So, as long as a government program competes with private landowners, it's OK? Seriously?
The government does not drive prices down by ‘competing’ with private landowners. Public property is used to generate funds that pay for services without taxes, which is a good thing.
Most ranchers would prefer to use private land, but look at how much of Utah & Nevada & Arizona are public land. The land is usually lower quality and less accessible, and the contracts written in terms less favorable to the rancher, so the rancher will normally pay more to use private land if it is available. It often is not.
Nor do I want to see all public land go away, because like a lot of the public, I like using it for hiking, riding, motorcycles, etc.