan
I’m often asked about what can be done to manage for quail in Texas. In response, my shoulders sink, I shove my hands in my pockets, kick a little dirt, take a deep sigh and respond with a less than enthusiastic statement of, “Yah – that is a good question.” These dang bobwhite quail are just a hardheaded species…they only want things their way or else they will take their ball and go home. Why can’t they be like deer and move into the suburbs, eat your plants, reproduce, and live on your lawn?
If it is too hot, they delay nesting or won’t nest. If it is too cold, they delay nesting or won’t nest. They need rain, but too much rain will drown them and/or their chicks. Tasty – the little buggers are tasty to every bobcat, hawk, anteater, snake, platypus, and coyote around. They are borderline high maintenance, in my opinion…but I guess I still like them. The management techniques aren’t the hard part, it’s keeping the quail alive to benefit from them that is the challenge.
Since bobwhite quail tend to be a sensitive species, yet beloved by everyone, researchers such as Dr. Brad Dabbert at Texas Tech University continue to investigate new and improved management techniques to provide these birds with a better opportunity to survive year in, year out. Taking a note from the Tall Timbers Research Station (TTRS) and their quail management efforts, Dr. Dabbert has modified the TTRS supplemental feed distribution technique to possibly make broadcast feeding an applicable management method on ranches in Texas. Since 2010, Dr. Dabbert and his students have been investigating the feasibility of broadcasting supplemental feed (milo/sorghum) into pastures to provide a reliable year-round food source to wild bobwhite quail populations. The hypothesis is that the supplemental feed will allow the quail to stay healthy throughout the year and thus increase annual survival rates, which would lead to higher numbers of birds nesting/hatching during the spring and summer. In general, bobwhite populations fluctuate heavily up and down, year in/year out, depending on weather conditions. During extended periods of drought, bobwhite population can become very low in numbers, which is a concern for the species in general.
Historically, supplemental feeding of bobwhite quail has shown to have little to no positive impact, but Dr. Dabbert’s current research may create some hope. Interestingly, during one heavy snow event this past winter, bobwhites that were in feed areas suffered less than 10% mortality while those quail in non-feed areas neared a mortality rate of 50%. Further data shows that bobwhites in areas where feed is broadcast are nesting earlier than areas without feed. In addition, those birds nesting in fed pastures are showing very high nest survival rates. For more information concerning this ongoing research, follow the link to the Texas Tech quail research website http://www.quail-tech.org.