• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Summit on the prairies

B

Big Muddy rancher

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
22,807
Location
Big Muddy valley
I got invited to sit in on a panel discussion at the Canadian Geographical Society conference. The panel will discuss
"How are rural environments changing and how, in turn, are residents, communities and governments dealing with rapid socio-economic and environmental changes? "
Here is how it works<The panel discussion is intended to be informal yet structured, following a set of focus points to help facilitate discussion. Each panelist will have 8-10 minutes maximum to address the following points based on your own experience:



a. discuss 2-3 points you feel are most important to understanding rural change in a grasslands context, focusing on perceived challenges as well as positive change;



b. reflect on 2-3 lessons learned from your personal interaction with others living and working in the context of grasslands conservation and development (e.g. academics, First Nations, government, ranchers, environmentalists, etc.);



c. suggest 2-3 ways we can work together to improve relationships and address mutual challenges (e.g. perceived opportunities to improve community-researcher relationships, practice, research).



Since I am the only rancher on the panel the other man is with the WWF wanting to turn the Northern Great Plains into a "Buffalo Common" and the three ladies are from academia I thought this would be a good chance to get our voices heard.
How about those of you with and interest and an opinion give me some insight on this topic. Post it here or in a PM is fine.
 
Big Muddy rancher said:
Since I am the only rancher on the panel the other man is with the WWF wanting to turn the Northern Great Plains into a "Buffalo Common" and the three ladies are from academia I thought this would be a good chance to get our voices heard.
How about those of you with and interest and an opinion give me some insight on this topic. Post it here or in a PM is fine.
Click to expand...

Tell them that is a fine and admirable idea and we can get to work on it as soon as all the land now covered in concrete and asphalt that was once farms and ranches, is returned back to farms and ranches.
 
allen57 said:
Big Muddy rancher said:
Since I am the only rancher on the panel the other man is with the WWF wanting to turn the Northern Great Plains into a "Buffalo Common" and the three ladies are from academia I thought this would be a good chance to get our voices heard.
How about those of you with and interest and an opinion give me some insight on this topic. Post it here or in a PM is fine.
Click to expand...

Tell them that is a fine and admirable idea and we can get to work on it as soon as all the land now covered in concrete and asphalt that was once farms and ranches, is returned back to farms and ranches.
Click to expand...

Good answer but prolly not the one they are wanting to hear.
 
You don't need any help here BMR, just speak from the heart. Multi generational ranchers on the prairie are uniquely qualified as stewards of native grassland. In fact on contiguous native prairie that is a large feature of your operation there has been very little change in the grassland and keeping it like that especially in the context of academics interfering with the process is the challenge. What needs to be understood is that the natural protector (because your livelihood depends on it) is the rancher.

It is interesting that they used conservation and development it the same sentence and context. It seems in Government vernacular that you must conserve until they want to develop. You can't pick a crocus yet they can strip mine. Mitigate the need for mitigation by keeping the footprint small. In essence, that is the code most native prairie ranchers live by.

As ranchers steward the grassland they provide ecological goods and services to the area by keeping the watershed intact, managing fire risk, protecting wildlife habitat and all the while contributing the the GDP of the Province and Country.
 
I would echo per's comments. As a rancher you...
preserve the fastest disappearing ecosystem in the world
sequester carbon every day
cycle nutrients using ruminant technology (as the grassland was developed under)
contribute to society as a gainfully employed citizen
provide relatively inexpensive "on the ground" expertise and management of the resource
and help feed the world as you do it. Your primary production also gainfully employs many people up the food chain.
I would talk about all the unique species that you see every day, and really challenge people how they think they got there.
Oh yeah - don't post your coyote pics on an overhead... :P
 
Thanks guys, I hope a few more from both sides of the border speak up.
Your right on the disappearing grasslands. It has been government policy to break the grasslands right from the Homestead Act to the Crow Rate to the quota system for selling wheat. The "experts" were telling us to break the native grass up and "Improve" it with tame grass ie Crested Wheat :roll:
With out the rancher resisting these government policies more native grass would be gone. Now the "Experts" want to regulate the very people who have stewarded this land. If they would recognize the ecological value contributed by good stewardship of the grasslands for the greater good of the public and reward good stewardship maybe that would be a step toward "improve relationships and address mutual challenges".
 
There must be a few more posters on here with skin in this game. Lets hear what you have to say on the subject. The risks and challenges are not exclusive to any one country and the solutions could be universal across boundaries.
 
burnt said:
allen57 said:
Big Muddy rancher said:
Since I am the only rancher on the panel the other man is with the WWF wanting to turn the Northern Great Plains into a "Buffalo Common" and the three ladies are from academia I thought this would be a good chance to get our voices heard.
How about those of you with and interest and an opinion give me some insight on this topic. Post it here or in a PM is fine.
Click to expand...

Tell them that is a fine and admirable idea and we can get to work on it as soon as all the land now covered in concrete and asphalt that was once farms and ranches, is returned back to farms and ranches.
Click to expand...

Good answer but prolly not the one they are wanting to hear.
Click to expand...

Part of the problem. The right answer is seldom the one anyone wants to hear.
 
I think it would be interesting to take part in a panale discussion like that. I wonder what the people who are putting it on really want to do. I wonder about their real ideas or their real agenda. There are a lot of topics and issues that can be discussed, but it seems it always gets to population shifts. Often it seems some people are looking for amunition to promote the idea that there is nothing worthwhile out here in the prarie states They like to talk about population decrease and small towns disapearing.

We can not afford to lose any more of our native prairie anywhere. Our native prairie is the nearest to being self sustaining as we will get. The land we continue to crop, or plant introduced crops on needs outside resources to keep it productive.

One point I would make is that our native prairie consisted of a complex mixter of plants that complement either. Once they are gone it is nearly impossible to restore it like mother nature did.
 
Clarencen said:
I think it would be interesting to take part in a panale discussion like that. I wonder what the people who are putting it on really want to do. I wonder about their real ideas or their real agenda. There are a lot of topics and issues that can be discussed, but it seems it always gets to population shifts. Often it seems some people are looking for amunition to promote the idea that there is nothing worthwhile out here in the prarie states They like to talk about population decrease and small towns disapearing.

We can not afford to lose any more of our native prairie anywhere. Our native prairie is the nearest to being self sustaining as we will get. The land we continue to crop, or plant introduced crops on needs outside resources to keep it productive.

One point I would make is that our native prairie consisted of a complex mixter of plants that complement either. Once they are gone it is nearly impossible to restore it like mother nature did.
Click to expand...

I agree that the native prairie is the best for this country. Once tame species like crested wheat grass gets started the plant mixture tend to move toward a monoculture plant community that is less desirable for livestock and wildlife
 
Here are Agrivilles responses BMR. It seems some didn't totally read the fact that you were the author and not me. Oh well.

IP: Logged
Edit?

Kathy posted May 11, 2010 0:58
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't waste my time with this panel, they have an agenda and their goal IS to turn the prairies into a buffalo park.

We had the University of Guelph out hear "interviewing" us (a couple years ago). They asked very similar questions, with the main jist being "how will you change practices to survive under the global warming crisis ie: drought etc."

After the two students interviewed us and many others in the community; they returned about a year later with their Professors, who proceeded to tell us the best move we could make was "leave the palliser triangle asap".

You'll be wasting your time and breath, so far as I can see. But it's yours to do so, if you think it will help. There are some good folks involved I certain, but there are those who will use you to further their own careers and keep their income flowing (grants etc)...
IP: Logged
Edit?

per posted May 11, 2010 8:49
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we just roll over we get what is coming to us. This could be an opportunity to teach and educate. There are all sorts of ecological goods and services that as Stewards of native prairie we provide. Not the least of which is habitat for the very fuzzy creatures that pull at the heart strings of these folks. If we let them run roughshod without at least trying we missed an opportunity and just hand them the ball.
IP: Logged
Edit?

Sawbones posted May 11, 2010 10:06
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good for you per. You're absolutely right and as frustrating as it might be we need to be active in getting out the message that ranchers are still the best stewards of the land
IP: Logged
Edit?

Happytrails posted May 11, 2010 23:18
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per, I wish you well enlightening the urban masses but for what they are worth here are my 2 cent suggestions.
IP: Logged
Edit?

Happytrails posted May 11, 2010 23:27
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wrong key. I'll try again.
a. Rural change. The biggest rural change is depopulation. Apart from the human sociological aspects there is a definite increase in wildlife numbers and variety. Of course this only applies to the real rural areas not those in the urban shadow.
IP: Logged
Edit?

Happytrails posted May 11, 2010 23:42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wrong key again. Guess I'm not up on this version of word perfect. To continue: The other rural change is better management of native grasslands. When my grandfathers homesteaded they were required to break land to fulfill their contract. That would never happen now and more land is reverting slowly to a native state than is being broke up.
b. Guess that is your call Per. Mine would be that the best decision maker is the one closest to the land.
c. I'm tempted to suggest that the researchers and academics studying us and our land find real jobs whereby we might approve of their career. Seriously, I feel they must cede to our seniority in the area. If they want to conduct ecological and social experiments let them do them in areas that are already under gov't control. That would be parks, community pastures, etc.
Good Luck. HT
 
I often think that our silence from the ag community is driven internally by fear of the unknown/regulation (eg: the 3 S rule) or lack of time or other things like a dislike of public display. Externally I think this is often perceived as apathy towards the environment, or that we are destroying things and don't want to get caught. Nothing could be further from the truth, but we have to speak up and engage.
The best thing that environmentalists can do is to make sure agriculture is profitable and the resource base valuable. They have a bunch of people out there in the farm community that will work like dogs for the local environment and pay taxes to do it. I agree with using the stick approach for blatant negligence, but the carrot also does wonders...
 
I got a feeling- and depending on who the academics are and what/who they represent-- you could be like Custer riding into the Little Big Horn...
 
Oldtimer said:
I got a feeling- and depending on who the academics are and what/who they represent-- you could be like Custer riding into the Little Big Horn...
Click to expand...

I'll make sure i wear my Arrow shirt. :wink:

This is a bit different conference then I am used to. Most are a environmental bent and the "Conservationist" community is fairly ag friendly recognizing cows are better then plows and can be a effective tool in managing grass.
This bunch are looking more at the social aspects of rural issues.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top