# Open range.



## Bowdacious (Sep 16, 2007)

I'd like to try to get some kind of group together that would get rid of all the sheep and cows on National Forest land. Open range is no longer needed as it once was in the country's history. Sheep go through and tear up prime elk and deer habitat and leave hardly anything in their wake. I wouldn't be worried about putting anyone out of work because it is mainly illegals that are driving the sheep and they don't speak a lick of English. I've seen some places after sheep have been in there and the hearder has left trash and all kinds of junk just laying around. 

I think if the state got rid of open range then it would make room for more and better elk and deer habitat and they could introduce more goats and sheep which would in turn bring in more $$$$ which is what Utah wants anyway. 

Some of you may think this is the dumbest idea in the world. These are just a few of my thoughts on the subject. Just curious to see what everyone else thought about it.


----------



## cklspencer (Jun 25, 2009)

> Open range is no longer needed as it once was in the country's history.


Open range is still needed very much. A very large number of cattle and sheep still need to be supplied to feed America, Unless you want to eat grass and leafy greens.



> Sheep go through and tear up prime elk and deer habitat and leave hardly anything in their wake.


 Sheep do tear up lots of vegetation when they move though an area but not in a bad way with proper management of the herd. If they are left in one place to long yes they can do some damage but the vegetation comes back every year and I have seen many areas come back even better after it has been grazed.



> I wouldn't be worried about putting anyone out of work because it is mainly illegal's that are driving the sheep and they don't speak a lick of English.


By getting rid of open grazing your would be putting many American people out of work like the farmers, meat packers, butchers, all the way down to the poor bagger at the check stand. Most of the herders are not illegal's they are migratory workers and most are from Peru, big deference then the ones jumping the local borders.



> I think if the state got rid of open range then it would make room for more and better elk and deer habitat and they could introduce more goats and sheep which would in turn bring in more $$$$ which is what Utah wants anyway.


They bring in lots of money from grazing rights, not only that but from taxes and sales for meat and tax able wages. It would be hard to beat what they bring in form it then from what a few deer and elk would bring in. I don't see to many sheep running in areas where you would find mountain goats. There may be a few where big horns might like to be but the big horn population would not increase over night. It would take a long time and a lot of money to make their number come up like that.

Grazing has lots of good benefits to lots of forested areas. It helps with forest fire prevention and by grazing some types of vegetation down it makes way for better and more suitable foods for wildlife. It helps loosen some types of soil to better allow vegetation to grow.

Deer and elk move around grazed areas a lot. They don't like being right in the mix but they are not driven all the way out. They just move on and return when the grazing animals have moved out.

I personal feel the deer and elk number would be better served buy protection and providing more winter range and better management.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

The cattle and sheep people have always been in bed with the lawmakers of this state and the DWR. Good luck with that one. :?


----------



## Bears Butt (Sep 12, 2007)

cklspenser said:


> Grazing has lots of good benefits to lots of forested areas. It helps with forest fire prevention and by grazing some types of vegetation down it makes way for better and more suitable foods for wildlife. It helps loosen some types of soil to better allow vegetation to grow.


+1


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

cklspencer said:


> > Open range is no longer needed as it once was in the country's history.
> 
> 
> Open range is still needed very much. A very large number of cattle and sheep still need to be supplied to feed America, Unless you want to eat grass and leafy greens.
> ...


 Sheep do tear up lots of vegetation when they move though an area but not in a bad way with proper management of the herd. If they are left in one place to long yes they can do some damage but the vegetation comes back every year and I have seen many areas come back even better after it has been grazed.



> I wouldn't be worried about putting anyone out of work because it is mainly illegal's that are driving the sheep and they don't speak a lick of English.


By getting rid of open grazing your would be putting many American people out of work like the farmers, meat packers, butchers, all the way down to the poor bagger at the check stand. Most of the herders are not illegal's they are migratory workers and most are from Peru, big deference then the ones jumping the local borders.



> I think if the state got rid of open range then it would make room for more and better elk and deer habitat and they could introduce more goats and sheep which would in turn bring in more $$$$ which is what Utah wants anyway.


They bring in lots of money from grazing rights, not only that but from taxes and sales for meat and tax able wages. It would be hard to beat what they bring in form it then from what a few deer and elk would bring in. I don't see to many sheep running in areas where you would find mountain goats. There may be a few where big horns might like to be but the big horn population would not increase over night. It would take a long time and a lot of money to make their number come up like that.

Grazing has lots of good benefits to lots of forested areas. It helps with forest fire prevention and by grazing some types of vegetation down it makes way for better and more suitable foods for wildlife. It helps loosen some types of soil to better allow vegetation to grow.

Deer and elk move around grazed areas a lot. They don't like being right in the mix but they are not driven all the way out. They just move on and return when the grazing animals have moved out.

I personal feel the deer and elk number would be better served buy protection and providing more winter range and better management.[/quote:29orjlgc]

+1


----------



## .45 (Sep 21, 2007)

Good post cklspencer... good comments !!


----------



## BucksNBulls (May 27, 2008)

The ranchers that are grazing on open range are not the rachers that are "feeding america". Those ranchers are big enough that they have their own land and graze and feed on their own land...not use public resources. The "free grazers" are small outfits that are just trying to stay afloat.....Maybe only selling 500 head at a time. 

No butchers or meat packers or "poor bagger at the check out stand" are going to go out of business because ranchers aren't allowed to free graze any more. 

Most sheep pushers are not from Peru. I've seen adds many many times for them in the paper. MOST are MEXICAN. I've stopped and talked to them when I see them. They don't speak a lick of english and most will admit they are illegal. They only make about 600 dollars a month and don't care about leaving their junk all over. 


Just my 2 cents on the issue.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

I watched a series recently called "Last American Cowboy" and I assure you those ranchers depend on open range. Without it the cost of feeding those animals would be too much for many ranchers and put them out of business not to mention driving the cost of beef way up. Honestly I have no idea what the sheep do for us.

I won't lie, I can't stand seeing the cows and sheep in the field and what they leave behind while hunting but I understand why they are there and I have no desire to try and remove them.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

BucksNBulls said:


> The ranchers that are grazing on opne range are not the rachers that are "feeding america". Those ranchers are big enough that they have have their own land and graze and feed on their own land...not use public resources. The "free grazers" are small outfits that are just trying to stay afloat.....Maybe only selling 500 head at a time.
> 
> No butchers or meat packers or "poor bagger at the check out stand" are going to go out of business because ranchers aren't allowed to free graze any more.
> 
> ...


A major source of beef is Montana. At one point every summer the cattle outnumber people in that state. Even the biggest operations depend on open country. Thier own ranch land would be grazed out half way through the summer. Not only that but the ranchers use their ground in the summer to grow hay to get the cattle through the winter.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

.45 said:


> Good post cklspencer... good comments !!


I agree.

To add to it, you have about zero knowledge of how things really work. It is wise to do your homework before running your mouth. I am guilty of it also, so don't worry you just need to be educated.  :mrgreen: :lol: Anyways there is a family in Huntington that run cattle and sheep and I run into the boys every summer in their sheep camp. First off they do not use illegals, very big myth. They spend a lot of money getting proper visas, ect. to get some of the guys from South America up here. The only reason they hire those guys because most Americans are too lazy to do the work they have to do, sheep herding is not easy. I hate sheep but after spending a few evenings around the fire with these fine gentlemen I grew a very healthy respect for what they do and their livelihood. I will be the first to admit I wouldn't be able to do it. Especially for the little pay they get. Anyways look into it more, go spend a few days with a sheep herder or go on a cattle roundup then see what your opinion is.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

I would move domestic sheep from areas with Bighorns. Mountain goats too I guess. I see a lot of Mountain Goats and come to think only one time have I seen them where domestic sheep hung out.

If you witness overgrazing and litter on public lands by the livestock industry report it to the appropriate agency. Be able to back up your claim with pictures, coordinates, and dates if you need to. And then, hopefully, be prepared to take a horseback ride into the area with a government rep. Have your hunting partners file complaints also. It's not easy, the "Good Ole Boy" system still applies out west. So be persistant.

As far as deer and elk go, I think they get along with the livestock OK.

Winter range is the key, without good winter range the other things like game management, over-grazing, and weather mean little. 

I do see one trend that is alarming: increased road kills in areas where there are still good numbers of deer, or even elk for that matter.


----------



## Bowdacious (Sep 16, 2007)

*


bullsnot said:



I watched a series recently called "Last American Cowboy" and I assure you those ranchers depend on open range. Without it the cost of feeding those animals would be too much for many ranchers and put them out of business not to mention driving the cost of beef way up.

Click to expand...

*I grew up on a dairy farm in Duchesne, Utah. The farm had been in my family for over 100 years. We milked about 50-60 head of cows (holsteins) twice a day. Through taxes and mandatory updates to barns and equipment and water rights and irrigation issues...the government just about shut us down. Milk prices were low and we weren't making enough as a "little outfit" to make it worth our while. Sad to say, but it was my generation (dad and I)that cut our losses. We still lease the 150 acres the farm was on but we can't make a living at it anymore.

What I'm trying to say is that you've gotta be able to roll with the punches and change with the times. If you can't make it on what you got....get out.

*JAHAN*.......if you have any questions about my "KNOWLEDGE" Refer to what I wrote above. I've been on round-ups with friends and know the hard work it takes. I have experience with beef and some with sheep....don't care much for sheep, think they are stinky and stupid and think they do worse to the land than cows. I don't mind the cows so much.

I believe that there is a "good 'ol boy club". I know cause I have "EXPERIENCE". I'm not just talking out my azz. This is just my observations.

I'm a country boy...been around cows and beef and horses my whole life. I know and understand why open range is a good thing...I do...but what is good for the rancher is not always what is good for national forest and national forest assets.


----------



## Bowdacious (Sep 16, 2007)

wyogoob said:


> Winter range is the key, without good winter range the other things like game management, over-grazing, and weather mean little.


Goob....you talk about winter range being the key and I believe you are on to something.....but with sheep and cows destroying what could be possible great winter or late season range.....doesn't that effect things as well? What they graze and destroy doesn't grow back until spring.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Bowdacious said:


> *
> 
> 
> bullsnot said:
> ...


Well I am surprised to hear your opinion while being around it so much. Hey you have the right to your opinion even if it is wrong.  :mrgreen: :lol: I agree with you if they are disrespecting the land, then like Goob said, turn them in, it shouldn't be tolerated. I hunt in areas with lots of sheep and cattle, haven't noticed a big deal with it. More issue of how many people there are than the livestock. Like I said I don't like sheep, but these folks are making a living like we are. Could there be some changes to way things are done, hell yeah, but to say no more open range is too extreme IMO.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Bowdacious said:


> wyogoob said:
> 
> 
> > Winter range is the key, without good winter range the other things like game management, over-grazing, and weather mean little.
> ...


Yeah, thanks for explaining further.

Let me use the Deseret Land & Livestock as an example. They have some of the finest elk in the country; and some good deer, bison, and antelope. Yet they have 1000s of cows. How do they do it? 
1st: good winter range that comes from rotating the livestock in 7 different grazing areas. 2nd: great game management. 
3rd: ah....always nice to own 1/2 of a county :lol:

Another example is the deer herd north of Evanston.

We couldn't get the Game & Fish to lower the number of tags so we worked with the BLM, and others, and got them to turn the over-grazed Bear River Divide open range into a half-dozen fenced-in allotments. The grazing allotments were already there, well defined on paper, but numerous brands would use the same habitat, overgrazing the best spots, especially in the dry months preceding round-up. It was a tough one to pull off, that ground is the checkerboard, a convoluted mix of Fed, State, and private ground.

I can't thank the landowners and lessees enough for their cooperation putting this thing together. The deer and antelope are coming back OK and the elk are doing great. Most of the cattleman are from Utah by the way.


----------



## Puddler (Apr 30, 2009)

Get rid of them all!!! I have some acerage up in the manti-la sal N.F that I haven't been upto since early last year. I made a trip up last weekend and I have to say that I am going spend the money to put a fence around my property due to those **** cows that range up there. They have such a negative affect on the land that my vote is make the ranchers put them on their own land and if a rancher doesn't have enough land to support their hurd then sell the cows and get chickens. :lol:


----------



## duckhunter1096 (Sep 25, 2007)

Elk tear up prime DEER habitat...should we get rid of all of the elk?


----------



## MarkM (Sep 7, 2007)

duckhunter1096 said:


> Elk tear up prime DEER habitat...should we get rid of all of the elk?


YES!!!! :lol: :lol: :twisted: 
o-||


----------



## hoghunter011583 (Jul 21, 2008)

I think the first thing we need to do is stop looking at what is going to bring the most money and start doing what is right!!! Even if the state could make more money by doing away with free range, why would it? Just so us hunters don't have to deal with the cows and sheep, or because they can make more money?? I thought this was a free country and not a country of greed??
I don't know the numbers or the details but if you take away free range you are taking away a big supply of beef and that seems like it would have to make beef prices go up!! 
I hate cows in the forest but I'm totally against a law that says they can't be there, next thing the bunny huggers will be saying the hunter can't be their because we can make more money by having more tourist areas and ski areas!!! It isn't always about the dollar!!!


----------



## Bowdacious (Sep 16, 2007)

hoghunter011583 said:


> It isn't always about the dollar!!!


In Utah it is all about the mighty $. I only brought money into it because I thought IN UTAH they would be motivated by it.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

I don't have a problem with private cattle responsibly managed and allowed to graze public land as long as fishermen are allowed to access and fish public water that flows through private land! Either we get rid of the cattle off public land or we should be allowed to fish public water that flows through private land! After all, how much fisheries habitat has private cattle destroyed on public land?


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

I say bring back the bison and the Native Americans. 

Send the white people and all their stuff back to Europe.


----------



## dibb03 (Dec 17, 2007)

My brother and I were just having this conversation the other day. As an outdoorsman who loves to hunt deer and I elk I am constantly frustrated by the presence of sheep in the areas I have hunted. I once held the opinion they should not be able to graze in those areas and should be taken off the mountains. My brother brought up the point that where sheep use to graze predator numbers (cougars, bears, and coyotes) were at low numbers. But now that the sheep are gone from those areas the number of predators have increased dramatically. Sheep herders have strict orders to kill any predator they see to protect the sheep. I like the fact there is someone controlling the predator numbers since the state will not give out enough predator tags to control the populations. Although annoying and frustrating I vote to keep them there so the herders can continue to kill predators.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

Cattle and sheep provide a lot of benefits to open range, provided they are manged responsibly. Although I'm no expert I have not seen much if any "over grazing" Just because the grass in areas is eaten down to a few inches does not equal "over grazing".
I belive there is enough room on the mountain that we can live with grazing that goes on. Cattle and sheep don't really compete with deer as much as elk.
Just my .02


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

wyogoob said:


> I say bring back the bison and the Native Americans.
> 
> Send the white people and all their stuff back to Europe.


+100 That would eliminate a lot of problems. :twisted:


----------



## Packout (Nov 20, 2007)

I am still trying to wrap my head around the question. I never knew the DWR could make the decision, I always thought it was the Dept of the Interior and the Federal Government that made those decisions. That question and the fact that "illegals" are herding sheep. I'd wager I have met 150 or so sheep herders over the last 20 years in Utah and I can only think of 4 which were not from Peru and they were 2 Americans and a Mexican- all legal. (I bought cull ewes for 15 years) 

I hate livestock which is degrading habitat and ruining the landscape, but I have seen it is more rare than prevalent. There is a certain naivete about the way things really are which runs rampant on these internet forums. Don't let your inconvenience with the livestock ruin your time afield. After all it is called Multi-Use. And we hunters do use.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Packout said:


> I am still trying to wrap my head around the question. I never knew the DWR could make the decision, I always thought it was the Dept of the Interior and the Federal Government that made those decisions. That question and the fact that "illegals" are herding sheep. I'd wager I have met 150 or so sheep herders over the last 20 years in Utah and I can only think of 4 which were not from Peru and they were 2 Americans and a Mexican- all legal. (I bought cull ewes for 15 years)
> 
> I hate livestock which is degrading habitat and ruining the landscape, but I have seen it is more rare than prevalent. There is a certain naivete about the way things really are which runs rampant on these internet forums. Don't let your inconvenience with the livestock ruin your time afield. *After all it is called Multi-Use*. And we hunters do use.


Packout nailed it! It seems we want "multiple use" lands only when it benefits our personal preference.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Personally, I would say that overgrazing is the exception rather than the norm on our public lands...cattle are destroying fisheries habitat all over the state and have done so for years. Take a look at how much money has been spent on fencing riparian areas in the last ten years to keep cattle out and then take a look at how much of that fencing has since been removed/ruined/destroyed and is no longer effective....

....cattle grazing can have a positive impact on wildlife habitat, but too often the impact is negative IMHO!


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

I guess I'm missing something here.....in all the areas I've hunted the cattle and sheep are way up high. That's summer range only for the deer and elk. The much bigger threat is subdivisions going up on winter grounds. Also other than being an annoyance and stinking up the joint I just haven't seen any evidence that they have much impact on the deer and elk. The only exception would be the sheep spreading disease to wild sheep. Somebody please educate me here. This just seems like a solution in search of a problem.

What do the sheep do for us again? Can someone explain that to me please while you're at it.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Bowdacious said:


> I grew up on a dairy farm in Duchesne, Utah. The farm had been in my family for over 100 years. We milked about 50-60 head of cows (holsteins) twice a day. Through taxes and mandatory updates to barns and equipment and water rights and irrigation issues...the government just about shut us down. Milk prices were low and we weren't making enough as a "little outfit" to make it worth our while. Sad to say, but it was my generation (dad and I)that cut our losses. We still lease the 150 acres the farm was on but we can't make a living at it anymore.
> 
> What I'm trying to say is that you've gotta be able to roll with the punches and change with the times. If you can't make it on what you got....get out.


I understand economics (not saying you don't) and the market has a way of thinning itself out when it's over saturated so I don't think you can compare the singular experience your family experienced with making a move that will impact the entire market. Sure if a few small outfits can no longer survive then so be it but making a move like stopping free ranging effects everyone involved and ultimately the consumer pays the price.

Also I don't think milk cows are quite the same as beef cows. With beef cows you have a lot of mouths to feed that aren't producing meat other than giving birth to your meat cows.


----------



## Renegade (Sep 11, 2007)

Grazing is crucial to the management of the land. Without it, the hills would be overgrown and you'd be complaining about more fires and lousy browse.


----------



## Bowdacious (Sep 16, 2007)

Renegade said:


> Grazing is crucial to the management of the land. Without it, the hills would be overgrown and you'd be complaining about more fires and lousy browse.


Well, for that matter...I think more fires are needed too.....


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

In the past couple of months of scouting and hunting I have come to the conclusion that the North Cache unit has a serious problem with overgrazing and that is one of the major reasons for populations of deer and elk that are struggling to survive. The big game herds on the North Cache are almost nil and the hills look like a bulldozer has gone through them. 
I still believe in using public land to graze. I do believe the number of animals grazing on this unit needs to be reduced. 
I would like to see sheep eliminated from any public usage plan. I just think they bring too many problems for little real benefit anymore. Synthetic products have largely replaced wool. I vote for taking sheep off of the public teat and allowing for cattle ranchers to continue grazing practices.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Renegade said:


> Grazing is crucial to the management of the land. Without it, the hills would be overgrown and you'd be complaining about more fires and lousy browse.


Renegade I'm not sure if you were responding to my question where I asked "what do sheep do for us?" If you were I didn't mean what was their impact on the wildife habitat....I meant what are people raising and using them for? Cuz there isn't anywhere near the demand for wool there used to be.

If you weren't responding to my question then just ignore me and carry on.


----------



## lehi (Sep 13, 2007)

Is it true that there were less deer and elk in Utah before the pioneers arrived? And once they arrived and brought in cattle and sheep, the deer populations went up? Or is that just a tall tale. Someone clue me in. 

I don't think it is sheep or cattle that are ruining wintering grounds, it is humans. This we all know for a **** fact. 

I don't know how the big game herds are effected by grazing, but I do hate it when cattle ruin the banks of streams and take massive shi*s in the water.


----------



## FSHCHSR (Aug 30, 2008)

> I have come to the conclusion that the North Cache unit has a serious problem with overgrazing and that is one of the major reasons for populations of deer and elk that are struggling to survive. The big game herds on the North Cache are almost nil and the hills look like a bulldozer has gone through them.


Amen brotha.And someone correct me if im wrong but they are not suposed to be in the wilderness area up there either i see cows there every year.


----------



## Cold Track (Sep 11, 2007)

Alot of you guys are very ignorrant, and very self centered. Our deer and elk herds are not suffering due to livestock grazing. You guys that live on a 1/4 acre building lot in the city have got it all figured out. By the way bullsnot, the average cow calf operation in the U.S. is 40 head. I believe those guys running 500 are a little bigger than that. This has been beat to death time and time again. Grow up, educate your self, and enjoy the hunting you have and try to improve in a positive way, not by bagging on the men that feed this country. And don't tell me you only eat wild game because you don't. We can go on and on about how we all benefit from farming and ranching and it's a whole lot bigger picture than just a T-bone.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Bowdacious you need to educate yourself on the benefits that sheep and cattle have on the deer population.

In the early days the rangelands wasn't suitable for Mule deer because it was mostly grassland. Then the "early settlers" brought their cattle and sheep by the hundreds of thousands and the cattle and sheep ate away the grasses which held moisture in the soil. This made it easier for browse plants like sagebrush and bitter brush to grow because they grow in places without as much water thus causing the deer population to explode. There was a lot of overgrazing at that time because it wasnt regulated like it is today. 

Cattle and sheep help create better Mule deer habitat.

Logging would also help out the deer and elk herds because it helps open up the landscape instead of having places become less suitable for habitat because of fallen timber where nothing grows in that thick crap.


----------



## hoghunter011583 (Jul 21, 2008)

Bowdacious said:


> *
> 
> 
> bullsnot said:
> ...


So if it is so bad for the forest, how long have they been free grazing? Why are we still seeing good Elk and Deer hunting after all this time? I know the deer are down but what about before the down swing, I think they were free ranging at the time and long before???????
This is just another example of putting people out of business for "special intrest groups". Stop making hunters a special intrest group!!!


----------



## hoghunter011583 (Jul 21, 2008)

Bowdacious said:


> hoghunter011583 said:
> 
> 
> > It isn't always about the dollar!!!
> ...


Well, if Utah is all about money and they allow free range maybe you are wrong about being able to pull more money with hunting!!


----------



## hoghunter011583 (Jul 21, 2008)

Renegade said:


> Grazing is crucial to the management of the land. Without it, the hills would be overgrown and you'd be complaining about more fires and lousy browse.


Hah, yep dang straight!!! 
The fact is, this isn't Heaven and we need to learn that things will never be perfect for everybody!! Hunting in Utah is awesome, so lets report the poachers and litter bugs and keep things clean. Stop fussing and have a great time on the mountains!!!!


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

jahan said:


> .45 said:
> 
> 
> > Good post cklspencer... good comments !!
> ...


What was the names of the boys from Huntington? Just curious as to which ones you ran into.


----------



## shootemup (Nov 30, 2008)

open range=affordable beef 

field grazing + hay to supplement lack of availible grass=really really expensive beef

This is one you have to pick your battle on.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

What we know about cattle and how they compete with elk and deer:
http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/science-update-13.pdf

http://oregonstate.edu/dept/eoarcunion/ ... cattle.pdf

http://www.blm.gov/or/districts/medford ... verlap.pdf

Cattle can and do affect deer and elk both positively and negatively.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Packout hit the nail on the head.


----------



## cklspencer (Jun 25, 2009)

> What we know about cattle and how they compete with elk and deer:
> http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/science-update-13.pdf


Thanks for that link wy2utah. That studied made some very interesting observation in regards to the age of elk and breeding. Although there are a few small negative impacts on elk and deer from grazing it looks as though the positives on elk and deer by having multi use land greatly outway the negative. Looks like the largest negative was roads which is a topic for another thread.


----------



## cklspencer (Jun 25, 2009)

http://www.blm.gov/or/districts/medford ... verlap.pdf

It would have been nice to see some data on sheep and their diet in realation to the deer and elk.


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

I won't spend a lot of time on this issue. It is obviosly one born out of ignorance. Thanks packout for pointing out that it IS NOT the DWR that regualtes public lands or grazinf permits. In fact the DWR is not any different than the cattlemans association or the sheepmens assocaition. They live within the management parameters set forth by the land manager (i.e. the USFS or BLM for the most part)
There are long term plans and decisions that regulate wildlife numbers, livestock numbers, resource harvest etc. etc. until you understand the complete puzzle it easy to single out your heartache and moan about it. However, removing your heartache will not always result in your preferred outcome. In many areas if the grass was allowed to grow unharvested, by mid August it would require land closures to limit fire hazards such as wood cutters, recreationist, hunters. So next time you complain because an area has been grazed ask yourself if the area could stand human fire pressure if someone hadn't cut the grass. Next time you sit in your treestand over a pond ask yourself on whose dollar was the pond made on and if it would be there if a stockman hadn't needed it. As far as wilderness they have defined grazing and managment plans, most often used by sheep, however cattle permits are also issued. Obviously animals do not understand allotments and will cross boundaries, most any day you will see a herder looking for strays. My real question is why can't humans understand boundaries and continually breech the wilderness with bikes, snowmobiles, game carts, after all we do understand plans and restrictions if we dare take the time to learn management schemes. Or is it easier to complain about someone else than learn after all knowledge usuallty limits our use also. We don't have to look any further than ATV abuse to understand this point. It is easier to beg forgiveness from ignorance than take the time to understand and know travel management plans and adhere to them for most folks.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Another good link:
http://www.muledeerworkinggroup.com/Doc ... nes_V2.pdf

Sample from the link: "Domestic sheep and goats have diets very similar to deer 
(forbs and browse) and as such have the potential to seriously reduce forage available to deer (Smith and Julander 1953)."


----------



## Renegade (Sep 11, 2007)

bullsnot said:


> Renegade said:
> 
> 
> > Grazing is crucial to the management of the land. Without it, the hills would be overgrown and you'd be complaining about more fires and lousy browse.
> ...


 I wasn't  But I will now 

The U.S. economic impact of the sheep industry is 1.8 Billion dollars annually. That is for meat, wool, and dairy (never heard of sheep milk).

That's not a lot when you consider our derelict President drops 1.3 trillion in stimulus money that just disappears without doing anything.


----------



## hoghunter011583 (Jul 21, 2008)

Cold Track said:


> Alot of you guys are very ignorrant, and very self centered. Our deer and elk herds are not suffering due to livestock grazing. You guys that live on a 1/4 acre building lot in the city have got it all figured out. By the way bullsnot, the average cow calf operation in the U.S. is 40 head. I believe those guys running 500 are a little bigger than that. This has been beat to death time and time again. Grow up, educate your self, and enjoy the hunting you have and try to improve in a positive way, not by bagging on the men that feed this country. And don't tell me you only eat wild game because you don't. We can go on and on about how we all benefit from farming and ranching and it's a whole lot bigger picture than just a T-bone.


Amen!!! I buy a split quarter of beef about every 20 months and I pay $2.20 per pound. I really love my beef and really have a warm spot in my heart for the cowboy and farmers. I really don't want to see them stepped on more than we already have done in this country!!


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Cold Track said:


> By the way bullsnot, the average cow calf operation in the U.S. is 40 head. I believe those guys running 500 are a little bigger than that.


Thanks for the info but I'm not following what you were trying to say?


----------



## Beast (Apr 4, 2010)

mulepacker said:


> I won't spend a lot of time on this issue. It is obviosly one born out of ignorance. Thanks packout for pointing out that it IS NOT the DWR that regualtes public lands or grazinf permits. In fact the DWR is not any different than the cattlemans association or the sheepmens assocaition. They live within the management parameters set forth by the land manager (i.e. the USFS or BLM for the most part)
> There are long term plans and decisions that regulate wildlife numbers, livestock numbers, resource harvest etc. etc. until you understand the complete puzzle it easy to single out your heartache and moan about it. However, removing your heartache will not always result in your preferred outcome. In many areas if the grass was allowed to grow unharvested, by mid August it would require land closures to limit fire hazards such as wood cutters, recreationist, hunters. So next time you complain because an area has been grazed ask yourself if the area could stand human fire pressure if someone hadn't cut the grass. Next time you sit in your treestand over a pond ask yourself on whose dollar was the pond made on and if it would be there if a stockman hadn't needed it. As far as wilderness they have defined grazing and managment plans, most often used by sheep, however cattle permits are also issued. Obviously animals do not understand allotments and will cross boundaries, most any day you will see a herder looking for strays. My real question is why can't humans understand boundaries and continually breech the wilderness with bikes, snowmobiles, game carts, after all we do understand plans and restrictions if we dare take the time to learn management schemes. Or is it easier to complain about someone else than learn after all knowledge usuallty limits our use also. We don't have to look any further than ATV abuse to understand this point. It is easier to beg forgiveness from ignorance than take the time to understand and know travel management plans and adhere to them for most folks.


+1!


----------



## El Matador (Dec 21, 2007)

In my line of work, I would like to:

1) Hire illegal aliens and pay them $300 per month.
2) Have state employees at my disposal that will kill publicly owned wildlife for my benefit
3) Get ridiculously cheap rent for use of public property
4) Impose upon others who would like to enjoy land that belongs to them

If I set up my construction company by these guidelines I would probably end up in jail. But sheep herders are doing it everywhere and the government is encouraging it. I understand the need for cattle (sheep are a mystery...) and also that grazing is beneficial to a certain extent. The areas I hunt are way over grazed, use illegals to herd, and are always trashed with litter. I don't think grazing should be eliminated but everyone should have to play by the same rules. If your business isn't profitable, you go out of business! If you can't run a legal business that doesn't impose upon others, find something else to do! If you want to herd sheep or cattle, pay your legal employees at least minimum wage and manage your herd responsibly. There is room for livestock and hunters in the forest but I feel that some livestock owners are overstepping their bounds in a big way.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

El Matador said:


> In my line of work, I would like to:
> 
> 1) Hire illegal aliens and pay them $300 per month.
> 2) Have state employees at my disposal that will kill publicly owned wildlife for my benefit
> ...


I am by no means an expert, but my encounters with herders were that they were all here legally. Hint: Just because they speak Spanish or whatever foreign language, does not make them illegal.  :mrgreen: I do agree with your last sentence, there are always those that milk a system, but that goes for any industry including the construction industry which has more illegal immigrants than about any other industry, just thought I would throw that in there. 8) :lol:


----------



## cklspencer (Jun 25, 2009)

> I don't think grazing should be eliminated but everyone should have to play by the same rules. If your business isn't profitable, you go out of business! If you can't run a legal business that doesn't impose upon others, find something else to do! If you want to herd sheep or cattle, pay your legal employees at least minimum wage and manage your herd responsibly. There is room for livestock and hunters in the forest but I feel that some livestock owners are overstepping their bounds in a big way.


How are they not playing by the rules. The rules have been set and most follow them.
If you end grazing on public lands then the cost of your food and some goods will go up. Not only that but they would make a push for the government to sell those public land so they could graze and have the room for their animals and then you would be left without. Most land back east is already privately owned I would hate to see the same thing happen here.
If this issue is all about grazing animals in an area you hunt and that is why you are complaining then go find somewhere else to hunt.

Most cattle herders don't have someone one the mountain 24/7 to watch their cattle. Most herders are there for sheep or goats and if you have spent the time to talk to them and the owners of the live stock you would know that most aren't here illegally. Most aren't Mexican
Go sit around a fire with few of them. Most may not speak much English but are willing to try and talk with you. Take them a beer and see just how much they will tell you about the animals in an area or anywhere a spring or water hole is.

It's multi use land. I hate the fact that some treehuggen bunny kissen azz hole wants to try and end hunting for me without understanding the facts behind it so I won't try and end something for someone else that is allowed on multi use lands out of respect for someone else's reason be it recreation or lively hood to be there.

Something else to think about it the fact that some of these ranchers/farms have help with wildlife projects. It is a relationship between them and us huntersthat should be kept in tacked. We benefit off what they do and they benefit off what we do.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Archaic rules and regulations are sometimes easy to play by, especially when there is huge, subsidized advantages to doing so. Cody's construction analogy is good, IMO. I'll take it a step further; to me, it would be like the government subsidizing lumber prices for contractors and builders by 80% and keeping the subsidy active for a hundred years. Might as well just send them a welfare check every month.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> Archaic rules and regulations are sometimes easy to play by, especially when there is huge, subsidized advantages to doing so. Cody's construction analogy is good, IMO. I'll take it a step further; to me, it would be like the government subsidizing lumber prices for contractors and builders by 80% and keeping the subsidy active for a hundred years. Might as well just send them a welfare check every month.


Some probably do get welfare checks, they don't make much money.  :mrgreen: Like I said there is room for improvements, but the original statement if you remember right was to completely take all livestock off of public land and not allow open grazing on public land. We are talking about multiple use, which is important in my opinion. It is what allows us to hunt, camp, fourwheel, fish, get fire wood, ect.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

I agree. I think the original statement was completely asinine and out of touch.


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

So lets look at a special use permit for grazing for a minute. In the permit it will define how many AUM's I am allowed and a geographic boundary for the use. It will define my cost for each AUM. For most of you it appears you beleive it is that simple and the only cost associated with public grazing. However in the permit it will also define areas of nonuse it will define a plan to curtail and prohibit animals from using that area, thus a need for a herder (cost). Now according to the land management plan it will have specific clauses to fit in that plan. This may be that water sources need to be rehabilitated or developed an additional cost for which I will be responsible. Often times my grazing strategy does not allow me to take advantage of the water source , but it I still do it. It is obvious most of you know when an area is overgrazed , however within each pasture there is a stipulation for what the land manager expects from my grazing. Therefore constant "grass checks" are conducted to make sure I meet the grazing result the land manager wants. Sometimes this means grazing an area to nothing in order to promote rejuvenation. Of course I won't get the rate of gain I need to make a profit on this poor pasture but my permit is to insure the managemnt of the range. Other times I am pushed off a pasture because the grass check says that 12" of grass must be left for wildlife even though it surely would be most proftable if I could stay there. For anyone that believes grazing is simply some poor farmer freeloading I feel sorry for you. If you believe it is the only industry subsidized you need to get out in the world. If i remember right there was just huge subsidy to the housing market, I would guess that trickled down to construction industry. I wish I could pull up in front of Home Depot and pick up a day worker without any questions. Price the special use permits out of the public land management and see how long you have public lands, Afterall I can't remember the last time I saw a construction worker, school teacher, business man working on USFS management plan on their own time and dollar. Taking our land managers out and making sure they know the specifics of a particular forest because they asked. Oh by the way the deisel to get up for the tour is usually on my dollar another cost of the free grazing permits. Take away all the use which requires a fee and see how long it is before the public lands are sold to the highest bidder or there is a toll gate at the entrance of public lands.

I wonder how much it cost me to remove 6 miles of old telephone wire that had been abandend, so cattle and wildlife would not get tangled up in it. Or packing in water troughs to roadless areas so that a seep could be captured and allow wildlife to inhabit the area 12 months a year while cows are there 2-3 weeks each summer. Maybe hunters should start putting there money where there mouth is drop a small fee off at the USFS office each hunting trip to use the public lands and then take 7-14 days out of their life each year to improve the public lands. A good idea would be to start by pulling dyers woad which is known to have an impact on wildlife. Then instead of me taking a couple mules in each summer and spraying for dyers woad I could load them with fishing gear and head to the yellowstone. The way I see it as hunters we are the ones using public lands for free and that surely isn't fair to the guy paying regardelss of how little you think he is paying.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Great post mulepacker, I think many people forget all of the improvements, ponds, troughs, roads and ect. that these free loaders take care of. Great explanation.


----------



## .45 (Sep 21, 2007)

Basque sheepherders is all I've ever run into. Generally polite, even with the language barrier. It's got to be a tough life...


----------



## Beast (Apr 4, 2010)

Its too bad that ranchers and sportsman can't stand united! The ranchers are in a huge fight as it is with John Marvel and the WWP. (Western Watershed Project) Remember the "Cattle free by 93", slogan? This is the same _ _ _ * hole! I think there are bigger problems than cows on public ground. (Wolves). The reason its hard to beat these Environmental groups, is because they stand together. Lets get in a fight with the ranchers now and see what happens when Utah Sportsman decide to fight the wolf lovers. If you can't put cows on public ground, why should they care if the wolf kills off all the wildlife? The reason we put cows on public ground, is called Exchange use. We have a section of ground out there in the checker board, and instead of fencing and Posting it! The BLM said lets keep it open and let everybody benefit!


----------



## TAK (Sep 9, 2007)

.45 said:


> Basque sheepherders is all I've ever run into. Generally polite, even with the language barrier. It's got to be a tough life...


That and Perouvians(sp?) or they may be the same.... Working on the law side of things I have NEVER seen one of them in Jail! Matter of fact a couple of them live not far from me. Last fall I was building a fence and they came over and showed me I needed to go about it different. My wife cooked them up a roast dinner with the fix'ns and they was about the politest people, very thankful!


----------



## twigflipper (Dec 11, 2009)

Talk about all me, public land is for multipule use. "Domestic" Wild Horses should be addressed long before cows and sheep!!! And there are far less illegals on these ranches than you might think!!


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

I'll tell ya what's a pain in the anus. When you set up a camera and elk bait. Next thing you know the **** cows get in and tear up the entire place, and you get 1500 pictures of a cows fat ass. Not an Elk cows fat ass but a moo cows fat ass.

*Disclaimer.* I only read 2 pages before posting this, so if it was already mentioned please take your complaints to my little midget friend Jahan.


----------



## hoghunter011583 (Jul 21, 2008)

El Matador said:


> In my line of work, I would like to:
> 
> 1) Hire illegal aliens and pay them $300 per month.
> 2) Have state employees at my disposal that will kill publicly owned wildlife for my benefit
> ...


I agree, we need to simply inforce the laws on the books, just like nearly every other issue, instead of just outlawing the whole business!! Poper managment is the key!!


----------



## hoghunter011583 (Jul 21, 2008)

jahan said:


> El Matador said:
> 
> 
> > In my line of work, I would like to:
> ...


Yeah so I guess we only have one choice and that is to shut down the cunstruction guys because of the bad things they do!!!


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

Predators!


----------



## hoghunter011583 (Jul 21, 2008)

fixed blade said:


> I'll tell ya what's a pain in the anus. When you set up a camera and elk bait. Next thing you know the **** cows get in and tear up the entire place, and you get 1500 pictures of a cows fat ass. Not an Elk cows **** a moo cows fat ass.
> 
> *Disclaimer.* I only read 2 pages before posting this, so if it was already mentioned please take your complaints to my little midget friend Jahan.


Yeah but should we put a guy out of a job so you can take pictures of you elk??

Look guys I'm from Louisiana and I know what it is like to have ZERO public land and have to hunt WMA's. Imagine all the hunters in Utah having to hunt WMA's!!! You think things are crowded now, take all the national forest away and put us all on little 50,000 acre areas and see what crowded looks like. Let me tell all of you something, stop messing with a good thing!!! I know things aren't perfect and they never will and because of the free rangers you will have things to deal with. However because of the same free rangers you have tons of water holes, trails and better areas to hunt!! I'll deal with having to move unexpectedly when the sheep have come through my areas and still have the other benefits!! They are like the weather, you can hate it or just roll with the punches and find ways to work it to your own benefit. I think instead of jumping on these guys case and fussing, maybe have a sportmans org. get together and work with these guys. I'll go out and help these herders build water holes and troughs!! I think that is the way to approach the problems they are causing!


----------



## Iron Bear (Nov 19, 2008)

I happen to like sheep herders and their cougar killing ways. Also there are many good cattlemen out there that will kill a cat on sight as well.  

Just a reminder 1 cougar kills 50 deer on average per yr. All this fuss on habitat. If deer and elk were anywhere near capacity then we would have huge winter losses and more game down in the farmland causing problems. 

Habitat is a farce. Are cattlemen running less cattle per acre today than in the past? Are they just sitting on the great habitat issue? Hands tied doing insignificant restoration projects and putting up yr after yr with less cattle?


----------

