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

MT Land Board Votes to Double Grazing Fees

A

Anonymous

Guest
MT Land Board Votes to Double Grazing Fees
general admin posted on July 16, 2011 09:21


UPDATE: The Montana Land Board did vote to go forward with a proposal that would more than double the grazing fee for state land. The fee is cuurrently $6.23 per animal unit month (aum) and the proposal is to raise it to $12.88.

Now that the Land Board has said that they will be going forward, DNRC will hold hearings and allow for more public comment on the proposed changes. After the close of the comment period, they will bring back a final recommendation to the Board.

There is nothing yet on when those meetings will be or how the comment period will be conducted. We will let you know that information as soon as it becomes available!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Just to stir conversation- here is one take on the land boards actions...

Kind of goes along with a lot of Tex's comments about the wealthy wanting government programs/subsidies- as long as its sticking more dollars in their pockets...

I wonder if the Kochs/Stockgrowers Assn will have enough pull- and stuff enough politicians pockets- to get the DNRC to reverse their recommendation before the final order :???: ...

The Koch Brothers are part of the Socialist Stockgrowers Association!
by: Kevin
Mon Jul 18, 2011 at 17:27:07 PM MDT

( - promoted by Rob Kailey)

The Matador Ranch Company, owned by Koch Industries (yes, THOSE Koch Brothers), sent a representative to the Montana Land Board meeting today to protest a proposed increase to the state grazing lease rate. This rate is what the state charges ranchers who lease state-owned land for cattle grazing. The money earned from these leases helps fund schools in Montana.
The average state grazing rate is currently about $6 or $8 per month for each animal, or Animal Unit Month (AUM). The new rate being proposed is around $12 per month. Everyone recognizes that this rate has been set too low for some time, especially with cattle prices way up. The reason for proposing a new rate is that the market demands it; the average grazing rate on similar private land is $20 and higher!

But the point is, it turns out that the Koch Brothers--the supposed "defenders against socialism"--are some of our most prominent socialists! In fact, they are the state of Montana's biggest lessee. Their 300,000 acre Matador Ranch operation contains over 80,000 acres of state land. The Koch Brothers have been enjoying their subsidized rate, and they want to keep it! They don't want to pay something closer to the market rate, despite claiming to be defenders of free markets. This is "corporate welfare" in its most hypocritical form.

It's widely known that state and federal grazing rates are a subsidy to ranchers. Federal grazing rates are worse. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management rates in Montana and other western states are set at only $1.35 per AUM! The Koch Brothers cash in on that giveaway too, because another large portion of their 300,000 acre ranch is federal land.

So it turns out that the Koch Brothers are not against socialism after all. They're just against socialism for anyone but themselves. And the schoolkids of Montana can go to hell!
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2005
Messages
4,716
Reaction score
0
Location
NW Panhandle Texas
How much do you pay? Do you aggree with the raise in the cost?
Or do you graze on the reservation and are exempt from any "government" fees?
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
Oldtimer said:
I wonder if the Kochs/Stockgrowers Assn will have enough pull- and stuff enough politicians pockets- to get the DNRC to reverse their recommendation before the final order :???: ...

all of the politicians currently on the Montana Land Board are Democrats,
so are you saying that the Koch Bros. bribe Democrats?
Are you saying Democrats take bribes?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
MsSage said:
How much do you pay? Do you aggree with the raise in the cost?
Or do you graze on the reservation and are exempt from any "government" fees?

MsSage-- I have no government leases-- state or federal...Everything is deeded...
For comparison-private and tribal leases bordering next to state leases are going for $30+ an AUM...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lonecowboy said:
Oldtimer said:
I wonder if the Kochs/Stockgrowers Assn will have enough pull- and stuff enough politicians pockets- to get the DNRC to reverse their recommendation before the final order :???: ...

all of the politicians currently on the Montana Land Board are Democrats,
so are you saying that the Koch Bros. bribe Democrats?
Are you saying Democrats take bribes?

Politicians of both cults take bribes- except they don't call them that...They prefer the terminology of campaign contributions- and the wealthy/corporate sector hire lobbyiests to find ways to get these "contributions" to work for their benefit....
Remember Jack Abramoff ?
 

ranch hand

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 4, 2005
Messages
1,360
Reaction score
0
Location
USA
Oldtimer said:
MsSage said:
How much do you pay? Do you aggree with the raise in the cost?
Or do you graze on the reservation and are exempt from any "government" fees?

MsSage-- I have no government leases-- state or federal...Everything is deeded...
For comparison-private and tribal leases bordering next to state leases are going for $30+ an AUM...

Who pays for the fence, water, tanks and improvements on the state land? Land we lease from private is furnished by the lessee unless otherwise stated and then it is taken into consideration on the price?
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
Oldtimer said:
Lonecowboy said:
Oldtimer said:
I wonder if the Kochs/Stockgrowers Assn will have enough pull- and stuff enough politicians pockets- to get the DNRC to reverse their recommendation before the final order :???: ...

all of the politicians currently on the Montana Land Board are Democrats,
so are you saying that the Koch Bros. bribe Democrats?
Are you saying Democrats take bribes?

Politicians of both cults take bribes- except they don't call them that...They prefer the terminology of campaign contributions- and the wealthy/corporate sector hire lobbyiests to find ways to get these "contributions" to work for their benefit....
Remember Jack Abramoff ?

so you are saying that the Koch Bros. gave campaign contributions to the democrats, namely the ones on the land board? and they used those campaign contribution illegally to fill their own pockets? if so then why are they voting to raise the Koch Bros. rates if you and your article is correct?
Your not making any sense OT.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
This is directly from the MT Secretary of State website:

Secretary of State Linda McCulloch is a member of the state Board of Land Commissioners, which oversees the management of 5.2 million acres of school trust land across Montana. The federal government ceded the land to the state in 1889, under the Enabling Act that granted statehood. Congress expressly mandated that the land be used to generate money for the support of public schools. In 2002, the school trust produced more than $45 million for its beneficiaries: Montana students and classrooms.

The Land Board is responsible for deciding how best to generate revenue for the trust from school trust lands. It considers such options as:

Grazing and farming leases
.
Timber-harvesting.
Leases for oil, gas, and mining operations.
Easements for such projects as power lines, roads, and private driveways.
Fees for recreational use.
Cabin-site leases.
Land sales and exchanges.
The state Department of Natural Resources and Conservation carries out the management decisions of the Land Board through its Trust Land Management Division.

If you have a question about issues relating to school trust lands, contact or write Secretary of State Linda McCulloch's office at P.O. Box 202801, Helena, MT 59620-2801.

Other members of the Land Board are Governor Brian Schweitzer, Attorney General Steve Bullock , Auditor Monica Lindeen , and Superintendent of Public Instruction Denise Juneau .

So the only ones that could be bribed right now to withhold raising grazing fees are all democrats. They are the only politicians that have a say in this so they are the only politicians whose pockets could be lined. By the way, it is illegal to use campaign contributions to "line your own pockets"
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
ranch hand said:
Oldtimer said:
MsSage said:
How much do you pay? Do you aggree with the raise in the cost?
Or do you graze on the reservation and are exempt from any "government" fees?

MsSage-- I have no government leases-- state or federal...Everything is deeded...
For comparison-private and tribal leases bordering next to state leases are going for $30+ an AUM...

Who pays for the fence, water, tanks and improvements on the state land? Land we lease from private is furnished by the lessee unless otherwise stated and then it is taken into consideration on the price?

Yeah I see your point and have heard all the arguments- altho most private leases I dealt with all you got was the land--everything else was up to you to maintain, altho often times the landowner contributed/paid for the initital fence (altho many government leases have also been fenced- and crossfenced and paid for by government programs)...

And I have no dog in the hunt- just trying to see what comments I can get...

But it does make a guy wonder- when under open bidding, tribal pasture leases that border state land goes for $30+ AUM- and the fellow leasing it has to pay for all the fence, water and improvements- besides the headache of dealing with the BIA and Tribes which have been known to be rather wishy washy at times and cancelling leases for little or no reason...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lonecowboy said:
Oldtimer said:
Lonecowboy said:
all of the politicians currently on the Montana Land Board are Democrats,
so are you saying that the Koch Bros. bribe Democrats?
Are you saying Democrats take bribes?

Politicians of both cults take bribes- except they don't call them that...They prefer the terminology of campaign contributions- and the wealthy/corporate sector hire lobbyiests to find ways to get these "contributions" to work for their benefit....
Remember Jack Abramoff ?

so you are saying that the Koch Bros. gave campaign contributions to the democrats, namely the ones on the land board? and they used those campaign contribution illegally to fill their own pockets? if so then why are they voting to raise the Koch Bros. rates if you and your article is correct?
Your not making any sense OT.

This just came up out of the blue last week- and even most folks with state leases didn't know about it...

The rule has not been finalized yet... It will be interesting to see if the Land board stands by its guns-- or if in the meantime they get "influenced" by outsides sources such as the Koch Bros...
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
Oldtimer said:
Lonecowboy said:
Oldtimer said:
Politicians of both cults take bribes- except they don't call them that...They prefer the terminology of campaign contributions- and the wealthy/corporate sector hire lobbyiests to find ways to get these "contributions" to work for their benefit....
Remember Jack Abramoff ?

so you are saying that the Koch Bros. gave campaign contributions to the democrats, namely the ones on the land board? and they used those campaign contribution illegally to fill their own pockets? if so then why are they voting to raise the Koch Bros. rates if you and your article is correct?
Your not making any sense OT.

This just came up out of the blue last week- and even most folks with state leases didn't know about it...

The rule has not been finalized yet... It will be interesting to see if the Land board stands by its guns-- or if in the meantime they get "influenced" by outsides sources such as the Koch Bros...

now maybe they have already been "influenced" by outside sources.
who stands to gain by this decision,hmmmmmmm. well school employees for one. Do you think they have been "influenced" by teachers or teachers unions OT?? there's a thought!
or how about the enviromental terrorist groups that want to do away with cattle ranching. Do you think any on the the land board has taken any "influential" money from "enviromental" groups OT?

Maybe this has nothing to do with the Koch Bros. after all?

Remember all "legal" campaign contriutions are easily verifiable.

when you sling your paint too wild with too broad of a brush some of it might splatter on your friends. Should we look up who these democrats on the land board took campaign contributions from OT? Maybe we can see a pattern there.

You wanted to start a conversation about this OT, should we look it up?
or do you want to just backtrack right now? Your choice!
 

I Luv Herfrds

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
1,639
Reaction score
2
Location
Montana
OT right now we have the State of Montana trying to tell us we have NO RIGHT to the water that hubby's grandfather developed on State Land.
The State did not pay to build that resesvior, they didn't build the fences, spray the weeds nor anthing else WE have done to improve it.
We pay the taxes to the STATE and the FEDS for the money we make off the sale of our cattle raised on the 1 section we lease. They do nothing, but stand there with their hands out demanding more money.
How about they take a pay cut.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
KOBER, AL
Retired SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C PARK CITY, MT $25 Unknown
KOCH, COLLEEN
Retired SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C BILLINGS, MT $25 Unknown
KOCH, COLLEEN
Retired SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C BILLINGS, MT $20 Unknown
KOCH, COLLEEN
Retired SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C BILLINGS, MT $35 Unknown
KOCH, DAN
General Trade Unions SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C LAUREL, MT $50 Unknown
KOCH, DAN
General Trade Unions SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C LAUREL, MT $50 Unknown
KOCH, DAN
General Trade Unions SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C LAUREL, MT $50 Unknown
KOCH, DAN
General Trade Unions SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C LAUREL, MT $25 Unknown
KOCH, DORIS
Retired SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C CORVALLIS, MT $25 Unknown
KOCH, KARL
General Trade Unions SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C LAUREL, MT $100 Unknown
KOCH, LINDA
Uncoded SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C BILLINGS, MT $25 Unknown
KOCH, LINDA
Uncoded SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C BILLINGS, MT $25 Unknown
KOCHIS, SHIRLEY
Retired SCHWEITZER, BRIAN & BOHLINGER, JOHN C HAMILTON, MT $25 Unknown

here is all the Koch's campaign contributions to BS campaign
HMMMMMMMMMMMMM nope no Koch Bros. there, David or Charles Koch I belive their names are. woooops but there are a few "union" names mentioned. do you think unions had any "influence" in the latest decisionOT? should we look up just unions next?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
HMMMMMMMMMMMMM-- so here I guess I'm mistaken again... Here I thought it was the job of the State Land Board to get the citizens of the State the best return they could on the land they own ... But you seem to be condemning the Gov- and the State Land Board for trying to do that job..

The Land Board is responsible for deciding how best to generate revenue for the trust from school trust lands. It considers such options as:

Grazing and farming leases.

Lonecowboy--so I take it both you and I Luv Herefords agree with the Koch Bros and think that $6 an AUM is a fair price for the state to ask for pasture lease-- and that $12 is exorbitant--even when neighboring pastures under identical type leases are getting $30 or more :???:

Or should not the state ask a price consistent with the going rates :???:


I Luv Herfrds-- I spent a couple years as a local Water Commissioner when during a drought the District Judge appointed me-- and all I learned was that Montana's water rights records are totally screwed up-very difficult to research- and unless the proper paperwork was filed (and approved) during the latest water rights filing period, much historical record of prior usage/maintenance are nonexistant and/or very tough to find/verify....


In the future I predict water will be more valuable/costly than oil....
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
8,019
Reaction score
0
Location
Az.
Oldtimer said:
HMMMMMMMMMMMMM-- so here I guess I'm mistaken again... Here I thought it was the job of the State Land Board to get the citizens of the State the best return they could on the land they own ... But you seem to be condemning the Gov- and the State Land Board for trying to do that job..

The Land Board is responsible for deciding how best to generate revenue for the trust from school trust lands. It considers such options as:

Grazing and farming leases.

Lonecowboy--so I take it both you and I Luv Herefords agree with the Koch Bros and think that $6 an AUM is a fair price for the state to ask for pasture lease-- and that $12 is exorbitant--even when neighboring pastures under identical type leases are getting $30 or more :???:

Or should not the state ask a price consistent with the going rates :???:


I Luv Herfrds-- I spent a couple years as a local Water Commissioner when during a drought the District Judge appointed me-- and all I learned was that Montana's water rights records are totally screwed up-very difficult to research- and unless the proper paperwork was filed (and approved) during the latest water rights filing period, much historical record of prior usage/maintenance are nonexistant and/or very tough to find/verify....


In the future I predict water will be more valuable/costly than oil....


You also predicted that Obama would save us all along with the liberal party!~!! :roll: :roll: :roll:
You make a lot of predictions that fall flat on on you BIG butt
:wink: :wink:

Eh OH VEY
 

I Luv Herfrds

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
1,639
Reaction score
2
Location
Montana
We've done it 3 TIMES.
Once during KC's time (Grandfather)
Once during KCT's time (Father in law)
Once again during DT's time (Hubby)

Since they are so desperate to raise money they should look at cutting all the deadwood in the education.
The people in Helena are ok, but do the MSU UM or Northern need to keep hiring more and professers who are only suppose to be there for 2 years?
Talk to NR about one of the proff's down at Bozeman who spoke no english and understood less and HE WAS HIRED TO TEACH! Now that is BS!
Talk to a former proff up in Havre and how after putting in over 30 years as a teacher they cut his pension so the Regents could get more take home money, so now this elderly man is left twisting in the wind.

Raising the grazing fees to go to pay some piece of crap proff who does not speak english is BS and we should not be forced to pay higher lease prices.

Besides the KIDS WILL NOT NOT NOT SEE ANY OF THIS MONEY IF THEY INCREASE THESE FEES!!!!!!!!!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I Luv Herfrds said:
We've done it 3 TIMES.
Once during KC's time (Grandfather)
Once during KCT's time (Father in law)
Once again during DT's time (Hubby)

Since they are so desperate to raise money they should look at cutting all the deadwood in the education.
The people in Helena are ok, but do the MSU UM or Northern need to keep hiring more and professers who are only suppose to be there for 2 years?
Talk to NR about one of the proff's down at Bozeman who spoke no english and understood less and HE WAS HIRED TO TEACH! Now that is BS!
Talk to a former proff up in Havre and how after putting in over 30 years as a teacher they cut his pension so the Regents could get more take home money, so now this elderly man is left twisting in the wind.

Raising the grazing fees to go to pay some piece of crap proff who does not speak english is BS and we should not be forced to pay higher lease prices.

Besides the KIDS WILL NOT NOT NOT SEE ANY OF THIS MONEY IF THEY INCREASE THESE FEES!!!!!!!!!

I take it you are no fan of the Land Grant/Trust Universities... :wink: :lol: Me neither....
 

mrj

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
4,609
Reaction score
1
Location
SD
Northern Ag Network carries some stories on this situation which seem less biased than what OT says.

We have no government leases for land, and are one of most likely very few ranch families who do NOT instinctively resent those who do lease government land. IMO, there is far too much government owned land, especially in the western states. Certainly in these hard times, government should be offering much of that good ranch/farm land for sale to those families who have leased that land AND spent THEIR OWN MONEY to improve water and fences on those lands.

The leases may seem low to those leasing private lands, as we have done for years, however, when figuring in additional costs as well as the very real possibility of having all your improvements taken away and given to others, the costs are far too high! And that beautiful scenery just doesn't buy many groceries for the family or the cows.

We do need to consider the fact that OT never misses a chance to criticize those great MT Stockgrowers!

I've seen some of that Matador Ranch, and it is a treasure, made even better by the good management funded by the Kock Family. They even won the national Environmental award a few years ago, and well deserved it. For the record, our ranch was one of the competitors for the award and every one of the regional winners felt the same as we do about the winning ranch. The treat their employees well, too, contrary to what too many people like to assume about 'corporate' ranchers. Matador ranches in TX and other states look pretty nice, too.


mrj
 

Latest posts

Top