Public-Land Grazing Solution

grizzly

grizzly

Long Time Member
Messages
5,598
Everybody has very strong feelings about grazing and sometimes over-grazing on public lands. The cattlemans association claims it is their right to graze animals on public land, due to historic grazing rights and mixed-use laws. I agree. Though it is a privilege that can be revoked, not a right.

If we open public lands for private enterprise, we should require the same cattleman to open a proportionate parcel of their private land to public use. Private ranches were once public land as well, so the "historic" argument goes both ways.

I bet many ranchers wouldn't want this being a two-way street.

Grizzly
 
That's the most riduculous thing i've ever heard. They are paying for that use of the land and you aren't denyed access.

That's like saying because you are renting a building in town, I should be able to use part of your house.

Typical liberal!!!
 
You might want to check on those ranches "once being public land" how do you figure that?

Half the ranches out there were settled before the BLM or Forest Service existed and most ranches were established prior to the Taylor Grazing Act.

Why don't you research the grazing act? You will find that prior to these allotments it was open range with little to no control over who, what and how long.

I believe that if the grazing act was not put into place that many of these public lands would in fact be owned by private persons. It was a different world 100 years ago.

Don't agree with the concept. And it is in no way a "2 way street" to open your private lands because you lease public grazing.
 
So you believe that private property rights are no big deal and can be trampled because you want to hunt on their property? I bet you don't even know what a rancher had to do in order to get a grazing allotment.

Nemont
 
My idea was simply to generate dialogue. Due to the fact that the cattle industry typically also participates in hunting/fishing, we all jump on their bandwagon and support cattlemen, without objectively reviewing the consequences.

I absolutely support private property rights, but we should question the validity of allowing our public lands to be abused by private ranchers who pay so little for grazing permits.

They demand to use public property for their own financial gain, yet are quick to paint every fence post with neon orange and keep the public out or their own property.

Ask a rancher how much money it will cost to feed his cattle for a summer, then ask him how much he pays to have his cattle eat OUR public lands and drink OUR public water.

The costs of grazing should equal the benefits.

Grizzly
 
The head of the local cattleman's association was quoted in the Salt Lake Tribune that he wants streams returned to private owners, (speaking against the Utah Supreme Court ruling).

His reason was liability if somebody gets hurt by his livestock and he can't control access. These are the same livestock that feed during the night on the side of the road in National Forests all over Utah, and people do die from hitting cows on the road. If his animals are so dangerous that he needs to keep people away from them, what are they doing in our National Forests?

They want to have their cake and to eat it to.

By the way, if you read the Taylor Grazing Act, it specifically says that grazing is not a right, it is a privilege that can be revoked at any time. The Beef Association is currently fighting a plan for the government to voluntarily buy back permits. These folks do not speak for sportsman, they speak for their pockets.
 
To recieve a grazing permit, a rancher must show a "base property" to tie the permits to. It would be very simple to require the "base property" to be open-access without requiring a rancher's entire estate be affected.
 
First off, since you seem to know very little about how it works, if the public land is being abused it's the fault of the forest service or blm, because THEY determine how many cattle the land can support. They give the rancher a limit as to how many cattle he can run and they do check.....at least here in NM.

I don't know about the demand part, but yes if they are paying for the grass, then it is their right.

In many cases if it weren't for ranchers you wouldn't be hunting anything because they either provided a habitat for the game to thrive or re-introduced game, such as elk, to areas where they didn't exist before.

And, I hate to brake it to you, but ranching is not a big money making proposition. It'll be a sad day when ranchers disappear and rich city folks take over.
 
If grizz had his way, all public grazing would be stopped. Then we all can yell about how high beef prices jumped and the hay farmers would all get rich.
I wonder how some people can open mouth and insert foot and never engage the brain during the process.

RELH
 
RELH, that is an absolute lie, I never called for the cessation of grazing. You can't point to a single place that I said that, and I have not edited a post.

I said ranchers should open private land to the public, like we do for them, or pay their fair share.

Cattlemen are actively fighting in court to take public land away (Utah Rivers), yet demand we give them grossly cheap feed out of our public resources.

Something has to give.
 
Ropinfool, you're absolutely right. It is the fault of the BLM and Forest Service.

But which lobby is giving the cattle industry the blank check they get now? The Cattlemen Association.

And nobody stands up against it, so the BLM and Forest Service look the other way, or spend their budget fighting court battles and can't enforce laws on the books.
 
Yes, grazing is considered a privelege, not a right, per the act. The reference to the act was for you to think about how "public lands grazing" was managed prior to the act. It wasn't.

I would also submit that if grazing on public lands was not allowed back in the day that ranchers would have simply forced the gov't to sell these lands to them. You think the cattlemans association is a powerful lobby now think about their power in the late 19th and early 20th century!

Price of grazing leases, my favorite topic. I do agree they are "cheap". But they are a couple dollars an AUM too cheap, not $15 per AUM too cheap.

I ran a herd of cattle on private grazing. Cost $17/AUM. I dropped the herd off in the spring and picked them up in the fall. The owner of the land provided fencing, salt and made sure they were in the right pasture. They provided water and the irrigation. When I picked them up I had 600# calves, 1200# cows, and app. 97% were bred. No death loss.

The same year I had a group of cattle on public lands. I fixed fence, serviced wells, pipelines and troughs. Put the cattle out, hired a range rider, paid for the salt, moved the cattle to 3 different pastures during the summer. All on horse over a huge acreage. IN the fall, I had 450# calves, 1000# cows, 85-90% bred and 3% death loss. Cost-$2/AUM or a little less.

There is no comparison between the two and to say that public lands AUM=private is not correct. Sure, it could be higher than $2 (I think its like $1.80 today), maybe $4-$5 but your costs and lack of production means the value of the grazing is less. Period.

Ranching isn't a way to get rich unless you sell your private lands to a wealthy non-rancher. Usually, ranching is the only economic activity in rural areas. On the allotment I was on, the ONLY source of water is the wells the association drilled.

Is it perfect, nope. Is there overgrazing, sure. Do I think public grazing needs to go away. Absolutely not.
 
I will gladly open up my private land to you Grizz, ONLY WHEN YOU ALLOW EVERYONE ELSE TO STAY IN YOUR HOUSE, EAT YOUR FOOD AND DO ANYTHING THEY WANT TO YOUR YARD!You are messing with people's livelyhoods! You are threatening small town throughout the west! You are talking about something you have absolutely no correct information about. You are a whiny treehugger with ideas that make no sense! Grow up! What do you do for a living? How would you like it if we attacked your vocation? (That's a big word that means job) You are p.o.'d about cattle on public land and you claim they ruin it. BUT THEY HAVE BEEN GRAZING THERE FOR OVER 100 YEARS. Wouldn't common sense tell you if they have been ruining something THEY WOULD HAVE DESTROYED THE ENTIRE WEST BY NOW? A recent study in Arizona showed that an endangered fish was drastically put at risk by STOPPING GRAZING! It seems that certain species need shallow creeks with warmer water to SURVIVE. When the cattle were removed bigger fish moved in and ATE the fish that are endangered! But nobody thought that grazing could possibly be benefital. You better hope you do not get your left-wing wish. Because ranchers are some of the best stewards public land ever had! We are the ones cleaning up after joe public's beer partys, garbage dumps, illegal motorized vehicles, ect. We are the ones installing water sources, pipelines, range improvements, ect. P.M. me and come see the range we destroy! Come look at where wildlife prefer! Come walk in my shoes! And quit talking when ya have nothing to say!
 
I love these posts, this is what I love to read, because it does help you to think outside of the box, and does help give you perspective of how both people feel on a subject, usually there is some name calling, and animosity, but in the end we all agree do disagree and return to the common bond that unites us, and thats our love of the land, and the animals that use it...
 
I'm wondering if Grizz is tired of seeing cattle and sheep in his hunting spots? I'm not too educated on the whole grazing thing, I don't mind cattle being in the hills but the sheep drive me absolutely crazy! I'm pretty sure I don't eat 'em, and I don't wear wool very much, but my biggest gripe with sheep is they can flat out ruin an area. Cattle too if they set up shop for too long. I just wonder why do all these animals need to graze in the mountains rather than on CRP ground that is closer to town, easier to manage the herds, less cost of transportation, and the feed on the CRP is probably just as good as anywhere. To me it seems like a good idea. But I'm also sure that the debate will continue to rage on.
 
>I will gladly open up my
>private land to you Grizz,
>ONLY WHEN YOU ALLOW EVERYONE
>ELSE TO STAY IN YOUR
>HOUSE, EAT YOUR FOOD AND
>DO ANYTHING THEY WANT TO
>YOUR YARD!You are messing with
>people's livelyhoods! You are threatening
>small town throughout the west!
>You are talking about something
>you have absolutely no correct
>information about. You are a
>whiny treehugger with ideas that
>make no sense! Grow up!
>What do you do for
>a living? How would you
>like it if we attacked
>your vocation? (That's a big
>word that means job) You
>are p.o.'d about cattle on
>public land and you claim
>they ruin it. BUT THEY
>HAVE BEEN GRAZING THERE FOR
>OVER 100 YEARS. Wouldn't common
>sense tell you if they
>have been ruining something THEY
>WOULD HAVE DESTROYED THE ENTIRE
>WEST BY NOW? A recent
>study in Arizona showed that
>an endangered fish was drastically
>put at risk by STOPPING
>GRAZING! It seems that certain
>species need shallow creeks with
>warmer water to SURVIVE. When
>the cattle were removed bigger
>fish moved in and ATE
>the fish that are endangered!
>But nobody thought that grazing
>could possibly be benefital. You
>better hope you do not
>get your left-wing wish. Because
>ranchers are some of the
>best stewards public land ever
>had! We are the ones
>cleaning up after joe public's
>beer partys, garbage dumps, illegal
>motorized vehicles, ect. We are
>the ones installing water sources,
>pipelines, range improvements, ect. P.M.
>me and come see the
>range we destroy! Come look
>at where wildlife prefer! Come
>walk in my shoes! And
>quit talking when ya have
>nothing to say!

IM not gonna say for or against. Really cattle dont bug me much but going from cattle run areas to non cattle run areas is a huge jump in wildlife. Never delt with sheep. but curious as to the Arizona fish that was brought up which was it. I did a little research due to hearing the contrary and found this.

Grazing as an impact in endangerment of 21 out of 25 of Arizona's T&E listed Native Fish:
1. Mexican Stoneroller - "habitat loss and degradation due to overgrazing" p. 9 (AGFD)
2.Yaqui Shiner - "habitat loss and degradation due to overgrazing" p. 9 (AGFD)
3. Sonora Chub - "Channel degradation, siltation, and water pollution caused primarily by livestock overgrazing" p. 10 (AGFD)
4. Gila Chub - grazing a factor. W.L. Minckley
5. Yaqui Chub - "habitat loss and degradation due to overgrazing" p. 11 (AGFD
6. Roundtail Chub - grazing a factor W.L Minckley
7. Virgin Chub - grazing a factor W.L. Minckley
8. Roundtail Chub - grazing a factor W.L. Minckley
9. Virgin Spinedace - grazing a factor W.L. Minckley
10. Little Colorado Spinedace - grazing a factor W.L. Minckley
11. Spikedace - grazing a factor W.L. Minckley
12. Loach Minnow - grazing a factor W.L. Minckley
13. Yaqui Sucker - "habitat loss and degradation due to overgrazing" p. 14 (AGFD)
14. Yaqui Catfish - EXTIRPATED "habitat degradation due to overgrazing" p. (AGFD)
15. Apache Trout - "erosion, sedimentation" [grazing a factor] p. 15 (AGFD)
16. Gila Trout - "erosion, sedimentation" [grazing a factor] p. 16 (AGFD)
17. Quitobaquito Pupfish - grazing a factor W.L. Minckley
18. Gila Topminnow - grazing a factor W.L. Minckley
19. Yaqui Topminnow - "habitat loss and degradation due to overgrazing" p. 17 (AGFD)
20. Monkey Springs Pupfish - EXTINCT grazing a factor W.L. Minckley

Now thats just fish, the list is much longer. Any input....seems to me thats alot of WILDlife effected over a wide scale.

http://www.rangenet.org/directory/witzemanr/seventy.html


"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." -- Abraham Lincoln
 
#11 on the list is the exact fish i mentioned, the spikedance. The river in AZ is the Verde and the article about this story was written by Dan Dagget, Author of "The gardeners of Eden: Rediscovering our importance to nature" and has a blog at RightWay2BGreen.com Now i realize the importance of riaparin areas and how ALL large herbavores can impact them. But Throwing a blanket of blame soley on livestock is unsound logic and not fair. If we are keeping score most, if not all of ya'lls homes and communities have destroyed many times more critters than ranchers. Just my 2 cents!
 
They wanna graze on public land, they should make your deer or elk tag good for one stink ass cow shot on public land if you find yourself unable to hang it on a buck or bull......thats a good solution. discuss............
 
very very true, but the folks who complain about encroachment are normally tree huggers who know little to nothin about wildlife and conservation and are the ones wanting to live CLOSE to it, the key problem. And in fact if you wanna take it to an extreme people are the sole and only problem, we own atv's, trucks, horses, cattle and homes. Fact is all contribute, nothing will ever be as it was before white man settled here. best we can do is control it. proper cattle management is good, enforcing atv laws is imperative and also not listed yet is littering. I hate that more than anything it is a blatant disreguard for habitat and pristine country. Dove "hunters" in arizona seem to be the worse most pathetic example. Shells, boxes and other trash just left with out a second thought. Cattle can screw an area real fast, it also recovers extremely fast when compared to four wheeler/truck damage/littering. its all relative. both cause harm one lasts a hell of alot longer. I do believe wilderness should be a sanctuary for wildlife NOT cattle for any reason whatsoever.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." -- Abraham Lincoln
 
Idiot! Try shooting a cow and end up in prison where you belong. I hope you choke plumb to death on your next t-bone!
 
Yeah.....I know it's a tad extreme.....I'd never dream of doing that and I have no doubt you take care of your cattle and care about overgrazing and that...But still, I view this as a pretty significant problem and can name a few spots that are pretty much a mess due to livestock.........something needs to be done.
 
I think we all agree that overgrazing is a problem. Grass is a ranchers livelyhood. Any rancher worth his salt manages his herd and land so that he may stay in business. Yes, there are some stupid ranchers who overgraze, but not on public land....at least in NM.

I can't understand why you guys are whinning. Elk do as much if not more damage to the environment than cattle so if you got rid of the cattle, then what? Are you going to complain about the elk? Nobody is denying any of you access to public land that I know of. Do you really think the cattle are driving off the game? Wild game go to where there is food, water, and no pressure.......PRIVATE LAND. Now, were kinda getting off the subject, but a lot of ranches are being bought up by rich city folks who don't care about running cattle or don't need to to make a living. They are basically providing a sancuary for the game. That's best case because worst case is the land is developed.

Cattle and game can coexist, because they HAVE for over 100 years. You guys don't realize that you are trying to cut off your nose to spite your face.
 
except for the fact that most habitat has supported large number of elk historically since their existence. They do not destroy it they are a native animal to most parts, therefore the "damage" they may or may not cause is natural and meant to occur.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." -- Abraham Lincoln
 
doityourself, Yes I'm sick of seeing cattle and sheep ruin riparian and bedding zones.

I've never seen a herd of elk stomp a creek so badly that the water temperature raised, due to the lack of brush, to the point that the fish died. I have seen cattle have that affect on streams.

You can't compare elk and cattle.
 
Before the arrival of Europeans in the Americas it is estimated that there was between 30 and 75 million buffalo here that ranged from Canada to Mexico. From nearly all the way to the east coast to slightly past the continental divide in the west.

In the U.S. and Canada there is around 100 million head of cattle. That's down from highs of about 120 million in the 1980s. About 20 percent of those cattle do set foot on public land in the U.S.at some point in there life.

Today's population of cows on public land is slightly greater than was the population of buffalo where they did accrue before our arrival.

Add sheep, wild horses and burros, and ATVs to that mix and yes we might be a little heavy in our usage in some places.

If it came down to kicking two of those things off public land, for me it would be ATVs first, then sheep. Leave the cows alone they taste great. If beef becomes too expensive alot people will start killing deer.

Too bad about the buffalo. Wish I would have been there to kill afew.
 
Here is an idea lets increase are elk, deer, and sheep population as high as we can get them and lower the cattle grazing by that amount. Sounds like a win win more wildlife and still cattle grazing.
 
I agree with the fact that public grazing should be limited ALOT. It needs to be priced comparable to private grazing. Plus not to mention that public land grazing costs the taxpayers over a hundred million dollars. And also not to mention the fact that the HUGE majority of our beef is produced on private feed lots. Not public land. Times have changed.
 
Times have changed, the public needs to take more control of what they want. AUM's should be priced higher, they are next to nothing and we have to put up with them out there. We need more wildlife on our public land not cattle.
 
You think elk and buffalo don't damage some areas? Go to Yellowstone and check it out.
 
>I will gladly open up my
>private land to you Grizz,
>ONLY WHEN YOU ALLOW EVERYONE
>ELSE TO STAY IN YOUR
>HOUSE, EAT YOUR FOOD AND
>DO ANYTHING THEY WANT TO
>YOUR YARD!You are messing with
>people's livelyhoods! You are threatening
>small town throughout the west!
>You are talking about something
>you have absolutely no correct
>information about. You are a
>whiny treehugger with ideas that
>make no sense! Grow up!
>What do you do for
>a living? How would you
>like it if we attacked
>your vocation? (That's a big
>word that means job) You
>are p.o.'d about cattle on
>public land and you claim
>they ruin it. BUT THEY
>HAVE BEEN GRAZING THERE FOR
>OVER 100 YEARS. Wouldn't common
>sense tell you if they
>have been ruining something THEY
>WOULD HAVE DESTROYED THE ENTIRE
>WEST BY NOW? A recent
>study in Arizona showed that
>an endangered fish was drastically
>put at risk by STOPPING
>GRAZING! It seems that certain
>species need shallow creeks with
>warmer water to SURVIVE. When
>the cattle were removed bigger
>fish moved in and ATE
>the fish that are endangered!
>But nobody thought that grazing
>could possibly be benefital. You
>better hope you do not
>get your left-wing wish. Because
>ranchers are some of the
>best stewards public land ever
>had! We are the ones
>cleaning up after joe public's
>beer partys, garbage dumps, illegal
>motorized vehicles, ect. We are
>the ones installing water sources,
>pipelines, range improvements, ect. P.M.
>me and come see the
>range we destroy! Come look
>at where wildlife prefer! Come
>walk in my shoes! And
>quit talking when ya have
>nothing to say!


As construction trash I would like to point out that in the begining the illegals were brought here to ranch/farm. Now with construction near dead and only the cheapest illegals here working it is fair to point out that you did affect MY livelyhood and your continued lobbying to keep them DOES affect it. Elk have only become important to ranchers as they have been given a buisness based upon them(CWMU's in Utah). To pretent that cows or sheep don't do damage is a flat lie! I support open grazing, i think it is what makes the west the west, but grizzys point is somewhat fair. Ranchers/farmers love to preach about wanting to be left alone by government, yet they love the tax money. Fly over the west sometime and see the round fields- pivot lines created it and the government(me)paid. Government trappers? government. Agricultural disasters, covered. Who is covering the contractors that did stupid things or had problems? No one they go bankrupt! How much does your private land hiding in the green belt cost you in taxes? Can I hide my front lawn there? If it wasn't cost effective for you to use public land, you wouldn't so to pretent anything different is just stupid. No, I'm sorry but your Peruvians or Argentinians don't care about the land as much as most of us, and we both know you aren't there day after day. Should you be kicked off? HELL NO!!! But don't tell me it wouldn't be fair to allow you to graze for free in exchange for (walk in access) which you could control. Go to south dakota and see what there access for pheasants has meant to the economy. Ranching is a dying buisness, especially with a "global market" you all should realize that 90,000 deer hunters(Utah) who are the 2nd or 3rd biggest industry in the state only behind skiing and minerals, aren't the ones you should tussle with. How many "cattle ranches" in my state would go bust without CWMU's? In North Eastern Utah there is a lot of private(railroad) land being bought back by the government(me). Do you think that if you go down your land won't be bought back? Having said that, I will defend with force if necessary your grazing!! But don't take sides against us, or your friends are all the others who do, Sierra Club, WWF, SUWA, etc.!!! Rancers(cattlemans assoc.) DO NOT have the political clout they once did, and as more and more politicians are removed from the land there influence is lessening. Note to them, if you fight the treenazi's on one side, why do you want to fight us on the other?
 
Free ranging bison move. Cattle are kept in rotating units. In those units there are only so many water sources so guess where the cows gather. Not every herd has a herder, most ranges have only one herder(paid by the cattlemans association). There is also a date given to the rancher to have his animals off. In my area that seems to be the start date to start moving for too many( we have some real winners). October the snow flies and the herds coming off can do real damage! I hunt private land(30% of the time). The owner also has mtn. permits. He is a good rancher and does a good job. But guess what, his private land is open to hunters, no fee, you only have to ask. He has enough land to go CWMU and the DWR is always trying to sell him on it but he doesn't. See this is what some of us are saying. Lock your gates, give keys only to those who ask, control your numbers, and kick off anyone who screws up! But when you become a Private hunting club, CWMU, or whatever, give us the finger, so why shouldn't we give it back? How much did the private rancher pay the DWR for that elk that wanders on his property? He'll sell you the tag for $7500 and up. Notice that guy doesn't have 10ft fences, why? Because he isn't worried about elk/deer leaving and he can sell those that enter. In Utah the CWMU's have become ridiculous with there small ammount of drawn tags, and 60 day seasons. If you want to be a cattle/sheep rancher and lock up your land go for it! You want us to donate land to be grazed off so your land isn't, then animals are drawn to it, then we should allow you to sell tags, and have 10x longer to hunt then us? Why are you supprised we might not be greatful?
 
Sorry, but you guys are absolute IDIOTS if you don't think wild game do as much or more damage than cattle!!! You guys sound like a bunch of tree huggers.
 
Fool, and appropriate name for you, wild animals naturally move!! What do you see by every creek bed and water hole when you drive by? CATTLE!!! Elk and deer will CONSTANTLY move. You cannot compare cattle to wildlife. Be real. Your grasping at straws.
 
You need to get out more dude. I can show you places where there are no cattle that have been damaged by elk. Elk are just like cattle....if nobody bothers them they won't move.

You dumb a$$es don't get it. Go ahead and kick the ranchers out from the forest. What you don't realize is you'll be next.
 
I dont care if public grazing exists, it just needs to be controlled more. Our public lands should not be managed to accomodate ranchers. It should be managed to accomodate the PUBLIC as a whole. Not special interest groups. Too many ranchers refer to the range as "their" range or "their" grass and elk and deer are just pests. Its a joke. Not to mention that Public Grazing COSTS the taxpayers MILLIONS and MILLIONS of dollars. Times have changed, like the one post, the guy pays almost $17 AUM for private grazing, and you guys pay like $1-$2 for public grazing!!!!!!!! Are you kidding me!! It should be priced comparable to private if its gonna be there at all. I had a rancher on the Dutton tell me to kill as many elk as I could because he lost some of "his grazing oermits" to the elk. Its sad. I dont know why public land ranchers feel that self entitlement.
 
Who would you rather deal with, a rancher with a bad attitude or an environmentalist? This is a time when ranchers and sportsmen need to stick together. You want to "preserve" the habitat for wild game? How's about turn it into a wilderness area or worse yet a national park. Don't believe it can happen?....it has in NM. And it's happening again in unit 9. The sierra club united local indian tribes and had most of the unit placed on the states register for cultural properties. Private landowners, public, etc., will now have to go through the tribes to do anything on the mountain. So far, it doesn't affect hunters, but it will. Soon, if these groups have their way, most of the unit will be a national park. Then guess what.....no hunting. Yeah, that's worst case, but it's happening now. You guys are worried about cattle?.....there's much bigger problems out there.
 
Ropin, You honestly 100 percent feel that what you guys pay for AUM's is fair? You know public grazing costs the taxpayers well over a hundred million dollars. Thats alot of money. I am not saying end it, but the prices for AUM's needs to go up to be competitive with private grazing. Also if they have enough acreage on private to graze they should not be allowed on public land.
 
I think $17 is ridculous. I can't say what's fair. How does public grazing cost the taxpayers over $100 million?
 
Ropin, How is $17 a month to feed a cow and her calf ridiculous? I think the $1-$2 dollars you pay is ridiculous. The 100 million spent is easy to identify, who do you think pays for all the fences that are strung across the mountains? How many tens of thousands of miles of fence are strung across public land just to keep cattle in specific areas? All the cattle guards? All the government employess that spend all year managing and trying to keep up with everything. I have the report from the Federal Agencie that tracks the spending if you want me to email it to you. Just PM me your email and I will forward it. In 2004 they took in 21 million in grazing fees and spent over 140 million in expenses related to public land grazing. Like I said if you want the report I will send it to you.
Not only that but domestic sheep are a huge threat to NATIVE bighorn sheep populations. In ID the sheep ranchers want to eliminate entire populations because they interfere with their grazing!!!!! So dont sell us on how ranchers are on our side.
CC
 
LOL.....most of those expenses would still be there even if you eliminated grazing. I have good frends who work for the forest service and they don't spend the majority of their time managing grazing. They waste our money in many more ways.

I never said that ranchers were on your side. I said that we should stick together because there are greater threats. People like you have tunnel vision though and will never see it until it's too late. The environmentalist and anti's love people like you because your helping them and are too ignorant to see it.

Sorry you've had so many bad experiences with ranchers, but at least they are fighting to maintain their and your access to public land. In some places ranchers do have a lot of influence. Do you think that sportsmen can maintain that access without them?

I'm sure eventually the price to graze will go up. I accept that. Of course, the price of beef will too. Something to think about....the price for a calf is about $1.30/lb....go to the grocery store and look at the price of beef/lb. The ranchers aren't making much.

Sure, send me the report.
 
If we did not have cattle would we need thousands and thousands of miles of fences installed and repaired every day? Would we need biologists to manage and maintain grazing allotments? Woudl we need an ENTIRE agency just to manage public land grazing? NO. You are the ignorant one my friend, of course your worried about it because if you could not ranch off the publics dime you would be screwed. So obviously you have a biased opinion. My access and a ranchers access to public land is TOTALLY different, and you know that. I am not profiting off of a public resource like a rancher does. I hunt and fish. Also Ropin I hate to break it to you, almost ALL of our beef is produced on PRIVATE FEED LOTS. Not public land. So the small amount that is produced on public land would be insignificant.

I have actually looked into this alot, and it is WELFARE RANCHING, and you know it. You cant deny it, there is no way you can deny it. Times have changed, and I am sure this will change also. I am fully aware of the anti's and environmentalists and the issues they present. Like I said, I dont mind if there is public grazing, but it needs to pull its weight, if it cant. Then it needs to be stopped. IMO
 
Ropinfool, I listen to you say we are idiots because we think elk don't do damage. I don't know where you live but in Nevada I have never seen an area damaged from elk. I can take you all over and show you land that looks like hell from cattle. I do think we need to stand together but there has to be compromise and it has only been by sportsmen in my eyes.
 
I will concede that you don't know what your talking about.

Quick question.....where do you think the cattle on those feed lots come from? They come from ranches....big, small, private land, public land, etc. Feed lots don't manage cow/calf operations.....they only feed....period. That's like saying car dealerships make the cars. Feedlots don't produce calves....they only buy them and feed them....then they go to slaugter....then to you the consumer.
 
Coyote , I'm not saying that being subsidized by the government is right or wrong, but almost all forms of food production in this country is subsidized in one way or another.

Do you mind telling us what you do to make a living?
 
Fool, Its called cattle operations on PRIVATE PROPERTY. Not WELFARE GRAZING ON THE PUBLICS DIME. Public land grazing does nothing but LOSE money for taxpayers. If it was a business, it would of been shut down years ago.
 
Cast, I am not saying that it should be outlawed, but do you realize the price for grazing has not changed since 1978! The same price. Dont you wish all your bills were the same?
As for my means of making money, I am in investment education and am active in the stock market. So the whole time Ropin Fool gets subsidies to go ranch on public lands, I pay capital gains taxes on all my returns. If public land ranching was a business it would of been bankrupt along time ago.
 
Coyote, I'm not a big fan of subsidies either, but if anybody should get them it should be the food producers because food is the one thing that we can't do with out.

What a day to be a stock broker hu? What do you think about all the financials and investment firms being bailed out?

The 100 million to mend a few fences won't be a drop in the bucket by the time all these financials get bailed out.
 
ok, now i love how everyone is just throwin opinions out there. all your saying is what YOU think. That means crap. Lets see proof of free ranging wild animals doing more damage in their natural habitat than cattle do. i can find countless research on cattle problems/overgrazing/destruction. lets see some facts rather than your crappy opinion and callin us out for what apparently hurts your lively hood. Sure get mad, lets see facts. ive previously posted a number of NATIVE animals threatened/endangered and even extirpated because of cattle. None from any naturally occuring wild animal. But if you like to talk out of your a$$ feel free.


"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." -- Abraham Lincoln
 
Also, who is familiar with the #1 cause of Australia's Extinct and endangered wildlife???? Ill argue with you when you gimme proof, cuz i sure as heck got it.


"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." -- Abraham Lincoln
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-15-08 AT 04:15PM (MST)[p]I agree Cat, this financial mess is going to drag us down to new lows. I am more of an options trader, so I was actually playing the down side. So worked out good for me. This mess will be in the billions of dollars before its all said and done. Buy PUTS I guess! The S&P will break support this week then we will see lower lows. Buy some PUTS on POT, thats a free stock tip!

I know we need food, it just bugs when people like Ropin act like there is nothing wrong with public grazing. He only sees one side of the issue.

CC
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-15-08 AT 04:20PM (MST)[p]I agree with alot on here. #1 wildlife does not damage its own habitat. #2 Cattle do alot of bad, yes i like steak.

everyone is everyone. Its all opinions. Really no answer will be correct unless facts can back it up. Obviously ropinfool has a reason to argue, probably a good one. But no valid points other than an opinion. I think a discussion over this is good but really....callin eachother ignorant and uneducated is pretty ridiculous. Just sayin lets see some research either way.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." -- Abraham Lincoln
 
Coyote, thanks for the tip but I don't got any idea what you said.

I don't own any cattle but my place is surrounded by BLM on all sides. When you own property in that situation it is your responsibility to keep range cattle off of your property. I don't have a fence across the front because it don't want to see it from my porch. I have about a ten acer stand of cottonwoods and willows on my land. The cows like them for shade and the deer like them for feed and cover. When the cows move in the deer move out.

flathead097.jpg



minersvillejuly08019.jpg



Of coarse I would rather have the deer so I run the cows off when they show up. The other day the cows showed up so I ran them a good couple of miles back onto BLM. Well the rancher watched me do it and came down to the house and confronted me about it. {In a real nice manner}.

Neither of us got pissed off and came to a consensus that I would not push them as far next time. He even offered to help me build the fence across the front of my property if I decided to do so.

I hate to see a bunch of city dwelling hunters start a fight with ranchers. I think that fight would be bad for both sides.
 
I hate to see the fight started also, but I am shocked at "if anyone is gonna get subsidized" arguement. Tell me how it makes sense to take money from me, send it to Washington, run it through the bueauracracy, then sent back to ranchers in my state. I am curious ropin, your grazing costs haven't increased since '78, the same add runs in my paper every year looking for herders for a whole $700 a month(yes thats less than $30 a day), so your labor costs have remained stagnant, your taxes compared to ALL other industries are nearly non-existant, yet beef prices are at all time highs. And your contention is that if you pay more to graze beef will go up, wanna bet? Hows that working for the oil companies? Every product has a tipping price. Housing crashed, oil is dropping, etc. How long until your market is crashed by south american beef? Or mexican? In your county how many ranchers are their? How many hunters/fisherman? If push comes to shove, and we all know money talks to politicians, which industry do you think will have more clout? Ropin, your probably a good, stand-up rancher, but a quick history lesson for you. Long before your "historic" claim to grazing there were free grazers running cattle all over the west. They were run off by ranchers and BARB WIRE. Problem is, out west 70%+ of the land is government owned so ranchers quickly figured out that they could not support their livelyhood without public land grazing. Nothing has changed. The hunting industry has changed. We have started to realize that we can't just show up in October and everything is OK. We have started to become political, our numbers are larger, and our industry is larger in dollars to the economy. What has changed is that the cattlemen/sheepmen aren't in power anymore. The smart ones realize this and try to work with us, the dumb ones(soon to be out of buisness ones) try to fight us. Yes we can all get along, but the days of "my family ran cows here forever so I'll do as I please" ranchers are picking a fight that they will lose, and unfortunately they will take the good guys down with them. I hunt sometimes on private land owner by a cattle rancher with mtn. permits. He is extremely accomidating to the public with his land, and that has meant that I personally am with his animals on our land. I often let him know of dead, or help to move cows out of bad spots, or push them as his deadline comes. We can all get along, but not with the few remaining ranchers pushing us, then wondering why we turn on them. Basic rule is you get what you give!
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-16-08 AT 12:55PM (MST)[p]I thought that was the point I was trying to make. We all agree that overgrazing is bad whether it be by cattle or wildlife.

What upsets me is not that people have their own opinions, but that their opinions are based on untrue facts. Public grazing is not something utilized by just small ranchers in need of wellfair. Most of the largest ranches if not all, at least in NM, graze cattle on public land. And, YES, wildlife can cause damage.....you'll either just have to take my word for it or come down to NM and i'll show you.

Somebody also mentioned compromise.....how so? Seems like the sportsmen, on here anyway, are the ones who don't want to compromise. How is eliminating public grazing a compromise. As for gaining access to private land, in NM when a landowner gets landowner tags, they have the option to open up their ranch. Many or most do.....only the larger ranches don't. I'm not sure where you all are from or how your state runs their landowner tag system.

In the past, people who worked for the forest service were western folks with western values who appreciated the things that the ranchers did. Nowadays, they are more and more and bunch of tree huggers who would rather see the ranchers disappear. They care more about spotted owls and endangered weeds than peoples livelyhoods, economic development and recreation. We all see where the trend is going, but this "don't push us" attitude is also bad for you because you will be the next to get pushed off.
 
I'm from Nevada and here all we hear is cry cry cry cry from a group of ranchers. We are trying to increase the herd size and we have all the biology behind us that says we are not even close to what the area can handle. But this group does nothing but try and block this from happening. This is not compromising. Before long we are going to say ok if we can't have elk then no cattle should be there. Sportsmen far out number the ranchers and they are going to have to come to terms with this. Sportsmen are stepping up to the plate more and wanting to make a difference in the wildlife out there. Before ranchers had a monopoly on what happened on public land so now that other groups are getting involved this is hard for ranchers to accept.
 
Reading this has been pretty comical. Ropinfool, who is actually out amongst the cattle and the wildlife and sees first hand what goes on, has to defend himself and his way of life to some people who stick their head out of their cozy little office space on the weekends and claim to be experts on the effects of cattle and sheep on public ground. The reason that they are self-proclaimed experts is because of some statistics that they came across somewhere and most of them hold little water, if any. Nice!! Whoever it was that was "flapping" earlier about how the cattle prices are at an all time high, and the cattleman are getting rich, is not the sharpest knife in the drawer! The cattle prices might have gone up some, but so has the price of everything else such as feed, supplement, fuel, vaccine, trucking, labor....some have doubled and tripled. So, do I agree that the price of grazing on public land is cheap......yes, but to some producers that is the only way that they can afford to keep operating and producing beef. If they were to quit producing beef, some of you would not be able to go down to your local grocery store (where a lot of you think beef is raised) and buy your beef, fire up your grill, put on you favorite NASCAR shirt and kick a few cold ones back and feed the neighbors while you bad mouth ranchers. Vicous circle, really!

If it weren't for ranchers that graze public land, the wildfire situation would be out of control, the weed problems would be out of hand, and the water systems that ranchers have developed would be non-existant. And beleive it or not, elk and deer do use water tanks and developed springs that ranchers have done themselves on public ground. CastnShoot, you have some common sense on this subject and Ropinfool, you obviously know what is going on because it is your lively hood. But the attitude of "what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine" is getting a bit carried away with the sportsmen vs. the rancher. The thread that started this "debacle" is so far out in left feild that it's not even funny. Just because a rancher has a public grazing lease does not mean that he should have to open his private ground up so you can cruise all over it too. I suppose some of you think that his wife should make you breakfast and pack your sack lunches too! My God people, get a grip!
 
Blueleader you are out in left field to think people don't know what they are talking about. My family is in ranching and I'm in the field more in one year than most in ten years or a life time. It is not the sportsman's problem that some may go out of business if it were not for public land grazing. To think the American people would not have beef if there were no public land grazing is absurd. Public land grazing is a privilege not a right. My problem is when I read posts like yours that criticize peoples opinion because it is different than yours. There are as many uneducated rancher as there are sportsmen, because a rancher is out there does not mean they are smart enough to see past there nose on what is best for the land. And one more thing many ranchers are only out on the range a couple times a year, they turn out then at the end of the AUM's date they go and gather. A sportsmen may very while be out in the field more than many ranchers. I would hate to see an end to public land grazing!
 
My family runs a cattle ranch and believe me it's not FREE to range cattle on public domain. Beyond the fees, every summer we would receive an assignment from the Forest Service to help add value to or improve public property, and more times than not it wasn't the property where the cattle were ranging. We didn't receive any compensations other than the privilege to pay for the permits. We built/fixed fences, collected bugs and insects for university studies, protected natural springs, fixed and cleared trails, and many other things. These weren't just 1 day events either. We would spend weeks of the summer in the mountains.

I respect everyone?s opinion, but I think one should collect at least some data before throwing out crazy ideas.
 
Just an example of compromise, up Black Smith Fork Canyon in Northern Utah there is a section of land that is owned by the South Cache Cattleman?s Association. This property is smack dab in the middle of the Forest Service. The SCCA participates in the walk-in-access program in Utah opening up acres of private land to the public.
 
Bearman any rancher that only checks on his cows a couple of times a year is definitely one of those ranchers that you think should go out of business.
 
I dont think what we talk about is crazy ideas. Public land grazing loses over 100 million dollars of the tax payers money every year. For what? A select few ranchers that benefit from it? Sheep ranchers that refuse to retire grazing leases even though they are wiping out ENTIRE bighorn sheep populations? Just look at ID for example. Its going all the way to the Supreme Court to retire leases so bighorns in Unit 11 dont get wiped out.

And cattle dont prevent wildfires!!! They are the reason cheat grass is spreading so quickly, which is a HUGE factor in wildfires. You think Ropinfool honestly has an unbiased opinion on public grazing!! LMAO He thinks wildlife do unrepairable damage to the environment! We cant increase herd sizes because of cattle operations. Economically speaking more permits and healthier herds and healthier habitats would produce a HELL of alot more economically than public grazing!! I went camping a few weeks ago and paid $10 to stay at a campground, a rancher could camp 3 cows and 3 calves for one month on public ground for the same price!!! How xan you say that is not robbery of public resources?? LOL
 
Bearman, you are right, the American public would have beef....right from South America, Australia and other countries that have no regulations on what or how they are fed. That sounds really fun and delicous, I am sure that everyone would enjoy that. Oh, and by the way, you say that you don't like it when people criticize other people's opinions, what in the "wide world of sports" do you think that those guys were doing to Ropinfool? And one more thing, the rancher that goes out to check his cows when he gathers to wean or ship, is probably missing the boat a little too.

Coyotechaser, on the wildfire thing, if you keep the grass managed by grazing, with a controled number of cattle, (key word here is managed), there is less to burn when there is a wildfire. If there is no grazing at all and the grass is hip high, in about August it is nothing but a dry tinder box waiting to burn. When you talk about growing healthier herds and giving out more permits, take a look at the Missouri Breaks in Montana, not to mention central Montana as a whole, which is home to one of the healthiest herds of elk around, they are right there amongst the cattle, thriving and doing just fine both in numbers and in quality. So contrary to what you think, both can thrive and do well.

Again, this all comes down to the attitude of "what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine" and people think that they should be able to go where they want, when they want. I am both a sportsman as well as a cattle producer, and in my opinion they better learn to work together or we are all going to be in a bind and the "tree huggers" will take over both entities.
 
Blue, but cattle ranchers here in Utah REFUSE to allow herds to increase in size. They throw a fit if it is brought up. Last time I checked it was PUBLIC land and should be managed with the PUBLIC as a whole in mind. Not a few private subsidized welfare ranchers. Blue answer me a few questions, why has the cost of an AUM not been raised in since 1978? Why should taxpayers spend millions and millions of dollars to build fences just for public grazing? Why is it fair that cows are allowed to sit and $hit in every creek, river and waterhole on public land? I talked with a rancher on my elk hunt in UT asking how to access a certain area and he asked if I had an elk tag, he told me to shoot as many as I could because he lost "HIS" grazing rights!!!! Are you kidding me!!!! HIS grazing rights!! As if its his private property! And you know that is how the majority feels. Its "their" grass and these damn pests are eating it. Its ridiculous. Why should we sit back and watch native Bighorn Sheep populations die so a few domestic sheep can graze?
As for the cheat grass, the spread of cheat grass is attributed almost solely to the cattle industry. They knock down and destroy sage brush and crap out cheat grass seeds which causes it to spread which in turn takes over where sagebrush used to grow. Which acts as a tinder for wildfires. There has been many reports on that subject.
Blue, I am not saying that ALL public land grazing is bad, but it needs to pull its weight. You guys charge almost $17 AUM for private grazing and then pay $1.38 AUM for public grazing. Your ripping off the public, and YOU KNOW IT.
CC
 
I tend to lean more toward ropin fool on this. I believe the wise use of Natural Resources is whats needed. I think much of the west needs to be grazed by cattle. I would rather see cattle on the mountain than another trophy vacation home. The Ranchers I know earn thier grazing allotments, by improving the springs or building new stock tanks that bwenefit more than just thier cattle. I raise cattle and farm corn and beans. Cattle aren't much of a money maker these days at all.
Driftersifter
 
> And one more thing
>many ranchers are only out
>on the range a couple
>times a year, they turn
>out then at the end
>of the AUM's date they
>go and gather. A sportsmen
>may very while be out
>in the field more than
>many ranchers.


What an ignorant statement.
 
Cows and Sheep destroy the habitat of native critters............I've seen it firsthand. Anyone involved in ranching can't teach me something I've already learned.............I'm not saying some guys dont manage things the right way I'm sure plenty do. Just because I dont know the specifics on how leases are granted etc does'nt change a damn thing. End result is the same. I don't care how much you pay to run cattle on public land.......I just don't want them there......... Or at least I want it highly regulated and enforced more than it currently is............
 
I'm a dedicated sportsman here in utah which means that I donated 24 hours to the dwr in order to get the "privledge" of hunting archery, muzz, and rifle. My hours weren't in places I hunt so ranchers having to "donate" hours doesn't break my heart. I have seen first hand the cattle that stay on the mountain long after their off date to "let the snow bring them out". I would be interested to see if the law made them public property after the off date if this would continue. Second, the forest service has a division that does only forest inventory. I have a family member who does this for a living. He is on the mtn. every day, 9 months a year. Guess what, livestock do damage, FACT. As for protecting against forest fires by grazing, forestry 101 says that there needs to be burning so as to recharge soil, reseed trees, and clean out bugs and disease. Lastly, Ropin isn't it funny that your so opinionated about elk damage and what they do, but you'll gladly take those landowner tags to sell. Of all of the practices this is the most disgusting. You run on public land for a low price, you pay almost nothing for calves, this lets you preserve you private lands feed to hold wildlife,and to thank you for that you are GIVEN tags that go for thousands. Then here in utah, after all that, if you have a fence damaged by one of these elk, you can get taxpayer compensation. Go ahead and graze, but lets not even pretend that your 1. Doing any of us a favor. 2. Beef prices are what they are because you "donate" beef to help americans. 3. You graze public land to help suppress fires. Because its cheaper than hay, or pasture land you do it. It is the cheapest feed PERIOD. Otherwise why would you deal with transportation to and from your permit, loss to predation, loss to larkspur and other toxic plant, loss to injury? IT IS COST EFFECTIVE otherwise your just a very poor buisnessman.
 
LAST EDITED ON Sep-18-08 AT 10:05AM (MST)[p]Well for starters, of course i'm biased. I also never said that cattle cant do any damage.

Not being from your part of the country, I can't comment on what goes on there. We can all come up with bad and good examples of what takes place on the forest. In my part of the country wood haulers, pinion pickers, horn hunters, scouters, sight see'ers, four wheelers, atv'ers, and hunters do some of the worst damage by making roads all over the place, throwing trash, and cutting fences. There are many more people in the forest these days verses 20 years ago. Everybody want's there piece of the pie and is highly critical of everybody else. We can all make good cases as to what we deserve. Hunters want to ban atv's and cattle, woodhaulers need to heat their house, ranchers need to make a living, people want recreation. The reality is no one group of people are any more deserving than the other.

Is raising the grazing fees going to make some of you happy?....probably not. Coyote thinks we're wasting his money and asking for welfair......he's entitled to his opinion.

If you want the forest to remain in it's prestine untouched condition, then everybody needs to stay out....is that what we want? Or is it that we are selfish and want everybody else out except us? Fact is we all have our right to enjoy and use our public land as long as we follow the rules and don't abuse. We need to punish the abusers, but not ruin it for the people who don't abuse, no matter what group they are from.
 
Blueleader you are the reason that people are against ranchers, as I have said I'm not infavor of taking all cattle off public land! The statement of "what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine" is exactly what ranchers think! We do need to work together but here in Nevada we get the same as mentioned in Utah "no more elk no more elk". And if you think it is too tough to make a living in ranching and you don't get rich, then go get a job. The ranchers I know do pretty dame good.
 
Coyote, it has always kind of surprised me when ranchers don't want to try to improve the wildlife habitat like in the instance of the ranchers in Utah not wanting to increase herd size. I hate to say it, but by increasing herd size and improving habitat for the wildlife, they are increasing the value of their land. In my opinion, the good producers can see this as another avenue of income while they do own it and if they ever get ready to sell it and they can show potential buyers 380 inch bulls and/or 190 inch deer, this is just added value to the potential buyer. It seems to me that they might be missing the boat a little. The good managers in our state have learned to live with the wildlife, especially elk, because it has been worth some money to them.

As far as why the cost of AUM's hasn't went up......good question. The issue of the cows filling the water ways up with "poo" is grasping a little as I am sure that the wildlife do it as well, you might have gone a little "tree-huggerish" on us there. The cheat grass thing.......in our country cheat grass is not an every year deal, mostly on dry years, this year we didn't have much, but I have a hard time beleiving that wildlife doesn't pass a cheat grass seed or two themselves, I do know that they do spread the hell out of leafy spurge.

Like you said, the key to the whole thing is management, wether it is by the producer or the governing agency. There cannot be a total "free for all" or some habitat will be destroyed. But again, demanding that a producer that has public grazing leases needs to open his/her private ground, is a little far fetched.
 
Ropin, its not my opinion, its a fact, I have the PDF from the FEDS that details how much money public land grazing costs the taxpayers. Over 100 million. Give me your email and I will forward it to you. Here is a small exerpt from the report:


"In fiscal year 2004, federal agencies spent a total of at least $144 million. The 10 federal agencies spent at least $135.9 million, with the Forest Service and BLM accounting for the majority. Other federal agencies have grazingrelated
activities, such as pest control, and spent at least $8.4 million in fiscalyear 2004.
The 10 federal agencies? grazing fees generated about $21 million in fiscal year 2004?less than one-sixth of the expenditures to manage grazing. Of that amount, the agencies distributed about $5.7 million to states and counties in which grazing occurred, returned about $3.8 million to the
Treasury, and deposited at least $11.7 million in separate Treasury accounts to help pay for agency programs, among other things. The amounts each agency distributed varied, depending on the agencies? differing authorities."

Like I said Ropin, what I say is not opinion, its fact. If you have any other sources that say otherwise let me know. I can forward the entire PDF to you if you just wanna PM your email. Thanks

CC
 
It is your opinion that it's a waste of money.

You should be able to click on my profile and email it to me. I'll hold comment until I read it.

I doubt it was the intent of the government to ever to make money. If the forest service or blm was in the business to turn a profit, don't you think they would be charging everybody for access?
 
Ropin you crack me up. So wasting almost 120 million dollars to benefit a few welfare ranchers is worth it to who? The ranchers, thats all it benefits.
 
No I agree with ropin, it isn't the forests service job to clear a profit. Government isn't a buisness. Ranching is. Yes, if the prices were raised we would have less complaints. Coyote has a good point, you pay to camp at a lot of federally owned campsites, and that ammount $6-10 per week is a lot more than a cow and calf pay for a month. Why? I work in construction ropin, demand is nearly dead, yet materials continue to go up due to oil/gas. Guess what, we are eating the increases because if we passed them along the little bit of work out there would most likely dry up. Notice that the federal government doesn't come in and level out our prices and provide below market pricing for materials so that prices don't go up. See this is a buisness, in yours you get paid to keep your land out of production(greenbelt, rotations), way cheap feed on public land(compared to hay etc), government agencies help(trappers, range scientists, range management, forest inventory, etc.) and price subsidies, tarifs, and an entire federal cabinet(dept. agriculture). I guess I missed the department of construction, or accounting, or computer science. You also employ nearly all illegal aliens and are exempt from minimum wage laws, workmans comp laws, etc. that all other buisnesses have to comply with. And why do we the taxpayer invest all of this money into private ranchers? TO keep food prices low? Food costs in Utah went INFLATED 7% last month alone. Beef prices have nearly doubled in the last 2 years. Oh I know your off the hoof prices are aren't nearly that much, which again points out why do you get $1.30lb(or whatever it is now) only to have that meat going for $6-7lb? Ranching has long ago quit being a buisness. You can't complain about pricing and tree huggers and whatever when you sit on the big government nipple constantly suckling. Thats my .02 Ropin, but I have no personal hate for you, You get a lot of credit for coming in here and defending/explaining because look how many of your counterparts stay hidden, so you get my respect.
 
I'm still reading the report, but do have a couple comments.

The problem with coyote, besides sounding like a member of earth first, is that he lumps all ranchers who have leases together in a negative manner. Different ranchers have different situations. Calling us welfair recipients is not only an insult, but not true since we are only paying what is asked. From what i'm reading, congress determines the fee's. Whether they are fair or not is another subject.

So far, from what i see in the report, the aum's billed vs the aum's approved is quite a bit less. In other words, there is capacity for more cattle on the blm and forest service lands (actually a lot more in NV and UT)....according to their report. I'm not qualified to discuss that point.

When I finish the report, i'll comment some more.
 
Ropin, the AUM's were supposed to go up, but the cattlemens association fought it tooth and nail. You guys only pay $1.36 per AUM. That is to keep 1 cow and 1 calf on public land for a month, yet I pay $10 to go camping at a campground! Go figure. You can run almost 18 cows on public land for a month for what it costs me to camp for one night!! Dont tell me that is not welfare ranching! If we asked you to pay $10 AUM's you guys would freak, and you ranchers have fought tooth and nail not to raise it. You know that.
Ropin I dont know about NM, but I dont think every acre possible should be used for grazing, that is the whole issue, we feel there is already TOO MUCH grazing, not enough. I say bring the price of an AUM up to compete with what you would pay for private grazing. But we know that will never happen. I feel we should allow wildlife numbers to increase and use those available AUM's instead of cattle. It would have alot larger economic impact.
CC

I dont belong to Earth Justice, just sick of what I see on the mountain.
 
WELL, WELL, WELL, look what we have here....... If it isn't my old friend bearman and a few of the others trying to gang up on the cattle industry again. Bearman, last time we locked horns, you went from insulting my wife to running away with your tail between your legs. I thought we had made some progress but then I come over here and see you guys gainging up on Ropin. Shame, shame, shame. I have been eyeing this post for awhile and honestly, have been biting my tongue because it is the same old hashed out B.S. My head starts to tingle and my left eye gets a twitch in it whenerver I start to try and read some of the posts in this thread.

It's all been done before kids. I can go out there and I can find you an example of habitat destryoed by cattle, I can find you examples of habitat destroyed by sheep, I can find fences is disrepair and noxious weed problems. Then, I can go around the corner and show you range that is in phenomincal condition that has been grazed for the last 100 years, I can show you a homeranch that is flurishing with deer and elk, I can show you a cattle water develpoment that is supporting 100's of big game animals. The fact of the matter is, when done right, proper range management can be a wonderful tool for creating wildlife habitat and both should be fighting the same fight, not pointing the finger at each other. It is the job of the local BLM and Forrest Service offices to make sure that the ranchers are doing thier part on the public land.

It is unfortunate that there is a vocal minority in both the ranching and hunting communities that are creating a problem. With all the problems that the two groups are going to have to face in the near future such as loss of habitat due to urban sprawl, pressure from envirnomental groups for species listings, etc, etc.; is this argument really worth having? I have said it before and I will say it again, ranches, in the long run, benefit wildlife in more ways than any of you know. I really don't want to get drug into this post anymore than I already have, the level of uninformed opinoions makes me nauseous. But, I doubt I will be so lucky.
 
Wow fallout I thought we left on ok terms. Number one I never talk to your wife unless she was using your post. Number two I insulted you only after you started it, I would not insult anyone unless they went off on me. Third I never left with my tail between my legs from you! Forth if you read the post I'm on sportsman's side but I do not think cattle should be removed! As I see it the debate is not one sided. The benefit to wildlife you speak of is a bunch of bs. Ranches do help but to say we don't know, I bet I spend more time out than you.
 
Fallout, you make me smile. Nothing like jumping in on a post and telling everyone how "uniformed" people are with welfare ranching. Thats a good one. Your right it is the job of the BLM and Forest Service to make sure ranchers are up to par, thats one of the points. We the taxpayers fund your cattle operations. Its a joke, thats the whole point. Why should we pay for hundreds of government employees to benefit a minority group that does not pull its weight. $1.36 an AUM, give me a break. There is no government agency making sure I do my job.

I have no doubt that when "done right" they can benefit wildlife, the problem is that it seems its rarely done right. Fallout I can show you many more species and habitat destroyed by cattle than you will ever show me saved by it. One other thing if you think I am mis-informed please post un-biased links to support your "educated" theory. I have already emailed Ropin the GAO "Government Accountability Office" (You probably did not know it even existed) report on how public grazing costs the taxpayers over 120 million dollars a year. I can forward that to you so you can take a gander. I dont state my opinion, even though I have one, I state obvious facts.

CC
 
Ah come on bearman, we did leave on good terms. I am just trying to see how easily I can get your feathers ruffled again! I still do believe you made some sort of comment about my wife being my sister though, it made we want to go get a blood test just to be sure. You and I had our fun already and there is no need for us to get into it again, we agreed to disagree and I am fine with that. I just wish you would ease up on some of these posts as I still think you are making your opinions based on a few bad experiences with Elko county ranchers.

Ah, now on to Coyote_chaser. I really haven't had my fun with you yet. To be honest, I am not sure if you are even worth the effort. Bearman at least put up a fight, I don't know if you have it in you. You have already shown us glimpses of your ignorance by your comments on cheatgrass. Do you understand that this is the World Wide Web? Do you get the concept that at any given time, any individual person on the planet can get on the internet, go to this website , and read what you have typed? Think a little bit before you type, for all we know, this stuff could be floating around cyberspace for all eternity. Stop making a fool of yourself.

I really don't care about the GAO report, I've seen it. Some of it is fine and some it should be read very carefully. Do you know how much logging cost taxpayers? How about mining? How about natural gas drilling? How about open-ocean fishing? Or research on pygmy rabbits? Or FDA lawsuits? Do you want me to go on and on and on? That really wasn't the point of this post. anyone can come up with some numbers. Don't preach to me about biological data. I can bury you in enough biological data that you wouldn't be able to get to your computer to trade another stock for three months.

Coyote-Chaser, that's actually a funny name for a guy who is against ranching. Have you read the report that shows that shooting coyotes and thining their population actually stimulates increased reproduction and higher predation rates among the next generation? Not important to this discussion, just an example of how this biological data stuff can work for you.

Fact of the matter is, I don't know you....know nothing about you. I wouldn't know you if you walked by me on the street tomorrow. However, you paint a nice picture of yourself through your posts. Stop while you're ahead, this isn't going to get any better for you. Stick to the stock market. As bad as it is right now, between this and that, its the best thing going for you.
 
Guess I missed the oil drilling is good for the environment arguement. I also believe that my reading has pointed out the destruction to fisheries that is possed by commericial fishing, see overfishing. If a nuclear bomb went off in the forest it would do more damage than grazing so grazing must be good for the forest. Get real. Coyote and I don't agree on a lot, I think there should be continued grazing, but the prices are out of wack, and yes the cattlemens/ sheepmens associations lobby for this. Should you get a break compared to private, yes, half price, maybe, but your not even close to that and we all know it. As to the arguement that our range here in Utah could support more, our deer herds that starved to death by the thousands last year would beg to differ. I could be swayed if the permits were issued on real time data, meaning that if we are in a severe drought(which most of the west is in most of the time) the animals come off mid summer versus end of sept. first of oct..
Bearman I would love to see the biological data showing grazing on forest ground benefits the forest, haven't seen it. The best you might do is that it is a draw, but I would love to see even that. Again, I grew up here in the west, my family runs animals both private and public and I think it is one of those things that makes us the west. However, for nearly 150 years the cattlemen/sheepmen have pushed there weight, both in courts and with bullets, but the tide has begun to turn, its not the hunters that need to come to the ranchers side, its the ranchers that need to change their "my family has run here forever so its my land" attitude, or else THEY will be gone. The hunters might follow, but there are a lot more of us than you.
 
You missed the point chief, not surprising.....

Let's talk a little bit about the price issue as that has been brought up repeatedly. What is an AUM paying for? In a nut shell, the leasee is buying the grass. What monetary value does that grass have? Well that depends, it is used by some wildlife. Not deer, they are browsers, not grazers. Elk graze and browse but they only use a fraction of the bunch-grasses and for the most part, none of the big game rely heavily on it on winter range. What happends to unutilized grass? It grows through the season, dries up in the winter, and dies. The more this process occurs, the more the grass becomes tougher and the more dead useless fuels that accumulate.

This is where the whole concept of grazing was born. Utilizing a basically unused resource and converting that energy into a human food source. There are a lot of factors that play into the pricing of AUMs and government subsidies play a big role, but understand, this was origionally based on the sale of a product that had no other relative value.

The number of cattle grazed on public lands has dropped off a lot but in an environment where all the buzz revoles around global warming and greenhouse gas emissions, grazing remains one of the more efficient and clean ways to produce beef protein. I admitt, it has to be done right and you are seeing more and more of a push for eco-friendly ranching. Read "Revolution on the Range" by Courtney White, a former Sierra Club Activist who saw the effects that proper ranching could have on the environment. It is a great book.

Hossblur, like Coyote and Bearman, I'm sure somewhere along the line you had a bad experience with ranching or cows or a rancher and it has biased your views on a few things. Remember, iformation is everywhere and promotes everything. Keep an open mind and get to know a topic before you go blabbing on about it.
 
Grazing came about because the grass was there, free grazers occupied much of the west LONG before private land and barb wire ate up large expanses. You are right about bunch grasses and deer, but then sheep occupy much of the land we are talking about and sheep are much less picky about their food source and will eat down to the dirt. Also sheep are flock animals unlike cows which may travel in herds but often feed more spread out, sheep feed and travel in large swaths, trampling what they don't eat. What is the monetary value of grass? what do you pay for hay? Yes, much of my complaints are aimed at bad ranchers. I hunt on private ground a lot and he has mtn permits, keeps his animals moved and gets them off the mtn on his deadline, he also allows hunting on his private land to all those that ask and know how to act. You made one of my points for me, grazing is the cheapest way to grow cows. You could double the price and it still would be. Knowledge of the subject, my brother in law is a forest inventory specialist for the forest service, I have a degree in microbiology, I have extended family that still run sheep,and a friend that is a cattle rancher. Guess what, we debate this all the time, which is all I'm doing here, I don't want to end public grazing, I am hoping that as the older guys move on the younger generations will have less of an entitlement attitude, and that programs such as Utahs CWMU favor the rancher less and the citizen more. Ranchers need to police there own, remember that poachers and high fence hunters are simply killers not hunters, but to the anti's we're the same. The same is true for ranchers.
 
I am glad that from time to time we can debate a subject, which leads to better info for all without us having to brawl. This site can go into my balls are bigger than yours a lot so it is nice to have a place where real topics can be discussed so I am not hating on rancher in anyway, i'm just talking, mostly because the muzz hunt doesn't start till wed. so I am, like you, looking for anything hunting related to make the time pass faster! This has been a pretty good subject, I think anyway.
 
Hossblur, I agree with you about the whole debate subject and also agree that this post has had a good back and forth. One of the reasons I stayed out of this post for so long is because I figured it would turn into one of those "mine are bigger than yours" type of post you describe. I'm glad it hasn't and hopefully it won't.

Grazing came along because the grass was there, AND because it wsn't used. As far as comparing the price of range grass with grass hay, you can't compare the two. You can't harvest and market range grass. I didn't say that public grazing was the cheapest way to grow cows, I said it quote "grazing remains one of the more efficient and clean ways to produce beef protein." It is one of the cheaper ways, but there are ways that are plenty cheaper, such as grazing on private meadows where the landowner owns the cattle or even in a feedlot situation where the landowner owns the cattle and raise their own feed.

It seems that a lot of people have more of a problem with sheep grazing. Mainly because it is more high intensity and if you enter an area after a band of sheep have gazed it, you are usually not left with a great impression. Sheep need to be be moved constantly in order for them to be eficient, but again when done right, they can have many positive impacts on the range. One of the biggest benefits that we saw in NV when there were a lot of sheep around is that they kept the bitter brush trimmed back and there was an annual growth of more succulent shoots on the bitterbrush that deer loved. Since the sheep are gone, now you see these huge, old bitterbrush bushes that are tough and gnarley that a deer hasn't touched in years because all the lower stuff is too tough and not appealing to them. Little things like that can go unoticed, but make a big difference on the winter range. These are some of the reasons that some of our highest deer numbers corresponded with the times when grazing was at a high level.

I think sheep ranchers are a dying breed. The market and lifestyle are dying off. The hearders are mostly coming from South America and in another 20 years you will be hard pressed to find a sheep rancher. I think cattle have a little more staying power.
 
I totally agree except that you have a lot of expense in raising your own feed(diesel, labor, eqipment, etc.) The land that I hunt on (private) actually feeds cows out of california because it is still cheaper to truck them in to feed on his lot than pasture or hay would be in california. They also use turkey waste to feed the cows because turkey only digest about 30% of their mash leaving alot of grain in their waste, however this also expensive when compared to grazing. I guess my biggest problem with grazing is the attitude of some of the ranchers more than anything. Because they think they own the land they are less likely to keep sheep moving or cows off the stream beds, more likely to overstay their times and in general they really do wear out their welcome. Yes I know they are the minority, but here in utah we have a poacher hotline telephone number, and reward for poaching etc., the same should be true of livestock guys. If you(ranchers) allow it to happen(bad managment) then you deserve to pay the consequences. The west is changing and the old attitudes will not work! We as hunters have had to become politically active and proactive in policing our sport, the ranchers are politically active, but THEY MUST start to police their own or they will be gone, and I agree with ropin and bearman, that would be bad for us because we would loose and ally when it comes to access into our own forest lands.
 
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE CATTLE/SHEEP GRAZING.

I just think they should have them off the public ground by Labor Day Monday............. more of a 90 day grazing timeframe than the current 120 day gig.

It is multiple use ground and everyone else is subject to a timeframe of restrictions in one form or another.

Off the Public Ground grazing by Labor Day Monday.....is very far....

Yeh----I know 'what about getting 3rd crop' off the ground and in the barn.....adjust--we all have to adjust.

Robb
 

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

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

ADAA5E1F-F13A-4FCF-9E35-4B1FA58C6740.jpeg
E36097D6-45AB-45BE-BA1D-1AC47EBB3211.jpeg
san juan elk side view.jpg
D81CE768-215A-4A13-8EE6-007608D50CCA.jpeg
1F59F604-604D-4321-8CC0-D3B13A9AB130.jpeg
FB_IMG_1514767089922.jpg
09BBE665-A29A-4542-A3E0-DE514AFE3A48.jpeg
AD834FB8-72B0-4AD4-96F9-B0A29B67714E.jpeg
2010 buck2.JPG
1688579644301.png
C4B5A2F6-37AB-4A59-B957-DD503BB83FB1.jpeg
IMG_1251 2.JPG
Back
Top Bottom