Environmentalists Call for Fair Grazing Fees

Peter G Harrison pgharr at PEG.APC.ORG
Tue Mar 16 21:32:27 EST 1999


How do you know? Were you there?
-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Zorzin <redoak at forestmeister.com>
To: ag-forst at net.bio.net <ag-forst at net.bio.net>
Date: Tuesday, 16 March 1999 21:29
Subject: Re: Environmentalists Call for Fair Grazing Fees


>Peter G Harrison wrote:
>>
>> This assumes that you can produce vegetable protein from the actual piece
of
>> land.  In many areas it is not feasible - practical and technical and
>> economic so grazing is still a sound land use policy for many areas.
>
>Fine. But not in mountain forests.
>
>>
>> Yes, the land condition must be maintained.
>>
>> This sounds like a lot of pretty ignorant foresters sounding off about a
>> subject of which they seem to know little.  Some sound reasoned debate by
a
>> few range management professionals may be more illuminating.
>
>So who made you so smart? Did you ever watch a cow walk through forest
>land? Their hooves dig up the ground. Who needs them in the forest? It's
>*&^%$ idiotic. I never said anything about cows on the RANGE. Since when
>are mountain forests RANGE land?
>
>>
>> There is probably no one answer - and yes recreation is damaging the
>> rangeland / forest / beach etc in many places - if over used.  But how do
>> you stop / restrict the damage to low limits consistent with access ?  It
is
>> always a balancing act.
>
>Get them out of the forests, and the problem is solved. It's nothing but
>a subsidy, welfare. It's OK to smash welfare for poor urban people, but
>not for these white ranchers in states with excessively powerful
>Senators on those select committees?
>
>>
>> Security of access for ranchers / graziers to an area where they have a
long
>> term interest in preserving the range quality may [ not always] help.
There
>> are also considerations of issues such as fire management, where grazing
for
>> example may be a very desirable management practice.
>
>There is a difference between RANGE and mountain forests. Mountain
>forests are NOT range land. And speaking of RANGE, everyone already
>knows the massive damage our range land have received from cattle. Much
>of America's range land is very inferior to what it was centuries ago.
>
>




More information about the Ag-forst mailing list