Horse News

How the BLM Serves the West’s Welfare Ranchers

by George Wuerthner as published on CounterPunch

“… the BLM failed to note that livestock grazing is by far and away the biggest factor in sage grouse decline across the West…”

The BLM just released its decision on its proposed Bruneau Owyhee Sage-grouse Habitat Project (BOSH Project) which will degrade 617,000 acres of southern Idaho by logging juniper, creating linear weed patches known as fire breaks, and using other questionable management strategies, all done, we are told in the name of enhancing sage grouse habitat.

Remarkably the BLM failed to note that livestock grazing is by far and away the biggest factor in sage grouse decline across the West, in part, because of the multiple ways that the livestock production harms the bird. But, of course, seeing its role to pander to the welfare ranchers of the West, the BLM has taken the politically expediate measure of doing more harm in the name of sage grouse.

The BLM starts out with some questionable assertions. The first is that juniper, a native species, is expanding its range and thus must be eradicated.  Any number of studies challenge that assumption. Juniper woodlands tend to burn at intervals of hundreds of years, and in stand replacement blazes. After such blazes, the juniper slowly recolonizes the landscape. Also climate change has led to natural expansion of juniper in some areas. In either case, the presence of juniper is not abnormal or something to be destroyed.

Instead of even responding to such studies, the BLM relies only on studies by Range Department professors who exist to justify livestock grazing on public lands. These studies start with the incorrect assumption that wildfire was very frequent in sagebrush ecosystems and therefore, also in juniper woodlands, but more recent sagebrush fire studies also find sagebrush burns at long rotations of hundreds of years.

Beyond the fact that juniper woodlands are native and natural, the BLM advocates logging and burning which has been shown in many locations to become inoculation sites for cheatgrass. Cheatgrass is spread wherever there is disturbance. Disturbance from logging or disturbance from livestock.

Livestock by trampling soil crusts and consuming native grasses, aids the spread of cheatgrass.

Cheatgrass poses a far greater threat to sage grouse because it increases the fire frequency and burns out both juniper and sagebrush.

The other major assertion of the BLM that is equally as misleading is that creation of 200-foot-wide linear “fuel breaks”. While fuel breaks may work to some degree under low to moderate fire weather conditions, under extreme fire weather, such breaks are for the most part useless.  All large fires occur under extreme fire weather conditions of drought, low humidity, high temperatures and wind, especially wind. Wind blows embers miles ahead of a flaming front. A 200-foot-wide “fuel break” has absolutely no effect on such wind-driven fires.

But such linear disturbances are wonderful pathways for the spread of weeds, including cheatgrass.

Beyond these concerns, the BLM again has ignored the multiple ways that livestock degrades sage grouse habitat. Beyond the trampling of soil crusts and spread of cheatgrass mentioned earlier, livestock fencing is a major mortality factor for the low flying birds. Fences are also perching for avian predators like raven that feed on sage grouse chicks and eggs. Livestock are also the major factor in the destruction and loss of riparian areas and wet meadows which are critical to young sage grouse chicks. Livestock also consume some of the forbs (flowers) critical for growth by sage grouse chicks. Livestock also consume the native grasses and other vegetation that would otherwise hide nesting exposing birds and young to predators.  The irrigated hay fields that dot the West, usually created by eliminating the native vegetation, not only eliminates much of the native habitat for grouse, but can fragment habitat because grouse at loathe to fly across large expanses of hay meadow without cover from sagebrush.

There are other ways that livestock production harms sage grouse, but you would never know that any of these exist from the way the BLM ignores science to facilitate the use of our public lands for private profit by the West’s welfare ranchers.

More articles by:

George Wuerthner has published 36 books including Wildfire: A Century of Failed Forest Policy. He serves on the board of the Western Watersheds Project.

3 replies »

  1. Two quick points. One, I attended a land mgmt. conference a few years ago where I accessed a published research study which was undertaken to increase forage for cattle by mechanically reducing woody brush (as I recall it was Pinon/Juniper). To the researchers surprise all this added cost did not in fact produce the intended results but did increase invasive weeds the cattle wouldn’t eat. In other words, they caused a bigger, more expensive and lasting problem than they started with. Sound familiar?

    Second, the 200 foot wide belt of disturbance will not limit fire spread as Wuerthner points out, but it will provide runways for grass fires to race along in wooded areas. Grass fires burn faster and hotter, which is well known. The Paradise CA fire last summer, for one example, was ignited in an area formerly cleared of trees that was regrowing with grasses and shrubs. Something also not commonly considered is that pollen from any trees is also highly flammable and can be ignited and carried, like other embers, long distances in strong winds. Consider also the 2016 Ft. McMurray fire in Alberta, which was not considered a big threat when discovered but overnight reached then crossed the Athabasca River and took out most of Ft. McMurray — in a hurry.

    So removing Junipers will not solve any wildfire problems other than in some places allowing vehicles to drive in and disturb areas once impassable (possible sparking more fires), and the presence of grass is no insurance against wildfires whatsoever.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Please Comment Today to Help the Fifteenmile Wild Horse Herd in Wyoming
    Published by Carol Walker at February 20, 2019

    Please comment by March 4 on this plan, and choose the No Action Alternative, and request that they raise the AML to 150-300 wild horses, and begin a study of this unique herd.

    The most effective thing you can do is to use your own words -the BLM says if you use a form to comment that they count all the forms received as one comment.

    Comments should be received by March 4 at 4:30 MT and can be emailed to:
    blm_wy_fifteenmile_hma@blm.gov
    (please include FifteenmileHMA in the subject line) or mailed to Wild Horse Specialist, BLM Worland Field Office, 101 South 23rd Street, Worland, WY 82401.

    https://www.wildhoofbeats.com/blog/please-comment-today-to-help-the-fifteenmile-wild-horse-herd-in-wyoming

    Like

  3. More About “Encroaching” Junipers on Juniper Mountain by Ken Cole (excerpts below)

    While investigating the claim that junipers don’t belong on Juniper Mountain, I was asked to look at the original public lands surveys found on General Land Office Records site and found surveys for this landscape from 1914 and 1921. While the surveys don’t quantify junipers or show their density they do document their presence and in the General Description notes at the end of each survey the surveyors noted “thick juniper” and “scattered juniper” in every township. When doing the surveys the surveyor walked the lines between each and every section (a square mile) to mark section corners and quarters. At the end of each section line they noted the type of timber. To map this I read the notes for each and every section line and noted the documentation of juniper. I was able to give each section a score of 0 to 4. If all four section lines noted “timber: juniper” then the section was given a score of 4. What I found was that nearly every section had juniper presence just as they do today. The surveys also mention “good growth of bunch grass which affords excellent range” even though today the understory is composed of very sparse grass and a nonnative semi annual grass called Poa bulbosa that is a very poor range plant with little habitat value. Small islands of these healthy bunch grasses can be seen in areas that can’t be reached by cattle and the contrast is quite startling.
    http://www.thewildlifenews.com/2013/03/07/more-about-encroaching-junipers-on-juniper-mountain/

    Like

Care to make a comment?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.