Raymond V. Corning
MS Zoology (Limnology)

April 17, 2002

Jack Kelly, Manager
Lander Field Office
Bureau of Land Management
P.O. Box 589
Lander, WY 82520

Dear Jack:

As you know, I was one of the attendees at the meeting held April 12, 2002, regarding the Green Mountain Common Allotment. I was very much concerned about all the talk regarding proposed new fencing projects within the Allotment, as I was about proposed grazing dates and numbers of cattle that would be allowed to graze if the drought lets up by May 15. A copy of the proposed fencing to date is numbered on the attachment that follows.

If one tracks development of the Green Mountain Common Allotment Management (GMCA) Plan, which was developed to guide actions on the allotment, many voices, including the voices of permittees were united against further division of the Allotment through additional fencing. A series of meetings beginning in 1997 and ending in 1999, led to development of a comprehensive Management Plan for the Allotment. The plan included a series of Goals and Objectives. The permittees, Wildlife Federation, Back Country Riders Association, Lander Valley Sportsmen, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, Wyoming Outdoor Council, sage grouse groups, supporters of the Oregon and Mormon trails, interested public, and County Commissioner Crosby Allen, were more united on the subject of holding fencing to an absolute minimum than on any other subject discussed during the numerous meetings that were held.

United efforts led to development of Goal # 5: "Maintain the open spaces and natural character of the allotment and the uses that are dependent on these values." An Objective was also developed: "Minimize adverse affects on open space and the natural character of the area by carefully analyzing this issue at the design and approval phase of project proposals. Emphasize dispersed rather than developed recreation opportunities." Again, a major strategy adopted was: "Minimize the use of fencing."

Proposed riparian pastures that were agreed upon as badly needed to restore neglected riparian areas and wetlands were nevertheless fought over and finally reduced in numbers because of probable impacts to open space, raptor birds, prairie chickens, and big game, as well as to numerous users of the Allotment.

It was realized early on that intensive cattle herding in the large unfenced areas would be required if riparian/wetland habitats were to be restored to properly functioning conditions as outlined in Goal # 1: "Improve or maintain riparian areas." The same herding was also necessary to meet Goal # 4: "Improve the distribution of grazing animals.". However, evaluations conducted in the years 2000 and 2001 have shown herding was a dismal failure, as was adequate herd distribution. Rather than riparian/wetland habitats being improved, they continue to decline because cattle continued to concentrate on the areas that are so critical for maintaining water quality and quantity of the allotment, and for producing high value forage.

You, as BLM Lander Field Office Manager, put your finger on the need for maintaining riparian/wetland habitats in good condition when you pointed out that they were like the heart and blood of the allotment. While comprising less than 2 percent of the total allotment, a reduction in riparian/wetland capabilities can easily lead to heart failure. Heart failure can be determined in several ways. Precipitation from storms will no longer be retained for extended periods within the existing stream systems, but will exit the allotment within a few days. Sources of water for use by cattle, animals, and even man will also be greatly restricted. A highly reduced level of water will be available for offsetting effects of drought during drought periods such as are expected this year. Many signs already point to imminent heart failure in the Allotment due to the poor condition of riparian/wetland habitats.

The amounts of humus and humic materials in the wetlands of the allotment have diminished at a dramatic rate over the past 40 years. Some wetlands no longer function as water storage areas, merely passing water downstream within hours following a storm. Other wetlands have greatly diminished water storage capacities and thus limited water retention capabilities. Both riparian and
wetlands have insufficient vegetative cover to act as filters for providing high quality water for drinking purposes. With the drying out of wetlands because of declining production of humus and humic materials, and comparable drying of riparian areas because of the denuding of vegetative cover, both areas are rapidly losing the characteristics for which they are valued. Evaluations of both wetlands and riparian areas have shown the abundance and quantity of dry land vegetation is on the increase, a sure sign they are losing their primary functioning capacities. See: http://rangenet.org/directory/corningr/sweetwtr/

Permittees are now realizing the full import of BLM findings and are reading the hand writing on the wall. Some other means of controlling cattle must be found - or, permittees will be forced to reduce the number of cattle grazed on Green Mountain Allotment to levels far below those currently permitted.

At the meeting, BLM was deluged by fencing proposals from permittees. These permittees have completely forgotten their former reluctance regarding additional fencing within the GMCA, along with Goal # 4. In the neighborhood of 100 miles of additional fencing have already been proposed for this coming grazing season, only a month or two away. Additional fences are being proposed
almost daily.

It will be a sorry day for the local region, and the Nation, if the largest unfenced grazing allotment in the United States (more than 500,000 acres) is ripped up into small areas in the hope of staving off grazing reductions. It will not be easy to cut up the area, because while the permittees may have forgotten the goal: "Minimize adverse affects on open space and the natural character of the area by carefully analyzing this issue at the design and approval phase of project proposals."; all the other backers of this goal are sure to speak out in no uncertain terms. It is now time for these backers to once again join hands in opposition to the multiple fencing projects being proposed for the Green Mountain Common Allotment.

The sad part about fencing is that it will still not take care of the basic problem, over grazing of public lands. Many smaller allotments within the Sweetwater Drainage are suffering from the same problem, proving fencing will be of little avail without major changes in land management practices. Both the need for preparing an Environmental Impact Statement for the Sweetwater River Drainage, and the need to discuss radically new management practices, are discussed in the paper I previously sent to you: http://rangenet.org/directory/corningr/sweetwtr/ It shows very graphically why change is needed and why the measures that were recommended should be undertaken.

I hope the permittees who have proposed all the fencing soon realize they are following the wrong path, and one that will be fought tooth and nail by other users of the Public Lands. Otherwise, much very precious time for remedying problems in the allotment will be spent unproductively over the issue of fencing. Time is running out very quickly on the riparian areas and on riparian-wetlands, and little time is left to come up with acceptable solutions. Nevertheless, to maintain any semblance of the former glory of the West, these solutions must be attained.

Sincerely,

Raymond V. Corning