# Hives on BLM or govn't land



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

Most any use of government-owned land requires a
permit. I place hives in several national forests
(The George, the Jeff, and along the BRP) every
year to go after Sourwood honey, and I sit down
with the area ranger to sign permits and work
out logistical details, like getting keys to
various locked gates.

The paperwork is not too bad, and the rules are
no more than common sense. I do them every fall
for the following summer, so that he can easily
look at fire road conditions himself. (Some of
the fire roads are barely clear enough to walk
after years of neglect, so I tend to want access
along fire roads that are in better condition,
even if they are roundabout paths to a site.

Sometimes, there are fees for uses of national
forests. Sometimes not. Temporary placement of
beehives has been ruled a "non revenue event" in
these parts, no different from hunting.


----------



## wayacoyote (Nov 3, 2003)

I got my start in beekeeping while a naturalist at a Fish and Wildlife Refuge. My boss kept a few hives on the property to supply our observation hives. When he moved on to another position, we brought in a local beekeeper to keep the hives. In exchange, he was allowed to put a couple hives on himself. He does the extraction and we sell our honey in the "association book sales." Proceeds go to sponsor small programs by the association to support the refuge.

Our fish and wildlife refuge supports migratory birds, so agriculture plays a huge roll in providing feed.

Now I work for the Park Service. They have a different mission, and I've been told that they won't allow the introduction of plants or animals. We don't do agriculture on the park.

Forest Service in in the department of Agriculture, so it might be a viable option.

WayaCoyote


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

Yeah, forget National parks and most State parks.

The Blue Ridge Parkway is technically a National
park, but as it is surrounded by National Forest,
it is often the only practical road to use to
get to the access (fire) roads that lead to
where one would want to place hives, so one needs
their permission/approval to haul a trailer or
truckload of hives on "their" road, as no
commercial vehicles are allowed as a general rule.

...and pointing out that it is really YOUR road
won't help one bit.









Actually the rangers that patrol and enforce the
traffic laws are very nice about checking on
hive trailers, and mentioning that they saw
"nothing amiss", implying that they would give
me a shout on the VHF if they found anything
wrong. The Forest Service guys are simply
spread far too thin these days to do more than
react to situations. Both groups are so
underfunded and understaffed, it just is not
funny.


----------



## David Stewart (Jan 22, 2005)

Interesting topic, I'm a Lead Park Ranger with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and we had this very discussion in our office the other day. I concur with everything Jim said regarding placement of hives on Federal lands. To my knowledge there is nothing the provides for a blanket "prohibition" this practice on lands our agency manages (can't speak for other agencies and their internal policies, regulations etc..). We routinely see small bee yards of less than 200 hives placed immediately adjacent to our fence. I have always viewed it as part of our Natural Resource Management Program (hint:use those buzz words in discussions with Federal Land Managers). With the decline of native bee populations, native wildlife populations benefit from the pollination provided by tame bees. If there are endangered plants in the area that utilize pollination by bees you can explain the benefit from the stnadpoint of their Endangered Species Management program. This is one point where I take dissagree with my brethren "down the hall" at the Nat Park Service and their policy of hands off management but that is a different battle that's been fought and lost on many fronts before. I do run into a conflict when dealing with "commercial operations". Some agencies have pretty tight rules and procedures concerning for profit operations. Examples would include: Fees charged for permits, competitive bidding for sites etc.. The best advice I could give you is to follow Jim's advice and contact the local agency staff directly. I can and do issue individual permits for a variety of different requests (some on the far side of bizarre) and while I've never received a hive request, I would certainly at least take a look at approving it with certain restrictions such as; not at developed facilities like playgrounds or camping areas etc...

Good Luck,
David


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

Here in Northern Cal.you can put them out on the National Forest with a permit-renewed annually(mine came in the mail yesterday).Currently its $30.00 per site/100 hives.You have to find the locations and get each approved.You have to have a burn permit for your smoker.There are rules that need to be followed such as staying for a specified time after working the hives to see if a fire starts from your smoker.Have to have a shovel and fire extinguisher-just common sense stuff.You cant start a yard within a certain distance of someone elses yard.And finally while not required-you'd be nuts not to build a BEAR FENCE!(and maintain it )


----------



## Curry (Sep 22, 2003)

Hey, thanks all for the input. This sounds like the way to go ($30 per site is a heck of a lot cheaper than trying to buy land in CA).

I just bought a lot in Utah and it cost me $103,000. A few weeks later a guy offered me 130K for it, and I turned him down. Another lot near me just went for 140K. Land is going up by the week in Cedar City, my dad says. Glad I got it while I could.

Out there I'll be close enough to CA to keep bees there, and just commute when they need to be moved.


----------



## Rob (Mar 29, 2005)

The majority of our hives are located on private land (vast eucaliptus plantations owned by multi-million dollar companies).The majority of beekeepers that put there hives in the plantations are charged by the companies,but seen as we have a small plot of land situated smack bang in the middle of the plantations we struck up a (good neighbour) deal with the companies.
We put our hives on their land for free and in exchange we keep an eye out for illegal tree cutting,fire hazards and so on.This was only possible because we have our own land registered next to theirs but I'm sure you could do something along the same lines over there in the U.S.


----------



## Bryon (Mar 29, 2005)

I'd check with the local state trust land offince if you have one and also the local BLM office. I believe the permit required is the same as a grazing animal permit. Checking with the local forest service office couldnt' hurt either.


----------



## Connie Bart (May 9, 2003)

I recently met with someone at the BLM office here in Kern County, California, about the requirements for setting up an apiary site. It is not a simple or inexpensive process. By the time I was told this process would require a Environmental Impact Study (EIS), including a site visit by an archeologist, botinist, and two other specialists, and that I would be paying their hourly wage, plus overhead to visit a site nearly 3 hours round trip, I was convinced the BLM does not want Beekeepers setting up apiary sites on BLM property. Period. As the criteria was laid out for me it appeared it was going to cost me several hundred $$ to get through the process and there was no guarentee I would have a site even after that. All this for 25 hives. Has anyone else come up against this? I am not giving up yet, as I believe this may be a case of an overzealous interpretation of the regs. However, I do not want to anoy the good folks at the local BLM office, as I feel they are probably following orders from above. Anyone else come up against this?


----------



## The7Cs (Apr 25, 2005)

LoggerMike,

I saw some liquid smoke spray in the Mann Lake catalog that came this week. Anyone have any experience with it? I wonder how well it would work if you can't use a smoker, or don't want to mess with the burn permit.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> I was convinced the BLM does not want Beekeepers 
> setting up apiary sites on BLM property. Period.

The US Department of the Inferior's Bureau of Land
Mismanagement is apparently not aware of the
complete lack of impact that a few beehives would
have. The Forest Service (part of USDA) clearly
seems to be more small-scale oriented.

As the requirements listed for you were complete
nonsense, you can assume that the fellow "blew
you off", simply because he has no time for
small-scale permits. This makes sense given the
much higher workload posed by the current gang
in possession's plans to clear-cut much more
government land, and then strip mine and drill
as soon as the loggers are done. I think that
the policy is called "Leave No Tree Behind".

I'd move up the management chain of command, and
ask why the placement of beehives would require
the input of, for example, an archaeologist.

I am sure that there is someone who will agree
that a few beehives aren't going to have any
impact at all, less impact than fishing or
hunting or camping, and order the lower-level
staff to write you a darned permit before you
get mad and go to the papers with your highly
amusing tale of "your tax dollars at work"
and "how the public can't use public lands".

"Liquid Smoke" has been around for a while,
and really never has caught on, mostly due
to the residues issue. During dry periods,
it is easier to use a metal containment box
or a scrap of 3/4-inch plywood to set the
smoker on when working hives than to mess
around with less effective alternatives.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

>>This makes sense given the
much higher workload posed by the current gang
in possession's plans to clear-cut much more
government land, and then strip mine and drill
as soon as the loggers are done. I think that
the policy is called "Leave No Tree Behind".

My observation as a logger for 28 years is that when the Republicans are in power-there is TOO MUCH logging(over cutting perfectly healthy young forests).Just the opposite when the Dems were in-NOT ENOUGH(allowing burnt and dying trees to rot).Where is the 'happy medium'?.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> Where is the 'happy medium'?

She's living on St. Kitts.

I made her even more happy for a few years,
but her darned seances got on my nerves,
so I sailed back to the USofA.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

If I remember right,we once got a BLM permit over the phone with a minimum of paperwork.My impression of the BLM is they dont even know what land is under their control,and only leave the office for donuts.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

Heres a typical forest service yard.(really just testing to see how this photo thingy works)
http://pic2.picturetrail.com/VOL1011/3600070/7409829/96798454.jpg


----------



## dickm (May 19, 2002)

>>>>(allowing burnt and dying trees to rot)<<<<

Loggermike,
How much logging have you seen done on those types of trees. Seems like the loggers all want the best and the healthiest. When they don't clear cut, they leave a little fringe of trees at the top of the ridge so they can go back and collect them when they blow down.

Dickm


----------



## Barry Digman (May 21, 2003)

> I was convinced the BLM does not want Beekeepers setting up apiary sites on BLM property


Just a point of clarification. It's not BLM property, nor is it "government" land. It belongs to the citizens of the US. The BLM/government is only the caretaker.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

I know nothing of Eastern logging practices.But the dry West often has forest fires that burn thousands of acres of softwoods.If you jump on these quickly,most of the material can be salvaged before the wood deteriorates or 'bugs' ruin it.But I have seen our 'caretakers' wait a whole year before even starting logging operations so archeological surveys can be done.(an arrowhead chip can mean 5 acres flagged off from salvage as 'an ark site').On one such job-I was the only white guy on an all Indian logging crew(I told them I was there on an affirmative action program).Their opinion was it was that kind of nonsense that weakened the publics support for real protection of their sacred sites.


----------



## SilverFox (Apr 25, 2003)

Then they sell the top grade to foreign countrys and we get the second grade and have to buy the top grade back from the countrys we sold it to. I belive in selective cutting. To see that in action look at Montana. Don't see bald mountians there, unless it is above the tree line.


----------



## David Stewart (Jan 22, 2005)

Not wanting to stir the pot, but it's only court actions from Environmental groups that force the Federal Agencies to toe the line so tight on compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 as ammended. Fortunately, unless you live in an area determined as critical habitat for an endangered species, private landowners are not subject to such restraints.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

>>I saw some liquid smoke spray in the Mann Lake catalog that came this week.
Never tried it .There used to be an aerosol spray smoke(canned smoke) but havent seen it in years.We would use it occasionally.The main thing is just to be extremely careful during fire season.More than one beekeeper has started a fire with his smoker and burned up his hives.If a fire gets out of control in Cal.you are held responsible for supression costs.We like burlap as it doesnt throw sparks as bad as some materials.


----------



## Flyer Jim (Apr 22, 2004)

I tried liquid smoke last year. It works pretty good, maybe not as good as a smoker but you don't have to light it and if it falls over you don't have a fire. Where I live in the summer time a fire goes real fast. You can get the liquid smoke at a grocery store for a couple bucks and a spray bottle if you want to try it. It's used for BBQing. It takes about a tablespoon in a quart of water. It makes the land owners feel a lot better when you tell them you're using Liquid smoke and not a real smoker in the summertime around here.
Jim


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

Well this will be the year to try it.As soon as all this high grass turns brown,it could be a big fire year in Cal.Of course it hasnt stopped raining yet.....I do use a spray bottle with thin syrup with a bit of either wintergreen oil or anise to join nucs and hives when needed(instead of newspaper).It seems to calm the bees but I never considered using it routinely instead of the smoker. I'll get some liquid smoke and compare.Thanks for the tip.


----------



## Barry Digman (May 21, 2003)

[No message]


----------



## robinpagen (Mar 23, 2011)

I recently visited the local BLM office in Las Vegas, NV. I was told about all the environmental impact studies as well as $60. per hive permit. It doesnt look very promising to work on BLM lands but I will try the Forest service and national parks as noted in other comments. Hope the best to you and all the bees.


----------



## Bsweet (Apr 9, 2010)

Two years ago I lived in Colorado. I had a service contract with some coal mines and spent alot of time in the back/high country. I got an idea of mounting hives (40 or 50) on a trailer and parking them in a meadow in the mountians for the summer to work wild flowers. and parking my rv in the same meadow so I could watch over them for bears or vandels. I called the forest service office for my area to inquire about premits or even if it was possible. I talked to three persons(the first passed me to his boss and so on)who all said they had never heard of such a thing. They said I would have to move camp (my RV) every seven days but the hive trailer could stay in one place as longs as it wasn't near a campground. I approched this with the idea that bees are livestock and wanted to know if I needed a grazing permit like they do for sheep or cows. So the forest service gave the infomation above and suggested I call the dept. of agri. so I did. Talked to two persons there and got pretty much the same answers 1. wow never been asked that 2.don't see why not as long as forest serv. is ok with it. 3. no we don't have a permit for bees at this time.
Haven't put anything in action yet but thought it might work out nice as I could justifie spending the summer in the mountians close to the lakes and streams


----------



## Hevyduty (Feb 8, 2010)

A few years ago I considered putting hives onto national forest lands. The short answer that I got upon inquiring as to the possibility of doing this was "NOT POSSIBLE . The land that you want to put hives on is owned by the public and if you were to put hives on the ground then you would be benifitting from the use of that land at the exclusion of all other members of the public who may want to also use the same land." It was then made clear that we were actually talking about the 16 1/4" x 22" piece of land actually under the bottom board. I believed at that time that the guy felt that he had more important things to do and I had just hit the brick wall. 

It encourages me to think that it may actually be possible.

How about 2 or 3 yards in close proximity and moving the rv to a different site every week?


----------



## Bsweet (Apr 9, 2010)

That might work, I was told that I did not have to move the RV out of the meadow just to a different spot.Alot of the F.S. camp grounds limit you to a seven day stay in each spot so if your in spot #11 you can move to #12 for seven days. As far as profiting from public lands ask em how a rancher with a grazeing permit gets away with it? As for someone wanting to use the ground under my hives...no problem I'd move the trailer for them, might have to do that anyway to prevent dead spots for lack of sun.
Another way you might do it is buy or file a mining claim, which is legal on public lands. Been awhile since I read up on it but the high points are 1.no perm. dwelling 2.you must do improvment work on the claim(work the claim yearly I think)it seems like it was $200.00 value of work. Jim


----------

