Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 169
  1. #1

    Default Private beef out of our public land.

    Ok, so I searched the threads to see if anyone had already touched on this and didn't find anything.

    Am I the only one tired of the enormous destruction of beef grazing on our public grounds? Polluted water with giardia, heavy erosion, direct feed competition, riparian damage, etc.

    Someones private financial interests should not jeopardize our public lands with reckless abandon. Keep private beef on private land.

    I posted a really hypocritical photo of a forest service gate sign on my instagram page (@bornintherut) last year that said the gate was closed to "protect soil and water resources". Wait. So the destruction of the habitat by the beef is ok if they pay enough? Ok I get it now.

    See the problem here?

    Should we not stir the pot, and advocate to stop all private beef on public lands? Pretty tall order.
    "Much trouble would be saved if we opened our hearts more."

    Chief Joseph

  2. #2

    Default

    Unless you plan for the full reintroduction of the bison, cloven hoof animals are an essential part of the ecosystem.

    But yes, I have seen places that were overgrazed to a point of ridiculousness. But its not the norm.
    “To me, if you don’t eat it, then it’s not a point of pride”. -Matt Rinella

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Gallatin Gateway, MT
    Posts
    2,437

    Default

    Am I the only one tired of the enormous destruction of beef grazing on our public grounds? Polluted water with giardia, heavy erosion, direct feed competition, riparian damage, etc.
    No, there are others who exaggerate the impact of beef grazing on public lands, but typically not due to factual widespread conditions ... moreso due to a ideological and political bent. Range management is challenging in certain areas with free roaming large grazers, but significant damage as you describe is not as typical as you contend.

  4. #4

    Default

    Rotational (is that a word?) grazing is very beneficial to the land and animals. Some overgrazing does occur, but for the most part it is minimal.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Western Montana
    Posts
    2,299

    Default

    I think public land grazing is complicated. I've shared this before, but this is an article interviewing a ranching family in the town I went high school in. http://grist.org/food/this-rancher-says-the-bundys-are-idiots-but-he-too-is-worried-about-losing-access-to-public-land/

    Yes we are subsidizing grazing on Our Public Lands. But we are also subsidizing wide open spaces currently being used as ag and ranch land on private lands, which, after watching half the county I grew in up be subdivided to death, and now they are carving up the carcass, I feel open spaces are valuable thing. The incredibly low rates federal land grazers enjoy is a complicated issue and vilifying public land grazers, as so many environmental orgs do, may bite us in the a$$ IMO.

    That said, nearly every high mountain meadow in the Boulder Mountains is a cow chit ridden mudpit. If greater efforts were made to keep cattle out of riparian areas, the majority of local environmental impacts that folks see and get concerned about would be significantly diminished.
    “It is well to go all out sometimes.” - Elers Koch

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    "Land of Giant Rams"
    Posts
    5,113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bornintherut View Post
    Ok, so I searched the threads to see if anyone had already touched on this and didn't find anything.

    Am I the only one tired of the enormous destruction of beef grazing on our public grounds? Polluted water with giardia, heavy erosion, direct feed competition, riparian damage, etc.

    Someones private financial interests should not jeopardize our public lands with reckless abandon. Keep private beef on private land.

    I posted a really hypocritical photo of a forest service gate sign on my instagram page (@bornintherut) last year that said the gate was closed to "protect soil and water resources". Wait. So the destruction of the habitat by the beef is ok if they pay enough? Ok I get it now.

    See the problem here?

    Should we not stir the pot, and advocate to stop all private beef on public lands? Pretty tall order.
    110% opposed to your philosophies.
    Wood is Good treefarmsystem.org

  7. #7

    Default

    Seen a good share of cattle patty spreads on public land. Not a real fan of it though it makes for trails to walk along... Trying to find the good of it. As Nameless Range shared, it's complicated. Even to the point of a quality U.S. export value. We provide 20% of the world's beef.

    For the value gained vs the cow patty fire starters and trails within areas, I'm okay with public land use for cattle.

    Where I am not okay with cattle grazing is within our National Parks! Just because Glacier (East side) is bordered by Tribal land, a "look the other way" Administrative decision to not offend is cow shnitz! They are not permitted, period! Tribal or not... No difference. /Mini rant over. Haha!
    " There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." - Theodore Roosevelt
    Live to work or work to live... Your choice.

  8. #8

    Default

    No cattle on public lands is certainly a position on one extreme with Bundy on the other. The best answer is probably in the middle... given that people on both sides are complaining we are probably in the sweet spot right now

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Coloado Springs
    Posts
    2,175

    Default

    Here are the issues (and I have expressed them one way or another before) that I have experienced here in CO:

    1) Ranchers, who for the most part have inherited land through a long succession, act as if the fact that some distant member of their family happened to be in that place at the right time to initiate a ranch makes them some sort of sacrosanct group whose "way of life" we must all support. Don't take this as in any way meaning that I don't believe ranchers work hard. But guess what, LOTS of folks work really hard and don't have the benefit of having been passed thousands of acres to enjoy as we see fit or have public subsidies to support them in a "lifestyle" they choose.

    2) Along with the above, acting as if there is somehow an absolute right to use public land to support their lifestyle AND that that right should supersede the rest of the publics use of that public land. I believe I have relayed the shenanigans that ranchers in the area I hunt have been perpetrating over the last few years. To make matters worse, authorities of all flavors don't seem very interested in enforcing any limiting regulations or laws to the detriment of the "poor" 50+ thousand acre ranchers. Having cattle still grazing on public land past deadlines, running herds through public land prime hunting areas during the middle of rifle season(including directly through hunters camps) and herding elk off of public onto private. We have documented and even provided pictures of the violations....nothing has been done.

    3) Throw into that the cash-mill of running outfitting businesses on the ranches further subsidized by large amounts of private land only and RFW set aside tags. With elk hunts starting at +-$7k in the area and these ranches having large amounts of tags the $$$$ is sizable. All of that $$$ coming from a public resource.

    Full disclosure, I will admit that I surely wish my family had a ranch and I had the ability to enjoy it. I don't and, even though I have worked hard an earn a good living, I have no shot at ever owning any sizable piece of land. I guess that in the end most of us who have some problem or another with the grazing and use of public lands by ranchers in the current set up feel that not only is the public subsidizing the ranching lifestyle and business but we also end up having more of our opportunities infringed on while being excluded from access to HUGE tracts and generally treated like dirt in many instances.
    "Never apologize for being a Patriot!"

  10. #10

    Default

    Most of the grazing that takes place is necessary for a variety of reasons including fuel reduction IMO.

    I see adjusting the AUM grazing rates closer to market value as the most needed change in our public land grazing system.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SFC B View Post
    Here are the issues (and I have expressed them one way or another before) that I have experienced here in CO:

    1) Ranchers, who for the most part have inherited land through a long succession, act as if the fact that some distant member of their family happened to be in that place at the right time to initiate a ranch makes them some sort of sacrosanct group whose "way of life" we must all support. Don't take this as in any way meaning that I don't believe ranchers work hard. But guess what, LOTS of folks work really hard and don't have the benefit of having been passed thousands of acres to enjoy as we see fit or have public subsidies to support them in a "lifestyle" they choose.

    2) Along with the above, acting as if there is somehow an absolute right to use public land to support their lifestyle AND that that right should supersede the rest of the publics use of that public land. I believe I have relayed the shenanigans that ranchers in the area I hunt have been perpetrating over the last few years. To make matters worse, authorities of all flavors don't seem very interested in enforcing any limiting regulations or laws to the detriment of the "poor" 50+ thousand acre ranchers. Having cattle still grazing on public land past deadlines, running herds through public land prime hunting areas during the middle of rifle season(including directly through hunters camps) and herding elk off of public onto private. We have documented and even provided pictures of the violations....nothing has been done.

    3) Throw into that the cash-mill of running outfitting businesses on the ranches further subsidized by large amounts of private land only and RFW set aside tags. With elk hunts starting at +-$7k in the area and these ranches having large amounts of tags the $$$$ is sizable. All of that $$$ coming from a public resource.

    Full disclosure, I will admit that I surely wish my family had a ranch and I had the ability to enjoy it. I don't and, even though I have worked hard an earn a good living, I have no shot at ever owning any sizable piece of land. I guess that in the end most of us who have some problem or another with the grazing and use of public lands by ranchers in the current set up feel that not only is the public subsidizing the ranching lifestyle and business but we also end up having more of our opportunities infringed on while being excluded from access to HUGE tracts and generally treated like dirt in many instances.
    Well said. I think most of us are ok with or at least understand the need for allowing cattle to graze on public land. Unfortunately the sense of entitlement that leads a few bad apples to pull stunts like herding elk of public, harassing hunters, locking public roads, etc. gives ranchers across the west a bad name even though the majority play by the rules.

  12. #12

    Default

    $10 and a bit of time will get one a pretty good education on public lands grazing.

    http://www.cast-science.org/publicat...productID=2857

    There's quite the lack of understanding regarding the rules, regulations, rationale, and history regarding public lands grazing. The above is a good primer for those wanting to better understand the topic.

    FWIW, by most all reports/surveys, public lands are in better "condition", as it pertains to grazing and its impacts, now than probably any time since they've been public managed lands.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    1,102

    Default

    While I dislike much of what I see in terms of public land grazing, I dislike winter range housing developments and ranchettes more. So, I'll continue to support the lesser of those two evils, and support private cows on public land as a way to keep them financially viable and discourage them selling their ranches to developers.
    Elitist Hunter

    "Never let schooling [work] get in the way of your education" - Mark Twain

  14. #14

    Default

    Talk to a rancher about it. Might change your point of view.
    "I'll be halfway to heaven with paradise waitin'
    Five miles away from wherever I am."

  15. #15

    Default

    I like cows on public land, personally.
    get over it commies..
    JWP58

  16. Default

    I like cows a lot more then subdivisions and any kind of drilling

  17. #17

    Default

    If done right it can be beneficial http://www.wyomingextension.org/agpubs/pubs/B965R.pdf
    If abused it's a big mess.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Gallatin Gateway, MT
    Posts
    2,437

    Default

    "And ef you graize yur cows long enuf, the land belongs to yur family." C. D. Bundy

  19. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nameless Range View Post
    I think public land grazing is complicated. I've shared this before, but this is an article interviewing a ranching family in the town I went high school in. http://grist.org/food/this-rancher-says-the-bundys-are-idiots-but-he-too-is-worried-about-losing-access-to-public-land/

    Yes we are subsidizing grazing on Our Public Lands. But we are also subsidizing wide open spaces currently being used as ag and ranch land on private lands, which, after watching half the county I grew in up be subdivided to death, and now they are carving up the carcass, I feel open spaces are valuable thing. The incredibly low rates federal land grazers enjoy is a complicated issue and vilifying public land grazers, as so many environmental orgs do, may bite us in the a$$ IMO.

    That said, nearly every high mountain meadow in the Boulder Mountains is a cow chit ridden mudpit. If greater efforts were made to keep cattle out of riparian areas, the majority of local environmental impacts that folks see and get concerned about would be significantly diminished.


    I agree. While it gets a bit frustrating dodging cattle in some of my elk hunting spots, the alternative of those ranches that would not be financially viable without public grazing being sold and subdivided is much worse. It's still a net benefit for all of us.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Coloado Springs
    Posts
    2,175

    Default

    Here is a question about making those ranches "financially viable". While tax rates differ from state to state, without exception, those rates on unimproved land are extremely low ( a quick search shows that here in CO the rate on that land is about $.33 an acre, infinitely less than residential property) . The question of the viability of those ranches simply has to do with how the ranch owners CHOOSE to make their living/income which will support their land. If they choose to run cattle they are choosing the lifestyle and the chance that raising cattle will be profitable(which is usually supported by subsidies). If they choose not to do that then they will have to get a "regular" job to support the land. Working in a fashion like most of us, doing what it takes working for someone else in order to support our family and how we choose to live. Past that, if there is a market, THEN they might choose to sell for development and cash out for LARGE sums of $$$$.
    To me it seems to be almost a case of extortion, the threat of subdivision and development being used to extract subsidies, public and governmental support for the "ranching lifestyle". I will be the first to admit that I do take exception to that. Most of us have not been given such a huge resource. What we do have, we have to find independent ways to purchase and support. We do and have what we can afford. A simple analogy to me is this.....I LOVE the beach and would like nothing more than to run a tiki bar on the beach. While I might be able to afford to by a piece of land (or, if I were lucky enough to inherit it), trying to support my family that way is an incredibly risky proposition. Now what if I use the threat of selling my portion of the water front, which others CANNOT use but has some benefit in the fish population for the area, to developers or oil drillers if the taxpayers didn't subsidize my costs in order to make my lifestyle choice "viable". Then I would do things like close off the road along the beach that folks use for access. Anyone that does get to the beach and wants to fish I will find ways to make it unpleasant and unproductive for them unless they want to pay for a charter from MY plot of ocean front...etc. Does this seem familiar? That is the rub to me.
    "Never apologize for being a Patriot!"

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nameless Range View Post
    That said, nearly every high mountain meadow in the Boulder Mountains is a cow chit ridden mudpit. If greater efforts were made to keep cattle out of riparian areas, the majority of local environmental impacts that folks see and get concerned about would be significantly diminished.
    This is the worst part of it to me.

    It's the 'Land of many uses.' a lot of things we enjoy in our homes come off public lands. Energy, raw materials like timber and ores, and of course beef. I'd not thought of the open space aspect and loss thereof if it were private and available to be subdivided, but that's another important aspect. I do get frustrated down here in New Mexico when I see nearly water feature -especially those at low elevations- that's not fenced heavily impacted by cattle.

    Although I DON'T advocate transferring public land to private, I have noticed superficially (looking out the window while driving through) better range quality in low elevation west Texas grasslands where it's all private than in similar latitudes and elevations on public land in New Mexico. I think it's a matter of taking care of what you own vs. what the public owns. Like how SOME people treat their own cars vs. a rental car.

    I have talked to Forest Service and BLM biologists who have confirmed this attitude by SOME ranchers towards grazing on public lands.

  22. #22

    Default

    Reintroduction of the bison would obviously be a good thing but domesticated ungulates are not. Sorry doesn’t hold water.
    "Much trouble would be saved if we opened our hearts more."

    Chief Joseph

  23. #23

    Default

    I can buy that.
    "Much trouble would be saved if we opened our hearts more."

    Chief Joseph

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MTGomer View Post
    Unless you plan for the full reintroduction of the bison, cloven hoof animals are an essential part of the ecosystem.

    But yes, I have seen places that were overgrazed to a point of ridiculousness. But its not the norm.
    Reintroduction of the bison would obviously be a good thing but domesticated ungulates are not.
    "Much trouble would be saved if we opened our hearts more."

    Chief Joseph

  25. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Straight Arrow View Post
    No, there are others who exaggerate the impact of beef grazing on public lands, but typically not due to factual widespread conditions ... moreso due to a ideological and political bent. Range management is challenging in certain areas with free roaming large grazers, but significant damage as you describe is not as typical as you contend.
    Whether it's typical or not, it's still a bad idea. As far as exaggerating impacts, have you tried to pump drinking water from a spring filled with cow piss and dung? How was it? Your financial interests in beef are peeking through your comment.
    "Much trouble would be saved if we opened our hearts more."

    Chief Joseph

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •