Rim Neighbor

Mr. Lawrence , Thanks for your input. The Neighbors of the Mogollon Rim are all hunters who seek to preserve the wildlife resources. The members have cabins in the area and have been there long before Mr. Hemovich bought the Bar X. I see that Mr. Hemovich is on the Board of Directors for your organization. You are probably aware that when the Bar X, LLC (of which Mr. Hemovich is a member) bought the Ranch in 2007, it was permitted by the USFS for 130 cow/calf cattle yearlong and grazing in (the now sought after) Colcord pasture was precluded entirely. It was permitted for that amount because the United States Forest Service (USFS) studies conducted in the 1970s documented that the existing permit which allowed for 468 cattle yearlong with yearling progeny for 10 months (468 CYL) adversely affected forest resources which in turn adversely affected wildlife. Here are some quotes from the USFS scientists with respect to the damage done affecting wildlife: · "Extreme overuse of grass and browse on the Bar X and HeberReno Sheep Driveway has severely damaged the wildlife resource. Reduced herbage production, extensive severe erosion, soil compaction, and stream siltation are the results of overgrazing in the area. This damage has resulted in degradation of the quality habitat needed to sustain healthy, diverse wildlife populations."(emphasis added); · "Of the three primary needs of all wildlife species ... food and cover have been the most severely damaged [by overgrazing] ... which has reduced the capability of the land to support viable populations of wildlife species that one would expect to find."(emphasis added); · "Excessive grazing by livestock eliminated cool season grass species in the woodland zone."; · "Wildlife habitat has been damaged significantly by the removal of herbaceous plant cover. The decrease in forage production induced by continuous overgrazing has greatly reduced the required cover for viable populations of game and non-game species of wildlife. The near elimination of cool season grasses from the plant community in the woodland zone by domestic livestock grazing has resulted in habitat without the diversity of plant species needed. The limitation of plant diversity in turn limits the diversity of wildlife species to be found. Deer and cattle are in direct competition for browse. This is especially evident in the pine type, but is also a concern in the lower elevation, woodland areas." (emphasis added); · "Much of the Pine type is delineated as no capacity because of steep slopes (40% +) in conjunction with a lack of forage." (Exh. A at p.9); · "A prolonged history of overstocking and unsatisfactory management has depleted the range resource to a very critical point. Nearly all desirable cool season grasses such as bottle brush, squirrel tail, mutton grass, and western wheatgrass have been eliminated from the plant community. The Pine type is severely depleted of all vegetative groundcover.” As a result of these findings, the USFS closed the Colcord/Turkey Peak and Haigler pastures to grazing in 1979 and drastically reduced the number of cattle the Bar X was permitted to graze on forest lands from the 468 CYL, to 59 CYL. In an environmental assessment conducted in 1985, the USFS documented the benefits to wildlife, noting wildlife habitat "has improved greatly ... Probably the greatest evidence supporting this statement is the renewed presence of elk below the Naegelin Rim, historically an elk winter range." The Forest Service also stated that the abundance of turkey increased throughout the allotment by the reduction in cattle. We are not opposed to the Bar X grazing, we are simply opposed to reopening the Colcord pasture, which has been closed to cattle grazing for 40 years and is predominantly Pine with limited forage. With respect to water, first, the area under the Rim is dotted with springs and seeps and creeks and the wildlife know where it is. Second, the USFS has excluded grazing in the Colcord pasture for 40 years and to our knowledge, the Bar X has not maintained any water facilities in that closed pasture. And third, while water tanks can help the wildlife, especially in a drought, it must be remembered that cattle compete directly with elk and deer for the limited forage. If cattle consume all the forage and drive the wildlife out,then what good does all that water do? With respect to your statement that Mr. Hemovich has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars – I am not sure how much he has personally spent, but I will point out the Bar X has received hundreds of thousands in public grants for projects. (attached). In conclusion, we seek to avoid the devastation of the resources for wildlife in the Colcord pasture that the Forest Service documented in the 1970s based on 468 CYL and therefore are opposed to the current USFS draft EA which proposes up to 552 CYL and which proposes reopening the Colcord pasture under the Mogollon Rim to cattle grazing after a 40 year exclusion. I appreciate your efforts on behalf of mule deer, but we’ll simply have to agree to disagree. When I opened this discussion, the idea was to get people information so their comments, if any (to the June 5, 2019 scoping letter) could be informed by previous USFS studies. I provided access to real scientific studies conducted by the USFS. A discussion based on facts has simply not occurred. Given the hostility of some on this site, I’m not going to add any further public comments. If you’d like to read the Forest Service’s own scientific studies, they can be found at www.rimneighbors.org. Thanks. P.s. - you allege the following: "Your group of environmentalists and “anti’s” are familiar to many Sportsmans organizations, the Gila County ranching community and the USFS, your reputation precedes you." This simply isn't true as this is the only issue that NOMR was founded for and has ever spoken on. BarX-EQIP-contract-042607.pdf PermitMod-fence.pdf

Not surprised at yet again another baselessly screeched accusation by Delw. A guy who aggressively asked for my name, was given it and then hypocritically refused to ever give his own when called upon. I regret having to yet again engage but I was, right out, called a liar and so must respond with documents that demonstrate this guy’s seemingly endless ignorance. For all who are curious and think “maybe this guy Delw is right; Did Nick lie about how they came across the info; Did they not really do the FOIA requests?” – The answer is “Of course not.” Attached is a response from the US Forest Service to one of our many FOIA requests that Delw, so positively, stated I lied about. I don’t have time to sit here and attach all the requests and responses and documents. All the pertinent documents provided with the responses to our requests are on the “Documents” page of our website. It's one thing to be curious and ask questions of people who claim a thing, it is another to ignore all of the evidence they offer and begin name calling and hurling completely fabricated accusations at them. Had he simply asked for proof of how we came about this info. I would have thanked him for his curiosity and provided him with the same response from the Forest Service that I now attach to this comment. I hope those of you that are curious and want to learn more about this subject will check out our website at rimneighbors.org, review the studies and come to your own conclusions as to whether quadrupling cattle grazing in this area of Unit 23 will bring harm to the populations of deer and elk and their environment as it was shown to have done during the 70s. There is nothing else I can say. Doubtless he will have more fabricated accusations, but I refuse to address them any longer. Thank you all for your time. Response of 3-1-16.pdf

Yes. We partnered with Advocates for the West and were successful in getting the Forest Service to at least perform an Environmental Assessment before going forward with reintroduction and increase that was precluded by the operating permit. Now we are in the commenting stage for the Environmental Assessment where people can tell the Forest Service what they think. That is all detailed in the website, and the complaint is also in the documents page. So, to address your earlier post, we did partner with a legitimate wildlife advocacy group. We were successful and we are simply now in a public comment phase. Someone in the forest service will later make a decision as to whether or not these numbers should be allowed and peoples' voices will be heard via their comments they submit.

The three scenarios outlined above are completely fabricated. The slightest amount of research will show that none of these scenarios are in line whatsoever with our position on the issue. I strongly encourage anyone who wants to learn more about this situation to research as much as you care to and you will see very soon that everything this guy is saying is completely without merit. What we are doing is simply in the interests of anyone who wants to enjoy the most prosperous hunting possible in Unit 23, and if after exploring the website, you don't agree, then that's just fine. My intention in creating this thread was to shed light on an issue that is deeply concerning to many yet is not easy to come by on your own. Our website has a trove of unbiased, factual studies that people can research and come to their own conclusions about. Anyone can feel free to reach out to me and I will be happy to provide them with any information I can. Rimneighbors.org.

My name is Nick Dillenburg. I stand by what I say. We are only concerned about Unit 23 and the elk and deer being driven out by an overabundance of cattle. I'd be happy to have discourse with you after you've educated yourself on the subject and read the Forest Service studies that were performed on this allotment. Funny, don't seem to see your name anywhere.

Ha, I can promise you that we have zero aspirations in becoming the next CBD. The group of us working on this is very small and this has sucked up enough time of ours as it is. If you visit our website you will see that we only involve ourselves with Unit 23 and this one Allotment. We concerned ourselves with it because it is where we hunt and recreate. Upon noticing a sudden spike in cattle numbers in the area and seeing them in places where there previously were none, we sent out some FOIA requests to the Forest Service and discovered that the active permits and regulations were not being followed as they should have been. We saw that the number of cattle they now propose is larger than the previous amount they allowed for (in the 70s) on this very same allotment that the Forest Service had demonstrated caused significant harm to the environment and quantity of game animals in the allotment. Since they weren't following proper procedure with regard to reintroduction and and cattle number increases, we decided to form this organization for this one specific purpose of making sure there was a voice to speak for the hunters, fisherman and other recreationists. All information on our website is true and cited obsessively. The information from the Forest Service Studies is readily available to you on the "Documents" page of our website for purposes of validation.

Thank you for letting me know. I am fixing now.

ATTENTION UNIT 23 LOVERS! Many of you know what a great resource Unit 23 is for hunting game such as Elk, Muleys, and Coues. Some of you might even enjoy the fisheries in the unit. In 2007 a local ranch was purchased by a new entity who now seeks to expand the cattle operation by 4 times what was allowed since 1979. Including into an area that the Forest Service had completely closed to grazing back in 1979. Despite what you might have heard about cattle water tanks, any benefit they might provide is outweighed by their direct competition with with deer and elk for the limited forage and browse. Regretfully, this was clearly demonstrated in the Forest Service’s own studies done on this precise Allotment back in the 70s and 80s when their studies showed that the cattle (in smaller numbers than are now proposed for by the current ranch owner) denuded the forest so badly that Elk had left the Naegelin Rim entirely. The deer and elk know where the springs and seeps are. If you want to help preserve Unit 23 from being overgrazed then you can visit our website at Rimneighbors.org. Check out our website and send your comments into the Forest Service. These comments are due by July 23. We do not ask for donations, nor do we get paid to do this in any way. The only payment we get is the possibility of a healthy and diverse ecosystem under the Rim so we can continue to enjoy all the hunting seasons to the fullest. I really hope that you will take the time to look at our website. Not all land is created equal. Cattle ranching is proper in some areas and improper in others. We are not against ranching. We are against overgrazing to the detriment of wildlife resources. The science is on our side. This is not a proper area for the numbers now being sought. Don’t believe us? Read about the Forest Service findings in the 70s and 80s. Their studies are on the “Documents” page of our website. All of the claims made in our synopses and summaries found on our website are cites directly from those studies. This is a serious threat to many game species and all riparian areas in this allotment. I guarantee what you read will shock you. I am a hunter, and I care about wildlife and the health and diversity of this ecosystem. We need all of the voices we can get. Sorry there isn’t much time left to comment but getting all this together has taken time and this is not how any of us involved make our living. Again, our website is Rimneighbors.org