Denied Lease land access??

[Brock1]

Originally Posted by Dieselj19

I did some searching and found a couple sections of land in the area I hunt that are leased and surrounded by crown. I looked up the contact information and the restrictions the leaseholder put on the land. The restrictions were: No access if livestock on land, Call 2-3 days before when you want access, and access by foot only. I called and talked to the leaseholder today (would have went in person, but they live no where near the town I live in) and they said "no there is enough people that hunt there."
I am just a little curious as to if they can deny access like that? I have no intentions of persuing it any further or doing anything about it, but seeing as lease land is "agricultural public land" can the leaseholder straight up deny access even if all their conditions are met?

Originally Posted by OpenRange

My point was that if I have to pay for the land, then pay rent and a transfer fee then what I say happens on the lease land goes. If I only had to pay a rental fee to the government then the government gets to set the rules. I know people who have put out millions upon millions of dollars to own lease land and to say it isn't theirs to do as THEY please is morally wrong. We all know the government can step in and mandate us to allow hunters to do what they please but that wouldn't be a moral or ethical thing to do. The best way I can describe it is if you rent an apartment, you don't own it, but at the same time that is YOUR space and unless you do something seriously wrong they can't evict you are just enter your premises without you giving them permission. Just cause you technically "rent" something doesn't mean it isn't yours when you have a contract saying it is.

You are mistaken my friend. A farmer or leaseholder leases the right to graze the land for his cattle or animals. It is nothing like a house or apartment. You don't live there and raise your kids in the house on the leased land. You or a lease holder leases the land to graze for the lowest price per acre from the gov anyone cld imagine.
No comparison.. It's not your land you rent the grazing opportunities. If you want to expand and decide the rules on any land buy it for hundreds of thousands, not lease it for 1500$ a yr. for a section.


This is so ridiculously absurd. I called land and titles last year for 2 lease holders in the valley view area and all was taken care of in an hour. This is soooo wrong culture needs to change..

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by OpenRange

Half of my 5 mile river front is lease land. I think most of you are missing a big piece of information. If I buy someone's place and lets say there are 320 acres of deeded and 320 acres of lease, I still have to pay the previous owner for the lease land and then pay rent on top of that to the government each year. In my area deeded acres cost around $550/ acres, lease acres are around $350 per acre to buy. So thinking that this is just government land that you can use at your own leisure is wrong, you can go on public grazing reserves without any hassle after October 15 when the cattle get pulled out of most co-op's. If all I had to do was take over the lease land from the previous owner and pay a small transfer fee and then the annual rent then by all means hunters have the right to access it. Since I need to pay for those acres and then pay a transfer fee and then the rent payments, it makes those acres the same as deeded acres in most landowners minds.

But not in the eyes of the law.

You make a deal... you sort of have to take the good with the bad.
You don't get to make it up as you go along and change the conditions to suit you.
Some leaseholders need to remind themselves of that and SRD needs to rienforce that point by stripping the leased property from the ones that habitually ignore the terms and conditions of their contract.

A minority for sure...but it is becoming a growing problem.

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by hal53

good point!, would be very nice if that was the last comment ever on this issue, but, naturally it won't be.....some people will find a way to abuse anything and everything that has "rules. Myself??? you rent the land from spring until Oct. 15th, to graze your cattle after that you are done with it until the next spring....

Yes.
Oct 15 and if there are cattle there on the 16th... there should be fines.
Access for hunting after that date should not be dependant upon livestock being off the land either.

[elkhunter11]

My point was that if I have to pay for the land, then pay rent and a transfer fee then what I say happens on the lease land goes. If I only had to pay a rental fee to the government then the government gets to set the rules. I know people who have put out millions upon millions of dollars to own lease land and to say it isn't theirs to do as THEY please is morally wrong. We all know the government can step in and mandate us to allow hunters to do what they please but that wouldn't be a moral or ethical thing to do. The best way I can describe it is if you rent an apartment, you don't own it, but at the same time that is YOUR space and unless you do something seriously wrong they can't evict you are just enter your premises without you giving them permission. Just cause you technically "rent" something doesn't mean it isn't yours when you have a contract saying it is.

If you accept the conditions of the lease, then you have to abide by those conditions. If you aren't prepared to abide by the conditions, then don't lease the land.

[diamond k]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

If you accept the conditions of the lease, then you have to abide by those conditions. If you aren't prepared to abide by the conditions, then don't lease the land.

It should be that simple but there a lot of things at play. Alberta Beef Producers carry alot ot of power in this provice so that is only one hurdle. If they enforce this then the oil leases are next to get scrutinized. Not many land managers care to go against there lease holders. They deal with the ranchers alll the time and some hunter who shows up and wants access does not usually have much of a chance in some districts

Next is that we need to police our own. My family are beef producers and although we dont have any leases we know lots who do and some of the abuse and crap on our land or our friends leases is crazy. Animals shots, gates rippped of with chains, fires left unattented etc. Quit being idiots and the arguments gets alot weaker for lease holders.

[elkhunter11]

Next is that we need to police our own. My family are beef producers and although we dont have any leases we know lots who do and some of the abuse and crap on our land or our friends leases is crazy. Animals shots, gates rippped of with chains, fires left unattented etc.

None of which changes the conditions of the lease that was signed. Charge the offenders, and if the person holding the lease won't comply with the terms that he accepted by signing that lease, then strip him of the lease.

[ali#1]

Is it time for this again ?

[michaelmicallef]

Originally Posted by pikergolf

It's Alberta, everything's for sale. LOL

You got that right!

[brownbomber]

That would be why we own ours and don't lease, no hassle. If you don't want to allow access then we don't, if they persist then we chase them off.
Leasing you gotta expect people will want to access what they are entitled to. If you actually own it nobody but you is entitled to anything.

[wolfriver]

all leases should be sold.
It would be a cash infusion to the gov to help pay for High River and all you guys that want land could just pony up and buy it.
Maybe lobby your MLA to sell all the leases and we won't have this problem.
Or does everyone want something for nothing.

[OpenRange]

Most of you people from up north don't understand the differences in lease land. There is grazing reserves and then there is the lease land that ranchers/farmers have. I see places all over the northern half of the province for sale that come with a "range permit" for a certain number of AUM's for a year. Those cattle go in mid May and leave in Mid October. All ranchers pay for that is the rent. The reason that land is different is because some places say its 11,000 acres of grazing but because of heavy brush or timber you can only graze 3,000 acres of it. In the southern half of the province we have province grazing leases which if you look at a land map for a county usually says something like Pinhorn Grazing Assoc, or Bow Island Grazing Assoc. There are loads of these down here that the door is thrown open to hunt on. The stuff ranches have is bought and paid for, then a transfer is paid and then an annual rental fee. We can graze this land 12 months a year if we want to if the grass maintains itself. We sign a lease contract with the government for sometimes 50 years for that land. I allow hunters to shoot antelope in the field where my cows are, I allow hunters to shoot mule deer in the fall in the field I wein my cows into. I could say no because I have cattle in there, but I don't. BUT I can set the rules any way I see fit because if something happens out there, because it is MY land I am held liable, lease or deeded.

[Torkdiesel]

Openrange
So according to your reasoning my Trapline should also be under my control for access year round. I bought it for a large sum of money from the previous owner and I now pay a yearly fee to the government ???
In my opinion I lease the right to trap that land and nothing more. The same as you lease the right to graze your cattle on that land, nothing more.

[salamander]

Yes, do phone your local Provincial Land Manager. I did once when a person with a grazing permit told me there were too many hunters on the property already. The Land Manager set things straight very quickly. Guys with grazing leases can have more conditions for access than the fellows with grazing permits. The information on the SRD public agricultural lands site appears to be accurate. I always print out the page for the area I access and carry it with me.

[pikergolf]

I hate disputes with lease holders, but some lease holders will not play, which is why as hunters, we need push back on these guys. They bluff and bluster that they own the land and the more they get away with it the more others will try. Nobody likes getting in a dispute over a place to hunt, but the more we back down, the more it will happen and if we do not exercise our rights we will be left on the outside looking in. The law is very clear on what is law and how disputes should be resolved, there is no shame in seeing it through it's course, for those that do I tip my hat.

Also want to add this is not a wide spread problem that I can see, I've only had problems twice, funny enough when I contacted the land manager both times she agreed I was right but didn't want to do anything about it, I forced her hand the second time and she made the call but was not happy about it.

I don't hunt deer so my not be getting a true picture of what those that hunt deer face.

Also where ever you hunt this season, please be respectful of the land and the person that let you on. Report suspicious activity, even a call to the landowner to let him know what you saw. A call after the trip is nice to get as well, how you made out and any highlights, most of my hosts seem to appreciate the call.

[Eze]

most leases by Oct 15th are used up , the cattle ate all the food. I have a lease and know that and hard to find game there in fall. they are on greener pastures.

go get permission on private land, hunt crown land, own your own and enjoy yourself instead of this fighting about lease land.

[Okotokian]

I've run into that "too many people" stuff before, but the last time it was from the neighbour of a rancher who does freely let me hunt on his leased and private land. I didn't press the issue as I didn't want to make any waves for my rancher who does let me hunt. The fewer problems I make for him the better.

[Bedded Buck]

here is what the gov't says

What happens if the reasonable access?

The Department may issue an access order requiring leaseholders to allow access. If leaseholders are unsure of whether or not they can restrict access, they can call their local Lands Office. The section titled "Settling Disagreements" further on in this pamphlet deals with resolving issues that a leaseholder or a recreational user may raise.

Can the leaseholder limit the number of people who come on the land?

No, but the leaseholder can discuss the concern with the Local Settlement Officer who can limit the number of people who can come on the land. Also, in cases where there are a high number of recreational users accessing the leases, the leaseholder can ask that a recreational management plan be put in place. These plans could include restrictions on the number of people on the lease at one time.

Both completed recreational management plans and limits set by a Local Settlement Officer will be included with the contact information on the website. Call your local Lands office of Environment and Sustainable Resource Development for more detail


Under the regulations, the leaseholder may deny access, or apply conditions to access, when:
◾Access would be anything other than foot access, including bicycles, horse or other animal, or motor vehicles
◾The proposed use would occur 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
◾The proposed use would involve hunting at a location that is unreasonably close to a fenced pasture in which livestock of the agricultural disposition holder are present
◾The proposed use is camping
◾The proposed use would be contrary to a recreational management plan


I know it's a lot of reading but it is the regs. if the leaseholder allows access to one, including himself, he must allow all.


Good luck eh

[Nait Hadya]

The most common excuse given has been; family is using it at the requested time. It seems like a well rehearsed reply. As was mentioned, unless they have taken the time to add more stringent conditions to the access conditions, they are not able to reserve a hunting spot for family members or offer that up as an excuse to deny access. I was quite impressed with the response from Public Lands in regards to such a denial. Lease holder compliance with the rules suddenly became stellar. Make sure your talking to the proper person when making an access request. The ranchers wife may hold a totally different view of lease land and access, thinking it's private property.

There is a concern of illegally posting lease land as "private property" as private occupied property carries with it different rules in regards to hunting.

[baptiste_moose]

I would call your local f&w office and make a complaint!

[Pikebreath]

OpenRange, would you happen to be in Special Areas?

Agricultural leases within Special Areas are,,,, well,,, "special",,,, in that they still are and have always been treated essentially as "real property".

[dmcbride]

Originally Posted by Eze

most leases by Oct 15th are used up , the cattle ate all the food. I have a lease and know that and hard to find game there in fall. they are on greener pastures.

go get permission on private land, hunt crown land, own your own and enjoy yourself instead of this fighting about lease land.

I do not believe this to be true. Most game eat different stuff than cattle and when the cattle are gone, all the Willow, Red Dogwood and other food sources aren't touched.

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by diamond k

It should be that simple but there a lot of things at play. Alberta Beef Producers carry alot ot of power in this provice so that is only one hurdle. If they enforce this then the oil leases are next to get scrutinized. Not many land managers care to go against there lease holders. They deal with the ranchers alll the time and some hunter who shows up and wants access does not usually have much of a chance in some districts

Next is that we need to police our own. My family are beef producers and although we dont have any leases we know lots who do and some of the abuse and crap on our land or our friends leases is crazy. Animals shots, gates rippped of with chains, fires left unattented etc. Quit being idiots and the arguments gets alot weaker for lease holders.

Right.

For every animal shot...theres a thousand of claims of animals being shot.
Fact is... its rare as hens teeth and when it does happen its a one lone idiot in the whole province...usually not a hunter that pops up every year or two.
Its usually some guy that is out thrill killing.
Just the timeing of the season and when animals should be off the land sort of akes that unlikely.

As for the gates why would anyone do that?
Its easier to open a gate than to hook up worth a chain... unless perhaps.... it is locked unlawfully perhaps?

And how may hunters light fires?
Most leases don't allow fires or camping and most hunters have no need of one or interest in that.

Honestly... the whole paragragh sounds like more thin excuses to deny access but they don't hold water if one takes more than a passing glance at em.

I've hunted a lot of lease land and private land and open range...all over the place for over 40 years now.
In that time I don't recall ever having found a campfire or a camp on lease land.
I've never found a gate ripped off and only seen a fance ripped out once... on a grazing lease by quaders pre-hunting season.
And finally.... referring to the many landowners I have known, family and friends... I can name one who had an animal shot.
The guy had mistakenly wandered into a lone secion of owned land in the middle of a large parcel of leased land. That section held bison and one charged him.
His fault.... for hopping that fence but you can hardly blame a guy for defending himself once that mistake was made.
The shot was intentional but he didn't set out to kill livestock and he didn't mistake livestock for game.

Course every other guy knows a guy who knows a guy who had a second cousin who had one shot... somewhere....sometime.

The reasons access is denied usually boils down to 3 things.

Some folks just feel like they should have more perogative than they have.
Some folks are anti guns and anti hunters
Some want their own private hunting reserve or exclusive access for the "friends" they are hosting or guiding for pay.

Thats the more common reality... and not the thin excuses offered because most people are willing to accept them at face value.

[diamond k]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger

[/B]

Right.

For every animal shot...theres a thousand of claims of animals being shot.
Fact is... its rare as hens teeth and when it does happen its a one lone idiot in the whole province...usually not a hunter that pops up every year or two.
Its usually some guy that is out thrill killing.
Just the timeing of the season and when animals should be off the land sort of akes that unlikely.

As for the gates why would anyone do that?
Its easier to open a gate than to hook up worth a chain... unless perhaps.... it is locked unlawfully perhaps?

And how may hunters light fires?
Most leases don't allow fires or camping and most hunters have no need of one or interest in that.

Honestly... the whole paragragh sounds like more thin excuses to deny access but they don't hold water if one takes more than a passing glance at em.

I've hunted a lot of lease land and private land and open range...all over the place for over 40 years now.
In that time I don't recall ever having found a campfire or a camp on lease land.
I've never found a gate ripped off and only seen a fance ripped out once... on a grazing lease by quaders pre-hunting season.
And finally.... referring to the many landowners I have known, family and friends... I can name one who had an animal shot.
The guy had mistakenly wandered into a lone secion of owned land in the middle of a large parcel of leased land. That section held bison and one charged him.
His fault.... for hopping that fence but you can hardly blame a guy for defending himself once that mistake was made.
The shot was intentional but he didn't set out to kill livestock and he didn't mistake livestock for game.

Course every other guy knows a guy who knows a guy who had a second cousin who had one shot... somewhere....sometime.

The reasons access is denied usually boils down to 3 things.

Some folks just feel like they should have more perogative than they have.
Some folks are anti guns and anti hunters
Some want their own private hunting reserve or exclusive access for the "friends" they are hosting or guiding for pay.

Thats the more common reality... and not the thin excuses offered because most people are willing to accept them at face value.

First thing to get straight I am the biggest propenet of keeping access open to the leases. I hunt them and dont want to see that privl;age taken away. I encourage anyone who is unlawfully refused acces to contact there land manager. Dont expect them to all be happy about the conflict but that is there job so you may have to push forward.

As for the animals shot it happens more than you know. Our family had 2 black horeses shot because the idiots thought they were cow moose. Lease holders can lock gates to protect from cattle theft. Also happens more than you think. ASk for access and most lease holders will oblige. If not again call the land manager.

As for the fire there was a large one in northern alberta a couple of years ago and it was determined it was started by an illegal campfire by hunters on a lease.

[Kurt505]

File a complaint against the lease holder, it's early in the season, you'll get access much easier next year too!

[Duke11]

I believe fire ban's are on in parts of alberta. Hunters get your hiking shoes ready because you won't be getting any permission unless you walk