Livestock Grazing

[patrick15]

Have you noticed how nice the perrenial grass has recovered after most of the cattle were taken off the Tonto for the past two years? Timber Camp for example. Its never looked this good.

After watching the habitat improve, I have noticed much more mule deer and whitetail in these places. I sat and watched turkey stripping seeds of a side oats gramma grass and hunted mearns quail in 24A!

Mearns rely entirely on perrenial grasses to survive. Cows have completely denuded the perrenials from most of the flat areas in 24a permanently and these grasses are the first to be eaten by cows. Not to mention the forbs does need to produce fawns in the early spring and the winter browse needed in the winter.

Have you noticed that most every spring in the desert is a water trough for cows! They completely denude the riparian veg that holds in the water and let the cows suck it dry...then they turn it off when the cows arent in the pasture.

The only thing keeping cows off right now is the current high price. The Tonto is going to let the ranchers put hundereds each back on and the drought is far from over.

These ranchers pay almost nothing to graze their cattle on public land and take forage away from wildlife! Not to mention closing access and chasing people off "their" public land.

Sportsmen should be more aware of how livestock effects deer habitat. It makes me angry and hunters should be upset.

and...dont say...its their way of life and they deserve it! Please. Its just a tax write off for them and the taxpayers pay the high price of range management and depleted resources. Very few of them live off their ranches. Most have full time jobs and let the cows manage themselves. Lots of them in 24A are very wealthy from other businesses and dont need to graze on public land anyway.

Thanks,

 

Patrick

[wklman]

patrick,

 

you seem to forget that without ranchers you'd have unbridled development of lands that are now protecting habitat and wildlife from urban sprawl.I know of at least 4 ranches that have sold there land to developers because dealing with environmentalists,government agencies and people like you have got them sick of it all. ranchers are stewards of the lands, keeping water in drinkers and tanks during the droughts so that wildlife and cattle both have water.they're not all rich either. I know of one rancher in southern AZ who had to sell out because his father died and the IRS told him he had to pay tax on the estate left to him which amounted to hundreds of thousands of dollars. the ranchers also have to go by guidelines that the forest service sets as to how much cattle can graze on an alotment so your anger should be sent to the forest service and not at ranchers.

 

 

wade

[Buckhorn]

Patrick,

 

I come from a cattle family and worked for the forest service as a range conservationist and can't believe what i'm reading. Wildlife as you and everybody else in AZ knows it couldn't and wouldn't be any where near what it is today without the ranching system of the old. I think you and alot of people have been sucked into believing that ranchers are taking every thing they can get; and it's just not so. We could get into first, second and third bite info and what it all means to wildlife but I need to settle down and and control my thought before i say something i should. i do however believe that you should read -up on it before making a comment like that.

 

Buckhorn

[fatfootdoc]

Patrick,

Tree Huggers R US called and your yearly dues are paid in full, they also would like you to run for president

Holy misguided comments. Without ranchers and the improvements they make the wildlife would be in TROUBLE!!! Watch what happens in most ranges that carry cattle and then have them removed and lose the land stewardship that goes with it. With in a few years most of the big game is gone and there goes your hunting spot! Those ranchers are what make much of AZ and NM huntable, if they want to block some of their land I will respect that and still thank them for the improvements that they have made.

[patrick15]

You guys have watched way too many cowboy movies. .

First of all, I am hardly a tree hugger and I am very well read on range conservation and ecology issues.

Second, your argument on unbridled development is unfounded. In Gila County, tell me where there are huge blocks of private land to turn into subdivisions. These are small private inholdings in the middle of forest land. If they were developed, then it would be the same...people living in a house or two ...but not grazing cattle. Also, conservation groups have been trying to buy base property so the range associated with it doesnt have to be grazed and forest service rules prohibit it. If these rules were changed...there could be improved wildlife habitat without the ranchers ruining the health of the land and receiving subsidies from your tax money.

Thirdly, what range improvements are you talking about? The ranchers around here shut off all their water during the entire time their cattle were not in the pastures...despite the fact that they sucked the springs dry for their cattle and the water that would have been available for wildlife in a natural setting is now gone.

Wells and other water catchments could and have been developed by others besides ranchers. How many improvements have you seen lately that have been maintained?? how many even work? how many tanks have water in them? How many fences do you want to climb over?

You tell me to read???? Go out and look how livestock denude an area of native grasses and nutritous forbs. Seen Seven Mile valley lately? It was seeded for non-native lovegrass for cattle and now its the only thing growing....cows dont even eat it let alone deer. It looks atrocious even after the rainy winter.

Hunters are way behind the times if they dont think grazing negatively effects wildlife. If you dont believe me...pick up a range ecology book, learn your plants, learn wildlife forage species, and have a look.

and yes....most are rich or work a full time job...with very few exceptions.

[patrick15]

oh and...you say the big game would disappear if cattle were removed? the stewardship would disappear? What stewardship? What exactly would happen? The diversity and amount of forage would choke deer to death? The compacted soil would spring loose and poke elk's eyes out?

[kwp]

I have to agree with wklman, Buckhorn, and fatfootdoc on this one, where would our wildlife be today without cattleman. How many deer would have actually survived the drought of the last two decades if it weren't for ranchers

 

Sure, as in any group of people, there are some bad ones that often get more publicity than the good ones that quietly work as hard as anyone to take care of the land.

 

Where my brother and I hunt coues there is little to no natural water during the driest times yet the deer population is through the roof (we see on average 80-120 deer everyday even in the summer when it is hot as heck) There are multiple springs (both gravity fed and pump fed) that the rancher still upkeeps even though there has not been a single cow on his allotment for over ten years.

 

Ungrazed grass has the ability to take over. On the Audobon ranch near Sonoita, the environmentalists that run it stopped grazing over 15 years ago and the grass is so thick and tall that the antelope herd, which is struggling to survive, has completely left. The thick grass won't even allow any of the forbs to grow that antelope like. The environmentalists are actually thinking about grazing it just to see if it will bring back the forbs and antelope.

 

Don't even get me started on the unreal amount of predator control that ranchers do!

[billrquimby]

What both sides are saying here is nothing new.

 

Governor Jack Williams gave me his Conservation Communicator's Award in 1973 for using my newspaper columns to expose the horrible overgrazing of the Kofa and Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuges. Members of my family were cattlemen in the past, however, and I have no problems with grazing on public lands when it is properly managed.

 

Many cattlemen have done good things for wildlife, but the ultimate responsibility for stewardship of our lands is entirely the land management agency's responsibility. Thirty years ago there were no wildlife specialists for Forest Service and BLM lands, and no money for habitat improvement work to benefit wildlife. That's changed. The land management agencies, by and large, are no longer dominated by livestock groups.

 

If you have a problem with an area you feel is being trampled by cows, or if you want to praise someone for good stewardship, write the land management agency and your Congressmen.

 

Bill

[Kilimanjaro]

I will have to split my sides on this one. Patrick, I whole-heartedly agree with you that a majority of ranchers these days do not run cattle on their land out of necessity.. they run livestock for the tax exemptions.. I'M NOT SAYING ALL OF THEM, but alot do just that. The quail hunter side of me really gets pissed off when I hunt a canyon one year that is full to the brim with Mearns, only to go in the next year and find that not even a goat couldn't even scrape out a living in there after the cows had their way.. that is range manegment in the worst of ways... I've seen it time and time again down in the San Rafael valley.. Grazed into a parking lot.....

 

No the other hand, ranchers who truely care about their piece of land and the land they have rights on, are true stewards to the land and ALL the wildlife that calls that habitat home. They contribute more to the land and the animals who are native to it than almost anyone.. Water, supplimental food ( oat fields, food plots etc) ,winter range, shelter from a barrage of hunters on public land, perdator control, etc......

 

I think that this issue just comes down to the simple fact of the person with the grazing rights giving a crap.. it's a simple matter of personal peference towards ALL wildlife. Some people have different views on whats right and whats wrong..

 

By no means do I think that I am an expert in this field, but I did take ALOT of range management classes while getting my wildlife management degree back in TX. I did learn this...Grazing affects ALL aspects of the landscape and the condition in which the land was originally..it affects it now and will continue to do so down the road..

 

BTW, I do know that TX and AZ are very different when it comes to this matter !!!

 

I just wish all the parking lot makers here in Southern AZ would learn an old saying about Mearns ... " Take a third, and leave a bird"...

Most hear " Take more than half to make more on my calf"..... Nothing good comes out of it when this is the case. Too bad I see it alot out here..

 

Remember, ranchers are all different.. Some truely do do it for a living and care and are doing more to help than you or I could ever do, and some, well... we all know what some of them do. Money talks.

 

So, I agree AND disagree with both sides!!! Does that make any sense, or does that cancel my opinion out???

 

Oh yeah, if ya don't believe me about some of them not caring at all, here's a pic from last week...

Good grazing practices vs. not-so-good grazing practices... You tell me which is better for the wildlife. The proof's in the pudding....

[DesertBull]

I am not against ranching at all, it's a tradition that is sadly going away and I hate to see it, but that doesn't mean that it is all good.

[fatfootdoc]

Ok Ok, I agree whole heartedly with the fact that the ranchers have to give a crap. but I know that the areas that I hunt in the Chiricuahas are only in as good as shape as they are in because the rancher takes care of it. The only water in the canyons we hunt is from his catchtanks and gravity drinkers. I have seen some instances of overgrazing but mostly I have seen the good that the ranchers do. So just like real life there are the good and the bad. Oh and none of the ranchers I know here in NM are what you would call rich. Must be easier to ranch in AZ ag

[patrick15]

I agree that there are a few good ranchers and in some areas their water has helped wildlife.

The thing is....there arent helping wildlife anymore. Waters are developed by game and fish and conservation groups and the land does not have to be grazed.

That is also very rare that grass has choked an area....I wonder what kind of grass it is..? probably a non-native. Antelope need grass cover for fawn survival.

This area evolved without livestock and the grass does just fine without cattle...and no..buffalo never grazed here either. Look at the next flat that is grazed and notice all the weeds that are growing in place of the natives that provided forage and cover. Most flats around Gila County are nothing but dirt and mustard grass. No wonder the Mearns are few and far between.

I just find it hard to believe that diehard hunters refuse to consider the competition of livestock with wildlife. Its plain as day.

The forest does not make them stay within standards. They dont monitor..I have asked them for data...and the ranchers are always fighting them politically.

Predator control???

Science shows you cant control predators other than short term..lions and coyotes will always be here. They were here way before cows. Yes, they kill our beloved whitetail but they were doing it way before us.

Did you know that when you put cattle on an area the predator population expands because of the increased prey base? So...cows also increase prey population. I guess their killing of them probably comes out even. Considering that they are impacting your public land for very little money..I think predators are a cost of doing business.

[patrick15]

I liked your comments Scottyboy.

I agree with you. I agree that there are good ones although I dont see any around the Tonto Natl Forest. I am really frustrated with the local ranger district who has told me that they cant monitor or make any changes to overgrazed areas because the ranchers are too political right now.

Rangers act like its their right to use public land and that burns me.

I am just trying to make people aware so someday the bad ranchers cant get their way by just picking up a phone and crying to their Congressman.

[.270]

who are all the bad ranchers? i was raised on a ranch in Az. still have a lotta kin and friends that run cattle. some fairly big spreads too. first off, if it's private land, it's just that, private. if a guy wants to overgraze, lock it, or whatever, it's his perogative. if it's public land, they all have the same rules they have to abide by. they can't lock it, they can't overgraze it, they can't foul the water. every person i know who has a ranch has a real connection with the land. the dirt, the animals, the plants, the water. i have a cousin who literally works his butt off trying to make something of a ranch that will probably never show a profit. he owns a real profitable company that makes up the difference. and everyone who hunts in u27 is better off because of the work he puts in. and he doesn't have a lock on the place. there is better water, the roads are better, etc. etc., because he's there. the difficulty he has with the wolves and other predators isn't even funny. he deals with the state, blm, forest circus, azgfd, usfw and every tree hugger organization there is, every day. puts up with all the rules and regs and bs, just because he likes bein' a cowboy. he hunts whenever he can get a permit. his cabins are always open to whoever wants to use em. he could be a prick. but he ain't. over where i hunt deer, there are now at least 5 times as many deer as when i was a kid. all because the guy that owns the ranch has piped water all over heck. at great expense. seems like the last time i talked to em about it, it was over 60 miles of pipe and a couple dozen tanks, troughs, etc. they had put it. wherever there is feed, now there's water. that ain't always been the case. i'd guess they've spent at least half a million bucks on the water improvement alone. this last fall they rounded up every head on the place, just to give it a rest for a couple years. nobody told em they had to. the blm and state were fine with the range condition. they just did it. i don't know one rancher who locks up anything other than private land. and most will provide easement to anyone wanting to cross to the public land. some won't. and i won't blame em. if it's private land, that says it all. i don't necessarilly like it, but it's their right. when that goofy woman locked up lower aravaipa, i was as vocal as anyone about it. but it was still apparantly her right. just because you see more feed someplace, doesn't mean it was or wasn't because of cattle. stop and look at the benefit that wildlife get from the improvements made for cattle. some ranchers are not nice folks. i really disagree with the large landowners trying to get free permits. but joe cowboy tryin' to make living because that's what he likes is a pretty good feller. and when all the grazing permits are gone, and mark my words on this one, you'll eventually regret it. Lark.

[fatfootdoc]

lark,

I heard one of the ranchers up there in round valley lost the biggest forest service lease on the mountain to an environmentalist bid, any truth to that? ag