Lease Land

Originally Posted by grandslamer

for christ sakes read what i said
we put the bulls on there so we could have some control

I DID read what you said, in no way am i defending vandals and poachers.

[grandslamer]

not right in your books?? well maybe the next book you read should be hooked on phonics..

you took one sentence and keep dwelling on it post the whole quote we let anyone hunt but now we have a way to kick out people we catch cutting our fences and gates and cutting trees .or should every farm just bend over.we have never kicked out legit hunter my father wouldnt allow it he say they paid for thier tickets let them hunt they arent my deer..

and all the talk about OUR land caus in owned by the province ..go in to th parliment building or any other provincally owned building and lay down and take a nap se how long till u get kicked out or OUR property

[Vindalbakken]

Originally Posted by thumper

I'd be interested to know how the annual lease cost of a full section of grazing lease compares to fair market value of rental of a full section of similar deeded land. (with the same conditions of responsibilities)
This would tell us if grazing leases are in fact taxpayer subsidies to livestock producers (as is widely assumed) or not.

When I see ranches being advertised for sale, they always mention the amount of land held under grazing lease, and this seems to add significant value to their holdings, even though they don't hold title. This would suggest that grazing leases cost less than renting similar deeded property from other ranchers.

However, I don't know for a fact if there is a value disparity.

I can speak to this one. Currently I have been offered $25/AUM for yearlings on my pasture. I know of two contracts that are getting $35/AUM for bulls on pasture. The gov't rate for grazing lease on pasture land in this region is $2.32/AUM. The obligation of the leaseholder for maintenance of infrastructure is the same on my land as it is on the gov't land - there is no increased costs incurred in fencing, waterways, access roads etc. Leaseholders on my private property have rights to the grass only for the four-six months of the grazing season - no more. Decide for yourself if the ranchmen on gov't grazing leases are being subsidized at taxpayer expense.

As far as the sale of ranchlands goes, the lease contracts are sold as capital property for the same commercial value as deed to the land. That is WRONG.

[BUD]

Originally Posted by grandslamer

gezz bud you have to be the only one who didnt get it
he has lot 6 horses over the 3 generations his family has ranched and one time 2 horse were shot at the same time if you dont think it can happed watch the news 5 horses were shot around bently this year all at the sametime

Sorry , dont jeeze me , your the only one who didnt get it , read his first post, he said over the past year , but now he,s changed it in his last post , a spelling mistake .

Originally Posted by BUD

Sorry , dont jeeze me , your the only one who didnt get it , read his first post, he said over the past year , but now he,s changed it in his last post , a spelling mistake .

That's right Bud, and everyone new it was a spelling error quite some time ago.

[packhuntr]

Grandslamer, im asking cause i dont know.... Could you legally prevent access to that leased quarter. I think if you own land completely surrounding a public lake, you must provide reasonable access to it. What that might mean though in its self im not sure about either.

keep a strain on er.

[BUD]

Originally Posted by 7 Ultra

Sorry bud it was a spelling mastake i did mean over the years. Lets just all work together in order to hunt together, the more we can educate the younger hunters and older that not all farmers only have leased land and yes you would have to travel across my private land to get to the lease makes me the guy you have to get along with.But i still believe in hunting on lease land

Well thanks for clearing that up , now l,ll shut up.
Over the past year of hunting , meaning from Sept to Dec , just seemed like a lot of stock to be shot on one piece of property in just 3 months by hunters ,carry on.

[BUD]

Originally Posted by grandslamer

gezz bud you have to be the only one who didnt get it
he has lot 6 horses over the 3 generations his family has ranched and one time 2 horse were shot at the same time if you dont think it can happed watch the news 5 horses were shot around bently this year all at the sametime

Were,nt those WILD HORSES , l know the grazing lease holders up there dont like Wild horses munching on/competing for the grass with there domestic stock , might lay the blame there instead of hunters , dont think hunters have a reason to shoot 5 horses all at the same time , some hot head leaseholder might do it tho.

[grandslamer]

we checked and double checked no matter what happenes you dont have allow any one on your private land and to the lease we own all the land on all side of it there is no road allowance or easement we built the road to it but it legally a private road on our land
excatly the same as eden lake for years a popular trout lake stocked every year a guy bought up all the land around it now no one can access the lake including the people who had cabins built on the nw side due to survay errorno allowance was made ..so they got screwed the gov had to pay them off now alberta owns 2 lots with cabin that can only be acessed by helicopter

and ill stress again we have never stopped legit hunter from our lease or our deeded lands ecept for the home quarters

[BUD]

Originally Posted by SNIPER

That's right Bud, and everyone new it was a spelling error quite some time ago.

YEA RIGHT , then why didnt you say something quite some time ago , funny you mention the fact right after he told us that , haaaa.

[packhuntr]

Wow, i was of the understanding the complete opposite, about water anyways, good to hear of another instance though..... We have a very similar situation with a lake near my home, though one of the two land owners is being cooperative with anglers... For now i suppose.

keep a strain on er.

Originally Posted by BUD

YEA RIGHT , then why didnt you say something quite some time ago , funny you mention the fact right after he told us that , haaaa.

Sorry Bud, I don't have facts to back up my statement........Only common sense

[grandslamer]

there was wild horses shot this year but i dont know the details on that
the horses im talking about was by bently the 3 guys were caught charge and fined turns out they were denied permission all day they drove around all day drinking and in the evening somehow decided to shoot horses in a feild
and these are the guys that cause 99% of all huner land owner problem

[packhuntr]

Boy,,,,,if i couldnt get permission in a whole day of searching for it, i may take up drinking durring my hunting season as well. We arent only trying to stop the irresponsible behavior created by the very few in the field fellas.... Were also trying to fight off this wave in recent years of land owners that dont allow access to outdoors people. Dont get me wrong though, im not condoning their behavior at all, its just the way you typed there grandslamer.

keep a strain on er.

[BUD]

Originally Posted by grandslamer

there was wild horses shot this year but i dont know the details on that
the horses im talking about was by bently the 3 guys were caught charge and fined turns out they were denied permission all day they drove around all day drinking and in the evening somehow decided to shoot horses in a feild
and these are the guys that cause 99% of all huner land owner problem

Were they Bad boys from the City or Outlaws from the local community , my guess would be the latter , young punks.

[BUD]

Originally Posted by SNIPER

Sorry Bud, I don't have facts to back up my statement........Only common sense

YEA , well my common sense includes reading material the way l see it , not assuming . ya know what that makes you.

[Morbius131]

Why must good threads turn into arguments about who knows more or knows better. Take the information and add to it, leave the in fighting out of it.

This is another good thread that is getting ruined by arguing.

Get it back on track!

Morb

[dogpound]

Originally Posted by packhuntr

Boy,,,,,if i couldnt get permission in a whole day of searching for it, i may take up drinking durring my hunting season as well. We arent only trying to stop the irresponsible behavior created by the very few in the field fellas.... Were also trying to fight off this wave in recent years of land owners that dont allow access to outdoors people. Dont get me wrong though, im not condoning their behavior at all, its just the way you typed there grandslamer.

keep a strain on er.

packhuntr,
Are you trying to suggest that the majority of landowners that deny access is the major problem and reduced access did not arise from property/livestock damage or unauthorized access?

The hunting community needs to adamantly condemn this type of practice.

"Were also trying to fight off this wave in recent years of land owners that dont allow access to outdoors people"
- every try asking landowners if they would allow you to access their land to take pictures or go hiking?

The primary issue is with irresponsible hunting and lack of respect for private property. I agree that the irresponsible are the vast minority - but how do you expect a landowner to make a judgement call on a stranger on which one of these he/she is? Don't forget that the landowner is usually there all year long and in most cases for many years - history has a strong bias on deciding future behavior.

If those guys received jail time, and loss of hunting privelages for life - bet it would reduce similar incidences in the future.

Those stories spread like wild fire throughout the rural communities.

[AbAngler]

The hunters who follow the regs in regards to accessing leased land are NOT the ones who are cutting fences, shooting horses etc. Why would you not let someone on your leased land that has jumped through all the hoops to request access?

7ultra, it's unfortunate that you've had your livestock shot up and fences cut. We've heard this before, but again, read my first paragraph. You should be welcoming hunters with open arms if they've gone through proper channels to access your leases. They are the good guys.

[FiveO]

[QUOTE=AbAngler;98192]The hunters who follow the regs in regards to accessing leased land are NOT the ones who are cutting fences, shooting horses etc. Why would you not let someone on your leased land that has jumped through all the hoops to request access?

Excellent point. As a person seeking permission for access to lease land I provide my name, phone number, vehicle licence plate number etc, very legitamite, protects the farmer and the person accessing the land. Like i said earlier the rules should be a win win.

Lets keep this post on track and not name call or bash one another.

Opinions are like *****holes, everyones got one.

[dogpound]

FiveO,
That is some good advice for people seeking access.

This year I recieved about 20 requests - about 60% (+/-12) of the inquiries I got were phone calls from strangers - no thanks.

20% (4) of the requests I got were during hunting season when animals are spotted and the hunters feel the need to introduce themselves quickly - I let one of the 4 on because I know his dad, other 3 strangers no luck, sorry.

20% (4) of the other requests were four guys that took the time to stop by before hunting season, 2 that introduced themselves years ago and have been able to hunt my property since and two new guys I just met this, seemed like really respectful guys, seemed genuine and understood my concerns about shooting near my house/shop.

Another (4 to 5) that I know of, that decided they wouldn't ask and trespassed anyway, one poached muley, head cut off.

Now there is probably 12 to 15 guys that think I am keeping the animals to myself, being unreasonable by not granting access, and one of them probably shot up my waterer on my lower pasture.

Guess I deserve the holes in my waterer - they purchased a license and therefore have unfettered rights to hunt my land in search of "there" wildlife - next time I guess I won't be so ridiculous and just let everyone hunt.

[FiveO]

Guess I deserve the holes in my waterer - they purchased a license and therefore have unfettered rights to hunt my land in search of "there" wildlife - next time I guess I won't be so ridiculous and just let everyone hunt.[/QUOTE]

Just another example of how one bad apple ruins the bunch. If its private land you refused you have all the right in the world cant say I blame yah for not allowing everyone on the land you OWN however in the case of land we all own protocal should be followed.

You must live in a very populated area or have ton of animals visible from the road to have that number of people seeking access.

[Dakota369]

Thanks Dogpound.

Excellent response to a difficult and emotional topic. It goes a long way towards giving those of us who hunt and do not have land an idea as to how things look from the otherside of the fence, while not being inflammatory. I am fairly new to this whole hunting buisness, so it does give me some excellent guidence as to when and how to go about approaching landowners when I am in search of permission.

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by FiveO

I think its a good system that is currently in place very economical for the farmer, helps with his lively hood and supports agriculture in Alberta. .

I agree. Unfortunately the government hasn't seen fit to put into place a system that is very economical for ME, helps with my livelihood and supports my business. We all get it that lease land is a nice deal for the farmer/rancher. And if the ones I asked permission to get onto their LEASED land (not their own land) this past year didn't rub their toes into the dirt and mumble about how their brother actually decides who gets onto the land, or that they figure "We've let enough hunters onto that land for the year", I'd be more sympathetic. I have absolutely no problem if a farmer doesn't want hunting on their own land. It's the lease stuff that bothers me, hits a nerve. I'd change the rules so they can't lock people out.

GRRRRRRR... Bad memories of asking for permission. ok, I'm better now. Thanks. LOL

[willy]

The cost to get lease land around here is to high to make it work runnin cows better to buy deeded. I know of some they want $400+/acre for native prairie lease which you can run 20-25 cows/ section. The cow market the way it is now we're losing money. I know some say you shouldnt be able sell lease but its been that way for 100 years now so how you change it without major effect on the assets of ranches.

[calvin]

i hear what you boys are saying about access issues and such. the one thing that i keep reading in your posts when your not bashing each other is that you call public lease lands as *my land*. no it is not your own personal property it is the crown's land. your name is not on the title, or the tax registry. you have an access process that must be followed and so does the leaseholder, end of arguement. if he doesn't want you on the land he can say no and let you whine and snivvle all you want. go and try all this process,courts etc. all you want but in the end if your not drilling for oil and gas your arguement will probably fall on deaf ears. the other point is when i do see or hear from a majority of hunters for access its usually while they are sitting at the gate waiting to go in. that is usually my signal that there may be a big buck in the area. alot of times when i'm looking for permission its usually denied by people that have bought land from the city and keep for themselves. usually referred to as my *property*. get out establish relations, earn trust and helping out a bit is not paying for access.CP

[thumper]

Thanks for this info Vindal:

" I can speak to this one. Currently I have been offered $25/AUM for yearlings on my pasture. I know of two contracts that are getting $35/AUM for bulls on pasture. The gov't rate for grazing lease on pasture land in this region is $2.32/AUM. The obligation of the leaseholder for maintenance of infrastructure is the same on my land as it is on the gov't land "

Unfortunately, I think that the agricultural lobby is too politically strong for this significant subsidy to ever change.

But on the bright side, since holding a grazing lease is such a great deal, then the threat of losing that lease would very significant. IF, when we hunters follow all the rules and are refused access by leaseholders NOT following the rules - we should report every last one of them to the appropriate land managers, and strongly suggest that the land managers pull the grazing lease from the rancher. I'm not naive enough to think that the rancher will actually lose the lease - but the land manager would probably at least mention that possible penalty to the lessee for not following the rules.
And the next hunter requiring access might get treated more fairly.

[thumper]

I've often wondered when attempting to gain access to a grazing lease, what the approriate questions should be....
I'm not really "asking permission", as it's public land that I shouldn't need "permission" to access, unless the lease-holder has a bona-fide condition to refuse me. If you read the gov't website closely, you'll see that they don't use the word "permission" either in this regard.

I've been saying "I've been hoping to hunt this lease, do you have any objections?"
That way, the leaseholder is aware that I know it's leased land and not private property, and is also aware that I know of the rules - I should be permitted access unless he has a bona-fide (gov't approved) reason to refuse it.

How do others approach this?

[AbAngler]

ANy news FiveO?

[FiveO]

Here we go this Friday in front of SRD for a final decision, or at least I hope a final. The lease holder has his day in front of the director at which time a decision will be handed down unless the lease holder finds another avenue to fight. I will be at the hearing and may have to provide evidence against his wrong doing and hope it is the end to a complete waste of time on all parties counts. this could have been avoided if the lease holder would have followed the regulations that are in place for all stake holders.