Can those that have a grazing lease deny me access?

[lannie]

Originally Posted by Paskell

Yes lease holders can deny even foot access if livestock is on the lease. They never have to allow vehicle access or a bicycle even on a permanent high grade road for any reason. But they can allow anything they feel like to friends at anytime, camping, fishing, hunting, atv's, they are absolute dictators when it comes to access. They can lock gates on roads which are all weather and been used for years which lead to thousands of acres of crown land for absolutely NO REASON. Of course they and friends then have a private hunting and fishing area. The latest wrinkle is keeping livestock on the lease until after hunting season is over, except they and friends drive all over, camp, and hunt by themselves all season on YOUR land. This is allowed because most leases now have no on-off dates. The windfall surface disturbance payments they receive and the ability to sell the lease not the improvements are the least of everyone's worries. You have basically lost your land! But reading this thread it looks like the majority are happy to give their land away. The scam is actually laughable.

You need to get into raising cattle and buy yourself a lease or two. There are many currently for sale.... Much more productive than a whine fest.

[CanadianEh]

Originally Posted by lannie

You need to get into raising cattle and buy yourself a lease or two. There are many currently for sale.... Much more productive than a whine fest.

We are not Ranchers.. we are Hunters.. For most of us, ranching was not our chosen profession.

If I happen to be a geologist, should I get the rights to hundreds or thousands of acres of Alberta public land, which I can then turn around and say no one is allowed on becasue there are sensitive rock formations?

If the situation were reversed, and the general population was able to walk, hunt, camp, or plain recreate on all of what are currently grazing leases.. Can you imagine the belly aching from ranchers?? they would be petitioning government for special rights, and regulations just like we as hunters have to.

It is no different on the flip side of the coin.

[lannie]

Originally Posted by CanadianEh

We are not Ranchers.. we are Hunters.. For most of us, ranching was not our chosen profession.

If I happen to be a geologist, should I get the rights to hundreds or thousands of acres of Alberta public land, which I can then turn around and say no one is allowed on becasue there are sensitive rock formations?

If the situation were reversed, and the general population was able to walk, hunt, camp, or plain recreate on all of what are currently grazing leases.. Can you imagine the belly aching from ranchers?? they would be petitioning government for special rights, and regulations just like we as hunters have to.

It is no different on the flip side of the coin.

I am not interested in butting heads with anyone but this above is unproductive complaining. I suggested something productive. If you don't like the leases you need to do more than type how hunters are wronged. The whining about grazing leases has been going on since the day I joined AO many years ago and not a thing has changed because of it so far.....

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by lannie

You need to get into raising cattle and buy yourself a lease or two. There are many currently for sale.... Much more productive than a whine fest.

These constant whine fests by the entitled get more and more access shut down on a yearly basis than the whiners realize

[Paskell]

Originally Posted by lannie

You need to get into raising cattle and buy yourself a lease or two. There are many currently for sale.... Much more productive than a whine fest.

I'm not whining, only stating the truth, and you know it! Lesees have such a sense of entitlement they actually believe they can rightfully abuse every aspect of the public ownership of the the land they are supposed to only rent the grass from. Your only defense is to accuse me of whining: why not include racist, bigot, or homophobe? It makes just as much sense. You are frustrated because there is no defense for the present grazing lease program. It's too bad you don't feel at least a little guilty, then maybe you could raise cattle on your own two feet instead of the public's back.

[ram crazy]

Who does most of the whining? Is it the urbanites.

[hal53]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

Who does most of the whining? Is it the urbanites.

It's pretty typical of the lefties, they have no idea about how the entire leasing scenario was developed, or the conditions that the lease holder is accountable for...they just assume it's crown land and therefore it is "theirs" and they should be able to do as they like. As in every walk of life there are some people who will abuse the system while the majority deal with the situation very fairly. Spouting off about leaseholders gating and locking "high grade" roads thru' their leases tells a person all they need to know about some posters knowledge of the process.

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by hal53

It's pretty typical of the lefties, they have no idea about how the entire leasing scenario was developed, or the conditions that the lease holder is accountable for...they just assume it's crown land and therefore it is "theirs" and they should be able to do as they like. As in every walk of life there are some people who will abuse the system while the majority deal with the situation very fairly. Spouting off about leaseholders gating and locking "high grade" roads thru' their leases tells a person all they need to know about some posters knowledge of the process.

Don't you know, lease holders don't pay taxes on lease land. Geesh!!

[Joe Black]

Real life FYI. If anybody is trying to access the camp creek staging area in the bob creek wild land, and has joe lease holder telling you the access to the staging area is also closed to OHV travel, take his picture/plate number, tell him to pound sand, and keep on trucking.

[Deer Hunter]

Abuse occurs on both sides. Know your rights, use respect and stand up for yourself if the other side doesn't.

thankfully, internet bullying and bull****ting doesn't occur standing on a cut line on lease land.

[Joe Black]

Amen

[Paskell]

Originally Posted by hal53

It's pretty typical of the lefties, they have no idea about how the entire leasing scenario was developed, or the conditions that the lease holder is accountable for...they just assume it's crown land and therefore it is "theirs" and they should be able to do as they like. As in every walk of life there are some people who will abuse the system while the majority deal with the situation very fairly. Spouting off about leaseholders gating and locking "high grade" roads thru' their leases tells a person all they need to know about some posters knowledge of the process.

Your response is typical of those who either have a vested interest or simply do not understand the right to graze grass should not morph into "ownership". It has nothing to do with "lefties", it has to do with regular Albertans who are getting royally screwed out of their own land. Its not a matter of a few abusers as you suggest, its the fact the government has vested management solely for the lessee in the lessee's hands at the expense of the rest of us. There is no need for this abuse, the land must be managed for everyone not simply an anointed few. If present lessees can't exist with just grazing their cattle then relinquish the lease and they will be replaced overnight even if the management was changed so it was REASONABLE AND FAIR!

Please elaborate on your comment re "high grade roads thru leases". What does my "spouting off" tell you about my understanding of the "process"? Or more accurately your lack thereof?

[elkhunter220]

Originally Posted by Paskell

Your response is typical of those who either have a vested interest or simply do not understand the right to graze grass should not morph into "ownership". It has nothing to do with "lefties", it has to do with regular Albertans who are getting royally screwed out of their own land. Its not a matter of a few abusers as you suggest, its the fact the government has vested management solely for the lessee in the lessee's hands at the expense of the rest of us. There is no need for this abuse, the land must be managed for everyone not simply an anointed few. If present lessees can't exist with just grazing their cattle then relinquish the lease and they will be replaced overnight even if the management was changed so it was REASONABLE AND FAIR!

If a lease owner does not limit the amount of hunters allowed per day in many areas lease's would be far worse off than if they were managed properly by restricting the amount of people allowed.
This topic comes up every year and frustrates me when I hear people say you "tell the lease owner your are going" vs "asking for permission." Many leases these days have sign up dates which limits the amount of people per day (this number is set by a settlement officer). This is in the best interest of the public and lease owner to manage the property in my opinion. So when a hunter feels "entitled" to going on any lease at any time they wish to hunt, consider that when the lease holder says they are "booked" that you just missed the ball.
There never will be a perfect solution to this manner, but a little respect can go along ways for both sides.

[Paskell]

Originally Posted by elkhunter220

If a lease owner does not limit the amount of hunters allowed per day in many areas lease's would be far worse off than if they were managed properly by restricting the amount of people allowed.
This topic comes up every year and frustrates me when I hear people say you "tell the lease owner your are going" vs "asking for permission." Many leases these days have sign up dates which limits the amount of people per day (this number is set by a settlement officer). This is in the best interest of the public and lease owner to manage the property in my opinion. So when a hunter feels "entitled" to going on any lease at any time they wish to hunt, consider that when the lease holder says they are "booked" that you just missed the ball.
There never will be a perfect solution to this manner, but a little respect can go along ways for both sides.

The "perfect solution" to the grazing lease problem is to take the management authority away from the lease holder who is interested in himself and return it to the government where ordinary taxpayers would have at least some influence. It is none of the lessee's business or settlement officer's how many people choose to hunt on any particular area whether it is leased or open crown. It's an insult to ask to access your own land by foot only while the lessee's buddies drive around and camp there. And you think you get frustrated!

[hal53]

Originally Posted by Paskell

The "perfect solution" to the grazing lease problem is to take the management authority away from the lease holder who is interested in himself and return it to the government where ordinary taxpayers would have at least some influence. It is none of the lessee's business or settlement officer's how many people choose to hunt on any particular area whether it is leased or open crown. It's an insult to ask to access your own land by foot only while the lessee's buddies drive around and camp there. And you think you get frustrated!

Sounds like you have n issue with one lease in particular, if that is the case you would be much further ahead by contacting the settlement officer, rather than posting your hatred of all lease holders in the province on an open forum, if any rules are being ignored.

[Deer Hunter]

Now your trying to downplay his experience as isolated case. I assure you it is common province wide. Leases locked, except for the leaseholder and his buddies. Livestock present, no hunting, except for ...
You know the story.
Settlement officer? Come on...

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by Paskell

The "perfect solution" to the grazing lease problem is to take the management authority away from the lease holder who is interested in himself and return it to the government where ordinary taxpayers would have at least some influence. It is none of the lessee's business or settlement officer's how many people choose to hunt on any particular area whether it is leased or open crown. It's an insult to ask to access your own land by foot only while the lessee's buddies drive around and camp there. And you think you get frustrated!

So why does the lease holder have to buy the lease and pay tax for the lease then. What do think our taxes would cost us per year if the government didn't collect taxes on the leases. What do you think the **** show would be if you had a free for all. Must be a urbanite

[elkhunter220]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

So why does the lease holder have to buy the lease and pay tax for the lease then. What do think our taxes would cost us per year if the government didn't collect taxes on the leases. What do you think the **** show would be if you had a free for all. Must be a urbanite

I agree with the free for all comment here. If it was up to the public who "own" the land (although they get to skip the fence fixing, lease payments etc...) to run it, it would go to shambles.

[CanadianEh]

Originally Posted by elkhunter220

I agree with the free for all comment here. If it was up to the public who "own" the land (although they get to skip the fence fixing, lease payments etc...) to run it, it would go to shambles.

That is the cost of business for ranchers. If they owned the land outright, would they not have to still pay Taxes, fencing, etc?

You forget the fences do not benefit the people of Alberta, they benefit the rancher who is borrowing the grass. The lease payment is also a small cost to pay for borrowing the grass. Pretty small price to pay for huge chunks of land. Not to mention they would also very likely be 100% tax deductible.

If some rancher is willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for the lease rights, that is his prerogative. But that still does not mean he/she owes the land.

And further to your point about limiting access to a few parties per day on a schedule. That is by far the easiest way for a land owner to just say.. "nope sorry all full" not to mention the very great possibility of people not showing up for their "scheduled" hunt. Perhaps they tagged out a week before they needed access. Therefore many opportunities would go unused. Limiting people is a joke. The vast majority of hunters would pass on a property for the next one, if they saw a few vehicles already parked.

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by CanadianEh

That is the cost of business for ranchers. If they owned the land outright, would they not have to still pay Taxes, fencing, etc?

You forget the fences do not benefit the people of Alberta, they benefit the rancher who is borrowing the grass. The lease payment is also a small cost to pay for borrowing the grass. Pretty small price to pay for huge chunks of land. Not to mention they would also very likely be 100% tax deductible.

If some rancher is willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for the lease rights, that is his prerogative. But that still does not mean he/she owes the land.

And further to your point about limiting access to a few parties per day on a schedule. That is by far the easiest way for a land owner to just say.. "nope sorry all full" not to mention the very great possibility of people not showing up for their "scheduled" hunt. Perhaps they tagged out a week before they needed access. Therefore many opportunities would go unused. Limiting people is a joke. The vast majority of hunters would pass on a property for the next one, if they saw a few vehicles already parked.

Yup, spoken like a true urbanite. I'll bet if someone parked in front of your house or your driveway all the time you'd be having a fit about it.

[CanadianEh]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

Yup, spoken like a true urbanite. I'll bet if someone parked in front of your house or your driveway all the time you'd be having a fit about it.

People park in front of our house all day everyday.. What's the big deal?

I don't see how someone parking on my driveway which is my owned titled private land has to do with anything. As grazing lease are not private land.

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by CanadianEh

People park in front of our house all day everyday.. What's the big deal?

I don't see how someone parking on my driveway which is my owned titled private land has to do with anything. As grazing lease are not private land.

Oh so now you own the street, I didn't say anything about parking in your driveway.

[CanadianEh]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

Oh so now you own the street, I didn't say anything about parking in your driveway.

Obviously I misread your post bud. But your point is still totally ridiculous.

What does parking in front of my driveway has any baring on this argument. The argument isn't about some hunter parking and blocking access to a ranchers private deeded land, not by a long shot.

[Paskell]

Originally Posted by hal53

Sounds like you have n issue with one lease in particular, if that is the case you would be much further ahead by contacting the settlement officer, rather than posting your hatred of all lease holders in the province on an open forum, if any rules are being ignored.

Hal - you could not be more wrong, the issues I raise are perfectly legal in all leases and I don't want my rights to my land dictated to me by a lease holder and then held up by a bureaucrat. A settlement officer can only deal with small legal issues and upholds everything that is LEGAL. Everything I have said IS LEGAL so you will get nowhere appealing these concerns. If it's an argument over calling at 6 or seven o'clock they could maybe handle that. Anything more and it's out of their hands. You should really inform yourself.

I don't hate lease holders, many are my friends and neighbors and my father and brother have a lease. I just call it as I see it, and do know what I'm talking about.

I'm still waiting on your answer about your disparaging comment "high grade lease roads" which told you so much about me. Please.

[RoosterCogburn]

I have read the posts in this thread with great interest tonight. As a rancher who controls a very large tract of lease land (66,000 acres) I thought I would give my view on this topic.
- Sure we spend a large amount of money for the right to graze cattle on these leases ( up wards of 300 to 500 an acre to buy the lease), We also pay taxes and a grazing fee on this land, we are responsible for properly grazing the land to ensure there is grass through the good years as well as the dry years for not only our livestock but also for the wildlife that live on this land. We improve the water for our cattle but that is also used by the wildlife. We have found that the better the grass and water is, not only do our cattle do better, but so does the deer, elk, and antelope, as well as provide cover for all sorts of bird species. We allow hunting access with three stipulations. Vehicles to trails at all times, Shut any gate you go through and please do not cut the fence. We have the odd gate left open, we have the odd fence cut and pulled back and hung on the fence, we have the odd calf or young cow shot and butchered but the worst is the vehicles driving all over the grass which reduces the carryover we work very hard to leave by breaking it off or worse fire , the more grass we can leave the better the grass will grow next year for not only our cows but also the wildlife that inhabit our ranch. We find most hunters very good to deal with. We usually have a good conversation on the phone or in person. The only issue I have is with the idea of having all cattle off by Nov 1.

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by RoosterCogburn

I have read the posts in this thread with great interest tonight. As a rancher who controls a very large tract of lease land (66,000 acres) I thought I would give my view on this topic.
- Sure we spend a large amount of money for the right to graze cattle on these leases ( up wards of 300 to 500 an acre to buy the lease), We also pay taxes and a grazing fee on this land, we are responsible for properly grazing the land to ensure there is grass through the good years as well as the dry years for not only our livestock but also for the wildlife that live on this land. We improve the water for our cattle but that is also used by the wildlife. We have found that the better the grass and water is, not only do our cattle do better, but so does the deer, elk, and antelope, as well as provide cover for all sorts of bird species. We allow hunting access with three stipulations. Vehicles to trails at all times, Shut any gate you go through and please do not cut the fence. We have the odd gate left open, we have the odd fence cut and pulled back and hung on the fence, we have the odd calf or young cow shot and butchered but the worst is the vehicles driving all over the grass which reduces the carryover we work very hard to leave by breaking it off or worse fire , the more grass we can leave the better the grass will grow next year for not only our cows but also the wildlife that inhabit our ranch. We find most hunters very good to deal with. We usually have a good conversation on the phone or in person. The only issue I have is with the idea of having all cattle off by Nov 1.

Well said.

[pikergolf]

I bet if every hunter treated the lease and leasee with the respect they would want to be treated with the problems would disappear. And, I don't think it's just a few bad apples. I see guys driving where they shouldn't be every deer season, lots of them.

[KegRiver]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

Now your trying to downplay his experience as isolated case. I assure you it is common province wide. Leases locked, except for the leaseholder and his buddies. Livestock present, no hunting, except for ...
You know the story.
Settlement officer? Come on...

Why do you suppose that is?

Do you think it might have something to do with the fact that a lease holder has as much right as you do on crown land, UNTIL HE PAYS FOR MORE, which he has.

He PAID for access to that land you DIDN'T. He has MONEY and TIME invested in improving that land, you DO NOT.

With all that most lease holders would have no issue with hunters on their lease if it weren't for the rutted up roads and cut fences that result.

I find it unbelieveable that so many think they have a God given right to all lease land. You don't.
You have no more rights then I and 35 nillion other Canadians do.
We do not all agree that you should have unfettered access to that land,and our vote counts as much as yours does.

When will people get it. What you have CAN be taken away.
If you insist on taking away the incentives for grazing, ranchers WILL find another way to feed their cattle and it WILL require just as much land and it WILL NOT BE OPEN TO HUNTING under any cercumstances.

Keep pushing and you WILL bring an end to grazing leases. and you WILL be the BIG LOSER because those grazing leases will become deeded land to somebody and you will be shut out. Everyone will be shut out.

That is all I have to say on the matter. I fully expect that you will never get it until you've brought about an end to grazing leases and you find yourself shut out of this land you DEMAND access to.

Public means everybody, not just you and those who agree with you.

They say money talks, who do you think has more money invested in this dispute. Think about it.

[boppers]

I guess it is different for people who have lease land and people who do not. I do have some lease land for cattle and I also do my part in phoning other lease holders to ask for permission. I have people contacting me and my family for permission and it all depends on who you are and how you handle yourself. We let (and I use that loosely because we do lease it) hunters on but only a few (like 5 per year) to limit impact and pressure. if you walk only and organize days with us to come out we do our best to get you your big buck and make sure your not there with 5 other guys. If you have a cow elk tag ill even call you when they come through. We hunt to so the least the pressure the better for everyone.

When I call and ask for permission and I get a no I let it go and ask to keep me in mind for next year. Throughout the year I may stop by and chat because better chances than not you can hunt there next year with a select few and as ling as your not a ass you can hunt there forever.
I have a friend who is not a hunter and also has a lease. He has 145 people hunting there this year. The land is beat and shot to sh#t and theres no animals around any more. Thats not hunting to me.

My advice, keep in contact, even pop out and introduce yourself and see if you can walk in in the summer a couple times to scout. You will get permission in no time and it will be way better than hunting with a ton of other people at the same time.

[Paskell]

Originally Posted by boppers

I guess it is different for people who have lease land and people who do not. I do have some lease land for cattle and I also do my part in phoning other lease holders to ask for permission. I have people contacting me and my family for permission and it all depends on who you are and how you handle yourself. We let (and I use that loosely because we do lease it) hunters on but only a few (like 5 per year) to limit impact and pressure. if you walk only and organize days with us to come out we do our best to get you your big buck and make sure your not there with 5 other guys. If you have a cow elk tag ill even call you when they come through. We hunt to so the least the pressure the better for everyone.

When I call and ask for permission and I get a no I let it go and ask to keep me in mind for next year. Throughout the year I may stop by and chat because better chances than not you can hunt there next year with a select few and as ling as your not a ass you can hunt there forever.
I have a friend who is not a hunter and also has a lease. He has 145 people hunting there this year. The land is beat and shot to sh#t and theres no animals around any more. Thats not hunting to me.

My advice, keep in contact, even pop out and introduce yourself and see if you can walk in in the summer a couple times to scout. You will get permission in no time and it will be way better than hunting with a ton of other people at the same time.

Out of the goodness of your heart you let 5 hunters per year on their land. What a saint. You are right that it's all about "who you are", how you act has nothing to do with anything. For you and all the other "lease managers" you management "skills" are neither wanted or needed. You are supposed to have some cows eat some grass which the people of AB out of the goodness of their heart allow you, nothing else. If the government were not so politicized they would step up to the plate and re claim the land for everyone. If too many people hunt an area it will regulate itself and hunters will go elsewhere - on their own - not because some would be cattle baron is managing them. Manage your cows only and do everyone a favor. The abuses I pointed out are real and is what happens when authority is granted to people who have no business what so ever having it and actually MAY believe they are managing the land in everyone's best interests. It doesn't get any worse than this.

I see gates locked and friends or relations hunting and camping on the lease while others if they can, walk in and pack game out on their back. Other more progressive lessee's have "managed" to keep some stock on through hunting season so they don't even need to deal with the people that can walk. I feel so sorry for the fellow that has to have his stock off by Nov.1, maybe when it's renewed he will get no on/off dates and then he can be happy, no more pesky Albertans to deal with.

Grazing allotments work just fine and leases should be patterned after them. No matter how poorly the government manages its better than a dictator riding herd over us peons.