Leased Crown land question?????

[Backwoods]

Just have a quick question for you guys, I was out hiking on crown land scouting/hunting, this is land I have hunted and hiked for the last three years. And on my way out to my truck a guy pulled up to talk to me and said his family and him are leasing the land for cattle and that I couldn't hunt or even hike this area. Also in the three years I've spent a lot of time in this area and have never seen a cow or cow paddy, And I've gone over multiple maps by my self and with others at the local hunting store and it's clearly crown. Is the somewhere I could find in the regs about hunting on land that's leased? And does it have to be posted, the are no signs anywhere saying there is cattle or anything. Thanx - Backwoods!!

[Fella]

Yep he's apparently leased the grazing rights and has the right to keep you out of the area.

[Backwoods]

Really hey, I've never heard of that, is it listed in the regs at all? And does that mean I potentially could lease some nice crown land for myself and keep others out? Or is there a lot more to it? Thank you for a quick reply

[r106]

ya IF he has a grazing lease they he can restrict you hunting there. Thats If he does. If nothing is posted and fenced. IMO i would hunt it

[dakoda62]

GRAZING LEASE VALUES AND USES» Grazing leases support forage production for both livestockand wildlife.» Habitat for rare or endangered grassland species and dry forestspecies can frequently be found within grazing lease areas.» Grazing lease areas often fall within Agricultural Land Reserveboundaries and may be situated amongst other parcels ofprivate land.» Leaseholders rely on grasslands and other forage resourcesfor their livelihood. Grazing lease areas form an integralcomponent of many ranching operations.» As part of livestock management, animals are typically rotatedthrough a series of pastures during the year to help maintainforage productivity over time.» Leaseholders are responsible for range improvements andweed control.PUBLIC ACCESSPermission to access leased areas may be granted by aleaseholder if:» Access is by foot from an established road or trail;» Livestock are not present;» Crops have been harvested;» No campfires or burning will occur;» Camping does not take place;» Gates and fencing are left in the same condition as they werefound; and» Vehicle, motorcycle, all-terrain vehicle or bicycle access islimited to established roads identified in lease agreement(and only when the surface of the land is dry or frozen).ACCESS FOR OFF-ROAD VEHICLES» Anyone who enters a grazing lease area without permissionfrom the leaseholder is committing an offence under Section4 of the Trespass Act.» Section 65 of the Land Act authorizes a leaseholder to takelegal action against people who enter enclosed lease areasor undertake activities in those areas without the permissionof the leaseholder.» Enclosed land is land that is legally fenced or where signs areposted to indicate that no trespassing is allowed.» The operator of a motor vehicle on a Forest Service Roadrequires at least $200,000 third-party liability insurance.» Details about many Crown leases or areas where publicaccess is not allowed can be viewed online using the iMAPBC website at:www.data.gov.bc.ca/dbc/geographic/view_and_analyze/imapbc/index.page(Launch Application (Public) > I want to… > Add DataBC layers> Land Ownership and Status > Crown Leases)ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION» Grasslands and wetlands are easily damaged by vehicle use.Therefore, vehicles must stay on established road surfaces atall times.» A person must not engage in any activity on Crown landthat results in damage to the environment (apart from afew exceptions outlined in Section 46 of the Forest andRange Practices Act). Penalties for environmental damage areoutlined in Section 46 of the Forest and Range Practices Act:www.bclaws.ca/Recon/document/ID/freeside/00_02069_01#section46FOR MORE INFORMATIONFor more information about grazing leases in B.C., contact yourlocal natural resource district office or range agrologist:

[Fella]

Really hey, I've never heard of that, is it listed in the regs at all? And does that mean I potentially could lease some nice crown land for myself and keep others out? Or is there a lot more to it? Thank you for a quick reply
Sure, if you had livestock you probably could lease it. I don't know the specifics of the program but I'm sure someone here knows the ins and outs.

[russm86]

Sure, if you had livestock you probably could lease it. I don't know the specifics of the program but I'm sure someone here knows the ins and outs.

It is my understanding that the government will not issue new grazing leases anymore, only grazing permits which only authorize them to have their cattle graze on CROWN land that remains open to public access rather than leased land which is seen the same as private land. They will grandfather existing leases though.

[Looking_4_Jerky]

Backwoods,

If you tried to lease a chunk of Crown Land just to exclude others they'd see through your plan like it was Lemon Kool-Aid.

The range branch is not supposed to be issuing new grazing leases. They will renew existing ones, but new grazing tenures are supposed to occur under licenses and/or permits, which do not give the tenure holder "the right to peaceful enjoyment" of the subject parcels (like leases do), and thus they cannot exclude you from those parcels. Grazing leases are an archaic form of tenure that basically work well for the lessee, but screw everybody else. Someone get's to pay pennies an acre to to tie up land for a purpose which is perfectly compatible with other concurrent land-uses. The better range officers in the Province will, at the time of renewal, delete known trails, roads, access to lands beyond, etc, from the lease. This is not always the case, as Provincial staff are subject to workload, support from their superiors if the lessee bitches, and some are unfortunately just not that diligent or are actually sympathetic to lease holders and the cattle industry in general.

Your best bet is to learn to use IMAP BC, turn on the range-related layers and see what form of tenure the holder has, if any. If it's only a license, permit, or the access you want to be on has been deleted, the next time you get to see buddy you can tell him to go jump off a tall cliff :)

Good luck.

[ACE]

Guide/Outfitter with a few beef/horses ...... grazing lease ?

[Looking_4_Jerky]

Guide/Outfitter with a few beef/horses ...... grazing lease ?

Different Provincial policies: Adventure Tourism/Wildlife Act regulates guide outfitters and the Range Act regulates grazing. A guide outfitter would have no better chance at securing a grazing lease than average Joe. If you are not holding significant head of cattle and can demonstrate a need for the lease (that your business will be adversely impacted and that you will face unavoidable hardship), they'll just give you a permit or license and send you packing.

[Doostien]

Couple of facts about grazing leases.

-They have covenants of "Quiet Enjoyment" for the leaseholder. Meaning they can keep out whomever they wish, with the exceptions made in the lease agreement. The trespass act applies to all grazing leases.

-They are attached to fee simple private property. No lease was ever given out to someone who didn't own private property that adjoined it.

-They aren't cheap. We don't even have that much and yearly rent is close to 15k. Plus leaseholders pay ALL property taxes on their leases. Factor in other things like weed and erosion control and we're talking a sizeable chunk of change.

There is one thing about leases in the Regs, but it missed the most important part.
39 (1) A person commits an offence if the person, without the consent of the owner, lessee or occupier of land,
(a) hunts over or traps in or on cultivated land, or
(b) hunts over Crown land that is subject to a grazing lease while the land is occupied by livestock.
(2) This section does not affect the Trespass Act (http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96462_01).

The regs include section 1 but not 2. Essentially hunting a grazing lease without permission can net two different tickets, one under the wildlife act and the other under the trespass act.

I can guarantee that land has been lease longer than you've been hunting it. They stopped giving out leases over ten years ago. Are they're really no signs? I get that excuse from people a lot, despite the hundreds of dollars I've spent on signs.

[gcreek]

Just have a quick question for you guys, I was out hiking on crown land scouting/hunting, this is land I have hunted and hiked for the last three years. And on my way out to my truck a guy pulled up to talk to me and said his family and him are leasing the land for cattle and that I couldn't hunt or even hike this area. Also in the three years I've spent a lot of time in this area and have never seen a cow or cow paddy, And I've gone over multiple maps by my self and with others at the local hunting store and it's clearly crown. Is the somewhere I could find in the regs about hunting on land that's leased? And does it have to be posted, the are no signs anywhere saying there is cattle or anything. Thanx - Backwoods!!

Most on here know I'm a rancher and sometimes I have biased views. This one smells funny, no cows, no cowshit, and no fences........ I would make my way to the local BC MOF office and ask to see the Range Manager. He/she would be able to tell you in a minute if the land was a grazing lease ( no tresspassing) or a range licence (free to hunt) provided you could give an exact location. Good luck.

[tomcat]

Backwoods, listen to gcreek. IMO l also I believe somebody is bs'ing you.

[Backwoods]

Most on here know I'm a rancher and sometimes I have biased views. This one smells funny, no cows, no cowshit, and no fences........ I would make my way to the local BC MOF office and ask to see the Range Manager. He/she would be able to tell you in a minute if the land was a grazing lease ( no tresspassing) or a range licence (free to hunt) provided you could give an exact location. Good luck.
Thank you, I really appreciate getting the knowledge, I believe in ethics for hunting and respect everyone's land including our governments it is great to hear feed back from guys with the knowledge of ranching/ leased land.

[Bugle M In]

Most on here know I'm a rancher and sometimes I have biased views. This one smells funny, no cows, no cowshit, and no fences........ I would make my way to the local BC MOF office and ask to see the Range Manager. He/she would be able to tell you in a minute if the land was a grazing lease ( no tresspassing) or a range licence (free to hunt) provided you could give an exact location. Good luck.

sounds good, is their any way to find this info online when preparing to go out to a particular area.

[Fisher-Dude]

The cost of Crown leases is really high.

It makes no economic sense to shell out dough like that for a small hunting area that you'll spend more time chasing guys off than hunting it yourself.

[Swamp mule]

On imapbc or map view layers that you turn on the range tenures layers to find the any of the tenures within your of interest or gps points. Grazing licenses and or permits always start with the letters "RAN" followed by the numbers. Those tenures the rancher only has the rights to forage.

[Mulehahn]

...

I can guarantee that land has been lease longer than you've been hunting it. They stopped giving out leases over ten years ago. Are they're really no signs? I get that excuse from people a lot, despite the hundreds of dollars I've spent on signs.

Are you the person he talked to? Just curious is all because he never said where he was hunting.

As for the issue of grazing lease, it has been pretty much covered. If it is a grazing lease stay out without permission. If it is a grazing permit then hunt away. I have heard a few stories about people from other provinces thinking that BC works the same as where they are from. I have also been on other forums about people trying to make BC they way it is where they are. I have a feeling that these types of questions are going to become a lot more common in this province. If there is any doubt, go to IMAPBC, or better yet the MOE office and talk to a range officer. They will know for sure.

[Bugle M In]

On imapbc or map view layers that you turn on the range tenures layers to find the any of the tenures within your of interest or gps points. Grazing licenses and or permits always start with the letters "RAN" followed by the numbers. Those tenures the rancher only has the rights to forage.

thanks...I will be checking that out.

[Looking_4_Jerky]

... or better yet the MOE office and talk to a range officer. They will know for sure.

The Range Branch is actually part of your District's FLNRO offices, not MoE.

Most range officers will either screen calls and only reply to priority items, or tell you to learn to use IMAP, which IMO is totally justified. They are just not equipped time-wise to keep up wit their work demands and help hunters who are avoiding the technological revolution that happened 20 years ago.

Embrace the technology. Learn to use IMAP. It's reasonably intuitive (even if you are not super tech savy), and I guarantee once you learn how you will much prefer spending 2 minutes rather than trying for hours over days to harass the range officer for info every time you are looking for it.

[Fisher-Dude]

Most range officers will either screen calls and only reply to priority items, or tell you to learn to use IMAP, which IMO is totally justified. They are just not equipped time-wise to keep up wit their work demands and help hunters who are avoiding the technological revolution that happened 20 years ago.



After witnessing the response of Range Officers to a request to deal with feral horses, I'd say they have loads of time but no willingness to do their jobs. At least the two involved in a simple request to enforce the relevant FRPA sections showed blatant disregard for the provisions of their jobs, IMO. It reaffirmed my bias against bureaucrats, that's for sure.

[Doostien]

Are you the person he talked to? Just curious is all because he never said where he was hunting.

As for the issue of grazing lease, it has been pretty much covered. If it is a grazing lease stay out without permission. If it is a grazing permit then hunt away. I have heard a few stories about people from other provinces thinking that BC works the same as where they are from. I have also been on other forums about people trying to make BC they way it is where they are. I have a feeling that these types of questions are going to become a lot more common in this province. If there is any doubt, go to IMAPBC, or better yet the MOE office and talk to a range officer. They will know for sure.

Probably not. I only say that because he said he'd been hunting it for the past three years and no new leases have been issued for over ten. So at a minimum the lease was there for 7 years before he hunted it.

[Swamp mule]

After witnessing the response of Range Officers to a request to deal with feral horses, I'd say they have loads of time but no willingness to do their jobs. At least the two involved in a simple request to enforce the relevant FRPA sections showed blatant disregard for the provisions of their jobs, IMO. It reaffirmed my bias against bureaucrats, that's for sure.

That depends on the district. There are some districts where the officers just don't have the man power to deal with all questions and are so short staffed while there are other districts that have sufficient staff. However feral horses are a different matter and in some cases and areas they are challenged with ownership of the horses but would rather allow them to remain on the land. That is what frustrates the officers.

[Looking_4_Jerky]

After witnessing the response of Range Officers to a request to deal with feral horses, I'd say they have loads of time but no willingness to do their jobs. At least the two involved in a simple request to enforce the relevant FRPA sections showed blatant disregard for the provisions of their jobs, IMO. It reaffirmed my bias against bureaucrats, that's for sure.

To be clear, I am not a range officer. I do work with them occasionally, however. I'm not trying to make excuses for them, but it's good public knowledge for people to understand some of the bureaucratic processes that, like it or not, are part of our system.

Priorities:
Just because an issue is a big one for you doesn't necessarily mean it's a big one for the organization. You may phone and complain about feral horses, and even if the range officer is sympathetic to your complaint, they may not necessarily be at liberty to drop other work they have been tasked with to follow up. Typically, the work is passed downward and unless it has some profile attached to it, it may not make the high-priority list, leaving it to be managed off the side of the officer's desk, or when they can finally squeeze it in. If you don't like that, call your MLA and either try to raise the profile of the issue or tell them to increase staffing in the Range Branch (and good luck with that one!).

Feral Horses:
A sensitive topic. As you can imagine, managing feral horses is not as simple as going out, blasting the subject animals and selling them for dog-food (or hot dog wieners :) ). There's a whole PR and media aspect to manage on top of what the f*ck to do with the horses. Often, the feral animals are clear descendants of populations originating from identifiable properties or FN reserves. Try dispatching a bunch of horses that originated from a FN reserve. To those on the outside it looks like it should be no big deal. To anyone whose ever been involved, it's a bureaucratic and political nightmare. This is not at all a FN rant, just observations from having been peripherally involved.

[Fisher-Dude]

Oh, it eventually came out that they were afraid of the Indians.

They did respond to one of the group who said he might as well let his horses out and save money on feed if Range Officers didn't enforce Range Laws. Seems they would have had time to do something to him.

Do your jobs, bureaucrats. I'm paying you handsomely to handle even issues that may not be as simple as where to hold the annual Christmas party this year or whether Folgers is better than Kirkland coffee.

[Looking_4_Jerky]

Do your jobs, bureaucrats. I'm paying you handsomely to handle even issues that may not be as simple as where to hold the annual Christmas party this year or whether Folgers is better than Kirkland coffee.

It sounds then, like you're the right guy to ask for a raise ?!? :wink: And if you loosen up the purse-strings a bit, we could buy some nice boutique coffee, since both Folgers and Kirkland leave something to be desired.

[Fisher-Dude]

It sounds then, like you're the right guy to ask for a raise ?!? :wink: And if you loosen up the purse-strings a bit, we could buy some nice boutique coffee, since both Folgers and Kirkland leave something to be desired.

I wish I were that guy.

Not sure sure that ineffective bureaucrats would wish to be paid based on results, though!

[wideopenthrottle]

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?118110-I-thought-grazing-leases-just-gave-the-ranchers-the-right-to-graze-their-animals&highlight=lease
there was some discussion on this awhile back

[TPK]

Oh, it eventually came out that they were afraid of the Indians.

When talking to Chief Joe Alphonse a few years back when the "We're (FN's) shutting down moose hunting around our Region" fight was raging. His comment to me was that he has talked with his people and quite frankly, they would rather eat moose than look at horses, so no problem culling them from his perspective. His view was that the feral horses are out of control and eating up all of the forage that the moose need for food.

[GoatGuy]

https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/publications/legislation_policy/GrazingLeases_OffroadVehicleRecreation_FLNRO_Facts heet.pdf

Details about many Crown leases or areas where publicaccess is not allowed can be viewed online using the iMAPBC website at:www.data.gov.bc.ca/dbc/geographic/view_and_analyze/imapbc/index.page(Launch Application (Public) > I want to… > Add DataBC layers> Land Ownership and Status > Crown Leases)

[GoatGuy]

-They have covenants of "Quiet Enjoyment" for the leaseholder. Meaning they can keep out whomever they wish, with the exceptions made in the lease agreement. The trespass act applies to all grazing leases.

That is a liberal interpretation of quiet enjoyment. Not sure that interpretation would meet the test when livestock are not on the land or crops have been cut.

[bridger]

Actually the convenant of quiet enjoyment was challenged by an oil company in the peace recently and the court ruled that quiet enjoyment only pertained to grazing rights

[Doostien]

That is a liberal interpretation of quiet enjoyment. Not sure that interpretation would meet the test when livestock are not on the land or crops have been cut.

Quiet Enjoyment. A Covenant that promises that the grantee or tenant of an estate in real property will be able to possess the premises in peace, without disturbance by hostile claimants. Quiet enjoyment is a right to the undisturbed use and enjoyment of real property by a tenant or landowner.

It's not Liberal at all, the quiet enjoyment clause is not related to the livestock aspect. It's the exact same clause that keeps your landlord from letting people into the house without your permission. It will 100% hold up if cattle aren't present. Remember this is land LEASED, the same as leasing any other property.


Actually the convenant of quiet enjoyment was challenged by an oil company in the peace recently and the court ruled that quiet enjoyment only pertained to grazing rights

The crown retains all rights to any mineral deposits on the lease. The covenant of quiet enjoyment is subject to that. Meaning that the quiet enjoyment clause is only overruled in cases outlined in the lease agreement. Whichever lease holder tried to keep the oil company out didn't understand his lease agreement. Minerals, timber and roads are some of the clauses, hunting is not one.

[gcreek]

That is a liberal interpretation of quiet enjoyment. Not sure that interpretation would meet the test when livestock are not on the land or crops have been cut.

Oh yes it would......... maybe not all but my lease and most others in this area are 365 days use for the lease holder. It matters not to other private citizens what I am doing with it. I only have to stand aside for industry.

[GoatGuy]

Quiet Enjoyment. A Covenant that promises that the grantee or tenant of an estate in real property will be able to possess the premises in peace, without disturbance by hostile claimants. Quiet enjoyment is a right to the undisturbed use and enjoyment of real property by a tenant or landowner.

It's not Liberal at all, the quiet enjoyment clause is not related to the livestock aspect. It's the exact same clause that keeps your landlord from letting people into the house without your permission. It will 100% hold up if cattle aren't present. Remember this is land LEASED, the same as leasing any other property.


It's related to the use, not the application of the residential tenancy act lol.

It is similar to freehold, but it must be consistent with the intent.

[GoatGuy]

Oh yes it would......... maybe not all but my lease and most others in this area are 365 days use for the lease holder. It matters not to other private citizens what I am doing with it. I only have to stand aside for industry.
The quiet enjoyment clause was created for industry lol, not low impact activities such as the public walking on it.

Not interested in a piss*ng match over the point. It has not been challenged, but considering it is a lease with a purpose, a member of the public testing it would not go over well particularly considering how the 'circle of life' works in this instance.

Overall, I think it's in the best interests of grazing lease holders to allow some low impact use by the public when safety/disturbance/economic issues are not going to happen. Probably in our common interests to get along.

[Davey Crockett]

The quiet enjoyment clause was created for industry lol, not low impact activities such as the public walking on it.

Not interested in a piss*ng match over the point. It has not been challenged, but considering it is a lease with a purpose, a member of the public testing it would not go over well particularly considering how the 'circle of life' works in this instance.

Overall, I think it's in the best interests of grazing lease holders to allow some low impact use by the public when safety/disturbance/economic issues are not going to happen. Probably in our common interests to get along.

Quiet enjoyment comes from English common law - it's not something specific to BC. It is a very old and very common principle.

I think the best and only real option is to gain permission from the leaseholder. I think most would accommodate and would be surprised that people would ask.