BLM Grazing Overhaul

[Walkalot]

You are one of the rare ones. I dont want access to private. I think most dont care anymore and are pushing to manage the public for the public. Sorry to offend ya but private should do what they feel is best for them and the public should just cut ties with private landowners honestly. No more grazing or tax dollars.

 

[BigHornRam]

You are one of the rare ones. I dont want access to private. I think most dont care anymore and are pushing to manage the public for the public. Sorry to offend ya but private should do what they feel is best for them and the public should just cut ties with private landowners honestly. No more grazing or tax dollars.

You seem to have everything figured out. Good luck with your mission.

 

[Walkalot]

Far from it.

 

[antlerradar]

An excellent example of a non sequitur.

An excellent response for some one that is unwilling or unable to answer the question.
I post this up not because I think that hunters should pay to hunt public land. I don't think that for a minute. I post this to get hunters thinking about how they are going to handle the argument when it is upon us. Mining, logging and grazing have all had to deal with groups apposed to their public land use claiming they do not pay enough. It is only a matter of time until antihunting groups start making the same argument. When it happens we had better have a good response and complaining that other groups do not pay market price in is not going to help our argument.

 

[antlerradar]

I would be open to grazing on public lands. Willing to hear it. The problem is much deeper than that. Ranchers grazing on public pay far less than they would on private. But how many millions of tax payer dollars are also spent for ranchers on public lands. Fence. Water developments, land cattle study ect. BLM is basically goverment employees working for ranchers. Granted they put up some out houses and pavilions but come on. Having not have worked for the forest service I cannot say. But would assume similar. With the overhunting on public lands it's time to change things up. But it is also a management issue. Montana public lands are so mis managed it's a crime. But that also relates to must manage the deer and elk so they can have grass to graze. There was a statement earlier in post about elk moving off wall creek to private. I would guess pressure has something to do with it. Land owners create there own problems by not allowing hunting.

I have been using pubic land in SE Montana for 40 years. The range has never looked better. I wish I could say the same for the deer herd. The problem with the deer is not landowners or cattle, but us as hunters. We simply can not take truck loads of deer out of the public lands for five weeks in October and November and not have it come back and bit us in the butt.

 

[timmy]

Some of the best hunting you will have is green up after the grazing.

 

[BigHornRam]

An excellent response for some one that is unwilling or unable to answer the question.
I post this up not because I think that hunters should pay to hunt public land. I don't think that for a minute. I post this to get hunters thinking about how they are going to handle the argument when it is upon us. Mining, logging and grazing have all had to deal with groups apposed to their public land use claiming they do not pay enough. It is only a matter of time until antihunting groups start making the same argument. When it happens we had better have a good response and complaining that other groups do not pay market price in is not going to help our argument.

AUM's on BLM and Forest Service lands are cheap but not free. HUM's are free. Think about it hunters.

 

[SouthNVHunter]

I really wish grazing could be used as a tool to allow more public access onto private land. Drives me nuts when ranchers complain about too many elk or deer on their land but they graze their animals on public land. Not sure how they could manage it but I feel like if they graze public land, they should have to allow some kind of public hunting or fishing access

It is my understanding that you can still Hunt/Fish on BLM land that has a permit for grazing.
I currently hunt quail on BLM land that has cattle grazing on it. The rancher that has the permit does not own the land, the public does, and therefore he cannot restrict recreational access to it. When I googled this subject that is what I read and I wanted to be sure some rancher didn't try to tell me I couldn't hunt on BLM land just because he had a permit to graze cattle there.

 

[406dn]

AUM's on BLM and Forest Service lands are cheap but not free. HUM's are free. Think about it hunters.

They might as well be free. Really,, $1.35 a month for a cow and her calf is only cheap??? It's cheaper than dirt cheap.

 

[BigHornRam]

They might as well be free. Really,, $1.35 a month for a cow and her calf is only cheap??? It's cheaper than dirt cheap.

If this bothers you so much, contact your representatives and express your concerns. Whining on the internet about it is pointless.

 

[406dn]

If this bothers you so much, contact your representatives and express your concerns. Whining on the internet about it is pointless.

As is your immediately responding. I have written to them about it. That too is pointless.

It has been this way from the start. If you resided on the right side of the political aisle, some would call it crony capitalism.

 

[BigHornRam]

As is your immediately responding. I have written to them about it. That too is pointless.

It has been this way from the start. If you resided on the right side of the political aisle, some would call it crony capitalism.

Well, you can always become a member of WWP. I'm sure they would be happy to take your money and listen to your complaints.

 

[BWALKER77]

I have been using pubic land in SE Montana for 40 years. The range has never looked better. I wish I could say the same for the deer herd. The problem with the deer is not landowners or cattle, but us as hunters. We simply can not take truck loads of deer out of the public lands for five weeks in October and November and not have it come back and bit us in the butt.

Fire for effect.
It's really sad what has happened to MT. You can bitch about grazing all you want, but the fault lies solely on the FWP.

 

[JLS]

Deer and elk numbers in a unit are def managed to share the range with cattle. No doubt

What unit(s) are you referring to?

 

[antlerradar]

I have been using pubic land in SE Montana for 40 years. The range has never looked better. I wish I could say the same for the deer herd. The problem with the deer is not landowners or cattle, but us as hunters. We simply can not take truck loads of deer out of the public lands for five weeks in October and November and not have it come back and bit us in the butt.

I take back the part about landowners. They do contribute some to the problem.
There is vast herds of deer right now on the private land on Tongue, Powder River and Otter Creek. Just where do you think that the bucks have gone? Come December those deer will move back up into the public where they are included in the winter/spring surveys that FWP uses to set policy.

 

[Fire_9]

It is my understanding that you can still Hunt/Fish on BLM land that has a permit for grazing.
I currently hunt quail on BLM land that has cattle grazing on it. The rancher that has the permit does not own the land, the public does, and therefore he cannot restrict recreational access to it. When I googled this subject that is what I read and I wanted to be sure some rancher didn't try to tell me I couldn't hunt on BLM land just because he had a permit to graze cattle there.

You are correct, you can still hunt that BLM land. What I was suggesting was some for of public access onto their property for the grazing rights on public property.

 

[Walkalot]

JLS, I dont know how to answer your question without being sarcastic. I would think it would be common knowledge and or very accessible info

 

[Walkalot]

​

MenuQuick
Access

Montana Statewide Elk Management Plan​

Feedback
This plan has been separated into smaller sections for faster downloading.

Elk Management Plan​
Table of Contents & Introduction	Pages 1-3	144 KB
Background Information for Elk Plan	Pages 4-55	972 KB
FWP Mission, Statewide Objectives & Summary of Changes	Pages 56-64	466 KB
Purcell, Salish, Whitefish, North Swan Flathead Valley, Clark Fork & Bob Marshall Wilderness EMU	Pages 65-129	1.3 MB
Ninemile, Bitterroot, Garnet, Flint Creek, Rock Creek, Sapphire, West Fork, Deer Lodge & Granite Butte EMU	Pages 130-202	1.5 MB
Fleecer, Pioneer, Tendoy, Gravelly, Tobacco Root, Highland, Elkhorn, West Big Belt, Bridger, Gallatin/Madison, Northern Yellowstone, & Absaroka EMU	Pages 203-290	1.9 MB
Crazy Mountains, East Big Belt, Castle Mountains, Little Belt, Devils Kitchen, Birdtail Hills, Teton River, Sweetgrass Hills, Golden Triangle, Highwood & Snowy EMU	Pages 291-353	1.7 MB
Mid-Yellowstone, Bull Mountain, Bears Paw Mountains, Missouri River Breaks, Hi-Line & Custer Forest EMU	Pages 354-392	1.0 MB
Literature Cited	Pages 353-397	113 KB

System RequirementsUse of Google AnalyticsSite IndexContact FWP

• PRIVACY & SECURITY
• ACCESSIBILITY

 

[JLS]

JLS, I dont know how to answer your question without being sarcastic. I would think it would be common knowledge and or very accessible info

I’m not omniscient.

You’re also now conflating state and federal management policies and regulations.

 

[1_pointer]

Seems like a great time to add the following to every BLM/FS lease,

"Any attempt to limit or discourage access by lawful recreational users of the leased public land, such as hikers or hunters, shall result in immediate termination of this lease and a 5 year ban on applying for any other BLM/FS lease. Violations include improper posting of "private", "no trespass" or "no hunting" signs, harassment of lawful users, herding big game off public and back on to adjoining private land, re-routing of established two tracks to make public access more difficult, locking gates or otherwise limiting lawful access."

For the BLM: 43CFR4140.1b7

For those interested in the the difference between costs on public vs private land grazing:

Grazing on Public Lands - CAST Science

Approximately 262 million acres of public land in the western United States are grazed by domestic livestock. This report discusses and provides scientific information concerning livestock grazing on public lands in the West. Chair: William A. Laycock, University of Wyoming, Laramie. R129, ISBN...

www.cast-science.org