Article;

Elk may be culled to battle disease threat

"We've got way too many elk," said John Scully, a rancher living in Montana's Madison Valley. "Clearly with so many elk, the risk rises. We need to reduce their numbers."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25558285

"BILLINGS, Mont. - Federal officials are considering a tentative proposal that calls for capturing or killing infected elk in Yellowstone National Park to eliminate a serious livestock disease carried by animals in the area.

Government agencies have killed more than 6,000 wild bison leaving Yellowstone over the last two decades in an attempt to contain brucellosis, which causes pregnant cattle to abort their young.

Cattle in parts of Wyoming and Montana where bison haven't roamed for decades are being infected, and livestock officials in both states are now targeting elk as the cause.
Story continues below ↓advertisement

"We've got way too many elk," said John Scully, a rancher living in Montana's Madison Valley. "Clearly with so many elk, the risk rises. We need to reduce their numbers."

One goal is to eliminate the disease
A tentative proposal, drafted by federal officials, sets a goal of eliminating the disease � not just controlling it in bison and in elk.

Livestock officials say infected elk herds around Yellowstone must be culled � an explosive proposition for a prized big game species that has thrived under the protection of a dedicated constituency of hunting groups. Nevertheless, pressure is mounting to kill or capture more of the animals.

Outfitters and hunters are digging in against the prospect of killing elk, concerned that too much culling could shrink herds. They contend wildlife managers should focus on vaccinating cattle or eradicating the disease in bison.

"I will fight that tooth and nail. As a sportsman, those wildlife are a public resource," said Bill O'Connell of the Gallatin Wildlife Association.

An estimated 95,000 elk populate the greater Yellowstone area in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. Experts estimate only a small percentage carry brucellosis.

There is no effective brucellosis vaccine for wildlife, and cattle vaccines are only 60 to 70 percent effective. Humans are susceptible to the disease, but cases are rare and usually limited to those who work with infected cattle.

Eradicated everywhere else in the nation, brucellosis surfaced seven times in the Yellowstone area this decade, including twice since mid-June. With the recent cases, Montana ranchers near Yellowstone face severe restrictions on out-of-state cattle sales, and Wyoming ranchers could face a similar fate if another cow in the state tests positive for brucellosis in the next two years.

For bison, the strategy to prevent transmissions has been brutally straightforward. When deep snows prompt large numbers of the animals to migrate outside Yellowstone, they are rounded up and sent to slaughter or herded back into the park.

Millions already spent on disease control effort
An estimated $19 million has been spent on those efforts since 2002. Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer said the recent brucellosis infections exposed the program as a failure.

"Managing a disease means more than chasing buffalo back into the park," Schweitzer said.

In terms of sheer numbers, the Yellowstone region's 25 elk herds dwarf the three herds of bison. And unlike bison, which move in groups, elk move freely over the region's numerous mountain ranges, often alone or in small numbers.

Since late 2006, federal officials and the governors of Idaho, Wyoming and Montana have been trying to negotiate a regional brucellosis plan that would deal with different species. But prospects for an agreement remain uncertain given the states' divergent approaches to wildlife.

Wyoming's use of artificial feedgrounds, for example, remains a sticking point among the states. Researchers say the feedgrounds concentrate elk herds and foster the spread of disease.

But Wyoming officials say the elimination of the feedgrounds could make the brucellosis problem worse, if hungry elk scattered into areas where cattle range. Near Pinedale, Wyo., the state has begun capturing elk and slaughtering any that show signs of the disease.

In Montana, state officials hope to increase elk hunting near Yellowstone and expand a testing program to gauge which herds are badly infected."



I have friends who are ranchers and we go round and round bout this all the time.
I call them up and ask them if they are watering and feeding my elk? They hate it when I do that!

There's a double meaning to these ranchers when they say,
"we need to reduce their numbers."

I hear the taste of brucellosis, can be hidden with A1 sauce.

Brucellosis is nothing to mess with. It can devastate the livestock industry. A rancher can easily lose an entire calf crop if it gets going in his herd. Then the cows become carriers. Once they have it, there's no cure other than a thump on the head. In former years, it wiped out many ranchers & dairmen.

The heck with artery clogging beef steaks and burgers. Buffalo tastes better and is healthier too as well as venison.

MtnHtr

How can there be too many elk? I thought that all the elk were being wiped out by the wolves? Am I missing something here?

All wildlife is considered the enemy of most the Ranchers I know. The cattle gave the disease to the elk in the first place. They should be removed from contact with the elk not the other way around. The Ranchers have it backwards. It's easier to move the captive cattle around than the wild elk. By the way the elk numbers are way down in Yellowstone. Ask anyone that's hunted the areas. Gardner use to issue over 3000 cow tags. Now their down to less than 150. I'd say that was a reduction. Oh this will all be blamed on the wolf, watch the outcome on this one. Where's Saveourelk.com on this one.

That's good, LOL!

If the numbers of elk are down why are they crawling over and thru fences in areas that they never been a problem before. Whats pushing them to new habitat,why are they leaving their old habitat. Maybe its like Salmon, Id. elk use to stay up in the mountains now they are down around town and along the roads wonder why? it couldnt be the wolves could it. And of course them welfare ranchers it terrible how they wont let the public on their private property to hunt public game that they feed hay to all winter and then spring grass, the sportsman has a right to that game. Maybe the sportsman should ask that some of the lic fees go to feed wildlife in the winter to take up the slack that the ranchers cant do. If a sick animal comes on my private property and makes my animals sick its my fault? This is a private property rights issue not public land grazing issue. danny

I'd take elk over cattle any day. I hate the things(cattle- we sold ours as quick as I could afford to, but have a renter, and still dislike them). But they are someones living. There should be a happy medium somewhere some how.

It is always a shame when someone considers only their money makers, and not the whole scheme of life in the world.

Bigsky... the only thing you left out was the outfitting leases, and doing away with the late hunt in the Mad. Valley.

IMO there are fewer elk in the valley now than there was 15-20 yeras ago, BUT they are all down in on the flats in the ranchers hayfields most of the winter, where as they used to winter at the base of the mountain.

I fully agree that its a private land issue. However if the rancher doesn't want the elk he has every right to fence them out.

Yes you are missing something, some parts of the state are hit harder than others.

The Yellowstone area (Gardiner and such) has been hit very very hard, now the Madison is doing very well and probably as good if not better than ever.

One last thing for all to consider on a side note, ranching is like any other business out there including the ones that you and I are in and non of them come without day to day challenges but we all know that going into it. We all face our challenges and many of them threaten our pay check. There is on guarantee of making a profit in any business out there.

Dober

BigSky56,

For starters where did brucellosis originally come from? I dont think native elk, deer, and bison had it before cattle were on the scene.

So, who's problem should it be to deal with?

Secondly, there are many reasons why elk are living the easy life in hay fields nearly all year long these days.

1. Montana has an excessively long hunting season for both archery and rifle...total of 11 weeks. Lots more people in the field for longer periods of time pushing elk onto private.

2. The number of leased acres of private land has increased dramatically as well. This forces more and more pressure onto public lands which in turn drive elk onto private.

3. Lots of private land owners either dont allow hunting at all, have it leased (they want as many animals as possible on their land for their fat clients), or allow just a select few on their property.

In recent years the MTFWP has also allowed early rifle cow elk hunts and many late hunts. Meaning your 11 week seasons in some areas are extended to 15-16 week+ seasons. Just last year the general seasons were extended in many areas an additional week.

Things were much different in regard to elk, outfitters, and landowners when I first started hunting elk in Montana in 1980. I could get access to private land, outfitters didnt lease as much, there were lots fewer archery hunters, and lots fewer people that hunted as seriously as they do today.

To blame it on wolves is not only ridiculous, but also simply not true.

Sorry, but I'm not willing to stand by and watch as the Cattlemens associations run rough-shod over my public wildlife. The cattlemen are as much, if not more, to blame than anyone for the problem. The only reason they've tolerated elk, deer, and antelope is because its just another "cash cow" (pun intended) to them if they can lease, charge trespass fees, etc. for sportsmen to utilize the PUBLICS resources.

This one will drive a wedge between hunters and ranchers and I dont think the minority of cattle ranchers will win out. Time for sportsmen to start worrying about themselves and their PUBLIC wildlife...that very same philosophy has served the cattlemen and their associations well in the past. I'm a quick learner and I'll play the same game the Cattlemens Assocations have played so well.

There will be no compromise if it comes down to it from a lot of sportsmen out there.

The problem is there are SH**brains on all sides of the fence...hunters, farmers/ranchers AND PETA peckers. No one wants to find a solution, they just want to defend a position, keep some kind of mindless nostalgia thoughts going, and be on top.

Greed and Avarice rule instead of good sense.

The excess animals could be harvested, slaughtered and sold for food just like a damned cow, except you don't get as much meat from an ELK for the effort. Hunters could get their "back to nature", Dan'l Boone, "around the campfire" experience and the PETA pholks could get their "look at nature", even though nature has been gone for a very long time in this country and most others.

It doesn't take much of a look around to see the problems are human caused because NO ONE, including the animals, can keep their peckers put away. We are screwing ourselves out of house and home because of our stupidity and we are seeing the effects of it right now...it won't be long until Mother Nature solves the problem and all you phools will see the real answer to the problem. Have you developed the taste for "long pork" yet...bet do so or become the porkee.

Here is a simple solution to reduce the problem - but one that will never fly for reasons real and imagined - and that is to allow public hunting on private grazing grounds. Once elk identify that private land isn't a safe haven, it will serve to not only reduce numbers but reduce elk/cattle interaction.

I sympathize with the cattle ranchers - this is a nasty disease that can wipe out a small timer in a heartbeat - but I'll be more convinced of the sincerity of the Cattleman's Association when they publicly urge their consituency to resume the practice of allowing public access to private lands in order to reduce the chance of transmission . . .

I dont sympathize with cattle ranchers at all...as was pointed out by Dober, theres risk involved in all businesses. Why should ranchers feel entitled to eliminate everything and anything that is a threat to their cattle?

Large corporate ranches, grazing associations, subisidized grazing, and other predatory practices by the cattle industry itself have put more "small timers" out of business than any disease...and thats a fact.

They cause the problems and the disease was started from cattle, that isnt MY problem, thats THEIR problem.

Leave my public wildlife alone.

Yep, let the ranchers go bankrupt and sell everything off in 40 acre ranchettes where there will be no hunting at all.

Right now if ranchers had not put up so much resistnce, you would have wolves crawling over each other eating elk.

Some diseases do come from domestic livestock, but CWD is spread by too much wild life in too close proximity.

The more you cost the ranchers, the more your beef prices go up.

The people bitching here about this do not have a clue as to what will happen if Montana loses thier brucellosis free status.

I'm not a rancher nor do I live in Montana

Perhaps the sportsmen and cattlemen can put enough pressure on our congress to open Yellowstone for hunting ? Doubtful, but crazier things have happened. I would rather see hunters in Yellowstone than elk being culled.

:/hey, I just heard that someone paid 127 K to take a bull in Jellystone, nope scratch that it was Texas or was it......grins

Dober

Saddlesore,

You couldnt be farther from the truth if you tried to be.

For starters, take a look around at who is selling off the family ranch. Even when cattle prices are good, theres land being sold left and right by ranchers that are either getting too old to ranch or by their kids who have no interest in ranching. Further, the ranchers as well as their kids, will sell to whomever will give them the biggest profit. They dont care if they sell to a developer or develop the ranch themselves to make more money...its always the bottom line. Thats fine, I can live with that. However, dont expect me to come to the pity party you're trying to throw for the poor old rancher when they make the decision to maximize profit by subdividing and/or selling off the ranch.

I'm not forcing them to ranch, not forcing them to sell either, its all THEIR personal choice. In business you assume risk. Part of that risk in ranching is disease, weather, predators, etc. If they cant accept the risk, they need to get out of the business. Thats the way it works.

I wont be supporting this latest bunch of BS from the cattlemens association. MY public wildlife is worth more to me and the public than some herd of disease ridden, slobbering, goo-butted, black angus mongrels.

I also dont care if beef prices go up to $10 a pound...hell, the ranchers that remain will be rolling in money and I'll still have elk to hunt.

Win-win.

Wow, this even made the Campfire!

Rimrock, aka Bill O'Connell here, with a little different perspective on the MSM (main stream media) than I had yesterday at this time.

Matt Brown, the AP writer of the linked article interviewed me last week. He'd got wind of a meeting we had over in the Madison, where some of the landowners are advocating that we bait elk into "pop-up corrals", test them for brucellosis, slaughter the positives, and haul off the negatives to "somewhere they want them", or somesuch.
Now since they're talking about one of MY hunting areas, plus I've been involved with the wildlife committee of the Ranchlands group for several years now, Shannon Taylor and I crashed the "party". Actually he facilitated SCI paying for the new and extremely capable mediator Ginny Tribe.
Gads, there's WAY more to this than I can sum up in a paragraph or three, but to get back to my original point about the MSM, it took a little for it to sink in just how far this article went.
My inbox and phone have been lit up all day by people from literally all over the country wanting to know how they can help!

One major point, though... There is NO evidence that elk are responsible for brucellosis transmission in Montana. NONE!! In Idaho and Wyoming, yeah, thanks to feedgrounds, yes, it was elk. In Montana, the brucellosis cases so far involve a WAY disproportionate number of Corriente cattle, aka Mexican roping stock.
Of course APHIS failed to collect tissue samples from the Corrientes in last summer's brucellosis discovery. It's easier to blame buffalo.
Except wait, there's no way...
So then it's ELK!! Kill 'em!!!

This time their reach has exceeded their grasp.

Hey Rimrock, good to see you're still above ground!

Dober

Bill,

Good to hear from you. Didn't know you were a member of the Campfire! Did you read Michael Scott's guest column in today's Bozeman Daily Chronicle titled "Cattlemen: Stick to what you know"?

Although it didn't address brucellosis per se, it is a hopeful sign that western governors will help fend off the heavy handed cattlemen and their friends.

Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help out. I tried to call Joe G the other day but Millie said he was out for a walk.

Steve Hunts

Pretty much, Dober, except for some minor septic problems.
Just way too busy, although I see you're talking about a Bozone barbecue or something, which I'd try to make.

Yepper, if you PM me your email I'll put you on the invite list, we'd love to have you grace us with your presents...

Dober

You're not a buffalo blaster by any chance, Hunts? ;-)

I see I still qualify as a "regular" hahaha and used to be, certainly. Almost staggeringly far back, before Al Gore even.
Through an incarnation or two pre-Rick, at least.

I think these internet discussions are finally coming into their own, especially combined with news sources, and it's really scaring the Old Guard badly. So they're lashing out with some pretty bizarre stuff.
Personally, I think we have WAY better suggestions for elk management in the Madison, but man, if we solve it all right here and now what's the mediator to do?
But wait, we could go fishing or something...

Bill,

Would much prefer to blast an elk this year, but who knows?

I did add my name to the damage roster for elk in 360 or 362(somewhere up there I hope). An eternal optimist me thinks.

BUZZH. You indeed have no concept of what it takes to make money in ranching.

Some of the best conservationist are indeed ranchers and if it were not for them a lot more elk would be dead from winter starvation.

If the kids don't want to continue ranching,I expect you think the older generation should just give thier land to some government agency so you can hunt elk on it.

Tell me, how many millions of dollars would you give away if you had no hiers to take over what you built up?

As for the leased land, blame the fat cats who cough up $8-$15 K to hunt on them. The outfitters and ranchers are only providing a supply to meet a greedy demand.

Why does anyone think that some one else should support thier recreation by coughing up income. I see no reason why any rancher or anyone else for that matter has to be a friend to wildlife it it takes money out of thier pocket.

I'd damn sure side with the ranchers before I would get in bed with the ones who promoted wolf reintroduction

My respectful answers are in red.

Saddlesore,

Stick to the topic.

So, let me get this straight...you want me to side with a bunch of ranchers and their associations to systematically destroy a 1 billion dollar industry (elk hunting, that doesnt include other recreational value of elk) because they cant keep their cattle brucellosis free?

I dont think I'll let the cattlemen run me over any longer, they can leave MY public wildlife alone.

Time for the ranchers to stand on their own two feet and quit taking from the hunters and taxpayers.

It is a whole lot easier to round up a bunch of snot licking infected cows and kill them off, than to try to kill the infected elk. Sheesh.....there sure are some great minds involved in this. I for one am DARN sick of the cattlemen running our national forests, big game, parks and economy. There are few things that irritate me more than sneaking into my favorite big game watering hole, only to find it all torn up and full of cow crap and stinking to high heavens with a bunch of fly bitten poopy butt cows wallering around in it, which have turned it into a mud hole. Stupid animals..LOL! Buffalo are heartier, healthier eating, great tasting and are pretty darn good at managing themselves. They are hell on fences though ;o)Flinch

The saddest fact is that most Rancher, landowners have the Brains that saddlesore has. They really believe that wildlife of any kind is either a cash cow, or should be eliminated. This just shows the mentality of cattlemen.

Its angus herds that have been vaccinated for bangs and still came down with it not roping stock and Montana has lost its bangs free status, one more animal tests positive and Wyoming loses its free status. Elk can give bangs to cattle in Wyoming&Idaho but not Montana? Sounds like someone doesnt like ranchers did they let their horse piss on your fire or just cause they wont let you hunt game on their property. Are you as open with your property or house as you want the rancher/farmer to be? danny

BigSky and Saddlesore , you are wasting your breath....it's been painfully obvious to me for some time that many urban based hunters really despise farmers , ranchers , and their way of livelihood .

It's very apparent to me why many western ranchers just lease out their places to the outfitters and their fat cat clients , rather than deal with local residents with bad attitudes......

Don't know anything about what goes on out west and it's none of my business as we've got our own problems here in WV. DEER DAMAGE PERMITS! Talk about the misuse of a program! I can only hope it's not as bad out where y'all are discussing.

til later

This whole thread sorta of sounds like the same argument that folks have about saving wild horses. It's the people who don't have to put up with them that want to tell others how to run thier property,.
I don't live in MT, but I imagine it is the same as it is here in CO.Very little bottom land, river land, lower elevation meadows that provide good winter habitat to wildlife is owned by the federal govt. Any trip into this country will show that all that good winter forage land is privately owned and controlled. Grazing leases are typicaly for summer grazing in national forest or BLM land,although some are year round. Recently, some of that land has been procured by the Nature Conservancy, RMEF, or tuned into Conservation easmennts. However, when compared to total acreage ,these plots are miniscule in scope.

Elk and other wildlife, have no concept of property boundaries and typically end up on the private deeded acreage to winter. SO you want the owners of these private lands to feed YOUR elk in the winter, but keep thier cows off your public land in the summer,all at thier expense

Now if some one has a beef (pun intended)about grazing leases, why don't they bid on them when they come up for renewal and get all those nasty cows off them. Or when some of these ranches come up for sale,why not buy them and turn them into public hunting preserves? Maybe you can go into cahoots with Ted Turner. Now there is a guy that has sure helped elk hunting. He got all the cows off his properties. Wonder how many elk hunters he lets on. NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

Talks cheap until,you have to dig into your pocket and put up your own gold.

It is clear that this problem is not one for a quick, easy solution by the sounds of many of the hot-heads on this thread. I, for one, want both the ranchers and the hunters to be happy with each other and happy with the deer and the elk roaming both the public and private lands. I hunt both public and private lands and would hate to see that restricted or eliminated any more than it already is. I am for public policy that would help out the ranchers, hunters, and the wild game.

Amen Rolly

I don't know if anyone remembers an organization that used to be around out west called Western Sportsman Association or not. But I remember my dad being a member and having access to all kinds of private lands for any type of hunting and fishing a guy could want. It was a nominal fee as my dad could afford to do so working at Safeway as a produce manager. I know the board went corrupt and that was the down fall of the association, but an organization like this would help bridge the gap between private and public. Plus, it also keeps the cost down to where anyone could afford it.

Then again, I could be living in a bygone era, but it seems all parties were happy with the arrangement. Most of my first hunting experiences were on these properties.

Just a thought...

Kelk. I rember that org. Around here the managers ran off with the funds for the leases. Now CO DOW is instituting a walk in program for big game besides the one they ahave for upland game. This year will be the first year for it.I believe it cost $40 and opens up private land that ranchers have sighned up for

I do remember the big shots tanking the organization. It was too bad. I had seen a little snippet about the DOW on trying the big game walk in access. Hadn't heard they were starting it already. Hopefully it grows in the coming years. I think the biggest thing we all want is plenty of opportunities without the headaches. I hunt exclusively on public. But I missed the days of WSA and being able to ask permission and maybe do a little work for a landowner for access. My dad used to do all his antelope hunting this way with a rancher out east of Calhan that had a ton of land. We used to hunt deer outside Ramah a lot too. I miss living in the Springs.

One thing to remember is not all ranchers are money grubbin' [bleep].
Some of 'em actually give a damn about the land and the wildlife. It's a real shame more don't.

Of course WTF do I know anyway.

All I can say is my grandpa on either side were small ranchers, didn't give a flip about wildlife. Cattle were the only issue.

My father in law farms about 400 acres, same thing.....

My cousin farms about 4500 acres with his dad, same thing.

My other cousin married into farming also.... their family combined farms I don't know how many thousand acres...and has netted up to a million in subsidies at times.... same thing, dont' care about wildlife, but the bottom line dollar is it.

I can still remember how mad grandpa was when I fenced out about 5 acres of the farm to allow it to go back to nature... less for cows, IE one less cow maybe... but today I have turkeys, deer, etc.... on that 5 acres that actually live there. Before that deer were only a passing issue, passing through the property that is.

Jeff

Yes, those ranchers are all evil. One who lets me hunt his property fed around 75 elk with his own hay for 2 months last winter. He also furnishes ammo when I go squirrel shooting on his fields and is a rabid supporter of Oregon's Dept. Fish and Wildlife.

Given, open gates, escaped cattle, and shooter damage to his irrigation systems, I'm surprised anyone would be allowed to light one off on his property. Yes, we should shut down the cattle industry and let the country live on free roaming venison for about a month until we have all the deer killed off.

Portions of Wyoming and Montana do have excess elk. Send their Fish and Game folks a note and ask how much hay they purchase for winter feed grounds. Any environment that needs to supplement its wintering herds with feeding, has way too many elk.

There should be a two week season on ranchers. The tags should be OTC and cost $20 for residents and NR alike. If you get one wearing a Carhartt jacket with frayed cuffs it would be a trophy.

I agree that not all are bad... but I think like most things, money is the king and the good ones are few and far between. I have acreage, has cattle on it(thankfully not mine as they are a PITA) and I plant more or less year round food plots, take care of habitat, have enlarged ponds, do supplemental feed as needed for wildlife and so on.... and very rarely hunt or shoot anything here. I can say that locally as to ranchers/farmers go, I am the exception, not the rule.

Jeff

Ranchers kind of get a bad wrap in many ways,if they farm in such a way that leaves little for wildlife. Heavy grazing,converting all cover into crops or pastures,then they are greedy.

If they maximise their property for wildlife,food plots,crp fields,etc, then they are accused of baiting up all the wildlife for their friends and clients.

I am sure there are bad apples but most are decent folks trying to make a living in what can be a very tough buisness.

Britt

Maximizing for wildlife doesn't hurt my feelings one bit at all... Greed does.

Yes its a tough business, I no longer own cattle due to the fact that we never made money, we always lost, and I can find better things to waste money on than a cow....

I'm thinking ranchers would be considered dangerous game. I can just imagine the "minimum cartridge" debates that would go on.

I seen on TeeVee that there is a vacine, developed in Europe(?), that works much better. It is waiting for FDA or something approval. I think the TV program was against the current bison management, so they could have been grasping at straws. Anyone heard of this "new vaccine?"

Personally, I would like to see grazing on public lands stopped and if ranchers don't like wildlife on their property, they need to put up one of them tall fences around it. They put up fences here in Colorado to keep elk and deer out of the haystacks...and it works. Same thing could be done elsewhere. It may cost a bit of dough, but thats business.

Or it could be argued that any environment that has to feed wintering elk has way too much elk wintering habitat lost because of human development.

You think wildfires are bad now.....stop grazing the public land and see how much worse it gets. Should have seen how fast the fire moved through the "wildlife habitat" area last year.

I think we should stop thinking of ways to get rid of the rancher and start figureing how to fix the problem. That nice meat the rancher is raiseing and you're buying for a hell of a bargin in the market is a needed staple in this country. You cant blame the rancher for his stance, we all would get fired up if something was over running are buisness/livelihood. You think the fix is getting rid of the cattle, or let the rancher fence out the elk if he dont want them on his land. He has fenced his cattle off your public land, you get with your dwr and fence your elk off his land. There is a reason the elk and other wildlife is going to the ranches, there is feed there better (or more of) than what they have left on the public land. You dont like the ranchers selling tags or rights to the highest bidder, ok lets close down all hunting on ranches and the elk and other wildlife that move down and live on the ranchers land will be took care of by the dwr of that state and donated to the food bank or less fortunate families of that area. You hunt your public land and let the your dwr acquire the land the rachers sell and you can play by their rules,,,this many tags one year maybe none the next, ect. See how far that bargin beef gets you thru that winter when you cant draw a tag.
Sorry for the long first post but this is unbelivalbe that we argue gettin rid of a lifestyle instead of fixing a problem.

Grazing on public land does little to impact the elk. Most public grazing land is summer habitat and except for the end of a really dry season the elk and cattle aren't competing for the same food at all. There are actual scientific studies done by people that are primarily concerned about elk that show it.

The limiting factor to the carrying capacity for any elk herd is winter habitat and feed levels. That's where the rancher and elk bump heads. Most ranches and other private land holdings (farms, orchards, etc) are in winter habitat.

That's the main issue as I see it and I don't know how to "fix" it.

Steelyeyes.That is exactly the point I was trying to make,but you said it better. Most of the guys chiming in on this do not seem to realize that

And your comment shows your completely mislead and ignorant mentality, with a touch of dumb-azz thrown in.

Bill

I have stayed out this thread because my blood starts to boil (which is not the best time to post a reply) when I read some of the ignorance lead comments here.

I won't ever begin to say all ranchers are concerned protectors of wildlife, but MOST are. Some of you have gotten a bad taste by dealings with bad ones.

I DON'T LIKE THE BAD ONES ANYMORE THAN YOU DO.

Rost495 seems to have family that are not the greatest and I'm sorry he got the view that all ranchers are greedy and could care less about wildlife.

The fact is, cattle have very little impact on most game species unless they are allowed to grossly overgraze an area. I have a degree in wildlife biology so I have a little knowledge about this. Sheep and goats however are a different story, they compete directly with many game species.

Also some of you stupidly think ranchers are some kind of wealthy millonaires, believe me less than 1% of ranchers (or farmers) are wealthy in the U.S..

The solution here is a tough one, I agree. There propably isn't a perfect one. And I don't have the answer, but I don't start throwing blame.

The one thing I don't understand is how someone can think someone else should give up possibly a large portion of their income thats feeds their family, pays their family's health insurance so others can experience a better 2 week hunt. Admit it people, thats what it all boils down to with many of you.

I don't think landowners should be able to block access to public hunting when their land is the only feasible access.

But, at the same time if I was in the ranchers shoes I'm not sure I would want every Tom, Dick and Harry who handle a gun once a year stomping through my property.

If you had to sit and watch part of your livelyhood eaten away, how would you feel. If it's not really affecting your income and you have plenty of feed it should'nt be a big deal, in fact a person should welcome helping the wildlife. But if its a bad year and your already on a fixed or tight budget, really, how would you feel? And don't give me the usual arm chair opinion of "thats why I don't ranch" or "it just comes with the territory if you risk being a rancher".

It's real easy to sit back and point fingers when your income is not at stake. And those of you whining about ranchers and cattle will be first to cry when a pound of hamburger cost $10 and a steak $30 a pound.

Bill

First off Bill, I live in Montana, not Texas, and for any industry, trying to make things better for themselves, at the expense of another industry (outfitters,gas stations, meat cutters, ect), is quite arrogant.
If in fact you have a degree in wildlife biology, then you'd know that this disease hasn't been documented as being passed from elk to cow. Somehow this gives Ranchers another reason to try and kill off wildlife.
In Montana we have Ranchers whome lease federal or state lands that happen to be lowlands where wild deer and elk winter. After the cattle eat everything down to the dirt, the elk and deer move to where they find feed. If that happens to be a private land then the problem surfaces. It's not where it began though.

I'll say it again, most Ranchers I know, in Montana have a Us vs the animals mentality. Texas is a long ways from Montana but after reading your post I'd say Texas has morons living there too.


I would give a rats rectum for beef reaching this price, I live off venison. The only problem is more ranchers running more cattle on our elks public winter ranges.

It's the same the world over and been that way forever. Wildlife/nature vs man and his money = wildlife/nature loses.

til later

You are completely clueless.

Do you have any idea whatsoever of how closely regulated 'leased' grazing is?

Get your chit straight before you start sounding like all the other office baby's whining here.

You want to see a complete wildlife chitfuck?

Take a drive through the Gallatin valley. I can only imagine how nice it was before the ranchers moved out..........

Urban sprawl rules!

One only has to take a drive though Yellowstone or Rocky Mountain National park about late August to see grass lands grazed dwon to dirt by elk or bison. Ain't been no cattle in those parks for 100 + years or more.

That is how the federal governmnet manages thier own grazing lands.

I just get a little riled up when when the ladies get all pussy hurt and start bitching.

My family has been ranching in Eastern Montana for close to 100 years. Deeded and federal land both.

The Feds keep a VERY CLOSE eye on aum's and grazing rotation not to mention a bunch of other worthwhile practices. They also come up with quite a few regulations that leave one scratching the old noggin'.

People have got to realize that (most)ranchers are the last ones who want to chit themselves out of the nest.

I won't argue the elk to cow brucellosis spread, I was in school 15 yrs ago. But just because it has not been documented as you alledge, does not mean it can't happen. However, it is as the first post also stated a fact that bison can spread brucellosis which is where the whole thing seemed to stem from, not cattle.

To give you a little more education on wildlife and range management, as saddlesore or Sam stated, you really don't have a clue what strict managed land grazing consist of, ranchers are not just allowed to let their cattle run rampant and rape the land on federal lands, if they do they can get in trouble and it hurts them the next year because land does just not rebound from one year to the next from rabid overgrazing I don't give a damn how much snow or rain you get, its a proven fact.

Elk have overgrazed of their own range in parts of the west without any help from cattle. In most areas I'm familar with the cattle are pulled out the high country WELL before most of the game has moved down. Most of these cattle are placed on private land to winter. Agian these are areas in the west I'm familar with ( mostly CO, it may work different in Montana) So the rancher is supposed to make his cattle stop eating on HIS land so the deer and elk will have something to eat? I know I'm getting off topic slightly but this seems to be along the mentality your reasoning with, correct me if I'm wrong.

Also cattle eat GRASS, deer eat BROWSE. You can turn a deer, be it whitetail or mulie into the most beautiful lush field of grass in the world, but if there is no browse THEY WILL STARVE TO DEATH. Elk do sustain off grass more than deer, and I know this is where part of this problem arises.

I am allowed to shoot six deer here per season, but I still wouldn't want to rely on the meat from those six deer to last my family all year. I doubt you do either despite your bold statement. Ever eat out? Don't tell me you never do, I'll call you a liar, sorry. If you do eat out then you HAVE eaten beef during the year.

You may think I'm all for the ranchers and not for the wildlife. You could not be more wrong. If anything I lean slightly towards the wildlife. But it's wrong to sit and blame it all on the ranchers and their cattle, just as it would be wrong for the ranchers to blame all their problems on wildlife.

Their are two sides to every story.

Montana ranchers are gonna have to Bangs test every heifer/cow that leaves the state now.

Ain't no big deal...........grin



(I really hope the bitches lawnmowers don't break down tomorrow).

clueless should be your handle.
We have a Rancher that happens to be on the Elk Working Group which gives our dept of FWPs advice and input on seasons, structures, and quota's the Fish and game manage by. He has stated repeatedly that he wants the numbers of elk reduced because they are tromping his grazing allotment. It's their range (elk), and also is winter range.


Give me a break, cowboy, there's corruption at any level either!
It all depends on what side of the fence your on doesn't it.

Does he happen to be your brother inlaw?

Brother inlaw aside, back on the northern side of the CMR, local earth [bleep](read ranchers) actually reintroduced elk way back when.
They hauled them up in old stock racked graintrucks and turned them loose alongside the MFWP officers.

That's what this is all about, the fact that the ranchers in the Madison Valley claim the Brucellosis came from wild elk, not Bison. The Madison is one of the few spots in the state where elk numbers have rose, so the competition for forage is climaxing. The ranchers found a good scapegoat for the brucellosis free listing the state lost. Lets not lose the fact that the wild ungulate got brucellosis in the first place from Beef.


This is true, although in Montana large amounts of the leased lands that the beef graze for 3 solid months happen to be range lands the elk would use for winter range. The feed is depleted, so the elk search out better grazing and it happens to be private range lands. (Go figure that on such a regulated subsidy). Excuse me will I yawn because although the subject is interesting, the people engaged in the subject have the same old song and dance.

BTW, I eat maybe 3, thats right 3 beef steaks a year. Sorry I don't support you guys more. (NOT).

Excuse me will I yawn because although the subject is interesting, the people engaged in the subject have the same old song and dance.


Including you. Beef, cattle, and ranchers are bad, that's all you know or don't is more like it. At least I tried to show both sides of the coin.

Bill

Bill

I am surrounded by ranchers here. Smaller ones though. Couple hundred acres or less generally. We do have a wildlife coop though.

I"d be willing to say that to this day, generally the idea is get rid of brush, plant coastal for the cows and go on. In an area of about 6 square miles or so here, I am aware of 3 places that have actual food plots or managed for wildlife and cattle. One of them is our measly 100 acres now that grandpa is dead.

I also happen to know a bunch of local farmers, their whole goal is be rid of hogs or deer that eat ANY of the crops. They'd just as soon night shoot everything.

Don't get me wrong, I know most have deer feeders and shoot deer, and maybe oats patches, but that is LURE, not maintain year round.... their goal is to kill. Mine is to help out and kill along the way.

Sorry thats my take on it, but it seems to ring true to a certain extent. Kinda gripes me that we have areas fenced out of cattle, with feed available year round and to as much an extent some type of food plot going year round also. Others idea of management is a deer feeder that gets corn in October and is empty by December...Just so they can pop a deer.

Up in the hill country(possibly your area) I see ranchers with a different attitude, but thats pretty much only since the deer may make more income than the rest of ranching at times...

BUT the bottom line is we probably have as many slob hunters as we do slob land stewarts.

Jeff

Won't disagree with you Jeff. That's not as much the mentality in this area, though it happens.

Bill

I've never met a bad rancher.