Pajarito
New member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2020
- Messages
- 17
Don't eat much beef due to the fact I'm a hunter. I'd much rather have public land that wasn't destroyed by cows than lower beef prices.
BLM Grazing Overhaul
- Thread starter BigHornRam
- Start date
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
Thanks for that. I like the explicit and self-triggering penalties of my language and the reference to herding of big game. Anybody know anybody at BLM that would entertain some friendly edits to this this section? If so I will happily connect with them next time I am in DC and see if we can trigger a little grass roots rule making.
AlaskaHunter
Well-known member
I wish BLM would reserve 1/1000 of 1 percent of their land for fenced grazing exclosures.
That would demonstrate the potential of land in terms of vegetation habitat that has not been impacted by cattle.
That would demonstrate the potential of land in terms of vegetation habitat that has not been impacted by cattle.
kwyeewyk
Well-known member
Only problem is that would have had to happen before we brought the cattle and sheep in to start with, if you put an enclosure around a bunch of cheatgrass and stop grazing it you just get tall cheatgrass. At this point there is very little land that hasn't already been impacted by livestock. Not to say exclosures aren't useful or shouldn't be used where they make sense.
Workingonit
New member
This is SUCH a key point! Most of the issues people here are concerned about could be addressed pretty effectively through competitive bidding for grazing rights and a requirement that permitees follow the basic rules (AUM limits, staying current on fees, etc.). I have no idea how we could move to that model at this point though, because there is so much financing secured by the leased land. We've allowed it to function as some sort of weird public/private hybrid asset for so long that getting that element out of the economy would be extremely complicated and expensive for taxpayers. Even if we were all on the same page and working together in good faith (ha!), this one would be really, really hard to sort out.
I am anti public land grazing. Big game and public access are at complete odds with the almighty cattle industry and the landed gentry. It is easy to sympathize with a rancher who is blue-collar and staying afloat with the help of a couple summer grazing allotments however this rosy enterprise is a distraction. You cannot argue with the fact that both elk and cattle must have lots of grass. Public land grazing is subsidized Agriculture on a massive scale. Grass is big $$$. Every fat black cow you see wallowing around in a FS or BLM riparian area or camp ground represents 2 elk (or a bison) that a wealthy rancher took from the general public and put into his personal bank account. In my experience moose seem to be intolerant of moo cows. Domestic sheep growers regularly kill bighorns and I’ll probably never get the chance to hunt one. I will only mention the transportation of noxious weed seeds from the winter feed yard to our favorite place on earth. Last year my favorite drainage was grazed to the ground illegally (2nd year of a 3 year rest rotation). The grazing association claimed accident (2 months of grazing is no accident) and barely received a slap on the wrist-had an outfitter made a mistake of that level he or she would NEVER operate on public land again. Then of course when the big game move out of the foot hills cuz there is no forage left the same bloated industry that took the winter forage demands that it’s -paid-for-state legislators hand them shoulder seasons to protect their unprotected candy stacks of alfalfa...all while closing the gates to the general public during regular seasons so that they may collect trophy hunt leases first. Sadly I am sure big money will continue to get what the grass it wants just like it always has
BigHornRam
Well-known member
I think we as hunters could use less biased rhetoric like this, and more thoughtful discussion by people like Fred King, Kurt Alt, Mike Frisina, and land stewards like @antlerradar . My opinion.
brocksw
Well-known member
Not long ago I walked around with a friend who could identify pretty much every grass species we came across, including what was native and what was invasive....it is absolutely mind blowing how much invasive grass/tree/shrub species have impacted ecosystems and how vastly different our landscapes look because of it.
To another comment that was made. Public lands are multiple use, I think it is in the best interest of hunters and Americans to keep them that way.
Luke_with_a_lab
Well-known member
It would be great if they'd have animals off before hunting season like you said. For exapmle, when we went archery hunting this year there were cowboys EVERYWHERE rounding up cows.. needless to say they blew all the elk out. It was a bummer because I'd spent a ton of time over the summer setting up trail cams and patterning elk.
Yeah I understand what you’re trying to say bighorn-the cattle industry is big and powerful enough that our interests will be best served if we just try our best to fake a smile and kiss their a****. You don’t like my rhetoric but nothing I said was incorrect. Keep in mind that I got to see my favorite drainage with grass and without cattle for 2 consecutive years. In 12 years of hunting and camping this drainage, 2018 was the first year I’ve seen it without cattle and ‘19 the second. Granted we did have above average precipitation in ‘18 and ‘19 but the quality of habitat and density of big game during those years in this drainage was stunning for me. It absolutely changed my opinion of public land grazing allotments forever. The grass was waste high on the hill tops and chest high on the creek bottoms. There was two bull moose of Alaskan size using the same creek bottom both years. Mule deer everywhere I looked. A healthy band of bighorns stayed around that drainage from august to thanksgiving both years-before that I’d only seen one traveling ram back there in 2009. Saw fat as hell black bears nearly every day. Elk in every meadow during daylight hours. I was privileged to see and hear a herd of 170+ head of elk grazing through the same large pasture every evening. Picture a big ol herd of hungry cattle getting turned out onto new grass but instead they were elk! For once the creek bottom trail wasn’t demolished by cattle. In the first year of grazing rest beavers made a pond where in past years cattle had wallowed. Luckily the beaver pond still stands and the trout and waterfowl are all over it- I even saw my first group of harlequins on it this year. Furthermore I want to state that my opinion on this matter may be seen as hypocritical-I make my living as an independent contractor drawing my pay from cattle producers and have a bunch of good friends who are working cowboys. If my opinions on this matter were to someday sabotage my business I will own that and move on. The mountains, the wildlife and my access to ‘em are the only reason I live here.
Luke_with_a_lab
Well-known member
One other thing that the ranchers should be required to do is NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL. Maybe they are supposed to do it but dont? It never fails cows spread weeds like crazy. Especially houndstounge. Where I hunt Ive seen the houndstounge and knapweed in new spots every year and its obvious its from the cattle.
And this past year 2020 when the cattle came back (illegally) the grass was once again so short you could’ve played golf. I only saw 1 cow moose, no bighorns and just the occasional mule deer. Only say the same skinny red bear a few times. Elk seemed scattered, less dense and I never saw them grazing the big open pastures, at least during the daylight, like I’d seen many times in ‘18 and ‘19. Creeks were once again a muddy wreck. Trails were also an unrecognizable wreck. Hounds tongue everywhere
So do wildlife. So do hunters. So do others recreating on public lands and driving on roads, both open and closed. I will admit each of those have different levels of contribution to the spread, but each are still a factor. Nothing is obvious. Cattle may have not even been what introduced houndstongue into that area. It could have been a human and now the cattle are spreading it along with wildlife.
kwyeewyk
Well-known member
It's good to hear that the area looked so good after two years' rest, that means it's still in good condition overall, because if it had been wrecked from all they previous years of grazing it wouldn't have instantly returned to the condition you describe, unless of course you're mistaking invasive plants (which can grow waist deep) for natives, in which case it's really just a huge fire hazard and seed source for further expansion of the invasives. I think most people underestimate the amount of change that has occurred on the landscape from historic livestock grazing, not to say all current grazing is well managed and perfect, but historic grazing changed everything long before any of us ever saw it. Most of the areas that are really bad have been for a long time. There is certainly an expansion of weeds still occurring, and current grazing is a factor, among many, but not the sole driver. It was humans who brought the weeds here. Yes cattle spread them, but as previously mentioned so do elk and everything else, some of the worst weed expansion I've seen after a fire was due to elk, they cover a lot more ground than cows, get it all in every nook and cranny.
brocksw
Well-known member
It's not as easy as just taking a 4 wheeler out and spraying. I'm not a range specialist or anything but I understand that some, not all, weed/grass species are receptive to herbicides, some can only be burned, some can only be burned certain times of year, some places the grazing associations and even local residents get real nervous when you start talking controlled burns, some don't want that land taken out of production for that time, some might have ESA protections, etc..
The point is, at least to my understanding (and I could easily be wrong)it's not as simple as pointing a finger and saying go do that today so it's all better tomorrow. The noxious/invasive weeds/grasses/trees is a MASSIVE undertaking, that costs a whole bunch of money, with a whole bunch of stakeholders that have different interests and concerns, and changes are made incrementally...which means small steps over sustained periods. Which also means the business of fighting this is one that can make you feel like you're chasing your tail.
Last edited:
brocksw
Well-known member
I'd rather keep politicians out of hunting/public land than ranchers.
It's why MT SB 143 is so frustrating and disappointing. I have a lot more in common with an outfitter who ranches than I do the politician who who gets fed cocktails and 5 course meals by his corporate donors in 5 piece suits and knows nothing of anything about fairness or the blood, sweat, and tears of the average American who works their ass off for work and play.
Just as an example(and there are plenty on both sides of the aisle), I hear a lot of conservatives talk about Ted Cruz like he's some sort of conservative hero that represents "Real Freedom loving Americans". The dude was a private school baby who went to princeton and then Harvard law to became an attorney and then a politician. Smart dude right? Except, WTH does he know about shooting a bull elk 3 miles into the shit by yourself? Or calving season in the winter? Or saving up all year for that elk tag? Or putting up miles of fence in the Aug heat? One 5 mile packout in the dark would do a lot for Mr. Cruz, if he could hack it. So nah man, he's more the enemy than the rancher who has cows in my mule deer spot. Just wish the rancher wouldn't try to limit my opportunity or access.
Last edited:
Luke_with_a_lab
Well-known member
I have a fairly good idea when it comes to this being that I do large acerage weed control for a living. My big problem gripe is the houndstounge, that is what the cattle are spreading the worst in my area. It is a bi-annual type of weed meaning it lives two years. In most cases it is as easy as point and shoot with a sprayer, if you are to keep on it somewhat regularly. The other option is go in with backpack and spot treat problem areas. Is it alot of work? yes, however if they are not held responsible they wont willingly do anything and the problem gets way worse. I feel the ranchers should in some way be responsible for the weed infestations their cows are responsible for spreading. Otherwise in another 10 years we will have weed problems you cant even imagine. I understand that people and other users do contribute to the spread of the weeds but in most cases it is minor in comparison. Also they usually spread weeds along trails that are much easier to control, while cows go all over.
Additionally I think livestock should only be fed certified weed free hay for a week or so prior to being taken to public lands, otherwise they will poop out weed seeds from wherever they came from, thus starting new infestations.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
I did a lot of hunting in this country last season and was impressed with the weed management going on there. This goes against the narrative that some here are trying to promote. My first hand observations say something different. Read it or ignore it, I'll just leave this here for those who care to learn something.
Last edited:
Carnage2011
Well-known member
Glad you were impressed. I’ve done a lot of that spraying myself. That allotment tries to be the standard for rotational grazing and land management, but it’s a battle.
Last edited:
BigHornRam
Well-known member
I figured you had a hand in the weed management there. Great job and thanks for what you do.
