Grant County ranchers fear financial hit from court-ordered loss of grazing territory (OR)

The Oregonian ^ | January 30, 2011 | Richard Cockle

[jazusamo]

Richard Cockle/The Oregonian/2008

Ken Brooks, a rancher in Grant County, takes a break from

 feeding his cows to discuss a federal judge's decision on

 steelhead that he says could force him to cut his herd from

 450 cows to 150.

JOHN DAY -- Rancher Ken Brooks is standing in his ranch yard near the ghost town of Fox , his eyes sweeping the timber-covered Malheur National Forest that holds the key to his future and that of 18 other Grant County ranching families.

"They're all pretty angry," he said. "We're all in the same boat. We're unsure what we're going to do. And most of all, we're unsure of the reason we have to do it."

A Dec. 30 ruling by U.S. District Judge Ancer Haggerty prohibits the ranchers from turning their cattle out on seven summertime U.S. Forest Service grazing allotments to protect threatened Middle Columbia River steelhead.

The latest decision in a years-long battle over the effects of grazing on stream habitat bans cows on 16 percent of the 1.7 million-acre forest, which has one the largest grazing programs of any forest in the Pacific Northwest.

The ban starts in June and would affect almost 4,000 mother cows and their annual calf crop valued at $2.8 million, ranchers and forest officials said.  

Environmentalists who filed the steelhead lawsuit said the Forest Service and National Marine Fisheries Service must do a better job enforcing laws to preserve stream banks from roaming cattle.

"The court makes clear that the agencies have to make steelhead protection their highest priority," said Brent Fenty , executive director of the 1,400-member Oregon Natural Desert Association.

But outside the courtroom, Grant County is bracing for the economic repercussions, said county Commissioner Boyd Briton.

"There are families involved, there are employees," Briton said. "All those cows, the feed stores, the Les Schwab tire store downtown, the grocery stores, it affects all of us."

The sprawling, mountainous county has a single stoplight, no rail or interstate highway access, only three fast-food restaurants, one theater in an old Rebekah Lodge and a mere 7,500 residents on land twice the size of Delaware.

The county already is coping with unemployment higher than 14 percent. The 19 ranchers affected by the judge's decision represent about 20 percent of those who hold grazing permits on the Malheur.

The overall hit from the ban, perhaps 60 jobs, is the equivalent of losing roughly 7,000 jobs in Multnomah County, said Mark Webb,  Grant County commission chairman.

Brooks, whose family has ranched between Fox and Mount Vernon for a century, expects some of his neighbors to quit ranching. He would have to reduce his herd from 450 to 150 cows, he said.

A reduction that dramatic would force him to lay off his two cowhands, he said, including one who's worked for the family since 1975.

The judge's ruling surprised John Grubel, a Forest Service district ranger in John Day, and Spencer Hovekamp, a branch chief with the National Marine Fisheries Service  in La Grande.

Both said ranchers have made significant strides in the last two years toward meeting government stream bank standards.

Hovekamp, a fish biologist who keeps track of John Day River system steelhead, said recent adult returns have been high -- mostly due to favorable ocean conditions and not, as some ranchers claim, owing to improved range management. Ranchers also blame habitat problems on wild horses and elk.

Still, they "are putting in a lot of work" riding the allotments on horseback, monitoring cattle, repairing fences and shutting gates left open by other forest users so cows and calves stay out of areas where they aren't supposed to be, said Jeff Shinn, a Forest Service spokesman in John Day.

Hovekamp also noted that some problems are out of ranchers' control, including logging reductions and wildfire suppression that contribute to canopy shade that leaves less grass for grazing.

"Where the grass remains lush and growing is near streams," he said, and that's where grazing has the biggest potential impact on fish.

The grazing ban doesn't leave them many other options, ranchers said.

Private summertime pasture is relatively scarce. More than 60 percent of Grant County is federally managed, and ranches tend to be at low elevations and devoted to summertime hay production to feed cattle in winter.

Brooks, for example, owns 9,000 acres, but he needs to set aside some to produce 800 tons of hay, and much of the rest is in parcels scattered among federal allotments. Grazing those tracts while keeping his cows off enjoined federal lands would mean building 18 miles of fence at a cost of $10,000 per mile, he said. He can't afford that.

The one hope for ranchers is if a new biological opinion can be drafted by the Forest Service and approved by the National Marine Fisheries Service before June, showing that cattle can graze on those allotments without harming fish runs.

But Hovekamp said getting that done in time "doesn't seem likely" with a large and complicated grazing program. A more reasonable deadline would be June 2012, he said.

The quandary for ranchers is what to do now:

Should they hold onto their herds, gambling that they'll find summer pasture or that the judge will relent on the timetable? Or should they sell?

"The price is highest for cow-calf pairs in January and February," Hovekamp said.

[goodnesswins]

Thanks

[SatinDoll]

What I’m saying is that anyone who wants to continue to make their living by farming or ranching is going to have to be flexible and creative, especially where the government is directly involved as in grazing on BLM land.

[Robwin]

Eastern OR isn’t too much different than WA where I reside. They have Portland and the surrounding area, we have Seattle and environs. Both are chock full of enviros and “progressives”.

[kiryandil]

You lose the thread, firstly because of your complete ignorance of the methods of the EnviroNazis, secondly because of your little threat.

Put a sock in it.

[kiryandil]

What I’m saying is that anyone who wants to continue to make their living by farming or ranching is going to have to be flexible and creative, especially where the government is directly involved as in grazing on BLM land.

Right. And we taxpayers are also going to have to pay the Holy Trinity of The Left (teachers, police & firefighters) $20, $30, $40, $50 an hour for 25-30 years after they retire at age 55 BECAUSE IT'S THE LAW. Oh, and don't forget the full medical benefits, too.

The government is dealing itself out of the game. Or do you intend on working like a good little slave till you're 72 to keep feeding the Machine, so you can afford outdated cans of dog food in your dotage?

[SatinDoll]

“Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts.”

What threat? I suggest you reread what I wrote earlier.

There are plenty of third parties reading these posts who dislike vulgar rudeness and report to moderators.

Me? I’m a Navy veteran, and used to people like you.

[kiryandil]

That doesn’t change your ignorance, and willful blindness to the government overplaying its hand.

[cherry]

Just was in Portland today, and we stopped on the way home at a Fred Meyer...the shop clerk was talking to someone and the extent of the conversation was "there's no jobs" and the enviro regulations are just keeping everyone down....so the people are starting to get it FINALLY.....

but people but wise up a lot more...

[cherry]

no...not all in the Pacific northwest are radical enviros...we're not and most of our area...eastern washington) is not....they tried to tear the dams down in the past and it was defeated.....

the problem is the west coast cities of Seattle and Portland...where they think their food comes from some food plant that doesn't use water, fertilizers or electricity....

[cherry]

no...not all in the Pacific northwest are radical enviros...we're not and most of our area...eastern washington) is not....they tried to tear the dams down in the past and it was defeated.....

the problem is the west coast cities of Seattle and Portland...where they think their food comes from some food plant that doesn't use water, fertilizers or electricity....

[cherry]

the more farms and ranches are sold off, the more 5 acre mini mansions will be built for the ruling and govt classes....the loss of habitat in doing that will be astounding....ranches and farms and orchards provide habitat for many animals, large and small....

[cherry]

just so people know...a large section of Oregon,and Washington are very dry....the land would be useless for mors things other than ranching....the ranchers need large tracts so their herds can find grazing....

[SatinDoll]

You know nothing about me.

Right now my family is fighting off the BLM from taking our land in California. They want it, they say, for a wildlife refuge, an argument that’s ridiculous.

They want it because it is part of large plat dotted with natural gas wells.

We’ve had inquiries about selling this land for going on 20 years. No one is willing to pay us what it is worth.

Now along comes the BLM claiming they want it for a refuge but the American Land Conservancy erred by sending us a letter telling us the BLM was going to make an offer. American Land Conservancy was the group that went into the Klamath Basin and bought up farms for pennies on the dollars twelve or so years ago, and later got into trouble in Nevada for land flips involving Sen. Harry Reid.

We believe Pacific Gas & Electric wants the land so as to store natural gas underground. They just don’t want to pay what the land is worth. Dirty dealings.

Oregon has abolished nuclear power and is working hard to abolish Boardman, the coal burning electric generating plant. Between the crazies in Oregon and BLM attacking ranchers, folks in Oregon and Washington will be starving while freezing in the dark.

Does that sound like I have “willful blindness to the government overplaying its hand”?

It is possible to out-think government bureaucracies. Look around the nation and see how other ranchers manage to survive without using Federal land to graze on part of the year. But don’t let this get to you. God gave you brains and imagination to find a way around this problem.

[Man from Oz]

SD,

That is wishful thinking. Across the road from my family’s ranch, the US Army is telling us and our surrounding neighbors that they “need” another 425 thousand acres of land to enlarge the existing Pinon Canyon Manueuver Site.

No, it is going the other way. We are serfs and the concept of private land ownership is a farce.

MFO

[OregonRancher]

We baled 3000 tons of alfalfa every season. All irrigated.
Four cuttings in a good year. In central and eastern OR you need 40 acres a mother unit plus good water. Without baled
hay, you need a winter and a summer range which means thousands of acres which you have to lease from the BLM or
FS. If you have irrigation, good soil, fertilize, you can
get by with two acres per unit. Notice that everything
depends on water.

High desert hay is prized for it’s high nutrient value. It
gets top dollar.

[Hot Tabasco]

The privately held land is scattered into small islands, totally surrounded by fed and state land that has been leased to these ranchers for decades.

Would I be correct in saying that the Fed. land adjacent to the privately owned land is not for sale?

Or is it more cost effective for the owner to lease the land rather than purchase it then have to pay taxes on it too?

[SatinDoll]

I’ve known folks here in ‘Rain Land’ who only buy hay from eastern Oregon because it’s the best. Glad to know you have a cash crop.

I don’t know what to say about the BLM situation. The Obama administration pushed through Congress passage of the U.N.’s Treaty of the Sea last year, and it gives that anti-U.S. organization authority over ALL our shorelines AND inland waters, including non-navigable streams and fresh-water lakes (particularly those with fish stocks).

How the Treaty will impact everyone’s adjoining property has been unknown but this may be just the beginning, and existing lease contracts on Fed controlled land will mean nothing. The existing contracts Chrysler car dealers had were seized and given to someone else by the Obama administration despite its being illegal.

That is why I said to be flexible and be creative in finding a way around this situation. You don’t want to lose your land. Cattle and sheep can be replaced but losing one’s land is the worst thing possible, closely followed by losing the ability to profit off it. Our government has become a criminal enterprise and we citizens are the victims.

If ever there was proof of how one election can adversely impact a nation, the election of Obama is that proof.

[SatinDoll]

Sounds odd, as the Obama administration wants to cut back on Defense spending. But the White House often does things totally at odds with what they say they want.

[OregonRancher]

“Would I be correct in saying that the Fed. land adjacent to the privately owned land is not for sale?”

For sale? Does it snow in hell? Just try doing a land swap. The BLM NEVER sells land.

A friend of mine tried for a decade to no avail. The BLM is God, judge, jury, and the prosecuting attorney, all rolled into one. Decades ago, the BLM actually tried to help the ranchers until it morphed into the unrecognizable doppelganger that it is now. A huge, unwieldy bemouth that radiates power and unbridled arrogance in its pursuit of
more government funds as it strives to halt all forms of
commerce in the lands it controls.

A few years ago in Nye county in NV, it came down to armed
confrontation between officials and ranchers over the
arbitrary closing of a county road that the ranchers needed
to use. And when I say a county road, we’re talking about
a dirt road between Bum F___ Egypt and Timbuctoo.

Several years ago, we had a bull Elk on one of our pastures using the seven foot wheel lines to polish his rack. Thick
fog obscured the view so we headed out to see what all the
ruckass was about. The one large SOB had done over 2 grand
worth of damage to the line. Called Dept. of Fish and Game and after two hours decided that a bull elk had done the deed. DUH? Gave us a conditional kill permit. Could only
shoot the elk on our property. If he jumped the fence, we
couldn’t shoot. And if we did get him, we had to clean and cool the body and then deliver it to local butcher so the meat could be given to the needy. I asked...Hey, I’m needy and out over 2 grand and the game warden said...tough luck.

Puck ‘em

[oneolcop]

Shoot, Shovel, Shut up. What they don’t know can’t be used against you.