American Prairie loses grazing rights

[CJ19]

Some were sold to market, they’re not cattle though and ranchers have a huge swing with the current administration.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am not asking if ranchers have swing in the current administration. I want to know if APR is producing meat for public consumption off their grazing leases. i see endless talk on hunting forums about how ranchers leases are publicly subsidized. So Am I or am I not subsidizing these grazing leases that beef is usually raised on?

 

[WRO]

I am not asking if ranchers have swing in the current administration. I want to know if APR is producing meat for public consumption off their grazing leases. i see endless talk on hunting forums about how ranchers leases are publicly subsidized. So Am I or am I not subsidizing these grazing leases that beef is usually raised on?

Re read my first sentance, some were/are sold to market.

The blm also considers donkeys and horses livestock, neither of those go to market either.

 

[Axlrod]

Ironically Montana classified Bison as livestock many years ago. They did so in order to slow the dispersion of Bison from Yellowstone, in the name of disease control.

 

[LostWapiti]

To think that the lease grazing fee should not be higher is being ignorant to economics. If the lease grazing fee was where it should be in the market then holding the leases would not have value as the cost of paying for the lease would be equal to the benefit of grazing the cattle.

Instead these rights to these leases are worth millions of dollars which if you take the “value” of the lease demonstrates the subsidy being offered. Offering subsidies to food producers is not always a bad thing as it is crucial to national security and stability but we need to be honest about what is going on and balance how much subsidy is worth giving to those who are in many cases being very hard on our deer and elk habitat. It pretty apparent when you go in to areas grazes heavily and see no deer or elk sign and scorched earth grasses between the sage.

 

[CJ19]

Re read my first sentance, some were/are sold to market.

The blm also considers donkeys and horses livestock, neither of those go to market either.

Ok, thanks for clarifying that. I am trying to understand the issue. I understand that you don't like ranchers and that you want to fish and hunt. I know this is a hunting forum and constistently see opinions that are based around peoples interest in that. There are other perspectives. APR is not some helpless charity organization. The people running APR are some of the richest people in the world and know exactly how to benefit financially through "philanthropy". They have plenty of political influence just like the ranching lobby does.

I know little about APR but based on what I have learned recently, I don't really have any particular love or hate for APR. So long as they continue to run their projects like they are currently, seems like nice places for outdoor lovers. The names behind APR are involved in all kinds of social engineering projects, so that always will make people suspicious.

 

[Marbles]

Wow, public land ranchers are very inefficient.

In 2017 the USDA says 805 million acres in the US was used for grazing.

BLM has grazing leases that cover 155 million acres.

USFS leases 73.7 million acres.

So 576.3 million acres of private grazing.

Public land grazing accounts for over 28% of all grazing land, while producing only 2-6% of the cattle.

Based on 2015 numbers that I can find, the livestock grazing program cost BLM $36.2 million to administer, but it brought in just $14.5 million in fees.

BLM also apparently is very bad at enforcement and nothing happens when ranchers steel from the public by over grazing (or just don't pay like the Bundy's).

 

[Big Sky Guy]

Ok, thanks for clarifying that. I am trying to understand the issue. I understand that you don't like ranchers and that you want to fish and hunt.

I think you’re confusing criticism of the government-rancher relationship via grazing leases with dislike.

IF grazing leases were at market value and/or IF our nations beef supply was heavily connected to these leases and/or IF the price of beef we pay in stores more closely reflected the amount of subsidy I think this thread would read differently.

What hunters on here are upset about is being fleeced by the government. The ranchers are having their cake and now eating it too. Cheap grazing leases, little to no accountability on how the lands are grazed and the environmental impact and now they’ve convinced this administration that bison are still the enemy when science has largely proved they are not. The grazing lease thing was the exact thing I hoped Musk and DOGE would make right.

I greatly value the habitat provided by and role ranchers play in the community, but I also recognize the issue at hand. In this case I hope this is overturned and the APR can return to grazing bison on our public lands. I don’t really “stand” with ranchers or APR but rather have considered the facts available to the best of my ability and what I view as the biggest net benefit for the majority of taxpayers (public landowners), not just myself or just a certain group.

When you consider the wild/feral horse issue that has decimated those lands and compare them to this it’s even more infuriating. Again, had hoped DOGE would eliminate the environmental disaster that has become. It still blows my mind that folks would rather have horses starve to death than rounded up and butchered and even more so our government listens to them and doesn’t do what’s best for those lands, wildlife and the taxpayers that own them.

 

[Big Sky Guy]

Wow, public land ranchers are very inefficient.

In 2017 the USDA says 805 million acres in the US was used for grazing.

BLM has grazing leases that cover 155 million acres.

USFS leases 73.7 million acres.

So 576.3 million acres of private grazing.

Public land grazing accounts for over 28% of all grazing land, while producing only 2-6% of the cattle.

It takes a LOT more land in the west (where most of public grazing is occurring) to graze vs. in the Midwest and other areas that receive substantial rainfall. I am not a rancher and don’t remember the numbers of cows/acre but that is likely a big reason for the discrepancy. Add in feedlots and those numbers don’t sound as alarming.

 

[S.Clancy]

Wow, public land ranchers are very inefficient.

In 2017 the USDA says 805 million acres in the US was used for grazing.

BLM has grazing leases that cover 155 million acres.

USFS leases 73.7 million acres.

So 576.3 million acres of private grazing.

Public land grazing accounts for over 28% of all grazing land, while producing only 2-6% of the cattle.

Based on 2015 numbers that I can find, the livestock grazing program cost BLM $36.2 million to administer, but it brought in just $14.5 million in fees.

BLM also apparently is very bad at enforcement and nothing happens when ranchers steel from the public by over grazing (or just don't pay like the Bundy's).

BLM isn't bad at enforcing. They try to enforce then get shut down at the State or National level.

Also, a super high percentage of lease holders do a great job. We need grazing on public lands, at least in states like MT where bison grazed historically.

I would need to dig into the ruling and re-read the Taylor Grazing Act to have an informed opinion on this.

 

[WRO]

Ok, thanks for clarifying that. I am trying to understand the issue. I understand that you don't like ranchers and that you want to fish and hunt. I know this is a hunting forum and constistently see opinions that are based around peoples interest that. There are other perspectives. APR is not some helpless charity organization. The people running APR are some of the richest people in the world and know exactly how to benefit financially through "philanthropy". They have plenty of political influence just like the ranching lobby does.

I know little about APR but based on what I have learned recently, I don't really have any particular love or hate for APR. So long as they continue to run their projects like they are currently, seems like nice places for outdoor lovers. The names behind APR are involved in all kinds of social engineering projects, so that always will make people suspicious.

Some of my best friends are ranchers, to say I dislike them is patently false. I don’t like the ranching industry as a whole with regard to the stranglehold on our public lands. I’m not even against public land cattle ranching within reason, the current graze it all to dirt I do have a problem with.

The APR I’m sure isn’t without issue as well, yet the precedent is being set that cattle rule and bison drool. Every attempt to reintroduce bison across the west has been fought tooth and nail.

 

[CJ19]

Some of my best friends are ranchers, to say I dislike them is patently false. I don’t like the ranching industry as a whole with regard to the stranglehold on our public lands. I’m not even against public land cattle ranching within reason, the current graze it all to dirt I do have a problem with.

The APR I’m sure isn’t without issue as well, yet the precedent is being set that cattle rule and bison drool. Every attempt to reintroduce bison across the west has been fought tooth and nail.

My misunderstanding about your opinion on ranchers. Im not a rancher nor have a strong opinion about them.

 

[Gila]

It takes a LOT more land in the west (where most of public grazing is occurring) to graze vs. in the Midwest and other areas that receive substantial rainfall. I am not a rancher and don’t remember the numbers of cows/acre but that is likely a big reason for the discrepancy. Add in feedlots and those numbers don’t sound as alarming.

Some areas up there are in need of restoration but it is acres per cow, not cows per acre. Some ranches might lease some land to two or three of the neighbors. People out East can’t get their arms around the concept of open range with cattle that might have three or four different brands. The local ranchers determine their own economy and help each other out. I live in the middle of 50K of open range. The fence around my place is to keep cattle out. If you took a million acres from us, our regional economy maybe the entire state economy would collapse. There is no way on God’s great green earth could we graze bison and survive.

 

[WRO]

Some areas up there are in need of restoration but it is acres per cow, not cows per acre. Some ranches might lease some land to two or three of the neighbors. People out East can’t get their arms around the concept of open range with cattle that might have three or four different brands. The local ranchers determine their own economy and help each other out. I live in the middle of 50K of open range. The fence around my place is to keep cattle out. If you took a million acres from us, our regional economy maybe the entire state economy would collapse. There is no way on God’s great green earth could we graze bison and survive.

Ranching isn’t even in there top 10 economic drivers in New Mexico. The state has the 2nd lowest income per person and 17% are below the poverty level. What’s going on New Mexico obviously isn’t working.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Marbles]

It takes a LOT more land in the west (where most of public grazing is occurring) to graze vs. in the Midwest and other areas that receive substantial rainfall. I am not a rancher and don’t remember the numbers of cows/acre but that is likely a big reason for the discrepancy. Add in feedlots and those numbers don’t sound as alarming.

Ok, not taking the time to dig as deep or as reliably. But, looks like the US has 305 million AUMs worth of grazing and BLM leases about 10.8 million AUMs and the USFS about 5.5 million AUMs.

So, 5.3% of US grazing AUMs help produce 2-6% of cattle.

Of course, we I don't know the breakdown for AUM use as clearly not all are used for cattle (public or private).

I guess the question comes down to should tax payers subsidize industries so they can exist in locations a free market will not support? And, the answer to that is 'it depends '.

 

[WRO]

Ok, not taking the time to dig as deep or as reliably. But, looks like the US has 305 million AUMs worth of grazing and BLM leases about 10.8 million AUMs and the USFS about 5.5 million AUMs.

So, 5.3% of US grazing AUMs help produce 2-6% of cattle.

Of course, we I don't know the breakdown for AUM use as clearly not all are used for cattle (public or private).

I guess the question comes down to should tax payers subsidize industries so they can exist in locations a free market will not support? And, the answer to that is 'it depends '.

Most estimates put production and 2-3% of total production.

We do get benefits of water sources etc for wildlife as well. From talking to a good friend of mine that works for blm, it costs half as much to manage grazed land and ungrazed land.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tipsntails7]

I could be off base on this, but I remember listening to a podcast, believe it was Meateater some time last year, and they talked about the comparison of cattle vs bison, and how Bison graze and traverse their areas is a significant net benefit to the land itself over cattle. I don’t know enough about bison but do know enough about cattle that you’d be hard pressed to find a more destructive animal on the land.

I don’t know a ton about APR but do know they’ve opened access to properties for outdoor recreation in the past.


I will say, I grew up on a ranch (grandfather owned) and cattle are not a net positive for any land they are on, and I can’t get behind maintaining or expanding ranchers access to public lands for their private gain.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

don’t know enough about bison but do know enough about cattle that you’d be hard pressed to find a more destructive animal on the land.

Sheep. Domestic sheep. We had them on our farm before we went to entirely cattle. Horrible animals. Goats are a close second.

Properly contained and managed cows are good on grass pasture. It just requires good rotational grazing practices. Good rotational grazing requires abundant water, small fields, good fences, and the “right” number of cattle per acre. On the extreme ends, too few cows are almost as bad as too many cows when it comes to the right number per acre.

Since my father quit running his own cattle and started renting it out, our biggest challenges have been renters not understanding rotational grazing, refusing to do it because it’s too much work, or not having enough cattle to do it properly. And that’s on land with abundant streams and rain.

As long as the subsidies exist and the land is essentially free, there’s no incentive for ranchers to do anything more efficient.

 

[Gila]

I am not asking if ranchers have swing in the current administration. I want to know if APR is producing meat for public consumption off their grazing leases. i see endless talk on hunting forums about how ranchers leases are publicly subsidized. So Am I or am I not subsidizing these grazing leases that beef is usually raised on?

Read some of Sean Gerrity’s papers if you have some time. He had several presentations on YouTube. His experience is getting large wild animal preserves and parks in Africa. Quite a bit of his funding comes from former Soviet Union Oligarchs. The bison are not to be consumed by humans because he plans to get Grizzlies and Wolves to predate on the bison and other ungulates on the Preserve. His goal is to connect three million acres for predator management and bison grazing.

American Prairie is just another Yellowstone only privately owned (for now). Deb Haaland subsidized American Prairie by allowing them to graze their bison (not raised for consumption) on BLM land. Those Grazing leases came with the cattle ranches they bought up. AP dangled a carrot in front of hunters by putting 80K into Block Management and allowing some access to public lands on their borders. Newberg and Hettick (BHA) are trying to get hunter support for AP. They are also in bed with Center for Biological Diversity. American Prairie is a socialist idea and has nothing to do with the North American Wildlife Conservation Model which uses our excise taxes on sporting goods etc. for wildlife management.

 

[Marbles]

American Prairie is a socialist idea

If so, than so is the publicly subsidize grazing of cattle. So, if socialism is always bad, time to get some socialist ranchers off the land.

Better option is stop using words inappropriately to demonize others. Neither can accurately be described as socialist.

 

[WRO]

Read some of Sean Gerrity’s papers if you have some time. He had several presentations on YouTube. His experience is getting large wild animal preserves and parks in Africa. Quite a bit of his funding comes from former Soviet Union Oligarchs. The bison are not to be consumed by humans because he plans to get Grizzlies and Wolves to predate on the bison and other ungulates on the Preserve. His goal is to connect three million acres for predator management and bison grazing.

American Prairie is just another Yellowstone only privately owned (for now). Deb Haaland subsidized American Prairie by allowing them to graze their bison (not raised for consumption) on BLM land. Those Grazing leases came with the cattle ranches they bought up. AP dangled a carrot in front of hunters by putting 80K into Block Management and allowing some access to public lands on their borders. Newberg and Hettick (BHA) are trying to get hunter support for AP. They are also in bed with Center for Biological Diversity. American Prairie is a socialist idea and has nothing to do with the North American Wildlife Conservation Model which uses our excise taxes on sporting goods etc. for wildlife management.

National parks, wildlife refuges, and public land are by nature socialist ideas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk