Your cow's in my pocket again
Letter to the Editor
Only in Wyoming can a private business owner suffer a loss on public land due to an act of nature and then expect compensation via public funds, sportsman's license fees, for his loss and get 68 percent more than the actual value of his loss. An analogy would be <Rep.Clarene> Law in Jackson suffering glass damage to her motels due to wind damage, an act of nature. For every $100 worth of glass damage she would receive $168 of public money. Would the citizens and sportsmen of Wyoming permit this type of subsidy?
Maybe Dan Ingalls and the rest of his welfare ilk who graze their range maggots on public land should operate like other private business owners and recoup their business losses not from the public trough but from the price of the product they produce. Ingalls statements to the appellate panel reflect the absurdity of the whole situation. He expects the state, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, to expend its time, materials and labor to trap and remove public wildlife, bears, on public land so he can graze his private property on the public land.
If Ingalls and others don't like the inherent risks associated with grazing cattle on public land then they should graze them elsewhere. Don't expect public money, sportsmen's license fees, to compensate you for the risks you knowingly assume when you graze your cattle on public land.
Maybe the sportsmen of Wyoming should ask how much deer and elk habitat could be improved for $39,846 as opposed to
compensating a private business owner.