- Thread Starter
- #181
finner
Lil-Rokslider
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2019
- Messages
- 236
I don't disagree, but you won't get very far in this state with that line of argument. I know some ranchers who take a big hit every year because of elk, and I've got sympathy for them. I also feel for the elk, who have pretty marginal browse and winter range in a lot of places because of cattle and development. Not gonna blame them for heading straight for alfalfa and haystacks. However, as McKean brings up, there's a way for ranchers and hunters to find common ground. We've done it in the past— see the initial conversation around shoulder seasons. This bill wrecks that history of collaboration and compromise.You make some good points. But, I think it's also important to remember that the wildlife was living off that land before it was bought and farmed/ranched. 60 million Bison and 10 million elk didn't exist in a vacuum of space and time, the conditions that meant good ranching and farming meant they were already good for bison, elk, mule deer, etc....
Ranchers and farmers went into that deal perfectly happy to share the land and its resources with wildlife. Now, that's not saying "tough shit" to landowners, there is absolutely a balance we need to find and absolutely hunters need to remember there is a cost associated with an elk herd eating a ranchers hay. But, ranchers also need to remember the elk and bison were fine before they started bailing up their hay, in fact there were more elk and more bison across the country before it became the USA than there is now by a long shot. So, ranchers also shouldn't have some self inflated value in this system either.
That guy would have made a great commissioner. Shame the legislature wants to put party politics above all else.