Livestock “The greatest homage we can pay to truth is to use it.” – JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL JULY 15, 2014 • www. aaalivestock . com
MARKET
Digest T Volume 56 • No. 7
by Lee Pitts
A penny saved is a government oversight.
W
Middlemen
NEWSPAPER PRIORITY HANDLING
It’s been interesting to see the public relations campaigns of the
various state beef councils to convince their cattlemen that they can be trusted to spend the extra buck a head wisely. Texas even included a refund provision. All the states have bent over backwards to make the point that the federal government doesn’t have anything to do with this extra dollar, but the same thing was said about the national checkoff, only to have the NCBA save the checkoff in the Supreme Court in 2005 by forcefully arguing that it was a government program. So pardon us for being skeptical.
It’s also been fun to watch states try to distance themselves from the big elephant in the room, the NCBA. One article I read in trying to explain the national checkoff made the statement about the original checkoff tax, “That money goes to the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.” Well, not exactly. Although most of it does end up there, technically it first has to go to the Beef Board, who acts as a middleman before handing over the biggest chunk to the NCBA. Even though all the funds from
the second dollar proposed for these various checkoffs are supposed to stay in their respective states, that doesn’t necessarily mean the money will be spent to promote beef produced in that state, or even in the United States, for that matter. Consider Wendy’s Ciabatta Bacon Cheeseburger.
The North American Beef Council This past February R-CALF USA submitted a complaint to Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack alleging unlawful use of U.S. beef checkoff program dollars. Only it wasn’t the NCBA spending the money in a questionable manner this time, it was the Montana Beef Council. They spent $5,000 of state checkoff money to help promote Wendy’s ciabatta bacon cheeseburger. This was half of the $10,000 ad campaign Wendy’s spent to call attention to their new burger. I think most would agree that was both a good idea and continued on page two
Stop the Big Green mind-killer BY RON ARNOLD, WASHINGTONEXAMINER.COM/
ear is the mind-killer,” wrote Frank Herbert in his 1965 science fiction epic, Dune. With that melodramatic mantra as a guide, we can see how ugly, malicious and wrong the Big Green climate mafia is: It’s making dead minds. Dead minds don’t ask, “If we give in to your fear and stop using fossil fuels, how will we meet our energy needs of today and tomorrow?” Live minds do ask such questions and climate bigots don’t like that. Thus skepticism becomes a civic duty to challenge everything dogmatists say and do. Climate science is crumbling daily. In May, the Wall Street Journal ran an op-ed exposing the claim that “97 percent of the world’s scientists” agree that climate change is both man-made and dangerous. It originated in a
“F
by LEE PITTS
Housebroke Horses
The United Provinces of Mexico hile the low cattle population in the United States has meant great prices for ranchers, it is raising havoc with the budgets of one sector of the beef business: the checkoff industry. While it doesn’t seem to have dampened the demand for our beef any, the Beef Board and state beef councils are bemoaning the fact that they have less money to work with. Yet despite the Beef Board’s regular pronouncements that declare ranchers overwhelmingly support the checkoff, they know that cattlemen, even in their current flush state, are in no mood to be taxed another dollar per head when the biggest share of that dollar is just going to be handed over to the NCBA. Some state beef councils, on the other hand, have had the courage to ask ranchers in their states to vote themselves a 100 percent increase in the tax to two dollars per head, promising that the second dollar will only be spent in state and won’t end up in the bottomless pockets of the greedy NCBA. Results so far have been mixed. States such as California and Minnesota defeated the proposal while ranchers in Ohio passed it. As this article was being written the votes in Texas are still being counted.
Riding Herd
2009 survey two researchers sent to 10,257 scientists. Only 3,146 responded, the researchers tossed out 3,069 replies, selected only 77 favorable answers — and 75 finalists agreed totally. That’s “97 percent.” You judge. Hotshot environmentalists including billionaire Tom Steyer, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Al Gore, and the Sierra Club claim that America can easily switch from fossil fuels to renewables, but don’t say how. Bill McKibben, anti-carbon campaigner, says, “making the transition to 100percent renewable energy is a political decision and an ethical imperative — the technical options do exist.” No they don’t. The Paris-based International Energy Agency says so. The IEA is no panic peddler like McKibben’s mob, with their glib pie-in-the-sky assertions and no responsibility for what they say. The IEA was created in the wake of the
1973 oil crisis to cope with physical disruptions in the oil supply, now a 28-nation energy supply regulator assuring global oil stock levels. The IEA calculates that today’s 82 percent share of fossil fuels in the global mix — even with huge increases in renewable energy — will still make up around 75 percent by 2035, more than 20 years hence. There are no technical options, only ways to stop economic growth, which is the specialty of hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer (estimated net worth $1.6 billion), Big Green’s latest new action leader. Steyer created Risky Business, an initiative to destroy the fossil fuel industry, and recruited co-chairs Michael Bloomberg, former New York City mayor ($32.8 billion), and Hank Paulson, former U.S. Treasury Secretary ($700 million), for his power elite. continued on page four
he latest ploy of the animal rightists is to get people to think of horses as pets, rather than livestock. The Animal Welfare Council wants teachers to incorporate into their lesson plans the question, “Is a horse more like a dog or a cow?” The animal rightists shot themselves in the foot on this one, after all, when is the last time your Quarter Horse curled up in your lap or sat beside you in your pickup, like some teenager in love? Tell your horse to roll over and lay on his back so you can scratch him in his secret spot and see if his leg jerks uncontrollably like a dog’s does. Throw a slobbery tennis ball for your horse to retrieve and see if he or she retrieves it like an overeager mutt, or just stands there like a common cow. And when’s the last time your horse obeyed your command to “shake” or “sit”? Here is further proof that a horse is more like a cow than a dog: n Many dogs are housebroken but when was the last time you saw a horse enter through a “horsey door” to sit at his owner’s feet while they watch Dancing With The Stars together? And you hardly ever see a horse or a cow drink out of the toilet, or dig a hole in the flower bed like dogs do. n Has your vet ever had to remove a squeaky toy from your horse’s stomach? n I’d guess the average weight of cows and horses to be around 1,100 pounds whereas the biggest dog in history was an old English Mastiff that weighed 343 pounds. n You can go broke raising livestock like cows and horses. Unless you are betting on Greyhounds or have gone completely crazy buying chew toys and designer pet outfits, it’s a slower process to lose your life’s savings on your pet dog. n Horses and cows are vegetarians; dogs are carnivores. Put a flake of hay in front of a cow or horse and it will disappear. Do the continued on page seven
www.LeePittsbooks.com
Livestock Market Digest
Page 2
July 15, 2014
United Provinces
If your farming or ranching operation depends on grazing, including permanent forage crops, you know all too well the dangers of drought. Pasture, Rangeland and Forage insurance from Farm Credit of New Mexico can cover your back. Apply by November 15 for protection against decreased biomass.
Call (800) 755-6432 or visit www.FarmCreditNM.com
For advertising, subscription and editorial inquiries write or call: Livestock Market Digest P.O. Box 7458 Albuquerque, N.M. 87194
MARKET
Livestock Market Digest (ISSN 0024-5208) (USPS NO. 712320) is published monthly except semi-monthly in September, and December 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
EDITORIAL and ADVERTISING STAFF: CAREN COWAN . . . . . . . Publisher LEE PITTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . Executive Editor CHUCK STOCKS . . . . . . . .Publisher Emeritus RANDY SUMMERS . . . . .Sales Rep FALL MARKETING EDITION AD SALES: Ron Archer . . . . . . . . . . . 505/865-6011 archerron@aol.com
Subscribe Today
FIELD EDITOR: DELVIN HELDERMON 580/622-5754, 1094 Kolier Rd. Sulphur, OK 73086
NAME
ADDRESS
CITY
Telephone: 505/243-9515 Fax: 505/998-6236 www.aaalivestock.com
STATE
ZIP
My check is enclosed for: o One Year: $19.95 o Two Years $29.95 Clip & mail to: Livestock Market Digest, P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194
ADMINISTRATIVE and PRODUCTION STAFF: MARGEURITE VENSEL . Office Mgr. CAROL PENDLETON . . Special Assistance CHRISTINE CARTER . . . . Graphic Artist
money well spent. After all, the Wendy’s restaurants in Montana used 1.9 million pounds of beef last year. Obviously they are a valuable customer of ranchers, but it’s what the ads said that made R-CALF seethe. For example, one ad said, “Wendy’s serves 100 percent pure North American beef that is always fresh and never frozen.” And another said, “Wendy’s serves 100 percent pure North American beef... proudly supported by Montana Beef producers.” Uh, excuse me but not all Montana ranchers were proud to support an ad that pushed “North American beef” that just as easily could have come from Canada and Mexico as it could from the Bitterroot Valley. How nice of Montana ranchers to donate their checkoff tax so that Wendy’s could promote beef from Mexico and Canada. Initially the Montana Beef Council didn’t realize they’d made a big blunder but after a minifirestorm erupted they were smart enough to pull the tagline. But the damage had been done, not damage to the price or demand of beef, mind you, but damage to the credibility of one state checkoff. It raised a red flag and an obstacle to overcome for those pushing these new state checkoffs. Up until now most state checkoffs have managed to stay out of the fray created by NCBA’s theft of the national checkoff, but this incident called into question whether they too were on the multinational packer’s side in hawking foreign beef.
Super Bowl “References” After the Montana Beef Council pulled the North American tagline the brouhaha settled down, until that is, the USDA put their clumsy foot in their big mouth. In their complaint R-CALF made the case that state checkoff moneys being used to promote North American beef was illegal and R-CALF wanted those responsible “prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.” When R-CALF filed their complaint they didn’t do so in some court or with a judge, no, proper procedure required they file it with none other than the USDA, who according to the Supreme Court, runs the whole darn outfit. Well, you just knew that USDA wasn’t going to punish one of their own. Asking the USDA if checkoff dollars could be used to promote foreign beef is like asking a cowboy if likes fast horses, smart dogs and pretty cowgirls. Or fast cowgirls and pretty horses. Instead of the United States Department of Agriculture it should be called The United Provinces of Mexico Department of Agriculture because, to paraphrase Will Rogers, “they never met a foreign food they didn’t like.” R-CALF’s basis for raising their complaint in the first place was that they’d been told that the beef checkoff dollars, whether they be state for federal, could not be used to promote beef that is of U.S. origin. In fact, the Supreme
continued from page one
Court referred to the Beef Checkoff Program as “a federal program that finances generic advertising.” So checkoff dollars can’t be used to advertise Montana beef but they can be used to advertise North American beef? See the contradiction? Predictably, USDA Undersecretary Edward Avalos made things worse in responding to R-CALF’s complaint by saying his “research team” had concluded the ads sponsored by the Montana Beef Council that featured “North American beef” were in compliance with the Beef Promotion and Research Act because they “were a reference to, not an advertisement of, North American beef.” Right, and I suppose Chevy’s commercials on TV during the Super Bowl aren’t advertisements but merely expensive “references” to Chevy trucks. Naturally, the response from Avalos was not received well by RCALF’s Bill Bullard who called the decision “ridiculous.” He said, “This type of outrageous decision is what happens when federal agencies like USDA are captured and controlled by the very industries they are supposed to regulate. USDA’s decision simply shows USDA is afraid to even challenge the meatpackers and retailers.” Bullard also asked a very good question, “Why should U.S. producers be forced to pay for advertisements that encourage the consumption of foreign beef?
For Sale: Beef We Don’t Have All this talk about North American beef is really relevant right now because due to shrinking U.S. herds, and a subsequent shortage of cull cows, beef importers are using the opportunity to grab a bigger bite of America’s tasty hamburger market. It stands to reason that if we don’t have enough domestic product, and are promoting beef we don’t have, any extra demand will have to be filled with imports. Which raises another question, why are we trying so hard to sell a product we don’t have when feeder cattle imports were up 33 percent in the first four months of this year. Aren’t we just helping our competitors get a bigger foot in the door to our lucrative beef market and if, and that’s a big IF, our numbers do return to normal will our foreign competition just willingly give back the niche we are helping them carve out? Numbers from one of our fellow North American producers, the Canadians, show that they stand ready and willing to fulfill demand created by American checkoff dollars as their imports are up substantially. Also helping our North American friends is a comparatively weak Canadian dollar that’s fallen 10 percent just this year in relation to ours. And Canada isn’t the only country knocking down our doors to sell beef. As R-CALF’s Bill Bullard reminds us, “Central America and the Islands of the Caribbean Sea continued on page three
“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”
July 15, 2014
United Provinces are generally considered a part of North America too.” Many in Congress are on beef’s welcome wagon. For example, Congressman Rick Crawford from Arkansas suggested in a recent hearing about country of origin labeling that we need “a common sense change to the COOL law so that beef from Canada, Mexico and the U.S. could be labeled as a North American product.” But why stop there, NAFTA isn’t the only free trade agreement we have, we also have a host of them with South American countries. Will we open wide the doors for them too? Take Peru and Colombia for example. Peru and Colombia have a combined herd size of more than 30 million head, twice as large as Canada. They’ve been increasing their beef production with the goal of one day gaining access to the most lucrative beef market in the world: our own. Their role model is Uruguay. After that nation received their foot-and-mouth-free trading card in mid-2003 they ramped up production and exports to the U.S. and in just three years they were routinely exceeding their beef quota and ultimately becoming the fourth largest exporter of beef to the U.S. In 2005 Chile gained full access to the U.S. market and we haven’t even mentioned Brazil, home to the second largest herd in the world, only surpassed by India. Brazil is also the second largest beef exporter in the world and is home to the meatpacking behemoth JBS. Although Brazil can’t currently send fresh beef here due to foot and mouth disease, (and a recent mad cow
continued from page two
sighting didn’t help) if they ever do clean up their act you can bet there will be stateside politicians begging them for beef as a lever to lower the price of hamburger for their voting constituents.
Running Out Of Rocks R-CALF says there are ways to fix this mess and make it right, but fat chance of that ever happening when the NCBA, who gets 85 percent of its money from the checkoff, is a cheerleader for the multinational beef packers. But like a castrated bull, R-CALF keeps trying. They have tried to get an amendment to the Beef Checkoff Program that would allow U.S. ranchers to promote their beef derived from cattle exclusively born and raised in the United States, but it’s a David and Goliath battle and David is running out of rocks. Right now R-CALF is trying hard to hold on to the victories they’ve enjoyed. They thought they’d finally won the battle over COOL but the NCBA and their packer backers filed a lawsuit to get rid of, or weaken, the law. The NCBA is part of an alliance that includes nine trade associations, including one Mexican and two Canadian producer groups plus six packer-backer groups in the United States that want to be free of COOL once and for all. At least three of the those six U.S. based groups that filed the COOL lawsuit have received checkoff dollars. Passage of COOL was a hard fought victory for R-CALF and others so to see NCBA try to weaken it on behalf of their meatpacking buddies is particularly galling. R-CALF is running out of
ammunition and they are woefully under financed, not having access to your checkoff taxes like the NCBA. In desperation they are now circulating a petition for ranchers to sign that reads in part, “We, the undersigned citizens of the United States, believe it is a blatant conflict of interest, if not outright unlawful, for the largest recipient of federally mandated Beef Checkoff Program funds to simultaneously sue the federal government to weaken or eliminate the widely popular country of origin labeling (COOL) law. Therefore, we hereby petition the Secretary of Agriculture to immediately and permanently terminate all contracts between the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the Beef Checkoff Program. “It is outrageous,” concludes R-CALF. “There can be no clearer example of deep-rooted government corruption than when you have an organization – the NCBA – that receives a super majority of its funding from a federal program and is nevertheless allowed to sue the federal government to stop a program that is widely supported by both U.S. consumers and U.S. producers.” In conclusion, I have both good and bad news for you. I feel quite confident in saying that even if the North American label does stick, it will soon fall off like a label on wet plastic. That’s the good news. The bad news is that I can easily foresee the day when it is replaced by a sticker on beef that reads, “Product of the Americas”. It’s the least we can do for our fellow “Americans” south of the equator.
One size fits all’ grazing policy doesn’t work COLUMNIST
DOUG
WARNOCK
WRITES ABOUT GRAZING ON PUBLIC LANDS /WWW.CAPITALPRESS.COM
he May 30 Capital Press opinion article spoke of the trend in reducing the number of cattle on federal land, especially land managed by the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service. The continued reduction of grazing allotments on public lands has been very characteristic of the last several decades. It is a typical reaction of land management agencies in responding to pressures related to multiple use issues and concerns about water quality. The problem with this reaction is that reducing the number of grazing animals is not the way to improve ecosystem health. Animal numbers is not the key, time is the key to improving ecosystem health. By time, I mean the time that a plant is exposed to grazing and the time that a plant has to recover from grazing before being grazed again. Rest, or non-grazing time,
T
is a management decision. A period of rest is useful in controlling the grazing of an area. But, total rest in an arid climate, which characterizes most of the western United States, is harmful. Forage plants, such as grasses and forbs, need periodic grazing to stimulate new growth and regenerate the plant food reserves in the roots and crown of the plant. Total rest in an arid climate results in old, coarse plants, that add little organic matter to the soil and don’t support much soil organism activity. Hardened soil surfaces don’t absorb precipitation and allow water to run off, eroding the soil. By reducing the number of grazing animals, we are taking away some of the tools that a grazing manager has in managing land. Grazing animals, when properly managed, can be a very powerful means of regenerating a depleted or low producing area. Planned grazing along with monitoring and adaptive mancontinued on page twelve
Page 3
to n w Do OUR g n i om ! Get Y DAY! C s ’ t I ire ved TO W e th Reser e Spac For the 2014 Edition of
Livestock Market Digest’s
FALL MARKETING EDITION Featuring the
The best read annual publication in the livestock industry! Please contact me to discuss your advertising plans
RON ARCHER 505-865-6011 • ron@aaalivestock.com Livestock Market Digest PO Box 7458, Albuquerque, NM 87194
Livestock Market Digest
Page 4
Stop The initiative’s culmination was the Risky Business report released recently, a mind-killer designed to scare money away from fossil fuel investments with estimated ranges of the potential costs of climate change for property, insurance, energy demand and agricultural production. How will we meet our energy needs of today and tomorrow? The Steyer/Bloomberg/Paulson report does not offer solutions. Like all climate change gospel, the report is just an exercise in fortune-telling with a lot of footnotes. The fearful need only recall that a billionaire’s crystal ball is no better than yours. Big Green’s mind-killer campaign was boosted in early June by President Obama’s commencement address to University of California-Irvine graduates — it was actually an election campaign speech to fire up Democratic votes by degrading Republican climate skeptics with odious slurs (“deniers”). Tellingly, two-faced Obama went straight from his anti-fossil fuel speech to a closed-door Democratic National Committee fundraiser at the Laguna Beach home of Getty oil heiress Anne Earhart, whose fossil fueldrenched Marisla Foundation gives $1 million every year to John Podesta’s Democratic Party holding-tank, the Center for American Progress. It’s no surprise that about the time of his speech, a Gallup poll found only 29 percent of respondents with “a great deal / quite a lot” of confidence in Obama. Remember, Obama promised during his 2008 election campaign to bankrupt the coal industry, and his Environmental Protection Agency is keeping that promise with a proposed anti-coal carbon emission rule. Obama now talks like he’s had too much McKibben-Steyer Kool-Aid, but if you read the EPA announcement of the rule by his own employee, agency head Gina McCarthy, you will find a stunning moment of clari-
July 15, 2014
continued from page one
ty in the schizophrenia. In the midst of wildly exaggerated benefits and strategically contrived evils, there appears: “We know that coal and natural gas play a significant role in a diverse national energy mix.” Alas, in the next sentence the light fades back into bureaucratic night. Things are slowly changing. Obama’s EPA rule will be in court for years, encouraged by the Supreme Court’s recent decision that partially struck down EPA overreach. And there’s political pushback: Sen. David Vitter, R-La., told a Senate subcommittee, “The burden of proof lies with the administration and its allies to provide the specifics as to how we can power our future with wind, waves and solar — and how we can do it, as they claim we can, quickly and without any cost to the consumer or the broader economy.” New voices are also rising. Kathleen Hartnett White, former Texas environmental regulator, has written a guide for living minds, “Fossil fuels: the moral case.” Access to oil, gas and coal, White says, are inextricably linked with prosperity and human well-being, but policies to replace those fossil fuels with inferior and unreliable energy sources could undermine all civilization. Now a senior fellow of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, White wrote, “Would voters choose an energy regression to less productive, efficient, comfortable, and healthy living standards? Multiple polls say no way! For the wealthy elites who make policy decisions — ‘the ruling class,’ it appears to be another story.” Time to end that other story. It’s beginning to stumble over its own faked, politicized climate science and its elites are teetering on the abyss of their own arrogance. Time to stop the Big Green mind-killer. RON ARNOLD, a Washington Examiner columnist, is executive vice president of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise.
Lotz Takes Title at LMA’s 51st World Livestock Auctioneer Championship Kansas auctioneers take top two spots in annual world contest in Knoxville, Iowa laine Lotz of Edna, Kan. proved his world-class talent as a livestock auctioneer at the 51st anniversary of the Livestock Marketing Association’s (LMA) World Livestock Auctioneer Championship (WLAC) in Knoxville, Iowa, on Saturday, June 21. Lotz’s parents met while his mother was selling cattle, and his father was buying them. As a third-generation auctioneer, the world champion was quite familiar with the livestock marketing industry. When he was 15, Lotz attended auctioneering school at Western College of Auctioneering in Billings, Montana and later received his first full-time job as a livestock auctioneer at the age of 17. Ultimately, Lotz’s favorite part of being an livestock auctioneer is working for consignors to maximize the value of their livestock, their livelihood. Just a month shy of turning 21, Lotz notes that winning the WLAC is a huge accomplishment and something he has worked for for a lifetime. During his acceptance speech, Lotz said that he couldn’t wait to hit the road representing the LMA and livestock marketing industry. Lotz was sponsored by South Coffeyville Stockyards, Inc., South Coffeyville, Okla.; Fredonia Livestock Auction, Fredonia, Kan.; and Tulsa Stockyards, Inc., Tulsa, Okla. This year’s champion takes home a customized 2014 Ford F-150 pickup to use during the year of his reign; $5,000 cash; a championship sculpture; world champion Gist belt buckle and a hand-tooled leather briefcase from LMA; world champion ring sponsored by Knoxville Regional Livestock Market; the Golden Gavel Award sponsored by the World Wide College of Auctioneering; and a James Reid,
B
Ltd. money clip sponsored by CattleUSA.com. Also, making a great showing were the Reserve Champion, Preston Smith, Dodge City, Kan., and Runner-up Champion, Brennin Jack, Prince Albert, Sask. Smith was sponsored by Winter Livestock, Inc., Dodge City, Kan., and Pratt Livestock, Pratt, Kan. As reserve champion, Smith received $2,000 cash, a Gist knife and reserve champion Gist belt buckle from LMA. Jack was sponsored by Heartland Livestock Services, Nilsson Brothers Inc. and Direct Livestock Marketing Systems. He will take home $1,000 cash, a Gist knife and runner-up Gist belt buckle, sponsored by LMA. The 2014 Audrey K. Banks “Rookie of the Year” Award winner was Justin Gattey, Consort, Alberta, who was sponsored by Vold, Jones & Auction Co., Ltd., Ponoka, Alberta; Blair Vold, Ralph Vold, and Nansen Vold; and Viking Auction Market. Gattey was awarded $500 cash by LMA, in recognition of an impressive display of talent at his first WLAC competition. David Whitaker, Ames, Iowa was awarded $1,000 cash and a hand-tooled leather padfolio from the LMA. The seven remaining 2014 WLAC finalists: Mitch Barthel, Perham, Minnesota; Will Epperly, Dunlap, Iowa; Garrett Jones, Los Banos, Calif.; Brandon Neely, Southside, Ala.; Paul Ramirez, Tucson, Arizona; Russele Sleep, Beford, Iowa; and Jason Santomaso, Sterling, Colo.; all received Gist belt buckles from LMA. Each of the 31 semi-finalists received a barbeque set from the LMA and vests, coolers, and knives from the host market. Thirty of the semi-finalists were selected during three quarterfinals that took place during the year at LMA member-markets in the U.S. As the International Auctioneer
Champion is always given a “bye” to become an automatic semi-finalist, Justin Gattey qualified as the champion from the Calgary Stampede in Canada. When not on the auction block at the livestock markets he regularly sells at, Lotz will spend his year traveling the country sharing his auctioneering skills with other livestock auction markets, and acting as a spokesperson for the industry. Therefore, each semi-finalist had an opportunity to establish their knowledge of the livestock marketing business, and their ability to express that knowledge with clarity, in a judged interview session on Friday of the championship. The auctioneering phase of the contest is conducted during an actual sale, with live bidders in the seats. Contestants were judged on the clarity of their auction chant; vocal quality; their ability to catch bids and conduct the sale; and finally, would the judge hire this auctioneer for their own livestock market? Following the semi-finals, ten finalists were selected to return to the auction ring for the final round where they sold more lots of cattle, and were judged again, based on the same criteria. A special one-hour highlight show will be aired on RFD-TV June 30 at 8:00 p.m. EST. The WLAC highlights the auctioneer’s crucial role in the competitive marketing of livestock. LMA hosts the contest each year to promote the auction method of selling livestock; which results in true price discovery of the value of all classes of livestock and sets the cash market for all other methods of selling. This year’s 51st anniversary contest was hosted by Knoxville Regional Livestock Market in Knoxville, Iowa. Attendees had the opportunity to witness a great livestock sale that sold over 4,000 head of cattle.
Leading Charity Evaluator Slaps Animal Rights Groups with Donor Advisory Warnings harity Navigator, the nation’s largest and mostutilized evaluator of charities, has stripped their rating of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and other animal rights groups and replaced them with a “Donor Advisory” warning. Charity Navigator rates organizations from one to four
C
stars, with four being the highest rating possible. According to Charity Navigator, a “Donor Advisory” means that “serious concerns have been raised about this charity which prevents the issuance of a star rating.” The move comes after Feld Entertainment, Inc., operator of the Ringling Brothers Circus, recovered $15.75 million in
attorney fees from HSUS and their codefendants who include Born Free USA/Animal Protection Institute, Fund for Animals, Animal Welfare Institute, and the American Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) as reported by USSA in early June. continued on page five
July 15, 2014
“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”
Show-Rite Feeds Becomes a Presenting Sponsor of the Arizona National Livestock Show he Arizona National Livestock Show is pleased to announce Show-Rite® as a Presenting Sponsor for the 2014 Show. As a Presenting Sponsor Show-Rite® will support the Master Showmanship Contest, Pedigree Barrow Show, Pedigree Gilt Show and Sale, Educational Poster Competition, Western Legacy Jackpot Show, Educational Clinics and the Supreme Champion Market Show Selection for Beef, Sheep, Goats and Swine. “Show-Rite® is committed to agriculture’s youth of today and we are excited to be partnering with the Arizona National Livestock Show, an organization that shares the same values and commitment,” says Dr. Dennis Holthaus, Show-Rite® Business Manager. “The Arizona National continues to be the largest livestock show in the southwest and equally complements the dominance of the Show-Rite® brand. We look forward to the continued
T
relationship with Arizona National and the positive impact for the youth in the United States.” In 2013 Show-Rite® partnered with the Arizona National Livestock Show as a sponsor for the first Master Showmanship Contest. The event will expand this year to not only include Senior level but Intermediate level exhibitors. “The Leadership of the Arizona National Livestock Show is pleased to welcome ShowRite® Feeds as a Presenting Sponsor for 2014. ShowRite® will provide many unique opportunities for advancing the Mission of our show and the “Experience” that all exhibitors and families have come to appreciate while participating in our events, activities and educational programs. The Show-Rite® Company is dedicated to youth leadership through livestock projects and the life skills learned from those responsibilities,” said Michael Bradley, Executive Director, Arizona National Livestock Show.”
Sundays Headed Home
have been a travelin’ man a good part of my life. Most of my speakin’ jobs are Friday and Saturday nights, so Sunday means I’m usually on the road and headed home. For me, Sunday morning on the road is a good part of bein’ me. Nine times out of ten I’m in a rent car drivin’ to an airport where I board a flight to a major hub where I connect to another flight that gets me within an hour of bein’ home. Since my territory covers the U.S. and Canada I get to see fresh country every week. In different seasons, in all kinds of weather, day or night . . . it’s like a travel movie. I stop and take pictures for the office Facebook page. I always try to include photos of cows on green pasture, high desert, corn stubble, palmetto, cactus, forests, woods, swamps, the frozen north, and
I
mesquite higher than your horse. A picture that I think might interest any farmer watchin’ from another part of the country. I’m a good traveler but a poor tourist, though sometimes I can’t resist taking pictures! Like ice on the Mississippi River, a bridge in Duluth, the peaks and rock formations on the road from Reno to Bishop, the state house in Albany, Cullman to Nashville, Thibodaux to Baton Rouge, Livingston to Billings, Van Horn to Alpine, Audubon to Omaha, Stockville to North Platte, the Wal-Mart in Silver City, Moab, London, OH, Portland (both of them), Springfield (both of them), Emporia to Eldorado, Denver to Lamar, Pittsburg to Elkins, the Appalachians, at least 3 Greenfields, Miami to Brandon, Miami to Tulsa, Miami to Wauchula, and finally Tucson to
Advisory Warnings Except for ASPCA, each of the codefendants also had their rating revoked. Charity Navigator explains on their site that they take no position on the allegations made or issued by third parties. They follow that with “However, Charity Navigator has determined that
Page 5
Benson. On the road most Sunday mornings my spirits are high. The folks that come to my programs are my folks; rural . . . country people who are involved in agriculture, its land and its animals. They invite me to their town, they make me welcome and I do my best to give them their money’s worth. So when I head out the next morning with a cup of convenience store coffee, in the cup holder, in my rent car, I am uplifted, the world is good, I don’t have to worry about next week yet. I have time to let the camaraderie of last night sink in and I inevitably talk to God and thank Him for another good time, for the wonderful people who’s world I get to be a part of, and the fortuitous blessing that I was born in America. I usually have a big ol’ grin on my face. He travels with me, He’s always there, regardless of my behavior. I guess on those ‘coming home’ Sundays I get to spend a little private time with Him. Which is pretty generous considering all the church services He’s committed to on Sunday mornings. I mean, ya know He’s got to be busy. But it doesn’t stop me from rattlin’ on and, somehow He always seems to have time to listen me and I don’t take it for granted. continued from page four
the nature of this/these issue(s) warrants making this information available so that donors may determine for themselves whether such information is relevant to their decision whether to contribute to this organization.” “I think the donor advisory issued for HSUS and the other
groups by Charity Navigator speaks for itself,” said Nick Pinizzotto, USSA president and CEO. “Our focus is maintaining USSA Foundation as a firstclass organization and our four star rating, which we know gives our supporters tremendous confidence in our work.”
While HSUS and others have fallen on the Charity Navigator scale, USSA Foundation recently earned the coveted four star rating from the organization. “Our supporters can be fully confident that we manage our organization with the utmost
integrity, which includes how we utilize the precious funding they provide,” said Pinizzotto. “We will continue to make decisions based upon sound science and will not allow ourselves to fall into the pit of extremism and propaganda that others can’t seem to avoid.”
Livestock Market Digest
Page 6
According To et me take you back to the early nineteen nineties in America. George H. Bush was still the president and we had just rescued Kuwait from the Iraqi invasion. Michael Jackson was at the top of the pop charts and guys like Alan Jackson and Toby Keith were on country radio. The economy was good and most folks were working. It was a pretty good time in America. Because we Americans are a curious lot, so began the “information age” to the chagrin of many a horseshoer and other equine professionals. Suddenly with the mass availability of information everyone became an expert on many different subjects. Computers were starting to become more common and the number of magazines became mind boggling. For years the great magazine the Western Horseman was a staple of western life as it carried news about rodeos, trail rides, ranchers, and horsemen. Everyone that wanted to know what was
L
going on in the horse world west of the Mississippi subscribed as it was pretty much the best source of news for western folk. I used to like Randy Steffen’s articles and drawings about some clever gate latch he had seen on some ranch or other useful tip. Mostly the magazine was full of news about the western way of life. Then the nineteen nineties began. I was shoeing lots of horses at the time and traveling constantly. One day I would be working on an expensive race horse and the next day I might be at a horse show. Every once in awhile a special job may arise at a ranch where an injured horse might need a bar shoe made or may have torn part of his hoof off in the rocks. Ranch cowboys took care of ninety five percent of their own needs, but sometimes a horse might need a special forged shoe. I always enjoyed these jobs as they were challenging and a good break from the high pressure farrier life of working in
show or race barns. One such instance involved a torn up hoof on a broncy, but necessary ranch horse. On the phone the rancher told me this horse was pretty tough to shoe, but said he would have him fouled so I could work on his injured hoof safely. Since real cowboys know how to tie animals down that is what I expected when I arrived. When I got there the horse was tied down with a fifty five gallon drum between its legs. Bolted across each end of the drum was a four foot hard wood two by four. Attached to each end of the two by fours were horses pasterns laced carefully to rings in the board. I thought that was a pretty clever set up and asked them how they came up with that idea. They said there was an article in the Western Horseman about shoeing unruly oxen and they thought it might be easier for me than just having the horse tied on the ground. It was certainly easier as they just rolled the horse into whatever position I needed it in to work on. Thanks Western Horseman! A few years after that I was summoned to the barn of Erline Zook in eastern New Mexico. Erline told me that she had a horse with a special problem and needed some special horse shoes made. I went a little early on that appointment as my directions were sketchy and I thought it might take awhile to find the place. I tend to be an early
July 15, 2014 morning person so I arrived in the little town and decided to have some breakfast at the one café that was there. The café was typical as there were a bunch of locals. Everyone was very friendly and advised me to pull up a chair. I asked if they knew where EZ Horse Training was located and they all laughed. One ol’boy piped up and said sure do. He explained it was about 4 more miles just outside of town. Finally I asked what was so funny and they explained that she had lots of boyfriends. After finishing my eggs and chorizo I was on my way to EZ Horse Training. I arrived at a very nice barn and well kept place. A split rail fence surrounded the entrance along with a vivacious flower garden. Erline met me at the front and asked me to come and look at her horse. I could see the problem right away and knew I could help. Instead of Erline letting me get to work she brought me a copy of the Western Horseman. She had read an article in there about a particular type of horseshoe she wanted on her horse and could I make her one? I said I could, but I thought there was a much more practical solution that would be better for the horse. Of course, Erline would not hear of it and insisted on the shoe described in the magazine. I said “okay” and started to unload my tools. While doing so I noticed the young lady that worked there preparing some horses to ride and was cleaning
out their hooves. I asked if she cleaned out all the hooves there and she assured me she did as her boss’ back always hurt. With that information I went ahead and shod the horse the way I thought it would benefit the horse the most. When I was finished she asked me to shoe another one, for which she had another copy of the Western Horseman in hand. This time her reasoning was completely nuts so again I just shod the horse the way I thought was best. Pretty soon six weeks had gone by and I got another call from Erline. She was ecstatic about how well the horses were doing that I had shod. She asked me back again to reshoe the two horses. When I got there she asked me to shoe the rest of her horses as well. She had a few more Western Horseman articles as time went on. As always I nodded my head and shod them how I thought they should be. This was the only horse trainer I ever met that never picked up her horses feet or if she did couldn’t tell what was on the bottom of them. Still clients paid her every month. There is nothing wrong with the articles in Western Horseman, and today there are lots more “How To” articles. However, the unintended consequences of inexperienced horse people interpreting this information is frustrating for professional horseman. Like Mark Twain said “Never read medical books as you may die of a misprint”.
U.S. Farmers & Ranchers Alliance® Launches Search for the Country’s Best Agricultural Ambassadors Organization is searching to find standout farmers and ranchers to represent their industry to the world through Faces of Farming & Ranching program
hen it comes to today’s agriculture, the pictures and perceptions of farmers and ranchers often do not match reality. There are many examples of great
W
farmers and ranchers all over the country doing wonderful things to bring food to the table for those around the world. But few of those farmers and ranchers are recognizable by consumers,
The Best of the Bunch & !) % *&&# &, ( *& * , (. # )* )*&(. /) % - )* &&" % $ ! !) '+( !**) % * *( !*!&% & !(* & ) % & /) &+%*(. /) # * )* -!## %* ( * !% % !%)'!( )*!% *& # ))! (--0% !,4 &-2/ -& %%60 "--*0 !,$ .!4 !,$ 1(!1 -,+4 ),#+2$%0 /)-/)14 -01!'% 5 1 !++ !$$0 2. 1- ! .-1%,1)!+ 0!3),' -& -3%/
mainstream media and influencers. U.S. Farmers & Ranchers Alliance (USFRA®), a unique organization that is a collaboration of nearly 80 farmer- and rancher-led organizations and agricultural partners, wants to change that. This year, through its Faces of Farming & Ranching program search, USFRA is looking for standout farmers and ranchers who are proud of what they do, eager to share their stories of continuous improvement and are actively involved in sharing those stories in public and on social media to help put a real face on agriculture and shine a light on the heart, personalities and values that are behind today’s food. “We’re very proud of the improvements our farmers and ranchers are bringing to America’s food supply and we think it’s imperative that they have a strong voice in addressing consumer questions,” said Randy Krotz, chief executive officer at USFRA. “The success we experienced with last year’s ambassadors shows us that people want to hear directly from those who are cultivating our food.” Farmers and ranchers who grow and raise an assortment of foods through various methods, on differing scale and across all regions of the country are encouraged to apply, as it is important to show American agriculture and all of its diversity.
To apply for the Faces of Farming & Ranching program, farmers and ranchers must fill out an application form, available at www.FoodDialogues.com/Faces, and include a home video of less than three minutes describing themselves and their farm or ranch. Among other criteria, farmers and ranchers must have an existing social media presence, either through Facebook, Twitter and/or a blog. Information on the application process can be found at www.FoodDialogues.com/Faces. Entries will be accepted through August 10, 2014 at 11:59:59 p.m. CT. A combination of public votes and USFRA judges’ scores will determine the winners, who will be announced on November 12 at the National Association of Farm Broadcasting Convention (NAFB) in Kansas City. The public will get to know the USFRA Faces of Farming & Ranching winners through national media interviews, advertising and public appearances. For their time, they will receive a $15,000 stipend. “Farmers and ranchers are passionate about their jobs and their communities. Showing that side of the food business by sharing their personal stories is an exciting way to connect Americans with the hardworking and dedicated backbone of agriculture,” Krotz said.
July 15, 2014
“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”
My Cowboy Heroes
Riding Herd
Burel Mulkey Small Man, Big Heart urel Mulkey was born May 25, 1904 in Clyde, Idaho to Columbus and Nellie Mulkey. He became one of the sixty-one men who walked out of performing at the Boston Garden Rodeo in 1936. On that late October day, history was made. Those sixty-one men had no way of knowing that what they were doing would eventually wind up as the Professional Rodeo Cowboy Association (PRCA). And while their immediate concern was fair prize money there at the “Garden” (a matter of a few thousand dollars at the time), they could not even have imagined that what they did would play a small part in the fact that a rodeo finals now pays out over six million dollars in ten days of professional rodeo (the National Finals Rodeo)! I never met Burel, but after doing much research on the man, I would have liked to. A small man with a big heart, quick with a laugh and a smile, and full of mischief when the occasion rose. Sounds like a fun fellow to travel with. Raised on an Idaho ranch, Burel Mulkey was a cowboy from the word go. As with many of the days top rodeo hands, he started life by working as a cowboy. He was even promoted to the status of foreman for the Wood Cattle Company in 1928. About that same time however, a friend convinced Burel he ought to give rodeo a try. He entered his first rodeo at Ogden, Utah, in 1929—placing in the bronc riding. Prize money won and the thrill of rodeo soon took over. He became a full-time rodeo man. Author Willard Porter once wrote, “Mulkey was known among his peers as a rider who gave his very all to each bronc. Of course, there were good horses and bad horses (to score aboard), but Mulkey looked at them all as ‘bucking horses,’ and as such he spurred all of them in the same fashion—hard!” Burel’s hard-riding ways and his short, but stocky stature earned him the nickname “The Shetland Stud.” He was often referred to as the “Banty Cowboy” as well. He was one of rodeos most colorful performers. He was known for a love of pranks, his trademark black satin shirt and for going “all out” on every ride. By 1937, he’d won the title of World Champion Bronc Rider, a feat he repeated again in ’38. As a matter of fact, he
B
Page 7
was crowned the All Around Champion of the World in 1938 as well. An old newspaper article reads: Denver (AP) January 19, 1938: Twelve seconds a day . . . five days a week . . . that’s Burel Mulkey’s working time . . . when there’s a rodeo on. The 31-yearold Mulkey, the world’s champion bronc rider, admits he made “more than $5000 but not very close to $10,000” last year, his first champion season. Mulkey, a blue-eyed ranch reared rider from Salmon, Idaho, is riding the bucking horses this week at Denver’s National Western Stock Show, Horse Show and Rodeo. “We’re riding regular from now on through till after the show at Baton Rouge next November,” said Mulkey, declared last year’s champion by the Rodeo Association of America. “Sure, a bucking horse ride is only 12 seconds – 10 seconds for indoor shows like this – and we only ride about five times through a whole show. But you sure enough do a lot of riding in 12 seconds, if you stay on.” Dropping his wide, square jaw in a big grin, Mulkey explained, “I don’t need to do any other riding besides what I do in the shows to keep in shape.” Does Burel have any plans for quitting riding and settling down on a ranch of his own? “That’s what all the top boys say they’re going to do some day,” said Mulkey, opening up his big grin again. “But there’s not many that do. These days I guess you can make more money riding than running a ranch, anyhow.” An interesting side note about the 1938 championships involves the following year’s champion, Paul Carney. Some rodeo cowboys are superstitious. Burel Mulkey and Paul Carney are no exceptions. After winning the championships in ’38, Mulkey gave his favorite shirt he was wearing to his good friend, Carney for good luck. The very next year, Paul Carney won the title of 1939 All Around Champion of the World—he did it wearing Mulkey’s shirt . Author Clifford Westermeier wrote of Burel in 1947, “That mighty little man from Idaho, Burel Mulkey, has the reputation of a bronc rider who never lets up in his efforts to win . . . Whether he rode a dog or the best of broncs, he spurred every one of them. He is short and heavily-built, but as a personality, he is a character . . . Like ham and eggs,
Mulkey and mischief belong together. Mischief is his specialty, and he enjoys nothing more than handing out tall stories and watching the listener’s eyes grow larger and larger.” Mulkey competed in professional rodeo for over twenty years. He later served on the Rodeo Cowboy’s Association board of directors as a bronc riding representative. He proved to be a great ambassador for the sport, both inside and out of the arena. Burel married Marion Silicz on June 26, 1940 in Fallon, Nevada. Once Burel retired from full-time rodeo, the couple moved to California. They bought a ranch and Burel worked for many years as a brand inspector as well. The fun-loving, hard-riding Mulkey died November 20, 1982 in Lake Isabella, California. He was posthumously inducted into the ProRodeo Hall of Fame in 2011
same to a dog and he’ll pee on it. n Dogs have litters. If your cow or mare ever gave birth to eight offspring at one time you’d have your own reality show on The Discovery Channel n Next time you are in a restaurant ask the server for a “Horsey Bag”. n It’s a common sight these days in urbanized areas to see people chained to their dogs, carrying around a plastic bag of doggy doo. Be honest now, have you ever seen someone walking their horse or cow dragging behind them a triple-strength garbage bag full of horse or cow manure? n At rodeos cowboys attempt to ride members of the equine and bovine species but you hardly ever see a cowboy or cowgirl getting bucked off a Border Collie. If cowboys even attempted to ride a Dalmatian or Corgi PETA would have a coronary. Put 200 pounds on the back of a Dachshund and it would high center on a pebble. n Ranchers don’t usually dress their livestock in cute
0 /& / ! 1&#0$ & $ , % !/& , ( - , !% 2 "#3 /& /
&/- & # / !% $!## 0/ , % %
continued from page one
little hats and handmade sweaters. I’ve never seen a Quarter Horse sleeping in pajamas like some dogs do. n Horses and cows swat flies with their tails. Dogs try to bite them to death. n Many dogs are yappers and barkers whereas cows and horses are much more quiet and don’t talk back like dogs have been known to do. n Even hint that you might be going somewhere and your dog will load itself in your truck faster than your wife does for a trip to Costco. When’s the last time you had a cow or a horse voluntarily jump in the truck for a trip to the auction market? n Shoot a duck and your Lab will swim in a lake or climb a mountain to retrieve it. Shoot the same shotgun in front of your horse or cow and you’ll have to retrieve your livestock from the next county. And when is the last time your gelding retrieved your newspaper or your slippers for you. So, go ahead and ask the question, is your horse more like a cow or a dog? I rest my case.
!/ !- !$(&--! # /& #!-/ ## !/ $-) 2( & ! " ,-&% 2 ( 222) 0 /!&%) &$
/$/-.
2
./,! 1
/$/-.
2 /*! 1
% &&#&2 , &&#- 6 " & &/&, , , !# ,- '5 555 #) / # %"!( !//!% &2 ,- !1 -/& " ,- *0 4 0/ , ( *0!($ %/ &# !% /,0 /0, # / # / # 0#1 0 0 &,
6%/!*0 - &## /! # - # /,! , !%- &/- & !% - 6%/!*0 ,$ !% ,3 , ! %&/& , ( - !&% 0 / , !, ,$-
,
&4 ,- !1 -/& " - / # !( !//!% / # &(( , # ,/- / # # 5+
-/ ,% &## /! # - % ! % #! #&/ !% - 6%/!*0 &3- # % 0 0 &,
, !# ,,/&,
0$
##
% ,("& '",-+* * *.",* .&+* ( / .&+*"",## !# % ,("- #! / .&+* +) &/&-. !-/. ( 000 #! / .&+* +)
Livestock Market Digest
Page 8
By Frank DuBois My column addresses states and federal lands, hauling goods in a monument, Yogi Bear, drones and EPA poopers n my May column I wrote New Mexico and other western states had language in their state constitutions and enabling acts whereby they ceded control over unappropriated public land to the feds. The language in New Mexico’s constitution reads, “The people inhabiting this state do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated and ungranted public lands lying within the boundaries thereof . . .”. Many, including myself, had assumed this, along with the inapplicability of the various Homestead Acts to a desert environment, was the explanation for why ninety percent of all lands owned by the feds were in the western states. The western states had been discriminated against because they were required to include the cession language. It turns out this is not even close to being correct. Lands were ceded to the feds before there was even a Constitution. Recall that our original colonies were created by grants, some of which read “from sea to sea”. Those claims were cut off at the Mississippi River by England in 1763 when they recog-
I
nized Spain’s right to territory in the area west of the river. Of the original thirteen colonies seven had claims to western lands. This created friction between those states with land claims and the six so-called “landless” states, who worried about the size and power the landed states would bring to any union of states. Before the landless states would sign on to the Articles of Confederation they demanded the landed states cede their western lands to the Confederation. Between 1780 and 1802 the states of New York, Virginia, Massachusetts, Connecticut, South Carolina, North Carolina and Georgia, in that order, ceded a total of 233 million acres to the feds. That 233 million acres wound up being in all or parts of ten states. Yet none of those new states formed are a “public land” state. For instance, the feds own less than one percent of Ohio and only three percent of Kentucky. Seven of our original states ceded lands to the feds, but those lands were converted to states where the feds have a very limited land ownership. How can this be? I’ll get into the disposal of federal lands next month.
Hauling in a monument New Mexico has been “blessed” with two new National Monuments totaling just under
750,000 acres, so we are paying attention to management issues associated with that designation. The Colorado National Monument recently announced that vehicles containing “hazardous” cargo would be banned from using the route they have used for decades. “Ranchers and other residents of Glade Park — a rural community situated on the plateau above CNM — use Monument Road to haul goods, equipment, hay, fertilizer, livestock, fuel, and other necessities, to and from their operations” says one publication. In addition, the decision was made without consulting the residents of Glade Park nor the relevant county commission. Welcome to the world of National Monuments.
Federal wolf is after your sheep The American Sheep Industry Association (ASI) tells us that half of all domestic sheep in the United States graze on federal lands at least part of the time. The FS and BLM are systematically removing domestic sheep from grazing allotments in the name of bighorn sheep management despite the fact there are reasonable solutions to accommodate sheep ranches says ASI. “In Idaho, the FS removed 70 percent of domestic sheep from the Payette National Forest and one ranch is now out of business and two others reduced their sheep numbers drastically. Only 10 percent of FS allotments and 3 percent of BLM allotments are actually within occupied bighorn habitat however recent documents indicate the agencies are expanding the Payette analogy beyond that occupied territory
THE LIVESTOCK MARKET DIGEST ) * "& $, * '&0 /() ** *+ +"'& '$ * !''$!',* ($,* %' )& !'% & "%()'- % &+* "))" + ! 0 $ & $ ) ) * )-'") '& *+) % +!)', ! +! ) & ! . $$ . + ) ."&+ ) & *,%% ) ) + + 0 ) )',& $$ ')
+ "$*
*#"&
"$$"'&
$ *
++$
)'# )
!
!
!
!# !12%0- %5 %6)#. !-#( %07 1#%-)# !-$ 1.,% '!,% %++ 5!2%0%$ 5)2( 5)-$ ,)++1 -%5%0 &)"%0 12.0!'% !-$ $0)-*%0 23"1 .3/+% .& 1,!++ 1/0)-'1 %0),%2%0 &%-#)-' !-$ ! #0.11 &%-#% )#% "$0, "2( (.,% 5)2( &)0%/+!#% !-$ 1#0%%-%$ )- /.0#( 4%07 /0)4!2% "32 -%!0 /!4%,%-2 #0%!'% )1 !//0.6),!2% !-$ )2 )1 #. +)12%$ !++ (!0+%1 !7 !# 07 !0,+!-$ %!12 .& .'%01 %5 %6)#. 5)2( !# /!71 !4' .& 7%!0 3-2)+ !1 ! 1,!++ !# '0!11 1/.2 !2 5)-$,)++ 5)2( 5%++ !-$ %+%#20)#)27 2. 13",%0')"+% /3,/ ,.+ !# &!0, +!-$ 0%!$7 &.0 !#2).- 6#%++%-2 1.)+ !++ !#* %00)#* .,% /)#230%1 .- 5%"1)2%
!++ 31 5)2( 7.30 -%%$1
37%01 !'%-21 !+1.
To place your Real Estate Guide listings, contact RANDY SUMMERS at 505/243-9515 or RON ARCHER at 505/865-6011
July 15, 2014 to vast additional areas through the West. Such expansion of removing sheep grazing would impact fully 23 percent of the nation’s sheep production and therefore jeopardize lamb and wool companies used by all sheep producers.”
Yogi Bear to ban drones Jonathan Jarvis, Director of the National Park Service has just issued a policy memorandum that orders the superintendents of national park areas to prohibit landing, launching or operating drones on federal park land or water, an area covering 84 million acres. A Park Service spokesman indicated they were issuing the policy in response to safety concerns, noise complaints and an incident in which a drone reportedly separated some young bighorn sheep from the herd. There’s those bighorn sheep again. I think we are getting a little closer to the truth when the spokesman says they designed roads and trails so visitors could enjoy the park’s natural beauty but not impinge on it. “Now unmanned aircraft let people get into a lot of different places where we never intended human activity.” That’s close, but I think the Parkies don’t want members of the public or the media watching them as they go about their daily duties. In other words, they don’t want to be spied upon. I know how they feel.
Act. This is a huge power grab by the federal agencies. AFBF President Bob Stallman says the proposal is a serious threat to farmers, ranchers and other landowners. “Under EPA’s proposed rule, waters — even ditches — are regulated even if they are miles from the nearest ‘navigable’ waters,” Stallman said. “Indeed, so-called ‘waters’ are regulated even if they aren’t wet most of the time. EPA says its new rule will reduce uncertainty, and that much seems to be true: there isn’t much uncertainty if most every feature where water flows or stands after a rainfall is federally regulated.” When our Founding Fathers wrote about navigable waters in our Constitution, I don’t believe they were thinking of toy boats.
EPA employees pooping in the federal coop
Don’t spit, you may create a wetland
Government Executive magazine reports they’ve obtained an email from management in Region 8 (Denver) that went to all staff pleading with them to halt inappropriate bathroom behavior, including defecating in the hallway. Apparently EPA management was so concerned about this they consulted with a “national expert” on workplace violence. I say what’s the big deal? EPA has been “pooping” on us for years. Till next time, be a nuisance to the devil and don’t forget to check that cinch.
The EPA and Army Corps of Engineers have issued a draft rule that redefines “navigable waters” under the Clean Water
Frank DuBois was the NM Secretary of Agriculture from 1988 to 2003, is the author of a blog: The Westerner (www.thewesterner.blogspot.com) and is the founder of The DuBois Rodeo Scholarship (http://www.nmsu.edu/~duboisrodeo/).
Real Estate Guide Scott Land co. Ranch & Farm Real Estate
1301 Front Street, Dimmitt, TX 79027 Ben G. Scott – Broker Krystal M. Nelson, NM Qualifing Broker 800-933-9698 day/eve. www.scottlandcompany.com www.texascrp.com
= ,187(6 )520 8,'262 08/7, 385326( 3523(57< : $& /$%25$725< 2)),&( &29(5(' 3(16 +20( '($/ )25 86( )25 +256( 25 &$77/( %5((',1* (0%5<2 75$16)(5 )$&,/,7< 9(7 &/,1,& 25 0$1< 27+(5 86(6 ,1 $ %($87,)8/ $5($ 2) = $& :(// ,03529(' : +20(6 %$516 3(16 :(// :$7(5(' 3907 $// :($7+(5 52$'6 )520 7+( ,17(567$7( = /0267 6(&7,216 0267/< '(('(' :(// ,03529(' : +20(6 %$516 6(9(5$/ 6(76 2) 3(16 : 6&$/(6 :$7(5(' %< 62/$5 (/(&75,& 32:(5(' 68%6 :,1'0,//6 $1 (;7(16,9( 3,3(/,1( 6<67(0 635,1*6 635,1* )(' '5$:6 &$1<216 ($57+(1 '$06 5,9(5 )5217$*( 3907 $// :($7+(5 52$'6 = 2: 25 $/) <($5/,1* &28175< 2/)$; 2 $& '(('(' $& 67$7(/($6( )5217$*(217+(:(67 :< 21 7+( 1257+ -867 287 2) 35,1*(5 21 7+( ,0$5521 ,9(5 " ! # 2 = ( $&$ 8$'$/83( 2 $& (;&(//(17,03529(0(176 )(1&(6 :$7(5(' &2: &$/) <($5/,1* &28175< ,1 (;&(//(17 &21',7,21 21 3907 = :< )5217$*(21%27+6,'(62) +:< )5217$*( 21 %27+ 6,'(6 2) :< +:< )5217$*( 21 :< $& '(('(' $& 67$7( /($6( :(// ,03529(' (;&(//(17 :$7(5 6<67(0 3529,'(' %< $ /$5*( 635,1* $7 7+( +($'48$57(56 :(//6 (48,33(' : 68%6 :,1'0,//63529,',1*:$7(5)25$1(;7(16,9(3,3(/,1( &2: &$/)<($5/,1*&28175< = /(7>6 ',9,'( 7+,6 $& 5$1&+ ,1 1257+ &(175$/ !(;$6 /$5*( /$.( : 3(50,76 )25 '$0 5,*+7 72 ,03281' ,1 3/$&( 72 $'' 75(0(1'286 $(67+(7,& 9$/8( 72 7+( 5$1&+ 72*(7+(5 : +817,1* %2$7,1* ),6+,1* &200(5&,$/ 5(6,'(17,$/ '(9(/230(17 327(17,$/ $1 %( %28*+7 %< 7+( 3$6785( 25 ,1 08/7,3/( 3$6785(6 1 ,0$5521 2 $& 1$7,9(*5$661257+:(672) $/+$57 !(;$6 /$5*( '5$: 7+528*+ 6287+ 3$57 2) 3523(57< $))25'6 *22' +817,1* :,17(5 3527(&7,21 )25 /,9(672&. :,/'/,)( :$7(5(' %< $ 0,// $ 68% 67((/ 3(16 ,55 327(17,$/ 21 1257+ 3257,21 1 = $& 3,9276 ',7&+ :$7(5 5,*+76 (/. +817,1* 21 3907 1 = $& 3907 21 )285 6,'(6 21 585$/ :$7(5 %5,&. +20( : /$5*( 6(7 2) 67((/ 3(16 : (;&(//(17 ,03529(0(176 /2&$7,21 $& 2) &+2,&( *5$66/$1' : +286(6 %$516 67((/ 3(16 /$<6 ,1 75$&76 :,// ',9,'( & + # % )-* . +$, !)* $(!) )( ,# + * ( # + ),# * * ( # + $( /+ $**$" , *0& ( ! *'+
$"/ %*6*%& "$ "2*3 &8"3 &8$&--&/4 1"3452& 1"6&% 20"% '20/4"(& )5(& -",& ."/3*0/ )0.& $"44-& 2"/$) 0' -"2,36*--& ! &% *6&2 0 /*$& #2*$, )0.& #"2/3 1*1& '&/$&3 (00% %&&2 )0(3 %5$,3 )5/4 */( 7/&2 '*/"/$&
20/43 ."/
"$
024)". &8"3 5/4*/( "/% $"44-& 79
)5/4*/( $"44-& "5' 05/49 &8"3
&7 0.& #"2/3 2&% *20/ $0/3425$4*0/ "44-& 3)07 "(&2 &--&2
79
&"(06*--& !
:
: "8 +0&12*&342& /&4 : +0&12*&342& &"24)-*/, $0.
“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”
July 15, 2014
Page 9
Landowners file trespass lawsuit against Western Watersheds Project he United States and Wyoming Constitutions hold the ownership and protection of private property, including the right to exclude third parties, in the highest regard. Regardless whether your private property is your backyard in town or rangeland in the country, trespassing is illegal. Fifteen landowners in Fremont County, Wyoming and Lincoln County, Wyoming have filed a civil trespass lawsuit in Wyoming District Court, Fremont County, against Western Watersheds Project, Inc. and Jonathan Ratner, WWP Director for Wyoming, Utah and Colorado, and John Does 1-10 with the Western Watersheds Project, Inc. (WWP) for intentionally and without landowner permission trespassing and entering private property. The Plaintiffs in the case are seeking a permanent injunction to stop further unauthorized trespass against their private property. The Plaintiffs are also seeking recovery of actual, nominal, special and punitive damages. According to Western Water-
T
sheds Project, Inc.’s website, “Policy Memo Number 2” is “To Do: Get all cows and sheep off public lands ASAP!” In order to advance the agenda of WWP, the Defendants were willing to break laws by illegally trespassing on private property. “In many areas in Wyoming, private land is interspersed with federal lands. We (Wyoming private landowners) have typically allowed public access through our private lands,” said Anjie McConnell with Frank Ranches. “Allowing public access is a property owner’s choice.” “For instance, if you are not comfortable allowing someone into your home you are able to tell them “no” and close the door,” She explained. “Landowners have the same rights and the ability to say “no” to groups and individuals that knowingly trespass; including those trying to advance an agenda against multiple-use of federal lands.” Trespasses by WWP occurred while collecting and submitting water quality samples to the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Tres-
passes also occurred while collecting range monitoring data. According to the lawsuit (Complaint), in June 2005 and May 2010, Ratner, on behalf of WWP, submitted to the DEQ a “Sampling and Analysis Plan” (SAP) for the collection of water quality data. “The signed 2005 SAP and the 2010 SAP affirmatively state that all water quality monitoring will be in compliance with Wyoming’s Credible Data Act of 1999,” wrote Attorney Karen Budd-Falen. “Additionally, the SAP’s state the sampling sites will be on public lands with legal public access.” According to the Complaint, when the latitude/longitude coordinates for the individual water quality site locations provided by Defendants were placed on a land ownership map, circumstantial evidence shows the Defendants trespassed upon the Plaintiff’s private property. “Additionally, two of the water monitoring site locations were illegally located on the private lands belonging to two of the Plaintiffs,” She continued. “Because the Defendants
were required to use GPS equipment to note the locations of their water quality monitoring sites, Defendants knew or should have known that they were trespassing on private property to access these sites,” Budd-Falen explained. “Landowners are not comfortable having an extreme biased organization, that has not demonstrated the professional qualifications to collect credible data, trespassing their lands,” Budd-Falen continued. Additionally, the Defendant trespassed on State lands and was notified on July 15, 2013 by the Director of the Wyoming Office of State Lands and Investments that collection of monitoring data on Wyoming State trust lands was prohibited by law and that any continued unauthorized data collections may constitute trespassing. Punitive damages are being sought because of the continued and habitual trespass by the Defendants. The Complaint states: “Punitive damages are proper where there has been an
002/8*-"4&,9 %&&%&% "$2&3 ; /.( 2&&+ ; 3&"3/.", ; -/.4)3 35--&2 0"3452& '/2 $/7 $",' 0"*23 ; -*,& $2&&+ 3*%& 342&"-3 ".% 302*.(3 ; 0)/.& 0/7&2 ./ 53"#,& *-02/6&-&.43 ; 9&"2 2/5.% "$$&33 ; ,".%/7.&2 )5.4*.( 4"(3 '/2 -5,& %&&2 ".% &,+
Bottari Realty Paul Bottari, Broker • 775/752-3040 www.bottarirealty.com
INTEREST RATES A S L OW A S 3% Pay m en t s Sch ed u l ed o n 25 Year s
NEVADA FARMS & RANCH PROPERTY Farm near Wells, NV: 90 acres in hay; 2 homes; shop and storage three miles from town. $450,000
J o e Stu b b l ef i el d & A s s o c i at es 13830 Wes ter n St ., A m ar i l l o , TX 806/622-3482 • c el l 806/674-2062 joes3@suddenlink.net Mi c h ael Per ez A s s o c i at es Nar a Vi s a, NM • 575/403-7970
002/8*-"4&,9 %&&%&% "$2&3 <3 02*6"4& 2&(/. &6"%" #/2%&2 $ &2-*44 ; "4&% ; 9&"2,*.(3 = -/.4)3 /2 $/7 $",' 9&"2 ,/.( ; 02/%5$&% "#/54 4/.3 (2"33 )"9 *. 7 / '&24*,*:&2 ; ! 2&"4 "3*. -934*$ 002/8*-"4&,9 %&&%&% "$2&3 <3 02*6"4& 3-",, 02*6"4& ,&"3& ; 2"4&% ".*-", 5.*43 9&"2 ,/.( ; #"3*$",,9 ! *22*("4*.( "$2&3 ; ,".%/7.&2 )5.4*.( 4"(3 ; %&&2 &,+ ".4&,/0& '*3)*.( ; 15",*49 *-02/6&-&.43
Bar M Real Estate ## " %%%
!
$"
!
&%*$", 02*.(3
SCOTT MCNALLY $"
$"
"# #
#' "
"(2*,".%32&",&34"4& $/-
www.ranchesnm.com 575/622-5867 575/420-1237
'
&#
&
Ranch Sales & Appraisals "#
# #
Fallon-Cortese Land
NEW MEXICO % "
#
!
($ ( " # $" & )!* +%!% $! " !' #! %" % # #*$#-(+ ' " ) ' "
'" " ' %"
& & &
! #!
# # (
$" %
#
!
#
#
" "' $"
!
%"
%
$$$
aggravated disregard of another’s rights and where the imposition of punitive damages will tend to prevent this type of violation in the future (Sears V. Summit, Inc. (Wyo. 1980)). In this case, Defendants wilfully and wantonly acted, in reckless disregard for the consequences, and in complete and utter disregard for Plaintiffs’ property rights.” “It is of great concern to us when an individual or an organization habitually trespasses on our private lands,” McConnell concluded. “It should also be of great concern to all people who own, use and enjoy lands and value open spaces in Wyoming.” Accessing land without permission is against the law and a violation of the basic rights of property owners. For this reason, the Plaintiffs in this lawsuit have the support of the Wyoming Association of Conservation Districts, Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Wyoming Stock Growers Association and Wyoming Wool Growers Association.
Tom Hardesty Sam Hubbell 520-609-2456
! !
,,, ) ' " % ' * (&
Missouri Land Sales 675 Ac. Excellent Cattle Ranch, Grass Runway, Land Your Own Plane: Major Price Reduction. 3-br, 2-ba home down 1 mile private lane. New 40x42 shop, 40x60 livestock barn, over 450 ac. in grass. (Owner runs over 150 cow/calves, 2 springs, 20 ponds, 2 lakes, consisting of 3.5 and 2 ac. Both stocked with fish. Excellent fencing. A must farm to see. MSL #1112191
See all my listings at: paulmcgilliard.murney.com
PAUL McGILLIARD Cell: 417/839-5096 1-800/743-0336 MURNEY ASSOC., REALTORS SPRINGFIELD, MO 65804
113 acres SOLD / 214 acres REMAINING: “Snooze Ya Loose.” Cattle/horse ranch. Over 150 acres in grass. 3/4 mile State Hwy. frontage. Live water, 60x80 multi-function barn. 2-br, 1-ba rock home. Priced to sell at $1,620 per acre. MLS #1204641 GREAT INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY CLOSE TO SPRINGFIELD. El Rancho Truck Plaza. MLS #1402704; Midwest Truck Stop MLS #1402703; Greenfield Trading Post MLS # 1402700. Owner retiring. Go to murney.com, enter MLS #, CHECK THEM OUT!!!
; ;
Livestock Market Digest
Page 10
July 15, 2014
IIAD Releases Mobile App to Enhance CVI Submissions from the Field he Institute for Infectious Animal Diseases (IIAD), a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Center of Excellence, in partnership with the Texas Center for Applied Technology (TCAT), a part of the Texas A&M Engineering Experiment Station,
T
have developed a mobile Certificate of Veterinary Inspection (CVI) application to support veterinary practitioners submitting animal health certificate records from the field. The technology was developed as part of the Institute’s DHS funded business continuity project, and in close coordination
and collaboration with state animal health officials (SAHOs) in Colorado and Kansas. The mobile application was modeled after and builds upon the eCVI PDF form developed by the SAHOs in these states. The “iCVI” app is currently available for free download from Apple’s App Store and provides an easy-to-use, touch-screen interface for digitally entering animal health certificate data. IIAD’s iCVI strives to expand the toolbox of capabilities available to veterinary practitioners, allowing them to easily submit electronic animal health certificates, or store that information within the application for forwarding when data connectivity becomes available. This real-time information sharing is an alternative to email or web-based systems, and helps improve communication between veterinarians and state animal health offices by supporting certificate submission from the field. In addition to providing a mobile interface for CVIs, the enduser has the ability to print paperbased forms directly from the mobile application. Submitted CVIs can also be automatically and/or manually imported into state animal health information systems.
“This new technology will help streamline the work flow for our veterinarians in the field,” said Bill Brown, DVM, Kansas animal health commissioner. “We want to make sure that tools are available to improve efficiency, as well as provide connectivity to the animal health network.” The submitted CVIs can also be made available within IIAD’s AgConnect suite. AgConnect is a suite of customizable data integration and analysis products designed to enhance real-time animal health situational awareness, enable permissioned data sharing and support decision-making in the event of emerging, zoonotic and/or high consequence diseases. With permissions, state veterinarians will be able to visualize the iCVI data along with other data stored within the AgConnect suite (e.g., additional animal movements, premises, surveillance, diagnostic test results and other emergency response data), allowing for greater situational awareness during a disease event. Real-time data integration of the above mentioned data streams would greatly aid state animal health officials in making decisions on animal and animal product movements during a disease outbreak. “The iCVI has tremendous
potential to provide real-time information on livestock movements and improve the accuracy of that information to animal health officials,” said Keith Roehr, DVM, state veterinarian of Colorado. “It will definitely enhance animal disease traceability, which ultimately safeguards animal and human health.” iCVI is currently being piloted in eight states with several additional states looking to start their own pilot programs. During the pilot, IIAD will work closely with SAHOs and practicing veterinarians to refine and optimize this newly developed mobile application as needed. As part of future efforts, IIAD intends to expand iCVI to operate on other mobile platforms. The app was also recently presented on a call to the National Assembly of State Animal Health Officials (NASAHO). “There has been a significant interest from other state veterinarians in the iCVI project,” said Dr. Roehr, who is also a past president of the NASAHO. “This new development may be the ‘tipping point’ in moving veterinarians forward in using electronic means to issue certificates of veterinary inspection.” To learn more about IIAD, visit http://iiad.tamu.edu.
Dan Harris elected Livestock Marketing Association President Regional Directors, Directors join Association leadership an Harris, owner of Holton Livestock Exchange in Holton, Kansas, has been elected president of the Livestock Marketing Association (LMA). In this role, he will spend two years leading the nation’s largest membership organization representing more than 800 local livestock auction markets and allied businesses. Harris is no stranger to having a microphone in his hand; but, as he told the LMA membership at Annual Convention, it is usually because he is selling something. “I grew up in the livestock marketing business,” Harris says. “My father helped build our facility in 1951, and I’ve been coming along to the market ever since I was knee high to him. At a young age, I decided that I wanted to follow his footsteps to be a livestock auctioneer and in the marketing business.” Following high school, Harris, along with his brother, attended auctioneering school in Mason City, Iowa. He then returned to the family business at Holton Livestock Exchange. Now, Harris is taking an additional step to represent not just his own market but all livestock markets as he takes the helm of the volunteer leadership at LMA. “I’m an LMA member because I feel like we need a stronger voice than we have as individual market owners. LMA is a grassroots organization that allows us to come together to develop national programs and policy and to speak with one voice.” In laying out his goals for his presidency, Harris stressed the importance of continued focus on LMA’s animal handling program and pushing back against unnecessary and overly burdensome regulation. “Enjoyment of time around livestock is a major factor that keeps me loving my job,” Har-
D P.O. Box 7458 Albuquerque, NM 87194 505/243-9515 • Fax 505/998-6236 caren@aaalivestock.com www.aaalivestock.com
Have that “hard to buy for” friend or relative? Why not gift them with a subscription to the Livestock Market Digest? They will get a reminder of you every month AND stay up with the news and views of the livestock and ranching business!
~Gift Certificate ~ To:_________________________________ From:_______________________________ You have received a ____ year subscription to the Livestock Market Digest. SUBSCRIPTION RATES: 1-year $19.95, 2-year $29.95
ris says. “Our consignors put a great deal of trust in us in allowing us to sell animals they depend on for their own livelihoods. It’s for this reason and others that I’m incredibly proud of the leadership LMA with our focus on animal handling.” Additionally, Harris sees overregulation as a concern that LMA must continue addressing. The association will continue working to prevent new regulations that would overly burden markets or livestock owners. At the same time LMA will seek updates to bring Grain Inspection Packers and Stockyards Administration requirements more in line with the 21st century businesses today rather than the early 1900’s businesses the law was written to regulate. In addition to owning Holton Livestock Exchange, Harris is a member of the Kansas Beef Council Executive Committee. He and his wife, Lesley, have three sons, Blake, Garrett, and Tyler. LMA immediate past president Tim Starks of Cherokee, Okla., will now become Chairman of the Board and Jerry Etheridge of Montgomery, Ala., has been elected Vice President. Regional Directors, Mark Barnett, Guthrie, Ky. and Tom Frey, Creston, Iowa, joined the Executive Committee. Directors from the Western Region: Joe Goggins, Billings, Mont.; Jake Parnell, Galt, Calif.; and Lex Madden, Torrington, Wyo. Goggins and Parnell will serve 1-year terms; Madden will serve a 2-year term. Directors from the Midwestern Region: Tom Frey, Creston, Iowa; Clay Myers, Texhoma, Okla.; and Larry Schnell, Dickinson, N.D. Frey and Myers will serve a one-year term; Schnell will serve a 2-year term. Directors from the Eastern Region: Mark Barnett, Guthrie, Ky.; Brian Glick, Bellville, Pa.; and Dean Hanson, Lewisburg, W.Va. Barnett will serve a 1-year term; Glick and Hanson will serve 2-year terms.
July 15, 2014
“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”
U.K. Asks United States to End Haggis Ban .S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and the United Kingdom’s Environment Secretary Owen Paterson met recently to discuss trade policy. The BBC reports that Paterson had planned to ask the United States to overturn its import ban on haggis, though it is not clear how the meeting went. Imports of haggis, a traditional Scottish dish, have been outlawed in the United States since 1971, because the United States outlaws the use of sheep lungs in food products. The haggis market is worth 15 million pounds in the United Kingdom alone, and Scottish producers believe there is a market in the United States for the dish. According to Scottish Food Secretary Richard
U
Lochhead, “With almost nine million Americans claiming Scots ancestry, there is clearly an appetite in the US for haggis made to traditional recipes.” The United Kingdom was hopeful that the ban could be lifted as part of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, an E.U.-U.S. trade agreement that is currently being negotiated. According to the BBC, Paterson was also seeking an end to the United States’ ban on Scottish lamb, which has been in place since 1989. The United States has agreed to allow imports of Scotch beef for the first time in two decades. Source: “UK government bids to overturn US haggis ban,” BBC, June 29, 2014; Zenon Evans, “U.K. to U.S.: End the Haggis Ban,” Reason, July 1, 2014.
Federal Appeals Court invalidates Department of Labor rules that set unfair employment standards for sheep and cattle herders Government Must Undertake New Rulemaking to Set Herders’ Wages and Housing Conditions .S. and foreign herders will benefit from a decision today by the D.C. Circuit to invalidate U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) rules that permit employers to pay herders far less than other agricultural workers and allow lower standards for employerprovided housing, Public Citizen said. “Today’s decision will force the DOL to reconsider the
U
Cattlemen Can Lock in their Profits from Unprecedented Cattle Prices s cattle inventories steadily declined over the past several years, most market experts expected 2014 to be a year of high cattle prices. Still, many in the industry have been surprised by just how high prices have gone. People have been calling a top to the cattle market for a long time, only to see it make another run higher. How high the market will go is anybody’s guess, but two things are fairly certain: 1) The market will eventually find a stopping point and then correct lower and 2) Virtually every cowcalf producer is in profitable territory at these price levels. Working from these assumptions, prudent cow-calf producers should be taking steps to capture profitability at these levels. For the 2014 calf crop, prices can be protected several ways. Producers trying to lock in prices in a profitable environment have long used forward contracts through video sales or order buyers. Managers of larger operations have included futures and options contracts in their price risk management strategies as well. Recently, smaller producers who sell less than one load a year, and who have historically had limited risk management options, have been able to utilize the Livestock Risk Protection (LRP) Program, administered by the USDA’s Risk Management Agency (RMA), to insure against market downturns. Video sales have been very active this spring and summer, suggesting that a lot of producers have already contracted their 2014 calf crop. There is certainly nothing wrong with this strategy,
A
as it’s hard to lose money by locking in a profitable price. Anecdotal evidence suggests that a much greater proportion of the 2014 calf crop has been forward contracted than usual at this point in the year. If this is true, it may mean that feedlots are locking in inventory in advance and there will be less demand for calves this fall, putting pressure on calf prices. Alternatively, higher volume in early video sales also means that fewer calves will be available this fall, and feedlots that are looking for inventory will have to pay even higher prices. In the former scenario, producers who are contracting calves now will be very happy with their marketing strategy, but if the latter scenario develops, these same producers may leave some money on the table. Producers who understand and trade futures markets can use put options to protect themselves from a market downturn without limiting the upside potential of a rapidly rising market. Of course, the downside is that this protection isn’t free, and buying near-the-money puts on fall contracts are going to cost between $3 and $8 per hundred-weight, depending on the strike price and contract month. Options farther out of the money are not as expensive, but don’t provide as much price protection, i.e., the market has to fall farther before the options are in the money and start paying off. Also, futures and options are no price guarantee, as basis may vary with market conditions. Futures and options are the best alternative for producers who are willing to risk some downside in
Page 11
exchange for capturing value if the market continues to climb. LRP insurance is another way to protect against a market downturn. As with options, this is protection with a price. As with options, basis risk remains for producers who use LRP, and there is no price guarantee; rather, the insurance pays if the CME Feeder Cattle Index falls below a predetermined level, similar to a strike price with options. Unlike options, LRP policies can be tailored to the size of the operation, and can be purchased on a per-head basis. Because LRP can be purchased for a specific number of animals, this tool provides near-ideal price protection for producers who sell less than one or two truckloads of calves every year. The 2014 cattle market has been remarkable. Since January, front month feeder cattle futures have risen nearly 32 percent, and they have climbed 70 percent since hitting their 2013 lows last summer. Live cattle are similarly 30 percent higher than they were at the same time last summer, and boxed beef prices are over 25 percent higher than last July. At the same time, even at these price levels, exports have increased, suggesting that demand for US beef is healthy. This is all good news and reason for optimism regarding prices in the near term. We learned in 2008, though, that markets can change quickly, and good prices now are no guarantee that prices will be good this fall. With prices this profitable, employment of some sort of price risk management strategy is the right call.
unjust employment standards that it set for sheep and cattle herders,” said Julie Murray, an attorney at Public Citizen and counsel for the plaintiffs. “It is a victory for U.S. and foreign herders alike, who toil for unconscionably low pay and are often forced to live in abysmal housing conditions.” Through the H-2A visa program, foreign agricultural workers may come to the U.S. to work as herders if the government certifies that qualified U.S. workers are not available and that the employment of foreign workers will not adversely affect similar U.S. workers’ wages and working conditions. In 2011, the DOL announced “special procedures” that exempt herder employers who wish to participate in the H-2A program from requirements that they offer important workplace benefits and protections to U.S. workers before being allowed to hire H-2A workers under those same employment terms. The DOL rules permit herders to be on call 24 hours a day, seven days per week and to earn as little as $750 a month (or the equivalent of $2.34 per hour in many cases). The rules also require employers to offer only the most basic housing accommodation for herders living on the range. Those accommodations do not need to include electricity, running water, refrigeration or toilets. Public Citizen attorneys are lead counsel for three U.S. herders who seek herding positions at wages and working con-
ditions that have not been depressed by DOL’s rules. In a unanimous decision, the D.C. Circuit reversed a federal district court decision holding that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring their challenge to the DOL’s rules and then reached the merits of the plaintiffs’ claim. The court of appeals concluded that the DOL rules are “legislative” rules that set U.S. policy for ensuring that the admission of foreign herders does not adversely affect American workers. Given the nature of the rules, the court of appeals held that the DOL violated the Administrative Procedure Act by adopting the rules without notice and an opportunity for the public to comment. It found that the rules adversely affect herders by lowering wages and worsening working conditions, and it sent the case back to the district court to determine whether to vacate the rules immediately or leave all or a portion of them in place while the DOL undertakes a new rulemaking. “The public will soon have an opportunity to weigh in on rules to replace those invalidated by the D.C. Circuit,” Murray said. “This time around, we hope the government does the right thing by adopting new rules that protect vulnerable workers.” Edward Tuddenham, Jennifer J. Lee of Colorado Legal Services’ Migrant Farm Worker Division, and P. Alex McBean of Utah Legal Services, Inc., are co-counsel for plaintiffs in the case.
Livestock Market Digest
Page 12
July 15, 2014
How the EPA’s empire-building got in the way of its science BY RON ARNOLD, WWW. WASHINGTONEXAMINER.COM
he Environmental Protection Agency is completely bipartisan in only one respect: its uncontrollable rogue insistence on empirebuilding. Democratic and Republican EPA administrators have been infected with that endemic disease of bureaucrats – the irresistible urge to expand a department's size, budget and authority by asserting control over more and more key missions and initiatives. It’s an old problem of democracies: Pericles, charismatic general and leader of ancient Athens, outraged his Greek allies by sending officials to appropriate their joint military treasury so he could use their money to beautify his city with the Parthenon and other civic glories. Today, President Obama’s EPA holds the United States imperial championship with 2,827 new taxpayer-funded regulations filling 24,915 pages of the Federal Register – 38 times more space than the Gutenberg Bible, which took up only 1,282 pages, says CNS News. But Republicans bear the onus for EPA’s most disastrous decision, which came immediately after President Richard Nixon created the agency with Reorganization Order No. 3 in 1970. First thing out of the box, newly minted EPA administra-
T
tor William Ruckelshaus – a respected attorney and excellent manager – faced a worldchanging decision: whether to ban DDT, the miracle insect killer that wiped out malaria in America. Ruckelshaus inherited authority over pesticides from the Agriculture Department, so the fledgling EPA’s first order of business was the DDT issue. EPA Administrative Law Judge Edmund Sweeney held testimony hearings for seven months, concluding that DDT “does not have a deleterious effect on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds, or other wildlife,” “is not a carcinogenic hazard to man” and that “there is a present need for the essential uses of DDT.” Ruckelshaus did not attend a single hearing or read Sweeney’s report, but he clearly heard from readers of Rachel Carson’s anti-pesticide mindkiller Silent Spring, from the old-line bird-protecting National Audubon Society and the new (1967) Environmental Defense Fund. Ruckelshaus was a member of Audubon and later of the Environmental Defense Fund. He overruled Sweeney’s decision and issued the ban, asserting that DDT was a “potential human carcinogen,” thus beginning EPA’s rogue disregard of court decisions — empirebuilding on the march. A few years later, I had the opportunity to ask Ruckelshaus face-to-face about his decision: Was it political? He told me,
“Yes, it was completely political. It was the right thing to do.” Millions of Third World victims of malaria would disagree if the Republican DDT ban hadn’t killed them. I contacted Alan Moghissi, who has a doctoral degree in physical chemistry, for his assessment of the EPA’s bipartisan problems. He was there at the EPA’s beginning – a veritable charter member – and has become legendary as a regulator for demanding accountability of the science used by policy makers. He served as EPA’s principal science adviser for radiation and hazardous materials and as manager of the agency’s Health and Environmental Risk Analysis Program, and has since been in high positions with several universities. He developed the “Best Available Science” concept and its “metrics for evaluation of scientific claims,” which are notably absent from today’s EPA: open-mindedness, skepticism, universal scientific principles, transparency and reproducibility. Moghissi praised Ruckelshaus for establishing seven fundamental principles for running the EPA (which the boss preached but didn’t practice), including “Scientific decisions must be free of non-scientific influences.” If today’s EPA “climate scientists” had to obey that, they’d be jobless. Most dismal, the Ruckelshaus dictum that “Governmental actions must be based
on sound science” has degenerated into “noisy science.” Moghissi pointed to specifically bipartisan empire-building: “During the presidency of Jimmy Carter, I became involved in ‘The Harvard Six Cities Study’ of the association between air pollution and mortality,” he said. The study concluded that “air pollution was positively associated with death from lung cancer and cardiopulmonary disease,” fodder for blanket regulations. Moghissi pointed out that the study’s theoretical model assumed that “the inhalation of any amount of particles causes adverse effects.” Even though the study allowed for different effects from different kinds of pollution and only claimed “association” but not causation, Moghissi found the model’s assumption appalling, because it ignores a basic premise of epidemiology, “the dose makes the poison,” called “the doseresponse curve.” So what? Pollution is pollution. No, it’s not. Don’t faint, it’s not rocket science, it’s common experience. Think of salt: Get too little salt and you die of heat exhaustion or congestive heart failure; get the right amount and you’re healthy; get too much and you die of high blood pressure, diabetes or kidney disease. The dose makes the poison. Just because high levels of exposure cause an effect does not imply that any level at all
One Size agement will produce the best results. Grazing management decisions should be made based on the responses and condition of the major species in the plant community. This is where regular monitoring is necessary. Monitoring reveals what is happening in the plant community and suggests when animals should be moved off an area and when another area is ready to be grazed. This is an adaptive management approach and is not done according to the calendar. Decisions must be made continually and based on the information coming from the monitoring process. Often we find that an area is capable of supporting a
For advertising, subscription and e ditorial inquiries write or call: Livestock Market Digest P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194 Telephone: 505/243-9515
will cause the same effect — like salt doesn’t. If researchers don’t explain that to the media, they scare people, they’re mind-killing fear merchants. Moghissi cited bipartisan empire-building in government climate science: It only blames CO2 for “dangerous man-made climate change” because it can be regulated and ignores the 800-pound gorilla of greenhouse gases, water, because it can’t. The omission is justified with a bland assumption that they know all about it. Moghissi said, “Water plays a significant role in the global climate. However, water occurs as vapor and as particulate [clouds]. Researchers assume that globally on the average the ratio between vapor and particles is constant. Where is the evidence?” Evidence-free science is the hallmark of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and all the dead minds that follow it. When you can’t tell the difference between science and politics, what do you need evidence for? Moghissi is still trying to convince governments to honor the metrics for evaluation of scientific claims: open-mindedness, skepticism, universal scientific principles, transparency and reproducibility. If you want to confound a climate-change believer, just suggest they abide by any one of those things. RON ARNOLD, a Washington Examiner columnist, is executive vice president of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise.
continued from page three
higher number of animals, when planned grazing is implemented. Agency policies should allow for flexibility that fosters effective management. Too many governmental policies are “one size fits all,” which is not realistic or efficient. The key to a healthy ecosystem and higher forage production is not determined by the number of animals present in an area, but how well the grazing is managed. Doug Warnock, retired from Washington State University Extension, lives on a ranch in the Touchet River Valley where he writes about and teaches grazing management. He can be contacted at dwarnockgreenerpastures@gmail.com.
“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”
July 15, 2014
Page 13
Mergers Are a Challenge to Rural Television FROM PATRICK GOTTSCH, RURAL MEDIA GROUP, INC
arriage of the rural, independent programming delivered by RFD-TV and RURAL TV is at stake now with the potential merger of Comcast Cable with Time Warner Cable, and the separate merger of AT&T U-Verse with DIRECTV. If approved by the FCC, these two mergers will control over 54,000,000 homes effecting RFD-TV and RURAL TV viewers in all 50 states. Let me be clear – we are NOT opposed to these mergers, at this time. Instead, we are working hard to raise the level of awareness of the plight of rural, independent programming in Washington, DC, and how we can insure that our channels are treated fairly with these mergers so that rural interests are protected. In May, I testified before Congress, and met separately with both the FCC (Federal Communication Commission)
C
and the DOJ (Department of Justice). All were very interested in the potential effect of these mergers on rural America. These same people are now reviewing the potential mergers between Comcast Cable and Time Warner Cable, along with the pending merger of AT&T with DIRECTV. This is a big deal, and will essentially determine RFD-TV and RURAL TV’s carriage for the next several years on all these cable and satellite systems. At this time, the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) wants to get comments from the public. Here is your chance to really make a difference, and make your statement in support of RFD-TV and rural programming. There is a short and simple process to register your comments directly to the FCC. Here’s how: 1. Go to the FCC page for making comments: .http://www.fcc.gov/comments (PLEASE READ THE
INSTRUCTIONS BELOW BEFORE GOING TO THE FCC PAGE). 2. Select Proceeding Number 14-57: Applications of Comcast Corporation and Time Warner Cable Inc. for Consent to Assign or Transfer Control of Licenses and Applications 3. Fill out the form with your name, address, and comments in the boxes provided. 4. Click “Continue” at the end, where you will review your information and comments one more time. 5. Click “CONFIRM” and your comments are then delivered to the FCC. I ask that you do this without delay, as there will be a limit to the time for public comment. Each and every comment takes us one step closer to insuring that RFD-TV and RURAL TV are carried post merger(s). Note – Remember this is FCC Proceeding Number 14-57 - Comcast Corporation and Time Warner Cable. Make sure
that 14-57 is in the first line on your FCC form. Comcast has been removing RFD-TV from many of their cable systems over the last year. Mr. David Cohen, VP at Comcast, explained the dropping of RFD-TV in Colorado and New Mexico in August/2013 in the House Judiciary Hearing on the merger by stating that Comcast is “primarily an urban-cluster cable company”. That did not sit well with the rural Congressmen on the panel. Mr. Cohen gave no explanation for adding Al Jazeera America two days after taking RFD-TV down on those same Colorado and New Mexico cable systems, or for carrying BBC World News as an independent channel on all their systems. I also testified at that same hearing, and asked the rhetorical question "Can't there be room for at least one channel that serves the interests of rural America”? Please feel free to contact me direct with any questions at
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Determines ESA Protection Warranted for Two Southwest Gartersnakes he U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that threatened species status under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is warranted for the northern Mexican gartersnake (Thamnophis eques megalops) and the narrow-headed gartersnake (Thamnophis rufipunctatus), native species in Arizona and New Mexico. Both species will be listed as threatened throughout their range. Under the ESA, a “threatened” listing means the species is likely to become in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future; this status is a step below “endangered” and allows for more flexibility in how the Act’s protections are implemented. This rule becomes effective August 7, 2014. This final listing rule includes a special rule under section 4(d) of the ESA that will exempt operation and maintenance of livestock tanks on private, state and tribal lands from the prohibitions on “take” of listed species. Some northern Mexican gartersnakes occupy stock tanks, or impoundments maintained by cattlemen as livestock watering holes. The special rule will allow landowners to construct new stock tanks and to continue to use and maintain those stock tanks on non-federal lands, which may be occupied by northern Mexican gartersnakes, without the need for further regulation. The northern Mexican gartersnake is found in Greenlee, Graham, Apache, La Paz, Mohave, Yavapai, Navajo, Gila, Coconino, Cochise, Santa Cruz, Pima and Pinal counties in Arizona, as well as in Grant and Catron counties in New Mexico. The narrow-headed gartersnake is found in Greenlee, Graham, Apache, Yavapai, Navajo, Gila, and Coconino counties in Arizona, as well as in Grant, Hidalgo, Sierra, and Catron counties in
T
New Mexico. The northern Mexican gartersnake is also found in the Mexican states of Sonora, Chihuahua, Durango, Coahuila, Zacatecas, Guanajuato, Nayarit, Hidalgo, Jalisco, San Luis Potosí, Aguascalientes, Tlaxacala, Puebla, México, Veracruz and Querétaro. Northern Mexican and narrow-headed gartersnakes are non-venomous snakes that use riparian and aquatic habitat in Arizona and New Mexico. Both species depend on robust prey bases consisting of native fish and amphibians (narrow-headed gartersnakes only eat fish). Eightythree percent of northern Mexican gartersnake populations in the U.S. and 76 percent of all narrow-headed gartersnake populations are likely not viable and may exist at low population densities that could be threatened with extirpation or may already be extirpated. Ecological data derived from native fish field research in Mexico suggest that similar trends in northern Mexican gartersnake populations have likely occurred in that country. Northern Mexican gartersnake and narrow-headed gartersnake populations have declined primarily from interactions with harmful nonnative species such as bullfrogs; crayfish; warm-water, predatory sportfish; and brown trout. These harmful nonnative species prey upon, or compete with the gartersnakes and the native prey species (including native amphibians and fish) that are vital to their existence. Human activities and large-scale wildfires that diminish surface water or degrade streamside vegetation are also significant threats, but particularly where they cooccur in the presence of nonnative species. Therefore, based on the best available
scientific and commercial information, the Service has concluded that harmful nonnative species are the most significant threat to both the northern Mexican and narrow-headed gartersnake, range wide. The Service expects the impacts from harmful nonnative species to increase in the foreseeable future. The effects of these threats on both gartersnakes have resulted in the extirpation of a few populations and the decline in abundance in the vast majority of populations. The Service anticipates that the continuing decline of the gartersnakes, in terms of additional population losses and increased risk of extinction in the foreseeable future, will occur over the next several decades. The Service will finalize the designation of critical habitat for the northern Mexican gartersnake and narrow-headed gartersnake in a separate rule in the future. The northern Mexican gartersnake can grow to 44 inches, and often occurs along the banks or in the shallows of wetlands (cienegas and stock tanks) and stream pool or backwater habitats. Within the United States, the most viable populations of northern Mexican gartersnake are found in the middle/upper Verde River drainage, middle/lower Tonto Creek, the San Rafael Valley, the Bill Williams River and a few isolated wetland habitats and stream reaches in southeastern Arizona. The smaller (up to 34-inches), narrowheaded gartersnake is the most aquatic of the southwestern gartersnakes and is a highly specialized predator on native fish species and trout found primarily in clear, rocky, higher-elevation streams along the Mogollon Rim from northern and eastern Arizona into southwestern New Mexico.
Patrick@rfdtv.com. Together, we can get this done and ensure that rural programming is distributed on cable for years to come. Breaking news on this matter will be announced on all our channels – RFD-TV, RURAL TV, FamilyNet, and RURAL RADIO on SiriusXM channel 80, and through our e-mailed weekly newsletter.
Livestock Market Digest
Page 14
June 15, 2014
Montana Water Conflicts – Part Three: The Push to Pass the Compact Bill BY HEATHER SMITH THOMAS
he Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (CSKT) on the Flathead Reservation have been negotiating their federal reserved water rights with the State of Montana, and presented their Compact to the 2013 Montana Legislature. The legislature rejected the bill to approve the Compact because there are major flaws that need to be addressed, but the Compact Commission and the Governor of Montana have been working very hard behind the scenes to continue to push this Compact forward, as is. “The tribes are saying it’s this one or nothing,” says Terry Backs, a member of the Concerned Citizens of Western Montana. “This is where we stand today and we are concerned about the possibility that the Governor may call a special session to push it through the legislature again,” says Terry. “The Compact is out of line with federal reserved water rights law,” says Dr. Kate Vandemoer, hydrologist. “This Compact Commission has pushed their boundaries; they’ve created a nightmare for Montana and essentially all
T
other states. They’ve been pushing this and hoping it would slide under the radar and be accomplished before people know what’s going on,” says Dr. Kate. There has also been some deliberate deception. “For example, the Commission said that this Compact was like every other compact (for the other reservations in Montana), but you can readily see that it is not,” she says. In the legislative session the Commission tried to get it through the Natural Resources Committee, but due to the fact that there were legal and constitutional issues, the Compact went before the House Judiciary Committee, which disposed of it because the Commission couldn’t answer questions about the legal and constitutional issues. The Compact bill was submitted on the very last day that bills could be submitted to the legislature. “The legislators already had too many bills that they had to consider,” says Dr. Kate. The Compact Commission sought to pressure the legislators, in hopes that they would just pass it without looking into it too deeply. “If it were not for our Con-
cerned Citizens group, and the work of other concerned people, this thing would have been a done deal,” she says. Some of the legislators then asked their group to write a critical review of the Compact. Both the critical review and a proposed alternative were submitted to the Compact Commission, but the group fears that these two documents will be ignored. These documents explain the need for more studies before the Compact is finalized, and the need to limit the ability of anyone to contract what should be state constitutional functions. PARALLELS WITH THE KLAMATH BASIN WATER CONFLICT – “The things that this situation and the one in Klamath County Oregon have in common are first the federal government using the tribes against local citizens,” says Dr. Kate. “The second is a big irrigation project. Over at Klamath their irrigation project was created by the Bureau of Reclamation. Over here it’s the Bureau of Indian Affairs.” Third is the use of a divide and conquer strategy. “In Oregon this was accomplished by creating the Klamath Basin Restoration Act which pitted irrigators against irrigators and successfully divided the water users. Over here it’s the Flathead Water Use Agreement where the tribes and federal government enlisted some people inside the irrigation community to help facilitate their goals and continue to promote the Compact. This strategy has divided the irrigation community, making them even more vulnerable to loss of water rights through the predation of the Tribes and the United States,” says Dr. Kate. The divide and conquer technique was used to the tribes’ advantage in Klamath. “There may be aspects of the Klamath Basin Restoration Act that are unconstitutional, but this Flathead Water Use Agreement gives water rights (that the irrigators have had for more than 100 years) to the tribes. Some people within the irrigation community are saying it’s the best deal everyone could have. Several hundred irrigators saw the wrong in this, however, and filed suit to prevent a vote on approving this water use agreement. They were successful, but most importantly the District judge ruled that movement of water from the private irrigators including individual Indian irrigators to the tribe was an unconstitutional taking without compensation,” says Dr. Kate. “Another thing that parallels Klamath is pushing the boundaries of federal Indian law
much farther—trying to create precedent for something beyond what it ever was in the past but doing so in a way that avoids an opportunity to fully disclose and resolve the issues in a court of law,” she says. She also feels there is an underlying agenda. “In Montana we have Glacier National Park, the push for a Y to Y corridor (Yukon to Yellowstone), etc. So the tribes’ expansive claims would have sealed federal control over all of western Montana.” UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND ILLEGAL – “The water use agreement is unconstitutional and there is a court decision that said so. The Compact Commission and the proponents of the Compact have ignored that ruling and continue to promote this as the best thing for everyone. At least now they are admitting that it is a transfer of water rights from non-Indians to Indians but for awhile they tried to cover that up. They tried to say it’s not a taking and that its just moving the water rights under the tribes’ umbrella, but this is still a taking,” says Dr. Kate. “It is a neighbor giving away another neighbor’s water rights. We know from various state studies here in Montana that an acre foot of water adds about $2000 in value to an acre of land. If you can’t irrigate it, or only have half enough to irrigate it, the land isn’t worth much, and you might not be able to sell it,” she says. The only buyers, for pennies on the dollar, would be the tribes. This is a direct attack on agriculture and ranching, the history and development of Montana, and on Montana’s Constitution. “The Compact Commission wants to take away state control and give it to the federal government. This would virtually destroy the hope of any future growth and development in western Montana,” says Terry. “For example, one abstract (one page of those thousand pages of abstracts in the Compact) is an abstract for all of the natural flow of water into Flathead Lake. This would effectively cut off all the people in that area and in the Kalispell area from being able to develop any water on their property. It’s pretty sobering when you think about the future,” she says. “The Compact Commission intentionally tried to focus people on their claim that ‘we’re protecting existing uses of water’. People who came to the meetings asked if their well would be ok and the Commission would say yes. The Commission presentation was designed to put people asleep
to the fact that this is all about ensuring that there will be no future growth and development in Montana.” Existing uses will wither because people won’t be able to use their land the way they have been using it, and won’t be able to sell it. “A realtor recently showed us a disclaimer that is appearing on the water permits both on and off the reservation. It says that it is the Tribes’ position that development of this water right could impact their reserved water right on the reservation. The Tribes are putting people on notice, both on and off the reservation, that there will be a diminishment of their water right and a person could be liable for the development of that water right. This disclaimer is showing up on municipalities’ and counties’ water rights throughout western Montana,” says Terry. “The Compact Commission has created a new administration system (the Unitary Management Ordinance), which basically takes the state constitutional function and gives it to the tribes,” says Dr. Kate. For someone to get a water permit approved or changed, or get a well drilled, the tribes will extract something in exchange. It puts them in charge. “The Unitary Management Ordinance is probably one of the worst pieces of this Compact. It is the most frightening because it will gut the state’s constitutional function. The CSKT is demanding that the state do this or they will file thousands of claims all over the state. This is illegal. A federal reserved water right is based on the purpose of the reservation and the amount of water that is needed to fill that purpose, and is not a claim to water rights all over western Montana. The law is very specific on this issue,” says Dr. Kate. “The Compact Commission was relying on people’s lack of knowledge about the federal reserved rights doctrine and how it works and is supposed to work,” she says. In every public meeting that she and Terry attended, the Compact Commission threatened the public with litigation. “They told us that this Compact was the best we could do and the product of 30 years of work,” says Terry. “They told us we don’t want to try litigation because we’d have to hire our own lawyers to adjudicate our water rights and it would cost us a lot of money in fees.” The tribe is also saying that western Montana is not the only region that is aboriginal territory for them. “They told continued on page fifteen
June 15, 2014
“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”
Page 15
American Junior Shorthorn Association elects new board 2014 National Junior Shorthorn Show & Conference he 2014 National Junior Shorthorn Show and Conference was held in Louisville, Kentucky, in late June. Junior voting delegates took part in electing three members to the American Junior Shorthorn Association (AJSA) Board of Directors, with new and retiring board members electing new AJSA officers. 2014-15 AJSA Board of Directors are as follows:
T
President Dustin Smith, Decorah, Iowa, is currently attending Iowa State University, double majoring in Agricultural Systems Technology and Agronomy. He is the son of Eric and Dainna Smith. Vice President Tyler Pierson, Watertown, Minnesota, a sophomore at South Dakota State University majoring in Animal Science and Agricultural Economics. Pierson is the 19-yearold son of Tom and Sherri Pierson. Secretary Haley Alden,
Water Conflict
continued from page fourteen
ATTEMPT TO GAIN CONTROL VIA PUBLIC LAW 93-638 – After many years of lawsuits aimed at the irrigation community and the Flathead Joint Board of Control (trying to get what they are not legally entitled to), in 2007 the Tribes sent a letter of request asking the Department of Interior to transfer the operation and maintenance of the water project to the tribes under the Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance Act (Public Law 93-638). These “638 contracts” allow the Secretary of the Interior to enter into selfdetermination contracts with Tribes for various programs “for the benefit of Indians because of their status as Indians”. The CSKT were saying that the Flathead Irrigation Project falls into this category. The Department of the Interior (after reviewing the 1904 and 1908 Acts that opened the reservation to non-Indian settlement) concluded that the Flathead Irrigation Project was not constructed solely for the Indians and was not contractible under the “self determination” contracts. The tribes’ 2007 letter to the Secretary focused solely on the language in the 1904 Act, ignoring the 1908 Act that spelled out Congress’ intent to extend irrigation opportunities to all lands within the reservation and which clarified that these “surplus lands” (and their non-Indian owners) were also entitled to benefit from an irrigation system. Currently the tribal land holdings within the Flathead Irrigation Project amount to less than 10 percent of the lands irrigated by this system, and since the system was not constructed solely for them, the CSKT were unsuccessful in their attempt to take over the irrigation project under an Indian Self Determination contract. [to be continued…]
Digest
Classifieds
Kendra Davis, Glenville, Minnesota, is the 18-year-old daughter of Lance and Sharon Davis. She attends South Dakota State University where she majors in Animal Science. Newly elected to the board, Mitchell Smith, Pendleton, Indiana, is the 19-year-old son of Neal and Jennifer Smith. Smith is a sophomore at Purdue University majoring in Agricultural Economics. Retiring from the junior board, fulfilling their terms are President Ashley Vogel, Hartley, Iowa and Vice-President Joseph O'Sullivan, Maple Lake, Minnesota.
KADDATZ Auctioneering and Farm Equipment Sales New and used tractors, equipment, and parts. Salvage yard, combines, tractors, hay equipment and all types of equipment parts. ORDER PARTS ONLINE.
www.kaddatzequipment.com • 254/582-3000
g•u•i•d•e RED ANGUS
angus
Phillips
Bell Key Angus
RED ANGUS
Dennis Boehlke 208/467-2747 Cell. 208/989-1612
A few Choice Bulls Available at Private Treaty.
NAMPA, IDAHO
Spring & Yearlings For Sale CeCil FelKiNS • 209/274-4338 5500 BueNa ViSta Rd. • ioNe, Ca 95640
Bradley 3 Ranch Ltd. www.bradley3ranch.com
Our Next Bull Sale: February 14, 2015 at the Ranch NE of Estelline, TX Ranch-Raised ANGUS Bulls for Ranchers Since 1955
A SOURCE FOR PROVEN SUPERIOR RED ANGUS GENETICS
M.L. Bradley 806/888-1062 Fax: 806/888-1010 • Cell: 940/585-6471
14298 N. Atkins Rd., Lodi, CA 95240
BRANGUS
SANTA GERTRUDIS
209/727-3335
Dan Wendt
R.L. Robbs 520/384-3654
S
4995 Arzberger Rd. Willcox, Arizona 85643 Willcox, AZ
Santa Gertrudis Cattle Polled and Horned HERD ESTABLISHED 1953
S
“They are all hoping that the affected people don’t know or understand the history and the laws, and they have enlisted a handful of local irrigators and political people to continue to mask and misrepresent the unconstitutional taking of property rights. Under the Compact there would be no representation of non-Indian interests,” Dr. Kate explains. The ongoing hassle has been a nightmare and some people want to get it over with—to the point of giving in to the tribal demands, according to Terry. “As bad as it is now, however, it will be much worse if the Tribes get control of all the water,” she says. If they can get ownership of the irrigators’ water rights, then it will be easier for the Tribes to renew their push to take over the Flathead Irrigation Project under a 638 contract, something which so far has been consistently rejected by the federal trustee (Department of Interior). If they do finally get their way, this means that the non-Indians paid for the development of the Flathead Irrigation Project (investing millions of dollars) and the CSKT gets the water and management of the project through the Compact. This would destroy property values and the agricultural economy, forcing hundreds of families out of the valley. The Water Use Agreement contemplates the eventual decommissioning of the Flathead Irrigation Project itself. Farmers and ranchers who have been paying county property taxes on their water rights since these lands were settled are upset to learn that now those rights not only would not belong to them, but there may eventually be no more irrigating on these lands.
Bev Pearson. She currently attends South Dakota State University where she studies Animal Science. Director Marshall Allison, Hookstown, Penn., is the 20year-old son of Michael and Sharon Allison. He is currently attending Penn State University, majoring in Animal Science. Re-elected to the board as a director, Gerritt Pearson of Tea, South Dakota, is the19-year-old son of Brad and Bev Pearson. He attends South Dakota State University where he is majoring in pre-chiropractic. Newly elected director,
S
us that if we go to adjudication they are also going to file claims in eastern Montana in the Missouri River basin. That argument was designed to get eastern Montana legislators to cave in because they don’t want the tribes coming after their water,” says Terry. Another example of divide and conquer. DIVIDE AND CONQUER – “One of the things that the Compact proponents are doing now is breaking up the FJBC (Flathead Joint Board of Control). They are trying to separate the irrigation districts from each other, so two of the ‘rogue’ districts can go ahead and sign the flawed water use agreement and bring this Compact crushing down on 360,000 people in western Montana,” says Dr. Kate. The irrigators are faced with having their state-protected water rights terminated, and replaced with a so-called Farm Turnout Allowance limited to 1.4 acre-feet per acre—which is not adequate for many of the farms/ranches. Any traditional water rights above that amount would be subject to call by the Tribes or federal government and to possible termination via post-Compact adjudication. If the Compact goes through, nobody knows which rights might be called, or how often. With the push from the Compact Commission, the proposed CSKT Compact ignores history and law. It is rewriting the definition of reservation land to include all the private land, claiming ownership of all surface water, requiring non-Tribal irrigators to relinquish their water rights to the CSKT (in the Water Use Agreement) and claiming full management authority over the water through the Unitary Management Ordinance.
Hamilton, Missouri is the 19year-old daughter of Ron and Judy Aden. She currently attends the University of Missouri where she is studying Agribusiness Management. Public Relations Officer Mackenzie Cash, Beloit, Wisconsin, is the 21-year-old daughter of Anthony and Cheryl Nickels. She is a senior at University of Wisconsin-Madison majoring in Animal Science. Director-Brooke Pearson, Tea, South Dakota, is the 21year-old daughter of Brad and
S
Call: 979/245-5100 • Fax 979/244-4383 5473 FM 457, Bay City, Texas 77414 dwendt@1skyconnect.net
Livestock Market Digest
Page 16
June 15, 2014
Wal-Mart’s warning to the world BY LAWRENCE LEWITINN, WWW.FINANCE.YAHOO.COM/BLO GS
he official unemployment rate is down. But, if you think that means more money in the hands of consumers to spend at stores such as Wal-Mart, guess again. Wal-Mart U.S. CEO Bill Simon has remarked in interviews that the discount retailer isn’t seeing the gains in employment trickling down to the chain’s cash registers. Simon said to CNBC: “I think the economic num-
T
bers – the unemployment numbers in particular – have been difficult to read with the number of people dropping out of the workforce. And I think it’s going to take a while – six months or more – for the numbers to balance out . . . Hopefully after six years, we’re starting to gain a little bit of traction and that traction is coming at the top end. I think the middle and down is still pretty challenged.” If a strong jobs report doesn’t mean more sales for the likes of Wal-Mart, is that a warning to the economy as a whole?
“This is obviously an economic problem,” said Gina Sanchez, founder of Chantico Global. “Wal-Mart is a big bellwether, so it’s worth looking at to understand what’s happening.” Retailers get hurt if employment numbers don’t translated into meaningful wage or disposable income growth, said Sanchez, a CNBC contributor. “Wal-Mart actually does well when the economy’s doing well,” she added. “We’re seeing all of these upbeat numbers. We’re seeing proof that we are generating more jobs. But, we’re not
really generating more income – or at least not a lot of income growth – and that’s important.” Without income growth, “people have just scaled back in terms of their spending,” Sanchez said. “That’s hitting Wal-Mart, and I think it’s going to hit the retail sector.” Ari Wald, head of technical analysis at Oppenheimer & Co., is pessimistic about Wal-Mart and the retail sector in general. “It’s a sell,” said Wald about Wal-Mart. “It’s in my least favorite sector. I just don’t think the consumer staples in general
have enough juice to keep up with this equity market. And, Wal-Mart fits into that boat.” What worries Wald about Wal-Mart is its chart. He sees a distribution pattern over the past year, indicating signs of a potential top. “You’re seeing volume confirm that as well, where each subsequent rally has been . . . on lighter trading volume and this is a very big concern,” he said. Though the stock currently trades in the $76 range and Wald doesn’t believe a top is confirmed until it breaks below $72, he doesn’t believe investors should wait to get out of the stock. “Best case scenario, the stock continues to move sideways [and] underperforms a rising equity market,” Wald said. “I think it’s a sell. I think your funds are better used elsewhere.”
Illegal Immigrants Cross Over Protected Lands he U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) oversees wildlife refuge areas, and many such areas are along the South Texas border. These areas are causing real issues for the American border patrol, because illegal immigrants, including drug smugglers and human traffickers, are exploiting these lands to make their way into the United States more easily, writes Genevieve Wood of the Heritage Foundation. Because of rules created by the FWS, the U.S. Border Patrol struggles to pursue and apprehend illegal immigrants in the reserved lands. For example: n Border Patrol agents are forced to drive exclusively on already established dirt roads that run along the Rio Grande River. n They are forbidden from going off-road or creating new paths. n If footprints are found, agents are limited to following the prints on foot or driving to another road and hoping to spot the culprits. n Agents sometimes struggle to gain access to protected lands. Often, it is adjacent landowners, not the federal government, that give the Border Patrol access to lands in the area. Wood notes that allowing Border Patrol agents greater access to protected areas may actually help preserve the lands. Indeed, illegal border crossers pollute these areas and leave trash in the deserts, disrupting the environments of protected species. Furthermore, they also wreck private property, endangering the livelihoods of those ranchers who work to nurture the desert lands.
T
Source: Genevieve Wood, “How These Rare Species Are Making It Impossible to Keep the Border Secure,” Daily Signal, July 1, 2014.