![]() |
| Horse Creek Cove, Grand Lake, Oklahoma. (grandlake.com photo) |
The choice to restrict farm animals from streams took farmers like Grant Victor, who wanted to clean up his property's creek, even if it meant breaking with ranching tradition. Buckley writes, "Working with a conservation program, he installed fencing around Horse Creek, creating a protective riparian buffer, even though it meant keeping his animals off 220 acres, about 6% of his family’s land."
He waited and nature did not disappoint. "The benefits of a healthier waterway exceeded his hopes," Buckley reports. "Within just a couple of years, the banks were transformed into verdant corridors of grasses and shrubs. Wildlife appeared, including white-tailed deer, bobcats, coyotes and bald eagles that return each year to a sprawling nest to rear their young."
But that's not all. Victor was rewarded with healthier cattle. Buckley adds, "Victor installed pipes and wells in the pastures, allowing his cattle to drink water unsullied by sediment and their own waste. They put on more weight and suffered fewer respiratory ailments, and that resulted in lower veterinary bills."
Other Oklahoma farmers have adopted methods that support nature while increasing farming profits. Steve Glasgow, a recently retired Oklahoma state resource conservationist, "estimates that nearly a third of Oklahoma’s crop farmers employ conservation practices, up from roughly one-fifth 25 years ago. . . . Conservation practices can also increase yields and reduce labor and fuel costs."
Victor knows some of his neighboring farmers remain conservation skeptics and scoff at his choices but he's OK with that. He told Buckley, "I’m sure at the coffee shop, they were all laughing at me. . . . My dad always taught me there’s some things you can’t afford to do and there’s other things you can’t afford not to do. This was one of the things I couldn’t afford not to do."

No comments:
Post a Comment