This is interesting, and a sad effect of modernist ideas on how land should be used.
It seems pretty apparent after reading much of the linked material, that this is a ranch family that wants very badly to keep on ranching!
And to keep their hired help, which I find admirable. They are going into an unkown future after onlly 12 years which will fly by very fast for them.
I was a little surprised at how much they had to pay for that "cheap" government lease, at a little under $24.00 per cow/calf unit per month. I believe that in those situations, the rancher, NOT the landowner pays for fencing and water development and distribution.
It is interesting that the original idea behind such government leases was to assure that the ranchers who developed the area communities and built small ranches would not be forced out of business by limited grazing land access. Apparently, back then, even government officials knew where food came from!!!
Burnt, it is disappointing to read that you, like too many others, seem to be quite certain that big land owners got that way by squeezing out smaller ones. Why do you believe that, and also seem gleeful that some, probably this one, is suffering for their 'sin'?
It seems to me the virtual cult of teachin the public that greed is the only reason for "big" farms, ranches, businesses, or whatever the 'target' may be. Goverment leaders at all levels,politicians, popular media stars and reporters, some churches, certainly our schools, all are guilty of seeding envy of those with more, whether money, or any other 'good'.
The story of at least one early settler I know of gives the lie to the "greed breeds acquisition by 'pressure' on the 'little guy'.
A rancher, through his own hard work, later enhanced by family and hired "FRIENDS", thrift and wise decisions accumulated a fairly large ranch. Homesteading began. He feared for those homesteaders, believing that the premise that anyone could make a living in western SD on that amount of land by farming or ranching was in error. That those people were simply being set up for failure by the government and the land salesmen and railroads who painted glowing futures with claims of "the rains will follow the plow". He finally did homestead his 'settlers ranch site' after friends insisted that someone else would take that land and he would be out all the hard work of building his log cabin and horse barn.
His fears soon became reality, and while he helped many homesteading neighbors, when they did decide to leave, several of them begged him to buy their land so it would be cared for......and he did. And paid fair prices allowing them to start a new life elsewhere, if they chose.
His practice from the first days in the area was to encourage others to settle there and help to build a community......and many did and are friends and neighbors many generations later.
Most certainly, he was not the only one.
Nor have all the 'little outfits' been free of any 'greed' in how they operated and lived!
Guess I got on a soapbox a little here, but I know too many wonderful people who have suffered accusations such as that, and who truly were/are the "good ones".
mrj
