If you want to protect grouse, bring back the cattle

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • wrz Ogden, UT
    Jan. 17, 2013 10:14 p.m.

    Sorry, but cattle don't eat the tall old grass. They go for the new, tender grass if they can get at it. And they rarely if ever eat weeds.

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    Jan. 17, 2013 7:25 p.m.


    Buried within your bad-natured distortions are several very good points. First, Al Gore is a hypocrite, and you're right that he has spent a lot of time promoting environmental goals he himself is not living. Second, this can be seen to a lesser extent in most mainstream American environmentalists. You can't really be an environmentalist and live a First World life. Even a modest American lifestyle is very ecologically damaging.

    But, you are certainly guilty of projecting the worst possible motivations to people who are only trying to improve the world in the way they would like to see it improved. Just like everyone else. Accusing them of having no other motivation than power and money is just as bad as me accusing a capitalist of having no other motivation in life than power and money. Get off your high horse and try to understand where people are coming from.

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    Jan. 17, 2013 7:16 p.m.

    The research cited in the report was from numerous studies conducted over a period of several decades, and the results have nothing to do with the proposal to list Gunnison as a separate species that you spent several breathless, ranting paragraphs yelling about. Since you don't believe there are 2 species, then the research results must apply to the birds in Utah, yes? Bad cattle grazing practices helped drive this species toward extinction, and that contradicts Mr. Jones's claims. That was the extent of my point.

    "And, BTW, the real experts are people like Carl Jones"

    Do you even know who he is? I'll allow that those who live on the land can have valuable perspective, but judging from the condition of many rangelands in the West, it is safe to say a good number of ranchers have no expertise in ecology. Or they willfully don't use their expertise.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Jan. 17, 2013 3:02 p.m.

    Re: "I would like to save these birds. If experts agree . . . ."

    They don't.

    And, BTW, the real experts are people like Carl Jones, who wrote the original letter, and those who live, day-in, day-out, on the land with these birds. NOT politically-motivated, agenda-drive academics and EPA bureaucrats.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 17, 2013 2:19 p.m.

    I would like to save these birds. If experts agree with this solution,
    lets do it.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 17, 2013 1:37 p.m.

    Irony Guy: I never said that there are no individuals or even groups who care deeply about sage grouse, national park lands, whales, oil spills, or a ton of other causes.

    What I am saying is that the majority of people you see in the news demonstrating, filing lawsuits, and harassing business - don't really care about those things more than they care about money, power, and in general - being a big pain.

    They are like televangelists who make millions preaching the gospel but don't really believe or try to live the things they are preaching.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Jan. 17, 2013 1:21 p.m.

    Re: ". . . a US Fish and Wildlife Service report on sage grouse cites a bunch of research literature . . . ."

    Yeah -- that would be the one dated January 11, 2013, in which the Service disingenuously proposes to separate out the "Gunnison sage-grouse" from all other Western sage grouse, so it can illegally fast-track its ESA designation as endangered, stopping Utah energy exploration immediately, rather than having to wait until 2015, when the real sage grouse study is due.

    I defy any EPA or FWS bureaucrat to distinguish between our sage grouse and any others in the West.

    They're NOT separate species, of course. But, since it's important to East-bench elites and back-East bureaucrats to create a crisis to justify fast-tracking their freedom and prosperity-destroying scams, they just lie, and say they are.

    Your tax dollars at work!

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    Jan. 17, 2013 1:03 p.m.

    Well, Joe, I'm a liberal and I do care about the sage grouse. So there.

  • Papaman6 Los Angeles, CA
    Jan. 17, 2013 12:37 p.m.

    Well said, JoeCapitalist2. Too bad they didn't pay as much attention to the indians. Why not import the Gunnison Sage Grouse to a reservation where there is no human or pedator activity. How much time and money are the environmentalists willing to spend on research, studies, plans and hearings?

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 17, 2013 8:47 a.m.

    One of the biggest lies being perpetrated on the public these days is that most "environmental groups" primarily care about wildlife, nature, or the environment. These things are merely tools for them to promote their anti-business and anti-energy agenda and to gain a lot of power and money in the process.

    Look at Al Gore. If anyone thinks this guy cares one bit about pollution or the sea rising they need their head examined. It was always about doing or saying whatever gave Al more power and money. He never did anything to sacrifice his own comfort in order to reduce his own "personal carbon footprint". Unfortunately, he is the rule instead of the exception.

  • Papaman6 Los Angeles, CA
    Jan. 17, 2013 8:39 a.m.

    Sage Grouse make a great diet for the eagles and the ravens love their eggs. Keep importing the grouse. The question is: will they live long enough to lay eggs?

  • Emajor Ogden, UT
    Jan. 17, 2013 5:16 a.m.

    I'm guessing Mr. Jones didn't get this information from a credible source, because a US Fish and Wildlife Service report on sage grouse cites a bunch of research literature that contradicts his claims.

    The cited research shows that sagebrush and wet meadow habitat fragmentation and loss is the primary reason the species is declining. This habitat loss is due to human activities including invasive species introduction, the resulting wildfires, energy development, CATTLE GRAZING, urban expansion, and agriculture.

    Read the habitat requirements for this bird and then take a walk out on western public lands that have been overgrazed to see if it meets any of the criteria. Because "overgrazed" IS cattle at their "historic levels".

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Jan. 17, 2013 5:03 a.m.

    Re: "Do-gooders living in the eastern U.S. think that they know how to save wildlife."

    Oh, it's worse than that, Carl. Those "do-gooders" aren't really even all that interested in wildlife. They just want to turn the entire West into an uninhabited, undeveloped playground and petting zoo for liberal East-bench, back-East, and Left-coast elites.

    Their primary interest in grouse is as a tool to block energy development.