Environmentalists Call for Fair Grazing Fees
chrerick at email.msn.com
Sun Mar 14 15:02:30 EST 1999
The real problem is not the rate at which rate of inflation should prices be
adjusted -- only burocrates worry about such things.
The fact is that our management of public lands is a crazy system which only
a soviet appratik could love. The fact is that some of our largest
corporations receive subsidies from the Federal government, driving down the
price received by small business people (i.e., small timber lot owners and
operators). This underpricing of resources results in over utilization.
The real solution to the problem is to privatize public grazing lands and
Don't believe me. Then do the following thought experiment: Suppose the
stump price of timber was rised, say 10 percent. Would large timber
companies complain: Yes. Would they lobby for privatization of national
forests: No, because they know that a 10 percent increase in stump prices
would still represent a subsidy.
Keep increasing the price of stumpage by small increments. When you hit the
price at which Timber companies start lobbying for privatization and that
would be the true unsubsidized price.
Larry Caldwell wrote in message ...
>In article <9bdf81bd&220.127.116.1190311160900.4507480c at pop2.igc.org>,
>wafcdc at americanlands.org writes:
>> The Interior Department and Department of Agriculture announced that the
>> minimum grazing fee of $1.35 per animal unit would remain in effect this
>> year, for the fourth year in a row. In response, Forest Guardians has
>> demanded that the fees at least be adjusted for inflation, which would
>> them slightly over $5.
>If you adjust for inflation, the grazing fee should be $0.81/AUM, since
>the price of market beef has declined 40% in the last 20 years. That is
>in dollar figures, ignoring the fact that the rancher is being paid in
>inflated dollars that are only worth about half what they were worth 20
>Forest Guardians needs to be honest about what they are trying to
>accomplish. If they want to convert all meat production to factory
>feedlots, they should say so.
More information about the Ag-forst