Now if we could just find a fungus for welfare cattle

[BigHornRam]

"BHR, you know what's sad? The fact that this knapweed study would likely never have gotten funded if the weed problem wasn't affecting welfare ranchers."

But the fact that it has been funded is a positive benefit for wildlife. You guy's continue to always see the glass 1/2 empty. What is really sad is that I know of several wildlife groups that have done great things funding weed control in the West. But what does negative guy's like Buzz do? Instead of saying encouraging things about it, or at least keeping their negative bitter pill comments to themself, they go out of their way to bad mouth the organizations that are trying to do something positive.

At least the livestock communitee is smart enough to relieze that it's in their best interest's not to eat each other. The hunting communitee can't seem to figure that out.

 

[Oak]

I know of several wildlife groups that have done great things funding weed control in the West. But what does negative guy's like Buzz do? Instead of saying encouraging things about it, or at least keeping their negative bitter pill comments to themself, they go out of their way to bad mouth the organizations that are trying to do something positive.

I don't see anybody bad-mouthing wildlife groups that are trying to do something positive to control weeds. Did you make that up?

How do you thing the weed problem got so bad? Think big-boned ATV riders and subsidized ranchers had anything to do with it? Maybe we should start with the source of the problem if we ever hope to fix it.

At least the livestock communitee is smart enough to relieze that it's in their best interest's not to eat each other. The hunting communitee can't seem to figure that out.

I refuse to defend any "hunter" that's not doing it right. Seems counter-productive to me. I'd say that you're not immune to that either, so don't get "holier-than-thou" on that issue:

Yep, we have. We have a quorum and a majority vote, No more game farms. Motion carries.

You need a second first Miller......I second your motion.....all in favor.....I!

 

[BigHornRam]

Oak,

You must have never read any of Buzz's posts running down RMEF and similar organizations. You don't have to agree with everything the organization does, but you can give them credit when they do good things, and you don't have to go out of your way to knock them either. Look at the ridiculous lengths he went to, to bad mouth the NRA.....what's the purpose.....what's the point? That's what I mean when I say you're eating your own.

Also I think it's possible to have a civil discussion about differences in opinion. It's not possible with Buzz however. Disagree with him, and he starts in with the insults and the "MY PUBLIC LAND" blather. Do you think additudes like that will ever lead to solutions?

 

[JoseCuervo]

At least the livestock communitee is smart enough to relieze that it's in their best interest's not to eat each other. The hunting communitee can't seem to figure that out.

BHR, every time I think you can't say anything more stupid than your last pass, you exceed my expectations with something even more stupid than the last time you opened your pie-hole.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but lots of people in the livestock industry are tired of paying outrageous taxes to subsidize Welfare Ranchers. Lots of people in the livestock industry are tired of paying the mandatory Check-Off that the Welfare Ranchers use to promote/defend their practices.
Lots of people in the beef industry are tired of having Welfare Ranchers competing on the government's money against their own private capital.

You are as wrong on this topic as nearly every other topic you post on. I will give you credit for your consistency.

 

[Nemont]

Deleted Post

 

[JoseCuervo]

Jose,

Beef Checkoff is totally independent of grazing public lands. The ranchers grazing pulbic or private land all pay the check off and the promotional package never mentions the where the beef exactly came from. In addition Checkoff dollars are not and cannot be used to promote one producer over another. Check off dollars simply fund the programs like "Beef, it's whats for dinner" campaign. There are just lots of cattlemen who hate to be forced to pay the checkoff period. However since the Supreme Court Ruled the checkoff program is Constitutional I doubt the program will end

Nemont

Nemont,
Obviously BHR is wrong to say that the "that it's in their best interest's not to eat each other" when you even cite Supreme Court Rulings where cattlemen sued each other. Obviously if you have lawsuits, you have "eat each other" going on...

I have started seeing Check off billboards "educating" how good of stewards Beef producers are of rangelands............ To me, that is defending public land grazers.

 

[Nemont]

Deleted Post

 

[ELKCHSR]

Is it just distasteful that private enterprise, or money's garnered from the private sector help to fund public land issues that affect every one?

Who cares where the help comes from if it's a big positive step in the right direction!

Especially as monumental as some thing such as this would be

Maybe it just feels like a slap in the face to those who collect government checks to cure the problem and just can't come up with the right answers

It makes no difference where the help comes from or what the intentions or motives are

I for one would welcome cross country hikes with out feeling obligated to spend a number of hours pulling noxious weeks knowing it's a losing battle

Even if I have to venture across a certain amount of cow poop in the process, zero knapweed would be worth it especially since it would mean more herbatious plants in the trade off

 

[shoots-straight]

The Sportsman club I belong to here in the Bitterroot, raised money to spray,weeds and pulled weeds on the elk winter range in the East Fork to improve the land for the elk, guess what grazed the area once the grass came back without napweed? I'm Paul Scervy and now you know the rest of the story.

 

[TheTone]

The Sportsman club I belong to here in the Bitterroot, raised money to spray,weeds and pulled weeds on the elk winter range in the East Fork to improve the land for the elk, guess what grazed the area once the grass came back without napweed? I'm Paul Scervy and now you know the rest of the story.

What was the land ownership situation? If its private really not much can be said; but if its a public section then resting the land and conitnuing those efforts (weed treatments) would be a good way to get something better established to compete with the weeds you've got there. Plus that really helps the elk to graze their winter range before they ever get to it.

 

[Ithaca 37]

guess what grazed the area once the grass came back without napweed?

I'm aware of many instances where well meaning sportsmen worked hard to improve wildlife habitat and then cattle were allowed to destroy it again. Yesterday I hunted near a ID F&G habitat improvement area that consisted of about an acre in a good wintering area that was fenced and planted with better food and cover for pheasants, chukars and quail. After one year the gate was mysteriously opened and cattle wiped out everything.

I used to hunt thru a two acre enclosure on BLM that was improved by Pheasants Forever. It was adjacent to a ranch. The ranch was sold and, three weeks before the rancher took his cattle and left, the gate to the enclosure was opened and the cattle flooded in.

One time I worked on a project on FS land with the local chapter of the Turkey Federation. We enclosed about an acre in a turkey wintering area and planted it with buckwheat. We put signs up so people would know what was being done. It lasted one year before the fence was cut in multiple places and the local grazer's cattle cleaned it out.

After seeing that same thing happen many times in many areas I finally realized there's no sense trying to improve wildlife habitat in an area where there is a grazing lease. Sooner or later (usually about as soon as some good forage is there) the cattle will get in and eat everything.

Most welfare ranchers can't stand to see any kind of good wildlife habitat left for wildlife. They consider it a waste of good cattle feed.

There's always a new generation of sportsman's club leadership that has to learn that the hard way.

 

[Nemont]

deleted post

 

[mtmiller]

I have to echo what Ith has seen on some exclosures. I get so pissed when I drive by some of the riparian exclosures that have been created to protect riparian and valuable wildlife habitat and there are 50 cows standing knee deep in the water. Of course I don't understand why we spend thousands of dollars to protect these small areas and put three gates on a 2 or 3 acres exclosure in the first place.

One that I found this year did have the wires cut, but the permittee said it wasn't him. Curious how three blocks of mineral fell from the sky and into the exclosure as well.:BLEEP: This shit happens all the time, but to get anything corrected takes too much time and wasted money to resolve. Priority goes to Lease Parcel Reviews and APD's for energy development.

Don't get me wrong, I love my job, but I think if tresspasses or not following a grazing permit cost something more than a slap on the wrist or nothing at all, public lands would be much better off.

I have a feeling gates and fences would be much more secure if there was an occassional lead posioning of livestock when they are not where they are supposed to be...just joking folks.

Jeff, as for hunters tresspassing...yep, happens all the time. There are dumbass hunters just like there are permittees that make their own rules. Thing is when a hunter is caught tresspassing, there is usually a more than "well try not to let it happen again" fine.

 

[Nemont]

Craig,

I need to just not post on threads like this. I shouldn't have posted the first time or the last time.

Nemont

 

[mtmiller]

Jeff, I have zero problems with your postings and respect your opinions and viewpoints. You have family that leases public lands and I have no reason to believe they are not great stewards of the land, as are most. I just want to point out, like any other group, there are ones that can make the whole group look bad. This goes for ATV riders, hunters, public land livestock grazers or federal gov't employees. Most of my experience is with permittees on BLM land and it is not the ones that are doing good things that get the "Miller-press".

 

[noharleyyet]

deleted post

...too bad Nemont, you had the field lapped.

 

[1_pointer]

You cant improve over-grazed land with grazing.

I'll call bullshit on this comment. It's been proven over and over again that improvements can be made with properly managed grazing.

On the topic of exclosures on BLM lands, if grazing was not closed on those parcels through a formal decision there is very little that can be done to the offenders. And yes the decision process for grazing is different than any other program that I know of in the BLM. However, I have been facing this very problem for the past couple of years and have been able to make great strides in keeping cows out of the exclosures. It was actually pretty easy, a few converstions and a couple of locks are all that it took. But, in my situation the open gates were due mostly to sportsmen/recreationists. The wire gates were tight enough that they couldn't be closed without the use of a fence stretcher. Plus, I still all grazing in all the exclosures under certain circumstances and with close oversight. Cows have been much more successfull in reducing the amounts of thistle inside three of the exclosures than herbicide in addition to having fewer impacts on the willows. Overspray had been a problem for the willows in the past.

 

[BuzzH]

Pointer,

I'll see your bullshit and raise you one.

You show me one piece of over-grazed land that has a continuing level of grazing pressure that will ever improve. Its impossible to keep a the level of grazing pressure thats caused the degradation on over-grazed lands and see improvement.

Doesnt happen.

Sure, if you change the duration, intensity, or timing...but keep things as they are...nothing gets better.

Not real complicated.

Maybe thats why the BLM constantly has its tit in a ringer...trying to convince the public that continued over-grazing is the best way to help over-grazing.

 

[1_pointer]

Sure, if you change the duration, intensity, or timing...but keep things as they are...nothing gets better.

I'll see your raise and raise you one! Changing the duration, intensity, or timing is still grazing. Do you admit that changing the duration, intensity, or timing can improve range condition?

Now if the original quote was that grazing in the same manner that lead to the overgrazed condition will not lead to improvement I would have disagreed less... Other factors can lead to over utilization of forage than just livestock grazing, but I don't deny it being the primary or most common cause.

Its impossible to keep a the level of grazing pressure thats caused the degradation on over-grazed lands and see improvement.

By 'grazing pressure' do you mean AUMs?

 

[mtmiller]

On the topic of exclosures on BLM lands, if grazing was not closed on those parcels through a formal decision there is very little that can be done to the offenders.

Um, yeh.

It was actually pretty easy, a few converstions and a couple of locks are all that it took.

So the easiest way to have them follow their permit is to lock gates?

Cows have been much more successfull in reducing the amounts of thistle inside three of the exclosures than herbicide in addition to having fewer impacts on the willows. Overspray had been a problem for the willows in the past.

That is great if that is the strategy and not just a perk of tresspass. If it works well, make it a riparian pasture and not an exclosure. Should be a BLM grazing decision and not a permitee decision.