birdseye
Active member
I just pulled up same GE image. at very bottom it states "Imagery Date: 9/17/23"
That's a 2 year old aerial. We're talking about today, 10-1-2025
Domestic Livestock in the Bighorn National Forest
- Thread starter birdseye
- Start date
That's a 2 year old aerial. We're talking about today, 10-1-2025
shb
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2018
- Messages
- 717
Stupid cattle.
antlerradar
Well-known member
Do to the Remington fire we had to find private leases for most of the summer, Payed 22 and 25 dollars for those leases. It was a huge pain in the rear because the ranch is not set up for it and the trucking was expencive. All was not bad though. Unlike on the forest the landowner picked up all of the maintenance and the calves never looked better. Easily 30 to 50 lb heavier than normal on the younger cows, better on the old cows to. I bet pregnacy rates are up too. Even though we had to pay much more, money wise there is not going to be much difference than the public lease, might even come out a head on the deal if pregnacy rates are up.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,929
What maintenance? The fencing, water, and oversight of the cattle? Just curious - did you run cows there in the early 80s?
If youre coming out ahead, i am believing the margin is a lot thinner than it is.
AntelopeEater
Active member
- Joined
- May 31, 2023
- Messages
- 131
As someone who will be hunting antelope near there in a couple weeks this thread had me concerned.
But....here is what I found on Wikipedia about the Bighorn mountains:
"The Wilson Price Hunt expedition of Astorians noted in 1811 that the bison dung was so dense in this area that it resembled a "continuous barnyard" for several miles."
So it seems like before domestic cattle, it was normal for the same area to be heavily grazed by bison.
But....here is what I found on Wikipedia about the Bighorn mountains:
"The Wilson Price Hunt expedition of Astorians noted in 1811 that the bison dung was so dense in this area that it resembled a "continuous barnyard" for several miles."
So it seems like before domestic cattle, it was normal for the same area to be heavily grazed by bison.
Mallardsx2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2015
- Messages
- 3,586
I
HATE
COWS
HATE
COWS
BigHornRam
Well-known member
I will take cows every day over people that whine about cows every day.
antlerradar
Well-known member
We will see if we come out money a head. the extra weight is a big plus when calves are bringing nearly four dollars a lb. We will see about pregnancy rates, but with better water and smaller pastures, I suspect there is going to be improvement over the forest lease. On the other hand we are not set up to ship out pairs in the spring, that would require some changes if I was to lease remote grass more than a one time deal and the trucking was expensive.
My family has had cattle on the forest lease since the 1880's
Mallardsx2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2015
- Messages
- 3,586
Kind of like someone complaining about someone joking around complaining about cows. Talk about dumb right?
Perlodid
Well-known member
Not saying that bison don't impact/change areas, particularly back then when there were millions of them out there, but in my experience bison graze much differently from cattle. They range further out, they spend less time in and near streams, and they don't stay in one area until its decimated (generally). Any of the areas I have been in with bison looked much better than your average cow-grazed range - especially around water. Those bison areas are probably managed more closely than most cattle operations, but I think if all things are equal the behavioral difference is still noticeable.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,929
No idea about your herd or the specific associated economics with it, especially transport as that can make or break a situation. The privates undoubtedly in better shape ecologically for a lot of reasons.
All i can say is that is pretty counter basic intuition - when i hear that 250 bucks a head profit is doing well in cattle and somehow an extra 125 bucks per head (5 months at 25 more a month) in grazing fees makes more profit. Seems hard to make up for that unless preg rate is very awful, loss rate is dramatically higher, and they all weigh significantly more. If that was a reality on the ground for a lot of folks, theyd not run their cattle on public.
I missed the maintenance you were referring to in your first response, still interested in hearing that.
Last edited:
You all are making me nervous for my Wyoming elk point plan. I’m still not sure there is anywhere I’ve ever seen grazed harder than where I was in Idaho this year; all grass grazed to less than half an inch in height, fences broken down, every exclusion I saw broken…
birdseye
Active member
Here are the facts: severe overgrazing has occurred in the BHNF for years. FS authorities have been notified again and again, yearly. The result? Nothing, other than more cattle and sheep. This season is especially tough with the drought conditions but the FS has let the livestock people pour it on. IMHO, the FS will take no responsibility nor accountability and the more people complain, the more livestock end up on the mountains. Something very vindictive is occurring and I'm guessing that the FS leadership will pour on the coals just on spite for taxpayers calling them out.
Again, if any readers here doubt what's going on, take a cruise from Upper Shell Valley/Ranger Creek on Hwy 14, swing over the Hwy 14A through the N. Tongue Valley and cut back over to Hwy 14 via Hunt Mtn Road. If you want to see more ground pounded, check out Bald Mtn and Dayton Gulch Road.
Again, if any readers here doubt what's going on, take a cruise from Upper Shell Valley/Ranger Creek on Hwy 14, swing over the Hwy 14A through the N. Tongue Valley and cut back over to Hwy 14 via Hunt Mtn Road. If you want to see more ground pounded, check out Bald Mtn and Dayton Gulch Road.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
You are starting to sound conspiratorial now. I was up there at the end of August, and didn't see the devastation you speak of. Lots of people and side by sides running around, but it was a holiday weekend. Get off the roads a little and the crowds thin out quickly.
Forkyfinder
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2023
- Messages
- 5,929
I am interested in hearing more from your "birdseye" perspective - but those are your opinions - not facts.
If you have pictures, or can prove what you're talking about, im all ears and ill help oil your torch.
If you dont - its just conjecture paraded as facts.
You should go through Lamar valley right now. Looks like scorched earth and buffalo already moving in to the blacktail.
antlerradar
Well-known member
On the one lease, we got them off the truck and loaded them on when it was time to leave. Landowner handled everything else in between. The other wasn't that much more.
We were only on the private lease 2 1/2 months, 30 to 40 Lb a head will easily cover the extra lease payment, At today's prices a 1% increase in pregnancy rates will nearly cover a month of the higher grazing fees for 100 head of cows. I am hoping for 3% better but wouldn't be surprised if it is more.
Normally we have two separate herds of cattle one that primarily grazes our private land and the other that is on a forest lease. The private herd has weaned calves that weigh 40 to 70 lbs more than the forest herd for as long as I can remember. Preg rates are also a bit better on the private herd even though we run fewer cows per bull on the forest to try to compensate. I once figured I could pay more than 15 dollars an AUM for our private and still make more per cow than I do with the forest herd and prices were much lower then.
It ties back to the way the land was settled. When the homesteaders started settling eastern MT in the 1880's they would lay claim to the best 160 and in later years 640 acres that was available. When the homestead act was discontinued the land that was unclaimed became BLM land. The best BLM grazing lease is not as good as the poorest private land in theory. Forest land was removed from the homestead act before the act was discontinued so in theory much of the forest land is better than the poorest private, but not as good as most private. Because of this Gov leases are just not as productive as a private lease and there for not worth as much.
First of all it is not that easy to find a private lease, If the cow herd in eastern MT was not near the bottom in terms of numbers and that other ranchers wanted to help those that were burned out, I doubt we would have been able to find a private lease.
Second, economics states that if marginal revenue is greater then marginal cost it is worth it to do.
Could I make more money by ditching the forest lease and going private. It is possible, maybe even likely, but I would have to put substantial money in to infrastructure to make it work and would need to find a long term private lease to make it worth while. I have thought about this often.
Last edited:
antlerradar
Well-known member
I was thinking the same thing. I was in the Lamar back in mid July. It looked bad then. Here is a google earth shot of the Lamar. Notice the difference between the Lamar and the North fork of the Tongue. The Tongue looks fantastic compared to Lamar. There is little to no vegetation on the banks of the Lamar and the stream bank damage looks extensive. The Lamar has been pounded by Bison and elk for decades and it shows.
Reasons why birdseye is full of it regarding fall 2025 range conditions on some portions of the the Bighorn NF:
Wait, maybe that last one belongs in a different category.
Two cattle grazing allotments on the Coronado National Forest below. Some ranchers do it correctly, some don't.
- You probably eat beef, you hypocrite
- Bet the dirty ranches are herding elk, too
- Last administration did it as well
- Forest fires
- Pictures or it didn't happen
- Some ranchers don't overgraze
- Some jurisdictions cut AUM during drought
- There's a rancher in NM going the extra mile
- Bison do it too
- I didn't see it
- Cattle and sheep ranching businesses are subject to environmental and market forces that cause uncertainty for those families. When those businesses rely upon forage on federal grazing allotments for which management decisions are made by their neighbors and friends, the management system is doomed to fail the ecosystem in favor of mitigating human impacts.
Wait, maybe that last one belongs in a different category.
Two cattle grazing allotments on the Coronado National Forest below. Some ranchers do it correctly, some don't.
Similar threads
