A big issue we spent some time
looking at this summer is the effects of cattle ranching on the prairie ecosystem. Though
there weren’t cows directly on the property this year, the signs that they had
occupied the area were still visible from past years. As a society, Americans
have what some would call an unhealthy obsession with beef (i.e. the iconic
Cheeseburger). However, besides the generally less then healthy nutritional value
of cheap beef, cattle and other livestock have a tremendous carbon footprint
and a massively destructive impact on the land they occupy. With this knowledge,
I decided to research some alternatives to traditional cattle ranching.
One alternative proposed is the
idea that the pre-modern system of pastoralism is actually a healthier option
than the ranching that has developed in North America. This practice is an
ancient livestock technique used by some of the earliest humans and has been
shown to damage the land less than modern cattle ranching. The technique is
heavily labor intensive as, “Pastoralists conduct grazing activities and keep
constant surveillance to prevent losses to predators and thieves and also to
keep livestock from damaging crops. This is done through human presence and
labor, not through technologies, and for pastoralists, fences are rather
obstacles to the daily conduct of grazing”(LaRocque, 2014). This method is proposed especially
in relation to the emergence of large natural predators, such as wolves and
grizzly bears. It has become apparent that, “In the absence of predators, prey
scatter and linger where they have no such expectation and proceed to use areas
with the best forage to excess. Conversely, where apex predators like wolves
are reintroduced after a long absence, their presence alone contributes to
habitat restoration.” However, cattle ranching has become deeply ingrained in
the socio-economic makeup of much of the west and it is not so simple just to
switch every operation over to pastoralism. As one author puts it, “The tug of
war is a recurrent one that has to do with an apparent incompatibility between
the rights of nature and those of people making a living from it.”
Another alternative option to traditional
cattle ranching is wildlife ranching. This is a proposed method to aid in the
process of wildlife conservation as well as the demand from the big-game
hunting community. “Fee-hunting,” or the leasing private land for hunting access
came into existence during the early 1920s and now is the most common form of
wildlife ranching in North America. The economic return to the private
landowner from fee-hunting provides incentive to protect and manage for
wildlife habitat and the welfare of wildlife populations. These economic gains
from fee-hunting and wildlife farming and husbandry provide positive incentives
to private landowners to conserve and protect wildlife and wildlife habitat. For
many ranchers, “raising live-stock is not enough to make ends meet”(Ballard et al. 2005). Fee-hunting has protected landowners from revenue losses and even land sales. The
revenues from wildlife ranching can provide positive incentives to private
landowners, resulting in increased wildlife and wildlife habitat conservation
and preservation. And because private landowners control a substantial amount
of wildlife habitat, it is important to develop and pro mote methods of
encouraging sound wildlife management on private lands. Economic incentives
such as wildlife ranching can slow the rate of habitat destruction currently underway
in North America. But it is crucial to maintain some state control in order to
help prevent overexploitation.
Nonetheless, There are several
issues associated with this practice including the fact that many individuals from
the general public as well as professional wildlife biologists fear that
commercial activities associated with wildlife recreation and products ultimately
will allow a shift from public to private ownership of wildlife, resulting in
diminished public interest in wildlife. Another issue is the possibility with the introduction of exotics or artificial
inflation of carrying capacity through supplemental feeding may overstress the
land, causing irreparable harm. Many
ranchers try to manage wildlife the same way they manage their livestock.” Other major concerns surrounding exotic big game ranching
include “disease introduction and spread, competition with native wildlife,
hybridization or genetic pollution of native wildlife populations, range
degradation, associated predator control, and uncontrolled spread of exotics
resulting in nuisance and pest problems. There are several other potential
problems associated with exotic big game: range degradation, poaching,
redirection of focus and funds from native wildlife, and commercialization may
jeopardize conservation of some species such as predators.”
Neither of
these alternatives are the perfect solution to cattle ranching. But they useful
ideas to take into consideration as society moves forward into an unfamiliar
world that climate change will produce. Further research is necessary to prove
whether or not these are viable options, but hopefully these options will
inspire others to continue to search for healthier alternatives to traditional
cattle ranching. That is, if society can move away from its obsession with beef
and the holy Cheeseburger.
Some cattle just past the property line
fences guard our camp from the destruction of the cattle
a little rodent near an old cow pie
we went to a rodeo, which is a traditional cattle ranching cultural phenomenom
Articles referenced:
LaRocque, Olivier. "Revisiting distinctions
between ranching and
pastoralism: A matter
of interspecies relations
between livestock,
people, and predators"Critique of Anthropology, McGill University. 2014.
Ballard, Warren B. et al. "Wildlife ranching in North America- arguments, issues and perspectives" BioOne, The Wildlife Society. 2005.
