Montana PERC "Elk Rent" Program?

[MTTW]

I just wonder what has changed? Brucellosis isn’t new, the northern elk herd was 2x what it is now when you moved into the area, and average snow has probably been less over the last decade. So wolves and the price per acre? I just wonder if we are fixing or making the problem worse with money?

Largely what has changed is wolves. The elk used to live in the mountains but now want badly to live on the valley floor. I think it is a natural reaction to wolf presence. There are ranches in Paradise Valley that fenced their haystacks roughly 20 years ago that had never been fenced going back to the late 1800s.

I believe that there is value to keeping these working ranches intact even if it doesn't solve the elk problem. Could it possibly make it worse? I believe it could, but we don't have much to lose by trying.

 

[Big Fin]

Some of the landscape changes are gradual. YNP and surrounding public land had fires in 1988 that created post-fire habitat that remained productive for about 20 years. I'd have to find where I read it, but some have theorized that migrations were later and elk spent more time on public land during the period when those large burned areas provided premium habitat. In the last 10-15 years, those areas have transitioned to far less productivity.

As with most of the complicated problems we deal with, lots of moving parts that make it hard to isolate the problem to one factor that could be addressed and solve much of the problem.

 

[SAJ-99]

Largely what has changed is wolves. The elk used to live in the mountains but now want badly to live on the valley floor. I think it is a natural reaction to wolf presence.

They still have to eat something, no? I admit that I don't completely understand the dynamic between the two, but I have seen wolves and elk be quite comfortable in their ageless dance. Maybe elk get comfortable staying in the valley like mule deer get comfortable staying in city limits.

If the issue has changed to $$$'s, hunters can't compete.

Dome Mountain Ranch | Yellowstone Ranch | Fay Ranches

Large Paradise Valley Montana Ranch for sale located close to Yellowstone. Well balanced recreational and agricultural ranch with incredible hunting and fishing

fayranches.com

 

[BuzzH]

I mean let's just not dick around...just have hunters pay fair market value for their cattle at the auction. If we're going to give away our public grazing, compensation for grass the elk eat, just cut to the chase and get on with it.

We can give them transferable landowner tags while we're at it, too. They can then quit bitching, I'm tired of listening to how horrible wildlife makes their lives.

 

[MTTW]

They still have to eat something, no? I admit that I don't completely understand the dynamic between the two, but I have seen wolves and elk be quite comfortable in their ageless dance. Maybe elk get comfortable staying in the valley like mule deer get comfortable staying in city limits.

If the issue has changed to $$$'s, hunters can't compete.

Dome Mountain Ranch | Yellowstone Ranch | Fay Ranches

Large Paradise Valley Montana Ranch for sale located close to Yellowstone. Well balanced recreational and agricultural ranch with incredible hunting and fishing

fayranches.com

The elk bounce back and forth between the foothills and the valley floor. The wolves would be killed if they remain in the open in daylight. Nighttime is a different story. There are also bulls that pull back into the mountains because if they stay with the big herds of cows, it is a death sentence. Wolves play hell with them and any other warm-blooded critter they find.

Quite a few ranches allow limited cow hunting this time of year and gut piles don't last long. If you go back into the mountains surrounding Paradise valley elk and deer are at the lowest population of any time in my life. I have lived here since 1964.

I saw a herd of elk this morning in the bottom of the valley that numbered in the hundreds. They were bedded with houses visible around them in the near distance. They cross back and forth across the river at will. In my opinion they will never move back up. This herd was on a landlocked state section and season is open. This won't last long, and they will be bumped back to the foothills, but they will not go up on the mountain even though there is no snow at this time.

This is not meant to be a rant against wolves, it's just the way it is. I don't think we can change it much. It is what captain Clark saw around Pompey's pillar in 1806 or whatever. The elk have gone full circle.

 

[BuzzH]

I mean let's just not dick around...just have hunters pay fair market value for their cattle at the auction. If we're going to give away our public grazing, compensation for grass the elk eat, just cut to the chase and get on with it.

We can give them transferable landowner tags while we're at it, too. They can then quit bitching, I'm tired of listening to how horrible wildlife makes their lives.

Wait, I have it wrong. Hunters would have to pay fair market PLUS a 10% buyers premium. That will make up for all the gates we leave open, litter we leave, damage to roads, cows hunters shoot, fence posts we burn ( no kidding a GF commissioner accused hunters of burning his fence posts), etc.

Hunters and wildlife will only be tolerated if we give them enough money.

 

[Horse]

All good points and I tend to agree. Brucellosis is a bad deal and certainly complicates matters within the DSA. I’m fairly naive regarding brucellosis, are wintering elk the issue for potential disease transmission or is it more in June when elk are calving? I thought that cattle had to come into contact with fetal material to pick it up, but I certainly could be mistaken. I’m just trying to think about risk potential and timing and what options one might have given the time of year. Regardless when your neighbors aren’t on board it’s pretty tough to be effective.

It can be contracted other than fetal. For the ranchers and farmers in other states its a major issue. From their own herd health issues such as calves being aborted. But Having your state be labeled as not Brucellosis free also limits the imoort/export of cattle out of the state and canada.

 

[Nameless Range]

I am all for trying new solutions, but I do have a sort suspicion about things. Moving forward, I think creative solutions, though absolutely needed, should: A) have clear and discrete sideboards and B) be reversible (we should assess their efficacy and retire them if they are not working).

So, right now it will be through PERC, but in the future it could be through another contingent - maybe even a public one - and if successful will elk no longer a problem for those being compensated? Are they going to be done asking for things?

I know as well as anyone that landowners aren't a monolith - they are as diverse as any set of neighbors - but I do wonder, when does the problem go away enough, or is compensated enough, that the asks will stop?

Elk in the Paradise Valley isn't a new problem.Here's a 62 year old article:


Lately, I have been reading about Landowner Preference and its history. Frankly, I think a good case could be made that this concession, this skimming from the Public Trust made in the spirit of acknowledgement and alleviating friction, has lost its utility to do either. As we proceed to a Montana that is going to be limited entry in a widespread sense, that 15% of landowner preference permits + the 10% from the 454 program (I know those are "in addition to", but that isn't how the biology that sets permit numbers works), we are approaching a time where 20+% of all permits in wherever is limited entry, will be given to a subset of the beneficiaries (landowners). I mean, ok, but will they be done asking for special considerations? It sure doesn't seem so. Like any contingent, they generally want to better their standing - get more for themselves. The DIY hunter does this too, but as over time, his/her standing in the act of hunting seems to only be eroded in one direction, I guess the question is, when does it stop?

Here's a 43 year old article about the angst of landowners not having preference for limited entry elk permits, which they eventually got. Has the problem been solved? Perhaps "Landowner Elk Problems" are never solved, and in the world of certainty hold hands with death and taxes.




I am concerned about markets getting involved with elk. Maybe that isn't sensible, and every situation needs to be evaluated distinctly, but this paragraph from the article in the OP caught my eye:

“In the years of outreach that PERC has done with ranchers in the valley, it became really clear that what keeps them up at night is elk,” says Whitney Tilt, a PERC fellow and coordinator of the Paradise Valley campaign. “When it comes to wolves, bears, endangered species, or hunter management, landowners have support and flexibility and people they could call for assistance. But when it comes to elk, the state says, ‘Aren’t you glad to have them? By the way, they’re not yours and we’ll tell you what you can do with them.’

That last sentence is a state of affairs that seems to be viewed negatively by those involved. And yet as a Montanan, I think it is the thing most worth fighting to keep.

 

[Nameless Range]

I think it would be fair to point out that we have incorporated markets into access with incredible success (Block Management). Is access so functionally different from wildlife that we shouldn't explore compensation for the latter? I guess with anything, the concern is what the original effort with intent morphs into.

 

[DP_PublicLands]

This highlights some of the core problem, which is that valley is a traditional wintering area. The landowners want the elk to go back to public but also want to graze that public in summer. That leaves migrating animals with less to eat and consequently they move down to private. You could put pivots of alfalfa on a state block to hold those elk and I would bet ranchers would have no problem taking the brucellosis risk for the $1.35 lease. I’m not saying they are disingenuous in their concern, just that every cost/benefit can be adjusted for in $. There are no clear answers, so I don’t have a problem with trying the PERC idea.

This is right on here. I don't know about the paradise valley, but in my stomping grounds, there is winter range but minimal feed on public land. It gets grazed heavily. The FS grazing manual has had only minor updates since the 1920s.

I do know that requiring updated grazing techniques on public land would help. The way the FS grazing manual reads is that its all based on not damaging the grass resource. Leasers can graze it all the way down just to the point as where its gone but will grow again next year, leaving nothing for wildlife. I've watched a lot of elk during the fall just on the private side of the fence... Its not because they are safe there, in fact, the private is hunted just as hard as the public if not harder. Its because there's three feet of grass on the private side and dirt on the public.

There isn't going to be a solution, there will always be conflict. But that's just another way of saying you can always strive to be better. What would really help is interagency coordination - make sure the goals and objectives of FWP are reflected in the management practices of the FS and BLM, and vice versa. I've tried, getting these three agencies to talk to each other is painstaking.