Serving Proudly As The Voice Of Valley County Since 1913

A Rancher's Worst Nightmare

Remember the spotted owl? As I recall this bird was going extinct if we didn’t shut down the logging industry in the Pacific Northwest. It was shut down causing untold economic, social and, with the recent forest fires, ecologic damage. Did it save the owl? Has anyone heard anything lately? The last I heard its relative, the barred owl, was moving in and replacing the spotted owl. Remember the chant of the bureaucrats and Non Government Organizations (NGOs) that we had to save the spotted owl’s habitat. At that time their habitat was defined as “old growth forest.” Now it seems the primary component of the spotted owl’s habitat that is limiting its distributiion and survival has nothing to do with vegetation.l It’s another owl! Keep in mind when sage grouse habitat is discussed without any mention of predation.

The very high costs and lack of results in the m isguided attempt to protect the spotted owl should have resulted in, at least, an intensive review of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the way it was implemented. You would have thought the bureaucrats and NGOs responsible for this de3bacle would have been diving for cover. Wrong! Instead, flushed with their success with shutting down the timber industry in the Pacific Northwest, (they could care less about the owl) the NGOs dusted off their next poster species – the sage grouse. Their stated goal was to use the sage grouose to remove all livestock from the western federal ranges. The scientists and bureaucrats rose to the bait and initiated studies aimed at showing the sage grouse were in trouble. Fortunately, many researchers were honest enough to report that livestock grazing not only was not harmful to sage grouse, but in some cases was found to be beneficial.

The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has spent hundreds of millions of dollars through its Sage Grouse Initiative (SGI) in a commendable effort to help ranchers within sage grouse core areas. While I applaud their intentions and realize they are the main bureaucratic ally in our natural resources battles, I have a problem joining the SGI program. When you sign a SGI contract, you are admitting your livestock are neegatively impacting sage grouse and the SGI program and dollars will fix the problem. I do not believe livestock grazing is a problem and, therefore, will not sign anything claiming the opposite.

The threat of listing under the ESA had everyone worried even though the sage grouse does not meet the definition of an endangered species. In other words, it probably will not go extinct in the foreseeable future. A huge sign of relief went up when the US Fish and Wildlife Service decided not to list it. Unfortunately, this sense of relief was short lived!

Several years ago the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) initiated a review and rewrite of their Resource Management Plans (RMP). A number of drafts were run up the flagpole to see if anyone would salute. (I have lost count of how many we commented on.) The last revision included language to address the latest resource issue de jour – sage grouse conservation. Needless to say, we wasted our time sending in comments!

The RMPs went to Washington, D.C., and the Department of the Interior Secretary Sally Jewel rewrote the sage grouse section to meet the NGO’s agenda. Since the science did not support their assumption that livestock grazing was harmful to the sage grouse, they had to take another tack and enlisted the aid of their ally, Secretary Jewel. I believe her action violates several federal statutes (NEPA, FLPMN, etc.) since there was no opportunity for the public to comment on this major revision. This is just another example of the Obama administration ignoring the laws and overstepping its authority.

So what did she slip into the RMPs and why is it so bad? Apparently, some federal legal beagle advised the BLM that if they wanted to win resource issues in the courts, they had to devise a program that had definite goals, have a method to measure the parameters and have a penalty for not attaining the goals. What Secretary Jewel did was to sanction a vegetation matrix supposedly for sage grouse. The matrix has five soil types across the top and various vegetation types down the side. The interior of the matrix is filled in with heights (inches) and percentages for the vegetation types in the various soils. Apparently, the plan is to run three transects in an area (this is vague because the BLM is just now trying to work out the details) and if the vegetation on two of the transects fails to measure up to the parameters in the matrix the penalty kicks in – you take an Animal Unit Monty (AUM) cut of 10 percent! If there is no improvement within a year, you get hit with another 10 percent cut. The totally insane part of this whole program is that it has nothing to do with sage grouse! Your grouse population may be exploding but if the vegetation on two of the transects fails to measure up – your AUMs are cut. In addition, there is no scientific proof the AUM cuts will provide the desired vegetation parameter. The BLM should be mandated to provide this proof before any cuts are implemented. There are a lot of well intentioned, intelligent, people in these bureaucracies, so how do we end up with so many stupid regulations?

 

Reader Comments(0)

 
 
Rendered 03/26/2024 17:45