Home Forums Hunting & Shooting General Big Game Wyoming ranch for antelope

Ranch13,

My point is simply that the leasees of federal grazing alotments have not a single thing to complain about. There isnt cheaper grazing found anywhere, or they'd be letting their leases go, and that is pure fact.

For the record, I do know a thing or two about federal and state leases. I realize that on SOME leases the responsibility of water, fencing, etc. is up to the leasee. Not always the case though, leases vary greatly depending on location regarding who's responsible for what. The thing that doesnt change is the price paid per AUM, and thats the fleecing of Americas public lands.

I'm sure that since you know so much about federal leases that you're well aware over 70% of them are in some sort of over-grazed condition according to the BLM? You likely also know that 90% of riparian areas on federal lands are in poor condition and not functioning properly according to the BLM?

Good stewards??? Maybe 30% are, according to BLM documentation.

I'm not blaming the poor rancher totally, the BLM/FS have a share in the blame on the condition of MY public lands. They are equally responsible for sound management.

Its a total sham anyway you look at it from the viewpoint of the average American taxpayer. We subisidize an industry with our tax dollars...and what we get in return is OUR federal lands being over-grazed and in poor condition. For an encore from the ranching community, we get locked out of OUR public lands and denied access to enjoy our over-grazed public lands.

What a deal!

I wanted to stay out of this, but just can't stand it any longer. I'm pissed!

Grazed public lands across the entire west are in far better condition now days than they were in the 1930's, 40's, and 50's. They also support way more wildlife than in the old days. In those days a deer, elk, sheep, or pronghorn sighting often made the paper, and sheep and cattle came home in July or August on their own, because there was nothing left to eat.

On the surface, federal grazing alloments might seem like a screaming deal, but I see very few family ranchers, other than cooperate folks that made their money elswhere, living the high life or wintering in Bimini. The average rancher works his ass off and gets maybe a 2 or 3% return on his efforts if he's lucky. Most would be well ahead to sell to developers and get the hell out.

Stocking rates, schedules, and durations are all dictated on public land allotments, and often do not come close to meshing with ranch demands or mother nature's schedules. Ranchers also expend funds to maintain fences, roads, and water sources as well as haul and round up expenses for their cattle on their allotments. They often are not allowed to address toxic plant or weed issues. Try rounding up cattle in a 200 square mile pasture some time, and see how many full days of wages and how much horse flesh one needs to accomplish that.

Should a small wildfire occur, they may lose access to thousands of acres while a small patch is allowed to heal for two full growing seasons. Toss in some T&E species, wolves, bears, salmon, or wild horses, and managment can become even more of a nightmare.

Yes the simple direct cost seems like a good deal, but indirect costs often make allotments more expensive than private leases. In private arrangements, one can contact for lbs of gain on their animals, dictate season of use, and not have to deal with all the maintainence issues.

I for one am glad that livestock are out there. We've seen instances here in Oregon (Bridge Creek winter range) where livestock were removed from state owned land to reserve grass for elk. Inside of 3 years, elk moved to the surrounding heavily grazed private holdings. Cattle were brought back at 2 times the previous numbers, and the elk returned at 2 times their previous numbers. If you want citations, let me know and I'll furnish them. Deer, elk, and pronghorn all prefer to graze where old growth has been cleaned off by grazing or fire, and they all have easy access to new herbage. Managed grazing can also be used to stimulate the growth of palatable shrubs. With early spring use, cattle will focus on competing grasses and that leaves more moisture for the shrubs needed to elevate wildlife diet quality later in the winter.

Ungrazed grasses in our environment are about 3 to 5% crude protein by late summer. That level will not sustain any herbivore that I know of. If cattle can take off the tough stems when herbage is still green, a tussock starts new growth and cures at 7 to 9% crude protein when soil moisture runs out. Elk, deer, bighorn, and pronghorn can do quite well on that cured regrowth and actually chunk up before the coming winter.

My office windows look out over about a 1000 square mile basin that floods each spring to promote hay growth and harvest. It's all deeded land. The basin chunks up literally millions of water fowl during spring migrations too. We also have a huge flooded and largely ungrazed wildlife refuge to the south. Make a guess as to where all the birds (duck, geese, cranes etc) forage each spring. It's almost entirely on deeded property.

Review many of the articles that come from the Starkey Experimental Forest, and one will find that in a given year, as soon as cattle move out, elk will move in to work the more nutritious herbage.

Ranchers have screwed this country up so much in the last 50 years, that the enviro's flock out here to get away from things and enjoy nature every year. If it's that fuc-ed up, why are they spending all their vacation time here and building their cabins. My definition of an enviro is someone that built their cabin in the woods last year. Now they can't stand the thought that someone might build a little higher on the hill.

I for one am glad that ranchers are out there. We'd have far fewer wildlife without them. It's true that some deeded land owners are paid for crop damages. But put 200 elk or pronghorn on a 1/2 section pivot in late summer and a whole third or fourth cutting of valuable alfala can disappear. It costs a sh-tload of money to install and run pivots, and big game benefit greatly from their presence. I personally know ranchers here in eastern Oregon that pull from their stacks to feed deer, elk, pronghorn, and sheep during tough times, and they've never requested or gotten a dime. Ask for permission and most will grant it. Break down in the boonies, and they'll haul you out and refuse payment. Let's keep those ranchers here, be nice to them, and one can likely gain access to their properties and the lands beyond. Sorry for the rant. I'll shut up and go elsewhere,

I can't speak for WY but in MT a very well funded, private group made an offer on the grazing association(private and lease land) where my dad has beening running cows for the past 20 years. Their goal is to gradually phase out ranching on that particular chunk of land.

Guess what, they don't own any cattle and I'm pretty sure they don't really care for hunting. And this BLM/CMR ground we are talking about. The same BLM/CMR land that has highly regulated grazing(a good thing). Don't worry, PLENTY of grass out there, deer and elk certainly aren't starving and might even hit the stock tanks and dams once in awhile.

A neighboring rancher doesn't even run cattle on a huge piece of it just because it's a pain in the ass gathering that area. Pretty sure he's still paying the lease(deep pockets so they can afford it).

And I'm also pretty damn sure the cost to lease has increased since once or twice since 1960.

Sure there are those that abuse the system but please don't throw the 'welfare rancher' comments out there.

And I would cagefight your dumbass over that one if you ran your mouth like that around me. Not real keen on people talking chit about my family's way of life.

(This is why I stay away from the wolf threads, ignornat [bleep] with big mouths really get under my skin)


And I'm out of here also.
Not worth getting worked up over some crap a chick types on the internet.

SamOlson:

I completley disagree. It's definitely worth getting worked up about. The wealth of public lands is the reason I hauled my butt out here from the east in 1974.

It would take ton of $$$ and 4 months of vacation time a year for me to live in Texas. Texans are indeed fine people, but I have way more freedom here than they do down there. Winter well, 1Minute

I needed a timeout...(grin)


You're right, our public lands(and any land) should be treasured and looked after with respect.
Something my old man taught my brother and I years ago.

Peaceout.


(I'm still ready for that cage fight though!)

Sam,

For your reading enjoyment...you are correct, current AUM price on federal leases is actually 13 cents an AUM higher now than in 1966.

Staggering increase...

Do you suppose the costs of administration of federal leases has increased or decreased since 1966? Federal wages stayed the same? Cost of vehicles stayed the same?

Subsidized grazing=welfare. No way around it, look up the definition of a subsidy, and I'd say it to your face. No disrespect, just the definition of a subsidy.


BLM and Forest Service Announce
2007 Federal Grazing Fee

The Federal grazing fee for Western public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service will be $1.35 per animal unit month (AUM) in 2007, down from $1.56 in 2006. The newly adjusted fee, determined by a congressional formula and effective on March 1, applies to nearly 18,000 grazing permits and leases administered by the BLM and more than 8,000 permits administered by the Forest Service.

The formula used for calculating the grazing fee, established by Congress in the 1978 Public Rangelands Improvement Act, has continued under a presidential Executive Order issued in 1986. Under that order, the grazing fee cannot fall below $1.35 per AUM, and any increase or decrease cannot exceed 25 percent of the previous year's level. An Animal Unit Month is the amount of forage needed to sustain one cow and her calf, one horse, or five sheep or goats for a month.

The annually adjusted grazing fee is computed by using a 1966 base value of $1.23 per AUM for livestock grazing on public lands in Western states.The figure is then adjusted according to three factors - current private grazing land lease rates, beef cattle prices, and the cost of livestock production. Based on this formula, the 2007 fee declined primarily because of an increase in production prices.

The $1.35 per AUM grazing fee applies to 16 Western states on public lands administered by the BLM and the Forest Service. The states are Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. The Forest Service applies different grazing fees to national grasslands and to lands under its management in the Eastern and Midwestern states and parts of Texas. The national grassland fee will be $1.37 per AUM, down from $1.73 in 2006, and will also take effect March 1. The fee for the Eastern and Midwestern states and parts of Texas will be out later this month.

The BLM manages more land - 258 million surface acres - than any other Federal agency. Most of this public land is located in 12 Western States, including Alaska. The Bureau, with a budget of about $1.8 billion, also administers 700 million acres of sub-surface mineral estate throughout the nation. The BLM's multiple-use mission is to sustain the health and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Bureau accomplishes this by managing such activities as outdoor recreation, livestock grazing, mineral development, and energy production, and by conserving natural, historical, and cultural resources on the public lands.

The Forest Service, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, manages 193 million acres of Federal lands in 44 states, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

1-minute,

I agree with some of your post. No question that duration, timing, and intensity of grazing can have be a positive for the land, the wildlife, and the rancher. I've seen some extremely well managed federal, state, and private lands...really a model for how things COULD work.

However, the reality on the many thousands acres of BLM, FS, BIA, State, etc. land I've personally inventoried, along with a fair amount of private land as well, in WY, MT, ID, CO, NV, AZ, N. Dakota, and S. Dakota, that isnt whats going on.

The land is still in a declining or over-grazed condition on way more than half of it. It likely is an improvement over 50 years ago...but one would hope to hell it would be better. Saying that 50 years ago it was grazed to dirt compared to now we leave SOME grass still doesnt mean anything is being managed properly, or that the land/system is healhty. You cant make chicken salad out of chicken $hit.

It obvious to me that you do know more than a fair bit about the situation, but I dont think its prudent to live in denial that the federal grazing system is not still in big trouble as a whole. Its also unfair to say that no problems exist in regards to the health of the federal grazing leases, in particular riparian areas.

As to things like T&E, are you implying that federal regulations like those should be ignored because it may change how or when a block of federal property is grazed? Are you also implying there is no way to mediate such issues?

I also disagree with you that a majority of ranchers that lease federal lands will allow you to hunt or access land locked federal lands. I can assure you, that in MT, ID, and WY you will be denied access 90% of the time. It very well could be different in Oregon...one of the few Western States I've never spent much time in.

My contention is that despite some of the things you listed, there is no question that grazing on federal lands is a highly subsidized endeavor that is also out-of-date and in need of a massive over-haul.

I do appreciate a fair dialogue on the federal lands issues.

I'm just curious but if $1.35 is say the average going rate on BLM etc then what is the average going rate on private land. And yeah I realize there's a lot of variables to the question but am just curious about the ballpark diff?

(and I don't have a perro in this fight by the way)

Thx
Dober

Depends...on similar land types and AUM's, $8-$12 an AUM on private.

Not unusual for higher AUM prices on private either...I think it would be rare to find any under $8.

Thx Buzz, was just being my normal curious George self.

Dober

Buzz, just what are your qualifications to rate the condition of grazing lands?
I'm sure that you've taken into account in your grazing land assessment the affect of the severe drought that has been in this part of the country for the last 12 years. Yes it rained some last year, but theres several years of shortages to make up.
The BLM sets the stocking rate , NOT the rancher. The BLM sets the length of the grazing season, and NOT the rancher.
Until you've actually had to set down and make ends meet from a calf check or sale of grain, you can't possibly even begin to understand the finances of it.
You go on about 1960's grazing rates, yet you gloss clear over 1960's prices paid for cattle. And ignore the 2009 price of production.
Can you tell us how many lbs of forage a 1200 lb momma cow needs this time of the year?

Your price guess is about 15 years old there bub. Private leases are also 90% of the time on grass land that has a stocking rate of 1/3 or less the acres per cow it takes on the bulk of blm and forest service. The weaning weights of calves coming off cows in private grazing is about1/3 heavier than public lands cattle. That makes an awful lot of difference in the value of the lease right there. Then you have to take into account various private leases, the leasee has to do nothing but turn the cattle out and go get them in the fall on many of them. There isn't a publicland lease that way anywhere.

Mark,

The average per AUM will also vary from state to state...a quick internet search will likely tell you what you want to know. For example, S. Dakota average AUM price on private ranged from $20-$24/AUM.

I think that for similar private land conditions and similar obligations in regards to fencing, etc. (comparing to BLM) that $8-$12 would be fair.

Ranch13, I didnt gloss over anything, and for the record, go read what I wrote. I put half the blame on the BLM for the poor condition of 70% of their federal land. However, that does not excuse poor stewardship on the ranchers part that obviously happens on federal leases.

My qualifications on rating the condition of grazing lands is direct work with the BLM's own risk rating system for riparian and non-riparian lands. Its a comprehensive assessment of over 120 variables, species presence, amount of utilization of and identification of grasses, forbs, and shrubs down to a "presence" level. On riparian variables things like pfankuch bank stability, Rosgen stream classification system, deep binding root mass, etc. etc. etc. Also fairly well versed in the presence/abundance of macro-invertebrates and how they translate to water quality and ecosystem health. TMDL collection techniques and how they translate to water temperature, turbidity, oxygen content, etc. Understanding of channel migration using permanent surveying techniques via total station. Taking said data and comparing various stream reaches using GIS for cut and fill analysis...comparing healthy (stable) VS unhealthy (unstable) banks.

I've personally inventoried thousands of acres collecting the above data in several states on a variety of land ownerships.

I've used the data to aid in drafting short and long term management plans to address and/or help to recover land that is no longer functioning properly or in a state of decline. I've done this for both Federal and Private lands.

I also have a degree in resource management.

But, really, you dont need much more than common sense to recongnize if a given unit of land is in decline, improving, or staying the same. Ever looked at fenceline contrasts? Why the land on one side of a fence looks vastly different than the other side? Ever looked at historic VS current photos of the same area of land and noted the differences between then and now? Thats what the risk rating system proves via an unbiased standardized system.

Ranch13 and Mark...dated information from 2007, check out the AUM average price. Also a good article to note the differences in AUM based on lots of variables.

I still contend my numbers are NOT out-of-line...you be the judge. Heres a link to the average prices per AUM on private land in most of the western states. Ranged from a low of $8/AUM in Arizona to a high of $24/AUM in Nebraska. Wyoming came in at $15/AUM and Montana at $16/AUM. If the link doesnt work, just cut and paste it.


http://beefmagazine.com/images/GrazingTable%5b1%5d.pdf



Lingering drought and strong cattle prices combined to push private grazing rates up 4.5% this year to $13.80/animal unit month (AUM) across the Western U.S. This year's rise follows a modest 0.8% gain last year, according to the latest USDA January Cattle Survey.

Given the overall strength of the cattle economy, pasture rates would have likely risen higher except for the persistent drought, writes Michael Fritz in the upcoming March issue of BEEF magazine. Fritz is owner of Mercator Research LLC in Monona, WI, and editor and publisher of Farmland Investor Letter, a monthly subscription newsletter providing farmland market insight and intelligence for farmland investors and managers.

He says last year's dry weather, high corn prices and high energy costs stalled the rebuilding of the beef herd, which remains 6.3% under the 1996 peak of 103.5 million head. The number of beef cows in Texas, Missouri and Oklahoma, which represent nearly 29% of the U.S. beef cow herd, was down 4% in January compared to a year ago. Beef cow replacements in these three states contracted 7%. The result: 216,000 fewer beef cows and replacement heifers are competing for pasture than a year ago.

The region's firmest pasture markets are in South Dakota, California and Nebraska, where rates are up an average 10.3%, 7.1% and 6.7%, respectively, over last year.

The January survey reports that grazing rates contracted in Oregon and Washington. However, interviews with market participants in Oregon indicate grazing leases are steady to up 3.5%.

USDA's survey reflects state averages. Local rental rates vary widely based on such factors as forage quality, proximity to roads, and the availability of stock water, size of the acreage, lease term and landowner services. Charges for counting, checking health and water, providing salt and minerals, and maintaining fences vary with each situation.

The accompanying chart (click here to see chart) reports average grazing rates for three common pricing methods: per AUM, a cow-calf basis, and per head. An AUM is the amount of forage needed to sustain one cow and calf, one horse, or five sheep or goats for a month.

The protracted drought across the Southwest, Plains, Wyoming and southwest Missouri continued to counter landowner efforts to seek higher pasture rents. Lease rates were mostly unchanged in these states.

South Dakota is the exception. Here the strong cattle market and a tight grass supply due to insufficient rainfall provided much of the momentum behind a more than 10% increase to $20.30/AUM.

The run-up in corn prices is also believed to be indirectly pushing up grazing rates in eastern South Dakota. Cattlemen are feeling pressured to pay up for grass pasture since grass serves as a substitute for high-priced corn, asserts Matt Diersen, a South Dakota State University economist in Brookings.

These cost pressures continue to narrow the lease rate gap with Nebraska, which leads the western states at $24/AUM.

In Texas, rising maintenance costs have prompted landowners to take advantage of healthy cattle prices and push grazing rates up more than 6%. Higher steel prices have nearly doubled fencing costs over the last 18 months, says Richard Conner, a Texas A&M University economist in College Station.

Heading north into Oklahoma, grazing rates are flat to nominally higher. Cattlemen are paying an average of 34�/lb. of gain for young lightweight stocker cattle on winter wheat pasture during the mid-November to March season, says Roger Sahs, an Oklahoma State University economist in Stillwater.

Graze-out wheat pasture, in which cattle remain on fields into May, is especially scarce. Strong wheat prices are prompting landowners to pull cattle off wheat fields before the first hollow stem growth stage to harvest their wheat for grain. This has helped push graze-out rates up 4� to an average of 37�/lb. of gain.

Leases for native grass in Oklahoma are essentially unchanged at $9.80/acre. Bermuda grass pasture -- located mostly south of Interstate 40 -- is averaging $15/acre, up $2.

Lease rates are also flat in Missouri. Pasture leases range from $10/acre to $25/acre, depending on forage quality, reports Richard Sullivan, a Farm Credit Services appraiser in Springfield. Better quality land suitable for hay is renting for $35-$40/acre.

Mark Harmon, who runs 160 cows on leased pasture east of Joplin, says fescue pasture is renting for $35-$40/acre, also unchanged from a year ago.

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest Service are cutting the federal grazing fee for Western pasture lands 13.5% this year to $1.35/AUM from $1.56/AUM last year. The new fee, which takes effect March 1, is the lowest rate allowed under the current formula. BLM says rising production costs, especially higher fuel prices, outweighed strong cattle prices and higher private lease rates. The fee applies to more than 26,000 grazing permits and leases on public land administered by the two agencies.

At the state level, grazing fees on state-owned trust lands are flat to modestly higher. In Oregon, 2007 lease rates are up 3.6% to $5.80/AUM for the 638,000 acres of arid to semi-arid state rangeland in central and eastern Oregon. Typical privately-owned irrigated pasture in Klamath County, OR, rents for $22.50/AUM. County Assessor Reg LeQuieu expects 2007 rates will rise to about $24/AUM.

In Colorado, state grazing leases are up 5.5% and range from $7.64/AUM to $10.22/AUM.

In neighboring Nebraska, grazing rates on state-owned land are generally flat, despite USDA's reported 6.7% average increase for private leases. State leases for sandy soil pasture range from an average $21/AUM in the western Sand Hills, to $28/AUM in the eastern Sand Hills.

The extended drought has prompted continued cuts in stocking rates, reports Ron Vance, field supervisor with the Nebraska Board of Educational Lands and Funds.

Heavy herd liquidations over the last 6-9 months in the south-central and southern Plains have left some uncertainty in private lease rates. In mid-February, local observers expected private rates to hold steady at $18-$24/AUM in eastern Wyoming and the western Nebraska Sand Hills, and $22-$30/AUM in the eastern Nebraska Sand Hills.

Still, private rates could soften because fewer cows are competing for grass, notes Lex Madden, manager of Torrington Livestock Markets in Torrington, WY. Western Nebraska, western South Dakota and most of Wyoming remain in a moderate to severe drought.
-- Mike Fritz, Mercator Research LLC, Monona, WI

Strong cattle prices? that pucker was smokin dope.
Most of us brought home 15-20000$ less this past fall, than we did in 08, and 08 was less than 07,07 wasn't as strong as 06, for crying out loud.
Buzz who pays your wages?

I'm not a rancher or farmer but I can say that there's a lot of business people who've taken it hard in the last few years. The farm/ranch community is just one more place that's taken it's hits just like the rest of the world.

Dober

Dober absolutely the small business community has been hit and hit hard. The problem when farmers and ranchers start taking it in the shorts is , those shorts already had holes in em. With profit margins being slim to none in the good years, the bad years are even tougher. This is why the attack on "public land ranchers" is so sickening. The expenses those guys incur that folks not involved with them don't see are terribly high.Their winter feed costs are probably twice what mine are, the weaning weight of their calves means less $ per head than what a private outfit gets, and then you take on the added expense they have in the extras it takes to run of public land .
I the basin where I live I sort of expect there to be a couple of collapses this coming year, and I'm not sure how many more of these years my outfit can sustain.
The problem is when folks like me go out of business the cows go to town, the land gets parceled, and there's another 5000 acres that doesn't make for very good wildlife habitat.
Of all the things man can do to the land erecting towns and homes is the one thing it will take millions of years to undo.

Geeze
Think I'll go to a hunter friendlier state like...California

Mark:



Just did a little surfing.... between 13 to $15 per animal unit month.

There are several plus sides to deeded leases. 1. They usually involve very productive pasture or meadow lands that yield tons as opposed to lbs of forage per acre. 2. The landowner is responsibe for fencing, water, and security. 3. There are usually handling facilities for loading, unloading, or working stock. 4. One can put out supplements etc to boost nutrition and weight gains. 5. Topography or distance to water does not usually constrain animal distribution.

Our mid-elevation (4,000 ft) BLM grounds typically yield between 200 to 500 lbs of forage/acre in good years. In bad years half of that. Average precip is 12 inches annually and 80% comes as snow. Standing crop can be tripled if fire or herbicides take out sagebrush. Sage will return though and stocking rates will have to decline.

Typical allotment management strives to leave about half of the standing crop for soil protection and as forage/cover for mother nature's critters. On ranges I've worked with, one needs from 7 to 9 acres to carry a cow for a month. We don't have turf. One can step on a single bunch of grass, and may be able to reach another with the next step. I some of Nevada, it may be 15 feet between bunches of grass.

A good approximation for herbivore intake is 3% of body weight per day. Thus a 1000 lb cow needs 30 lbs (dry weight) per day or 900 lbs per month. Start multiplying things out, and one needs a lot of property to carry 250 hd for 7 months of the year on our high desert grazing lands. Forage quality is usually below maintenance levels from mid July to early October, and stock can barely maintain or typically loose weight. They make fabulous compensatory gains in April, May, and June (like up to 4 lbs per day).

Two hundred and fifty cattle will not make a person rich, but he can work his ass off caring for them. Most have to put up hay to get cattle through the winter, so winter feeding costs (tractors, fuel, labor for harvest and feeding) often amount to 70% of an operation's budget

On top of low standing crops, topography and water tend to limit where livestock can or will go on public lands. Slopes exceeding about 20% or lands greater than 1.5 to 2 miles from water are seldom visited by stock. In rugged enviroments, 70 to 80% of an allotment's land area may essentially be unavailable due to topographic constraints.

The reason the west contains so much public land is that it's just not productive enough to support small scale endeavors. Homesteaders tried in the early days, struggled for a few years, and gave it up. Nearly all that homesteaded land reverted to public ownership. Grazing allotments were formed and priority given to the nearest rancher that was able to tough it out and survive.

Those homesteader hardships were the product of eastern lawmakers who absolutley knew that anyone with a strong back, horse, and a plow could care for a family on 160 acres. That's certainly possible back east with deep soil, no rocks, and 35 inches of growing season precip. Not so out here with 10 inches of soil and 12 inches of precip in the form of snow.

There are those that argue for open bids to graze these lands each year. Tossing out a new batch of ignorant stock, riders, and equipment in such expansive and harsh enviroments would be an absolute wreck. It takes people and animals that know the country to come close to making things work. How many of us would run a business and hire a new lowest bidder manager to run the shop each year? It pays to have knowledge around.

South of here there is a Pliestocene basin that contained 7 towns and school districts in the homesteader days. Today, it all belongs to a single ranch and is divided into approximately three 100 square mile pastures. That's enough property for them to winter their cows, so they move out to federal allotments during the summer so their winter ground can grow a new crop of forage. I mixed in 15 GPS/radio collared cattle in one of their allotments this past summer, and with 3 days of searching, 3 of us found 4 of those cows. The pasture covers 366 square miles. It was stocked for 3 months. My goal to compare the travels and activities of experienced and naive stock. I've got a ton of numbers to crunch and maps to poor over.

If that was an absolutely square pasture, that's 76 miles of fence to check and maintain, as well as miles of pipelines, springs and stock tanks to service. Pay some one with several horses to take care of those tasks and profits are eroded in a hurry. Even with todays technology, the grazing animal is about the only way one can get any return at all from those lands. They obviously can not grow crops

Some see public land grazing as an easy, get rich quick, subsidized trough. For the most part, it's a way for a few 3rd or 4th generation hard working folks to eek out a living. If we want to think of leeches, look to where all the billion dollar government checks went in the last 6 months. I don't think many western ranchers cashed in.

I will admit there are still areas where there are stocking rate or distribution issues to resolve. Those that want to sustain a family ranch will typically work to solve such issues. There are still some hard headed apples around that don't want to think or shift from the way that dad did things. Let's not condem a whole group of fine Americans because there are still a few bad apples to tend to.

JeffP: Load up and go to Wyoming for about 8 or 9 days. There's plenty of public land and pronghorn to go around. You'll be safe, because we'll all be in town shooting it out in the streets. Take care, 1Minute

1minute, that was a most excellent presentation. Thank you.