Public-Land Grazing Solution

There is a hotline, it's called the local BLM or Forrest Service office. If you see something that is against the regulations, report it. In the country I'm from, we had a guy who has been running cows on Forrest Service land for over 40 years. He was notorious for not repairing his fences, not keeping his cows off riparians, etc. Finally, last year the Forrest Service said your done, pulled his permitt and said have a nice day, end of story. None of the local ranchers, the Cattlemen's Association, nobody went to bat for the guy because he wasn't holding up his end. Sometimes that has to happen. My family has been running on public land for over 30 years. We ride at least twice a week moving cows off of riparians, fixing fence, and rotating fields. That's the way it has to be. We have a good relationship with the USFS, BLM, wildlife agencies, and the sportsmen.

My biggest problem with these types of posts is that guys get on here and start making generalizations. You make sweeping comments about ranchers and grazing when you are only exposed to a small sector somewhere in god-knows-where-America. I am not claiming that I know what goes on everywhere, but I can tell you I know what is going on in a lot of different areas. DON"T LET THE ACTIONS OF A FEW SHAPE YOUR OPINION OF THE MAJORITY!!

PleaseDear, it's too late for you to bring any new ideas to this forum, we've already solved all the problems!
 
I'm behind the ranchers we have bigger problems than ranchers trying to make a living.
the bigger problem is Hobie ranchers that are super rich people who buy up big ranches not to make money but to loose it as a tax deduction we have several of them in these parts.
they let the ranch hands run the hunting and charge outrageous amounts for hunting.
Texas oil men, walmart airs some more down in Douglas that i don't know how they got so well off.
when they have more money then they could ever spend why would they take something dear to those of us who don't away.
conglomerations of rich guys buying up large ranches of critical mule deer winter range then splitting it into 40 acre ranchettes and building roads to each. 16,000 acres destroyed.
17 sections of blm and state that they fought to block off any access to the public. it needs to have the roads opened back up to the public.
the blm and state needs to pass laws and condemn private land and build access points to land locked public lands eminent domain should be used to do this if the rancher isn't willing to take market value.
outfitters do not have the lease on public lands only private anyone can hunt public lands and when a outfitter tries to run a hunter off they should be fined for hunter harassment.
yes there is problems out there but the real ranchers are not the problem they could be the solution.
 
Fallout, the same thing you accuse us of doing you do. You get on here and proclaim that the MAJORITY of ranchers hold up their end of the stick!! Are you kidding me!! What data do you have that supports that blanket statement? Just curious. Would love to hear it.
Also I am not surprised when you say you have read the GAO reports on grazing and could care less. Why would you care, its says that you cost taxpayers well over 100 MILLION dollars every year. We are not talking about mining, or fishing or logging, were talking about PUBLIC LAND grazing. I thought you would of figured that out, if you want to start a thread on those topics go ahead. If not explain to me why the public has to support your job. No one supports my job but me. My tax bracket is through the roof. I want my welfare tax cuts like you guys. Explain to me please. And dont give me the bull crap argument that without public grazing the price of beef would shoot through the roof. You and I know the LARGE majority of beef the US uses is produced on private land.
As for the price of an AUM, you honestly feel just the value of grass is included. Lets see I am sure cows drink a $hit load of water. They destroy riparian areas, they do not leave water sources unless moved by the illegal herder living in a trailer on the mountain. And in a drought desert envirnment like Utah water and water rights are at a very high demand. $1.36 per AUM, give me a break. Fallout you know that is welfare, just admit it.
Like I said before I would like to see actual data from you for once. Not just your opinion. Everyone has those.
CC
 
Ah, just another brush stroke in the picture you continue to paint........keep posting Coyote.......

What data do you have to support this? What data do you have to support that? What data do I have that you are an idiot? Well exhibit A would be 244 posts on this website that have wasted a lot of people's time. The evidence that I have that the majority of ranchers are doing it right is that the majority of ranchers are still operating on lands that they have been operating on for a long time and despite what you would like to portray, those lands are going strong.

I don't cost taxpayers a thing. I am not in ranching. I said my family ranches, never said that I did.

"they do not leave water sources unless moved by the illegal herder living in a trailer on the mountain."

THAT is one of the most ignorant statements I have ever read on this site. THAT is DATA that supports the fact that you are a waste of carbon. You are truely one of the most ignorant, misinformed people who posts on this site.

Yes, an AUM is basically a purchase of the grass. Yes, cows use water, often from water developments and catchments that wouldn't be there if cattle were not there. If is as simple as supply and demand. What other demand is there for a clump of grass in the middle of nowhere? That changes on where you are and who is involved but in most cases, that is still the fundamental question.

I told you, I could bury you in data, I have more resources to scientific data than you could ever know. But why do I want to waste the time and energy to provide that data to you? You pose no threat to anything, becuase when the chips are down, you are a babling bafoon. You are a waste of my time and you were a waste of 30 seconds of your dad's time.

If you can't come on here and post something of substance besides one biased, number manipulated report, then quit wasting your keyboards time.
 
Fallout have you resorted to childish insults so quickly? :) This is only your fourth or fifth post on the subject. I have known in all my years, and I have been in sales and marketing for a long time, when you have someone backed into a corner they resort to insults and childish remarks.

Fallout is it not true that cattle hang around water sources? Is that not where EVERYONE finds them? Plodding through stream banks etc. Is that not one of the main issues with cattle? I thought it was. I dont care if the cattle ranchers created water sources just to feed their cows. That is the PUBLIC's water and it has a value, WAY more than $1.38. Average private grazing in the west, $12.50 AUM. No wonder you guys wanna suck on the government tit!!

So you may not cost tax payers a dime, but you family does.

You think grass is all that cattle use? A clump of grass in the middle of nowhere has alot of demand if we could raise herd objectives to what the habitat could support. That in my eyes is a huge demand.

Fallout you have no data on the ecological benefits of cattle. There are very few if any benefits.

Here is a couple of tidbits for you though.

In ID sheep herders want to have the IDFG kill entire bighorn populations because they interfere with "their" grazing allotments. Glad sportsman have them on our side!!
http://www.idahostatesman.com/235/story/296240.html


Grazing Impacts on Threatened and Endangered Species
Threatened and endangered plant and animal species inhabiting federal rangelands and imperiled by livestock grazing: more than 175.1 Rank of livestock grazing as a cause of species endangerment in
?southern Arizona and western New Mexico No. 1
?southern Nevada and central Arizona No. 3
?California No. 4
?northern Arizona, southern Utah and southern Colorado No. 5

In the United States, grazing has contributed to the demise of 22 percent of federal threatened and endangered species?nearly equal to logging (12 percent) and mining (11 percent) combined.

3.Livestock grazing is especially harmful to plant species, affecting 33 percent of endangered plants.4

http://www.sagebrushsea.org/pdf/factsheet_Grazing_Ecological_Impacts.pdf


There are about 1 million other links to the damages of cattle on OUR public lands. Fallout I have nothing against ranchers, I am sure there are good ones just like bad ones. Like I said you can keep spouting your opinion. But your opinion does not change fact.

CC
 
CoyoteChaser........you make me laugh. Everything with you is data, data, data.......and more data, with maybe a few reports thrown in there. What you might try to do is to get out of your cubicle once in a while and get out here with some of us that actually ranch and keep the habitat good for the wildlife and try to improve the water, basically try to be good producers. By doing this you might not have such a sour attitude towards this subject, the subject of ranchers that is. You might see that the damage isn't bad everywhere you go and that cattle are not going to be the ruination of the elk and deer herds. While you are out here you can also help some of the ranchers test their cattle for brucellosis that they got from coming into contact with the elk herds. Now every cow, heifer or bull that leaves the state of Montana has to be tested, so maybe the grazing did come with a price that was a little higher than your precious camping fee.
 
Fallout I thought you where a rancher. Are there any ranchers on here aginst raiseing the elk population?
 
Blue, of course you dont want to read studies or reports, they all point to the same thing. Do you just want peoples opinions? As for me getting out believe me I spend more than my share of time out and about. I am out and about almost all year Blue. I train bird dogs all spring out west of Lehi UT, been on an elk hunt already am headed to ID in the next couple weeks for an antelope hunt and then headed to CO for a late season deer hunt. Not to mention training dogs and hunting coyotes in between those and hunting chukars in the west desert.

On my elk hunt lets see what I saw in regards to cattle, found a dead calf in a cattle guard. How long does it take a cow to die in a cattle guard? And it was half rotted so obviously been there awhile. And its probably still there. Where was the rancher? Who knows right. Then found a dead cow IN a waterhole. Actually floating in a waterhole. Where was the rancher? Who knows right. Had a rancher tell me to shoot as many elk as I could because he lost "his" grazing permits to the elk.

Like I said Blue I just feel there should be some changes, charge more for an AUM, I took a drive up American Fork canyon last night, cost me $6. Imagine you could graze almost 5 cows and calves for what I paid to drive up the mountain to look at leaves with my family. One thing you need to understand Blue is that you are talking about PUBLIC land, not private and it should be managed to benefit the PUBLIC. Not a few private individuals. Is that really that hard to understand?

CC
 
Well, I read the report.....it was over 100 pages. It probably took six months to write and could have been condenced to less than five......talk about wasting tax payers money.

"ranchers are the principal managers of federal land, and if they cease operation, federal agencies would have to pay others to manage these lands, thereby raising budgetary costs to the government"

"The quality of forage and availability of water on state lands are considered more comparable to that on federal lands because the federal government granted some of its lands to various states when they entered the Union. In addition to differences in the quality of soil, forage, and water resources, private grazing fees differ from fees for public lands because private landowners often provide services that are not provided on BLM and forest service lands. In addition, lessees of private land can themselves lease the land to other users, such as hunters and generate revenue."

"According to agency officials, many range management activities need to be conducted whether or not grazing occurs."

Those are all quotes from the report. It was a little biased against ranching but was written or at least signed by the director, of the natural resources and environment dept.....tree hugger.

Everybody has their own opinion, but fact is if you've never had any direct involvement then you aren't fully informed.

Most people on here are pretty reasonable. Coyote (fitting name) is probably one of those tree huggers that doesn't eat meat. I guess though that I am a fool for trying to argue with a bigger fool.
 
Ropin so anyone concerned with the quality of the habitat in which we hunt is automatically labeled a "tree-hugger". Wow, I am sure there are alot of tree-huggers out there then. Not a vegetarian here either Ropin, sorry.

CC
 
That may be the best message on this thread. Let's all have a group hug and sing "Kumbyah"!!
 
I can only express my opinion. I've never owned cattle, but know and have kown a number of ranchers. I do spend several months a year in the mountains, hunting, trapping, getting wood, etc... My experience is limited to Wyoming: Snowy Range, Sierra Madres, Bighorns, and the Wyoming Range.

I think we have another case of a "us vs them" ideology that stands to end up a loss for both sides if we seek to make an issue of it. I used to get frustrated at livestock in the areas I like to hunt--years ago--before I gained enough hands on experience to realize that the stock in the areas I've hunted (I realize there may be other areas that are poorly managed) neither caused damage, nor hindered my ability to have a good hunt. A lot of sheep do seem to equal less deer in an area, but the sheep move on and the deer that stay where the sheep are are the ones you want to hunt! I'm not talking about microareas like a couple of hundred acres, but in terms of sections and the forest/prarie as a whole.

A wildlife population can be damaging to the habitat if over population occurs, as apparently is a problem in some areas where whitetails are like rats. The national parks are areas that are not representative of the national forest or BLM lands as a whole. I've never seen "damage" by livestock or wildlife in my hunt areas.

If your area is being over grazed, then it is a management problem with the administrative agency. The solution isn't to attack the livestock men. I believe that they are a group of people we want as peers and advocates, not as enemies. Just my opinion for what its worth...

A bit off topic: but some of you would find your arguments more compelling if you left out the emotion and name calling. You may not know who you are, but everyone else does. MOst of us left Jr. High school years ago.
 
Haven't looked at the post in a while, with the exception of more drivel from coyote, I am glad to see some good posts on here. Seems like a few got nuked, they must have been aimed at coyote, not surprising.

Coyote you are wrong, there are two times when people resort to insults: 1) when you have them backed into a corner and they have nothing left and 2) when they instantly realize the person they are dealing with is a total idiot whom their is no point in trying to reason with or respect. Unfortunatly for you, my last post fell under number 2.

If the rancher is doing their part, cattle shouldn't be hanging around water sources. If they are, the range manager and the rancher aren't doing their job. I have expressed that over and over, get it through your thick head.

All you want to talk about is data, data, data. In a lot of arenas, data is good. I am not out to prove "ecological benefits" of grazing. There are ecological benefits of grazing such as reduced fuel loads, increased plant regeneration, etc. but it is wasted on you, you have your opinion and you can have it. You aren't going to change and I wouldn't expect anything else from someone so simple and narrow minded. Also understand that cattle are not put on the range to provide an ecological benefit, they are put there to gain weight and provide a food source.

As far as your sheep posting, follow the entire story and post the other articles involved if you want to go there.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/508531.html
http://www.idahostatesman.com/531/story/510633.html

Again, with all of your grazing impacts on endagered species, 99% of those are from histoic over-grazing. No one is arguing that 50-100 years ago there wasn't overgrazing. Grazing practices have changes so much since then, it isn't even worth comparing the two. Again, look at White's book I referenced above, it will do a nice job of satisfying your data hungry appetite.

It is absolutely HILARIOUS that you posted a link to the sagebrushsea website. Do you even know what that group is about? Talk about radical environmentalist. They will take every hunting right you have away from you and not even bat an eye!

Anyway, this is why I didn't get into this post for so long, because it is the same old argument I have had a million times before. You feel the way you do and that is great. You aren't alone. Join Western Watersheds or Sagebrushsea and fight the fight. See where it gets you, heck at the end of the day if it makes you feel better about yourself, go for it. Times change, policy changes, and to be honest, 50 to 100 years from now, you will probably no longer see public lands grazing. Just be willing to accept all the changes that come with that. Hunting as you know it will be forever changed, you will refer to today as the "good old days" when you could go almost anyhwere and hunt and fish. If you are half the "hunter" you claim you are, you will regret the rights you will loose as a hunter the day that ranching is lost in the west.
 
Fallout, it seems to me like you jumped into this thread guns a blazin! Because someone does not share your opinion they dont deserve respect? Really? Says alot about ya.

"If the rancher is doing their part, cattle shouldn't be hanging around water sources. If they are, the range manager and the rancher aren't doing their job. I have expressed that over and over, get it through your thick head."

Well that seems to be a HUGE PROBLEM. Fallout why is it such a huge problem? You act like its the exception, where as in all the areas I hunt, it seems like the rule.

"As far as your sheep posting, follow the entire story and post the other articles involved if you want to go there.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/508531.html
http://www.idahostatesman.com/531/story/510633.html"

You act as if the rachers were the ones who compromised, they were not, they were FORCED to compromise. A big difference. In fact they took it to court to fight it, and lost, then appealed. Now its going to review. Seems someone might wanna read up a little bit more. So Fallout what side should us "hunters" support? Ranchers that want their leases to have priority over wildlife, or environmental groups like WW? In fact WW was one of the main groups fighting the ranchers over the bighorn sheep conflict. So who is looking out for who more? In UT cattle associations want LO tags now. You saw the reaction that got on here. I would support WW, they do alot of good things. They have bought out and retired alot of leases in ID.

Fallout, I guess I should apologize that I want MY public lands managed to benefit the public as a whole and not managed to maximize grazing potential. I must be crazy.

CC
 
Coyote, I respect a lot of people who don't share my opinions on things. That is not why I don't respect you. I don't respect you becuase you run your mouth when you have no idea what you are talking about. Don't lump yourself with most other hunters. You don't have to go very far on this website to find out how most people feel about ranchers and grazing on this website. Despite what you think, you are in the minority on this issue. Where I come from cattle hanging on riparians is not a problem because they are kept off with water gaps, off site water developments, and constant monitoring. That's the way it should be.

Take a poll of people on this site and ask them wheather they would stand behind Western Watersheds or ranchers. I would be willing to bet that about 95% would choose ranchers smart guy. WW is the reason wolves are what they are in Idaho, the reason yellostone cutthroat are repeatedly petitioned, the reason sage grouse are on the brink of listing. Talk about wasting taxpayers money. John Marvel wastes more taxpayer money petitioning any animal in the west just trying to get the leverage of ESA on his side.

Those public lands are no more YOURS than they are MINE so want what you want. When you wake up in the morning, who is getting what they want, you or me? I just helped my dad bring in 2,500 head of cattle off the range and there are a bunch of great looking 500 lb. cavles that are going to bring a great price in a few months. Go waste another animal by sticking an arrow through its flank and loosing it, hopefully there isn't an Idaho antelope that suffers the same slow death you brought on that bull. I've hunted big game since I was 12 and never lost an animal. There's lots of cows in unit 42, it is some prime Owyhee cattle range. Hope you can deal with it. Oh yea and by the way, about 98% of the watering holes in 42 that antelope use are there as stock ponds put in by ranchers. Try to stay away from those you hipocrite.
 
Fallout. I find myself walking that line that most of us walk when it comes to this subject. I actually like seeing the livestock in the hills its what makes the west the west. I also like the romance of the "cowboy". I hate the groups that are trying to lock up land with every enviro loophole ever created. I really enjoy, and often follow the collies bringing off sheep, I think they are simply amazing! BUT. The stockmen put out the troughs, the stockmen put up the fence, the stockmen this or that really wears thin. First if you did, you did so to water or fence YOUR animals, not for wildlife, if they benefit also so be it, but you didn't do it FOR wildlife so get off your high horse! Second, who paid for your pivot lines? Who paid for much of your irrigation? Who paid for the trapper? Who pays to keep land out of production? Who pays the Department of Agriculture? And if the truth was known, the troughs and wire were most likely granted by the government. Does this make you bad, NO. Do I hate you? NO. But when I hear anyone involved in agriculture whine I just roll my eyes. Fact, you get a cut rate on grazing when compared to private grazing acre per acre of similar ground. Fact, your tax burden is much less than any other commercial buisness. Fact, your "government welfare(agriculture subsidies, ag bills, depts. etc.) dwarf any other segment of the economy other than education, and entitlements. Fact, livestock poorly managed are extremely destructive, AND the point is the POORLY MANAGED part! That is the point, POORLY MANAGED, if your doing a good job then chill out, if your not GET OFF PUBLIC LAND!!! Now having said all this, I TOTALLY SUPPORT public grazing, ranching and farming!! But phrases like "try to stay away from those you hypocrite" are part of a attitude that is very difficult to deal with when it comes to OUR public land. I'm not dumb enough to think that you don't have a hard job that some years is very profitible and most years your lucky to break even, but a lot of us have tough jobs and some have no jobs now, and we get nothing from the government but unemployment, unless your self employed, so it is a little tough to hear ranchers complain. Thats all! Run your livestock on the land I hunt, I'll help watch out for them, like WE ALL SHOULD! The only thing I ask is that you help watch out for my animals as well. To all of you NOT heading hunting today, SUCKS TO BE YOU!!!! See ya next week!!!
 
The underlying argument against public grazing by many hunters has always been that it hurts wildlife. The reality is that this simply isn't true. If you look at the most productive era for wildlife here in the state of Utah, it was at the same time as the highest numbers of cattle grazing. The reality is that at the height of the cattle grazing era, the public lands were the most productive they have ever been both for cattle and wildlife- particularly deer.
I live in an area in southern Utah where there are several areas where cattle and sheep grazing have been removed. These areas which once held bountiful wildlife are now barren of almost any form of life. The water sources which were created and maintained by cattlemen are gone and the wildlife have gone with it.
Hunters need to wake up and realize that public grazing is good for wildlife. If you want more wildlife on public lands, encourage cattle grazing. The inputs put into the public lands for grazing help wildlife flourish.
It is just a matter of history. Would you rather have the wildlife of the '60's and '70's or the depletion of wildlife on public lands that we see today.
 
Wildman........Good Work!! I bet that you didn't have to read a bunch of "Data" to gather that information as it is pretty much common sense. Unfortunately, some hunters/sportsman don't have a lot of that when it comes to public land issues. They want "Their" public lands managed for "Their" use when in all reality, the cattle producers (the good ones, not the bad ones) are doing a pretty good job of managing the land the other eleven months of the year when the hunter is not out there. This is when the snow is deep and the deer and elk are eating out of the producers stacks or in the summer when the wildlife is coming down from the public ground and mowing down the hay before the rancher gets to cut it, he isn't getting paid for that too often.
 
Ok, I stayed out for a while but here I go again. Common sense is great but studies are also. Both sides that think it is one way are off. There are more ranchers than not that do not ride much to move cattle around. Every riparian area I see have cattle in them. The Biology shows the deer herd mega population has less to do with grazing and predator control and more to do with the fires that took place and the weather that changed the forage that suited deer the best. Public land grazing has less to do with deer than people think , to help or to harm. Everybody should do more research, spend more time in hills and educate them self as much as possible to help out all involved.
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-23-08 AT 11:08AM (MST)[p]Fallout, who paid to put EVERYTHING on your allotments? The taxpayers. Unit 42 is mostly desert right? High desert? So the high desert is "prime cattle range?" Thats entertaining. When did the high desert become "prime cattle range", I guess that comes with the mentality if there is a blade of grass somewhere there better be a cow there to eat it!!!!

I am glad that my tax dollars could fund your families WELFARE cattle operation. I am glad that you have healthy 500lb calves that my tax dollars helped raise on public land for $1.38 per month. I am glad that MY tax dollars PAID for you ranchers to install waterholes to water your cattle, and paid for all the millions of miles of needless fencing. Thank you for your kindness in allowing the antelope in 42 to use them. We should give you tax break on the whoppin $1.38 a month you pay to feed a cow/calf on public land. 98% huh, all cattle ponds and water sources from ranchers? Does not SFW install guzzlers all over that area? I am sure they do. I am sure that you have some sort of documentation to back that up? Probably not Fallout, just your opinion. Opinions are not worth $hit Fallout, you know that.

Fallout, like I said your family cattle operation sucks on the government tit, thats my BIGGEST issue with you guys. You can have the public lands just like I do, why do you feel that you need to run your WELFARE business on my public land?

I am glad that you have never lost an animal. I wish I could say the same. I am taking the Ultra Mag this time so it should be fairly easy. Your resorting to childish insults again. :) You backed into the corner again?

Also learn to spell, you have errors in almost all your posts.

CC

Oh yeah, Hossblur had a pretty good post, you should read it a few times.
 
Wildman when was the most productive era in UT for mule deer? Are you talking population size or B&C bucks? Are you talking before or after the HUGE winter kill in the 90's that the deer cant seem to rebound from? Grazing benefits wildlife, tell that to all the bighorn sheep populations that are lost to sheep grazing. Cost sportsman hundreds of thousands of dollars to transplant and lost to sheep grazing allotments. Happening in ID as we speak.
With habitat disappearing and winter range becoming more and more valuable and important for elk and deer populations, you mean to tell me the answer to solve those problems is more cows on public land? Really.

CC
 
Wildman, You are very much right as far as the water sources go.
Most mule deer typically stay with in 5 miles of a dependable water source.

Cattle stay even closer. So if you were to do away with all of the water that is placed out there by the ranchers/blm/tax payers the deer would not fair nearly as well in most of the arid south west.
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-23-08 AT 11:32AM (MST)[p]We all need some compromise as all have valid points.
 
bearman,
Thanks for bringing up riparian areas. I was at a meeting a few weeks ago where there were representatives from both the Sierra Club and the Grand Canyon Trust. The only thing that they were more ticked about than the cows were the elk. If you hunters think this riparian area philosophy is just about cows, you are dead wrong.
I am going to break the number one rule of the educated elite- "don't queston the system," but this prominent riparian area philosophy has some serious holes in it. It is a good thing the enviros weren't around thousands of years ago or the Grand Canyon would be a gentle winding stream. I live in southern Utah. There is a no more defining characteristic of this area than massive amounts of erosion, and yet millions of riparian area worshipers come here ever year and call it the most beautiful thing they have ever seen. If they really believe riparian philosophy, southern Utah's landscape would be the biggest nightmare they have ever seen. It really is a joke.
 
Hossblur, your posts are improving. At least you are becoming more rational. My only issues with your last post are that when you asked who payed for the pivots, irrigation, troughs, fence, etc, etc, where I am from it is the rancher and no one else.

Secondly,

"But phrases like "try to stay away from those you hypocrite" are part of a attitude that is very difficult to deal with when it comes to OUR public land."

Don't try to portray that as a blanket statement made to all sportsman. That statement was directed at a single hypocrite who just so happends to be going to shoot at an antelope that is using a rain-catch stock pond as its main water source. That after everything that flops out of his mouth is against cattle.

My families ranch does more for wildlife in a year than you will do in a lifetime, and I am talking about the actual private ranch, nothing to do with grazing.

As for you coyote, the high desert is prime cattle grazing range. The environment is filled with high energy native bunchgrasses and big open expanses. With the addition of all the water catchments, it creates near perfect rangeland grazing conditions. You are a one-trick pony beating the AUM horse to death. Can you remind me about it in your next post, cause that is all you got (oh yea, and you can keep beating the sheep issue as well). Take your own advise, opinions aren't worth $hit so it's about time to give yours a rest. Backed into a corner heh, the one thing you can find in almost any argument post on this site, when someone is running out of ammo they turn to the learn how to spell card. That's a great one coyote. Why I am learning how to spell, why don't you learn how compose an argument and critically think, or even think for that matter. Hopefully you have praticed with your overkill Ultra Mag like you should have with your bow so you didn't look out of your shot and hit way right.

Bearman, glad to see your back to your old ways too, trying to throw out terms like "mega population" so that your argument doesn't sound as moronic. What exactly is a mega population?

Hossblur, you are also right about hunting this weekend. Hopefully everyone is going to get out. I am headed out Bighorn Sheep hunting with my dad. Coyote, I will keep an eye our for those pesky domestics and rock the first one I see.
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-23-08 AT 07:51PM (MST)[p]I like how you say "now as for you Coyote" on every post, like your getting ready to expose me on some HUGE level that is gonna shock the whole thread! Its funny, but other than that I am glad you could get on here and approve of all the comments made on the subject! :) You should be the head of the cattlemens association!

High desert is not prime grazing habitat, it gets very low rainfall each year, which is why vegetation is sparse. Thats why they call it a desert, because its a DESERT. You might create artificial water sources to support your cows, but that does not mean that the available feed is there also. That should be very simple to understand. All your doing is putting more animals out there than it can support. But of course if there is a blade of grass, then by damn there better be a cow there to eat it!

Why learn another trick Fallout when you cant answer or tell me how come you only pay $1.38 an AUM. Comparable private grazing is almost $12.50 in the west. Answer that to me then maybe I will not bring it up. I can compose a very good argument and can obviously back up what I say, if not I would of got out of sales years ago. I have posted numerous links and obvious points to the subject. All you do is get on here and beat your chest like a caveman and expect people to run off, and say because you ride around with your dad collecting cows you know everything about the subject. If it was such an obivious benefit then why is Congress looking into the effects of public land grazing? Just curious.

CC

I am sure the Ultra will do the job, actually I am not hunting over a waterhole, because according to my maps there are MULTIPLE lakes and streams in the area I will be hunting. But I am sure that you and your cattle boys installed the lakes and streams. I will thank you when I am done.

Also one funny thing Fallout, I just remembered this, when I pack into hunt I cant camp within 200 yards of a water source. But your cows can $hit in the same water source. How funny is that.

And dont I doubt there will be any wild sheep if your seeing domestics, remember they pass very fatal diseases on to bighorn populations. You guys are always helpin us sportsman out! :)
 
Coyote, I think we should go for a record on MM for the most posts in a single thread. We can just keep going back and forth until the record is set. You post, stating the price of an AUM and bighorn sheep. And I will post to reafirm that you are still an idiot, and we can keep doing this until we have passed posts like the "15 in. bases" and the "Spidey" and even the old "duck call" posts.

I can tell you why I pay $1.35 an AUM (not $1.38 by the way). It's because that is what the BLM and Forrest Service charges me. There, now I guess you can drop that one. The Pasteurella issue has never been argued with you. I have focused on cattle grazing. I brought up the sheep stuff because you were headline grabbing. I fully understand the issue with bighorns. Hells Canyon is one of the last remaining places where this is an issue and I am all for moving the sheep out of there to help the herds. Its one of the best Rocky Herds in the country for big rams. I have half a grand slam and have been on numerous sheep hunts.

You want to treat me like I am an evil rancher that is against sportsmen when in essence, I am as big a sportsmen as anyone on here. Go back and look at some of my past posts and look at all the animals I have shared on here that I have harvested. You talk about training hunting dogs. I have an awesome pointer and shoot chukar and pheasant every year till I can't stand it anymore. I don't think you have ever posted a kill pic one here, probably because all you do is wound and loose animals.

My family ranch that raises the grazing cattle that you are so against supports a mule deer heard that averages above 250 animals. EVERY year we allow multiple elderly and youth hunters to harvest deer off our PRIVATE property. Last year, a guy 86 years old shot a deer in one of our fields. I was there when he thanked myself and my dad with a tear in his eye stating that that was the last deer he would ever shoot and he appreciated the opportunity. A week later I watched a 12 year old girl kill her first deer out of next field over. These are hunters that me or my family had never met until they knocked on our front door and asked if they could hunt on our ranch.

Coyote, quit trying to vilanize people that you don't know. Those same values that I just described spill over to public lands as well. We have voluntarily added ramps to all our stock water improvements to facilitate sage grouse and chukar use, fenced off miles of riparian to aid cutthroat, and aided in identifying unkown sagegrouse leks.

Coyote, enjoy hunting your multiple lakes and streams in 042. The streams you refer to are the streams that make up the Owyhee River. Have you been to those lovely streams? About 75% of them are dry, and the ones that aren't are in the bottoms of box canyons that neither you nor the antelope can get into or out of. No, the antelope hang out up on the flats. You will find a few around the Riddle lakes, but not many. You will find the big boys off in the middle of nowhere, watering at some random stock pond, that isn't on your map. I know that area like the back of my hand. Also know where there are at least two B&C bucks down there. Also, that is the famous range of the YP Ranch. One of the biggest and most famouse ranches in the American west, still in operation. They run thousands of cattle in that country, some great looking cattle as the grass out there is knee high in the spring.
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-25-08 AT 10:36AM (MST)[p]Fallout I am glad that you are a responsible rancher. But your still a welfare rancher. Every rancher should be REQUIRED to make the improvements that you have. But you know as well as I do that you are WAY above the average rancher as far as that is concerned. In all the units I hunt I have never seen any of the improvements that you talk about. Those improvements should be EXPECTED of every public land rancher. You are the exception, not the rule. And you know that.

As for the sheep issue in ID I was not headline grabbing, I have been following that for a very long time. I just use it when ranchers say they are on the sportsmans side. Thats all.

You got me on the wounding of animals, thats all I ever do. I have not killed a deer in over 3 years, hell I have not even drawn my bow back in 2 years. You gotta pass up the 150's to get a 180. I killed a spike bull 2 years ago on the fishlake unit in UT with my bow. You want me to post a pic of the giant? He is a dandy of a spike! I never put a tape on him so I dont know what he scored. :)

CC
 
CC After reading all of your posts I have come to the conclusion that you were born in a corner, Have waaay below average hunting skills and are blaming cattle and cattlemen for your poor hunting results. Now if we could only come up with the data to support our conclusions.
I would rather have cattle chewing grass on the mountain than another trophy mansion and a No Tresspassing sign on the same mountain. Do you really understand whats at stake here? Ranchers are waaay more likely to give permission to hunt or cross that land than another cali transplant. If that doesn't convince you try asking for permission around Boseman Montana. That my friend is the future you are describing or perscribing.
Mike
 
Drifter,

Thanks for your input, my issue is not the fact that the cows/sheep effect my hunting. I never said that at all. That is not even any part of this conversation. We are talking about the public land grazing issue as a whole, not how it effects anyones hunting.

"I would rather have cattle chewing grass on the mountain than another trophy mansion and a No Tresspassing sign on the same mountain. Do you really understand whats at stake here? Ranchers are waaay more likely to give permission to hunt or cross that land than another cali transplant." You are referring to PRIVATE LAND, this discussion is about PUBLIC LAND. I dont care what a rancher does on his PRIVATE property, he can put signs up all he wants or graze a million cattle, I am talking about PUBLIC LAND.


"That my friend is the future you are describing or perscribing." No Drifter I think you are confused, I am describing a future where your public lands are managed with EVERYONE's future in mind, not just a few cattle ranchers. Does that make sense?

CC
 
How often do you get access to public land through private land? I always thought ranchers were part of the public that should utilize grass to feed thier cattle. grass that otherwise would go to waste. Cut the ranchers out of the pubilc land and you will find that land use will change for the worse. We don't need hunters to keep the Elk numbers down we have wolves for that. Do you need my crystal ball?
Mike
 
See coyote, that is the main problem with you. You see things in one dimension. Drifter's point was that once you get rid of grazing, ranches go under, no place to graze their cows, no business. In most cases, the hundreds of thousands of private acres that were cattle ranches that provided wildlife habitat and hunting opportunities for those willing to ask, now get sold of to a Ted Turner or some rich California retiree that has no interst in anything put putting up no trespassing signs and locking gates. Even worse yet is when the private land gets subdivided and all the habitat is lost to make way for 500 homesites. In the end, everyone looses.

If you would have paid attention to his Bozeman example, you would understand that that is what happened.

If you were able to take a step back and look at an entire picture, you might be able to grasp some of these concepts. However, you can't because you are uninformed and are focused on a single aspect.

As far as your hunting description, that is just how I pictured you. You haven't been successful because you don't have the ability. You have to put in the time and do the research to kill a 180, not just wander around till season is over.

I really like the irony of you inquiring into the antelope post as to what unit in ID the guy was hunting. Notice the stock trough in all of those pictures that the antelope are watering at?

H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E
 
H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E

Fallout, your makin progress, your spelling has become alot better so I will give you credit for that. And asking someone what unit he shot his goat in proves that I am a hypocrite in what way? Lets see I have an antelope tag in ID, a guy says he shot his goat in ID, I asked what unit. WOW, your a genius Fallout. You just proved the definition of a hypocrite!! Give me a break. Those antelope are NATIVE. They have always been there!!!! Cows did not put antelope on the map!! But if I see a smoker drinkin at a cow trough I will shoot him just for you and send you a picture.

Now spell W-E-L-F-A-R-E , that is when the general public supplies an individual with the means to accomplish something that they could not accomplish without the help of someone else. If I owned a business and it was not able to turn a profit on its own would you feel it is appropriate for the public as a whole to then give me money to stay afloat? I hope you are in favor of the bailout that is going to happen with the Federal Government. Because that is exactly what is going on, the public will bailout/support those businesses that are unable to stay profitable without the WELFARE/SUPPORT of the general public.

How do you picture how I hunt Fallout? Just curious. I have not been successful in what way? Define the definition of a successful hunt. I got to spend 5 days chasing elk with my dad on a great LE unit in UT. Wether I killed a 400 bull or came home empty handed it was on of the most successful hunts I have ever been on. Obviously I wanted to kill a smoker bull, just did not happen. If your half the sportsman you say you are I seriously doubt that you measure the success of a hunt based on the size of the animal killed. Was the buck that 84 year old man killed a 180 buck? I doubt it. So was his hunt a success. If your trying to change the subject thats fine just say that. If you want to measure someones worth by the animals they have killed you got me beat. I have not yet killed two bighorn sheep, cant draw a tag. You killed a good bull last year, I could not get it done, did you use a rifle or bow? I have no gripes with what you have killed and could honestly care less. You honestly think that I care if you have killed a bigger deer/elk/sheep than me? For real! Can your dad beat up my dad? What other childish things are you gonna bring up?

One thing I can say that you cannot though Fallout, is that I have worked my whole life for everything that I have, AND I have never once put an unnecessary burden on anyone else to support my way of life. I am not saying that you dont work hard, because I am sure ranching is hard work. But if things dont go right for me I dont have the Feds there to help me out. Like I said, I cannot stand WELFARE, its what has got our country into this financial mess that we are in. If a ranch cannot stay in business on its own, then it should not be in business. If the public has to help you guys stay in business, where do you draw the line? Who gets the help and who doesnt? Just curious

CC
 
Drifter, does every blade of grass need to be consumed? I have said many times in my post, I want public land ranching to pull its weight. Do you know what that means? It means that the taxpayers dont go into the hole every year to subsidize them. Thats all, just raise the price of an AUM to a realistic level that would raise enough income to cover the cost of public grazing.

The private land owners in your neck of the woods must be alot more open to allowing access than the ones I grew up around. So I dont really see anything changing.

Let me ask you a question though Mike and Fallout also, do you guys honestly 100 percent feel that there is nothing at all wrong with the cost of an AUM or that there is nothing that needs to be changed with the way its being done now? Is the system perfect? If its not what changes do you think should be made?

Answer me that question and this will be my last post on the subject.

CC
 
In the interest of this being the last post on the subject, I say No the system isn't perfect. But its better than the Bozeman alternative. My solution would be a two prong approach. One would be a management program simular to Montanas walk in hunting program that I think is funded by the state through hunters license fees. You want the ranchers to be off the government, but with out the government involvement in agriculture and some incentives by them why on earth would any farmer or rancher want to cooperate with the general public which generally around hunting season are quite a nuisance. They can and do take up a lot of time. In addition to that you are asking some ranchers to give up a life style. They need the additional land to make a ranch go. Nobody is asking you to give up your lifestyle. I suggest you spend a week working on a ranch along with a little scouting and your eyes would see the ranching/ cattle buisness in a different more respectfull light.
Mike
 
Coyote, you are still a one trick pony. Your whole hang up is that the price of an AUM has not gone up over the years. I don't know what to tell you, I am not the one that determines the price of an AUM. If what you did for a living had any relevance at all, like providing food for the American people then maybe you would get some subsidies. Where do you think the 1,000 steers that we sell every spring end up? In your grocery store. Are you a vegetarian Coyote? Do you buy beef? You can feed me a line about what a small percentage of beef is raised on public lands yada yada yada but if you have bought beef in a grocery store in the west, chances are great that you have at some point bought beef that was grazed on public land. You can also feed me a line about meat prices and all of that but look at what other countries pay for red meat. The price you pay for an ounce of protein in this country is peanuts to what people pay in most other countries and some of that can be traced alllll the way back to the price of an AUM.

My point about your hunting is that its not a coincidence that you come onto a hunting website where people share hunting stories and photos and all you have to contribute is opinions. What did you say about opinions earlier in this post? I don't claim to be the world's greatest hunter. Yea, I've killed some good stuff, but I've also been fortunate enough to draw some great tags. That's great that you went out and spent time with your dad hunting, but I do measure hunting success by whether or not you kill something. I hunt a lot with my dad and if I just wanted to spend time with him in the field, we can go hiking, or camping, or fishing. He and I are both disapointed if a season comes and goes and we are unsuccessful. You know that saying "real beauty is on the inside" and the saying "that's just something ugly people say?" Well "it was a successful hunt whether we killed something or not" is just something people that usually don't kill something say. All I am saying is that a pattern of unsuccesful hunts doesn't surprise me based on what I have learned about you through these posts.

"One thing I can say that you cannot though Fallout, is that I have worked my whole life for everything that I have, AND I have never once put an unnecessary burden on anyone else to support my way of life."

I will give it to you, your post do always give me a good chuckle. You have no meaning of the term hard work. Didn't admitt on here somewhere along the way that you are in investing? You probably have never even had a blister on your hands. You wouldn't last one day doing what I grew up doing.

Have you ever considered the "unnecessary burden" you put on your parents.......

Oh yea, and yes my dad could beat up your dad.
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-29-08 AT 09:41PM (MST)[p]Look who is back in all his glory!! The economist/rancher/biologist/professional hunter. LOL I would gladly pay more for beef if it meant that the habitat I hunted in was managed for the public as a whole and not based on some ranchers welfare grazing permits. Thats an easy answer. I harp on the AUM because it shows the welfare status of the public land rancher. Thats why. You guys fight it tooth and nail when it is proposed to be raised and throw a HUGE fit about how your gonna go out of business. Its entertaining actually. I was just on the Cattlemens Association website, and guess what they were bitching about? Your not gonna believe it! TAX BURDENS!!! Ha They were complaining about their TAX BURDENS!! I about died. They said it was a big issue for them! WOW Here I am paying almost 30 percent in taxes every year and you guys are complaining about your almost NEGATIVE tax burdens! LOL

Would you really like me to post my pictures? I went sharptail hunting up near ID this weekend and got a few, you want to see a pic? I killed about 15 coyotes last fall, PM your email and I will send you some pictures of my "successful" hunt. I have killed 2 elk and 4 deer in my life. ALL but one with a bow. How about you? Let me guess you tote around a rifle the whole time. And yes its obvious that you have drawn some REALLY good tags, an NV elk and TWO bighorn tags! People put in for two lifetimes to get tags like that. So congrats. This elk tag I got this year was my first LE tag in my life. Plus I drew an antelope tag that I will go fill this weekend. So thats two LE tags in my life. Killed a 165 buck with my bow in high school. All successful hunts I guess. You want a picture? And if its the last day on the extended season wasatch hunt and I pass up a small buck, first off because I dont want to haul the damn thing off the mountain. That makes me a bad hunter? LOL your amusing.

"All I am saying is that a pattern of unsuccesful hunts doesn't surprise me based on what I have learned about you through these posts." You read one story about my elk hunt and now all of a sudden I have a pattern of unsuccessful hunts? LOL You graduate? You know how to count, a pattern means that you have read multiple examples. Maybe if you did you could do something with your brain instead of your hands.

I admitted that I was an investor? LOL is that a bad thing? There is a TON of money in investing. Not to mention your investments are probably down 20-30 percent this year alone. And it will continue to get worse. The DOW was down 777 points today. Do you have any idea what is going to happen? While your investments tank mine climb. Ignorance is expensive and I am glad to watch you pay the price. You had better stick to tending cows thats for sure. Not to mention I grew up in a small town. I laid foundations and did cement work during high school, I operated heavy equipment and laid water/sewer pipes while I went to school. Paved roads for two summers also, and I had my CDL. Now I am in investment education and sales. There is alot more money in that.

There my parents, they have a responsibility and an obligation to raise me. Are you saying the taxpayers have the same obligation to support your families welfare cattle operation? You better be voting for OBAMA because he is a big fan of forced redistribution of wealth. He is all about subsidies and welfare. Seems right down your isle.

CC
 
Coyote, I for one would like to know exactly how much money is spent on fencing as it seems to me that would be the only money actually spent on cattle grazing the public land. By the way you are speaking to a welfare teacher, farmer,hunter and divorced father of one. I'm not interested in people that make a lot of money, just in people that make a lot of friends.
Mike
 
Drifter,

Just google the GAO report on public land grazing. They break it down for you as to what the costs to run the program are. The program goes in the red about 120 million dollars a year. Thats just what the government spends, then you can factor in your tax breaks on top of that. So I would imagine its significantly higher than that.

They brought in 21 million in grazing fees, 8 million of that was put BACK into the program. So if you raised AUM's to a reasonable rate even 3-4 dollars an AUM and it would almost be self-sufficient. At the same time you would flush all the "hobby" ranchers out of the system. But that will never happen. You know that as well as I do. When you subsidize something you create ineffeciency and waste. Thats why private feedlots produce MANY times over the amount of beef on less land. Certain large corporations actually graze a few cattle on their land for the SOLE purpose of tax breaks. Its a very flawed system.

Its just the attitude of some ranchers(not all) that drives me crazy. Their sense of entitlement. Read some of the posts above and see some ranchers taking credit for big-game populations, that we should not hunt anywhere where there are cattle because some random antelope might drink in a stock pond. That we should manage our big-game populations according to their grazing permits. Then on top of it all here in UT they want actual tags on LE units to sale! Thats what I am talking about. Thats what I dont like about certain piublic land ranchers.

By the way your talking to a married father of one and you can be interested in whoever you want.

CC
 
I'll say one more thing then I'm done with this thread and I'll appologize to everybody except coyote.

"Thats why private feedlots produce MANY times over the amount of beef on less land."

Coyote, you truely are a complete and total dumba$$. That statement above proves it. It truely proves that you haven't a clue about what you are talking about.
 
Private feed lots do not produce cattle. They feed cattle. Ranchers produce cattle, specifically cow calf operations.

As for these great tax breaks, tell me what they are. I run some cows and the only tax break I get is the (revenue - expenses = profit) just like every other business in America. The only way to make real money in ranching is to sell the ranch.

The only comment against the western rancher as a group I would make is be greatful for the cheap grazing. It is approaching $30/AUM here in the Dakotas. If you had to bid against the next rancher I would expect these rates would be higher.
 
fallout, Your dad and uncle sell a 1000 steers from paradise valley? That is your family isn't it?
 
Ropin...........you beat me to it!! That statement is absolutely, without a doubt, the dumbest one made since the beginning of this thread. Coyote, you might want to quit while you are, well, behind actually. Like I said earlier, you should toddle out of your cozy little cubicle, loosen your tie (because it is obviously too tight and cutting off the flow of blood to your head and is causing you to make stupid statements) and spend some time with some ranchers. But on second thought that might not work because about the time that you opened that uneducated flapper of yours, you would get run off. You are basing all of your knowledge on data, reports, hear-say, whatever you can grasp at. Consider yourself lucky that the program is what it is and that the ranching industry is still afloat because if it wasn't, the beef that you buy in the store would be from a foreign country that has no regulations on feed, or drugs or quality. So you would be feeding your family sub-par beef that has been fed Lord knows what. They could be Canadian cattle that have BSE, who knows. So basically, when you stand on your soap box and preach about the AUM problem, you are "bighting the hand that feeds you"!! Now, you better get back to some investment deal, but remember, when you go to lunch and eat a hamburger, that beef was probably raised on some sort of public ground at one time or another.
 
Blue leader, private feedlots/private cattle operations, or beef produced on private grounds. The same thing in my mind. Cause blue you are aware that the western united states accounts for about 3-10 percent of the nations beef produced. Depends on who your source is. So you might not wanna toot your horn to loud.

Look at the rancher that posted from the Dakotas, he pays $30 AUM. What is that, like 300 percent more than you WELFARE ranchers pay!! How does he do it? Tell me that Blue, how does he run a successful cattle operation paying those AUM prices, while you can barely turn a profit without the help of taxpayers dollars? And you guys ##### and complain about if they even mention raising the price of an AUM!! And he turns a profit. Because subsidies cause WASTE AND INNEFICIENCY!! Thats what happens when the government gets involved. Thats why I am praying this bailout does not go through. If you cant run a business without government help, then GO OUT OF BUSINESS! Blue why should I pay for your business? Tell me that. I can almost guarantee your bitching about this bailout going through, along with alot of other Americans, that your gonna pay for the greed and misconduct of others. Well look in the mirror, because you are doing the EXACT SAME THING. Suckin off the tit of the american taxpayer. Your inability to operate a successful ranch on your own costs the taxpayers over 120 million dollars a year. But of course that was just a report from the Feds so obviously it holds no water, right! YOU are not entitled to ANYTHING Blue, WORK and run a successful business on your own then come talk to me.

Consider myself lucky for public land grazing operations!! LOL are you bein serious. If the program is so great why is everyone from Congress who is lobbying for reform in the cattle industry, to who knows how many environmental groups with THOUSANDS of studies and peer reviewed(just so you what peer reviewed is, its a scientific study from a non-biased group)studies that states all the environmental damage that cattle cause. I would GLADLY pay a 10 percent increase for beef!! Thats a small price to pay to protect what habitat is left in my mind.

CC

Oh Blue just so you know, people would say the same thing about the fallout nuclear waste back in the day, not to listen to reports or science because obviously they had no idea what they were talking about. WOW, lot of people should of listened. If you had to choose between listening to biologists and scientists about the health of a certain rangeland, or between a rancher than runs his cows out there, who would you listen to?
 
Coyote........just so you know, we don't run on public ground, it's all deeded, except for about 2 sections out of 70 that are state. But the reason that I am voicing my opinion on the matter is for the fact that a lot of my customers in my one business run on public ground and a lot of my landowners in my other business utilize public ground, and it is square-heads like you that are jeapordizing both groups. By the way, neither one of my businesses are subzidized by the government, as well as the ranching part of my lively-hood.

As far as who I would listen to in regards to the rangeland conditions, it's pretty simple........the rancher that makes his living there!! No doubt in my mind. Not some office dwelling hillbilly like yourself!
 
"just so you know, we don't run on public ground"
"By the way, neither one of my businesses are subzidized by the government, as well as the ranching part of my lively-hood."

Thats how it should be across the board, that should be the rule not the exception. If your gonna run on public ground pay a competitive price.


"As far as who I would listen to in regards to the rangeland conditions, it's pretty simple........the rancher that makes his living there!! No doubt in my mind. Not some office dwelling hillbilly like yourself!"

That statement makes me laugh. You a Monday Night couch quarterback, an internet biologist, give me a break Blue. I highly doubt you are that ignorant. I am not the one doing the studies I make my living of the stock market, does that mean I would run the market to benefit everyone as a whole, or benefit me? Thats an easy question. A rancher would have a biased opinion about the health of the publics range that he runs his cows on and a biologist would not. Last time we let ranchers manage the range 50 years ago they OVERGRAZED out of control, that has been documented all over the place, and if you tell me they have changed, any changes they have made for the better are because of SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY. Basically your saying that a rancher knows more about rangeland protection than a biologist with a Masters degree that does it for a living. Get real Blue, like I said I highly doubt you are that ignorant. But you can keep your name calling up, it adds a TON of credibility to your arguments :)

CC

Also Blue, not ONE person that disagrees with me has posted any sort of link to ANY source to back up anything they say! I have posted many links to different sources. Or keep spouting your opinion. Whatever works for you.
 
Found this, take it for what it is worth.

"[A 1982 US agricultural census] found that Arizona had 3346 farms and ranches that sold cattle. Of these, 9 7 farms and ranches accounted for $413 million of the $502 million in sales... --l-17-86 Phoenix Gazette

At this point, one might reasonably ask what all these facts and figures amount to, food-wise. There are roughly 260 million acres of BLM and Forest Service System "grazing land" in the 11 Western states -- 35% of the land area ofthe West -- but how much of this country's livestock is produced there?

Two percent by weight, value, or livestock feed (food of .any kind) (Com. on Govt. Oper. 1986). This will surprise most people, for we have always been led to believe otherwise. Ranching on federal land is insignificant to US food supply -- only I out of 50 pounds of combined beef and mutton. Alabama alone produces nearly this amount, mostly on pasturage!' Iowa produces more than 2 1/2 times as much, mostly with grain feed. (USDA 1987) The US imports more than 4 times as much (US Dept. of Com. 1986).

Even if all public lands in the West are considered together, their yield is insignificant. All Western public lands -- federal, state, and local together, roughly 306 million acres, or 41% of the West -- produce less than 3% of America's combined cattle and sheep feed. Nearly 6 times this amount is raised on the private ranchland that encompasses about 25% of the West. (Government publications)

Only 3% of US cattle feed is supplied by all Western public land"
 
As I stated when I first got into this post, I knew this was really a pointless argument because most people's opinions on this matter are deep rooted and are not easily changed. Because of that, I am going to agree to disagree with the few who have differing opinions than me. This will be my last post on this thread.

Just a couple more points before I go. Earlier coyote refered to me as an "economist/rancher/biologist/professional hunter" I was amazed at how close he was. I was raised on a ranch and fully understand the economics and ranching aspect as I grew up with it. I have a bachelor's degree in biology and a Master's Degree in Fish and Wildlife resources. I have never been paid to hunt though I have hunted since I knew what it was, so I guess I am as close to professional as one could get without being a full time guide.

"Basically your saying that a rancher knows more about rangeland protection than a biologist with a Masters degree that does it for a living. Get real Blue, like I said I highly doubt you are that ignorant. But you can keep your name calling up, it adds a TON of credibility to your arguments"

Well Coyote, I guess I have it all covered so maybe I have a lot better perspective on the whole thing than you do?

In reference to Tuleelks post above, I don't disagree with anything you posted. However, if you break that down and only look at the western U.S., then those numbers will change a ton and the percentage of beef from grazing becomes a lot more significant. The most important stat that you posted is that "All Western public lands -- federal, state, and local together, roughly 306 million acres, or 41% of the West -produce less than 3% of America's combined cattle and sheep feed. Nearly 6 times this amount is raised on the private ranchland that encompasses about 25% of the West"

Right there, 25% of the west in private ranchland, do you realize how significant that is from a fish and wildlife standpoint? (Coyote, see Master's degree credentials above). Do you know how much of that 25% encompasses water in the west? The majority of the private land is affiliated with public grazing. The reason for the "nearly six times this amount" stat is because of feedlots in the west that account for a low amount of land and a high amount of production.

The biggest problem that faces fish and wildlife in the west (Coyote, see Master's degree credentials above) is loss of habitat. One of the biggest potential losses of habitat is the development of a huge portion of that 25% of the west that will follow losses in grazing rights. It is SOOO important to preserve as much of that habitat as possible. This is why I encourage proper grazing practices, because if done properly, grazing can be a benefit to the habitat and the associated private lands play a huge role in wildlife habitat.

I have stated before and I will again. If you feel there are areas where grazing practices are not being practiced correctly, contact the local BLM or Forrest Service office and report it. I have stated that someone I personally knew lost their grazing rights because they wouldn't go about it the right way and I fully supported the loss of those rights.

In the end, these arguments are healthy, even though they expose the true ignorance of some people. See you all on another thread, another time.

Coyote, I don't want you to PM me pictures of your hunts, I want you to post them on here and share a story. That's what this site is all about.
 
I read, quickly, most of the posts on this thread and find it entertaining and disheartening. Some good arguements and some bad.

Sounds like this Coyote DUDE is suffering from a bad case of mange or something. Sounds like we have some WELFARE Hunters out there who are reaping the benefits of history. Who do you think helped developed the roads, water holes, etc. you use to hunt on public lands? It was the Cattlemen, miners, and resource extractors in the past, not hobby hunters!

I agree, public land is for everyone to use. So, WELFARE hunters, pay-up or go hire a guide to walk you around a high-fence private land hunting experience. Coyote, how much do you pay to hunt on our public lands? I thought so, the same as me, nothing!

For those of you who don't support our ranchers, shame on you! You are only helping the enemy, and that is those who want to lock up public land from multiple use, including hunting!

Here's some good reading if you have some spare time.
[www.rangemagazine.com/specialreports/index.htm]

Might even help fill some of the missing common sense folks are in need of. Stop scrounging up DATA from anti-grazing sites, they are biased. I don't have time to argue all the subjects of rangeland management on a forum like this, just had to have some entertainment.

Hunt where the food is, on multiple-use, subsidized public land, where a cowboy or sheep-herder is welcome in my camp anytime, not a sneaky Coyote.

Headbones
 
>I agree with alot on here.
>#1 wildlife does not damage
>its own habitat. #2 Cattle
>do alot of bad, yes
>i like steak.

Sorry Charlie... but wildlife in number can very easily damage their own habitat... just like cattle in too high of numbers. Apparently you are a youngster that wasn't around when the Kiabab deer herd was almost entirely wiped out by too high of numbers.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

IMG_0057 copy.jpg
FullSizeRender.jpg
1A9A7961-11F1-4CA4-8C9C-C85507C1957C.jpeg
4B67131C-2FA2-4CD5-84F6-FE1CDFA2561A.jpeg
7DDC7ECC-58DF-46E8-9E86-482316AC1527.jpeg
20221030_083820.jpg
34022D1B-4445-4BEC-AC1D-095EA4D0DBA5.jpeg
B6D659F4-4CF2-4492-8855-642F7D81A0C5.jpeg
345B8C65-F4BE-4A35-9BA3-51F00CB5B801.jpeg
MD213.jpg
IMG_9543.jpg
Screenshot_20201006-091043_Gallery.jpg
Back
Top Bottom