Just playing [emoji35]

[bearhunter99]

WSU assessed our land and recommended a ten year break at least from grazing. The cattle had been brought in too early and left too long for multiple years by the rancher. Natural grass had been destroyed, weeds and sage brush had taken over creating more fuel for a fire than the natural grass.

Just like hunting it needs to regulated to have a sustainable habitat. Over hunting and overgrazing both are detrimental to the habitat in my opinion.

This!  Grazing can be a great tool for the habitat and environment as long as it is not over grazed.  Once it is over grazed, even for one year, it takes many years to bring it back especially in the high desert soil environment.

[ducks4days]

Im a huge fan of grazing leases, mostly because they provide a $ justification for keeping public lands public.

Wolves predating livestock on private land should be culled. That shouldnt extend to public grazing leases, depredation risk should be considered part of the package that makes the grazing leases so incredibly cheap.

[Feathernfurr]

At $1.35 per animal unit per month I just don’t see the true value outweighing the negative impacts. Especially when you consider they’re really the only end user that gets to profit off of public land. I’d gladly pay the monthly fees equivalent to the allotments fees in my elk spots to keep cattle off of them. The damage I’ve seen from cattle (don’t get me started on off road vehicles) will last generations.

I can respect cattle farmers, and I can respect the benefits of proper grazing and rotations. But I’m not going to weep for them when I’ve seen the damage they’ve done in places that are important to me. I like a picture of a public landscape with abundant wildlife that a man can be self reliant on. Not a public landscape riddled with not native livestock with the mentality of “we’ll feed you”.

[GOcougsHunter]

I also think there are two sides of this coin.  My duck hunting spot on state managed land was allowed to be overgrazed, literally everything gone up to and into the water line of the lakes.  We used to set up our blind in the cattails or just into the shore brush. Everything was consumed.  Took almost 5 years for that to grow back.  I also enjoy my $3 hamburgers, so my opinion is really not worth squat.

[2MANY]

Location: West Wa

Of course it is.

[Feathernfurr]

Intelligent response. Idaho resident, Uncle Sam doesn’t give you a lot of options on where you get orders.

[time2hunt]

Just kind of curious on what makes you an open range grazing expert. Are talking strictly Washington state or you talking Nevada,Idaho,Wyoming and other BLM land grazing programs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Feathernfurr]

Degree in ecology, with significant coursework in range management, and experience working in habitat programs for neighboring states wildlife agencies. My experience is specific to Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana. Not to mention first hand experience over a decade of seeing the impact of cattle grazing to a majority of the areas I big game hunt.

[Feathernfurr]

But it’s pretty simple with the point I’ve tried to make. Ecosystem can support X amount of animals. I’m interested in maximizing X in game species that I can harvest and provide for myself and family, and others having the same opportunity. I’m not terribly interested in X having to account for added cattle. I can appreciate someone’s business, and I don’t wish anyone ill will. But, if that business directly impacts my ability to use public land in the manner I desire, I’m not terribly likely to have the most empathetic ear, and that is my experience.

I’m not saying I want to see people’s cattle killed by wolves. I think it’s a crapshoot for all parties involved, the cattleman, cow, and wolf. I’m not heartless. I’m also not going to blindly support something that has had a negative impact on my lifestyle and act like it hasn’t.

[Mudman]

Any of you unhappy with cattle using your hunt lands I suggest ya stop eating beef then..... Or raise your own like us.  Problem solved.  To add to this debate I just returned from "natural" habitat of yellowstone.  Not to many deer or elk there.  Lots of cattle..I mean bison and wolves and bears too.   So there is an example.  Is that what we all want?   Maybe we should remove cattle and reintroduce thousands of Bison?   Eco friendly conservation right?

[time2hunt]

What if your Fish and Game department don’t see it the same way. You’re telling me if we pull all the cattle and sheep off open range state and BLM land that they’re going to increase the game herds. Or is it going stay the same and burn intensely hot and be worthless ground for years to come on the next big wildfire. I don’t disagree that the ranchers need to maintain fences and keep the cattle in their lease sections.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Feathernfurr]

In the aforementioned states, and many others where they’re reintroducing elk, the agencies want more wildlife. Additionally, I would speak up for the state agency to push for more numbers of wildlife as well. Mind you this relationship for management is between a state agency that controls wildlife, and a federal agency that owns the land, more often than not. Those relationships are rarely effective. Let’s be honest, in most areas, there is one blm officer in charge of hundreds of thousands of acres. Even if they tried to enforce the allotments, they don’t have the resources.

The thing is, in most of the western states, there are already enough ungulates to combat vegetation and support a healthy fire cycle. Grazing cattle push those ungulates off of prime habitat. In states with harsh winters, that habitat is vital to population growth/sustainment. I understand people’s concern with fire, especially when it comes at the cost of human life, homes, financially. Fire has its place though. Sure, it may create poor habitat for a few of years, but often times burn areas are the richest and most abundant areas in the aftermath.

The problem is we removed a giant portion of the wildlife that supports a healthy cycle in the market hunting days, replaced animals with livestock, and started fire suppression to protect towns and cities. Nature takes care of itself, but human impacts have changed that. There isn’t a whole lot we can do about it now. As you have maybe noticed in a number of my other “controversial” posts, I’m interested in the sustainment of wildlife and long term hunting opportunities for generations to come. That means being real about my experiences and fighting for less human impact on that balance outside of sustainable harvest and management. Whether it’s realistic or not, I will always support native species and game animals over livestock. I’m generally more supportive of using logging as a means of supplementing a healthy forest succession.

[Rainier10]

Just kind of curious on what makes you an open range grazing expert. Are talking strictly Washington state or you talking Nevada,Idaho,Wyoming and other BLM land grazing programs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just play devils advocate, what makes you an expert?

I’m sure there are experts here but also think everyone is entitled to their own opinion, expert or not.

I can assume from the @2MANY response having a western Washington address decreases a persons street cred and diminishes their opinion.

Not trying to start a fight just trying to gage what a few of us from the west side with ties to the east side have to do to be able to express our opinion based on our personal experiences that some of you may know nothing about.

I appreciate a good discussion but some of the comments I have seen in this thread don’t promote discussion at all.

[2MANY]

"Grazing cattle push those ungulates off of prime habitat."
This statement is BS.

"I can assume from the @2MANY response having a western Washington address decreases a persons street cred and diminishes their opinion."
You can assume.
In some situations this may also be true.

"In states with harsh winters, that habitat is vital to population growth/sustainment."
Actually during harsh winters the wild animals migrate down to the private land and eat the farmers grass.
BLM grazing usually takes place at the higher elevations far above the harsh winter forage.

"I’d gladly pay the monthly fees equivalent to the allotments fees in my elk spots to keep cattle off of them."
Your elk spots? I thought this was public ground.

While some areas may be over grazed(especially in eastern WA), ALL of the BLM ground I'm familiar with certainly isn't.

[Rainier10]

I own land next to DNR. Most of my land is fenced. Where my land is not fenced next to DNR land cows from the rancher with the DNR lease graze on my land. When this happens I see an increase of deer on my fenced property during the time the cattle are grazing.

I will also say that since I have stopped grazing cattle inside the fencing I have see an increase in deer and elk inside of my fences.

One other thing to note is we had a massive fire ten years ago. The fire was on ground that had been heavily grazed in prior years and selectively logged.

Lots of variables. The heavily grazed areas didn’t do so well. The selectively logged did better.

All of them have seen an increase in all wildlife since the fire.

I’m just not sure that a blanket statement either way works.

Grazing is great for the land.

Grazing is bad for the land.

I will say the grazing should be managed if allowed.

I will also say I’m not an expert but I do have real world observations that are valid and shouldn’t be dismissed because of my permanent residence address.