Riding Herd
“The greatest homage we can pay to truth is to use it.”
by LEE PITTS
– JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL
March 15, 2018 • www.aaalivestock.com
Volume 60 • No. 3
Zinke’s Zoo
BY LEE PITTS
M
any years ago I worked an auction for a well known hunter’s organization. Prior to the sale there was a presentation from a rep sent out from national headquarters to explain about all the work they did for the hunters and why their dues were so high. Since most ranchers I know also like to hunt, prior to that evening I had assumed hunters and ranchers would be on the same side in defending the multiple-use concept on our public lands. After the comments made that evening I specifically remember thinking on my drive home that if push ever came to shove, the hunters would definitely NOT be on the rancher’s side. Well folks, push has now come to shove and you’re on your own.
Zinke The Zealot
NEWSPAPER PRIORITY HANDLING
BIAS ALERT: Even though I optimistically voted for Donald Trump, from day one I’ve never been a fan of his appointment to head the Department of the Interior. Even diehard Trumpsters must admit that some of his appointments have been questiionable, and in some cases, unmitigated disasters. With each passing day Ryan Zinke’s appointment to head the Interior is looking
If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop diggin’. more and more like one of those disasters. Oh sure, Zinke has the resume to be a bureaucrat. He has a B.S. degree in geology, an M.B.A. and an M.S. in global leadership and was a U.S. Navy SEAL from 1986 until 2008. In fact, he was the first Navy SEAL to be elected to the U.S. House of Representatives and rumor has it that someday he’d like to follow in Trump’s footsteps and be Pres-
ident. Trump tabbed Zinke to run the Interior Department after being urged to do so by Donald Trump Jr. who was a hunting buddy of Zinke’s. Zinke says he’s a strong advocate for multiple use on public lands, except in his case, Zinke seems to think that “multiple use” refers to elk, deer and ducks, not ranchers, miners, foresters or roustabouts. Even his admirers admit that Zinke is a zealot when
it comes to hunting. Here are just some of the gifts the lifelong sportsman from Montana has given hunters in just his first year: Zinke expanded hunting and fishing opportunities at 10 national wildlife refuges; directed bureaus to open hunting and fishing on all national monument lands where legally allowed; finalized a land acquisition to make the Sabinoso Wilderness Area accessible to hunters for the first time ever. A recent Interior press release freely admits that, “Secretary Zinke has prioritized sportsmen’s access and healthy herds during his tenure at the Department.” Zinke chose a hunting expo in Utah to present his biggest gift yet to hunters and fishermen. A gift that The Free Range Report says will be “the
continued on page two
Opinion: CME Reverses Course on Addressing Cattle Market Volatility BY KENNY GRANER / AGRI-PULSE OPINION
F
our months after the CME Group “declared victory over cattle market volatility” (Reuters, Oct. 11), the futures exchange offered yet another surprise for the cattle industry. On Feb. 1, the CME issued an advisory notice to the marketplace that stated three delivery points would not renew their participation on the Live Cattle Futures Contract: North Platte, NE; Columbus, NE, and Pratt, KS. We understand that participating in the delivery mechanism on the contract places an onus on the stockyard and we respect any individual stockyard’s decision to participate in the contract, but a reduction in delivery capacity on the Live Cattle futures contract is unacceptable. The discontinuation of those delivery locations directly follows a year where the United States Cattlemen’s Association (USCA) worked diligently with CME and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to address cattle marketplace volatility by adding delivery locations to the contract. (USCA Letter to CME, Feb. 2017). The withdrawal of North Platte, Columbus and Pratt from the contract amounts to an estimated 10 percent immediate reduction in the
weekly deliverable supply capacity, according to the CFTC’s rules and regulations. The annual approval process was a key feature of the 2017 contract changes that was meant to ensure financial soundness and physical infrastructure of participating yards was sufficient to ensure the health and safety of the cattle, the yard crew, and the USDA graders. It was also the direct result of CME’s neglect of the physical delivery infrastructure which manifested in the removal of the yard at Norfolk, NE nearly four months after it went out of business. The annual renewal process was not meant for CME to passively watch the delivery capacity dwindle on the contract. Annual applications to the CME for renewal of regularity are due prior to January 1, so the Exchange had at least one month to anticipate and address any reductions or withdrawals of regularity on the contract. This is particularly egregious given that our letter to the CME offered eight suggested delivery locations, of which the CME successfully added three of those recommendations to the contract: Kearney, NE; Lexington, NE; West Point, NE. Even though the typical review process is one month, the application for regularity from Dunlap, IA has been languishing continued on page four
If Butt For A Name
T
here’s a fad occurring in the western world that I’d like to encourage. Ranch people are naming their kids rodeo-inspired words. I’m not talking about names like Freckles, Ote, Tibbs Ty, Tuff, Trevor, Tomkins, Luke, Lane, Beaver, Monty, Mahan, Shoulders, Charmayne, Ace, Jake or Walt. Although all of these are excellent names. (My personal favorite is Shoulders. With a name like Shoulders the kid is already half way to winning the world in steer wrestling.) What I’m referring to is the use of nouns for names. What inspired this column was a Christmas card I got from my good friend Jimmy who named his daughter Dally. From her photo I can tell she’s as beautiful as her name. It’s got a good ring to it, don’t you think? And if Dally decides to become a rodeo star, and she’s already on her way, can’t you see what an advantage it will be at the pay window? There won’t be a rope, saddle, boot, or hat company that won’t be offering Dally big bucks to promote their products. I’ve met a couple youngsters recently with the first name “Cinch” and I can see the dollar signs roll like the wheels on a slot machine in the eyes of their parents. This is great strategic thinking and I can see Cinch Jeans throwing dollars at their namesakes in the future. Of course, this would also hold true for any kids name Levi. But you have to pick the right company, after all, my name is Lee and I’ve never had the jeans company of the same name offer me a multimillion dollar endorsement deal. Or even a free pair of pants, for that matter. I’ve also heard of kids being named Buck, Rope, Riggin and Sorrel. Isn’t Sorrel a pretty name for a gal? I personally know a Bronc and a Bull, although I’ve yet to meet a Bodacious. I think Bull is the perfect name for
continued on page seven
ELM
Livestock Market Digest
TO SACRAMENTO HWY 4
STOCKTON
J17 M AR
IPOSA
SALE SITE
RD
VALLEY HOME
HWY 99 OAKDALE
HWY 120 ESCALON
SALE MANTECA HEADQUARTERS
MODESTO
#N
TO FRESNO
Facility located at: 25525 East Lone Tree Road, Escalon, CA 95320
ESCALON LIVESTOCK MARKET, INC.
LIVESTOCK SALES 3 days per week on
Monday, Wednesday, & Friday MONDAY: Beef Cattle
FRIDAY: Small Animals
WEDNESDAY: Dairy Cattle
Poultry – Butcher Cows
NTS IGNME S N O C OME! WELC r more Call fo ation inform ning sig on con stock. your
MIGUEL A. MACHADO President Office: 209/838-7011 Mobile: 209/595-2014
JOE VIEIRA Representative Mobile: 209/531-4156 THOMAS BERT 209/605-3866
March 15, 2018
ZOO
FARMINGTON
Page 2
CJ BRANTLEY Field Representative 209/596-0139
www.escalonlivestockmarket.com • escalonlivestockmarket@yahoo.com
CAREN COWAN..........Publisher LEE PITTS....................Executive Editor CHUCK STOCKS.........Publisher Emeritus RANDY SUMMERS......Sales Rep LYNN MARIE RUSAW...Sales Rep
RANDY SUMMERS, 505/850-8544 email: rjsauctioneer@aol.com
LYNN MARIE RUSAW, 505/243-9515 email: AAALivestockMarketDigest@gmail.com
MARGUERITE VENSEL..Office Manager JESSICA DECKER..........Special Assistance CHRISTINE CARTER......Graphic Designer
Endangered Species Act on steroids.”
Zesty Zinke’s Zeal for Hunting According to Zinke, “Secretarial Order 3362 will improve wildlife management and conservation and expand opportunities for big game hunting by improving priority habitats within important and migration corridors across the West. Priority states currently include Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.” In introducing his Order Zinke said, “We all know that animals go where animals want to go, and more often than not that’s dependent upon natural features like watersheds, rather than whether land is owned by the BLM, state, or private landowners. We need to manage appropriately. My goal is healthy herds for American hunters and wildlife watchers, and this order will help establish better migration corridors for some of North America’s most iconic big game species like elk, mule deer and antelope. American hunters are the backbone of big game conservation efforts, and now working with state and private landowners, the Department will leverage its land management and scientific expertise to both study the migration habits of wildlife as well as identify ways to improve the habitat. For example, this can be done by working with ranchers to modify their fences, working with states to collaborate on sage brush restoration, or working with scientists to better understand migration routes.” Zinke didn’t state who would pay for these new fences or what might happen when these animals strayed from their migration corridor and demolished a rancher’s alfalfa field or destroyed the fence the rancher had to put up as a result of Order 3362. Zinke promised that soon he’d name a coordinator “to work with appropriate states, federal agencies, nongovernmental organizations and others to optimize connections between wetlands and other migration and wintering habitat.” What Zinke did not talk about at the hunter’s confab was how this measure would impact ranchers, farmers, miners, foresters and private property owners whose land just happens to fall into one of these migration corridors. The last time I read about wildlife migration corridors was in 1992 when Agenda 21 was introduced to the UN Earth Summit in Rio De Janeiro. It’s a radical action plan long endorsed by Earth First and other radical green groups that can be executed at local, national, and global levels to socialize land ownership and redistribute wealth. Zinke’s Order 3362 sounds like it came straight from the pag-
continued from page one
es of Agenda 21 and is even more radical than anything the Obama administration ever dreamed up.
Green Groups Get Zany Over Zinke After Zinke signed Order 3362 environmental groups are giddy over the exciting possibilities of the legislation. Groups as diverse on the political spectrum as the National Wildlife Federation to the National Rifle Association were arm and arm, singing kumbaya and doing handstands over the measure. • Collin O’Mara, president of the National Wildlife Federation said, “Together, we can and must restore important habitat, mitigate physical barriers to migration, prevent conflicts with energy development, reduce disease transmission from domestic livestock, and protect genetic diversity — all of which will help ensure safe passage and survival for some of America’s most majestic species.” • Safari Club International President Paul Babaz wrote, “Recognizing this most recent Secretarial Order, Safari Club International applauds Secretary Zinke for his leadership in conservation and wildlife management. It is part of important ongoing efforts to enhance meaningful conservation of wildlife that results in benefits for all, including the millions of hunters throughout the country.” • Blake Henning, the Chief Conservation Officer for the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation said, “The goal of this effort lies at the heart of our conservation mission, ensuring the future of elk, other wildlife, their habitat and our hunting heritage. In order to do that we must maintain a focus on winter range and migration corridors for elk and other wildlife. We support stronger collaboration between landowners, agencies, conservation groups like RMEF and all others seeking to enhance habitat for the benefit of our wildlife populations.” • Mule Deer Foundation President, Miles Moretti said, “We greatly appreciate Secretary Zinke’s commitment to improving the habitat quality of big game migratory corridors and winter range on lands managed by the department’s bureaus. We pledge our wholehearted support and engagement to implement Secretarial Order 3362.” After a day spent drumming up support for 3362 Zinke said, “Protecting wildlife corridors will make sure our kids, our kids’ kids, will have the same opportunities we did to hunt and fish.” He also said that mule deer were “kind of a bellwether of the health of all the other species included in our legacy of hunting and fishing.” So now when the history of the west is written we wonder, continued on page four
March 15, 2018
Livestock Market Digest
Page 3
Page 4
Livestock Market Digest
March 15, 2018
ZOO
continued from page two
will the greenies speak of mule deer in the same reverential tones they previously reserved only for the spotted owl, the wolf and the lesser prairie chicken?
Zinke Zigs And Zags Not everyone was as enthusiastic as the green groups with Order 3362. The best response we’ve found in opposition was written by Clifford C. Nichols, Esq. a former research associate of The Heritage Foundation and now an attorney licensed to practice law in both California and New Mexico. (The entirety of his comments can be found at The Free Range Report’s web site, freerangereport.com.) Nichols wrote, “The unanswered question is whether Zinke’s Order will eventually afford “game animals” a protected legal status similar to that of “endangered species”? If it does, the adverse effects of this Order will likely far exceed just the “modification” of a few fences. It will adversely effect some entire industries that operate in the West, i.e. ranching, oil and gas, mining and logging. “Although perhaps deliberately vague, it does not require much imagination to foresee that such directives will certainly have material future adverse impacts on industries throughout the West, even though the exact nature of any specific individual future effects may not yet be defined. The regulatory nightmare that this Order may unleash has yet to unfurl. But it’s inevitable that unfurl it will,” wrote Nichols. According to the attorney, “Zinke has essentially issued
his Deputy a blank check to create and enforce in the future any laws, policies, rules and regulations that he or she feels are, or may be, appropriate to fulfill his or her mandate. These future regulations, once enacted, will carry the full force and effect of becoming federal law. The question remaining unanswered is: just what adverse impact will they have on the businesses and therefore livelihoods of people living in the West? “Given these provisos,” wrote Nichols, “first consider the enormous areas of land in the West that Zinke intends to make subject to his Order’s mandates. His Department alone controls over 245 million acres in the West.” Add to that all the millions of acres controlled by all the other federal and state agencies. “Next, it is important to note that buried in the language is an indication that the Order may be intended to protect more than only “Big Game” like elk, deer and antelope. In fact, is it not even limited to protecting only mammals. Tucked in the language are references to birds (e.g. grouse), and evidently also “game” that may be “fished.” Thus, it might be fair to conclude that the habitats and migratory corridors of all game animals are to be protected by Zinke’s Order – whether they are mammals, fish or fowl – both large and small.” Nichols says, “This would bring both the skies above, and all lakes, ponds and waterways found within or running through any public lands in the West within the scope of the Order’s mandates. Then, one must also not overlook the fact that the Or-
For Advertising Contact:
Lynn Marie Rusaw
Office: 505-243-9515 Email: AAALivestockMarketDigest@gmail.com
Ryan Zinke
der is also expressly intended to protect the migratory corridors of all such game animals. For that, the map has yet to be drawn.” “There is yet another hidden blank check issued by Zinke’s Order that can only further impair those same businesses,” said Nichols. “That is the one issued to that sect embedded within the environmental movement that is committed to bankrupting and/or eradicating all productive businesses operating in the vicinity of any public lands in the West via the bringing of an onslaught of never–ending litigation. And Zinke’s Order will give them every incentive to do so. “It offers such enviro-litigators yet another path by which they may further exploit U.S. taxpayers via the Equal Access
to Justice Act. This Act allows enviro-litigators to receive compensation from the federal government for suing the federal government to achieve the environmentalists’ objectives under the pretense of protecting some animal. “When one considers the above language of Zinke’s Order, one can only imagine the lawsuits they might bring in the future to compel the federal government to “avoid development,” “minimize development” or “limit disturbances” caused by good people … industrious people … people like ranchers, wildcatters, miners or loggers who just happen to be attempting to make a living at a location near the habitat or migratory corridor of some form of protected wildlife.” Nichols says that going forward the greenies don’t even need to pretend any more that animals are endangered and need protection. “They will only need to be recognized by the courts as “game animals” covered by the Order of Zinke.” Finally, Nichols asks, “How many millions of families, jobs and businesses throughout the West should America be willing to impair, injure or sacrifice in order to achieve the vague goals of Secretary Zinke’s Order 3362?”
Zinke’s A Zero Why it is that some of the most anti-private property rights legislation is signed into law by Republican Presidents
CMCE for the last nine months despite the fact that it is a well-operated and staffed facility that meets all the requirements for regularity. We need these delivery locations to be available on the contract whether or not they regularly receive deliveries on the Live Cattle contract. In a properly functioning market, the ability to make and take delivery on the contract is critical to keeping the futures market in line with the cash market. The lack of stakeholder engagement and failure to move swiftly to address the reduction in capacity is not only ill-advised from a market integrity perspective, it’s bad business. Should we continue on this path, the futures board will certainly revert back to the irregular volatility that brought us to this point, which undermined confidence in the market. Since CME made changes to the contract and improved the delivery procedures, volume has been up; open interest is up. The Live Cattle Futures Contract is and can continue to be a profitable venture for the CME Group – but they need to keep on moving towards that goal, part of which is incentivizing sale barns to participate on the contract as approved delivery locations. In a hearing before the Senate Agriculture Committee, Joe Goggins, on behalf of USCA, requested that “the Committee work with the CFTC and relevant market participants to ensure disruptive trading practices are prohibited so as to not compromise the foundation and role of the futures market as a risk management tool for cattle producers”. We commend U.S. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts and Ranking Member Debbie Stabenow for continuing that dialogue – most recently, the Committee hosted a hearing with CFTC Chairman J.
who you’d think would want to protect the rights of property owners and those who use public land as part of the multiple use concept? On December 28, 1973 it was Republican Richard Nixon who enthusiastically signed the Endangered Species Act and made it the law of the land. He bragged at the time about, “Protecting a heritage which we hold in trust to countless future generations of our fellow citizens. Their lives will be richer, and America will be more beautiful in the years ahead, thanks to the measure that I have the pleasure of signing into law today.” I don’t know of a single rancher, logger, miner or private property owner whose life has been made “richer” or more “beautiful” by the Endangered Species Act. And now a Republican Interior Secretary has signed another measure that has the potential to make the Endangered Species Act look as harmless as a Sisters of Mercy auction for an orphanage. Pardon me for having a little fun fun with the letter “z” in this story. It’s just that as a writer I don’t get that many chances to use the last letter of the alphabet. I can only think of one more word that starts with “z” and it’s the score I’d give Zinke so far on a scale of one to ten when grading the job he’s done for property owners and public land users in the West. That would be a very big ZERO!
continued from page one
Christopher Giancarlo. We were encouraged by statements made during the hearing by both the Chairman and Senators that showed a strong interest and awareness of the need for properly functioning contracts, especially in the livestock industry. In particular, we applaud Chairman Giancarlo’s statement that “it’s vitally important for the [CFTC] to keep an eye on how contracts, especially in agricultural markets, are working to let those that operate those contracts at the Exchange know their responsibilities to keep these contracts fresh and updated…because they need to serve our ag users.” Despite that message from the CFTC, the CME remains unmotivated to finish the work they started and address the volatility concerns that plague the cattle marketplace. The futures board has always been a tool for cattle producers to mitigate risk, but the ongoing uncertainty associated with the CME’s administration of the Live Cattle Futures Contract will deter members of the cattle industry from using these markets. This will prove most consequential for young and beginning farmers and ranchers, who borrow the majority of their operating funds from the banks. Without confidence in the ability to hedge risk in a volatile futures market, producers will not be able to secure operating loans from lenders. Ensuring that the fundamentals of the cattle market are working properly is a basic tenet that the industry needs to work towards in 2018. USCA will continue to be at the forefront of these conversations, and we look forward to working with industry stakeholders in reducing marketplace volatility and strengthening the bottom line of U.S. cattle producers.
March 15, 2018
Livestock Market Digest
Page 5
Cattle and Grass – A Symbiotic Relationship BY HEATHER SMITH THOMAS
G
rass and grazing animals evolved together. In Africa vast herds of grazing species continually roam the grasslands. In North America the bison, pronghorn antelope and elk grazed the plains. In mountainous western areas, elk, deer, bighorn sheep, mountain goats and smaller cousins of the plains bison (the “mountain buffalo”, which became extinct in the late 1800’s) grazed the more rugged regions. The native vegetation on our continent evolved with grazing animals very similar to our domestic cattle and sheep; grazing by large ungulates is the “natural” condition for these lands. Some ecologists and so-called environmentalists believe grazing by domestic livestock is detrimental to native forage species, especially in our western regions, and are pushing for removal of livestock from public rangelands. They think these lands can’t withstand the pressure of grazing. They claim these lands were covered with lush “virgin grass” when the settlers first arrived, and that the grass that was then depleted and destroyed after a few decades of domestic livestock grazing. Rangeland degradation caused by mismanagement led many people to believe that these lands cannot withstand the pressure of grazing and that livestock should be removed from public lands. Yet history shows that these lands were often heavily grazed by bison, elk and pronghorn antelope in earlier times. These native grazers utilized almost all grassy regions of the mountain west (not just the plains) and the vegetation in these areas was grazed for several hundred thousand years. The native grasses, forbs and shrubs that exist today evolved being grazed. The plants and grazing animals co-existed in a symbiotic relationship, each benefitting the other. The “sea of grass” was there when pioneers arrived because of the way it was utilized by the grazing animals. If grazing was damaging, those plants would not exist. Dr. Fred Provenza (Professor Emeri-
tus, Department of Wildland Resources, Utah State University) has been observing and researching grazing for 50 years. He has traveled extensively to study animal behavior and to consult with stockman and land managers around the world. He is amazed by the growing number of educated people who are unaware of the long history of grazing lands and the symbiotic relationship of plants and grazing animals. Many well-meaning people have the perception that livestock grazing is harmful and destructive for rangelands. One of the things that distorted our thinking and got us off on the wrong foot about the arid parts of our country was that our ancestors came from Europe where there was a lot more moisture, and from the East where there is also ample rainfall. With too many animals grazing year-round, they did overgraze arid rangelands in the U.S. and Australia. “When people came to the arid West, they didn’t understand that you have to be more careful on these landscapes,” he says. These regions don’t have the moisture to withstand season-long grazing or to rebound as quickly after grazing. Grazing native rangelands just once during the growing season and giving plants ample soil moisture and time to recover and regrow is best (and sometimes grazing in late fall and winter when the plants are dormant)—like the migrating bison and other grazers did. “In the early days of settlement and range use, a lot of people didn’t understand this and some ranges were overgrazed and abused, and that’s where people got the negative idea about livestock grazing. When I was studying wildlife biology in the 1960’s that was certainly the case. Everything that happened during the early years of grazing in the West influenced the way biologists thought about grazing. They felt that all grazing is bad.” People thought these lands were too fragile for livestock, yet these lands supported millions of grazing animals that roamed over it before settlers arrived. “Talking with some of our friends, I
discover how little the general public knows about the important relationships between plants and animals, and how confusing this can be. Many educated professionals who are interested in health and what is happening with the planet are strongly against raising and eating meat,” he says. They don’t understand the links between soil health, diversity of plants that thrive being eaten by the animals that forage on those plants, the health of the livestock that forage on these lands and the health of the humans who consume meat from those animals. “The health of the land influences the health of the animals, which influences the health of the people. When we break our links with the landscape that nurtures us, we are in trouble, and we have certainly been breaking them,” says Provenza. Sadly, in this country, many people are now a generation or more away from the land and don’t have any background to help them understand the big picture and how it has been a symbiotic relationship for tens of thousands of years. Most people today haven’t raised an animal or butchered it and have no concept of the link between the land, the plants and the grazing animals. Even some of the professional range managers in government land management agencies are not looking at the big picture. Some think all the problems on the land are due to livestock and overgrazing and the only solution is to remove or reduce the number of those animals. They don’t realize that problems are due to mismanaging grazing, and that the land/plants are much healthier if grazed. “Grazing can be good or bad, depending on timing and management. How you graze livestock influences the health of the landscapes, health of the plants, biodiversity, etc.” he says. Livestock can enhance biodiversity of rangelands, as Provenza and Michel Meuret discuss in their book The Art and Science of Shepherding: Tapping the Wisdom of French Shepherds.
Grass that is never grazed is never as healthy or productive. “Rank overgrown pastures with no grazing are stagnant. The CPR program was a perfect example—the ground that wasn’t grazed or cropped, and needed to have some grazing as part of the cycle,” he says. Elk preserves/refuges where livestock were removed to protect and provide habitat for elk were another example; the elk didn’t want to stay in those areas where the grass grew up rank and over-mature. The elk went into grazing lands instead, to eat the more tender, nutritious regrowth after the cattle gazed. The same thing occurs in areas where people have removed cattle to “protect” sage grouse. The grouse prefer the regions that are grazed, as shown by studies of sage grouse in central Utah. “We worked at Deseret Land and Livestock (in northern Utah) for several years, and one of the things they wanted to do was quit feeding the 1000 elk that came in—that they’d been feeding every winter, all winter long, since 1984. They’d been encouraging elk because they benefited from hunting (charging big fees for hunters to hunt elk), but the elk were wintering on their neighbor’s ranches. So they started feeding the elk to keep them on their own land and off the neighbors’ places,” says Provenza. “We decided to gradually wean the elk off the feed grounds. One of the ways we did that was by using strategic grazing by cattle in certain places where we wanted the elk to be. We’d graze early in the season and there would be a lot of nice regrowth in the fall and elk could stay in those areas and eat that nutritious regrowth going into winter. This would complement some of the mature grasses and sagebrush, providing more protein. The elk went to those grazed areas in the fall/winter and Deseret was able to wean them off their feed grounds and haven’t fed them since,” he says. Grazing is often an excellent tool to manage landscapes, for the betterment continued on page six
Page 6
Livestock Market Digest
March 15, 2018
GRASS of the plants, the cattle and the wildlife. Done properly, grazing can promote regrowth of forage plants, and hoof action can plant the seeds and break up dry, hard crusts and allow more penetration by moisture. Some years back, scientists discovered a substance in bovine saliva that stimulates plant growth. “This was an area of research by scientists working in Africa. Their work suggested there are some stimulatory effects when plants are grazed. Areas of Africa where studies were done have evolved under heavy grazing pressures by many different species of animals and the plants there were well-adapted to grazing,” says Provenza. When a big herd of bison, cattle or other grazers go over the landscape and graze it down,
continued from page five
then leave it and don’t come back until the plants regrow, this cycle stimulates more growth. “The saliva on the grazed plant, the urine and feces left behind as fertilizer aids the plant. The saliva is just one more factor that stimulates growth,” he says. “When a plant is grazed, root growth halts temporarily, and exudates are released into the soil. About 30% of the carbon that plants fix goes into the soil and serves as an energy source for bacteria and other soil microbes. This stimulates life in the soil. Bacteria are breaking down soil and decomposing it into minerals that can be utilized by plants. This is all part of the symbiosis that takes place below ground, that is very important for the health of the plant, health of the life in the soil that in turn feeds the plants—that feed the animals that feed the humans. The bacteria, fungi, etc. provide mineral nutrients the plant needs and the plants provide the energy the microbes need, so there’s a huge symbiosis below ground that’s also stimulated by grazing,” he explains. Without healthy soils we have nothing. There is a huge emphasis nowadays on soils, but without plants you don’t have soils, and without the herbivore grazing as part of the system, you don’t have the healthiest plants. The relationships are crucial.” Mother Nature is the author of sustainability, and our model for it. This is how Mother Nature has worked for millions of years. “It’s definitely a symbiotic relationship between grass and grazer. Good range science is built on this factor. Some of the people I worked with at Utah State determined that spring grazing by livestock can lead to nice winter range for mule deer, by putting pressure on some of the grasses and forbs (to reduce their competitive edge a little) to enhance the shrubs the mule deer depend on,” says Proven-
za. “One of my mentors made a career looking at how to use domestic livestock to improve habitat for wildlife.” Stockmen have learned a lot the past several decades about grass management via cattle, with mob grazing and other rotational grazing methods that provide high animal impact and adequate recovery time. This is similar to the way big herds of bison in North America and herds of ungulates on the African plains moved over the landscape grazing everything down and trampling/fertilizing, then moving on—coming back after the forage regrew. Mankind declared physical and chemical war on soils, but soil health in the U.S. in regions that were earlier plowed, farmed and depleted of soil nutrients can be restored much faster than people thought possible, simply by using livestock and intensive grazing to add manure and organic matter to the soil profile. It’s all in how the land and animals are managed. “We’ve also learned how to handle the livestock better, with people like Bud Williams teaching low-stress stockmanship and placing the animals on the landscape. When you put these ideas together, you are where the French shepherds and herders were—with the tools to manage the landscape with livestock, and gain optimum potential from both the livestock and the land,” he says. In their book about shepherding, Meuret and Provenza make the case that people using shepherding to rejuvenate rangelands are ecological doctors, creating healthy soil, plants, wildlife, livestock and people. “Some people really are becoming ecological doctors—thinking about the landscape and the health of soil, plants, wild and domestic animals and people. It’s all about health--human health included.” We are part of the ecosystem,
too. “I wasn’t born and raised on a ranch, but started working on a ranch hauling hay, back in 1969. I worked there for 7 years during summers, then ran the place for a couple years. I was going to school and majoring in wildlife biology, learning about ecology and natural systems in relationships,” he says. “Back in those days, on ranches, ecology wasn’t so much a part of the typical thinking and wasn’t discussed. Today, however, many livestock folks are on top of all this. Listening to them talk is like being back in my classes on wildlife biology and ecology. They talk like college wildlife biologists! It’s all about ecology and realizing how Mother Nature did all this and how we can mimic this—like calving in synch with nature and practicing holistic management. Many livestock practices today are moving in that direction,” says Provenza. “For instance, grazing lower regions in the spring and then moving to higher pastures as the grass grows mimics nature—like native grazers following greenup as the snow recedes and grass grows. The plants at that stage haven’t elevated some of their growing tissues yet, and those are still protected early in the spring, and there is still moisture in the soil. These plants can be grazed and then regrow after the livestock move on to higher elevations. The parts of the plants that do the growing are still in place and there’s still some spring/early summer moisture to facilitate that growth,” he says. “This works for the plants, and works for the animals as they follow the green on up the mountain. There is a lot of scientific data to support this type of grazing management and why it works, and how the plants are able to respond so well under those conditions,” he says. Grass that is grazed once during its growing season, when moisture remains in the soil to enable plant regrowth, and maybe again after it is dormant in the fall/ winter is more productive and healthy than grass never grazed.
BENEFITS OF GRAZING TO REDUCE FIRE EPISODES If livestock can be utilized on landscapes in balance, wildfires are kept to a minimum and are not as devastating—and don’t destroy as much habitat and soil life. Many people today think fire is “natural” but devastating fires are not. Grazing is healthier. “Fire can oxidize a lot of material and it is wasted, whereas grazing recycles it better,” Provenza says. Native Americans burned the prairies, and lightning also set fires, but the prairies were also being grazed—with large herds of bison, elk and antelope moving over the land. There wasn’t as much fuel load to carry a major fire. A fire episode was a flash-through that didn’t damage so much. “Timing is everything on burning. Deseret Land and Livestock
used to do a little burning to reduce sagebrush in some areas, but it was in early spring, when weather was still cool and there was still snow and fire didn’t get out of hand. We started working with them and showed how you could reduce sagebrush with grazing rather than fire. We used sheep, and some places we used cattle, for late fall and winter grazing. We showed that not only could we reduce the abundance of sagebrush and make it a part of the mix, along with grasses and forbs, but we could also improve the range,” says Provenza. “Grazing was just as effective as the herbicides and fires they were using, and not as damaging—because fire and herbicides destroy some of the things you want to keep. Grazing does the job, and provides additional benefits as well, supplying urine and feces for better soil fertility. This also benefited the livestock by providing winter range and a forage source in certain locations.” says Provenza. “This works very well in some cases. One rancher in Oregon said he’d spent his whole life trying to get rid of sagebrush with burning and herbicides and spent a lot of money doing that. He said he never thought about grazing the sagebrush areas or feeding some of his cattle on that ground during winter. The hay provided the supplement to help the cattle utilize the sagebrush, and added the manure and a seed source for more variety of plants. It worked terrifically for him; the sagebrush became a winter forage and the cattle helped rejuvenate those landscapes, without fire,” he says. This has worked well on a lot of sagebrush country over the years. “Even some of the ranges down in central Utah that looked like there wasn’t much there but sagebrush came back to greater biodiversity with winter grazing. If we knocked that sagebrush back by grazing, and gave the other perennials a chance (the remnants that were left) they came back strongly and I was amazed. When we were grazing it with cattle and sheep we were able to allow those plants to take off and expand again,” he says. “Timing is important. Winter is the best time to graze sagebrush because it’s not as nasty; the terpene compounds that make sagebrush less palatable for livestock are lower in late fall and winter. Grazing can be the best tool to enhance biodiversity and keep the ecosystem in balance,” he explains. Fire is the biggest problem in areas that are not grazed enough. If there is too much fuel load, it is often a hotter fire that destroys plant roots and seed bank and damages the top layers of soil. Then there will be nothing but opportunistic invasive weeds coming back in because the perennial grasses, forbs and shrubs are gone. This is one reason we now have so much cheat grass across the western U.S., and a sagebrush-fire/cheat grass-fire cycle exacerbates the problem.
March 15, 2018
Livestock Market Digest
Page 7
Montana: Land Board Delay Raises Questions About Conservation Easements as a Public Access Tool BY TOM KUGLIN / HELENAIR.COM
F
inding a place to hunt on the two-thirds of Montana that is privately owned can be a tricky proposition. Whether they are a result of changing demographics, financial reasons or convenience, stories of once accessible private property being shut off recur each year. While a landowner’s right to control access remains fundamental, hunters have increasingly cited the need for access as one of the biggest threats to the future of hunting in Montana. One of the programs the state uses to push for public access is Habitat Montana, housed under Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks. The program is simple on its face: a portion of hunting and fishing license sales goes into an account, and FWP uses it to acquire access. But for more than 25 years Habitat Montana, with funding going to both land purchases and conservation easements on private property, has had its critics. “Habitat Montana has been very well intended, very well conceived and been sternly if not unanimously supported by hunters and folks who want access,” said Glenn Marx, executive director of the Montana Association of Land Trusts. “But it has also always been at some level of controversy as it’s been implemented by the department, because it allows more government management to a degree on private land. There has always been a segment of the Montana Legislature and the Montana population who has concerns about more government in more places in more ways.” The primary criticism of Habitat Montana centers on land purchases. FWP’s acquisi-
tion of entire ranches has met resistance to growing the state’s estate. In 2015 lawmakers took away FWP’s authority to purchase more land, restricting the account to private land easements. The purchase authority was restored last year but came with a continued legislative preference for easements. Conservation easements are a contract between a private landowner and entities such as land trusts or government agencies. Easements come in many shapes and sizes, but typically landowners agree to limit development. In exchange, landowners may receive payment and tax incentives -- the incentives a result of depreciating the value of the property by agreeing not to subdivide. Easements may contain other provisions for public access or habitat conservation, and are often touted as a means of keeping land in agriculture.
State Board of Land Commissioners Following unanimous approval by the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission, last week’s split-vote by the Montana State Board of Land Commissioners to indefinitely delay a decision on an eastern Montana conservation easement has raised questions about the coexistence of oil and gas development with habitat, hunting and agriculture. The Horse Creek Conservation Easement near Glendive came before the Land Board after a year and a half of negotiations between the Stenson family and FWP. The Stensons agreed to allow walk-in public access, implement a wildlife-friendly grazing plan and limit development on about 15,000 acres. The cost of the easement is $6.1 million, with roughly $4.3 million of that from Habitat Montana.
RIDING HERD a bouncy twelve pound baby boy who looks like he’d already improve the offensive line for Cleveland when he learns to walk. Especially if he has CRL’s. (Charging rhino legs.) But while Bull is a good name for a boy, under no circumstances should a young girl be named Cow. Years ago I worked for a livestock publication who had a Patty on the staff and she chose Cow Patty as her byline, thinking it was clever. I never saw her name on another story. While I like the name Rope, or even Wope which was the nickname of the great rodeo star Dean Oliver, I absolutely adore the name Reata. I think it’s the prettiest name I’ve heard recently and it doesn’t seem to have held Buck Brannaman’s daughter back any as Reata Brannaman was the youngest professor at Montana State in their history. She may have been the youngest person in her class but Reata, being the daughter of the one and only Horse Whisperer, certainly has a doctorate in Horse. I also like the names Calgary and Cheyenne, but not Pendleton. That sounds too hoity-toity. For the life of me I’ve never understood why an Angus breeder didn’t name their child Angus if it was a boy, or Aberdeen if it was
The easement has become embroiled in a property rights debate after the owners of the mineral rights came forward with concerns that the easement will hinder oil and gas development. Both before the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission and the Land Board, the mineral right holders testified that habitat protections cannot be legally guaranteed if mineral development takes place -- a stance challenged by both conservation groups and the oil and gas industry -- and that the $6.1 million price tag is too high. FWP has defended the process and the independent appraisal that came with it. As the owners of only the surface rights, the Stensons have no legal authority to stop mineral development -- a legal principle stated several times in two public hearings and one that went without a formal challenge from either the attorney representing the mineral right holders or the Montana Petroleum Association. For their part, the Stensons say it is their private property rights, specifically the right to contract their surface rights, that are being tread upon. Citing a desire for more time to consider the proposal, Republicans Superintendent of Public Instruction Elsie Arntzen and State Auditor Matt Rosendale agreed with Secretary of State Corey Stapleton to indefinitely delay a vote. Stapleton stated his leeriness for contracts that go into perpetuity, and Rosendale said the five-day period between the Fish and Wildlife Commission and Land Board was too short for a full vetting. Democratic Gov. Steve Bullock and Republican Attorney General Tim Fox dissented, with both stating that the commission had enough information to move forward.
continued from page one
a girl. I love the name Angus and Galloway is also an acceptable name, although Belted Galloway is not. My accountant is named Galloway and I certainly hope he wasn’t belted when he did my taxes. Breed names like Dexter, Devon, Brangus, Brahma and even Charolais might be good names if you happen to breed those kind of cattle, but I don’t care for Pinzgauer or Waygu as first names. We must be careful with this trend that we don’t go too far and start naming our kids after diseases and other cattle related nouns. For example, while Bruce is a good name I really don’t care for Brucellosis as a first name. Corpus Luteum isn’t good either and neither are names like Warbles, Rump, Burdizzo, Coccidiosis, Freemartin, Afterbirth, Bangs, Butt, Grub, Lepto, Creep, Dewlap, LumpJaw, Ringworm or Rhinotracheitis. Believe me, I have deep personal knowledge of how something as simple as a name can make or break you. If my name was anything other than Leland Pitts I’d already be as rich and famous as Alice Addertongue, which was Benjamin Franklin’s pen name. wwwLeePittsbooks.com
What will the future bring? With no specific date to reconsider the easement and the Stensons needing an answer due to a land purchase hanging in the balance, project supporters wonder about not only the viability of Horse Creek, but the future of Habitat Montana as an access program. “By the time it makes it to the Land Board, it’s already been through an incredibly rigorous review, so I feel like this is really unprecedented,” said Nick Gevock, conservation director for the Montana Wildlife Federation. Gevock says he takes the commissioners who wanted more time at their word but believes delaying a decision is concerning. “Why would a landowner go through two years of rigorous review laid out in a popular program only to have it rejected?” Gevock asked. “It could have a very chilling effect on land conservation efforts, and I think if we start turning down easements that’ve been in the works for two years, that effectively kills Habitat Montana.” FWP Director Martha Williams is also worried about setting a precedent if a high-profile easement such as Horse Creek falls through due to delay or is voted down. “I worry about a landowner that has to navigate this very public process and I hope we can come out with some clarity, because these can take years to come together,” she said. Fish and Wildlife Commission Chairman Dan Vermillion has concerns as well about the message to conservation-minded landowners and access proponents. While many organizations offer conservation easements, state-held easements typically come with a public access component. “We spend so much time as a state talking about our hunting and fishing heritage, and
we know there are certain parts where there isn’t a ton of public land, so we need to create access,” he said. “If a political leader is a strong believer in hunting and fishing, and almost all say they are, I have to ask, ‘How do you hunt or fish if you don’t have a place to hunt or fish?’” Vermillion is familiar with the resistance to land purchases, but questions the debate over Horse Creek considering easements’ largely noncontroversial history. “We’ve gone through this process and the department has worked really hard with some great landowners, and everyone knows this conservation easement has zero impact on the mineral rights,” he said. “So to hold this easement up on mineral rights when we’re only talking about surface rights, it’s mystifying to me.” Regardless of how the Land Board proceeds on Horse Creek, Marx believes that private land conservation organizations and easements remain on solid footing. He sees Horse Creek in navigating the public process as more complicated than most easements and this Land Board appears to be taking a harder look at proposals coming before it than past boards. Requests for more time and information may require an adjustment with scheduling between the Fish and Wildlife Commission and when projects come before the Land Board, he said. “Habitat Montana was created to accomplish a goal, and this project fits extremely well within that goal,” he said. “I think the Stensons seem to be good neighbors, good stewards of the land and committed to agriculture. They want to find ways to make their agricultural operation sustainable in the short and long term, and I admire them for doing that. They approached all this with a really good faith effort and deserve an answer as soon as possible.”
Page 8
Livestock Market Digest
March 15, 2018
Genomic Testing: Measuring Genetic Merit
BY CAROLINE GRAHAM, DNA SPECIALIST / RED ANGUS NEWS
T
hrough genomic testing, the DNA of an animal is assessed to produce molecular breeding values that enhance maternal, performance, and carcass EPDs. Without the use of genomic testing, the EPDs of an animal are based largely on the hard data provided for their calves - i.e. growth data, carcass data, etc. Genomic testing provides producers with the opportunity to consider EPDs when making selection or marketing decisions for animals that have little to no progeny. Through the RAAA, both GeneSeek and Zoetis offer options for genomic testing. GeneSeek offers three testing options that can be used to appraise the genetic merit of registered animals in your herd: GGP-uLD: GeneSeek Genomic Profile: Ultra-Low Density • Based on a 30k (30,000) marker panel. • GGP-uLD testing is recommended for use as a tool in selecting replacement females. At the lowest cost per test in the GGP lineup, just $34/test, it
is practical for use on a larger number of head. Producers that choose GGP-uLD testing for potential replacements have the added benefit of selling females with genomically enhanced EPDs. GGP-LD: GeneSeek Genomic Profile: Low Density • Based on a 50k (50,000) marker panel • Includes Genetic Defect Testing for OS and MA GGP-LD testing, at $48/test, is largely used to assess and select bulls that are destined for pasture breeding. For breeders who wish to raise and retain or sell bulls, this test can be used in making selection decisions as well as a marketing tool come sale season. Out of the three, GGP-LD testing is the most widely used among Red Angus breeders. GGP-HD: GeneSeek Genomic Profile: High Density • Based on a 150k (150,000) marker panel • Includes Genetic Defect Testing for OS and MA • GGP-HD testing, the most powerful in the GGP lineup, is intended for the assessment of high-impact animals: AI bulls, donor cows, and high-use herd
Checkoff Lawsuit Prompts Utah to Propose Reorganizing Beef Council BY TOM JOHNSTON MEATINGPLACE.COM
U
tah officials are working to reorganize the Utah Beef Council as the state faces a lawsuit from a rancher arguing that the council’s collection of a checkoff fee is unconstitutional because it supports political speech and lacks transparency. Evergreen Ranch says the mandatory 50 cents it pays to the Utah Beef Council for every head of cattle it sells has been used by the council, a nonprofit private entity, for political advocacy on topics from greenhouse gas emissions to public land disputes, in violation of the First Amendment. On Friday, according to a report by Deseret News, Utah officials discussed the likeli-
hood, based on federal court guidance, that the plaintiff would win the case. A legislative analysis done by the state’s auditor and treasure also concluded that the beef promotion statute is unconstitutional. The plaintiff, according to the report, has held off on the litigation pending a legislative solution to the issue. That solution could come in the form of a bill sponsored by Rep. Scott Sandall that would create the Utah Beef Council as an independent state agency that can take money and engage in promotional activities. Addressing the issue of transparency, the bill would require the council to submit a proposed budget and an audited financial statement within 180 days of the end of each fiscal year.
sires. For $90/test, it includes the same components as the GGP-LD test, with an increase in accuracy, as nearly three times the number of markers are analyzed. Zoetis currently offers two different genomic testing options for Red Angus breeders to use in the evaluation of their herd: i50K • Based on a 50k (50,000) marker panel • I50K testing is recommended for use in selecting females for the breeding herd as well as marketing animals according to their genetic attributes. I50K testing is the low-cost option, $39/test, offered by Zoetis intended for use on a larger number of animals. HD50K • Based on a 80k (80,000) marker panel HD50K testing, at $84/test, is largely used to assess high-influence seedstock animals. By testing AI sires and donor cows, breeding decisions can be altered based on GE-EPDs. As with GGP-HD testing for GeneSeek, the increased number of markers analyzed on the HD50K panel allows for an increase in
accuracy. As of 2017, the Rules and Regulations of the RAAA require all herd sires and donor cows to be parent verified. While available in a stand-alone test, parent verification is included with any of the genomic tests offered through our Association. As members take the time and effort required to obtain and submit DNA samples as a part of this requirement, consider incorporating genomic testing into your program. GE-EPDs can be used in tandem with visual evaluation to cull animals with undesirable traits from the herd; effectively saving time and money that would be required to develop them. At the same time, EPD information produced by genomic testing can be utilized in marketing animals. When you take your animals to the sale, wouldn’t it be beneficial to sell feeder cattle shown to excel in terminal traits and breeding cattle that display excellence in maternal characteristics? By using GE-EPDs as a management and marketing tool, producers can greatly increase their return compared to submitting a DNA sample for parent verification alone.
Pending Transport Regs Could be Bad for Live Animals BY GREG BLOOM MEATINGPLACE.COM
(The views and opinions expressed in this blog are strictly those of the author.)
I
n late January I sat in on a cattlemen’s meeting and listened to a State Trooper talk about the necessity of keeping our highways safe. He promoted Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs) as the solution to keeping sleepy drivers off the road, even if the load is livestock. That sounds simple on the surface, but ELDs are being used as control tools for unrealistic regulations. Under Federal rules, after a maximum of 14 hours of time in the truck (11 hours of driving), truckers must take a whopping 10-hour sleep break! I don’t know how many out-of-touch bureaucrats it took to write this law, or what rationale the “sleep police” at the DOT used to come up with it, but almost nobody over the age of 16 can sleep for 10 straight hours. Maybe 4 to 6 hours of sleep after every 12 hours of driving would be realistic, but not an impossible 10! The cattlemen began explaining the dilemma this regulation causes: One rancher named Mike periodically sends 10 to 15 head of cattle to the sale barn. The truck that picks them up also has to pick up small herds at surrounding ranches to fill the load. It can take a full day to get the ranch pickups completed before the driver is ready to head for the sale barn or feedlot. With the ELD regulation requiring forced down-time, this driver now has leave this full load of cattle in the trailer for an additional 10 hours before he can even begin their journey. So, they’re crammed in, with no way
to get them water, in all kinds of extremely nasty weather, to suffer needlessly overnight. It’s a gross understatement to say that this doesn’t work out well for the welfare of the animals. The State Trooper listened carefully, and offered what he thought was a simple solution. “You just need to get teams of drivers to drive these trucks so the cattle would be on the truck the shortest amount of time possible.” That also sounds simple on the surface. Another rancher named Carl chimed in that using teams would so add to the costs of transport that it would make it impossible to compete economically. Carl told the story of his friend Fred, an independent-trucker who hauls cattle. With the new ELD regulation, Fred would have to hire a second driver and charge an extra $300 per load, because it usually takes longer than the allowed 14 hours to pick up and deliver cattle. Also, there’s a labor shortage and teams aren’t always available. Carl sees his narrow profit margin quickly evaporating toward insolvency. But maybe that’s the intent of the law?
Another rancher said, “The best thing to do is make sure all your truckers run older than 1999 rigs so they don’t have to worry about ELDs.” Nodding heads were seen all around the room. That loophole could compromise highway safety as well. Surely there’s a way to simultaneously promote safety, economic sustainability, and animal welfare. Why hasn’t the welfare of live animals even factored into the ELD legislation? There’s got to be a better balance than this currently proposed one-size-fits-all regulation Cows, pigs, sheep and livestock shouldn’t have to be without food and water for extended hours in harsh weather because of a poorly-written law. Doesn’t this violate your animal welfare policy? What about your corporate customer’s animal welfare standards? The current 90-day waiver of this regulation for agriculture will expire on March 18th, exposing our industry to financially burdensome rules and exposing our livestock to unnecessary suffering.
March 15, 2018
Livestock Market Digest
Livestock Market Digest
REAL ESTATE GUIDE
For advertising information contact Lynn Marie ‘LM’ Rusaw at 505- 243-9515 or email AAALivestockMarket Digest@gmail.com
Bottari Realty Paul Bottari, Broker
775/752-3040 Nevada Farms & raNch PrOPerTY www.bottarirealty.com
Selling residential, farm, ranch, commercial and relocating properties.
Page 9
SOCORRO PLAZA REALTY
Bar M Real Estate
On the Plaza
Donald Brown
Qualifying Broker
SCOTT MCNALLY
505-507-2915 cell 505-838-0095 fax
www.ranchesnm.com 575/622-5867 575/420-1237
116 Plaza PO Box 1903 Socorro, NM 87801 www.socorroplazarealty.com dbrown@socorroplazarealty.com
Ranch Sales & Appraisals
COLETTA RAY
Pioneer Realty 1304 Pile Street, Clovis, NM 88101
575-799-9600 Direct 575.935.9680 Office 575.935.9680 Fax coletta@plateautel.net www.clovisrealestatesales.com
BAKER CITY, OREGON Andrew Bryan, Owner/Broker Office 541-523-5871 Cell 208-484-5835
521 West Second St. • Portales, NM 88130
575-226-0671 or 575-226-0672 fax
Buena Vista Realty
HeAdquArters West Ltd.
andrew@bakercityrealty.com www.bakercityrealty.com
Qualifying Broker: A.H. (Jack) Merrick 575-760-7521 www.buenavista-nm.com
ST. JOHN’S OFFICE: TRAEGEN KNIGHT
P.O. Box 1980 St. John’s, AZ 85936 www.headquarterswest.com
TEXAS & OKLA. FARMS & RANCHES
928/524-3740 Fax 928/563-7004 Cell 602/228-3494 info@headquarterswest.com
• New 40 acre Nice older brick home, 3/3/2, 4 barns, excellent grass. Kaufman Co., Texas. 35 miles from Dallas Court House. $350,000.
Filling your real estate needs in Arizona 521 West Second St., Portales, NM 88130
575-226-0671 www.buenavista-nm.com
1509 Davis Road - East of Portales - Thinking of moving closer to town? Check out this nice 3 bdrm 2 bath home with 2540 sq. ft on 1/2 acre - great sunroom, attached garage plus large workshop garage. This place is just so nice and country but only 3 miles from downtown Portales - Small barn is horse ready - see pictures on website. 349 S. Roosevelt Rd Y - West of Portales - Approx 80 acres was in past CRP- it has submersible pump in well and concrete pipeline w/12” risers - currently in grass - some fencing good, some needs work. There are structures on property being included and sold “as is” Sweat equity can make a nice place, priced right.
Missouri Land Sales See all my listings at: • NEW LISTING! 167 Acres, Cattle/Horses/Hunting Estate 5000 sq ft paulmcgilliard.murney.com inspired Frank Lloyd Wright designed home. 3 bed, 2 1/2 baths, full w/o Paul McGilliard finished basement, John Deere room, bonus room. This estate is set Cell: 417/839-5096 up for intensive grazing, 3 wells, 3 springs, 4 ponds, automatic waters. 1-800/743-0336 Secluded, but easy access, only 22 miles east of Springfield, off Hwy Murney Assoc., Realtors 60. MLS# 60081327 Springfield, MO 65804 • NEW LISTING! 80 Acres - 60 Acres Hayable, Live Water, Location, Location! Only 8 miles west of Norwood, 3 miles east of Mansfield, 1/4 mile off Hwy 60. Well maintained 3 bed, 1 1/2 bath, 1432 sq. ft. brick/vinyl home, nestled under the trees. Full basement (partially finished), John Deere Room. This is your farm! MLS#60059808 • 10 ACRES - MAJOR PRICE REDUCTION Location, location, location. Only 4+ miles south of Mountain Grove, you will find a a secluded 10 acres at the end of Hopper Lane with 1,550 sq. ft. home, nestled under the trees. Numerous outbuildings, with an exceptionally well built 18 x 30 shop. The present owners have lived there 46 years. MLS# 60056419.
NTRACT
UNDER CO
SOLD
• 165 acres Nice spanish style house, nice barn, 3 tanks, city water. Sold at $750,000. • 270 acre Mitchell County, Texas ranch. Investors dream; excellent cash flow. Rock formation being crushed and sold; wind turbans, some minerals. Irrigation water developed, crop & cattle, modest improvements. Just off I-20. Price reduced to $1.6 million.
SOLD
• 40 acre, 2 homes, nice barn, corral, 30 miles out of Dallas. $415,000.
Joe Priest Real Estate
1-800/671-4548
joepriestre.net • joepriestre@earthlink.com
TURKEY TRACK RANCH – First time offering of one of the largest ranches in the southwest, comprised of over 253,000 acres to include 37,000 deeded acres. Some mineral included. Price Reduced: $17,500,000 BLACK DOG RANCH – Central NM, near Corona in Lincoln County. Comprised of 314 deeded acres with nice new of remodeled improvements. Good elk, mule deer and turkey hunting. Comes with elk tags. Price: $565,000 DOUBLE L RANCH – Central NM, 10 miles west of Carrizozo, NM. 12,000 total acres; 175 AUYL, BLM Section 3 grazing permit; Water provided by 3 wells and buried pipeline. Improvements include house and pens. Price Reduced: $1,150,000 X T RANCH – Southeastern NM cattle ranch 40 miles northwest of Roswell, NM on the Chaves/Lincoln County line. Good grass ranch with gently rolling grass covered hills. 8,000 total acres, 200 AUYL grazing capacity. Partitioned into four pastures watered by 2 wells with pipelines. Call for brochure. Price: $1,750,000 SOUTH BROWN LAKE RANCH – Nicely improved cattle ranch located northwest of Roswell, NM. 5,735 total acres to include 960 acres deeded. 164 A.U. yearlong grazing capacity. Modern residence, bunkhouse, shop and feed barn. Three wells and buried pipeline. Excellent grass country. Price: $1,300,000 L-X RANCH – Southeastern NM just ten minutes from Roswell, NM with paved gated and locked access. 3,761 total acres divided into several pastures and traps. Nice improvements to include a site built adobe residence. One well with extensive pipeline system. Well suited for a registered cattle operation. Price: $900,000
O’NEILL LAND, llc P.O. Box 145, Cimarron, NM 87714 • 575/376-2341 • Fax: 575/376-2347 land@swranches.com • www.swranches.com
WAGONMOUND RANCH, Mora/Harding Counties, NM. 4,927 +/- deeded acres, 1,336.80 +/- state lease acres, 2,617 +/- Kiowa National Grassland Lease Acres. 8,880.80 +/- Total Acres. Substantial holding with good mix of grazing land and broken country off rim onto Canadian River. Fenced into four main pastures with shipping and headquarter pasture and additional four pastures in the Kiowa lease. Modern well, storage tank and piped water system supplementing existing dirt tanks located on deeded. Located approximately 17 miles east of Wagon Mound on pavement then county road. Nice headquarters and good access to above rim. Wildlife include antelope, mule deer and some elk. $2,710,000
RATON MILLION DOLLAR VIEW, Colfax County, NM. 97.68 +/- deeded acres, 2 parcels, excellent home, big shop, wildlife, a true million dollar view at end of private road. $489,000. House & 1 parcel $375,000
MIAMI HORSE HEAVEN, Colfax County, NM. Very private approx. 4,800 sq ft double walled adobe 4 bedroom, 3 bathroom home with many custom features, 77.50 +/- deeded acres with water rights and large 7 stall barn, insulated metal shop with own septic. Would suit indoor growing operation, large hay barn/equipment shed. $1,375,000.
MIAMI 20 ACRES, Colfax County, NM. 20 +/deeded acres, 20 water shares, quality 2,715 sq ft adobe home, barn, grounds and trees. Private setting. This is a must see. Reduced to $375,000
MAXWELL FARM IMPROVED, Colfax County, NM. 280 +/- deeded acres, 160 Class A irrigation shares, 2 center pivots, nice sale barn, 100 hd feedlot. Depredation Elk Tags available. Owner financing available to qualified buyer. Significantly reduced to $550,000
UNDER CONTRACT Scott Land co. Ranch & Farm Real Estate
MIAMI 80 ACRES, Colfax County, NM. 80 +/deeded acres, 80 water shares, expansive views, house, shop, roping arena, barns and outbuildings. Reduced $485,000 COLD BEER VIEW, Colfax County, NM 83.22 +/- deeded acre, 3,174 sq ft, 5 bedroom, 3 ½ bathrm, 2 car garage home situated on top of the hill with amazing 360 degree views. Reduced $398,000
FRENCH TRACT 80, Colfax County, NM irrigated farm w/home & good outbuildings, $350,000 COLMOR PLACE, Mora County, NM 354 +/deeded acres, I:25 frontage, house, pens, expansive views. Ocate Creek runs through property. $275,000 MAXWELL SMALL HOLDING, home with horse improvements, fenced, water rights and 19+/deeded acres. Handy to I25 on quiet country road. $232,000.
1301 Front Street, Dimmitt, TX 79027 Ben G. Scott Land Company, LLC Krystal M. Nelson - NM Qualifying Broker #15892 800-933-9698 • 5:00am/10:00pm www.scottlandcompany.com
■ OPPORTUNITY TO OWN A PIECE OF AN OLD
homes, working pens & fences, well-watered by wells &
owners of the Frontier Ranch consisting of their individual, undivided ownership of 6,423.45 ac. +/- w/undivided ownership ranging from 38 ac. +/- & greater. You may buy undivided interest in this ranch at your discretion, improvements are average for the area, this is good country suitable for a year-round cow/calf or summer yearling grazing, located in close proximity to the Grey Fox Ranch for addtl. acreage. ■ GREY FOX RANCH – Guadalupe Co., NM – 2,919.85 ac. +/- of deeded land, all native grass, located in close proximity to the Frontier Ranch for addtl. grazing. ■ QUAIL HAVEN – along w/deer, turkey, antelope & other wildlife – Borden Co., TX., 1,689 +/- ac., well located near Gail/Snyder, Texas on pvmt. & all-weather road, well improved. ■ GREAT STARTER RANCH – Quay Co., NM – well improved & watered, 2,400 ac. +/-deeded, 80 ac. +/- State Lease, excellent access from I-40. ■ RANCHO AL OESTE DE LA MONTANA – located on the West face of Tucumcari Mountain – Tucumcari, NM, 560 ac. +/- deeded land w/80 ac. +/- NM State Lease, outstanding views & location greatly enhances the beauty of the 3 bdrm., 2 bath home w/large unattached garage & large barn. ■ OTERO CO., NM – 120 scenic ac. +/- on the Rio Penasco is surrounded by Lincoln National Forest lands covered in Pines & opening up to a grass covered meadow along 3,300 feet +/- of the Rio Penasco. This property is an ideal location to build a legacy mountain getaway home. ■ ARROYO LARGO – 22,850 ac. +/- located in Lincoln, Chaves & DeBaca Counties, NM, well improved w/two
provide for year-round cow/calf operation or seasonal yearling operation. ■ MALPAIS OF NM – Lincoln/Socorro Counties, 37.65 sections +/- (13,322 ac. +/- Deeded, 8,457 ac. +/BLM Lease, 2,320 ac. +/- State Lease) good, useable improvements & water, some irrigation w/2 pivot sprinklers, on pvmt., all-weather road. ■ SOUTH CONCHAS RANCH – San Miguel Co., NM - 9,135 ac. +/- (6,670 +/- deeded, 320 +/- BLM, 40 +/State Lease, 2,106 +/- “FREE USE”) well improved, just off pvmt. on co. road., two neighboring ranches may be added for additional acreage! ■ ALFALFA & LIVESTOCK – Tucumcari, NM - 255.474 ac. +/-, state-of-the-art huge hay barn & shop (immaculate), steel pens, Arch Hurley Water Rights, two nearly new sprinklers, alfalfa established. ■ MINE CANYON ROAD (paved) – Quay Co., NM – 1,063 ac. +/- native grass, well watered w/a good set of pens, located between Ute Lake & Hwy. 54. ■ WOOD FARM & RANCH – Quay Co., NM – 480 ac. +/-, w/292 ac. classified as cropland fully allotted to wheat & milo, 365.9 ac. of Arch Hurley Water Rights, nice combination farming/cattle operation, presently in grass for grazing. ■ EXCELLENT OWNER FINANCING! ABERCROMBIE RANCH – Huerfano Co., CO - 7,491 ac. +/- of choice grassland, excellent winter protection for lvstk. & commercial Elk hunting, watered by wells, pipeline, Sandy Creek & the Cucharas River, on pvmt. ■ HALL CO., TX – 445 ac. +/- dryland farm, excellent hunting!
WEST RANCH – Guadalupe Co., NM - There are multiple pipelines, open rolling country w/numerous draws & arroyos
Please view our website for details on these properties, choice TX, NM & CO ranches (large & small), choice ranches in the high rainfall areas of OK, irr./dryland/CRP & commercial properties. We need your listings on any types of ag properties in TX., NM, OK & CO.
Page 10
Livestock Market Digest
CLASSIFIEDS KADDATZ
Auctioneering and Farm Equipment Sales
A
www.kaddatzequipment.com • 254/582-3000
g•u•i•d•e angus
Bradley 3 Ranch Ltd. www.bradley3ranch.com
Annual Bull Sale: February 10, 2018
at the Ranch NE of Estelline, TX Ranch-Raised ANGUS Bulls for Ranchers Since 1955
M.L. Bradley 806/888-1062 Fax: 806/888-1010 • Cell: 940/585-6471
BEEFMASTER
Exxon Sues the Suers in Fierce Climate-Change Case BY BOB VAN VORIS, BLOOMBERG
New and used tractors, equipment, and parts. Salvage yard, combines, tractors, hay equipment and all types of equipment parts. ORDER PARTS ONLINE.
HEREFORD
Registered Polled Herefords Bulls & Heifers
FOR SALE AT THE FARM
Cañones Route P.O. Abiquiu, N.M. 87510 MANUEL SALAZAR P.O. Box 867 Española, N.M. 87532
575/638-5434
RED ANGUS
s climate-change lawsuits against the oil industry mount, Exxon Mobil Corp. is taking a bare-knuckle approach rarely seen in legal disputes: It’s going after the lawyers who are suing it. The company has targeted at least 30 people and organizations, including the attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts, hitting them with suits, threats of suits or demands for sworn depositions. The company claims the lawyers, public officials and environmental activists are “conspiring” against it in a coordinated legal and public relations campaign. Exxon has even given that campaign a vaguely sinister-sounding name: “The La Jolla playbook.” According to the company, about two dozen people hatched a strategy against it at a meeting six years ago in an oceanfront cottage in La Jolla, Calif. “It’s an aggressive move,” said Howard Erichson, an expert in complex litigation and a professor at Fordham University School of Law in New York. “Does Exxon really need these depositions or is Exxon seeking the depositions to harass mayors and city attorneys into dropping their lawsuits?”
At Stake A SOURCE FOR PROVEN SUPERIOR RED ANGUS GENETICS 14298 N. Atkins Rd., Lodi, CA 95240
209/727-3335
CORRIENTE
BRANGUS For Advertising Contact:
Lynn Marie Rusaw
R.L. Robbs 520/384-3654
Office: 505-243-9515 Email:
4995 Arzberger Rd. Willcox, Arizona 85643 Willcox, AZ
AAALivestockMarket Digest@gmail.com
March 15, 2018
Experts say Exxon’s combative strategy – an extraordinary gambit to turn the tables – is a clear sign of what’s at stake for the fossil-fuel industry. So far, New York City and eight California cities and counties, including San Francisco and Oakland, have sued Exxon and other oil and gas companies. They allege that oil companies denied findings of climate-change scientists despite knowing that the use of fossil fuels posed “grave risk” to the planet. Attorneys general Eric Schneiderman of New York and Maura Healey of Massachusetts, are investigating whether Exxon covered up information on climate change, defrauding shareholders and consumers. Exxon, the world’s 10th biggest company, has denied the allegations and says its defense is intended to show that it’s being punished for not toeing the line on climate change, even though it agrees with the scientific consensus. “The attorneys general have
violated Exxon Mobil’s right to participate in the national conversation about how to address the risks presented by climate change,” said Dan Toal, a lawyer who represents Exxon. “That is the speech at issue here – not some straw man argument about whether climate change is real.”
‘Scare Tactic’ Plaintiff lawyers and legal experts contend the oil giant’s tactics are meant to intimidate while shifting the spotlight away from claims of environmental damage. And they say there’s nothing improper with lawyers discussing legal strategies together. “It’s crazy that people are subpoenaed for attending a meeting,” said Sharon Eubanks, a lawyer who was at the La Jolla gathering. “It’s sort of like a big scare tactic: reframe the debate, use it as a diversionary tactic and scare the heck out of everybody.” Exxon has focused on the La Jolla meeting as ground zero for its conspiracy claim. Ironically, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, a nonprofit run by descendants of John D. Rockefeller who are pressing Exxon to address climate change issues, has funded organizations that led the La Jolla conference (Exxon, which grew out of John D.’s Standard Oil, also subpoenaed the fund to testify.) At the gathering, participants met to discuss litigation strategies that could be applied to climate change, according to a 35-page summary that was later made public. Eubanks, a former Justice Department lawyer, talked about how the U.S. government used the racketeering law against cigarette makers, for example. More than four years after the meeting, Eubanks got a subpoena from Exxon to testify about it. The subpoena is pending.
Document Request Exxon has also aimed its legal firepower at Matthew Pawa, whose firm represents Oakland, San Francisco and New York in their suits against Exxon. In January, Exxon asked a state judge in Fort Worth, Texas, to order Pawa to turn over documents and testify under oath about the La Jolla conference and other conversations with lawyers and activists. He’s also been subpoenaed to testify in a federal ac-
tion Exxon has brought against the state attorneys general. Pawa declined to comment. The company is also seeking testimony from 15 municipal lawyers and officials in California. Exxon said it’s seeking evidence for “an anticipated suit” claiming civil conspiracy and violation of its First Amendment and other Constitutional rights.
Routine Meetings Experts in litigation say that lawyers in big lawsuits, including those targeting tobacco, guns and pharmaceuticals, routinely meet to share information and coordinate strategy. “I don’t think there’s anything wrong with plaintiffs’ lawyers and attorneys general strategizing together,” said Fordham professor Erichson, ”just as I don’t think there’s anything wrong with lawyers for oil companies strategizing together.” But Linda Kelly, general counsel of the National Association of Manufacturers, said the climate litigation is really a play for money and votes. “It’s a coming together of plaintiffs’ lawyers who have a profit motive and a liability theory, environmental activists who have a political agenda and politicians who are looking to make a name for themselves with this issue,” Kelly said.
Contingent Fees San Francisco has promised 23.5 percent of any settlement to its lawyers. New York is working on a contingent-fee deal like San Francisco’s, according to a spokesman for the city’s Law Department. In recent years, the most notable attack on a plaintiff lawyer came in 2011 when Chevron Corp., claiming it was target of an extortion scheme, successfully pursued a civil racketeering suit against Steven Donziger, the attorney behind a $9.5 billion Ecuadorian judgment against the company over pollution in the Amazon. Some experts say Exxon’s strategy goes beyond mere litigation tactics. “People often try to use litigation to change the cultural conversation,” said Alexandra Lahav, a professor at the University of Connecticut School of Law, pointing to litigation over guns and gay rights as examples. “Exxon is positioning itself as a victim rather than a perpetrator.”
Top 10 Rancher’s Famous Last Words BY MARK PARKER / FARMTALKNEWSPAPER.COM
10. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1.
Leave the gate open—the cows won’t bother it. That horse doesn’t have an ounce of buck in him. Don’t weaken and that ol’ cow will turn back. This market still has some life in it — believe I’ll hold off on selling for a few more days. Been driving through this wet spot for 20 years and haven’t been stuck once. There’s no way in creation that bull can go over that fence. No rain in the forecast so just leave the pickup out in the field. You can run a good 20 miles after the fuel gauge says empty. Just stand your ground and that dog won’t bite. Now watch — if you get right up close behind a calf you won’t get ... ^#$%!
March 15, 2018
Livestock Market Digest
Page 11
The Sordid History of New Water for Southwest New Mexico BY HOWARD HUTCHINSON
History of the Gila and San Francisco Water Rights Battle
I
n 1955 New Mexico entered the contentious water battle for Colorado River water in one of the longest running adjudication battles before the U.S. Supreme Court, Arizona v. California. State Engineer Steve Reynolds endeavor to have the Court’s Special Master recognize additional claims to Gila and San Francisco water rights failed. An estimated 30,000 acre feet of claimed irrigation rights were lost due to the fact those waters were not in “present use.” The depression, Korean War, and drought had left many acres fallow. Fast forward to the mid 1960’s. State Engineer Reynolds, Governor Jack Campbell and Senator Clinton Anderson teamed up in an effort to restore the lost water rights. Congress was debating the Colorado River Basin Project Act (Act). The Central Arizona Project (CAP) was proposed to deliver a portion of the water rights won in Arizona v. California to central and southeastern Arizona via canal. Bowing to Senator Anderson’s threat to kill the Act, authorization was provided for the construction of Hooker Dam or alternative and an offer to contract with New Mexico users for an additional 18,000 acre-feet per year of Gila River water. Arizona representative Mo Udall along with national environmental organizations expressed grave fears that Hooker Dam would impound the Gila River up into the Gila Wilderness. Thus began the long and sad saga of obstructing and delaying any effort to develop this new water for the state and region. Supporting and opposing organizations sprang up populating countless meetings, forums and collaborative gatherings for the next fifty years. New Mexico did not take advantage of the Hooker Dam construction and the offer of 18,000 acre-feet of water through the turn of the century. In that interim litigation to address Tribal claims for additional rights resulted in court settlements. Congress memorialized these settlements through the 2004 Arizona Water Settlements Act (AWSA). In 2003 the Southwest Water Planning Group (Group) was formed for the Southwest Regional Water Plan (SRWP). The Group was composed of the southwestern four counties, municipalities and soil and water districts. After the fact the Group was informed of the passage of the AWSA. None of the Group was a party to the negotiations. The AWSA called for the Fund be created by the state of New Mexico to receive funds for
construction of the New Mexico Unit or other water utilization alternatives to meet water supply demands in the Southwest Planning Region of New Mexico The Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) forming the Gila/San Francisco Water Commission (Commission) was finalized in 2006 and based on the information in the SRWP the Commission began looking at designing projects. In 2007 at the prodding of Gila diversion opponents Governor Richardson vetoed an appropriation to the ISC to support planning for the diversion projects and made the statement, “The AWSA appears to permit the local communities, state, and region to meet water supply needs without maximizing the new depletion of water from the Gila and San Francisco Rivers. I am concerned about the impact that maximizing depletions will have on the river system. Going forward, I believe that a range of alternatives should be studied, with the “no diversion” option as an essential part of the analysis. To initiate the studies, I have allocated $300,000 to the GSFCC and expect the committee to consult with other interested parties in setting priorities.” Governor Richardson expanded his policy statement in June of 2008 that included, “The planning process must include inquiries on a range of topic areas already identified by the planning group, including: • Needs assessment of regional water supply and demand • Multi-stakeholder planning process including administration and public involvement • Demand management/ conservation • Demographics • Economics/Social • Ecologic studies • Hydrologic studies including characterization of surface and groundwater supplies within the four-county area considering drought and climate change.” The Governor’s order and policy launched four years of over 200 studies and countless meetings exhausting millions of dollars of federal, state and local government funds. This satisfied the opponents’ primary objective of delaying a diversion project. Recently opponents point to all of the money spent on these studies, engineers and lawyers assigning the blame to the New Mexico CAP Entity that was yet to be created. As a result of the opponents prompted studies and meetings the Commission made recommendations for water conservation projects that the ISC funded at $9.1 million. Under Governor Martinez the ISC moved to devote the remainder of the Fund and the maximum of $62 million construction funding to developing diversion and storage projects.
Baxter BLACK
NM Legislative Actions Representative Rudy Martinez introduced HB 301 in 2011 creating the New Mexico Unit Fund. The bill passed both the House and Senate on unanimous votes and was signed into law by the newly elected Governor Martinez. Opponents continued their relentless attacks on the ISC and proponents of acquiring the new water for the region. The press and media eagerly regurgitated invented exaggerated stories of billion dollar boondoggle and impacts to the Gila Wilderness, and the last wild and free flowing river in the state. This same scaremongering was repeated to federal and state legislators. In 2016 and 2017 Senator Morales attempted to raid the Fund to finance the Grant County Regional Water Supply Project. In this 2018 session Senator Morales and Representative Martinez sponsored respectively SB 72 and HB 127 to gut the New Mexico Unit fund and effectively put an end to New Mexico’s sixty three-year efforts to secure lost water for the southwestern region of the state. Senator Morales’ bill passed the Senate Conservation Committee and wasn’t acted on by the Senate Finance Committee. Representative Martinez’s bill was tabled in the House Agriculture and Water Resources Committee. A dummy bill resurrected Martinez’s bill as HB 330 that passed from the House State Government, Indian & Veterans Affairs Committee and was tabled in the House Appropriations & Finance Committee after bi-partisan opposition threatened lengthy and heated debate.
MEET
ON THE EDGE OF COMMON SENSE www.baxterblack.com
Pig Tales P
igs are funny. Nobody would argue about that. There are people that collect them. Pictures of them, memorabilia, statuettes, door stops, curtains, pig clocks, wallpaper, pig tails, piggy banks, pigweed, pick stickers, piglets, pig-eyed piebalds and pygmies. In the homes of a pig collector you are surrounded by pig knick knacks. But due to my lack of experience, I have never been able to write pig poetry. When I attended veterinary school there were only three pigs west of Scott City, Kansas and they were in the Salt Lake City Zoo. In the world of cowboy music no one has risen to claim the title Ghost Riders in the Sty. I have held the contention that most cowboy poetry is funny due to that close relationship between humor and tragedy. Workin’ livestock is a dangerous and those of us who do it get hurt...a lot! So the only way to deal with the pain is to laugh about it. And you quadruple the chance of injury (and therefore humor) by adding a horse to the equation. Well, most people don’t work pigs a’horseback, so you don’t have as many wrecks. But where there’s a will there’s a way. Ol’ Mr. Schneider had a hog operation in central Missouri. He was one of the few in the country to employ dogs on the farm. Specifically, blue heelers. One afternoon he had gathered two sows to take to the sale. Big ones, in the five hundred pound range. He backed his pickup to the loading chute and pulled the tail gate up. Climbing down in the loading pen, he set the gates and began tickling and tormenting the two sows up the loading ramp. He thrashed and cursed them but they wouldn’t go more than halfway. It was then he happened to look up and see his blue heeler, Bruno, sitting in the pickup bed peering down the loading chute. He shouted commands at the dog who promptly leaped into action! The two sows started backing down the ramp and into Mr. Schneider who was wedged in place. He went down in the chute and one of the sows sat in his lap! The dog scaled the pileup and exited stage left. Gasping for air and grasping for straws, Mr. Schneider did what any good cowboy would do...he called the dogs! Bruno tore back around the corner, stormed up the chute and bit Mr. Schneider on the ham! They loaded in the chute alright, slick as you please. All three of ‘em. Bruno is now sausage. www.baxterblack.com
DISCOVER
Page 12
Livestock Market Digest
The View FROM THE BACK SIDE
Escape From the Iniquity Administration
BY BARRY DENTON
M
any citizens may not realize just how bad things had gotten until now. The charges against Cliven Bundy, his two sons Ammon and Ryan, along with Ryan W. Payne were dropped in Nevada by Federal District Court Judge Gloria M. Navarro. The judge, in a ruling from the bench, cited the government’s missteps in withholding evidence against the Bundy’s and Mr. Payne were so grave that the indictments would be dismissed. Navarro said that it was apparent that the FBI was involved in the prosecution and held back evidence that was in favor of the Bundy’s and Mr. Payne. Whether you agree with Mr. Bundy’s reasoning or not, the wrath brought on them by the feds was extreme and ridiculous. You have to keep in mind that the Bundy’s had no previous criminal record. The whole incident probably could have been handled by a couple of reasonable officers sent to the front door instead of an army of militarized agents. Why should any Americans ever be made an example of by corrupt leadership? Now it looks like Mr. Bundy is considering suing the Obama Administration and Nevada Senator Harry Reid for his wrongful imprisonment. The next thing about this case is who were these cowboys that were hired by the government to roundup the Bundy’s cattle? Where are they? Don’t you want to ask them why they would hire on for such a job against their brethren?
I can hardly believe that a true cowboy would even consider such a thing. I have never met one that would, even if he disagreed with them. I also understand that several cattle were stampeded and killed during the alleged roundup. Where were the People For The Ethical Treatment of Animals then? The cattle did not do anything wrong, why were several of them killed? Would you guess yahoos on horseback? PETA should change their name to COWARD. Where was Pamela Anderson when you needed her? After the standoff at Bundy Ranch I was able to listen to and speak with Ammon Bundy in Prescott, Arizona. He was very open and matter of fact about the entire incident. When I listened to his side of the story it all seemed so absurd and Orwellian. I had never heard of the American government doing such a stupid thing since Ruby Ridge in 1992. Politics played such a large part in this American tragedy at the Bundy’s as it did at Ruby Ridge. I’m also quite certain the judge would never have turned the Bundy’s loose if a democrat administration had still been in place. Recently I read a piece in this publication rating the Trump presidency at about a C- in regard to what it had accomplished in nine or ten months. Have you seen the list of the former Obama Administration’s accomplishments that have been reversed by Trump? There are over a hundred items on the list. I noticed when Secretary Of The Interior, Ryan
Take your marketing program to the top! Advertise in
Contact:
Lynn Marie ‘LM’ Rusaw
Advertising Representative & Marketing Specialist Office: 505-243-9515 Cell: 505-577-7584 AAALivestockMarketDigest@gmail.com
Zinke traveled the West there was lots of hue and cry that he would change nothing at all. Funny thing, but the first thing Trump did was reduce Bears Ears and Grand Staircase National Monuments by over two million acres. That is more than half, of the land that would have been shut down to grazing, mining, hunting, lumbering etc. Now, Tax Reform has been passed and that will be a huge nail in the coffin of Obama Care because included in it was the elimination of the individual mandate. The longer time goes on, the more fun it is watching President Trump dismantle the inept policies of President Obama. Don’t you think the ranchers and farmers will be pretty joyous with less of a tax burden? Of course, the one thing helping the majority of Americans now is the spectacular stock market which is over an unprecedented 25,000. Even if you do not personally have any stocks, look at the benefit to the cavalcade of pension funds and businesses. This spreads the wealth around and it keeps your retirement out of jeopardy. Something else we
March 15, 2018 have to look forward to are the amount of companies that are coming back to America because of the tax breaks. Consider this, coal miners, and oil field workers are back at it. How many years had they been sitting around? Developers of all kinds are starting projects that have sat dormant since 2008. Pretty soon, workers will become the only shortage, which is a good problem to have. According to the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Tom Homan “Overall removals are down because the border’s under better control than it has been in 45 years.” That also means less drugs coming in through Mexico. This will do nothing, but help our economy and well being. Remember Obama pardoning over 150 drug dealers? Actions speak louder than words, the Iniquity Administration is over and Trump is returning this country to it’s former greatness. I am a “show me” type of guy and so far I like what I see.. We all get impatient and anything that involves government takes a dreadful long time. However, those of you that are
involved with government realize that if you get 70 percent of what you want from a negotiation that is a tremendous victory. The Washington, DC culture was not established over night and it will not be renewed quickly, but it has already had somewhat of an overhaul. Environmental Protection Agency head Scott Pruitt has been making lots of progress especially his suggestion to get the United States out of the Paris Accord. It would have been a stifling tax burden to hardworking Americans with nothing to show for it. He also is not nit picking and fining ranchers over environmental protections like the previous administration. The EPA’s income has dropped dramatically. Mr. Pruitt has been very unorthodox in his role and keeps his opponents guessing about what he will do next. It’s time to get the ranch in good order and enjoy your tax break. The average hard working American has escaped the Iniquity Administration and is on the path to prosperity! Now, if we can just get the Hammonds out of jail.
How Federal Tax Reform Will, & Won’t, Help Ranchers & Farmers SOURCE: AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST
Profit Planner panelists weigh in with different takes on tax reform. Q: We’ve read stories about the Tax Reform Act will help everybody. But what do you see as the greatest opportunity for farmers to benefit? Mike Evanish: Taxpayer-friendly relief The law is one thing; yet-to-be-written regulations (details) are another. But doubling the standard deduction is likely to reduce itemizers from 30 percent of taxpayers to 10 percent. That means a less complicated national return, and who doesn’t like less complication? • Business friendly. Given increased deductibility of asset purchases and lowered tax rates, it’s easy to see why it’s friendlier to small business than to big business. Businesses grossing under $25 million can deduct all interest paid on loans while larger businesses have limited deductibility. • Family friendly. Sure, exemption deductions are going away, but are replaced with a large and mostly refundable child tax credit. I’ll take a credit over a deduction any day. And, all workers will see greater take-home pay in each paycheck thanks to reduced tax rates. Most families don’t itemize deductions. So, the near doubling of the standard deduction is major tax relief. • Cooperative friendly. Most everyone in ag has read about the 20 percent deduction from income if the farm’s production is sold to a co-op. While this is not a “pure” 20 percent deduction (there’s more to the calculation), it’ll help reduce tax bills of most that sell production through co-ops. Dale Johnson: Not simplified for everyone - Many middle- to upper-middle-class taxpayers will reduce taxes by lumping deductions every other year. One strategy may be to use the standard deduction ($12,000 individual, $24,000 married filing jointly) for 2018. In 2019, you’d lump deductions to maximize benefits from charitable contributions, property tax and other possible prepayments. Of course, many don’t have the cash flow to do that. George Mueller: The great giveaway - I’ll leave the way too complicated and confusing tax bill for professionals to explain. But there does seem to be substantial cuts in it for hard-working farmers. It lowers most tax brackets 15 percent to 25 percent. And if you don’t earn enough to benefit from the $2,000 child tax credit, our treasury will
give you a refund of up to $1,400 per child. My main concern is that this tax bill gives away trillions that our government doesn’t have. Our national debt ended 2017 at 20.24 trillion dollars — 105.6 percent of our yearly gross domestic product, and continues to grow rapidly. I guess I’m getting a bit cynical as I enter the second half of my eighth decade. But we have the most wonderful, prosperous and generous nation. It has been a delight for my family and friends growing up all these years. I fear we’re in danger of losing it all due to our lack of fiscal discipline. Our democracy won’t survive if we continue to vote for the politician who can dip into the treasury the most and spread it around to all. We face a dictatorship, oligarchy, or worse, anarchy, unless we start teaching and preaching basic economic discipline so necessary in a democratic society. Our “land of the free and home of the brave” is at risk. Glenn Rogers: Nothing’s simple -A wise old person I met in D. C. once told me not to count on Washington for more than a 10 percent change in things. The other 90 percent must come from your own efforts. So, concentrate on that 90 percent. It’ll take months or years to sort out the true impact Most farmers are small sole proprietorships, not corporations. Consequently, the changes to ones’ personal income tax should be placed first. That’s not to say that positive changes won’ be felt by larger incorporated farms. But there are fewer farmers in this category. Impact to farm income is harder to determine; not all the rules have been written yet. However, there are a few notable items. The new 20 percent deduction for qualified business income from a partnership, S corporation or sole proprietorship sounds great. Bu there are wage limitations. The deduction offsets income tax, not self-employment tax. Dairy farmers may find this new 20 percent deduction of little use as capital gain sales (raised cow sales) limit its impact. Cooperatives now have the 20 percent deduction to help reduce co-op income. However, this one isn’t directly passed on to patrons. The new law does include a 20 percent deduction specific to co-op members on payments received from the co-op. I question the benefit of higher estate tax exemptions for farmers. Most don’t have estate values that high. Most never hit the $5 million level in the old rules. If they did, it was because of the capital required to produce an income in a capital-intensive dairy business.
March 15, 2018
Livestock Market Digest
Page 13
Another Land Dispute is Brewing BY ROGER HARNACK DAILYSUNNEWS.COM
C
ould the next land-use dispute between Westerners and the federal government be brewing in Eastern Washington? You bet it could. And rancher Walter “Sonny” Riley of Pomeroy and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Spokane could be right in the middle of it. Over the years, there’s been several land-use uprisings in the West. The two most recent incidents people these days are familiar with are the so-called “Battle of Bunkerville” in Nevada during 2014 and Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon during 2016. As you know by now, most of the defendants involved in the cases brought by the federal government have been exonerated of any crimes. There’s also the failed low-key effort by Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge officials in Cheney to gain control of farmland bequeathed to teenagers in a will a couple years back, right here in our own state. Now, a new battle is brewing
over a small parcel north of the Snake River just a couple hours drive away outside Pomeroy. So far, it looks like this matter will end up in court. At issue is the grazing rights of the 71-year-old Riley, who raises cattle along the river on land currently managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The U.S. Attorney’s Office has filed in federal court to force the rancher to pay fines and fees for allegedly trespassing, encroaching and damaging public lands. The federal government also wants his cows off the land. In court documents, Assistant U.S. Attorney Vanessa Waldref accuses Riley of illegally grazing cattle on land managed by the federal government, as well as generally installing feeding amenities for a feedlot. Riley’s family has grazed cattle on the land since the mid1940s. But high-water issues prompted the family to sell some of the land in the 1960s to the public to be managed by the Corps, which manages the dams along the Snake River. The land was never fenced off and Riley’s family and other
ranchers continued to use the land without issue until about 6 years ago. Shortly thereafter, the Corps started ordering Riley and other adjacent land owners to halt grazing activity. Since that time, it’s been all downhill for ranchers there. It’s not surprising the issue has ended up in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Spokane. In fact, the agency is charged with handling legal matters relating to federal agencies operating here in Eastern Washington. But it is noteworthy to point out that the same office was involved in both the Malheur and the Turnbull cases. Former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Washington Michael Ormsby — the former head of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Spokane — was tapped as the man to prosecute Ammon Bundy’s attorney. You may recall Bundy’s attorney was tasered and tackled by U.S. Marshals during court proceedings over the Malheur standoff. And it was Ormsby’s second-in-command, attorney Pamela DeRusha, who employed strong-arm tactics to try to give
New Step Announced to Add Transparency to Development of Dietary Guidines
T
he U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced on Feb. 26 a new step in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) development process. For the first time, the departments will seek public comments on the proposed priority topics and supporting scientific questions that will guide the development of the upcoming 20202025 edition of the DGA. The public may submit comments through the Federal Register; the comment period will be open from until March 30, 2018. The topics, supporting scientific questions, and link to submit public comments will be available at DietaryGuidelines. gov. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans serves as the cornerstone of federal nutrition programs and policies. This new public comment stage at the beginning of the DGA development process helps maintain the integrity of the process and ensure transparency in communicating the topics that meet the priorities of federal nutrition programs. This new approach allows for more public participation over this multiyear development process. It also improves customer service by being more responsive to stakeholder recommendations and feedback. “The American taxpayer is an essential customer – indeed, a shareholder,” said Brandon Lipps, acting deputy under secretary for the Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services at USDA, the administrative lead for the 20202025 DGA. “We’re proud to be taking this important step forward towards greater transparency, and ensuring that the American public’s voice is heard throughout this process.” USDA and HHS are proposing a life stage approach for this edition of the DGA, focusing on priority scientific questions from birth through older adulthood. The 2014 Farm Bill mandated that, starting with the 2020-2025 edition, the DGA provides guidance for women who are pregnant, as well as infants and toddlers from birth to 24 months. In addition to a focus on life stages, the topics and supporting questions for public comment reflect a continued focus on patterns of what we eat and drink as a whole, on average and over time, not on
individual foods or food groups. “We know that good nutrition together with physical activity can help decrease Americans’ risk of developing serious health conditions across the life span,” said Don Wright, MD, MPH, deputy assistant secretary for health at HHS. “The Dietary Guidelines for Americans help support healthy choices at home, school, work, and in the community. That’s why we are encouraging the public and stakeholders in nutrition to submit comments up front to help inform the next edition of the guidelines.” The 2020-2025 DGA topics which USDA and HHS propose are based on four criteria: • Relevance – the topic is within the scope of the DGA and its focus on food-based recommendations, not clinical guidelines for medical treatment; • Importance – the topic has new, relevant data and represents an area of substantial public health concern, uncertainty, and/or knowledge gap; • Potential federal impact – there is a probability that guidance on the topic would inform federal food and nutrition policies and programs; and • Avoiding duplication – the topic is not currently addressed through existing evidence-based federal guidance (other than the Dietary Guidelines). USDA and HHS will consider all public comments submitted in finalizing the list of topics and supporting questions to be examined in the development of the 2020-2025 DGA. After finalizing the topics and supporting questions, USDA and HHS will post a public call for the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee nominations. The areas of expertise needed will be based on the final topics and supporting scientific questions, resulting in a coordinated and efficient scientific review. For information and links, go to DietaryGuidelines.gov. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) serves as the cornerstone of federal nutrition programs and policies, providing foodbased recommendations to help prevent diet-related chronic diseases and promote overall health. According to the National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act of 1990, the DGA is mandated to reflect the preponderance of scientific evidence, and is published jointly by USDA and HHS every five years.
wrest control of the teenagers’ farmland and turn it over to Turnbull. When the Battle of Bunkerville case ended in dismissal with prejudice last month, Washington State Representative Matt Shea, Spokane, said he hoped it would help curtail the strong-arm tactics federal agencies use in land management in rural areas. And when
U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions reprimanded federal employees for their tactics in the cases, it appeared as if those changes may be coming. Obviously, along the Snake River, the change isn’t coming fast enough. And rural residents and taxpayers will be paying the bill for continued shortcomings in federal land management practices.
BARRY DENTON PHOTOGRAPHY
! ! w o w N e o b i r c N Subsscribe Sub k c o t s e v i L Digest at..ion blicatio licn. estock pu ck pub
rmative liv t’s most info
es
The Southw
ut
The So
e
rmativ
st info
’s mo hwest
...
livesto
KET
MAR
S
3Yes.
Please subscribe me to the Livestock Market Digest for:
1 Year at $19.95
2 Years at $29.95
NAME
NAME
ADDRESS
ADDR
PHONE
PHON
E-MA
MC
VISA
CARD NUMBER
CARD
EXPIRATION DATE
EXPIR
SIGNATURE
SIGNA
Payment Enclosed
SEND PAYMENT TO: Livestock Market Digest P.O. Box 7458 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87194
@
or subscribe online
Pay
SEND AAALIVESTOCK.COM
Lives P.O. Albu
Page 14
Livestock Market Digest
March 15, 2018
More government misconduct, wilderness testimony, a letter on grazing and a new rural tax Obama and who, prior to this, had sided with the government on almost every issue brought to the court.
Wilderness testimony
Government misconduct
M
y two most recent columns have covered the mistrial in the Bundy case and then the dismissal “with prejudice” of all charges against the Bundys. Recently, several court documents were unsealed for the first time. I reviewed the documents, which included several motions to dismiss and the transcript of Judge Gloria Navarro’s final decision. Given the media’s bias in favor of the prosecution I was concerned their reports had overstated the government misconduct due to their disappointment in the outcome. What I found was just the opposite. For instance, the government’s justification for such a “highly militarized” approach to the cattle confiscation was the danger posed by Cliven Bundy and his family. I had previously written that an FBI threat assessment came to the opposite conclusion. Indeed, the recently disclosed documents show there were actually four such threat assessments completed. Those threat assessments were prepared by the FBI Behavioral Analysis Unit, the Southern Nevada Counterterrorism Task Force, the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force and the Gold Butte Cattle Impound Risk Assessment, and they all concluded the Bundys posed no danger and referred to Cliven Bundy’s history of seeking non-violent and legal means of addressing the issues, These documents, which had not been turned over to the defense, demonstrate the BLM’s entire plan of operation was based upon a lie.
One of the key defense theories was that some of the defendants were there to protest the government’s treatment of the Bundys. The government, however, charged that defendant Ryan Payne had made ‘false statements”, including his claim that government snipers were placed around the Bundy home. It was previously disclosed that the snipers did, in fact, exist. The new documents show that after finally admitting the existence of the snipers, the government argued that technically they weren’t really “snipers”, and besides they were not actually “deployed” and were only “training” in the area. Judge Navarro found this argument “disingenuous” and “a deliberate attempt to mislead and to obscure the truth”, especially since there were three separate FBI documents referring to them as snipers. Judge Navarro also said the Court had “serious questions” about why the FBI “inexplicably placed (or perhaps hid)” information about the placement of FBI snipers, “on a thumb drive, inside a vehicle, for over three years.” Sure sounds suspicious to me. How about you? Read through the judge’s decision and you will find phrases like “reckless disregard”, “flagrant prosecutorial misconduct”, “intentional abnegation of responsibility”, “willfully failed to disclose”, “conduct especially egregious”, and “grossly shocking” when describing government conduct and concluding that, “a universal sense of justice has been violated.” Keep in mind this is by a judge who was sponsored by Senator Harry Reid, nominated by President
A subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources recently held a hearing on S. 441, the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks Conservation Act. Sponsored by New Mexico Senators Udall & Heinrich, this legislation would designate eight new Wilderness areas on or near our border with Mexico. The New Mexico Cattle Growers Association submitted testimony in opposition to the bill. President Tom Sidwell said the grazing guidelines in the bill were, “written when most wilderness areas existed in the high country where the allotments had natural waters and were seasonal in nature. The lands affected by this legislation occur in a desert ecosystem where the resource and ranching needs are far different.” Sidwell requested that, “Congress or an independent entity conduct a thorough review of the guidelines applicability to desert allotments and make recommendations for any warranted changes” and that no new desert areas be designated until the review was completed and revisions considered. Sidwell also expressed concern over the bill’s impact on the health and safety of rural residents in the area, stating, “The prohibition on motorized vehicles and mechanical equipment will place
severe limitations on the Border Patrol and therefore threaten the safety of residents in the area. It defies common sense to create a ‘no law enforcement zone’ in this border country.” President Sidwell also questioned the need for the legislation to protect these lands, stating, “By Presidential proclamation they are withdrawn from all forms of disposal, just like Wilderness. By that same proclamation they are withdrawn from all forms of mineral entry, just like Wilderness. There can be no new roads built, just like Wilderness. So we ask why impose this additional regulatory burden on the users of these lands?” Also submitting testimony in opposition to the bill were the New Mexico Woolgrowers, the Western Heritage Alliance, the Dona Ana County Farm & Livestock Bureau, the Southwest Grazing Association, the Council of Border Conservation Districts, the Mesilla Valley Sportsmens Alliance and ranchers Carol Cooper, Gary Thurm, Tom Mobley and Wesley Eaton.
Monument language In his report to President Trump concerning the review of national monuments, Secretary Zinke said he was contemplating changes to the grazing language in the two New Mexico national monuments under review. The New Mexico Cattle Growers has written to Secretary Zinke encouraging him to make such a change. Calling the grazing language in the Rio Grande
del Norte and Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks national monuments “the most anti-grazing of any proclamations where grazing is still allowed”, President Sidwell recommended the language in the Basin and Range National Monument. That grazing language, said Sidwell, is “clear and precise that the designation does not affect the administration of livestock grazing, and results in livestock grazing being on an equal footing with other uses.”
A rural tax The White House recently praised an Oregon program that charges participants 1.7 cents for each mile driven on state roads. Many say this is another sign that President Trump is open to a mileage tax to fund his infrastructure initiative. Rural residents, however, already spend a larger percentage of their income on transportation than the general population, and a tax of this type would increase that disparity. And guess who will benefit the most from this new revenue? That’s right, the relatively wealthier urban residents. This is the opposite of a Robin Hood Tax, it’s a Sheriff of Nottingham tax. Until next time, be a nuisance to the devil and don’t forget to check that cinch. 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 and The DuBois Western Heritage Foundation
More Than 100 ‘Climate Change Cases’ Filed In US Courts In 2017 BY MICHAEL BASTASCH / DAILY CALLER
D
ozens of lawsuits concerning man-made global warming were filed in U.S. courts last year, according to a new report. The Sabin Center for Climate Change Law found more than 100 lawsuits “raised claims concerning either the impacts of climate change or reducing GHG emissions” were filed in U.S. courts in 2017. Most notably, seven California cities and counties filed suit against oil companies over alleged damages caused by man-made global warming. Two more cities — Richmond, California and New York City — joined the effort in 2018, but now plaintiffs are scrambling to address discrepancies in their bond offerings. However, the Sabin Center’s report focused on 82 “climate change cases” related to the Trump administration’s regulatory efforts. Federal agencies have been busy rescinding Obama administration rules, including many energy and climate rules. Most of the suits were filed in support of Obama administration regulations — most of those were brought by environmental groups and Democratic state attorneys general, according to the report. “Many of these cases concern environmental review and permitting decisions for individual programs and projects that cumulatively shape national climate policy,” reads the report.
“Some seek to increase transparency and expose allegedly illegal workings within the federal government,” reads the report. “Still others seek to fill the void of federal climate change leadership — a ‘litigate-to-mitigate’ strategy.” The lawsuit frenzy started quickly after President Donald Trump took office. Trump made deregulation a major priority in his first year, delaying or rescinding hundreds of Obama-era rules. By May, environmental groups had filed dozens of lawsuits challenging Trump administration decisions and policies. For example, the Center for Biological Diversity alone had filed 15 lawsuits against the Trump administration by that time, including one challenging the proposed U.S.-Mexico border wall on environmental grounds. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has filed a slew of lawsuits against the Trump administration as well, including regulations on household appliances. The Obama administration implemented the rules as part of the former president’s “Climate Action Plan.” NRDC argues those rules are essential to fighting global warming. New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman led a coalition of Democratic-held states, and New York City, in their legal battle against the Trump administration delaying rules for household appliances.
March 15, 2018
Livestock Market Digest
Page 15
Bovine Viral Diarrhea: Why One Strain hitting so Many Herds? BY ANN HESS, STAFF WRITER AGDAILY
B
ovine viral diarrhea virus is a coat of many colors. As Dr. Stephen Foulke, professional service veterinarian with Boehringer Ingelheim points out, we may call it bovine viral diarrhea virus, or BVDV for short, but diarrhea is probably one of the least common symptoms when it comes to the disease. “The biggest thing a lot of people forget with BVD is when you are exposed, even if you don’t break with one of these big diseases, it’s immunosuppressive,” Foulke said. “It actually suppresses the immune system opening up the door for every other disease out there. You may not see a break with BVD itself but you may be getting a lot of other illnesses, decreased weight gains,
Lawsuit Challenges California Law Criminalizing Teaching Trade Skills SOURCE: HTTP://IJ.ORG/CASE/ CALIFORNIA-TRADE-SCHOOLS
E
arlier this year, Bob Smith, owner of the Pacific Coast Horseshoeing School, opened his mailbox to find a notice from the state of California threatening to shut him down. The notice said that Bob was violating state law by admitting students to his horseshoeing school who hadn’t first graduated from high school or passed an equivalent government-approved exam. A few months later, Esteban Narez, a ranch hand working odd jobs, applied to attend PCHS’s eight-week course. He’d heard from other PCHS graduates that shoeing horses was a great way to turn his love of working with horses into a stable profession that would help him better support himself and his family. But because Esteban hasn’t graduated from high school, Bob was forced to deny his application. For students with limited education, trade schools like Bob’s are often the best opportunity to learn a skill and join a trade that empowers them to earn an honest living. By denying students’ right to a quality education in a profession of their choice, California’s prerequisite education law hurts the very students it was intended to help. Standing in front of a room of students and teaching a vocational skill is no different than writing a how-to book, publishing a series of newspaper stories, or uploading an instructional video to YouTube. In other words, teaching is a form of Constitutionally-protected free speech. That’s why Bob and Esteban have partnered with the Institute for Justice to file a lawsuit against the state of California to vindicate their First Amendment rights to teach and learn.
decreased reproductions just from the effect of this, that is not direct, but of the immune system shutting down.” We had the opportunity to chat with Foulke recently at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association Convention and Trade Show about one particular strain of BVDV that keeps popping up, Type 1b. “Over the last 20 years we have actually had a shift from the BVD 1a virus to the BVD 1b as now the most prevalent virus,” Foulke said. “They are finding not just in the respiratory form, but even on the reproductive side.” Foulke said most producers are very familiar with the respiratory form of the disease — causing pneumonia, knocking back the respiratory apparatus, and allowing for secondary bacteria to come in and cause real damage. BVD Type
1b has a reproductive form as well. It can cause early embryonic death, abortions, and congenital defects as well as cause the animal in utero to become a persistently infected carrier. “If the virus is there during that phase, the animal thinks the virus is part of its normal self and will mount no immunity against it,” Foulke said. “So, the virus lives in the animal, just replicating and spreading everywhere once it is born for the rest of its life.” What’s causing the prevalence of 1b? Foulke said most vaccines probably had 1a in them over the years and thus did a good job of pushing back against that strain. “Whenever Mother Nature sees one of her things being pushed back, well guess what, someone comes to fill the void so now we are seeing more of the
1bs are more prevalent,” Foulke said. It’s important for producers to make sure their vaccines cover 1b as well as cover the 1a and 2a strains. Foulke said that’s why Boehringer Ingelheim’s Pyramid and Express lines have been tested on cattle out in the field to ensure they cover all strains. And while BVDV does not change or mutate as fast as the human flu virus, Foulke said it is important to keep up with cattle vaccinations as immunity will wane after a year. “If you don’t vaccinate, what we tend to see is you get away with it for a little while but remember that immunity is waning and once it gets below a certain threshold or the exposure gets big enough, it’s going to come right back and then you are totally unprotected,” Foulke said.
Page 16
Livestock Market Digest
March 15, 2018
Ancient DNA Upends the Horse Family Tree BY ELIZABETH PENNISI WWW.SCIENCEMAG.ORG
H
orses radically changed human history, revolutionizing how people traveled, farmed, and even made war. Yet every time we think we’ve answered the question of where these animals came from, another study brings us back to square one. Such is the case with an extensive new study of ancient horse DNA, which largely disproves the current theory: that modern horses arose more than 5000 years ago in Kazakhstan. Instead, the new work suggests that modern-day domestic horses come from an as-yet-undiscovered stock. The research also shows that the world’s only remaining wild horses, called Przewalski’s horses, are not truly wild. “This paper radically changes our thinking about the origin of modern horses,” says Molly McCue, a veterinarian and equine geneticist at the University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine in St. Paul, who was not involved with the work. “It’s an exciting and surprising finding.” Until now, many researchers had thought that the Botai culture, an ancient group of hunters and herders that relied on horses for food and possibly transport in what today is northern Kazakhstan, first harnessed horses 5500 years ago. Researchers have discovered horse meat fat and milk fat in Botai pottery, suggesting these people ate horses and kept mares in captivity for milking. Markings on horse teeth indicate that the Botai tethered the horses with bits and either rode or herded them, suggesting some degree of domestication. The site is also home to lots of horse bones, and modern genetic evidence has pointed to the region as the source of domestic horses. With this history in mind, paleogeneticist Ludovic Orlando at CNRS, the French national research agency in Toulouse, and the University of Copenhagen decided to analyze the ancient DNA of these horses. “I expected to catch evolution red-handed, when domestication first started,” Orlando recalls. He teamed up with longtime Botai zooarchaeologist Alan Outram from the University of Exeter in the United Kingdom, and together they discovered an ancient corral at the site, another sign of domestication. They collected and later sequenced DNA from 20 Botai horse remains; they did the same for a similar number of horses living in various regions over the past 5000 years. They then compared these sequences to scores of already existing sequences, including Przewalski’s horses, and built a family tree showing which breeds were most closely related. The tree “was really quite a shock,” Orlando says. Intensive sequencing of horse DNA at this site in Kazakhstan suggests this is not where today’s domestic horses originated.
Alan Outram For one, Przewalski’s horses were in the same part of the tree as the Botai horses. From their relationship, it was clear that these “wild” horses were escaped Botai horses, the team reports
today in Science. “We have now found that there are no truly wild horses left” anywhere in the world, Outram says. Another surprise was that all the other horses were on a separate branch of the tree, suggesting they were not Botai descendents as many have long thought. “We are now back to the intriguing question—who were the ancestors of our modern horses, and who were the peoples that were responsible for their early husbandry?” says Emmeline Hill, an equine scientist at University College Dublin who
was not involved with the study. This new work, which hints that other horses may be represented in these ancient genomes, shows “that [horse] domestication could have been a process with many phases, experiments, failures, and successes,” says Ernest Bailey, a geneticist at the University of Kentucky’s Gluck Equine Research Center in Lexington. Orlando and his colleagues lay out two possible scenarios to explain their family tree. In one, as Botai horsemen expanded to other parts of Europe and Asia, they bred their herds with so
many wild species that almost none of the original Botai DNA remained. As a result, those horses don’t seem related to the Botai, even though they actually are. In the second scenario, the Botai horses didn’t survive, and were replaced by horses domesticated elsewhere, creating at least two centers of horse domestication (as there may have been for dogs, cats, and other animals). Outram suspects that in addition to the Botai horses east of the Ural Mountains, there may have been domesticated horses
to the west that won out thanks to migrations, he explains. One major barrier remains to knowing which scenario is right: a dearth of DNA samples from between 4000 and 5000 years ago. So Orlando and his colleagues are collecting more. But another kind of DNA might help them in their work—ancient human DNA that details migration and population patterns from that time. Indeed, they already have some evidence from unpublished studies. But Outram is keeping quiet about that work. “My mouth is zipped for now.”