“Oh, give me a home where the buffalo roam and the deer and the antelope play. . . ”— by Dr. Brewster Higby, 1871, sung by Bing Crosby, Frank Sinatra & John Denver, among others.

Preamble:

A large land rectangle in Northcentral Montana is the centerfold of an altruistic plan to “rewild” over 3 million acres of farms, cattle ranches and government owned or managed land utilizing grazing bison as its foundation. With well-heeled domestic and international supporters, (reference my blog of Oct 27, 2022m here), American Prairie (AP) is buying or co-opting US government owned or protected wilderness, privately owned farmland and cattle ranches, in its attempt to re-create a “wilderness” that offers exclusive public access for all types of outdoor recreation including hunting, hiking, fishing, mountain biking and more while promoting wildlife conservation and cattle ranching limitation. Opposing this effort is Save the Cowboy (STC), a group of Montana cattle ranchers bent on preserving their ranches, income, heritage and way of life from AP’s encroachment. I have chosen this topic to bring to the fore a brewing battle until now seen only on the edges of the climate change/environmentalism brouhaha. In three episodes, I will describe these two opposing arguments in as disinterested a manner as I can muster by presenting both sides as advocated by each, beginning with AP (episode 1), then STC (episode 2) and concluding with my opinionated observations (episode 3).

First Episode: American Prairie

In October of last year, 60 Minutes aired, “American Prairie: creating a huge nature reserve in Montana,” by Bill Whitaker. It piqued my interest. After gathering hundreds of pages of googled research, I wanted to delve deeper. I attempted to interview both AP’s protagonist principals and STC’s to get their perspectives.

Sometimes to sort the buckwheat from the bulls—t, it is best to look at an organization’s financial statements, if available. Since AP is a 501(c)(3) Tax exempt entity, I was able to access its Audited Consolidated Financial Statement for 2020 and 2019. AP is no small outfit. Its total assets are $104 million with 64% of that in “conservation lands.”

The stated goal of AP is to create the largest wildlife reserve in the lower 48 states, consisting of approximately 3.2 million acres of both private and public lands. AP intends to acquire and manage approximately 500,000 private acres. Its main focus is the “purchasing and permanently holding title to private lands that glue together a vast mosaic of existing public lands so that the region is managed thoughtfully and collaboratively with state and federal agencies for wildlife conservation and public access.”

Let’s not quibble over AP’s choice of words like “thoughtfully and collaboratively,” leaving that to the last episode wherein I draw my conclusions. Let’s objectively review what AP wants to do with 3.2 million acres in central Montana to better understand their intentions and any good that may come forth.

It was felt by AP’s originators that Montana’s glaciated Northern Plains had experienced a disappearing shortgrass prairie ecosystem which had not been regeneratively managed to preserve and extend the native plant and animal habitat. AP felt that the affected acres could form the basis for a wildlife preserve unlike anything else in the lower 48 states.

The benefit of such a gargantuan wildlife reserve accrues to many, according to AP. It starts with the public who will gain access to these “rewilded” public lands to be able to recreate in many forms. It accrues to the wildlife that will be able to inhabit a giant regenerated wilderness unfettered by impinging human development. While growing herds of free-roaming bison are its foundation ungulate, AP points to the many deer and elk that will propagate and touts that there are a recorded 441,000 head of cattle in the seven-county area of the reserve. Thus, to say that AP’s real goal is to rid the area of cattle in favor of free-roaming bison, at least initially, is not entirely true.

There should be no doubt however, that one of AP’s principal goals is to ameliorate climate change, helping to sequester carbon dioxide in the soil by the tromping bison and to a lesser extent other hooved ungulates. Can such goals be both altruistic and practical? That remains to be seen.

To be continued...

American Prairie vs. Save the Cowboy: Episode 1

Join for free* to continue reading.