WY the most conservative, D.C. the most liberal - according to Gallup (Cheyenne: how much, school)

[monkeywrenching]

just another reason why I believe that all national parks and wildlife reserves become state parks and state reserves.

nothing in the Constitution saying anything at all about parks or reserves.

[BerkMTB]

Thought I would give you an east coast point of view here. How some of us see it:

1. Ranchers are raising cattle to make money.
2. A lot of these cattle are being grazed on federal land (land which belongs to all of us).
3. Wolves were here before we were and are a natural part of the ecosystem. The Ecosystem needs top tier predators. Here in the east we have moose and deer with no predators except for cars . We end up with diseased animals which do not get naturally culled and then run into them.

Many people in the east are in favor of trying to have as natural ecosystem as possible. Hunting (unless you are going to chase them on foot with a bow and arrow) does not cull weak animals. It culls trophy animals. It is not a natural process.

Its very difficult for us to sympathize with Ranchers. Sorry about that,

And, yes, I am a vegetarian. And yes, I favor bringing back the wolf to the northern forest here in new england.

Just thought I would put that out there. There are other opinions.

[jody_wy]

and those ranchers pay to graze on federal land ,wolves just don't kill the sick and weak , like when they run 150 head of ewes off a cliff and pile them up .
Try losing 30 head of $200 lambs in a month and corralling and sleeping with them at night. took 30 days to trap that old coyote , had to trap every skunk , coon and porcupine on private property before getting that one killer, oh he didn't eat on any of them he just liked killing...
Sold my public land grazing leases it cheaper to run on my private land then the hidden expenses on public.
We have area were wildlife are in a predator pit , predator are killing each other because there not enough other prey.... wildlife needs managed, man has always been involved , where running herds of bison over cliffs to burning grassland to stop brush....

[jody_wy]

oh and there are one heck of a lot of bow hunters.... usually more sit in a blind with other driving animal toward the hunter. Or using cow elk calls and bull elk calls to bring the animal with in bow range....It a rush calling a bull elk with in 15 yards....most all wildlife spend part of the year on private property, a large portion winter on private property...

[sunsprit]

Originally Posted by BerkMTB

Thought I would give you an east coast point of view here. How some of us see it:

1. Ranchers are raising cattle to make money.

While that's an interesting concept that we who raise cattle would like to aspire to, the reality is that very few make any money at it. Just about every small landholder/rancher that I know of has to work off the ranch to support their "ranching habit". The fact is, it's a lifestyle more than a real income producer due to the very low economic net; even in the recent marketplace of some of the highest dollars/lb for slaughter animals, the cost inputs have gone up faster and the net to the rancher is still pretty low per animal.

2. A lot of these cattle are being grazed on federal land (land which belongs to all of us).

Again, you ignore that substantial portions of the Western states are owned by the Fed. If you want to lease/rent land to run your cattle on, then you've got to go to the folks that own the land. In this case, with 48% of WY being owned by the Fed, they're the big landowner in the area.

Keep in mind that animal grazing permits cost money for the lease, and there's no guarantee each year that the Fed landlord will allow much use of their land. They determine the condition of the lease property and tell the leaseholder what days he can utilize the land. If they don't get enough days in a year, then they're stuck with having to find alternate grazing/feeding; sometimes it's not available and the livestock are forced to be sold because they can't be kept by the leaseholder. These sale situations typically are distress deals and at a loss. In essence, the Fed management can (and oft times in recent drought years) break a livestock operator.

FWIW, the highest and best possible use which helps preseve much of the Fed lands is livestock grazing. Otherwise, these lands would simply turn into a weed patch of no benefit to anybody.

3. Wolves were here before we were and are a natural part of the ecosystem. The Ecosystem needs top tier predators. Here in the east we have moose and deer with no predators except for cars . We end up with diseased animals which do not get naturally culled and then run into them.

The fallacy of the wolf "reintroduction" here in Wyoming is that the wolves being introduced and protected were never "a natural part of the ecosystem" here. My bet is that you'd not appreciate the Fed establishing wolf populations in your backyard only to see them initially control and them DECIMATE the "moose and deer" in your area ... especially if hunting was a huge tourism income/livlihood for you, or if you depended upon that annual large animal hunt to fill your freezer with high quality meat.

Many people in the east are in favor of trying to have as natural ecosystem as possible. Hunting (unless you are going to chase them on foot with a bow and arrow) does not cull weak animals. It culls trophy animals. It is not a natural process.

Tell that to the hunters who go home with less than a trophy animal to fill their tag each year. I don't know any of my neighbors who have ever brought down a trophy animal in any species, but they fill their tags most every year.

Its very difficult for us to sympathize with Ranchers. Sorry about that,

And, yes, I am a vegetarian. And yes, I favor bringing back the wolf to the northern forest here in new england.

Absent seeing the results of what a wolf reintroduction, particularly with species that are far more aggressive and sizable than what historically did range in your area ... is nothing but hot air and posturing on your part. When the wolves decimate the wildlife and then turn to domestic animals, such as pets ... or start attacking the population ... then we'll know how much you "favor bringing back the wolf to the northern forest here in new england".

Just thought I would put that out there. There are other opinions.

Yeah, too bad your's is full of that smarmy all-knowing what's best for everybody else eastern attitude where you don't have to live with the consequences of your posturing.

We here in Wyoming, unfortunately, do.

[jody_wy]

[SIZE=3]
T
[/SIZE][SIZE=1]OTAL [/SIZE][SIZE=3]D[/SIZE][SIZE=1]EATH [/SIZE][SIZE=3]L[/SIZE][SIZE=1]OSS [/SIZE][SIZE=3]U[/SIZE][SIZE=1]P[/SIZE][SIZE=2]: [/SIZE]
[SIZE=2][/SIZE][SIZE=3][SIZE=3]Wyoming sheep and lamb producers lost an estimated 43,000 head of sheep and lambs to predators, weather, lambing problems, disease and other causes in 2012 according to our annual survey. Total losses were down 12,000 head from the previous year. Predators accounted for 43 percent of the losses. The 2012 lamb crop totaled 240,000 lambs marked, docked, or branded which was up 9 percent from 2011. Adding in the lambs lost before docking results in a potential lamb supply of 259,000 head. Of these, 11,000 or 58 percent were lost to various non-predator causes, compared to 77 percent in 2011. [/SIZE][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][SIZE=3][/SIZE][/SIZE]

[SIZE=3]

P
[/SIZE][SIZE=1]REDATOR [/SIZE][SIZE=3]L[/SIZE][SIZE=1]OSSES [/SIZE][SIZE=3]U[/SIZE][SIZE=1]P[/SIZE][SIZE=3]: [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE][SIZE=3][SIZE=3]Wyoming sheep producers lost 18,500 sheep and lambs to predators in 2012, up 6 percent from 2011. Coyotes were again the biggest predator taking 64 percent of the total predator losses and 27 percent of all losses. Losses to weather, disease and other non-predator causes decreased by 13,000 head to 24,500. http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_...lletin2013.pdf[/SIZE][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][SIZE=3][/SIZE][/SIZE]

[BerkMTB]

I guess I figured a reactive response along these lines. Not going to bother dialoging point by point.

I appreciate that you enjoy your way of life but your not going to convince me that what you describe positively contributes to a sustainable planet or ecosystem.

Apologies if this sounds elitist or condescending. Just an opinion.

I wish Wyoming luck with the challenges you face. We have ours as well.

[sunsprit]

Originally Posted by BerkMTB

I guess I figured a reactive response along these lines. Not going to bother dialoging point by point.

I appreciate that you enjoy your way of life but your not going to convince me that what you describe positively contributes to a sustainable planet or ecosystem.

Apologies if this sounds elitist or condescending. Just an opinion.

I wish Wyoming luck with the challenges you face. We have ours as well.

LOL. I've spent a few minutes in your part of the country, and it's pretty clear that the overwhelming "way of life" there DOES NOT "contribute to a sustainable planet or ecosystem". NOT in the slightest ... you've (as a group of residents) have polluted your way into national caliber messes, destruction of the local ecosystems ... for a long time.

Rather than screwing up the way of life and ecology here in Wyoming with all your pontificating and laws/regulations that have repeatedly proven themselves to be a detriment for those who actually live here ....

May I humbly suggest that you start on your noble adventures of cleaning up you own ****ing mess in the toilet where YOU LIVE?


PS: this is a perfect example of what I refer to as that "smarmy eastern attitude of folk who know better than everybody else how to live their lives". You sit in your messed up environment and blow smoke up everybody else's as* about how the world would be a more perfect place for you with all your regulations and grand ideas, but the bottom line is "don't do as I do, do as I say".

PPS: as far as a vegetarian diet goes ... of which I've personally watched many folk destroy their health (over 50 years now of seeing this fad, starting in Boulder CO in the 1960's) following this, you might want to look at the current issue of Well Being Journal and the article about bone health/tooth health issues and how one researcher found that her vegetarian diet was destroying her teeth. She fixed it by going to a ketogenic type diet.

[blorph]

"PS: this is a perfect example of what I refer to as that "smarmy eastern attitude of folk who know better than everybody else how to live their lives". You sit in your messed up environment and blow smoke up everybody else's as* about how the world would be a more perfect place for you with all your regulations and grand ideas, but the bottom line is "don't do as I do, do as I say". F.U."

Sunsprit: I registered for this site just because of your post (after I gave you a positive mention). I almost cheered aloud
after reading your post. You were/are 100% right on! We live in one of those absolutely horrendous eastern states where the freedom stealing, pagan lib, tyrannical politicians thrive. I was born and raised here, have most of my family here, friends here (who are mostly newly minted unconvicted felons because they will not turn in their weapons or magazines) and love our church here but it is finally time to ESCAPE. I just found this site in researching Wyoming. Again, loved your post.

[jody_wy]

Wealth comes from the earth it either extracted(minded or drilled) or Harvested, more money is made adding value to these raw commodities.
My Ranch is pretty sustainable, yes it relies on mined iron and other metal for machinery for harvest and transportation of resources. Iron requires fuel . But with less iron and energy from out side more Labor would me needed at a higher cost.
As long as income can cover cost I stay in business, there are a lot of farms ranch all over the US that need out side income to help cover cost and many off farm work was just for health insurance.