Winter 2011 Volume 11, Issue 1

Winter 2011 Volume 11, Issue 1

Reality TV Explores Ranch Life – pg. 4

IFBF Policy for 2011 – pg 8

An Interview with Idaho’s Most Famous Onion Farmer – pg. 24

The Ag Agenda

EPA’s Regulatory Diet is Unhealthy for Agriculture

Benjamin Franklin once said that he was a “mortal enemy to arbitrary government and unlimited power.”

Because of this philosophy shared by all of our founding fathers, America enjoys the freedom of democracy and a fine balance between federal authority and state rights.

By Bob Stallman

President American Farm Bureau Federation

Unfortunately, some very important state rights have come under attack recently by the Environmental Protection

Agency, which is threatening to expand federal control over the Chesapeake Bay region. For that reason, the American Farm Bureau Federation filed a lawsuit in federal court last month to halt EPA’s pollution regulatory plan for the Chesapeake Bay. Putting the Skinny on States You may ask why farmers and ranchers nationwide should be concerned with the Chesapeake Bay region. Simply, this new EPA approach will not end with the See STALLMAN, page 6

The President’s Desk

Salazar Initiates Land Grab; Usurps Congress

Reminiscent of the Clinton Administration’s War on the West, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar recently signed a secretarial order authorizing the Bureau of Land Management to place severe restrictions on public land use in 11 western states and Alaska.

By Frank Priestley President Idaho Farm Bureau Federation

Salazar’s order bypasses congressional oversight, directs BLM state officials to evaluate public lands with “wilderness characteristics,” and

create a new public lands category called “Wild Lands.” According to a press release, “Americans love the wild places where they hunt, fish, hike and get away from it all. . . This policy ensures that the lands of the American public are protected for current and future generations to come.”

This policy is troubling on many fronts.

Chief among them is the Department of Interior (DOI) provides no working definition of what “Wild Lands” are, except “appropriate areas with wilderSee PRIESTLEY, page 6

Inside Farm Bureau

We are Farm Bureau

By Rick Keller CEO Idaho Farm Bureau Federation

You are part of Farm Bureau. Nationally, Farm Bureau is more than 6 million member families. Idaho has a total of 64,668 member families. Collectively, Farm Bureau is the state’s and nation’s largest farm organization.

Farm Bureau members produce most of your food, the fiber that goes in your clothes, inputs for ethanol and biodiesel fuels, and timber

2

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / WINTER 2011

used to construct your homes.

Farm Bureau represents America’s farmers and ranchers on the local, state, national and international levels. IFBF is ranked as the most influential farm group in Boise and AFBF as the most influential farm group in Washington, DC. Farm Bureau is nonpartisan but politically active to achieve members’ goals.

Farm Bureau is The Voice of Agriculture™ and rural Idaho.

See KELLER, page 7

Contents

Volume 11, Issue 1 IFBF OFFICERS President . ................................. Frank Priestley, Franklin Vice President ..................................Mark Trupp, Driggs Executive Vice President .............................. Rick Keller

Features

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Bryan Searle ............................................................Shelley Scott Bird .......................................................... Pocatello Chris Dalley ....................................................... Blackfoot Dean Schwendiman ........................................... Newdale Danny Ferguson ........................................................Rigby Scott Steele ..................................................... Idaho Falls Gerald Marchant .................................................. Oakley Rick Pearson ................................................... Hagerman Mike Garner.............................................................. Declo Curt Krantz ............................................................ Parma Mike McEvoy..................................................... Middleton Tracy Walton ....................................................... Emmett Marjorie French .............................................. Princeton Bob Callihan . ...................................................... Potlatch Louis Kins ........................................................... Kootenai Carol Guthrie ......................................................... Inkom Austin Tubbs . .......................................................... Malad

Reality TV on Animal Planet features three Montana ranch families

IDAHO FARM BUREAU QUARTERLY USPS #022-899, is published quarterly by the IDAHO FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, 275 Tierra Vista Drive, Pocatello, ID 83201.

Page 31

Page 4 Idaho Farm Bureau delegates to the organization’s 71st annual convention adopted policy for 2011

STAFF Dir. of Admin. Services ....................... Nancy Shiozawa Dir. of Member Services ................................... Ray Poe Dir. of Commodities ............................ Gary Fuhriman Commodity Assistant ................................. Peggy Pratt Membership Assistant .............................. Peggy Moore Market Information Assistant ................ Dixie Ashton Dist. I Regional Manager ........................ Kendall Keller Dist. II Regional Manager .................... Dennis Brower Dist. III Regional Manager .................. Charles Garner Dist. IV Regional Manager ................... Russ Hendricks Dist.V Regional Manager ...................... Bob Smathers Dir. of Governmental Affairs ....................... Kent Lauer Asst. Dir. of Governmental Affairs ... Dennis Tanikuni Range/Livestock Specialist..........................Wally Butler Director of Public Relations ............. John Thompson Video Services Manager ............................ Steve Ritter Broadcast Services Manager .................... Jake Putnam Office Manager, Boise ............................ Shawna Yasuda Member Services Manager ........................ Joel Benson Printed by: Owyhee Publishing, Homedale, ID

Marketbasket survey shows slight increase in basic staples

Farm facts

Page 33

Page 8 Focus on agriculture – The difference a word can make

Page 23 An interview with Idaho’s most famous onion farmer – Phil Batt

Page 24

Winter cattle drive – a 45-mile horseback adventure in January

Page 36

Winter logging in the Payette Forest

Page 38

DEPARTMENTS

POSTMASTER send changes of address to: IDAHO FARM BUREAU QUARTERLY P.O. Box 4848, Pocatello, ID 83205-4848.

Periodicals postage paid at Pocatello, ID and additional mailing offices.

Subscription: $4 a year included in Farm Bureau dues.

MAGAZINE CONTACTS: Idaho Farm Bureau Federation EDITOR (208) 239-4292 • ADS (208) 239-4279 E-MAIL: dashton@idahofb.org www.idahofb.org

Cover: Cattle on Stucky Ranch near Avon Montana, with rancher

Travis Goettle in the background. The Stucky family was part of a reality television program on Animal Planet called The Last American Cowboy. The program followed three Montana ranch families over about eight months from the time their calves were born in the spring up until they were shipped in the fall.

Photo Courtesy of Audrey Hall, Animal Planet

The Ag Agenda: Bob Stallman............................................................. 2 The President’s Desk: Frank Priestley.............................................. 2 Inside Farm Bureau: Rick Keller......................................................... 2 Insurance Matters............................................................................... 28 Word Search........................................................................................ 30 Farm Facts............................................................................................. 33 Classifieds ............................................................................................ 42

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

3

Reality TV Portrays Life on Montana Ranches

By John Thompson STANFORD, Montana – Having his life featured in reality television provided rancher Scott Hughes the opportunity to reflect on, critique and strengthen the relationships within his family.

That was Hughes’ response when asked about his role in Last American Cowboy, a program about three Montana ranches that recently aired on The Discovery Network’s Animal Planet. Like most reality shows, the program’s allure comes from human drama – the representation of interpersonal relationships. What’s different is this one has a conscience.

Hughes was sometimes hard on his wife, sometimes didn’t have time for his kids, and struggled to get along with his father.

Just like any family, they went through difficult times, but they had the courage to put their strengths and weaknesses on display for millions of viewers to see. In addition, there was no motivation to profit from the experience or attempt to gain celebrity status. Hughes started the program as a cattle rancher with strong family values and nothing really changed.

“Seeing myself on television gave me the opportunity to grow personally and better understand my family,” he said.

Same with Bill Galt, another rancher featured on the program. Galt is the owner of one of Montana’s largest cattle ranches.

He said people now recognize him everywhere he goes.

“People seem shocked by honesty and integrity,” Galt said. “They can’t believe we do business on a handshake.”

During filming Galt was contacted by the Fox Network and offered a trip to New York City to be interviewed on the network’s morning show, Fox and Friends. In hindsight, he says he probably should have gone.

Galt was portrayed on the program as the “innovator” because he uses modern ranching methods. He is a pilot and flies a helicopter to regularly check his herd and his land. He continues to receive email from viewers almost every day. Most of it is positive. People want to know more about cattle ranching in Montana. He’s been taken to task by viewers three times. Once for

Scott and Stacey Hughes with their children, Sarah and Parker. Hughes Ranch, Stanford, MT. Photo by Audrey Hall, Animal Planet 4

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

using his helicopter to shoot a coyote that was killing calves, once for not using anesthesia during branding and castrating, and a third time by a rancher from South Dakota for being “too modern.” He’s received over 150 applications for an internship he provides to one college student per season.

“I can’t go anyplace where somebody doesn’t come up to me and mention the show,” he said. “It’s been overwhelming.”

During filming there were two cameramen on each ranch from February to October.

Galt said one of them, Doug Stanley, was a cameraman during all six seasons of The Deadliest Catch, a reality program about crab fishermen in the Bering Sea. “They were very professional and had been at it quite a while,” Galt said. “They were both tougher than nails and never asked for any quarter, no matter how late, how hot or cold it got. They really got to be part of the family and when they left it was like losing part of the crew.”

The Hughes Ranch was homesteaded by Scott’s great-grandfather in 1893. Hughes was portrayed as Last American Cowboy’s “loner.” He runs the ranch primarily by himself with help from his wife Stacey and his father Tucker Hughes. When asked about managing 12,000 acres and 500 cows, mostly by himself he said most people in agriculture work just as hard as he does. “My stuff just ended up being on TV. It was nice having somebody around (camera crew) that had a general interest in what we do.”

In one poignant scene during the program Hughes is clearly spent and stressed out during calving time.

Alone in the barn, shortly after barking at Stacey for no good reason, he said paraphrased, “This busi-

ness creates hard men. I’m trying not to let that happen to me.”

In another scene with a blizzard approaching there is clearly tension between Scott and his father Tucker over whether to bring the cows in or not. The tension is multiplied by the fact that Tucker is questioning whether to turn the ranch over to his son. At one point Tucker said if Scott can’t handle the job he’ll find someone else who can. When asked about the relationship with his father, Scott said it’s really no different than any other father/ son relationship where a business is involved.

“The tension between us may have been embellished a little bit,” he said. “We work hard together to benefit the ranch and move forward.”

Both ranchers agreed the program was an accurate portrayal of what they do for a living. On the third ranch, the Stucky Family of Avon, Montana, were portrayed as “traditionalists.” They run their ranch primarily from horseback and put their hay up loose with a beaver slide. Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly was not able to reach the family’s patriarch Earl Stucky to comment for this article. Earl’s son in law Travis Goettle is featured in the cover photo on this magazine.

According to a press release from Animal Planet, Earl and Glenna Stucky have led a modest sized family ranch in Montana for the last 30 years. They have managed to keep the 20,000-acre ranch going through tough winters and difficult calving seasons. In order to cope with the intense workloads and 3,000 cattle, they rely on their children and in-laws for help. The Stucky ranch is entirely a family affair with no hired ranch hands and they prefer it that way. They feel the bonds they have living and working together are among life’s biggest treasures.

the way they run their ranch. They choose horseback over ATVs and most of the work is done by hand. They believe this is the best way to ranch and value that this is the way their ancestors ranched for hundreds of years before them. Keeping these traditions alive is intensely important to the entire clan and as the ranch continues to grow and expand the Stuckys’ hope is that it will be passed down through generations.

“The families featured in Last American Cowboy have extraordinary and compelling stories of grit and determination as they struggle to preserve their way of life for future generations,” said Marjorie Kaplan, president and general manager of Animal Planet Media. “The rawness and tenacity of the American West has built their character and continues to test it every day, and we are privileged to offer our viewers a glimpse into an authentic way of life few get to see firsthand.”

Galt said the show received average ratings and there is no word on whether another season will be filmed. He said he is interested in filming another season at his ranch.

Galt got involved with the program through a book that was written about him by au-

thor David McCumber titled “The Cowboy Way: Seasons of a Montana Ranch.”

Someone at the Discovery Network read the book and tracked him down.

Hughes was approached by the Montana Film Office, a state agency in Helena, about using his ranch as a backdrop for films. The company that produced Last American Cowboy located him through the state agency. They interviewed several ranchers in the area and selected Hughes from the group for the program.

Galt said it was a good opportunity to present a positive message about agriculture. “Traditionally people in agriculture fear how we are portrayed in the media,” he said. “The thing I would tell them is do your homework and if they are good, honest people there are a lot of plusses to letting the world see how we do things and where their food comes from.”

The program continues to air on Animal Planet at various times. DVD’s of the program can be purchased at http://store.discovery.com/?v=animal-planet&ecid=PRFTV1-400000&pa=PRF-TV1-400000. It is also available at Amazon.com.

The Galt Ranch L to R: Gary Plachy, Tanya Hill, Suri the dog, Austin Paulson, Tyson Hill, Warren Deal, Jack Galt,

The Stuckys are a traditional Samantha Welborn, Bill Galt, Jill Galt. White Sulphur Springs, MT. family and it is reflected in Photo by Audrey Hall, Animal Planet

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

5

Stallman

Continued from page 2

Chesapeake Bay. EPA has already revealed its plan to follow suit in other watersheds across the nation, including the Mississippi watershed. That is why our legal effort is essential to preserving the power of the states—not EPA—to decide whether

Regardless of what happens with this lawsuit and EPA’s diet, farmers will continue their good stewardship efforts.

This lawsuit is about whether EPA alone can dictate how we accomplish a cleaner watershed and at what cost. and how to regulate farming practices in America’s watersheds.

EPA’s Total Maximum Daily Load dictates how much nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment can be allowed into the Bay and its tributaries from different sources. EPA’s plan is built on inaccurate assumptions and

flawed data. Further, the agency failed to provide the public with critical information about the basis for the TMDL and allow sufficient time for the public to comment on the incomplete, but highly technical, information that EPA did provide. In addition, EPA’s plan overreaches its legal authority by dictating to states how and when they must achieve water quality goals, regardless of costs.

EPA likes to call the TMDL a “pollution diet,” but this diet threatens to starve agriculture out of the 64,000 square-mile Chesapeake Bay watershed. The agency’s diet would unlawfully micromanage state actions and the activities of farmers, homeowners and businesses within the six-state watershed, imposing specific pollutant allocations on activities such as farming and homebuilding, sometimes down to the level of individual farms.

It seems that a government by the people for the people is becoming out of fashion.

It was Thomas Jefferson who said that “the

greatest calamity which could befall us would be submission to a government of unlimited powers.

Fattening up the Government This lawsuit is not about whether farmers will work to achieve clean water. Like all Americans, farmers want a clean Chesapeake Bay. They are already working throughout the Chesapeake Bay region and across the nation to implement real, on-theground conservation measures to improve water.

Regardless of what happens with this lawsuit and EPA’s diet, farmers will continue their good stewardship efforts. This lawsuit is about whether EPA alone can dictate how we accomplish a cleaner watershed and at what cost.

I know who I trust in that scenario— America’s farmers and ranchers, who, day after day, are the true environmentalists.

Farm Bureau is standing behind our farm and ranch families.

Priestley Continued from page 2 ness characteristics.” Whereas wilderness areas have a fairly explicit definition including phrases like “untrammeled by man,” and “generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man’s work substantially unnoticeable.”

In addition, the process completely bypasses the authority of Congress, which is required in the creation of wilderness areas to provide some level of accountability to the people who actually live nearby. This new policy leaves designation of Wild Lands, whatever that means, up to BLM employees. In its press release, DOI promises the opportunity for public input.

However, many of us remember what has happened in the past when federal agencies promised us they would listen to our concerns. We trust they will listen, but what we can most certainly expect is that public 6

comment from these 11 western states will largely be ignored and overridden by the concerns of environmental groups and others with romantic notions of the American West - mainly people with no economic ties to the region.

To prove this point let’s take a look back at recent history. Despite significant opposition from Utah residents, then President Bill Clinton used his authority under the Antiquities Act in 1996 to create the 1.9 million acre Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument. Earlier that year, despite significant public opposition from affected residents, Clinton and his Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt gave Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming the dubious gift of wolf reintroduction.

Overall, Idaho currently has 33 million acres being managed by federal agencies.

At present, just over 4 million acres in

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

Idaho are designated wilderness areas with another three million acres in Wilderness Study Areas, which are essentially de facto wilderness areas. The BLM manages 12 million acres in Idaho.

Further restrictions on public lands will harm rural communities where people depend on grazing, mining, logging and other activities that create commerce in rural areas. It makes us wonder if that is the point of this secretarial order. For the past two years the Obama Administration has mostly stayed away from western land management issues. We know there is a lot of pressure from people in other states to preserve the wide open spaces left in America. Most of those people don’t have any idea what it’s like to live in a state that is mostly owned by the federal government. We hope this isn’t an indication that another War on the West is beginning.

Keller Continued from page 2

Farm Bureau’s strength lies in its grassroots. Farm Bureau is a voluntary organization of member families joining together to solve common problems.

Farm Bureau Members Pay Less For Choice Hotels!

Farm Bureau represents all commodity interests and is involved in all issues that are of concern to farmers and ranchers, including taxation, regulations, landowner rights, food safety and services to the farm community.

Farm Bureau’s strength lies in its grassroots. Farm Bureau is a voluntary organization of member families joining together to solve common problems.

A $40 room will be closer to

Anyone interested in the welfare of Idaho’s farmers and ranchers is welcome to join the state’s largest and most influential farm organization. Farm Bureau’s strength stems from individuals working together.

To understand Farm Bureau, it is important to start at the local rather than the national level. It is in the 2,800-plus county Farm Bureaus that programs are developed to meet the needs of member families. Farm Bureau relies on its member families for strength and direction. Thousands of volunteer leaders serve on county Farm Bureau boards and committees. From social outings and educational workshops to political involvement and community forums, Farm Bureau offers programs and services for the entire family.

County Farm Bureaus are the foundation of state Farm Bureaus.

Once county Farm Bureaus set policies, they select voting delegates to voice their beliefs at state Farm Bureau annual meetings. These delegates determine which policies will provide direction for the state Farm Bureaus. Farmers and ranchers serve as the officers and directors of state Farm Bureaus and work, with the help of professional staff, to carry out the policies of the organization.

Farm Bureau remains politically strong, offers educational resources for promoting agricultural literacy and telling agriculture’s story, provides leadership training opportunities for all members and saves you money through member benefits and discount programs.

Thank you for being Farm Bureau.

$32 A $60 room will be closer to

$48 A $90 room will be closer to

$72 1.800.258.2847

Farm Bureau Discount Code

00800286

advanced reservations required

Farm Bureau remains politically strong, offers educational resources for promoting agricultural literacy and telling agriculture’s story, provides leadership training opportunities for all members and saves you money through member benefits and discount programs.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

7

Policy 2011 BASIC PRINCIPLES Purpose of Farm Bureau

Farm Bureau is a free, independent, nongovernmental, voluntary organization of farm and ranch families united for the purpose of analyzing their problems and formulating action to achieve educational improvement, economic opportunity, environmental awareness and social advancement, and thereby, to promote the national well being.

Farm Bureau is local, statewide, national, and international in its scope and influence and is non-partisan, non-sectarian, and non-secretive in character.

Farm Bureau Beliefs and Philosophy

America’s unparalleled progress is based on freedom and dignity of the individual, sustained by basic moral and religious concepts. Freedom to the individual versus concentration of power, which would destroy freedom, is the central issue in all societies.

We believe the definition of marriage is a union between one man and one woman.

We believe that since the beginning of time, man’s ability to provide food, fiber, and fuel for himself and his dependents has determined his independence, freedom and security.

We believe that a strong and viable agricultural industry is one of the most important cornerstones in the foundation of our national security, and that the importance of the role that agriculture plays in the development of our society must never be taken for granted. Economic progress, cultural advancement, ethical and religious principles flourish best where men are free, responsible individuals. The exercise of free will, rather than force, is consistent with the maintenance of liberty.

Individual freedom and opportunity must not be sacrificed in a quest for guaranteed “security”.

We believe that America’s system of private ownership of property and the means of production has been, and is, one of the major foundation stones of our republic. This element of our economic system and the personal rights attendant to private property, including grazing and water rights, must be maintained and protected.

We will take every opportunity to publicize and defend our position, and we will stand firm on basic constitutional rights.

We believe in government by law, impartially administered, without special privilege.

8

We support agricultural programs and organizations that give equal opportunity for personal and professional growth based on skills, knowledge and leadership ability.

We believe in the representative form of government; a republic as provided in our Constitution; in limitations upon government power; in maintenance of equal opportunity; in the right of each individual to worship as he chooses; in separation of church and state as set forth in the First Amendment to the Constitution; and in freedom of speech, press, and peaceful assembly.

The U. S. Supreme Court imposed one man one vote rule should be overturned and return the U.S. to the republican form of government that was envisioned by the framers of the Constitution.

Individuals have a moral responsibility to help preserve freedom for future generations by participating in public affairs and by helping to elect candidates who share their fundamental beliefs and principles.

We oppose the use of public funds for financing political campaigns. People have the right and the responsibility to speak for themselves individually or through organizations of their choice without coercion or government intervention.

Ownership of property and property rights are among the human rights essential to the preservation of individual freedom. The right to own property must be preserved at all costs.

We believe in the right of every man to choose his own occupation; to be rewarded according to his contribution to society and to save, invest, spend, or convey his earnings to his heirs.

These rights are accompanied by the responsibility that each man has to meet the financial obligations he has incurred.

We support a society free of drug abuse.

The Constitution Stable and honest government with prescribed and limited powers is essential to freedom and progress. The Constitution of the United States was well designed to secure individual liberty by a division of federal authority among the Legislative, Executive and Judicial branches. The 10th Amendment assures that liberties are further secured for the states and the people through the retention of those powers not specifically delegated to the federal government. The constitutional prerogatives of each branch of government should be preserved from encroachment.

The Constitution is the basic law of the land and changes should be made only through

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

constitutional amendments, not by federal policy or regulation. One of the greatest dangers threatening our republic and system of private, competitive enterprise is the socialization of America through the centralization of power and authority in the federal government. The centralization of power and responsibility in the federal government violates constitutional purposes. It has usurped state sovereignty and individual freedom and should be reversed.

In defense of our constitution, and of the sovereignty of the U.S.A., we oppose the centralization of power worldwide into one world government.

Religious Life Our nation was founded on spiritual faith and belief in God. Whereas the Constitution of the United States was founded on moral and religious principles, it is proposed that moral, ethical and traditional family values get equal support and consideration in the public schools as do the atheistic and humanistic views.

We support the right to have religious beliefs and symbols of those beliefs presented in our communities.

We vigorously support retention of: (1) “So Help Me God” in official oaths; (2) The phrase “In God We Trust” on our coin; (3) The fourth verse of the “Star Spangled Banner”; (4) The phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Capitalism-Private Competitive Enterprise

We believe in the American capitalistic, private, competitive enterprise system in which property is privately owned, privately managed, operated for profit, individual satisfaction and responsible stewardship.

We believe in a competitive business environment in which supply and demand are the primary determinants of market prices, the use of productive resources, and the distribution of output.

We support the continuing freedom of the people of Idaho to manage, develop, harvest and market the useful products of our natural resources.

We believe in man’s right to search and research to select the best ways of maintaining quality production of food and fiber.

We believe every individual in Idaho should have the right to a job without being forced to join or pay dues to any organization. Government

operation of commercial business in competition with private enterprise should be terminated.

We also believe that no element of society has more concern for, understanding of, or a greater stake in, the proper husbandry of poultry, livestock, furbearers, game animals and aquaculture than the producer.

Economy in Government

We consider the proliferation of government with its ever increasing cost to the taxpayer a major problem.

State expenditures and growth of personnel on the public payroll should not be allowed to expand faster than the population and should be compatible with the percentage of economic growth of the state.

We believe that Article B, Section 1, “Limitations of Public Indebtedness” of the state constitution is the main reason for the healthy financial condition of Idaho’s government. We will oppose any attempt to amend this section of the constitution.

Tax exemptions granted by the state Legislature that reduce county income should at the same time require appropriations of sufficient funds to replace county revenue losses caused by such exemptions.

We support economy at all levels of government.

Education

We believe education starts with the parent or guardian and is extended to the schools as a cooperative partnership in which parents and guardians have the right to review any and all methods and materials used in the educational processes of school systems.

We believe parents have the right to choose how best to educate their children.

We believe local school boards must be elected by the people to maintain control of public school systems and must have authority to establish policy for dress standards, personal conduct standards, testing standards, fiscal controls and curriculum in order to assure public schools are effective in their continuing effort to strengthen the educational programs.

We believe all school systems must be accountable to give opportunity that all students in their educational systems obtain proficiency in the basics of reading, writing and mathematics.

Parents and guardians must be kept informed by the school system, of the educational progress of their children.

We believe parents and guardians have an inherent right and obligation to discipline their own children.

Political Parties Strong, responsive political parties are essential to the United States system of elective government.

We recommend that Farm Bureau members support the political party of their choice.

We believe that government should in no way be involved directly in the political process but should lay down certain rules to assure fair and proper elections.

We strongly favor retaining the county central political committees composed of county precinct committee people and their existing functions within the party structure.

We are opposed to shifting the functions of a county committee to a district committee.

We support the right of members of Idaho’s political parties to demand a closed primary and encourage the legislature to pass a law to make it possible.

COMMODITIES (1) Agrichemicals

We oppose establishment of zones of agricultural land in which any kind of legal application or storage of agricultural chemicals is curtailed without sound, scientifically validated evidence to warrant curtailment.

We support increased research and labeling for minor-use pesticide registrations.

We recommend that compliance with federally approved label instructions should absolve farmers or commercial applicators from liability claims of environmental pollution.

(2) Anthracnose Virus

We urge the Idaho State Department of Agriculture to do all within its power to prohibit the importation of Anthracnose virus into Idaho.

(3) Commodity Indemnity Fund We support all efforts to maintain accountability, monitor efficiency and protect the fund.

We favor a minimum of $15 million in the state commodity indemnity fund to provide an adequate level of protection for growers.

(4) Commodity Promotion

We support the organization of commodity commissions for promotion and research purposes of any commodity.

We support compulsory deduction of funds if producers can establish the commodity commission through referendum, with assessments being established or increased by a majority vote of the producers, or if producers can easily obtain refunds of their assessments.

We support a periodic referendum if assessment is made mandatory.

We recommend that all ag commodity commissions be removed from state legislative control and put into producer control.

(5) Commodity Sales

We support expansion of Idaho agricultural markets, domestic and foreign. We also support trade missions abroad to better inform our producers and the hosting of foreign delegations to our state in efforts to increase our market share.

We support changes to crop insurance that truly reflect a safety net.

We oppose double discounts by grain dealers.

We support licensing and bonding of all commodity brokers by the State of Idaho.

We support identification and quantification on the container label of all seeds that have been identified in samples from a lot of agricultural, vegetable, flower, tree or shrub seed to be sold.

(6) Country of Origin on Food

We support mandatory country-of-origin labeling of agricultural products for the State of Idaho.

(7) Environmental Studies

We recommend that any individual or group doing environmental studies be held accountable for claims or assertions of damage by agricultural practices to the environment. Claims or assertions should be treated with skepticism until they have been subjected to critical peer review and tested by practical application.

(8) Fair Trade

We support the concept of fair trade as outlined in American Farm Bureau Federation policy.

(9) Field Testing Biotechnology Products

We support effective field testing of new biotechnology products, to promote commercial use of products that will benefit agriculture and the general public.

We oppose any law or regulation requiring registration of agriculture producers who use or sell biotech- based products or commodities.

(10) Food Safety/Government Accountability

We strongly believe a government agency making public health decisions that result in product recalls, product seizures or destruction of perishable goods must be held accountable when such decisions prove false. Such agencies must be required to compensate or indemnify individuals

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

9

and companies for the monetary losses that occur because of poor or false regulatory decisions.

(11) Forage/Soil Sample Testing

We recommend that action be taken to set uniform guidelines for all testing labs in the analysis of forage and soil samples, with the Idaho Department of Agriculture to administer them.

(12) Hay Certification

We support a uniform state noxious weed free hay certification program.

(13) Industrial Grade Hemp

We encourage the legalization of cultivation and production of industrial grade hemp in Idaho.

(14) Lien Law

We oppose any attempt to alter the system of centralized filing or first in time, first in right system of lien priorities, either in revised UCC Article 9, or any other legislation.

Delivered feed shall not be encumbered by a blanket lien from a financial institution until the grower/supplier is paid in full.

(15) Moisture Meters Commodity buyers’ moisture meters should be certified for accuracy by the ISDA Bureau of Weights and Measures.

(16) NAFTA Withdrawal

We support a concurrent resolution from both houses of the Idaho State Legislature to Congress to take necessary steps to withdraw from NAFTA. (17) Pesticides We support continued use of pesticides and/or related products until more complete studies are done, or a substitute is approved that is economically feasible and equally effective.

We oppose fumigant buffer zone limitations proposed by the EPA without research giving substantial evidence that current practices are negatively affecting bystanders.

(18) Potato Seed Management

We support a potato seed management program that encourages the use of certified seed potatoes in seed and commercial production for the control of diseases and pests.

We recommend: That the tolerance for late blight in potato (1) seed planted in the state of Idaho be 1% or less at shipping point inspection.

That the Idaho State Department of (2) Agriculture recognize the entire state as

10

late blight infected.

(19) Potato Wart Virus

We support the quarantine of all sources of the potato wart virus.

(20) Rhizomania

We support active research and the dissemination of information to all interested parties related to rhizomania and urge that any imposed restrictions be based on scientific data.

(21) Root-Lesion Nematode

We support any phytosanitary action taken by the Idaho Department of Agriculture to protect the Idaho potato industry from the threat of the “Pratylenchus Neglectus� nematode.

LIVESTOCK (22) Animal Care

We support the rights of owners and producers to raise their animals in accordance with commonly accepted animal husbandry practices.

We oppose any legislation, regulatory action or funding, whether private or public, that interfere with the control of animals or with commonly accepted animal husbandry practices.

We support fines and/or reimbursement for animal research lost and all costs and damage incurred, when farms or research facilities are willfully damaged. Responsible persons or organizations should pay all costs.

We further support the role of licensed veterinarians in the care of animals and support current licensing standards for veterinarians.

We support the Idaho Veterinary Practice Act and oppose any efforts to weaken it or the licensing standards.

We oppose the creation of an Idaho livestock care standards board.

(23) Animal ID We support procedures and or equipment for an animal ID program that makes it possible to trace an animal back to its original location.

We support the right of the owner to choose among the acceptable methods of identification and to leave their animals unidentified prior to movement from the premises of origin.

We support the concept of private industry groups only maintaining the data base.

(24) Animal Rights

We oppose the concept that animals have rights and oppose legislation that would give funds to animal-rights organizations or any public agency or the right to establish standards concerning these

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

so-called rights of animals.

(25) Bioterrorism

We support legislation that would make it a felony for any person to purposefully spread any type of contagious, communicable or infectious disease among livestock or other animals.

We support legislation that would make it a felony for any person who intentionally attempts to transfer, damage, vandalize, or poison the product, water, or facilities of a posted commercial aquaculture operation.

(26) Bovine Tuberculosis

We support amending Idaho cattle importation rules to make those rules equal to U.S. border states in their restriction of tuberculosis infected/exposed cattle.

(27) Brucellosis

We oppose all efforts to eliminate the mandatory vaccination law and require its complete enforcement.

We insist that the National Park Service eradicate brucellosis in Yellowstone and Grand Teton Parks.

We support regulations requiring the appropriate state and federal agencies to control and eradicate this disease in wildlife.

We oppose separating the state into zones for definition of brucellosis free status.

(28) CAFO Regulations

We support efforts by all livestock associations to create MOUs with the appropriate state and federal agencies. All information obtained by government agencies on agricultural producers, including nutrient management plans, shall be kept confidential.

We believe that counties should have the sole right, responsibility and authority under existing laws for the siting of CAFOs (Confined Animal Feeding Operations).

We would encourage the counties to consult the local extension personnel, state agencies and soil and water agencies in determining the parameters to write siting guidelines.

Matters pertaining to CAFO regulation other than siting, should be under the jurisdiction of the state.

(29) Cattle Liens

Liens should not be attached to livestock until ownership can be proven and verified.

(30) Data Confidentiality

We support the confidentiality of data collected on farms and feedlots. Only final reports or conclusions should be made a matter of public

record. No data collected from individual operations should be made public.

encephalopathy (BSE) in order to ship products to countries that require individual tests.

Bureau of Reclamation reservoirs shall be controlled solely by state water law.

(31) Domestic Cervidae

We support the right of domestic cervidae owners to use private trophy ranches as a means to ethically harvest their animals.

We support the right of domestic cervidae owners to breed, raise and market all members of the cerividae family indigenous to Idaho that can be legally acquired.

(34) Foot Rot in Sheep

We support a continued stringent foot rot control program for sheep in Idaho.

(41) Bureau of Reclamation Water Contracts

We support, when renewing irrigation contracts with Bureau of Reclamation, irrigators should retain full quantity of water and be allowed conversion of water service contracts to repayment contracts as required by law.

(32) Equine

We oppose any attempt to eliminate the equine owner’s or the BLM’s right to the humane slaughter of their equine for consumption or any other purpose.

We support construction of new slaughtering facilities and/or use of existing processing facilities in Idaho to humanely slaughter equines.

We support individuals and nongovernmental organizations right to save horses from slaughter as long as they take possession of the horses and are responsible for their care and feeding.

We support the humane treatment of equine at all times and in all places including those destined for slaughter.

We support the continued classification of equines as marketable livestock and oppose any efforts to classify them as pets or companion animals.

We support the inclusion of equine in the National Animal Identification System.

When an equine is in the custody of a government agency and an adoption has not been able to take place within 6 months, that equine should be slaughtered or humanely euthanized.

(33) Foot and Mouth/BSE Disease

We support stringent controls to protect Idaho’s livestock industry from foot and mouth disease and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). In addition, the United States must impose restrictions on importation of animals and animal products that could carry other contagious infectious diseases.

We oppose the opening of live cattle imports from Canada until sound science proves no threat of BSE spread into the U.S., and all imported live cattle must be under the age of 30 months.

We oppose any announcement to the media of BSE suspects in the U.S. until the final scientific determination is made whether they are positive or negative.

We support allowing entities to voluntarily test all slaughtered animals for bovine spongiform

(35) Livestock Brands

We support the concept that livestock may be left unbranded at the discretion of the owner except for those livestock grazing on federal/state managed lands.

We support research into alternative methods of permanent livestock identification and ask that the Brand Department be authorized to recognize these methods.

(36) Manure Management

We believe that manure and manure/ compost are nutrient-rich residue resources.

We oppose manure being classified as industrial waste.

We encourage research on manure management including such areas as odor reduction and waste and nutrient management.

We encourage programs that educate livestock operators on techniques regarding properly managed organic nutrient systems, especially if implemented with consistent best management practices (BMPs) developed by extension, university and the livestock industry.

We support the Idaho State Department of Agriculture allowing certification of third-party soil sampling for nutrient management plan compliance purposes (37) Sheep Tail Length We support the creation of a minimum length standard on tail docking of sheep for show purposes.

(38) State Veterinarian

We believe that the Animal Health Division of the Idaho Department of Agriculture should be administered by a licensed veterinarian.

WATER (39) Artesian Wells

We support the current law regarding artesian wells if adequate funding is appropriated to fund the cost-sharing of well repairs.

We oppose the designation of the heat value from a geothermal source as being the only beneficial use.

(40) Bureau of Reclamation Reservoirs

Release of water in power head space in

(42) Comprehensive State Water Plan

We urge the Governor to appoint Water Resource Board members who will be protective of the waters of the state of Idaho.

We oppose all minimum stream flows unless sufficient storage is built to supply priority needs first.

We support legislation requiring legislative approval before establishing minimum stream flow, river basin plans and state water plans.

That provision of Idaho Code 42-1503 (e)ii which allows “Minimum Stream Flows” proposed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources to become law if no specific action is taken by the Legislature to prevent that, must be repealed.

We support a mandatory requirement for legislative approval of agreements made by state agencies with federal agencies when dealing with commitments on water.

We support the Swan Falls Agreement as originally written in October of 1984.

(43) Dams

We support legislation that would focus the attention of the Northwest Power Planning Council’s authority on planning to provide for present and future power needs of northwest power states and away from other secondary issues.

We support the construction of storage facilities that provide beneficial multiple uses of Idaho’s water, and encourage municipalities, federal agencies and tribal agencies to advocate and fund additional storage to help meet their increasing demands for water, thus avoiding the need to take irrigation water from agriculture.

We support the continued existence and current usage of all dams on the Columbia and Snake rivers.

We oppose any efforts to destroy or decrease production of those dams.

(44) Effluent Trading

We support the concept of effluent trading.

(45) Flood Control

We recommend that steps, including

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

11

additional storage facilities, increased recharge and land transfers from federal to state ownership, be taken to control future flooding within the state of Idaho.

(46) Moratorium

We support the current Idaho Department of Water Resources moratoriums on critical groundwater development.

(47) Outstanding Resource Waters

We support the Basin Advisory Groups (BAGs) and Watershed Advisory Groups (WAGs) process, recognizing that outstanding resource waters (ORWs) are part of this process.

We oppose nominations of ORWs by parties other than BAGs and WAGs. (48) State Purchase of Water Rights for Mitigation

We support having the state of Idaho purchase water rights for mitigation purposes to be held by the state water board, so water trade may benefit recharge and pump conversions.

(49) Transfer of Water Rights

We oppose the transfer of water rights to the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR).

We oppose the taking of water for fish flushing. Water held by the Idaho Water Resources Board will be held and used for purposes intended and in accordance with state law.

We believe all water in Idaho should be used beneficially. In the event the BOR or IDWR desires use of water they would have to negotiate on a yearly basis for rental-pool water in accordance with state water law.

(50) Waste Management

We are concerned with wastes and other pollutants entering and adversely impacting the state water quality.

We oppose mandatory facility construction without scientific proof of environmental pollution on an individual basis.

(51) Water Development on New Non-Ag Development

We support legislation that would require developers to supply water and water-delivery systems using existing water rights or gray water to new developments.

(52) Water Quality

We support the continued management of water quality, both underground and surface, by utilizing “Best Management Practices” (BMPs) as contained in USDA’s “Natural Resource Conservation Services Field Office Technical

12

Guide” and Idaho’s “Forest Practices Act”, which provides very adequately for buffer strips or “Stream Protection Zones”. Changes in these BMPs should be based only on scientifically monitored data rather than “best professional judgment”.

We support the development of BMPs for recreational uses.

We support canal and irrigation districts’ efforts to halt unwanted drainage into their water systems.

The EPA should not have the authority to arbitrarily impose penalties on landowners without first identifying the problem and giving the landowner an opportunity to correct the problem. If there is a difference of opinion concerning the extent of the problem, a reasonable and cost-effective appeal process of the EPA decision should be available to the landowner.

We oppose the deletion of the word “navigable” from the Clean Water Act. (53) Water Quality Standards

Water quality standards must be site specific and realistically achievable for each water body. These standards must at least partially support designated beneficial uses.

(54) Water Recharge

We support state planning and implementation of a basin-wide aquifer recharge.

We request the development of new conveyance systems for the implementation of large-scale recharge of the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer. Government mandated water conservation (i.e. lining of canals, etc.) must be accompanied by equivalent recharge of the aquifer.

Aquifer recharge must be considered a beneficial use of irrigation/stock water.

Funds for recharging the aquifer should be available as an annual budget appropriation of the Legislature.

(55) Water Rights

We support the state’s right concept of state ownership and control of its water held in trust for the residents of the state of Idaho, and will oppose any policy, program, or regulation, including Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing, which would infringe on this right.

We support continued state control of water issues within appropriate Idaho agencies and departments without federal legislative or regulatory intervention, especially regulations such as the Endangered Species Act that would jeopardize any of our state’s or individual’s established water rights.

We support defining public interest under

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

water right law, to give priority to beneficial uses and agricultural viability.

We support the efforts of the Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) to limit frivolous claims against water-right applications by imposing appropriate sanctions upon any party filing or pleading such frivolous claims. Frivolous claims are those that are not reasonably grounded in fact or law to cause unnecessary delay, increased cost, or harassment.

We are opposed to the Water Resources Board accepting any further applications and giving water rights on surface stream water of the state of Idaho that has been over decreed and adjudicated.

Adequate water for domestic and agricultural purposes should have priority over other uses when the waters of any natural stream are insufficient for the services of all those desiring a use, as per Article 15, Section 3 of the Idaho Constitution. Permittees on federal land should be allowed to retain ownership of water rights in their name as their livestock provide beneficial use under state law. Minimum stream flows should not jeopardize water rights and should be financed by the benefit recipients.

We support water adjudication but not on a basin wide basis.

We favor the continued wise development of all Idaho’s rivers and their tributaries as working rivers.

We support first in time, first in right, and state control of water issues within appropriate Idaho agencies and departments without federal regulatory or legislative intervention.

We support the privatization of Idaho irrigation canal systems. We support the protection of canal and drain ditch easements from arbitrarily being taken over by cities, counties, states, federal or private developers or private landowners and developed into green belts or bike paths, or a threat to private property and water rights.

We support the concept of conjunctiveuse management when scientific evidence is available upon which to base the decision.

We support efforts by local groundwater districts to provide supplemental or water bank water to senior surface water users to prevent curtailment of junior water rights. Irrigation districts shall have no net loss of irrigated acres due to growth and development.

We oppose changing the historical beneficial use of water rights when that change will have a negative impact on other water right holders.

(56) Water Spreading

We support voluntary conservation of water use by updating irrigation systems. Increases in irrigated acres (water spread acres) due to

redesigning or remodeling irrigation systems or development of areas within a recorded water right, should not be excluded from irrigation. Conservation should not adversely affect the full use of an irrigation water right.

(57) Water Supply Funding

We encourage the Legislature to dedicate 1/16 of a cent of the state permanent sales tax, to assist in meeting the development costs of Idaho’s water supply, which is a vital natural resource.

(58) Water Transfers

We oppose out-of-basin transfers of irrigation water from lands enrolled in the federal cropland set-aside program for use on lands that have not historically been used for agricultural development.

We oppose the continued use of the 427,000 acre feet of water for flow augmentation.

LAND USE (59) Conservation Reserve Program - Grazing

We support managed grazing or other management tools of CRP acres to enhance the health of vegetation at the discretion of local committees.

We support the separation of haying and grazing on CRP acres and the use of both as separate management tools.

(60) Conservation Security Program We support efforts by affected agricultural producers to correct discrepancies in administration of the Conservation Security Program by the Natural Resources Conservation Service.

(61) Experimental Stewardship Program

We support and encourage the continuation and expansion of the Experimental Stewardship Program and Coordinated Resource Management Program, (CRMP) as long as producer control is maintained in all decisions concerning range management.

(62) Federal and State Acquisition of Land

We support no net loss of private property. We urge enactment of legislation to require prior legislative approval for any federal or state land acquisition on a parcel-by-parcel basis.

We support prohibiting the sale of state land to the federal government or agencies of the federal government, except for the purpose of building federal facilities or structures.

When federal land is sold, traded, or exchanged, all holders of grazing preference must be fairly compensated. When land is to be sold, the

current grazing permit holder must have the first right of refusal. If there is no permit holder, the adjacent landowner should be given the first right of refusal based on appraised value.

We oppose any land exchanges involving publicly owned land unless there is strong local support.

When any entity acquires property from the federal government, that entity should be required to compensate grazing preference holders on the former federally administered lands for the loss of their property right.

(63) Government-Managed Lands

We support multiple-use management of federal and state lands with due regard for the traditional rights of use.

We urge county governments to have a land-use management plan with which both state and federal agencies would coordinate in order to protect the land within their tax base.

We support state’s rights and state sovereignty over waters of the state and federal lands within the state.

We support the equal-footing doctrine and efforts to reclaim federal land back to state jurisdiction and management.

Holders of grazing permits or leases should not be penalized or removed from allotments because of administrative errors or omissions of the land-managing agency.

We support legislation clarifying State Code #58-310 to specify that an individual, corporation or other organization applying to participate in conflict bids on state lands, specifically designated as grazing lands, must demonstrate the ability and intent to utilize the lease for the purpose of livestock grazing, to be deemed eligible to participate.

We oppose the Idaho Department of Lands proposed leasing rules that include conservation leases in the bidding process with grazing, farming and recreation leases.

On state and federal government grazing permits and/or lease rules, the word “grazing” needs to be further defined as livestock consumption of forage and brush for livestock production with benefits of weed and fire control.

We support grazing contracts on nongrazed public lands to reduce excess fuel that contributes to range or forest fires.

We support the timely salvage of trees in burn areas within our state.

We support legislation that would promote harvest of trees and forage on federal and state land to help prevent and control wildfire.

We support all efforts by the Department of Lands to optimize the timber yields and stumpage

prices as mandated by the Idaho Constitution. We oppose actions by the Land Board or Department of Lands that would inhibit or further restrict these processes, including, but not limited to, habitat conservation plans and conservation easements.

We encourage the release of federal, state and local government held lands for development or private use.

(64) Grazing Fees

We support the current state grazing fee formula and the PRIA formula concept.

We are opposed to incentive-based grazing fees on federal lands.

(65) Grazing Permit Transfer

We oppose the U.S. Forest Service ruling that will prevent transferring grazing permits for twenty-five head or less.

(66) Idaho Forest Practices Act We support the Idaho Forest Practices Act. We support legislation requiring all forest land owners, even tribal forest land owners, to comply with standards at least as stringent as the rules placed in the act.

(67) Idaho Grazing Land Conservation Initiative (GLCI)

We support the Idaho Grazing Land Conservation Initiative.

(68) Landfills on BLM Lands

We encourage the development of new, as well as the continued use of, county landfills on BLM lands.

(69) Local, State or National Land Designation

We oppose any infringement upon private property rights through any designation of land by any government entity, including highway scenic byways/corridors and National Heritage Areas.

(70) Mineral Rights

We support legislation that would transfer government-retained mineral rights to current landowners (at no expense to the landowners), where there has been no meaningful mineral activity for ten years.

(71) Mining

We support the continuation of mineral extraction in Idaho as long as the appropriate mine reclamation and environmental protections are in place and followed.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

13

(72) Open Range We oppose any changes to Idaho open range and fence laws.

(73) Pest Control

We support enforcement of current laws to give counties authority to spray and control insect infestations on private land, with the cost of the spraying to be assessed to the current tax base of the present owner of the land.

We support legislation that requires state and federal governments to manage their lands and control their noxious weeds and pests so that no harm is done to adjoining lands, crops and animals.

(74) Protecting Farm Land

We ask all units of government to give high priority to the protection of farm land and/or grazing land when considering other uses of such lands for public purposes. There should be no governmental taking of private property rights by restriction of use without just and due compensation.

We support the federal and state “takings” law in support of the U.S. Constitution, Article V.

We oppose any infringement of private property rights caused by regulation of rivers and dams for endangered species.

We oppose infringement on private property rights caused by highway districts and transportation departments.

(75) Range Management Plans

We believe that range management plans developed by the Idaho Department of Lands, BLM or U.S. Forest Service should be based on current factual information. If any plan is proposed without current information, we will join with others to persuade BLM and U.S. Forest Service or Idaho Department of Lands to revert to the pre-existing plan until current factual data is obtained.

We support voluntary forage monitoring and oppose mandatory forage monitoring by livestock permittees on federal lands as proposed by the Federal Land Management Policy Act. (76) Rangeland Resource Commission

We support the Rangeland Resource Commission and the fees assessed on BLM and U.S. Forest Service grazing AUMs on state lands and on private dryland grazing lands.

(77) Regulation of Agricultural Practices

We recognize and support long-standing

14

sound agricultural practices such as field burning, including grass seed straw, residue burning, timber slash burning and animal-waste disposal, cultivation and harvest practices.

We support farmer participation in voluntary airshed quality programs.

We oppose any legislation or regulations that would segregate any agricultural industry, agricultural crop, cropping practice or geographical area and would impose a higher air quality, water quality or environmental standard than is required of any other person, entity, industry or geographical area within the state.

We oppose regulations on agricultural practices that are not validated by sound peer reviewed scientific process and supported by scientific fact.

We oppose the issuance of undocumented assertions regarding damage to the environment from agricultural practices that are not supported by scientific fact.

The Idaho State Department of Agriculture should not have the authority to impose sanctions on livestock operators without first identifying specific problems and giving the operators an opportunity to correct said problems.

We oppose mandatory registration or licensing of farms and ranches.

We support the farmer’s right to farm by being able to carry on sound farming and forestry practices and to be free from environmental regulations that are not proportionately beneficial to the implementation cost.

Rule changes to the Idaho Forest Practices Act should be given a public hearing by the Legislature prior to approval, so farmers can be heard on issues affecting the regulation of their practices.

We support access of agricultural implements of husbandry and vehicles to any and all local, county and state roads/ highways in Idaho and oppose the imposition of any minimum speed requirements.

(78) Right to Farm

We support the right-to-farm law, and the concept behind it, and encourage legislative changes to strengthen the law so it can be enforced at the local governmental levels through conditional use permits or other permitting processes.

(79) Riparian Management

Proper multiple-use management of riparian areas is essential.

We believe these highly productive areas can be properly harvested with modern forest or livestock best management practices (BMPs) and still improve riparian habitat for all uses.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

We believe these areas should be properly used but not abused. However, management of the entire allotment should not be governed by forage utilization of riparian areas.

We support the concept that all existing roads along class 2 streams be given grandfather rights approval.

(80) Sawtooth National Recreation Area

We oppose any expansion of the Sawtooth National Recreation Area (SNRA).

(81) Sheep Grazing

We believe that sheep grazing is a valuable use of Idaho forage and resist attempts to terminate grazing permits and/or move domestic sheep because of their proximity to Bighorn sheep.

We support the best management practices concept for dealing with this issue.

(82) State and County Noxious Weed Control

We support stronger enforcement of Idaho’s noxious weed law by the state and counties, together with appropriate use of special management-zone provisions.

We urge that Idaho Transportation Department weed control policies, at both the state and district levels, be changed to require that the ITD be in compliance with the Idaho noxious weed law each year, by controlling all infestations each year in a timely and effective manner and by controlling noxious weeds on the full width of all rights of way.

We urge the Idaho State Department of Agriculture to require timely and effective noxious weed control by all railroads on their rights of way within the state.

We urge that state and county authorities direct more emphasis to rights of way.

We request that the Idaho Department of Agriculture add dog rose (Rosa canina) and sweet briar (Rosa eglanteria) to the Idaho noxious weed list.

(83) Timber Trespass

We support legislation that would award delivered log values to landowners with no deduction for logging for incidental timber trespass. Additional penalties would be established for intentional trespass.

(84) Wilderness and Restrictive Zones We oppose wholesale dedication of land in Idaho to wilderness and roadless areas and support the release of lands currently held in wilderness study areas (WSA) back to multiple-use management. All lands designated as non-suitable for wilderness must be immediately released from WSA status.

We support legislation that will direct our Governor to minimize designation of federal lands as “Roadless Areas� in Idaho.

We support the traditional balanced multiple-use practices on all federal/state lands and that access to wilderness be free and accessible for everyone.

We support negotiated wilderness solutions when the stakeholders have been participating in the negotiations and are in agreement with the solution.

We oppose designation of lands in Idaho as biosphere reserves, corridors or buffer zones, using the Lands Legacy Initiative, the Antiquities Act and the National Monument Declarations by the executive branch of the government.

We oppose the Central Idaho Economic Development and Recovery Act (CIEDRA), also known as the Boulder-White Clouds Wilderness Bill, as currently written or any similar wilderness legislation.

We support adding adequate fire breaks in wilderness areas.

(85) Wildfire Control We recommend changing fire-control policy to put out any fire upon arrival or as soon as safely possible. Local landowners must be allowed to protect private property. Local entities (such as counties and fire districts) and private landowners and individuals need to be allowed to act as first responders.

We support changing state and federal wildfire policy to require that state and federal fire managers and incident commanders coordinate with county and local fire departments and landowners.

We also encourage farm groups to coordinate with the state department of lands in organizing trained, local fire crews.

We support a provision that state and federal agencies maintain a fire break strategically located to protect private property and to control large wild fires.

FISH AND WILDLIFE (86) Animal Damage Control We support animal damage control programs to control and manage predators, rodents and destructive wildlife.

We recommend bees and beehives be added to the animal damage compensation list.

(87) Emergency Feeding of Wild Game

We oppose feeding big-game animals except in emergency situations. We support the role of the Idaho Department of Agriculture in the rules passed in 2005 for emergency feeding of wild game

and oppose any effort to remove the Department of Agriculture from its current role.

All money collected by Fish and Game for the purpose of feeding wild game should be used only for that purpose.

(88) Endangered Species Act (ESA) We oppose any effort to create a State Endangered Species Act (ESA). We believe that modern society cannot continue to operate on the premise that all species must be preserved at any cost.

We support a revision of the ESA to include a more thorough consideration of agricultural, mining, logging and tree farming in such a manner that these activities will be sustained and made part of any recovery plan. Recovery of Threatened or Endangered (T/E) species should not receive higher priority than human uses or rights.

We believe basic requirements of human life have priority over protection of other species, including T/E species. A thorough consideration of all potential adverse impacts to human economic and social welfare should be an integral part of any consideration to list any T/E species.

A species cannot be listed before its critical habitat is identified within its scientifically established historical range. Habitat site specific assessments and recovery plans must include comprehensive appreciation and inclusion of the protection of private property rights.

No critical-habitat designation should be allowed until it has been established beyond scientific doubt that the species in question is actually present and that endangered or threatened status is actually warranted. The agency, organization or individual requesting the critical-habitat designation must bear the cost of proving presence of the species and this must be done through the use of the best available peer reviewed science.

We oppose road closures and land and water use restrictions imposed in the name of critical habitat.

Anadromous hatchery fish and wild fish should be treated equally under the ESA. Hatchery fish should be counted toward recovery of the species.

We support eliminating the marking of hatchery fish.

We oppose the introduction of the wolf and grizzly bear into federal/state and private lands in Idaho.

We believe that introduction/ reintroduction of any species must be approved by the state Legislature.

We support the right of landowners to protect themselves, their families, livestock and properties from all predators including grizzly bears

and wolves without legal retaliation.

We urge Congress to seek depredation funding for losses or damage resulting from endangered species and to mandate responsibility to deal with such losses.

We oppose implementation of the endangered species pesticide labeling program, other than in critical habitat.

We oppose the listing of the Giant Palouse Earthworm (Driloleirus americanus) as an endangered species.

(89) Fish and Game Department

We oppose the acquisition of additional land by the Fish and Game Department without local input.

We encourage the department to use good-neighbor management practices on the land they now own, including fences, pests, noxious weeds and provide sportsmen with guidance and marked boundaries.

We oppose any increase in funding for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game from either the general fund or license fees without showing a specific need or use for the funds.

The Fish and Game Department must control the concentration of wildlife numbers on all lands and should be prohibited from entering into agreements to limit access to any area, without approval of the local governing authority.

We support retaining the present composition and selection method of the Idaho Fish and Game Commission.

Hunting license fees and tags should cost disproportionately more than at present for nonresidents compared to Residents.

We support a Habitat Improvement Program and request Idaho Fish and Game Commission to reflect strong emphasis on multiple use.

We propose that the $1,000 depredation deductible now in existence be reduced.

Fish and Game should be responsible to pay for damages caused by management decisions.

We support Idaho Fish and Game issuing emergency depredation permits to ag producers and landowners to harvest animals that are causing verifiable damage to crops, livestock and property.

Emergency depredation permit holders should have the option to retain possession of harvested animals.

We support creating depredation areas for landowners who are annually affected by depredating animals and support mechanisms for quicker response in those areas.

Transactions between the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Foundation and the Idaho Department of

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

15

Fish and Game may represent a conflict of interest and should be investigated.

(90) Fish and Game – Private Reservoir Companies

Fish and Game Department shall pay private reservoir companies for the use of that reservoir for fish habitat. The Department should also pay up-keep assessments on reservoirs in which they own water.

(91) Fish and Game/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Responsibility

We support the reform of the Idaho Department of Fish and Game to create local management of the wildlife of Idaho. This program should be site specific to control damage caused from over populated species of both game and nongame animals.

We oppose the relocation of wild game and non-game species without proper notice being given to residents and property owners in the area where they are released.

The Idaho Fish and Game Department should not engage in activities that encourage only non-consumptive uses of fish and wildlife species in Idaho.

The state or federal wildlife personnel shall be required to file an environmental and economic impact statement before they can release non-native insects or plants in Idaho or make regulations that affect the counties and/or the state.

We support the Idaho State Department of Agriculture’s ban on the release of deleterious exotic animals into the State of Idaho.

All state and federal agency personnel must go through the elected county sheriff for all law enforcement.

(92) Fish Species Population Management

We support alternative scientific applications to modify fish species population without affecting contractual agreements or causing detrimental effects on flood control, irrigators, recreation and economies.

(93) ISDA and F&G Prior Notification The Idaho State Department of Agriculture and Idaho Fish and Game must give 24hour prior notification to land owners or designees before entering premises.

(94) Introduction of Salmon

We oppose the introduction of salmon above the Brownlee Dam.

16

(95) Salmon Recovery

We support the following salmonrecovery alternatives: Physically modifying the dams rather (1) than tearing them down or lowering water levels.

Improving barging such as net barge (2) transportation.

(3) Privatizing salmon fisheries for stronger fish.

Controlling predators of salmon.

(4)

(5) Utilizing a new fish friendly turbine developed by INL having 2 goals:

a. Increased power production.

b. Reduce hazards to fish passage.

(6) Operating the Brannon bypass system as an option to facilitate salmon recovery and support continued study of the Kevlar Tube and other bypass systems.

Regulating harvest of off-shore and (7) instream fish.

(96) Snake River Basin Snails

We support the delisting of snail species in the Snake River Basin and the grouping of snail species based on taxonomic/biological similarities.

We oppose the future listing of new snail species.

(97) Wolves

We support the delisting of wolves and access by all citizens to any and all control measures available to provide relief from wolf depredations.

Wolves should be classified and managed as predators. Until they are, we support the Idaho Fish and Game in its attempts to establish a hunting season on wolves. The costs associated with wolves, including triple damages for depredation costs, should be borne by the federal government. Until such time that livestock owners are compensated from the federal government, money should be made available from the sale of wolf tags to compensate livestock owners for depredation.

We request that IDFG require hunters to turn in all wolf carcasses for testing for communicable diseases.

We further demand that all wolves captured and/or killed by IDFG, Wildlife Services, US Fish and Wildlife or any other agency or individual be tested for communicable diseases.

We support a 10-j type rule for managing wolves being extended to north of Interstate 90.

We encourage the Governor to invoke our Tenth Amendment rights of State sovereignty and apply it to all wolves on private or state land within Idaho to allow us to manage the wolves.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

EASEMENTS (98) Conservation Easements and Scenic Easements

We support continuation of conservation easements or agreements and scenic easements or agreements only if the real property involved remains on the tax rolls according to use.

ENERGY (99) Bonneville Power Administration Credit We support some type of BPA credit that allows all of Idaho’s citizens to benefit from the BPA’s use of Idaho water for power generation.

(100) Electrical Energy

As future demands for electrical energy increase, we support the continued careful use of water as one of our renewable natural resources through hydro projects, providing all county, state and federal requirements are met.

We encourage canal companies and irrigation districts to adopt hydro projects to generate power for sale.

We support the construction of power generation facilities in Idaho.

We oppose any deregulation, reorganization, merger or consolidation of power generation or transmission which could result in loss of water rights, less service or increased rates.

We support re-licensing of dams and upgrades in transmission and distribution.

We oppose foreign ownership of public utilities and water rights.

We support economically feasible sources of power generation.

We support legislation and/or policy to change the compensation schedule currently paid by utility companies from a monthly net metering pay allowance to an annual net metering pay allowance.

We support the establishment of power generators that use plant and/or animal residue or logging slash.

We support the construction of only those coal fired plants which have established that all parties to the project be held to strict standards in the construction, operation and retirement of the facility.

We encourage utilities operating in Idaho to develop economically feasible renewable energy portfolios.

We support the relicensing of the Hells Canyon complex using a least cost mitigation plan reflecting the desire of the customers to have a reliable power resource at reasonable rates.

We encourage state agencies to work with utilities to increase Idaho’s power generation

capacity. This should be done to keep power rates low, while protecting the environment and not harming current economic ventures in the state.

We support the routing of utility corridors through the areas of least impact to private property owners.

(101) Farm Produced Fuel

We support grants, cost share programs and bio-fuel production tax credits for farm-scale biofuel projects.

(102) Fossil Fuels

We support the mining and drilling of fossil fuels.

(103) Nuclear Energy

We support the generation of electricity from nuclear reactors in meeting our future energy needs and urge the development of permanent disposal sites for radioactive waste material where it will not endanger Idaho’s aquifer.

We support research and development of further usage of radioactive waste materials and safer ways of storage.

We support development of the fast burn sector of nuclear technology which massively reduces or eliminates the need for nuclear waste disposal. We further support the utilization of the Idaho National Laboratory to provide the lead role in advancing the continued development of this technology.

(104) Power Buy Back

We support demand control programs as long as current water rights and power usage contracts are protected. These programs must remain on a voluntary basis.

(105) Renewable Fuels We support the promotion and use of alternative fuels made from agricultural products.

We encourage all state and local governments to assist in developing renewable fuel projects in Idaho.

We support the availability of low-cost fuels, including off road bio-fuels, for the operation of farms and ranches.

All state vehicles should use bio-fuels when available.

We support legislation to enjoin petroleum companies from restricting the marketing/sale of renewable fuels to the public by local retailers.

(106) Utility Companies

Utility companies that damage public

roads should be responsible for restoring roadways to their original state for at least a period of two years.

LABOR (107) Health Insurance We oppose any legislation to require employers to carry health insurance on their employees whether they are seasonal or full-time.

(108) Legal Aid

We oppose the uninvited presence of Legal Aid personnel soliciting business on private property.

(109) Minimum Wage

We oppose any state minimum wage that is higher than the federal minimum wage.

(110) New Hire Reporting

We support changes in the Idaho New Hire Reporting Law to extend the reporting date to 60 days.

We support not having to report seasonal temporary workers that work less than 45 days in a year.

(111) Supplemental Agricultural Labor

We support programs sponsoring labor for agriculture on a temporary basis. If existing programs fail to satisfy labor needs, we would support a system under which supplemental labor from other countries could be imported on a timely and flexible basis to work in agriculture. When these workers are no longer needed they would be required to return to their countries of origin. If a status adjustment is contemplated for farm workers currently working but not authorized to work in the U.S., then such adjustment may not include citizenship and must include penalties for illegal entry into the U.S.

We recommend strict enforcement of our immigration laws and improved procedures to verify status.

(112) Unemployment Insurance

Eligibility requirements should be made realistic to reflect agriculture’s seasonal employment practices.

Business owners should not have to pay unemployment tax on themselves.

The minimum basic-period wage criteria for unemployment benefits should be increased proportionately to increases in the minimum wage.

(113) Workers Compensation Workers compensation for agricultural employers should provide: (1) rates.

Cost control measures and fair base

(2) (3) (4)

Mediation for agricultural concerns.

Protection from third party lawsuits.

Employer protection from worker caused injuries (i.e. drug & alcohol). Ag workers should be covered with either workers compensation or equivalent coverage.

Corporate officers holding less than 10% stock should not be required to be covered by workers compensation. Business owners should not be required to pay into workers compensation on themselves since they are prohibited from collecting as business owners.

We support changes in the existing worker’s compensation law that would take into consideration the employee’s responsibility when an accident occurs.

We support having the settlement reduced by the percentage that was determined that the worker was responsible.

TAX (114) Agricultural Property Tax Shifts

We are opposed to shifting property tax to agricultural real estate.

We support removing the Idaho Housing Price Index from the 50% / $75,000 homeowner’s exemption.

(115) Alternative Energy Tax Credit

We support tax incentives to assist in the development of alternative energy.

(116) Assessed Value of Ag Production Land

We believe all land being used for commercial agricultural production should be appraised for tax purposes according to its current use, eliminating any consideration of its speculative value, using realistic productivity figures, realistic cost deduction, including government mandated control of noxious weeds, taking into account the USDA’s annual report on farm real estate values in Idaho and that only the landlord’s net share of production be used in computing value for tax purposes, as prescribed by Idaho State Tax Commission rules and regulations.

We support the retention of the five acre minimum productivity option and the Bare Land & Yield Option for forest lands.

(117) Budget Caps

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

17

We oppose the loosening, removal or alteration in any way or the granting of an exemption from limitations and restraints placed by present Idaho law on units of local government, community colleges, school districts, etc., in increasing local property taxes.

We oppose the creation of additional tax entities that could be exempt from such limitations and restraints.

(118) County Taxing Districts Sharing Administrators We encourage county commissioners, school districts, highway districts and possibly other taxing districts to consider using administrators and secretaries on a county-wide or multi-district basis to help ease the tax burden of administration.

(119) Fuel Tax Refund

We oppose all efforts to raise revenue by repealing the off-highway fuel tax refund.

We oppose efforts to pretax off-road fuel.

(120) Impact Fees

We support local impact fees on new or expanding developments to pay for the services required to support growth.

We support simplification of current impact fee rules and procedures.

(121) Investment Tax Credit

We support retention of the current 3% investment tax credit provisions, or an increase in the credit.

(122) Local Option Taxation

We support local option taxation when used specifically for projects that would have been paid for with property tax dollars.

(123) Personal Tax Privacy Rights

We oppose the county tax assessor’s office requiring personal tax information to establish land use.

(124) Property Tax

We oppose budget increases and foregone balances that current Idaho State law allows.

We support limiting yearly assessment increases of property of the same category in the state to a maximum of the state inflation rate.

We support legislation that would allow county tax assessments and collection on property that has been purchased by non-profit groups and placed in tax exempt status, such as a tax code that covers environmental tax exempt classification.

18

We support exempting all equipment used in the production of agricultural commodities from personal property tax.

(125) Property Tax – Funding Local Government & Schools

We support gradually reducing the property tax burden to fund public schools and local government.

We are opposed to judges being allowed to levy taxes.

We support legislation mandating that plant facilities levy monies can be used only for capital expenditures related to school operation and maintenance.

We oppose school districts carrying over these funds to finance the construction of new buildings or the acquisition of additional property.

We support removing the school budget stabilization levy that was authorized in the 2006 special Legislative session, unless it is supported by a local vote.

We support the creation of standardized mandatory full disclosure of the school district’s revenues and expenditures that are related to extracurricular activities; separated into curriculum and athletics, and budgeted in standard categories of salaries, transportation, supplies and capital expenditures.

(126) Sales Tax

We oppose all efforts to delete the sales tax exemption on production items.

We support legislation that would exempt non-profit organizational fund-raising from paying sales tax on those receipts.

We oppose the collection of sales tax by the state of Idaho on out-of-state goods purchased

by Idaho residents.

(127) Special Taxing Districts

We support county commissioners approving special taxing districts budgets, except independent road districts, before such budgets are published for public review.

We support a requirement that all new taxing districts must be approved by a 66-2/3% majority vote of the registered voters within a district.

We support legislation allowing special taxing districts to be funded by a household fee.

All taxing districts that charge fees should be under the same 3% cap that applies to counties and municipalities.

We support giving library districts the option to be funded by a household fee rather than through an ad valorum tax. If the library district

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

chooses the household fee option, any bonds they pass must also be paid through household fees.

(128) State Budget

We support zero-based budgeting.

We oppose balancing budget shortfalls by any tax increase.

We support a constitutional amendment limiting state spending to a calculation determined by population growth and inflation.

(129) Super Majority

We support retaining the 66-2/3 percent majority vote as required in the Idaho State Constitution for bond levies.

We oppose circumventing the required two-thirds majority by creative financing options.

(130) Tax Compensation for Federal and State Managed Lands

We recommend that a fee in lieu of taxes be assessed on all lands removed from tax rolls by state or federal agency management.

We favor an annual fee equivalent to local private property tax on land.

(131) Tax Increment Financing We support legislation that limits tax increment financing districts to the purpose for which they were created and legislation that places mandatory time limits not to exceed ten years on the life span for any district so formed.

(132) Tax Refund Extension We support extension of the statute of limitations on income-tax refunds from 3 years to 10 years. Tax refunds 4 to 10 years old may be used to offset taxes and interest due.

LOCAL AFFAIRS (133) Annexation

We are opposed to areas adjacent to a city being annexed into the city unless a twothirds majority of those owning property in the area proposed for annexation vote in favor of the annexation.

(134) County Commissioners

County Commissioners should be elected by the district in which they reside, not the whole county.

(135) Distribution of Federal Fines

We support legislation that would require public notification of the distribution of fines collected

by the governmental agencies in that county.

We support legislation that would require federal agencies to return a portion of federal fines collected in the county where the infraction occurred.

development and smart-growth initiatives.

We recognize and encourage the use of planning tools allowed under state law to encourage planned and orderly growth in or near agricultural areas.

(136) Elections

We support a mandatory pre-registration requirement to be eligible to vote in all local bond elections.

We support more positive proof of residency for voter registration at the polls.

Pay raises for elected officials shall not take effect until the official stands again for election.

We support requiring full and complete disclosure of all campaign contributions with stiff penalties for failure to disclose. This will include full disclosure of any personal funds contributed by the candidate. The information will be readily accessible to all interested individuals and organizations.

EDUCATION

(137) Indigent Care Funding

We support the use of the interest from the tobacco settlement monies to reduce the indigent care deductible now being paid for by the property owners. The deductible should continue to decrease incrementally as the settlement monies increase, not to drop below $1,000. The reduced deductible for tobacco-related illnesses should be expanded to include a reduced deductible for all health-related situations.

(138) Lighting in Agriculture We support adequate lighting to operate agricultural businesses in a safe, efficient and unobtrusive manner.

(139) Notice of Zoning Change

Water-right holders or recipients of water delivered through property that is proposed to be rezoned should receive the same notification of public hearings as surrounding landowners.

(140) Public Hearings

Public hearings that affect a given area of the state must be held in the area that is affected, at a reasonable time and date for those impacted.

(141) Waste Recycling

We support and encourage voluntary recycling of solid waste.

(142) Zoning

County commissioners should control all zoning in the county. Zoning should be site specific within the county; we oppose the use of blanket zoning ordinances, including sustainable

(143) Adolescent Nutrition

We support school districts offering dairy products, healthy nutritional snacks and fruit juices in vending machines on school premises.

(144) Ag in the Classroom We support “Ag in the Classroom” in school curriculums to increase student literacy of agriculture.

We support an increase in funding for Ag in the Classroom.

(145) Contracts for Teachers

We recommend that the tenure system for schoolteachers be eliminated and replaced with contracts based on evaluation and performance.

We support the concept of incentive pay that will improve teacher excellence.

Schoolteachers should have the option of being able to negotiate their own contract with the school district as a private contractor.

(146) Education Standards and Assessments We support using: 1. Professionally established standards and assessments that can be modified to reflect locally recognized educational values, goals and philosophy.

2. Standards to ensure the progression of a student that reflect a comprehension of the subject.

3. Instructionally supportive assessments based on growth, limited in frequency and results returned on a timely basis.

(147) English Language

We recommend that English be the language that students are required to learn and use in public schools.

We support designating English as the official language of Idaho and the United States.

(148) Knowledge of Constitution

We support requiring students graduating from Idaho schools to have a thorough understanding of the Constitution and the form of government that it gives us.

(149) Local Control of Education We encourage the State Board of Education and the Idaho legislature to refuse federal

funds aimed at promoting control of educational programs in public schools by the federal government.

We oppose the gathering of personal information of students that is not related to their academic education without parental consent.

(150) No Increase in School Time We oppose increasing required school hours beyond 990 hours per year.

(151) Parental Choice in Education

We support the voucher system for education.

We support the continuing freedom of Idaho parents to choose private school, parochial school, home school, public charter school or public school as prescribed in the Idaho Constitution and in the Idaho Code.

We recommend that kindergarten remain on an optional basis.

We oppose public funding of prekindergarten.

(152) Right to Challenge Class

We recommend that high school students be given the opportunity to challenge high school classes and if able to pass, be given credit for that class toward graduation.

(153) Sexually Transmitted Diseases/Sex Education

We oppose the teaching of homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle.

We support the teaching of abstinence as the only 100% effective method to prevent pregnancy.

We also support the teaching of abstinence before marriage and monogamy after marriage as the most effective method for the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases.

We further support educating for increased awareness and prevention of any sexually transmitted diseases.

(154) Veterinary Students

We support an increase from eleven (11) to fifteen (15) seats per year for Idaho residents in the Washington-Idaho Cooperative Veterinary Medical Education Program.

(155) Vocational Education

We support adequate funding for Idaho’s vocational education program.

We encourage vocational teachers, administrators and school boards to utilize this funding by actively developing and administering programs in their school districts that promote career development.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

19

STATE AFFAIRS (156) Agricultural Research and Extension

We support the University of Idaho Agricultural Research and Extension Service and urge the Legislature to adequately fund this vital program.

We support adequate funding to the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences to allow research to develop new improved varieties of seed that are classed as public varieties.

We request the Legislature examine the role of the University of Idaho as the land grant college, and take steps to ensure the University honors its commitment as our agricultural research facility. The University should be on the same budgeting system as the State of Idaho.

We support expanded research and education in all crop areas relative to Idaho. This must also include new and improved plant and animal varieties along with effective insect, pest, disease and weed controls.

We also support an informational exchange and cooperative effort within the tri-state area in agchemical registration and research as well as plant/animal variety improvement research. Every effort should be made by state and county officials to retain an agricultural extension agent in each county as an extension service of our land grant university.

Strong pressure must be exerted to revitalize and improve the agricultural information and education programs.

We recommend that extension activities assist farm programs on a first-priority basis, including the integrated Farm Management Program.

We also believe that county agents should be first and foremost county agricultural agents.

We support the hiring of new extension educators in the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences with primary training and experience in commercial agriculture and forestry.

(157) Attorney General Review

We support legislation that establishes a process whereby farmers and ranchers may request a review by the state attorney general of all local and state ordinances and rules that could violate state law by restricting normal agricultural operations.

(158) ATV Safety

We oppose the creation of a mandatory class or special license for the ability to ride an ATV on private or public land.

(159) Ballot Initiative Process

We support using legislative districts as a geographic requirement for gathering signatures to qualify an initiative for the ballot.

20

(160) Cell Phone Use

We oppose any legislation that would ban cell phone use in vehicles for voice communication.

We oppose texting while driving.

(161) Commercial Auction Companies Bonding

We support legislation that would require licensing and bonding of commercial auction companies.

(162) Commercial Unmanned Air Systems (UAS)

We support the commercial use of unmanned air systems (UAS) for natural resource management.

(163) Cross Deputization of Law Enforcement Officers We believe that cross deputization of county sheriffs and any tribal law enforcement officers should be voluntary.

(164) Definition of Agricultural Buildings We support changes to Idaho Code to define agricultural buildings as follows: They are buildings where agricultural products are stored, housed or grown. They are buildings where agricultural equipment, including licensed vehicles that are used in the production of agriculture, can be fixed, repaired or stored. They are buildings that are used for the normal servicing of an agricultural business. They can be used by employees as a place of employment as well as a place to have meals and take bathroom breaks as required by GAAP (Generally Accepted Agriculture Practices.)

(165) Department of Corrections

We support legislation requiring the Department of Corrections to notify victims and witnesses who have requested to be notified when inmates convicted of violent crimes will be paroled or issued passes. Records should be reasonably accessible to concerned individuals.

We support having names of juveniles convicted of a felony made public knowledge.

The Department of Corrections should be required to house nonviolent prisoners in county jails when space is available, instead of shipping them out of state. The state should reimburse counties at the rate that it is paying out-of-state prisons.

(166) Drug Penalties

We favor stiffer penalties─not necessarily prison terms─for drug pushers, money launderers and repeated users, with no plea bargaining.

(167) Drug Testing for Welfare Recipients

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

We support legislation that would require adult applicants/recipients for state and/or federal welfare payments, or similar benefits, to submit to periodic testing for illegal drugs and test negative to receive benefits.

(168) Executive Branch MOU/MOA

We oppose actions by the governor entering into memorandums of understanding or memorandums of agreement without legislative oversight and approval.

(169) Falsifying Reports Knowingly filing a false report and/ or complaint to any agency shall be considered a misdemeanor and the perpetrator should be required to pay damages and/or expenses to the individual that was falsely accused as well as the investigating agency.

(170) Gambling

We oppose any amendment to the State Constitution to permit licensed or unlicensed casino gaming in Idaho.

(171) Government Employees Accountability

Employees of government must not be exempt from any laws and should be accountable under law for their actions. State officials should refrain from involving themselves in how county governments operate.

We believe the principles of the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution should apply in the state’s relationship to the counties as well as in federal to state government.

Government employees should be restricted from moonlighting in their field of expertise, competing unfairly with private professionals or using government equipment, files etc.

(172) Hazardous Waste

We believe that each state should, to the extent possible, take the responsibility for treatment and disposal of hazardous waste generated in its state and that these waste products be disposed of in the most feasible manner that will not endanger life or resources.

We feel that hazardous material and hazardous waste should be kept separate in the law.

We support a statewide hazardous materials clean-up day.

(173) Judicial Confirmation

We support the repeal of the “Judicial Confirmation”, Title 7, Chapter 13, Idaho Code, for ordinary and necessary expenses.

(174) Liability & Tort Claims

We support current Idaho statutes dealing with liability and tort claims and will resist any effort to weaken or erode them.

(175) Medicaid

We support a co-pay by Medicaid recipients for hospital visits.

(176) Memorials in Public We oppose awarding attorney’s fees and penalties funded by tax money when judges order the removal of religious icons and expressions from public property.

We support the continued display of the Ten Commandments on public property.

(177) Mental Health and Drug Court

We support increased state funding for mental health and drug court programs.(178) Mosquito Eradication

We support spraying and other methods to kill mosquitoes.

(179) Nationalized Health Insurance

We oppose nationalizing insurance.

health

(180) North-South Highway

We support construction and/or improvement of a North-South Highway to the Canadian border.

(181) Planning and Zoning Commission Compensation We support a change in Idaho law allowing members of county planning and zoning commissions to receive payment for the time they devote to their duties if approved by local voters.

(182) Private Property Rights/Eminent Domain

Private property should be defined to include but not be limited to all land, crops, timber, water rights, mineral rights, all other appurtenances and any other consideration associated with land ownership.

We support programs to educate the public about private property rights and about trespass laws. Landowners should retain the right to refuse access within the current law.

Landowners having lands adjacent to federal and or state lands should not be forced through coercion/or fear of imprisonment to allow new easements across their land for public access to federal and state lands. The taking of property or easements should be permitted only when there is eminent domain.

We oppose the use of eminent domain

for recreational purposes, for private economic development or to expand the land holding of wildlife agencies.

We support an Idaho constitutional amendment defining public use as found in the eminent domain doctrine to prohibit the condemnation of private property for economic development or any use by private parties. If private property is taken, compensation must be prompt, just and adequate.

In the cases of partial taking of real property, the landowner must be compensated when government-imposed regulations cause a loss in value of private property. Landowners or tenants shall not be held liable for any damages incurred as a result of the condemnation. Entities condemning property shall assume liability for any damages incurred by landowners.

(183) PUC Rates We will continue to cooperate with organizations that are trying to obtain equitable public utility and freight rates.

We oppose any action by the PUC to move in the direction of inverted block rates or in any major rate design revision that would be detrimental to agriculture.

(184) Public Employees Bargaining

We believe that public employees, when negotiating contracts, should be separate entities in themselves, and by statute not allowed to delegate or reassign their negotiating rights to professional negotiating forces.

(185) Public Funded Institutions and Entities

All public institutions and entities funded in whole or in part with public money will discourage and prevent the sanctioning, promotion, encouragement or advocacy of any behavior or any lifestyle containing behaviors that are in violation of Idaho statute or the Idaho Constitution.

(186) Re-Apportionment

We support the state’s right to a republican form of government, and the right to pattern our representation in the state Senate and House after the Congress of the United States; with the Senate by county and the House by population.

(187) Re-Establish Congressional Lawmaking Responsibility

We support the state Legislature in its efforts to encourage Congress to reclaim its constitutional responsibility of making law.

Proposed rules or regulations by bureaus or agencies should have congressional approval before becoming law.

Presidential directives or executive orders should be limited in scope and subject to

congressional approval in a timely manner.

We support passage of legislation ensuring that no treaty can supersede the Constitution or reduce the protections we enjoy under the Constitution.

(188) Regulation Reform

We support: (1) Complete review of existing regulations to determine their effectiveness and appropriateness prior to assigning more restrictive regulations.

(2) Peer review of the existing regulations to determine their potential to mitigate the problems they address.

(189) Rights-of-Way

Easement rights-of-way obtained by public or private sectors shall not be committed to any new or additional purpose, either during their original usage or after abandonment, without consent of the owner of the land underlying the easement. Upon abandonment of railway or utility rights-of-way or leases, all property and rights associated with such rights-of-way or leases should revert to the current owner of the original tract.

We urge enactment of legislation to require that adjacent landowners be given priority to purchase at fair market value lands that have been vacated by railways, power companies, roadways, etc. and require that public agencies obtaining title to abandoned rights-of-way be responsible for maintaining fences, drainage systems, all field and road crossings and for controlling weeds on any such acquired rights-of-way.

We support access to or through federal lands using RS2477.

We support allowing county commissioners the ability to determine the validity of an RS2477 claim, the right to move an RS2477 when it occurs on private land and the ability to temporarily close an RS2477 for resource reasons. To prevent the misuse of RS2477 claims, we recognize the superiority of a property’s title over RS2477 claims.

We will not support the use of RS2477 as a tool for the taking of private property without just compensation as prescribed in the Constitution.

Any party who controls a railroad rightof-way for use as a trail or any other purpose that prevents the corridor from reverting back to the adjacent landowners, must continue to honor all historical maintenance agreements that the railroad formerly performed including fencing, weed control and any other agreement that may have been in existence before the corridor changed management.

(190) Right to Bear Arms

We oppose any abridgment of the

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

21

Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which protects the right to keep and bear arms.

We support current law that allows lawabiding citizens the right to bear arms and be free from legal jeopardy when protecting themselves, their families and their property.

We oppose the retaining of personal records collected by the FBI as a result of firearms purchase background checks. The dangerous weapons code should be updated to reflect these rights in the home, the place of business or in motor vehicles.

We support legislation that declares that all firearms and ammunition made and retained in-state are beyond the authority of the federal government.

(191) State Agencies

We oppose regulating any phase of farm and ranch business by any state agency that does not have an agricultural representative as a member of its policy-making board or committee.

We oppose combining, splitting or changing government agencies without the approval of users of the services.

We support the concept of the Soil Conservation Commission or successor entity to advise and aid local Soil Conservation Districts by providing technical support and a mechanism to receive financial support at no less than fiscal year 2010 levels.

We recommend representation by an agricultural producer on the Board of Regents for Idaho’s land grant university and on the Idaho Fish and Game Commission.

We urge and will support legislation to require that government rules and regulations, wherever applicable, be based upon supportive disciplinary peer reviewed scientific data and that wherever policies, rules or regulations do not meet this standard the responsible individual and/or individuals can be held liable.

When a state agency makes an arrest there should be a means provided to reimburse the county for all costs associated in maintaining the prisoner.

(192) Sexual Crimes

We support increased penalties for violent, repeat sexual abuse crimes.

(193) State Building Code

We ask the State Legislature to review the State Building Code with amendments, to limit infringement on private property rights through excessive permit requirements.

22

(194) State Commissions and PERSI

We support the development of a policy at the state level that allows for opting out of PERSI for State Commission board members to preserve their IRAs. (195) State Hatch Act

We favor restoring the State Hatch Act, 67-5311 Limitation of Political Activity, to its original form and content.

(196) State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) We oppose the expansion of the authority of the SHPO and oppose any state funding.

(197) State Legal Reform

We support reform of the state’s civil justice system, which would cure or substantially solve many of the problems farmers face with hostile, harassing legal services lawsuits. Any person or organization that sues to prevent livestock operation siting, or the use of agriculture or resource management practices, should be required to post a bond in a reasonable amount, which will be forfeited to the defendant to help defray their costs in the event that the suit is unsuccessful.

We support legislation by the Idaho Legislature that would require any entity bringing such lawsuits to post substantial bonds based on the potential harm of the lawsuit. Individuals who file complaints against an agricultural operation and request an investigation must pay a fee to cover administration costs. Complete names, addresses and phone numbers are required on each complaint.

We support legislation to restore the election of district judges.

We support the open and full disclosure of the actions of the Idaho Judicial Council.

(198) Term Limits

We oppose term limits on statewide offices, legislative offices and county and local levels, with individual counties given the choice to adopt or oppose term limits.

(199) Termination of Life We oppose human euthanasia.

We oppose legalization of assisted suicide.

We oppose abortion except in cases of rape, incest or when there is endangerment to the life of the mother.

We oppose any state funding of Planned Parenthood.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

(200) Transportation

We support continuation of independent road districts without oversight by county commissioners.

We would consider an increase in the state fuel tax for infrastructure construction.

We would consider a tax or fee increase on vehicles of 12500 GVW and under if this revenue is used for infrastructure construction.

We oppose the removal of the Port of Entry system from the Department of Transportation.

We support increases in gross weights with axle weights non-changing.

We support the continued use of long combination vehicles (LCVs).

We support the Idaho Department of Transportation policy of issuing oversize load permits for Idaho public roads.

We support the continued improvement of Idaho’s agricultural roadways.

We support accountability of highway transportation department’s engineers for the cost over-runs and/or miscalculations for wrongful designs of highway projects.

(201) Unfunded Mandates

All new laws passed by the legislature that put financial burdens on the counties or cities should be funded by the state.

(202) U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals

We support the division of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to add a new northwest U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

(203) Use of the Public Trust Doctrine for Hunting

We oppose the use of the Public Trust Doctrine to force private property owners to allow hunting on their private property.

(204) Well Drillers License

A well shall only be drilled by or under the responsible charge of a licensed driller except that a property owner who is not licensed can construct a well on his own property for his own use with the aid of power driven mechanical equipment with the option of substituting a video tape of the well head and bore for the “well log” showing geologic strata, casing and satisfactory compliance with “Well Construction Standards Rules”.

Focus on Agriculture Today’s ‘Amazing’ Farms

By Stewart Truelsen What a difference the right adjective makes. Put the modifier “family” in front of “farm” and the words mean more than just a farm that is family owned-and-operated. “Family farm” evokes warm, nostalgic feelings with farmers and non-farmers alike. You can just picture yourself as a child running across a farmyard to a big white house because mother is ringing the dinner bell.

Replace the word “family” with “factory” and see what a difference it makes. The warm smiles on the non-farmer faces are gone and farmers blanch at the term. No farmer wants their family’s farm labeled a factory farm, even if it is a large operation and uses the advantages of science and technology to produce farm products efficiently and affordably.

“Factory farm” has become a derogatory term thrown around loosely by critics of today’s agriculture. It was different, however, in the 1930s. An article published by Scientific American in 1937 praised modern production of laying hens and broiler chickens. “The advantages of the factory system over the open-range method have

been definitely established,” said the author, Peter H. Smith. “Caged birds standing on wire are kept away from disease-carrying soil and litter; unit water-supply receptacles also prevent infection,” he added.

Smith noted that some egg farms were moved closer to cities as a result. “The egg factory,” as he called it, “makes possible production at the center of consumption, reducing transportation costs, breakage, and assuring freshness to the consumer.”

Another reason for moving the hens indoors was to eliminate fluctuations in production during winter months.

The concept of a factory farm was a good idea in the 1930s, but over the years the term took on a different meaning for at least a couple reasons. First of all, the size of farms became a big political issue by the 1950s. The Truman administration tried unsuccessfully to mandate the size of farms through farm program legislation.

Similar issues arose in the West over water and grazing rights. Big became bad and small became good in farm debates.

Next, the animal rights movement came on the scene and demanded rights for animals, including farm animals. Farmers today re-

main responsible for the welfare of animals in their care, but to equate animal rights with human rights, as some activists did, was too much to accept.

In the 1930s, the prevailing attitude about farm animals expressed in the Scientific American article was that the chicken’s ‘life work’ was to provide consumers with meat and eggs. That’s why they were here, and why we were thankful for them.

The term ‘factory farm’ will never be restored to its original meaning: a modern, efficient operation for the production of meat, milk or eggs, but it doesn’t really matter.

What matters is that farmers fed nearly 123-million Americans in 1930, and today they feed 308-million. We eat much better for a smaller share of family income than generations ago. ‘Amazing’ seems like better adjective to use in describing today’s American farm.

Stewart Truelsen is a regular contributor to the Focus on Agriculture series and is author of a new book marking the American Farm Bureau Federation’s 90th anniversary, Forward Farm Bureau.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

23

Citizen Batt An interview with the former Governor and Idaho’s most famous Onion farmer

Interview and photo by Jake Putnam What’s your earliest memory of farming?

Well my Dad, we had four siblings, two sisters, two brothers and he had us doing farm chores as soon as we could walk. I remember at six years old I was digging up wire worms out of lettuce. We were always doing something out on the farm.

What brought you into politics?

I was involved in farm organizations that proved to me that you could get things done collectively. I had no political aspiration. My brother was in the legislature for a term but didn’t like it and quit. I got into it but never ran more than six years; I had my own term limitations. I just think it’s a good system if you don’t make it too political. I think people tend to lose their objectivity particularly if they are in too long. I was an advocate of term limits, but I can see why they’re probably unconstitutional.

Are we losing touch with where our food is coming from?

It’s really too bad, everyone should have the experience of growing their own food; it’s one of the finest you can have. That said, agriculture has become so efficient that we’re depending on fewer true farmers all 24

the time. They’re being replaced by a lot of big operations, so it’s very difficult to get the same experience. I think it’s one reason that gardening is becoming so popular; but it’s a good substitute.

You were one of the Founding fathers of the Food Producers of Idaho, how did that happen?

It came to be because we were having difficulties with farm labor organizations.

We were being accused of some very bad practices which we were not guilty of and I think Doyle Symms and a few others thought we needed to get organized and present the true side of farming and its relationship with labor.

Your legacy as governor and lawmaker will forever be tied to epic water battles, is water still the activist lynch pin it’s been in the past?

It was and is the life’s blood of Idaho agriculture. All the other facets of Idaho life would drastically change with a limited water supply and we wouldn’t amount to much economically.

How did you balance the Endangered Species Act with Idaho water demands during your administration?

We had to make sure there were scientific

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

basis for all uses of water. I don’t think it’s ever been demonstrated that if they took all of Idaho’s water that it would do much for the species so, we argued on that basis.

We did agree to divert a certain number of cubic feet down the river each year which we thought was adequate, which we could afford at the time.

What attracted you to hops; it can be a very difficult crop to grow?

My family, my cousins and uncle were into hops before I was. They made some good money at it, so I thought I’d give it a try. It’s a very interesting crop and as you know, labor intensive. Other than that it’s just a beautiful, fine crop to raise. I still dream about it now.

In the farm world you are best known for onions. Tell us about your operation and how the operation grew through the years?

I always raised a few onions but thought the packers made too much money, so I partnered up and opened my own shed. I wanted to try and cut out the middleman. It grew into a fair sized operation through the years. It was very interesting and I made a little money on it.

As mentioned before, Food Producers

of Idaho was born out of Caesar Chavez movement, and yet you were one of the first farmers to take a stand on civil rights in Idaho; Your thoughts on farm labor?

I worked with my laborers and hired hands all my life and learned to admire them all.

The people I used to work with, the first gang from the dust bowl days blew in from the Midwest. They were very industrious people and then we started importing braceros from Mexico. We even had prisoners of war and I had a great deal of empathy for all of the workers. I worked with them side by side. I became aware of one thing: A person is a person and should not be looked down upon for being farm labor or any other occupation. But there was a great deal of discrimination practiced particularly against Mexican workers. I didn’t like that and made sure that all were treated on an equal basis as we could. I tried to keep from hiring illegals. Our hired hands have been most helpful. I couldn’t have done it without them, and worked to give them as many rights as we could give them.

You were instrumental in building the Wilder labor camp?

Yes we put in a housing project, my cousin Wendell was a big gun in it and it was a model in all labor camps at that time. We had some real bad ones before then. It was obvious that we needed new ones and I worked hard on field facilities. We didn’t have any toilets in the field. The disgrace!

To make people go a quarter mile away to a ditch? We took care of that more or less.

Of course I formed the first Human Rights Commission in Idaho, not only for that group but others who felt discrimination in Idaho and there was plenty at the time.

I’m proud of Idaho for doing it; in a way I think we are one of the most tolerant of all states now. It’s a balancing act to look out after all of those rights without intruding unnecessarily on other people’s lives with too much government, I think we have a good set up here.

You served during a time when there was a sense of civility in government; you had respect for those across the aisle. Have we lost that can do attitude?

It’s a shame. I’ve been digging through some of my old clippings. There was an amazing difference in the way we treated each other not only in the legislature but everywhere. Most striking was in the legislature where people really had respect for each other and argued things on a reasonable basis and came to the proper conclusions. I think we did a really good job. The press was much more objective back in those days. They gave us credit for good things as well as bad, and gave us the benefit of the doubt whenever they could. It was just a far better procedure than it is now.

You were friends and worked closely with Cecil Andrus in the legislature: That’s a very good friendship in which I’m

very proud. We were not the only ones to develop teamwork and friendship across the aisle; it was very common in those days. We’d argue like heck in the daytime and then have a cool one in the evening and talk things over. Sure, we were proud of our parties, we didn’t make them the dominant part of it; it was all about Idaho.

Probably something many don’t know about you, you’re a writer, a poet, a jazz musician and composer. Anything new in the works?

I wonder why I quit. I’m 83 will be 84 next month, it’s hard to concentrate on things like that.

And your music?

I still play a little music; whenever I can, I love it.

Your career runs the full gamut, you were in the House, Senate, Lieutenant Governor, Governor of all those years of public service what are you most proud of?

I enjoyed the four years I was governor probably more than any other. It’s probably because we were able to accomplish things.

We had a marvelous staff. I think people knew we responded to their issues. I came out at the end of my career on a high basis, quite popular. I think we could have gotten re-elected, that was the high point of my career. I did enjoy the House of Representatives because it was my first term in public office. I enjoyed it all.

Fuhriman to Retire After 24 years of service, one of the Idaho Farm Bureau’s best friends and most dedicated employees is set to retire.

For the past 24 years Gary Fuhriman has traveled around Idaho and beyond helping farmers solve problems and creating new marketing opportunities for Idaho crops.

Fuhriman has held the position of Director of Commodities and Marketing since 1978. He was originally hired to manage IFBF’s Safemark Program.

“Gary has been a pleasure to work with all of these years,” said IFBF President

Frank Priestley. “He is always optimistic and he has a great work ethic. We will surely miss him and we wish him all the best.”

“Gary has a great attitude and a cheerful disposition that rubs off on everyone around him,” said IFBF CEO Rick Keller.

“He has been a great asset to the Idaho Farm Bureau and we are going to miss him.”

IFBF Vice President Mark Trupp said Fuhriman is a leader and an ambassador See FUHRIMAN p.30 Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

25

What is a Tree Farm?

By Chris Schnepf Recently I received an e-mail from a forest owner who was interested in “starting a tree farm.” He had a lot of good questions for which there were not necessarily neat, discrete answers. I decided to take the opportunity to expand on some of my responses in a column on some of the more common questions that I have heard regarding “tree farms.”

Forestry as Agronomy?

The term “tree farm” is sometimes misinterpreted by people unfamiliar with forestry. To many, the term conjures up images of trees growing in rows, like agricultural crops. This kind of image is correct when talking about woody ornamentals grown for landscaping or Christmas tree farms.

But the Society of American Foresters defines a tree farm as a privately owned forest “in which the production of wood fiber is a primary management goal, as distinct from a tree nursery, fruit orchard, or landscape business.”

Implicit in the term tree farm is the idea of “trees as a crop;” an expression often attributed to Gifford Pinchot, the “Father of Forestry” in the United States. This expression rubs some people the wrong way. Many see forests as more than a fiber farm, and some people feel equating forests with farming reduces forests to a commodity. Personal26

Idaho Tree Farmers of the Year, Steve and Janet Funk. Photos Courtesy of the University of Idaho

ly, having grown up, hunted, trapped, and fished on a large family farm, I have always seen a farm as more than a simply a site for commodity production. But tree farms are perhaps even more so. If I were speaking to a group of environmental activists about a farming system that used native, perennial species, relied largely on natural seeding, rarely had fertilizer inputs, only made harvests of any kind once in 30 years or more, typically only used herbicides once in 50 years, intentionally left portions of the crop for wildlife, left 75 foot buffer zones along perennial streams, and rarely if ever used insecticides, some people would likely be asking what this wonderful new form of “sustainable permaculture” was. I would also be talking about a typical Idaho tree farm!

Timber companies have also sometimes referred to their plantations as tree farms.

At the heart of this expression is a desire to

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

make it clear that trees can be grown sustainably just as annual agricultural crops can be; that wood is not necessarily something that is mined like copper; rather it can be grown like wheat.

Forestry can be described as a spectrum of management approaches with intensive fiber management at one end (e.g., hybrid poplar plantations) and wilderness at the other end, where the primary focus is on managing recreationists who use the forest. In between, there are plantations of non-native trees (e.g., radiata pine grown in New Zealand), intensive management of native forest species (e.g. industry and Idaho state forests). All of these forests have varying kinds of benefits to water, wildlife, and all the other values we associate with forests. Family forests each have their own unique mix of management emphases, but generally fall broadly in the middle of this spectrum.

The American Tree Farm System (ATFS) While the term tree farm is often used generically, Idaho foresters using the term are usually thinking of a family forest that is enrolled in the American Tree Farm System® (ATFS), hereafter referred to as “Tree Farm.” Most people’s familiarity with Tree Farm is through the green and white sign that recognizes forest owners enrolled in the program, which most Tree Farmers proudly display on their property.

The Tree Farm program started in 1941 in Washington State. The American Tree Farm System is now a national program administered by the nonprofit American Forest Foundation’s Center for Family Forests. The mission of the ATFS is to “To promote the growing of renewable forest resources on private lands while protecting environmental benefits and increasing public understanding of all benefits of productive forestry.” The Tree Farm program is guided both locally and nationally by family forest owners. Tree Farm also functions as a forest owners’ organization which advocates for family forest owners in a variety of public and private sector policy arenas.

Most American tree farms are composed of native species.

Idaho has over 442 enrolled Tree Farms totaling 207,413 acres. The system is present in all states with significant family forestland. Nationally, there are over 90,000 family forest owners who have certified 24 million acres.

To enroll in the Tree Farm program, you must have at least 10 forest acres, and request a visit from a volunteer ATFS-certified forester, who may come from the public or private sector. The forester makes a site visit to evaluate the forest to make sure it meets the independently-reviewed certification standards to become a certified Tree Farm. These standards include a management plan that meets specific benchmarks for biodiversity, healthy watersheds, wildlife habitat, healthy trees, and recreation. Once certified, Tree Farms are periodically re-inspected to ensure they continue to meet Tree Farm standards. These certification standards allow Tree Farmers to sell logs to companies that manufacture wood products certified as coming from sustainably managed forests through the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI).

Should I Approach My Forest as a Tree Farm?

Regardless of whether you sign up for the ATFS program, tree farming can be thought of as a deliberate effort to manage a forest to meet landowner objectives. The most important fruit of this is a forest that functions in a way the meets your ownership goals. There are several potential financial advantages to managing your forest more formally. Many Idaho county assessors require a written management plan to document eligibility for property classified as forestland, which is taxed at a lower rate than other categories. Some people refer to this as an “exemption,” but it is more properly described as a lower property rate for a different land use, much as cropland is taxed at a different rate than other types of real estate.

Managing your forest more formally also has some federal income tax benefits.

Generally speaking, the more activity you can document in managing your forest, the more you can take advantage of forest management incentives built into the fed-

eral tax codes (for more information, go to “timbertax.org”).

Finally, there are periodically a number of different cost share programs available to family forest owners through the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Idaho Department of Lands.

Most of these programs require a written forest management plan to participate.

The risks associated with starting a tree farm are much the same as any other effort: How much money and time are you putting in, and do the returns justify the investment? The main difference with a tree farm is the importance of thinking in the long term, and factoring how much investments really cost, given that it may be many years before you see a financial return on the investment (e.g., What did that tree planting really cost after compounding the interest on it for 40 years?). That having been said, many forest owners develop management plans, sign up for Tree Farm, plant trees, and many other management activities without necessarily expecting a dollar return in their lifetime, just to have a healthier forest. In aggregate, these investments are very important to Idaho’s timber supply, water quality, wildlife habitat, and other shared forest values.

For More Information Whether you want to describe your land as a tree farm or simply a forest, the goal of most forest owners is the same – to have a healthy forest functioning in a way that meets their goals. If you are exploring this for the first time, a good place to start is the University of Idaho Extension forestry web site (http://www.uidaho.edu/extension/forestry), which provides links to all kinds of sources of technical assistance, educational programs, publications and other resources. If you would like to learn more about the Idaho Tree Farm Program, start with the Idaho Tree Farm web site at http://www.idahotreefarm.org.

Chris Schnepf is an area extension educator – forestry – for the University of Idaho in Bonner, Boundary, Kootenai and Benewah counties. He can be reached at cschnepf@uidaho.edu.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

27

Insurance Matters Mike Myers ­­— Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. of Idaho

Train-auto crashes in Idaho declined each year from 2005 to 2009, but the number increased in 2010.

Promoting Idaho Railroad Crossing Safety Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company of Idaho is proud to announce it will once again help sponsor a nonprofit group in promoting railroad crossing safety.

Idaho’s Operation Lifesaver will target Idahoans statewide with a media campaign, safety posters, the Adopt-A-Crossing program, and a pool of statewide presenters in 2011.

Besides its educational objectives, Operation Lifesaver will also inspect all Idaho highway rail crossings and conduct eight “Officer on a Train” runs statewide. The operation’s ultimate goal is to reduce the number of crossing incidents that occur in Idaho to zero.

The number of train-auto crashes in Idaho declined each year from 2005 to 2009, but the number increased in 2010. On April 20, 2010 one person was killed at a railroad crossing near US Highway 95 four miles south of Weiser when a car failed to 28

yield and was struck by a northwest bound train.

• Watch out for a second train when crossing multiple tracks.

Idaho has a total of fifteen freight and passenger railroads operating on over 1,600 miles of track.

• Expect a train on the track at any time. Trains do not follow set schedules.

To help prevent train-auto collisions, Idaho Operation Lifesaver offers the following tips: • Never drive around lowered gates: It’s illegal and deadly. If you suspect a signal is malfunctioning, call the 1-800 number posted on or near the crossing or your local law enforcement agency.

• Be aware trains cannot stop quickly. It can take a mile or more to stop once the emergency brakes are applied. When the engineer can see you it is already too late to be able to avoid a collision.

For more safety tips and more information about Idaho Operation Lifesaver, visit www.ols.idaho.gov or contact:

Chris Jarvis • Do not get trapped on a crossing.

Idaho State Coordinator Only proceed through a crossing if you are 300 South Harrison Ave. sure you can cross all of the track.

• Get out of your vehicle if it stalls on a crossing and call your local law enforcement agency for assistance. Only attempt to restart if you can post lookouts to warn of approaching trains.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

Pocatello, ID 83204 Phone: (208) 236-5626

Peace of mind Enjoy for life Retirement On your Terms

A

s you plan for your future years, it’s wise to consider your options, outline your goals and fine-tune your expectations. We can help you: v Continue your standard of living.

E

nsuring financial security forfinances. you and v Remain in control of your

those you care about most is more important than ever. Life insurance can help provide Stay controlalong of your future.

Use 1 and thatinsecurity, with guarantees our retirement peace of mind. calculators on www.fbfs.com or contact your local Visit www.fbfs.com or contact your Farm FarmBureau Bureauagent agentto to learn reviewmore. your life insurance needs and learn how we make it simple to help secure your family’s Visitfuture. www.fbfs.com to sign financial v Maintain your independence.

up for our free e-newsletter. It’s filled with useful tips to help you protect your family and save time and money.

Visit www.fbfs.com to sign up for our free e-newsletter. It’s filled with useful tips to help you protect your family and save time and money.

The guarantees expressed are based on the claims paying ability of Farm Bureau Life Insurance Company.

Farm Bureau Life Insurance Company/West Des Moines, IA. © 2011 FBL Financial Group, Inc. LI141-ID (2-11)

1

ID-Life(2-11)R.indd 1

1/14/11 12:26:18 PM

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

29

WORD SEARCH: Food Safety Word Search -­‐ Food Safety

P

R

E

V

E

N

T

I

O

N

B

N

W

S

D

J

Bacteria

Microwave

R

U

W

S

B

T

G

N

I

N

I

A

R

T

R

F

Canning

Prevention

O

P

F

E

N

O

Z

R

E

G

N

A

D

O

Y

P

Chill

Processing

C

L

M

I

C

R

O

W

A

V

E

R

T

R

I

S

Clean

Reheating

E

G

N

I

H

S

A

W

D

N

A

H

K

A

N

H

Cooking

Responsibility

Cutting board

Safety

S

P

O

I

L

R

C

C

O

O

K

I

N

G

G

Y

Danger zone

Separate

S

A

I

R

E

T

C

A

B

C

L

J

R

E

R

R

Disinfect

Spoil

I

K

E

S

C

R

D

G

M

L

P

I

D

Y

H

E

Drying

Storage

N

R

E

S

P

O

N

S

I

B

I

L

I

T

Y

H

Food

Temperature

G

W

F

N

O

I

M

H

M

F

R

L

S

E

G

E

Freezing

Training

L

D

K

F

T

H

C

L

E

A

N

N

I

F

E

A

E

R

U

T

A

R

E

P

M

E

T

E

N

A

I

T

C

R

U

S

E

T

A

R

E

P

E

S

F

S

N

I

L

C

A

N

N

I

N

G

E

R

M

S

E

G

E

N

M

F

R

E

E

Z

I

N

G

F

D

H

C

W

M

G

P

R

C

I

T

M

I

N

S

P

E

C

T

I

O

N

Food Processing Freezing Reheating Continued from page 25 Chill Germs Responsibility Clean Hand washing Safety for the organization. “He and Sandy en- In 1987 he joined the IFBF staff as manCooking Hygiene Separate couraged me to get involved with Farm ager of the Safemark Program. He later Cutting board Illness Spoilof ComBureau in 1985,” said Trupp. “He believes accepted the position as Director Danger zoneand that’s what made Inspection Storage in Farm Bureau me modities and Marketing. In that position he Microwave wantDisinfect to get involved.” managed domestic marketingTemperature programs as well as extensive work in Mexico develop Dryingwas raised on a dry farmPrevention Training Fuhriman in ing markets for Idaho wheat.

He organized

northern Utah. He attended Utah State and led many farm tours to Mexico, Can University where he met and later married ada, China, Australia and the U.S. He has Sandy (Penfold) Fuhriman. He farmed and been a long-serving member of the Pacific

Germs Hand washing Hygiene Illness Inspection

ANSWERS ON PAGE 34

Bacteria FUHRIMAN Canning

worked for the Soil Conservation Service and later sold the Utah farm and entered a farm partnership with the Penfold family in the Teton Basin. During that time he served on the Teton County Farm Bureau Board of Directors and later as President of the Teton County Farm Bureau. In 1982 he was elected to the IFBF State Board of Directors.

30

Northwest Economic Region (PNWER) and served as the organization’s Agriculture Co-chairman.

Gary’s wife Sandy has also been a stalwart IFBF member for many years. She served as the Teton County FB Women’s Chair and on the State Women’s Committee. She also organized Idaho’s first Ag in the Class-

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

room meeting that was held in Rexburg.

Following retirement in March, the Fuhrimans plan to serve an 18-month LDS Mission at the Heber Valley Camp in Utah.

The Camp provides various activities in a mountain setting for young women, families and other church groups.

The Fuhrimans have five children, Tonya and husband Ron in Salt Lake City, Mike and Sheri in Kaysville, Utah, Matt and Marni in Chandler, Arizona, Brett and Kristie in Pocatello, and Heather and Travis in St. George Utah. They are proud grandparents to nine granddaughters and six grandsons. In their spare time they enjoy traveling, gardening, riding ATV’s, woodworking and sewing.

Marketbasket Survey

Retail Staple Food Prices Edge Higher in Fourth Quarter WASHINGTON, D.C., January 5, 2011—Retail food prices at the supermarket increased slightly during the fourth quarter of 2010, according to the latest American Farm Bureau Federation Marketbasket Survey.

The informal survey shows the total cost of 16 food items that can be used to prepare one or more meals was $46.97, up 80 cents or about 2 percent compared to the third quarter of 2010.

Of the 16 items surveyed, nine increased, six decreased and one remained the same in average price compared to the prior quarter. The total average price for the 16 items was up $4.07 (about 10 percent) compared to one year ago.

Bacon, eggs, whole milk, sliced deli ham and bread increased the most in dollar value compared to the third quarter.

Bacon increased 68 cents to $4.32 per pound; eggs and whole milk increased 19 cents to $1.60 per dozen and $3.35 per gallon, respectively; sliced deli ham increased 18 cents to $4.84 per pound; and bread increased 14 cents to $1.75 for a 20-ounce loaf.

“Hearty breakfast lovers felt the pinch in the fourth quarter of 2010,” said AFBF Economist John Anderson. “Increased consumer demand for meats and dairy products that began in 2009 continued through the fourth quarter of 2010.

Wholesale meat supplies remained tight in the fourth quarter of the year, due to smaller live-

stock herds and poultry flocks, which also contributed to the retail price increases our volunteer shoppers reported.”

Other items that increased in price since the third quarter were sirloin tip roast, up 9 cents to $3.95 per pound; shredded cheddar cheese, up 7 cents to $4.16 per pound; toasted oat cereal and vegetable oil, up 4 cents each to $2.88 for a 9-ounce box and 32-ounce bottle, respectively.

Most items showing an increase in retail price from quarter-to-quarter also showed year-toyear increases. Compared to one year ago, bacon was up 44 percent, eggs were up 4 percent, whole milk was up 10 percent and sliced deli ham was up 11 percent.

“Increasing our nation’s livestock herd to meet the growing demand for meat and dairy products takes time, so we are likely to see retail prices continue to increase for some foods throughout 2011,” Anderson said.

Six foods decreased slightly in price compared to the prior quarter: boneless chicken breasts, down 34 cents to $3.10 per pound; flour, down 16 cents to $1.99 for a 5-pound bag; Russet potatoes, down 13 cents to $2.50 for a 5-pound bag; ground chuck, down 10 cents to $2.83 per pound; and bagged salad, down 6 cents to $2.69 per pound.

Orange juice remained the same in price at $2.97 for a half-gallon.

The year-to-year direction of the marketbasket survey tracks with the federal government’s Consumer Price Index (www.bls.gov/ cpi) report for food at home. As retail grocery prices have increased gradually over time, the share of the average food dollar that America’s farm and ranch families receive has dropped.

“In the mid-1970s, farmers received about onethird of consumer retail food expenditures for food eaten at home and away from home, on average. Since then, that figure has decreased steadily and is now just over 20 percent, according to Agriculture Department statistics,” Anderson said.

Using the “food at home and away from home” percentage across-the-board, the farmer’s share of this quarter’s $46.97 marketbasket would be $9.39.

AFBF, the nation’s largest general farm organization, has been conducting the informal quarterly marketbasket survey of retail food price trends since 1989. The mix of foods in the marketbasket was updated during the first quarter of 2008.

According to USDA, Americans spend just under 10 percent of their disposable annual income on food, the lowest average of any country in the world. A total of 92 shoppers in 29 states participated in the latest survey, conducted in late October/early November.

Tracking Milk and Egg Trends For the fourth quarter of 2010, shoppers reported the average price for a half-gallon of regular whole milk was $2.24, up 20 cents from the prior quarter. The average price for one gallon of regular whole milk was $3.35, up 19 cents. Comparing per-quart prices, the retail price for whole milk sold in gallon containers was about 25 percent lower compared to half-gallon containers, a typical volume discount long employed by retailers.

The average price for a half-gallon of rBST-free milk was $3.10, down 26 cents from the last quarter, about 40 percent higher than the reported retail price for a half-gallon of regular milk ($2.24).

The average price for a half-gallon of organic milk was $3.60, down 2 cents compared to the prior quarter–about 60 percent higher than the reported retail price for a half-gallon of regular milk ($2.24).

Compared to a year ago (fourth quarter of 2009), the retail price for regular milk in gallon containers was up about 10 percent while regular milk in half-gallon containers increased 13 percent. The average retail price for rBST-free milk went up and down over the quarters and was essentially unchanged in a year’s time. The average retail price for organic milk in half-gallon containers was stable throughout the year, fluctuating by just a few cents.

For the fourth quarter of 2010, the average price for one dozen regular eggs was $1.60. The average price for a dozen “cage-free” eggs was $3.07, about 90 percent higher than regular eggs. Compared to a year ago (fourth quarter of 2009), regular eggs increased 3 percent while “cage-free” eggs increased 11 percent.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

31

LOAN RATES YOU’LL LOVE

from a company you trust.

Top Farm Bureau Agents Rookie of the Month:

For a limited time, Idaho Farm Bureau Financial Services has reduced rates on all new (and many other) loan products.

Agent of the Month:

OUR “LOAN SALE” OFFERS GREAT RATES ON:

Agency Manager of the Month:

Cars Home Improvements ATVs Boats Motorcycles Contact your local agent or call: Rod Eggleston at 239-4249 (Pocatello), Scott Loveland at 947-2521 (Boise), or Gary Kildow at 455-1526 (Caldwell).

Keefan Caron Boise Office

Rhett Price

Soda Springs Office

Dean Schmitt Pocatello Office LOANS & INVESTMENTS Visit us online at www.idfbfs.com

32

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

Farm Facts

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

33

Food Safety Word Solution From Page 30

Food Safety Solution

P

R

E

V

E

N

T

I

O

N

B

N

W

S

D

J

R

U

W

S

B

T

G

N

I

N

I

A

R

T

R

F

Bacteria

Illness

O

P

F

E

N

O

Z

R

E

G

N

A

D

O

Y

P

Canning

Inspection

C

L

M

I

C

R

O

W

A

V

E

R

T

R

I

S

Chill

Microwave

E

G

N

I

H

S

A

W

D

N

A

H

K

A

N

H

Clean

Prevention

S

P

O

I

L

R

C

C

O

O

K

I

N

G

G

Y

Cooking

Processing

S

A

I

R

E

T

C

A

B

C

L

J

R

E

R

R

I

K

E

S

C

R

D

G

M

L

P

I

D

Y

H

E

Cutting board

Reheating

N

R

E

S

P

O

N

S

I

B

I

L

I

T

Y

H

Danger zone

Responsibility

G

W

F

N

O

I

M

H

M

F

R

L

S

E

G

E

Disinfect

Safety

L

D

K

F

T

H

C

L

E

A

N

N

I

F

E

A

Drying

Separate

E

R

U

T

A

R

E

P

M

E

T

E

N

A

I

T

Food

Spoil

C

R

U

S

E

T

A

R

E

P

E

S

F

S

N

I

Freezing

Storage

L

C

A

N

N

I

N

G

E

R

M

S

E

G

E

N

Germs

Temperature

M

F

R

E

E

Z

I

N

G

F

D

H

C

W

M

G

P

R

C

I

T

M

I

N

S

P

E

C

T

I

O

N

Hand washing

Training

Hygiene

Refer a friend, get a gift!

Announcing the program that rewards you for your referrals.

Every year, thousands of satisfied

neighbors about Farm Bureau

agent for a free, no obligation quote

customers refer their friends and

Insurance and give them a copy of

and gives your agent a completed

families to Farm Bureau Insurance.

the Rewards Program Referral Card.

card, we put your name into our

We recognize these word-of-mouth

(Cards are available from your agent.)

quarterly drawing for a $500

referrals are one of the best ways for

When your qualified referral contacts

MasterCard® Gift Card - even if your

us to grow. Now, we would like to

your agent, fills out the card for

referrals don’t purchase a policy.

thank you for your referrals and your

him/her and purchases a policy from

trust with our new Rewards Program.

Farm Bureau Insurance, we send you

Here’s how our Rewards Program

a $25 MasterCard® Gift Card. Plus,

works: Tell your friends and

for every referral who contacts your

Certain restrictions apply. Please see the Rewards Program flyer available from your local agent for complete details.

34

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

Idaho delegates to the American Farm Bureau Federation annual meeting in Atlanta Georgia are presented with the AFBF Pinnacle Award. The award is judged upon overall performance of state Farm Bureaus. One Pinnacle Award is presented for each membership category. IFBF received

the award for state Farm Bureaus with membership ranging from 25,000 to 75,000. Pictured at center holding award are left, IFBF Vice President Mark Trupp and right, IFBF President Frank Priestley.

Farm Bureau members pay 10% less off of “Best Rate� .

New Farm BureauAvailable Member Benefit 10% qualifying monthly recurring Calloff Toll-Free: 877-670-7088 services for new and existing users.

For Super 8 call 800-88ount ID# 61810 For New lines: Call 866-464-8662 Exclusive Offers/Waived Activations Farm Bureau Promo Code 10099TMOFAV Existing Users: 877-453-8824 Farm Bureau Node 4732231 This discount does not apply to unlimited calling plans and non-recurring services such as overage cost or international long distance charges. Other restrictions may apply. Contact T-Mobile for full details.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

35

Owners of Pale Horse Cattle Company, (the Dalley family of Pingree) and some friends push a herd of cows across the desert in central Nevada in early January.

The Great Winter Cattle Drive Article by Jake Putnam Photos by Kimmel Dalley Dawn broke clear and cold on the morning of January 3rd outside of Deeth, Nevada.

Cowhands unloaded horse trailers then saddled up nearly a dozen horses in bonejarring cold. The rolling desert was dusted with snow. Blackfoot rancher Chris Dalley set out to move his cattle to greener or at least better pastures on this cold morning.

“Usually we just haul them home and start feeding them, but I found this place and it’ll last us,” said Dalley. “Depending on the weather we’ll get another month to six weeks, and we don’t have to feed so much hay.”

In life imitating art, the great winter cattle drive of 2011 had the look and feel of the 1972 John Wayne movie, “The Cowboys.”

36

In the film, Wayne had to replace his drovers with kid cowhands after the seasoned hands left him for gold fields. Dalley had six pint-size drovers helping him on this morning.

“The secret to staying warm,” said 12year-old Naomi Dalley, is “dress in layers and keep hand-warmers in your pockets.”

At first glance the desert looks inhospitable this time of the year, but under the snow is crescent wheat grass and lots of it. The Dalleys needed move the herd to Clover, Nevada to get to the new range, about 50 miles across the Starr Valley.

“It’s just high desert grass,” said Chris Dalley. “Cows do so much better because it’s natural for them to graze it, so they’ll do much better grazing even if they have to dig for it and they do better grazing than feeding. I have cattle at home and the range cattle look better.”

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

Twin Falls County Farm Bureau Board member Brett Meyer also pitched in. Meyer is known far and wide for his cowboy skills.

Also along for the rider were 18-year-old Tanner Hawkins and 11- year-old brother Trayce from Weiser, not to mention Naomi and 9-year-old Quinci Dalley.

“This was the first of many winter drives to this location, this is good range,” said Kimmel Dalley, Chris’s wife. “We dealt with temperatures from 5 to 15 degrees but settled in around 10-degrees until the sun went down then it got very cold. For both days we were still pushing cattle in the dark.”

The first day was the longest, but the drive went off without a hitch. When nightfall came the drovers all retired to a nearby ranch and got warmed up after the long day. “We stayed in the bunkhouse, found something to eat and then played a game or two and went to bed. I slept really well and

I got to sleep in a bedroll,” said Naomi.

On the second day they picked up where they left off; saddled up and drove cattle again till just after dark. “We didn’t see any coyotes; but saw lots of antelope running around,” said Chris.

With two days down there was a growing feeling of pride and accomplishment amongst the drovers despite the cold. “But you know it wasn’t that bad,” said Kimmel. “The last day we got pretty cold. If you get too cold you can get off your horse and start walking and that warms you up and thaws out your feet,” The kids could get off their horses whenever they wanted to get in the truck but for the most part toughed it out.

On the third day the cattle were tired and the crew spent a lot of time picking up stragglers.

“We had a cow that wouldn’t move,” said Naomi. “I went to get her and she came at my horse, well the horse kicked her and that didn’t help things. So I went to get my Dad and she attacked my Dad.” “That old girl figured she was done,” said Chris. “She was just mad, she wanted to chase around the bush. I got her up close to the road, threw a rope around her, backed the pickup and loaded her in the trailer. She was just done and tired; it was quite a trek in three days.”

Rancher Chris Dalley of Pingree encourages a tired cow to “git along” during a cattle drive near Deeth, Nevada.

Kimmel says cattle drives are priceless in teaching kids life’s lessons. “They learn how to deal with cattle, how to read body movements, horsemanship. Also the way we take care of the cattle is also very important, patience. Brett Meyer talked to the kids about ‘pushing through the pain until the job is done.”

Chris said that’s what it’s all about. “That’s why we run cattle; we run cattle to raise a family. I want my kids to be involved in it like I am, that’s the whole key-- have them come, help, and enjoy it.”

The kids never complained one time about the cold. “The second night, we drove the cows for three miles in the dark. Those kids just hunkered down and I like to see that,” said Kimmel. “I love to see my kids enjoy what I enjoy doing. We can always have fun, in work and in play, they learn respect and how to work hard and that nothing in life is free.”

Cattle trail across the Nevada desert. The herd was moved about 50 miles in about two and a half days.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

37

Fallers wade through the deep snow and forest debris with a chain saw on their shoulder, to get from tree to tree.

Winter Logging Photos and Article by Steve Ritter Working on a logging crew is never easy work. Add a few feet of snow to the landscape and it gets even tougher. Along the Pole creek road in Adams County, Brown Brothers Logging of Emmett is busy harvesting timber off a state land sale that eventually will be trucked to mills in Oregon for processing. And they’re doing it in almost three feet of soft powder snow.

The wood was purchased by Boise Cascade Woods Products who then hired the Brown brothers to log it. Hand fallers (men with chain saws) dump the trees along the 38

road, then an off-road jammer will skid the tree lengths to the road, remove the limbs, cut them into log lengths and deck the logs along the road for loading on to the trucks that will haul the wood to Oregon.

The total sale is 4.7 million board feet.

Some will be logged in the summer to purposely create ground disturbance, which benefits re-growth of the forest. The winter job will take 1.5 million board feet and last about thirty to forty days.

Scott Howerton, a timber specialist with the Idaho Department of Lands (IDL), says they are logging along the road in

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

the winter to minimize site impact. Pole creek road travels through state land and provides primary access to the Payette National Forest. Heavily used in the summer and winter seasons for recreation, the appearance of the landscape is important to state land managers. Inventory demands from the mills also determines how much will be logged during the difficult winter months.

Profits from the sale of timber on state lands support the State Endowment Fund which mostly benefits Idaho schools.

As the trees tip over the sawyer underneath gets a cold snow shower while retreating away from the falling timber.

The jammer operator piles the logs into decks prior to hauling them to a mill.

Posted on Idaho Department of Lands website: Who are the endowment beneficiaries?

— Public Schools — Agricultural College Fund (University of Idaho) — Charitable Institutions Fund (Idaho State University, Industrial Training School, State Hospital North, Idaho Veterans Homes and the School for the Deaf and Blind) — Normal School Fund (Idaho State University Department of Education and Lewis-Clark State College) — Penitentiary Fund — School of Science Fund (University of Idaho) — State Hospital South Fund — University Fund (University of Idaho) — Capitol Commission To learn about the history of endowment lands, the State Board of Land Commissioners and the Idaho Department of Lands, refer to the University of Idaho, College of Natural Resources publication, Idaho’s Endowment Lands, a Matter of Sacred Trust by Jay O’Laughlin, March 1990.

A track off-road jammer works to skid the trees into an organized deck for truck loading onto trucks.

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

39

40

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

41

Classifieds

Animals

Household

Real Estate/Acreage

Wanted

Need to find a new home for my Pionus Parrot. Asking $450 obo. Includes cage and toys. For pictures and more information www.featherandbrush.com/lorien. htm Cataldo, ID (208) 682-4453

Beer signs and Budweiser steins.

Any reasonable offer. American Falls, Id. 208-226-2719

6 acre farm with barn, 3 ponds and seasonal creek. 3 bedroom, 2 bath home, with 2 nice shops one for RV. Motivated seller, price reduced to $163,500. Call Donna 208-924-6981 or 208-660-4047 or Linda 208-983-6771.

Old License Plates Wanted: Also key chain license plates, old signs, light fixtures. Will pay cash. Please email, call or write. Gary Peterson, 130 E Pecan, Genesee, Id 83832. gearlep@gmail.com. 208-2851258

1977 Mobile Home for Sale. Must be moved. Includes built in oven, Cook Top, Dishwasher, Disposal, Blinds, Storage Shed, 3 Bedroom.

2 bath, Fireplace, Heat: Electric Forced air. Good Condition $14,900.00 1680 square feet 208-240-3922

Paying cash for German & Japanese war relics/souvenirs!

Pistols, rifles, swords, daggers, flags, scopes, optical equipment, uniforms, helmets, machine guns (ATF rules apply) medals, flags, etc. 549-3841 (evenings) or 208-405-9338.

Black & white (50/50) Paint geldings - yearling + 2 years old.

Gentle, halter broke & stands well for farrier. Should you desire a matched ‘drive team’ - this is a ‘his & hers’ matched set’! Snaffle bit/cow breed. $1200.00 each or $2000.00 for the both. Pictures on request. Phone: 1.208.263.5549 At Stud - Paint Homozagous Stallion. Black & white with a super disposition. Sired foals that respond very easily to training. $400.00 + $100.00 (booking fee). After April 1st, 2011 - fee will be $500.00. Pictures upon request.

Phone: 1.208.263.5549

Farm Equipment 3000 gallon Calumet liquid manure spreader, could have other uses. $1500 or best offer. Bancroft, Id 208 648-7837 2001 Case IH 8880 rotary swather, 2707 hrs.-$28,000; 1995 Case IH 8555 baler, stored in shed-$9000; International 620 12-foot grain drill-$1200; 12-foot roller-harrow seed-bed maker-$1300. Blackfoot area 208-785-4525 Balewagons: New Holland selfpropelled or pull-type models. Also interested in buying balewagons.

Will consider any model. Call Jim Wilhite at 208-880-2889 anytime

Antique Furniture – Restored Oak Furniture, Bookcases, Dressers, Secretary, Desks, Table & Chairs, Rockers, Cupboards. Also Roseville, Jull & Lead vases. Burley, Id 208678-2036 or 431-2036

Miscellaneous Cemetery plot. Sandy, UT. Price Neg. Leave message. 208-734-2319 1977 John Deere 4230 w/ frontmounted Shulte 9600 snowblower, 4 post canopy w/ Femco weatherbrake, chains front & rear, good rubber, have duals, 8380 hrs. total tractor time. Asking $15,500.

Cascade, Id. Call (208) 382-6256 Flag poles by Old Sarge. Custom made from 2” galvanized poles.

Any length, 16-30 ft. Check us out.

Wilford Green, 2618 N. Inkom Rd. Inkom, Id 208-775-3490

Real Estate/Acreage Great summer home. Paul, ID. 3 bdrm, 1 bath. 1150 sq.ft. Total remodel in and out. Vinyl siding and windows. ½ acre, rural. Mt. View. Great skinning and fishing.

4 sale-owner contract or lease opt.

Al Woodward 253-279-2320 80 acre ranch property in Cascade.

Incredible views, Great horse or cattle set-up, log home, 30x82 implement shed, 36x40 barn, 30x52 hay storage, good water rights, possible additional 40 acres. Asking $699,000 call (208) 382-6256

FREE CLASSIFIED ADS

FOR FARM BUREAU MEMBERS 42

Idaho Farm Bureau Quarterly / Winter 2011

Movie Store for sale. Business and/or Building. Great location on the main street through town.

Where the “old post office” was first located in Glenns Ferry, Idaho.

For more information call: (208) 366-2282

Vehicles 89 Ford F250 XLT Lariat 460ci Engine. 5 Speed ext.cab Long bed Air, Cruise. Power L B W. No leaks Very clean Very good condition Les Schwab’s 10 ply tires 134k actual miles. Caldwell, Id 208-405-9027 Like New 2009 Ford Super Duty 4x4. Air Cond, Auto Trans, 5.4 Liter V/8 motor, low miles 2,170, am/fm radio, CD player, chrome steps, air sensor tires, full size spare, receiver hitch, never wrecked, $27,000.

OBO. Boise, Id 208-376-1199 351 Cleveland engine, 4 barrel manifold, 4 bolt main, disassembled, missing can & lifters. $400; 1946 Ford flathead engine, complete, make offer; 1946 Blocks Ford, some extra parts; Clay Smith Ford flathead cam; 3 sets Ford flathead rods, 21A, 29A, 8BA. Call Ernie.

Boise, Id. 208-344-3720

Buying U.S. gold coins, proof and mint sets, silver dollars, rolls and bags. PCGS/NGC certified coins, estates, accumulations, large collections, investment portfolios, bullion, platinum. Will travel, all transactions confidential. Please call 208-859-7168

Help Wanted Earn $60,000/yr Part-Time in the livestock or equipment appraisal business. Agricultural background required. Classroom or home study courses available. 800-488-7570. www.amagappraisers.com

DEADLINE DATES: ADS MUST BE RECEIVED BY APRIL 20 FOR NEXT ISSUE OF THE QUARTERLY

SEND US YOUR CLASSIFIED AD FREE TO IDAHO FARM BUREAU MEMBERS!

FREE CLASSIFIEDS Non commercial classified ads are free to Idaho Farm Bureau members.

Must include membership number for free ad. Forty (40) words maximum.

Non-member cost- 50 cents per word. You may advertise your own crops, livestock, used machinery, household items, vehicles, etc. Ads will not be accepted by phone. Ads run one time only and must be re-submitted in each subsequent issue. We reserve the right to refuse to run any ad. Please type or print clearly. Proof-read your ad.

Mail ad copy to: P.O. Box 4848, Pocatello, ID 83205-4848 or email Dixie at DASHTON@IDAHOFB.ORG Name: __________________________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________________________________________________ City / State / Zip: __________________________________________________________________ Phone: _____________________________________ Membership No. ___________________ Ad Copy: ________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________