For those who are against grazing !

[mtn300]

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/agency/co...ent%20Plan.pdf
Very good info on how grazing affects helps plants. This was put together by a friend of mine who works for the odfw.

[baltz526]

the link is blank

[nehalemguy]

Link works ok for me.

E

[jschainsaw]

I call on that plan.

[sealgal2008]

Keep in mind that this is a DRAFT copy. Which means it is still under peer review for editing and modification, this is not the final published version of this paper and it will likely look different once it is published. Did you ask your friend if you could post it? I know if it was my work I would not release it to the public before it was finalized.

Cheers

Betty

[Duckwheat]

Sounds like overgrazing was one of the problems. Then grazing was used as a tool along with other work to fix the damage from the overgrazing.

Sounds like the keyword is over in regards to grazing.

In Colorado I got to hunt some private ranches that were set up for hunting only via the states Wildlife Ranching program. Public gets some tags on private ground. This place had had no cattle in over 10 years. The wildlife and the plant life was like something I had never seen. Streambeds with out the banks torn up and mud holes. If you have some pristine ground, I don't think anyone is going to tell you to put a bunch of cows on it to help it out.

Sounds like they are trying to do the best with a damaged resource.

DW

[BrianMaguire]

MTN300, I am going to start this with: I am sorry for what I have to say, I have the utmost respect for you as an outdoorsman and hunter, I consider you a valuable and respected member of the board. I love reading your posts:

I will start my comment out with the top point: To say this "Plan", not finding, has anything positive to say about grazing is jingle bells. Its a "Plan" to not hurt elk, not proof that it can or has occured. I have seen a gazillion plans say the same politically correct tripe its unreal. What it says it that prehaps its possible to graze and not hurt elk, at least at current population levels. It is utter nonsense, that grazing helps elk in any way, stretch or form, elk and cows are direct competitors on winter range. I may be true that Bison and elk had a co-existance but the scale of the biologial complex was so vast you can NOT reproduce that, especially here in Oregon. Cows are at the VERY BEST edge case neutral to elk, and in the majority of instances a negative.

"The goals, objectives and strategies (implementation actions) described in this 2009 plan are focused on maintaining and enhancing key habitats and providing significant wildlife oriented public use. "

The operative word here is "maintain", that means "don't make it worse". It is ridiculous to even conjecture that grazing on elk winter range even comes close to providing a positive outcome. The best you can hope for is neutral, meaning there is enough graze for both. This is not an argument for grazing, it’s an argument that with low elk pops you can graze.

"Most habitats on the BCWA have been altered to some degree with respects to species composition and/or diversity. These alterations may be attributed to fire suppression and past land use practices such as timber harvest, overgrazing, agriculture, and invasive plant species. "

The plan clearly states that the area was over grazed. This is akin to arguing that "Look, I was drunk for 20 years, now I am sober and can be a CEO." Does not fly. Give it 20 years and if elk calf recruitment increases, I'll buy it, until then, it’s a load of hot air.

The plan merely states that we "think" we can graze and still do our job of helping elk, which was not done before. How on gods good earth this is pro-grazing is probably something you can pick up in the smoke of rope fiber.

Her are the invasive weeds, introduced by cattle: Lotsa good stuff --- ohhh booy
Canada Thistle Cirsium arvense
Cheatgrass Bromus tectorum
Diffuse Knapweed Centaurea diffusa
Fiddleneck Tarweed Amsinckia intermedia
Field Bindweed Convolvulus arvensis L
Puncture Vine Tribulus terrestris L.
Rush Skeletonweed Chondrilla juncea
Russian Knapweed Acroptilon repens
Scotch Thistle Onopordum acanthium
Tansy Ragwort Senecio jacobaea
Ventenata Ventenata dubia

[BrianMaguire]

Originally Posted by mtn300

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/agency/co...ent%20Plan.pdf
Very good info on how grazing affects helps plants. This was put together by a friend of mine who works for the odfw.

MTN300, I am going to start this with: I am sorry for what I have to say, I have the utmost respect for you as an outdoorsman and hunter, I consider you a valuable and respected member of the board. I love reading your posts:

However:

Where are your "friends" studies published? I see nothing scientific in the above reference, other than the invasive weed list, that even comes close to science. Science is a study over a period of time, with a hypothesis and a conclusion. I am supposing the your "friend" had the hypothesis that grazing (of cattle) helps elk winter range, did a study of such and proved that the elk, wintering on cattle grazed land, were improved by grazing. If he did this study and it’s published, it would be akin to finding Bigfoot. Cattle do not, and can not help elk (in the long run), they at best case may not hurt them (like I have 1 elk on 5000 ac. and 100 cows.)

[Sled Dog]

AMEN to that!! +1

[Blacktail Slayer]

I'm not sure on this, but here goes. If you read up on a few of the game food plot company websites you will read that mowing your food plot is a must and the new cut plot will actually have higher nutrition value than a plot that is left to grow for 3-5 years. With very strict cattle grazing; would this not be the same effect? I have heard of a private ranch in eastern Oregon that ODFW now manages and allows cattle to graze before elk go there to winter. This help the vegetation the elk feed on. I think the key is strict cattle grazing management.

[Rbogus]

There were probably some of these same concerns 40+ years ago when this first started.
In case some only read parts of this document,

This plan will guide management of the Bridge Creek Wildlife Area (BCWA) for the next 10 years. Purposes of this plan are to:

1. Provide clear direction for management of BCWA;
2. Provide long-term continuity in wildlife area management;
3. Communicate the department’s management priorities for BCWA to its neighbors, visitors, and the public;
4. Ensure management programs on BCWA are consistent with the original mandate and purpose of the area when first established;
5. Ensure management of BCWA is consistent with Federal, State, and local natural resource plans;
6. Ensure management activities address conservation priorities and recommendations described in the 2006 Oregon Conservation Strategy, and;
7. Provide a basis for budget requests to support BCWA needs for staffing, operations, maintenance, and capital improvements.

Historical Background

BCWA is located in Northeastern Oregon, approximately three miles south of the town of Ukiah along Forest Road 52 within the Blue Mountains Ecoregion of the Oregon Conservation Strategy (OCS). This places BCWA roughly 50 miles south of Pendleton and similarly southwest of La Grande, Oregon.
Establishment of the BCWA initially started in 1961 when a parcel of land was purchased from the Frank Hilbert estate. After the initial purchase, several private holdings were acquired to consolidate the land under department ownership. The last parcel was purchased from the Colvin Cattle Company in 1975.
Three different land agreements complete the BCWA boundary. Thirty five acres are under agreement with the U.S. Forest Service along the southeast boundary fence. An adjacent 400 acres in two parcels of Bureau of Land Management property (320 acres located along the North Fork of the John Day River and 80 acres near Camas Creek) is under a cooperative management agreement for wildlife management as well as an administrative use site. The BCWA also encompasses approximately 1,585 acres of Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and Oregon Parks and Recreation Department (OPRD) land along Camas Creek and the N.F. of the John Day River (these lands comprise most of the western and southwestern boundary of BCWA). In total the department manages 15,206 acres on the BCWA which includes both department-acquired lands and cooperatively managed lands.

The USFS, BLM, OPRD, Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), Umatilla County, Umatilla Soil and Water Conservation District and Umatilla County Extension

Service have all been involved with the development of the BCWA. A Coordinated Resources Management Plan developed in 1973 provided the basis for the formulation of the present grazing system.

[BrianMaguire]

Originally Posted by Blacktail Slayer

I'm not sure on this, but here goes. If you read up on a few of the game food plot company websites you will read that mowing your food plot is a must and the new cut plot will actually have higher nutrition value than a plot that is left to grow for 3-5 years. With very strict cattle grazing; would this not be the same effect? I have heard of a private ranch in eastern Oregon that ODFW now manages and allows cattle to graze before elk go there to winter. This help the vegetation the elk feed on. I think the key is strict cattle grazing management.

Most of that research is aimed at deer, so I can not comment on the elk impacts. I do know that browse species, grasses and forbes can be induced into more intense growth in the short term. Long term you can not ,over and over again, take energy from a plant, via grazing, and expect the plants to thrive, especialy forbes and grasses that evolved with an ecosystem devoid on the intense grazing we put on the ground. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure this stuff out, just look at your lawn, do you think you could maintain a native (what the elk have evolved with) mix of browse cutting it everyday? Of course not, so what makes any one think that we can maintain traditional elk winter grounds when we mow it every day?

[Reel Obsession]

Originally Posted by Blacktail Slayer

I'm not sure on this, but here goes. If you read up on a few of the game food plot company websites you will read that mowing your food plot is a must and the new cut plot will actually have higher nutrition value than a plot that is left to grow for 3-5 years. With very strict cattle grazing; would this not be the same effect? I have heard of a private ranch in eastern Oregon that ODFW now manages and allows cattle to graze before elk go there to winter. This help the vegetation the elk feed on. I think the key is strict cattle grazing management.

Hey Slayer. Not sure the correlation works. Mowing a lawn, or even plowing under a cover crop, can assist a lawn or garden plot. Put sheep, cows, geese, or any animal on it and allow it to overgraze and it wil not have the same affect as mowing. I do agree that the key to minimizing damage is strict grazing management, but I don't think that this enhances wildlife habitat.

[lake creek charlie]

So many problems with the current grazing program. FIRST of all the land owner pays about one hundredth of the cost to study, collect the money, monitor the land and hire all the people that work in the blm offices,install and repair the fences etc etc.Ive hunted the same property in eastern oregon for 50 years now and can tell you what grazing cattle have done to this property,destroyed it ! If you were shown a picture 50 years ago and one today........20 foot banks beside the creeks ,willows and cover GONE. Trout GONE. Deer GONE.And the rancher has closed off access to the blm land, while paying hardly anything to destroy our land

[scottishsetter]

Strict grazing management has and will never be the case on Public land in EO. It's the Feds. not State range managers.
When cattle eat all available grass EXCEPT that grass between boulders where their 5" wide lips cannot go;;;elk will not be in there when the snow piles up. Off to private land/landowners shows them to ODFW/private hunt tags go thru the roof/$$$$ for hunting them on the private land goes up.

Cash Cow.No changes in the near future.Just look at the number of tags in RED in the Northside Unit. Simple arithmatic add them up at $2000/tag(Highest $$$$ for nice Branch Bull=$5000+)

[baltz526]

one aspect of the greenys taking over the USFS and the BLM through our university training bias. is that every decade the grazing practices on federal lands gets just a little better. as OLD managers retire, the new greenys take a step up in the food chain. critical mass is aproaching in our land management leadership, lets hope we still get to hunt on our improving public lands with this turn over of power. look to the wolf issue to see hints of the future

[Eagleclaw]

Originally Posted by baltz526

the link is blank

because that's how much it helps...

[OR_Bo_Huntr]

No kidding, for all the over east hunters, you can thank those stupid cows for the amazing spreading of the Hounds Tounge as well

[mtn300]

One question How long have cows been grazed in the mountains ? The highest elk population recorded in 1994 hmm wasn't hunting with dogs banned the same time. There are more elk on private ground than public explain that. Overgrazing is not what I am talking about either. The plan is on the odfw website if you want to read it. Of all the people who read this how many have been to bridge creek to see what it looks like ? If you complain about the price of things now just eliminate grazing on forest and blm then you will really scream. As far as invasive weeds those can be packed in on atv's and other vehicles as well. The increase in great habitat can't bring back an elk and deer that are being ate by cats. Cows and wildlife have coexisted for years. Ranchers have improved their practices and the sheep industry is no where near what it used to be. My opinion will probably never change on grazing. Say what you want I figured I would get ripped on but oh life goes on.

[Benny]

Originally Posted by mtn300

Say what you want I figured I would get ripped on but oh life goes on.

Yeah, it does. I like the intent, and there was some very good information there.

Thanks for sharing!

[flipperdog]

The bubble of Portland is so so wide and soo soo green. This world will go on much longer than the green effort from Portland Oregon. We are survivors and you will continue to compete and lose your elk to private land and those "nasty bovines." The Lord knows the balance and your green religion will dwindle. Remember the balance that fire or cattle will bring to winter range done correctly. Your choice!
God Bless

[flipperdog]

Originally Posted by baltz526

one aspect of the greenys taking over the USFS and the BLM through our university training bias. is that every decade the grazing practices on federal lands gets just a little better. as OLD managers retire, the new greenys take a step up in the food chain. critical mass is aproaching in our land management leadership, lets hope we still get to hunt on our improving public lands with this turn over of power. look to the wolf issue to see hints of the future

Your wolf will have you howling up the wrong tree. Lets see Oregonian May 2018. Headline reads- No Elk left in Eastern half of Oregon. Cougar population at an all time low. Wolf population at record 980 breeding pair. Feds consider delisting bovine!!!
XOXO
God Bless

[Reel Obsession]

Originally Posted by flipperdog

The bubble of Portland is so so wide and soo soo green. This world will go on much longer than the green effort from Portland Oregon. We are survivors and you will continue to compete and lose your elk to private land and those "nasty bovines." The Lord knows the balance and your green religion will dwindle. Remember the balance that fire or cattle will bring to winter range done correctly. Your choice!
God Bless

I just brought up Translator.com. I choose English as the output language, but couldn't figure out what to use for the input language.....

[flipperdog]

No Brainer!!!!

[SILVERSINK]

you Hermiston boys dont have cattle that graze on public land do you?

[mtn300]

Nope sold all of them because it is tough to make any money running your cows on irrigated ground. It is not like I haven't been around it all of my life and got a degree in livestock production. But what do the majority of eastern oregon ranchers know when we could learn everything from someone who sees it 2 weeks a year.

[mtn300]

I spoke my peace and will say no more.

[lake creek charlie]

NEVER trust the opinion of someone financially involved in an issue.Unless you live in pendleton and work in burger king you are feeding, cleaning up behind or growing food for cows. I lived east for a number of years, and understand the value of beef there. The public is subsidizing the ranchs that cut off access to blm land and then sell the chance to harvest a bull @ 5000 dollars on blm land that they pay 2 dollars an acre to run their cows on......That land costs 24 dollars an acre to cllect the 2 dollars and ruin OUR LAND!!!!

[Reel Obsession]

Originally Posted by mtn300

Nope sold all of them because it is tough to make any money running your cows on irrigated ground. It is not like I haven't been around it all of my life and got a degree in livestock production. But what do the majority of eastern oregon ranchers know when we could learn everything from someone who sees it 2 weeks a year.

Ok, I call. Since when does a degree in livestock production make someone either an expert, or more to the point an advocate of the most beneficial methods of managing wildlife habitat? I have a degree in economics, and could speak to the financial benefits of grazing BLM land. Doesn't mean I know what's best for wildlife. And for the record, I'm not saying I do, just curious as to why that wouldn't slant a person towards wanting to see the benefits to grazing vs ignoring the negative aspects of their industry?

[llama77]

Brian,
Your yard comparison doesnt really hold water. You cant mow your yard everyday. But plant it and dont mow it all and you wont have a very good yard either. It wont grow in as thick. The deer eat my roses and they keep coming back thicker. (Both the deer and the roses!) And somebody correct me if IM wrong but isnt second cutting Alfalfa more nutricious than first?

Elk populations have dropped in Hells canyon after the cattle have been removed. Just one factor but it must be considered.

Your suggestion that we rely on science is sound. Yet you suggest that if there is not better Elk calf recruitment in 20 years in bridge creek , then this plan is a failure. That is not good science. There are many variables involved in managing a successful Elk population.

This plan may work very well but a couple of bad winters could devastate the elk and folks like you would blame it on the cows. We also have a documented predator problem. All the winter range in the world wont do the elk any good if predation eats up (sorry for the pun) each years calf production. Yet its still the cows. In 20 years when the wolves are in residence at bridge creek, youll still blame the cows.

You blame the cows for the invasive weeds. Are cows the only way these weeds are introduced?? I think not. Horses, Mules, Llamas, Goats, Dogs, ATVS, Cars, Trucks, and yes Boots!!! Would the wind have anything to do with it? To suggest that by eliminating cattle we eliminate invasive species is not good science.

When they closed the Lord Flat road, that was supposedly based on "science". There were several variables that were totally ignored by folks with a personal interest. After the fact it was admitted that it was "just a few" that wanted it closed.

We know that historically the highest deer populations in the Steens was when it was being "overgrazed" by Sheep/cattle and had arguably the highest amount of predator control. Kind of makes you wonder about "science" dont it.

[baltz526]

no, it dosn't make me wonder about land management science. just your interpretation. one plant explains a lot of the degradation of our public lands. CHEAT GRASS and the way grazing increases its effect on the destruction of native ecosystems.

[Bigburnbucks]

All you people need to also think that the ranchers are trying to make a living in this bad economy as well. Complaining about cattle grazing isn't going to change the problems that Oregon faces. There are many problems so why point the finger at people who are just trying to make a living.

[Reel Obsession]

Originally Posted by Bigburnbucks

All you people need to also think that the ranchers are trying to make a living in this bad economy as well. Complaining about cattle grazing isn't going to change the problems that Oregon faces. There are many problems so why point the finger at people who are just trying to make a living.

Uhhhh...... Maybe because "all us people" are responding to a post, from someone who is, or was in that industry, inviting "Those who are against grazing" to read some propaganda with the preface "Good info on how grazing helps plants". This is not an attack on ranching, but rather the sharing of thoughts on the subject as raised by a rancher.

Want to discuss a different topic? Then use your 13th post to open a new thread.

[Duckwheat]

There are more elk on private ground than public explain that

There is something to eat on private ground. Is this a trick question?

DW

[Reel Obsession]

And less hunting pressure.......

[scottishsetter]

Here's my take; If the alotment holder leaves his cows on an allotment in draught years into Nov when the food ran out in July the cows just trample the browse.
Then two years later way more cattle than the land can support are put on this particular alotment and they eat EVERY blade of grass; again until Nov.
Then again and again and again.........
Federal Rangeland Managers are in Portland spending money on Christmas...

Last year the area looked like a Hermiston Feedlot/ All of it!
Five creek headwaters were just poo and here's the kicker IF you allow a water trough to be put into the headwater stream spring area at least pipe the water off to the side, not downstream and create a 100'X100' toxic mud hole. Allow 6 springs and their rail fences to go to the ground as the 'public cows' eat everything in sight.
Put salt blocks every 200yrds so the cattle stay at these springs all summer.
Then drive the cattle during deer season thru elk season with dogs, riders, and trucks/stock trailers in a road closure "Quality Hunt area" .
This last year was just that

[SILVERSINK]

300 I think you need a group hug. Slow down your getting way too excited,its not good for your health.

[Blacktail Slayer]

Great posts llama77 and mtn300. I do also agree with the people who say that the cattle grazing management is not where it should be. We on the other hand have to think of ranchers trying to make a living. Then like Baltz526 said about how “grazing practices are slowly getting better”; I would agree on that also. More research and tougher grazing management is needed. Humans help bring in the invasive species also. We can’t forget about all those politics also.

[Reel Obsession]

Slayer. I think EVERYONE here believes practices need to improve and is not where it should be. And for ranchers using their own, deeded land, the responsiblity for that should be theirs to address. in whatever timeframe they deem necessary. Most ranchers I know are multi-generation land managers, and plan (or at least hope) to pass these lands on to further generations.

However, when you are talking about public lands, I don't see why improvement should be secondary to "ranchers making a living". If good environmentally sound management practices cause higher beef prices, so be it. But why distribute the social cost of grazing across all owners of public land (i.e tax payers), regardless of their consumption of beef, or lack thereof? If I had a wrecking yard, but couldn't afford enough property to store my wrecked vehicles and still be profitable, should I be allowed to store them on BLM land, regardless of the environmental impact, so as to keep ME financially viable?

[hilclimber]

Originally Posted by Blacktail Slayer

Great posts llama77 and mtn300. I do also agree with the people who say that the cattle grazing management is not where it should be. We on the other hand have to think of ranchers trying to make a living. Then like Baltz526 said about how “grazing practices are slowly getting better”; I would agree on that also. More research and tougher grazing management is needed. Humans help bring in the invasive species also. We can’t forget about all those politics also.

Wow..there is a lot of info on here. I am not a rancher, but have been around them all of my life. Like wise i have always hunted on public ground. Several things I have seen though that support the original post. If you leave a piece of ground ungrazed, mowed, burned etc., the grass eventually grows tall, rank, and lays over smothering the growth underneath. Some friends bought a piece of property about 1990 like that. It had no grazing or other maintenance for about 15 years. There are hundreds of elk, and deer in the area, that use the property, but due to the condition of the graze just passed through. Once they had spent a couple of seasons grazing and burning it the animals stayed and grazed alonside their horses. Likewise with browse and other forage. That is one of the chief reasons that the BLM, Forest Service, and Nature conservancy burns millions of acres annually, to revitalize forage.

Second, it comes down to well regulated, and managed grazing (in place of other means like burning), which for the most part is impractical and too costly if not impossible. Cows are lazy by nature, and will pick the nicest flattest greenest browse close to water, and grub it down to nothing and make mudholes....just like elk will do in some areas, but not to the same extreme. In these days, with the rules that go with allotments, in many cases it is a losing proposition for ranchers. Traditionally the cows were turned out once the grass was green, and snow pushed them out of the high country (in Baker County anyway). Now, they have to be 'out' by a certain date which in some years is BEFORE GREENUP, and out in mid fall, with no weather to push them out. Add to that they increasing losses they are experienceing to growing predator populations, and it starting to cost more to graze on allotments than not too. I hunt within an alotmen in the Sumpter Unit. I have heard that the family who has that allotment wants to drop the allotment, and that they only hold on to it for family tradition as the Patriarch of the family demands it....

Finally, i cannot remember whose comment it was, but the government doesn't maintain fences, patrol etc on allotments. The allotment owner is supposed to maintain all fences, gates etc as part of the allotment agreement. In fact I believe noncompliance can result in removal of allotment rights if serious enough. Herein lies the problem. There is little oversight, because there is little funding for the programs. If you raise the price of the allotment, the cattle are forced out, as the ranchers cannot afford increases. However, as public, we all have the right to visit our public servants IE range tech's at your local district office, and discuss anything you see that seems to be out of place with best use of the land. This would include fences in disrepair, large groups of cows staying in one area overly long, waterholes being torn up etc. With that knowledge, the range tech's can utilize their time more efficiently. My

[baltz526]

here is the real problem most of us have, i believe. cows should be fenced out of critical water sources, cows should only be on allotments every 3rd year, some every 5th year, some allotments need to be removed from use, some allotments need large areas protected. allotments used every year need to be divided into 3 or 5 fenced pastures, to allow the rotation of use each year, with bi yearly fence inspections documented. cow numbers need to be set for each pasture of an allotment. penaltys for violation of fencing maintenance and cattle off correct pasture rotation need to be stiff. cattle ranching is a buisness, we as the tax paying property owners these buisnesses are using. we need our land managed for healthy habitat FIRST. in a lot of the west our public land is managed for cows ONLY. habitat is only considered as (how long can we have cows on it every year) PERIOD. people ask how come the big game is on the private ranch land? it is a simple answer on some ranches, because there are very few cows on the ranch, except on winter pastures. this is happening because the ranchers are feeding their cows on public ground, not the ranch. so you have a 10,000 acre deeded ranch with 20 prize bulls on it from may 1st to oct 31st, then 10,000 cows on winter feed lots for the winter. with ranch management arrainged like this, the ranches habitat is the best in the area. then when the ranchers are setting salt licks and water sources for big game, getting tags to sell on the ranch. HOW WOULD YOU NOT DO THE SAME THING, given the oportunity? i would, the system is set up this way. i would work the system exactly the same, untill the system changed.

[lake creek charlie]

Like one post said (if the price of beef goes up,so what). Like i said before this is not conjecture on my part. The land im talking about is in baker county. In the late 50s cattle ran all over the mountain and deer and elk were EVERYWHERE> Then the land started to be degraded, because the cattle were allowed to eat on the blm until november and there was no feed left when it snowed.The decline was BEFORE there was a cougar problem(which is also a Big problem now i agree)There is 1/ooth of the deer and elk(badger ,coyote ,rabbits quail).The land did great before cattle and didnt need to be mowed.....LOL.The junk yard analogy was right on the money.WELFARE plain and simple.Thats what the grazing system on blm is. On all issues i consider myself a conservative, and theres no difference to me whether youre too lazy to work or allow the tax payers to support you.WELFARE! Blm land is being destroyed by OVER grazing until just before the snows. Wildlife, in a winter like this one turned out to be,DIE and the cattle are slaughtered and brought out of the mountains in november and the deer and elk try to find something left to eat . Sad way to take care of our wildlife,and the blm emplyees still get their government pensions while working for the ranchers.....CROOKED SYSTEM

[Idahoan]

If the price of beef goes up then there will be that many more people out in the woods.......then you will be complaining about all the hunters screwing up your hunt. you want to be in the woods with millions of more people....be my guest. I rather run into a cow in the woods then another hunter.

Paved roads and cities have done far more damage to wildlife habitat then cattle. But yes cattle grazing guidelines need to be monitored and managed better. But it shouldn't be taken away.

[Wetwrk2]

After a few days of posts I finally have to say something. If its not the LOP's its the Wolves. If its not those two subjects it's the public grazing. These subjects normally start the bickering and borderline getting a thread locked or deleted by the Admin.
Whatever side you choose you need to get the whole picture. Period. If it's a preception opinion that is the same as uneducated guess... If you only visit a area for two weeks a year, how can you know anything? Even if you visit the same place for ten years in row but only for two weeks how can you really know? Uneducated...If a person were to visit your town for two weeks a year, every year, should they be allowed to vote for your town mayor? Your property taxes? For your town's schools? No..they shouldn't.
My brother's wife's sister, on her step-dads side, says the ranchers are killing our wildlife so it must be true. I saw it last season. I read it on the internet. If you don't live there, you don't know. If you don't ranch you are speculating. If I don't know something I learn it before I open my mouth and give my brothers a stone to stumble on.-ww

[hilclimber]

Originally Posted by wetwrk2

after a few days of posts i finally have to say something. If its not the lop's its the wolves. If its not those two subjects it's the public grazing. These subjects normally start the bickering and borderline getting a thread locked or deleted by the admin.
Whatever side you choose you need to get the whole picture. Period. If it's a preception opinion that is the same as uneducated guess... If you only visit a area for two weeks a year, how can you know anything? Even if you visit the same place for ten years in row but only for two weeks how can you really know? Uneducated...if a person were to visit your town for two weeks a year, every year, should they be allowed to vote for your town mayor? Your property taxes? For your town's schools? No..they shouldn't.
My brother's wife's sister, on her step-dads side, says the ranchers are killing our wildlife so it must be true. I saw it last season. I read it on the internet. If you don't live there, you don't know. If you don't ranch you are speculating. If i don't know something i learn it before i open my mouth and give my brothers a stone to stumble on.-ww

very well said!!!

[Reel Obsession]

Originally Posted by Wetwrk2

After a few days of posts I finally have to say something. If its not the LOP's its the Wolves. If its not those two subjects it's the public grazing. These subjects normally start the bickering and borderline getting a thread locked or deleted by the Admin.
Whatever side you choose you need to get the whole picture. Period. If it's a preception opinion that is the same as uneducated guess... If you only visit a area for two weeks a year, how can you know anything? Even if you visit the same place for ten years in row but only for two weeks how can you really know? Uneducated...If a person were to visit your town for two weeks a year, every year, should they be allowed to vote for your town mayor? Your property taxes? For your town's schools? No..they shouldn't.
My brother's wife's sister, on her step-dads side, says the ranchers are killing our wildlife so it must be true. I saw it last season. I read it on the internet. If you don't live there, you don't know. If you don't ranch you are speculating. If I don't know something I learn it before I open my mouth and give my brothers a stone to stumble on.-ww

Ok, right up front, this is off subject, but given the attempt to say that only those who "live there" should be able to express an opinion, I need make a few comments and ask a few questions.


Yes, it’s a hot topic, it’s sensitive and often gets heated. However, the only ones that tend not to want to discuss hot topics are those who have something to hide as the facts slowly, sometimes painfully, reveal themselves. So I’m not sure one should be afraid to take a side, or to discuss a subject based on those concerns alone.


Now, by suggesting that that someone who doesn’t live in your town shouldn’t get a vote(and doesn’t, that’s controlled by voting precincts) is somehow akin to whether or not someone has real information, or that they shouldn’t have an opinion, or worse, get to share that opinion, flies in the face of the same “right to vote” country you live in. (Remember there's that pesky Article 19 that says something about freedom of speech and implies freedom of expression.) And just because someone lives in your town, certainly doesn’t mean that they have read, studied and understand the issue, or even read the issue at all. So does living in your town make someone knowledgeable even though they have the responsibility to be so?


That said, can you please explain who should get the right to express an opinion? If not someone who “visits” a location 2 weeks a year, then is 3 weeks enough? How about 26 weeks? Perhaps all year?? Maybe someone “trained” or schooled on the subject? Of course, if we are talking about full, or even half time residents, there really aren’t any on BLM land, at least not that can speak for themselves. And those who spend the most time on the land, might (just guessing) have some bias one way or the other. Seems a little dangerous to let only those who have a bias to discuss, share, or decide on public issues, don’t you think? So it’s a little tricky deciding who should, and who should not have, or express an opinion.

Also of note, I would point out that I never cease to be amazed at the level of information, education, scientific knowledge, concern, study, or personal first-hand knowledge comes to light in ifish. Please keep in mind that even some field studies designed to uncover long term changes in a given environment may only check on that enrinonment periodically. To suggest that only those who “live there” know anything about this subject is either naïve, or an attempt to bias the thread towards who’s opinion counts, and whose does not.


But hey, that’s just my opinion.

[BrianMaguire]

Originally Posted by Wetwrk2

If you don't ranch you are speculating. If I don't know something I learn it before I open my mouth and give my brothers a stone to stumble on.-ww

OK, so if you are not the perp you should not be on a jury. Some of us know quite a bit about grazing, and its not anecdotal. Also who is anyone to say that when they go to their public lands, for sure, two weeks, that their experience should be subservient to another. Its public land and hunters dollars are critical to small towns.

All the ranchers say grazing is getting better, I agree, but it is not all out of the goodness of the rancher’s heart. It’s the agencies staring down the barrel of a law suit. I dealt quite a bit with the a ranger districts 10 year grazing plan, it’s only after I laid out a clear cut smackdown suit that I got traction. BTW - I had enough evidence to shut down grazing on the entire forest, but I worked with the agency, if I were out to get ranchers I would have sued anyway. The agency started to do what the law requires them to do and then only to the kicking and screaming of the allotment holders. Now its better but you have to ask why? Meanwhile that same area put so much pressure because of grazing politics on ODFW that ODFW refused to even comment on a grazing plan with 10's of thousands of acres of winter range. Yeh we hunters should all pipe down, we don't know jack. Let’s take our low MO's and rotting stream beds and be happy we even get a chance.

[scottishsetter]

Fair wetwrk2:
The area in my posts has been hunted in my family for 50 yrs.
I've hunted deer in it since '80
I've hunted elk in it since '88 when drawn. 6 of 7 for the last 7.
Pioneer Oregonian

There IS a difference between LOP and Private land Tag Hunts.
Most tags PRIVATE are in the liberal season private land tags(= to public land tags approx.)Aug.1-Sept.30:::Oct.1-Dec31;;;Jan1-Mar31,2010;;;Aug1-Oct.15;;;COW TAGS!
Plus tags during the regular hunt dates for One Elk.

ENJOY!!!

[hilclimber]

Originally Posted by BrianMaguire

OK, so if you are not the perp you should not be on a jury. Some of us know quite a bit about grazing, and its not anecdotal. Also who is anyone to say that when they go to their public lands, for sure, two weeks, that their experience should be subservient to another. Its public land and hunters dollars are critical to small towns.

All the ranchers say grazing is getting better, I agree, but it is not all out of the goodness of the rancher’s heart. It’s the agencies staring down the barrel of a law suit. I dealt quite a bit with the a ranger districts 10 year grazing plan, it’s only after I laid out a clear cut smackdown suit that I got traction. BTW - I had enough evidence to shut down grazing on the entire forest, but I worked with the agency, if I were out to get ranchers I would have sued anyway. The agency started to do what the law requires them to do and then only to the kicking and screaming of the allotment holders. Now its better but you have to ask why? Meanwhile that same area put so much pressure because of grazing politics on ODFW that ODFW refused to even comment on a grazing plan with 10's of thousands of acres of winter range. Yeh we hunters should all pipe down, we don't know jack. Let’s take our low MO's and rotting stream beds and be happy we even get a chance.

Kudos BrianMcguire! I am one of those 'public servants' mired in policy, politics, and budgets ,and for one am glad that you stood up to the agency, made yourself heard, excercised your rights, and made yourself part of the situation. The National Environmental Policy Act, is a double edged sword. It gives the public the ability to be involved in all projects that are of scope or scale that basically 'do anything'. Unfortunately, the way it works is, if project B is proposed...and 99 people like it, and say nothing, but one person says something and doesn't like it, that one person has the impact and may shut down the project regardless of its merits.

Again, Kudos, and thank you for being part of the process! And not only made yourself heard, but worked with the forest to get a better product.

[Wetwrk2]

Holy Catfish!!!!!! Where do I begin? I must be all wet he-he (wetwrk) get it!! I guess my attempt at trying to make this more educating was a bad plan. . I opened this thread to more high-jacking than PizzaHut deliverly boy on the wrong side of Jefferson Street in Detroit.
All I was saying was get educated. A jury educates itself on the case, during the case. I've defended the Constitution with my life for twenty years...not many can say that, if at all. So get a educated opinion, instead of just following blindly. I am and will be fifth generation rancher..over a hundred years same land, same ranch..and our family hunted the same area for all this time. Thats a hundred years guys...a hundred. Before ODFW, before the Forest Service was even around he-he. So what'd I know right? If we didn't do something right all this time I couldn't comment about anything, as we'd be out of business. We do not sell tags, or hunt leases or herd wild game so they can't get off the ranch. We do not let the public hunt our place for fear of lawsuits all it takes is one trip or sprain...this country is so sue happy these days it'd be stupid to risk the ranch, trust no one and you don't get sued, and loose it all. We haven't ever had to lease "public land." But have many friends that do, and where I hunt I've never noticed the cattle ruining everything and see'em all the time. What I see is droughts and hard winters, and cats where I'd never seen cats before.. or my fore-fathers. So I guess thats my opinion. Maybe cattle help by giving the cats slow targets?? Isn't your public land my public land? I pay taxes too..in fact the exact same ones.
So I got a little idea on the ranchers side of thing's fella's I promise. And gosh darn it I'm a super nice guy and everyone I know likes me he-he!! Nobody like's a shady business..period. Not the public, not anyone. If you are a dirt bag rancher and you know you are ruining the land then "nuts" to you. If you are a huge corporate ranch and your managers are shady, I won't buy a darn thing from you. And I hope no one else does. If you know your livestock are killing elk/deer then change. Last but not least good news if you want your own ranch..statistics show most ranches rarely last three generations so there's your chance. Keep the Faith, Bless you and yours, and happy 2009!-WW

[baltz526]

see you agree with us. bad public land managers, bad corperate ranch owners, bad public land policy. turns our public lands into destroyed ecosystems not suitable for wildlife. if you run cows on the same ground every year for decades, you end up with land only suitable for cows.

[Reel Obsession]

Hey WetWork, put down the pizza and back away from the counter slowly..........

Based on your response, I suspect you feel like you are under fire. Personally I can say you are not. I agree with much of what you are saying in your second post, and I have NO doubt that you understand the issues better than most, certainly better than I do. I can also honestly say that I know more about the issue than I did 72 hours ago when this particular thread started, even though I started with some background of my own. Not a lot more, but I consider these exchanges an opportunity to listen, learn, and share opinions. I've also found occasion to go back and say "I stand corrected" more than once when my opinion changes. So the only part that really struck me is the comment that seemed to say, "if you don't live on a ranch, you should stop speculating", which I took as stop given our uneducated opinions. Coming from rancher stock myself on my father's side,(my dad moved away from that life and we became city folk...). and placer gold mining on my mothers side. I have been around both enough (summers on the farm) to understand some of the issues, most of the struggles, and a great deal of the bias that exists, on both sides of this issue.

Lastly, thank you very much for your service. I assume you are, or have been USCG? As one of the Salty Dogs, I have to say we love our service people in general, and the Coast Guard on a daily basis.

[Wetwrk2]

Hey WetWork, put down the pizza and back away from the counter slowly..........
Based on your response, I suspect you feel like you are under fire. Personally I can say you are not. I agree with much of what you are saying in your second post, and I have NO doubt that you understand the issues better than most, certainly better than I do. I can also honestly say that I know more about the issue than I did 72 hours ago when this particular thread started, even though I started with some background of my own. Not a lot more, but I consider these exchanges an opportunity to listen, learn, and share opinions. I've also found occasion to go back and say "I stand corrected" more than once when my opinion changes. So the only part that really struck me is the comment that seemed to say, "if you don't live on a ranch, you should stop speculating", which I took as stop given our uneducated opinions. Coming from rancher stock myself on my father's side,(my dad moved away from that life and we became city folk...). and placer gold mining on my mothers side. I have been around both enough (summers on the farm) to understand some of the issues, most of the struggles, and a great deal of the bias that exists, on both sides of this issue.
Lastly, thank you very much for your service. I assume you are, or have been USCG? As one of the Salty Dogs, I have to say we love our service people in general, and the Coast Guard on a daily basis. - Reel Obsession

- Thankyou sir I retire this summer. And I was just chapped he-he...I can't understand how can anyone offer opinions on something they don't or haven't tried to see both sides of or researched? That bothers me a lot I guess he-he a opinion just to have a opinion? I guess for the last twenty years I've not been allowed to say anything without regulations/laws/ or documention to back up my statements and it carrys over he-he.

Hey I grew up on Mutual Of Omaha's Wild Kingdom, Jacques Causteau, and I've been a card carrying member of the Ranger Rick Club since 1975!! At one time or another I was DU, then Delta, then Rocky Mt. Elk Foundation, and the Wild Turkey Foundation. Oh and of course NRA. but sadly about the only one I haven't lapsed in is the Ranger Rick Club he-he.
I never said I agreed or disagreed on the ops origional post.
We've ran cows and horses on the exact same 3000 acre ranch for 100 years straight and counting. The elk and deer and antelope do not mind at all, and go to the same draws, drink out of the same waterholes, and eat in the exact same places since 1908 that our cows do...thats a fact, and I say again for 100 years straight. Nothing has changed in 100 years. My Great, Great, Great Grandfather shot bucks in the same spots I have, leaned off the same Juniper tree for support. Over the last 100 years we have changed the crops we planted, let some land fallow, replanted with what the market says helped the cows. Nothing changed same cattle, same elk, same land, same deer, same antelope. If it was a bad winter deer and elk died. If it was a drought year, plus bad winter more deer and elk died. If it was a good year or two or three in a row the critters where right back to the normal numbers we had seen in the good years. Our creek has always had trout. So who's right? I guess we didn't over graze??? But in a drought year theres nothing to eat for anything? I'm rambling.....I like pine trees, and sagebrush.-WW

[Reel Obsession]

Thank you WW, I think I better understand your position and what you were addressing. Personally, I narrowed the issue at hand, both in my head, and (at least I tried) on paper (see post 39) to grazing on BLM land, and the often poor practices associated with usage of land without personal stewardship of the same. As I alluded to above, I believe that landowners take great personal responsibity for their land, and the condition they leave that land in for future generations. Just not sure that the same can always be said for private use of public land.

Thanks,
RO

[Rbogus]

a opinion just to have a opinion

Wow!
This place should have a forum with that name as much of it as I have seen in the short time I have been here.

[Reel Obsession]

Originally Posted by Rbogus

Wow!
This place should have a forum with that name as much of it as I have seen in the short time I have been here.

I disagree......

[ORsouthpaw]

You gotta love these grazing posts! After some serious thinking about the last major grazing thread I have simply come to this point of view.

Grazing is and will always be a part of life in the woods. I don't want to prevent anyone from making a living but I have a problem understanding how privately owned animals can be allowed to consume public resources without a significant fees or strict limitations being placed on the owners of those animals. YES I know that the owners of those animals are assessed a fee. However when you compare those fees to the cost of sustaining those very same animals on private land the cost for the animal owner is really pretty insignificant. Grazing on public ground is good business, the costs of operations are lower and the profit margins are higher. It's really no different that companies which subsidize work to foreign countries. Ask any EO rancher how they feel about sending American work off shore and 9 out 10 time I'll bet their against it. But grazing after all is about making the most money with the least amount of overhead and not necessarily about what is best the common people, the environment (weeds, etc) or in this case the game animals in general and the fellow Oregonian public land users (insert whatever state it effects you in)

All of that aside, my real issue with this is with the game animals that are being driven from desolate public areas onto the more lush and supple private lands where they find ample food source and limited competition and pressure. Often times these private land owners will implement a land access fee in order for the public to be able to access OUR public resource. That's Bull! or no bull if your an elk hunter!

A viable solution in my mind would be to mandate limited public access to large privately held ranches that are currently using public ground for the purpose of supporting their privately held animals. It would simple, The land owner would still be in control and could make the choice of either grazing on public ground and allowing public access or Keeping up their fences and keeping their grazing animals from competing with our public resources and still be able to deny public access.

Call me crazy but when I cover almost 30 miles on foot and only see 7 elk in 7 days while in a designated wilderness area and then I see a a large herd of elk wandering around on private land, I have to think that the average hunter is getting the short end of the stick.

This is not a Portland issue, nor is it an EO issue. It effects ALL of us hunters. There are many hunters living on the east side that are just as frustrated with the current grazing situation. Though I don't know statistically I'd be willing to bet that there are only a small percentage of all of those that live and hunt in EO that actually own and operate these large ranches.

I have nothing but respect for those that live and make their living on the East side. I'm envious and wish I had that opportunity myself. Perhaps I would feel differently but as for now I'm tired of hearing about all the Portland this and Portland that. The bottom line is that continuing to allow reckless grazing practices will only accelerate what is already happening... The slow steady elimination of game animals in Oregon. Yes! It's only one aspect which is effecting our game numbers but it is a piece of the pie none the less. When it is regulated along side with proper predator control it will help... I hope!

[lake creek charlie]

That seems like a REALLY good solution osp.These people that say they treat the land great and therefore all ranchers do.....the game animals are not affected.....Im for everyone making a living, but for example when i started hunting in baker county the ranch i hunted had just went from 50 cattle to 500.You could never catch a deer on the alfalfa low lands. The sage brush was thick and 6 feet high. Along the creeks feeding down off the mountain there wer 5 feet green on both sides and lots of feed for the wintering deer and elk.You were allowed 2 deer a year ,one buck and one doe.Deer and elk were everywhere!Hunters were everywhere too but didnt matter. Now the sage brush is mostly gone ,the willows along the creeks are gone, and about ten years ago the winter kill started to be huge. Now the deer are all in the alfalfa and the f&g has and is issuing doe tags for the deer that are in those fields.Seems like VERY poor management. The rancher (a billionaire from back east that just bought it)sells (leases the hunting rights to an outfitter for major money) and doesnt allow any access to the 75 percent that is blm. He also leases out the grazing rights.Somehow years ago the blm sold him a couple of 50 foot strips of land that cross the road.NO ACCESS. The land on this huge ranch is changed beyond belief. His land he can do whatever, but blm.... just not right

[Wetwrk2]

I want to get rich selling mushrooms. I happen to know mushrooms grow great on the West side of the State. So I get the permits and I pack up my family and friends and we drive to say...your town for a couple of weeks, and set up camp at the local Motel 6, or local public campground. We get up early and drive around your town, and end up in your neighborhood. We drive around and around tossing out pop cans til we decide to pick your house to look for mushrooms. I knock on your door..dressed in my finest "Metallica" shirt, torn jeans, and dread-lock hairdo. You're at work so your wife answers the door, or your kids, and they say" No get out of here." When someone knocks on your family's door its always intimidating it don't matter if its a door-to-door salesman, or church recruiter. ..Now I'm mad, what right do you have to hide or grow or raise the "States" mushrooms when they are free for all of us tax payers. I saw some mushrooms growing in the lot across the street you rent, so I know they must grow in your yard. Public Mushrooms. Heck mushrooms don't hurt anything, they don't eat crops, they don't ruin your hay( well actually it does but..), they don't knock down your fences. Now I notice you don't have a fence, or say even if you do, but no signs that say anything about mushroom picking. So I jump your fence because I didn't know better "Sorry Mister, I didn't see a sign?" and start rooting around your backyard...I look under your trash cans, your shed, nothing so I decide maybe you have mushrooms growing in the trunk of your car, its the States mushrooms right? Now say the State has given you a permit to only you and your family to harvest those fantastic mushrooms, well I think thats crap, and now I'm really mad because...they are the "States" mushrooms. They just happened to cross into your yard, heck you even feed them in your yard with much better fertilizer, and you water them all the time. Well sorry you aren't taking care of the lot, so you are hurting the mushrooms, and I should still be able to go in your yard to get a bucketfull and I pay taxes for the States mushrooms right? I quoted myself with this tale of how I've felt and its as true now as when I wrote it before.. Somebody explain me the difference? Is it cause you live in town? Put this mushroom hunter in your apartment, your house, or your house in the country.I see zero difference. Plus, you should let the pickers decide whats best for your rented lot across the road to grow more mushrooms, they show up a couple of weeks every year during mushroom season, and boost the economy.-WW

[ORsouthpaw]

WW- I would say Yeah, you should be able to access mushrooms that are on my land IF and only if I was deliberately utilizing publicly owned property (NF or BLM) for the purpose of growing my private mushrooms which I in turn plan to profit from. But wait do you think that you should be able to pick my private mushrooms that are on public land too. Should I be able to shoot your cow that's on public land? Should I be able to drive your vehicle since it's on public land. This could go on and on.

It's pretty simple. If I didn't want to allow any public access to my own private property then I shouldn't be allowed to use public property to grow my private mushrooms. I'm not saying that there should be unlimited access for every hunter out there but any private land owner that uses public land for profit should be mandated to allot a certain percentage of use to the public and subsequently access to public animals. Maybe the land owner should have to allow a draw based on his acreage and the amount of grazing that he does on public land. If he doesn't want anyone on his land, then he shouldn't consume more than his share of public resources. Either way he would make the choice.
OR
Perhaps another solution would be to mandate that all the money which is gathered based on Private Land Access fees (Read access to our public game animals) should be forwarded to the wildlife agencies when that particular land owner is using public land to profit and sustain his herd. This would also mean that those land owners that choose not to use public land to sustain their herds would be able charge and collect any amount the wanted to. After all fair if fair. Right?

This isn't about wanting to step on anyone's toes here and I know life's not fair but it seems ridicules to me that as a landowner I could take my private livestock, raise and profit from them being on public ground which in turn persuades the publicly owned animals to move onto my private land where I can then put up a fence and charge 5000.00 dollars to a hunter who most likely would have been able to shoot that very same animal while it was still on public land had I not abused or overgraised its' natural resource.

I'm not really against grazing on public land! I'm just really against public animals being used for profit becasue they have moved onto private land in search of better habitat. Habitat that may have been availible to them on public land but was consumed by privately owned animals.

BTW
If you show up at my door in a metallica shirt, holey jeans and dreadlocks make sure to bring a bucket. I don't have any mushrooms for you but my dog could supply all the feritlizer you could ask for.