masterrig

Thanks Chuck. I've learned some things about this as well. The info about tortoises eating poop was quite thought provoking. I have to agree that government policy may often be unduely influenced by one side or the other, and once policies are in place they seem to become fossilized and are impervious to reassessment in the light of new data. Hope you get rain soon. We had a drought here for three years and it killed a lot of trees on my property. Pastures dried up, and the price of hay went from $2.50/bale to $5-6/bale. Even though the rain came back the last 2 years, the price of hay has stayed up. Drought sucks. Don You got that right! We're about in the middle of a 13-yr. drought. We have so many dead trees and more on the way, this area looks like some 'dead planet'. What I find interesting is, in regard to the tortoises is, when it rains, they are all over the place out here. During dry spells, you won't see a single one. You'll see many of them along the highways having been run-over. I like learning and sharing ideas. You're right about drought!! You mentioned the price of hay... I feed my horse and burro only Coastal Bermuda hay and a standard bale is going for $12.00 ea. Alfalfa is going for $14.00 - $16.00 ea. Most of what we're getting is 'old' barn stored. We we're getting some out of California for the same price till the drought hit out there. We're forecast 30% chance of rain this week-end but I'll believe it when I step-out and get wet. Best to you in your business. Chuck

That's beautiful country, in my eyes. I've found that a combination of horses and goats works fairly well to maintain a pasture. Goats will eat grass, but really prefer broad-leaved plants as they are browsers. Horses prefer the grass. Goats keep the weeds from taking over when horses keep the grass cropped low. There's no question, though, that goats can be very destructive if they overpopulate an area. No question about that. While I can respect his perseverance, I disagree strongly with his tactics. I see several distinct, though related, problems. First, he fought the grazing fee (which I understand him doing) but when he lost in court (twice) he resorted to an argument that the entire United States is illegitimate. This is pissing on the head of every person who has ever fought or sacrificed in defense of this country. Then, he threatened anyone who tried to enforce the court order to remove his cattle from lands where he was trespassing. I find it telling that he has only been able to continue ranching by spreading his herd over land that is 5-6 fold larger than his families original lease. This is land that his family never had any permit to use, and in fact the land is so marginal that it has never been under a grazing permit to anybody. How viable can his operation be if he needs to "occupy" so much land that was never in his families grazing permit? Do you think he would be able to sustain his operation if he confined his cattle to the land originally permitted to his family? If I pastured my animals on my neighbor's land, without their permission and against their explicit wishes, and refused to remove them even in the face of a court order, could I really then claim to be a good farmer wisely using the land as my grandparents did? Perhaps. Certainly there are fewer ranches than they were in the past. If an operation is barely scraping by, adding a grazing fee or reducing the number of cattle/acre could push a farm to the point where it isn't worth running. I haven't seen anything about the actual amount of the fees. As far as I can tell, though, there are a lot of factors that are squeezing small farm operations. Profit margins are tiny, so the only way to make a living is to do things on a sufficiently large scale. Small ranchers are competing with giant feedlots and factory farms. In the past it may have been possible to scrape by with a small herd, but today the return per cow is too small, due to competition. No doubt regulation, such as cradle to grave tracking of animals (which resulted from scares about mad cow disease), adds to the economic stress. Most people do not appreciate how high-tech farm operations have to be these days. I suspect that, in many cases, it's convenient to blame the government, when grazing fees are just one of several factors that pile up to make a farming operation unprofitable. It is possible, of course, that in some cases the grazing fees would be the straw that broke the camel's back. I don't have experience in your area, so I'm happy to take your word. When I worked at the University of Arizona, I saw study sites where some plots were fenced to exclude cattle, so on one side of the fence there was normal grazing pressure and on the other vegetation had not been grazed for a decade or more. The difference was really quite remarkable. Biodiversity and total biomass was higher by orders of magnitude in the ungrazed plots. Grazed land was dominated by a few grass species (mostly non-native) and cacti, which thrive because the cattle leave them alone but eat competing species. If you stand in the middle of a grazed area it looks OK, not stripped bare or devastated. It's only when you can directly compare grazed and ungrazed areas that the effect of grazing is obvious. I would not argue that every place should be protected from grazing, that would be stupid. If an area is biologically productive enough to sustain an economically viable ranching operation, then generally it should be used. I'd only suggest that some areas here and there be set aside as refuges so the native species are not lost entirely. I really do respect that. Don You certainly have done your homework and have a good grasp of all things agriculture. I've learned some things in reading your posts. I think, this whole thing is about 'who's right and who's wrong' in a very badly handled situation that has gone on too long. We don't know what is really in the minds of either side. It appears, we'll just have to sit back and see how it all shakes-out. I'll have to agree with you about the high desert country. It's beautiful in a rough sort of way. Due to the drought, we're not seeing all that much of the cactus flowers that we have seen in the past, this time of year. No signs of grass, either. Rain is only a 'wish' and water wells are drying up. Just a bit un-settling. Chuck

I live in the 'high desert' country. Not all that far from Big Bend. With your experience in agriculture, I can see where you would have an understanding of things. As you know, cattle don't 'scalp' the grass. Sheep and goats will. Ranchers in places like Arizona and Nevada, as an example do the best they can with what they have because they love the work while producing a good product, the best they can. In Bundy's case, he has continued ranching where his grand parents started. That means a lot to agricultural folks. I don't see a problem with that. From all I could find, the BLM has managed to run-off all the other ranchers from that area and as far as I am concerned, totally mis-handled the Bundy case. Truth of the matter, Bundy probably mis-handled things on his end. I really feel there is more to all of this than we are being told. We may never know. Living in a semi-arid area, I've been on ranches where blades of grass are acres apart and no devastation by cattle. That is what I question. We have a lot of country out here, quite similar to that which is in Nevada. It's hard country and people are just trying to make a living. I do feel that much of the argument is maybe, a bit exaggerated to gain public support. (?) Chuck

Let me ask this... If, the BLM and other 'conservation' groups take away all the ranchland so as to make 'parks' out of that land, where do you suppose we'll get our food? What really irritates me is the idea presented here that farmers and ranchers are a bunch of dumb hicks. Just the opposite is closer to the truth. Farmers and ranchers today are college educated and work 'with' extension services as well as conservation groups. They do that so they can produce a good product for the consumption of this and other countries. They have learned from history and improved methods so as to continue to do something they love to do. They do all that through drought, wildfires, early snow storms, freezing temperatures flood, insect infestations and you name it. I would have to argue much of what your lengthy post, earlier in this thread contends. I've spent a lot of years in and around the farming and ranching business and have seen what the government agencies and conservation groups are doing to harm farming and ranching. They spread their lies and videos to get public support. In attempt to make farmers and ranchers some evil entity. The bottom line is greed on their part. They only see it their way. I've always understood that one gets farther through cooperation. Doesn't seem to work when it's their way or the highway. Chuck

Are you believing everything you see on the internet? Every reliable source is saying that this isn't true. That's where everybody on here is getting their information! I'd like you to name these 'reliable sources' Seems like I'm just not finding one. To me, the media is the media is the media... they're all slanted, twisted and contrived. Are the only 'reliable' sources the one's that protect Harry Reid? We all know he's hip deep in green energy. All I said was; "Who knows?" sheeeesh! I found several sources that said Harry Reid's son, a big-time lawyer in Las Vegas, was representing a Chinese group who the Reid's were pushing to build a huge solar power plant in the area of the Bundy ranch. The Chinese pulled-out of the deal stating they felt the area was not ready for such a plant. The deal fell through, thus de-bunked. Chuck

Good god! I have seen a bunch of stories saying yes and a bunch of stories saying no. That's why I said what I did. If you think I'm going to believe some politician, you're dead wrong. Believe what you want. Chuck

Yes, I knew that. All I said was; "Who knows?" Chuck

+1, without a doubt. Including the moderators. Chubby Checker would be proud for all the 'twistin' going on around here! Chuck

I can see your point. I gotta tell you though, I got a little choked-up seeing those cowboys ride up on horseback carrying the stars and stripes to face those 'hired guns'. Whether you believe he's right or you believe he's wrong, he has the courage to stand-up for his beliefs. Isn't that what this country is based on? Chuck

Who knows. The fact that a former aid of Reid's is now the head of the BLM! Hmmmmm.... Chuck

You do realize this entire affair is several orders of magnitude below his level of gives-a-shit; right? So, no. I can almost guarantee he has no plans to visit the ranch. Not because he's afraid of gun fire, but because this is not actually an issue worth him caring about unless gun fire actually breaks out. That was just a wise-crack. Chuck

You got that right! I don't think things would go to good for the BLM in 'local' courts, either. Folks need to open their eyes to the fact that just because it's a government agency doesn't mean it's good. I wonder if Obama has plans of visiting that ranch? Chuck

Proof positive that our government truly cares about the citizens of this country! (sarcasm) Chuck

BINGO! Chuck

The guy was being 'green' and 'fire wise' by mitigating fire fuel by picking-up those pine cones. Geeze... That's the way the government works... drag you through the courts till you're dead broke, go back to laws that are still on the books but hadn't been used in a hundred years, claim there is some 'endangered species' on the property and they have to save it and finally the victim is out of resources and bingo... the government wins again! They have more tricks than a trained seal and they always win. Chuck

No Chuck he is not... One of the militia supporters actually told people that was what they were doing. And that supporter should know better since he I believe is supposed to be LEO in a neighboring state. That could've been 'thrown-out' there during a bull session and someone took it serious or thought it could really make big news. Who knows? The defending of the BLM is the part that really got me. They play by their own rules, do whatever they want and as long as it's done in the name of 'green' or that they are saving some endangered species, it's OK. They can lie through their teeth and we're supposed to accept it. After all... it's the government and the government is always right. We'll all be eatin' rainbow stew and drinkin; free Bubble-up, too. http://21stcenturywire.com/2014/04/16/exclusive-evidence-of-blms-deadly-abuse-of-animals-taken-from-bundy-ranch/ Chuck

You're jokin'... aren't you? Chuck

They should've had a warrant and the local sheriff with them. They are like I said terrorists. Am I to understand that you defend and or approve of what the BLM did? As for the FOX report I provided... do a search and pick one you like it's all over the net. How's that? Chuck

I will agree, both sides are wrong. But, where was the BLM's warrant of arrest for failure to pay? They didn't have one because they do just as they damned well please and they did! They tore up his water lines, water tanks, 'stun gunned' two of the man's family members, killed two of the man's bulls and anything else they felt like destroying claiming that all that was interfering with the livelihood of the natural surroundings. Where was their paperwork for that? Two wrongs don't make a right, granted, but how can they refer to themselves as 'stewards of the land' when they do things like that. That, is to me, out and out terrorism. NOW, they are going to do it 'peacefully in the courts'. Marvelous! No wonder farmers and ranchers can't stand the BLM. Even the hard working honest one's. Chuck

Who said the rancher was on welfare? Tell me, how many ranchers do you know who are on welfare! Besides, you do like a good steak, don't you? Well, that cow didn't just waltz into the supermarket. Someone had to raise it. Chuck Chuck Free grazing on public land sure sounds like welfare to me. What ever... There are sill parts of this country where there is 'open range'. Is that welfare too? Chuck

So... does that justify the BLM doing this... http://ww[url]w.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/16/feds-accused-leaving-trail-wreckage-after-nevada-ranch-standoff/ Real stewards of the land... riiiight. Chuck

Who said the rancher was on welfare? Tell me, how many ranchers do you know who are on welfare! Besides, you do like a good steak, don't you? Well, that cow didn't just waltz into the supermarket. Someone had to raise it. Chuck Chuck

You bet! Chuck

Uh no...the internet is rife with this guy's escapades so why don't you let your fingers do the typing and do the search yourself...I'm not here to spoon feed you! Former drug dealer who got religion! ...and all around counterfeit. Chuck

Since it is a federal agency, yes, that is normal. Chuck