# Good news



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Remember the BLM haters that were on this site not as sportsmen, but rather to ride herd on sportsmen? Well I have good news. They were full of bs. They didn't like the regulations and said it was bad management. Well the good news is the BLM still believes in multiple use.

I hooked up the small camper and the wife and I have been running around Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, Idaho, and Montana. Ranchers are still grazing, loggers logging, 4x4 running around, people fishing, camping, and opportunities abound for hunting.

I have stayed in many Forest Service campgrounds and have enjoyed them. This is the first time I have stayed in a BLM campground. My hats off to them. I stayed in a BLM campground on the north side of the Great Basin National Park, in Nevada. The camp was free and each site had a leveled area for tents, a shelter, a picnic table, a grill, garbage disposal, a bathroom, and a pond stocked with fish.

In the Escalante Grand Staircase they have reintroduced antelope. I guess what ranchers don't like is not being able to graze every last spear of grass. BLM is doing a great job of protecting the resource that belongs to all people, and providing opportunities for all who enjoy the outdoors in any manor. One should not be an automatic gov hater simply because groups want us to hate for the purpose of giving them everything at the expense of others.


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

Beautiful picture. Wish I was there. Glad to hear good news about a government agency and their efforts. Seems the only time you hear about them is when someone is complaining. Hope you continue to enjoy your trip and have more good experiences. Safe travels!!!


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

I have noting against farmers and ranches and respect what they do. It's a tough job. I had a taste of it years ago and decided it wasn't how I wanted to spend my life. But....... They tend to have tunnel vision.... Land is good for one thing and one thing only. Raising crops or cattle. Any other use is a waste of that land. If they cant turn a dime on it, it is useless. This tunnel vision makes them want to utilize every square inch even if it isn't really suitable for what they want. They will tear down a 1/2 mile shelter belt to gain 3-4 acres of land of which the cost of making usable may take 20 years or more to recoup. Unfortunately many don't see grazing rights and the minimal cost of that as the subsidy it is and don't like that THEY can't get maximum use (for their purposes ) of the land. Again, allowing other users on it is just seen as a waste. it's not necessarily good or bad it's just another perspective.


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

That is a very perceptive and true dakotashooter. It something that is engrained in you from the start. Part of your DNA as a farmer/rancher. Having been blessed knowing sportsman over the years has helped soften this perspective in me but it is hard to shake. That's one of the reasons why sites like this and different viewpoints are so important.

The shelter belt issue is a tough one. Most are dying out and need replaced. I spend several days a year picking tree branches from the fields to farm. Ran an unseen branch through the combine last fall that cost me over $1,000. Seeding this spring on a field with 5 rows of shelter belts led to me over seeding 24 feet x 5=$$$$. With seed, fertilizer, herbacide, etc costs so high that equates into a lot of money and resources wasted. Most farmers just tear the dying shelter belts out for these very reasons. Not saying it's right but it is the prudent and sensible alternative in their minds. The erosional justification for their existence with today's farm practices have been lost. The conservation and habitat they provide hasn't been pushed. Again $$$ wins.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

North
I do understand why some are being torn out. And I understand that chemicals are very hard on them making it difficult to establish new belts. But I see little or no attempt to maintain or even re-establish many of them. And I get that too, It's largely an issue of time. Thought in many cases the ideal time to thin out dead trees would seem to be in the winter when the farmers would seem not so busy. It's not my call, but I have to think our grandfathers and great grandfathers put them there for a reason. 
When it comes to BLM grazing I know most farmers try to be god stewards of the land but I also know when land is not yours you often tend to push it a bit harder than you would your own if something has to be pushed.. I think this is part of what the BLM tries to guard against.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

There certainly is a wide variety when it comes to farmers. Conservation is top priority on my brothers farm. I have a couple of friends that are the same. I have one friend who farms and we never talk farming. When he buys a new farm he bulldozed the farmstead after burning it then starts on the tree belts. He doesn't see any value in habitat or wildlife. You could kill every animal in North America and I'm not sure he would care, yet he spends thousand supporting a Christian Missionary single handedly. His son like my oldest passed away in his mid 40s. When his son had about a month left he called me to his house and asked that I teach his son to hunt. We will see how that affects grandpa.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> When it comes to BLM grazing I know most farmers try to be god stewards of the land but I also know when land is not yours you often tend to push it a bit harder than you would your own if something has to be pushed.. I think this is part of what the BLM tries to guard against


.
That's exactly right Dakotashooter. They have range management specialists who look at the species composition of the range, the grazed species production, nutrition, and grazing pressure tolerance. With this information they determine the acres required for a cow calf pair that will not lower production in following years. Many don't like the term sustained grazing, but that's exactly their goal. Some ranchers forget that they asked for this management intervention years ago when grazing lands were being severely over grazed. In southwest Texas it will be another 100 years before the range recovers, maybe much longer. 
This isn't anti rancher, it's simply pro future ranching and thinking ahead to ranching and range land. I will admit that I suckered for some of the complaining. As it turns out it's simply coming from those who want no control. I found the BLM very accommodating to ranchers. This Bundy guy who runs around waving a flag in one hand and an AR15 in the other simply wants to rile people so he can have his way.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Took this pic in a BLM office.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

And the BLM doesn't get it right 100% of the time either. When they don't they often have to make changes which is when the ranchers start to complain about poor management. Nobody is there to criticize when the rancher makes a bad management decision on his own land and has to make adjustments but when it happens to the BLM that's a different story and the screaming starts. It could be worse ... The BLM could cut off grazing altogether.... Sometimes you have to be happy with what you get.....


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I got close to that rancher Bundy raising all the fuss. The BLM has no choice but to follow the law concerning endangered species. Often endangered species appears a bit of a hoax, but the desert tortoise is in dead endangered. The BLM purchased the grazing rights from willing sellers. The interesting thing is Bundy has not paid his grazing fees for 19 years and locals say he is simply holding out for four to five times the value for the gov to purchase his grazing rights. About the same thing is happening in Oregon where they had the armed standoff. This isn't about gov heavy handedness it's about a small minority holding out for a kings ransom. That's what caught Bundys eye and lured him to Oregon.


----------

