Permission Revoked on lease land!

[MooseRiverTrapper]

Originally Posted by bushbug

Apparently there is not enough wilderness to go around in Alberta so we have to bother lease holders who have to pay to use the land as well as maintain the boundaries. Maybe try offering to help them in the off season and see if there is a difference in access.

Some southern zones are 90% leased land.

[o.w.l]

Originally Posted by buckbrush

Do the conditions of the lease not apply if the farmer is trying to make a living? I'm trying to make a living, why do the governments taxes have to trump my need for a new bow?



Also, while on the topic, what do you guys think is the minimum 'thank you' gift we should be giving when the lease holder tells you most people give a gift in return for access?

If he’s putting his cows back on it to feed, he’s making a living off the land. He’s paying to use that land, your not


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Full Curl Earl]

At what point does a lease holder lose perspective? They know and agree to the access plans to get the lease, then they break their word on allowing access. That makes a man worthless in my books. If a rancher needs graze for cows, buy it like many of us do. The lease is for the grass, nothing else.
Many understand this and have honoured the deal agreed to. But there are many giving a poor name to all. I have lease holders who say, “I have cows out there so just be carefull”. A common sense approach. Another rancher who Always says no to lease land told me this year that he didnt like bow hunters because they shoot his bails with broadheads and the cows eat them! Who’s shooting $50 arrows and broadheads into bails! No one, thats who.
Lease land is the people of Albertas land. Lease holders get the privilege of renting the grass. Just like a logging company gets the trees, thats all. No stopping access till the next growth occurs. Ranching is a business, if a guy outgrows his acerage and needs more graze than he can afford then he made a business mistake. Happens in all business.
I bet most lease holders wish the bad apples who lease large tracts of land and refuse recreational access were gone, just like most hunters wish trespassers and poachers were gone...


QUOTE=DeadEyeGardner;4054325]In Alberta we have more land to hunt and less people occupying it than most of the world... yet guys get upset about lease land every year. It used to upset me too, but the right thing to do is respect the farmers and move along. Why are we fighting with our local farmers over a few hundred acres of hunting property? Sure it’s usually easily accessible and prob holds impressive animals. Every other guy just wants the low hanging fruit, and to me that isn’t what hunting is about. Go knock on doors and get permission to private land, it will pay off for you. If you want your own lease then apply for one, buy a couple yearlings to graze for the year.[/QUOTE]

[KegRiver]

Originally Posted by Full Curl Earl

At what point does a lease holder lose perspective? They know and agree to the access plans to get the lease, then they break their word on allowing access. That makes a man worthless in my books. If a rancher needs graze for cows, buy it like many of us do. The lease is for the grass, nothing else.
Many understand this and have honoured the deal agreed to. But there are many giving a poor name to all. I have lease holders who say, “I have cows out there so just be carefull”. A common sense approach. Another rancher who Always says no to lease land told me this year that he didnt like bow hunters because they shoot his bails with broadheads and the cows eat them! Who’s shooting $50 arrows and broadheads into bails! No one, thats who.
Lease land is the people of Albertas land. Lease holders get the privilege of renting the grass. Just like a logging company gets the trees, thats all. No stopping access till the next growth occurs. Ranching is a business, if a guy outgrows his acerage and needs more graze than he can afford then he made a business mistake. Happens in all business.
I bet most lease holders wish the bad apples who lease large tracts of land and refuse recreational access were gone, just like most hunters wish trespassers and poachers were gone...


QUOTE=DeadEyeGardner;4054325]In Alberta we have more land to hunt and less people occupying it than most of the world... yet guys get upset about lease land every year. It used to upset me too, but the right thing to do is respect the farmers and move along. Why are we fighting with our local farmers over a few hundred acres of hunting property? Sure it’s usually easily accessible and prob holds impressive animals. Every other guy just wants the low hanging fruit, and to me that isn’t what hunting is about. Go knock on doors and get permission to private land, it will pay off for you. If you want your own lease then apply for one, buy a couple yearlings to graze for the year.

[/QUOTE]


Good move, drive another nail in the lease access coffin.

It's been a tough year, How does any of us know he didn't get an extension because of the conditions?

Fact is any lease can be altered under special circumstances to accommodate the lease holder legitimate concerns. It's reasonable to suspect that's the case this time.

I don't doubt some lease holders abuse the system just like some hunters do. But no one gains if lease holders are forced into buying that land so they can graze their cattle unmolested.

I think it makes a lot more sense to ask before jumping to conclusions.
Then, if there is no legitimate reason, talk to the Lands office.

Complaining on here can have only one outcome. It makes a bad situation worse. Word gets around among lease holders. Poking one angers a lot more then one.

I have no dog in this fight, I don't lease land, I don't hunt on lease land. But I do know some lease holders and I know they are just average people doing the best they can. And I know they are already talking about how they can buy the land they need for grazing.

It will happen. It's just a matter of time. When it does that's 100 million acres that will no longer be accessible.

And we will have no one to blame except hunters who couldn't practice common courtesy.

[bearb8er]

What's the difference Keg? Can't get on it now as a lease or can't get on it if they buy it?

[Drewski Canuck]

All a Lease Holder has to say is that they want to put in a TENDER. Then the land is advertised, and the Public can also enter into a TENDER to buy the land. Highest bidder wins. Plain and simple.

THAT is why the Lease Holder does not risk losing his Lease Land by putting in a Tender. Right now the Lease Holder pays a nominal lease payment, far cheaper than the $60 per month for a cow / calf pair, without having to lay out $120 K for a quarter of pasture.


But anyway, I also am running into the story that "I still have a couple Bulls loose in that Pasture so don't go there" line. They know the Bulls have to be out by Oct 31, and when confronted, there really was just a load of "Bull" to keep the public off.

Drewski

[pikergolf]

[QUOTE=Full Curl Earl;4054589]At what point does a lease holder lose perspective? They know and agree to the access plans to get the lease, then they break their word on allowing access. That makes a man worthless in my books. If a rancher needs graze for cows, buy it like many of us do. The lease is for the grass, nothing else.
Many understand this and have honoured the deal agreed to. But there are many giving a poor name to all. I have lease holders who say, “I have cows out there so just be carefull”. A common sense approach. Another rancher who Always says no to lease land told me this year that he didnt like bow hunters because they shoot his bails with broadheads and the cows eat them! Who’s shooting $50 arrows and broadheads into bails! No one, thats who.
Lease land is the people of Albertas land. Lease holders get the privilege of renting the grass. Just like a logging company gets the trees, thats all. No stopping access till the next growth occurs. Ranching is a business, if a guy outgrows his acerage and needs more graze than he can afford then he made a business mistake. Happens in all business.
I bet most lease holders wish the bad apples who lease large tracts of land and refuse recreational access were gone, just like most hunters wish trespassers and poachers were gone...

Good grief, all this over a freaking deer. Get a grip.

[RZR]

So who pays for the cow that got shot on lease land because they went out hunting anyways even though they weren’t allowed. This is the mentality of folks on this form “it’s my god given right to hunt on lease land whenever I want because I pay taxes and I own the land”. So now a cow is dead and no one to answer for it, oh well it’s just money.

[Full Curl Earl]

If thats what you got from this post, you really missed the mark. Its about the freedom to take your children and grand children to beautiful places all around this great province, thats still relatively wild, for all Canadians. Maybe fighting to keep it open for public access will be a losing battle, but at least some will have fought. I support the good lease holders, and oppose the bad. Seems simplistic, and it ought to be. But it sure as heck ain't about no deer.

[QUOTE=pikergolf;4054867]

Originally Posted by Full Curl Earl

At what point does a lease holder lose perspective? They know and agree to the access plans to get the lease, then they break their word on allowing access. That makes a man worthless in my books. If a rancher needs graze for cows, buy it like many of us do. The lease is for the grass, nothing else.
Many understand this and have honoured the deal agreed to. But there are many giving a poor name to all. I have lease holders who say, “I have cows out there so just be carefull”. A common sense approach. Another rancher who Always says no to lease land told me this year that he didnt like bow hunters because they shoot his bails with broadheads and the cows eat them! Who’s shooting $50 arrows and broadheads into bails! No one, thats who.
Lease land is the people of Albertas land. Lease holders get the privilege of renting the grass. Just like a logging company gets the trees, thats all. No stopping access till the next growth occurs. Ranching is a business, if a guy outgrows his acerage and needs more graze than he can afford then he made a business mistake. Happens in all business.
I bet most lease holders wish the bad apples who lease large tracts of land and refuse recreational access were gone, just like most hunters wish trespassers and poachers were gone...

Good grief, all this over a freaking deer. Get a grip.

[Full Curl Earl]

Cows dont get shot by accident, Thats a criminal thing. More cows die from predators every year, and hunter dollars pay for that loss for some ridiculous reason!
I would love to see a Block Management plan like Montana has, where private land owners allow hunting and receive funds based on cards filled out at the gate based on useage. Seems to be a great program. Land owners happy to have hunters, what an odd concept.

Originally Posted by RZR

So who pays for the cow that got shot on lease land because they went out hunting anyways even though they weren’t allowed. This is the mentality of folks on this form “it’s my god given right to hunt on lease land whenever I want because I pay taxes and I own the land”. So now a cow is dead and no one to answer for it, oh well it’s just money.

[calvin]

Originally Posted by Full Curl Earl

Cows dont get shot by accident, Thats a criminal thing. More cows die from predators every year, and hunter dollars pay for that loss for some ridiculous reason!
I would love to see a Block Management plan like Montana has, where private land owners allow hunting and receive funds based on cards filled out at the gate based on useage. Seems to be a great program. Land owners happy to have hunters, what an odd concept.

Then move to Montana. You would be a happy hunter then..

[buckbrush]

Originally Posted by RZR

So who pays for the cow that got shot on lease land because they went out hunting anyways even though they weren’t allowed. This is the mentality of folks on this form “it’s my god given right to hunt on lease land whenever I want because I pay taxes and I own the land”. So now a cow is dead and no one to answer for it, oh well it’s just money.

Where did ANYONE mention going in without permission?

[Full Curl Earl]

Good problem solving Calvin, your inputs valued.


QUOTE=calvin;4054908]Then move to Montana. You would be a happy hunter then..[/QUOTE]

[Pikebreath]

Originally Posted by cacty

Call the Gov, file a complaint or whatever the protocol is. This has to stop. These folks RENT the land, they DO NOT own it. My family homesteaded here in 1908.

A renter is a legal occupant.

[lannie]

Originally Posted by Full Curl Earl

Cows dont get shot by accident, Thats a criminal thing. More cows die from predators every year, and hunter dollars pay for that loss for some ridiculous reason!
I would love to see a Block Management plan like Montana has, where private land owners allow hunting and receive funds based on cards filled out at the gate based on useage. Seems to be a great program. Land owners happy to have hunters, what an odd concept.

We did have a management plan in southern alberta but it was cancelled. I think this was 7 or 8 years ago.

[Prairiekid]

Not that I could afford one but where does one find available grazing leases? I'm more curious at cost and availability than anything, but having a few cattle wouldn't hurt either.

Originally Posted by DeadEyeGardner

In Alberta we have more land to hunt and less people occupying it than most of the world... yet guys get upset about lease land every year. It used to upset me too, but the right thing to do is respect the farmers and move along. Why are we fighting with our local farmers over a few hundred acres of hunting property? Sure it’s usually easily accessible and prob holds impressive animals. Every other guy just wants the low hanging fruit, and to me that isn’t what hunting is about. Go knock on doors and get permission to private land, it will pay off for you. If you want your own lease then apply for one, buy a couple yearlings to graze for the year.

[lannie]

Originally Posted by Prairiekid

Not that I could afford one but where does one find available grazing leases? I'm more curious at cost and availability than anything, but having a few cattle wouldn't hurt either.

Talk to anyone who would handle real estate transactions. I have bought and sold with realtors. The price is fair market value so it is very fair for anyone interested.
The government does have to put their stamp of approval on the transactions.
You can't have a grazing lease without livestock to graze on it and every lease has its own rules like when livestock can be put on and when it must be taken off. You don't need to have livestock on it every year as it can be rested.

P.S. - Good for you for wanting to get into the market instead of sitting on the sidelines whining about how it isn't fair.

[RZR]

Originally Posted by Full Curl Earl

Cows dont get shot by accident, Thats a criminal thing. More cows die from predators every year, and hunter dollars pay for that loss for some ridiculous reason!
I would love to see a Block Management plan like Montana has, where private land owners allow hunting and receive funds based on cards filled out at the gate based on useage. Seems to be a great program. Land owners happy to have hunters, what an odd concept.

That's funny the Coyotes are now shooting the cows.

[KyleSS]

Originally Posted by RZR

That's funny the Coyotes are now shooting the cows.

Are they required to have a PAL or are the "Exempt"

[CanadianEh]

Ive dealt with alot of lease holders. Ill say that MOST are great people, just looking to make a living. Dont have any issues with them, they are fair and allow access anytime and their only issue is to not have fires, or camp without permission. I agree 100%

I believe NOT one of us has issue with these kind of lease holder people.


on the other hand... just like with the small population of jerkoff hunters, who ruin it for the rest of us and give all hunters a bad name... There is a similar group of jerkoff lease holders. It is with that group i believe people have the most issues, and unfortunately lump in ALL leaseholders as being awful, which isnt the case.


My personal experience with one VERY difficult person. also a GREAT example of why alot of people dislike ***** leaseholders.

3 years ago after writing in for access to a good looking lease, I was denied by the leaseholder, so I hunted elsewhere. A few weeks later I get an email from that lease holder accusing me of using one of his tree stands on that land and dropping cigarette buts all over the ground around it. Had to inform him that I dont smoke for one and I had not ever accessed his land after the denial. Not to mention, why would someone who is abiding by the rules like me, going to do something like that to jepordize future access?

I have been trying to gain access to that 1/2 section lease for three years now. Calling EARLY ( June) to rightfully gain access for the bow hunting season (not rifle). I have had the leaseholder toss every excuse in the book at me. from cows, fire risk, to houses too close shoot on the land( was asking for bow access) , we are all booked up, etc etc...


So this year I called in January for the up coming season. saying I am calling early to have my name first on the list. The response was to call back later in the year as they are re-applying for lease rule changes as it is too much of a hassle for them to deal with each year.

I called back at the end of March, again asking for permission for bow season. Same response, call back later, we haven't had the new rules changed yet.

I called again in June. The response I got this time was we are booked up. ( no rules ever changed or modified) I questioned further and asked how that can be as I have asked since January I should be top of the list. The response was staggering. We have had the same people hunt with us on "our land" for 30 years. They are friends of ours and we let them park in our yard when they go hunting. occasionally we help them load an animal with equipment and bring it back to the yard for them.

So I called him out on only allowing himself and friends and family access to the lease for hunting. once I said they he begrudgingly allowed access this year. but I wasnt able to go on for the first 2 weeks of Sept because they are already booked up. I said fine and let time pass.

In August I get an email saying that weeks are now booked, and that there will be no late BOW or RIFLE season this year becasue they would put cows back on the land on OCTOBER 1st "for a few months"

At this point I gave up for this year.

This guy clearly uses the lease as his own deeded land, and has done so for 30 years. He does not allow hunters aside from himself, friends or family to hunt, and uses any excuse handy at the time to do so. I believe his lease should be terminated.


*edit* In an early post I had said Novmeber 1st, but i just looked at the email from him, and it was OCT 1st)

[7magtime]

I agree with CanadianEh above. Most of the lease holders I have dealt with over the years have been great but there's a few bad apples that will do everything to keep people off after the grazing season is done for the year.

I had a disappointing experience last year when I called for access on a lease East of Edmonton. I had permission on the private land adjacent to the lease and had walked the fence line on 2 sides and glassed the lease looking for livestock/tracks before I called(there was 8" of snow and it hadn't snowed in awhile). When I asked for permission I was "curtly" denied access due to livestock still being on the lease. When I explained that I had looked over a good portion of the lease from next door and there was no evidence supporting livestock were present, the lease holder came unglued and accused me of wrecking one of his gates a couple weeks prior(which were posted "no hunting" at the gate). He then went on to say he didn't care if I believed there were livestock present or not and that he had better not catch me on the lease, he pays the taxes on the lease and can decide who enters or not.

I decided to follow up with the gov't land manager for the area(first time I've done this) just to see what my options were. Not much came from that discussion so I decided to leave it at that and didn't contact the lease holder again. Unfortunately the lease holder now had my number I had called him from initially and decided a few days later to do his own follow up......

As has been said in past posts, I think the grazing lease access plan has to be revisited to get hunters and lease holders on the same page and to hopefully weed out the bad apples on both sides IMO.

[Full Curl Earl]

Does anyone know of a hunter who was charged for going onto lease land after numerous attempts to contact lease holder to no avail?

[CanadianEh]

Originally Posted by Full Curl Earl

Does anyone know of a hunter who was charged for going onto lease land after numerous attempts to contact lease holder to no avail?

Yes, some. Guys poached an elk on the lease I had permission on, they did not.

$287 fine. For trespass. Aside from whatever poaching stuff happened.

[drake]

Talk to the settlement officer....he will review the lease holders grasping history and act as a mediator. Worked for me this year.

[Full Curl Earl]

Right. But had they attempted contact with lease holder but could never get an answer at any if the phone numbers? I know alot of folks who have been calling lease holders since August, leaving many messages, 10 or more, and never successfully getting through. Others on this forum have said “just leave a message that you will be hunting the lease, and thats all that’s required”. Just wondering if anyone has any first account info of taking this route and being charged for trespassing.

QUOTE=CanadianEh;4055372]Yes, some. Guys poached an elk on the lease I had permission on, they did not.

$287 fine. For trespass. Aside from whatever poaching stuff happened.[/QUOTE]

[Knotter]

Read the conditions closely, does it state there is no access if livestock is present?

Call the settlement or lands officer and get clarification.

[BlackHeart]

The grazing lease system is BS!!!

And like Kegriver stated, it will change to private with enough screwing around...but from the leaseholders doing it, not hunters ....great because I am (along with a lot of other hunters, big Corps, foreign owned companies) going to be bidding on them. Good luck to the grazing leaseholder winning in that process. And now your grazing land has a FMV cost.

As to the cost of beef...meh!.....it’s already too high...grew up on the farm, my dad raised cattle AND survived and made a good living WITHOUT a grazing lease. So the concept that without grazing leases, our beef prices will become unaffordable is utter BS!!!

Where I hunt there are 2 Quarters of grazing lease that are prime for a lot of reasons. But there are no fences, and there hasn’t been a domestic hoof on that land for at least 10 years!!! BUT for some F reason this is a grazing lease!!!! And the lease holder likes to play games denying access. A few years ago they claimed they had horses on the lease. Absolute lie!!!! After some pressure they “started” to fence the quarters.....if you could loosely call putting in posts for a few hundred yards without wire fencing it.

It’s been two years since the discussion with the leaseholder and not another post or a single wire has been put up. And there still has not ever been an domestic animal grazed on this land.

Land manager for this area is a useless biatch that likes to make excuses for them. Has to be reminded that his job is not to come up with “welllllll maybeeeeee.......” (well maybe they are raising ghost horses like in the song ghost riders) creative excuses for the leaseholders.

[thumper]

Blackheart - then call your area Land Manager's manager/supervisor, and state your case. Or, talk to your MLA - whose job it is for their constituents, to track down concerns like being stonewalled by bureaucrats. I had a similar situation with a leaseholder and the local provincial land manager where I'd been trying to get access to the same section of grazing lease every time I got drawn for mule deer (about every 3 years), for 15 years. Finally, now a senior, I went to my MLA, told him that just once, before I died, I'd like to get to hunt that piece of PUBLIC PROPERTY. In a week, I got a call back from the rancher, with a short, terse 'permission'.

[CanadianEh]

Originally Posted by Full Curl Earl

Right. But had they attempted contact with lease holder but could never get an answer at any if the phone numbers? I know alot of folks who have been calling lease holders since August, leaving many messages, 10 or more, and never successfully getting through. Others on this forum have said “just leave a message that you will be hunting the lease, and thats all that’s required”. Just wondering if anyone has any first account info of taking this route and being charged for trespassing.

QUOTE=CanadianEh;4055372]Yes, some. Guys poached an elk on the lease I had permission on, they did not.

$287 fine. For trespass. Aside from whatever poaching stuff happened.

In regards to not being able to contact the owner of the lease.. This isnt gospel. so dont take it as such.

But if you have record of your attempts, with no response. Print it out and Take it with you. If you get stopped by a CO, I would be willing to bet that your cleared for access. If you just tell them without evidence, they will likely believe the leaseholder.

Funny enough, in regards to my story above, I had the same thing happen. I tried to contact the lease holder for Months. All they had as a contact information was for a FAX line. I ended up researching who owned it and found other contact info that way. They didnt respond once for about 4 emails.

On the 5th Email I said, Consider this my notice to access. If you do not respond to this email, I will take that as confirmation that I am free to access the lease during the hunting season. I will be going on ( xxx dates and xxx date) for the purpose of bow hunting.

Within 1 hour I had an email response saying no you cannot do that., as we are fully booked.

Funny how the response came so quick, after nothing before when I was just politely asking.

on a side note, I always prefer email correspondence with them, so there is a paper trail of what was said and when. Makes it easy to provide evidence.

[tim1]

You lease experts crack me up. These rants you post about lease land does not help your access. There are some of us who actually do have the right to winter graze leased lands. You should get your facts straight.