2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Grazing is not all good or all bad.  It depends on the number of animals, the time of the year they are on the land and how long they are on the land.  There are good grazing managers and not so good managers.  Historically, there were too many animals for too long a time.  This has generally changed.  It isn't a case of graze or not graze as some conservation organizations and some livestock associations would have you believe.  Good management takes diligence and federal land managers and livestock managers know their jobs and their livelihoods depend this.  Everyone involved cares about the land, don't paint this issue as graze or not graze.  Agreement needs to be reached on management objectives and how to monitor to ensure those objectives are being reached.  Thank you.

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context