Alberta Grazing Lease Issues.....

[Jays toyz]

[QUOTE=marky_mark;3916198]

Originally Posted by Buckhorn2

You would be suing someone for information you received on a podcast??? What would your defense be? Thats like breaking a hunting law or trespass law based on what you read on this forum



What’s the point of doing the podcast if your spreading bs info?

It's up to you to vet the "facts" you obtain except possibly if you have hired a lawyer for your advice.
Threat of lawsuits? Really? Are you 12? Maybe get your dad to beat up his dad or something constructive like that.

[mk63]

Both sides need to be represented in the discussion. I don't blame Ranchers for feeling entitled to control of the land because they are spending a *****load of money purchasing grazing rights and maintaining the land (fences, gates, etc). However, they aren't paying market value for the land, and in that sense I don't think they should be able to control all aspects of access, especially when they don't have livestock present come mid-late October.

[trapperdodge]

I hunt in the US every year. In the western states there is a lot of public land. Arizona for example is probably 80%.

The ranchers who graze cattle have 'rights ' to the grass. They cannot deny access to anyone. Hunters walk right through cattle without incid8.

[Joe Black]

Originally Posted by WhiteTailAB

Well when you rent the lease YOU are paying. Why should someone who pays for that lease just allow anyone to march on in as they please?



From albertagrazinglease.ca

So it costs the farmers, how would you feel if they charged you a maintenance fee?

and typical ranchers get a return through GRAZING cattle. yes there may be costs to develop it. they then get return. what am i missing? dosn't change the fact that it is still not deeded land. its a financial arrangement to gain revenue in exchange for lease fee for grazing.

if you want to get a GRAZING lease just to keep as your own hunting grounds, don't get bent out of shape as you are using it for a purpose it is not intended, and you are forced to allow access(if that is what you are doing, kinda sounds like it with the examples you site)

the examples of what land stewardship is expected are put in place to ensure it is used for GRAZING, not for other purposes.

some lease holders get it. some do not. just like some hunters respect the lease and reasonable restrictions, some do not.

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by WhiteTailAB

Well when you rent the lease YOU are paying. Why should someone who pays for that lease just allow anyone to march on in as they please?



From albertagrazinglease.ca

So it costs the farmers, how would you feel if they charged you a maintenance fee?

This is from the Alberta Environment and Parks website:
Rights and Responsibilities of the Leaseholder
Show All
Does the leaseholder have to provide access to recreational users?
As the holder of a grazing lease or farm development lease, leaseholders must allow reasonable access to the land for recreation.

Leaseholders may have legitimate concerns about some recreational use. There are circumstances when access is not reasonable and under which leaseholders may restrict access or specify conditions for using the grazing or farm development lease. The Department of Environment and Parks may also add conditions or restrictions on using the land. For example, these restrictions may be placed during times of high fire hazard or to protect the land from erosion.


Under the regulations, the leaseholder may deny access, or apply conditions to access, when:

Access would be anything other than foot access, including bicycles, horses or other animal, or motor vehicles
Access would be in a fenced pasture where livestock are present or on cultivated land on which a crop is growing or has not been harvested.
Access to all or part of the agricultural disposition land has been prohibited due to a fire ban as determined by either the Provincial or municipal authority
Recreational use involves hunting at a location that is unreasonably close to a fenced pasture where livestock are present.
The proposed use is camping
The proposed use would be contrary to a recreational management plan

Here's the link if you'd like to read the whole thing:
http://aep.alberta.ca/recreation-pub...d/default.aspx

[Grizzly Adams]

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. I leased 6 quarters of land (bid on at a public auction), bought a dozer, spent all winter clearing fence lines, worked my guts out fencing through the muskeg and beaver dams, burned a bunch more deisel discing down the fence lines, and then over the next few years spent >$50 000 on clearing brush, discing, grass seed, burning piles, re-piling, etc. You may want to do a little researching before putting all lease holders in the same basket. There are some that inherited 10 000 acres of lease and are making a bundle off the surface rent, but most lease holders work hard to maintain the productivity and receive no surface rent.

Also, grazing leases are traded on the open market and sell for what ever the market will bear. I don’t know why everyone is so against that.

Coal companies, oil companies, camp grounds, golf courses, ski resorts, sawmills, etc are all making money of crown land and I don’t hear any of them referred to as welfare recipients.

I gave my lease to my brother, in case anyone is wondering how many millions of dollars I made off my investment.

Obviously, the original poster has an agenda. I hunt a grazing lease regularly. Funny, the beer cans and crap left behind by "responsible users".

Grizz

[WhiteTailAB]

Originally Posted by Joe Black

and typical ranchers get a return through GRAZING cattle. yes there may be costs to develop it. they then get return. what am i missing? dosn't change the fact that it is still not deeded land. its a financial arrangement to gain revenue in exchange for lease fee for grazing.

if you want to get a GRAZING lease just to keep as your own hunting grounds, don't get bent out of shape as you are using it for a purpose it is not intended, and you are forced to allow access(if that is what you are doing, kinda sounds like it with the examples you site)

the examples of what land stewardship is expected are put in place to ensure it is used for GRAZING, not for other purposes.

some lease holders get it. some do not. just like some hunters respect the lease and reasonable restrictions, some do not.

Sure whatever you say, I can see you're one of the many who DEMAND to be let in because you pay taxes blah blah blah.


There are thousands of crownland acres in this province, seems like many only want to access the stuff that you can road hunt through lol.

[WhiteTailAB]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

Hey everyone,
On an upcoming podcast, John and I are going to be diving into a topic that many Alberta hunters find frustrating.... our access system for Grazing leases, and the issues around it. We’ve heard it called “cowboy welfare” before, due to all the perks these lease owners get that much of the public isn’t aware of. If anyone has any information or personal experience, we’d love to hear about it. If there are any links that state what the lease owners are entitled to, we’d also like to get as many facts as possible.

So you're calling it cowboy welfare without knowing the facts?

Step 1. Insult the farmers, Step 2 ask for facts.


Please direct me to your podcast, I would love to listen to this unbiased discussion.

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

[QUOTE=marky_mark;3916198]

Originally Posted by Buckhorn2

You would be suing someone for information you received on a podcast??? What would your defense be? Thats like breaking a hunting law or trespass law based on what you read on this forum



What’s the point of doing the podcast if your spreading bs info?

The point of the podcast is to spread information, not bs. There's enough of that out there already.

Here's what our podcast is all about- Offering tips, instruction, and stories about backcountry hunting on public land.
So we look for topics that are of interest to hunters who are looking for info about hunting on public land. Pretty much every podcast episode we've done is in alignment with that. The Alberta grazing lease access issue is one that a number of our listeners have emailed us as a suggestion for a podcast episode. So we thought we'd take it on.

Both me and Mike have hunted crown land and crown land grazing leases. We've also been turned down or not called back by leaseholders a number of times. I would bet that this is the same experience as many hunters on this forum have had with the system.

I get that for leaseholders this recreational access thing is a pain in the butt. I'm under no illusions that some hunters disregard the rules and trespass, damage fences, leave garbage, etc. But the that doesn't change the fact that we as Alberta residents, have the right to reasonable access to grazing lease land for recreation. So when the hunter gets the impression that the system is slanted toward the whims of the leaseholder, it creates frustration.


John, Highlander Hunting Podcast

[KyleSS]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

If a hunter is denied access and he/she feels it is unreasonable, then it is up to them to follow up with the Ag Land Settlement Officer for that area. Most of the people that have been denied that I have spoken to do not follow up with the Ag Land Settlement Officer but yet the feel the need to complain. How can you complain if you did not use the system as it is intended. Ag Land Settlement Officers have jobs to ensure both sides are held accountable.

You still haven't answered my question, are you going to be hosting a grazing lease representative that can accurately represent their part of this equation.

With the statements you have made, it is my opinion that you have a predetermined addenda already in mind.

This is going to be the kind of show with questions like "what color is the black cat"

[Joe Black]

Originally Posted by WhiteTailAB

Sure whatever you say, I can see you're one of the many who DEMAND to be let in because you pay taxes blah blah blah.


There are thousands of crownland acres in this province, seems like many only want to access the stuff that you can road hunt through lol.

accuse me as you want. actually i'm not "one of those guys" i rarely hunt any lease land.

let me reply.

"I can see you're one of the many lying DB's who what public land for their own exclusive personal use(or their buddies or outfitters).."

nice right?

[HoytCRX32]

Originally Posted by WhiteTailAB

Gee sounds like a podcast that's just gonna crap all over farmers. Heres an idea. If you don't like it go get your own leases? We had one, it had oil revenue, it was cheap to buy and the oil paid for it and it was less than $100k and it bordered the NS river and had crownland next to it. Just start looking for available leases and quit crying cause the "cowboys" got em. Nothing is stopping hunters from getting a lease. Guys wanna spend $30k on back country hunts year after year well I guess it's about priorities.

I call BS...I'm not so sure you can lease Crown land just for hunting or outfitters and wealthier hunters would be all over that...isn't there a requirement for cattle?

[gloszz]

Originally Posted by marky_mark

It would be wise for the op to talk to a lawyer before going forward with their podcast
I know if I listened to it and got bad info I would be suing their hides

You seem to have a lot of issues with people on this forum, don't you?

[cowmanbob]

Originally Posted by HoytCRX32

I...isn't there a requirement for cattle?

Yes, cattle are bought and sold all the time.

[gloszz]

Originally Posted by WhiteTailAB

So you're calling it cowboy welfare without knowing the facts?

Step 1. Insult the farmers, Step 2 ask for facts.


Please direct me to your podcast, I would love to listen to this unbiased discussion.

Quotation marks would mean that they did not use their own words, but in quotation.

"each of a set of punctuation marks, single (‘ ’) or double (“ ”), used either to mark the beginning and end of a title or quoted passage, or to indicate that a word or phrase is regarded as slang or jargon or is being discussed rather than used within the sentence."

References

Quotation Marks: Rules How to Use Them Correctly. (2017, April 07). Retrieved from https://www.grammarly.com/blog/quotation-marks/

From now on, I will be citing and adding a reference to everything I write on this forum because we have a lot of butt hurt people that get offended by too many things instead of working. If you have time to nit pick at every single thing on this forum, you have too much time.

[NCC]

Originally Posted by HoytCRX32

I call BS...I'm not so sure you can lease Crown land just for hunting or outfitters and wealthier hunters would be all over that...isn't there a requirement for cattle?

Anybody can buy cows. If grazing leases are such a money maker, feel free to buy a few cows and get at it. As far as that goes, the lease for Grande Cache Coal is available. you could buy it also and have a sheep hunting sanctuary.

I've never had any trouble gaining access to a grazing lease. For what it's worth, I think reasonable access should be granted to recreational activities, including hunting. The OP's assertion that lease holders are recipients of "Cowboy Welfare" had nothing to do with access, but was purely a cheap shot at lease holders.

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

https://www.albertalandinstitute.ca/...ocuments/14872


https://www.reddeeradvocate.com/life...ds-decreasing/

RIP Bob.



https://ashfm.ca/hall-of-fame-honour...t/scammell-bob

Thank you very much, we’ll read all of this.
Mike

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by KyleSS

If a hunter is denied access and he/she feels it is unreasonable, then it is up to them to follow up with the Ag Land Settlement Officer for that area. Most of the people that have been denied that I have spoken to do not follow up with the Ag Land Settlement Officer but yet the feel the need to complain. How can you complain if you did not use the system as it is intended. Ag Land Settlement Officers have jobs to ensure both sides are held accountable.

You still haven't answered my question, are you going to be hosting a grazing lease representative that can accurately represent their part of this equation.

With the statements you have made, it is my opinion that you have a predetermined addenda already in mind.

This is going to be the kind of show with questions like "what color is the black cat"

I'd be happy to host a grazing lease representative on the episode. Before today I didn't know there was a grazing lease association. So I'll be reaching out to them for sure.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I understand the system could be just as frustrating for the leaseholders. so it would be a good thing for hunters to hear their side of the issue.

John, Highlander Hunting Podcast

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

Thank you very much, we’ll read all of this.
Mike

You're welcome.
Here is another one worth reading.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...gary-1.3409117

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by marky_mark

It would be wise for the op to talk to a lawyer before going forward with their podcast
I know if I listened to it and got bad info I would be suing their hides

The great thing about canada, is we can discuss issues as we have freedom of speech. we will be doing our homework on this one, and as always, we will be talking about facts, not rumors.

[WhiteTailAB]

Originally Posted by gloszz

Quotation marks would mean that they did not use their own words, but in quotation.

"each of a set of punctuation marks, single (‘ ’) or double (“ ”), used either to mark the beginning and end of a title or quoted passage, or to indicate that a word or phrase is regarded as slang or jargon or is being discussed rather than used within the sentence."

References

Quotation Marks: Rules How to Use Them Correctly. (2017, April 07). Retrieved from https://www.grammarly.com/blog/quotation-marks/

From now on, I will be citing and adding a reference to everything I write on this forum because we have a lot of butt hurt people that get offended by too many things instead of working. If you have time to nit pick at every single thing on this forum, you have too much time.

Thanks for your completely offtopic post.

[husky7mm]

Originally Posted by 41thunder

Chances are this will cause a lot more farmer to deny access where they can

Sound vindictive......

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by NCC

Anybody can buy cows. If grazing leases are such a money maker, feel free to buy a few cows and get at it. As far as that goes, the lease for Grande Cache Coal is available. you could buy it also and have a sheep hunting sanctuary.

I've never had any trouble gaining access to a grazing lease. For what it's worth, I think reasonable access should be granted to recreational activities, including hunting. The OP's assertion that lease holders are recipients of "Cowboy Welfare" had nothing to do with access, but was purely a cheap shot at lease holders.

Our intention is not to shoot cheap shots at lease holders, but raise awareness that this is a system that is not transparent, and there are access issues for hunters- i have experienced this for many years west of Calgary myself. It is OUR land, and we should have fair access on it.
The other main concern is that lease holders can profit from selling their leases. Money that should be going back to the government.
We are reaching out to government workers now to get the facts, and all the rules associated with Alberta lease land, so our podcast will be factual.

[WhiteTailAB]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

Our intention is not to shoot cheap shots at lease holders, but raise awareness that this is a system that is not transparent, and there are access issues for hunters- i have experienced this for many years west of Calgary myself. It is OUR land, and we should have fair access on it.
The other main concern is that lease holders can profit from selling their leases. Money that should be going back to the government.
We are reaching out to government workers now to get the facts, and all the rules associated with Alberta lease land, so our podcast will be factual.

Man no offence but if you think the money should go back to the government then the government should go in and fence the whole property, build all the gates, build every single corral, everything. And then raise taxes on everyone for that because that is what will happen.

Currently the farmer puts in all the work and pays for it and when he decides to sell it he may or may not make some money back.

This whole thread reeks of jealousy just like those in society that hate the "1%" and "big oil" and all the other capitalists.

"OUR land and FAIR access" well go help the farmer, put in your FAIR share of work and stop the entitlement.

[cowboy1949]

part of my beef was unlevel playing field for other producers. I paid $30 AUM(private land) where lease holder paid I think approx. $2 AUM. I think new price to be voted on is $2.53? Lease holder got mineral surface rights which often paid for lease. My example would be Trap(Flat) creek west of Longview. Oil company paid for road on existing trail to get rig in. Now locked gate with no access at all.

[NCC]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

Our intention is not to shoot cheap shots at lease holders, but raise awareness that this is a system that is not transparent, and there are access issues for hunters- i have experienced this for many years west of Calgary myself. It is OUR land, and we should have fair access on it.
The other main concern is that lease holders can profit from selling their leases. Money that should be going back to the government.
We are reaching out to government workers now to get the facts, and all the rules associated with Alberta lease land, so our podcast will be factual.

You don't think that "cowboy welfare" is an offensive term? It sure as hell offended me the first time that I heard Bob Scammell say it.

Why shouldn't lease holders profit from selling their lease? Every other industry that operates on public land and resources expects to make a profit from their investment.

How do you propose to determine the fair price of a lease if the leaseholder can't sell to the highest bidder? Arm wrestle for it, play musical chairs, or let the largest donor to the UCP have first crack at it? We operate in a laissez faire economic system; the only realistic way to determine the value of a grazing lease is to let the market decide.

I suggest that you stick to the issues surrounding access, unless you are willing to do a lot of research and gain a complete understanding of all the issues. Even then, access and revenue are completely different issues. If your talking about access and then then throw in a reference to lease holders profiting, it comes across as sour grapes.

[Grizzly Adams]

Originally Posted by cowboy1949

part of my beef was unlevel playing field for other producers. I paid $30 AUM(private land) where lease holder paid I think approx. $2 AUM. I think new price to be voted on is $2.53? Lease holder got mineral surface rights which often paid for lease. My example would be Trap(Flat) creek west of Longview. Oil company paid for road on existing trail to get rig in. Now locked gate with no access at all.

Flat Creek is an obvious abuse of process, all too common in that neck of the woods. Used to be an old access road that went all the way around to Sullivan Creek. The lease road was built about 45 years ago and the lock went on soon after.

Grizz

[NCC]

Originally Posted by cowboy1949

part of my beef was unlevel playing field for other producers. I paid $30 AUM(private land) where lease holder paid I think approx. $2 AUM. I think new price to be voted on is $2.53? Lease holder got mineral surface rights which often paid for lease. My example would be Trap(Flat) creek west of Longview. Oil company paid for road on existing trail to get rig in. Now locked gate with no access at all.

When you pay $30/aum, do you pay for the initial investment, interest, fencing, discing, grass seed, breaking, rolling, weed spraying, etc?

Figure out what everything else costs on top of the $2.50/aum and you'll quickly get to $30/aum. I did the math and I don't have a grazing lease any more.

Some leaseholders got some oil money. Why does everyone begrudge them for being good businessmen or just getting lucky. No different than an oil company executive drilling a boomer well and making millions off of our natural resources.

[marky_mark]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

Our intention is not to shoot cheap shots at lease holders, but raise awareness that this is a system that is not transparent, and there are access issues for hunters- i have experienced this for many years west of Calgary myself. It is OUR land, and we should have fair access on it.
The other main concern is that lease holders can profit from selling their leases. Money that should be going back to the government.
We are reaching out to government workers now to get the facts, and all the rules associated with Alberta lease land, so our podcast will be factual.

You guys need to do your homework on this one. The entitled city slicker attitude is probably one of the reasons you’ve been denied access or phone calls not returned. It’s funny how your accusing the lease holders of profiting off of the public land, while you guys are trying to do the same thing with your podcasts. Pretty funny actually

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by trapperdodge

I hunt in the US every year. In the western states there is a lot of public land. Arizona for example is probably 80%.

The ranchers who graze cattle have 'rights ' to the grass. They cannot deny access to anyone. Hunters walk right through cattle without incid8.

This is the same system as it is in Kananaskis..... Ranchers pay to graze their cattle, and people can access the land as they see fit.