Saying things that need to be said.
Here We Go Again
Despite writing a weekly syndicated column for 40 years and thousands of feature stories I am not a journalist. As I understand it, journalists are supposed to be unbiased and not have any agendas. That’s definitely not me! I don’t think I’ve ever given the impression that I was impartial or objective. For gosh sakes, I’ve never taken a journalism class in my life and I don’t even know how to type. It’s my wife, who must have paid more attention than I did in high school English class, who fixes all my mistakes and makes sure I follow all the rules of English. I consider myself more of a curious snoop than I do a journalist and the job gives me carte blanche to ask all sorts of personal questions. Anyone who has ever talked to me knows I ask more questions than I have a right to and I’m surprised I’ve gotten away with it for 50 years without getting punched in the nose or sued for everything I own.
watch CNN or read the New York Times you know that’s a bunch of horse pucky. One of those fights I lost big time and one of them I won. If I was a baseball player I’d be batting 500. That’s good if you’re a ballplayer but terrible if you’re a brain surgeon or a team roper.
Choose Your Battles Wisely
The battle I lost was the heist of the checkoff by the NCBA. And enough said about that.
Having said all that, there have been two instances in my career where I accidentally came close to being a journalist. In both instances I clearly chose sides, something real journalists, I am told, never do. But if you
at the time to unveil the damage beta agonists like Merck’s Zilmax® were doing to cattle and to the cattle business in general. When I wrote my first story about beta agonists I never dreamed that it would lead to my working with two of my cowboy heroes to get Merck® to withdraw their beta agonist from the market, which at the time was a 159 million dollar annual product for them.
Never give the Devil a ride — He will always want the reins.
In the second battle I waged I had better luck. At the time I was the first and only writer in the livestock press to introduce ranchers to beta agonists and this paper was the only one
Beta agonists had been around since 2007 but it wasn’t until seven years later that the proverbial manure hit the fan. The only problem with the war we waged was we didn’t finish the job because after Merck pulled Zilmax®, cattle feeders merely switched to another lesser known beta agonist called ractopamine, which is produced by Elanco Animal Health, a division of Eli Lilly
Supreme Court Strikes Down Chevron, Curtailing Power of Federal Agencies
BY AMY HOWE
In a major ruling, the Supreme Court of the US (SCOTUS) cut back sharply on the power of federal agencies to interpret the laws they administer and ruled that courts should rely on their own interpretation of ambiguous laws in late June. The decision will likely have far-reaching effects across the country, from environmental regulation to healthcare costs.
By a vote of 6-3, the justices overruled their landmark 1984 decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, which gave rise to the doctrine known as the Chevron doctrine. Under that doctrine, if Congress has not directly addressed the question at the center of a dispute, a court was required to uphold the agency’s interpretation of the statute as long as it was reasonable. But in a 35-page ruling by Chief Justice John Roberts, the justices rejected that doctrine, calling it “fundamentally misguided.”
When the Supreme Court first issued its decision in the Chevron case more than 40 years ago, the decision was not necessarily regarded as a particularly consequential one. But in the years since then, it became one of the most important rulings on federal administrative law, cited by federal courts more
continued on page 3
and Company. Their beta agonist is marketed in America as Paylean® for swine, Topmax® for turkeys and Optaflexx® for cattle. It is a feed additive that enables cattle to produce more lean meat with less fat. In one study carcass weight increased by more than 100 pounds compared to cattle not given Optaflexx®. Nearly all studies about ractopamine showed that growth performance declines as the duration of feeding is prolonged, but an improvement in muscular growth continues with the increasing duration of its use. Ractopamine is known to increase the rate of weight gain, improve feed efficiency, and increase carcass leanness in finishing swine. Its use in finishing swine yields about 6.6 lb. of additional lean pork per animal, and improves feed efficiency by 10 percent. That’s the good news about ractopamine. Now here’s the bad. According to the National Library of Medicine, “There is no evidence in the scientific community to prove that racto-
continued on page 2
“Ecocide” Legislation is Radical Environmentalism
BY JACLYN DE CANDIO FOR PROTECT THE HARVEST
Apoorly kept secret is that environmental extremist groups and like-minded NGOs work diligently in America to undermine personal liberties and essential industries, including agriculture. Such has been the case for half a century or longer. As they routinely do, radical environmentalists recently added a new term to their misinformation/disinformation vocabulary: “Ecocide.” Sounds ominous.
It’s a term being used to demonize activity that allegedly damages the environment based on how these groups define the so-called devastation. This war of words is another example of environmental extremist ideology focused on creating more and tougher restrictions for Americans, our society, and economy. This folly has serious consequences for the nation’s food-producing capabilities, food security, and food independence.
According to the group Stop Ecocide International – which is a partner of the United Nations (UN) – this term is used to describe what is happening to our planet: the mass damage and destruction of the natural living world. It literally means ‘killing one’s home’ and was coined in the 1970s by an American bioethicist to describe the environmental damage caused by Agent Orange used during the war in Vietnam.
continued on page 4
by
BoobyTrapped
The feds came out with a list of rules that protect wolves but make living in the West like walking through a mine-field. The feds have now placed booby-traps everywhere in the West that are meant to trap people like you, so I’d watch my step if I were you. It’s become very dangerous to tread anywhere on the 46 percent of the eleven western-most contiguous states that is public land owned by the U.S. government. For example, a person may NOT kill a wolf in the act of killing livestock on public land. If you do, you’re facing serious prison time and legal bills up the wazoo. If you are one of those people who believe in the three S’s, as in shoot, shovel and shut up, be sure to bury the carcass on your neighbor’s property so he or she will be the one being someone’s girlfriend in prison.
These new rules make it harder for urban dwellers too, not just ranchers. Suppose you live in a big city and take Fifi, your poodle, for its daily walk in a park that, unbeknownst to you, is public property. And suppose a wolf jumps out of the weeds and starts killing and eating your beloved poodle. And suppose you pick up a branch and start trying to beat said wolf so he’d stop munching on Fifi. Well, you’re going to be cell mates with the rancher because you can’t kill or injure a wolf in the act of injuring your pet.
As if to rub it in, you cannot go home and get your gun and go back to shoot the wolf now feeding on Fifi’s carcass. I’d think twice if I were you because it’s now illegal to kill a wolf on public property feeding on the dead carcass of an animal it murdered. You’re just supposed to stand there and watch the wolf tear and rip the meat from a dog that you loved dearly.
It is now illegal “to enter official enclosures or rendezvous sites where there is denning behavior.” Pardon me but I think you’d need a master’s degree in wildlife biology to be able to recognize “wolf rendezvous sites.” Are these rendezvous like mountain men and trappers traveled to 150 years ago or are they more like the rendezvous when a businessman
LEE PITTS
Volume 66 • No. 7
LEE PITTS
SIGNATURE
□ Payment Enclosed
pamine is safe. The use of ractopamine also faces challenges posed by animal welfare organizations. Trade organizations for the meat industry contend the drug is proven scientifically to promote growth safely. In contrast, animal welfare groups argue that the drug harms both animals and humans.”
Our Day of Reckoning
After the Zilmax® battle I felt the day would come when we’d face another standoff over ractopamine. But at the time we were so giddy about getting rid of Zilmax we were like the new father with six girls who finally got a boy on the seventh try. When asked who the baby looked like he replied, “I don’t know, I haven’t looked at his face yet.”
Please subscribe me to the Livestock Market Digest for: □ 1 Year at $35 □ 2 Years at $45
Livestock Market Digest (1SSN 0024-5208) (USPS NO. 712320) is published monthly except semi-monthly in September in Albuquerque, N.M. 87104 by Livestock Market Digest, Inc. Periodicals Postage Paid at Albuquerque, N.M. POSTMASTER-Send change of address to: Livestock Market Digest, P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194
For advertising, subscription and editorial inquiries write or call:
Livestock Market Digest P.O. Box 7458 Albuquerque, N.M. 87194
Telephone: 505-243-9515 Fax: 505-349-3060 www.aaalivestock.com
EDITORIAL and ADVERTISING STAFF
CAREN COWAN Publisher
LEE PITTS Executive Editor
CHUCK STOCKS Publisher Emeritus
RANDY SUMMERS Sales
FALL MARKETING EDITION AD SALES
RANDY SUMMERS, 505-850-8544 email: rjsauctioneer@aol.com
FIELD EDITOR
DELVIN HELDERMON, 580/622-5754 1094 Koller Rd, Sulpher, OK
ADMINISTRATIVE and PRODUCTION STAFF
— MY CHECK IS ENCLOSED FOR — One Year: $35 Two Years: $45 Single copy: $10
Clip & mail to: Livestock Market Digest, P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194 lit Yes.
KRISTY HINDS Graphic Designer
All subscriptions non-refundable.
Our day of reckoning came on May 27, 2024, just a few weeks ago when the Food Safety and Inspection Service of the USDA announced that China has banned beef imports from JBS’s Swift Beef Company plant in Greeley, Colorado, after U.S. officials found traces of the feed additive ractopamine in meat from the plant set for export to China. China also blocked meat and poultry imports from a port in Oakland, California, a cold storage facility used for holding perishable exports like food.
According to the USDA, the Greeley, Colorado, plant is the only beef plant involved in the ban and why is it that none of us are surprised it was JBS, a member of beef’s Big Four, who has struggled in the past with, how shall we put this, sketchy business practices?
A Group of Two
This whole brouhaha over beta agonists began when I got a phone call from a friend of mine, Dr. Ray Rodriguez. Ray has an impressive resume both as a rancher and consultant in Mexico and the United States. He called to tell me of a near-death experience he had after eating beef at a restaurant. Ray’s doctor told him it was probably caused by a beta agonist called Zilmax®. I researched and wrote Ray’s story knowing that it would cause many sleepless nights worrying about lawyers taking every penny I had. One of Merck’s lawyers did call as did a professor who couldn’t say enough good things about Zilmax®.
My knees would have buckled right then and there if not for a phone call I got from another friend, Gerald Timmerman of the highly respected Timmerman clan. They do it all from running stockers and cows, owning several feedyards and as a packer with an outstanding reputation for quality. As the announcer for Western Video for 20 years I witnessed first-hand their obsession with buying only the highest quality cattle. Gerald said my Zilmax® story was right on the button and that he and another friend of mine, Harvey Dietrich, who owned Sun Land beef and ran cattle on some of Arizona’s biggest ranches, planned to do something about it. Because of their mutual hatred for beta agonists, the two heavyweights started “a group of two” they called Beef Additive Alert™. The two men paid out of their own pockets to run ads on the giant Reuters/PR Newswire electronic bulletin board in New York’s Time Square educating New Yorkers about the dangers of Zilmax®.
I got a new dose of courage after figuring that if two beef industry giants who had a LOT more to lose than one insignificant writer like myself were willing to lay it all on the line in divulging our dirty little secret then I shouldn’t have any doubts whatsoever about divulging the dangers of beta agonists. After all, these two men had hundreds of millions of dollars invested in the beef industry and they placed their sterling reputations on the line. Their desire to do the right thing inspired me to not hold back and to do everything I could to make people aware of the potential negative effects of Zilmax®. I must say that their actions were the most inspirational and meaningful acts of courage I’ve witnessed in my 50-year career of writing about cows.
At the time In his typical blunt manner Gerald said this about beta agonists, “No amount of drug maker-sponsored study or 5 step PR spin campaign will convince us that beta agonists belong in beef production. We hope processors continue to resist accepting Zilmax-fed cattle for animal welfare, and to preserve USA beef quality, consistency and integrity.”
Harvey agreed and said, “The consumers here and abroad do not want their food produced with lab-produced chemicals, coupled with no food labeling and lack of transparency. Beta agonists tend to reduce marbling. Steaks taste tougher, less juicy and less tender.”
Of course, it helped our cause immeasurably that when Temple Grandin was asked about beta agonists she told the Wall Street Journal, CNN, MSNBC and Fox outlets that she had “observed heat stress, lameness, hoof problems and aggressiveness in feedlot cattle fed beta agonists. In hot weather, I have seen open mouth panting and a few animals were non-ambulatory after fed beta agonists,” Temple said.
Even more importantly to the halt of Zilmax® sales, the nation’s leading meat packers, led by Tyson, stopped buying cattle fed the feed additive due to their animal welfare concerns. Then Reuters reported that a second major meat packer, JBS USA, showed a video at a cattle industry conference that showed cattle at a JBS plant having difficulty walking after they were fed beta-agonists. In Canada a videotape surfaced showing animals that were fed Zilmax® in distress, with hoof problems and lameness that required cattle to be destroyed. Reuters also picked up on the story and did a series of reports that publicized a Texas Tech and Kansas State University study titled “U.S. Cattle Deaths Linked to Zilmax Far Exceeded Company Reports.”
After this full-court press Merck® pulled Zilmax® once and for all.
A Clear Risk
There were many reasons we didn’t finish the fight over beta agonists and go after Optaflexx® right then and there. Shortly before he died Harvey called me up to ask if I had one more fight left in me, that he and Gerald were still disheartened that beta agonists were still being used and that we owed it to the industry not to
finish until beta agonists were outlawed. I never talked to Harvey again and I miss his guidance. Plus, we thought that the market would finish the fight we started, after all, the evidence against ractopamine was starting to pile up.
A study was done to find out just how much of a danger to humans the pharmacological use of ractopamine was. That study came to the conclusion that it could have an “intoxication effect” and that “any consumption by humans of a meat and/or byproducts of animals that consumed ractopamine with feed for growth stimulation, may result in such clinical effects as tachycardia and other heart rate increases, tremor, headache, muscle spasm, or high arterial blood pressure. Consumption of products that contain ractopamine residues is not advisable for persons with cardiovascular diseases.”
In swine, ractopamine was tied to hyperactivity, trembling, and broken limbs. In a conversation with Boulder Weekly newspaper, Temple Grandin described harmful effects of ractopamine on feedlot animals, “such as cattle with stiff, sore, and lame limbs, and increased heat stress.” But the real blow to ractopamine and beta agonists in general was that it was linked to behavioral changes in humans such as restlessness, apprehension, and anxiety.
Thanks in part to an article in Fortune Magazine, the USDA approved a new label that packers and retailers could use: “No ractopamine — a beta-agonist growth promotant.” Also in 2015, an 18-year-old female martial arts athlete from Egypt gave a urine sample in order for her drug test to be completed. It was found that the urine contained too much ractopamine and the athlete was sanctioned with ineligibility for four years. One conclusion reached in October 2017 was that there was a “clear risk for athletes to be tested positive” when consuming meat with beta agonist residues.
Get The Picture?
Twenty-seven countries of the European Union, China, Taiwan, Russia New Zealand and 160 other countries banned the impor tation of meat produced with ractopamine. In July 2007, Chinese officials first seized U.S.-produced pork for containing ractopamine residues, deeming it “unfit for human consumption.” Further ship ments of Canadian ractopamine-fed pork were seized in September 2007 and again in June 2019.
Ractopamine has been banned in Taiwan since 2006. In the summer of 2007, two US shipments including ractopamine-laced pork were rejected by Taiwan’s health authorities,
Are you starting to get the picture? Despite the fact that the medical community in the U.S. seems to have decided once and for all that children and people with cardiovascular disease should not ingest ractopamine, it still is used as a feed additive and is still authorized for use in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. In the U.S. the maximum residue limit for ractopamine for meat is 50 parts per billion. One study speculated that ractopamine was fed to an estimated 60 to 80 percent of American pigs, with residues often finding their way into the meat counter.
If I haven’t convinced you yet that beta agonists are unhealthy for humans to ingest let me appeal to your more practical side. Based on what has occurred so far in 2024, economists now predict that Bidenomics will produce at least a 32 BILIION dollar ag trade deficit this year. For the second year in a row the American Farm Bureau Federation is predicting that the U.S. is buying more im ported ag food products than we export.
than 18,000 times.
Although the Chevron decision – which upheld the Reagan-era Environmental Protection Agency’s interpretation of the Clean Air Act that eased regulation of emissions – was generally hailed by conservatives at the time, the ruling eventually became a target for those seeking to curtail the administrative state, who argued that courts, rather than federal agencies, should say what the law means.
The justices had rebuffed earlier requests (including by one of the same lawyers who argued one of the cases here) to consider overruling Chevron before they agreed last year to take up a pair of challenges to a rule issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service. The agency had required the herring industry to pay for the costs, estimated at $710 per day, associated with carrying observers on board their vessels to collect data about their catches and
the Supreme Court, asking the justices to weigh in. Chevron deference, Roberts explained in his opinion for the court, is inconsistent with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), a federal law that sets out the procedures that federal agencies must follow as well as instructions for courts to review actions by those agencies. The APA, Roberts noted, directs courts to “decide legal questions by applying their own judgment” and therefore “makes clear that agency interpretations of statutes — like agency interpretations of the Constitution — are not entitled to deference. Under the APA,” Roberts concluded, “it thus remains the responsibility of the court to decide whether the law means what the agency says.” Roberts rejected any suggestion that agencies, rather than courts, are better suited to determine what ambiguities in a federal law might mean. Even when those ambiguities involve technical or scientific questions that fall within an agency’s area of expertise, Roberts emphasized, “Congress expects courts to handle technical statutory questions” – and courts also have the benefit of briefing from the parties and “friends of June’ ruling came in one of three cases during the 20232024 term seeking to curtail the power of federal agencies – a
Do we really need to make the work of the Meat Export Feder ation any tougher than it already is by producing a product other countries simply do not want? The time has come to rid the world of ractopamine once and for all. ▫
conservative effort sometimes dubbed the “war on the administrative state.” In October, the court heard arguments in a challenge to the constitutionality of the mechanism used to fund the consumer watchdog Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Last month the court upheld the CFPB’s funding by a 7-2 vote. And on Thursday, the justices pared back the power of the Securities and Exchange Commission and other administrative agencies, holding that the SEC cannot continue to use in-house proceedings to impose fines in securities fraud cases.
The fishermen in both cases were represented at no cost by conservative legal groups, the Cause of Action Institute and the New Civil Liberties Alliance, linked to funding from billionaire and longtime anti-regulation advocate Charles Koch.
continued from page 1
New Word, Same Environmental Extremism
In 2021, an international group of activist criminal and environmental attorneys invented a legal definition for “ecocide.” They made the definition available for nations and states to use as part of an ongoing effort to identify and pursue alleged cases of “environmental damages” punishable by the International Criminal Court.
“This would create an arrestable offense for anyone committing ecocide and would make individuals responsible for acts or decisions that cause severe damage to the environment liable for criminal prosecution,” explains Melissa Hart in an opinion piece for Farmer’s Advance.
Legal Tools Used to Enforce Globalism
The call to criminalize something defined by ideological ambulance-chasing attorneys, such as ecocide, is not limited to a few extremists. It’s being used by power-hungry goose steppers at the UN to enforce their ideals and force conformity through its Department of Economic and Social Affairs, stating:
“Our key objective is to accelerate legal recognition of ecocide as an international crime as an essential protective and preventive deterrent to severe and either widespread or long-term harm to ecosystems (including water ecosystems). We do this by actively driving the global conversation around ecocide law and its potential; and by convening and mapping diplomatic collaboration and progress towards adoption of the law.”
The Department of Economic and Social Affairs’ stated core strategy is to develop an impactful and high-level collaborative effort to compile compelling communication on ecocide. This aligns with its overall strategy to implement the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
“We are well positioned to do this,” they continue, “as our activities straddle legal developments, diplomatic advocacy and public narrative.” It’s difficult, at best, to decipher such a “word salad” sentence, yet logic would dictate that, coming from the UN, this is all about forced acceptance of their position combined with punitive measures against those who disagree. Like an oil slick, “ecocide” mania is spreading around the planet.
Stop Ecocide International proudly declares, “We are working, together with a growing global network of lawyers, diplomats, and across all sectors of civil society, towards making ecocide an international crime.” The group also looks to criminalize offenses that are “comparable to ecocide.” This is incredibly dangerous as the terminology can be defined and interpreted by those in power.
Using “Ecocide” to Attack Personal Freedoms
Like virtually all extremist efforts, ecocide relies on the support of we the people who, willingly or not, are often compelled to sac-
505/850-8544 rjsauctioneer@aol.com
rifice rights, liberties, and freedoms to conform with ever-changing, radical, scientifically questionable, and ideologically driven environmental restrictions.
This issue goes beyond farmers, ranchers, and others involved in work producing the food our families consume, the fuel that runs our economy, and the fiber that clothes us. It’s also about convincing people a word invented by radical environmentalists (ecocide) represents “truth, good and the right thing to do.”
According to Melissa Hart, “Climate activist Jojo Mehta speaking at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos (Switzerland) said it plainly, because farmers are trying to make a living, they are producing collateral damage to nature, and we are just too dumb to know better. She basically wants to enlighten us so that we won’t commit ecocide anymore and if we don’t stop, then we will be thrown in jail…”
Awareness, Engagement, and Advocacy are Keys to Our Food Security
Environmental extremist groups are playing a dangerous game, one that threatens the integrity of food security, affordability, and access. By attacking how food is produced, these misguided efforts to “save the planet” place ever-larger numbers of people at risk from food insecurity. ▫
Mid-Year Cattle Market Assessment
BY DERRELL S. PEEL, OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION LIVESTOCK
MARKETING SPECIALIST / COWCALF CORNER
With the first half of 2024 in the books, it’s worth evaluating the first six months and what to expect for the remainder of the year. At mid-year, cattle prices are at all-time record levels. Fed steers averaged $195.81/ cwt., live basis, and 850-pound, Med/Large, No. 1 steers averaged $255.41/cwt. in Oklahoma auctions prior to July 4. Likewise Boning cull cows, average dressing, averaged $143.22/ cwt. with high dressing Breaker cows averaging $ 154.41/cwt. Steers calves are priced slightly below the March seasonal peak but averaged $324.53/cwt. before July 4 for 475-pound Med/ Large, No. 1 steers, down from the $350.85/cwt. March average.
Beef production is down 1.6 percent year over year in the first half of the year. Thus far, beef production is down less than expected. All of the reduction in beef production is in non-fed beef, with fed beef production actually 0.7 percent higher for the year to date and non-fed beef production down 12.5 percent year over year in the first half of 2024. Steer slaughter is down 1.7 percent and heifer slaughter is down 1.5 percent year over year so far this year, but sharply higher steer and heifer carcass weights are more than offsetting the modest decreases in slaughter.
Carcass weight showed little seasonal decline through the first half of the year and steer carcasses averaged 32 pounds heavier year over year in the second quarter of the year with heifer carcasses 26 pounds heavier in the past 12 weeks.
Choice boxed beef prices are just about equal to one year earlier with a price of $329.96/ cwt in early July. Wholesale prices for popular grilling steaks are strong at midyear, led by Strip Loins and Top Sirloin. The reduction in non-fed beef production, combined with strong ground beef demand has pushed 90 percent lean trimmings and subsequent whole-
cheats on his wife by meeting his secretary at some discreet hotel room? I think the feds should have given us some guidance here as to how to identify a wolf rendezvous site.
If you’re a public lands rancher you may not kill a wolf or harass a wolf just because it is hanging around your property. I think we should test this rule out by taking a few trapped wolves to Washington D.C. where they could hang out around the offices of Congresspeople. Just how long do you think it would be before they’d call out the combined might of all four major branches of the U.S. military to deal with said wolves. I bet you we’d have F-18 Hornets in the air, M1 Abram tanks on the ground and the U.S. Navy Seals trying to kill those wolves.
sale ground beef prices to record levels.
A mix of five pounds of 90 percent lean and one pound of 50 percent lean resulting in an 83.3 percent lean ground beef formulation has a record wholesale price of $3.26/lb. in early July.
As of June 1, feedlot inventories were equal to one year ago. Feedlot inventories have been stubbornly slow to decrease with annual average monthly feedlot inventories down just 2.2 percent since the peak level 21 months ago in Sept 2022.
Feedlot placements are declining but feedlot inventories remain high due to more days on feed and continued large heifer slaughter rates. The strong heifer slaughter suggests that little, if any, heifer retention for herd rebuilding has begun. Supply fundamentals will continue to tighten for the remainder of the year and beyond. Beef production will likely finish the year down 3.0 to 3.5 percent year over year, less than previously expected due to continued heavy carcass weights.
Feedlot inventories and cattle slaughter will continue to decline, perhaps faster if heifer retention begins in a significant way. Baring outside shocks, cattle prices will remain at record levels and push even higher if herd rebuilding begins in the coming months.
Plant-Based Foods Association
Tofurky Lack Legal Standing to Challenge Oklahoma Ban BY MELISSA SUE SORRELLS / MEATINGPLACE.COM
Federal Judge Stephen P. Friot from the District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, ruled that the Plant Based Foods Association doesn’t have standing to challenge Oklahoma’s Meat Consumer Protection Act and that Tofurky Co., also a plaintiff in the suit, isn’t under a credible threat of prosecution under the law.
The case, filed in November 2021, challenges a state law that, according to a press release, “imposes vague and burdensome disclosure standards on companies producing plantbased meats and also targets all products sold in Oklahoma if they use ‘meat’ terminology —
Here’s a government booby trap that could catch a lot of people: You cannot shoot a wolf just because you thought it was a coyote or something else. I bet I could select three photos, one each of a large dog, a coyote and a wolf and the experts at the Fish and Game Department couldn’t tell them apart. I’d advise you to find out if the bus stop where the bus picks up your little Billy and Vanessa is on public land. If it is DO NOT shoot the wolf that is deciding who to eat first, your son or your daughter. Just remember... to be safe DO NOT KILL OR INJURE A WOLF, PERIOD! Don’t forget, the only time you can legally kill a wolf for killing your livestock is if it’s on tribal or private property. But I wonder what happens if you only wound the wolf on private property who then goes on public land to die?
These new rules are loaded with such booby-traps, just make sure you don’t get caught in one or you’ll be on the evening news doing the perp walk, dreading your first blind date in prison. ▫
even when accompanied with language that makes clear the products are 100 percent plantbased.”
In his decision, Judge Friot dismissed the action without prejudice “for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to plaintiffs’ lack of standing.”
While rejecting the claim that the law was unconstitutional on its face, the judge interpreted the law narrowly, saying Oklahoma’s Act “applies only to persons ‘advertising, offering for sale or selling meat,’” meaning that companies selling meat alternatives, like Tofurky, aren’t subject to the law. Tofurky declined to comment.
Similar meat-labeling laws that have been passed in Arkansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi and Texas, among other states. Many of these laws face similar legal challenges, with an Arkansas court halting the law from going into effect there, while a federal court rendered the Louisiana law irrelevant. ▫
SOME OF OUR OFFERINGS
• Custom Home on 36+ acre estate in Dragoon Mountain Ranch
• 36+ acre homesites in St David, AZ
• 80 Acre Farm land with 16” Irrigation Well in Willcox, AZ
• Custom Home on 4+ acres in Cochise, AZ
• 40 acre off grid land in Portal, AZ
Arizonahomesandlandsales.com Rick Frank, Designated Broker • 520-403-3903
REAL ESTATE GUIDE
THE SAND CAMP RANCH
The Sand Camp Ranch is a quality desert ranch with an excellent grass cover and above average improvements. Located in southern Chaves County east of the productive Pecos River Valley. The ranch is comprised of 2,380 +/- deeded acres, 6,074 NM State Lease Acres, 23,653 Federal BLM Lease Acres and 480 acres Uncontrolled, 32,107 +/- total acres (50.17 Sections). Grazing Capacity set by a Section 3 BLM grazing permit at 405 Animal Units Yearlong. The ranch is watered by five primary wells and an extensive pipeline system. This ranch is ready to go, no deferred maintenance. Price: $3,672,000. This one of the better ranches in the area. It is nicely improved and well-watered. You won’t find anything comparable for the price. Call or email for a brochure and an appointment to come take a look.
EIGHT MILE DRAW LAND
740 ± Acres of unimproved native grassland located four miles west of Roswell in the Six Mile Hill area with frontage along U.S. Highway 70/380. This parcel is fenced on three sides and adjoins 120 acres of additional land that may be purchased. Great investment. $600 per acre.
SOLD
Scott McNally, Qualifying Broker
Bar M Real Estate, LLC
P.O. Box 428, Roswell, NM 88202
Office: 575-622-5867 Cell: 575-420-1237
Website: www.ranchesnm.com
$3,800,000 SPRINGER VIEW, 29.70 +/deeded acres. Large house being remodeled, shop, trees, old irrigation pond. All back off highway with great southern aspect. 311 Hwy 56, Colfax County. $209,000 $205,000 MAXWELL FARM, 140+/- deeded acres with 103.75 +/- irrigable acres of Class A water shares. Property has a domestic water meter also utilized for livestock. Currently a flood irrigation system but would suit installing a pivot. Property is bounded on
World’s First Carbon Tax on Livestock Will Cost Farmers $100 Per Cow
BY HANNA ZIADY, CNN
Dairy farmers in Denmark face having to pay an annual tax of 672 krone ($96) per cow for the planet-heating emissions they generate.
The country’s coalition government agreed this week to introduce the world’s first carbon emissions tax on agriculture. It will mean new levies on livestock starting in 2030.
Denmark is a major dairy and pork exporter, and agriculture is the country’s biggest source of emissions. The coalition agreement — which also entails investing 40 billion krone ($3.7 billion) in measures such as reforestation and establishing wetlands — is aimed at helping the country meet its climate goals.
“With today’s agreement, we are investing billions in the biggest transformation of the Danish landscape in recent times,” Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen said in a statement Tuesday. “At the same time, we will be the first country in the world with a (carbon) tax on agriculture.”
The Danish dairy industry broadly welcomed the agreement and its goals, but it has angered some farmers.
The move comes just months after farmers held protests across Europe, blocking roads with tractors and pelting the European Parliament with eggs over a long list of complaints, including gripes about environmental regulation and excessive red tape.
The global food system is a huge contributor to the climate crisis, producing around a third of greenhouse gas emissions.
Livestock farming has a particularly big impact, accounting for around 12 percent of global emissions in 2015, according to the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization. A share of this pollution comes from methane, a potent planet-warming gas produced by cows and some other animals through their burps and manure.
proved by Denmark’s parliament later this year, will amount to 300 krone ($43) per tonne (1.1 ton) of CO2-equivalent emissions from livestock from 2030, rising to 750 krone ($107) in 2035.
A 60 percent tax break will apply, meaning that farmers will effectively be charged 120 krone ($17) per tonne of livestock emissions per year from 2030, rising to 300 krone ($43) in 2035.
With the tax break in place, that levy will rise to 1,680 krone per cow in 2035 ($241).
In the first two years, the proceeds from the tax will be used to support the agricultural industry’s green transition and then reassessed.
“The whole purpose of the tax is to get the sector to look for solutions to reduce emissions,”
Concito’s chief economist Torsten Hasforth told CNN. For example, farmers could change the feed they use.
But Danish farmers’ group Bæredygtigt Landbrug said the measures amounted to a “scary experiment.”
“We believe that the agreement is pure bureaucracy,” chairman Peter Kiær said in a statement. “We recognize that there is a climate problem… But we do not believe that this agreement will solve the problems, because it will put a spoke in the wheel of agriculture’s green investments.”
Peder Tuborgh, the CEO of Arla Foods, Europe’s largest dairy group, said the agreement was “positive” but that farmers who “genuinely do everything they can to reduce emissions” should not be subjected to a tax.
“It is essential that the tax base for a (carbon) tax is solely based on emissions for which there are means to eliminate (them),” he added in statement.
Kristian Hundeboll, the CEO of DLG Group, one of Europe’s biggest agricultural businesses and a cooperative owned by 25,000 Danish farmers, said it was “crucial for competitiveness” for the tax to be “anchored” in European Union legislation. “Neither the climate, agriculture nor the ancillary industries benefit from Denmark acting unilaterally,” he said. Laura Paddison contributed to this article. Call
Fly That Flag!
In case you have forgotten, or you attend a public school I wanted to remind everyone that Friday June 14, 2024 was officially Flag Day across the country. Flag Day celebrates the history of the United States Flag and is observed because the Second Continental Congress adopted the Stars and Stripes on June 14, 1777.
This is a very historic day as we were not yet a country and there was a price on the head of each member of the Second Continental Congress. The symbolism of the flag is as follows: Red is for valor and bravery, white is for purity and innocence, and blue represents perseverance and justice.
The U.S. Flag Code provides some flag etiquette guidelines for you: The flag may be displayed 24 hours a day when a patriotic effect is desired, and if properly illuminated when it is dark. No other flag or pennant should be above or to the right of the U.S. flag. The flag should never touch anything beneath it such as the ground. It should only be displayed upside down
as a distress signal.
Remember on June 10, 2023
President Biden’s White House displayed the pride flag between two American flags and violated the U.S. Flag Code. There was certainly a flag displayed to the “right” of the American flag in that instance. They caught lots of flack for it and thankfully did not repeat the faux pas this year.
Betsy Ross, an upholsterer in Philadelphia, was chosen to make a flag after she was visited by George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Morris, and her uncle George Ross. Betsy was quite clever and changed their original design just a little. She converted the 6-pointed stars to five points. This was approved by the founding fathers and the first flag was born.
Soon it will be the 4th of July which celebrates our independence from Great Britain following the American Revolutionary War. One of the most interesting 4th of July stories is that of our 2nd President John Adams who was raised on a New England farm; along with Thomas Jefferson our 3rd President who was a dedicated farmer and farm machinery designer; and America’s 5th President James Monroe a plantation owner in North Carolina.
All three men served as President of the United States and all three died on the Fourth of
Supreme Court Blocks EPA’s ‘Good Neighbor’ Air Pollution Rule
BY AMY HOWE
Near the end of their session, the US Supreme Court temporarily blocked a rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to reduce air pollution from power plants and other industrial facilities in 23 states. By a vote of 5-4, the justices granted a request from three states, as well as several companies and trade associations affected by the rule, to put the rule on hold while a challenge to it continues in a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C.
Justice Neil Gorsuch, whose mother Anne Burford McGill served as the head of the EPA during the Reagan administration, wrote for the majority.
or “shadow” – docket. It stems from the EPA’s interpretation of a law known as the “good neighbor” provision of the Clean Air Act, which requires “upwind” states to reduce emissions that affect the air quality in “downwind” states.
Nearly a decade ago, the EPA issued new air-quality standards for ozone pollution, which can cause major health problems when it is present at high levels. The issuance of the new standards triggered an obligation for states to submit plans in which they indicated both how they would comply with the new standards and how they would reduce emissions affecting the air quality in downwind states.
July. Don’t forget that President Jefferson had been the primary author of the Declaration of Independence at the beginning of the American Revolution. Adams and Jefferson were bitter opponents serving in opposite political parties. John Adams served one term as President and was defeated by Thomas Jefferson in his run for a second term.
Even though they were great political adversaries they wrote several letters to each other in later years and became friends. Both died on July 4th, 1826. President Adams died first, and President Jefferson died later in the day. James Monroe who had been the 5th President died on July 4th, 1831.
Here we are 248 years later and this American experiment of a free republic is still working. Boy, do we have our ups and downs. As Canadian broadcaster Gordon Sinclair once remarked, “When the Americans have scandals they don’t hide it. They put it right in the front window for everyone to see.”
That is so very true and we always figure out a way to solve the problem. When you get up in the morning and are crawling on the back of a horse, or a tractor, or in a truck remember you owe a debt of gratitude to our founding fathers, and we do that by honoring our flag. ▫
the dispute. He acknowledged that the plan would improve the air quality in “downwind” states. But on the other hand, he continued, if the EPA did not act properly in adopting the plan, it would infringe on the states’ interests “in regulating their own industries and citizens.” Moreover, he continued, requiring the challengers to comply with the plan while litigation continues could cost them “hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars.”
Reducing
The tax, expected to be ap-
Thursday’s ruling came in one of the relatively rare disputes to come to the Supreme Court through its emergency appeals –
In 2023, the EPA rejected plans submitted by 21 states, which had not proposed any changes to their emissions plans. The EPA then published its own plan that would cover those 21 states as well as two more states that had not submitted plans.
Three of those states – Ohio, Indiana, and Virginia – went to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to challenge the EPA’s plan, as did several companies and trade associations. That court declined to put the plan on hold while litigation continued, prompting the challengers to ask the Supreme Court to intervene. In December, the justices agreed to fast-track the case for oral argument in February.
In an opinion by Gorsuch that was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh, the court granted the challengers’ request to put the plan on hold for now.
Gorsuch explained that allowing the plan to remain in place would affect both sides of
Given the considerations on both sides of the debate, Gorsuch continued, the key question in deciding whether to put the plan on hold temporarily is whether the challengers are ultimately likely to prevail on their argument that the plan is flawed. Here, Gorsuch reasoned, the scale tips in favor of the challengers, because the EPA did not explain why the emissions-control measures required by the plan – which were based on the assumption that the plan would apply to all 23 states – should still apply even if (as eventually happened) fewer states remained in the plan.
This article was originally published at Howe on the Court. ▫
Editor’s Note: The United Nations has been challenged on this statement. Studies found that beef cattle grazing on U.S. land is the equivalent of taking almost
Springfield Armory’s “Trapdoor Rifles”
History,
Evolution & Production
At the end of the War Between the States, the U.S. Government had over one million single-shot, muzzle-loading .58 caliber muskets of the Springfield variety. While many of these were still serviceable, wartime experience had shown that muzzle-loaders were becoming obsolete. Loading them was difficult, and repeated firing made them even harder to load. Soldiers frequently failed to load them properly in the heat of battle, causing the weapon to malfunction.
By this time, most European armies had already adopted breech loading arms due to these defects. After the war, the U.S. faced the possibility of conflict with France, which had installed a puppet government in Mexico while the U.S. was distracted by the Civil War. Many Americans believed war would be necessary to dislodge the French-backed Emperor Maximilian. However, a postwar administration was still reluctant to scrap large numbers of usable weapons and initiate a costly replacement program, so the Ordnance Department was directed to convert the existing muzzle-loaders to a breech-loading arm.
The Allin Conversion
The system selected for conversion was a relatively simple one developed by Erskine S. Allin, the Master Armorer of Springfield Armory. This conversion consisted of removing the top portion of the rear of the barrel and replacing it with a hinged breech block, soon nicknamed the “Trapdoor.” Five thousand Model 1865 conversions were produced utilizing the older muskets and retaining their .58 caliber. This basic “Trapdoor” design lasted more than 25 years, with some modifications along the way.
The .58 caliber was considered too large for a cartridge weapon, so in 1866, the rifle was redesigned and converted to .50 caliber, and the new cartridge was center-fire instead of rimfire. The Model 1866 made its battle debut on July 31, 1867, in the famous “Wagon Box Fight” near Fort Phil Kearney in the Wyoming Territory. Here, 28 soldiers and four civilians under the command of Major Powell held off repeated attacks by Chief Red Cloud’s vastly superior force, demonstrating the value of these new breech-loaders.
In 1868 and again in 1870, under the influence of Major J.G. Benton, the new commanding officer of Springfield Armory, further improvements were made. The caliber remained at .50, but new barrels were made, rather than relining the old muzzle-loader barrels. Surplus Civil War parts continued to be used on the remainder of the weapon however. The Model 1870 was similar to the 1868, except for a few minor modifications such as a shortened receiver and a changed rear sight. In 1869, a cadet version was also introduced.
Model 1873 “Trapdoor” Rifle
Major changes took place in 1873, based on the recommendations of the Ordnance Board under Brig. Gen. A.H. Terry. The resulting Model 1873 saw the caliber reduced and Springfield Armory produced the entire weapon from new parts. The new cartridge adopted was the .45-70, meaning it was a .45 caliber backed by 70 grains of black powder (the bullet weighed in at 405 grains). As with most other 19th-century Springfield arms, the Model 1873 was produced in three variations: a rifle (overall length 52 inches) for foot soldiers; a carbine (41 inches) for mounted troops; and a “cadet rifle” (49 inches) for use by cadets.
Continuing Evolution: Models 1879 and 1884
Continuing gradual improvements in the basic trapdoor design led to new model designations in 1879 and 1884. Because of changes, as well as later repairs and modifications, it is often difficult to find two trapdoors exactly alike, even though the operating mechanism remained essentially the same. The Model 1884 was also designed to handle the newer .45-70 (500 grain cartridge)— the same as used in the Gatling Gun. This heavier bullet provided for more complete combustion of powder in the barrel and packed a little more wallop.
The Final Model: 1888
The final model of the famous “.45-70 Trapdoor” series, was the Model 1888. It had a distinguishing feature of a combination cleaning rod and bayonet. What appears to be a ramrod is actually a cleaning rod which will pull out and snap into place to form a pencil-thin bayonet. All of the earlier models were designed for a more conventional, detachable triangular socket style bayonet.
Serial Number Ranges and Production Figures (all models 1873-1893)
The production figures below reveal the output of Springfield Armory’s “Trapdoor” rifles. These figures are organized by yearly production numbers and serial number ranges (they were first serialized in 1873):
1873: Production commenced with 1,950 units (serial numbers up to 1,950).
1874: Units produced were 33,268 (ending with serial number 35,218).
1875: Units produced were 25,107 (ending with serial number 60,325).
1876: Production figures were 13,888 units (ending with serial number 74,213).
1877: Units produced were only 2,512 (ending with serial number 76,725).
1878: Production increased to 23,670 units (ending with serial number 100,395).
1879: Production was 18,878 units (ending with serial number 119,273).
1880: Units produced were 25,246 (ending with serial number 144,519).
1881: Production figures were 20,377 units (ending with serial number 164,896).
1882: Units produced were up to 28,919 (ending with serial number 193,815).
1883: Production figures again increased to 34,756 units (ending with serial number 228,571).
1884: Units produced were up to 35,305 (ending with serial number 263,876).
1885: The most prolific year ever with 42,178 units (ending with serial number 306,054).
1886: Units produced were 40,721 (ending with serial number 346,775).
1887: Production figures were 40,870 units (ending with serial number 387,645).
1888: Units produced were 41,124 (ending with serial number 428,769).
1889: Production was 41,525 units (ending with serial number 470,294).
1890: Units produced were 32,246 (ending with serial number 502,540).
1891: Production figures were 31,140 units (ending with serial number 533,681).
1892: Units produced were 24,441 (ending with serial number 558,122).
1893: Units produced were only 9,760 (ending with serial number 567,882).
The End of an Era
The Springfield Model 1873 “Trapdoor” had been the standard issue long arm of all U.S. Cavalry units from 1874 to 1896. The end of the era came in 1892, with the U.S. Government adopting a bolt-action repeating rifle known as the Krag-Jorgensen which gradually replaced the old “Trapdoor” rifles. Many units however, carried their old .45-70s into the Spanish-American War of 1898, marking this the last time they saw official action.
Role in History
The Springfield “Trapdoor” rifle, despite being largely outdated in both propellant and loading system even before the government adopted them, remain highly desirable in collector circles to this day. Their unique loading system, numerous varieties, and aesthetically pleasing, yet simple components, make them a cherished part of U.S. Military history. Somewhere around 600,000 units were produced during the second half of the 19th century, serving the army well during a colorful (and often controversial) period of American history, spanning from just after the Civil War through the closing of the Frontier era.
Wade Leist Wins World Livestock Auctioneer Championship
When Wade Leist first came back to the family’s stockyards from auctioneer school in 2004, his dad didn’t exactly turn the auctions over to him — and he says that’s a good thing. Instead, the elder Leist started his son out selling a few baby calves here and there, and spending plenty of time working in the back.
The tactic paid off, as 20 years later, Leist came out on top in the World Livestock Auctioneer Championship, hosted by Livestock Marketing Association. It was the ninth time to compete for the auctioneer who regularly sells at Mitchell Livestock Marketing, Mitchell, South Dakota, United Producers Inc., St. Louis, Michigan, and his family’s Northern Michigan Livestock, Gaylord, Michigan.
The bid-caller earned his spot in the contest by winning the Torrington, Wyoming, qualifier last fall. He and 29 other semi-finalists battled it out in Oklahoma City June 12 through 15, participating in an interview competition and then selling on the block at the Oklahoma National Stockyards.
As the new champion, Leist will spend the next year traveling the country, sharing his auctioneering skills with other livestock auction markets and acting as a spokesperson on behalf of the association and the livestock marketing industry. It’s something he looks forward to — and a responsibility he doesn’t take lightly.
“I can’t wait to go to work,” he said. “Both for the people who have supported me along the way, but also those who have never heard of me and are just excited to have the champion come sell.
“Auction market owners care for and work hard for their producer customers. That they would invite me to come and represent them means a tremendous amount to me.”
Dakota Davis, Waukomis, Oklahoma, was named reserve champion, and Dean Edge, Rimbey, Alberta, Canada, was runner-up. Jace Thompson, Billings, Montana, was the high score rookie and Barrett Simon, Rosalia, Kansas, had the top interview score. Rounding out the top 10 were: Justin Dodson, Welch, Oklahoma; Eric Drees, Caldwell, Idaho; Brennin Jack, Virden, Manitoba, Canada; Sixto Paiz, Portales, New Mexico; and Zach Zumstein, Marsing, Idaho.
Oregon, Wyoming Senators Propose Bill to Expand Grazing on Federal Land
Source: The Center Square
U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, introduced a bipartisan bill this week in hopes of supporting ranchers who graze their livestock on federal lands. Wyden filed the Operational Flexibility Grazing Management Program Act with U.S. Senator John Barrasso, R-Wyoming.
“After embracing the Bureau of Land Management pilot program, ranchers in eastern Oregon worked closely with me to include updated operational flexibility in my community-crafted Malheur Community Empowerment for the Owyhee Act to bring certainty, conservation, and economic opportunity to the forefront of Malheur County’s future,” Wyden said in a press release.
“Today I’m pleased to work with Senator Barrasso to build on the work of Oregon ranchers to give the rest of the West the tools to adapt in real time to the changing conditions and seasonal variations in weather brought
on by the climate crisis as they manage grazing on rangelands. These authorities will recognize the ranchers who choose to use them as active participants in improving the ecological health of our public lands.”
Wyden’s office said the bill would improve the management of livestock grazing on federal lands by allowing livestock operators to adapt and respond to emergencies, like droughts or wildfires, more flexibly.
“The Federal Government owns over 52 percent of the land mass in Oregon, much of this land is open space used for livestock grazing and recreation,” Matt McElligott, President of the Oregon Cattlemen’s Association, said.
“The flexibility given in this Act will put the management decisions of these lands in the hands of local range scientists and permittees that lease them.
Oregon public lands ranchers are committed to environmental stewardship through science-based management. Public lands ranchers sequester carbon, protect valuable wildlife habitat, and reduce the incidence of wildfire by the removal of fine fuels on the landscape. Our public lands ranchers are critical in the economic viability of Oregon’s rural economy. This Act is a step in the right direction in responsible management of Federally owned lands in Oregon and throughout the Western United States.”
If it becomes law, the Operational Flexibility Grazing Management Program Act would do the following, the release said:
· Expand a national grazing program at the Bureau of Land Management that will allow for approved grazing permittees to have more flexibility in how they manage the federal rangelands they utilize.
■ Require the BLM to develop and authorize flexible grazing use alternatives at the request of grazing permittee or lessee, in consultation with the affected federal and state agencies, applicable Tribes, and other affected parties within the allotment.
■ Provide for adjustable pasture rotation dates up to 14 days before and after the specified timeframe to respond to changes in weather, forage production, fire, drought, market conditions, or other temporary conditions.
■ Require BLM to establish cooperative monitoring plans and rangeland health objectives to monitor and evaluate the impact of the program in coordination with the permittees.
The cattle industry is Oregon’s top agricultural commodity, generating over $900 million annually for the state’s economy.
Most of the state’s cattle ranches are in Malheur, Morrow, Harney, Klamath, and Lake counties. These cattle graze on private and federal rangelands and timberlands; they graze arid land unsuitable for farming, according to Oregon Fresh. ▫
Trespassing
Cattle Trespass
Let’s head up to northern New Mexico and visit the Valles Caldera National Preserve.
About 1.2 million years ago a volcanic eruption created a 14mile wide circle-shaped depression in the earth, which became referred to as the Valles Caldera. The area been through quite a few phases, but most recently it has gone from private ownership, to federal ownership managed by a trust, to now being under control of the National Park Service.
That wasn’t enough for the enviros and now they want to have less grazing on the Forest Service allotments abutting the national preserve. How do they go about this? File a lawsuit.
Three different outfits – WildEarth Guardians, Western Watershed Project, and Caldera Action - have filed suit against the Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for violating the Endangered Species Act.
ness. And according to research by John Fowler at NMSU the allotments which abut the wilderness have received larger cuts in their permits than all the other allotments in the Gila. That could very well be the model they are attempting to impose on the Valles Caldera National Preserve and surrounding areas.
One has to ask. If these lands are so precious and under great threat, why doesn’t the government build the fence? The annual budget for the Park Service is $4.3 billion. You know there is plenty money there to build a fence.
Fed Trespass
It is more apparent every day that the short term modus operandi of the enviros and their ilk will be to utilize the president’s authority to designate national monuments. It appears there is a list for those designations to occur prior to the election, and additional areas to occur after the election, especially if Biden is not re-elected. There is also the possibility that an omnibus public lands bill is pushed this fall. In that case, the president and the enviros could use that second list as leverage to get the omnibus passed. Support the omnibus bill or I will designate this number of monuments in your district.
The suit says the preserve is home to several threatened and endangered species, including the Mexican Spotted Owl, Jemez Mountain salamander, and New Mexico meadow jumping mouse. The complaint says, “Historic livestock overgrazing degraded these species’ habitats, and only since the National Park Service assumed responsibility for the area and curtailed livestock use have these species returned to the preserve.” They also claim that each summer, “hundreds of cattle from the National Forest unlawfully trespass onto the Preserve, causing severe resource damage and harming these protected species and their habitats.”
Continuing, it claims the U.S. Forest Service “has long been aware of the ongoing livestock trespass and its substantial impacts on both the Preserve and the listed species and their habitats.” Further, it says the Forest Service, “has never consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding these well-known effects of its grazing program as required by the ESA.” It also chastises the Forest Service because it has not, “taken adequate measures to prevent this recurring and foreseeable livestock trespass.”
Can you guess their proposed remedy? Sure you can, but here it is officially from the suit:
“…this Court (1) declare that the Forest Service and FWS have violated the ESA…(2) declare that the Forest Service has further violated the ESA by causing unlawful take of threatened and endangered species, failing to ensure that its actions do not jeopardize such species, and failing to take necessary steps to conserve such species; (3) vacate any existing AOIs for the Allotments; (4) enjoin the Forest Service from authorizing grazing on the Allotments until the agency fully complies with the ESA.”
We are probably heading for a situation like they have in the Gila National Forest. Livestock grazing has been completely eliminated in the Gila Wilder-
One example of this process playing out can be seen in the attempt to designate a Dolores River Canyonlands National Monument. Enviros there want the president to designate 400,000 acres (625 square miles) of river and land as a national monument. However, in this case, there is an alternative proposal.
Colorado’s two senators have introduced S. 636, the Dolores River National Conservation Area and Special Management Area Act. This bill would place protective designations on 68 thousand acres. The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources has held hearings, and after three amendments were adopted the bill has been favorably reported for the consideration of the entire Senate.
Let’s compare the two modes of governing here.
On the one hand you have legislation where everyone can see the text. Hearings have been held, debate has occurred, amendments adopted and a Senate committee has voted in an open and democratic process.
On the other, the enviros did not get what they wanted, so they have turned to the autocratic process. Public hearings are held, but what are they commenting on? What does the grazing language say? We don’t know. What about the language on roads, right-of-ways, or hunting? We don’t know, and won’t know until the president has issued his proclamation.
In the first instance, the public can be fully involved in crafting and passing legislation. In the second, enviros and the White House, working completely in the dark and out of public view, will write the language to control your future.
Until next time, be a nuisance to the devil and don’t forget to check that cinch.