Shouldn conservationists avoid associating with or confronting public lands ranchers with a buyout proposal and instead focus on establishing Wilderness and other protective designations?
Politically, conservationists made a deal with the livestock industry in the Wilderness Act of 1964, grandfathering grazing use in any area where it was occurring before it became/becomes designated as Wilderness. However, the deal has not resulted in the livestock industry supporting new wilderness areas. In fact, (strangely) in many parts of the arid West, the livestock industry has been the major opposition to Wilderness designations. If this opposition can be reduced through permit buyout, it is probable that more, larger Wilderness areas could be established on landscapes newly liberated from livestock grazing–while public lands graziers will get the transition payments they need to move on.
Related Questions
- Shouldn conservationists avoid associating with or confronting public lands ranchers with a buyout proposal and instead focus on establishing Wilderness and other protective designations?
- If a sufficient number of ranchers elect to take the buyout and end livestock production on public lands, won that affect rural economies and communities?
- By endorsing the permit buyout, am I supporting the end of all livestock grazing on public lands?
