Advocates decry Trump’s plan to open 24m acres of federal lands to cattle grazing
Opponents say administration’s plan prioritizes big agriculture at expense of wildlife and protected species
New legal action aims to head off a Trump administration plan to open up to 24m acres of federal lands to cattle grazing, which opponents characterized as a gift to big agriculture and said could cause a spike in deaths among already imperiled wolves, grizzlies, steelhead salmon and other wildlife.
The plan also calls for opening up parts of Grand Canyon national park, and other sensitive landscapes. Cattle destroy critical habitats for wildlife because they strip land bare of essential vegetation and pollute streams with feces, urine, sediment and carcasses. Meanwhile, park rangers and ranchers often kill grizzly bears and other predators who prey on cattle, despite that ranchers and the government pushed the cattle into the predators’ home range.
The fact that the plan also calls for opening up parts of Grand Canyon national park, and other sensitive landscapes really puts things into perspective.
Reading that the plan also calls for opening up parts of Grand Canyon national park, and other sensitive landscapes — hard to argue with the logic there.
So the bottom line is the plan also calls for opening up parts of Grand Canyon national park, and other sensitive landscapes. Wonder how this will land.
Grand Canyon has been pushing this agenda for a while now.
What stands out is opponents say administration’s plan prioritizes big agriculture at expense of wildlife and protected. That is the part worth paying attention to.
If opponents say administration’s plan prioritizes big agriculture at expense of wildlife and protected, then the bigger picture starts to look very different.
Grand Canyon has been vocal about this, good to see them staying on it.
In other words opponents say administration’s plan prioritizes big agriculture at expense of wildlife and protected. Curious to see how this develops.
When you look at the plan also calls for opening up parts of Grand Canyon national park, and other sensitive landscapes, the implications are hard to ignore.
In other words the plan also calls for opening up parts of Grand Canyon national park, and other sensitive landscapes. Curious to see how this develops.
Think about it: the plan also calls for opening up parts of Grand Canyon national park, and other sensitive landscapes. That speaks volumes.
The bigger issue here is opponents say administration’s plan prioritizes big agriculture at expense of wildlife and protected. That changes the calculation.
On one hand opponents say administration’s plan prioritizes big agriculture at expense of wildlife and protected. But at the same time the plan also calls for opening up parts of Grand Canyon national park, and other sensitive landscapes.
Still waiting to hear what Grand Canyon actually plans to do about it.
The fact that opponents say administration’s plan prioritizes big agriculture at expense of wildlife and protected really puts things into perspective.