Livestock Grazing

[wklman]

bowsniper,

 

you brought up your deer so I thought it was fair game to talk about.All I did was go back and read your story about your deer.I've lived in az for more than 25 years and have hunted for 28 years.My brother works for the forest service and helps ranchers on his days off so I'm slanted on this subject.The public lands are not just for us sportsman.there a multiuse reusable resource.we cut the trees they grow back,the cattle eat the grass it grows back.mining companies,mountain bikers,hikers,birders, everybody uses our public lands.for us to say that we should remove cattle from these lands would be like saying we shouldn't be able to hunt these lands because it offends somebody who doesn't like hunting.yes, there is overgrazing on some property but most of that is private land.I think our biggest worry shouldn't be what ranchers are doing to our lands.It should be about urban sprawl.I remember when I was a kid living in rio rico we had property on sonoita creek.that creek used to flow from patagonia lake for about 3 miles before it soaked into the wash.now it hardly goes a mile because there's been so many wells drilled and the ground water has fallen from all the people moving into the area.look at the vail area in Tucson.A big developer moves in and drills a thousand foot well to water a golf course and sub-division and the wells that people own at 1,2,and 300 feet dry up.I'm going off on a tangent so I'll stop now before I get too long.

[JohnFriddle]

A case can be made on both sides of this issue... Surely everyone can agree that there are ranchers that overgraze, just like there are responsible ranchers... Unfortunately irresponsible ranchers are not held accountable like they should be... The forest service does not do a very good job policeing them like they should... They are the ones responsible for our national forests... You always get the old, "We don't have the rescources to check for overgrazing violations." from the forest service, well what exactly are you supposed to be doing other than managing the forests? Abuses need to be reported and followed up on if you expect anything to change... Water tanks are great and definately benefit wildlife, but overgrazing and over fencing does not...

 

Oh, and bowsniper, your comment on how you have killed a bigger buck than most guys have glassed up was in poor taste man... I guess being such a bad a** bowhunter makes you an authority on this issue...

[.270]

you can't "overgraze" on public land. they won't let ya. if the conditions are bad, you have to remove cows. sometimes all of em. before you guys start shootin' from the "lip", ya need to investigate what the rules are. the usfw, blm and state land dept. patrol the heck outta ranches and watch every little thing that goes on, on em. sometimes a guy will try and sneak some extra cattle onto his land and they usually always get busted. happened big time awhile back by big lake. usfw told the guy they knew he had too many cattle and he sorta laughed at em and said prove it. they brought in a buncha cowboys and rounded the place up. he had nearly twice what his permit allowed. by the time he paid all the fines, paid for the cowboys and did all the work to repair riparian damage and stuff and figuring in the loss on his permit (they cut it to less than half what it was) he was out over a million bucks. same thing happened to real a infamous family in the bowie area. they lost almost all their permit and their cows. one of em even went to prison over the deal. prison. no kiddin'. there is another real high profile deal going on in new mex right now over a similar situation. the only way you can "overgraze" is to break the law, and with all the cops the different agencies have, it's real hard to do and get away with it. on my cousins place, he has the usfw almost every day. at least once a week. a lot of it is because of the wolf deal. but he couldn't do anything without em knowing it. a lot of what has been said here is pure BS because you don't have a clue what the facts are. if the range looks bad, it's because it's a bad year. cattle ain't native animals, but as far as that goes, niether are elk. cattle have had some negative impact on the land. but nothing like some o' you guys have alluded to. they are more regulated and better managed than the wildlife is. the purpose of "multiple use" public land is just that. timber, hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, guiding, bird watching, biking, and yes, cattle, are all part of the plan. and everyone of these groups needs to be more or less united with each other or we'll all lose out. if you want to bash somebody, or a group o' somebodies, at least learn a little about what you're talking about. because most of the stuff that's been spread here looks a lot like what i stepped in this morning while i was feeding. Lark.

[fatfootdoc]

Bowsniper,

I really enjoyed the following quote in a previous post---Alright guys, let them fly, my rant is over. Just remember that a treehugger has killed a bigger buck (112") with an arrow than most of you have even glassed up.

 

What is that saying again? Oh yeah even a blind pig finds a root once in awhile

 

I think everyone has to agree just to disagree, there are valid points to both arguments . If all the ranchers were on the up and up there would not be an issue and if everyone hunted areas where the animals are benefitting from land maintenance from the ranchers we would all see eye to eye. unfortunately this is not the case so we all have to respect one anothers opinion about it. AG

[bowsniper]

Well, it wasn't the best comment I've ever made, but it really wasn't intended as boast for myself, but a boast for "treehuggers" in general. Poaching treehuggers on this forum is a popular sport, and I've been trashed a few times. As hunters, your primary concern should be WILDLIFE HABITAT. This may be a surprise, but one of the primary concerns of treehuggers is WILDLIFE HABITAT preservation. The reasons are different, but the goals are the same. Just as most hunters aren't rednecks (I think?), most treehuggers aren't animal rights wackos. Most treehugger organizations have a neutral position on hunting.

 

bowsniper

[azpackhorse]

aint nutt'n wrong with be'n a redneck, I'm one and dern proud of it

[JVS]

Hold it Lark...State lands Department, patrol??? No way...State lands are beat to death. There's like three guys to patrol the entire state or something ridiculous like that. The state just wants the $$$. Although, I do agree with your comment about the other land departments. BLM, Forest Circus, etc do round up cattle from time to time. That infamous roundup in San Simon (the first roundup fifteen or so years ago) was ramrodded by my pops. Pissed them good ol' Klump boys off till they couldn't see straight. Anyway, the fact of the matter is I think "most" land managing agencies do a pretty good job administering the Taylor Grazing Act. Besides, our deer browse, not graze! What we really need to be pissed about is locked gates! Don't get me started...Got into an area one day during my hunt, and went back the next morning to find it locked!!! Now that's enough to piss off the pope. I think these land management agencies need to focus some energy to access. Who gives a hoot if we have grazed or ungrazed lands...if we can't access it, does it even matter to us?

[Noel Arnold]

Jvs,

I totally agree . My biggest complaint about ranchers (not all of them) is blocking off public land.

Noel

[patrick15]

Hey Lark,

Why dont you learn a little about what you are talking about..if you want to be like that.? Evryone has their feelings about grazing..but what is disturbing is that people do not want to look beyond their bias and learn what science can show you. Open your minds!

There are 3 guys that patrol all of state land in AZ and the Forest's hands are so tied politically right now that they cant even monitor a pasture for an entire year even if the cows are beating the crap out of it. Actually in Globe, they dont even monitor..they are stuck in the office. This is thanks to the Gila County Cattle Growers who are currently appealing allotment plans that allow the permits 100-500 cows at a time. They want more and more. Its never enough.

I have gone to the Forest many times about overgrazed areas and they tell me they cant do anything about it because the ranchers will call their Senators and the head of the Forest Service who lets them do just about anything they want.

Its Multiple Use not Multiple Abuse and I agree with Bowsniper who says we should be worried about Habitat.

The Forest doesnt even know where the cows are on their land let alone regulate it. I respect most forest service employees but their funding is continually being cut.

Even if you look at straight $$$ without all the emotional arguments. It costs way more to administer grazing allotments than the return to the community. This isnt even including the cost to wildlife habitat and the money lost from sportsmen's dollars due to less deer.

and whoever said deer browse and not graze.....thats not true. They need forbs and grass and certain critical times of the year. Cows browse as well esp during the winter.

Too bad hunters dont care enough or want to learn enough to know what grazing does to wildlife habitat so they can influence their political leaders!!!!!

[JVS]

hey.... simmer dan. Your gonna piss off Lark because of something I said! I think the state has a few more than 3 guys, but probably not many more. You are right with the fact that they are tied up in politics and bureacracy though. Anyway, I think we are getting carried away here with the bashing.

 

Deer prefer browse...but yes, graze as well at times.

[JohnFriddle]

Yeah, the forest service stays right on top of things... right... We've all seen overgrazed forest service land... You see how they have handled the massive undergrowth that have made giant tinder boxes of our forests... I know they have been in the grips of legal battles with treehuggers all along keeping the them from clearing out the growth... This is no different it will have to get bad enough for there to be public outcry... Which I don't think we're there yet... But, anyone who thinks that all ranchers grazing cattle on public land are honest and their all abiding by their permits, and that anyone who isn't is immediatley caught and punished, is living in a fantasy land... The fact is there is a minority, (like in every field), that are giving the rest a bad name... I would hate to see ranchers not be able to use public land, Ranchers keep fs roads relativley maintained as well as tanks and other water sources... As well as the feed they sometimes put down is available to wildlife as well as cattle...

 

The answer is, as in most topics, it depends...

[patrick15]

field), that are giving the rest a bad name... I would hate to see ranchers not be able to use public land, Ranchers keep fs roads relativley maintained as well as tanks and other water sources... As well as the feed they sometimes put down is available to wildlife as well as cattle...

 

John,

Supplemental feed for cattle is illegal. That is so ranchers can beat the land up anymore than they already do...past point of dirt.

 

The thought that most ranchers are good and the minority are bad is a myth.

Grazing in these arid lands is just plain bad and permanently changes the landscape for the worse. I havent been on one permit in Gila County that is well managed or not overgrazed....except those that are closed to grazing. Even after removing most cattle during the drought and receiving tons of rain this year...some places have not recovered. I have a degree in range ecology but anyone can learn to notice what overgrazing looks like if you learn a few plants.

 

Maybe you guys have better ranchers in your neck of the woods...I hope so.

Now the Gila County Cattle Growers are demanding to graze the Superstition Wilderness as well as permits where they do not hold the required base property.

Hopefully, it will not be allowed but it seems like we are like India where the cow is sacred.

[Kilimanjaro]

""you can't "overgraze" on public land. they won't let ya. if the conditions are bad, you have to remove cows. sometimes all of em.""

 

Hey Lark, did you not see the picture I posted on the first page??? That pic was taken in the CORONADO NATIONAL FOREST!!! I guess somebody forgot to stop by and give the rancher down there a friendly reminder saying he probably has a few too many cows on the place..

 

In case you didn't get an opportunity to see see the photo, I'll repost it just for you...

[CouesWhitetail]

Interesting discussion going on here.

 

I guess it all depends on how you define overgrazing. Personally I think overgrazing is occuring when the native vegetation is being changed in such a way as to lower it's carry capacity for wildlife. I see plenty of areas on USFS land where cattle grazing has led to changes in habitat and it generally is reducing the carrying capacity of the land.

 

I think hunters would be wise to take a closer look at habitat changes. The photo Scottyboy showed shows how obvious some of the impacts of grazing can be. You don't have to be a range scientist to see it happening.

 

I also don't think ranchers should be villified as evil people who don't care about the land. Most ranchers I know are excellent people and I admire their way of life. I have seen some reasonable grazing where there are cows and yet still native grass is making it to seed. I think making money grazing in the desert must be an almost impossible task and with the vagaries of rainfall and cattle prices it's got to be very difficult to adjust stocking rates at just the right time.

 

I was just talking to my neighbor and he says that since the USFS had to pull cows off the land during the drought that it has made it almost impossible for some ranchers to be able to have enough money on hand to restock the land when the time is right. It's an incredibly difficult business..it seems to me. But I am no expert in ranching.

 

I do know that I enjoy talking to ranchers and their families and seeing how amazingly self-reliant they are. Kids that grow up on ranches are so much more interesting than kids that grow up in cities. So I think it's a great way of life.

 

Amanda

[runningbird]

I also know a few ranchers and have a chance to see the good and bad. one ranch close to my home has been in a family since the 1870's they have built many ponds out in the open where water never accumulated in the past, I think this is probably good overall. they have also tapped into springs in small narrow canyons and put water catches in these canyons, I think this is probably bad as now you have large animals ruining a very sensitive green area in the desert. it also seems like some ranches including this one the owners get more lazy as the generations go by. now when they are allowed to turn cattle out they just open the gate and mabey push them 1 mile away. ofcourse the cattle come home within 2 days.

now another rancher I know does things a little different. this year after the rains and before he turned his cattle out he made many improvements....fences,ponds roads and such. then we got horseback and pushed his cattle a good 12 miles away to an area with good water and growth so the cattle would want to stick around. let me tell you this was some hard a** work. it took 2 days working 5am till 10pm to get the cattle moved. only 2 bulls came home. now he checks them at least twice a week and moves them to new spots as nescesary.

Ive always thought cattle in the desert wasn't a good idea untill I met people in the business. BUT it must be done right and with consideration of the envirorment. It is a unique way of life and I would hate to see it stopped.

one last thing, bowsniper I wonder if all desert christian archers look to pick fights with inapropriate statements about the bucks they have killed. Ive never even shot at a coues yet, but if I'm lucky enough to tag one I won't throw it in peoples faces the way your tried to.