American Prairie loses grazing rights

[Gila]

Th

This needs to be shouted from the roof top. So few people realize that we subsidize a select few ranchers so much. At the cost of public land health.

And before someone disagrees....I am born and raised rancher.

That isn’t entirely accurate. Some private ranchers in the area are implementing the Mortensen Principles to restore the short grass prairie to its original natural state. As a result, more cattle can be grazed…Research has shown that cattle and bison grazing habits are very much the same. i don’t know how the Federal gov’t has invested in this effort…do know that some states’ extension offices have. There is a seed bank in Pierre, SD. Of course the benefit to wildlife is huge.

 

[Axlrod]

Let's apply this same logic to hunting public land vs. a hunting lease on private land.

How do the numbers turn out?

I was replying to a specific post that said:
"federal grazing lands are for production animals used to benefit the public with food.....in this case it was for personal use so in essence taking unfair advantage of taxpayers."
My reply had nothing to do with what you posted.

 

[541hunter]

AP is a non-profit….where is the capitalism in that?

WIKI: “Approximately ten percent of the funding comes from private foundations supporting land conservation and the remaining ninety percent comes from individuals living in 46 states and eight countries. Approximately 20% of its donors reside in the state of Montana.”

The focus of my comment is not about the entities involved but the process of acquiring the grazing allotment. If APR wants to pay higher rates than livestock growers then let them. I don’t care if it’s a cow or a bison. If it meets management objectives for the land and is done in a competitive process where each party can bid whatever they want then let it be.

If you want to limit access to the allotments due to the politics of one group or another, then that is a separate conversation as a whole and not in line with free market principles.

 

[finner]

That isn’t entirely accurate. Some private ranchers in the area are implementing the Mortensen Principles to restore the short grass prairie to its original natural state. As a result, more cattle can be grazed…Research has shown that cattle and bison grazing habits are very much the same. i don’t know how the Federal gov’t has invested in this effort…do know that some states’ extension offices have. There is a seed bank in Pierre, SD. Of course the benefit to wildlife is huge.

Tell me you haven't read the research without telling me you haven't read the research.

 

[Gila]

The irony is that this is being pushed entirely by people who would otherwise call themselves private property rights advocates. But sure, let's cancel grazing leases that would unnoticed if they were black angus instead of bison. Simply because of political dynamics and local "Save the Cowboy" rhetoric. It has nothing to do with the impacts of bison on the landscape.

Btw, APR allows public access for hunting and to get to adjacent landlocked public on almost all their property. They also hold annual draws for bison hunting.

None of that is really the case….it is all about repurposing the land from agriculture to eco-tourism. That effort is part of the Buffalo Commons Movement to eliminate private property rights to be replaced with government or ”organizations” property ownership. Crazy? Yup sure is…Conservation Easements are another way to achieve the same objective. This isn’t a conspiracy theory, this is really happening. AP is ample proof of that. But getting back to the topic, I would rather hunt elk and eat steaks produced on BLM land with my tax dollars.

 

[Gila]

Tell me you haven't read the research without telling me you haven't read the research.

Ya, Well I have some of the research. Clarence Mortensen was awarded a doctorate from South Dakota State University for the 30 years of research he did on his own cattle ranch. His sons maintain a seed bank of some of the plants that were once thought to be extinct.

 

[BrokentineCO]

This is not a win for anybody except for handful of already subsidized livestock ranchers who now gained some cheap public grazing rights. The ranch, along with it's existing grazing rights, was purchased by the APR using funds from PRIVATE donors. How this not capitalism? And they even let the the public recreate and hunt on the property for free. The government is now stepping in to say how said grazing rights are to be used? That's total BS!

I see you've referenced research done by a cattle rancher but there is less biased scientific evidence out there that does argue bison are in fact better for the landscape than cattle. There's no shortage of peer reviewed papers that support this. I'll link a couple to get you started:

Reintroducing bison results in long-running and resilient increases in grassland diversity - PubMed

The widespread extirpation of megafauna may have destabilized ecosystems and altered biodiversity globally. Most megafauna extinctions occurred before the modern record, leaving it unclear how their loss impacts current biodiversity. We report the long-term effects of reintroducing plains bison ( …

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Bison and cattle grazing increase soil nitrogen cycling in a tallgrass prairie ecosystem - Biogeochemistry

Nitrogen (N) is a necessary element of soil fertility and a limiting nutrient in tallgrass prairie but grazers like bison and cattle can also recycle N. Bison and cattle impact the nitrogen (N) cycle by digesting forage that is consumed, and recycled back to the soil in a more available forms...

link.springer.com

The APR is doing a lot of good up there. The only thing they weren't doing was helping a few well connected livestock owners fill their pockets.

"But getting back to the topic, I would rather hunt elk and eat steaks produced on BLM land with my tax dollars." You're certainly entitled to your opinion. I'd rather eat elk steaks and see bison back on the landscape.

 

[finner]

Ya, Well I have some of the research. Clarence Mortensen was awarded a doctorate from South Dakota State University for the 30 years of research he did on his own cattle ranch. His sons maintain a seed bank of some of the plants that were once thought to be extinct.

Fascinating. Doesn't have anything to do with the difference in impact between bison and cows on large landscapes, like where APR grazes bison. Nor does it have anything to do with the government revoking leases based on use type.

 

[HighUintas]

…Research has shown that cattle and bison grazing habits are very much the same.

Not correct. Most research shows their habits are very different

 

[Gila]

A little background on Clarence:
——————————————————————-

Clarence Mortenson and South Dakota State University​

Background​

Clarence Mortenson is a prominent figure in South Dakota, known for his contributions to sustainable ranching and environmental conservation. He is a member of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe and has a deep connection to the land, which has influenced his approach to ranching.

Contributions to Environmental Conservation​

Mortenson began his efforts to restore his ranch land in the 1940s. He focused on:

• Building Dams: To slow water runoff and prevent erosion.
• Planting Native Vegetation: This included grasses and trees to enhance biodiversity and restore the ecosystem.
• Grazing Management: He implemented techniques that mimic the natural grazing patterns of bison, which helped improve soil health and water retention.

Impact on Education and Community​

Mortenson's work has been recognized in various educational contexts, including exhibitions that highlight sustainable farming practices. His ranch has been featured in national exhibits, showcasing how modern ranching can coexist with ecological preservation.

His sons continue his legacy, running the ranch and a native seed business, further promoting sustainable practices in agriculture. The Mortenson Ranch serves as a model for integrating traditional ecological knowledge with modern agricultural techniques, making it a valuable resource for educational institutions like South Dakota State University.

 

[molliesmaster]

• Grazing Management: He implemented techniques that mimic the natural grazing patterns of bison, which helped improve soil health and water retention.

 

[Gila]

• Grazing Management: He implemented techniques that mimic the natural grazing patterns of bison, which helped improve soil health and water retention.

That part is sort of incorrect (AI). Clarence moved the cattle around by season so over grazing didn’t occur. He didn’t observe the movement of bison nor did he ever have bison on his ranch. It is merely coincidental. If you keep bison confined to a certain area without moving them around, they will over graze just like cattle do.

 

[npaden]

This just means that APR moves their bison onto their deeded property and domestic cattle onto their BLM leases.

Means they will need to buy more deeded land.

I haven’t seen a single logical reason why APR is bad. The weirdest thing is the circular arguments their opponents throw out.

Bison are bad for wildlife so we will graze cattle instead but to make it better for wildlife we will graze them like bison graze.

We believe in private property rights except for APR’s ability to buy property from willing sellers. We need to keep those people from being able to sell to them.

 

[wapitibob]

This just means that APR moves their bison onto their deeded property and domestic cattle onto their BLM leases.

Means they will need to buy more deeded land.

I haven’t seen a single logical reason why APR is bad. The weirdest thing is the circular arguments their opponents throw out.

Bison are bad for wildlife so we will graze cattle instead but to make it better for wildlife we will graze them like bison graze.

We believe in private property rights except for APR’s ability to buy property from willing sellers. We need to keep those people from being able to sell to them.

An accurate assessment.

 

[MT_Wyatt]

What’s funny is the very first post under this is a locked Gila thread on APR. Ominous.

Gila I’ve got 2 genuine question topics for you.
1. Have you actually spent time on APR? What’s your experience with them or what they are doing?

2. Is your intent to inform, sway opinions, or what with this thread?

I guess I don’t follow why, on a very “get politics out of here” kind of hunting site focused on how we do it and what we do it with, you would choose to try and make this particular point? Is it the organization’s management, their stated intent, the donors, or the bison that are the primary issue for you? I’ll admit this whole “livestock” classification and treatment of a native wild animal in MT has always been off to me. Big state, seems like there’s room for bison and cows.

 

[MT_Wyatt]

This just means that APR moves their bison onto their deeded property and domestic cattle onto their BLM leases.

Means they will need to buy more deeded land.

I haven’t seen a single logical reason why APR is bad. The weirdest thing is the circular arguments their opponents throw out.

Bison are bad for wildlife so we will graze cattle instead but to make it better for wildlife we will graze them like bison graze.

We believe in private property rights except for APR’s ability to buy property from willing sellers. We need to keep those people from being able to sell to them.

Good post.

To add to that, the fence argument is an interesting one. APR uses elec to help curb them away from boundaries, so I’m not sure whose fences the bison are so hard on…..

 

[Legend]

That isn’t entirely accurate. Some private ranchers in the area are implementing the Mortensen Principles to restore the short grass prairie to its original natural state. As a result, more cattle can be grazed…Research has shown that cattle and bison grazing habits are very much the same. i don’t know how the Federal gov’t has invested in this effort…do know that some states’ extension offices have. There is a seed bank in Pierre, SD. Of course the benefit to wildlife is huge.

I think you quoted the wrong post. I am simply saying you can't buy a candy bar for what we charge a cow/calf pair to graze on public land for an entire month.

 

[Gila]

What’s funny is the very first post under this is a locked Gila thread on APR. Ominous.

Gila I’ve got 2 genuine question topics for you.
1. Have you actually spent time on APR? What’s your experience with them or what they are doing?

2. Is your intent to inform, sway opinions, or what with this thread?

I guess I don’t follow why, on a very “get politics out of here” kind of hunting site focused on how we do it and what we do it with, you would choose to try and make this particular point? Is it the organization’s management, their stated intent, the donors, or the bison that are the primary issue for you? I’ll admit this whole “livestock” classification and treatment of a native wild animal in MT has always been off to me. Big state, seems like there’s room for bison and cows.

I posted this because it sets precedent for public land grazing in every state and most certainly does affect hunting opportunity on public as well as private lands. Most of the hunters on this forum understand APR for what it is and the only hunting organization and forum that supports them…..only one and guess who? APR has nothing to do with the North American Conservation Model. If anything APR is the anti-thesis of that conservation model. A model we must have in place to continue hunting.

I am familiar with the land that APR now occupies and I understand why they want a contiguous three million acre wildlife preserve that includes grizzlies and wolves. That land is the closest to the natural original short grass prairie ecosystem as any other land on planet earth. During the good times thousands, no tens of thousands of Pronghorn and Deer covered the roads from sunset to sunrise. That is all I have to say, take it or leave it…

 

[MT_Wyatt]

I posted this because it sets precedent for public land grazing in every state and most certainly does affect hunting opportunity on public as well as private lands. Most of the hunters on this forum understand APR for what it is and the only hunting organization and forum that supports them…..only one and guess who? APR has nothing to do with the North American Conservation Model. If anything APR is the anti-thesis of that conservation model. A model we must have in place to continue hunting.

I am familiar with the land that APR now occupies and I understand why they want a contiguous three million acre wildlife preserve that includes grizzlies and wolves. That land is the closest to the natural original short grass prairie ecosystem as any other land on planet earth. During the good times thousands, no tens of thousands of Pronghorn and Deer covered the roads from sunset to sunrise. That is all I have to say, take it or leave it…

All good - I appreciate the response, thoughts, and frankly not freaking out like so many tend to do when people don’t fully agree. Totally don’t have to agree here.

When I see orgs just locking up land as “preservation” with easements all around me, it does trouble me, because a couple acres isn’t going to save any particular species. APR is approaching it a bit more openly and accessible in my mind, which has always made it more palatable from a conservation standpoint. There’s always conspiracy theories on what “they are actually doing.”

“….understand APR for what it is.” What would you say that is? Again genuine question, I’m not trying to flame this thing, I’m trying to understand the major reasons non-ranchers or wildlife/conservation focused folks are so against it.

 

[S.Clancy]

Buffalo need to be contained or they will wreck fences and the land scape. Also Elk, Pronghorn and Mule deer tend to leave when bison show up. Wildlife comes back when the buffalo leave. Been that way for thousands of years before the buffalo were extirpated from the landscape. Wildlife has learned to co-exist with cattle though. Now with corner crossing, there will be more “hunt-able” BLM lands.

Corner Crossing isn't yet legal in the 9th Circuit.