The Western Range Revisited: Removing Livestock from Public Lands to Conserve Native Biodiversity (Legal History of North America Series, Vol 5) (Paperback)

~ Debra L. Donahue (Author) "In 1985 a federal judge in Oregon dismissed as "practically unthinkable" the policy choice to remove domestic livestock from public grazing lands in the Reno,..." (more)
Key Phrases: western range livestock industry, rangeland reform, arid western rangelands, Forest Service, Taylor Grazing Act, New Mexico (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

What happens when you dare talk about evicting cows from the West? If you're professor Debra Donahue, a considerably nonplussed Wyoming state senator threatens to introduce legislation to dissolve your employer, the University of Wyoming law school. While Senator Jim Twiford's threat can be viewed as a stunt, there's no denying that Donahue and her book The Western Range Revisited have upset the status quo in this arid state with a population less than that of Salt Lake City. Specifically, Donahue recommends livestock be removed from public lands "receiving 12 inches of precipitation or less annually." To support this argument, she examines a bumper crop of scientific evidence pointing to "severe degradation of western ranges" caused by overgrazing--and, in the process, unravels a complex tangle of regional politics and culture that foster such overgrazing. Why, for instance, does the livestock industry enjoy such political clout when it employs so few people? One reason, explains Donahue, is that the relatively unpopulous intermountain West "accounts for approximately one-third of the total Senate membership; thus westerners generally wield disproportionate influence on the Senate." Resulting from this influence, says Donahue, are two fallacies that conspire to keep livestock on the range despite poor return on investment and egregious environmental damage: "Public land grazing is important to the economic base of local communities, if not the region, and the ranching way of life merits preservation, both for its own sake and as a means of preserving the West's open spaces."

Cowboys take their lumps, too, from the author's cultural demythologizing: to wit, the so-called rugged individualists of Catron County, New Mexico--a hotbed of antigovernment fervor--collect more federal subsidies than the national average. Why? Because they're trying to live off public land that has been abused for more than a century.

Donahue concludes that grazing's "ecological impacts are more widespread than those of any other human activity in the West, and elimination of grazing holds greater potential for benefiting biodiversity than any other single land use measure." That said, the "essential ingredient yet lacking is the political will to oppose a narrow, but powerful, interest group--the deeply entrenched western livestock industry." Whether or not you agree with Donahue's thesis, her controversial book will go a long way toward bringing this debate to a broader audience. --Langdon Cook

Product Description

Livestock grazing is the most widespread commercial use of federal public lands. The image of a herd grazing on Bureau of Land Management or U.S. Forest Service lands is so traditional that many view this use as central to the history and culture of the West. Yet the grazing program costs far more to administer than it generates in revenues, and grazing affects all other uses of public lands, causing potentially irreversible damage to native wildlife and vegetation.

THE WESTERN RANGE REVISITED proposes a landscape-level strategy for conserving native biological diversity on federal rangelands, a strategy based chiefly on removing livestock from large tracts of arid BLM lands in ten western states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming.

Drawing from range ecology, conservation biology, law, and economics, Debra L. Donahue examines the history of federal grazing policy and the current debate on federal multiple-use, sustained-yield policies and changing priorities for our public lands. Donahue, a lawyer and wildlife biologist, uses existing laws and regulations, historical documents, economic statistics, and current scientific thinking to make a strong case for a land-management strategy that has been, until now, "unthinkable."

A groundbreaking interdisciplinary work, THE WESTERN RANGE REVISITED demonstrates that conserving biodiversity by eliminating or reducing livestock grazing makes economic sense, is ecologically expedient, and can be achieved under current law.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 352 pages
• Publisher: University of Oklahoma Press (December 1999)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0806132981
• ISBN-13: 978-0806132983
• Product Dimensions: 9.2 x 6 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.8 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (12 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #845,472 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

37 of 42 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A Review of a Book Founded on Controversy, February 5, 2000

By	Raymond Corning (Lander, Wyoming) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Western Range Revisited: Removing Livestock from Public Lands to Conserve Native Biodiversity (Legal History of North America) (Hardcover)

This book is particularly earth shattering; 1) Debra is a Professor of Law at the University of Wyoming, 2) She holds an MS degree in Wildlife Biology from Texas A&M University, 3) She has worked for three Federal Land Management agencies, as well as the National Wildlife Federation, 4) Her book is already trumpeted as heresy by grazing interests and their supporters, and 5)Predictably in a public grazing State, the Head of the University of Wyoming is giving her the barest of academic support already.

Debra lists more than 800 sources for her book, and has chosen certain excerpts from these sources to convey her thoughts through the words of other people. This book will serve as "The Reference Book" for many years to come on the subject of livestock on public lands.

Because her writings cover so many groups, and her materials are so pertinent to the general public and others in this day and age, I predict her book will soon be on the shelves of innumerable groups, scholars, and individuals. Her writings could ultimately become as important to the general public as the first writings of Rachel Carson

Cattlemen of the West have frequently made the statement cattle "merely replaced Bison as the grazers of western lands". Debra's research debunks this argument, shows cattle and Bison have different grazing patterns and food sources, and brings out the fact very few bison were ever found west of the Rockies, or for that matter, on BLM lands. Again, cattle interests have often been quoted as saying that if no cattle or sheep grazing existed on public lands habitat biodiversity would be greatly restricted. Debra utilizes the statements of various experts to prove differently.

A nearly insidious relationship between many Range Management Professors at Universities and grazing interests is both alluded to by Debra and documented. Debra also points out many range management texts are currently outdated and outright erroneous in their content and recommended methodologies. She shows the same situation applies to the current BLM range management evaluation methods, and goes on to quote various authorities to prove her case. Even the Society of Range Management is mentioned. A cozy relationship between Society members, University Professors, grazers, and federal agencies is discussed in depth and documented.

Debra documents the continued decline of public grazing lands. She does so using figures developed by the Departments of Agriculture and Interior. She brings out that the agencies themselves predicted in 1994 that if a "No Grazing" alternative was decided upon, it would effect "less than 0.1 percent of total westwide employment." On the other hand "the social well-being of recreationists and environmentalists would improve under No Grazing" because of "improved riparian and wildlife habitat and improved recreation opportunities ".

Costs borne by the public to underwrite grazing on public lands is proven through numerous sources to be far greater than revenues returned to Federal agencies. Her facts and figures also indicate, rather than ranchers keeping small towns in the West alive, the reverse is more likely. Many ranchers who hold grazing permits must hold a second job in order to continue ranching - for ranch costs are frequently greater than ranch incomes.

Debra methodically destroys the reasons for continued grazing on public lands, and builds upon why grazing on arid lands with less than 12 inches of precipitation should be discontinued. She also fills in the reasons why many misconceptions about grazing have developed and continue to exist. She stakes out no middle ground, steps on many toes, and eloquently presents her reasons for doing so.

The book points out actual cases where changes to animal grazing periods or to the numbers of Animal Unit Months (AUM's) were made at the peril of Bureau of Land Management managers and employees. Those who attempted change were frequently transferred, moved to other positions, fired, or made to apologize to the affected grazers in order to hold their jobs. Other unjustified activities were documented.

Some adverse effects of grazing documented by The Western Range Revisited include excessive upland and stream erosion; hoof damage, particularly in hot arid regions; loss of plant diversity; water pollution; the near absence of riparian habitat because of grazing; decreases in the abundance of birds, animals and aquatic life, and; increasing numbers of rare and endangered species because of grazing. The plight of sage grouse that formerly ranged over nearly all of the affected public lands is set forth as one example of a species that may soon be on the threatened or endangered list because of grazing activities.

One of the most disturbing findings brought out by Debra concerning biodiversity is the possibility that vast areas may have already passed the point of no-return, or threshold, for a return to earlier biodiversity.

In her Conclusion, Debra points out that the lands in question are public lands, subject to management in the public interest, and that any public versus private rights issue is not just economic or philosophic, but ethical as well. It is also her contention, and one to which I firmly agree, "we can no longer afford to sit back and wait for them [federal politicians, land managers, and agriculture service agencies] to act or for agriculture to reform itself."

7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Well researched, a strong argument, November 16, 2000

By	Pete W. Letheby (Grand Island, NE USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Donahue has certainly done her research. In a few places, the book becomes a slightly difficult read because of all the attributions, references to different legislation, etc., but generally it is a very strong argument against the destructive nature of grazing on arid and semi-arid federal lands. Given the growing public sentiment for preserving and restoring biodiversity and wildlife habitat, I suspect Donahue's book will emerge as a breakthrough in exposing the economic fallacy of public land grazing.

9 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Reviewing the Western Range Revisited by Raymond Corning, January 27, 2000

By	Raymond Corning (Lander, Wyoming) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Western Range Revisited: Removing Livestock from Public Lands to Conserve Native Biodiversity (Legal History of North America) (Hardcover)

I have just finished reading Debra L. Donahue's book entitled: The Western Range Revisited Removing Livestock from Public Lands to Conserve Native Biodiversity. My critique of this book, because of it's complexity and depth, can only be restricted to making a few salient points and giving a general idea of the book's content. This book is particularly earth shattering because; 1) Debra is a Professor of Law at the University of Wyoming, 2) Not only does she have a law background, but she also holds an MS degree in Wildlife Biology from Texas A&M University, 3) She has worked for three Federal Land Management agencies, as well as the National Wildlife Federation, and 4) her book is certain to be considered heresy by grazing interests and those who support these interests.

Having worked for two Federal Land Management agencies myself, including the Bureau of Land Management, I can truly say Debra Donahue listened closely to all that she was told over the years by co-workers, managers, grazing allottees, and biologists with whom she came into contact. All of the excuses she heard for justifying the continuance of livestock on public lands, as well as the reasons they should be removed, stuck with her and can be found in this book. She uses more than 800 sources to document and methodically destroy the reasons for continued grazing on public lands, and builds upon why grazing on arid lands with less than 12 inches of precipitation should be discontinued. She also fills in the reasons why many misconceptions about grazing have developed and continue to exist. She stakes out no middle ground, steps on many toes, but eloquently presents her reasons for doing so.

Debra Donahue pulled no punches in this bombshell. She not only mentions many special interest groups, but she documents some of their past activities. Because her writings encompass so many groups, and her materials are so pertinent to the general public and others in this day and age, I predict her book will soon be on the shelves of innumerable groups, scholars, and individuals. Her writings could ultimately become as important as the first writings of Rachel Carson, who changed people within the United States forever.

Holders of grazing allotments, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U. S. Forest Service (USFS) managers, biologists, scientists, environmentalists, state and federal senators, university groups, people of the U.S. who are interested in the fate of their public lands, and strangely enough - members of the Morman Church - provides a small smattering of those who will find this book of great interest.

Many of the fore-named will read the book, circle the wagons for the attacks sure to follow, or try to justify their past or future actions. The others will initiate attacks in an attempt to speed removal of public land grazing on arid lands.

Debra's knowledge of the law, and willingness to review the Taylor Grazing Act in great detail, sheds an entirely different picture of the Act than that portrayed for so many years by grazing interests. "The three chief purposes of the Taylor Grazing Act are to "stop injury to the public lands by preventing overgrazing and soil deterioration, to provide for their orderly use, improvement, and development, and to stabilize the livestock industry dependent on the public range.""

It is Debra's contention that intent established in the fore runner to the Taylor Grazing Act, the Stock Raising Homestead Act of 1916, was carried over to the TGA. "[T]he use of these lands for grazing shall be subordinated (a) to the development of their mineral resources, (b) to the protection, development, and utilization of their forests, (c) to the protection, development, and utilization of their water resources, (d) to their use for agriculture ...., and (e) to the protection, development, and utilization of such other resources as may be of greater benefit to the public." "And the act [Taylor Grazing Act] directs the secretary to identify lands "more valuable or suitable for any other use than [grazing]" - a proviso that surely reflects the general opinion that grazing was not an especially valuable use of public lands." Further, she makes the point: "The meanings of the section 1 terms "chiefly valuable for grazing" and "highest use of the public lands" merit scrutiny because they relate to the continuing discretionary authority of the BLM to allocate grazing lands to other uses, including biodiversity conservation."

FLPMA, as a whole, did not replace but supplemented the Taylor Grazing Act. It provided the authority for regulating livestock grazing on the public land. A policy of multiple-use and sustained-yield were mandated by FLPMA and it also included a provision "..to manage all resources without impairing the land's productivity or environmental quality". A controversial section of FLPMA that could hold major connotations for supporting landscape-level land management changes for biodiversity purposes is entitled Areas of Critical Environmental Concern. Areas so identified are to be protected from irreparable harm. Debra states: "In summary, FLPMA's policies and principles and the agency's self-proclaimed management direction are consistent with a landscape-level approach to biodiversity conservation on large, arid rangelands managed by BLM."

Debra documents the continued decline of grazing lands even after the Taylor Grazing Act was in place. Various assessments by both government and non government officials indicated the range was in decline. In fact, in 1963, Forsling, the head of the grazing service from 1944 to 1946, recommended closing to all grazing "many million acres of arid and semi-arid land in the West." By 1968, BLM had revised its grazing policies to reflect its position that continuous grazing was unacceptable, even though over the next 5 years continuous grazing was discontinued on only 274 out of 1,767 continuous grazing allotments.

The book points out actual cases where changes to animal grazing periods or to the numbers of Animal Unit Months (AUM's) were made at the peril of BLM managers and employees. Those who attempted change were frequently transferred, moved to other positions, fired, or made to apologize to the affected grazers in order to hold their jobs. Other unjustified activities were documented. Cattlemen of the West have frequently made the statement cattle "merely replaced Bison as the grazers of western lands". Debra's research into this matter throughly debunks this argument as both their grazing habits and food sources differ. She also brings out the fact that very few bison were ever found west of the Rockies in the arid southwest.

Cattle interests have often been quoted as saying that if no cattle or sheep grazing existed on public lands habitat biodiversity would be greatly restricted. Again, Debra utilizes the statements of various experts to lay this argument to rest.

A nearly insidious relationship between many Range Management Professors at Universities and grazing interests is not only alluded to by Debra, but is documented. She points out that even at the current time, many range management texts are outdated and outright erroneous in their content and recommended methodologies. She further states much the same situation applies to the current BLM range management evaluation methods, and goes on to quote various authorities to prove her case. Even the Society of Range Management is not left out of the picture. A cozy relationship between Society members, University Professors, grazers, and federal agencies is covered in some depth.

Numerous experts and sources are quoted to prove most current rangelands are overgrazed and have been overgrazed for years. Debra uses figures developed by the Departments of Agriculture and Interior for the draft Environmental Impact Statement entitled Rangeland Reform `94, to bring out the fact that the agencies themselves predicted if the "No Grazing" alternative was selected it would effect "less than 0.1 percent of total westwide employment." The agencies also wrote "the social well-being of recreationists and environmentalists would improve under No Grazing" because of "improved riparian and wildlife habitat and improved recreation opportunities". In other words, complete removal of cattle from public lands would harm few people and improve conditions for many.