Dear HCN,
As a not-so-recent
graduate of Utah State University’s College of Natural Resources,
I’ve known and respected Fred Wagner for years. His June 13 op ed
on Yellowstone elk should be read by every environmentalist.
However, a few points should be addressed.
The
Yellowstone Northern Range situation is not analogous to areas
where livestock have overgrazed on public land. This point was
brought home to me on a field trip a few years ago. I went on that
trip, armed with my university and BLM range experience, convinced
the Northern Range was devastated. I left with my arrogance
shaken.
While I still believe there is some
concern over woody plants (willow and aspen), the range still
retains native grasses and similar plants in near climax condition,
unlike similar riparian areas on public land where livestock have
overgrazed. Research seems to suggest this is because most grazing
(browsing) takes place in winter, causing less damage, and because
elk, being native ungulates, do not graze with the same impact as
cattle. The Northern Range watershed is in far better condition
than public-land riparian areas which have been severely overgrazed
by livestock.
The article also fails to note that
much of the Yellowstone Northern Range was plowed and converted to
exotic pasture for bison early in this century. That disturbance
likely affects range studies in those areas.
The
article chides us environmentalists about our concern over
public-land grazing while we are supposedly blind to the
Yellowstone situation. Even though groups like the Greater
Yellowstone Coalition have addressed this topic and continue to do
so, the point is well taken. However, as Ed Marston has clearly
shown, strong accusations of the reverse can be made about land
grant institutions like Utah State.
I’ve worked
on public-land grazing issues in Utah for over a decade. I’ve been
in many meetings where Utah state range extension specialists
usually (not always) take the side of the livestock industry on
areas in far worse condition than the Yellowstone Northern Range.
The justifications offered by the USU experts, in those majority of
cases where they defend the livestock industry, are similar to
those Wagner disparagingly ascribes to the Park
Service.
While I recognize the problems in
Yellowstone, I am not ready to give up on natural regulation. It is
a valid control study. Perhaps hunting outside the park congregates
elk on the Northern Range and should be stopped. Maybe a severe
winter will regulate the elk who, unlike livestock, aren’t fed hay
on base property. Perhaps fencing off mile segments of Slough Creek
and the Lamar River should be done for scientific study, unlike the
minute and meaningless range exclosures on grazed public land. In
any case, Yellowstone is a success. It still has grizzlies,
wolverines, trumpeter swans and an occasional wolf. No place in
Utah, regardless of how well livestock are managed, can make that
claim.
Gary
Macfarlane
Salt Lake City,
Utah
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline Nothing yet beats leaving things alone.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
