Federal Lands Grazing

Should grazing of livestock be allowed on publicly owned lands? Why or why not? (Remember to support your claim and to cite sources of information). If so, should the fees be the same as what is charged for private land leases? Why or why not? Try to be inclusive of as many viewpoints on this issue as possible when formulating your response.

If I understand everything I've read correctly, there isn't anything wrong with farmers allowing their livestock to graze on publicly owned land. For more information on the topic, I visited WorldNetDaily.com and found an article at the following URL: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=22039

After reading through that article (hopefully it was on the right track as this topic), I don't believe that farmers should be restricted any farther than the previous laws have restricted them regarding grazing on publicly owned lands, and they shouldn't be required to pay any additional fees. According to the article, they are entitled to a portion of the public land by law. If they're already entitled to the land by law, why should they need to add to the government's funds for its use?

Additionally, by allowing the cattle to graze farther out from only the private property, doesn't this reduce the risk of hazardously overgrazing? If they're restricted to the farmer's own property, the protection over the top soil would be worn away relatively quickly, allowing for rains to come and wash away top soil with no resistance. Should the farmer's be charged to prevent one piece of land from being over used?