BuzzH
Well-known member
AP is playing the long game, will be around when all the save the cowboy crowd is dust.
American prairie. What's the issue?
- Thread starter hossblur
- Start date
Q: How does this virtue signaling by Burgrum and the Montana delegation "Save the Cowboy?"
Seriously, I'm trying to figure out how hammering a group, AP, that leases private pasture for 8,000 head of cattle to nearby operators is somehow helpful to the cause of ranchers.
Seriously, I'm trying to figure out how hammering a group, AP, that leases private pasture for 8,000 head of cattle to nearby operators is somehow helpful to the cause of ranchers.
Thanks for finding the cattle number. I searched for a bit and then was side tracked. I think this is a major point....well, one of several anyway.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,459
It’s part of a larger plan to save ranchers. Phase one was sending 40 billion to Argentina and importing more Argentinian beef into the US market.
This will help lower retail beef prices and combined with the fact that AP will pay more for ranches that come up for sale in the area it should assist in helping beef producers expand their operations and pass on their ranches to the next generation….
Rack Daniels
Well-known member
Mixed reaction to BLM decision to cancel American Prairie Reserve bison permits
American Prairie CEO Alison Fox called the decision "unfair, deeply disappointing, disruptive, and inconsistent with long-standing public-lands grazing practices in Montana."www.krtv.com
Of all the touchy subjects in this great state, I fail to fully comprehend the Save the Cowboy thing.. maybe someone can elaborate?
“reversing a prior federal authorization that allowed APR to graze non-production bison on over 63,000 acres of federal public lands.”
When did we have to ALLOW or DENY free roaming native species to graze federal lands?
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,459
Those free roaming native species are legally designated as livestock in MT when they are privately owned. Those herds come under the jurisdiction of the MT Dept of Livestock rather than FWP which manages wild herds.
Rack Daniels
Well-known member
So is that the bottom line that needs to change? How do we change these from livestock to free roaming native species owned by the trustees? Wasn’t elk a high fence private stock at one point here…….?
BuzzH
Well-known member
The main thing that's important is that things like this aren't going to slow AP down from acquiring private lands when they come up for sale. In fact, things like this tend to make people more supportive of AP.
I think its more important that they continue to acquire lands for the sake of deer, elk, bighorns, sage grouse, etc. The bison are certainly part of it, but they can keep those on their deeded ground and kick off more cattle from their private leases.
Be interesting to see if AP fights this in court or appeals somehow.
I think its more important that they continue to acquire lands for the sake of deer, elk, bighorns, sage grouse, etc. The bison are certainly part of it, but they can keep those on their deeded ground and kick off more cattle from their private leases.
Be interesting to see if AP fights this in court or appeals somehow.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,459
Total conjecture on my part but I would expectt an attempt to change the status of bison from livestock back to wildlife would trigger a huge fight with the ag/livestock industry since bison are brucellosis carriers and can also interbreed with domestic cattle.
Pucky Freak
Well-known member
Go ahead and keep kicking the gift horse in the mouth.
