Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Range Riding
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
treeswarper
Alleged Sockpuppet!



Joined: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 9330 | TRs
Location: Don't move here
treeswarper
  Top

Alleged Sockpuppet!
PostSat Feb 01, 2020 10:55 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Anne Elk wrote:
This is the first I've heard of this range riding program.  Seems like whoever set it up neglected to include mandatory phone verification or other tracking methods to ensure it was being done.  Feh.  Another reason why I usually avoid wolf-related threads.  I'm sick of reading about them being killed.  And while I'm thinking of it, let's forget about the griz reintroduction program, for the same #@*#&$^ reason.   huh.gif

You might could read the range rider article which now has a link posted in this thread. 

Gee, and the ranchers (who I don't really like, but...) hate to see their calves killed. 

The range rider in the article sums it up..Those who like wolves don't live where the wolves are at, those who don't want wolves live in the areas where wolves are. 

Until you solve that, you'll continue to get dead wolves, legally killed or not.  And, before slug or some other righteous soul does their quick on line psychological evaluation and usual pronouncement-- No, I am not promoting the illegal shooting of cute widdle wolfies.

--------------
What's especially fun about sock puppets is that you can make each one unique and individual, so that they each have special characters. And they don't have to be human––animals and aliens are great possibilities
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Anne Elk
BrontosaurusTheorist



Joined: 07 Sep 2018
Posts: 778 | TRs
Location: Seattle
Anne Elk
  Top

BrontosaurusTheorist
PostSat Feb 01, 2020 11:35 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
sculpin wrote:
No doubt true, but we now have evidence that some are working it the other way.  My understanding is that the money for range riding first goes to the ranchers, and it is their responsibility to hire the riders, no doubt with some oversight.  Government entities these days shy away from hiring workers themselves.

Gov't entities subcontract work to the public sector all the time, certain on the Fed level, anyway.  Bootpathguy above stated that NWC claimed that the rangeriders were under contract with the state.

I get the point Treeswarper made, but for a program to work, all parties have to participate i good faith, not try to undermine efforts to keep everyone happy. So I re-iterate my point that there needs to be a verification system in place to ensure the work's being done.  I'd also say that having the ranchers involved with hiring the range riders would be a conflict of interest, as per sculpin's comment re sabotage.

--------------
"There are yahoos out there.  It’s why we can’t have nice things."  - Tom Mahood
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Waterman
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Mar 2015
Posts: 297 | TRs
Location: Big Snow Quadrangle
Waterman
  Top

Member
PostSat Feb 01, 2020 12:59 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Seems like the perfect job for someone who is retired.

--------------
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,I took the one less traveled by. And that has made all the difference.
Robert Frost
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Sculpin
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Apr 2015
Posts: 583 | TRs

Sculpin
  Top

Member
PostSat Feb 01, 2020 1:31 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
I found this:

https://wdfw.wa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/02062/FINAL_2018%20WDFW_WOLF_REPORT_11April2019.pdf

...which describes the WDFW program for hiring range riders:

"During calendar year 2018, WDFW had cooperative agreements with 31 livestock producers across the state. Operators with an active DPCA-L received reimbursement from WDFW for a percentage of the cost of each conflict prevention measure, up to a maximum of $10,000. The most common non-lethal conflict prevention measures used were range riders, improved sanitation practices (such as treatment or removal of injured or dead livestock), checking on livestock daily, and fencing (e.g. fladry). Producers received a total of $257,421 in reimbursements. Due to the demand from producers interested, the program exceeded the funding available.
WDFW contracted with eight private organizations for range riding services. Under these contracts, WDFW employed 15 range riders at a total cost of $241,010. Range riders monitored livestock on open-range grazing allotments to minimize encounters with wolves. Contractors were assigned to locations as needed, and often covered multiple grazing allotments during a single assignment to assist multiple operators."

So it looks like the ranchers hire their own riders, and the WDWF also go through other private organizations to hire additional riders.

I also found this article too:

http://www.timberwolfinformation.org/wa-range-riders-help-ranchers-deter-wolves/

Range riding leads to fatter calves.

--------------
Between every two pines is a doorway to the new world. - John Muir
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
moonspots
Happy Curmudgeon



Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 2160 | TRs
Location: North Dakota
moonspots
  Top

Happy Curmudgeon
PostSat Feb 01, 2020 4:43 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Waterman wrote:
Seems like the perfect job for someone who is retired.

Yeah, that looks like something I'd like to do (I'm assuming riders means horseback, and not those noisy 4-wheelers), but then being "retired", I don't have time!  lol.gif

--------------
"Out, OUT you demons of Stupidity"! - St Dogbert, patron Saint of Technology
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Cyclopath
Faster than light



Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 3606 | TRs
Location: Seattle
Cyclopath
  Top

Faster than light
PostSat Feb 01, 2020 5:53 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski wrote:
Two range riders who were supposed to be protecting cattle in Ferry County in 2018 were more than 100 miles away in Spokane, shopping and spending time at the Davenport Hotel, according to a Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife investigation that has since been referred to a Thurston County prosecutor.

Ski wrote:
So?

I agree.  We should double their pay, and then maybe they'll start working.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 27 May 2005
Posts: 10468 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
  Top

><((((°>
PostSat Feb 01, 2020 5:58 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
^ your first quote there is actually from the Spokesman-Review article, not something I wrote.

Let me know if and when the man is actually charged with a criminal offense by the prosecutor's office. up.gif

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Bootpathguy
Member
Member


Joined: 18 Jun 2015
Posts: 1054 | TRs
Location: United States
Bootpathguy
  Top

Member
PostSun Feb 02, 2020 6:05 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
https://www.capitalpress.com/ag_sectors/livestock/washington-lawmaker-prods-wdfw-to-collar-more-wolves/article_362f2a02-4443-11ea-9425-e7c4b982f9a6.html

--------------
Experience is what'cha get, when you get what'cha don't want
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Cyclopath
Faster than light



Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 3606 | TRs
Location: Seattle
Cyclopath
  Top

Faster than light
PostMon Feb 03, 2020 6:21 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
We should reduce grazing on public lands.  It's ecologically harmful and that would reduce the fraud we're talking about.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11514 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 04, 2020 9:32 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ranchers, and their customers, are the public too. It is perfectly defensible to use public lands to public benefit. There is already tons of land off limits to grazing, this suits the no grazing portion of the public, great. Continued access to grazable public land serving the other portion of the public means all have public land managed for their preferences, not just some.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 27 May 2005
Posts: 10468 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
  Top

><((((°>
PostTue Feb 04, 2020 10:34 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Is the land owned and administered by the United States Forest Service?
If the answer is YES, it was the intent of the U.S. Congress, when creating the National Forest Service, that "resource extraction" was part of the deal. "Resource extraction" includes grazing.

End of discussion on that issue.

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Jake Neiffer
Member
Member


Joined: 07 Dec 2011
Posts: 798 | TRs
Location: Lexington, OR
Jake Neiffer
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 04, 2020 10:49 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Cylcopath wrote:
It's ecologically harmful

Depends on how its done- the reverse can be true.  Rotationally grazed ruminants is the trendiest thing going in the mitigation of climate change.    Check out the Savory Institute, Soil4Climate, Rattan Lal at Ohio State, etc, etc.  Farmers are actually now starting to get paid to sequester carbon. 

https://www.agriculture.com/news/livestock/montana-ranchers-can-now-get-paid-to-sequester-carbon-using-rotational-grazing
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Sculpin
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Apr 2015
Posts: 583 | TRs

Sculpin
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 04, 2020 12:31 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Jake Neiffer wrote:
Depends on how its done- the reverse can be true.

Essentially all of the places in Washington State that have been grazed, have been severely degraded by overgrazing.  This was already true 100 years ago.

If you actively seek out places in eastern Washington that cows can't get to, you can find a few small areas here and there.  A perfect example is the top of Steamboat Rock.  There is a short scramble, 15 feet or so, that a cow can't do, and everything else is cliffs.  Once on top, you can see the flora that evolved in the presence of native grazers.  It is rich and diverse, and brightly colored with flowers in spring.  In other places where cliffs and other natural features allow access for bipedal apes but not cows, the same rich flora is found.

But climb back down, and you will find the impoverished flora that results from overgrazing across vast areas of the shrub steppe.  Cheat grass and nut sedge are common here but rare up there.  Larkspur and lupine, both quite toxic when they are green, manage to hang on.  But the mariposa lilies that used to turn the hillsides purple are long gone, as are most of the bunchgrasses and other natives that provide good forage.

That is a boots-on-the-ground observation.  My boots.

Studies have shown that the natives will gradually recolonize many of the lithic and loess areas if cattle grazing is removed, although cheatgrass will likely stay dominant on south facing slopes at low elevations.  But the clock ticks as the native seed bank diminishes over time.

--------------
Between every two pines is a doorway to the new world. - John Muir
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Jake Neiffer
Member
Member


Joined: 07 Dec 2011
Posts: 798 | TRs
Location: Lexington, OR
Jake Neiffer
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 04, 2020 1:11 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
I don't dispute your observations.  Oversimplifying here, but basically those ungrazed areas you saw would likely be even healthier if they were pulsed grazed- meaning lots of cows or sheep for 1 day and than 12 or even 18 months of rest.  (I understand they cannot be grazed because its physically impossible for a cow to get there).

If you scroll down to the second photo in the link below:

Similarly, a basic belief of conservation and range “science” is that resting land benefits all environments. That is why I used this image as well as a photo of one of the research plots established all over the Western U.S. but ignored by range academics.  As is clear to the eye, despite over half a century of rest, free from any overgrazing, and despite vast sums having been spent on soil conservation measures, this national park is desertifying as badly as anywhere in Africa

https://www.savory.global/response-to-holistic-management-a-critical-review-of-allan-savorys-grazing-method-by-maria-norborg-and-elin-roos/
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11514 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostTue Feb 04, 2020 3:05 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
This is an interesting example.


Quote:
One side is “grazed land” (that is, if you believe land can be grazed) and the other is ungrazed land — totally protected with all animals excluded. These two extremes have existed side-by-side for over half a century. The explanation as to why there is no difference in the condition of the land on either side of the fence — because total rest and partial rest are both deleterious — is absent from the peer-reviewed papers I’ve seen, such as the ones you relied upon. This is because range academics do not believe resting or conservation can be bad.


--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Range Riding
  Happy Birthday moosefish!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy