The Big Picture
Post by Montana Summer Program Student Sarah Coleman
Montana. A relatively short name for a state that covers a vast diversity of habitats and has so much to offer if you take the time to look. How could I possibly describe Montana in a single phrase? There are so many different landscapes and peoples that make it a very unique place. It is a melting pot of the past and the present with the blending of the young and old. I’ll try to sum it up for you though. Well, here it goes. Montana, it’s a different place out there. Impressive right? Nothing can do it justice, so I might as well make it as general as possible and try to explain myself. When I first arrived back in South Carolina there was one immediate difference that I noticed. I know what you’re thinking. I have to be talking about trees right? Well, that’s where you’re wrong. The air. In Montana, it’s filled with energy and excitement; not laced with humidity or sadness. When I would wake up and walk outside in the mornings I would always take a deep breath of air, preparing myself for the day. It’s intoxicating. If I had my way I would have stayed in the same spot all day just breathing; relishing the scent of the dewy sage. It was as if when the wind swept over, it washed all your worries and troubles away. I wish I could have bottled it up and brought it back with me. I wish, randomly and sporadically, that I could have stayed out there.
What makes Montana so appealing? It’s the vastness of the sky that takes your breath away. It’s the sweet smell of sage. It’s the wind and air that wash over you that feel as though they cleanse your mind and body. It’s the history of strong people who tried to make a go of a sometimes harsh and unforgiving land. While in Montana, I felt as though I had every opportunity to see the diversity of the state. I saw the various interactions between people, wildlife, and domestic animals; some being positive, the other negative. The positive and negative is subjective though, depending on who you may be talking to at the time. That doesn’t make any sense, now does it? How can one idea be considered positive by a certain person or group, while being considered negative by another? Do these persons/groups truly know what they are talking about or is their “proof” flawed. Those questions were what kept me on my toes throughout the entire experience. It sounds sad to say, but I chose the answer that I liked best, that made me the happiest, and just took it for what it was worth. However, to get the best outcome you have to look at the big picture, and when you’re under the Big Sky that can seem to be a pretty simple thing to do (even when it’s not).
There comes a time when you have to decide if you want to believe what your heart is telling you or what science (or your mind) is telling you. It’s nice to follow your heart, but does that give you credibility in the scientific world? Does that credibility even matter in the end? I am still conflicted over bison and cattle, even more so than when I wrote my first blog post. The more you study something the finer the details that separate the conflicting boarder. For example, we had the opportunity to travel to Fort Belknap Reservation to observe two biologists, one working with Black-footed Ferret restoration and the other with the tribes bison herd. Bronc Speaks Thunder, the manager of the bison herd, spoke to us about the role that the herd played in the tribe along with the current management practices. According to the federal government, the bison is considered a livestock animal, and that is how they are being managed at Fort Belknap. Of course they don’t go through a large amount of handling or get fed supplemental feed, still they are essentially a free-ranging livestock herd (in the eyes of the government at least). I liked that management practice though; they have a large herd that has been bringing in income through hunts and meat sales, supporting itself. Their goal isn’t the largest “free-roaming” bison herd, even though they would like to expand. What I felt from it was that the Native Americans have a closer relationship, a spiritual link, to the bison. Why should the tribes not control all of the bison herds? The Fort Belknap Reservation is a prime example for how I believe bison should be managed. Nonetheless, they have their conflicts with ranchers and other groups that do not support the reintroduction of bison, but the reservation has had this herd since the 70s.
Alright, bear with me here. Let’s just presume that there were no actions to restore bison to the plains, as it was for a while after herds were essentially exterminated. Who would take the bison’s place? Who else has the grazing capabilities? Hmm…tough question right? NO. It’s simple; cattle or sheep if that’s what you’re going for. By far the most inspiring portion of this class was on the last day when we were able to speak to John Carlson, a BLM Sage Grouse expert. What could Sage Grouse possibly have to do with cattle? Carlson told us of a portion of land near to the one we were doing field work on that had not been grazed for 12 years, which is seemingly unheard of. The field has become overgrown with sagebrush, too thick for Sage Grouse to nest in or even travel through; there are also no grasses that would provide habitat for songbirds. All of these things happening because there is nothing to graze the area. The bison aren’t there anymore and may never return, so the next best thing should be used. The communities under the Big Sky have so many parts that have to work together, if one is removed they fall out of rhythm. We should do our best to fill in the gaps that, in one way or another, we caused.
There are those that believe all ranchers are out to get wildlife, that they find no value in them unless they are dead. You will have those that care nothing about the wild creatures of the earth, but then you have ranchers that understand the value of the land is not just based on how many cattle you can run. It’s their livelihood. Why would they want to destroy the land on which they make their living? They understand that wildlife can intermingle with their cattle with little dispute, depending on the type of wildlife of course. With that comes another debate, but that could last longer than you or I care it to.
Montana is a land of extremes and a land filled with disputes. There are always disputes though, no matter where you travel. Disputes over land use and who understands how to best utilize the natural resources provided. It’s hard to figure out who to trust. Do you listen to the people who have been on the land for multiple generations, working with it day in and day out? Do you listen to the people who have little spiritual or physical connection with the land and do everything for the name of science? Those are questions that I will be pondering until I get to go to Montana again, and even on after. I’ll go back out there one day and visit the ocean of grass that ebbs and flows under the Big Sky, and maybe, just maybe, I’ll put down some roots in that hardpan clay.
Montana. A relatively short name for a state that covers a vast diversity of habitats and has so much to offer if you take the time to look. How could I possibly describe Montana in a single phrase? There are so many different landscapes and peoples that make it a very unique place. It is a melting pot of the past and the present with the blending of the young and old. I’ll try to sum it up for you though. Well, here it goes. Montana, it’s a different place out there. Impressive right? Nothing can do it justice, so I might as well make it as general as possible and try to explain myself. When I first arrived back in South Carolina there was one immediate difference that I noticed. I know what you’re thinking. I have to be talking about trees right? Well, that’s where you’re wrong. The air. In Montana, it’s filled with energy and excitement; not laced with humidity or sadness. When I would wake up and walk outside in the mornings I would always take a deep breath of air, preparing myself for the day. It’s intoxicating. If I had my way I would have stayed in the same spot all day just breathing; relishing the scent of the dewy sage. It was as if when the wind swept over, it washed all your worries and troubles away. I wish I could have bottled it up and brought it back with me. I wish, randomly and sporadically, that I could have stayed out there.What makes Montana so appealing? It’s the vastness of the sky that takes your breath away. It’s the sweet smell of sage. It’s the wind and air that wash over you that feel as though they cleanse your mind and body. It’s the history of strong people who tried to make a go of a sometimes harsh and unforgiving land. While in Montana, I felt as though I had every opportunity to see the diversity of the state. I saw the various interactions between people, wildlife, and domestic animals; some being positive, the other negative. The positive and negative is subjective though, depending on who you may be talking to at the time. That doesn’t make any sense, now does it? How can one idea be considered positive by a certain person or group, while being considered negative by another? Do these persons/groups truly know what they are talking about or is their “proof” flawed. Those questions were what kept me on my toes throughout the entire experience. It sounds sad to say, but I chose the answer that I liked best, that made me the happiest, and just took it for what it was worth. However, to get the best outcome you have to look at the big picture, and when you’re under the Big Sky that can seem to be a pretty simple thing to do (even when it’s not).
There comes a time when you have to decide if you want to believe what your heart is telling you or what science (or your mind) is telling you. It’s nice to follow your heart, but does that give you credibility in the scientific world? Does that credibility even matter in the end? I am still conflicted over bison and cattle, even more so than when I wrote my first blog post. The more you study something the finer the details that separate the conflicting boarder. For example, we had the opportunity to travel to Fort Belknap Reservation to observe two biologists, one working with Black-footed Ferret restoration and the other with the tribes bison herd. Bronc Speaks Thunder, the manager of the bison herd, spoke to us about the role that the herd played in the tribe along with the current management practices. According to the federal government, the bison is considered a livestock animal, and that is how they are being managed at Fort Belknap. Of course they don’t go through a large amount of handling or get fed supplemental feed, still they are essentially a free-ranging livestock herd (in the eyes of the government at least). I liked that management practice though; they have a large herd that has been bringing in income through hunts and meat sales, supporting itself. Their goal isn’t the largest “free-roaming” bison herd, even though they would like to expand. What I felt from it was that the Native Americans have a closer relationship, a spiritual link, to the bison. Why should the tribes not control all of the bison herds? The Fort Belknap Reservation is a prime example for how I believe bison should be managed. Nonetheless, they have their conflicts with ranchers and other groups that do not support the reintroduction of bison, but the reservation has had this herd since the 70s.Alright, bear with me here. Let’s just presume that there were no actions to restore bison to the plains, as it was for a while after herds were essentially exterminated. Who would take the bison’s place? Who else has the grazing capabilities? Hmm…tough question right? NO. It’s simple; cattle or sheep if that’s what you’re going for. By far the most inspiring portion of this class was on the last day when we were able to speak to John Carlson, a BLM Sage Grouse expert. What could Sage Grouse possibly have to do with cattle? Carlson told us of a portion of land near to the one we were doing field work on that had not been grazed for 12 years, which is seemingly unheard of. The field has become overgrown with sagebrush, too thick for Sage Grouse to nest in or even travel through; there are also no grasses that would provide habitat for songbirds. All of these things happening because there is nothing to graze the area. The bison aren’t there anymore and may never return, so the next best thing should be used. The communities under the Big Sky have so many parts that have to work together, if one is removed they fall out of rhythm. We should do our best to fill in the gaps that, in one way or another, we caused.
There are those that believe all ranchers are out to get wildlife, that they find no value in them unless they are dead. You will have those that care nothing about the wild creatures of the earth, but then you have ranchers that understand the value of the land is not just based on how many cattle you can run. It’s their livelihood. Why would they want to destroy the land on which they make their living? They understand that wildlife can intermingle with their cattle with little dispute, depending on the type of wildlife of course. With that comes another debate, but that could last longer than you or I care it to.
Montana is a land of extremes and a land filled with disputes. There are always disputes though, no matter where you travel. Disputes over land use and who understands how to best utilize the natural resources provided. It’s hard to figure out who to trust. Do you listen to the people who have been on the land for multiple generations, working with it day in and day out? Do you listen to the people who have little spiritual or physical connection with the land and do everything for the name of science? Those are questions that I will be pondering until I get to go to Montana again, and even on after. I’ll go back out there one day and visit the ocean of grass that ebbs and flows under the Big Sky, and maybe, just maybe, I’ll put down some roots in that hardpan clay.
