Logo
Prev
Bookmark
Rotate
Print
Next
Contents
All Pages
Related Articles
Browse Issues
Help
Search
Home
'
National Geographic : 1973 Sep
Contents
have been proven. But it also brings prob lems. Some studies suggest that rest-rotation grazing, unless accompanied by a reduction in livestock numbers, may sometimes increase the damage. Streams suffer as heavy livestock use causes fish-sheltering banks to cave off; fencing necessary for the rest-rotation pro gram is detrimental to wildlife. Spending tax money for the program is viewed by many conservationists as a direct subsidy to the relatively few livestock opera tors it benefits. (They represent only about 3 percent of the forage-fed-livestock industry in the country.) In general, grazing fees do not equal the fair market value of the forage taken, even though much of the Bureau of Last Standfor the Bighorn Land Management's fund outlays are used in direct support of grazing. But the blame cannot simply be put on the bureau. It is charged with administration of public grazing lands, but has lacked public and legislative support to reduce the number of grazing permits, and has no legal authority to apprehend and prosecute those who graze their stock illegally. As one concerned with the future of the bighorn, I hope ways can be found to assist livestock operators to shift from public graz ing lands to private operations-at least in those areas where ecological damage is cost ing the public lands dearly in soil, watershed, wildlife, and recreational potential. 397
Links
Archive
1973 Oct
1973 Aug
Navigation
Previous Page
Next Page