I am a
farmer/rancher and landowner. I am also a hunter, angler, and
recreationist. Each of these terms describe me but I am the sum
total of all. I have never charged anyone a dime for access to my
property. I take on as many hunters as I can but sometimes have to
limit the numbers so as not to be overrun. After 40 years on the
land, I have retired. Over that time, I have watched the “landscape”
deteriorate from “hunt where you want but be respectful” to one
of tightly controlled – or no- access. I believe that there is
more to be said, and said candidly from the perspectives of both
landowners and hunters/recreationists.
The root of the
issue seems to be from a growing disconnect between rural landowners
and urban recreationists. We’re all busy. We are much more mobile
and don’t have the same level and type of contact with close
friends and neighbors as we did in the past. I remember fondly all
the times our family went to stay the weekend with our country
cousins. Brandings, livestock and chores, machinery and driving,
real fresh eggs, milk and cream and maybe hand-cranked ice cream
Great wholesome food from gardens and barnyards. We kids kept busy
all weekend while our folks visited and played cards. We developed
an understanding of each other’s lives and real, close
relationships came from that.
The level and kinds
of interaction today has declined due to many factors. Livestock
handling and machinery have become increasingly high tech and
expensive. Kids aren’t welcome to play here. Farms having
combinations of geese, turkeys, chickens, milk cows, beef, sheep,
pigs, and cattle are rare.
In addition, there
are so many additional “extra-curricular” activities and sports
that we didn’t have. Parents pass each other coming and going,
often dividing kid’s interests and commitments between them.
Social time is at these events. Golf, tennis, soccer, swimming, etc.
have been added to football basketball and track. Computer games and
fast-thumbing on smart phones occupies the attention of so many
folks.
Yet, a major
touchstone of Montana’s heritage is shared resources such as
wildlife. Montanans love to hunt and fish and recreate. It is
family time. Wild game is a regular feature on the menus of many
homes. People move here from out of state and work for less money
than they could get in big cities for those reasons. Many of us who
were born here made conscious decisions to stay here even if it meant
making less money. The quality- and quantity of life- was worth the
trade.
The personal
relationship building of the past seems to receive less emphasis.
Liability issues and OSHA make free help from outside folks much
riskier and far less desirable. Relationships are much harder to
build at a distance. Getting Western Montana townsfolk and Eastern
Montana producers together happens on fewer occasions.
Something that many
people who are not rural producers don’t understand is that Private
Property Rights are paramount to landowners. Management decisions
and the responsibility for the results of those decisions made on
private property largely rest with the owners. Their livelihoods
survive or not, based on these decisions. There too, are those
landowners who consider the public lands they lease for farming or
grazing to be essentially their own personal property. Many of these
folks fail to recognize that they are only paying leases for grazing
and/or farming. Those leases do not allow limiting access to the
public. Also, as a result, many lessees are inclined to deny public
access across their private property to access these public lands.
One thing that has
struck me is that there seems to be little focus on what I call
Public Property Rights. There are those who deny that the public
owns all wildlife, and that each and every one of us shares in the
ownership of our public lands. For some Americans and Montanans,
public lands are the only ownership they will ever have. As a
result, they love their public lands, and with good reason.
Why are landowners
often at odds with recreationists? I see many contributing factors,
attributed to both “sides.” Some recreationists show what I
perceive is an arrogance about private lands. Folks forget that the
landowner owes them nothing; trespass or access is a privilege not a
right. Garbage dumping, littering, thoughtless tearing up of roads,
willful unethical behavior, ignoring game laws, property damage and
vandalism, unauthorized driving – the list goes on and on. When
these activities regularly occur, it’s hard for a landowner to want
to be generous. Additionally, many recreationists are not good about
turning in illegal activities. They assume it’s not their problem
or simply don’t want to be bothered. We need to step up and be
accountable. “If you see something, say something” is the right
way to help and show appreciation for the privileges you are accorded
on private land.
The story of the
hunter or angler encountering a landowner who treats them unfairly
and poorly is as old as the hills. Upon asking permission to hunt on
a rancher’s land, are lectured about how bad all recreationists
are, getting a solid chewing for other’s inexcusable indiscretions.
The recreationist gets an earful about how tough the landowner has
it, and is personally blamed for the state’s wildlife agency’s
missteps or contentious policies. Add to that the increasing lack of
public access to private lands where there is so much pent up demand
that landowners get inundated. Very early morning visits and calls
and those late at nite to landowners who do welcome the public become
overwhelming, coupled with long hunting seasons. As a result, good,
reliable folks are denied access without having a chance to prove
themselves.
Along with these
issues, add private land outfitters to the mix. They are profit
driven, and frankly, offer an alternative to landowners in the form
of good payments and responsibility to handle all recreation on the
place. Since outfitters usually demand exclusive access for their
clients, the public is completely left out of the equation. Some
outfitters claim to “manage” these places to maximize bucks and
bulls but in reality is simply restricting access and as a result
putting more and more wild critters on the ground. “Managing”
for trophy wildlife by restricting access can be done by anyone; it
is not wildlife management. Managing overall game populations and
their distribution across the landscape is the charge of FWP in
Montana. But there seems to be no responsibility taken by these
outfitters to “manage” (i.e.- encourage and engage in the hunting
of) all critters in the herd, particularly those pesky, “valueless”
antlerless critters who are protected by limited access and hunting
during the regular seasons, Wildlife numbers expand, often
exponentially, with the result of over-objective herds, moving onto
the neighboring properties (often ones that do allow public hunting),
reeking havoc on someone else’s property. Late season,
antlerless-only seasons then are demanded to solve the “problem”
without affecting outfitted, antlered buck or bull clientele. There
seems to be no consideration to run seasons concurrently to avoid
brucellosis, chronic wasting disease, and other maladies that result
from unnatural concentrations of wildlife. Concurrent seasons could
disperse animals on the landscape while at the same time, offer
public hunters a chance to harvest on private and public lands
accessible to them. Shoulder seasons (hunting season that would
begin and/or end after the 5-week General Rifle Season) were recently
pushed as a means to deal with these problems. But they have
performance criteria that require buy-in by landowners and
outfitters, which has been pretty limited except with a few notable
exceptions. The problems created for the private landowners through
exclusive hunting on their properties keeps going to the legislature
for resolution. The Fish and Wildlife Commission is the place where
such decisions need to be made. They have the time, access to
resources, information and expertise to consider the best way to
move. Making wildlife management policy decisions in the partisan
arena only serves to slap bandaids on problems and utilizes the most
convenient and politically expedient solutions. We’ve seen the can
kicked down the road too many times. Nonetheless, I expect to see
the outfitters to continue to try to legislate their way out of their
responsibility for the problem.
Farmers and ranchers
were the original conservationists. Landowners are a fiercely
independent lot and often that tenacity has paid off. Farmers and
ranchers are coming off the best financial decade ever and they
deserve it. There have been some real tough times for producers with
little or no return on their investments. Often, government help was
the only way we survived. Yes, government help with crop price
deficiencies and disaster aid kept many farmers and ranchers on the
land. Subsidized crop insurance makes risk management affordable to
producers. In addition, the services of government agencies like the
Farm Service Agency, Natural Resource Conservation Service and Dept.
Natural Resources and Conservation provide help with land management
decisions, loans, and improvements like water and grazing systems,
fencing, trees, CRP, wildlife improvements, and many others. But are
these entitlements? Maybe to some, but they are paid for by all the
tax paying residents of our country, “The Public.”
Leases on state and
federal public lands for farming and grazing are a huge, necessary
part of many producers’ operations. Generally, these leases are
made far below “market”- what would be charged by a private
landowner. In the case of federal leases, they are so low as to be
ridiculous. Yet, these allowances have kept many an outfit in
Montana in operation. Once again, who pays for the costs of these
agencies who often manage at a big loss? “The Public.”
My intention is not
to single out anyone. Keeping agricultural operations viable not only
contributes to the economy but more often than not, has been of great
benefit to wildlife, fisheries and public recreation in general. But
I think it’s important to point to the fact there is legitimate and
crucial financial interaction and relationship between producers and
the public. Yes, those same town folks who you go to church with,
basketball games, funerals, weddings, and benefits. The same folks
who own the hotels, restaurants, gas stations, stores, bars, etc.
The families your kids go to school with. Property taxes paid by
landowners are a major component of the sustenance of our towns and
counties. We need to recognize that it is a two-way street.
I believe it’s
high time to realize we are all in this together and no one is
getting out alive. Landowners, producers, and their city cousins all
contribute to something called community, this thing we call “The
Last Best Place”. FWP manages wildlife in trust for all of us. We
all have legitimate and equal stakes in how it is managed and
maintained into the future. Landowners as well as recreationists must
realize we all rely upon one another, and, in fact, need each other.
Tolerance and cooperation are the main components of our collective
successful future. We all need to take responsibility for our
actions!
Solutions:
Sportsmen, take the FWP Hunter Landowner Stewardship course online.
Report lawbreakers, “if you see something, say something.”
Treat access to private lands as a privilege. Use “Fair Chase”
and “Hunter Ethics” as your guide.
Landowners, know
what the “Public Trust Doctrine” and the “North American Model
of Wildlife Conservation” are. Remember your leased public lands
are a privilege not a right. Share the resources your property can
offer with your less fortunate urban cousins. Keep track of bad eggs
and habitual offenders and let them pay the price for indiscretions,
while allowing others to prove themselves. Have enough tolerance for
the Public to harvest excess critters within the regular season.
Outfitters: Yes you
are a business but, since you harvest Public Trust resources, treat
it as a privilege. Look at more than just money in your pocket.
Have some compassion for the critters. Work with sportsmen to allow
harvest on leased lands during the regular seasons. Take
responsibility for problems you create. When you run to the
legislature to bypass public process, expect to pay the price of bad
relationships with the Public. Public Land Outfitters, if you don’t
want to pay the price for bad relationships caused by Private Land
Outfitters, speak up for integrity! You have always shared the
resources and have taken a shared role in management decisions. You
have worked with sportsmen on a variety of issues. Be cautious who
you allow to represent you. Private land outfitters, quit stirring the pot.
Joe Perry
