Parallel Universe, Part Three: When Two Worlds Collide - Ranchers ARE Environmentalists

Parallel Universe, Part Three: When Two Worlds Collide - Ranchers ARE Environmentalists



December 11, 2009



By Julie Kay Smithson, property rights researcher, London, Ohio propertyrights@earthlink.net
http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org and http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com



Some wise person once said that, before you can know where you’re going, you’ve got to know where you’ve been. Historic ranches garner awards, their roots soaking up the fertility of the soil, the lifeblood of judicious water use and the bounty to be had from an eagerness to try new things. From crops to livestock, new ways to grow both may mean trying entirely new concepts. Ranching in the New West means embracing experience while leaving the door open for new techniques. Ranchers put their all into their ranches, and it shows. The line of distinction -- between optimum habitat for people, livestock and wildlife, and poorly managed, or non-managed, federally controlled land – shows who the real stewards of the land and water are: ranchers.


The Purdy Ranch – Picabo, Idaho


Beavers and the Downcut Riparian: Copper Creek, on the 10,000-acre Purdy Ranch has been in the same family since the mid-nineteenth century. About that time, beavers were trapped out for their pelts. By the 1970s, 150 years later, the creek sported the regular symptoms of watershed disease -- soil compaction, sagebrush invasion, intense storm water downcutting. Rancher and conservationist Bud Purdy began a combined, deferred grazing plan (keeping cows out of the riparian during critical times) with seeding and brush control. At first, he tried constructing dams to reduce channel erosion, but 70 percent of them would not hold against flood peaks. Lew Fence (Wood River Conservation and Development Council) and Dale Roberts (Soil Conservation Service) suggested beavers, because beaver dams hold water better than human equivalents, and a colony of beavers build and re-build dams for free (or, at least, for inner bark). The successful results: The water table rose, 33 beaver dams were built in five years, the pool area exceeded 6 acres with correspondingly more wildlife, riparian area, longer flow seasons and some small trout. Noteworthy is the combination of deferred grazing, beavers and the "Beaver Committee," a unique interagency group that transplants "problem" beavers (beavers that chew up semi-rural apple orchards), relocating them to livestock-raising watersheds. The new co-evolution of ranchers and conservationists usually requires new, less formal public/private institutions like the Beaver Committee. – Source: "Co-Evolution of Ranching & Conservation Communities" (excerpt) by Peter Warshall, Originally published in Whole Earth magazine, Issue 90: Summer 1997, Page 70. http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:ANL2ktz5jOMJ:www.questiaschool.com/read/5000483624%3Ftitle%3DCoEvolution%2520of%2520Ranching%2520%2526%2520Conservation%2520Communities+2002+%22Bud+Purdy%22+%22Picabo,+Idaho%22&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&lr=lang_en
On August 20, 2002, Bud Purdy was honored for his efforts to improve grazing land management on privately owned grazing lands by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). NRCS State Conservationist Richard Sims recognized Purdy for his contributions as a member of the National Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative Steering Committee. The USDA Honor Award, which Sims presented to Purdy, is the most prestigious honor bestowed by the Secretary of Agriculture. "The honor award is a tribute to Bud for his commitment to meeting conservation needs of private grazing lands," said Sims. "As a member of the national steering committee, he has volunteered hundreds of hours of his personal time to increase public awareness of the values of the nation’s private grazing lands. His ability to work effectively with all levels of public and private organizations has been critical to the success of the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative. We also value his expertise as a member of the Idaho Grazing Lands Steering Committee." Purdy represents the Society for Range Management on both the national and state Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative steering committees. Source: http://www.id.nrcs.usda.gov/news/newsreleases/idaho_ranch.html


Maddux Cattle Company, Chase County, Nebraska


On October 17, 2009, southwestern Nebraska rancher Jack Maddux, of the Maddux Cattle Company in Chase County, received the 32nd annual Golden Spur Award, naming him the nation's top rancher. '"More than bringing prestige to an individual, the award spotlights the humanistic and scientific contributions of the livestock and ranching industries," says Robert D. Josserand, chairman of the National Cattlemen's Foundation, which nominated Maddux for the award.' Source: Nebraska Farmer, October 26, 2009. http://www.nebraskafarmer.com/story.aspx?s=32593 The ranch, homesteaded in 1886, is very productive, successfully running red Angus 123 years later.


"Great ranches are not made of the dirt, water, wind and grass that comprise their environment. They are formed and sustained by the character of the people attached to them." – Charles P. Schroeder, executive director of the National Cowboy and Western Heritage Museum in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.


The XXX Ranch, Tarrant County, Texas


“I want to assure you that among the cattlemen, there is a great deal of pride and a little competitive spirit to see who can be the best wildlife manager. ... I just wish, very much, that the working environmentalists -- and I guarantee you there is no more dedicated environmentalist than the farmer or rancher who lives on that land, makes his living from it, works with it all year long, year after year, and wants to leave it better than he found it -- were more recognized by the nominal environmentalists, who would rather talk about it than do it. ... Some have blamed greed of early ranchers for degradation of rangelands, when almost invariably it was lack of knowledge that led to decline. The science and art of rangeland management has been developed only in the past 50 years. With this knowledge -- provided by SCS (Soil Conservation Service) technicians through locally governed Soil and Water Conservation Districts, using information developed by federal and state experiment stations and the ranchers and technicians themselves -- dedicated ranchers voluntarily made tremendous strides in brush suppression, grazing management, and restoration of rangelands during the 1940s, 50s, and 60s. Progress has been slowed in the past 20 years by reduced technical assistance available for grazing lands and by the increase of production costs over prices received that has reduced capital available for needed improvements. During recent years, brush encroachment, especially by juniper, has taken over abandoned cropland fields and continued to invade rangelands. ... it is astonishing that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service says that endangered species recovery plans are exempt from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. It is hard to believe that anyone would consider a recovery plan not to be a major federal action, and I hope that policy statement will be carefully investigated by congressional staff for legitimacy.” – Source: Excerpted (pages 84, 85, & 218, from a statement by John L. Merrill, Burnett Ranches; Professor, Texas Christian University; Member of the National Steering Committee for the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative (GLCI). "Full text of 'Department of Agriculture's activities related to the yellow-cheeked warbler: hearing before the Subcommittee on Department Operations and Nutrition of the Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, second session, September 16, 1994, Cleburne, Texas.'" http://www.archive.org/stream/departmentofagri00unit/departmentofagri00unit_djvu.txt It should be noted that John L. "Chip" Merrill had, at that time, directed the ranch management program at TCU for the past 33 years, since 1961, as well as being a past president of the International Society for Range Management, a long-time member of the Wildlife Society, professional member of the Society of American Foresters, and a director of the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association. Though the Internet mentions many accolades he’s received, he prefers to continue learning rather than rest on his considerable laurels, still at the helm of the XXX Ranch in Tarrant County, Texas.


The Adams Ranch, Meade County, Kansas, and Beaver County, Oklahoma


"Biological Control Demonstration Project: Adams Ranch, Meade County, Kansas. The landowners are demonstrating biological control of tamarisk using goats. Approximately 100 head of goats were confined for feeding in a 10-acre plot infested with tamarisk. The project offered much information on appropriate stocking rates, predation, viability, and feeding habits of the goats." – 10-Year Strategic Plan for the Comprehensive Control of Tamarisk and Other Non-Native Phreatophytes. The project continued for a second year, but the goats didn't consume the tamarisk to the point of its demise, and the trial was halted. Source: http://www.kwo.org/Reports%20&%20Publications/Rpt_Tamarisk_10-Year_Plan_FINAL_120805_sm.pdf (Page 19 of 39 pages; 2.98 MB)


"We've been raising cattle on this land since 1890. We have to be good stewards or we'd go out of business. It's not our livelihood; it's our life! We spend thousands of dollars getting rid of noxious weeds and we have more of the desirable grasses." – Rancher Judy Adams.


The Three Circle (000) Livestock LLC – Carbon and Albany Counties, Wyoming


“The 2nd Annual NACD/NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) Olin Sims Conservation Leadership Award was presented to Wyoming rancher Ralph Brokaw on February 3rd, 2009, during the National Association of Conservation Districts (NACD) annual meeting in New Orleans. Brokaw was chosen for his outstanding leadership and service in conserving natural resources. … The Brokaw family ranch, the Three Circle (000) Livestock LLC, located near Arlington, Wyoming, is a testament to his passion for healthy lands. His commitment to natural resource conservation management makes him a leader and example in his community and throughout Wyoming. Bobbie Frank, Executive Director of WACD (Wyoming Association of Conservation Districts), said, “I am sure I speak for all of our Conservation Districts in congratulating Ralph on receiving the Olin Sims Leadership Award. It is a very deserving award for the work Ralph has done for natural resource conservation efforts in Wyoming, the region and at the national level. This award will hold significant meaning to Ralph I am sure, given that it is in memory and honor of his best friend and longtime mentor, Olin Sims.” Established in tribute to the late NACD President, Olin Sims, the award recognizes outstanding conservation leadership at the state and local level. The award is presented annually to an individual, based upon superior service to the conservation community in promoting conservation on private lands. Sims, a rancher from McFadden, Wyoming, lived a life distinguished by years of volunteer service to conservation. “Olin was a true conservationist who was equally committed to practicing conservation and advocating for it,” said NACD President, John Redding. “This award epitomizes the conservation leadership and integrity that was his life and highlights the leadership of other conservationists who assume the mantle of conservation leadership into the future.” Source: http://www.conservewy.com/temp/brokaw.pdf Ralph also received the 2002 Landowner of the Year from the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission for his outstanding commitment to wildlife habitat, including rotational grazing, riparian areas, managed hunting, etc.


Baker Ranches, Inc. – Nevada and Utah


Dean Baker, eastern Nevada rancher and longtime Nevada Cattlemen's Association member -- as well as being on the Board of Directors, the Executive Committee, a Second Vice President, and on various other boards & committees -- was named Nevada’s Outstanding Rancher of the Year in 2003, as well Cattleman of the Year the previous year. Baker Ranches, Inc., run by Dean, his wife, Barbara, and sons Craig, David and Tom, plus veteran buckaroo Lee Whitrock, straddle the Nevada-Utah border. Of its 12,000 acres, 2,000 are in barley, alfalfa and corn, and the ranch also runs about 2,000 head of cattle, and sells high-quality alfalfa hay to California dairies and Las Vegas area horse owners. " ... Nominees for Outstanding Rancher of the Year are evaluated on their conservation planning and resource management objectives, as well as any innovative or unique management practices." Sources: http://www.saveourwildhorse.com/PDF/Blm-Press/BLM2003/Release2004-08-12_Nov-2003.pdf (Page 1 of 7 pages; 80.06 KB) "The U.S. Bureau of Land Management agencies in both Nevada and Utah have honored Dean for his management of grazing allotments on the public domain." – Baker Ranch: A Success Story, March 28, 2005. The Nevada Agricultural Foundation http://www.nvagfoundation.org/NAF/news/article.cfm?id=158

Multi-generational ranch families have always hit the ground running, their dedication helping to feed the world. Ranchers already walk the walk, as evidenced by countless hours of physical and mental work. To talk the talk and explain what they already know so well, is difficult for an independent, self-reliant people, but learning to do so will build a communication bridge that will keep them and their world alive and well for another two hundred years.


“And to protect and care for all His creations, God made ranchers.” – Beverly Merritt, Merritt Ranch, Lincoln County, New Mexico.


1,997 words.



~~~~~


Article citation: "First published in the December 2009 issue of Progressive Rancher Magazine."

Parallel Universe, Part Two: When Two Worlds Collide – Justice and ‘equal access to justice’

Parallel Universe, Part Two: When Two Worlds Collide – Justice and ‘equal access to justice’


By Julie Kay Smithson, property rights researcher, London, Ohio propertyrights@earthlink.net http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org and http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com


Today’s atmosphere of seemingly endless litigation, whose outcomes often shut down resource utilization, requires some study to understand. Are the litigants actually “against” the use of resources on, or access to, federal land, or have they other reasons for filing lawsuits? The answer may surprise some readers. It is important to understand why certain actions are being taken that require property owners and resource users to defend their established, proven practices and methods.

Enabling legislation is defined as legislation that authorizes the State to assess, levy, charge, or otherwise mandate payment from external parties and includes a legally enforceable requirement that those resources be used only for the specific purposes stipulated in the legislation. http://www.oregon.gov/DAS/SCD/SARS/policies/oam/15.85.00.PR.pdf

The methods by which the federal system and other states initially select and then elect or retain judges are varied, yet the explicit or implicit goal of the constitutional provisions and enabling legislation is the same: to create and maintain an independent judiciary as free from political, economic and social pressure as possible so judges can decide cases without those influences. – United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, No. 99-4021 http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/04/994021P.pdf (Page 21 of 89 pages)

Enabling legislation also creates an legal environment in which litigation may be filed in order to correct a wrong or wronged party, clarify a statute that was not easily understood or interpreted, set precedent, etc.

The Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) Summary (5 U.S.C. § 504; 28 U.S.C. § 2412) provides for the award of attorney fees (up to $125 per hour) and other expenses to eligible individuals and small entities that are parties to litigation against the government. An eligible party may receive an award when it prevails over the government, unless the government’s position was "substantially justified" or special circumstances make an award unjust. To recover “fees and other expenses” under the EAJA, a claimant must show that it is a "prevailing party." Parties are considered to be prevailing parties when they have been successful on any significant issue in litigation that achieves some of the benefit the parties sought. A party must also show that the lawsuit was a material factor in bringing about the desired result and the outcome was required by law and was not a gratuitous act by the government. Finally, whether a party is a small entity for purposes of EAJA is determined by a unique size standard included in the act. Compliance with the size standard is a threshold requirement for an award of fees under the act. – Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy http://www.sba.gov/advo/laws/sum_eaja.html

In 1980, Congress enacted the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) in response to the federal government's growing demand for data from small businesses, individuals, and state and local governments, and attempted to institute controls over government requests for data. – 44 U.S.C. § 3501. http://library.findlaw.com/2003/Jan/14/132464.html

The Information Quality Act (IQA), called the Data Quality Act (DQA) by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), is an attempt by Congress to ensure that federal agencies use and disseminate accurate information. The DQA requires federal agencies to issue information quality guidelines ensuring the quality, utility, objectivity and integrity of information that they disseminate and provide mechanisms for affected persons to correct such information. … Questions that remain unanswered about the Data Quality Act are whether agency information quality guidelines apply to rulemaking and whether an agency's denial of a petition to correct information is reviewable by the courts. … Purpose of the Data Quality Act: Congress enacted the DQA primarily in response to increased use of the Internet, which gives agencies the ability to communicate information easily and quickly to a large audience. Under the DQA, federal agencies must ensure that the information it disseminates meets certain quality standards. Congress' intent was to prevent the harm that can occur when government websites, which are easily and often accessed by the public, disseminate inaccurate information. … Quality of Information: First, the agencies were to adopt a basic standard of quality of information as a performance goal, as well as specific standards of quality appropriate for the various categories of information they disseminate. 67 F.R. at 8459. Each agency was required to publish its own guidelines in the Federal Register as well as on the agency's website. Id. In addition, each agency promulgated guidelines that can be found on OMB's website. See http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/agency_info_quality_links.html and http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/omb/inforeg/2007_cb/2007_draft_cb_report.pdf (103 pages; 735.20 KB) http://library.findlaw.com/2003/Jan/14/132464.html

31 U.S.C.§ 1304 – US CODE, Title 31, 1304: Judgments, awards, and compromise settlements. (a) Necessary amounts are appropriated to pay final judgments, awards, compromise settlements, and interest and costs specified in the judgments or otherwise authorized by law when— (1) payment is not otherwise provided for; (2) payment is certified by the Secretary of the Treasury; and (3) the judgment, award, or settlement is payable— (A) under section 2414, 2517, 2672, or 2677 of title 28; (B) under section 3723 of this title; (C) under a decision of a board of contract appeals; or (D) in excess of an amount payable from the appropriations of an agency for a meritorious claim under section 2733 or 2734 of title 10, section 715 of title 32, or section 203 of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (42 U.S.C. 2473). (b) (1) Interest may be paid from the appropriation made by this section— (A) on a judgment of a district court, only when the judgment becomes final after review on appeal or petition by the United States Government, and then only from the date of filing of the transcript of the judgment with the Secretary of the Treasury through the day before the date of the mandate of affirmance; or (B) on a judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or the United States Court of Federal Claims under section 2516 (b) of title 28, only from the date of filing of the transcript of the judgment with the Secretary of the Treasury through the day before the date of the mandate of affirmance. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/31/usc_sec_31_00001304----000-.html

The Financial Management Service (FMS) is a bureau of the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Treasury’s role is to “oversee” the use of this appropriation. http://www.fms.treas.gov/judgefund/background.html "The Judgment Fund is available for court judgments and Justice Department compromise settlements of actual or imminent lawsuits against the government." – Overview: Judgment Fund: Programs and Systems: Financial Management Service http://www.fms.treas.gov/judgefund/index.html judgment.fund@fms.treas.gov or 866-277-1046

Because Congress has not articulated a specific standard of adequacy to support a fee application, but has noted that reimbursement of fees and expenses is made in lieu of the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), the Financial Management Service (FMS) will use EAJA as a guideline for determining the adequacy of applications for reimbursement under this legislation. Generally, applicants should submit an affidavit establishing (1) the attorney's hourly fee rate and how it was determined; and (2) include an itemized statement containing the amount of time spent working on specific tasks and (3) and itemized list of other expenses or costs.

The basic policy of FOIA is one of disclosure. Accordingly, FMS will assume that any information submitted as part of an application for fees and expenses is subject to disclosure. However, FMS will consider an applicant's request that certain material not be disclosed.
http://fms.treas.gov/judgefund/questions_108-007.html

The Western Watersheds Project, a self-described “non-profit conservation group,” is but one example of those organizations engaged in what, at first blush, appear to be valid “environmental” concerns. The WWP and a bevy of like-mined partners -- “ … the Oregon Natural Desert Association in Oregon, Forest Guardians in New Mexico, the Center for Biological Diversity in Arizona, the American Lands Alliance in Washington, D.C.; and the Larch Company in Ashland, Oregon” -- operates what seems to be a selfless campaign for good. “With these groups WWP co-founded the National Public Lands Grazing Campaign that supports federal legislation for a generous and voluntary federal grazing permit buyout program to compensate ranchers and restore public lands. Congressman Raul Grijalva of Arizona sponsors that legislation. WWP’s long-term partner in our efforts to bring the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service into compliance with national environmental laws is the non-profit environmental law firm Advocates For The West in Boise, Idaho.”

The WWP makes statements like: "Through vigorous litigation under the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act and Federal Land Policy Management Act, WWP has successfully challenged public-lands grazing practices that threaten watersheds and endangered species such as salmon, steelhead and bull trout." http://www.westernwatersheds.org/about

In the past decade alone, WWP has received, through Equal Access to Justice Act provisions, just short of one million dollars. Source: Budd-Falen Law Offices, LLC, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

The commissioners of Owyhee County, Idaho, bravely stood up and questioned U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2004. After more than a year, their reply seemed to put to rest any need to list the sage grouse or protect its habitat from grazing:

"Mr. Hal Tolmie, Chairman of the Board, Owyhee County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 128, Murphy, Idaho 83650-0128. Dear Chairman Tolmie: On June 21, 2004, the Owyhee County Board of Commissioners filed a request for correction of information (RFC) [emphasis added] under Section 5 15 of Public Law 106-554, commonly referred to as the Information Quality Act (IQA), with our Wyoming Ecological Services Field Office in regards to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) 90-day Finding for Petitions to list the greater sage grouse as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), published April 21, 2003 (69 FR, No. 77). In that notice, we announced that there was substantial information available to initiate a status review of the species and asked the public to submit any pertinent information concerning the status of or threats to this species. On December 2, 2004, you were notified that the Service needed additional time to respond to your request. Subsequently, the service published a final rule in the Federal Register (70 FR 2279), that the petitioned action to list the greater sage-grouse was not warranted, that the species is not in danger of extinction, nor is it likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future. [Emphasis added] The data quality issues you raised in your IQA resulted in additional review and we believe our response addressed them affirmatively. We believe the issues you raised were addressed in the final rule, and unless you feel that they were not adequately addressed, we will not be providing a separate response.” Sincerely, Thomas O. Melius, Assistant Director, External Affairs" – July 18, 2005, [U.S. Fish & Wildlife] Service response on letterhead with Washington, D.C., address. http://www.fws.gov/informationquality/topics/FY2004/Owyhee%20Sage%20Grouse/Response%2018%20July%202005.pdf (1 page; 86.66 KB)

Oftentimes, litigious parties seem more interested in what amounts to the “litigate free” sections of the Equal Access to Justice Act than the actual stated purpose of the lawsuits. If it were as costly for the plaintiffs as it was for the defendants in these cases, most such arbitrary and capricious litigation would come to an abrupt halt. Change in or repeal of this act would bring much-needed relief to American taxpayers without harm to any species.

After reading Part One of this article series, Ohioan G.L. Kronk observed of ranchers: “They have the common sense to rotate their crop, because cattle are a crop.” This is a powerful comment, coming from someone who neither farms nor ranches. The public, every member of which is a consumer, needs to see itself as the direct and active beneficiary of the responsible utilization of natural resources. An educated consumer does not advocate locking up natural resources, but supports production of resources for the mutual benefit of people, animals that are grown for human consumption and those that benefit from the presence of people. “The environment,” deprived of human touch, stewardship and ingenuity, loses its vibrancy, its ability to benefit others and its “reason for being.”


Part Three unites positive change, public action and ranchers.


~~~~~


Article citation: "First published in the October/November 2009 issue of Progressive Rancher Magazine."

Parallel Universe, Part One: When Two Worlds Collide – Ranching and Litigation

Parallel Universe, Part One: When Two Worlds Collide – Ranching and Litigation


By Julie Kay Smithson, property rights researcher, London, Ohio propertyrights@earthlink.net http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org


Today’s ranchers raise beef that is leaner, grown with an eye toward both responsible grazing techniques and health-conscious consumers. Unlike America’s east, where private property is in the majority of land ownership, the federal government owns vast areas in the American west. Ranchers own grazing permits on federal lands. Modern ranching has become complex. Ranching practices must be leaner and greener in order to be environmentally responsible and profitable.

The West and its federal, or “public,” lands, is no exception.

Under the Taylor Grazing Act, the first grazing district to be established was Wyoming Grazing District Number 1 on March 23, 1935. Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes created a Division of Grazing within the Department to administer the grazing districts; this division later became the U.S. Grazing Service and was headquartered in Salt Lake City. [1]

The Continental Congress, through the "Land Ordinance of 1785," adopted a “Rectangular Survey System” on May 20, 1785, which defines the public lands by Township, Range and Section, modified by the Act of May 18, 1796, and other subsequent Acts into the recognizable cadastral survey system of today. Originally established by Congress in 1812 under the Treasury Department as the “General Land Office.” The GLO, among other things, was responsible for the surveys of the public lands. Successor to the GLO emerged when the consolidation of the GLO and the Grazing Service occurred on July 16, 1946, creating the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). [2]

In today’s world, being savvy about definitions and laws is vital to running a business. It is also of paramount importance to those whose custom and culture, work and lifestyles, carry the indelible stamp of resource providing: America’s farmers, commercial fishermen, miners, ranchers, and timber growers and harvesters. The saying, “If it can’t be grown, it must be mined,” is true. Food and fiber grown in America is necessary for the health of our nation. Responsible resource utilization encompasses not only the ability to extract or harvest resources, but also the keen, ever-learning manner in which those resources are brought from source to consumer.

Twenty-first century resource providers never leave the classroom – they are constantly in pursuit of new and better ways to both protect the natural environment and provide products that are skillfully grown/raised to be healthful. The old days of just “being” a rancher, farmer, logger, miner, or fisherman, are, as they say, “history.” Today’s history is being written by those dedicated to making a positive contribution to the earth and its people. Such dedication requires a willingness to learn that goes far beyond the confines of learning institutions, one that also respects the science that is ever evolving from those places.

Today’s holders of grazing permits in the West must keep in mind that new ways of grazing mean everything from riparian restoration to making sure livestock don’t tarry too long at any one watering or grazing location.

Grazing allotments carry specific restrictions, including the number of AUMs (Animal Unit Months) that may be on each grazing allotment. One AUM means the amount of forage needed to sustain one cow, five sheep, or five goats for a month. A full AUMs fee is charged for each month of grazing by adult animals if the grazing animal (1) is weaned, (2) is 6 months old or older when entering public land, or (3) will become 12 months old during the period of use. For fee purposes, an AUM is the amount of forage used by five weaned or adult sheep or goats or one cow, bull, steer, heifer, horse, or mule. The term AUM is commonly used in three ways: (1) stocking rate as in X acres per AUM, (b) forage allocation as in X AUMs in allotment A, and (3) utilization as in X AUMs consumed from Unit B. [3]

Livestock grazing requires that land be rested. Rest means the absence of grazing by livestock to benefit plants for regrowth between grazing periods, for critical periods of plant growth and development, or for critical periods of plant establishment. [4]

Today’s ranchers win awards for their stewardship that prove their actions. These men and women also place a high value on wildlife and wildfowl, for protecting habitat means everyone wins. Ranch hands know when to steer clear of areas known to be in use by nesting birds or denning wildlife. They steward these places and keep a close eye on things that they know to report to the ranch boss/headquarters.

"The good thing about it is that good cattle country is also good sage-grouse country,” stated John Dahlke, founder, Wyoming Wildlife Consultants, LLC, Pinedale, Wyoming.

The multiple use of federal land is synonymous with the ability to access that land. The land, and its plant and animal life, is made more delicate by the sparseness of precipitation. Annual rainfall that would fall in just one season, “back East,” is all there is for the entire year. In times of drought, there may be many months in a row when negligible or no rain falls. Maintaining and caring for land, water, livestock, and wildlife, becomes more of a science than a job at those times – but it also requires ranchers to keep an eye on the horizon, never taking one drop of moisture for granted and making sure that their animals don’t overstay their welcome in any one location.

Range management has become a well-attended college course, a science in its own right. Ranches and farms now earn many of the awards once handed only to self-proclaimed environmental organizations. The “great wrinkled ranges” of the West may still look the same from the air, as they have come to be called “flyover country” – but they have come to be tended by far more knowledgeable hands and minds.

The U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management manages livestock grazing on about 160 million acres, having stewardship responsibilities for nearly two thirds of all public rangelands. [5]

The Bureau of Land Management does not make an annual national “count” of the livestock that graze on BLM-managed lands, because the actual number of livestock grazing on public lands on any single day varies throughout the year and livestock are often moved from one grazing allotment to another. So an aggregate head count would provide very little information on overall livestock use. Instead, the BLM compiles information on the number of AUMs used each year, which takes into account both the number of livestock and the amount of time they spend on public lands. … Over time there has been a gradual decrease in the amount of grazing use authorized by the BLM, and that trend continues today. Authorized (as distinguished from actual) grazing use on public lands has declined from about 22 million AUMs in 1941 to 12.5 million AUMs authorized in 2008. In most years, the actual use of forage is less than the potential amount available for use because forage amounts and demands depend on several factors, such as drought, wildfire, and market conditions, as noted earlier regarding annual public land grazing levels. In 2008, the number of AUMs actually used on BLM-managed land was 8.6 million. [6]

Enter the “Western Watersheds Project.” Against the responsible, award-winning grazing of livestock in harmony with nature on federal lands by ranchers, the WWP boasts: "WWP manages the 432-acre the Greenfire Preserve on the East Fork of the Salmon River in Central Idaho. The Preserve incorporates more than 1.25 miles of the East Fork, which provides critical habitat for Chinook salmon, steelhead and bull trout all listed under the Endangered Species Act. The preserve also provides winter habitat for 150 elk, over 2,000 whitetail and mule deer, wolves and the remnant White Cloud herd of Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep. The Preserve also provides year-round habitat for a wild horse band of sixteen horses. Since WWP began management of the property, more than 50,000 acres of public-lands grazing allotments associated with the Preserve have been closed to livestock grazing. Peregrine falcons, bobcats, spotted bats and wolf packs have replaced cattle. WWP's management program for Greenfire includes an extensive restoration project funded in part by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency." [7]

“Advocates for the West” filed a lawsuit, Case No. 08-cv-435, against the U.S. Department of the Interior and its agency, the Bureau of Land Management, on behalf of the WWP. 08-cv-435 seeks to stop all public lands grazing “…within the habitat of the Great Basin core population of greater sage-grouse in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and its implementing regulations, and the Clean Water Act.” This allegation, in the form of sixty-nine pages and numerous claims “for relief” by the WWP, “…covers a five state region of southern Idaho, northern Nevada, southern Oregon, eastern California, and western Utah.” The lawsuit accuses the DOI and BLM of refusing to acknowledge “ … that their grazing, vegetation treatment, energy development and other management actions are, in fact, contributing to the loss and fragmentation of greater sage-grouse populations and habitat across the Great Basin.”

WWP makes nebulous and non-factual allegations, like: “Livestock grazing is also pervasive across the Great Basin. Domestic livestock are exotic or alien species to this landscape, and have exacted a terrible toll on the ecological health of the Great Basin. Bred for the cooler and moister conditions of northern Europe, domestic livestock are poorly adapted for the hot dry summers and long cold winters of the Great Basin. Livestock thus tend to congregate around water sources and shady areas during hot periods, causing severe damage to streams, springs, seeps, and wet meadows – habitats that are critical for survival and reproduction of many native wildlife species, including sage-grouse.”

The following map shows the scope and intent of current litigation by groups such as the WWP:

http://westernwatersheds.org/species/sage-grouse/images/sg_rmp_scope.jpg

The map [8] suggests that sage-grouse habitat is very limited, with connectivity through narrow bands (green). The map is questionable, since sage-grouse range is actually far more widespread. There is a difference between “habitat” and “range.” Range refers to: 1. The geographic range is the entire area where a species is known to occur or to have occurred (historical range). The range of a species may be continuous, or it may have unoccupied gaps between populations (discontinuous distribution). 2. Some populations, or the entire species, may have different seasonal ranges. These may be overlapping, or they may be widely separated with intervening areas that are, at most, briefly occupied during passage on relatively narrow migration routes. 3. Home range refers to the local area that an individual or group uses for a long period of life. [9] Habitat means the particular type of place where an organism lives within a more extensive area or range. … characterized by its biological components and/or physical features. [10]

Livestock grazing can result in impacts on public land resources, but well-managed grazing provides numerous environmental benefits as well. For example, while livestock grazing can lead to increases in some invasive species, well-managed grazing can be used to manage vegetation. Intensively managed "targeted" grazing can control some invasive plant species or reduce the fuels that contribute to severe wildfires. Besides providing such traditional products as meat and fiber, well-managed rangelands and other private ranch lands support healthy watersheds, carbon sequestration, recreational opportunities, and wildlife habitat. Livestock grazing on public lands helps maintain the private ranches that, in turn, preserve the open spaces that have helped write the West's history and will continue to shape this region's character in the years to come. [11]

[1] http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/grazing.1.html

[2] http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/prog/more_programs/geographic_sciences.print.html

[3] BLM Rangeland Program Glossary http://www.nv.blm.gov/range/Glossary.htm

[4] The National Range and Pasture Handbook Glossary ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/GLTI/technical/publications/nrph/nrph-glossery.pdf

[5] Hope on the Range, Final Script, January 16, 2009: http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/Planning_and_Renewable_Resources/grazing.Par.88671.File.dat/Hope_on_the_Range_script.pdf (4 pages; 132.81 KB)

[6] http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/grazing.1.html

[7] http://www.westernwatersheds.org/wwpinfo/aboutwwp.html

[8] http://westernwatersheds.org/species/sage-grouse/images/sg_rmp_scope.jpg

[9] http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/websites/www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/habitatprotection/eis/Full%20Gulf%20EFH%20EIS%20703.PDF December 15, 2004 (page 12 of 654 pages; 5.22 MB)

[10] Ibid. Page 10

[11] http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/grazing.1.html

~~~~~

Part Two will explore the reasons litigation has become pervasive.

~~~~~

Article citation: "First published in the August/September 2009 issue of Progressive Rancher Magazine."



Also posted at these Internet locations:



Western Institute for Study of the Environment:

http://westinstenv.org/wildpeop/2009/08/07/parallel-universe-part-one-when-two-worlds-collide-%E2%80%93-ranching-and-litigation/

Klamath Bucket Brigade:

http://www.klamathbucketbrigade.org/Smithson_ParallelUniverse080709.htm

Klamath Basin Crisis:
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=153941;article=40112;title=Our%20Klamath%20Basin%20Water%20Crisis

Who loves ya, baby? What sage grouse really need & want

Who loves ya, baby? What sage grouse really need and want




August 11, 2009




By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net




I believe to my very core that responsible ranchers should never apologize for the many things they are doing right. Having driven many of the most rural roads of Nevada, Idaho, Utah, Oregon, New Mexico, Colorado, etc., I have witnessed evidence of the caring these strong families have poured into these places. If anything, they must be even more dedicated to these places than the farmers of the East, because forgiving weather conditions seldom happen in the West.

It is very important to me that my research be distilled into something that offers a means for those whose very lives and multi-generational family legacies, to understand the ways in which language has been used very effectively (until now) to put them out of business and off the land.

It is something considered by very few until now -- that words on paper could be such a powerful tool when employed against their honest blood, sweat and tears equity.

The sage grouse is far more important and precious to ranchers than most of them can even put into words, because it is a species that validates their reasons for getting into ranching in the first place: to make land and water burst with abundance in the form of, not only healthy cattle ranging the West, but also the inherent beauty of the arid places in America being helped, not hurt, by men with hope in their hearts and families, too.

The sage grouse is not the only one with an historic range, a mating dance, and the bond of family and offspring. So, too, it is with the ranchers and their families sprinkled across these wide-open places with strange-sounding names that keep calling, calling those whose devotion is evidenced in streams with green along their courses. Men, women and their children still make it their life's work to be part of the abundance, a help to the flora and fauna, a foundation upon which the deer and the antelope may not only play, but may also thrive.

Unkempt places, locked down and shut down, bear silent witness to lack of stewardship. One need look no further than the difference between a working ranch where Westerners show their love in ways not seen by most, but where a quiet pride exists every corner -- and one where the land is blowin' in the wind.

Water rights, grazing rights, property rights -- these rights are never taken for granted by ranchers, who are the real environmentalists.

Just as Patrick Henry remains a building block of America with his soul-stirring words, as powerful today as they were on March 23, 1775 -- "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me: Give me liberty or give me death!" Read his entire impassioned speech here: http://libertyonline.hypermall.com/henry-liberty.html -- so, too, our western neighbors hold true to the building blocks that feed our bodies good, healthful meat, and feed our souls the vast beauties of the places they call home, thereby keeping us free in this God-beloved land of America!



529 words.

Also posted on the Internet here:

http://www.klamathbucketbrigade.org/Smithson_Wholovesyababy081209.htm