RobertD
Well-known member
Speaking my language now. The pre-Columbian South would've been a fascinating place
American prairie. What's the issue?
- Thread starter hossblur
- Start date
appaloosa
Well-known member
I am a sustaining member of the APR, just got my renewal notice today.
the end
the end
brocksw
Well-known member
Any research into the current state of the Great Plains and prairie ecosystems compared to the time of settlement should yield some eye-opening findings. If it doesn't concern you, I'm concerned enough for both of us.
My assumption is that if in 100 years the APR is closed to hunting or closed to human access, it's because we as a species have literally plowed all other prairie into the ground. Ushered into extinction from neglect and omitted from the landscape of Middle America, all in the name of production and insignificance. Places like the APR will be mere relics of the "ocean of grass" that the euro-American explorers first described when breaching the deciduous forests of the east.
If that seems far fetched to you, you're unaware of the fact that we're already past the halfway point to get there. Less than half of the great plains remains in prairie. Nearly half of all great plains birds species are gone. 30 million American Bison, gone. Native herds of elk and big horn sheep, gone. Native grasses and wildflowers, have been corrupted by invasive species to a point of no return. Cheat grass, smooth brome, crested wheatgrass, are spreading like a prairie wild fire. Every single year we literally plow over a million acres of native prairie into the ground for mono-culture. The figure I saw for 2019 was 2.6 million acres. That's 2.6 million acres of prairie that may never be seen again.
So when Chuck and the UPOM crew gather round their Save a cowboy sign, wanting to rid the remaining prairie of Bison and elk. Doing everything they can to stop American Prairie and their mission. I have zero sympathy for them.
My assumption is that if in 100 years the APR is closed to hunting or closed to human access, it's because we as a species have literally plowed all other prairie into the ground. Ushered into extinction from neglect and omitted from the landscape of Middle America, all in the name of production and insignificance. Places like the APR will be mere relics of the "ocean of grass" that the euro-American explorers first described when breaching the deciduous forests of the east.
If that seems far fetched to you, you're unaware of the fact that we're already past the halfway point to get there. Less than half of the great plains remains in prairie. Nearly half of all great plains birds species are gone. 30 million American Bison, gone. Native herds of elk and big horn sheep, gone. Native grasses and wildflowers, have been corrupted by invasive species to a point of no return. Cheat grass, smooth brome, crested wheatgrass, are spreading like a prairie wild fire. Every single year we literally plow over a million acres of native prairie into the ground for mono-culture. The figure I saw for 2019 was 2.6 million acres. That's 2.6 million acres of prairie that may never be seen again.
So when Chuck and the UPOM crew gather round their Save a cowboy sign, wanting to rid the remaining prairie of Bison and elk. Doing everything they can to stop American Prairie and their mission. I have zero sympathy for them.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,629
This same thing can be said about winter range and development in the inter mountain west.
I’m definitely not disagreeing with your assessment about the Great Plains and Great Plains ecosystems but here is some food for thought, when a group of outside folks show up uninvited and tell the locals “we are here to save you!” Don’t you think it’s normal human nature to react with “from what? We are doing fine.” For me that boils it down pretty simply of why there are a range of thoughts and opinions on APR.
Hopefully this comment doesn’t incite a riot. I think I have already said my piece on this and ticked enough folks off.
brocksw
Well-known member
The same can be said about many ecosystems on the planet. Taigas, oceans, fresh water systems throughout the world. That's the point. "Normal human nature" can be very flawed. We have a history of selfishness and greed.
Look no further than the shortsightedness we employ when thinking about the future of the landscape on which we live. "From what? We are doing fine"........ We've only destroyed half of the 2nd largest grasslands ecosystem in the entire world. Nothing to see here. #saveacowboy
Last edited:
Laszlo Cravensworth
Well-known member
This is where the argument loses me.
I understand that there is some frustration that neighboring ranches are bought out at prices that locals can't afford. But, it seems to me that this is happening all over by groups that aren't APR. I see no difference there than when Bill Gates or the Mormon church sweeps in and drops millions in a property.
Many of us see value in APR consolidating property to preserve some of the massively diminished prairie ecosystem. Most of us see value in the APR keeping these properties from been developed.
It seems like it boils down to outsiders moving into an area and doing something different on their property than what the old owners did. If that's the case you have to learn to live with it, just like the rest of America has continually done.
When I was young Southern Oregon was covered in pear orchards. By the mid 2000s many had been removed for development and vineyards were spreading. There was quite a bit of animosity towards the grape growers. 20 years later vineyard acreage is double that of pears and people are excited to be a grape growing region.
In 2018 our area had 20k acres of registered hemp, and who knows how many acres unregistered. People hate it, and I'll admit that working across the highway from it literally stinks. Not much different than a hog farm being across the street though. These are the same growing pains that we've had across the continent. Things change.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,629
To be fair though, isn’t the reason APR chose this specific area was because it was one of the more intact ecosystems? The easiest to “restore”? Traditional ranchers in that area had done pretty good are my thoughts. I am just spitballing, I suspect farming is the biggest cause of loss of the prairie ecosystem so in essence lots of blame to go around but federal farming subsidies definitely have a hand, no?
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,629
I think you have misunderstood my argument. I simply will not support APR at this point. Your lesser of 2 evils argument may prove to be spot on, I am just saying the jury is still out for me. Of course than I laid out an anti hunting future scenario I could foresee while wearing my tinfoil hat. Just my opinion but i don’t think that scenario is impossible. For me I will support other causes such as funding Wy f&g with the purchase of moose points that are absolutely worthless to me right now or rmef access acquisitions. Groups that support long term public access not short term permission. Maybe someday APR will win me over.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,629
Question: do you think APR would support granting perpetual non-exclusive access easements to the landlocked public lands across their deeded lands?
brocksw
Well-known member
My understanding was that there was several locations they looked at throughout the plains. The reason they chose central MT was because there wasn't as much competition from extraction industries, it was slightly more isolated and distanced from civilization, and there was large tracts of public land that would help consolidate smaller chunks of land into larger pieces. I'm sure there was a host of reasons. Farming subsidies have absolutely played a roll. Improving biotech in ag has also contributed. When guys can get
Last edited:
brocksw
Well-known member
They've discussed this before. This is, I think, where some of the concern creeps in. They have stated publicly that they are shying away from permanent easements until they get a better feel for how wildlife populations will use the landscape as AP acres and wildlife populations grow. It makes sense. Easements are long term and hard, if not impossible to change once put in place. They stated they want to make sure easements are in the right place the first time.
They aren't trying to save the people that live there, they are trying to save the praire for everyone's benefit.
Thats what it seems like a lot of people miss in these discussions.
Sure, its a great life to run a ranch and part of the American heritage and all that but if it's not sustainable then what? Maybe make some foundations to preserve the skills? A non profit that runs some demonstration ranches?
I know that suggestion is gonna piss a whole lot of people off but there are a lot of f'people in this country and it was only a stroke of random luck that one guy was born to lawyers in New York, another to Seattle Techies, someone to rancher in Montana, etc.
When its lost, its lost to everyone. You can always rebuild the fences, shoot the buffalo again and plow under the praire. Its bringing it back thats the problem.
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Are they? Aren't some of the arguments against APR that the ranchers are struggling? Either way, let's pick an argument and stick with it. This is getting confusing.
Laszlo Cravensworth
Well-known member
I'm not really trying to make a lesser of two evils argument. I'm saying I dont really give a crap what they're doing on their property as long as it's a legal use. It's just a bonus that I think their mission is cool.
I think hemp farming is stupid. It's a get rich quick boondoggle here, imo. I'm not opposed to people growing hemp on their property though. I wouldn't care if the new brand of Rajneeshis came in next door as long as it's all above board and they turn the music off at a decent time.
rogerthat
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2015
- Messages
- 3,629
That wasn't my argument. I don't think many people are struggling in the US right now. We are filthy rich
APR also has a few properties that already have perpetual easements. I think one of them is a Habitat MT easement which requires public access in perpetuity as well.
brocksw
Well-known member
Yes, and if I remember correctly they found that one of them was right smack dab in the middle of a pronghorn migration corridor?
No idea, but prolly.
Corridor conserved forever with access conserved forever. Double win.
If you don't think people are struggling in the Great U S of A, you arent paying attention.
