Dennis Paulson says,

> On another note, you wrote:
>
> "A similar problem occurs with cows. Cows can be useful in management in
> some cases, but it is difficult for those of us involved in conservation to
> agree to such use. The problem is that the ranching community jumps on any
> such beneficial use of grazing as 'evidence' that widespread grazing is
> 'necessary for the health of the land.'"
>
> But I thought cows were useful for steaks and milk, and that's the only
> reason we have to put up with them! I have a funny feeling that there's
> not really any "beneficial" reason for cows to be on the landscape other
> than to feed human beans.

While I think you're basically right, cows do have some limited use. In
some of the North Dakota wildlife refuges they're having a terrible
problem with the prairie habitat turning into woods and shrubs under the
influence of civilization. Some of the managers decided that in
pre-European-people times the prairies regularly experienced fires and
herds of herbivores, especially bison. So they've been doing controlled
burns and are letting local farmers graze cattle in controlled ways to
substitute for the bison. I think the experiment is only a few years old,
but it seems to be working; the prairie ecosystems are remaining
prairies. So in some cases some kind of grazing _is_ necessary for the
health of the land, assuming we want to keep things as they were a few
centuries ago. But I'd rather have the bison.

Burt Guttman guttmanb at elwha.evergreen.edu
The Evergreen State College Voice: 360-866-6000, x. 6755
Olympia, WA 98505 FAX: 360-866-6794