Private beef out of our public land.

[Northwoods Labs]

Buzz, remind me do you own cattle or a lease (this is an honest question and I am not trying to pick a fight)?



I find Northwoods statement a little interesting, because I think we run the risk of being supporting of public land use as long as its "our type" of use. Couldn't the same statement above be revised to say "we are basically subsidizing the ability of folks in a lot the western state to play hunter? Believe me, I get annoyed when I find range land that has been left like moon scape from sheep grazing and trash from cattlemen trying to create a new water source that didnt work, but isnt that part of it being a land of many uses? Also, do we run the risk of fractioning our support of keeping public lands public and ultimatly cur off our nose to spite our face if we take such a hard stance against cattle grazing or many other activities?

We are paying into the system, and a large percentage of people hunting on public ground are taking absolutely nothing from the land (what are the success rates, like 10% or so for elk in most areas?). Through conservation efforts we are also giving a hell of a lot back to the public ground. I am sure there are some ranchers that give back too. Maybe I would change my tune if ranchers were actually paying fair market value for the lands they have cattle on as well.
Like I said, I have no dog in the fight, but I am certainly not sympathetic when I hear ranchers complain about "big government this" and "too much regulation that"

 

[bobbydean]

What is the ranch worth. Been for sale at $25,000,000 for 5 years and no takers.

Have absolutely no knowledge. Just curious.

I like that current owners do not interfere with the birthing of the elk herds on their lands.

Admire the owners for their conservation actions. but are they trying to cash in on their conservation actions.

 

[Sytes]

We are paying into the system, and a large percentage of people hunting on public ground are taking absolutely nothing from the land (what are the success rates, like 10% or so for elk in most areas?). Through conservation efforts we are also giving a hell of a lot back to the public ground. I am sure there are some ranchers that give back too. Maybe I would change my tune if ranchers were actually paying fair market value for the lands they have cattle on as well.
Like I said, I have no dog in the fight, but I am certainly not sympathetic when I hear ranchers complain about "big government this" and "too much regulation that"

The % of harvest is part of the main equation for proper management of our wildlife, or so the intent. I do not view this as a deficiency thus a lack of return to the public hunting community, if I understood your rationalized view of the bang for the buck type basis.
The charge to ranchers results in the consumer's cost to purchase their beef.

While I would love to proclaim all I eat is freezer filled wild game year round, that is far from the case for myself ( Approx 10% success rate you shared) and the mass large population that do not hunt nor have freezer filled yearly sustenance of wild game. Roughly, based on the following link for hunters, 17 million of the 330 million us population hunted last year. There is a whoopload of the population that eat beef.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/227422/number-of-hunters-usa/

 

[Straight Arrow]

.... are they trying to cash in on their conservation actions.

More likely the value is based on the incredible natural beauty and uniqueness of the place ... plus it's just down the road from Peter Fonda, Dennis Quaid, and many others of similar wealth and influence who have paid large prices for a piece / peace of Paradise Valley.

 

[Elkmagnet]

The charge to ranchers results in the consumer's cost to purchase their beef.

While I would love to proclaim all I eat is freezer filled wild game year round, that is far from the case for myself ( Approx 10% success rate you shared) and the mass large population that do not hunt nor have freezer filled yearly sustenance of wild game. Roughly, based on the following link for hunters, 17 million of the 330 million us population hunted last year. There is a whoopload of the population that eat beef.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/227422/number-of-hunters-usa/

Sitting here thinking of all the things I could get for cheaper if the dam government would get off of it's butt and subsidize the production.
Attention feds, crank up that money machine I'm tired of paying fair market value for my stuff.
#ribeyeseverynight

 

[BigHornRam]

What is the ranch worth. Been for sale at $25,000,000 for 5 years and no takers.

Have absolutely no knowledge. Just curious.

I like that current owners do not interfere with the birthing of the elk herds on their lands.

Admire the owners for their conservation actions. but are they trying to cash in on their conservation actions.

$5000 per acre with river frontage and that close to Yellowstone Park is not out of line. The way real estate in Montana is selling right now, it could be bought at any moment. The fact that the Yellowstone elk herd winter on the property and migrate through it makes it almost priceless as far as conservation values are concerned. Since the owner has taken the cattle off the ranch, a couple hundred head of elk now live year round in the irrigated hay fields. Unnatural (European look for TonyJ) in my opinion.

Here's a little more back ground on the ranch and owner.

http://www.explorebigsky.com/dome-mountain-ranch

 

[MTGomer]

I find Northwoods statement a little interesting, because I think we run the risk of being supporting of public land use as long as its "our type" of use. Couldn't the same statement above be revised to say "we are basically subsidizing the ability of folks in a lot the western state to play hunter? Believe me, I get annoyed when I find range land that has been left like moon scape from sheep grazing and trash from cattlemen trying to create a new water source that didnt work, but isnt that part of it being a land of many uses? Also, do we run the risk of fractioning our support of keeping public lands public and ultimatly cur off our nose to spite our face if we take such a hard stance against cattle grazing or many other activities?

Yep

I’ve seen people in the privatization crowd say that they’re ‘subsidizing your hobby. If you want to hunt get a lease. ‘

 

[Handlebar]

Sitting here thinking of all the things I could get for cheaper if the dam government would get off of it's butt and subsidize the production.
Attention feds, crank up that money machine I'm tired of paying fair market value for my stuff.
#ribeyeseverynight

Do you mean, like have the ability to hunt, fish and wander on millions of acres for pretty dirt cheap

 

[Elkmagnet]

Do you mean, like have the ability to hunt, fish and wander on millions of acres for pretty dirt cheap

I personally feel that's not the same thing as running a for profit highly consumptive industry without paying enough to cover the cost of administration. While paying organizations to lobby Congress and keep fees artificially low.
Are you suggesting it's the same?

I buy Christmas tree/firewood permits without batting an eye.
I believe most game license fees should be higher

Let's put it this way
If the us department of agriculture stopped all grazing and all associated programs/costs today. I as a hunter would be happy to cover the budget surplus it would create

 

[antlerradar]

Let's put it this way
If the us department of agriculture stopped all grazing and all associated programs/costs today. I as a hunter would be happy to cover the budget surplus it would create

Would you be willing to pay a recreation fee to cover all the administration costs associated with recreation? If you use public land you make an economic profit from public land.
I am surprised that the anti hunters have not started to work this angle. In their view hunting is a highly consumptive industry that is harming the environment. It is likely only a matter of time until the anti hunters start demanding that hunters quit being subsidized to hunt on their public land and that hunters start to pay the same rate as a private land hunting lease.

 

[Elkmagnet]

Would you be willing to pay a recreation fee to cover all the administration costs associated with recreation?

Absolutely.
I pay fees at campgrounds, boat ramps, state parks, national parks WMA's and refuge stamps I'm actually surprised we haven't be forced to take that route with the budget cuts these departments have seen

If you use public land you make an economic profit from public land.

So am l required to itemize my taxes or should I inquire about a w2 at the local BLM office?
I wonder if I itemize, can I deduct my expenses relating to my "profit"?

Ok come on, let's not be silly and act like me going hunting is the same as running hundreds or thousands of cattle as my family's income.

 

[Handlebar]

I personally feel that's not the same thing as running a for profit highly consumptive industry without paying enough to cover the cost of administration. While paying organizations to lobby Congress and keep fees artificially low.
Are you suggesting it's the same?

I buy Christmas tree/firewood permits without batting an eye.
I believe most game license fees should be higher

Let's put it this way
If the us department of agriculture stopped all grazing and all associated programs/costs today. I as a hunter would be happy to cover the budget surplus it would create

I appreciate your response and after looking at what I wrote it appears that I came off somewhat argumentative
, sorry that was not my intent.
My point was that all Americans have the ability to access millions of acres for the virtually nothing. Incredible country that there is no way as the common man I could every hope to own as a private individual.
I am a Range Manager for the Forest Service. Are there problems ? Absolutely. However the situation is not as bad as many think. The total number of AUMs has been cut in half since 1964, season long grazing has been replaced with rotations everywhere that I know about. Generally speaking when someone talks about a nuked out area usually that is a moment in time , not representative of the entire growing season.
The grazing fee should be raised but for a myriad of reason trying to match private grazing fees is unrealistic., not the least of which is politics but also because comparing the two is apples to oranges.
The best information that I have indicates that the grazing programs for BLM and FS run about 142 million in the hole, as a point of reference I have seen but not verified that recreation on the public runs around 350 million deficit.

 

[buckbull]

The best information that I have indicates that the grazing programs for BLM and FS run about 142 million in the hole, as a point of reference I have seen but not verified that recreation on the public runs around 350 million deficit.

It would be interesting to see what actually makes up these numbers. Is road maintenance part of the $350 million, fire suppression, facilities maintenance, etc....

 

[Firedude]

Right now cattle are kind of needed to help control fuels and graze fire breaks. I'm all for reintroducing bison. It has never made sense to me that we shoot and kill off thousnds of bison coming out of Yellowstone which could be a cheap, good, healthy meat source so we can allow grazing for beef we have to pay $5.99-$10.99 a pound for in the store.

 

[Sytes]

I appreciate your response and after looking at what I wrote it appears that I came off somewhat argumentative
, sorry that was not my intent.
My point was that all Americans have the ability to access millions of acres for the virtually nothing. Incredible country that there is no way as the common man I could every hope to own as a private individual.
I am a Range Manager for the Forest Service. Are there problems ? Absolutely. However the situation is not as bad as many think. The total number of AUMs has been cut in half since 1964, season long grazing has been replaced with rotations everywhere that I know about. Generally speaking when someone talks about a nuked out area usually that is a moment in time , not representative of the entire growing season.
The grazing fee should be raised but for a myriad of reason trying to match private grazing fees is unrealistic., not the least of which is politics but also because comparing the two is apples to oranges.
The best information that I have indicates that the grazing programs for BLM and FS run about 142 million in the hole, as a point of reference I have seen but not verified that recreation on the public runs around 350 million deficit.

Good info. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Because cows taste better. Nothing is stopping you from putting a couple bison on your spread and showing us all how its done.

Would argue that cows don't taste better than bison, but that corn fed tastes better (to some) than grass fed. We have done the Pepsi challenge with a big group of non hunter friends; elk, grass fed beef, corn fed beef, and bear (all the same prep, except the bear) . The unanimous results were corn fed, bear, elk, grass fed.

Ever had elk at restaurants, doesn't taste a thing like wild elk as they often finish those elk with corn.

 

[BigHornRam]

Would argue that cows don't taste better than bison, but that corn fed tastes better (to some) than grass fed. We have done the Pepsi challenge with a big group of non hunter friends; elk, grass fed beef, corn fed beef, and bear (all the same prep, except the bear) . The unanimous results were corn fed, bear, elk, grass fed.

Ever had elk at restaurants, doesn't taste a thing like wild elk as they often finish those elk with corn.

Go back and read my post again. I was saying cows taste better than woofs. Bison meat is fine. Woofs not really.

I then went on to challenge Tony to raise some bison and show us how its done. Probably would make a good tax write off for him. Guess I should have started a new paragraph to make it more clear.

 

[tjones]

Go back and read my post again. I was saying cows taste better than woofs. Bison meat is fine. Woofs not really.

I then went on to challenge Tony to raise some bison and show us how its done. Probably would make a good tax write off for him. Guess I should have started a new paragraph to make it more clear.

Ya and leave me out of your stupidity Paul.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

Go back and read my post again. I was saying cows taste better than woofs. Bison meat is fine. Woofs not really.

Nope I re-read it twice, you are clearly a shill for the beef lobby.


Would if be the internet if you didn't quickly read a post, misconstrue the position and then make a comment?

 

[Elkmagnet]

I appreciate your response and after looking at what I wrote it appears that I came off somewhat argumentative
, sorry that was not my intent.
My point was that all Americans have the ability to access millions of acres for the virtually nothing. Incredible country that there is no way as the common man I could every hope to own as a private individual.
I am a Range Manager for the Forest Service. Are there problems ? Absolutely. However the situation is not as bad as many think. The total number of AUMs has been cut in half since 1964, season long grazing has been replaced with rotations everywhere that I know about. Generally speaking when someone talks about a nuked out area usually that is a moment in time , not representative of the entire growing season.
The grazing fee should be raised but for a myriad of reason trying to match private grazing fees is unrealistic., not the least of which is politics but also because comparing the two is apples to oranges.

I agree 100%
I am also very aware of the glass house.

The best information that I have indicates that the grazing programs for BLM and FS run about 142 million in the hole, as a point of reference I have seen but not verified that recreation on the public runs around 350 million deficit.

I too would like to see the numbers broke down a little if at all possible. The first thing that comes to mind is what side does invasive weed control fall under? Why?

But for the sake of discussion I'll use those numbers
Part of the problem with throwing 142 and 350 out is you loose context.
Ranching is a paid for profit on public ground. It's also very limited in participation you basically have to be born into it.
What is the cost per rancher owner?
Why are these ranches not sustainable at a higher cost per aum yet permits are in such high demand and valed at a higher cost when sold by anyone other that the us government?
The average American has very little or no chance of participation but still pays the bill.
Recreation on the other hand is open to a plethora of Americans and participation is infinitely diverse.
I can't even imagine how many people recreate on public ground in a year.
So.
How many Americans were able to recreate for 350mill in cost?
What was the total cost per user?

What I'm asking is if [325 million Americans pay $1 each to pay for the recreation of say 100million people. While having the option to recreate themselves.]
Isn't that easier to swallow than
[325million people paying $.50 each to support say around 19,000 ranchers. While being excluded from participation.]
And we are still ignoring the bison.