Letter to the Editor, by Hugo Tureck
Lewistown News-Argus, September 12, 2001

Unfair to jump to conclusions on BLM

Dear Editor,

It is with regret that I must disagree with my friend and respected editor of the Judith Basin Press, Wes Gibbs, for his guest editorial of Aug. 8 titled "BLM management practices . . . If it can happen there, it could happen here."

This editorial, written without checking any facts, arrives at the conclusion that the BLM is a government agency out of control, running roughshod over people, and that those ranchers within the Missouri River Breaks National Monument should be in fear of their livelihood.

Wes arrived at these conclusions after visiting a close friend who is also a public lands rancher living in Nevada. Rather than paraphrase, let me quote several paragraphs from the editorial.

"Our friends' ranch consists of about 1,500 private acres and 525,000 acres of land leased from the BLM. The size of the operation isn't unusual when you understand that 87 percent of the land area in Nevada is claimed by the BLM.

"This ranch has historically run over 1,000 pairs of cattle along with an estimated 1,500 wild horses and burros on this and other local ranches, supposedly managed by the BLM. The ranch owners, our friends the Holmgrens, at first attempted to work with the BLM. Since 1997, they have reduced their herd to 500 pairs, while the BLM has not removed a single horse and burro, which number about 3,000 head.

"Now the BLM is claiming the ground is overgrazed and is demanding the Holmgrens remove more cattle or face losing their leases. Also, the yearly lease papers the ranchers are required to sign indicate that they will abide by a grazing management plan outlined by the BLM. Understandably, the ranchers refuse to sign such a lease and are than branded by the BLM as trespassers, having surrendered their leases by not signing the papers."

I called the BLM office at Carson City, Nev. and requested all of the documents available regarding this instance under the Freedom of Information Act, including previous owners and their grazing permits. I should first point out that the grazing permits are granted for 10 years, not yearly as Wes states.

Here is a quick history of this particular ranch. Hopefully the reader will wade through the tedious details.

This ranch was put together by a W.J. Stinson between 1943 and 1962. From 1949 until 1962, he was granted a license for 1000 cattle on a year-round basis.

J.W Brown purchased the ranch in 1962. At that time there were no seasonal livestock controls in the BLM allotment and subsequently the public range was deteriorating. Through a formal process that includes a series of meetings, site visits and discussions, Mr. Brown and the BLM agreed to a revised stocking level of 600 cattle year-round.

In 1964, Mr. Brown sold the ranch to Stewart Elsner who operated the ranch until 1979, under the same public land grazing agreement (600 head year-round). Mr. Elsner sold to Rodwork Mckay who operated the ranch until 1983 when he sold it to Jack Estill.

In 1988, the BLM and Mr Estill, at Mr Estill's request, began developing an Allotment Management Plan (AMP) for the ranch. Again, using the same formal process, an RMP was finalized in 1990. To improve the range conditions, the ranch would be permitted to run 900 cows from November through March. Also this permit allowed the ranch to run 150 pairs and 12 domestic horses year-round.

The final Multiple Use Decision was issued on Oct. 13, 1993. This decision also established that the herd size of the wild horses would be managed at 346 head. Mr. Estill agreed with these conditions and abided by them until he sold to the Holmgrens in 1997.

When the Holgrems purchased the ranch, they signed a 10-year lease that was simply a continuation of the permit Mr Estill had. Simply put, they agreed to run 150 cows year-round along with 12 domestic horses. They also agreed that they could run 900 cows during the five-month winter season. This ranch is located in high desert country and 500 cows grazing on 525,000 acres of public lands is roughly one cow per two sections. I can only assume that the move to make this ranch more of a winter ranch has to do with availability of water, cool season grazing and the fact that cows will range better under cooler conditions.

Whether one agrees with the BLM management plan is not the issue. What is important is that this management strategy was in effect for almost 10 years before the Holmgrens purchased the ranch and nothing was changed in their permit that expires in the year 2007.

The Holgrems had to know what they were buying with the ranch and they also had to know that they would have to find summer pasture if they chose to run cows rather than winter yearlings or some other arrangement. Finding summer pasture might be difficult but more importantly it is a lot more expensive.

After a year of paying for summer pasture, they requested that their permit be modified to run 500 cows year-round. Their request was denied and they neither formally appealed nor protested the BLM decision. The consequences of their not appealing is that the decision became final. As of now, the Holgrems are running the ranch as a year-round operation that places them in direct violation of their lease agreement. According to the terms of the existing grazing permit, most of their cattle are trespassing on public lands seven months per year.

Also, contrary to Wes' statements about a wild horse herd whose population is out of control, the opposite is the case. Mr. Jacobsen, the range management specialist with this allotment or permit, states as follows: "Further, as I stated to you, the wild horse count, conducted by me on April 23 and 24 this year was 260 head for the Pilot-Table Mountain Allotment. The Appropriate Management Level for the allotment is 302 head."

I understand Mr. Gibbs concerns for his friends. This in no small way an unfolding tragedy and I am saddened. But we cannot blame the BLM for the circumstances the Holgrems find themselves in. More importantly, to jump to the conclusion that this agency has its own hidden agenda is out of control and abusive to those it serves is unfounded.

Hugo Tureck
Coffee Creek