🚀 go-pugleaf

J ropin 1 (jropin1@aol.com) wrote:
: Have you seen this "destruction", or just read about it somewhere? I am so
: sick and tired of people believing this crap about how cattle are
: destroying the land.  And I'm real tired of this "welfare cowboy" crap.

I've not only seen the damage, I've felt it.  Sleeping on grazing land is 
very uncomfortable because the ground is so compacted.  It's worst in the 
late spring when the ground hardens after the cattle have stomped miny 
craters into what was mud.

The grazing of cattle and the resulting soil compaction can have long 
lasting negative impacts on the natural vegetaion of an area.  In one 
place I know quite well in the Los Padres National Forest, it is still 
possible to make out the old fencelines that defined the limits of 
grazing activity decades ago by observing where the damn star thistle 
gives way to sagebrush and buckwheat.

I've also seen plenty of ponds and creeks turned into disgusting mud and 
crap wallows by grazing cattle.  Several of them were in designated 
Wilderness Areas.  I think of those scenes every time I hear the old saw 
about ranchers being such wonderful caretakers of public land.  What a 
bunch of bull (no pun intended).  What the ranchers mean by being good 
caretakers is that they try to maximize their profits by managing the 
land so that it will sustain as many cattle as possible.  It has nothing 
to do with preserving naturally fluctuating balances of native flora and 
fauna.

Gotta say, I'm real tired of this welfare cowboy crap, too.

: Subsidized how?

By not charging enough to cover the cost of undoing the damage to the 
land, scenery, and recreational potential of our public land that is used 
for grazing, let alone covering the administrative costs of the grazing 
programs themselves.  As undeveloped land has become increasingly 
valuable, cattle ranching corporations and a small number of family run 
operations that still run cattle on public land have actually been paying 
less and less for it each year.  

They claim they can't afford to pay what they used to and that they can
get better deals on private grazing land when the improvements are figured
into the deal. Reading between the lines, what they are saying is that the
driving force behind a free market economy--price--is signaling the
ranchers that it is time to move off of public land because it is now
worth more when devoted to other uses than it is when used for cattle
grazing.  However, the perpetual welfare cowboys refuse to grow up and
take care of themselves.  Instead, they keep whining to their
representatives in Washington that they absolutely cannot adjust to
changes in our economy like all the rest of must.  Instead, they protest,
the rest of the public must continue continue to give the welfare cowboys
use of our increasingly precious public resources for less and less in
return. 

I say its about time we pulled the plug on businesses that can't make it
without sucking off the public tit every year.  Why is their way of life
any more sacred than that of other welfare families who have come to
expect the government to keep them going despite the real changes going on
in the economy?  Hell, even the ranchers admit that consumers are buying
less and less of their product at lower and lower prices (adjusted for
inflation) in favor of other foods.  I see no reason to subsidize an
industry the public has obviously found to be less and less valuable as
time goes on. 

: On public land's, we, the permitee, maintains and improves on that land.

Putting up fences and killing the public's wildlife when it is perceived
as a threat to cattle is not an improvement to the land, it is yet more 
damage to our remaining would-be wild and open spaces for which the 
public receives no compensation.  And who do you suppose pays for the 
roads that ranchers used to bring in that fencing material that gets in 
the way of recreationalists and snags elk and deer every year?  Yup, just 
one more subsidy for the welfare cowboys courtesy of an unwilling public.