American prairie. What's the issue?

[Carnage2011]

You could at least put some real facts in your assertions rather than pulling them out, I'll be nice, thin air.

There has not been a time since I bought my first diesel truck where the price for diesel was so low that off road diesel would be $0.77/gallon. Perhaps you are remembering buying it in Canada by the liter.

I WISH diesel hit $6-7/gallon. All of the company stock I accumulated from working 28 years in the oil refinery would be double what it is.

You and I can thank Putin for the price of fertilizer. It happens that I own a fair amount of Nutrien stock. It went no where before the war in Ukraine. Between that taking a lot of potash off the world market, he has made natural gas more valuable as well.

Yeah, you need to explain more, maybe with verifiable facts.

You should use some facts as well if you are calling someone out. Diesel was over $6 a gallon November 12th….I literally just looked at the receipt last night.

 

[Luke_with_a_lab]

You might have found the path to put AP and public land grazers on the same side. I disagree with that approach and I don’t think many are interested in using grazing permits to force access to deeded land. If you did promote that idea and focused it only at AP, I suspect ranchers would join AP against your efforts.

I wasn't intending it to force access to deeded land but instead only if they cut off access to land locked public land perhaps? Im not trying to come out against the APR. On their deeded land they have a right to do whatever they want. I see grazing leases as a major playing card the public could have in their corner going forward when it comes to access to landlocked/checkerboard lands across the west. Not just with the APR but also any other private land owner that could hold public land hostage.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Just thinking out loud but If the APR ever did shut the doors to hunters and public access would it be possible to lobby the BLM to suspend their grazing permits? If that is possible it would seem like a good way to ensure public access. If the APR didn't have the BLM to graze on they would then have to maintain fences and keep their bison off that BLM land, then they couldn't have the giant open range they want.

Force a private landowner to allow access on their property or take away their grazing lease on public land? That would go over really well with the UPOM crowd.

 

[Wild Bill]

Death, taxes, and the APR is the devil.

 

[BuzzH]

I wasn't intending it to force access to deeded land but instead only if they cut off access to land locked public land perhaps? Im not trying to come out against the APR. On their deeded land they have a right to do whatever they want. I see grazing leases as a major playing card the public could have in their corner going forward when it comes to access to landlocked/checkerboard lands across the west. Not just with the APR but also any other private land owner that could hold public land hostage.

You're off base a bit.

I don't think its a good idea to use a public land lease against a landowner in regard to anything to do with their private land.

However, under the current lease agreements, there is provision that they will not hinder or block in any way the right of the public to use accessible public lands.

If they violate terms of the grazing lease, in particular in a way that shows malice toward the public or other land owners, I would like to see their grazing leases revoked. It rarely happens, but needs to more often.

Here's an example:

I contacted this landowner and let him know I would be hunting elk near his property. Doug Cooper has a reputation of bullying hunters, harassing hunters so figured I'd head it off at the pass by talking to him in advance.

A couple days after I contacted him he threw this sign on a county road to try to intimidate and harass me from hunting elk off the county road. Yeah, well, that didn't work out real well for him, picked the wrong guy to mess with. I called my buddy Jeff and he contacted the GF and County Sheriff. I drove behind the sign to the end of the county road and went on to kill an elk. The sheriff contacted Cooper and said he had a couple choices, either remove the sign or he would be fined and the county would improve the road. His claim was that the road had "drifted" over time and was no longer on the easement. Strangely enough the sign was gone when my buddy and I left with our elk.

So, when I took the picture his sign was actually on BLM by a hair according to my GPS. IMO, Cooper should lose his grazing lease for this, should have been fined by the sheriff, and also fined for hunter harassment.

But, nothing happened to him, other than having to remove the sign that he illegally posted.

 

[Luke_with_a_lab]

Force a private landowner to allow access on their property or take away their grazing lease on public land? That would go over really well with the UPOM crowd.

Obviously it wouldn't go over well with UPOM but with new age landowners allowing no access what choice will the public have but to fight in non conventional ways to get access to all that public land. Incredibly cheap grazing leases and in return you have to allow the public to access that land, seems like a reasonable and fair trade to me. I like the APR and mostly support what their doing but @Eric Albus does make a good point that they are funded by some incredibly wealthy individuals and we truly do not know those individuals reasons or expectations for giving all the money. I think it is good to move forward with the APR with good intentions but just keep in mind the APR will not say or put in writing they are going to allow access to and for hunting in perpetuity going forward.

 

[Luke_with_a_lab]

You're off base a bit.

I don't think its a good idea to use a public land lease against a landowner in regard to anything to do with their private land.

However, under the current lease agreements, there is provision that they will not hinder or block in any way the right of the public to use accessible public lands.

If they violate terms of the grazing lease, in particular in a way that shows malice toward the public or other land owners, I would like to see their grazing leases revoked. It rarely happens, but needs to more often.

Incredibly cheap grazing leases and in return you have to allow the public to access that land, seems like a reasonable and fair trade to me.

 

[Luke_with_a_lab]

You're off base a bit.

I don't think its a good idea to use a public land lease against a landowner in regard to anything to do with their private land.

However, under the current lease agreements, there is provision that they will not hinder or block in any way the right of the public to use accessible public lands.

If they violate terms of the grazing lease, in particular in a way that shows malice toward the public or other land owners, I would like to see their grazing leases revoked. It rarely happens, but needs to more often.

And if they don't want people crossing their land then they don't get the grazing lease. What other bargaining power does the public have ?

 

[BuzzH]

And if they don't want people crossing their land then they don't get the grazing lease. What other bargaining power does the public have ?

UIA...and its happening soon in Federal Court is one option.

Passing a law to allow access like North Dakota, Wisconsin, etc. have.

 

[BuzzH]

Obviously it wouldn't go over well with UPOM but with new age landowners allowing no access what choice will the public have but to fight in non conventional ways to get access to all that public land. Incredibly cheap grazing leases and in return you have to allow the public to access that land, seems like a reasonable and fair trade to me. I like the APR and mostly support what their doing but @Eric Albus does make a good point that they are funded by some incredibly wealthy individuals and we truly do not know those individuals reasons or expectations for giving all the money. I think it is good to move forward with the APR with good intentions but just keep in mind the APR will not say or put in writing they are going to allow access to and for hunting in perpetuity going forward.

The BLM, FS, etc. have nothing in writing that would allow hunting into perpetuity either...lots of good reasons for that.

 

[Luke_with_a_lab]

UIA...and its happening soon in Federal Court is one option.

Passing a law to allow access like North Dakota, Wisconsin, etc. have.

Hopefully the your correct on the court case. Once could hope MT could pass a law similar to ND but it would take a very different legislature make up.

 

[BuzzH]

Once could hope MT could pass a law similar to ND but it would take a very different legislature make up.

Sounds like you have some work to do...

 

[Luke_with_a_lab]

The BLM, FS, etc. have nothing in writing that would allow hunting into perpetuity either...lots of good reasons for that.

What are the good reasons? BLM FS are government land owned by the people. APR is private non profit? Im not trying to argue for the sake of arguing. Just saying the grazing lease idea is something that could be a card in the back pocket if other, preferable means fail.

 

[Straight Arrow]

BLM FS are government land owned by the people.

That is a false premise. There are many federal public lands with no hunting, no camping, no shooting, no campfires, no littering, no off-road vehicle travel ... and so on.
The reasons for prohibiting are varied and many.

 

[Eric Albus]

Regular #2 was 5.99$ a gallon this summer in Helena, I paid over $6 a couple places in MT. That is what he is referring too.

Hope it was just a pickup. Filling the semi with 300 gallons at $5.90 leaves a void.

 

[sclancy27]

Hope it was just a pickup. Filling the semi with 300 gallons at $5.90 leaves a void.

Yea, old 7.3L Ford. Filling up took its toll, but was 1/10 what a semi would need

 

[406dn]

You should use some facts as well if you are calling someone out. Diesel was over $6 a gallon November 12th….I literally just looked at the receipt last night.

U.S. No 2 Diesel Retail Prices (Dollars per Gallon)

At no time has the average price for #2 diesel topped $6.00/gallon. In some place at some time, yes.

Right now in the Billings area it's going for $4.44999/gallon, down over a dollar in the last month or so.

 

[rogerthat]

What are the good reasons? BLM FS are government land owned by the people. APR is private non profit? Im not trying to argue for the sake of arguing. Just saying the grazing lease idea is something that could be a card in the back pocket if other, preferable means fail.

The federal government represents all citizens. What makes you sure they want public access to the landlocked portions of these federal lands for hunting? I don’t think your idea is a bad one if applied to all landowners since I support access and hunting but currently no laws on the books that even remotely address that. Grazing is codified by the Taylor grazing act. The AP is just like any private property owner. They are free to change their access ideology just like any other private landowner.

 

[Beignet]

I might’ve missed it in the last 34 pages and am admittedly too lazy to go read through their financial disclosures, but what kind of foreign funding is APR receiving?

 

[Carnage2011]

U.S. No 2 Diesel Retail Prices (Dollars per Gallon)

At no time has the average price for #2 diesel topped $6.00/gallon. In some place at some time, yes.

Right now in the Billings area it's going for $4.44999/gallon, down over a dollar in the last month or so.

@Eric Albus didn't say anything about the average price for diesel. He was talking about what he could fuel up for. You stated "I WISH diesel hit $6-7/gallon. All of the company stock I accumulated from working 28 years in the oil refinery would be double what it is." It did hit that mark. If you are going to call someone out over facts like you said "Yeah, you need to explain more, maybe with verifiable facts" then I'd make sure your facts are straight. Eric is in the middle of nowhere MT....his fuel prices are probably higher than they would be in Billings.