Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (24661)	1/16/2004 9:50:51 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793717

I liked Bob Dole. If he were running, I would vote for him. I, too, would vote for Ish's weird fish before I would vote for Bush. Change of subject alert. Guest opinion / Steven C. Amstrup: Legislative bid to fix grazing problem likely would make it worse By Steven C. Amstrup America's range wars entered a new phase with the recent introduction of House Resolution 3324, the Voluntary Grazing Permit Buyout Act. Its supporters say the bill would restore the health of public lands in the West with a one-time purchase of grazing rights from the ranchers who hold leases on those lands. Once grazing leases are sold to the government, HR 3324, and a similar bill that would apply to Arizona lands only (HR 3337), would prevent those public lands from ever being grazed again. It is true many arid public grazing lands are in poor condition. Unfortunately, permanently removing livestock is unlikely to restore the health of those lands, and the unintended consequences are likely to be exactly the opposite of those desired. Many Western rangelands have been abused because managers have erroneously associated overgrazing with animal numbers or "stocking rates" only. But stocking rate is only part of the equation. The timing and intensity of grazing are often even more important than animal numbers. Public land "pastures" are typically large, and domestic grazing animals usually occupy them for extended time periods, such as the whole summer. Concerns about overgrazing have been addressed in the past mainly by reductions in those time-related numbers. Timing and intensity of grazing, on the other hand, have received far less attention. This has resulted in ranges that paradoxically are both "overgrazed" and "overrested." Ranges are over-grazed because livestock remain in pastures long enough to repeatedly graze plants every time they produce new growth. Any gardener knows that plants, repeatedly denied their ability to photosynthesize new energy, ultimately will die. Ranges are overrested because animal densities are too low for hoof action to break down old organic matter or till the soil in preparation for seedling growth. And low animal densities allow livestock to graze only the most preferred new growth while avoiding decadent plants that shade out and otherwise prevent seedling establishment. So desirable plant cover declines, bare ground increases, and water and nutrient cycles fail. Although ecologically sound grazing can reverse these problems and restore landscape health, available data suggest simply removing grazing animals from arid areas only exacerbates the overrest problem and doesn't heal the land. Even if removal of grazing is not likely to restore public ranges as promised, the unintended consequences of the bills are potentially more serious. That is because both likely will accelerate land fragmentation - the real threat to healthy Western landscapes. The money offered by these bills will tempt many ranchers, caught in the trap of increasing land values and taxes, aggressive real estate brokers, drought and wavering revenue streams, to sell their grazing leases. After selling their public leases, however, ranchers will be faced with smaller and less profitable operations than they have now and will be more likely to pick this as the time to sell their private lands as well. Just as private lands are the foundation of ranching operations, they also are the foundation of many Western ecosystems. They are the wintering grounds, nesting areas and watering holes for the adjacent public lands, and their continuity is fundamental to landscape health. When private lands are converted to subdivisions, ranchettes and shopping malls, the public lands alone cannot carry the freight. Wildlife diversity and abundance suffer, and as ecosystem components disappear, total landscape health declines. As stewards of our public land heritage, we must revisit the timing, duration, intensity of use and fee structures for grazing on public lands. The real key to protecting the health of Western landscapes is figuring out how to keep family farms and ranches profitable so that private as well as public grazing lands remain in open space. * Steven C. Amstrup, Ph.D., is a wildlife biologist currently studying polar bears in arctic Alaska.