Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Human activity contributing to pollution of water essay
Human activity contributing to pollution of water essay
Human activity contributing to pollution of water essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The grazing of public lands has become a very controversial issue over the last couple of decades. This is due to the fact that there are some people who believe that grazing the land is beneficial to the wildlife and the different plant species there. Then there are other people who have the belief that the grazing of livestock on public lands is detrimental to wildlife and plant health. Therefore, they believe that it is actually doing more harm than good.
What are Public Grazing Lands?
Public lands are properties that are not owned by private land owners, but instead are owned by the federal government. Ranchers are given permits or leases to graze their livestock on these government owned lands. The government agency that has been charged with the care and maintenance of these public lands is The Bureau of Land Management (BLM). According to the BLM’s website their mission statement is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. According to the BLM’s fact sheet, presented on their website, the BLM’s objective is to ensure the long-term health and productivity of these lands, and to create multiple environmental benefits that result from healthy watersheds.
The BLM also says that the public lands, and the private ranches next to them, maintain open spaces in the fast growing West, provide habitat for wildlife, offer many recreational activities provided on public lands, and helps preserve the character of the rural West. There is also a Federal Grazing Fee which applies to the 16 western states on public grazing lands that are managed by the BLM and the U.S. Forest Service. This fee is adjusted annually and is calculated by using a fo...
... middle of paper ...
...nize, Perri. "Winning the War for the West." The Atlantic July 1999: 54. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 6 Apr. 2011.
Mapes, Lynda V. “Grazing on public land: helpful to ranchers, but harmful to habitat?.” Seattle Times 28 July 2008: N. pag. Date Accessed (5 Apr. 2011) .
National Public Lands Grazing Campaign. n.d. 5 Apr. 2011 .
Reece, Myers. “Lawsuit Puts Federal Livestock Grazing in Doubt.” Flathead Beacon 21 Oct. 2010: N. pag. Date Accessed (7 Apr. 2011) .
Stimpert, Marc. "Counterpoint: opportunities lost and opportunities gained: separating truth from myth in the western ranching debate." Environmental Law 36.2 (2006): 481+. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 6 Apr. 2011.
There are many issues regarding the raising and producing of various livestock animals, and the use of pesticides on various types of crops. The movie Food.Inc does a good job explaining these issues, but in a very biased way. It makes agriculturists look like terrible people, when this is not the case.
On March 10, 1892 the Billings Gazette reported, “The opening of spring may be more red than green for the horse thieves and cattle thieves of Johnson County” (Brash, 143). The writer of the article could little have known how truthful their premonition would prove to be. The late 1800’s were turbulent times in the West. Large tracts of publicly held range ground would be at the center of Wyoming’s very own civil war. Gil Bollinger, author and western researcher, reports that by the 1870’s and 1880’s fencing of land to enclose both crops and water sources was common (Bollinger, 81). This practice, however, was still illegal according to the federal government. In 1877, the United States Government sued Swan Land and Cattle Company, in an effort to set an example that all fences on open range must come down (Bollinger, 81). The fencing of lands was a major problem, as agricultural producers needed open access to the limited resources, especially water. Johnson County, in northern Wyoming, was an agricultural nucleus for cattle and sheep producers who knew the lush grass and good water supply would greatly benefit their operations. Since fencing was illegal, these resources were available to everyone. Cattle operators, large and small alike, ran their livestock loose and participated in large roundups once a year where all the cattle were branded. Slick calves, called mavericks, were often unrightfully claimed. Lack of fencing made any free ranging livestock available to whoever was devious enough to take them (Smith, 25).
Despite protecting millions of acres of wilderness, this act provided for the numerous groups of people affected by the establishment of this law. Stipulations regarding the use of protected lands by private landowners were made. People living inside the park lands were guaranteed the right to subsistence hunting and fishing, as well as the guaranteed access to their lands. This right of access is the main concern for this argument, as it is a major management issue for park officials and land owners alike.
The underlying issue of wild horses is the overpopulation of a particular species, which is contributing a serious ecological disaster, overgrazing. The degradation of the land has a domino effect, which will lead to more issues. It is important to maintain a balance between the need of the species, and what is healthy or the environment. The issue created controversy, is central to the passing of laws, and creates an opportunity for the government and the community to work together. There are many way to solve the issue of the wild horses and the issue that are created due to their existence. Issues such as a reduction in the number of the horses removed from the range. Increased use of birth control, a partnership with the Humane Society,
...DE, Popper FJ. "The Buffalo-Commons: A Bioregional Vision of the Great Plains" Landscape Architecture. April 1994: 144.
Mr. Middleton, a journalist, compiled an article describing, in his opinion, the flaws of the Endangered Species Act. He then attempts to back his opinion with studied analyses, researched facts, and testimonies. To summarize Middleton’s (2011) perspective, “Rather than provide incentives for conservation and environmental stewardship, the Endangered Species Act punishes those whose property contains land that might be used as habitat by endangered and threatened species” (p. 79). This quote is broad and generalized yet draws in readers and forces Middleton to spend the rest of the article backing this statement with more logic based facts.
Prairie dogs are well known for being a “plague-ridden, land-destroying blight.” In “Denver’s Street-Smart Prairie Dogs,” Morgan Heim states, “... their tendency to chew down grass and create dusty, pock-marked landscapes in pastures, cropland and backyards.” This argues that prairie dogs disrupted ways are destroying our lands, and in order to protect our lands we need to exterminate them. Furthermore to this evidence, the text, “Prairie Dogs: A Threatened Species or Public Nuisance?” it also claims,
Martinez, Michael. “Showdown on the range: Nevada rancher, feds face off over cattle grazing rights.” CNN US. Web. 6 May 2014.
The current situation today, is that horses and donkeys have exceeded the amount needed to maintain an ecological balance; from 26,600 wildlife to 38,300 wildlife. The horse program, enacted by the bill passed in 1971, costs the government approximately $49 million a year. It takes the majority of the budget to manage the already captured horses; taking into account the life of the horses, it has been concluded that the total cost would be closer to $1 billion (Dean Bolstad, Roundup of Wild Horses.). A federal law, allows the Bureau of Land Management to kill “excess horses to maintain what it calls ‘a thriving natural ecological balance’” (Ginger Kathrens).
For centuries, the wild horses have roamed the Colorado Plateau and they should be able to continue living in the park. The horse population of Colorado has dropped ninety-eight percent since the 1800s. This is mainly because the BLM has rounded up many of the herds from the Mesa Verde area. Contrary to many people's beliefs, horses are not a nuisance to the park because they are a native species. The horses are in the park to get the food and water they need to survive in a
For the true activists, a major point is that this is a really cruel and inhumane way of treating animals. Not only that, but the way these ranches are set up, there is a lack of regulation that eliminates the rights of these animals.
The U.S. Department of Interior’s, Bureau of Land Management, (BLM) was appointed to carry out the Act and given the task of managing the herds of wild horses and burros. Consequently, BLM’s management of wild horse herds has been highly criticized by animal rights activists, horse advocates, news media, as well as members of Congress. There have been numerous lawsuits filed against BLM regarding their management practices and their appalling wild horse round-ups. However, unimpeded BLM continues with the controversial issue of wild horse round-ups, resulting in the death and injury of many wild horses and burros. The vast majority of these round...
Years ago, killing animals for food was part of the average man’s everyday life. While, now a days, hunting is questioned by many across the world because it is commonly viewed as a recreational activity. Many residents have a problem with the dangers that come with hunting. Not to mention, as time goes on, society seems to feel differently about animals and how they should be treated. One of the biggest debates is the harvest of white tailed deer. All over the United States, white tailed deer thrive because of the few predators that feast upon them and the large forests and habitats that these deer can flourish in. However, as buildings and subdivisions pop up left and right decreasing the white tailed deer natural habitat, the debate grows stronger. The heart of the debate is centered around ethical issues, human and deer conflicts, safety, and the benefits hunting has on the economy.
The first noticeable step towards conserving the natural resources and wildlife in the United States started with the Lacey Act. The Lacey Act was started by Senator John Lacey in 1900 to stop the drastic drop in the number of animals and decrease in natural resources in the United States. Lacey’s act made it illegal to kill animals for sport and sell them elsewhere to escape from the law also known as market hunters. Thankfully an end was put to them. The Lacey Act is the oldest wildlife protection law in the United States and the prominence does not stop there. Multiple amendments have been made to the Lacey Act over the years to help preserve plants and wildlife. Since then, numerous species have been saved and the conservation of our natural
Childress, Diana, and Bruce Watson. "The fall of the west." Calliope 11, no. 5 (January 2001): 27.