What Standards Will Be Applied?
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
Imagine if a rancher were to purchase a sizeable ranch with a considerable amount of grazing permits connected for using federally-managed lands and that rancher were to by-pass local, on-the-ground or even state level Bureau of Land Management officials and travel to Washington, D.C. exerting incredible amounts of political muscle to forge considerations like no one has ever witnessed. They would propose to fence off the public lands for their exclusive use, suggesting to overstock the property with their livestock and also proposing that they should be paid, by taxpayers, $500 per head of livestock for their efforts (with the possibility in the plans of their herd exceeding 34,000 head)?
Somehow, based on slightly more than 22 years of reading the press reports of greedy ranchers and their ill-begotten gains from using federally-managed lands, I would anticipate that there would be no shortage of bashing, teeth-gnashing, etc. “How dare you even propose the idea!” might be a reaction with federal officials quickly responding that no such concept would ever get even the slightest recognition of being a legitimate consideration.
Now consider that proposal in the light of the much heralded proposal, reported to have been put forth by Madeleine Pickens, wife of Billionaire T. Boone Pickens. From way up on the food chain in the federal agency (supposedly responsible for the proper management of the federal lands under their assignment) – the proposal is being warmly received as something with a great deal of potential. After all, the animals in question are also the responsibility of the same agency – Wild Horses.
Following the purchase of a Nevada ranch, by a non-profit tax shelter under the direction of Mrs. Pickens, the proposal is taking shape to use the 14,000 acre property, with 540,000 acres of public land grazing rights (according to the Associated Press news account that I’ve read) to get started with giving 1,000 Wild Horses a sanctuary. The report suggests that the Wild Horse numbers could climb to as many as 34,000.
To accomplish this Wild Horse arrangement the property would need to be fenced (otherwise they could just wander around and they wouldn’t really be in a sanctuary…they would just be over-populating public lands like they are already doing, wherever they are). You would also think that without the fencing, there would be little reason for taxpayers to pay the Picken’s Non-profit tax-shelter the $500 per animal for “taking care” of the animals.
It’s interesting that when the public lands are proposed to be used for this type of purpose, grazing permits ascend to become “grazing rights” in media accounts – compared to the insistence that when the same permits are for cows, they are merely “grazing privileges”. It is also interesting that fencing off public lands for exclusive use in this example with payments in the works for the upkeep of the animals is believed to be an idea worth merit.
It makes you wonder whether the special considerations are tied to the who and their money/political juice or if it has more to do with the majesty of the animals as icons of our Western heritage? It also makes one wonder whether the animals housed behind fences on Nevada’s rangelands are any less livestock than those former free-roaming Wild Horses that have been located on private horse sanctuaries in the Midwest or in feed-lots?
These considerations and the way in which federal land managers process the proposal will be interesting to watch unfold. The standards to be applied for making the decisions (as well as the people involved in making the decisions) have to leave us wondering whether the criteria will be based on the principles of sound management or someone being more equal than others…
Imagine if a rancher were to purchase a sizeable ranch with a considerable amount of grazing permits connected for using federally-managed lands and that rancher were to by-pass local, on-the-ground or even state level Bureau of Land Management officials and travel to Washington, D.C. exerting incredible amounts of political muscle to forge considerations like no one has ever witnessed. They would propose to fence off the public lands for their exclusive use, suggesting to overstock the property with their livestock and also proposing that they should be paid, by taxpayers, $500 per head of livestock for their efforts (with the possibility in the plans of their herd exceeding 34,000 head)?
Somehow, based on slightly more than 22 years of reading the press reports of greedy ranchers and their ill-begotten gains from using federally-managed lands, I would anticipate that there would be no shortage of bashing, teeth-gnashing, etc. “How dare you even propose the idea!” might be a reaction with federal officials quickly responding that no such concept would ever get even the slightest recognition of being a legitimate consideration.
Now consider that proposal in the light of the much heralded proposal, reported to have been put forth by Madeleine Pickens, wife of Billionaire T. Boone Pickens. From way up on the food chain in the federal agency (supposedly responsible for the proper management of the federal lands under their assignment) – the proposal is being warmly received as something with a great deal of potential. After all, the animals in question are also the responsibility of the same agency – Wild Horses.
Following the purchase of a Nevada ranch, by a non-profit tax shelter under the direction of Mrs. Pickens, the proposal is taking shape to use the 14,000 acre property, with 540,000 acres of public land grazing rights (according to the Associated Press news account that I’ve read) to get started with giving 1,000 Wild Horses a sanctuary. The report suggests that the Wild Horse numbers could climb to as many as 34,000.
To accomplish this Wild Horse arrangement the property would need to be fenced (otherwise they could just wander around and they wouldn’t really be in a sanctuary…they would just be over-populating public lands like they are already doing, wherever they are). You would also think that without the fencing, there would be little reason for taxpayers to pay the Picken’s Non-profit tax-shelter the $500 per animal for “taking care” of the animals.
It’s interesting that when the public lands are proposed to be used for this type of purpose, grazing permits ascend to become “grazing rights” in media accounts – compared to the insistence that when the same permits are for cows, they are merely “grazing privileges”. It is also interesting that fencing off public lands for exclusive use in this example with payments in the works for the upkeep of the animals is believed to be an idea worth merit.
It makes you wonder whether the special considerations are tied to the who and their money/political juice or if it has more to do with the majesty of the animals as icons of our Western heritage? It also makes one wonder whether the animals housed behind fences on Nevada’s rangelands are any less livestock than those former free-roaming Wild Horses that have been located on private horse sanctuaries in the Midwest or in feed-lots?
These considerations and the way in which federal land managers process the proposal will be interesting to watch unfold. The standards to be applied for making the decisions (as well as the people involved in making the decisions) have to leave us wondering whether the criteria will be based on the principles of sound management or someone being more equal than others…
Posted by Doug Busselman at 10/9/2010 8:26 AM 
Categories: Public Lands
Tags: BLM Nevada Wild Horses Madeleine Pickens Natural Resource Management
Categories: Public Lands
Tags: BLM Nevada Wild Horses Madeleine Pickens Natural Resource Management
Comments