Deer & Cattle

[couesdog]

Wow Lark, gess I no whare you're buttin is. I wil tri to wach my speling in da footure.

 

Coueshunter84, I strongly agree with the fire suppression problems also! I know that the changes in our landscape are not all from grazing. I am simply stating that it is part of a big picture. I don't think ranchers are bad people. I like ranchers and rancher mentality, however, I still think cows do more harm then good in canyons and riparian areas.

 

Thanks

Thanks all!

 

 

[Browning'sCustomMeat]

WOOHOO Lark!!! You nailed it!

 

-Jeremy-

 

 

[GameHauler]

Lark has a pretty good handle on life

Except for choice of calibers

I wish the Ranchers the best of luck

but as you stated Lark times are changing

and I think one of the open range laws need to change also.

 

I can not quot the law but basically says that

I must fence cattle off of my property

 

I live in a small little community outside of town

that is located in open range country.

They started bringing cattle back into this range

which is great for fire control but when I wake up,

grab my first cup of coffee and head out to the shop

to wake up and check out whats new on this forum

 

I Get Really PO'ed when I step on a land mine in my slippers

 

I do not think I should have to put a UGLY fence up

across to very front of my property that I would have to open

and close every time anyone comes home or leaves.

Just my $.02

[TAM]

Wow a grammar lesson from Lark??? Or is it grammer?

 

I say we get Nappy out and vote Lark in!!! I can see the signs all over the state with "Lark for Gov" in big letters and the slogan underneath will read "Don't drink the Kool-aid".

[bowsniper]

Why graze cows on public lands? Let’s see…

 

We need the cows for beef, right? Well no, less that 2% of our beef supply comes from public lands grazing.

 

We need cows because the range has to grazed to be healthy? How did the range ever evolve without cows? Cows are an exotic introduction to our range land. Any exotic introduction will have detrimental effects, over grazing, noxious weeds and plants, impacts on wildlife. Cows completely trash riparian areas. They erode the stream banks and eat all the cottonwood saplings. When the older cottonwoods die out, the shade for the water is gone, and that in combination with the eroding banks making the stream shallower raises the water temperature. The water temp change kills the natural fish.

 

We need cows because the land will be developed without grazing. I’d rather have cows and hunting than condos, right? Well since most rancher private in-holdings are a few acres, compared to 1000s of acres of the public lands grazing lease, the only thing you could build condos on would be the few acres of private in-holding. You can’t develop the already public land, and you won’t lose hunting on it. You probably already can’t hunt in the private in-holding.

 

We need cows because the ranchers build all the water holes for all the critters to drink at, right? Well gee, how did all the little critters drink before the ranchers showed up? Anyway, if the cattle and ranchers had not destroyed most of the state riparian areas, we would not need all the water holes. So basically, Arizona traded it’s riparian areas for cows and water holes. The only new water holes I see being constructed these days are by G&F, not by ranchers.

 

We need cows because the ranchers pay money to graze to the fed and the state. Well let’s see… The ranchers pay $1.30 per month per cow to the fed. A GAO (Government Accounting Office) audit of Federal Grazing permits determined that it cost over $10 per month per cow for the government to administer the grazing leases (build fences, pay range cons to watch for overgrazing, and keep track of range health). That means that it costs the tax payers $8.70 per month per cow to let the Marlboro man to run his cows, trash the range, compete with wildlife, just because somebody’s family moved here 150 years ago, and his great grandpa went off to fight the civil war.

 

Wood sumbuddy pleseee xplane too me why wee ned them cows?

 

 

Mark

[GameHauler]

HERE WE GO

Sorry Mark, I think you are wrong on this one.

I am not educated enough to comment but I'm sure others are.

Put your seat belt on.

 

[elmergoo]

Right back at you Bowsnyper

[25-06]

HERE WE GO

Sorry Mark, I think you are wrong on this one.

I am not educated enough to comment but I'm sure others are.

Put your seat belt on.

Yup, this is gunna be a good one. This is what cattle do to the land were I hunt. I also know what the deer do in this case, they move on the other side. But I still have to agree with Lark.

[bowsniper]

Yup, this is gunna be a good one. This is what cattle do to the land were I hunt. I also know what the deer do in this case, they move on the other side. But I still have to agree with Lark.

 

Good picture of a fence line showing the bad effects of grazing. And you agree that cows push the deer out, which btw was the original question of the thread. But you are still agreeing with lark ? Must be some kind of rancher brotherhood thing?

 

Mark

[25-06]

Yup, this is gunna be a good one. This is what cattle do to the land were I hunt. I also know what the deer do in this case, they move on the other side. But I still have to agree with Lark.

 

Good picture of a fence line showing the bad effects of grazing. And you agree that cows push the deer out, which btw way the original question of the thread. But you are still agreeing with lark ? Must be some kind of rancher brotherhood thing?

 

Mark

Aint no rancher here Bro.

[muledeerarea33?]

I think I was with 25-06 when that picture was taken, and I know for a fact many BIG deer have been taken right in that area. In fact I beleive Terry's (26-06) brother shot a nice one about half a mile or less from there last year. Cows have been on this land for so long that the deer and cows co-inhabit the land with no prolbems. I beleive I know the rancher that Lark is talking about with the overgrazing trouble and if it is the same guy. Me my father, my uncles, and my grandpa have hunted in among the cows on that ranchers leased and private land with great succes, My grandpa used to own the property right next to the rancher and we never had any prolbem with wildlife, for shooting or for just looking at in the off season. anyway it might be a different rancher we are talking about and if so it is a very similar situation.

[NRS]

I have to agree with Lark, even though I am a professional in the wildlife management field. I do work for the feds and can assure you that the overgrazing of the range is a thing of the past for the public lands of the state. State trust lands may still have some problems, but that is because they only have 5 people to watch 9 million acres. As in all things there are always bad apples that think the rules are for everybody but them, whether they are ranchers or poachers.

 

As Lark stated in a post, the rancher put waters in and the deer population went up. The cost of the water development probably came out of the ranchers pocket, which is figured into the cost of leasing the land for grazing for $1.35 per animal per month. You as a hunter, did not pay for that increase in the number of deer, but you can benefit from it if you get a tag for that area.

 

The figure of 2% of the cattle coming from ranches in the west is very misleading. In reality, that number does not count the cattle that go to the feed yard or winter wheat pastures in Kansas and Nebraska from ranches before going to slaughter.

 

Fence line contrast pictures look dramatic, but can be misleading. All they do is show where the cattle have eaten off 30% of the plants top, which is about 60% of the plants height because most of a grasses mass is at the base and is still available for wildlife.

 

Just where are you seeing cattle in the canyons that you are glassing for sheep?? Cattle are lazy creatures and don't tend to get into sheep habitat because it is too steep. Studies in Aravaipa Canyon and the Silverbell mountains have clearly shown that.

"We need cows because the ranchers build all the water holes for all the critters to drink at, right?" That is correct. When was the last time that you caught a "verde trout" or a "3 foot long "salt river salmon" out of the Salt River in Phoenix, Tempe or Avondale? We have drastically altered the water sources and built freeways that cut off travel corridors to waters from food and cover that the wildlife uses.

 

Livestock grazing is just one of the many uses of public lands, just like hunting, fishing, hiking, biking, birdwatching or just cruising through the back country on a ATV.

 

 

[couesdog]

NRS,

 

I have seen cows in steep canyons such as Kanab Creek, West Clear Creek, Beaver Creek, the canyons north of Morenci, and Sycamore Canyon to name a few. One thing that I have noticed about science is that you can find a study that says anything you want it to say if you look long enough. I am not sure where the deer increases are that you are talking about, but in Arizona the deer herds are way down from what they were in the 80's and early 90's. That has to do more with weather patterns than anything else. In many places in Arizona, ironically enough, surface water is not the limiting factor. The Kiabab taught us that.

 

The fenceline contrast pictures are pretty alarming in my opinion. There may still be enough food for wildlife, but how about cover, especially during fawning seasons (both deer and antelope). And how about plant regeneration? I don't have a problem with cows in areas where they fulfill a niche, but in areas where the habitat is stressed from drought and areas such as canyons and riparian bottoms, cows don't fit in.

 

I don't think you can compare high impact land use such as cattle grazing with low impact use such as hiking, hunting, birdwatching, fishing, biking, etc.... It's apples and oranges.

 

(note- this post was not spell checked- sorry in advance!)

[AzHunt]

Ok, here is a simple question for Bowsnipe & Couesdoq: What is your ultimate solution & goal, and what are your long term changes as a result of these solutions?

 

Thank you in advance for your responses.

[couesdog]

AzHunt,

 

Good question!

 

#1- There is no need for cattle numbers to fluxuate. Each lease should have already identified how much cattle they can run during extreme drought conditions. We saw these conditions in 2004 I believe. This allows plant communities to regenerate during wet years and eases the stress on wildlife populations. It will be up to the Game and Fish to manage elk herds at this level also. Right now, the more elk that are killed, the more cattle that are allowed on lease lands. This will also allow fire to stay on the ground and move fast accross the landscape like it should.

 

#2- Cattle need to be limited to historic grassland habitat types. They need to be kept out of the large canyons and riparian areas. Forage monitoring needs to be established on all public land leases to ensure that plant communities are able to regenerate.

 

Long term goal is to re-establish a productive ecosystem in which all wildlife can benefit. This will enhance hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, biking, bird watching, etc.... It won't do much for mining, farming or ATV riding-sorry.