OCR Text |
Show t July 1966 Page 5 UTAH FARM BUREAU NEWS The ranchers generally feel that the reasons given for withdrawing grazing priveleges and for denying homesteading and purchases, are just excuses and that a much bigger reason They suspect that is in the background. pressure from Washington is the cause. Moves seem to indicate a desire to keep as much land as possible for future recreational purposes. This brings the average rancher's blood to a quick boil. "This is not the kind of place you'd want to build a summer cabin", said one. Much of the land is simply desolate but the sheep; and cattle dont mind. Public lands furnish grazing for one half of the feeder cattle and three fourths of the lambs produced in the country. Nearly ninety per cent of the wool is similarly produced. Say the ranchers, "Any attempt to go overboard in the direction of recreation on public land with the question: "Can should first be squared we afford it?" Farm Bureau asks the following questions of the Public Land Law Review Commission: 1. Is the administration of public lands such as to contribute to the economic stability of the communities dependent upon the resources found thereon? 2. Do the laws and regulations encourage private investment in the improvement of public lands? 3. Is there provision for reimbursement of losses incurred by private users when use privileges Millard County Farm Bureau President, testifying at the Salt Lake City meeting of the Public Land Law Review Commission. He and other ranchers called for study of laws pertaining to public land. Leo Robins,' The Conservationist Attitude There are two schools of thought among this group. One holds that everything that is wild should be kept that way. No tree should be cut, no shrub grazed or animal harmed in any way. Everything should be kept in its pristine simplicity. We can't help but wonder if they ever mow their lawns. The other group is more realistic. They feel that the wilderness areas may be used. Ranges may be grazed, timber may be cut and animals harvested, but all within reason. They draw the line when something is permanently destroyed. would be the motto of Use but not abuse this group. withdrawn? 4. Are there meaningful appeal procedure available to users injured by the rulings of public land administrators? 5. When a private user of public lands has invested in commensurate property in order to maintain an operation based on the use of public lands, do the laws and their administration lend themselves to the opportunity to recoup fi.is investment through sale to another? 6. Is the administration of public lands carried out with appropriate regard for the impact on the lives and wellbeing of those engaged in beneficial use when use patterns are arbitrarily changed? 7. Are local advisory committees used effectively in solving administrative problems? 8. Are the present payments to state and local school programs equitable? 9. Has the vegetative cover on the watersheds been maintained in a way that will yield the maximum quantity of water without unduly reducing other beneficial uses such as the grazing of livestock? 10.- ' Has there been maintained an appropriate balance between the big game herds and the volume of grazing by domestic livestock? Farm Bureau hopes that the Public Land Law Review Commission will bring some order and progress to the problem of our public lands. The Ranchers Attitude Among the ranchers who graze cattle and sheep on the public lands the common complaint seems to be "withdrawal". is the Clear Creek Allotment in the Kanosh Ranger District of the Fishlake National Forest. An example Twenty one permittees graze on this allotment of the forest. The Forest Service gave them three choices for future use of the public land. All three would cut their grazing. The permittees chose what they considered the best of the three situations. Altogether the loss in grazing priveleges will be nearly ninety per cent. Ranchers need to know how stable their investment will be. These uncertainties make business somewhat hazardous. The Forest Service contends that due to the badly declining condition of the range, cuts were necessary so that rangeland could be improved arid watershed protected. Better range management is the key to the use of this rangeland, the Forest Service says. A large number of ranchers tell of difficulties with reduced grazing and water rights and recommended sale of public lands where practical and an improved appeals procedure for permittees whose grazing privileges were withdrawn. Whereas the public agencies contend that continued grazing damages watershed areas the ranchers hold that increasing the foliage on the watershed cuts down on the amount of water that will reach the lower lands. They also indicate that scrub trees are taking over and are consuming more water and crowding out more . desirable trees. All in all the ranchers believe that privately owned land is managed better than public land and that if they were free to acquire it, much improvement could be made. are Security of investment is a big question with use of public land. |