Recent comments

Much of this has been precipitated by the discovery of brucellosis in a herd of cattle in far off Bridger, Montana. The entire herd of cattle is to be destroyed. No one believes that bison caused this. Of course, the slaughter might have happened anyhow since bison are still outside of Yellowstone's boundaries after a certain date. None of this actually does anything about brucellosis (and that's assuming anything SHOULD be done). Bison and elk with brucellosis continue to reproduce. Cattle, as you mention, continue to be in lands adjacent to areas bison wander. And, there's a sense that even if you moved cattle somewhere else, that one of these days there would still be a conflict. This is truly a clash of ideologies and cultures; it's never been about science (and I'm one of the few who doesn't think it should be about science - science only clarifies the boundaries of ethical disputes; it does not solve them). What's forgotten almost is the cattle. In a fight that's set up as bison v. rancher; cattle are the prisoners of a system that assumes that people have a right to make a living any way they choose. Of course, the people making that living are often not of the highest means themselves (some are, some aren't, many are in between), and it's easy and appropriate to point at trade agreements like NAFTA, and large multinational corporate interests as the ones who have the most to gain by erasing the rancher from the scene. One essay I linked to in the Yellowstone Newspaper that I work online on my site used that line of argument to suggest the need for a compromise. Yet, that misses the point that the cattle are not simply trading pieces (and nor are the bison - and nor are people for that matter). This is not an issue simply about compromise. It's about confronting values and confronting the consequences of those values head on and honestly. As for me, I am sickened by what's apparently imminent. Nothing ever changes, and the absurdity goes on and on. That's why I said the Democratic Congress would not provide the radical new wind needed because the issue is not partisan; it's systemic. It's related to much more than the people I deal with recognize. I believe fervently that a wild roaming bison population is the antithesis to centuries of destruction we have forced upon this continent. Yes, there are negative consequences (even if they aren't the ones the livestock industry would lead everyone to believe). However, none of the consequences can be as incoherent as the absolute control over life, over the ways living beings live, and the capitalizationof that life that exists. Wild bison mess up the civilized agrarian aesthetic. That's a big plus. As for the ways people will then capitalize on that reality (Yellowstone Clubs, big game hunts, wildlife viewing economies), that's certainly a problem, but it's not a problem that should convince us that we should continue playing god with the wandering herds. Dismayed, Jim