• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Can’t eat beauty,

J

jodywy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
6,113
Location
Cabin Creek, Carlile,Wyoming
Can't eat beauty, Talked with a couple guys that had those pretty picture places, rim rock, trees ,land standing on end. One his family place for the most part of the last 100 years was in the Black Hill of SD, lot of rock and trees. He sold it off and bought a place 4 times bigger in North Western Nebraska, center pivots and lots of grass, Hot as photogenic as the old ranch but a lot more cows and actually less work.
2nd out fit was High in the Mountains in Colorado, when he sold, there was family that were up set. Even though they had no say in the ranch or even a share involved they still thought it was the family's ranch. A lot of this place was standing on end either timber so thick you couldn't ride thru it. Or when you saw a cow across the canyon it was a few hour rides to get to her. He his wife and Kids bought a place in eastern Wyoming around Wheatland. Bigger, less winter feeding , more cows.
When Asked why I want to sell and move from these beautiful mountains, I can say some place where the summers not spent being a swather mechanic, where there not a new subdivision going in every few months, someplace more Ag friendly, no forest service to fight with. We found the place not as pretty as here, might have to be a plumber with all the pipe lines and tanks, but not as much iron to own either, a trade of 1 acre for 20 and 1 AU for3 AU….
 
A lot of those mountain ranchers tell me 'its hard to make a livin' on perty." I could tell them its hard to make a livin' on this desert too. It sure is less work.
 
Jody,
You sound like every rancher I know, that utilizes the public lands. The effort to work with the agency people is not worth the reward. Cattlemen, don't get enough credit for taking care of the public lands. The reason the country is in the good shape that it is in. Is because of the multi-generational ranchers that have kept it that way. Not the book learned range cons, that seem to move on, too frequently.

Hang in there Jody! Buy a new swather. In a few years you can sell that place by the square foot. Instead of by the acre.

I myself dream of moving someplace where I can make a living off the land. I am afraid until 99% of the public has to starve a little. The 1% of us that love this way of life, will continue to starve to make a living.
 
When we made our most recent purchase of range land 10 years ago I was afraid someone from MT or WY would come in and be able to outbid us because they had just sold their land and were looking to buy a lot more acres than they just had. It never happened but it sure could have. I wouldn't blame you one bit. It sounds like a no brainer to me.
 
I had a friend that ranched in the Black Hills told me twenty years ago that Nebraska was the place to ranch-he said the moisture was a little surer and nobody wanted to ski there or take pictures.
 
Pretty scenery and pretty women - Both are nice to look at, but if you aren't careful, either one can cause you to work your tail off and still go broke.
 
Northern Rancher said:
I had a friend that ranched in the Black Hills told me twenty years ago that Nebraska was the place to ranch-he said the moisture was a little surer and nobody wanted to ski there or take pictures.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the moisture on the west end is sure to be LOW. :wink: If the general public was really excited about flying kites then I guess a bunch of 'em might want to buy up a chunk of Nebraska at a premium. It's ideally suited to that passtime. :lol:
 
THe sdandhills looked like good cow country to me when I was through there if you treated it right. A drought in dry country isn't as bad as a drought in wet ground-at least your native grasses are drought adapted to some extent.
 
Yes, you make good points there, NR. "The west is a great country for men and mules but it's hell on horses and women." Not sure who originally quoted that, but it seems like it might at least halfway fit for the Sandhills. Of course, horses and women are largely essential to the current state of the region. :lol:
 
Quite a few years ago at a meeting someplace, people ranching on 'public lands leases' were asking the rest of us for help in getting better treatment, at least more honesty, from whomever was administrating those lands at the time. Some private lands ranchers were chiding the public lands ranchers as getting "a sweetheart deal on lease prices". A very wise public lands rancher stated that he and others, if forced out, would have money from selling out their privately owned small acreages for very high dollars per acre, and would be bidding up any ranches coming on the market in those 'private land states', if they are forced off the public lands.

It sure is coming true! I really can empathize with those who lose ancestral homesteads, even if well paid for them. It seems impossible any amount could compensate for the yearning for 'home' after such a sale.

And it certainly demonstrates how if ranchers fight against one another for really frivolous reasons, and on petty issues, we will all will be the losers.

Worst of all, it points up the need for the federal, and even some state governments to get over their greed and sell a large portion of the land they own, especially that which is best suited to raising cattle, or even far ming where that is feasible. The only place we MAY need more 'public' land for parks, green spaces, etc. is in very highly populated areas, mostly in the eastern quarter to one third of the USA, IMO.

The fact is, too much of our prime agricultural land has been .and still is being, paved over and turned into sub-divisions and urban playgrounds.

mrj
 
mrj said:
Quite a few years ago at a meeting someplace, people ranching on 'public lands leases' were asking the rest of us for help in getting better treatment, at least more honesty, from whomever was administrating those lands at the time. Some private lands ranchers were chiding the public lands ranchers as getting "a sweetheart deal on lease prices". A very wise public lands rancher stated that he and others, if forced out, would have money from selling out their privately owned small acreages for very high dollars per acre, and would be bidding up any ranches coming on the market in those 'private land states', if they are forced off the public lands.

It sure is coming true! I really can empathize with those who lose ancestral homesteads, even if well paid for them. It seems impossible any amount could compensate for the yearning for 'home' after such a sale.

And it certainly demonstrates how if ranchers fight against one another for really frivolous reasons, and on petty issues, we will all will be the losers.

Worst of all, it points up the need for the federal, and even some state governments to get over their greed and sell a large portion of the land they own, especially that which is best suited to raising cattle, or even far ming where that is feasible. The only place we MAY need more 'public' land for parks, green spaces, etc. is in very highly populated areas, mostly in the eastern quarter to one third of the USA, IMO.

The fact is, too much of our prime agricultural land has been .and still is being, paved over and turned into sub-divisions and urban playgrounds.

mrj
Click to expand...

I keep hearing that sell out the government owned land idea brought up--BUT will that actually get you more agricultural land :???: Or will it just compound the problem :???:

In our area many of the farms/ranchs being sold that have any wildlife at all on them- are being bought up by the wealthy non resident hunters or hunting groups (Cabellos is a good example) as private hunting preserves... Others are being bought by the International Greeny-Weeny/Wildlife groups to run buffalo- or make their buffalo commons...

Some of these enviromental (save the prairie dog/buffalo) groups would like nothing better than to have this land come up for sale...
As it appears to me these individuals/groups have way more money to bid than most farmers/ranchers can afford and expect to pay it off from production...
 
mrj and Ot pretty much the same deal here. NO real farms here but several are being owned by private land owners that take the land out of ag production. They just want land to look at even if its just a couple of acres with some sort of view.

Example yesterday I went to a feed store just three miles from the house to buy some crystal lix. They did not have any and did not know if the feed dealer would even bring them any. The big talk of the store that morning was the price of sun flower seeds for wild birds. The week before I was there two corn buyers were buying 1000 pounds of 17.00 hundred weight corn to feed the deer and wild turkeys.
I ended up in another town to get my crystal lix. Got it from a farm fertilzer plant. I bought up fertilzer prices the salesmen basicaly said the same thing customers wer wanting to plant grass seeds so the could mow their small places so things would look pretty. Selling bits of fertlizer and grass seed is becoming a larger part of their business now.

Even though the cattle insdustry is still a big part of the area it is changing over to trader cow/calf country. Cattle that have wheels under then from the south and east coast. A cheap 700 pound mongal cow of any color that is having baby sorta beef sired calves this week. WIll sell for as much as these high quality beef cattle from traditional beef states this fall.

We are now contendting with the State Department of Conservation buying land to take it out of production. To establish their Elk herds and take it away from the logging industry. The Conservation just closed on a property where the elk would have fresh clean creek water to drink.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top