O.K., the grazing fee is low, no question. But to compare it to private grazing is apples to oranges.
When you graze private land, you generally have fencing, water systems, salt, rangeriders, etc paid for by the private landowner. These items are NOT paid for with public allotments. So your "cost" of grazing public lands is much higher than the $1.35/aum you pay the govt. In most cases, private lands offers better quality grazing than public.
No, the cost/aum is not going to drive ranchers out of business and lead to development. The LOSS of public lands grazing is what leads to selling (as does huge $$$$ for the deeded, regardless of the grazing). But the point is that if the ranch uses public lands grazing, and that grazing goes away the ranch is no longer a viable entity.
If we remove all cattle from public lands are we going to get rid of all the gov't land managers? If we don't, how will we pay for them?
Finally, the numbers of cattle using public lands is skewed. The number being quoted refers to beef cattle (i.e. slaughter cattle) coming directly from public lands. In Idaho, at least 8 of 10 ranchers I know graze on public lands. The majority of use on public lands is either cow/calf operators or yearling operations. Neither of these operations would sell cattle directly from public lands to go to slaughter (other than a few cull cows). The calves/yearlings would go to a feedlot and then to slaughter.
Just understand that there is a great deal of self serving information being put forth by both sides. I personally support well managed public lands grazing.
When you graze private land, you generally have fencing, water systems, salt, rangeriders, etc paid for by the private landowner. These items are NOT paid for with public allotments. So your "cost" of grazing public lands is much higher than the $1.35/aum you pay the govt. In most cases, private lands offers better quality grazing than public.
No, the cost/aum is not going to drive ranchers out of business and lead to development. The LOSS of public lands grazing is what leads to selling (as does huge $$$$ for the deeded, regardless of the grazing). But the point is that if the ranch uses public lands grazing, and that grazing goes away the ranch is no longer a viable entity.
If we remove all cattle from public lands are we going to get rid of all the gov't land managers? If we don't, how will we pay for them?
Finally, the numbers of cattle using public lands is skewed. The number being quoted refers to beef cattle (i.e. slaughter cattle) coming directly from public lands. In Idaho, at least 8 of 10 ranchers I know graze on public lands. The majority of use on public lands is either cow/calf operators or yearling operations. Neither of these operations would sell cattle directly from public lands to go to slaughter (other than a few cull cows). The calves/yearlings would go to a feedlot and then to slaughter.
Just understand that there is a great deal of self serving information being put forth by both sides. I personally support well managed public lands grazing.
