BTNF Plans To Expand Livestock Grazing In Upper Green River Vacant Allotments.
The Upper Green River Valley and Wind River Range from the Elk Ridge grazing complex in the Gros Ventre Range. Photo George Wuerthner.
In a breach of trust and faith, the Bridger Teton National Forest (BTNF) proposes to stock 30,577 acres with cattle in the Elk Ridge area of the Gros Ventre Range, including the upper Tosi Creek, Lime Creek, Rock Creek, and Klondike Creek drainages. Approximately 44% of the site is within the Gros Ventre Wilderness. These allotments were previously grazed by domestic sheep and are within the Upper Green River valley. Angus Thuermer wrote a good overview of the controversy in Wyofile. https://www.wyofile.com/grizzly-conflicts-central-to-new-upper-green-river-grazing-debate/
I recently visited the area to see how the allotments were doing without livestock. Although the impacts of past livestock grazing are apparent in many places, with particular plant species typically avoided by livestock still dominating the landscape, the recovery of vegetation is ongoing. In addition, I found evidence of elk, pronghorn, and other wildlife use of the area.
Elk summer in the area but are socially displaced by the presence of cattle. Photo George Wuerthner
These allotments were closed in 2016 when private interests paid millions of dollars to the ranchers to voluntarily retire their grazing privileges in the area to reduce conflicts between livestock and public values like wilderness integrity and protecting bighorn sheep and grizzly bears. The assumption of those who donated funds to allotment retirement is that the area would never be grazed by livestock again—or so the people donating funds assumed this would be the case. Restocking these allotments could jeopardize future voluntary grazing buyout proposals.
It is important to note that the Upper Green River area is not just any typical FS landscape. It contains some of the best wildlife habitat in the West and is an area of increasing conflicts with wildlife like elk, grizzlies, and wolves.
In its Forest Plan, the BTNF recognizes the significant wildlife values of the area by designating 93% a special management designation where management is supposed to be the primary management emphasis and importance.
The heavily cropped vegetation seen here in the Upper Green allotment means little forage left for native herbivores, hiding cover for small mammals and birds, and greater soil compaction. Photo George Wuerthner
A recent Final Environmental Impact Statement that reviewed livestock grazing in the Upper Green River area concluded that the No Grazing alternative had the most benefits and most negligible impacts on dozens of resource values. In every instance, the No Grazing allotment would bring about more rapid improvement, more favorable benefits, and better ecological outcomes than any other grazing option. Indeed, the only negative impact reported would be on “traditional uses,” which is a euphemism for livestock grazing.
Now the Forest Service is planning to restock those allotments in a breach of trust that not only jeopardizes the ecological integrity of these public lands but the entire voluntary grazing retirement system. It also puts raises the question about who the BTNF thinks they work for? The public interest or private ranching interests?
The Upper Green River lies between the Wind River Range and the Gros Vente Range and is the headwaters of the Colorado River. It is a mix of flowery sagebrush meadows, aspen groves, and timber patches that include lodgepole pine, subalpine fir whitebark pine, and spruce.
The Upper Green has been the scene of numerous livestock conflicts with wildlife. As a result, there are endangered and rare species found here, including sage grouse, Colorado River Cutthroat trout, Kendall Hot Springs Dace, various amphibians like boreal toad. The area is also a significant migration corridor and summer range for pronghorn, elk, and other larger ungulates.
Dozens of grizzly bears have been killed in the Upper Green River area due to conflicts with domestic livestock. Photo George Wuerthner
However, the most immediate conflicts involve predators like wolves and grizzlies. In the past decade or so, dozens of grizzly bears have been killed to appease the ranchers utilizing our public lands for their profit. It’s critical to understand this idea.
A grazing allotment is a privilege. It is not a “right,” though many ranchers assert this myth. Grazing on public lands, like any other use, can be modified or terminated if there are significant conflicts with other public values.
Cattle grazing in the Upper Green River allotment this summer has already reduced hiding cover and cropped vegetation to golf course height. Photo George Wuerthner
In the case of the Upper Green River area, the conflicts are numerous (but not unique), including trashing of riparian zones (the vegetation and banks of streams) by cattle hooves, the pollution of water (where cattle graze E Coli levels are often much higher than legal limits), the consumption of forage that would otherwise sustain native herbivores from ground squirrels to elk, the social displacement of native species (elk avoid areas actively being grazed by cattle, thus are pushed into less suitable habitat), the creation of range “developments” like fencing, water pipelines, and so forth that are paid for with tax dollars to benefit private industry, and so on. This litany is only a partial list of the problems of livestock operations in this area. For more see this link.
In its previous environmental analysis, the Forest Service failed to consider the economic impact of livestock grazing on the public’s values. Instead, it focused on the financial interests of a small percentage of local ranchers who graze the Upper Green. Farm/agriculture in Sublette County only contributes about 3.1% of income in the area. The contribution of public lands forage to this total is some subset of this that is considerably less, likely fewer than 1%. Other public lands values like wildlife, fisheries, wilderness, water quality, and other values are far more critical to the local economy. Still, they are compromised by the livestock grazing of the Upper Green River allotments.
The Elk Ridge grazing complex is recovering from past sheep grazing. Photo George Wuerthner
At present, some 18,000 cattle graze in the Upper Green area each summer. The BTNF suggests that reopening the Elk Ridge grazing area to approximately 700 cattle can reduce conflicts between grizzlies and livestock. But all this will do is create the opportunity for more conflicts. The Forest Service sought comments on the Elk Ridge plan last month as it launched an environmental review, garnering 3,256 letters by the close of the comment period.
Elk Ridge in the Gros Ventre Range is over 10,000 feet in elevation. Photo George Wuerthner
The public must write the BTNF and urge them to do a complete Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before deciding about future grazing in the Elk Ridge area. Be sure to mention in your letters that restocking these allotments with cattle will compromise existing wilderness values, harm grizzly bears and other wildlife, and demonstrates bad faith when it comes to voluntary grazing retirement.
You can write and urge them to protect public values, not private interests.
Patricia Oconnor firstname.lastname@example.org Forest Supervisor
Kevin Khung email@example.com Deputy Forest Supervisor
Griebel, Randall L -FS (firstname.lastname@example.org) Resources
Hoelscher, Rob -FS email@example.com District Ranger
George Wuerthner is an ecologist and former hunting guide with a degree in wildlife biology
8 Responses to BTNF Plans To Expand Livestock Grazing In Upper Green River Vacant Allotments.
Subscribe to Blog via EmailJoin 970 other subscribers
- New Bison Video From Yellowstone Voices June 5, 2023
- We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate. May 31, 2023
- Wildfire And California Home Insurance Challenges May 27, 2023
- Grizzlies Get A Win On Upper Green May 26, 2023
- Senator Daines Ill-advised Forest Management Advocacy May 25, 2023
- Ida Lupine on We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate.
- Kevin Bixby on We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate.
- Lyn McCormick on We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate.
- Jannett Heckert on We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate.
- Rick Meis on We Lost Jim Bailey–Wild Bison Advocate.
- Ida Lupine on Save Our Sequoias Act–A Stealth Attack On NEPA, ESA and Our Sequoia Groves
- Mary on Save Our Sequoias Act–A Stealth Attack On NEPA, ESA and Our Sequoia Groves
- Rambling Dave on Wildfire And California Home Insurance Challenges
- Ida Lupine on Wildfire And California Home Insurance Challenges
- Mary on Wildfire And California Home Insurance Challenges
- Jeff Hoffman on Wildfire And California Home Insurance Challenges
- Jeff Hoffman on Senator Daines Ill-advised Forest Management Advocacy
- laurie on Grizzlies Get A Win On Upper Green
- Ida Lupine on Grizzlies Get A Win On Upper Green
- Jeff Hoffman on Grizzlies Get A Win On Upper Green
Cattle are the epitome of an invasive species on public lands. We simply do not need to graze cows in the forests any more.
I emailed all four of the addresses. Cattle are a scourge on our public lands and an environmental disaster. I’m repulsed by the power cattle ranchers have on our government agencies that are supposed to be protecting our public spaces.
The expanse of the cattle industry will be a continuing war over land use and water. When you have people like Bundy who continues to exert this unreasonable power over public land. This is unacceptable. Ranchers are making profits off these cattle at the expense of taxpayers. And the worst thing is how this affects the wildlife already struggling for survival, including wolves. How is this ever going to get better when the public is so reliant on their hamburgers and steaks? Keep public lands public!How can we resolve this?
Sent comments to all of the above. I do wonder if they “listen” to anyone who isnt a resident of that state, but certainly worth making opinions known. Putting livestock into a Wilderness Area is the epitome of stupidity – bottom line.
Grazing livestock in wilderness areas is nothing liess than a wanton assault on America’s wildlife, and it must end.
Too many of these politicians in the Western states seem to have the mindset that slaughtering wolves & grizzly bears, turning out livestock in areas that already is short on forage, pushing wildlife into areas where the forage & their safety is at risk – this is their prerogative – theirs alone! The mountainous and arid parts of our country are not natural habitat for cattle! That alone should tell anyone its bad BUSINESS, if nothing else, to insist on turning domestic livestock out in wildlife habitat that contains predators. Especially if there is no attempt to prevent these domestic animals from damaging the habitat (riparian) or pushing the native wildlife away from their grazing.
Thats pretty clear to anyone with a mind! I’m no farmer or rancher – but am very clear on what happens to a creek or stream where cattle are turned out – thats where they hang out when its warm! Simple. Looking at the cowpies – the dirt because grass has been overgrazed. This is only common sense. Wilderness is no place for domestic animals.
I often wonder what amount of dark money is being paid by cattle interests to politicians, and people who make such decisions.
The livestock lobby is very busy influencing the decision makers!