4 ms·
“Not suitable for crop farming” =/= “ecologically unimportant”
by lukas099 2y ago
“Not suitable for crop farming” =/= “ecologically unimportant”
- jeffbee 2y agoSeriously, the is a big problem in the US. Cattle are grazed on BLM land and they trample all the stream banks to such an extent that riparian ecosystems are totally destroyed. And in exchange the grazing fee is only $1/head/month! If you stand at the point where a stream crosses from a fenced conservation area into a grazing area, the difference across the boundary is stark.
- Amezarak 2y agoHow did did the riparian ecosystems thrive when there were tens of millions of bison? There is the same order of magnitude of cows in the US today (90 million) as bison hundreds of years ago (30-60 million.) Bison are also generally much heavier, meaning they eat more and trod the ground more deeply.
- jeffbee 2y agoThe historical range of the American bison was largely not overlapping with BLM grazing lands. The bison, a sensible animal, wasn't found in California, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.
- Amezarak 2y agoThe historical range of the bison did extend into those states, but granted, not into most of that land area. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_bison_belt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_bison_belt
- jeffbee 2y agoI think we are safe in describing the pre-columbian bison range as not marginal, and the post that started this thread is about how most of our cattle grazing is on marginal lands. The way Americans do this is the worst possible way: grow feed on the excellent grazing range, and feed it to an animal that spends most of its life either grazing a desert or standing in parking lot. We'd get more of everything, easier and cheaper, if we just grazed bison where we currently grow corn.
- HeyLaughingBoy 2y agoI'm all for that: bison is delicious.