BLM grazing rules up for comment

[cwitt]

Do you have something that supports that claim?

Everything ive read says that grazing on federal public lands account for low single digit percentages of the production.

There’s a lot of nuance and cherry picking of those numbers.

Western states are predominantly cow-calf operations. We send our calves to states like Nebraska, South Dakota, etc. where they finish them and butcher. So our beef production by the pound out west isn’t necessarily high but we are somewhere around 25% of total beef cow numbers. If you made it so ranchers in the west could only raise the number of cattle they could support on deeded ground, that number would be significantly lower and major dent in national calf crop.

 

[cwitt]

So you feel that at $1.69 /aum they are already paying to hire the BLM employee to oversee their impact/benefits on public land?

If we assume that an entry level range tech costs the feds $100,000 in salary and benefits (to low) then it only takes about 60,000 AUM (cow calf pair months) to pay for their work. That doesn't pencil.

I’ve sure never met anybody from the BLM making six figures. And yes it absolutely does pencil considering overseeing grazing is only one portion of what they do on an annual basis. They also monitor watershed, wild horses, sage grouse, vegetation surveys, etc.

 

[jkoehle1]

I’ve sure never met anybody from the BLM making six figures.

Havent met many then

 

[WRO]

There’s a lot of nuance and cherry picking of those numbers.

Western states are predominantly cow-calf operations. We send our calves to states like Nebraska, South Dakota, etc. where they finish them and butcher. So our beef production by the pound out west isn’t necessarily high but we are somewhere around 25% of total beef cow numbers. If you made it so ranchers in the west could only raise the number of cattle they could support on deeded ground, that number would be significantly lower and major dent in national calf crop.

Do you have any numbers to cite that the west west has 25% of the total beef cow numbers on public lands, most are relatively low productivity lands


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cwitt]

Havent met many then

Then by all means!! Please, enlighten me! Send me a dm or share with the group what you know.

 

[Legend]

 

[cwitt]

View attachment 1079339

I also have google.

 

[Legend]

It's pretty clear we have very different opinions. So I will take the high road and get off this subject.

I'll close with this. The public comment period, and the point the OP was trying to make, is open for a rule change. And while the process is far from perfect it is what it is. We all should make our voices heard. Even people who think subsidizing ranching is a good use of public land.

 

[cwitt]

Do you have any numbers to cite that the west west has 25% of the total beef cow numbers on public lands, most are relatively low productivity lands


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I never said the west has 25% of the total beef on public lands. My point is it is misleading to say that only 1-2% of beef production comes from public lands because that doesn’t describe the way it is practiced in real life.

Western states have ~25% of the US beef cow herd. I’ve read anywhere from 20 to 30%. It is hard to know the exact percentage of that group that utilizes public land at SOME point during the year as every ranch operates differently on a yearly basis. But it is certainly not as insignificant as 1-2%.

 

[cwitt]

It's pretty clear we have very different opinions. So I will take the high road and get off this subject.

I'll close with this. The public comment period, and the point the OP was trying to make, is open for a rule change. And while the process is far from perfect it is what it is. We all should make our voices heard. Even people who think subsidizing ranching is a good use of public land.

This has nothing to do with taking a high or low road. We are both engaging in civil discourse on a public forum. The difference is this isn’t a debate about sleeping bags or barrel lengths. You’re diminishing the way hard working people, myself and family included, earn a living and put food on the table of millions of people in this country. And now that we have discussed it, you’re also choosing to ignore the impacts this could have on the environment, on food supply, and on local and national economies, just because you’d selfishly rather there be less cattle and more elk on the landscape for you to hunt.

This is America and it is absolutely your right to have an opinion and make that voice heard. But that article is a fear mongering piece to rile up hunters and demonize a sustainable use of public lands. And you’re falling for it.

 

[Legend]

This has nothing to do with taking a high or low road. We are both engaging in civil discourse on a public forum. The difference is this isn’t a debate about sleeping bags or barrel lengths. You’re diminishing the way hard working people, myself and family included, earn a living and put food on the table of millions of people in this country. And now that we have discussed it, you’re also choosing to ignore the impacts this could have on the environment, on food supply, and on local and national economies, just because you’d selfishly rather there be less cattle and more elk on the landscape for you to hunt.

This is America and it is absolutely your right to have an opinion and make that voice heard. But that article is a fear mongering piece to rile up hunters and demonize a sustainable use of public lands. And you’re falling for it.

Seriously dude?

I am 3rd generation Montana rancher. I am in no way diminishing anything about ranching or ranchers. They work hard some harder than others. My grandfather homesteaded here. We have never been given the federal free grazing golden ticket. And still made a living. If you are on that gravy train enjoy the ride you are definitely NOT the majority. I can't believe that you are arguing that the only way to ranch is paying nothing for your grazing lease. That is an insult to ranchers.

I am not arguing for more elk on the landscape. I am not arguing for less cattle. I am stating a fact the feds give away grazing. That is not debatable the rate has barely changed in 60 years!! You can hardly buy a candy bar for what you are paying to feed a 1400lb cow and calf for a month.....and you think that is fair?

A real grazing price will not harm economics it will simply shift costs...yes some ranchers will have to pay a fair rate. And if they can't make it then the next rancher will.

National food supply will not be interrupted by paying a fair rate.

Impacts to the environment by paying a reasonable lease so our public land can actually be managed. Well that can only help environmental impacts to prevent mismanaged grazing.

Ranching is a sustainable use of our PUBLIC natural resources and it should continue. But free is not a fair price.