Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Cattle Boards
Beginners Board
Cattle, Water, and Environmental wackos and sheeples
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="CottageFarm" data-source="post: 905758" data-attributes="member: 16552"><p><img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" /> ILH, yeah, I remember reading that somewhere, It was long after I'd run across my first dead calf however. :lol: </p><p></p><p>Iso, I don't take issue with anyone using their water rights however they want, especially in a closed system like ponds or tanks. Although, :yuck: that you drink from them, too.... :lol2: </p><p>I was only noting that I have seen 1st hand the difference in stream bank/bed health when livestock are restricted from active/open systems. Grubbie, is also right that just because you don't restrict access doesn't necessarily make you a "bad" land steward. It really does come down to stocking density. If a the only water available to 1000 hd is a 1/2 mile stretch of small stream, that's going to have a huge, negative impact on stream health. On the other hand, if those 1000 hd have access to a 5 mile stretch of stream, and numerous tanks/ponds across their range, that will have little, if any, impact on stream health. However, that doesn't win the PR battle.</p><p>SL's original premise that anyone who considers restricting livestock from direct access to a stream is an "environmentalist wacko/sheeple" is another of the stupidest comments I've read. It's his kneejerk, and somewhat irrational, reaction to anything negative directed at the ag industry.</p><p>Whether we like it or not, it is a fact that the environmentalists have waged a successful campaign to demonize ranchers and farmers for poisoning the world. It doesn't mean they're right, just that they've been successfull by preying on the fears of a public far removed from the source of their food. If we're to avoid even more ridiculous regulations from gov't we have to start battling the negative image we've been given. Simple measures, like pumping water to ponds/tanks from open water systems seems like a good step to take.</p><p>It makes it a whole lot easier to paint the environmentalists with the extremist brush. Conversely, SL's attitude, makes their job easier. :2cents:</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CottageFarm, post: 905758, member: 16552"] :D ILH, yeah, I remember reading that somewhere, It was long after I'd run across my first dead calf however. :lol: Iso, I don't take issue with anyone using their water rights however they want, especially in a closed system like ponds or tanks. Although, :yuck: that you drink from them, too.... :lol2: I was only noting that I have seen 1st hand the difference in stream bank/bed health when livestock are restricted from active/open systems. Grubbie, is also right that just because you don't restrict access doesn't necessarily make you a "bad" land steward. It really does come down to stocking density. If a the only water available to 1000 hd is a 1/2 mile stretch of small stream, that's going to have a huge, negative impact on stream health. On the other hand, if those 1000 hd have access to a 5 mile stretch of stream, and numerous tanks/ponds across their range, that will have little, if any, impact on stream health. However, that doesn't win the PR battle. SL's original premise that anyone who considers restricting livestock from direct access to a stream is an "environmentalist wacko/sheeple" is another of the stupidest comments I've read. It's his kneejerk, and somewhat irrational, reaction to anything negative directed at the ag industry. Whether we like it or not, it is a fact that the environmentalists have waged a successful campaign to demonize ranchers and farmers for poisoning the world. It doesn't mean they're right, just that they've been successfull by preying on the fears of a public far removed from the source of their food. If we're to avoid even more ridiculous regulations from gov't we have to start battling the negative image we've been given. Simple measures, like pumping water to ponds/tanks from open water systems seems like a good step to take. It makes it a whole lot easier to paint the environmentalists with the extremist brush. Conversely, SL's attitude, makes their job easier. :2cents: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
Beginners Board
Cattle, Water, and Environmental wackos and sheeples
Top