Did Marvel run away before losing.....

[JoseCuervo]

Hey Bullhound,

Does the state pay the BLM (or FS) to do their monitoring for them? What do you suppose the Picketts tell the Federal guy when he tells them to move their cattle off of State Land???

Grazing on state lands loses the state money, and does not even attempt to maximize the income to the school kids. Why on earth would you defend it?

 

[Bullhound]

#1 Not is this case

#2 Grazing on state lands does not lose the state money in all cases, & definitely not in this case.

EG,

you may not remember, but if you go way back and look at my posts, you will see that I'm not in favor of "welfare ranching" so to speak. I'm not in favor of letting ranchers overgraze or abuse their legal rights when having a lease. Your attitude and approach, as I'm pretty sure you're aware, make a person want to be on the "other side".

 

[JoseCuervo]

Bullhound,

If the Fed's aren't paid for monitoring the land, and Picketts would not listen to the Fed guy if he told them to move the cattle, then how can you say the state is not losing money? The reason they are not losing money is that they are not paying the bills required to monitor the leases. Seems like a risky proposition to me.

And, I think we have had this discussion before, but I don't think the state makes money on the leases for grazing, once they are "fully burdened" with the managment and administration.

Look at this deal here: $13k for 15,000 acres for 10 years. Works out to a cost of less than $0.09 (yeppers 9 cents) per acre.

Can you believe the State of Idaho is leasing land for 9 cents, and not able to gain enough revenue to monitor it? And while doing so, risking habitat for Salmon and Caribou?

 

[pawclaws]

Good deal; maybe they would be interestedin a hunting lease or donation to IHLA!

 

[JoseCuervo]

Anybody and everybody can hunt these lands, already. That is why we call them PUBLIC lands....

 

[pawclaws]

Not if they are leased!!

 

[JoseCuervo]

Paws,
You really need to understand the Law before you comment. These leases are Grazing Leases, and do not preclude anybody from hunting on them. Looks like you don't know too much about this subject, do you?

Remember, we call them PUBLIC lands so the PUBLIC can use them for recreation.

 

[pawclaws]

Nope!

 

[Bullhound]

Correct, these are just leased rights for grazing purposes. That was almost changed about six months ago though. When the BLM had proposals out there that would have given ranchers with grazing rights the "right" to lock gates on the public as well, all in the name of protecting the grazing conditions or some other BS.

see EG, I believe we discussed this issue some months ago and we are probably still in agreement that this was a BS proposition.

.......in agreement.......did I say that????? Have a great weekend all.................

 

[1_pointer]

FYI, if state lands within a fed. grazing allotment are managed/monitored by the feds, the permittee could have to move their cattle off the state or even private lands if it was determined that is what was needed. Before this happens an Exchange of Use Agreement is agreed to by both parties. In many areas this isn't a big deal, but in areas where there is a lot of checkerboarded land this is a common practice. Oftentimes, the allotments may be less than 50% federal land, but the grazing is administered by a fed agency. This is cheaper/wiser for the landowner because without these agreements they'd have to fence the livestock from the fed. off their private land; ie open range laws.

PS- I SERIOUSLY doubt you'd have a problem with Doug Pickett moving cattle off an area if it was needed. He's a relatively astute and proactive rancher IMO.

 

[JoseCuervo]

1-Ptr,

How come the BLM would do the state's monitoring if the Picketts had the lease, but if Marvel has the lease, the BLM would not do the monitoring????

It sounds like it should be easy to monitor the Lease if there are not any cattle on it...

 

[Ten Bears]

Grazing on state lands loses the state money, and does not even attempt to maximize the income to the school kids. Why on earth would you defend it?

EG, what would maximize the income, subdivide? In this case EG, you came to the table with more questions then knowledge.

 

[1_pointer]

'Gunner- I'm not 100% sure, but I'd bet that if Marvel doesn't graze the allotment that it breaks the agreement with the BLM. Without the Exchange of Use Agreement the BLM doesn't have any administration to perform on the state lands, thus wouldn't spend the $$ to monitor it. Don't take this as gospel as I don't know for certain.

 

[ELKCHSR]

The best way to make money on the land if that is what every one is after, is to sell it all into small parcels, and let each of the land owners pay taxes on the land, per acre, this is the most lucritive way to make money on the ground, and the tax payers needn't worry about spending the money on maintining it...

 

[JoseCuervo]

Originally posted by ELKCHSR:
The best way to make money on the land if that is what every one is after, is to sell it all into small parcels, and let each of the land owners pay taxes on the land, per acre, this is the most lucritive way to make money on the ground, and the tax payers needn't worry about spending the money on maintining it...

Can we get a translator in here, anybody???

 

[ELKCHSR]

Can we get a translator in here, anybody???

 

[1_pointer]

'Gunner- I re-read the original article, the second to last paragraph explains what I was assuming to be the cause. Just FYI.

Elkchsr- Are you saying the best benefit to the state would be to sell the land in small parcels?

 

[ELKCHSR]

I am only pointing out that if it is money that every one is interested in, then yes. I know that is not the main interests, it is just another way to skin the cat. There is alway's the want to hang one group of people for some thing that is wrong or percieved wrong. The blame lies on both sides of the fence on any of these issues that keep coming up.
Those that make the product, what ever it is, or those that use it in any form it is produced in...
This is where hypocrite comes to mind... Only an observation, nothing more.

 

[Ten Bears]

CHSR, I see at least you understand my point.