Baiting or normal ranching practice?

[SEGARE]

Baiting isn't hunting.

 

[TBell]

In MT the wildlife is public property. It is not legal to intentionally try to attract them to your property.

In Texas wild life is State property also?

 

[WYO300RUM]

I've been saying it for years.......hunting is becoming big business. People are expanding faster than our natural resources, which ultimately dives up demand/value of what they are wanting. There are only a couple of ways to combat this and one of them is law and enforcement. We have to be proactive in getting laws on the books. Now I have never been a big fan of more laws and regulations, but where big money is concerned, it is the only thing that gets their attention.

I have found that when it comes to making money, a lot of people will push the limits on what is legal, with morals or a sense of fair play going out the window completely. Their thinking is: "I just play the same game better than you do". We had a similar problem with game cameras up on the legendary "strip" in AZ where some of the biggest mule deer are. Outfitters were running hundreds of game cameras all over the unit. By the time their hunters arrived, they knew exactly what was available in terms of inventory and the general area and time that certain places were frequented. How does the average hunter, who can't afford $6k-$8k for a guided hunt, compete in such an environment? Our state resource was being used primarily by outfitters who played the game better. Now with the ban of cameras, the playing field has been leveled a little more.

Right on the money. I know the Strip 13A and 12B well. Also 12A and 12B. 12B late is my favorite. Bow hunted Kiabab for 20 yrs.. Even there you see 20 trail cams on water tank. The Strip like 30. 80% are from outfitters. They'll have to use their legs and binos more now to get those wealthy clients . I like to scout myself . I'm not against the average Joe using trail cams on the area he hunts all the time. I've used them in the past. I got enjoyment out of seeing all the wildlife not just the deer. Few years ago I left 3 trail cams on an area and went to get them and they looked the forestry gate for winter . They were there from August to April . I had just changed cards and new lithium batteries. One cam got covered in snow but the other two I had thousands of pics. It was so cool seeing what animals were there at what months and the snow come and go and get deeper. Took forever to get through all the pics but saved some great ones . Saw what time they'd go up hill and back down during seasons .

 

[WahooYahoo]

Sounds like there are a couple of problems.

1. Land owners using their land to allegedly obtain profit from the guides/ hunters. This is the norm in some western states that have inaccessible public land inside their fences which is legal but viewed by people on the outside of the fence and a travesty.
2. The states paying land owners for damages to their crops from wildlife. Seems like some laws only favor the land owner… if you're not a landowner. But if you pay the debt maintenance, taxes, upkeep, ag inputs and suffer the losses during, say, an historic drought, you might see it differently.

Maybe. The bigger problem might be that both are allowed. It can seem like double dipping. Seems like if I allowed access to the hunter to remove animals that are causing the damage the damage might be reduced. If the landowner doesn't do what he can to limit his loss the state (taxes citizenry) shouldn't have to reimburse the land owner because he accepted the loss despite offered remedies.

I get a little sideways about number 1 and 2. But as a land owner it is my choice. And fairness is BS.

 

[MtPockets]

Àhhhhhhhhh....but I bet the outfitter published success rate.....looks real good! How did he know the crop wouldn't be harvested anyway? Not his job!

Actually, I believe he is also leasing the ground for "ranching" too.

 

[2buffalo]

Sounds like there are a couple of problems.

1. Land owners using their land to allegedly obtain profit from the guides/ hunters. This is the norm in some western states that have inaccessible public land inside their fences which is legal but viewed by people on the outside of the fence and a travesty.
2. The states paying land owners for damages to their crops from wildlife. Seems like some laws only favor the land owner… if you're not a landowner. But if you pay the debt maintenance, taxes, upkeep, ag inputs and suffer the losses during, say, an historic drought, you might see it differently.

Maybe. The bigger problem might be that both are allowed. It can seem like double dipping. Seems like if I allowed access to the hunter to remove animals that are causing the damage the damage might be reduced. If the landowner doesn't do what he can to limit his loss the state (taxes citizenry) shouldn't have to reimburse the land owner because he accepted the loss despite offered remedies.

I get a little sideways about number 1 and 2. But as a land owner it is my choice. And fairness is BS.

Well said.

 

[Troutslayer2]

Hoarding elk has become one of the biggest threats to public land hunting. The same ranchers are overgrazing their public land allotments while leaving habitat and food for elk on their own land. Don't get me started on all the welfare they demand on the backside because all the pesky elk are eating them out of house and home.

 

[MtPockets]

Baiting isn't hunting.

I guess some think otherwise, especially if they are paying big money to an outfitter so they can have a nice mount on the wall and a story to go with it.

Odds are the word "bait" never comes up when reciting those stories, either.

 

[Schw15]

Hoarding elk has become one of the biggest threats to public land hunting. The same ranchers are overgrazing their public land allotments while leaving habitat and food for elk on their own land. Don't get me started on all the welfare they demand on the backside because all the pesky elk are eating them out of house and home.

If the public land is getting overgrazed that isn't all on the rancher the blm forest or state leases have people who are suppose to check that and only allow a certain amount of head and length of grazing so they are not doing there job. Maybe Colorado is just different though

 

[gristlehead]

More and more ranchers are going to this type of grazing. It is a lot cheaper to have the cattle graze the crop off than to harvest and haul it or bale it, haul it and feed it. It can also be used as a soil building and erosion reducing way of farming. I don't have a lot of farm ground on our place, but what I have I farm to graze the cows on. Some of the seed mixes contain several different species of plants along with the sorghum, which can further attract wildlife as it increases biodiversity and build soil health. Along with the benefit of reducing costs through the reduction in fuel and time costs, bulding the soil with different planting and grazing practices, this type of farming/grazing reduces the use of chemicals, which can also benefit the environment along with further reducing input costs of the ag producer.

 

[TA2510]

I hunted a place near Harlowton a few years back, same thing happened there. A strip of private rite next to national forest and the landowner kept the large herd of elk pushed out in the middle of his land. If they started getting close to his property line he would ride the line on a four wheeler of horse and push them back out in the middle of his land. Was told by some locals that he was selling hunts on his property. Only elk I saw the entire hunt was the herd in the middle of his land.

 

[MtPockets]

More and more ranchers are going to this type of grazing. It is a lot cheaper to have the cattle graze the crop off than to harvest and haul it or bale it, haul it and feed it. It can also be used as a soil building and erosion reducing way of farming. I don't have a lot of farm ground on our place, but what I have I farm to graze the cows on. Some of the seed mixes contain several different species of plants along with the sorghum, which can further attract wildlife as it increases biodiversity and build soil health. Along with the benefit of reducing costs through the reduction in fuel and time costs, bulding the soil with different planting and grazing practices, this type of farming/grazing reduces the use of chemicals, which can also benefit the environment along with further reducing input costs of the ag producer.

Thank you for that input.