JoseCuervo
New member
cmiddleton said:
Someone who would say something as shallow and as ignorant as that is someone who deserves our pity. May God bless his soul.
Welfare ranchers don`t like Wyoming`s Wolf Plan
- Thread starter 280
- Start date
Someone who would say something as shallow and as ignorant as that is someone who deserves our pity. May God bless his soul.
middleton, we all got it, you have done well for yourself. Well done.
My question, why do you think you are an expert on gov't process, natural resources, wolves, drilling, federal grazing, etc... At least why do you think you are more knowledgeable on these subjects than others whom have earned degrees on some of these subjects or currently work in those fields? The way I see it, you telling Buzz he doesn't know what he is talking about on some of these issue since he is from MT is like him saying you don't know how to wire a building.
Glad you are passionate on the subject, but has already been pointed out in a few examples, you are talking out of your ass on a few issues.
My question, why do you think you are an expert on gov't process, natural resources, wolves, drilling, federal grazing, etc... At least why do you think you are more knowledgeable on these subjects than others whom have earned degrees on some of these subjects or currently work in those fields? The way I see it, you telling Buzz he doesn't know what he is talking about on some of these issue since he is from MT is like him saying you don't know how to wire a building.
Glad you are passionate on the subject, but has already been pointed out in a few examples, you are talking out of your ass on a few issues.
cmiddleton
New member
I'm not a expert i just don't think hunters or biologists should be so anti work force, no oil and gas no farming and ranching is the ground they are standing on. if wyoming had neither all we would have is welfare and unemployment.
or we could get a government subsidized job.
as far as wolves go they will have little impact on wyomings economy, how many people who go to Yellowstone go only because of the wolf. once they start hunting them how many tags a year will be sold? wow i bet that will boost the economy. talk about welfare ranchers when the biologists all work for the government.
I'm not talking out my ass I'm giving a different opinion. when buzz or 280 jumps on someones back i stick up for the underdog bhr is allowed to have his opinion too if that differs from their opinion that doesn't make him bad.
i do know how much of wyoming feels about this and or governor is doing just what the voters elected him for. he is the only demacrat i voted for.
wow buzz can type, and count the elk population drop and the wolves big game licenses fees. he can make up ideas how things work in a perfect world but its not proven tell its to late.
lets bring back wolves, they use to be here. while we are at it let bring back small pox it use to be here too.
or we could get a government subsidized job.
as far as wolves go they will have little impact on wyomings economy, how many people who go to Yellowstone go only because of the wolf. once they start hunting them how many tags a year will be sold? wow i bet that will boost the economy. talk about welfare ranchers when the biologists all work for the government.
I'm not talking out my ass I'm giving a different opinion. when buzz or 280 jumps on someones back i stick up for the underdog bhr is allowed to have his opinion too if that differs from their opinion that doesn't make him bad.
i do know how much of wyoming feels about this and or governor is doing just what the voters elected him for. he is the only demacrat i voted for.
wow buzz can type, and count the elk population drop and the wolves big game licenses fees. he can make up ideas how things work in a perfect world but its not proven tell its to late.
lets bring back wolves, they use to be here. while we are at it let bring back small pox it use to be here too.
Bambistew
Well-known member
In light of other posts...
Are the "welfare rancher" haters racist? If not how so?
Are the "welfare rancher" haters racist? If not how so?
BigHornRam
Well-known member
No Bambi, they are bigots. Bigot: one obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his own church , party, belief, or opinion
JoseCuervo
New member
Hey middleton,
How you doing on the race to a better life today? Make another bank deposit? Steal money out of the collection plate on Sunday?
How you doing on the race to a better life today? Make another bank deposit? Steal money out of the collection plate on Sunday?
BuzzH
Well-known member
Middleton,
You're definately talking out of your ass again.
I'm not saying stop oil and gas development or stopping all ranching.
My thoughts are to do both responsibly...in particular on MY PUBLIC LANDS.
If welfare ranchers cant figure out a way to graze without destroying wildlife habitat on MY PUBLIC LANDS...jerk the lease. If they over-graze...lease over...if they dont have their livestock off their leases on time...yep...no more lease. Welfare Ranchers have used, abused, and flat mismanaged public lands for years and years and years. The BLM, FS, and people like you have looked the other way and have done nothing but encourage it.
Well, times have changed, they're being held accountable. Research has proven that 70% of MY PUBLIC LANDS are in poor condition. Riparian habitat on federal lands...90% in poor condition.
I cant accept abuse of Federal Lands to any extent....let alone to the point that a vast majority are in poor health.
Same goes with oil and gas development. If it cant be done in a manner that limits the number of pads per square mile (along with the associated roads)...I dont want it to happen. I also dont want oil and gas development in areas that are sensitive to big-game winter range, sage grouse leks, riparian habitats, etc. Find a way to directionally drill or mitigate impacts...or keep off MY PUBLIC LANDS.
I dont see how anyone who claims to hunt and be a wildlife conservationist would post the crap you do.
You dont see the big-picture or even understand the problems. You live in the delusional world of make-believe where oil and gas development along with welfare ranching have no impact on anything else. My wildlife is being negatively impacted by a couple special interests on MY PUBLIC LANDS. Thats why I attend meetings and support groups that oppose these abuses. Wildlife should have equal consideration as hunting, fishing, and tourism are BIG BUSINESS for Wyoming.
Time to educate yourself Middleton.
You're definately talking out of your ass again.
I'm not saying stop oil and gas development or stopping all ranching.
My thoughts are to do both responsibly...in particular on MY PUBLIC LANDS.
If welfare ranchers cant figure out a way to graze without destroying wildlife habitat on MY PUBLIC LANDS...jerk the lease. If they over-graze...lease over...if they dont have their livestock off their leases on time...yep...no more lease. Welfare Ranchers have used, abused, and flat mismanaged public lands for years and years and years. The BLM, FS, and people like you have looked the other way and have done nothing but encourage it.
Well, times have changed, they're being held accountable. Research has proven that 70% of MY PUBLIC LANDS are in poor condition. Riparian habitat on federal lands...90% in poor condition.
I cant accept abuse of Federal Lands to any extent....let alone to the point that a vast majority are in poor health.
Same goes with oil and gas development. If it cant be done in a manner that limits the number of pads per square mile (along with the associated roads)...I dont want it to happen. I also dont want oil and gas development in areas that are sensitive to big-game winter range, sage grouse leks, riparian habitats, etc. Find a way to directionally drill or mitigate impacts...or keep off MY PUBLIC LANDS.
I dont see how anyone who claims to hunt and be a wildlife conservationist would post the crap you do.
You dont see the big-picture or even understand the problems. You live in the delusional world of make-believe where oil and gas development along with welfare ranching have no impact on anything else. My wildlife is being negatively impacted by a couple special interests on MY PUBLIC LANDS. Thats why I attend meetings and support groups that oppose these abuses. Wildlife should have equal consideration as hunting, fishing, and tourism are BIG BUSINESS for Wyoming.
Time to educate yourself Middleton.
is this now going to turn into attacking middlton because he "bragged" about his success??????
you insult the guy's typing skills, call him an ape and now accuse the man of being shallow when he defends himself.
Mdlton, congrats on your success and may your luck(skill) continue .
you insult the guy's typing skills, call him an ape and now accuse the man of being shallow when he defends himself.
Mdlton, congrats on your success and may your luck(skill) continue .
BuzzH
Well-known member
JB,
The reason Middleton is getting spanked is because he is CLUELESS when it comes to wolves, welfare ranching, and public lands management.
I couldnt care less about his "success" as an electrician. His typing skills are rough, but readable, and I care even less about his family tree.
All those things have nothing to do with his lack of understanding of the issues being discussed.
He thinks that rich tree-huggers can bid on and hold federal leases and then not graze it. See what I mean? Hasnt a clue of even the basics.
The reason Middleton is getting spanked is because he is CLUELESS when it comes to wolves, welfare ranching, and public lands management.
I couldnt care less about his "success" as an electrician. His typing skills are rough, but readable, and I care even less about his family tree.
All those things have nothing to do with his lack of understanding of the issues being discussed.
He thinks that rich tree-huggers can bid on and hold federal leases and then not graze it. See what I mean? Hasnt a clue of even the basics.
chambero
New member
Wow. This one got a little hot. A little moderation on both sides would be nice.
1. Buzz is right. Grazing leases on western land is a lot cheaper than private land. No reason not to charge a little more to fund some of things not getting done - like a little more oversight of oil and gas drilling. There is nothing wrong with grazing public land, there just ought to be a little more competition for grazing rights.
2. If done correctly, oil and gas development doesn't hurt much. The money generated from that activity funds a whole lot of things that we can't do without. We have no choice but to use those resources. From what I can tell, folks in Wyoming desperately need that money. And those jobs can translate to other careers. I don't understand someone putting folks down that are working pretty hard to make a living.
3. Mr. Middleton - most of those projects you mentioned working on were public infrastructure projects paid for by tax dollars just like civil service jobs are funded. We all benefit from government money in some way.
1. Buzz is right. Grazing leases on western land is a lot cheaper than private land. No reason not to charge a little more to fund some of things not getting done - like a little more oversight of oil and gas drilling. There is nothing wrong with grazing public land, there just ought to be a little more competition for grazing rights.
2. If done correctly, oil and gas development doesn't hurt much. The money generated from that activity funds a whole lot of things that we can't do without. We have no choice but to use those resources. From what I can tell, folks in Wyoming desperately need that money. And those jobs can translate to other careers. I don't understand someone putting folks down that are working pretty hard to make a living.
3. Mr. Middleton - most of those projects you mentioned working on were public infrastructure projects paid for by tax dollars just like civil service jobs are funded. We all benefit from government money in some way.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
Well said Robert. Good 'ol Texas common sense.
Wyodeerhunter
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2002
- Messages
- 2,150
BuzzH said:
Well said Buzz.
First off I am for public land grazing. But like Buzz pointed out there are many at fault for the over grazing. Starting with the rancher and all the way up to the BLM etc. I think with current drought conditions in much of the west the leases should be changed to reflect it. In some areas it is so bad that maybe they should end the lease till it (if it does) get better.
This winter I saw something pretty interesting. A local rancher has all his cows on his 160+/- acres for the winter. Normally his cows are out on the range all winter. I asked him why he brought all of how cows in. His reply was the range was so bad he didn't want to make it worse. There are still some good ranchers out there...but like hunting it doesn't take many to ruin it for everyone. A few wreckless hunters can make it an eyesore for the non hunting community. Same goes with the ranchers, but I would agree if someone said that its the majority of the ranchers.....
oh btw, JB it wasn't buzz that called him an ape. it was me. Bananas are beginning to become hard to find in Casper WY.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
280 said:kinda like "military intelligence"
..or 280 intelligence.
cmiddleton
New member
isn't that what everyone is doing on the wolf issue? its all beliefs and opinions.
the facts are yet to be seen. biologist have theories but nothing has been proven to fact.
the facts will show themselves in 20 yrs. my opinion is they will get out of hand if we don't get the upper hand in legislation first be for we sign off on any legal document.
buzz thinks we should give in so he could shoot one. talk about self centered
what do you think the draw odds will be? it will make a moose tag look easy.
i don't care to shoot one unless he is causing me grief. but when he does you can bet i will
the facts are yet to be seen. biologist have theories but nothing has been proven to fact.
the facts will show themselves in 20 yrs. my opinion is they will get out of hand if we don't get the upper hand in legislation first be for we sign off on any legal document.
buzz thinks we should give in so he could shoot one. talk about self centered
what do you think the draw odds will be? it will make a moose tag look easy.
i don't care to shoot one unless he is causing me grief. but when he does you can bet i will
cmiddleton
New member
i agree with chambero, my whole point is that, electrical trade or any building trade for that matter,biologists, engineers, car manufacturers.
everyone here benefits from government in one way or another.
why hate only one portion. everyone in the U.S. has at least one gain from government.
buzz thinks he knows everything I'll listen to chambero instead.
i think he has my vote he made statements that are true and didn't attack any one. if buzz and 280 would have done that they wouldn't have got me fired up.
I'm not clueless I'm standing up agenced two guys who were attacking bhr for his opinions I'm showing them some opinions are farther right wing than bhr.
i don't care who said we need wolves in wyoming but his opinion is wrong.
bhr wants the right plan to go threw. i would prefer they take the sum bitches all the way out. that's what will fire them up but wtf its my opinion and i reserve the right to hold my own opinion. if i can't have that then make dang sure that they don't populate the whole state keep them in the parks and hunt them as big game on wilderness areas. every where else shoot them on site. i bet that fires them up again but like i say its a opinion same as buzzes and 280's.
wyo deer hunter you are just a punk kid you let your mouth overload your ass. yep I'm a ape I'll stand my ground to anyone that's how you get ahead in life is by sticking to your ideas and acting on them. I'm not a big man but i never been in a fight that the other man didn't regret being in a fight the next day. you can make threats to me all day and i don't get mad but go after one of my friends and you will have to go threw me to get there.
they went after bhr and i stood up for him i'd do the same for you if they came after you. you are just a kid the same age as my son. there for I'll cut you a break. someday you may need work and i may need help. keep going in your apprenticeship but don't get to hung up on union or non just look at the job at hand. who cares which side of the fence if there is a job you want to be a part of. look at the projects some are real fun don't let a fun job go due to union or non union. on the same note you can pick and choose your jobs when you get that jw card. then start figuring out what you like to do the most in the field then look for those jobs. any employer will put you to work on it. electricians are in demand and you will have a commodity to sell yourself.
everyone here benefits from government in one way or another.
why hate only one portion. everyone in the U.S. has at least one gain from government.
buzz thinks he knows everything I'll listen to chambero instead.
i think he has my vote he made statements that are true and didn't attack any one. if buzz and 280 would have done that they wouldn't have got me fired up.
I'm not clueless I'm standing up agenced two guys who were attacking bhr for his opinions I'm showing them some opinions are farther right wing than bhr.
i don't care who said we need wolves in wyoming but his opinion is wrong.
bhr wants the right plan to go threw. i would prefer they take the sum bitches all the way out. that's what will fire them up but wtf its my opinion and i reserve the right to hold my own opinion. if i can't have that then make dang sure that they don't populate the whole state keep them in the parks and hunt them as big game on wilderness areas. every where else shoot them on site. i bet that fires them up again but like i say its a opinion same as buzzes and 280's.
wyo deer hunter you are just a punk kid you let your mouth overload your ass. yep I'm a ape I'll stand my ground to anyone that's how you get ahead in life is by sticking to your ideas and acting on them. I'm not a big man but i never been in a fight that the other man didn't regret being in a fight the next day. you can make threats to me all day and i don't get mad but go after one of my friends and you will have to go threw me to get there.
they went after bhr and i stood up for him i'd do the same for you if they came after you. you are just a kid the same age as my son. there for I'll cut you a break. someday you may need work and i may need help. keep going in your apprenticeship but don't get to hung up on union or non just look at the job at hand. who cares which side of the fence if there is a job you want to be a part of. look at the projects some are real fun don't let a fun job go due to union or non union. on the same note you can pick and choose your jobs when you get that jw card. then start figuring out what you like to do the most in the field then look for those jobs. any employer will put you to work on it. electricians are in demand and you will have a commodity to sell yourself.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Middleton,
There are opinions and there are facts.
The fact is a clear majority of the people that took the time to comment on the 3 full rounds of public comment periods were clearly in favor of wolf reintroduction.
The fact is a clear majority of the comments received from WY, MT, and ID RESIDENTS were in favor of reintroduction.
The USFWS, under the guidelines of NEPA compiled a draft EIS, again took comments. They took those comments drafted a final EIS...another round of comments. They adopted the prefered alternative and reintroduced wolves.
The states of MT, ID, and WY all agreed to the guidelines set forth in the final EIS. The States, along with the public had adequate time to comment and make adjustments and recommendations as they saw fit. THAT was the correct time to address concerns.
Wyoming agreed to the EIS, part of that agreement was to come up with a plan for taking over control once wolf population goals were met. Wyoming has not lived up to something THEY agreed to. Now, they're holding up delisting putting a hardship on MT and ID. They showed a lack of vision during the EIS process, they once again are showing a lack of vision expecting to not have to live up the guidelines they agreed to in the EIS. They're also showing a lack of regard for MT and ID when it comes to those states gaining control and the ability to manage wolves.
As to your opinions...well...dont get too attached to them in regard to how wolves will be managed in WY, MT, and ID. They wont be happening.
Mine will though, because my opinions make sense as it pertains to the law and how states manage wildlife. I will have a wolf tag someday...long before you and the gubmint "take them all the way out"...thats a fact.
Apparently whoever had the opinion that wolves belong in Wyoming was also correct...as they're running around Wyoming in good numbers.
You lose.
There are opinions and there are facts.
The fact is a clear majority of the people that took the time to comment on the 3 full rounds of public comment periods were clearly in favor of wolf reintroduction.
The fact is a clear majority of the comments received from WY, MT, and ID RESIDENTS were in favor of reintroduction.
The USFWS, under the guidelines of NEPA compiled a draft EIS, again took comments. They took those comments drafted a final EIS...another round of comments. They adopted the prefered alternative and reintroduced wolves.
The states of MT, ID, and WY all agreed to the guidelines set forth in the final EIS. The States, along with the public had adequate time to comment and make adjustments and recommendations as they saw fit. THAT was the correct time to address concerns.
Wyoming agreed to the EIS, part of that agreement was to come up with a plan for taking over control once wolf population goals were met. Wyoming has not lived up to something THEY agreed to. Now, they're holding up delisting putting a hardship on MT and ID. They showed a lack of vision during the EIS process, they once again are showing a lack of vision expecting to not have to live up the guidelines they agreed to in the EIS. They're also showing a lack of regard for MT and ID when it comes to those states gaining control and the ability to manage wolves.
As to your opinions...well...dont get too attached to them in regard to how wolves will be managed in WY, MT, and ID. They wont be happening.
Mine will though, because my opinions make sense as it pertains to the law and how states manage wildlife. I will have a wolf tag someday...long before you and the gubmint "take them all the way out"...thats a fact.
Apparently whoever had the opinion that wolves belong in Wyoming was also correct...as they're running around Wyoming in good numbers.
You lose.
chambero
New member
I'll be clear about my biases upfront. My family depends on the cattle business and I also work as an environmental scientist for a private engineering firm. We manage to make quite a bit of money with a cow/calf operation on land we own and lease (for a lot more than public land costs). On the other hand, I was recently finished a project for the federal government where we battled a cattleraisers group that was overgrzing DOD land. It was a heck of a political fight, but we did make progress.
I'm guessing that Buzz pretty good biologist from the posts of his I've seen over the years. I imagine he's seen a lot of things that truly need to be fixed on public land. Attacks on his professional competence really aren't right from my perspective.
I fully understand (and sympathize with) most of the gripes about the public land leasing system. However, I strongly wish the term "welfare rancher" would quit being used. That term implies a lot of very untrue things. Many aspects of agriculture in this country receive huge federal subsidies. The cattle industry as a whole have intentionally avoided getting caught in that trap. In the grand scheme of things, cheap grass leases don't even come close to making up for the subsidies row crop farming gets. Most of all, the term implies that these ranchers aren't working for a living. Which couldn't be any farther from the truth. When we gripe about western grazing leases, we aren't thinking about the extra labor costs and winter feeding costs that ranchers from southern states don't face. Without those subsidies, we all would find ourselves living in a very different world. The U.S. is a long way from perfect, but we go a long ways toward feeding the world and our agriculture industry is still a very strong backbone of our economy. Things may get bad someday, but we will still be able to feed ourselves which many other countries can't say.
I'm certainly not an expert on the wolf issue, but the ag industry is pretty guilty of overblowing their impact on cattle herds. That being said, I shoot anything that I catch bothering our cows and calves - coyotes, stray dogs, etc. I don't understand why ranchers in wolf country aren't allowed to defend their property. The real case against wolves is what has happened to other wildlife. It is my understanding that the moose herds in NW Wyoming are really getting hammered. Pretty sad.
I'm guessing that Buzz pretty good biologist from the posts of his I've seen over the years. I imagine he's seen a lot of things that truly need to be fixed on public land. Attacks on his professional competence really aren't right from my perspective.
I fully understand (and sympathize with) most of the gripes about the public land leasing system. However, I strongly wish the term "welfare rancher" would quit being used. That term implies a lot of very untrue things. Many aspects of agriculture in this country receive huge federal subsidies. The cattle industry as a whole have intentionally avoided getting caught in that trap. In the grand scheme of things, cheap grass leases don't even come close to making up for the subsidies row crop farming gets. Most of all, the term implies that these ranchers aren't working for a living. Which couldn't be any farther from the truth. When we gripe about western grazing leases, we aren't thinking about the extra labor costs and winter feeding costs that ranchers from southern states don't face. Without those subsidies, we all would find ourselves living in a very different world. The U.S. is a long way from perfect, but we go a long ways toward feeding the world and our agriculture industry is still a very strong backbone of our economy. Things may get bad someday, but we will still be able to feed ourselves which many other countries can't say.
I'm certainly not an expert on the wolf issue, but the ag industry is pretty guilty of overblowing their impact on cattle herds. That being said, I shoot anything that I catch bothering our cows and calves - coyotes, stray dogs, etc. I don't understand why ranchers in wolf country aren't allowed to defend their property. The real case against wolves is what has happened to other wildlife. It is my understanding that the moose herds in NW Wyoming are really getting hammered. Pretty sad.
BuzzH
Well-known member
Chambero,
Where did you come up with the fact that Landowners cannot defend their property from wolves? They can, do, and have in MT and ID. Kill permits were issued very early on in the wolf reintroduction process. The ranchers, as well as the Feds, have taken care of problem wolves from just about day one.
This is an interesting thing you said, "When we gripe about western grazing leases, we aren't thinking about the extra labor costs and winter feeding costs that ranchers from southern states don't face. Without those subsidies, we all would find ourselves living in a very different world."
I'll agree with what you said.
But, heres where we differ in public lands ranching...and for the record it is subsidized heavily. The public lands marlboro man takes from the government with both hands.
Does it make sense to subsidize an industry in places that are not cut out to produce cattle? When you get down to the raw numbers, less than 2% of the cattle in the United States are raised on public lands. The lands they graze are in very poor condition as a result. They cause unfair competition for other producers. The only way for someone else to compete is raise more and more cattle. The more cattle...the lower the price. The lower the price the more cattle you need to raise.
It makes absolutely no sense to the environment or the tax payer to subsidize public lands welfare ranchers in places that have very short growing seasons, very limited precipitation, and in most years are in some sort of drought. To top it off...they experience cold difficult winters! Its like the government subsidizing welfare farmers who are trying to grow freaking oranges in Point Barrow Alaska. Its ridiculous.
I say raise cattle where you get good annual precip...where you have good growing seasons...and where you have mild winters...coupled with low labor costs and no reason to feed all year.
The Interior West is a piss poor place to raise cattle, and without the goverments many water projects, cheap loans, cheap grazing fees and other WELFARE...it wouldnt happen. Its not free enterprise...its a subsidized joke...a very expensive joke both environmentally and fiscally.
Where did you come up with the fact that Landowners cannot defend their property from wolves? They can, do, and have in MT and ID. Kill permits were issued very early on in the wolf reintroduction process. The ranchers, as well as the Feds, have taken care of problem wolves from just about day one.
This is an interesting thing you said, "When we gripe about western grazing leases, we aren't thinking about the extra labor costs and winter feeding costs that ranchers from southern states don't face. Without those subsidies, we all would find ourselves living in a very different world."
I'll agree with what you said.
But, heres where we differ in public lands ranching...and for the record it is subsidized heavily. The public lands marlboro man takes from the government with both hands.
Does it make sense to subsidize an industry in places that are not cut out to produce cattle? When you get down to the raw numbers, less than 2% of the cattle in the United States are raised on public lands. The lands they graze are in very poor condition as a result. They cause unfair competition for other producers. The only way for someone else to compete is raise more and more cattle. The more cattle...the lower the price. The lower the price the more cattle you need to raise.
It makes absolutely no sense to the environment or the tax payer to subsidize public lands welfare ranchers in places that have very short growing seasons, very limited precipitation, and in most years are in some sort of drought. To top it off...they experience cold difficult winters! Its like the government subsidizing welfare farmers who are trying to grow freaking oranges in Point Barrow Alaska. Its ridiculous.
I say raise cattle where you get good annual precip...where you have good growing seasons...and where you have mild winters...coupled with low labor costs and no reason to feed all year.
The Interior West is a piss poor place to raise cattle, and without the goverments many water projects, cheap loans, cheap grazing fees and other WELFARE...it wouldnt happen. Its not free enterprise...its a subsidized joke...a very expensive joke both environmentally and fiscally.
Similar threads
