Free: Contests & Raffles.
The Federal Government is in fact taking over State Land in the West. That is one of the underlying issues in this case. What do you think the Antiquities Act is all about. It’s the Feds taking millions of acres from the States. I have friends in the Columbia Gorge. They were a multigeneration farming/ranching operation that could not compete in the era of new federal rules once their land was moved from state to federal control. Their land is now owned by a conservation group. Grand Staircase Escalante. I Jeeped there last year. It was a huge land grab by the feds and President Clinton President Trump realized this and is greatly reducing its size. The Bundys are the pawn that states wanted to push back on an overzealous conservation movement that started under good intentions It’s a struggle for balance. It’s States vs Antiques Act.
Quote from: farmin4u_98948 on January 14, 2018, 07:53:01 AMThe Federal Government is in fact taking over State Land in the West. That is one of the underlying issues in this case. What do you think the Antiquities Act is all about. It’s the Feds taking millions of acres from the States. I have friends in the Columbia Gorge. They were a multigeneration farming/ranching operation that could not compete in the era of new federal rules once their land was moved from state to federal control. Their land is now owned by a conservation group. Grand Staircase Escalante. I Jeeped there last year. It was a huge land grab by the feds and President Clinton President Trump realized this and is greatly reducing its size. The Bundys are the pawn that states wanted to push back on an overzealous conservation movement that started under good intentions It’s a struggle for balance. It’s States vs Antiques Act. The antiquities act only applies to current federal land.Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
QuoteThe grazing fee is just that ... a fee to graze your cattle a fee to compensate for the damage and food eaten and loss of the resource that is owned by you and me.they are basically running business for profit and not paying into the system for their share of the added damage the cattle create and the reduction of the resource.That's not true at all, if it were the grazing fee's would be a lot higher. The fee is to offset infrastructure work that goes along with having cattle. The fee's are to do projects like putting in additional water sources, fencing off stream beds to prevent erosion or fencing out critical habitat like wet land areas. All of these things benefit wildlife as a whole, in dry areas putting in a water tank helps out everything from antelope to elk, you name it. Even frogs, snakes and birds as the water can create a tiny wetland oasis. The grazing contracts today have property improvement projects right in the contract, have you read any? I have. Responsible grazing can and does improve land but you never hear about that, probably never see it either. People just buy into the tired old line of over grazing and welfare ranching. I see a lot of misinformed hunters on here buying into the same tired old lines. If overgrazing is happening then ask the BLM, DNR, USFWS responsible for that particular area whats up. There are ranchers who've been running the same property for generations and some of them perhaps get a little lax on making sure the cattle don't sit in one spot too long, the BLM or whomever needs to make sure that isn't happening too. Some of the best deer hunting is in cattle grazed leases, the fall grasses will green up and there'll be a new growth for the deer, then in the winter months they'll paw trough it. Cattle make nice trails through the brush allowing the rabbits, deer and other critters better access instead of just having a jungle of old rot that doesn't renew without a massive fire..cattle also reduce fire loads. So in don't know where you get your information but perhaps you could study up on it.
The grazing fee is just that ... a fee to graze your cattle a fee to compensate for the damage and food eaten and loss of the resource that is owned by you and me.they are basically running business for profit and not paying into the system for their share of the added damage the cattle create and the reduction of the resource.
Quote from: KFhunter on January 13, 2018, 07:00:25 PMQuoteThe grazing fee is just that ... a fee to graze your cattle a fee to compensate for the damage and food eaten and loss of the resource that is owned by you and me.they are basically running business for profit and not paying into the system for their share of the added damage the cattle create and the reduction of the resource.That's not true at all, if it were the grazing fee's would be a lot higher. The fee is to offset infrastructure work that goes along with having cattle. The fee's are to do projects like putting in additional water sources, fencing off stream beds to prevent erosion or fencing out critical habitat like wet land areas. All of these things benefit wildlife as a whole, in dry areas putting in a water tank helps out everything from antelope to elk, you name it. Even frogs, snakes and birds as the water can create a tiny wetland oasis. The grazing contracts today have property improvement projects right in the contract, have you read any? I have. Responsible grazing can and does improve land but you never hear about that, probably never see it either. People just buy into the tired old line of over grazing and welfare ranching. I see a lot of misinformed hunters on here buying into the same tired old lines. If overgrazing is happening then ask the BLM, DNR, USFWS responsible for that particular area whats up. There are ranchers who've been running the same property for generations and some of them perhaps get a little lax on making sure the cattle don't sit in one spot too long, the BLM or whomever needs to make sure that isn't happening too. Some of the best deer hunting is in cattle grazed leases, the fall grasses will green up and there'll be a new growth for the deer, then in the winter months they'll paw trough it. Cattle make nice trails through the brush allowing the rabbits, deer and other critters better access instead of just having a jungle of old rot that doesn't renew without a massive fire..cattle also reduce fire loads. So in don't know where you get your information but perhaps you could study up on it.You know what my point is. Grazing is not a right and your right to access public lands does not transfer to your cattle or business. We can argue back and forth the Semantics of every example here but the bottom line is they simply went about their objection to the fee's the wrong way. Laws are put in place in this country to avoid this very thing, it would be total martial-law if we all did things this way. Just pay your bill and object in the proper manner.
Quote from: M_ray on January 14, 2018, 12:06:38 PMQuote from: KFhunter on January 13, 2018, 07:00:25 PMQuoteThe grazing fee is just that ... a fee to graze your cattle a fee to compensate for the damage and food eaten and loss of the resource that is owned by you and me.they are basically running business for profit and not paying into the system for their share of the added damage the cattle create and the reduction of the resource.That's not true at all, if it were the grazing fee's would be a lot higher. The fee is to offset infrastructure work that goes along with having cattle. The fee's are to do projects like putting in additional water sources, fencing off stream beds to prevent erosion or fencing out critical habitat like wet land areas. All of these things benefit wildlife as a whole, in dry areas putting in a water tank helps out everything from antelope to elk, you name it. Even frogs, snakes and birds as the water can create a tiny wetland oasis. The grazing contracts today have property improvement projects right in the contract, have you read any? I have. Responsible grazing can and does improve land but you never hear about that, probably never see it either. People just buy into the tired old line of over grazing and welfare ranching. I see a lot of misinformed hunters on here buying into the same tired old lines. If overgrazing is happening then ask the BLM, DNR, USFWS responsible for that particular area whats up. There are ranchers who've been running the same property for generations and some of them perhaps get a little lax on making sure the cattle don't sit in one spot too long, the BLM or whomever needs to make sure that isn't happening too. Some of the best deer hunting is in cattle grazed leases, the fall grasses will green up and there'll be a new growth for the deer, then in the winter months they'll paw trough it. Cattle make nice trails through the brush allowing the rabbits, deer and other critters better access instead of just having a jungle of old rot that doesn't renew without a massive fire..cattle also reduce fire loads. So in don't know where you get your information but perhaps you could study up on it.You know what my point is. Grazing is not a right and your right to access public lands does not transfer to your cattle or business. We can argue back and forth the Semantics of every example here but the bottom line is they simply went about their objection to the fee's the wrong way. Laws are put in place in this country to avoid this very thing, it would be total martial-law if we all did things this way. Just pay your bill and object in the proper manner.Can't disagree with that at all, and you know what my point was. Grazing isn't all bad. I never discussed the Bundy's "grazing rights" if ever there was such a thing so I'll give my opinion on that here. As for the Bundy's I have no idea what rights the Bundy's are claiming, it was dealt with in court so that's that, their only recourse is hire a better lawyer and try again in court. I've never heard of any rights such as they're claiming, but that doesn't mean it doesn't or hasn't existed before, I'll defer to the courts who should have access to historical records. There must have been something tangible for it to go to court in the first place? I've no idea Like I said I'll defer to the court in this, where redress is properly handled, not under an interstate overpass with lot's of guns.
I gurantee even though bunch was innocent I the eyes of the law, which I don't care either because if he has to pay fees like the rest of us then pay the damn things, but if I was a local I would NEVER buy beef again,I would just go shoot one of this clowns cows, I mean they are on PUBLIC land and all !!! Pretty simple fix if you ask me , he would get tired if losing cattle pretty fast !!!
