Poll: Should horses be allowed

[Jason Snyder]

Of course horses should be allowed, unless it's a fragile alpine environment.

I can't believe some folks are so bothered by horse shit in the trail.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Billinsd]

Couldn't agree more!! I think horses are amazing animals and dont mind seeing them in the wilderness, but those damn cattle ruin every square inch of land they step on. Keep the horses get rid of cattle is my vote.

I love beef, only get rid of the cattle that I won't eat, lol.

 

[4rcgoat]

I love beef, only get rid of the cattle that I won't eat, lol.

I love a great steak,just wish they would keep them off the mountain.

 

[BigAntlerGetter]

If all the pasture land wasn't being bought up for sub divisions, golf courses and big box stores then ranchers wouldn't need to run as many cattle on the forest land.

But as they say log it, graze it or watch it burn.

 

[tttoadman]

If all the pasture land wasn't being bought up for sub divisions, golf courses and big box stores then ranchers wouldn't need to run as many cattle on the forest land.

But as they say log it, graze it or watch it burn.

The only reason it is being bought is because it is for sale by the cattle rancher who wants make a few million and then run cattle on public land.
The only people that "say that" are the people who want to run cattle on or log the wilderness.

 

[BigAntlerGetter]

The only reason it is being bought is because it is for sale by the cattle rancher who wants make a few million and then run cattle on public land.
The only people that "say that" are the people who want to run cattle on or log the wilderness.

Hahahaha o ya cause they always make a few million on it, actually most are forced to sell due to the cattle market dropping or prices in hay going crazy. Most don't want to sell to make a quick million. Also at least they pay to graze the land, that's 1. Next is there are many rules about them grazing like number of cattle, where they are for how long, trail maintenance, weed control, when they are allowed to put them on, and take them off.
There's a completely different argument all together on that. But o ya all the ranchers go you know what I'm gonna sell 1000 of my acres and make millions just because I wanna put cattle on the mountain and piss off the hunters hahaha

 

[Jauwater]

I have no problems with horses in the backcountry. Granted I live out east, and a lot of people don't think the terrain calls for using horses, and your probably right. I've had two hunts that I can remember ruined by folks on horseback. Never bothered me none, that's the way she goes. This land is "our" land. For the record I'd like to state that I have ties to around 3 hiking clubs that maintain miles upon miles of trail with no horse or other motorized way of transportation. Some of these boys hike 3500ft elevation gains with a chainsaw to keep it clean. On top of them I know a lot more people that help maintain trails all over the southeast. A lot of who would consider their self a "hippie". Whether full blown or partial. I stay in contact with a lot of them throughout the year cause their trails pass through our game lands. A lot of us have different opinions on how we all our using the woods, and although a lot of them don't promote hunting they are extremely friendly to me, and are always happy to hear from me even though I'm typically contacting them to ask about wildlife their observing. They've always been willing help me out in anyway they can with yearly information regarding what they are seeing out there.

Sent from my SM-S975L using Tapatalk

 

[theleo91386]

The only reason it is being bought is because it is for sale by the cattle rancher who wants make a few million and then run cattle on public land.
The only people that "say that" are the people who want to run cattle on or log the wilderness.

I wouldn't be painting everybody that "says that" with such a broad brush. Some of us that say that understand that the fuel loads in some of these forests has gotten way out of hand and would like to see some management tools used to reduce the chances of some of these fires that take 10+ years for the habitat to recover from. The absence of grazing and logging in areas that endured decades of fire suppression before being turned into a wilderness areas is a huge disservice to the forests. Case in point would be when much of the Wenaha burned 2 years ago and much was turned into a moonscape, some of the most epic elk hunting in the US changed for years due to such a high fuel load. Compare that to the area along I-84 outside of Pendleton that burned last year and will be great habitat since not everything inside the burn area was incinerated from the heat of the fire. Should a serious fire get started in the area of the upper Minam in the Eagle Caps the fuel load is so high up there that the FS view is that the silt and ash run off would kill any salmon run up there for 2-3 years and the forest would take decades to recoup. Neither myself nor anyone in my family would benefit financially from that area being logged or grazed but from a forest management stand point I wish they had the ability to helicopter log it to get some of the White Firs out of there and a year or two of sheep grazing to get some of the undergrowth under control before it goes up in flames.

 

[tttoadman]

I wouldn't be painting everybody that "says that" with such a broad brush. Some of us that say that understand that the fuel loads in some of these forests has gotten way out of hand and would like to see some management tools used to reduce the chances of some of these fires that take 10+ years for the habitat to recover from. The absence of grazing and logging in areas that endured decades of fire suppression before being turned into a wilderness areas is a huge disservice to the forests. Case in point would be when much of the Wenaha burned 2 years ago and much was turned into a moonscape, some of the most epic elk hunting in the US changed for years due to such a high fuel load. Compare that to the area along I-84 outside of Pendleton that burned last year and will be great habitat since not everything inside the burn area was incinerated from the heat of the fire. Should a serious fire get started in the area of the upper Minam in the Eagle Caps the fuel load is so high up there that the FS view is that the silt and ash run off would kill any salmon run up there for 2-3 years and the forest would take decades to recoup. Neither myself nor anyone in my family would benefit financially from that area being logged or grazed but from a forest management stand point I wish they had the ability to helicopter log it to get some of the White Firs out of there and a year or two of sheep grazing to get some of the undergrowth under control before it goes up in flames.

Well said. I may have jumped on the previous statement because of it's broad brush attitude. I get a little defensive about my wilderness areas sometimes.

The only good part about it lighting up would be it would only happen once. Drawing a line in the sand is hard when it comes to management. I am afraid if the door is opened for discussion of "limited" managing Wilderness areas, you will have all of the lobbyist attacking it for their own agenda instead of the good of the forest. FS should accidently light a few fires in the late fall and maybe it would act like a nice prescribed burn.