American Prairie loses grazing rights

[finner]

I feel like this thread has turned into people stopping watch a circus side show at this point or a monkey flinging shit at the wall.

Maybe Steve-O with AI, what stupid shit is going to be posted next?

My money is on bison killing trumpeter swans during the rut.

At least a monkey has the good grace to throw his own shit at the wall, instead of turning to desperate Google searches and AI.

It wouldn't be worth engaging except for the fact that he's spewing misinformation about a nonprofit that actually does a lot of good for Montana hunters.

 

[Axlrod]

I never intended that…that wasn’t even written anywhere. American Prairie had to put up special fences to contain the buffalo on the grazing allotments. They paid for the fences, but none the less; Bison are difficult to contain when they can’t roam. Buffalo will attack anything in their path, especially rutting bulls will go on a rampage. A bull elk is no match for them. I have seen those bison attack trees and bushes…anything. Anyone who has spent time around bison knows this. Just because you haven’t seen it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.

I used to work in Yellowstone, have spent over 1000 days there, and never seen it happen. The elk, Bison, trees & bushes all get along fine.
News flash Einstein the Bison, the elk, the trees, and the bushes ALL evolved on the landscape together. The invasive species in this equation are cattle and us europeans.

 

[Gila]

I learned quite a bit about American Prairie Reserve from this video. Maybe other will as well:

 

[Axlrod]

I learned quite a bit about American Prairie Reserve from this video. Maybe other will as well:

You learned if you post bullshit over and over again AI will turn bullshit into your version of "facts"

 

[WRO]

You learned if you post bullshit over and over again AI will turn bullshit into your version of "facts"

Before I lost interest, basically said what we all said, it’s political pressure from the cattle lobby, nothing to do with bison killing elk or pronghorn.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Before I lost interest, basically said what we all said, it’s political pressure from the cattle lobby, nothing to do with bison killing elk or pronghorn.

Why anyone would click on it to give it views is beyond me. No offense.

 

[WRO]

Why anyone would click on it to give it views is beyond me. No offense.

I do dumb stuff on the regular.

I was on the stair master bored.

 

[jolemons]

@Gila I respect your opinions on bison and how they interact with wildlife, fences and their aggression. I'm sure you have some substance to support your claims, but they're largely false. I've ranched cattle and bison my entire life, in multiple states and a wide array of ecosystems.

There are definately some differences between bison and cattle, however the contrast is nuanced and more subtle than you'd think. Each species has its advantages and disadvantages. The bison vs cattle argument, regardless of which side you're on, is more a reflection of social, cultural and/or political values than the merit of the species. Just my opinion.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

 

[bayoublaster7527]

You are about as far away as could be about what I think or who I am, or even what I have accomplished in conservation. If It wasn’t for people like me and what we have accomplished, you wouldn’t be fishing, hunting or trapping today! Agriculture is not the ogre. The 4th and fifth generation family ranches and farms are a way of life. They determine their own economy. They help each other out to survive. Most work hard and struggle to put their kids through school. They seldom go beyond the local town.

Ranchers like Clarence Mortensen have made a huge impact on the landscape. Their contributions have returned a good amount of the short grass prairie to its original state. Simply because they realized that a natural prairie can graze more cattle. Their enriched lands have benefitted wildlife. You want to blame the fat cats for a reason to grab that land and put it all into a reserve for your own piece of mind. The reality is the family rancher, who has been the good steward of that land, is being displaced. That is not the democratic way to have a park.

Montana is roughly one third public lands. Some other Western states don’t have that much public land. They need to recruit private lands for hunting access or they can’t do very much hunting.

AI here gives a good synopsis of why hunters like me….are against American Prairie Reserve. What is missing is the impact that grizzlies and wolves will have on our hunting. I have already delivered my own talking points ad nauseam:
—————————————————————————————————————————————
Some hunters oppose the American Prairie Reserve due to concerns that its land acquisitions limit public hunting opportunities and favor wealthy individuals through high-end safari experiences. Critics argue that the organization's practices may not align with the interests of the hunting community, leading to a perception of exclusivity and reduced access to hunting lands.

rokslide.com hunttalk.com

Concerns Among Hunters Regarding American Prairie Reserve​

Limited Hunting Opportunities​

Many hunters express concerns that American Prairie Reserve (APR) limits hunting opportunities. Initially, APR did not allow hunting on its properties, which raised suspicions among the hunting community. Although APR has since introduced some hunting tags, the extent of hunting allowed remains unclear. This uncertainty leads to frustration among hunters who feel their interests are not adequately represented.

Perception of Land Ownership​

Some hunters view APR's acquisition of large tracts of land as a threat to public access. The organization has been involved in significant land purchases, which some believe could restrict traditional hunting grounds. This sentiment echoes historical concerns about wealthy landowners controlling access to resources, leading to feelings of disenfranchisement among local hunters.

Legal and Environmental Issues​

APR is currently involved in legal disputes over grazing permits for bison, which some hunters believe could further complicate hunting regulations. The ongoing litigation with the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation has raised questions about the organization's commitment to balancing conservation with hunting rights. Hunters worry that these legal challenges may hinder their ability to hunt in the future.

Community Sentiment​

The local hunting community is divided. While some support APR's conservation efforts, others feel that the organization prioritizes wealthy clientele and high-end experiences over traditional hunting practices. This division reflects broader concerns about the impact of large land acquisitions on local culture and hunting traditions.

Overall, the apprehension among hunters regarding American Prairie Reserve stems from a combination of limited access, legal uncertainties, and the perception of prioritizing affluent interests over community needs.
rokslide.com wlj.net

Would like to add another data point. APR recently hired EarthJustice.org to assist in their litigation with aforementioned grazing rights. EJ is an environmental law group and they are absolutely no friend to the hunting community. Based here in Colorado they partner frequently with the plethora of anti-hunting organizations here and nationwide. EJ has filed multiple lawsuits in the past to stop wolf and grizzly bear hunting. EJ claims they “oppose trophy hunting of threatened or endangered species”. Well, I suppose it depends on who and how the decision is made on what is a “threatened or endangered” species. Many of the anti-hunting groups claim wolves and mountain lions are “threatened”. Also the “trophy hunting” term is commonly used by anti-hunting groups as a way to divide the hunting community and generate public opposition to regulated hunting practices. I believe APR’s association with EJ gives many hunters concern that their views on hunting may be changing.

I acknowledge this is a bit of a “guilty by association” claim but there are no shortage of good lawyers out there looking to take to your money. Maybe EJ is the best? Just food for thought and some concerns that hunters may have with APR.

 

[MT_Wyatt]

Would like to add another data point. APR recently hired EarthJustice.org to assist in their litigation with aforementioned grazing rights. EJ is an environmental law group and they are absolutely no friend to the hunting community. Based here in Colorado they partner frequently with the plethora of anti-hunting organizations here and nationwide. EJ has filed multiple lawsuits in the past to stop wolf and grizzly bear hunting. EJ claims they “oppose trophy hunting of threatened or endangered species”. Well, I suppose it depends on who and how the decision is made on what is a “threatened or endangered” species. Many of the anti-hunting groups claim wolves and mountain lions are “threatened”. Also the “trophy hunting” term is commonly used by anti-hunting groups as a way to divide the hunting community and generate public opposition to regulated hunting practices. I believe APR’s association with EJ gives many hunters concern that their views on hunting may be changing.

I acknowledge this is a bit of a “guilty by association” claim but there are no shortage of good lawyers out there looking to take to your money. Maybe EJ is the best? Just food for thought and some concerns that hunters may have with APR.

EJ also helps the state wildlife federations, which are not anti-hunting. They have their leanings, sure, based on clientele and specialty. But that can be used to help “hunting” focused orgs and wildlife. There’s a lot of gray in the world and using it where your priorities align does not make an organization bad or “anti.”

 

[Gila]

I used to work in Yellowstone, have spent over 1000 days there, and never seen it happen. The elk, Bison, trees & bushes all get along fine.
News flash Einstein the Bison, the elk, the trees, and the bushes ALL evolved on the landscape together. The invasive species in this equation are cattle and us europeans.

In Yellowstone those species have been around each other for quite a while and are somewhat used to each other. On the prairie….in those grazing allotments….The elk, pronghorn and deer have never seen a bison before. And conversely the bison haven’t been around those species either. I only said that elk, deer and pronghorn tolerate cattle better than bison. That is because cattle are docile. We bred them that way. Cattle don’t usually stampede. It is the bison’s nature to stampede on the plains. I have never been to Yellowstone. But I don’t consider Yellowstone to be part of the short grass prairie biome. Prairie Bison apparently act differently.

 

[Gila]

EJ also helps the state wildlife federations, which are not anti-hunting. They have their leanings, sure, based on clientele and specialty. But that can be used to help “hunting” focused orgs and wildlife. There’s a lot of gray in the world and using it where your priorities align does not make an organization bad or “anti.”

Hunting conservation groups would beg to differ after having been sued by EJ or other radical enviro-litigation groups like them. We were sued for introducing wild turkeys to a NF. We had funded the Fish&Game project and supplied our own biologists to work the project. We lost the lawsuit and the funding. SCI and other hunting conservation groups stepped up to the plate and kicked in some hefty donations to keep us going.

We actually had several private ranches within the NF volunteer to allow us to release the turkeys on their property. We accomplished the mission and the first turkey season on public land opened two years later. Today, 35 years later, that National Forest is some of the best public land turkey hunting in the country.

Some input from Aaron Flint who produced “the New Yellowstone” documentary:

“Now, the far Left APR is publicly teaming up with the radical environmental group Earthjustice to file suit. Click here for the press release. And that is what apparently set off Tom Opre, a filmmaker and wildlife and sportsmen's advocate based here in Montana. He produced a recent documentary called "The Real Yellowstone" where he interviewed all sides of the APR debate.

"Earthjustice is not a conservation organization, Opre writes. "It is a well-known anti-use, anti-hunting, preservationist litigation group whose entire model is built on suing to restrict grazing, end hunting, block predator management, and undermine science-based wildlife authority." Opre added that "when you partner with an organization that openly rejects sustainable use, rejects the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, and routinely works against hunters, ranchers, and tribal wildlife use" people are right to ask more questions.”

—————————————————————————-
“Environmental groups have advocated to cut or weaken ranchers’ federal grazing privileges without compensation, and some groups pursue relentless strategies of litigation to reduce grazing on public lands in favor of environmental protection.” (The role of EarthJustice)

The federal government has recently determined that bison are not considered to be domestic livestock. APR does not consider wildlife to be in the public trust therefore going back to the feudal estate where aristocracy owned the wildlife. Holding Wildlife in the public trust is a primary tenet of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model.

“Moreover, as a bottom-up endeavor, the best strategy — at least initially — may be for rewilded species to not actually be “wild” in the eyes of the law. In many cases, private ownership of rewilded animals may be necessary for acceptable management, especially for large and potentially destructive species.” (Another role of EarthJustice)

The tribes are primarily cattle, sheep ranchers and farmers with deeded acres. If they wanted large herds of bison they would have them by now.

“Today, bison are considered by some scientists to be ecologically extinct on much of the Great Plains. The populations that do exist are small and thus no longer play a foundational role in shaping the biodiversity of the prairie. APR intends to restore as many as 10,000 bison to its lands.”

Introducing Grizzlies and wolves to the landscape will render cattle and sheep ranching unprofitable to the point that ranching will no longer be feasible. The goal of introducing large numbers of apex predators is to replace hunting as a wildlife management tool.

“In addition, the reserve aims to support the reintroduction of other wildlife that were decimated after European settlement. And some of those species are already on their way. Grizzly bear populations are rapidly expanding out of Yellowstone and the Rocky Mountain Front and onto the farms and ranches of the Great Plains, where they once roamed in great numbers. Wolves are on their way as well, if not already there. Last year, a rancher shot and killed a female wolf near Denton, Montana, just 30 miles from one of the reserve’s properties. It’s only a matter of time before these species expand farther, much to the concern of some local ranchers.”

 

[MT_Wyatt]

Hunting conservation groups would beg to differ after having been sued by EJ or other radical enviro-litigation groups like them. We were sued for introducing wild turkeys to a NF. We had funded the Fish&Game project and supplied our own biologists to work the project. We lost the lawsuit and the funding. SCI and other hunting conservation groups stepped up to the plate and kicked in some hefty donations to keep us going.

We actually had several private ranches within the NF volunteer to allow us to release the turkeys on their property. We accomplished the mission and the first turkey season on public land opened two years later. Today, 35 years later, that National Forest is some of the best public land turkey hunting in the country.

Some input from Aaron Flint who produced “the New Yellowstone” documentary:

“Now, the far Left APR is publicly teaming up with the radical environmental group Earthjustice to file suit. Click here for the press release. And that is what apparently set off Tom Opre, a filmmaker and wildlife and sportsmen's advocate based here in Montana. He produced a recent documentary called "The Real Yellowstone" where he interviewed all sides of the APR debate.

"Earthjustice is not a conservation organization, Opre writes. "It is a well-known anti-use, anti-hunting, preservationist litigation group whose entire model is built on suing to restrict grazing, end hunting, block predator management, and undermine science-based wildlife authority." Opre added that "when you partner with an organization that openly rejects sustainable use, rejects the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, and routinely works against hunters, ranchers, and tribal wildlife use" people are right to ask more questions.”

—————————————————————————-
“Environmental groups have advocated to cut or weaken ranchers’ federal grazing privileges without compensation, and some groups pursue relentless strategies of litigation to reduce grazing on public lands in favor of environmental protection.” (The role of EarthJustice)

The federal government has recently determined that bison are not considered to be domestic livestock. APR does not consider wildlife to be in the public trust therefore going back to the feudal estate where aristocracy owned the wildlife. Holding Wildlife in the public trust is a primary tenet of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model.

“Moreover, as a bottom-up endeavor, the best strategy — at least initially — may be for rewilded species to not actually be “wild” in the eyes of the law. In many cases, private ownership of rewilded animals may be necessary for acceptable management, especially for large and potentially destructive species.” (Another role of EarthJustice)

The tribes are primarily cattle, sheep ranchers and farmers with deeded acres. If they wanted large herds of bison they would have them by now.

“Today, bison are considered by some scientists to be ecologically extinct on much of the Great Plains. The populations that do exist are small and thus no longer play a foundational role in shaping the biodiversity of the prairie. APR intends to restore as many as 10,000 bison to its lands.”

Introducing Grizzlies and wolves to the landscape will render cattle and sheep ranching unprofitable to the point that ranching will no longer be feasible. The goal of introducing large numbers of apex predators is to replace hunting as a wildlife management tool.

“In addition, the reserve aims to support the reintroduction of other wildlife that were decimated after European settlement. And some of those species are already on their way. Grizzly bear populations are rapidly expanding out of Yellowstone and the Rocky Mountain Front and onto the farms and ranches of the Great Plains, where they once roamed in great numbers. Wolves are on their way as well, if not already there. Last year, a rancher shot and killed a female wolf near Denton, Montana, just 30 miles from one of the reserve’s properties. It’s only a matter of time before these species expand farther, much to the concern of some local ranchers.”

Did not say EJ was a conservation org.

You do not speak for all hunting groups and I’m confident some should differ - EJ participates in a lot of actions that both harm and help conservation, and it varies on the issue and viewpoint.l. One issue and org I was involved with did indeed use EJ, for good. There’s no black/white here. I very much avoid pro/for/anti with broad brush statements and have stuck to what I actually have witnessed. It’s not going to be one way all the time.

The rest you can keep - your manner of discussion I partake in. Those points already made and they have nothing to do with what I was clarifying. I could care less how the Feds or State categorize bison apart from how it inhibits progress on restoration of them.

Edit also to say: ANY “source” starting with hijaked and charged language like “radical” is automatically dismissed, regardless of how well earned the reputation is. Using poor sourcing just devolves the discussion, which again is not really one.

 

[WRO]

Hunting conservation groups would beg to differ after having been sued by EJ or other radical enviro-litigation groups like them. We were sued for introducing wild turkeys to a NF. We had funded the Fish&Game project and supplied our own biologists to work the project. We lost the lawsuit and the funding. SCI and other hunting conservation groups stepped up to the plate and kicked in some hefty donations to keep us going.

We actually had several private ranches within the NF volunteer to allow us to release the turkeys on their property. We accomplished the mission and the first turkey season on public land opened two years later. Today, 35 years later, that National Forest is some of the best public land turkey hunting in the country.

Some input from Aaron Flint who produced “the New Yellowstone” documentary:

“Now, the far Left APR is publicly teaming up with the radical environmental group Earthjustice to file suit. Click here for the press release. And that is what apparently set off Tom Opre, a filmmaker and wildlife and sportsmen's advocate based here in Montana. He produced a recent documentary called "The Real Yellowstone" where he interviewed all sides of the APR debate.

"Earthjustice is not a conservation organization, Opre writes. "It is a well-known anti-use, anti-hunting, preservationist litigation group whose entire model is built on suing to restrict grazing, end hunting, block predator management, and undermine science-based wildlife authority." Opre added that "when you partner with an organization that openly rejects sustainable use, rejects the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, and routinely works against hunters, ranchers, and tribal wildlife use" people are right to ask more questions.”

—————————————————————————-
“Environmental groups have advocated to cut or weaken ranchers’ federal grazing privileges without compensation, and some groups pursue relentless strategies of litigation to reduce grazing on public lands in favor of environmental protection.” (The role of EarthJustice)

The federal government has recently determined that bison are not considered to be domestic livestock. APR does not consider wildlife to be in the public trust therefore going back to the feudal estate where aristocracy owned the wildlife. Holding Wildlife in the public trust is a primary tenet of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model.

“Moreover, as a bottom-up endeavor, the best strategy — at least initially — may be for rewilded species to not actually be “wild” in the eyes of the law. In many cases, private ownership of rewilded animals may be necessary for acceptable management, especially for large and potentially destructive species.” (Another role of EarthJustice)

The tribes are primarily cattle, sheep ranchers and farmers with deeded acres. If they wanted large herds of bison they would have them by now.

“Today, bison are considered by some scientists to be ecologically extinct on much of the Great Plains. The populations that do exist are small and thus no longer play a foundational role in shaping the biodiversity of the prairie. APR intends to restore as many as 10,000 bison to its lands.”

Introducing Grizzlies and wolves to the landscape will render cattle and sheep ranching unprofitable to the point that ranching will no longer be feasible. The goal of introducing large numbers of apex predators is to replace hunting as a wildlife management tool.

“In addition, the reserve aims to support the reintroduction of other wildlife that were decimated after European settlement. And some of those species are already on their way. Grizzly bear populations are rapidly expanding out of Yellowstone and the Rocky Mountain Front and onto the farms and ranches of the Great Plains, where they once roamed in great numbers. Wolves are on their way as well, if not already there. Last year, a rancher shot and killed a female wolf near Denton, Montana, just 30 miles from one of the reserve’s properties. It’s only a matter of time before these species expand farther, much to the concern of some local ranchers.”

You already posted the same shit earlier, I think literally the same cut in paste.

We all got into bed with earth justice and others when our public lands were on the chopping block and other issues.

 

[Gila]

You already posted the same shit earlier, I think literally the same cut in paste.

We all got into bed with earth justice and others when our public lands were on the chopping block and other issues.

BayouBlaster didn’t see those posts because the thread is very long and those previous points needed to be brought back into the recent conversation. Which should be obvious by the way so your malicious intent shows through here.

You like to stretch things to fit your narrative. But I don’t know any hunting conservation groups that would touch EarthJustice with a 10 foot pole. I agree that the overall “big Picture” narrative of not selling public lands may intersect with some of the litigation objectives of EJ. But that is about as far as it goes. EJ works outside of the North American Wildlife Conservation Model which is the cornerstone for hunting, fishing and trapping. BHA has their own interpretation of the NAWCM which is outside of the foundation of the Wildlife Federation. Yet, they do align on some issues which is why I am a member of and support both organizations. And those two groups do support each other depending on the issues.

EarthJustice was brought into the picture because they are part of the re-wilding effort which is in total alignment with American Prairie’s objectives. The issue with American Prairie doesn’t really have anything to do with bison. It is all about the first line in this thread: American Prairie Reserve was allowed to graze their “zoo” animals on BLM lands. The entire issue at hand is public use of public lands. American Prairie manages approximately 436,587 acres of public land as part of its total habitat base of 603,657 acres. That leaves approximately 168,000 acres of deeded private property. So yes our tax dollars are going into American Prairie for them to use our public lands for their own purposes.