Posted on 01/03/2016 1:54:57 AM PST by Nachum
What do you mean the production that is in state or private hands? That production will most likely kick out hunters so that ranchers can make money. The system may not be perfect, but it works for hunters right now.
I do hope you are not against ranchers making money, and I am betting you are not. Hunters and landowners can have a symbiotic relationship because depredation of grazing land and hay can be a serious issue for ranchers. You need some ranchers as friends not enemies.
The lands in Federal hands issue is a far more serious one. WY is one of the twelve Western States that did NOT get their promised lands at Statehood thus the Fed holds lands it should not, making your state a welfare state looking to the federal government for support, and making it difficult to meet the demands of state agencies to actually support the needs of WY.
In the past it has not been too serious an issue as you are fortunate to be blessed with lots of energy, however, with the energy sector in decline it may be an issue and this year is a budget year for your State Legislature. The last thing any state needs is contention among citizens and ranchers. They should exist in perfect harmony or close to it.
I do not live in Wyoming, my husband hunts there. And from what we have seen, the ranchers charge a fortune ( which is their right) to hunt on their private land. It is basically welfare to hand over public land to ranchers, because they are getting something for next to nothing. As soon as you give a lease to ranchers, they will kick out hunters, just like they try to do on BLM land, by stating to hunters that it is private land.
It does not matter to me if the state owns the land. It does matter to me when ranchers are trying to use the land for profit, and try to exile everyone else from using it.
It does matter to me when ranchers are trying to use the land for profit,
That is the nature of grazing permits and leases. The ranchers are able to utilize public land for what we refer to as multiple use. It should still be available for hunting and other multiple uses. I can understand your concern.
http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4163331&postcount=68
Interesting info especially #27.
Seems the BLM is busy these days.
See http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/04/blm_eyes_90000_acres_in_tx.html Been following this one for a while.
Thanks for posting the “backstory” info. Very important to understand the vindictive nature of the Government employees. Some of the key facts in this situation are here, “15. In the early fall of 2001, Steven Hammond (Son) called the fire department, informing them that he was going to be performing a routine prescribed burn on their ranch. Later that day he started a prescribed fire on their private property. The fire went onto public land and burned 127 acres of grass. The Hammonds put the fire out themselves. There was no communication about the burn from the federal government to the Hammonds at that time (note: prescribed fires are a common method that both Native Americans and ranchers have used in the area to increase the health & productivity of the land for many centuries)
16. In 2006 a massive lightning storm started multiple fires that joined together inflaming the countryside. To prevent the fire from destroying their winter range and possibly their home, Steven Hammond (Son) started a backfire on their private property. The backfire was successful in putting out the lightning fires that had covered thousands of acres within a short period of time. The backfire saved much of the range and vegetation needed to feed the cattle through the winter. Steven’s mother, Susan Hammond said: “The backfire worked perfectly, it put out the fire, saved the range and possibly our home.”
17. The next day federal agents went to the Harney County Sheriff’s office and filled a police report making accusation against Dwight and Steven Hammond for starting the backfire. A few days after the backfire a Range-Con from the Burns District BLM office asked Steven if he would meet him in town (Frenchglen) for coffee. Steven accepted. When leaving he was arrested by the Harney County Sheriff Dave Glerup and BLM Ranger Orr. Sheriff Glerup then ordered him to go to the ranch and bring back his father. Both Dwight and Steven were booked and on multiple Oregon State charges. The Harney County District Attorney reviewed the accusation, evidence and charges, and determined that the accusations against Dwight & Steven Hammond did not warrant prosecution and dropped all the charges (Got that? “Dropped all charges”...)”
The actions taken by the Hammonds do not qualify as “TERRORISM” in my opinion. They utilized common practices for fire and natural resource management. The BLM/Government employees are vilifying normal American citizens and there has to be a reason for that. Reading the backstory shows that they had a vendetta against this family.
I find it amazing when someone like Dusty presents himself as a Rancher and proceeds to bash other Ranchers who utilize land that is supposed to be managed by the Government. I think he misstated the actual cost Ranchers pay to utilize BLM/Forest Service land. This article states the fee’s were increased in 2015 to $1.69 per AUM. https://wlj.net/article-permalink-11160.html
My family utilizes Forest Service land on a cattle ranch in NE Arizona. We paid $1.85 per head per month last year. To place 800 head of cattle on the Forest it cost $1480.00 per month. This Forest Service land is used for 5 months out of the year so that privately owned winter pastures can be rested in the summer.
Dusty’s comment that you should not lease/use BLM or Forest Service land shows how truly uninformed he is. The article linked above states, “The BLM, a U.S. Department of Interior bureau, manages more land than any other federal agency—more than 245 million surface acres, mostly in 12 western states, including Alaska. The Forest Service, a U.S. Department of Agriculture agency, manages 193 million acres in 44 states, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.” In the Western states the Government owns the majority of the land and they are always trying to gobble up more of it. These Government agencies have been hijacked by extreme activists who use the animals to lock up the land and kick out the natural resource based industries like ranchers and loggers.
Those same 800 head would cost you 60,000 a year here on private property. Hey if you want to get in bed with the BLM you go right a head but don’t expect any sympathy when they pull the plug and leave you hanging. But I do want to thank you for giving an excellent example of what I said in an earlier comment. Instead of reducing your herd to a level your land can maintain you have put yourself in a position where you have to reach outside just to maintain your herd which puts you at the mercy of the BLM. I don’t bash ranchers but I will point out what I think is a bad/risky business decision.
Many ranches here in the Western States were owned/utilized by ranching families before the GOVERNMENT took over management.
What you do not understand is that the Forest Service land was intended to be used as a resource for the people of the state. It was supposed to be utilized under a Multiple Use philosophy, providing a resource for the citizens of the area. Income generated through Timber sales and livestock grazing was to be returned to the county, under PILT-Payments in Lieu of Taxes. (This was designed to offset the loss of revenue since the land was not going to be privately owned.)
The Hammond family has been dealing with Government bureaucrats who think they know better and have more rights than the private citizens.
At todays cattle prices, it appears your 800 head on private property would be unsustainable, but that is beside the point. azkathy has just explained in depth what ranchers in the 12 Western States have to deal with. Out west of Tejas the BLM rules, and ranchers have no or very limited choice in the matter.
The majority of land is in Federal hands when it should be in State or private hands, and as such it is unproductive in the extreme which costs you and I tax money to support the BLM and Forest service doing a very poor management job.
Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution explains in depth and specifically enumerates what the Government is allowed to do. It has outgrown it’s usefulness other than national defense, and I at times question how well they are doing on that subject.
The bottom line is Western ranchers would love to not have to deal with Government agencies, but it is a way of life. In most cases they have no or little choice, in order to save their private grazing land, they have to have summer range to preserve their own grass and that is where BLM and Forest Service come into the picture. If you have to buy hay in the winter, depending on cattle prices, thinning the herd becomes a real option.
Total I’m running 576 head all on our place, we’ve had a wet year and the pastures held up as well as all the stock ponds. Nice crop of calves coming in and the weather though cold hasn’t been extreme. We average 400 to 600 head a year depending on rain. Whether that land is owned by the Feds hands or owned by the states hands it’s still not owned by you which puts you dependent on somebody else for your livelihood, something I care not to do. This is my place and I make the rules.
“Whether that land is owned by the Feds hands or owned by the states hands it’s still not owned by you which puts you dependent on somebody else for your livelihood, something I care not to do. This is my place and I make the rules.”
Two points. No argument on you owning and ruling yours which is the ideal situation. Point two, in the scheme of things the Fed doesn’t or shouldn’t own squat. The States made it possible for them to exist, and no sovereign state is going to allow an all powerful Federal government to out own the states. As a State you would never place overwhelming power in the hands of limited Government, never. It is the nature of the Constitution itself and the enumerated powers that places limits on the Fed.
That said, we know where we are today, and it is not what the founding fathers had in mind. We know and understand original intent, because the founders were liberal in their writings explaining their intent. We have moved far from the ideal and the Fed has become the problem as the founders also saw, attempting to place as many restrictions on federal overreach as they thought prudent to apparent no avail.
Stopping the relentless progress of the beast will be the most difficult challenge “we the people” will face in the short history of this Republic. Land should be in State hands where it can be properly administered and made available to the public for benefit to the state as is the case in 38 states already. It doesn’t mean wholesale distribution or sale, it means for benefit of the State and citizens of the state, and there are 12 Western States that do not have what rightfully belongs to them for their well being and support.
And I’ll give you two points.
The feds will never give up the income generated from BLM, we can piss and moan all we want to but there’s not enough balls in Congress to make that happen.
States are just as arrogant and possessive of their holdings as the feds are. Even if it changes hands what makes anyone think it will change the way it operates. Recently the state of Texas sold off a large piece of the state owned land down by the Big Bend area to a private investor. There’s rumors about how many of our state officials fattened their wallets on that one.
One thing I know from riding in this rodeo for 66 years is politician are or will be corrupt or corrupted. The very few who are incorruptible will soon be attacked and run out of office by those that are. Put it all in private hands and get federal and state government out of it completely.
Not that it matters but for information purposes I was born in Pendleton Oregon in 1950. We didn’t live there we lived in a little town called Weston just east of there. I guess Pop got tired of the ranching life and decided to see what else was out there. Didn’t last long, two years after I was born we were back at the ranch and have been here since.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.