Agroecology 1000 Term Paper
Programmer: Shane Buchholz, Researcher: Lisa Dudgeon, Editor: Kelsea Mulcahy
Email Addresses:
shanebuc@uwyo.edu
ldudgeon@uwyo.edu
cowgrl23@uwyo.edu
***************
***************
Public Lands vs. Feedlot Feeding
Grazing has always been a key element in beef production. Today there are hundreds of controversies and issues relating to feedlot feeding and public land grazing. How these concerns can be managed are seen and viewed by many different people with various methods. However, in the meantime, this nation wide problem will continue to affect thousands in numerous, dissimilar ways.
Virtually all problems associated with grazing are due to the continuous presence of cattle on the same land for an extended period of time. This is true whether the land is public or private. As soon as time control becomes a factor in management, grazing becomes a positive factor in the environment. Previous studies have found that feedlot feeding and management can be extremely harmful to the animals associated with such practices. Many concerns include the well being of the animals living in such a space that is incredibly overcrowded with limited movement, lack of fresh air, disease is constantly at a higher level, and temperature control has no limit. There are over 1000 animals’ confined to a single building, causing problems with the animals to eating behaviors as well as making it difficult for the creatures to lie down.
The CAFOs (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations) are like factories, however they differ due to the fact that they contain tons of helpless animals living within their walls. One cow produces more than 20 times the waste a human produces. Waste from 10,000 CAFO cows in such limited areas contributes to untreatable waste of a city populated with more than 200,000 people. The manure from these animals is usually used as a valuable fertilizer but when it is liquefied, the waste instantly pollutes, contaminates and poisons most everything it comes into contact with. The nitrogen in the manure is very toxic to humans and pollutes the ground water. Furthermore the air quality is severely damaging humans and animals of the surrounding area. There is an unvarying amount of dust, odors, flies, and noxious gases that are daily produced and generated from CAFOs. These odors can cause many health problems for the workers and the people that confined to these working units within the feedlots.
Though few, some see these confined feedlots as advantages to cattle management simply because there are more animals in a condensed area so as to preserve additional open land along with supplying various job openings within the CAFOs. Many people claim that grazing is destructive and harmful to the landscape. Others agree that grazing is not only a powerful tool for environmental enhancement, but a necessary component of ecological health. In the past, grazing was something only farmers and ranchers were concerned with, now it is a national, public issue. Public land use, the environmental impact of grazing, and the health aspects of meat produced on pasture vs. in the feedlot are all issues of public concern within our modern day.
With proper use of herding or subdivision fencing, grazing is a positive tool for land management. Once livestock grazing is brought under control and managed, soil quality and health can be improved, vegetation management can be achieved and resources can be more efficiently used.
Previously The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) stated that the western public lands will cost about $1.43 per animal unit month (AUM) for grazing. AUM is the amount of forages needed to feed one cow and her calf or one horse or five sheep. The U.S. interior Department manages about 261 million acres of public land of which about 160 million are authorized for grazing by some 18,000 permit and lease holders. The average for grazed land in a one year period time frame is less than 160 million acres because grazing is affected by natural disaster like drought, and wildfires.
By having public land grazing there will and has been an incredible improvement in wildlife habitat and increased wildlife populations in various grazed areas. Territories for animals such as elk, deer, waterfowl, and fish have increased from the time that animals have been put out in the public land to graze. The BLM confirmed that if they didn’t have the animals grazing in certain locations there would be an unbelievable decrease in the surrounding animals and wildlife inhabiting the nearby regions.
Additionally, studies have found that ungrazed grasslands will burn far more frequently than grazed ones, causing wildlife populations to alter along with plants and animals that prefer them. This will eventually present an outcome of fewer rodents, which means less food for raptors, coyotes and other predators. Moreover, there will be a higher potential for ranchers to improve their profit margin, an expected decrease in vegetation and soil disturbances, and more importantly, minor negative impacts on air and water quality.
In conclusion, one can find that with public grazing comes an outstanding amount of positive and beneficial opportunities. Grazing programs protect the biodiversity and open space of the West by maintaining both private and public lands. With public land ranching, we as a nation are capable of protecting millions of acres of open habitat for rangeland species. Presently, all elements contributing to agriculture are being viewed under increasing public scrutiny. For centuries the farmer/rancher's image has been an untouchable American symbol. By using grazing, we have created a potential, environmental and socially acceptable form of agricultural. It's in our best interest, and that of the American public, realizes and respects effective methods to help manage and control this precious world we live into today.
Feedlot Calf.
Sources Sited
Sources Sited
2002 Federal Grazing Fee Announced
CAFOs and AFOs: Definitions and Issues