The Issue of Cattle on Public Lands

Longshot349

Longshot349

Active Member
Messages
160
This may be a can of worms to open, but I'd like to hear how others feel about Cattle on Public lands. I've personally owned cattle for over 40 years, so I feel somewhat qualified to speak about it. However, I run cattle on my own private land.

I've hunted Wyoming and Colorado and nearly always run into alot of cattle in the high country. This year I could count 10-50 cows from any place I wanted to glass for elk, and that was late October in a drought year.

Here's some questions to ponder; 1. How many more elk and deer could there be if grazing was stopped?

2. I realize these cattlemen are some great people and some long standing traditions, but is it really fair to cater to a select few, while the rest of us cattlemen have to buy our own land and compete? And is it fair to folks that reply on public land to hunt, when it's full of cows?

3. Would there be a dramatic increase in elk and deer if grazing stopped or is that myth? I do know that every historical game wintering valley in Colorado is now filled with cities and towns. Roll the calendar back 150 years and the game had those place to winter, but nowadays, the national Forrest is a full time home.

4. Is the cattle grazing all about taxes and Colorado economy? Are the politics such that this practice will never end? I'm not for ceasing immediately, but couldn't it be phased out over maybe a 30 year period?

5. Or, is cattle grazing a non issue that has little too NO effect on game? What are the pro's and cons?

I'd just like to hear what thoughts others have on this issue?
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-06-18 AT 06:50PM (MST)[p]I dont personally believe summer range is a limiting factor in our ungulates. The area I muzzleloader hunted in had cattle on it. All the trees are dead and the grass is getting plenty of sun. There was still plenty of feed even though we had a pretty dry summer.



#livelikezac
 
Don't worry. With the introduction of wolves livestock on public lands will be the least of your concerns. Side with the cattlemen or subdue to wolves. Part of the rationale to bring back the wolf is also to reduce or eliminate livestock grazing on public lands. Choose your poison but choose wisely as you will not get a second chance.

"Courage is being scared to death but
saddling up anyway."
 
>Don't worry. With the introduction of
>wolves livestock on public lands
>will be the least of
>your concerns. Side with the
>cattlemen or subdue to wolves.
>Part of the rationale to
>bring back the wolf is
>also to reduce or eliminate
>livestock grazing on public lands.
>Choose your poison but choose
>wisely as you will not
>get a second chance.
>
>"Courage is being scared to death
>but
>saddling up anyway."


Man, as much as I hate cattle, I never even thought about what you just said. Very good point! I know which side of the fence I stand even if there is cow ##### on my pant legs.
 
I am hoping that you are asking for information pertaining to cattle and grazing on public lands, not just another slam the land owner and public lands rancher!
I am a public lands user and this is my opinion.
My family has been holding permits since the laws passed that said we have to, we've used the land for 50+ years before that.
Every move we make is monitored by the government.
Hundred miles of fence, rebuilding of trails, putting in water tanks, not to mention the fact that we are always moving our livestock around elk calving grounds, and leaving reserve grazing areas for wildlife refuge. It's not a huge money making deal!
Meetings dealing with the wolf, grouse, linx, elk ,deer, cactus,fish, issues also take alot of time.
Grazing in the spring and summer and fall are really not a detriment to the wildlife,as wintering grounds.
Ranchers provide a great part of the equation.
I am also an outfitter, and am aware of the situations of stepping in cow ####.
We have to be willing to work with each other, even if our views differ!
 
>I am hoping that you are
>asking for information pertaining to
>cattle and grazing on public
>lands, not just another slam
>the land owner and public
>lands rancher!

I'm not slamming nobody and I didn't use a single exclamation mark!!! :)
I can see it's a highly emotional issue and I simply ask some questions about it.

I'll shoot straight and say I got mixed feelings about a buttload of cows all over elk country. Plus the fact that I been punchin cows longer than most of you , and on private lands that I paid for. So I don't need somebody telling me their hat is bigger than mine, cause I doubt it is.

All that pissing said, ranch folk are some of the best people in America-BAR NONE! I'd never wanna sh!T on any of them- ever.

But as was mentioned in a post above, if wolves are truly on the agenda, them I'm WHOLE HOG in the cattlemen's camp. Introducing wolves is a freaking disaster any way you slice it.

As a non resident, I look at Colorado and just shakes me head. A dope store on every corner, wolves in the woods, and a Governor that is light in the loafers!!! and there's an exclamation mark for ya'll.. Just kiddin. :) carry on.....
 
>>
>But as was mentioned in a
>post above, if wolves are
>truly on the agenda, them
>I'm WHOLE HOG in the
>cattlemen's camp. Introducing wolves is
>a freaking disaster any way
>you slice it.
>
>As a non resident, I look
>at Colorado and just shakes
>me head. A dope store
>on every corner, wolves in
>the woods, and a Governor
>that is light in the
>loafers!!! and there's an exclamation
>mark for ya'll.. Just
>kiddin. :) carry
>on.....

At least we have something we all agree with!!
 
I hunted some privet land in montana for pheasant, and it was totally hammered from the cows, later talking to the owner he had leased it to a guy for 200 head but he put 600 on the land, it was bad and the owner was on his way to fight with the cattleman.
 
One comment from me that maybe Mr. Massey can answer. It seems that there are more cows on the Unc than 20 years ago and that they are there much later in the season than they used to be. I'm not saying it is a bad thing because I know if we lose the ranchers who use public land they will likely have to sell the property they own lower down and it won't be for the better if they do. ASome rich bistard will likely buy it up and make bad changes.

Hasbean
 
The only real complaint I have is with the ranchers that graze on public land and than land lock public land for themselves. Years ago (20 plus years) every rancher I meet would at least let you cross there land to get to public lands. Not anymore. I feel if they graze on public land they should allow access across their land for the public to get to public property. Even if only allowing foot access.
Bill
 
Good observation, actually there are about 3000 less cattle up there than twenty years ago.
However the change in the way they are managed by using a rotation grazing system, puts the cattle in smaller pastures for less time.
Makes it look very compacted. And so happens that they are in those pastures on top of the mountain during the time of year that everyone is hunting.
Can't say that I like that idea either.
But I don't sit in Washington DC and make the decisions.
I do know that if we abuse the country that we can't sustain our existence.
I haven't seen a skinny elk either.
 
Bill, we don't have any landlocked areas on our ranch, but, I know what you mean.
I also hunt and see those animals across the private property.
The land use is definitely changing, from when a rancher used to encourage you to drive the animals away from the fields to those places sold or leased out.
Either money or just not wanting to put up with people is a fact of life.
Don't think that we should advocate for the loss of private property rights Though.
 
Very good discussion. The more people involved in all these questions the better off we all are.

It does appear that cattle are quite hard on the landscape.

As a mule deer fanatic. I would say so are elk.

The sheer size of the animals contributes to both the amount they eat and how much they trample.

What to do about it? Allow the debate to go on........
 
Well at least in Colorado you guys don't have whiney cattle ranchers storming F & G offices and wildlife meetings demanding all the elk be killed off like whats going on in Tardville.
 
I guess shouldn't pick solely on cattlemen on this thread. The Oil and Gas people have wrecked havoc on alot Forest land too. Sometimes they do build some good roads, but they can leave a wake of destruction too.

I think I'm just aggravated that I used to go to Colorado or Wyoming with multiple tags in my pocket, deer, elk, antelope, bear, moose.... and nowdays it's hard to even draw one tag!

These friggin hunting shows on 5 channels, 24hours a day popularized hunting to a frenzy. We all thought it was wonderful in the beginning, but it brought every Tom, #####, and Harry into the sport to where there just ain't enough to go around anymore.

Don't take it personal guys, I'm just venting and reminiscing about the "good o'le days" ? But sadly, those days ain't coming back- ever. I feel the saddest for our kids and grandkids that will never see a fraction of this sport like we have. :(
 
That cant be true longshot. Why I just heard our wildlife commissioner this weekend on a popular radio show talkin about how we needed more hunters cause there just ain't enough of us anymore. :D




#livelikezac
 
In our area in southwest Colorado, because of the fires, they put the cattle up in the high country sooner and left them later than usual. The grass that normally held the elk in that area was gone and the water holes where we can normally count on elk to be were trampled and had 30+ moo cows standing around them most of the time. I am a cattle rancher too, but that is abuse of public land.

txhunter58

venor, ergo sum (I hunt, therefore I am)
 
Is it na?ve to make game damage payment dependent on landowner allowing hunters access to his game-damaging wildlife?
 
Why
>I just heard our wildlife
>commissioner this weekend on a
>popular radio show talkin about
>how we needed more hunters
>cause there just ain't enough
>of us anymore. :D
>

Yep, I'm all for growing the sport, but unless they know how to wave a magic wand and make more elk and more land, I don't know where you'll put these new hunters?

And these private hunts bringing 10-15 thousand (or more) are so far from reality for most of us that you can't even count those as hunts. It's out of reach for the average guy. Hell, I'd be mad at my elk if I paid that much for him anyway. :)

I been doing this way to long to quit, so I'll struggle along in life and shoot an elk once in a while, wherever I can, but the cold hard truth is; young folks might as well find some other hobby to do in life.

That's my rant for the day. (I may have another one tomorrow though.lol)
 
I've hunted Colorado public lands since 1965, and have seen some dramatic changes in the habits of elk herds and the people that hunt them. Seems like there were more sheep summering in the high country than there are now, and the elk herds didn't seem to mind too much. Of course there were far fewer archery and muzzleloader hunters and nobody had 4wheel ATV's. As the numbers of hunters increased over the years, and the resultant disturbances increased, the elk learned to move off to private or difficult to access land.
One oldtimer I spoke with said he feels things started going downhill for hunters when non-ranching celebrity and jet-set types began buying ranches for the purposes of retreats and investment, and ceased running cattle. Posted and locked-up mid elevation properties have become sanctuary for bothered elk herds.
Smaller family-owned ranchers always had respect for and valued the wildlife, and this was at a time when big bucks didn't swap hands for hunting rights.
 
Since we seem to be having a civil discussion about the same goals, let's come up with ideas for keeping hunting as part of the future.
After attending more meetings this weekend a few things caught my attention.
1. The amount of people that are walking, biking, ATV riders, into the forest and wilderness areas. Are a huge threat! According to the environmental groups( of all people)
According to some statistics 500% from ten years ago.
2. Human and dog fecis littering the same.
3. Wolf introduction may very well be put on the ballot in 2020!
The tape worm they carry is confirmed to be transferred to ungulates, dogs and humans!
4.large out of control fires
5. Ranches being sold to non hunters.
6. Lack of predator control.
7. DROUGHT
You probably won't have to worry about the public lands rancher in a few years.
But, it's what we do. To damn foolish to call it quits!
 
Too bad BHA didnt throw in with ranchers rather than the greenies. That would have been a group to get behind.



#livelikezac
 
Can I play too or is the sandbox full?
First off let me state that I do not, nor ever have, owned cattle. I also never intend to.
My opinion is that grazing of public lands in our Nat'l forests is not the problem. In most cases there is more than enough feed for livestock and Deer/Elk. Winter grounds are a different matter.
Cattle in an area can move game but does't always. I find it interesting that no one has mentioned sheep. I hunted unit 33 this past year during the muzzy season and let me tell you they were everywhere or had been. Thousands of the stinky noisy beasts. There were still Elk/Deer in the area. And Of coarse this is nothing new as sheep have used this part of the country for decades. Man some of those herders can really carve a tree. Not sure of the oldest carving but I think I remember 1936?
I also believe that most of the livestock owners are better stewards of our public lands than the rest of us.
Stalker
 
I have no issues with cattle on public land under permit. Colorado has a long heritage of cattle ranching and we should be proud of that. The only issue I have is that I run into cattle and cowboys/dogs pushing cattle almost every year well into hunting season. I've heard there are dates in which the ranchers are supposed to have their cattle off public lands, don't no exactly what those dates are but I believe it is early October. Frustrating seeing large numbers of cattle (not a few straglers) still on public land in the later seasons. I don't think rules regarding dates or cattle numbers are enforced to well.
 
Alot of ranches have different off dates, example Grand Mesa has a off date around mid to late October, while on the Unc the off dates are mid November. And that's forest service, than Blm can go to February.
It would be nice to have a second opinion monitor,to keep track of trends and conditions that wasn't biased to the rancher or government.
Any one want that gig?
 
I run on my own land now days but for years I turned out on an allotment. I have my opinions and I feel with a lifetime of experience in the industry I have as good of handle on it as anyone.

So, for what it's worth.

Allotment holders have a legal right to graze. you can't just steal it from them.

Grazing properly done is beneficial to the land in most cases and reduces fire risk. it's not all negative .


The often seen overgrazing must end. this is the feds responsibility to set the dates and numbers and it needs to be done better.

Grazing rights are too cheap. not only is it unfair to the taxpayer but it's unfair to cattlemen who have to pay fair market value for private leasing or their own land.

While public grazing is a form of rancher welfare it must be taken into consideration public grazing comes with it's own set of perils. it needs to be cheaper than private lease to be competitive. just not as cheap as it is.


If it were up to me public grazing would remain. but it would be priced where it should be and it the existing rules and regulations would be strictly enforced. I see gross violations and poor management almost everywhere I travel, and 90% of the time this is why we're having this conversation.

And lastly let's not forget there are some allotments that are very well managed and the holder does a great job of complying. if we're going to bash the bad operators we need to commend the good ones.


















Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
I'm not a ranch basher and agree with most of your post Ocho. I would imagine the allotment price would vary some depending on quality but in your opinion what do you think is a fair range? You've got your finger on the pulse of this issue more so than the rest of us.


#livelikezac
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-18 AT 07:32PM (MST)[p]Look at what public land grazing with sheep had done to our bighorn populations. Public land grazing does not benefit anyone or any animals besides the rancher.
 
Alot of wisdom and good info in Ohchocokid's post above. It makes alot of sense.

Sheep come with another set of issues and the diseases spreading into Bighorns is a sad concern.

The debate over the use of Federal land will go on and on, but it's good to hear all sides here.
 
"As a non resident, I look at Colorado and just shakes me head. A dope store on every corner, wolves in the woods, and a Governor that is light in the loafers!!! and there's an exclamation mark for ya'll..."

AMEN to that !!!! and I'm a resident!
 
>Since we seem to be having
>a civil discussion about the
>same goals, let's come up
>with ideas for keeping hunting
>as part of the future.
>
> After attending more meetings this
>weekend a few things caught
>my attention.
>1. The amount of people that
>are walking, biking, ATV riders,
>into the forest and wilderness
>areas. Are a huge threat!
>According to the environmental groups(
>of all people)
>According to some statistics 500% from
>ten years ago.
>2. Human and dog fecis littering
>the same.
>3. Wolf introduction may very well
>be put on the ballot
>in 2020!
>The tape worm they carry is
>confirmed to be transferred to
>ungulates, dogs and humans!
>4.large out of control fires
>5. Ranches being sold to non
>hunters.
>6. Lack of predator control.
>7. DROUGHT
>You probably won't have to worry
>about the public lands rancher
>in a few years.
>But, it's what we do. To
>damn foolish to call it
>quits!

Austin, Really they are worried about human and dog fecis?? Every water hole I have ever seen on grazing grounds has been filled and contaminated with cow fecis. Ive never seen human or dog fecis in a water hole. I think that is a stretch and should be the least of their concerns.
 
LAST EDITED ON Dec-11-18 AT 12:15PM (MST)[p]>>
>
>Austin, Really they are worried
>about human and dog fecis??
>Every water hole I have
>ever seen on grazing grounds
>has been filled and contaminated
>with cow fecis. Ive never
>seen human or dog fecis
>in a water hole. I
>think that is a stretch
>and should be the least
>of their concerns.

This was the number 1 concern coming from a workshop sponsored by Subaru. I can't remember what the name of the workshop was.part of the leave no trace campaign.
If you have been to trailheads don't walk behind the trees or rocks!
I was also surprised to hear that.
However don't wear your sandals around a cowpond.
 
Ranchers have been and always will be a friend to the hunting community. When the left decides to put wolves on the ballot, there is only one other group that will stand with hunters to fight it. Right now there is only one group in this state that is hiring federal trappers, only one group aggressively controlling predators, etc. That are the cattlemen.

I have no issues at all with a well regulated leasing system. The truth is that cattle will help the land in many ways. Ranchers work hard to devleope and maintain water sources, they keep many of the trails open but removing dead fall, etc. They are out there trying to fight noxious weeds etc.

Wired is completely wrong when he states that ranchers o not care about the public lands. They care more than almost anyone I know as they have to have good healthy lands to feed their families.

Also a big issue people forget, the forest maybe where these ranchers are summering their cattle, but they still winter them on their ranches. In many places the only open winter range left for wildlife are these ranches. When the rancher no longer is grazing the summer range they eventually close down the ranch lower and sell it to a housing developer.

Sorry but it is BS and if hunters were smart we would start joining and fighting together with ranchers in regards to our public lands.

Look at just one example of the real issues threatening our wildlife. Maroon Bells saw over 325,000 vistors last year. Over 60,000 in one month. That is 2,000 people a day at the peak. Sorry but 300 head of cattle spread out over 60,000 acres is small potatoes compared to 325,000 people.

Last year White River National Forest saw over 10,000,000 visitors.

Add these numbers in with the issue of developing winter ranges and there simply is not room left for wildlife. Cattle are not the problem.

Again the predator control that goes with grazing is worth the cost alone. Without the predator control being done by ranchers our herds would be in a serious trouble.
 
I can agree with alot of what you said Elks96, but the following statement is a little light in the loafers too. :) pun intended.

"Sorry but
>300 head of cattle spread
>out over 60,000 acres is
>small potatoes"

There was a dang sight more than 300 cows on 60K of land where I was at this fall. I had to look for a clean place to sit down, dodge cows in the roads, and rake the pucky of my boots each night.

My take is much more in line with what Ohchocokid said above. But anyway run you're dang cows, but lower the numbers a tad and do your best to git 'um out by fall. I realize cows don't read a calendar, so getting them to come down before snow drives them out is hard to do.

I don't claim to have the answers, but what I saw this hunting season in elk country was over-cow'ed in my opinion. I had buddies hunting in other areas and said it looked like a mowed golf course from sheep grazing. Hell, the elk can't go low because it's full of towns, and if they stay up high, it's slim pickins too.
 
How many guys besides me have been chased by cow moose in the early seasons? There's gettin' to be a lot of moose where none were 5 to 10 years ago!
 
What Elk's said is well spoken as well.
Taking a trip back in time, 125 years ago, my ancestors came in as trappers, married in to the Utes and made their entire living with the land.
I am telling you this because of the stories about the real wildlife they told.
There were no elk! The earliest time that anyone can recall is in 1955.
Now 14,000 call it home.
There were mule deer, but, if they shot something,they tracked it down because it was the only one they might have even seen that week!
Wolves and grizzlies were both there.
As time went on and ranches and mining settled in the area, the predators were killed down. Not only because they were killing the livestock that feed them, but, also because of the diseases, mostly rabies, that infected everything.
Told you this because I think that it's important.
In the forties when trappers and ranchers and sportsman got together they got the predators under control.
Then entered the introduction of the elk and the best buck hunting ever!
Now there's no trapping, poisoning, spring hunts, dogs, and now fees for control of the predators.
Cattle and sheep ranches got to big for the use of the land, and were cut down on the stocking rates,
Now as most of us that have seen the trends of the use of the public lands, know that nothing stays the same. As people increase in incredible numbers and recreation takes over , the use is changing still.
We have to work together!
Thanks for your thoughts, they give me a couple of things to work on.
 
Sheep are another thing. everyone has always hated the sheepherders and I can't argue with that. in my opinion their value does not outweigh the value of the native sheep so the domestic sheep should be banned anywhere wild ones exist or may exist. those producers can graze bovine on their allotment or they can pound sand. this is a reasonable compromise.

A good point was hit on. in most cases big game ends up on private land in some part of the year. if you want to fight with the ranchers the public land grazing is where you start. it could end when they force depredation hunts and decimate wintering herds. then nobody wins.


As far as what it's worth that' not a one size fits all question. though that's how the feds see it, they just price it stupid cheap and don't look back.

There was an attempt to make allotments priced on a bid basis. and what better way to set market value than an auction. problem is a producer needs more certainty in order to make long term plans and even a 5 year contract would be difficult to manage under. and then of course, there is the fact we already have allotment holders with a claim to that land. it's a can of worms that's why nobody wants to address it.


I'm a huge public land protection advocate but at the end of the day these are multiple use lands. it can work for everyone as long as everyone cooperates.









Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
Guys, this is a great thread. Nobody bashing each other, just listening to everyone's view points.

I grew up in this area and know many of the ranchers around western Colorado. Most are great people and use the resources they have extremely well. They know that if they over graze one season they hurt themselves going forward. I say most because, just like in any group you do have exceptions and they do abuse the resources. You can say this for hunters, tree huggers, atv/motorcycle enthusiasts, bicyclists, etc. It always seems like the majority of problems arise from the few who abuse.

We hunt private and public land. There are cattle on the private we hunt as well as the public. The elk will stay in the same areas as the cattle and while they won't always use the same large ponds, the do share the small water sources, especially the springs.

If we were to push ranchers off the public lands, you would only see conditions worsen dramatically. Over growth will only lead to worsening wildfires. Guys like Massey are hard to come buy. Most people don't want to work as hard as ranchers do out here. If we lose the good ones, we will only see larger problems arise.

Just my 2 cents.
Bondo
 
I suspect in that part of the country they refer to it in pairs per acre, rather than acres per pair. If you needed 50 acres per pair how many acres would you need to run what yer runnin?


#livelikezac
 
>I suspect in that part of
>the country they refer to
>it in pairs per acre,
>rather than acres per pair.
>If you needed 50 acres
>per pair how many acres
>would you need to run
>what yer runnin?

Back here, the standard is about 1 cow per 2 acres. That's just an average that doesn't take into consideration, drought years and boom years... Colorado is a dang desert compared to Missouri. The average in Colorado is around 20 acres per cow... 10 times more than Missouri... It makes one wonder why anybody would even run cattle in Colorado at all? Missouri and Kansas could easily triple their cattle if the Market supported it, which still makes me wonder why we have Public land allotments at all?

Missouri currently ranks #6 in Cattle production and could easily triple production. Colorado is #10 in cattle production FYI.

Again, I'm not against the western Ranchers at all, Great people -- long standing traditions and all that... But my point is, we can make it without public land cattle in this country. However, like so many have stated on this thread, if the Rancher falls, so do so many other things along with it. It's a knife that cuts both ways.
 
it's all about AUM , ( Animal Unit Months ) . the range is assessed and AUM's are set . we always figured 26 lbs of dry matter a day for a 1000 lb cow and her calf pair.


obviously this varies greatly from one area to the other depending on the range fertility, moisture conditions and types of forage on it.


If everyone does their job properly and the rules are followed and enforced in most cases we should all be able to get along. maybe the best idea is to identify the places it's not and focus all the attention there. let's make life miserable for those who deserve it and not take it out on those who don't.

You can have a voice, the BLM and USFS are both sensitive to complaints on grazing. one or two whiners doesn't get much attention but if it gets bad enough they will take action. I know this personally because I've been there .










Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
"Colorado is a dang desert compared to Missouri. The average in Colorado is around 20 acres per cow... 10 times more than Missouri... It makes one wonder why anybody would even run cattle in Colorado at all?"

I agree. I wondered the same thing when it came to farming when I moved here from Minnesota. Yet we've got some of the worlds sweetest peaches, cantaloupe, and sweet corn on the planet! But it takes a great deal of the snowpack to do it. If you left a horse on 40 he'd probably do alright. 2 on that same 40 they'd both be lookin pretty poor come that first spring. Those grazing allotments in the mountains are certainly a linchpin to a lot of ways of life. I ran into cattle on my muzzleloader hunt this year. I moved to another part of the unit just to get the experience I was wanting. Most units are big enough to be able to do that. Like ocho commented earlier, if everyone plays nice it can work. If those ranchers lose those allotments I fear the whole thing crashes down. Somebody really needs to start BHR, Backcountry Hunters and Ranchers.


#livelikezac
 
I can live with "some cows" maybe even "alot of cows" in summer, but I just felt like it was over cow'ed where I was at.

But back to my original question... Would we have substantially more elk (and deer) if grazing was cut back or eliminated??? I suspect many here say no, -- and maybe you're right, I dunno.

I will just say that I DO believe the Bull Draw fire would have tripled it's size had there been no cattle up there keeping grass low. But again, maybe not, I dunno.

I do know we have a whole bunch of people wanting to hunt elk and not enough elk to go around.

If I had my way in a perfect world, all the Federal Land would be reserved for maximizing Big game, but that's a pipe dream. I'm sure if the Ute Indians that Domingues mentioned had it to do all over again, they wished they would have never seen a "white man" either.

The bottom line is--- it kinda is what it is, as they say. But ya'll just as well teach your grandkids to play on their cells phones for a hobby and not mess with hunting. just my honest opinion.
 
>>
>You can have a voice, the
>BLM and USFS are both
>sensitive to complaints on grazing.

I know that's the correct action to take, but I ain't never been one to piss and moan and try to cost another man his job. I can't stand people that bellyache to someone's boss. So, I'll just do my pissing on here instead and live with it. :)
 
We've got more elk in Colorado than anytime in history. I'm just hopein they dont screw it up!



#livelikezac
 
Not sure about you guys, but I have said, "bunch of cattle, wont be any deer here". Ive seen deer with cattle, but not as many.

It is my land as much as a cattle ranchers.
 
This is a honest question
I hear a lot about this is my land as much as there land (meaning cattleman) and I hear alot about how little the cattleman pay to graze there cattle.
So my question is how much does the average person that use the National Forestry and/or BLM to recreate or hunt?
How about to take pictures or video to sell?
How about guides for recreation and guide or outfitting for hunting or fishing?
I do think there is some user permits for pictures and/or video or guiding but really how much is it when you think about how much some of these guiding and outfitting business make.
I know the question is kind of all lumped together but I would really like to hear from some of you expecially the question on recreation and hunting.
I know I do not pay the forest service or BLM anything to go camping unless i stay in a paid camp ground, or riding my ATV.
I pay in Utah a county and state licensing tax but does any of that go to the Feds I do not really know I probably should know.
I do not pay anything to the forest service or BLM to hunt or fish and I am not aware of the department of Fish and Game paying anything to the forest service or BLM from are permit fees.
Please correct me if I am wrong about what we pay. I am from Utah so maybe some things are different in Colorado.
 
>This is a honest question
>I hear a lot about this
>is my land as much
>as there land (meaning cattleman)
>and I hear alot about
>how little the cattleman pay
>to graze there cattle.
>So my question is how much
>does the average person that
>use the National Forestry and/or
>BLM to recreate or hunt?
>
>How about to take pictures or
>video to sell?
>How about guides for recreation and
>guide or outfitting for
>hunting or fishing?
>I do think there is some
>user permits for pictures and/or
>video or guiding but really
>how much is it when
>you think about how much
>some of these guiding and
>outfitting business make.
>I know the question is kind
>of all lumped together but
>I would really like to
>hear from some of you
>expecially the question on recreation
>and hunting.
>I know I do not pay
>the forest service or BLM
>anything to go camping unless
>i stay in a paid
>camp ground, or riding my
>ATV.
>I pay in Utah a county
>and state licensing tax but
>does any of that go
>to the Feds I do
>not really know I probably
>should know.
>I do not pay anything to
>the forest service or BLM
>to hunt or fish and
>I am not aware of
>the department of Fish and
>Game paying anything to the
>forest service or BLM from
>are permit fees.
>Please correct me if I am
>wrong about what we pay.
>I am from Utah so
>maybe some things are different
>in Colorado.

meh. Your argument is invalid. Those user groups you mentioned do not do the damage livestock do. look at what cows do to streams etc.

You're smoking crack if you think ranchers care about public land.

Ranchers are always bitching about wildlife on their private lands yet they dont allow access. Hypocrites.

The only good rancher is a private land rancher. Rest of them are two legged wolves.
 
This is a great question.
Hunting fees, ATV fees, and fishing licenses go to the state.
Mining, timber, outfitter and grazing fees go to the feds. the only recreation fees that go to the feds are if they need a special permit for a big event.
 
Longshot,

I don't think cattle had any positive or negative affect on the Bull Draw fire. Several years of drought preceding last years worst in history drought provided the conditions for the burn, There plain wasn?t much forage up high and dang near zero forage low where most of the fire was. JMO but I spend a bunch of time up there every year.

Hasbean
 
>Longshot,
>
>I don't think cattle had any
>positive or negative affect on
>the Bull Draw fire.

Maybe so, but I would think had there been no cattle all summer long, the grass would have been higher and much harder to put out. At least that's how it is here in Missouri. A wildfire here is easier to contain where pasture is grazed and hay cut, verses, overgrowth with no grazing. But you're right, that's just my view from a 1000 miles away. I'm no expert.

All that said, I still think Federal Land should have minimal or no grazing, and gear more toward wildlife. I just think there's enough land in the great plains to raise all the cattle we need. But again, just my opinion and no ill will toward ranchers.
 
Some of you need to keep this in perspective, these are " grazing rights " that means they have a right to graze. it's not a matter of should we allow it or could we have more fun if we didn't.


As I said if they're not managing their allotment well and enough people gripe they're going to be hearing about it. they can and will be forced to correct the problems or they can be forced to pull off. maybe they don't care, but there are ways of making them care you just have to be proactive.


as far as would there be more big game without public grazing ? I'd say no in the northern states. in my area most of the public land grazing is at higher elevation where there is little or no game in the winter and extra forage would be useless there. and much of the winter range is private land. our elk numbers are set by how many the winter range can handle not how many the summer can handle. how would pizzing off private land owners gain the herds anything ?

But I have seen warmer climate ranges that have been over grazed and there is a good chance it's hurting game numbers. I never said never. but they still have the right.









Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
All I will say about this issue, is that the Federal Animal Unit Month (AUM) has remained stagnant at about $2 for the last 30 years. (Source https://www.taxpayer.net/energy-natural-resources/a-bovine-buffet-at-the-public-trough/). For private, non-irrigated land, ranchers had to pay in 2016 $17.53 per AUM in Colorado. (Source: http://www.wr.colostate.edu/ABM/ABM_Notes - PastureLease2015_2016.pdf). I don't hate ranchers, but the federal government is letting them rip off the taxpayer. Maybe if the federal government made ranchers pay their fair share, it would help improve the state of our federal lands. Just because you have a grazing right, doesn't mean you don't have to pay a fair market value.
 
>
>
>
>Some of you need to keep
>this in perspective, these
>are " grazing rights "
> that means they have
>a right to graze.
>it's not a matter of
>should we allow it

Explain that further... Is it a specified contract for a set amount of time? Is it unrevokable? I assumed that the Forrest Service allocates grazing rights with guidelines and limitations, in addition to ceasing, should they choose to do so.

Your statement above makes it sound like they have the same rights I have on my private property. Please explain if you will.
 
Let's take a look at the cost of the difference between a private lease and a public grazing lease.
Private leases at 10? the price is a great deal, usually the landowner provides good clean water, pasture with better stocking rates, care of the stock, good fencing, and better predator control, all adds up to more pounds and lower death loss.
Public grazers have to build and maintain fences
and build and maintain water resources have no more rights than the normal public when it comes to travel, move stock more often, usually more hands on than private leases. They also have to purchase the permits
The cost of the AUM is based alot on the cost of the product, which really hasn't changed much in the last 30 years.
Not sure where the grazers are ripping off the taxpayers? I haven't seen them out there doing anything!
Let's look at it this way, you could go to the store and buy all your meat at the counter all wrapped up and ready to go. Or go hunting and the only shown cost of a cheap public land hunt is a license fee.
Except we all know there is a lot more expenses to it.
 
I do need to point out that we have a good relationship with the forest service and the Blm ,as we have to deal with the same issues. Also we get help from the game department and groups such as rmef, turkey federation, mule deer assoc, that are stepping up to do some incredible projects!
We invite them to our reviews and discussions about the permits.
There's not anything that is not scrutinized, and nothing works perfectly.
The AUM numbers have been worked on to recognize the number of wildlife use.
I would like to invite you to come out and see it firsthand, it looks alot different than looking at it from a forum post
 
Let me correct myself. Congress is ripping the American people off, not ranchers. Ranchers get a great deal and if I were a rancher, I'd be ecstatic. The federal government is basically telling taxpayers that the rate that ranchers pay per AUM is exempt from inflation or paying fair market value. As quoted in one of my sources, "If BLM had simply kept its 1981 fee on pace with inflation, the 2016 rate would?ve been $6.20 [per AUM]..." Why should everything else go up with inflation over the years, but the price per AUM, which was $1.41 for 2018 on both USFS and BLM lands? My argument is based on facts and I site my side of the argument. Federal lands belong to us all. No one group who uses them should be favored over another.
 
Grazing rights belong to the ranch owner but can be handed down to is kids or whoever buys his ranch. the allotment is generally sold with the ranch it's part of . since it is part of the operation the allotment holder is provided assurance as long as he pays his fees and complies with the regulations it's his. rights can be revoked but I've never seen it happen.

It's not simply an annual contract the feds decide what they're going to do about.




So given the way allotments are administered I don't know how fair market value can be established. every time a proposal to set the fees by auction has come forward it's been shot down for the reason I've given.

This may help some. the fee structure makes no sense so don't try real hard but it explains a little of it.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RS21232.html#_Toc463527060







Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
>Grazing rights belong to the ranch
>owner but can be handed
>down to is kids or
>whoever buys his ranch.

Yep, I assumed there was some kind of "grandfather'ed clause that perpetuates the right to graze. That's why I suggested in an earlier post that grazing rights not be shut down, but phased out instead. I even mentioned over a 30 year period to be fair to ranchers to make other long term plans. Even if cattle numbers are downgraded, that should be done over time and not just slam the door shut on ranchers. They do deserve to be treated fairly as far as timelines go.

">This may help some. the
>fee structure makes no sense "

You're right, that doesn't make much sense to me. The chart shows 1981 AUM pirce at $2.31 , and 2016 at $2.11 per AUM.

It would seem to me that somebody in charge needs to re-visit the policies and adjust accordingly. But my original argument wasn't about what ranchers pay per AUM, but more about the footprint livestock grazing makes on public land. It certainly is a complex issue with alot of tentacles affecting alot of people, (and big game).
 
I hear you. it's hard to see a nuked pasture someplace you love. but then again it's hard to see a hillside you loved clear cut too. but rather than stop it maybe we could better manage it.


Talk has been for years that the fee structure for federal grazing should be 50% of what private lease in the county rents for. our ag property taxes are set on cash rent values so why couldn't this work ? it's probably too simple for the feds.













Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
Two things every responsible hunter should do:

1) shoot every cow they see

2) pull up every survey stake!
 
That kind of talk is counterproductive. and what gives hunters the poor public image we have.

I'd turn anyone in who shot livestock just as fast as if they shot a game animal.













Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
>
>
>
>
> More than once.
>so find somewhere else to
>spotlight.
>
>
>

What are you doing out that late? Must not like a little competition? hahahahahahhaah
 
Kind of ironic and even laughable (if you have a sense of humor) that early-season hunters camp out for a week with the cattle, while the elk are down on private where "no hunting" is allowed. The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. The water is probably cleaner, too.
 
There are about 99% of private property owners that don't own the leases behind their property.
90% of the time there is another way to get to that public land , it takes more effort and you may not be able to drive into it, but for those hunters willing to work at it, It's usually well rewarding!
Vouchers were a great way to compensate damage
to farm commodities, now those are being given to any land owner that has X amount of land acres, even if they have no crops on it, the vouchers are going to absentee owners that have nothing to do with farming or improvement of habitat.
Making it a large money issue, that's not what was intended.
I wonder if the DOW put a limit on how much can be charged for the vouchers and the farmer who received them must show damage, and make at least 50% of their income from the agriculture land.
If it would make sense?
 
For sake of discussion; if a rancher has animals grazing on public lands should the ranch be eligible for pvt damage vouchers?

I am all for grazing public lands as I feel grazing is a good management tool but you cannot state that grazing livestock does not impact wildlife/big game at least to some degree.

"Courage is being scared to death but
saddling up anyway."
 
It would be ignorant to say livestock don't impact wildlife on public lands, some spring through fall grazing times most years is minimal, draught years, yes.
We recognize the need to
Cut numbers and leave grass banks, and have working water source projects done. But the wildlife also need places to winter.
Alot of years that may only be a couple of weeks to a couple of months.
When it's a couple of months the damage is devastating and money is a great way to get along.
Selling vouchers is a good way to compensate.
Every case won't be the same, and should be looked at accordingly.
 
I agree that vouchers should be awarded to farmers (ranchers) that experience crop damage, and they should be allowed to sell them. But I don't agree that non-ag properties should get these vouchers. There are a lot of large properties bought up by folks that don't want cattle, and vouchers are awarded by the acre; but they also sell these tags at a premium, creating a private hunting preserve stocked with State-owned wildlife. Perhaps they should obtain tags the same way everyone else does. After all, going after the trophy class animals is not really about population control.
 
I think a lot of you are missing the fact that the cattle industry feeds our country. Some (wired?) seem to think that our recreation is more important. The Ranchers in this country are trying to scrape out a living just like the rest of us. Without those allotments most could not stay in business. We have record number of elk and without a couple of bad winters the deer population was in great shape.
We should thank Dominguez and the others who do more for the land, water and roads than any of us sportsmen do.
Your thought about to many cows, go hunt somewhere else. No one is begging you to come to Colorado.
 
The Ranchers in
>this country are trying to
>scrape out a living just
>like the rest of us.
>Without those allotments most could
>not stay in business. > Your thought about to many
>cows, go hunt somewhere else.
>No one is begging you
>to come to Colorado.


Hey Jack, I'm a guy doing some scraping for a living too with real live cows. And there ain't nobody offered me any allotments or vouchers or any dam thing else. I made what you call "Bank Payments" on my place.

And I got as much a right to hunt that land as you do, so don't go telling me to go somewhere else. I paid the Taxman just like everybody else did. So get off your high horse.
 
This whole thread has kinda went in the sewer. I don't have a solution that makes everybody happy. But yeah, I saw too many cows this year. But the truth is, I wont draw a tag there again anyway, so it's a deal you guys that live there with have cope with. I can tell you that the Mark Twain National Forrest surrounds me on all sides here in Missouri and there ain't one cow on any of it. But if folks wanna eat the mountains into the ground, be my guest. and good luck to you ya'll.
 
Longshot

Sorry, didn't mean to ruffle your feathers, most of us are scraping by. You absolutely have every right to come to Colorado.
The comment about not coming to Colorado was directed to Wired.
His comment for every hunter to shoot every cow he sees. And that Ranchers do not care how they treat public lands.
The Rancher who graze where I hunt spend more time on the roads, stock tanks and creek beds than I have ever seen the National Forrest Service.
 
Fair enough and well said. It's a very complex issue. I have loyalties on all sides. I've always liked ranchers and cattle have fed my family for years. The other side of that is, I believe public grazing cuts into the rest of us that own our own farms. We can't compete with someone paying $2 a month per head to graze. Land here sells for 2-4 thousand an acre, you'll starve to death paying for it with cow flesh. I think if mountain grazing stops, cattle production would explode across the plains to take up the slack.


Still on another hand, if you run the ranchers out of the mountains, the city slickers and tree huggers will take over, stop hunting and stock wolves and just about every other stupid idea you can think of.

But at the end of the day, it's like I said, I ain't coming back anyway, so it's a Colorado problem to solve. Best of luck to ya'll.
 
>Longshot
>
> Sorry, didn't mean to ruffle
>your feathers, most of us
>are scraping by. You absolutely
>have every right to come
>to Colorado.
> The comment about not coming
>to Colorado was directed to
>Wired.
>His comment for every hunter to
>shoot every cow he sees.
>And that Ranchers do not
>care how they treat public
>lands.
> The Rancher who graze where
>I hunt spend more time
>on the roads, stock tanks
>and creek beds than I
>have ever seen the National
>Forrest Service.
>

Ranchers scraping out a living? hilarious! show me a rancher that doesnt have a brand new truck. Ranchers are no friends to hunters. End of story.
 
Just like some hunters, wink wink, there are some narcissistic jerk ranchers. but if you think they all are you don't know many.













Stay Thirsty My Friends
 
>Two things every responsible hunter should
>do:
>
>1) shoot every cow they see
>
>
>2) pull up every survey
>stake!

You worthless piece of #####! You have added nothing to this conversation. When you grow a brain, feel free to post again. Until then go back to jacking off in your parents basement!
 

Similar threads

P
rejoice, fans of public lands grazing
Replies
8
Views
447
Utahlefty
Utahlefty
NebrCatMan
How Rough 44-45-47-444 and 80-81
Replies
1
Views
541
oldmossback
oldmossback
E
Texas, Welcome to ALL the state of Utah
Replies
10
Views
913
elkfromabove
E

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

STC_1619.JPG
IMG_9313.jpeg
buck me.jpg
20210105_121646.jpg
Good Lookin' Black Bear
20231123_112212.jpg
0CA084A2-6531-4BE0-AAEC-4283E1DF21A4.jpeg
IMG_2232.jpeg
A85AC562-29AD-4D66-B0C6-88F2B2222648.jpeg
Big Bull Elk
47C1AB99-947B-475C-973E-DEC9D4DED519.jpeg
IMG_20230920_155832.jpg

Colorado Hunting Guides & Outfitters

Rocky Mountain Ranches

Hunt some of the finest ranches in N.W. Colorado. Superb elk, mule deer, and antelope hunting.

Frazier Outfitting

Great Colorado elk hunting. Hunt the backcountry of unit 76. More than a hunt, it's an adventure!

CJ Outfitters

Hunt Colorado's premier trophy units, 2, 10 and 201 for trophy elk, deer and antelope.

Allout Guiding & Outfitting

Offering high quality mule deer, elk, bear and cougar hunts in Colorado units 40 and 61.

Ivory & Antler Outfitters

Hunt trophy elk, mule deer, moose, antelope, bear, cougar and turkey on both private land and BLM.

Urge 2 Hunt

We offer both DIY and guided hunts on large ranches all over Colorado for archery, muzzleloader and rifle hunts.

Hunters Domain

Colorado landowner tags for mule deer, elk and antelope. Tags for other states also available.

Flat Tops Elk Hunting

For the Do-It-Yourself hunters, an amazing cabin in GMU 12 for your groups elk or deer hunt.

Back
Top Bottom