LOCAL VS. FEDERAL
Broad brushes are problematic. A big fight is brewing between Trump and environmentalists in the west. The federal government owns 80 percent of the state of Nevada. Most easterners have no comprehension of the amount of federal owned land west of the Mississippi.
Ranchers (broadly) and environmentalists (broadly) have been fighting over how to use these lands for a long time. In general, environmental groups want to restrict cattle and of course, in general, ranchers want to liberalize water and grazing regulations.
In a response to the American Farm Bureau Federation, the largest agriculture lobby in the U.S., Trump said "I believe states, communities and private land owners know best how to manage their own resources." To the average environmentalist, "them's fightin' words." Indeed.
This is a classic example of local vs. federal control. The broad environmental lobby wants no decision-making capacity increased at the lower, local level. They want it centered in Washington. And of course the environmentalists point to birds and amphibians as jeopardized if ranchers have their way. In general (notice how I keep offering those caveats?) ranchers refuse to admit their devastating mismanaged grazing.
It's an example of polarization, where both sides distrust and essentially hate each other. This fight entails millions of dollars in legal fees, millions of dollars flying bureaucrats around the country to host meetings, and countless hours on social media and public relations campaigns.
I've visited many ranches in those areas. I've visited Bureau of Land Management and National Parkland in those areas. Both are ecological disasters. Nothing about government owning land versus private ownership makes it handled better. Some of the worst managed land I've ever seen is in Yellowstone National Park. What a travesty. Here in the east. U.S. Forest Service lands are "exhibit A" for terrible forestry management.
I could go into details on all these, but in my experience, no difference exists when comparing the poor stewardship between public and private lands. With that said, however, I've been on some privately-operated ranches that are stellar examples of ecological management. And they have tons of birds, amphibians, wildlife flourishing even while they have more cattle per acre than the mainstream.
I remember like yesterday flying over south Texas on my way to Mexico many years ago, as Allan Savory's Holistic Management was just gaining some early adopters. I knew a rancher in south Texas was a disciple and glued myself to the plane window to see if I could find it. Sure enough, suddenly an oasis-looking green ranch among the brown came into view. It looked like somebody had dropped a can of green paint on the arid, drab landscape. Yes, there it was. I've been on others since.
I was on one in Arizona, rainfall 4 inches per year, that within 5 years, using Holistic Management, tripled vegetation and saw numerous springs begin running again for the first time in half a century. One of the neatest affirmations I ever received was back in about 1990 when we had a logging crew come in to cut 30 acres of timber in exchange for building us a road to the top of the mountain on our farm.
The crew chief said they needed a drought in order to do the job, and my goodness did we get one. Not a drop of rain for 13 weeks. They put in 3 miles of graded all-weather access, building the road several hundred yards up Little North Mountain each day. At quitting time, the crew would all drive out in a cloud of dust. The log trucks pounded the road, making a couple inches of powder. But one day toward the end, all the guys whipped in at our house and jumped out, demanding "what's going on here?"
They weren't irritated; they were clearly enthusiastically curious. "What do you mean?" I asked. Their response was incredible: "We got up to the top today where we could see out. Everywhere it's brown because of the drought, but here, you're green. What's going on here?" I smiled broadly and told them about mob stocking herbivorous solar conversion lignified carbon sequestration fertilization (we sell T-shirts with that phrase on it).
Most ranchers will never change from their exploitation, land rape overgrazing systems. Most environmentalists are so proud of their anti-cattle position it's like a religion, a badge of identity. Many of these folks wish nobody had ever or could ever privately own land. This forever fight is a drain on emotions, energy, and ecology.
In my view, the best solution is to start privatizing the public lands. Start selling them. Then the environmentalists can get rid of the cattle on the land they buy. The ranchers won't get low-cost public grazing contracts and will be forced to think more ecologically. Sell it all. Quit the war being fought at taxpayer expense. That won't eliminate all the abuse, but at least it won't let the federal government abuse all of its land and will decentralize the level of abuse. And bring decision making to the local level. You can be pretty sure that anyone who wants power concentrated at the federal level is not a friend of individual decision-making.
I can feel the pushback. It's not perfect. But nothing this side of eternity is perfect. Let the peasants have a crack for once. I wouldn't do it all at once, and I would offer it in numerous sizes so lots of folks could get a piece of land to love and nurture.
Have you ever met any land-healing cow herds?