Sequoia Decides to Fully Protect Resources | High Sierra Topix  

Sequoia Decides to Fully Protect Resources

Grab your bear can or camp chair, kick your feet up and chew the fat about anything Sierra Nevada related that doesn't quite fit in any of the other forums. Within reason, (and the HST rules and guidelines) this is also an anything goes forum. Tell stories, discuss wilderness issues, music, or whatever else the High Sierra stirs up in your mind.
User avatar

Postby AldeFarte » Sun Jan 29, 2006 8:27 pm

Admin, I apologize and stand in corrected shoes! It wasn't meant as a castigation. More of a chiding. I had tunnel vision after I read the article and could not see the forest through the trees. jls :(



User avatar
AldeFarte
Topix Regular
 
Posts: 215
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:46 pm
Location: Eklutna, Ak.
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Postby caddis » Sun Jan 29, 2006 9:22 pm

JM21760 wrote:Aaaaaaaamen Steve! Tons of cows around Highland Lakes.
Save a tree, remove a "BUSH"!
Bush own them cows???
Image
User avatar
caddis
Founding Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:01 pm
Location: Lemoore
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Postby caddis » Sun Jan 29, 2006 9:49 pm

Good stuff Dave. I noticed slide 13 (the PDF files) had a picture of Bridgeport "Big Meadows"

dave54 wrote: Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth said in a speech "The worst managed ranch is still better wildlife habitat than the best subdivision."
I liked this line. Makes you think twice before you cut of your nose simply because you stepped in a cow pie.
Image
User avatar
caddis
Founding Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:01 pm
Location: Lemoore
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Postby ERIC » Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:10 pm

AldeFarte wrote:Admin, I apologize and stand in corrected shoes! It wasn't meant as a castigation. More of a chiding. I had tunnel vision after I read the article and could not see the forest through the trees. jls :(


No worries! :cool:

Eric
New members, please consider giving us an intro!
Follow us on Twitter @HighSierraTopix. Use hashtags #SIERRAPHILE #GotSierra? #GotMountains?
Follow us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HighSierraTopix
User avatar
ERIC
Your Humble Host & Forums Administrator
Your Humble Host & Forums Administrator
 
Posts: 2909
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:13 am
Location: between the 916 and 661
Experience: Level 4 Explorer

User avatar

Postby caddis » Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:12 pm

JM21760 wrote:How did Nature ever survive without Cows for thousands of years?
Same way it survives now and will continue to survive. Of course it willl be different "looking" in the future just as it was different in the past. Change happens.

It would be a disgrace for a meadow to naturally progress to forest, as God and Nature intended.

It would not be a disgrace if it was left to turn to forest just as it is not a disgrace to manage it in a way that is beneficial. Mother Nature is a cruel beotch.(had to bypass the curse filter) To allow her to have her way would mean population explositions, followed by predator increases and habitat destruction and finally population crashes. What is wrong with stepping in to manage such natural cycles? (I know it's a tad off topic from trees). The bottom line is we are a part of the environment. With limited and often times dwindling resources (acreage) proper managemant for the benefit of all and for the future is the only sensible course



It' s all about money.
Not that there is anything wrong with money as a motivator...but maybe you should read some of what Dave posted. As to the money question....those making the profit NEED a healthy forrest to secure their income for the future...maybe they have the biggest stake in a healthy forrest .
Image
User avatar
caddis
Founding Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:01 pm
Location: Lemoore
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Postby AldeFarte » Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:58 am

JM, it would be nice if we all realized that our lifetimes are but a blink of an eye in this big old world. Instead of thinking in terms of our lifetimes ,we should think in 1000 year cycles. We must manage our resources. Like it ,or not. Benign neglect is still management. Only it is not sound management. Just as allowing cattle to seasonally graze in SELECTED areas means more habitat for birds and other beasties of the wild country. To me it makes perfect sense. Just as allowing the private sector to cull cougars , sheep, wolves, deer, etc. will keep the rest of the population healthy. Heck, they will pay to do it ,instead of using precious guberment monies wrung out of hapless taxpayers. We all dig the sierras for what they are in our lifetime. I submit they are what they are today, because our greedy capitalist pig system has made it what it is. One way ,or another. I for one am appreciative of what we have, and why we have it. I agree with Dave and I agree with you on the drunkin hunter thing. Disgusting! Why would anyone want to ruin their buzz by getting drunk in Gods country?jls
User avatar
AldeFarte
Topix Regular
 
Posts: 215
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:46 pm
Location: Eklutna, Ak.
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Postby dave54 » Wed Feb 08, 2006 9:52 pm

In case some of you missed the news release.

The grazing fee for the western U.S. was just revised to $1.56 per AUM. Less than last year's $1.79 but still above the legal minimum of $1.35.

The fee is determined by a Congressional formula which includes, among other factors, private land grazing costs and current market prices for livestock.
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
Log off and get outdoors!
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
User avatar
dave54
Founding Member
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:24 pm
Location: where the Sierras, Cascades, and Great Basin meet.
Experience: N/A

Postby wingding » Thu Feb 09, 2006 9:56 am

thanks dave54
wingding
 

User avatar

Postby Buck Forester » Thu Feb 09, 2006 6:22 pm

I'm not anti-grazing by any means, but please, NOT in Wilderness Areas! There aren't too many things worse for me when backpacking a wild area to see a herd of cows! I'll never forget being in a very remote area of the Wind Rivers in WY, on day two of a 9-day trip, on a trailess ridge as I did an off-trail crossing to another wild basin, when I saw a large herd of cows up there, and one bull that was not happy to see me. Within minutes I saw a gorgeous herd of bighorns running across this ridge. I do NOT like cows in the wilderness. No sir reee. Not a bit. But regarding the "Bush" comment... I've hiked wild areas during both Repub and Dem administrations and have seen cows just the same. I don't blame cows on a President, even if I'm not fond of whoever is in office at the time. But the cows have got to go! Like Dave said, keep them in lower elevations and in less sensitive environments than our last remaining wild areas in the mountains.
User avatar
Buck Forester
Founding Member
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:38 pm
Location: Lincoln, CA (Sacramento area)
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Postby dave54 » Thu Feb 09, 2006 7:16 pm

Buck Forester wrote: Like Dave said, keep them in lower elevations and in less sensitive environments than our last remaining wild areas in the mountains.


I don't believe I said that. Although there is a credible argument for it.

Land so sensitive that even carefully controlled grazing would be of net negative impact is not restricted to a particular elevation zone. There are high elevation meadows that can be grazed with a net benefit to the environment and there are lower elevation sites that should not be grazed.

And some of the grazing permits are still held by the same families that has been grazing since before the National Forest system even existed.
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
Log off and get outdoors!
~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=
User avatar
dave54
Founding Member
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:24 pm
Location: where the Sierras, Cascades, and Great Basin meet.
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Postby Buck Forester » Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:27 pm

Ha! I guess I should be more clear when there's more than one "Dave"! :) I meant SSSdave when talking about mid-elevation grazing, as he referred to it earlier.

For me much of it is a matter of aesthetics. If we let cows graze in the foothills and flat lands, that's okay to me because they aren't marring unique and beautiful land. Even if a high meadow in the Sierra can environmentally "handle" cows grazing, the sight of them completely sucks and ruins the wilderness experience. I do realize this is in my own mind and my own ideas of wilderness and domesticated vs. wild animals in high mountains, but it's how I feel.
User avatar
Buck Forester
Founding Member
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:38 pm
Location: Lincoln, CA (Sacramento area)
Experience: N/A

User avatar

Postby caddis » Fri Feb 10, 2006 8:06 am

If you want to go with what "Dave" said then I'll stick what what Dave54 implies with his posts...let the science decide where and how to graze.










take from me...another Dave :cool:
Image
User avatar
caddis
Founding Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 7:01 pm
Location: Lemoore
Experience: N/A

PreviousNext

Return to The Campfire



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests