LMD Aug 24

Saying things that need to be said.

Project 25

Like me, you’ve probably been hearing about something called Project 25 or Project 2025. You might also have heard that it is Trump’s scheme that he’ll use to destroy democracy. We decided to dig a little deeper and find out what Project 25 is, and is not. We found, after reading the almost 900-page document that, as usual, the media has been lying to you once again as to what Project 25 is all about.

brags that Trump had adopted nearly two-thirds of its proposals on their 2016 wish list. The liberals also say that Project 25 was largely drafted by Trumpsters who strongly urge the President to fire thousands of civil servants, get rid of the Department of Education, usher in sweeping tax cuts, ban pornography, halt

The Heritage Foundation is a right wing think tank who for over 50 years has been putting out their “wish list” prior to every Presidential election. Their most recent wish list was released well over a year ago and little was heard about it then but now all of a sudden the Democrats are having a cow about it and are trying to convince everyone that it will be the blueprint for a Trump presidency and if adopted, it will “destroy America.”

What’s Not to Like?

Interestingly, in Trump’s first term the Heritage Foundation

Don’t worry about bitin’ off more’n you can chew; your mouth is probably a whole lot bigger’n you think.

sales of the abortion pill, defend the nation’s sovereignty and allocate funds to finish the wall on the US-Mexico border. Project 2025 also proposes dismantling

the Department of Homeland Security, creating a much larger and more powerful border policing operation, slashing federal money for research and investment in renewable energy, and calls for the next president to “stop the war on oil and natural gas.” In keeping with the Heritage Foundation’s conservative ideals, Project 25 also calls for school choice and parental control over schools. It demands an end to “woke propaganda” and thinks we should end “inappropriate political indoctrination of our children.” They also propose withdrawing from the United Nations. Project 2025 goals include “restoring

Carbon Pipeline Company Leverages Political Connections to Gain Eminent Domain

SOURCE: PROTECT THE HARVEST

In late June 2024, the appointed three-person, Iowa Utilities Board (IUB) dealt a devastating blow to property rights in the state by granting the right of eminent domain to Summit Carbon Solutions for its planned CO2 pipeline. The Summit pipeline would transport carbon dioxide produced by ethanol plants to an underground storage facility in North Dakota, more than 2,000 miles away, crossing five states.

“Eminent domain” is a power of government at the local, state and federal levels that allows the seizure of private property for public use or the “public good,” with or without the owner’s consent, usually with compensation at a fair or market rate. Originally known by the Latin term Eminenes Dominium, eminent domain can be traced to 17th-century English common law. The U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment “taking clause” enables this government power.

In the recent unanimous IUB decision, it approved granting eminent domain, stating that the “public benefits of the project outweigh the private and public costs.” IUB

continued on page 4

Riding Herd

by LEE PITTS

A One Man Ban

Ithe family as the centerpiece of American life, dismantling of the administrative state, and securing God-given individual rights to live freely.”

So, you may ask, what’s not to like?

Of course all these proposals are diametrically opposed by the Biden Administration who want a centrally planned socialist agenda and are attempting to make climate change the overriding law of the land. The Heritage Foundation says “USDA’s Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years 2022–2026 identifies six strategic goals, the first three of which focus on issues such as climate change, renewable energy, and systemic racism.”

The USDA can’t even come up with a Farm Bill let alone tackling climate change and systemic racism. Shockingly, in the Secretary of Agriculture’s plan, “there is only one mention of af-

continued on page 2

Can American Conservation Survive ‘Green’ Energy?

BY PORTIA ROBERTS / REALCLEARENEGY.ORG

It’s summer, the ACs are cranking, SUVs are loaded, and families are hitting the road for beaches, forests, mountains, and National Parks. Thanks to our unique history of conservation and a culture of preservation, Americans have, for many decades, taken for granted their access to natural beauty. Reverence, even love of that natural beauty is epitomized by our country’s 400 National Parks, hundreds of miles of protected coasts, and 800 million acres of forest, only 40 percent of which falls under government management.

Organizations like Save the Bay and thousands more founded by concerned citizens serve to champion habitat restoration and protection. Indeed, such was the very foundation of the modern environmental movement spawning nonprofits that advocate for policy, educate, install oyster beds, guard sea turtles, clean woodlands, “save the whales,” remind drone operators about the negative impacts of unmanned vehicles on wildlife, and, of course, constrain or prevent drilling and mining projects to preserve species and habitats.

But now the environmental movement is at odds with itself. The movement’s full-throated embrace of so-called “green energy,” successfully amplified by unprecedented government mandates and subsidies, is leading to habitat-invading and beauty-destroying energy projects at scales that not only rankle onlookers but also

continued on page 4

suppose you heard that Amazon founder Jeff Bezos made a commitment to give 30 million dollars over a five-year period to North Carolina State for research into manufacturing fake meat. For Bezos the 30 million is like a $20 bill to you and me because his wealth is currently estimated by Forbes to be $215 BILLION, which would rank him as the second richest human on earth. This is even after he gave his wife of 25 years, MacKenzie Bezos, $38 BILLION in Amazon stock in a divorce settlement.

For some reason Bezos has a beef with beef and he seems to hate cowboys. Maybe it’s because when he worked on his grandparents’ ranch in Cotulla, Texas, early in his life the rough and tumble cowboys did not play nice with the dweeb. At 5’7’’ Bezos does not appear to be someone who’d strike fear in the heart of your average cowboy.

The computer geek previously established the Bezos Earth Fund which is the largest philanthropic commitment ever to fight climate change and protect nature. The fund will supposedly disburse $10 billion by 2030 to make the world more sustainable and “create a future in which everyone can thrive.” Everyone except cattlemen, of course.

Because of his support for fake beef I am announcing that I will never do business with Amazon EVER again. Nor will I be a passenger on his space tourism venture, Blue Origin. Folks who get Amazon packages daily from the U.S. Post Office might think my boycott will create a real hardship for me but I don’t buy a dozen things per year on the Internet and less than half would be courtesy of Amazon. I prefer to buy direct and I don’t need a middleman who wants to see fake beef replace the real thing. For the past 50 years my career has centered around the beef business and I don’t need to enrich someone who wants to put me out of business.

You might think my boycott of Amazon will have little effect on Mr. Bezos but I’m warning him that several of my boycotts in the past have put many huge companies out of business. For example, I pulled my money

Volume 66 • No. 8

LEE PITTS

Yes.

Please subscribe me to the Livestock Market Digest for: □ 1 Year at $35 □ 2 Years at $45 NAME

□ Payment Enclosed

Livestock Market Digest (1SSN 0024-5208) (USPS NO. 712320) is published monthly except semi-monthly in September in Albuquerque, N.M. 87104 by Livestock Market Digest, Inc. Periodicals Postage Paid at Albuquerque, N.M. POSTMASTER-Send change of address to: Livestock Market Digest, P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194

For advertising, subscription and editorial inquiries write or call:

Livestock Market Digest P.O. Box 7458 Albuquerque, N.M. 87194

Telephone: 505-243-9515 Fax: 505-349-3060 www.aaalivestock.com

EDITORIAL and ADVERTISING STAFF

CAREN COWAN Publisher

LEE PITTS Executive Editor

CHUCK STOCKS Publisher Emeritus

RANDY SUMMERS Sales

FALL MARKETING EDITION AD SALES

RANDY SUMMERS, 505-850-8544 email: rjsauctioneer@aol.com

fordable food in the entire fiscal plan.”

A Big Waste of Time

The truth about Project 25 is that the Heritage Foundation brought together nearly 50 conservative organizations and more than 350 leading conservatives to draft what they call their “Playbook” for whoever is the next President. In our review of Project 25 there was just too much to swallow to share in this space so we centered our efforts on the role of the USDA in a possible Trump Presidency. The chapter on the USDA in Project 25 was written by Daren Bakst who notes, “In 1862, President Abraham Lincoln signed into law the legislation that created the USDA. The department had a very narrow mission focused on the dissemination of information connected to agriculture and ‘to procure, propagate and distribute among the people new valuable seeds and plants.’”

It’s safe to say that during the last 160 years, “the scope of the USDA’s work has expanded well beyond that narrow mission,” wrote Bakst.

“Today, the USDA is comprised of 29 agencies organized under eight Mission Areas with 16 Staff Offices, with nearly 100,000 employees at more than 6,000 locations across the country and abroad,” wrote Bakst. According to USDA’s budget summary for fiscal year 2023, outlays are estimated to be at $261 billion: $221 billion of that money is for mandatory programs and $39 billion for discretionary programs. Here is a breakdown of those outlays: nutrition assistance (70 percent); farm, conservation, and commodity programs (14 percent); forestry (5 percent). and “all other,” which includes rural development, research, food safety, marketing and regulatory, and departmental management (11 percent).

That’s right. Seventy percent of the money dispensed by the USDA is not for farmers and ranchers but for food stamps and other government programs. According to Project 25, “The USDA implements many means-tested federal support programs, including the largest food assistance program, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, also known as food stamps), and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Food Program. The Food and Nutrition Service oversees these programs and other food and nutrition programs, including the Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, which handles the USDA’s work on the “Dietary Guidelines for Americans.” Does this sound like the USDA that Abraham Lincoln had in mind when he established it? Needless to say, handing out food stamps is a long way from distributing plants and seeds.

According to Project 25, “This effort is part of a federal central plan to put climate change and environmental issues ahead of the most important requirements of agriculture—to efficiently produce safe food. Even before the Biden Administration’s radical effort to reshape the USDA’s work, the USDA’s mission was and is too broad, including serving as a major welfare agency through implementation of programs such as food stamps. This far-reaching mission is not the fault of the USDA, but of Congress, which has given the department its extensive power.

“The U.S. USDA can and should play a limited role, with much of its focus on removing governmental barriers that hinder food production or otherwise undermine efforts to meet consumer demand. The USDA should recognize what should be self-evident: Agricultural production should first and foremost be focused on efficiently producing safe food.”[DH1]

For the Heritage Foundation, focusing on climate change and renewable energy is a big waste of time.

A Love and Hate Relationship

There’s something for almost everyone to hate in Project 25. A portion of the ag community is going to hate Project 25. That’s because it calls for an end to all subsidies. According to Project 25, “The overall goal should be to eliminate subsidy dependence. Many farmers receive few to no subsidies, with most subsidies going to only a handful of commodities. According to the Congressional Research Service, from 2014 to 2016, 94 percent of farm program went to just six commodities—corn, cotton, peanuts, rice, soybeans, and wheat which all together account for only 28 percent of farm receipts. Many farmers do not receive much in the way of subsidies, especially those in the areas of livestock and specialty crops.

“Farmers, and the food system, should be free from any unnecessary government intervention,” Project 25 reads. “We should also eliminate virtually all USDA regulations on farms so they can produce as much as possible, for as cheap as possible, regardless of the consequences. It would be up to each farm’s own discretion when it comes to raising animals and growing food.”

In the agriculture chapter in Project 25 the following recommendations are made:

■ President Trump should champion the elimination of the Conservation Reserve Program. Farmers should not be paid in such a sweeping way not to farm their land.

— MY CHECK IS ENCLOSED FOR — One Year: $35 Two Years: $45 Single copy: $10

Clip & mail to: Livestock Market Digest, P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194

FIELD EDITOR

DELVIN HELDERMON, 580/622-5754 1094 Koller Rd, Sulpher, OK

ADMINISTRATIVE and PRODUCTION STAFF

KRISTY HINDS Graphic Designer

All subscriptions non-refundable.

■ There is also a need to reform USDA’s conservation easements. These easements are a powerful tool to incentivize long-term preservation of ecosystems while still allowing farmers to benefit economically. However, when farmers and ranchers sign conservation easements with the USDA, they can be enforced in perpetuity. Future generations, be they the descendants of the landowner or new residents, are bound by those conditions. Ecosystems and topography naturally change over time, but without legislative change, easement requirements will not. The new Administration should, to the extent authorized by law, limit the use of permanent easements and collaborate with lawmakers to prohibit the USDA from creating new permanent easements.

■ Promote legislation that would allow state-inspected meat to be sold in interstate commerce. These barriers to the sale of

meat and poultry from USDA-approved state-inspected facilities should be removed.

■ The next Administration should: Eliminate or Reform Marketing Orders and Checkoff Programs. There are currently 22 checkoff programs, and checkoff programs are some of the most egregious programs run by the USDA. They are, in effect, a tax—a means to compel speech—and government-blessed cartels. Instead of getting private cooperation, they are tools for industry actors to work with government to force cooperation. These programs should be eliminated, and if industry actors want to collaborate, they should do so through private means, not using the government to compel cooperation. There should be regular voting for parties subject to checkoff programs. For example, the voting should occur at least every five years, to determine whether a marketing order or checkoff program should continue.” Project 25 concluded, that with checkoffs, “We are actually funding our own demise.”

■ Remove Obstacles for Agricultural Biotechnology. Innovation is critical to agricultural production and the ability to meet future food needs. The next Administration should embrace innovation and technology, not hinder its use—especially because of scare tactics that ignore sound science. One of the key innovations in agriculture is genetic engineering. According to the USDA, “Currently, over 90 percent of U.S. corn, upland cotton, and soybeans are produced using genetically engineered varieties.”

■ Despite the importance of agricultural biotechnology, in 2016, Congress passed a federal mandate to label genetically engineered food. The USDA should work with Congress to repeal the federal labeling law. Use all tools available to remove improper trade barriers against agricultural biotechnology. The USDA should work closely with the Office of the United States Trade Representative to remove improper barriers imposed by other countries to block U.S. agricultural goods.

■ Champion executive action, consistent with law, and proactive legislation to reduce wildfires. This would involve embracing Executive Order 13855, building upon it, and working with lawmakers to promote active management of vegetation, reduce regulatory obstacles to reducing fuel buildup, and increase timber sales.

■ Reform Forest Service Wildfire Management.

The United States Forest Service is one of four federal government land management agencies that administer 606 million acres. the Forest Service manages the National Forest System, which is comprised of 193 million acres. The Forest Service should focus on proactive management of the forests and grasslands that does not depend heavily on burning. There should be resilient forests and grasslands in the wake of management actions. Wildfires have become a primary vegetation management regime for national forests and grasslands. Recognizing the need for vegetation management, the Forest Service has adopted “pyro-silviculture” using “unplanned” fire, such as unplanned human-caused fires, to otherwise accomplish vegetation management.

The Forest Service should instead be focusing on addressing the precipitous annual amassing of biomass in the national forests that drive the behavior of wildfires. By thinning trees, removing live fuels and deadwood, and taking other preventive steps, the Forest Service can help to minimize the consequences of wildfires.

Increasing timber sales could also play an important role in the effort to change the behavior of wildfire because there would be less biomass. Timber sales and timber harvested in public for-

ests dropped precipitously in the early 1990s and still remain very low. For example, in 1988, the volume of timber sold and harvested by volume was about 11 billion and 12.6 billion board feet (BBF), respectively. In 2021, timber sold was 2.8 BBF and timber harvested was 2.4 BBF.

In 2018, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 13855 to promote active management of forests and reduce wildfire risks. The executive order stated, “Active management of vegetation is needed to treat these dangerous conditions on Federal lands but is often delayed due to challenges associated with regulatory analysis and current consultation requirements.”

Project 25 says the government needs to reduce regulatory obstacles to fuel reduction in forests created by the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act.

“The USDA should help lead an effort to repeal the Dietary Guidelines. Minimally, the next Administration should reform the Dietary Guidelines. The USDA, with HHS, should develop a more transparent pro-

cess that properly considers the underlying science and does not overstate its findings. It should also ensure that the Dietary Guidelines focus on nutritional issues and do not veer off-mission by focusing on unrelated issues, such as the environment, that have nothing to do with nutritional advice. In fact, if environmental concerns supersede or water down recommendations for human nutritional advice, the public would be receiving misleading health information. Dietary choices are best left to individuals to address their personal needs.”

Dear Santa

The reason progressives hate Project 2025 so much is that it is not just a document that will sit on a shelf collecting dust. Project 25 is backed by a $22 million budget and “includes strategies for implementing these policies immediately after the presidential inauguration in January 2025.”

Not only are progressives and socialists in America scared to death about the possibility of another Trump presidency they are petrified about the possibility that he would actually

implement some of the recommendations in Project 25. So in response, Democrats have launched a Stop Project 2025 Task Force.

After reading the 900-page document I think of Project 25 as if it were a Dear Santa letter written by a greedy kid who wanted one of everything in the toy store. You know that child is not gonna get everything on the list, but he or she might get part of it. Like they say, you’re not going to get anything unless you ask for it. ▫

those environmentalists still committed to stewardship and conservation—and would shock the founders of the preservation movement.

In California, a 2,300-acre solar project requires destroying thousands of 150–200-year-old Joshua Trees, also the habitat of endangered desert tortoises. Locals object. Officials approve. The power generated in the eastern part of the state will reportedly benefit communities hundreds of miles west.

CARBON continued from page 1

SURVIVE ‘GREEN’ ENERGY? continued from page 1 members are appointed by the Governor and subject to confirmation by the Senate. The three current IUB members are Erik M. Helland, Chair; Joshua J. Byrnes, Commissioner; and Sarah M. Martz, Commissioner. Helland and Martz began their terms on May 1, 2023. Byrnes was appointed on November 30, 2020. Some have said they were “hand-picked” to make the decision to grant eminent domain because of the administration’s ties to Summit Carbon Solutions.

Disputes in Maine about where to put massive wind turbine projects pit environmental groups against conservationists intent on protecting wilderness and wildlife. Paradoxically, the state has the nation’s strictest mining laws, precluding any possibility of directly sourcing even a portion of the raw materials necessary to construct the turbines and solar panels slated for deployment to Maine’s electrical grid. Meantime in Vermont, a solar panel project that would cover 227 football fields of pristine landscape is being vigorously opposed.

These so-called “green” technologies, useful in generating intermittent power in discrete conditions and geographies, not only impact the visual environment but also have as yet unknown impacts on our environment when deployed at scale. However, we are starting to get some indications.

Scientists are still studying impacts from massive offshore wind installations on sea temperatures and marine life. Only now are some communities and environmental groups coming to terms with the monumental scale of non-recyclable plastic blade trash on the horizon as those turbines age out. Just this month at Vineyard Wind, a partial blade from a single Eiffel Tower-sized wind turbine failed, dropped into the ocean, and necessitated several beach closures. Add to this other newly discovered consequences such as studies showing that massive solar installations often proposed for the Sahara Desert would contribute to higher global temperatures. We also know that large-scale solar installations cause loss of habitat, confuse birds, drive runoff, pollute waterways, degrade soil health, and disrupt animal migration.

Despite ample evidence that we should proceed with caution regarding industrial scale deployment of land-invading green energy, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) promises trillions to subsidize such projects. So-called green energy, with the notable exception of nuclear, is—from mine to deployment—extraordinarily land and resource intensive. Some environmental groups are beginning to raise alarms about both deep-sea mining and expanding conventional mining for the vast quantities of critical materials needed for aggressive electrification and large-scale solar and wind projects.

In total acres used per megawatt, coal, natural gas, and nuclear power have tiny footprints compared to wind and solar. A solar power plant typically requires 5 to 10 acres per megawatt while a natural gas plant uses less than a half an acre per megawatt. These estimates don’t even account for the increases in land mined for the necessary metals and mining.

In the 100 years since modern environmental conservation began, we have become increasingly more efficient in the resources and land we use to supply energy. But now, “green” energy policies come at the expense of far greater land and water use. “Green” policies also ignore increased foreign resource dependence and environmental impacts overseas. The production of useful energy, which drives economic productivity, is always about tradeoffs. Americans are unlikely to tolerate increasingly obvious “green” tradeoffs.

A future with denser, cleaner urban footprints that preserve natural habitats requires that we continue to decrease the natural resources and land we consume, particularly with our population predicted to peak anywhere from 20 to 60 years from now. In addition to affordable cars, air conditioners, and smart phones, virtually all Americans want the clean air and abundant, biodiverse seas and wide-open spaces our 19th-century forebearers helped to realize. You can bet future generations will too. It’s in our nature. And our energy policies and choices should reflect that.

Summit Leadership Has Close Ties to Iowa Administration

Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds (R) formerly served as Lieutenant Governor, succeeding Governor Terry Branstad in May 2017, when he became the Trump administration’s ambassador to China. In November 2018, Reynolds was elected to her first full term and then reelected in 2022.

According to an April 2022 article from Reuters:

“At least four members of Summit’s leadership have direct links to the Iowa governor’s office or the Iowa Utility Board (IUB), both of which could influence the future of the roughly 2,000-mile (3,200-km) pipeline, according to the review. One is the top individual donor to Governor Reynolds. Another is Branstad, who nominated two of the IUB’s three commissioners, including its chair.”

Reuters found that Bruce Rastetter, head of Summit’s parent company Summit Agricultural Group, donated nearly $150,000 to Reynolds between 2018 and 2022, according to records maintained by the National Institute on Money in Politics.

Further, Branstad has served as Summit’s senior policy advisor, and Summit’s lobbyists in Iowa have included Jake Ketzner, who was Reynolds’ former chief of staff, and Jeffrey Boeyink, who served as Branstad’s chief of staff.

Nancy Erikson, one Iowa landowner that would be affected, stated:

“We will continue working to preserve our land and protect all Iowans from hazardous CO2 pipelines. We will challenge this corrupt proposal through every legal and regulatory process

HERD continued from page 1

out of Washington Mutual and Indy Mac Bank and both firms declared bankruptcy shortly thereafter. Other companies I’ve boycotted include Enron, Lehman Brothers, Silicone National Bank, Bed Bath and Beyond, World Com, and Toys R Us, and we all know what happened to them, don’t we? I stopped buying underwear and Craftsman tools from Sears when they started making everything in China and my boycott bankrupted them too.

Another rich guy who’s investing heavily in fake beef is Bill Gates and he now owns the most farmland of anybody in America at 269,000 acres. I started boycotting Gates several years ago when an airline gave me a free Windows based computer which I tried and then quickly gave to someone I didn’t like. When I began my boycott Gates was the richest

available. But, today’s decision should be a warning to all Iowans: When we allow powerful, wealthy people to buy off our government officials, no one is safe.”

Landowner and Environmental Concerns Ignored

Robert Maguire, research director of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, stated: “I would say there is a valid concern on the part of the (pipeline opponents) that tAhey’re not getting equal treatment by the government.”

Several citizen groups oppose the proposed CO2 pipelines, and prior to the granting of eminent domain, most property owners that would be affected refused to give Summit the easements necessary for the pipeline to cross their property.

One submitted comment stated: “When you have a large number of landowners refusing to sign easements, that should send a loud message that this project is not wanted.” In fact, Reuters found 98.9 percent of comments in the Summit docket at IUB were in opposition to the pipeline.

Landowners are rightly concerned about a range of issues. Farm productivity and land values would, of course, be affected. Of greater concern is the potential danger of a CO2 pipeline rupture. In 2020, a CO2 pipeline ruptured in Satartia, Mississippi, forcing the evacuation of 200 people and sending 45 to the hospital.

Interestingly, farmers have found allies in environmental groups fighting the pipeline. Sierra Club Iowa Chapter’s Jess Mazour stated, “If they are listening to the people, it’s very clear that this pipeline shouldn’t be approved.” Emma Schmit from Pipeline Fighters Director at Bold Alliance stated:

“Iowans have successfully delayed this unwanted project from an out-of-touch, multibillion-dollar company, for years. They have endured through petty lawsuits, acts of intimidation, and the corruption of democracy – the Board’s unjust decision can hardly shake their resolve to stop this crooked scheme. The unconstitutional use of eminent domain to seize private land for the profit of a few C-suite executives will not go unchallenged.

man in the world but since the beginning of my boycott Forbes says Gates has fallen all the way down to the number eight spot at $135 billion.

Poor guy.

These rich dudes shouldn’t question the power of my previous boycotts. When I switched to Wranglers it almost devastated Levi’s. I stopped buying Chicken Soup books when they stopped printing my columns and sure enough, they went bankrupt too. Closer to home, in the cattle business I never bought or sold a hoof from Eastern Livestock, Easterday or Millenkamp and all three crashed, fired and burned. So did the Tattooed Chef when I swore to never get a tattoo or to do anything in the kitchen. Chrysler declared bankruptcy years ago and that was probably because I only bought Oldsmobiles, but then Olds went out of business when I switched to Buicks. I’ve also never bought a sin-

We will continue to stand strong and fight against this egregious overreach.”

Other States Could Be Iowan Landowners’ Solution

Part of the IUB’s decision did stipulate that Summit “shall not commence construction on any segment of pipe in Iowa until it has obtained agency approval for a route and sequestration site in North Dakota and an agency approval of a route in South Dakota.” This may very well give opponents of the pipeline the time they need to appeal and ultimately save thousands of acres of productive farmland, as well as the generational legacies that created them.

Even while Iowans may have lost one battle in their state, it will ultimately be the decisions from other states that determine the fate of the Summit pipeline. Both North and South Dakota denied Summit’s permit applications in 2023, but the company is revising its applications to reapply.

Subsidized “Green” Globalist Agenda

The Summit pipeline is only one of several CO2 pipelines that have been proposed in recent years. All of them have stemmed from the Biden administration’s adoption of the United Nations’ (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recommendation that nations must not only reduce CO2 emissions, but also capture and store CO2. Substantial tax-payer-funded subsidies have been made available to companies that pursue such goals, making the installation of unproven, unsafe “green” infrastructure irresistible.

Some CO2 pipeline projects, such as the Navigator CO2 project, have been canceled, largely due to opposition from citizens and landowners. Navigator officially cited the “unpredictable nature of regulatory and government processes involved.” Nevertheless, Navigator CO2 is believed to have already received millions of taxpayer dollars prior to the cancellation of its project.

The ongoing threat from the globalist “green” agenda to American private property rights, food production, and food security must be confronted at every level. ▫

gle thing from Starbucks or Wal Mart and I’m considering boycotting Costco because they recently hiked the price for admission. I am presently boycotting Russia, dental implants and Tic Tok. Whatever that is.

If anyone sees Jeff Bezos please warn him that because of his support of the fake meat industry, and my resulting boycott, he’ll soon be homeless, panhandling on some street corner and begging for my forgiveness. ▫

Portia Roberts is the Policy Director for the National Center for Energy Analytics and holds an MA from Johns Hopkins SAIS. ▫

Bipartisan ‘Fix Our Forests Act’ Introduced to Combat Wildfire Crisis

The new and bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act is comprehensive, bipartisan legislation aimed at restoring forest health, increasing resilience to catastrophic wildfires, and protecting communities. The bill is timely, with millions acres already burned in wildfires this year.

Sponsored by House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Bruce Westerman (R-AR) and Congressman Scott Peters (D-CA), the bill addresses the urgent need for active management across over 117 million acres of overgrown, fireprone forests.

Westerman worked as an engineer and forester before serving in office. Peters has expressed his frustration with the proliferation of anti-forestry lawsuits and the importance of modernizing environmental laws to meet today’s challenges.

Representative Peters and Chair Westerman are also co-authors of the Save our Sequoias Act, a bill to give land managers the tools and funding needed to save California’s iconic giant sequoias.

Key components of the Fix Our Forests Act include simplifying and expediting environmental reviews to reduce costs and planning times for critical forest management projects while maintaining rigorous environmental standards. This also aims to end frivolous litigation that delays necessary forest management efforts, often for years.

The bill creates a new “Fireshed Center” aimed at promoting collaboration and operational efficiency between public agencies, tribes and local communities. Additionally, the act provides agencies with new tools to restore watersheds, protect communities in the wildland-urban interface, and prevent the conversion of forests to non-forests.

The Fix Our Forests Act emphasizes the use of state-ofthe-art science to prioritize the treatment of forests at the highest risk of wildfire. It incentivizes forest management projects of up to 10,000 acres to increase the pace and scale of active management.

To further support rural economies, the act strengthens tools such as Good Neighbor Authority and Stewardship Contracting, and adopts innovative technologies to address forest health threats like wildfires, drought, insects, and disease. Additionally, the Fix Our Forests Act focuses on hardening utility rights-of-way against wildfires by encouraging more active management and the removal of hazardous trees. By streamlining environmental analyses, reducing legal obstacles, and enhancing forest restoration efforts, the Fix Our Forests Act aims to restore and protect America’s forests and communities. ▫

Special Rangers Uncover Widespread South Texas Livestock Theft Scheme

Texas & Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association Special Ranger Matt Sigur led an investigation resulting in the recent arrest of Mason Solis, a Wilson County man charged with felony theft of livestock. The charges come after Solis failed to pay for cattle from the Live Oak Livestock Auction, which led to a widespread investigation that uncovered a complex livestock theft scheme spanning six Texas counties.

Texas & Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association was contacted in March 2024 by

Live Oak Livestock Auction. The auction barn sold 35 head of cattle to but never received payment. The auction barn was given a hot check from Solis for the livestock, who took the cattle from the sale barn despite the failed payment.

Special Ranger Sigur promptly alerted other special rangers in the surrounding counties about the fraudulent scheme. Within weeks, Special Rangers Joe Aguilar Jr., Steve Martin, Robert Fields and Todd Jennings, reported similar incidents from auction barns across South Texas.

Special rangers quickly assembled, securing court orders, documents and statements. As the investigation advanced, evidence indicated Solis executed the same scheme repeatedly stealing 251 head of cattle in total. Warrants were issued by Gillespie, Gonzales, Karnes, Lavaca, Live Oak and Starr Counties.

Efforts to locate and arrest Solis initially failed when the special rangers discovered he had left his Wilson County

Advertise in the

Contact

Randy Summers

ADVERTISING

REPRESENTATIVE

Office: 505/243-9515 Cell: 505/850-8544

rjsauctioneer@aol.com

home. However, thanks to the vigilance of the Wilson County Sheriff’s Office, Solis was arrested June 22.

Solis was charged with nine counts of felony theft, amounting to more than $375,000.

Breanne Mosley, Solis’ wife, was also arrested and charged with one count of felony theft for her involvement in the scheme. This case is separate from Solis’ charges and remains ongoing.

Texas & Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association would like to thank the Wilson County Sheriff’s Office and Detention Center for their joint efforts in this case and ensuring all warrants were served. ▫

Cattle Industry Controversy: Mandatory Electronic Identification (EID)

SOURCE: PROTECT THE HARVEST

In late April 2024, USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) announced final disease traceability rule requirements, mandating electronic identification (EID) tags for interstate transport of specific classes of cattle and bison. The new rule is an amendment to a 2013 rule requiring that all sexually intact cattle 18 months and older, rodeo and exhibition cattle, and dairy cattle being moved between states, have a government-approved visual ID tag. The newly revised rule requires these animals to have a government-approved ID tag that is both visual and electronically readable. The rule goes into effect later this year, six months after publication in the Federal Register.

Controlling Disease Outbreak to Maintain Global Market Access

The rule is intended to help control the spread of disease and, in doing so, aid in maintaining access to foreign markets for United States beef through precise electronic identification that should limit outbreaks of disease. Theoretically, if a disease outbreak were to take place in one area of the United States, and properly contained, it would prevent a ban on all US beef exports. This is critical for maintaining US beef exports, as confidence in food safety is imperative for selling to other countries.

According to USDA data, US beef exports averaged $10.7 billion annually over the 20212023 three-year period, and totaled more than one million metric tons in 2023. From 2014 to 2023, the top ten countries US beef is exported to were South Korea, Japan, China, Mexico, Canada, Taiwan, Hong Kong, the European Union, the Dominican Republic, and the Philippines. The US also imports beef, with some year’s imports exceeding exports.

National Animal ID Previously Considered

The possibility of implement-

ing a National Animal Identification System (NAIS) has been under consideration since 2005, following a rare outbreak of “mad cow disease” (bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE) in the US in December 2003. The initial NAIS plan required premises registration, electronic animal identification, and tracking of all movements for all livestock in the country, including species ranging from chickens to horses.

Due to widespread opposition, the initial NAIS plan was withdrawn in 2010. The USDA then refocused its efforts on “a new, flexible framework” that would apply only to animals moved in interstate commerce and encourage the use of lower-cost technology. In 2013, USDA adopted the Animal Disease Traceability (ADT) rule, allowing both traditional and electronic forms of animal identification.

Plastic ear tags are the most common, traditional, individual ID. In a number of western states, the permanent silver Bangs tag, are applied to breeding age cows, indicating that they have been vaccinated against brucellosis, or Bangs disease. In 1897, Bangs was the Danish veterinarian who identified the disease, which causes contagious abortion in cattle and can be transmitted between wildlife and domestic species. The requirement for Bangs vaccine is largely due to certain western states’ proximity to Yellowstone National Park and its resident bison population. Bison commonly carry and transmit the disease.

Until now, the use of EID has been voluntary, and the debate about making it mandatory has been a volatile and controversial issue in the livestock industry. Some producers see it simply as a technological improvement to an already established tracing system, and as being necessary to maintain the health and viability of the beef industry in the modern world. Others consider it to be an unnecessary financial burden and an infringement on freedoms and private property rights in the form of mandatory animal registration and monitoring.

Pros: Streamlined Operations, Increased Marketability

Operations already employing EID attest that it has served to simplify and streamline operations, making it easier to identify cattle being treated, and make recordkeeping easier. Additionally, EID-marked cattle could bring slightly higher prices.

The tags are passive, meaning that they have no battery or power source of their own. They are similar to bar codes and are read when they pass within the transmission field of the reader wands. The wand absorbs power from the tag and then returns the 15 digits to the reader. Information from the reader can be integrated into cattle management computer software and spreadsheets.

There are two types of EID, also known as radio frequency identification (RFID) ear tags: HDX (half duplex) and FDX (full duplex) ear tags. HDX tags have a slightly longer read range and are more expensive. The 15-digit tags are also sometimes referred to as “840” tags. The first three digits on EID tags signify that the animal is from the US. The remaining 12 digits on the tag are unique to individual animals.

Cons: Limited Effectiveness, Violation of Privacy and Freedoms, Unnecessary Expense

Some producers believe mandatory EID is an invasion of privacy and have concerns regarding how the data could be used. There are concerns that EIDs will be no more effective than currently existing technology in identifying and containing the spread of disease, and the new system could be used to limit the number of animals that producers are allowed to own. There is also concern about EIDs being used to levy carbon taxes in support of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) ideology, which is aligned with the globalist and environmental extremist agendas. Then, there is the additional cost.

Concerns about expenses are also valid. EID tags average

about $3 each, and the wands to read them cost between $1,500 and $2,500 each. With the adoption of the new EID requirement, USDA made available $15 million to producers to cover the cost of tags. It is not yet clear how long that money will be available, or if additional funds will be available in the future. Producers are being advised to contact their State Veterinarians to obtain tags.

USDA’s analysis of early NAIS pilot programs showed extremely low participation and high error rates in data recording. Additionally, a 2010 Congressional Research Service Report showed only 18 percent participation by cattle producers in the National Animal Identification System (NAIS), rendering NAIS entirely ineffective as a tool for controlling animal disease. USDA estimates the new EID mandate will cover a mere 11 percent of US cattle. If 18 percent was too low to be effective, 11 percent of cattle (approximately 11 million cattle) being EID tagged will undoubtedly be ineffective in achieving stated goals.

Inevitable Changes in Agriculture

Changes in agriculture are inevitable. A century ago, much of farming was still done with equipment pulled by draft animals. The invention and eventual widespread use of the tractor made draft animals obsolete in crop farming practices. Nevertheless, horses are still considered by many today to be the best option for moving and working cattle.

EID is likely here to stay. Whether it provides value remains to be seen. There is no question that a safe, nutritious, affordable, accessible, and plentiful food supply is essential for the prosperity of mankind and food security for Americans. If EIDs are utilized to that end, the benefits may outweigh the potential risks. With that said, taking into account numerous agendas, combined with the current political climate, the implications of widespread electronic ID are not without valid concerns.

Because of these concerns, US Senator Mike Rounds (R –S.D.) has introduced legislation that would prevent the USDA from implementing mandatory

EID. Rounds stated:

“USDA’s proposed RFID mandate is federal government overreach, plain and simple. I’m pleased to be introducing this legislation to block the Secretary of Agriculture from mandating the use of electronic tags in cattle and bison herds. If farmers and ranchers want to use electronic tags, they can do so voluntarily.”

The legislation is supported by several cattle industry groups. Doris Lauing, Executive Director of the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association, stated:

“Whereas we have had ample protection and means to trace any animal health issues in the past, the mandatory direction by the United States government to use electronic animal ID tags will be a violation of constitutional personal property rights and unnecessary expense.”

Wyoming Congresswoman Harriet Hageman believes a U.S. Department of Agriculture proposal to require mandatory electronic ear tags for cattle and bison is as useful as a chicken-wire canoe. Hageman has released an amendment to the USDA proposal to gut funding of the bill that supports EID. ▫

USDA Extending Comment Period for the Fair & Competitive Livestock & Poultry Markets Proposed Rule

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) is extending the deadline for comments on the proposed rule, Fair and Competitive Livestock and Poultry Markets (89 Fed. Reg. 53886), for an additional 15 days, from Aug. 27 to Sept. 11, 2024. Comments may be submitted anonymously at www.regulations.gov. USDA will publish a notice of the extension in the Federal Register.

The Fair and Competitive Livestock and Poultry Markets proposed rule would define unfair practices as conduct that harms market participants and conduct that harms the market. Combined, these comprehensively define the contours of “unfair practices” under the P&S Act. ▫

SOME OF OUR OFFERINGS

• Custom Home on 36+ acre estate in Dragoon Mountain Ranch

• 36+ acre homesites in St David, AZ

• 80 Acre Farm land with 16” Irrigation Well in Willcox, AZ

• Custom Home on 4+ acres in Cochise, AZ

• 40 acre off grid land in Portal, AZ

Arizonahomesandlandsales.com Rick Frank, Designated Broker • 520-403-3903

THE SAND CAMP RANCH

The Sand Camp Ranch is a quality desert ranch with an excellent grass cover and above average improvements. Located in southern Chaves County east of the productive Pecos River Valley. The ranch is comprised of 2,380 +/- deeded acres, 6,074 NM State Lease Acres, 23,653 Federal BLM Lease Acres and 480 acres Uncontrolled, 32,107 +/- total acres (50.17 Sections). Grazing Capacity set by a Section 3 BLM grazing permit at 405 Animal Units Yearlong. The ranch is watered by five primary wells and an extensive pipeline system. This ranch is ready to go, no deferred maintenance. Price: $3,672,000. This one of the better ranches in the area. It is nicely improved and well-watered. You won’t find anything comparable for the price. Call or email for a brochure and an appointment to come take a look.

EIGHT MILE DRAW LAND

740 ± Acres of unimproved native grassland located four miles west of Roswell in the Six Mile Hill area with frontage along U.S. Highway 70/380. This parcel is fenced on three sides and adjoins 120 acres of additional land that may be purchased. Great investment. $600 per acre.

SOLD

Scott McNally, Qualifying Broker

Bar M Real Estate, LLC

P.O. Box 428, Roswell, NM 88202

Office: 575-622-5867 Cell: 575-420-1237

Website: www.ranchesnm.com

New NALJA Board Elected at the 2024 National Junior Limousin Show & Congress

In late June, applicants interviewed for open positions on the North American Limousin Junior Association (NALJA) board. They spoke about their desire to be on the board, their biggest influences in life, and their future goals.

The new officers and board members for the 2024-2025 year were named during the awards ceremony held on July 3, 2024, in Tulsa, Oklahoma

Elected to lead NALJA as the president for 2024-2025 is Eliza Truel, daughter of Hal and Bridget Vogt, Skiatook, Oklahoma Truel stated, “Being on the board the past two years has brought many more opportunities than I expected. I have gained so much between meeting juniors and advocating for the Limousin breed. I am excited to be President so that I can continue my leadership and encouragement in an even more influential way and bring opportunities like these to future generations.” Eliza will continue at Oklahoma State University in the fall. She is studying Animal Science Biotechnology.

“I grew up looking up the NALJA board members and always wanted to be a part of a program that does so much for the juniors. It is so important to me that we never forget that everything we are doing is for the kids watching and growing by looking to us on how we handle ourselves and execute our events with class. Serving as vice president, I hope to continue to foster the connections made through the national Limousin events as I attend them this next year.” Boone Begert, Allison, Texas, will be serving as NALJA vice president. Boone is the son of Bret and Hayley Begert. Mr. Begert will be a sophomore at West Texas A&M University this fall and will be obtaining a degree in Agriculture.

Serving her third year on the NALJA Board of Directors and elected as secretary is Mikayla Askey, daughter of Robert and Angela Askey, from Queen Creek, Arizona, Mikayla stated, “I can say with confidence that these last two years have been some of the best years of my

life and I would not trade this experience for the world. I am blessed to be serving as a director for my fourth year on the NALJA board and look forward to further developing network opportunities with breeders and industry professionals that benefit the youth. My goal is to continue to promote the Limousin breed throughout Arizona as well as the U.S. While serving on the board as secretary, I have been able to meet some amazing people that I can now call close friends and family.” Mikayla will continue at the University of Arizona in the fall as an Agriculture Technology Management and Education major.

Elected to serve as treasurer and serve his second year on the NALJA board of directors is Shane Kendall from Magnolia, North Carolina, son of Dustin and Charmae Kendall. Kendall states, “being a national director has provided me with many new opportunities. It allows has allowed me to go to new places and meet new people. I have also enjoyed interested and getting to know Limousin juniors across the nations. I hope to continue to meet new people in the business that I can help down the line and to keep the breed continue growing.” Shane will attend Northeastern Oklahoma A&M College and participate on the Livestock judging team.

Serving his first term, Turner Sanders, Huntington, Texas, was selected to serve as the social media chair. Turner is the son of Roger and Jill Sanders. Upon being elected, Sanders said, “I am excited to lead and give back to a breed association that has been very welcoming to me and my family as we joined only a few years ago.” Turner will be attending Texas A&M University this fall to study Animal Science.

Landry Kleman will continue on the board as ex-officio. Landry is from Nazareth, Texas and is the son of Brad and Ashley Kleman. “I strive to be a role model for the younger kids in the association. I see the way some of the younger kids look up to board members and hope that I can do the same. I wish

to give back to this association any way I can,” stated Kleman. Landry is pursuing a degree in Agriculture Management and Production and Livestock Management and Production, Precision Agriculture at Southeast Community College. He hopes to manage a feed yard or ranch in the future.

From Decatur, Arkansas, Jacey Smith, daughter of Kevin and Jacque Smith, will continue as a director on the NALJA board of directors. While attending Northeastern Oklahoma A&M College, Jacey will be studying Animal Science and Large Animal Reproduction and will be participating on the livestock judging team. Jacey states, “I am so excited to continue my journey on the junior board and look forward to getting to know all the wonderful juniors within this breed.”

Selected to serve on the NALJA board of directors for their first term are Memphis Peterson, Pukwana, SSouth Dakota, son of Cade and Erica Peterson; and Brandt Gazaway, Stillwater, Okla., son of Jeff and Amy Gazaway. Appointed to serve a one year term as a director are Wyatt Jacoby, son of David and Jennifer Jacoby, Paradise, Texas; and Kason Kiser, son of Terry and Joanne Kiser, Lufkin, Texas.

Nikki Keeton, Ryleigh Morris, Lily Mitchell, and Ross Turner all completed their service on the NALJA board. While serving, they strived to always put the juniors first and looked for ways to improve the association. Thank you for your service, your dedication, and the humor you added to NALJA trips during your time as a board member. We wish you all nothing but the best on your future endeavors, you will all be missed!

“I am so excited about serving the Limousin juniors this year alongside this amazing board of directors! We are looking forward to setting and achieving new goals. If you ever have any questions about NALJA, don’t hesitate to reach out to a board member or myself,” stated Mallory Blunier, NALF Director of Media & Activities. ▫

Wintering Cattle? Tips to Keep Them Warm

TED PERRY, BEEF TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, PURINA

Cold weather impacts your cattle, but they can’t stay warm by putting on winter boots, a coat and a hat. They need other ways to keep warm. Winter nutrition and environment management will help maintain a cow’s core body temperature, keeping cows warm from the inside out. If you’re wintering cattle, here are 7 tips to keep them warm:

1. FOCUS ON BODY CONDITION SCORE

The number one way to reduce cold stress in cattle is to improve body condition score.

Having a good body condition score going into winter does two things. First, a cow in body condition score 5 or 6 has a layer of fat insulation helping her conserve body heat. Second, cows in good body condition likely have a good diet, which can result in nice, warm winter hair coats.

2. DELIVER MORE CATTLE FEED

Make sure cows have enough feed and water. A cow’s feed intake will increase by 20 percent during cold weather. Before temperatures drop, increase the amount of feed delivered. Provide additional hay, or offer 20 percent more cattle feed in

the bunk.

Increasing intake will increase the amount of fermentation in the rumen, and one of the biggest waste products of fermentation is heat. If you provide cows with more energy and get more forage into the rumen, more fermentation happens and more heat is produced. The process helps keep cows warm from the inside out.

3. SEPARATE THIN COWS

Thin cows mixed with the rest of the herd probably won’t get the nutrition they need to maintain or gain body condition. Separate thinner cows – young or old – to help take off feeding pressure. Once separated, make sure cows have plenty of forage and access to cattle mineral and cattle supplements. If you can’t separate thin cows, feed free-choice cattle supplements like a protein tub to give those cows access to feed at all times. Free-choice cattle supplements also provide a less competitive atmosphere than group-feeding protein cubes or hand-fed feeds.

4. PUT UP WINDBREAKS

When wintering cattle, it’s important to remember that wind chill affects cattle just like it affects people. Keep cattle out of the wind if possible. You can put up a homemade windbreak, create one out of bales or install a permanent windbreak. Wooded areas also provide shelter from the wind. When cows don’t have a windbreak, they feel the full effect of the wind, and it will cost you body condition. A drop in body condition score will result in additional feed cost to regain condition.

5. PROVIDE CATTLE MINERALS AND SUPPLEMENTS

Cattle mineral is vital during cold weather because it impacts a cow’s metabolic process. If cows are short on mineral, their metabolism will slow down. Once metabolism slows, the cow isn’t producing as much heat, and she may start losing body condition score. Providing cattle mineral and cattle supplements can also lead to better forage digestibility. A cow’s rumen microbes have mineral requirements and can also benefit from supplementation. Supplementing ramps up rumen microbes so they can digest more forage. The microbes can also get 25 or 30 percent more energy out of the forage they’re eating.

6. KEEP A CLEAN ENVIRONMENT

While wintering cattle, the environment tends to be muddy. Mud reduces the insulation factor of a cow’s hair coat, and a cow’s lower critical temperature goes up as a result. For

instance, if a cow is clean and dry, she may be okay down to 5 degrees Fahrenheit. If a cow is dirty, her lower critical temperature may go up to 20 degrees Fahrenheit. Give cows plenty of space, and move hay rings and feeding stations to limit the creation of muddy areas. The cleaner cows stay, the better insulation their hair will provide.

7. BREAK ROUTINE

We tend to feed cattle on a routine. We put out a set amount of cattle feed per day because we think that’s what the herd should need. But, pay close attention to temperature and watch cattle closely.

When you know it will be cold for the next few days, increase the feed offered at least 24 hours in advance to give cows a head start. Feeding cows after the storm is helpful, but the impact is greater when they are fed before. ▫

Reducing Mature Weight and Increasing Cow Productivity

MARK Z. JOHNSON, OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION BEEF CATTLE BREEDING SPECIALIST / COW CALF CORNER

The increasing mature weight of United States beef cows is concerning. Larger cows have higher nutrient requirements. Improving the efficiency, sustainability and profit potential of commercial cow calf production involves reducing feed costs while improving pounds of calf weaned. Reducing the mature weight of beef cows has a favorable impact on feed costs.

Cumulative weight weaned throughout a cow’s life in production is the result of total pounds of calves weaned and will be higher for cows that annually calve earlier, wean a healthy calf, and avoid being culled as a result of reproductive failure, unsoundness and bad disposition.

The Role of Selection and Mating

Mature cow size can be effectively controlled through sire selection. Mature cow weight is a high heritability trait with literature estimates ranging from 35 to 70 percent. Selection pressure applied to Mature Weight Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) in sire selection should be an effective means of changing mature weight.

Fertility is low in heritability with estimates ranging from 0 to 15 percent. Selection pressure, based on additive genetic merit alone, results in very slow progress in improving fertility.

Fertility is more largely influenced by nutritional environment and non-additive genetic merit. Non-additive genetic merit (or gene combination value) is the result of mating decisions.

The mating decision to crossbreed generates hybrid vigor (or heterosis) because of the gene combination value created by combining alleles from two (or more) different breeds at loci across the genome. Considerable research by various State Agriculture Experiment Stations and the USDA has clearly demonstrated the potential for increasing beef cow productivity through crossbreeding. Accumulated experimental data indicates pounds of calf weaned per cow can be increased by as much as 25% in well designed, systematic crossbreeding programs involving Hereford, Angus and Shorthorn. Approximately half of this increase in total production is dependent upon use of the crossbred cow to take advantage of heterosis for fertility, reproductive fitness, longevity and maternal performance.

Crossbreeding is a mating system that provides the commercial producer the opportunity to increase the cumulative weight weaned throughout a cow’s lifetime in production. A well-planned crossbreeding system requires a high level of management to reap maximum benefits.

The same breeding principles should be applied to the selection of breeding stock for a crossbreeding program that would be used for a purebred program. In both cases, the use of genetically superior breeding stock will result in offspring with better performance levels.

Once the decision has been made as to which breeds to include in a crossbreeding program, selection pressure should be applied based on the additive genetic merit (EPDs) of traits of primary economic importance.

Bottomline

Improving mature cow size and productivity can be accomplished in tandem through selection and mating decisions. Sire selection can be an effective means to reduce the mature size of a cowherd. Total pounds of calf weaned during the productive lifetime of a cow can be improved by a well-planned crossbreeding system. ▫

The View

FROM THE BACK SIDE

July is the first hot part of the summer. Right at the beginning of the month you get to celebrate July 4th as American Independence Day. That’s usually fun as most of us get to take a day off and see some different things such as parades, rodeos, the beach, fireworks, cookouts, etc.

In the days leading up to July 4th we are reminded of our founders who had such a great vision for our free country and their unselfish sacrifice. Then you must stop and think of all this country has been through and all our loved ones that we have lost in wars fighting for our ideals.

It’s a day to remember and to celebrate this great life that we have. I don’t know about you, but I always enjoy hot dogs and beer! Old friends get together, families gather, and all the townspeople get reacquainted with farm and ranch people.

The people I know shake hands and wish each other well. You bet, my 4th of July still looks like a Norman Rockwell painting. No one I know gives a damn if you are rich or poor, black or white, a cowboy or an Indian. On July the 4th our mission is to be Americans.

What July is For?

BY BARRY DENTON

After we get back home from the 4th of July, we all go right back to work because we have lots of it. If you are on the farm you have lots of crops to deal with. If you are on the ranch you have lots of livestock to work.

Besides the heightened season due to the good weather you also have extra animals that you may be getting ready for the county fairs in the fall. Typically, July is a very busy month.

I was astonished last Saturday when it was already the 13th of the month. However, with lots to do I went about my typical day of preparing arenas and working horses.

I got finished about 3:00 p.m. and decided to take a break. I went in the house, grabbed a sandwich, turned on the TV, and saw that former President Trump was having a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania that I decided to watch for a few minutes.

Unfortunately, it was only a few minutes until the shots rang out and wounded former President Trump, plus two others, and killed a former fire chief that saved his daughter’s life.

Former President Trump was a very lucky man and happened to turn his head at just the right time to not be killed by an assas-

sin’s bullet.

One thing that I found quite interesting is that the shot struck him officially at 6:11 p.m. If you read the Bible in Ephesians 6:11 it states:” Put on the armor of God so that you may be able to stand firm against tactics of evil.” You may call it coincidence, but I don’t think there are any. Good or bad, everything happens for a reason.

I do realize that it is part of the deal when you are trying to take someone else’s power away for things to turn nasty. Many politicians seem so addicted to power that they will do anything to keep it. That seems to be fueled by the rogue corporations they work for.

If America continues in this direction you will have no choice but to be a slave to these rogue corporations yourself. They are trying hard to get rid of independent thinking in this country.

It’s time to stand up to the current establishment, take back your schools, your jobs, and let’s get July back to being all American. Furthermore, July is not the time to assassinate, imprison, or indict your political opponent. ▫

Farm Credit Bank of Texas Reports

Farm Credit Bank of Texas (FCBT) reported solid earnings, loan growth and continued strong credit quality in the second quarter and first half of 2024.

Net income totaled $49.8 million and $98.7 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2024, up 13.1 percent and 25.9 percent compared with the same periods of 2023. The increases in both periods were driven primarily by lower provisions for credit losses on loans and higher net interest income, partially offset by lower noninterest income. The decrease in noninterest income reflects losses on the sales of loans within the bank’s participations portfolio, partially offset by a refund from the Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation in April 2024.

Net interest income was $87.6 million for the quarter and $173.2 million year to date, up 2.6 percent and 0.8 percent compared with the same periods of 2023. The increases reflect growth in the bank’s average earning assets, partially offset by decreases in the net interest spread due to a continued challenging interest rate environment and elevated funding costs.

The bank recorded a $3.1 million provision for credit losses for the second quarter, due primarily to specific reserves and related charge-offs for certain agribusiness loans, partially offset by the reversal of specific reserves for an agribusiness loan that was moved to other property owned. It recorded a $7.1 million provision for credit losses year to date, due primarily to specific reserves and related charge-offs for certain agribusiness loans, as well as an increase in general reserves due to higher qualitative reserves and elevated

economic scenario risk.

In addition, the bank issued $300.0 million of Class B perpetual noncumulative subordinated preferred stock in May. Preferred stock totaled $1.05 billion at June 30, 2024, including the Class B series issued in 2013, 2018 and 2020.

“The bank’s financial and credit performance through this year has been strong,” said Amie Pala, FCBT chief executive officer. “However, persistent inflation and high interest rates still present headwinds for agricultural lenders and borrowers. Our recent preferred stock issuance, along with other capital management strategies, further strengthens our capital position and increases our capacity to support continued loan growth and manage risk through this business cycle.”

Total loan volume increased 2.0 percent from year-end 2023 to $30.3 billion at June 30, 2024. The increase reflected growth in the bank’s direct notes to its affiliated retail lenders, which finance agriculture, rural real estate and agribusiness. Total assets increased 2.4 percent to $38.2 billion, reflecting growth in loans and investments. Nonperforming assets, which consisted of nonaccrual loans, accruing loans 90 days or more past due and other property owned, remained low at 0.18 percent of total loans, compared with 0.14 percent at year-end. Overall credit quality remained strong, with 99.5 percent of loans classified as acceptable or special mention.

Agricultural conditions were generally favorable across the bank’s five-state district, and precipitation continued to bring adequate moisture to most of the territory. Although agricultural producers and processors may face a variety of risk factors in 2024, the

district’s loan portfolio is well supported by industry diversification and conservative advance rates.

“The bank and its affiliated lending cooperatives are serving their mission by helping rural communities and agriculture thrive in this economic environment,” said Jimmy Dodson, FCBT board chair. “Loan growth and favorable credit quality illustrate the resilience and fortitude of Farm Credit borrowers as we look forward to a productive agricultural year.”

At the end of the second quarter, the bank had $2.1 billion in shareholders’ equity and a total capital ratio of 14.22 percent. The 22.6 percent increase in shareholders’ equity since year-end was driven primarily by the issuance of preferred stock. Cash and investments totaled $7.3 billion, providing ample liquidity and exceeding regulatory requirements.

The bank is part of the Farm Credit System, a nationwide network of cooperatives established in 1916. The System reported combined net income of $1.9 billion and $3.9 billion for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2024, compared with $1.8 billion and $3.5 billion for the same periods of the prior year.

These financial results are preliminary and unaudited. The bank will post its 2024 second-quarter financial report at farmcreditbank.com/ financials/bank-financial-reports. ▫

Harris on 30x30

SOURCE: LIBERTY MATTERS

The new Democrat nominee for President, Kamala Harris was one of the earliest advocates of the 30×30 agenda, long before most Americans had been made aware of the international land grab.

When Kamala Harris was in the U.S. Senate, she, along with 12 other senators filed S. Res. 372, “[a] resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that the Federal Government should establish a national goal of conserving at least 30 percent of the land and ocean of the United States by 2030.”

Harris, along with Senators Cory Booker, Dianne Feinstein, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders filed the resolution on October 22, 2019, two years prior to Biden’s Executive Order 14008 that launched the 30×30 land grab in America.

Section 5(E) of the resolution reads: “at the current rate of losses, less than 10 percent of the Earth will be free of substantial human impact by 2050,” reinforcing that a potential Harris Administration will continue Biden’s destruction of our nation’s private property and the livelihoods of millions of American landowners.

In addition, then U.S. Rep. Debra Haaland from New Mexico, now our current Department of Interior Secretary, sponsored and filed the companion resolution in the U.S. House, H. Res. 835, expressing the exact same desire of protecting 30 percent of our land and ocean by 2030. She had 42 co-sponsors in the House. ▫

Livestock Marketeers Hall of Fame Names Inductees

The Livestock Marketeers held their 58th annual Hall of Fame Banquet in Kansas City. This year’s host was The American Hereford Association and Certified Hereford Beef.

The 2023 class of inductees was comprised of Steve Sellers (Posthumous), Mike Sorensen and Joe Rickabaugh. Steve Sellers served as the Director of Communications for the Georgia Cattlemen’s Association until his death in 2022. Previously Steve held positions with EDJETechnologies, Auction.com, and other firms. Steve and his wife CeCe called Lake Park, Georgia home.

Mike Sorensen is the longtime owner and publisher of the “Livestock Plus” magazine. Based in Iowa, Mike made LPI a household name, traveling the country and providing ring service for some of the most progressive purebred breeders. Mike and his wife, Dixie, reside in Greenfield. Joe Rickabaugh has served as the Central Region Field Representative and Director of Seedstock Marketing for the American Hereford Association since 1999. Before his tenure at AHA, Joe worked for the Kansas Livestock Association. Joe and Tracey Rickabaugh currently live in Topeka, Kansas.

This year’s event saw the introduction of the Livestock Marketeers Scholarship. This award is aimed at college age students who are interested in entering the livestock marketing industry. Through generous sponsorships and donations, the organization will be able to deposit over $15,000 into their scholarship fund. ▫

From left, Hall of Fame honorees at the Livestock Marketeers annual banquet were Joe Rickabaugh, Mike Sorensen and Steve Sellars. (Contributed Photo)

Net Positive for Nature on National Forests

From stylish Olympic blazers to reducing carbon impacts, ranchers in the west make a global impact

BY LAUREN FAULKENBERRY, TAHOE NATIONAL FOREST

Across the West, lands are scarred with reminders of overuse and undermanagement. A century of fire suppression has resulted in unhealthy and overstocked forests. The cost to treat an acre of land can range from a few hundred dollars to tens of thousands of dollars. This leaves private landowners and government agencies faced with a financial limbo — who is paying for all of this and how?

As the individuals, organizations and agencies come to grips with the financial reality that is land restoration, we take a peek at the often invisible land practices at the core of American ranchers.

Stewards of the Land

Ranchers are masters at the delicate dance of ecological balance. Responsible grazing and animal husbandry practices directly affect their business. Sustainable land grazing results in ideal nutrition for livestock and can have positive impacts as vast as watershed, soil and climate health.

And then there are some ranchers who go above and beyond the legal standards and requirements for the sake of natural resource conservation.

Founder of Shaniko Wool Company Jeanne Carver has deep roots in America’s agricultural community. Carver’s family ranch has operated continuously since 1871. Since the late 1980s, they’ve adopted sustainable farming practices that address soil impacts, water quality improvements, and animal welfare that have carried on into her wool business.

“We have a long history of working closely with our natural resource agency partners in the management of land and natural resources,” said Carver. “It’s the health of our soil, water, grasslands, plant communities, the whole thing, that determines our collective future.”

Today, Carver’s Shaniko Wool Company is a “farm group” of ranches supplying wool that is Responsible Wool Standard-certified and fully traceable. In short, because of the stringent requirements, these ranches are having a net positive carbon impact on the environment.

It is common for federal landuse agencies to allow ranchers to graze livestock on federal lands. Strict standards are in place to prevent negative environmental or wildlife impacts. With well-managed grazing, ranchers help reduce fuels on the ground. Plus, sheep grazed on federal land are a direct link to carbon sequestration.

According to research from The Woolmark Company, “Organic carbon makes up 50% of the weight of wool, which is more than cotton, which is 40% carbon by weight and wood pulp-based fibers, such as rayon, viscose and bamboo, which are each about 42% carbon by weight.”

“We’re drawing down more carbon through our activities, our grazing management, than we are releasing as ranching operations,” said Carver. “We are net carbon sinks. Our greenhouse gas emissions are a net negative value. We’re below zero. We’re operating in a way that is net positive for nature.”

Shaniko Wool Company is also in year five of an independent, third-party research and measurement initiative to calculate the net impact of the ranches in the farm group. This research is being conducted on not only their private land, but all the land they graze — including Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management allotments.

The Responsible Wool Standard is governed by the Textile Exchange and holds certified wool suppliers to strict standards. This certification is a voluntary, third-party audited standard that addresses the welfare of sheep, the land they graze on, and the workers who tend both.

(Photo courtesy of Shaniko Wool Company)

Ranching Ripple Effect

Agriculture was once a booming industry in America. But faced with worsening environmental conditions, cheaper labor overseas, and the ever-increasing cost of doing business in this country, the agriculture sector is a tough business model. Most rely on grants, credits and incentives from government entities to make it work.

Companies that offset car-

bon emissions through their business operations can receive carbon credits as a source of income if sold off. Or they can invest or purchase carbon credits to reduce their carbon footprint — paying others to take action on the climate crisis on their behalf. While others may purchase carbon insets. They essentially invest in the regenerative work on the ground.

Carver points out that since many of their sheep are grazed on federal lands, there is significant carbon credit income lost. Federal permittees currently cannot enter into private contracts to deliver on increased carbon capture.

If this practice ever becomes allowable, Carver says, “We will deliver a win for all our federal agency partners and for our industry.”

Until then, Carver’s network of ranchers that are grazing on federal lands are leaving the land better than they found it and banking carbon — all without the high price tag to restore an acre of federal land.

Made in America

Carver’s wool journey began when the American textile industry

declined in the 1990s and her family ranch could no longer sell their wool.

“Between 1996 and 2000, 26,000 sheep producers in the U.S. went out of the business, which has been the fabric of America since our founding. We saw this being destroyed and along with it, the sheep industry, which is where the fiber is produced for our clothing and textiles. Wool has been the core of humankind’s textiles for more than 10,000 years.”

At that time, Carver focused her energy on branding her wool business. She gained traction with apparel companies that value the environmental positives of a reduced supply chain and Made in America.

Today, wool from Shaniko Wool Company has been sought out by brands like Patagonia and Ralph Lauren as

a Responsible Wool Standard supplier. Notably, her wool has been previously featured in several Ralph Lauren Olympic uniform pieces. This includes Team USA’s wool blazers that will be donned at the Opening Ceremony Parade for the 2024 Paris Olympic and Paralympic Games.

But as operating costs continue to increase, Carver stresses the importance of sustaining the agricultural community, “The point everyone has forgotten is that as it goes away, we have fewer and fewer grazing animals and fewer and fewer people in this industry delivering the food and fiber that have sheltered and sustained humankind for thousands of years. This is survival. We’re doing something that’s not glamorous. It’s timeless.” ▫

Sheep grazing on the Tahoe National Forest in Northern California. Grazing on federal lands relies on a strict permitting process that promotes forest health. These sheep provide wool to Shaniko Wool Company, providers of Team USA’s wool blazers for the upcoming Olympic and Paralympic Games. (USDA Forest Service photo by Lauren Faulkenberry)

Wool from sheep grazed on national forest lands was used in Team USA’s Olympic Uniforms, featured in the 2024 Paris Olympic Opening Ceremony. Ralph Lauren sources wool from Shaniko Wool Company, valuing its sustainable production in the United States. (Photo courtesy of Ralph Lauren)

The Responsible Wool Standard is governed by the Textile Exchange and holds certified wool suppliers to strict standards. This certification is a voluntary, third-party audited standard that addresses the welfare of sheep, the land they graze on, and the workers who tend both. (Photo courtesy of Shaniko Wool Company)

A PETITION FOR RELIEF BY AMERICA'S SHEEP PRODUCERS