Government-subsidized livestock grazing isn't exactly great deal for landscape

1 hour ago • PATRICK DURKIN For the State Journal

... Such cases make you wonder if we’re so disconnected from the land that we blindly subsidize its degradation. Most folks don’t know that federal grazing fees billed to Western ranchers continually lag similar fees on nearby private and state-owned lands.

Neither do folks realize livestock grazing on the West’s vast public lands inflict widespread damage to the range, wetlands and wildlife habitat. Even fewer realize cattle can be raised more cheaply and efficiently on more fertile, productive lands in other regions ...

If this were simply a government giveaway, maybe we could dismiss Bundy as just another hypocrite feeling entitled to handouts. Unfortunately, this program encourages livestock grazing on fragile lands, which damages fish, wildlife, wildlife habitat, native grasslands, water corridors, waterfowl flyways and scenic landscapes.

A 2000 review of 54 studies of arid grasslands in the West found grazed areas averaged 80 percent more soil erosion, 24 percent less biomass, and 45 percent less coverage in biological soil crusts than similar ungrazed areas. (“Biological soil crusts” contain moss, algae, lichens and microbes, which reduce erosion, fix nitrogen, improve water filtration, and slow the spread of exotic weeds) ...

http://host.madison.com/sports/recreation/outdoors/patrick-durkin-government-subsidized-livestock-grazing-isn-t-exactly-great/article_973e79e1-ae9d-5c5b-b990-6f96d92af272.html