Re: Alternative strategies to overgrazing
Connie Falk (cfalk@nmsu.edu)
Tue, 31 Oct 1995 14:09:49 -0700 (MST)
As a NM resident, Sierra Club member, acquaintance of those interviewed
on NPR, friend of people living in poverty in northern rural counties who
need grazing land, and observer of dismal state of grazed lands in
southern NM, I would say: This is a difficult problem that is exacerbated
by Sierra Club's purchase of lands because it perpetuates the image of
Sierra Club as anti-rural people, especially people of color, who live in
N. NM (where I think the land is being purchased but I could be wrong).
In southern NM the case is a little different because ranches are
usually larger and may not suffer as dramatically (unsubstantiated
opinion). I think what is needed is coalitions of folks who work
together to solve some problems. There are models of
cooperation--read High Country News regularly and you should see some
examples of environmental activists working with ranchers on grazing
issues to everyone's satisfaction. My own hope would be that when a
riparian area is in bad shape, the environmentalists would talk to the
local folks about it first, try to work something out, and as a last
resort buy the leases. I know that NM Sierra CLub has as an officer an
"environmental rancher" who seems to bridge the two worlds, and such
people should be involved in helping to improve grazing practices
so that riparian areas can be brought back to life if possible. I
personally would like to know his opinion of the action. Too bad NPR
didn't interview him. If you are interested in this topic, a good film
was shown on PBS a few years back entitled THE RANGE WARS, and you can
get a copy from PBS film catalog. The
problems are getting worse each year as more people relocate to NM and
without understanding the land base of many communities, try to impose
their vision of what the state should be. The loss of agricultural land
to developers in this state is accelerating as it is elsewhere in the
West, as more people try to escape the nightmares of California and
elsewhere. I think the economic impacts for some farm families may be
significant, (the loss of grazing leases to environmentalists) but not
nearly as significant as the loss of farmland to developers is (in terms
of changing the rural character of the northern tier of the state).
If we view the problem using economic criteria alone, we miss more than
half the picture. You have to look at the overall trend of conversion of
agricultural land to non-ag uses (nationwide) and the social implications
of people losing the ability to stay on the land (whose family's presence
on the land in NM may predate the Pilgrims on Plymouth Rock.) Connie
Falk, Assoc. Prof., AG ECON, NMSU
On Fri, 27 Oct 1995, JULIE ELFVING wrote:
> I heard on NPR this morning a piece about environmental groups
> in New Mexico, I think it was, bidding on state (not Federal)
> grazing leases in order to prevent what they consider overgrazing
> and abuse of the land. They were especially targeting stream
> corridors, which are among the most vulnerable areas in arid areas.
> The land would be left "unused". (That is, unused by cows.) The
> piece went on to air varying views of this strategy. Some oponents
> were concerned about loss of livelyhood for graziers; others
> expressed concern that there would be a loss of income from those
> lands, and therefore a loss of money flowing through the already
> poor local economies. I'd like to hear what you think about this
> strategy as a means to protect fragile western range lands? as a
> negative impact on rural communities? as...?
>