Alberta Grazing Lease Issues.....

[NCC]

Originally Posted by ruffy71

I come from a farming background but nowhere near grazing leases. Everything is private so you own it, or rent it from the owner. Pasture, hay crops, seed crops. Whatever. Nobody leases from the government.

Boy I am clueless when it comes to grazing leases. I had no idea that leasing could allow the lease holders to disc, bulldoze, burn and seed. I will offend all the people that lease these lands, but I thought all you could do was send cattle into a fenced area for a time to graze the natural grass and then move them out. That is how it should be as far as I'm concerned.

Is it common for people to have long enough leases they feel comfortable building corrals, sinking tens or hundreds thousands of dollars into these leases? If that is the case, you are acting like you own it. I would never sink that kind of money into land I don't own. I can't believe we would even allow that kind of investment into leased crown land. This system is not what I thought, not what I ever would have wanted. No wonder there is constant conflict between the leaser's and the public. It was stupid of the gov't to allow it in the first place.

I’ll agree that you’re clueless about grazing leases. In the boreal forest, it wouldn’t pay to fence off a patch of bush and “natural grass” that has no carrying capacity. Unless the grazing lease is close to deeded land, ranchers need corrals to get their cows loaded out in the fall. Not sure how building a set of pens figures into your logic. When a leaseholder sells the lease, he hopes to get reimbursed for those improvements.

When managed correctly, grazing leases create good habitat for wildlife by doing what the grass fires and buffalo did before us whities showed up. People wouldn’t be fighting to gain access grazing leases if there wasn’t any wildlife on them.

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by Yaha Tinda

The most frequent lie lease holders toss out there is that family is using it. Almost word for word from different lease holders. A call to public lands has resolved this block in all instances that I was required to contact them.

Quite dismayed when the family using it turned out to be camping on the lease next to the river. Decent camp complete with fire pit, out house and ample parking. Oh and a nice level well graded gravel road that lead to the camp. When do I get to camp there I wonder....lol

I can think of 4 camps within about 10miles of my home, all with fire pits outhouses and decent access roads that non locals use through the hunting seasons. I guess that’s OK but the family leaseholder doing the same should be forbidden?

The only way you know the family was in there was because you had met access conditions so what is the problem?

[NCC]

Originally Posted by Yaha Tinda

The most frequent lie lease holders toss out there is that family is using it. Almost word for word from different lease holders. A call to public lands has resolved this block in all instances that I was required to contact them.

Quite dismayed when the family using it turned out to be camping on the lease next to the river. Decent camp complete with fire pit, out house and ample parking. Oh and a nice level well graded gravel road that lead to the camp. When do I get to camp there I wonder....lol

Your posts remind of a woman who uses her personality for birth control. Not surprised that lease holders discourage you from accessing their lease. Complaining about a fire pit, an outhouse and a gravel road destroys your credibility and comes across as pure jealousy.

[ruffy71]

Originally Posted by NCC

I’ll agree that you’re clueless about grazing leases. In the boreal forest, it wouldn’t pay to fence off a patch of bush and “natural grass” that has no carrying capacity. Unless the grazing lease is close to deeded land, ranchers need corrals to get their cows loaded out in the fall. Not sure how building a set of pens figures into your logic. When a leaseholder sells the lease, he hopes to get reimbursed for those improvements.

When managed correctly, grazing leases create good habitat for wildlife by doing what the grass fires and buffalo did before us whities showed up. People wouldn’t be fighting to gain access grazing leases if there wasn’t any wildlife on them.

I'm not clueless about why you would need to push down trees to make good grazing for cows. But thanks for assuming I'm an idiot for not liking how grazing leases are run in this province. My basic point is that grazing leases are treated too similar to private land. You can make investments, improvements, even designate who they will go to if you don't want it anymore. That inevitably leads to strong feelings about access to "your land" er I mean "your lease".

Leases should be natural places that support grazing on their own. If you have to pour hundred and hundreds of hours and lots of money to make it worth grazing.... don't. There should be minimal investment, and that way any one using the lease is not so invested and then angry when other people want a say in how things go on that land.

[NCC]

I apologize for the insult - it was unnecessary.

Overall, grazing leases are good for hunters and for wildlife. Wildlife (mice excluded) don't thrive on old dead grass and trees. Without the cows doing what the buffalo used to do, the prairies would be covered with old dead grass and scrub brush. Look out west; where there are cows, there is good grass (the wild horses and game can go anywhere and they feed where the cows have grazed). In the boreal forest the lease holders are allowed to clear 20-25% of the lease. That 25% provides a lot of high quality feed immediately adjacent to great habitat. Old mature forest is good habitat for squirrels and marten but doesn't provide a bunch of grazing for ungulates. As I've stated before, if the ranchers were using 100% of the grass and damaging the habitat, hunters wouldn't be worries about access because the game wouldn't be there.

Access is a completely different concern. That has nothing to do with land care, cost per AUM, damaging riparian areas, camp sites, being too rich, not having cows on it, or turning a profit when the lease is sold. I've never had any issues gaining access to a lease (even when making cold calls while antelope hunting) and from what I've read on here and what my friends have experienced, all access issues have been quickly sorted out with a phone call to the right government office.

If the real issue is access or habitat damage, call SRD and have the problem dealt with. If you think ranchers are making too much money and getting something for nothing, buy some cows and get your own grazing lease. Cows and leases sell on the open market every day.

If the issue is jealousy, I don't have any suggestions.

[ruffy71]

It's not jealousy, I'm not against leases, or ranching cows. My understanding of the nature of leased crown land was wrong. I would not have gone down the road of allowing access to grazing, to end up looking so similar to what I or any other farmer would do with owned, private land. That's all I'm trying to say.

[JDK71]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

I think these threads bashing and insulting farmers and ranchers are great. Locking up more and more land to the "out of towners" with every post. Win Win

yep I could not agree more

[Yaha Tinda]

Originally Posted by NCC

Referring to grazing leases as “cowboy welfare” demonstrates that you are completely biased and don’t know WTF you’re talking about.

Really, just because you don't like the moniker doesn't indicate it is biased or comes from ignorance. Your hurt feelings don't mean squat,suck it up princess.

Lease holders are stealing money from the residents of Alberta. What would you prefer we call them,thieves?

Your ilk is trying to protect what you are getting for free, under the guise of grazing grass, which is the only thing you are entitled to.

[hillbillyreefer]

Originally Posted by Yaha Tinda

Really, just because you don't like the moniker doesn't indicate it is biased or comes from ignorance. Your hurt feelings don't mean squat,suck it up princess.

Lease holders are stealing money from the residents of Alberta. What would you prefer we call them,thieves?

Your ilk is trying to protect what you are getting for free, under the guise of grazing grass, which is the only thing you are entitled to.

So lease holders are entitled thieves. Thanks for that Yaha Tinda.

I’m beginning to think your attitude may be causing some of your access issues.

[AlbertaWild]

here is one... there is one GRL who sends you an application to you to fill out to access the GRL and then you sign it and send it back then they give you a day you can access it on the form and from where they choose and to carry the form with you , but there is a whole lot more grl to access from. my opinion is just a letter when you can access the whole grl they are leasing is a better way...its all crown land that is being leased we should have say on were we can enter from.. as long as we are parked in a safe way and not going across private land, unless we have permission too.

[R3illy]

I'm really torn on the topic of leases. I feel for the lease holders while also understand the issues hunters face. A new property I bought is surrounded with all sorts of leases. Cows were on the leases till nov 20th(on purpose) Most of the leases also have locked gates that no one can get through except the lease holders(on purpose).

I decided its better to meet the leaseholders to discuss access and was granted permission even when cattle were on(but never went).We ended up hunting all private land anyways and had great year but what I'm seeing is what makes a lot of hunters upset.

There is a battle between users and I'm not sure what the solution is. I know I dont blame the lease holders when they do what they do.

[Yaha Tinda]

Originally Posted by hillbillyreefer

....Thanks for that Yaha Tinda....

FOUR wHAT?

[MugEye]

I’m a leaseholder and a hunter that hunts on leases all over the province. I have had some issues with other holders ( there phone numbers are no longer in service ) that drives me nuts ! Mostly when I can talk to the lease holder they give me permission. Foot access . I hear a lot of guys crying about locked gates . I give permission and I gain others permission and the gates stay locked , I got two legs I jump over and go hunting . Locked gates are just there to keep these lazy road and quad hunters away.

P.s I’m all for wilderness areas like castle , bighorn. I’ll probably go hunting there after the free for all is shut down .

[ruffy71]

Originally Posted by MugEye

I’m a leaseholder and a hunter that hunts on leases all over the province. I have had some issues with other holders ( there phone numbers are no longer in service ) that drives me nuts ! Mostly when I can talk to the lease holder they give me permission. Foot access . I hear a lot of guys crying about locked gates . I give permission and I gain others permission and the gates stay locked , I got two legs I jump over and go hunting . Locked gates are just there to keep these lazy road and quad hunters away.

P.s I’m all for wilderness areas like castle , bighorn. I’ll probably go hunting there after the free for all is shut down .

Yeeesh everything goes round and round. MugEye is proposing exactly what all the quadders and campers in the Bighorn thread are upset about.

What this is really about is numbers. 50, 60, years ago, there would be space enough for all. Now there is not enough room for ranchers to deny access, put up locked gates, not enough room for the quad riders, the horsey people, the hiker-hunters. As this gets worse, everybody looks to stake their claim, affirm how tough it is for them versus everybody else.

In reality, it will settle down to 'how can this space be used by the most people, for the most good, without wrecking the space itself'. People that like to use machines, or horses, or campers, or have lots of cows, all take up a disproportionate amount of the space, or leave the biggest impact on the space. They will inevitably need to bend to the land itself and the people willing to tread upon it with their own 2 feet.

[pikergolf]

Originally Posted by ruffy71

Yeeesh everything goes round and round. MugEye is proposing exactly what all the quadders and campers in the Bighorn thread are upset about.

What this is really about is numbers. 50, 60, years ago, there would be space enough for all. Now there is not enough room for ranchers to deny access, put up locked gates, not enough room for the quad riders, the horsey people, the hiker-hunters. As this gets worse, everybody looks to stake their claim, affirm how tough it is for them versus everybody else.

In reality, it will settle down to 'how can this space be used by the most people, for the most good, without wrecking the space itself'. People that like to use machines, or horses, or campers, or have lots of cows, all take up a disproportionate amount of the space, or leave the biggest impact on the space. They will inevitably need to bend to the land itself and the people willing to tread upon it with their own 2 feet.

Nice post. Hopefully that last paragraph, is how it turns out, although the cattle can stay, it needs to be grazed. May be the streams need protection from the cattle, fencing would be nice.

[243plus]

Originally Posted by pikergolf

Nice post. Hopefully that last paragraph, is how it turns out, although the cattle can stay, it needs to be grazed. May be the streams need protection from the cattle, fencing would be nice.

Educate me.

Why would cattle need to be in the back country? Certainly they are needed on grasslands, especially on native prairie grass, where they emulated the required disturbance that buffalo had, but why in the Big Horn? Outside some grazing reserves, I am not aware of many tracts of land that have open grasslands.

I certainly agree something needs to be done about cattle impact on streams. The best I am aware of is off-stream watering, along with fencing.

[pikergolf]

Originally Posted by 243plus

Educate me.

Why would cattle need to be in the back country? Certainly they are needed on grasslands, especially on native prairie grass, where they emulated the required disturbance that buffalo had, but why in the Big Horn? Outside some grazing reserves, I am not aware of many tracts of land that have open grasslands.

I certainly agree something needs to be done about cattle impact on streams. The best I am aware of is off-stream watering, along with fencing.

I was speaking of the grasslands, come down to the SE, lots of grassland.

[243plus]

Originally Posted by pikergolf

I was speaking of the grasslands, come down to the SE, lots of grassland.

OK...we are in agreement! Yup, been there and hunted more than once.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by AlbertaWild

here is one... there is one GRL who sends you an application to you to fill out to access the GRL and then you sign it and send it back then they give you a day you can access it on the form and from where they choose and to carry the form with you , but there is a whole lot more grl to access from. my opinion is just a letter when you can access the whole grl they are leasing is a better way...its all crown land that is being leased we should have say on were we can enter from.. as long as we are parked in a safe way and not going across private land, unless we have permission too.

I would call up the local Lands officer and ask to see this lease's access management plan that allows them to operate in this fashion.

[HoytCRX32]

Originally Posted by ruffy71

I'm not clueless about why you would need to push down trees to make good grazing for cows. But thanks for assuming I'm an idiot for not liking how grazing leases are run in this province. My basic point is that grazing leases are treated too similar to private land. You can make investments, improvements, even designate who they will go to if you don't want it anymore. That inevitably leads to strong feelings about access to "your land" er I mean "your lease".

Leases should be natural places that support grazing on their own. If you have to pour hundred and hundreds of hours and lots of money to make it worth grazing.... don't. There should be minimal investment, and that way any one using the lease is not so invested and then angry when other people want a say in how things go on that land.

One of the best posts regarding this subject.

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by 338Bluff

No advertising then? Just curious. Doing it solely as a hobby?

Not one dollar has been paid to us, no free gear, nothing.

John- HHP

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Just doing some research on this subject and was having a look at the Alberta grazing leaseholders association webpage. Under the "about us" page it says this about recreational use of grazing leases:

"A grazing leaseholder is to a lease the same as a park warden is to a national park. They are local stewards put in place to look after the land. In a broad sense, the lessee helps protect all things on the land beyond the grass their cows graze, including the aesthetic, wildlife and recreational values."

I have no doubt that most ranchers are excellent stewards of the land. But to make the park warden analogy seems to be taking it a little far. The leases are crown land managed by the province. Am I wrong?

John, HHP

[Deer Hunter]

The "steward" word is used so that control is assured. With control comes compensation on surface revenue and lease sale. With compensation and control, the leases often get treated as private land by some leaseholders.

Watch how many times that this S word gets used. It's by design.

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

The "steward" word is used so that control is assured. With control comes compensation on surface revenue and lease sale. With compensation and control, the leases often get treated as private land by some leaseholders.

Watch how many times that this S word gets used. It's by design.

Crown land needs stewards. Who better than a rancher .
Bonus is providing food for those with a 20'x20' chunk of "pasture"

[Deer Hunter]

There is lots of crown land in the province that has no leaseholder stewardship. It is still there surprisingly.

[MugEye]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

There is lots of crown land in the province that has no leaseholder stewardship. It is still there surprisingly.

lol . Oh is it . And it’s shrinking every day . Just keep steam rolling the land and you’ll see more of it get shut down to the public.

Most rangers are good stewards but not all

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by MugEye

lol . Oh is it . And it’s shrinking every day . Just keep steam rolling the land and you’ll see more of it get shut down to the public.

Most rangers are good stewards but not all

Ok bullying the public with threats that access to crown leases will get shut down only strengthens the opposition to the way leases are currently governed.

[MugEye]

Bullying! . Just keep watching. Look in 5 years . Your not going to believe your eyes . It’s not going to look good for us hunters trust me . I don’t like it . But it will happen.

[Deer Hunter]

I'm glad you have your crystal ball out....

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by MugEye

Bullying! . Just keep watching. Look in 5 years . Your not going to believe your eyes . It’s not going to look good for us hunters trust me . I don’t like it . But it will happen.

I don't know if it will be that bad in 5 years. There's lots of crown land in Alberta. Lots of hunting opportunity. But vehicle access is what will change. Even that, there's only so much land that can get wildland park status.

Plus if we get a few more winters like this one, the crown land will be holding some real cranker muleys! Could be awesome hunting in 5 years!
Best start building priority points....

John, HHP