Wyoming all you can kill

bravo

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
567
Likes
327
Points
230
But that would take tax dollars :eek:

I’m mostly kidding Fritz, just fun in’.

It’s interesting though so many jump to the conclusion that feeding wild game is the final answer. Without looking in to it, I can almost guarantee there is public land in the subject area with plenty of food and cover, and it’s probably stomped flat by hunters after the first weekend of season. The article you posted yourself everyone agreed that elk are seeking refuge on private land, so maybe pressure would drive them off.

I’m all for a rancher’s right to keep people off their property. Just maybe don’t complain and look for the government to help when you’re overrun with elk. Plenty if other industries have to learn to coexist with nature. Ag used to know how to do it, but it sure has changed. Granted, the biggest problem out there is more likely the huge absentee owned ranches that are essentially refuges.
 


FightingSioux

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2015
Posts
703
Likes
353
Points
215
Location
ND
Absolutely nothing chaps my hide more then some playing victim to get special treatment when they were the ones who caused the problem. Not all land owners are like this though perhaps this may be like you said a landowners who donated to a special interest group who allows this landowners to double dip in receiving private and tax payers money.
I know this is different and that it is because it is north dakota but we have the opposite here where we have willing landowners who would like the gnf to g8ve out more tags
Most of the big landowners are like this is WY, they could give 2 sheets to cut off the public from hunting elk especially on landlocked public lands. This elk problem is 100% the fault of these greedy landowners. Unit 7 has issues a ton of tags the last few years and the population still keeps skyrocketing. The landowners see it as they are not getting enough tags to shoot all of the elk on their land because the common man hunter with a tag isn’t going to drop $3000 on a cow hunt. These out of state a millionaires ( they are not truly ranchers)need to start letting people hunt if they want this elk problem under control.

Hint if you do draw a unit 7 tag in WY make sure you spend all the time you can during bow season. More of the elk are up high in the mountains( public land) and your chances are better than in the gun season when most of the elk run to private after opening day.
 

Fritz the Cat

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
5,014
Likes
555
Points
413
But that would take tax dollars :eek:

I’m mostly kidding Fritz, just fun in’.

It’s interesting though so many jump to the conclusion that feeding wild game is the final answer. Without looking in to it, I can almost guarantee there is public land in the subject area with plenty of food and cover, and it’s probably stomped flat by hunters after the first weekend of season. The article you posted yourself everyone agreed that elk are seeking refuge on private land, so maybe pressure would drive them off.

I’m all for a rancher’s right to keep people off their property. Just maybe don’t complain and look for the government to help when you’re overrun with elk. Plenty if other industries have to learn to coexist with nature. Ag used to know how to do it, but it sure has changed. Granted, the biggest problem out there is more likely the huge absentee owned ranches that are essentially refuges.

bravo, since you brought up tax dollars. Bidens Inflation Reduction Act had $161 million conservation spending Bills in it. We all know the Inflation Reduction Act is a misnomer.

So here is the latest. This is from Sept. 5, 2023.

https://www.blm.gov/press-release/b...es-28-million-though-investing-america-agenda

Biden-Harris Administration infuses $28 million though Investing in America Agenda for restoration, conservation projects across America​

Funding will support 6 large-scale efforts on BLM-managed public lands​

Organization​

BLM

Media Contact:​

BLM Press
blm_press@blm.gov
Sep 5, 2023
WASHINGTON – The Bureau of Land Management today announced $28 million in investments from the Inflation Reduction Act for six large-scale partnerships with national organizations, States, and the Navajo Nation to support restoration and conservation on public lands.
As part of President Biden’s Investing in America agenda, these partnerships will help BLM implement critical conservation projects in sagebrush, forest, grassland, desert, and aquatic ecosystems through a collaborative approach with Tribes, States, and other partners. The investments will leverage additional funding, connect to local communities, and ensure the long-term success of restoration efforts on public lands.
The announcement comes as the Biden-Harris administration celebrated the one-year anniversary of the Inflation Reduction Act last week, the largest climate investment in U.S. history. This funding helps advance America the Beautiful, the Administration’s initiative to support locally led conservation efforts across the country with a goal to conserve and restore 30 percent of U.S. lands and waters by 2030.
“President Biden’s Investing in America agenda enables us to work more deeply with local, State, and Tribal partners to improve the health of our landscapes," said BLM Director Tracy Stone-Manning. "We're proud to announce these six national partnerships that build on our restoration track record and put people to work restoring public lands."
The $28 million in funding for the six partnerships come in addition to previously announced plans to infuse $161 million from the Inflation Reduction Act in 21 Restoration Landscapes, and the close to $40 million the Bureau already deployed in these areas from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
The partnerships announced today include:
  • A $9.9 million partnership with The Nature Conservancy will increase the scope and speed of low-tech process-based restoration (such as creating natural-looking beaver dams and rock structures) in key western watersheds to support healthy riverscapes and intact sagebrush ecosystems. The partnership will include up to seven landscapes in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Colorado, Oregon, and Utah where The Nature Conservancy will work with BLM offices to accelerate implementation of these restoration methods.
  • An $8.9 million partnership with Trout Unlimited on a large-scale, coordinated watershed and aquatic restoration initiative across arid landscapes of the Upper Colorado Basin, California-Great Basin, and Columbia Pacific Northwest regions. This initiative will improve drought resiliency, promote aquatic connectivity, and conserve ecosystems, habitats, and the species that depend upon them.
  • A $3.5 million partnership with the Mule Deer Foundation on BLM-managed public lands to improve and conserve important habitat for mule deer and sage-grouse. This agreement will focus on defending and growing core sagebrush habitat, which provides key winter and migratory habitats for mule deer.
  • Across BLM-managed lands in the West, $2.5 million will be used to employ and manage a team of Backcountry Hunters and Anglers’ (BHA) field staff to inventory, modify, and remove fences on BLM lands in areas of identified need. The partnership will also include BHA members, supporters, and corporate partners to assist with fence work.
  • In New Mexico, $1.8 million will fund a partnership with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) to support project work through its Pecos Watershed Conservation Initiative and Southern Plains Grassland Program. These established NFWF programs support the goals of BLM's Restore New Mexico program to restore and maintain rangelands.
  • In New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah, $1.2 million will fund the Navajo Nation’s Diné Native Plants Program, a native plant seed banking and ecological restoration program. The funding will support project outreach and expand the cultural plants aspect of the program for another two years. The BLM and Navajo Nation will collaborate to establish a seed certification program and administrative pathways for the program to be able to market and sell native plant materials to Federal and non-Federal agencies, including directly to the BLM.
  • Selected projects are in areas that hold significant potential for cross-boundary partnerships and investments from Federal agencies, State, Tribal and local governments, private landowners, and partner groups to support increasing the scope and scale of restoration work.
bravo, how much winter thermal cover and alfalfa bales could you purchase with $161 million? And this is just a drop in the bucket. To name a few, Obama's Get Outdoors America Initiative, the Recovering Americas Wildlife Act $1.4 Billion and the Farm Bill just expired with $6 Billion.

After all the money that has been spent, there should be a big buck behind every bush on public land.
 

bravo

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Posts
567
Likes
327
Points
230
Couldn’t tell ya. A lot I suppose. But at best it would increase the number of elk on public land and do nothing for the overpopulation on private. Carrying capacity shows they are doing just fine where they are. I’m never going to disparage dollars being spent on conservation. However I’d like to see these and more dollars going toward CRP.
 

lunkerslayer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
19,053
Likes
3,061
Points
858
Location
Cavalier, ND
To me unless the elk from Wyoming happen to carry a contagious disease that would effect livestock or other wildlife. State funding should be used to help improve hunting for sportsman, landowners again have made this a self inflicting by their own greedy self interests.
 


FightingSioux

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2015
Posts
703
Likes
353
Points
215
Location
ND
To me unless the elk from Wyoming happen to carry a contagious disease that would effect livestock or other wildlife. State funding should be used to help improve hunting for sportsman, landowners again have made this a self inflicting by their own greedy self interests.
Honestly it’s the mega ranches at fault here. The small ranches are the ones who take the brunt of the problem the mega reaches cause. The small ranches hate the mega ranches as much as the rest of us. The mega ranches could care less about making money because their owners didn’t buy the land to make money off ranching. It shouldn’t cost any ranch anything by letting in hunters, so we know their excuses are just lies.
 

lunkerslayer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
19,053
Likes
3,061
Points
858
Location
Cavalier, ND
Aren't we talking about loss of resources by wildlife eating up stocked hay on private land? That's what the original article pertained to was ranchers who were bombarded by elk herds, so I'm confused about mega ranchers not worried about making money? :unsure:
 

Griz

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 16, 2015
Posts
108
Likes
20
Points
113
Aren't we talking about loss of resources by wildlife eating up stocked hay on private land? That's what the original article pertained to was ranchers who were bombarded by elk herds, so I'm confused about mega ranchers not worried about making money? :unsure:
I worked on a cattle ranch in Wyoming , the ranch owner wasn’t worried about making money. It was a tax write off for him .
 

lunkerslayer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
19,053
Likes
3,061
Points
858
Location
Cavalier, ND
I worked on a cattle ranch in Wyoming , the ranch owner wasn’t worried about making money. It was a tax write off for him .
So the ranchers in the article are even more greedy then what they are telling us? Wow now who would have ever thought that could be possible.
 


espringers

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 18, 2015
Posts
8,189
Likes
895
Points
428
Location
Devils Lake
How is this a liberal policy? It's the exact opposite. Those libs would prefer animals never get killed and would be allowed to eat the landowner himself.
 

FightingSioux

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2015
Posts
703
Likes
353
Points
215
Location
ND
Difference between the little guys and the big guys. The smaller ranches need to make money and it’s harder every year to do so. Many of them have been closing up and selling off to the mega ranches for prices that could never be recouped by raising cattle. They shoot out an outrageous number and the mega ranches pay it
Aren't we talking about loss of resources by wildlife eating up stocked hay on private land? That's what the original article pertained to was ranchers who were bombarded by elk herds, so I'm confused about mega ranchers not worried about making money? :unsure:
 

CatDaddy

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 16, 2015
Posts
3,661
Likes
1,684
Points
588
Location
Casselton
Difference between the little guys and the big guys. The smaller ranches need to make money and it’s harder every year to do so. Many of them have been closing up and selling off to the mega ranches for prices that could never be recouped by raising cattle. They shoot out an outrageous number and the mega ranches pay it
Reminds me of a few Yellowstone epiodes
 


Fritz the Cat

Founding Member
Founding Member
Joined
May 11, 2015
Posts
5,014
Likes
555
Points
413
This story came across "my feed" and thought it pertains.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/rea...31&cvid=e71755c5716440068be813125bf56dc5&ei=5

The Largest Landowner in Wyoming Owns a Ridiculous 29.1 Million Acres​

Story by Claire Wilson • 14h


1699461082967.png

As the 10th largest state in the United States, Wyoming comprises 97,093.14 square miles of sprawling landscape from the desert shrublands to the prairie grasslands. And even though it has so much land to offer, Wyoming is the least populated state in the country. So, it may not come as a surprise that the largest landowner in Wyoming is not an individual but the government. Here’s how much land the United States federal government owns in Wyoming.


The Largest Landowner in Wyoming​

Considering the amount of public land, mineral estate, and historic trails, it makes sense that the United States federal government is the largest landowner in Wyoming. Of the available 63 million acres in the state, the federal government owns 29,100,000 acres in Wyoming. That means the federal government controls 46.7 percent of the land in the state. Of the land in Wyoming owned by the federal government, the Bureau of Land Management oversees 61 percent of it.

Overall, the total land area of the United States is 2.27 billion acres, of which the federal government owns about 640 million acres or 28 percent. And, out of all the states, Wyoming ranks 6th for the amount of land federally controlled. So, it’s no surprise that the United States federal government is the largest landowner in Wyoming.

What Does the Federal Government Own in Wyoming?​


Wyoming sees about 2.9 million tourists each year who visit federally-owned public land. ©KishoreJ/iStock via Getty Images


About 39 percent of government-owned land is public land (national forests, parks, wildlife refuges, etc.). Then, 61 percent is a federal mineral estate containing minerals, oil, and natural gas, which is managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

Federal Public Land​


Wyoming’s Yellowstone National Park is a significant part of the state’s tourism industry. ©Gjeterhund Photography/Shutterstock.com


The second-largest industry in Wyoming is tourism, and in 2022, 7.5 million tourists visited Wyoming. That’s almost 13 times the size of Wyoming’s population. And approximately 2.9 million of those visitors explored federally-owned public land. With Yellowstone National Park, this doesn’t come as a shock, but hunters and fishermen also frequent other areas of public land. In fact, Wyoming is home to the largest pronghorn population in the world and the largest population of sage grouse in the United States, which draws many out-of-state hunters.




Federal Mineral Estate

Wyoming has been the nation’s leading coal producer since 1986. ©svet110/iStock via Getty Images

Wyoming has been the nation’s leading coal producer since 1986. ©svet110/iStock via Getty Images© Provided by AZ Animals
BLM Wyoming is the number one producer of several critical energy and mineral resources. Some important resources include:

  • Coal: Wyoming supplies about 40 percent of the country’s coal.
  • Uranium: As one of the top producers in the U.S., Wyoming has the largest uranium ore reserves.


  • Trona: This compound is processed into soda ash, which is critical in manufacturing glass, textiles, and paper, to name a few. Wyoming has the largest deposit of trona in the world, which is estimated to last for 2,000 years.
  • Bentonite: Over 70 percent of the world’s supply is in Wyoming. It is used for drilling mud and as a carrier for fertilizers and pesticides.
  • Gas & Oil: The BLM Wyoming federal land is number one in federal gas production and number two in federal oil production.

Other Federal Agencies Managing Wyoming Land​


Besides the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. National Park Service also oversee significant amounts of federally-held land in Wyoming. ©Sulae/Shutterstock.com

Besides the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service and the U.S. National Park Service also oversee significant amounts of federally-held land in Wyoming. ©Sulae/Shutterstock.com© Provided by AZ Animals
While BLM Wyoming manages 61.15 percent of the acres owned by the largest landowner in Wyoming, there are other agencies as well. For instance:

  • U.S. Forest Service (30.76 percent)
  • U.S. National Park Service (7.8 percent)
  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (0.24 percent)
  • U.S. Department of Defense (0.05 percent)

Other Top Landowners in Wyoming​


In 2003, billionaire Stan Kroenke purchased 560,000 acres in Wyoming, making him the third-largest landowner in Wyoming. ©Fox Sports / CC BY-SA 3.0 – License

In 2003, billionaire Stan Kroenke purchased 560,000 acres in Wyoming, making him the third-largest landowner in Wyoming. ©Fox Sports / CC BY-SA 3.0 – License© Provided by AZ Animals
Besides the federal government, there are nine other significant landowners in Wyoming. Here is who came in second and third place:

  • Office of State Lands and Investments: In 1890, Wyoming became a state, and the federal government gave 4.2 million acres to the state. By law, the state land had to be held in a trust in order to generate income that went toward public schools and other state institutions. This trust, known as the Office of State Lands and Investments, is the second-largest landowner in Wyoming, managing 4.2 million acres to this day.

  • Stan Kroenke: The third-largest landowner in Wyoming and the largest private landowner in the state. This billionaire purchased 560,000 acres in 2003 and owns the biggest ranch in the Rocky Mountains. Kroenke also contributes significantly to habitat conservation in Wyoming.
 

dblkluk

★★★ Legendary Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2016
Posts
446
Likes
44
Points
138
"..That means the federal government controls 46.7 percent of the land in the state."

Bullshit. we all know that a large percentage of public land in WY is landlocked and CONTROLLED by private landowners
 

lunkerslayer

Founding Member
Founding Member
Thread starter
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Posts
19,053
Likes
3,061
Points
858
Location
Cavalier, ND


Recent Posts

Friends of NDA

Top Posters of the Month

  • This month: 190
  • This month: 153
  • This month: 142
  • This month: 137
  • This month: 113
  • This month: 93
  • This month: 93
  • This month: 88
  • This month: 84
  • This month: 78
Top Bottom