anyone know when the cattle in Reg 3 have to be in by?

[GoatGuy]

Alright just to settle everyone's wadded up panties over my post.... I am just wondering because some areas I hunted for years just recently got "no hunting grazing lease" signs put up, and I did some research and found out that once there is no cattle on the lease the sign is void. I don't burn out on the grass, I don't move fences.... I park in one spot and walk down this buried fibre optic cable line that runs through the grazing lease.

https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/public..._Factsheet.pdf

[GoatGuy]

Tim it is ridiculous to even imagine your suggestion..fencing riparian further fragments habitat and can you imagine the costs? As well current strategy with riparian is to leave timber as reserve..timber left next to creek in cutblock blows down..root wad tears up soil not unlike cattle leaving a mud hole which science suggest is good for creeks. Something that is ugly and messy is not necessarily bad and in an attempt to address one issue you end up smack into another .

Fencing, leaving up natural barriers, off-stream watering, nosehole watering amongst other tools is happening in parts of the province due to habitat destruction (same as ORVs) and concerns around water quality.

The benefits of grazing were brought up a couple of years ago with regards to habitat management. The province wasn't able to produce one example where there were measured benefits (not that they don't happen). I think there are two pieces of litterature in NA supporting that. The community pastures in the peace were one of those 'intensive management' plans that should have had benefits, but the intensive part of the management was never applied. There were also a number of cases were over-grazing of bunchgrasses and over-grazing of deciduous plants were identified by provincial habitat biologists.

Would love to see the science you are referring to.

Grazing is one of those things like all others, works in moderation, not so much when it's overdone. Plenty of folks managing their range according to their rup, plenty that aren't as well.

[twoSevenO]

Yeah, some of those tight gates sure require some upper body strength to get the loop on the post

easily remedied with a short piece of rope

Then leave me the rope ... that's the whole point. Not leaving said rope is part of the reason why most of the gates are so sh**y! You want your gates closed more often ... make it as easy to close as possible. High strung wire needs a rope to tighten fence back? Put the damn rope on the fence!


And for the record I close all the gates ... im just saying I understand why some people don't. You say oh it's just an extra 5 minutes. I say if the farmer spent an extra 5 minutes none of us would have to. It would be a 10 second job on some of these crappy gates.

[rimfire]

https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/public..._Factsheet.pdf

I don't know what everyone is complaining about. When you follow this link through and when you add the layers for the crown grazing leases that are included in iMap, there are very few spots in most areas that have grazing leases.

[horshur]

Fencing, leaving up natural barriers, off-stream watering, nosehole watering amongst other tools is happening in parts of the province due to habitat destruction (same as ORVs) and concerns around water quality.

The benefits of grazing were brought up a couple of years ago with regards to habitat management. The province wasn't able to produce one example where there were measured benefits (not that they don't happen). I think there are two pieces of litterature in NA supporting that. The community pastures in the peace were one of those 'intensive management' plans that should have had benefits, but the intensive part of the management was never applied. There were also a number of cases were over-grazing of bunchgrasses and over-grazing of deciduous plants were identified by provincial habitat biologists.

Would love to see the science you are referring to.

Grazing is one of those things like all others, works in moderation, not so much when it's overdone. Plenty of folks managing their range according to their rup, plenty that aren't as well.

Not hard to find literature on coarse woody debris in streams and its benefits. Do you know why they stopped the strawberry hill fire north of Kamloops? Poor range management practices.

[russm86]

Alright just to settle everyone's wadded up panties over my post.... I am just wondering because some areas I hunted for years just recently got "no hunting grazing lease" signs put up, and I did some research and found out that once there is no cattle on the lease the sign is void. I don't burn out on the grass, I don't move fences.... I park in one spot and walk down this buried fibre optic cable line that runs through the grazing lease.

If it is a true grazing lease and not a grazing permit it is to be treated exactly as PRIVATE land. You DO NOT have any rights or authorization to access/use said land without direct permission from the owner/lease holder (I would get written and signed). I'm assuming you are talking about the lower parts of Noble Lake and O'connor Lake FSRs. The first 8 - 9km of each is basically private property now. He can have his cattle there year round if he wants and even if no cattle are present it is to be considered private land for all intensive purposes. Now, in saying this, I believe the original lease holder sold the ranch etc and I was lead to believe the government would no longer allow leases so how the new owner still has the lease I'm not sure as I would have expected the lease to be rescinded when changing hands. All of this is based on what land titles office and COs have told me so don't beat me up if it's wrong. I thought the original rancher/leasee was a d*** the new ones even worse...

[rimfire]

If it is a true grazing lease and not a grazing permit it is to be treated exactly as PRIVATE land. You DO NOT have any rights or authorization to access/use said land without direct permission from the owner/lease holder (I would get written and signed). I'm assuming you are talking about the lower parts of Noble Lake and O'connor Lake FSRs. The first 8 - 9km of each is basically private property now. He can have his cattle there year round if he wants and even if no cattle are present it is to be considered private land for all intensive purposes. Now, in saying this, I believe the original lease holder sold the ranch etc and I was lead to believe the government would no longer allow leases so how the new owner still has the lease I'm not sure as I would have expected the lease to be rescinded when changing hands. At least this is what land titles office and COs have told me. I thought the original rancher/leasee was a d*** the new ones even worse...

The lease can be transferred to a new owner. The government isn't renewing any "new" leases; IE. They aren't allocating any more land to grazing leases at this time.

[RadHimself]

Anyone happen to give a crap about the damage the cattle are doing along all the drainages around douglas lake ranch?

there fences havnt been maintained in years around beak creek, stuart lake or anywhere up southfork/stuart/hudson bay/moose main, all along the fintry gorge... guess when it comes to cattle companies the rules dont apply

[RadHimself]

The "rancher" your talking about @ the bottom of noble canyon is Balcaen Logging

[Linksman313]

It has been proven time and again that where cattle are not, the wildlife soon leaves also. It has to do with keeping plants young and fresh.

Some changes due to Forestry rules but it once meant ranchers could burn range in the spring to get rid of old grass and brush growth to make room for new but that hasn't happened much in the last 25 years or so. Part of the reason moose have left for the prairies? Part of the reason for the mega fires this year?

If cattle weren't in those areas I doubt you would be able to walk through them.

You entitled folk need to sit back and think about your comments before you put your comments in gear.

I've been mulling over this comment for the last couple of days thinking about how to respond respectfully. Let me preface this by saying Gcreek, I do not know you personally but after reading your comments regarding the summer of fire in your area of the province and other topics I can reason that you are a hard working and conscientious Rancher and would love to buy you a big dozen for your troubles this summer. However, when I read that a member of the Canadian Beef industry dares to call someone in a very small minority group (hunters) entitled, I pretty much swallow my tongue and turn purple. IMO Big beef in Canada is the most entitled group (more than 1st nations) in the country, always being bent over to by all levels of government. Bailout packages, loss reimbursements and I'm sure more $$ coming their way after the devastating fires of this summer (not begrudging this). My family and I do not eat beef anymore, we simply cannot afford to pay the cost of the product which has tripled if not more in years past. That aside I would also like to know would a couple of healthy herds of Elk introduced on this same lease area benefit this environment in the same way a herd of cows would, why hasn't this option been explored if the scientific data you refer to is correct. I remember their was a push to reintroduce Elk in close to the same area of these devastating fires but was shot down by a certain almighty interest group.