Because we are talking about the LMNG here, and public lands rented out to ag interests in general. We disagree on the level of importance the competing interests should be given. I have been very disappointed in the past when making plans to recreate (hunt) a given area of public land only to find it nearly void of wildlife because it is void of vegetation.
And then we digressed into each other's qualifications, amongst other things.
- - - Updated - - -
"Well you see allen for those that understand range management and grasslands a bit more than from ridin around with Grandpa there are many mitigating factors one should consider before making a blanket claim of over grazing. (not that one can;t learn plenty from their Grandpa)"
You forget, I read too. Heck, I may even have attended a meeting or three over the years. The big difference is that while you still make your living off of cattle, I just help people make their living off of cattle.
allen, did you read the management policy plan I shard the link to?
You admit there is far less over grazing than 20 years ago. The people in charge of monitoring it and implementing allotments and plans and restrictions are saying there really is not negative impacts happening on wildlife and environments in the LMNG.
the link I shared shows the policy where grazing takes a back seat to wildlife interests and impacts on ecosystems in the LMNG .
Ya I get there have been and even still are abuses and over grazing happening on public lands. But not at the levels of claims some on here try ot make. I know firsthand some of the efforts ranchers themselves have driven to be better stewards and make improvements not only in reality but in public perception as ot the impacts grazing has as the ideologies swaying the realities of public opinions are having on the use of these public lands.
So hey if you want ot have an actual fact based conversation of what is happening on these public lands, the good, the bad and the ugly we sure can I would enjoy it but lets keep it based on current happenings and policies and based on actual facts and knowledge. And I promise ot curb the snarkiness.
and just keep in mind that while you may be disappointed in your
recreation opportunities because you think lands were over grazed, those communities and producers that have seen grazing and logging removed and communities impacted and stores and schools closing as industries and business dries up and ends may also be a bit disappointed in what they can provide for their families livlihood as well.
And THAT has been my steadfast "point" thru all this, that ranchers and sportsmen can not afford to bicker and make stupid accusations of "greed" and other foolish claims while those with agendas to end what we BOTH do to recreate and generate incomes are gaining footholds in these Federal agencies and policies.
When logging, mining and grazing and off roading are removed from these lands, what will be next?
Only a fool thinks they will be satisfied.
- - - Updated - - -
Because we are talking about the LMNG here, and public lands rented out to ag interests in general. We disagree on the level of importance the competing interests should be given. .
They don;t have to be "competing" allen. Only those seeking to drive a wedge for some reason believe that.
- - - Updated - - -
If you reigned in the "im better than you" dickheadedness when you post your message would be received by far more people. Just a thought.
I don't think I am better or smarter or faster or stronger than anyone else in particular. I simply share what are facts on here most times with the links to them that I find when I am reading on some subjects or know from previous learnings.
When those facts prove foolish claims others have made wrong and they begin with the petty personal accusations and name calling, I don;t have much time for that so ya I know I can get kinds dickheadedly snarky after a while.
Early on before some folks showed up here we were able to have some good conversations about some topics when this site first started.
I enjoy good conversations with people even though I may not agree with them when there is a level of courteousness.
Try having a conversation based on fact rather than petty personal accusations of greed and anti sportsmen and the stupid shit some invariably bring to the table and see what happens some times.
When someone comes on here claiming ranchers are closing hunting seasons becasue they are "whining" about what is the most real fire danger we have had in the state in many years, maybe that is the fella people ought to be putting o their ignore list.
There is a reason someone makes stupid claims like that and it is to drive a wedge between groups that like it or not are dependent on each other.
It really was a nice change from the other two sites back before plainsman started spouting his "greedy pervert" crap. Hell even when he was trying to hide behind the new name he wasn;t bad at first.
Here is the deal straight up, the USDA oversees all the federal agencies managing these public lands. Our last Ag Sec. Vilsack wife was involved with HSUS and they funded heavily her campaign effort. Vilsack appointed HSUS people ot positions within the USDA. Sportsmen need to understand they are next on the list of targets on these public lands.
http://protecttheharvest.com/2015/08/21/hsus-continues-to-infiltrate-usda-ranks/
We are not "competing interests" but should be allies.
When people post stupid shit on these public forums across the country like plainsman does, what is the end result they are looking for?
Once cattle and logging ect are driven off these lands hunting WILL be next.
And foolish false statements do little to bring these interests together to fight the real enemy.
The first topic in this thread goes back to a statement of finding a mutually agreeable solution.
Why would anyone post stupid shit to try and disrupt or distract from that kind of solution?
Over the years I have hammered o DU and have encouraged sportsmen to speak out. They have. DU is losing credibility and Delta waterfowl is picking up credibility and members I believe. Delta here in the state was one of the first sportsmen org to drive the narrative about opening CRP to drought stricken farmers. They get it. They are being procative on creating a workable CRP program that allows managed haying and grazing.
Of course there are sticking points but the dialogue is aimed at proactively creating something that works and benefits BOTH sportsmen and ranchers. A mutually beneficial solution.
The same has happened with the impact of the threat pf the Sage Grouse listing. Ranchers came ot the rable and gave concessions to help avoid losing MORE down the road. Some of that is reflected in the Grasslands managemenrt plan.
More andmore ranchers are implementing einvironmentalstewardship practices i their operations, especially those transitioning ot the next generations.
I get people not connected to ranching may not be aware of what is happening behind the scenes and that is why I try to share links ot the real story and actual facts when I post here. It gets old when the people whos claims are proven false by these facts drive these topics down the rabibit hole with the predictable "anti sprotsmen" "riding herd on sportsmen" bullshit.
So ya I get "snarky".
My apologizes and I truly do hope the next time a topic comes up like this those that would drive it down the rabbit hole with stupid claims that are easily prove false are driven there themselves.
plains has had a BUNCH of information shared with him on more than one occasion regarding Land Tawney and BCHA. 
