A Lesson in Conflict
Post by Clemson Montana Summer Program student Gillian Taylor
So far, each new day and activity has become my new favorite thing. In this section of our trip, we traveled to Phillips County near Malta, and interacted and worked with members of both sides of the debate in how to conserve the prairies.
Going into this section, I think I overestimated how much I knew, but did I learn a ton. We first traveled to the ranch of Leo Barthelmes, the former president of the Ranchers Stewardship Alliance, and we got to learn his form of land conservation. The Ranchers Stewardship Alliance is an organization comprised of local ranchers who try to practice the most environmentally conscious means to ranching. After giving us a rundown on what he does, he was kind enough to feed us lunch and take us on a tour of his property as well as the BLM property and leased property that he manages as well. The truck ride is what really peaked my interests because Leo got on the topic of the “opposing” forces, APR, and the problems he has with their methods. He explained the fear that the locals have with APR’s methods, buying ranches and turning them into part of their reserve. The problem being that the increase in demand of property contributes to rising property values and consequently property taxes, and ranches operate on a slim margin, and can use all the savings they can get. He demonstrated their pride in their way of life, that has survived in one of the toughest environments, and I can understand the fear of their loss of their tradition.
After lunch we traveled to “enemy” territory, the American Prairie Reserve (APR). We joined them for dinner and camped (using the term very liberally). The next morning we went to a symposium in which we listened to summaries of different research projects being done in the area. Which was interesting in itself, but after a while, I can either sit still or listen, but not both. Later that night we went to the UI bend National Wildlife Refuge to search for the black-footed ferret. My wondering has so far been pretty successful in finding interesting wildlife, because while I was adventuring, I found the prairie rattlesnake we’ve been looking for, but the real excitement came later that night. Rachel and I hopped in Randy’s truck and ventured out at 12am to spotlight ferrets. At first I was incredibly pessimistic at our chances of seeing one. Randy had mentioned that they usually go looking in April and August, and that he only counted six this past season, so I had essentially resigned myself to looking at the other nocturnal wildlife in action, but kept my eyes open for green eyes, just in case. Not too long into the journey, we saw a coyote, a few owls, and a mule deer, but then we spotted a low to the ground pair of green eyes, but just as quickly as we saw it, it was gone. We kept driving and ran across another pair. Randy pulled out his binoculars, and surely it was a ferret. Not only had we spotted one but we had caught her moving her litter of 4 kits to a new den, something Randy said he’d only seen once before. We jumped out the truck and walked over to the burrow that we had last seen her in, and she popped her head right out. Randy told us to keep our foot above the hole so she couldn’t get out while he went to get the PIT tag reader, and I was surprised at how unafraid she was, periodically trying to stick her head back out around Rachel’s foot. He got her tag, and we went on to watch her carry the rest of her above average sized litter to the new den. I felt privy to a secret; a once in a lifetime event. That's a moment that will stay with me forever.
The next day we went out and helped the members of APR spray the prairie dog dens for fleas. I really enjoyed this activity because I felt like I was actually making a difference and I was more than happy to help out the people who had already shown us so much kindness. I admit it was hard work, but it was rewarding, and I’ve always felt that the best way to learn about something, is to do it. Our last day at APR, we were given a rundown about the project and the goals of the organization. Danny addressed the topic about the potential increase in property values, but rebuked on the fact that APR pays the fair market price for the properties. One thing I wish I had thought of sooner, and asked about, was the fact that demand will shift the market price, and so APR’s reliable demand for property will raise the fair market price, which is neither good for the ranchers or APR, both trying to do the most with the financial tools that they are given. What I really loved about the work of this organization was the incentive programs that they offered to farmers when they would use specific practices. I feel that is a pretty fair compromise between the ranchers and the conservationists. The ranchers receive much needed extra funds and the conservationists increase the safe space for wildlife.
We spent the rest of the afternoon helping switch out the SD cards and batteries of the Bushnell cameras that APR will put out on ranches as a form of their incentive programs. Danny asked us if we could see ourselves doing this all day for a living, and honestly, I could. I would not mind at all hiking out onto some ranches all day, especially for a cause that benefits everyone involved. It got me thinking about taking a year or two off in between getting my bachelors and JD degree, and doing some tech work, and getting a real feel for the work that I would be defending in a court room. Especially while I’m young and capable of doing that hard demanding (but rewarding) work.
I loved this section of the class, but I think for different reasons than I think most others did. Yes, the exposure to wildlife was cool, but what I really liked was the exposure to the conflict. My goal is to become a lawyer and then a politician, and to help resolve these types of conflict, so while I know my questions about the economic/political conflicts probably bored my classmates, it’s just affirmed for me that I’m on the right track. I would love to see and maybe help facilitate in the future more collaboration between APR and RSA. Leo had mentioned APR’s attempt at their own brand of beef, but I think it would be worth them teaming up and revisiting the idea, and marketing the concept of marking their own label or simply a certification (like the USDA’s organic label) of beef and bison and splitting the profits. It would be costly to start because they would want to establish a vertical control of production line to establish a bulletproof brand, but with the current trends in the market (resurgence of more green ways of thinking) I think they could tap into a niche market. They would have to fight the threat of the large corporations that usually make the profit off of selling the final product, but competition is never a bad thing. I know I can’t speak for the whole world, but I know that I would eat beef more if I knew that the practices going into making the beef were environmentally conscious, and I would be willing to pay a few more dollars to ensure that. Not to mention, the beef tastes significantly better.
I realized that between the two parties, there is no exclusively right party. Both have their points and faults, and both are necessary in the conservation of the landscape. Elimination of either parties would be incredibly detrimental economically or environmentally, and I wish there was more collaboration between the two because there is strength in numbers. It sounds like they need a mediator, and that sounds like a pretty good job opportunity to me.
Going into this section, I think I overestimated how much I knew, but did I learn a ton. We first traveled to the ranch of Leo Barthelmes, the former president of the Ranchers Stewardship Alliance, and we got to learn his form of land conservation. The Ranchers Stewardship Alliance is an organization comprised of local ranchers who try to practice the most environmentally conscious means to ranching. After giving us a rundown on what he does, he was kind enough to feed us lunch and take us on a tour of his property as well as the BLM property and leased property that he manages as well. The truck ride is what really peaked my interests because Leo got on the topic of the “opposing” forces, APR, and the problems he has with their methods. He explained the fear that the locals have with APR’s methods, buying ranches and turning them into part of their reserve. The problem being that the increase in demand of property contributes to rising property values and consequently property taxes, and ranches operate on a slim margin, and can use all the savings they can get. He demonstrated their pride in their way of life, that has survived in one of the toughest environments, and I can understand the fear of their loss of their tradition.
The next day we went out and helped the members of APR spray the prairie dog dens for fleas. I really enjoyed this activity because I felt like I was actually making a difference and I was more than happy to help out the people who had already shown us so much kindness. I admit it was hard work, but it was rewarding, and I’ve always felt that the best way to learn about something, is to do it. Our last day at APR, we were given a rundown about the project and the goals of the organization. Danny addressed the topic about the potential increase in property values, but rebuked on the fact that APR pays the fair market price for the properties. One thing I wish I had thought of sooner, and asked about, was the fact that demand will shift the market price, and so APR’s reliable demand for property will raise the fair market price, which is neither good for the ranchers or APR, both trying to do the most with the financial tools that they are given. What I really loved about the work of this organization was the incentive programs that they offered to farmers when they would use specific practices. I feel that is a pretty fair compromise between the ranchers and the conservationists. The ranchers receive much needed extra funds and the conservationists increase the safe space for wildlife.
We spent the rest of the afternoon helping switch out the SD cards and batteries of the Bushnell cameras that APR will put out on ranches as a form of their incentive programs. Danny asked us if we could see ourselves doing this all day for a living, and honestly, I could. I would not mind at all hiking out onto some ranches all day, especially for a cause that benefits everyone involved. It got me thinking about taking a year or two off in between getting my bachelors and JD degree, and doing some tech work, and getting a real feel for the work that I would be defending in a court room. Especially while I’m young and capable of doing that hard demanding (but rewarding) work.
I loved this section of the class, but I think for different reasons than I think most others did. Yes, the exposure to wildlife was cool, but what I really liked was the exposure to the conflict. My goal is to become a lawyer and then a politician, and to help resolve these types of conflict, so while I know my questions about the economic/political conflicts probably bored my classmates, it’s just affirmed for me that I’m on the right track. I would love to see and maybe help facilitate in the future more collaboration between APR and RSA. Leo had mentioned APR’s attempt at their own brand of beef, but I think it would be worth them teaming up and revisiting the idea, and marketing the concept of marking their own label or simply a certification (like the USDA’s organic label) of beef and bison and splitting the profits. It would be costly to start because they would want to establish a vertical control of production line to establish a bulletproof brand, but with the current trends in the market (resurgence of more green ways of thinking) I think they could tap into a niche market. They would have to fight the threat of the large corporations that usually make the profit off of selling the final product, but competition is never a bad thing. I know I can’t speak for the whole world, but I know that I would eat beef more if I knew that the practices going into making the beef were environmentally conscious, and I would be willing to pay a few more dollars to ensure that. Not to mention, the beef tastes significantly better.
I realized that between the two parties, there is no exclusively right party. Both have their points and faults, and both are necessary in the conservation of the landscape. Elimination of either parties would be incredibly detrimental economically or environmentally, and I wish there was more collaboration between the two because there is strength in numbers. It sounds like they need a mediator, and that sounds like a pretty good job opportunity to me.
