LMD Oct 2014

Livestock “The greatest homage we can pay to truth is to use it.”

– JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL OCTOBER 15, 2014 • www. aaalivestock . com

MARKET

Digest T Volume 56 • No. 10

by Lee Pitts

If you can smile when things go wrong, you have someone in mind to blame.

D

Nothing To Crow About

NEWSPAPER PRIORITY HANDLING

When Chris Hurt, an Ag Econ professor at Purdue, crunched all the numbers the Professor’s name said it all . . . a big “hurt” had been put on beef.

In 2007 meat consumption in this country per person was 219 pounds of beef, pork, chicken and turkey. This year that number will be around 199 pounds, down 10 percent in just seven years. That’s nothing to crow about even for poultry people but it was especially bad news for beef. Of the 20 pound decrease in overall meat consumption, beef was responsible for 11

pounds of the drop, pork pork five pounds and chicken and turkey were down 2 pounds each. In percentage terms the news is even more bleak: consumption of beef was down 17 percent while chicken was only down 3 percent. See a trend here?

It can be argued that the primary reason for beef’s drop in consumption was that since 2007 the retail price of beef rose 40 percent. Compare that to

retail price for chicken which was up 18 percent over the same time frame. Even more telling, Professor Hurt says that beef’s price rose 5 percent faster than the general inflation rate at a time when the average American family had less income with which to buy groceries.“People simply eat less meat when prices rise quickly,” says Hurt.

Let’s not kid ourselves, we all know that the major reason we are enjoying such high beef

prices is not our advertising, it’s because we lost 12 percent of our cow herd just since 2007 and have the fewest number of cows in 60 years. Business school graduates would say our “national supply chain is depleted.” Talk about unsustainable! Sharing more of a smaller and smaller pie is no way to rebuild an industry.

It’s not about to change anytime soon either. The National Chicken Council says we can expect a double digit increase in chicken consumption this year and 24 percent of consumers say they’ll be eating even more chicken in the future.

A Cow Conundrum Part of the solution to our consumption woes is to produce more beef but if we save back heifers to rebuild the nation’s beef herd, that creates an even bigger shortage of beef, causing continued on page two

New Mexico Small Businesses Blast US Fish & Wildlife Service Backroom Wolf Deal ew Mexicans were outraged to learn that the U.S Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) and the Arizona Game & Fish Department (AGFD) have entered into a deal to accept an unpublished plan for Mexican wolf management in Arizona and New Mexico, according to Jose Varela Lopez, New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association President, La Cieneguilla.

“It is incomprehensible that a federal agency would engage in such an action,” said Varela Lopez. “We learned on September 22 that the deal had been made. Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and final revision of the Endangered Species Act 10j rule didn’t even close until September 23.”

The Mexican wolf reintroduction has been the subject of great controversy for more than 20 years and has had significant economic impact on rural com-

N

by LEE PITTS

Road Rage

More With Less arn those poultry pluckers anyway. While we’re all patting ourselves on the back, buying new pickups and feeling fine about these heady cattle prices, American consumers are jilting their former beefy first-love and have fallen hard for the two-legged soybeans. When we awake from this dream of a cattle market we may find that beef, the former King of Meats, has not only fallen far behind chicken, but the other white meat too.

We may want to change our advertising slogan because when more and more consumers ask “What’s for Dinner?” these days, the answer isn’t beef.

Riding Herd

munities in the reintroduction areas of New Mexico, noted Ric Thompson, Northern New Mexico Safari Club President, Edgewood.

Sources indicate that the deal cut between FWS and AGFD will do the following: (I) A Service commitment of no wolves north of Interstate 40.

Wolves that are identified north of I-40 will be trapped and returned to the Mexican Wolf Experimental Population Area utilizing a 10(a)1(a) permit.

(II) An expressed upper population limit in the rule of 300325 Mexican wolves in NM and AZ. When the population objective of 300-325 is reached, strict removal will be implemented to reduce the population to the maximum of 300-325 individual animals.

(III) Mexican wolves would be removed if impacting wild ungulate herds at a rate higher than 15 percent as determined by the States using state

methodologies of population measurement.

(IV) Zones of occupancy that are similar or the same as proposed by the Arizona Game and Fish Department in their previous comments and alternative.

These items were all contained in an alternative for the EIS from Arizona that wasn’t even published in the EIS, Thompson continued, so members of the public have had no opportunity to review and comment on it.

“This deal clearly violates the spirit, the intent, and the letter of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),” noted Tom McDowell, New Mexico Trappers Association President, Corrales.

While the deal will have tremendous impact on New Mexicans and land within New Mexico was included in the alternative developed by the continued on page three

he clean-cut boys and girls in their blue and gold FFA jackets make me so proud to be a former member. That was certainly the case when I saw on the front page of my weekly copy of the Voice News of Hickman, Nebraska, FFA members from the Freeman Chapter harvesting over 1,000 pounds of tomatoes, peppers, sweet corn, beans, cantaloupe, cucumbers and zucchini that they gave to needy area residents and food pantries. Although I’m quite sure the zucchini was probably later returned under the cover of darkness.

They also grew something called swiss chard and kale, which in my gardening days were known as weeds!

Most FFA chapters have such activities where they strive to make their community a better place to live.

And I salute them. In our town our big community effort was the annual roadside cleanup. This was back in the day when motorists thought nothing of opening the car window to empty their trash. So it was a big job and we were aided by Lions Club members who drove the trucks we filled with trash.

I must admit, I dreaded the day because it was a lot of hard work and I almost picked up a rattlesnake one time. But my Grandpa lived for roadside cleanup, although my Grandmother definitely didn’t. Just the words “roadside cleanup” were enough to make her break down and sob for she knew that if anything “good” was found it would end up in her house. Probably in the living room.

There is a big park named for my Grandpa in my town because he put on rodeos to build it. He was Chief of our volunteer fire department for decades, Honorary Chapter Farmer and a stalwart of our community, except on this day when his behavior was somewhat suspect. He voted himself the Inspector General and it was he who performed the mandatory check on every truck so that he might redirect it to his house if he found any “keepers” continued on page twelve

www.LeePittsbooks.com

Livestock Market Digest

Page 2

October 15, 2014

More With Less the price to go higher still.

Which in turn reduces consumption even more. But if we sell those heifers that means we'll have an even smaller national beef herd down the road. We could, and are, importing more beef to keep prices down as imports from Canada this year are up well over 20 percent. But is our goal really to build a better American beef market for foreign producers to capitalize on?

Add in the fact that more and more cows are being kicked off public grazing land, and many investors buying ranch land today are doing so for uses other than ranching, and you have an industry shrinking before our very eyes. This calls for new thinking about how we can produce more beef with fewer inputs. It won't be easy.

Breeding To Feeding

Felipe Sanchez, Member Since 2010, and son Diego

As far as farmers and ranchers are concerned, 40-hour workweeks only exist in movies. We put in the same long hours because we’re farmers and ranchers too. Since 1916, we’ve provided loans, insurance and other financial services to help generations of New Mexicans get ahead.

And relax. Someday.

Call 1-800-451-5997 or visit www.FarmCreditNM.com

For advertising, subscription and editorial inquiries write or call: Livestock Market Digest P.O. Box 7458 Albuquerque, N.M. 87194

MARKET

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

EDITORIAL and ADVERTISING STAFF: CAREN COWAN . . . . . . . Publisher LEE PITTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . Executive Editor CHUCK STOCKS . . . . . . . .Publisher Emeritus RANDY SUMMERS . . . . .Sales Rep FALL MARKETING EDITION AD SALES: Ron Archer . . . . . . . . . . . 505/865-6011 archerron@aol.com

Subscribe Today

FIELD EDITOR: DELVIN HELDERMON 580/622-5754, 1094 Kolier Rd. Sulphur, OK 73086

NAME

ADDRESS

CITY

Telephone: 505/243-9515 Fax: 505/998-6236 www.aaalivestock.com

STATE

ZIP

My check is enclosed for: o One Year: $19.95 o Two Years $29.95 Clip & mail to: Livestock Market Digest, P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194

ADMINISTRATIVE and PRODUCTION STAFF: MARGEURITE VENSEL . Office Manager.

CAROL PENDLETON . . Special Assistance CHRISTINE CARTER . . . . Graphic Artist

There are roughly nine million dairy cows in the U.S. and besides milk, cheese and other dairy products, they produce 20 percent of the beef consumed in this country. And that percentage could be higher still if Wulf Cattle, headquartered in Minnesota, has their way.

The nine million dairy cows produce 4 million dairy calves which are not needed for dairy replacements. Typically discounted, what if these 4 million head could be turned from Holsteins into beef machines, producing more tonnage and helping to preserve beef’s market share? That’s the idea behind Wulf’s Breeding to Feeding program.

The Wulf family has been in the cattle business for nearly 60 years, has been breeding purebred Limousin since the 1970s, and has been buying back those Limousin sired calves for 30 years to feed. So they know what’s under the hide.

Mike Hall has been a distinguished animal science professor and beef cattle specialist at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo for nearly four decades and he met members of the Wulf family while serving on the Board of Directors for the Limousin Association. Now retired, the tireless Hall became the western representative for Wulf in trying to sell dairymen on the Breeding to Feeding concept in the biggest dairy state in the nation, California.

“Wulf Cattle,” says Hall, “were first cattle feeders before seedstock producers. The late Leonard Wulf chose Limousin over other continental breeds in the early 70s because they crossed so well with their commercial cattle that were superior in the feedlot and on the rail.

Presently they have expanded their feeding operations from Minnesota to two additional feedyards in Nebraska. They have a one-time feeding capacity of over 50,000 between these feeding locations. Wulf also has cattle on feed in custom feedlots in Texas. Most of their cattle on feed are “program cattle” that

continued from page one

are either Natural, NHTC and/or GAP certified. From the early days and still today, Wulf prefers to work with their bull customers by buying their calves from the bulls that were purchased from Wulf.”

The Wulf operation was built on muscle and the feed efficiency that Limousin brings to a terminal cross. They see dairy cows as an underutilized resource and felt that Limousin would be the ideal beef breed to cross with dairy breeds to produce more of the kind of beef the American consumer demands.

A Golden Cross The idea behind the Breeding To Feeding program is dairymen would use sexed semen on their very best cows to produce their dairy replacements and use beef semen on all lower merit females. Because today’s dairy industry is numbers driven it is possible for a dairyman to rank each of his cows using any one of a number of computer programs.

The dairyman would then determine how many replacements he'd need in any given year and breed only that number with sexed semen from the best dairy bulls available. The rest of his cows would be bred to either Wulf Limousin or Lim-Flex® (Limousin x Angus) bulls to increase profits with steers that fit the beef industry's specs. They recommend using Limousin on Jerseys and Lim-Flex® on Holsteins.

Says Hall, “We have the most data on the Limousin X Jersey with over 3,000 head through the entire chain; however, the Lim-Flex X Holstein are coming in now with good results. Obviously, the Jersey has the most gain with the beef cross and the Limousin is the perfect complement. Angus X Holstein has been very popular cross, primarily with the Angus name. We feel the Limousin genetics is a better cross with increased ribeye area, higher dressing percent and improved feed efficiency.”

Just as the cattle industry has mimicked the dairy industry in their use of EPDs and data to build a better animal, there’s something to be said for the concept of using your very best beef cows to produce your replacements, while breeding your lesser cows to a terminal cross sire. The same concept would apply if you want to keep your herd 100 percent Angus. You would breed your very best cows to maternal, easy calving bulls and the rest to high growth Angus bulls or better carcass sires.

Wulf’s Breeding to Feeding program also has the potential to fix a couple of the dairy industry’s problems. “Many Holstein producers,” says Hall, “overproduce the heifer replacements which has caused severe problems with the operating budgets.

With the present technology of sex semen, especially on Jerseys, there is no need to breed concontinued on page three

October 15, 2014

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

Page 3

Arizona Game Department Tries to Provide Cover for Backroom Deal on Wolves rizona noticed a Commission meeting on September 20. Four state game department directors were told of the deal on September 22. The Arizona Commission met on September 23. This release came out on the 24th.

Arizona Game and Fish Commission demands resolution of three primary concerns in Mexican wolf rule proposal The Arizona Game and Fish Commission voted unanimously this week [week of September 22] to have the Arizona Game and Fish Department negotiate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to find agreeable resolution to three primary points of contention in the draft Environmental Impact Statement (dEIS) on the 10(j) rule for Mexican wolf recovery.

The commission directed the department to address three primary concerns in their negotiations with the Service.

The current proposal: n Lacks a cap on the number of wolves allowed in Arizona and New Mexico. Possible resolution is 300-325 wolves across the two states with clear and enforceable removal strategies to ensure that this number is not exceeded. n Fails to define the level of impact that constitutes “unacceptable impact” to ungulate populations. Possible resolution is to provide an objective definition of a 15 percent impact trigger to begin wolf removal. n Proposes three wolf management zones in Arizona that allow dispersal to almost the entire state south of I-40 despite many of these areas offering unsuitable habitat and prey base. Possible resolution is to expand wolf management in the experimental population area in phases as follows: – Phase 1: No translocations would occur west of Highway 87, but wolves could disperse to the Mexican Wolf Experimental Population Area (MWEPA) north of Highway 260 between Highway 87 and I-17.

– Phase 2: No translocations would occur west of I-17, but wolves could disperse to Highway 89.

– Phase 3: No translocations would occur west of Highway

A

More With Less ventional dairy semen to Jerseys as the bull calves have little value.”

A Dual Purpose Here’s how it all works. A dairyman orders semen from Genex, or other partners such as CRV, Alta Genetics, and Select Sires and inseminates the designated lower quality dairy cows to Limousin bulls. The Wulf sired

89, but wolves could disperse throughout the MWEPA. Evaluations of the phase-in approach would be conducted after the first five years of the rule and then every three years to determine if the next phase is needed. Evaluations would consider: n Adverse human interactions with wolves, n Impacts to ungulate populations, n Whether the wolf population is achieving an average of 10 percent annual growth, based on the end-of-year population count.

“The commission and department have always sought a balanced approach to Mexican wolf reintroduction. The Service’s current proposal has the potential for unregulated wolf population growth that would clearly have great impact on the people and other wildlife species of Arizona. The commission’s latest action seeks to pursue a managed approach to Mexican wolf reintroduction rather than the uncertainty provided by the Service’s preferred alternative,” said Commissioner Kurt Davis.

The commission is concerned that the dEIS failed to include any elements from an alternative proposal developed and submitted to the Service by 28 cooperating agencies and stakeholders. The commission adamantly believes that any successful proposal must address and balance the needs of all stakeholders and other wildlife species in the state.

The commission has indicated that if the Service fails to address their three concerns, they will consider legal and congressional remedies to resolve the failings of the dEIS. The rule proposals currently being considered will govern the future direction of the Mexican wolf reintroduction effort in Arizona and New Mexico.

The alternative developed by the cooperators’ group is scientifically-based and would further cooperation between federal and state agencies and stakeholders to achieve a selfsustaining wolf population.

For more information on the Cooperator’s Alternative and the Mexican wolf reintroduction effort, visitwww.azgfd.gov/wolf.

continued from page two

calves are born on the dairy and routinely transported to participating calf ranches. Then the crossbred calves are purchased

by Wulf Cattle and the dairy receives a premium.

The resulting crossbred calves are more efficient feed converters, have more muscle and as if by magic, a lower value dairy carcass is transformed into a beef carcass with increased rib-

Wolf Deal

continued from page one

AGFD, the effort had absolutely no support from any New Mexicans, said Kim Talbot, Southern New Mexico Chapter of the Safari Club. The New Mexico Department of Game & Fish withdrew from the wolf program two years ago because it was being run over by the FWS, he said.

A dozen sportsmen and livestock organizations in New Mexico put FWS Director Dan Ashe on notice that the actions of the federal and state agency are predecisional and recommended withdrawal of the entire process with a letter on September 25, 2014.

“The rush to judgment on this

issue is a result of a multi-species settlement entered into by the US. Department of Justice more than two years ago with two radical environmentalist groups,” reported Varela Lopez. “The FWS is set to complete the wolf program revisions by early 2015.

Clearly there will be much more litigation on the issue.

eye and excellent quality and yield grades. The carcasses are then sold to Laura’s Lean Beef, Tyson Fresh Foods or Greater Omaha Beef.

The Wulf’s did their homework before embarking on this program. The University of Minnesota, gathered data on over 2,500 cattle produced by Limousin matings to Jersey cows and came to the conclusion that over 80 percent of the 1350 pound carcasses graded choice, 9 percent graded prime, ribeyes measured more than 13.9 inches, and there were no discounts taken for the shape of the ribeye.

(Dairy cattle typically produce more elongated ribeyes.) Dairy cattle that can produce these kinds of beef animals have another plus going for them . . . they calve year round.

“We have proven that through this program we can produce both milk and beef from the same animal,” says Jerry Wulf, president of Wulf Cattle, “and do it efficiently with the use of Limousin genetics.”

makes it ideal for cheese producers. Also, dairymen are paid by processors based on the content of butterfat and protein in the milk they produce. Jerseys also calve easily, have a relatively lower rate of dystocia, and are highly fertile. For the 90 percent of the nation’s dairy herd that is Holstein, Wulf has selected specific Limousin and Lim/Flex® bulls that nick well with them.

Not only could this program give us more quality beef to withstand poultry’s advance, it has the potential to put another million head of feeders in America’s feedlots, who observers say have 20 percenet too much bunk space for the present size of our industry.

Breeding to Feeding is barely one year old but already participating calf ranches are located in eight different major cow pockets around the U.S. and the program earned a Dairy Herd Management Innovation Award at the 2013 World Dairy Expo. The award was based on program originality, usefulness and value to dairy producers, but it could be just as useful to the beef industry in supplying more domestically produced beef.

bulls. Until recently, most dairy calves were sold for veal, or they were sent to a feedyard at 200 to 300 pounds and fed for an entire year. Years ago in Southern California Ralph’s Markets committed to selling beef only from calf-fed Holsteins because it was so consistent.

Mike Hall recalls, “Crossing beef breeds with dairy cows has been practiced for sometime now with limited success. There have been some programs that have not delivered which has caused dairymen to be skeptical of this whole idea. But the timing is perfect now with a matured dairy herd and our reduced beef cow numbers.”

Dairy beef programs grew out of favor when there were plenty of beef cattle to feed and process. Also, because they have to be fed a grain-intense diet nearly from the get go, they don’t pencil out when grain is high priced. And should feed prices get as high as they were last year such a program as Wulf's Breeding To Feeding would face some tough challenges. But in the meantime they will produce more of the beef American consumers are demanding and in the process preserve and protect some of beef's market share.

We’ll need more of this type of thinking if we are to prevent the cocky capons from eating our lunch . . . and our dinner, too.

A Jersey Renaissance The Jersey seems like an ideal cross with Limousin but one drawback is the number of Jersey cows in dairy herds today. While it is the second most popular dairy cow in America, only 7 percent of the U.S. dairy herd is made up of Jerseys. But the breed is enjoying somewhat of a renaissance because their milk is 4.84 percent butterfat which

Nothing New Of course, there is nothing new to this idea of crossing beef and dairy animals. Back in the 1970s dairies often freshened their dairy cows by breeding them to easy calving Angus

Livestock Market Digest

Page 4

October 15, 2014

How to Fulfill the Promise of the Endangered Species Act The Case for an Endangered Species Reserve Program BRIAN SEASHOLES, SEPTEMBER 25, 2014

he Endangered Species Act (ESA) has become one of the most controversial pieces of U.S. environmental legislation. Proponents claim the ESA is a success because it has saved many species from extinction. Others question its record, especially in terms of conserving species on private lands.

Controversy over the ESA increased significantly following the 2011 settlement of a lawsuit between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and several environmental pressure groups, under which Fish and Wildlife is required to consider for listing under the Act a total 757 species by 2018. There is a significant risk that, in response to the threat of these listings landowners will make their lands inhospitable to endangered species, as they have in response to other listings. That would be a truly perverse and unfortunate outcome.

The Endangered Species Act, passed in 1973, aims to help prevent rare species from going extinct and improve their prospects. Since then, it has become apparent that: 1. On private lands, which comprise the main habitat for the majority of endangered species, the Act’s strong penalties have turned endangered species into financial liabilities.

As a result, landowners seek to rid their property of endangered species and their habitat.

2. Reforms ostensibly enacted to address this problem, for example by adding incentives and giving landowners assurances against future regulation, have fallen short because they

T

ameliorate but leave largely intact the Act’s perverse and counterproductive penalties.

3. Published research and other evidence point away from the Endangered Species Act’s punitive approach by showing that landowners are generally willing to conserve imperiled species so long as they are not punished for doing so, their autonomy and rights are not substantially infringed, they are compensated, and people they trust are involved.

This study proposes a new approach, called the Endangered Species Reserve Program, which would be a far more successful approach for conserving endangered species. The Endangered Species Reserve Program would remove the counterproductive penalties and replace them with an entirely voluntary system in which landowners are compensated for investing in habitat and species conservation.

The Endangered Species Reserve Program would essentially function as a contract program like the Conservation Reserve Program. The ESRP would compensate landowners for periods of around 10-15 years in exchange for agreeing to conserve endangered species habitat. There is also a wide range of innovative proposals, such as rewarding landowners for producing endangered species, or for providing cash bonuses to groups of landowners who manage contiguous land parcels for the benefit of endangered species. The Endangered Species Reserve Program would function best by being flexible enough to allow for a wide range of approaches to compensate landowners. Flexibility is also needed because ecological conditions can change over time and because landowners strongly dislike initiatives that lock them in to long-term or permanent

arrangements, such as perpetual conservation easements.

The Endangered Species Reserve Program has four additional aspects that would appeal to those who are truly interested in conserving imperiled species.

1. It would eliminate the wasteful lawsuits that have increasingly driven the process by which the Endangered Species Act is administered.

Over the past ten years, the Endangered Species Act has become increasingly bogged down in petitions by activist groups to list hundreds of species, which result in lawsuits against the Fish and Wildlife Service over technicalities that have nothing to do with actual conservation, such as the agency’s inability to meet statutory deadlines for responding to the ever-growing mountain of petitions.

This has earned these groups, in particular the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), the ire of conservationists, especially because the group is often reimbursed by the federal government for its many successful procedural lawsuits.

“The amount of money CBD makes suing is just obscene,” Amos Eno, a prominent conservationist and founding president of the Resources First Foundation, reportedly said. “They’re one of the reasons the Endangered Species Act has become sodysfunctional.” According to Eno, the federal government could, “recover and delist three dozen species,” with the money and staff time spent dealing with lawsuits from the Center for Biological Diversity. The Endangered Species Reserve Program would eliminate this waste because there would be no citizen suit provision. The Endangered Species Reserve Program would put the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service back in the business of being able to devote significantly more resources to actual conservation.

2. The Endangered Species Reserve Program would free-up the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service to make more rational decisions about which species to protect, instead of being required to respond constantly to lawsuits from activist groups.

The federal government and non-profit groups like the Nature Conservancy have extensive data on what species and habitats are most in need of conservation. These data could be used much more effectively if the endangered species conservation process were driven more by science rather than lawsuits.

The aspect of the Endangered Species Reserve Program that may be hardest for some to

grasp, especially those steeped in the intricacies of the Endangered Species Act, is its simplicity. Instead of micro-managing issues as currently occurs under the Endangered Species Act, such as the definition of species’ distinct population segments or what constitutes “harm” to species, the Endangered Species Reserve Program would not specify these issues. Rather, it would employ a system to score habitat for endangered species, much like the Environmental Benefits Index used under the Conservation Reserve Program.

Such a scoring system would incorporate both the biological value and the financial cost of conserving endangered species habitat to determine the most efficient and cost- effective expenditures.

3. The Endangered Species Reserve Program would most likely result in tens or even hundreds of thousands of landowners emerging from the shadows and volunteering that they have endangered species on their land. If landowners were free from the fear of being clobbered by the Endangered Species Act, then the most significant barrier standing in the way of a more successful approach to conserving endangered species would be removed.

4. From a political standpoint, the Endangered Species Reserve Program is very feasible because there are landowners in every state but Arizona enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program.

As a result, many members of Congress, as well as state legislators, already have constituents enrolled in the program and therefore can easily understand applying a Conservation Reserve Program approach to endangered species. Federal and state legislators are often hesitant to stick their necks out on an issue, especially if it is a hot- button issue like protecting endangered species. Fortunately, the presence of the Conservation Reserve Program gives politicians a good deal of the cover they will need to champion the Endangered Species Reserve Program.

Only substantive reform of the Endangered Species Act will work. That means removing the punitive regulations that cause landowners to destroy habitat, kill species, and to go silent in efforts to avoid being whacked by cocked-two-by- fours. There are several reasons why a nonpunitive approach to endangered species protection would work better than the current law.

1. Common sense dictates that if you want more of something, you reward it. At the very least, you don’t punish people for providing it.

2. There is now a large and

growing body of evidence, some of which has been documented in this paper, showing how the Endangered Species Act discourages species conservation.

3. America’s amazingly successful tradition of private conservation, as well as initiatives such as the Conservation Reserve Program, prove landowners across the country will willingly conserve wildlife, including endangered species, so long as they are not punished.

4. For those not convinced about the viability of a non-punitive Endangered Species Act, there is a practical consideration: it is simply impossible for enforcers and supporters of the Endangered Species Act to patrol this country’s hundreds of millions of acres of endangered species habitat. Short of turning the U.S. into a police state, private landowners will always be able lawfully to make habitat unsuitable for species that are already listed or proposed for listing, and most will be able to break the law without detection by destroying species and habitat.

5. Some Endangered Species Act advocates think the ideal approach is to reward good landowner behavior with carrots and discourage bad behavior with sticks. But given landowners’ enormous advantage when it comes to evading or breaking the law, the use of sticks will fail more than succeed. Therefore, it is in the best interests of all those concerned about conserving endangered species to get rid of the penalties.

6. Any legislation, be it for endangered species or other issues, must be based on a positive vision of the future in order to capture the public’s imagination and garner widespread support. People, including members of Congress, like supporting initiatives they see as optimistic, constructive and good for the country.

Fortunately, an Endangered Species Reserve Program presents just such an opportunity for the public, legislators, non-profit groups and business interests to support actions that are uplifting and elicit sympathy: endangered species, landowners, especially those who make a living from the land, America’s long and proud tradition of private conservation, and the amazing job American landowners and citizen-conservationists are doing to conserve this country’s land and wildlife.

This Study’s Materials Full Study — Fulfilling the Promise of the Endangered Species Act: The Case for an Endangered Species Reserve Program, PDF, 4.3 MB, Brian Seasholes See more at: http://reason.org/news/ show/endangered-species-act-promise #sthash.DgbwiXzi.LX2YPsAm.dpuf

October 15, 2014

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

Securing Texas Landowners’ Private Property Rights

BY LESLIE KINSEL, TSCRA LEGISLATIVE AND TAX COMMITTEE CHAIR, WITH LARAMIE ADAMS, TSCRA DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

ince the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association (TSCRA) was established in 1877, one of the association’s top priorities has been to represent landowners by working to preserve and protect private property rights.

This goal remains vital today as we monitor issues that could adversely affect the important rights held by ranchers and agricultural producers as stewards of our nation’s land.

TSCRA has recently been monitoring a new rule proposed by the Railroad Commission of Texas, in the wake of the 2013 Denbury case. This new rule attempts to clarify how oil and gas pipeline companies can obtain “common carrier” status when applying for a permit to operate a new pipeline.

Essentially, a pipeline operator transporting oil (or certain other products) “to or for the public” is a common carrier, and is thereby granted the right and power of eminent domain. This critical power carries with it the authority to seize private land for the pipeline right-of-way.

Currently, pipeline companies seeking the eminent domain rights of a common carrier merely register with the Railroad Commission by checking a few boxes on a T-4 permit application. Under the new proposed

S

rule, pipeline companies would be required to submit documentation supporting their claim to be a common carrier, and the commission would have 45 days to review applications.

While the proposal may sound like a step in the right direction, TSCRA doesn’t believe it addresses many of the key issues landowners face when pipeline companies decide to lay pipe across private land. In fact, the new rule only adds paperwork to the current common carrier registration process.

TSCRA submitted comments to the Railroad Commission regarding the rule proposal.

TSCRA stated that the revised T-4 application should include an acknowledgement from the applicant pipeline that they understand and agree the permit to operate a pipeline does not give a company the authority to utilize the power of eminent domain to acquire private property for its pipeline.

In other words, the Railroad Commission, in granting a permit, would not make a determination whether the pipeline is or is not in fact a common carrier.

That question is far too important for a routine application review. Landowners need to retain their crucial right to contest in a court whether or not a planned pipeline is truly for a public use.

However, the right to make a court challenge is only meaningful if the landowner has timely notice of a pipeline project.

TSCRA’s comments stressed

that pipeline companies seeking a T-4 permit should be required to give potentially affected landowners actual notice by first class mail within 10 days of the application. The notice should describe exactly how the pipeline could affect the landowner’s property. Additionally, the commission should adopt objective routing standards, similar to those used by power lines.

Lastly, it should be clear that an individual T-4 permit can apply to only one distinct pipeline or gathering system. If a company receives common carrier status for one pipeline project, it does not automatically give them the power of eminent domain for another project.

It is TSCRA’s hope that the Railroad Commission of Texas will seriously consider our comments before adopting the new rule proposal. Ranchers and agricultural producers have always been stewards of the land as they work to provide an affordable, safe and abundant supply of food worldwide. We must make certain their private property rights are respected so they can continue doing what they do best. TSCRA will continue monitoring the Railroad Commission’s rule proposal and strive to keep our members informed.

Leslie Kinsel and her husband Dan operate ranches in south and central Texas and are active members of the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association. Leslie has served as the chair of the TSCRA Legislative and Tax Committee since 2013, and she previously served as the vice chair of the committee for four years.

Page 5

Angus Junior Selected as National Beef Ambassador Will Pohlman, Prairie Grove, Ark., to serve as a beef industry youth spokesperson ifth-generation Angus breeder Will Pohlman, Prairie Grove, Ark., was recently named part of an elite group of young people responsible for promoting beef to consumers nationwide.

Pohlman is a sophomore at the University of Arkansas studying biochemistry and animal science. He joins Rachel Purdy, Wyoming; Alicia Smith, Texas; Kalyn McKibben, Oklahoma; and Demi Snider, Ohio, as a member of the 2015 National Beef Ambassador Team.

Representatives were selected at the annual National Beef Ambassador competition, which is funded in part by the Beef Checkoff and managed by the American National CattleWomen, Inc., contractor to the beef checkoff. Twenty senior contestants ages 17-21, were judged in the areas of consumer promotion, education and outreach strategy, media interview technique and issues response at the event held in Denver.

Contestants from throughout the country vied for a place on this team of agriculture advocates and $5,000 in cash prizes sponsored exclusively by Farm Credit. Additionally, five educational scholarships totaling $5,000 were given by the American National CattleWomen Foundation, Inc. and Monsanto.

F

This year’s contest also hosted a junior competition for youth beef industry advocates ages 12-16. Ten passionate contestants vied for cash prizes, competing in three judged categories: consumer promotion, media interview technique and issues response.

The first-place winner was Phillip Saunders, Virginia. The second-place winner was Bret Lee, Louisiana, and the thirdplace winner was Abbey Schiefelbein, Minnesota. They all took home checks sponsored exclusively by Farm Credit for their top scores.

While preparing for this national beef promotion and education competition, youth across the nation learn about beef and the beef industry with support from state CattleWomen and Cattlemen’s associations and state beef councils. The preparation highlights industry issues of current consumer interest. Winners of the state competitions compete at the national level where they receive additional training.

After the event, the youth ambassadors speak to industry issues and misconceptions and educate their peers and mealtime decision makers about beef nutrition, cattle care, safety and more during consumer events, in the classroom and online.

Follow the National Beef Ambassadors on Twitter at @beefambassador and visit www.nationalbeefambassador.org or www.ancw.org for more information.

Livestock Market Digest

Page 6

October 15, 2014

Industry Offers New Tool for BVD Management

BY MICKY BURCH, NEBRASKA CATTLEMAN FEATURE WRITER

any of us have heard the saying, “Don’t judge a book by its cover.” That lesson can be taken to heart when managing your cow herd for bovine viral diarrhea (BVD). BVD is a transitional disease, which means you can’t tell by looking if an animal has the virus. Years of research has helped identify the disease as having significant effects on productivity, especially reproductive and respiratory health, and now a new tool – BVD CONSULT (Collaborative Online Novel Science-based User-friendly Learning Tool) – has been introduced to the industry to help manage the virus at the cow-calf level.

BVD Background In his article “Use of a BVD Management Tool: BVD CONSULT,” Bob Larson, DVM, Ph.D., Kansas State University, explains that the virus is costly to cattle producers, because it causes immune suppression, respiratory disease, infertility and fetal infection.

One of the most detrimental effects of BVD takes place between (approximately) Day 45 and Day 135 of gestation – when the fetus hasn’t fully developed an immune system. If a fetus contracts the virus from its dam during this window of time, it becomes persistently infected (PI) with the BVD virus. Shortly after this time frame and up to about Day 160 of gestation, if the fetus contracts the BVD virus, congenital defects can result. “There can be skeletal, eye or brain defects or stillbirths may occur,” explains Dale Grotelueschen, DVM, MS, University of Nebraska Great Plains Veterinary Educational Center.

“Cerebellar hypoplasia is an example of a brain defect resulting from a fetal BVD virus infection where the calf may be born alive, but is unable to rise and is uncoordinated.” Most calves that contract BVD in utero get it

M

when their dams are exposed to and are undergoing acute infections of BVD, often following nose-to-nose contact with another animal that has the disease.

PI calves can also seem perfectly healthy, and healthy-appearing replacement females that are PI may enter your herd. In this instance, a PI dam will always give birth to a PI calf.

PI cattle carry the disease their entire lives and shed the virus from every orifice of their body, especially through nasal discharge, saliva and feces. “Preventing the birth of PI calves is a major focus for control in herds and in the cattle industry,” Grotelueschen explains. He also says that an extensive study found herds with PI calves had five percent lower pregnancy rates than herds without infected calves.

Because you can’t tell by looking, PI BVD cattle must be identified through lab tests.

According to the National Animal Health Monitoring System’s (NAHM’s) 2007-2008 beef cowcalf study, 8.8 percent of U.S. cow-calf ranches identified one or more PI animals, meaning that one in every 11 to 12 herds have PI calves, and most are not aware of their presence.

In recent years, Larson adds, the cattle industry has made huge strides understanding BVD. “Our current knowledge of BVD, the availability of effective vaccines, and the improvement in diagnostic tools have made the control of BVD feasible,” he says. The key to using these resources, Grotelueschen continues, is to design individualized herd-control plans for the disease. That’s where BVD CONSULT comes in.

BVD CONSULT BVD CONSULT is an internet-based tool for developing herd health plans for cattle operations; this means the producer makes choices and then sets goals for how BVD control can be accomplished in their herd. BVD CONSULT was designed for producers to work with their herd veterinarians to develop BVD control and prevention plans. For herds that currently have PI cattle

present, the tool helps create a plan to identify and remove those cattle and establish a strategy to reduce the likelihood of the herd becoming infected again, Larson explains. For herds that are currently virus-free, BVD CONSULT can be used to decide how to minimize the likelihood of the disease entering the herd and to reduce the impact if the herd is exposed.

“Using BVD CONSULT is simple,” Larson continues in his article. “The system is set up online as a series of questions with responses designed to mimic a conversation between a veterinarian and a producer who is concerned about BVD.” The program then provides recommendations specific to individual operations. After clicking “yes” or “no” to answer each question, an appropriate response is given based on the choices that have

been made, followed by another question. The questions that are asked, and the responses given, vary depending on the previous answers. There are six to 10 questions depending on the choices made. A printable report is available at the end of the questionnaire, which records the choices that were made and responses given.

Sample questions from the BVD CONSULT questionnaire include: n Do you have active BVD in your herd? n Will you institute a testing strategy that identifies all PI BVD cattle and remove them from your herd? n Will you quarantine and test all new cattle coming into your breeding herd? n Can you prevent fence line and direct contact of your pregnant herd with other cattle?

Jeremy Van Boeing, DVM, Republican Valley Animal Center, Alma, Neb., and chairman of NC’s Animal Health committee, has already started helping his clients utilize BVD CONSULT in their herds. “This program simplifies decision making for producers when it comes to BVD management,” he explains.

“It’s a tool that allows producers to look at the disease on their own time, then discuss the questions they have with their veterinarian so they know what the next step is and how to take it.”

All-in-all, Grotelueschen says, BVD CONSULT is an opportunity to increase the level of herd health plans in a way producers are comfortable with. More information and the online questionnaire can be found by visiting www.bvdinfo.org.

Reprinted with permission from September 2013 Nebraska Cattleman magazine.

Gelbvieh Breeders Recognized for Superior Females ach fall the American Gelbvieh Association (AGA) honors females in the herdbook that display maternal superiority through the Dam of Merit and Dam of Distinction program.

The AGA praises those members who continually place emphasis on the maternal traits of Gelbvieh and Balancer® genetics in their herd and produce these outstanding females.

Of the 40,132 active cows in the AGA herdbook, only five percent qualified for the Dam of Merit award. Only one percent of the cows within the herdbook qualified for the elite Dam of Distinction honor. All three of these numbers are up from only a year ago, when the AGA saw 39,516 active cows, 3.6 percent qualifying for Dam of Merit and 0.8 percent for Dam of Distinction.

“Maternal traits are where the Gelbvieh breed really excels. Encouraging our members to continue putting selection pressure on these traits will put the breed in an even better position for impacting the beef industry,” says Susan Willmon, American Gelbvieh Association’s director of breed improvement.

The Dam of Merit and Dam of Distinction recognition program was started in 1991 to honor superior females within the breed. Both of these honor females based on data that is submitted to the AGA. The females must meet the following criteria to qualify for this recognition: early puberty and conception, regular calving intervals, and aboveaverage weaning weights on their calves. Dams of Merit must have produced at least three calves in addition to meeting these criteria. Dams of Distinction must have produced eight calves or more and exhibit superior, long-term productivity.

E

Gelbvieh and Balancer females offer a maternal advantage through increased longevity, added fertility, and more pounds of calve weaned per cow exposed. With maternal productivity playing a major role in profitable beef production, Gelbvieh and Balancer cattle are a smart choice for commercial cattlemen, particularly for the advantages of crossbreeding. Using Gelbvieh and Balancer genetics in a crossbreeding program can add as much as $1,000 profit over the lifetime of a crossbred cow.

The following lists the top ten breeders of Dams of Merit and Dams of Distinction: 1. Judd Ranch, Inc., Pomona, KS 2. Bar T Bar Ranch, Inc., Winslow, AZ. 3. Lazy TV Ranch, Selby, S.D. 4. Taubenheim Gelbvieh, Amherst, NE 5. Flying H Genetics, Arapahoe, NE 6. Schroeder, Inc., Sioux Falls, S.D. 7. Wehri Gelbvieh, Hebron, N.D. 8. Post Rock Cattle Co., Barnard, KS. 9. Chimney Butte Ranch, Mandan, N.D. 10. Diamond D Gelbvieh, Mandan, N.D. The listing of the top ten owners of Dams of Merit and Dams of Distinction: 1. Judd Ranch, Inc., Pomona, KS. 2. Bar T Bar Ranch, Inc., Winslow, AZ. 3. Lazy TV Ranch, Selby, S.D. 4. Taubenheim Gelbvieh, Amherst, NE. 5. Flying H Genetics, Arapahoe, NE. 6. Schroeder, Inc., Sioux Falls, S.D. 7. Wehri Gelbvieh, Hebron, N.D. 8. Diamond D Gelbvieh, Mandan, N.D. 9. Chimney Butte Ranch, Mandan, N.D. 10. Sandy Knoll Farm, Saint John, KS.

St. Louis Rams move the chains on Responsibly-Sourced Meat Sportservice partners with former Rams linebacker Will Witherspoon's Shire Gate Farm to serve the most sustainable, high-welfare hot dogs and burgers at Edward Jones Dome, MO his season, football fans at the 64,000capacity Edward Jones Dome, home to the St. Louis Rams, will enjoy the first ever highwelfare, sustainable hot dogs and burgers served by stadium concessions, thanks to the pioneering work of Delaware North Companies Sportservice and AWA-certified Shire Gate Farm.

Never shy of tackling societal issues—both on and off the field—the team leads the field when it comes to serving responsibly-sourced meat products to its fans. Through its long-term partnership with Delaware North Companies Sportservice—

T

one of the nation’s leading food, beverage and retail management companies—St. Louis Rams will serve thousands of Rams and visiting Minnesota Vikings fans at the opening game of the season on September 7 with a new range of hot dogs and burgers that will satisfy fans’ growing appetites for meat products that are healthier for them—and the planet.

In keeping with their commitment to environmental responsibility and the guest experience, Sportservice has worked tirelessly with Will Witherspoon—last year’s starting linebacker for the Rams and owner of AWA-certified Shire Gate Farm in Owensville, MO—to serve fans with a new range of truly sustainable, high-welfare hot dogs and burgers at its concessions facilities at Edward Jones Dome.

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

October 15, 2014

21st Century Cowboyin’

BY BARRY DENTON

certainly enjoyed astronauts and thought I was going to be one for the longest time.

When I was a boy the “Space Age” was just beginning and what a marvel it was.

Now that I have seen much of the equipment the astronauts used, what they accomplished is even more astonishing. Being propelled by several hundred gallons of jet fuel and located in a bucket of bolts is just not too sophisticated.

I happen to have a friend that spent over twenty years of his career as a rocket scientist developing the engines for the Lunar

I

Module. He is perhaps one of the smartest people I know and he is amazed at what did not go wrong on that moon landing. The bottom line is that our astronauts were brave hardy Americans that liked to gamble because the risk was worth the prize.

Our ranch here in Arizona was started in 1945 by my in-laws.

They were tough hardy people with a vision of the future. Their goal was to build a cattle ranch known for having the best stock you could find. These hardy folks bought a run down ranch with an inherited string of pearls put up as collateral at the bank. With some money they had saved up they were able to seek out some

good horses and fresh cattle.

They worked side by side for several years until they accomplished what they had set out to do. Many people came from near and far to buy good Hereford cattle and top American Quarter Horses. The cattle herd supported the race and show horses easily for nearly 50 years.

Then in the 1980s things began to change. Cattle started to drop in price and horses started to go up. Within ten years the ranch changed completely to stay alive. Horses became the mainstay and cattle became secondary. It’s incredible how for over 40 years cattle paid the bills, but then the horses had to take over most of it.

The most important lesson is if you are running your own business you must embrace change.

I know many cattle and horsemen that are very traditional by nature. That is a fine thing to preserve the old ways, but when it comes to paying bills you may have to change some of that to make a living in the present.

We all know that the forces are against the small independent family ranch or farm. Large corporations have taken over agriculture and don’t have much sympathy for the little guy. They have even imposed a tax on the independent that he has to pay at the auction house when he sells his cattle. You have no choice to opt out of this ridiculous tax that probably goes to something that will never help you or your livelihood. The only choice is to not sell your cattle at auction. It is one thing to be taxed by govern-

Land Losses in Texas — 15-year Net Loss Exceeds One Million Acres exas experienced a net loss of nearly 1.1 million acres of privately owned farms, ranches and forests from 1997 to 2012, continuing the trend of rural land conversion and fragmentation in Texas, according to Dr. Roel Lopez, director of the Texas A&M Institute of Renewable Natural Resources.

“This dramatic loss and fragmentation of privately owned farms, ranches and forests — also known as working lands — is affecting the state’s rural economies. The conservation of water and other natural resources is also being affected, as is the nation’s national and food security,” said Lopez during a recent land and water forum in Austin.

“Privately owned farms, ranches and forests account for 83 percent of the land in Texas and are increasingly threatened by suburbanization, rural development and land fragmentation driven by rapid population growth,” he said. “More than 54 percent of this land conversion was related to development associated with population expansion in the state’s 25 highest growth rate counties. During this period, approximately 590,000 acres were lost from the agricultural land base in these counties.”

Lopez presented these and other key findings from a new Texas Land Trends study at “No Land, No Water: Tools and Strategies for Conserving Land to Protect Water Resources,” sponsored by theTexas Agricultural Land Trust.

The report describes recent changes in ownership size, land use and property values of private farms, ranches and forests in Texas from 1997 to 2012.

Developed by the institute, Texas Land Trends, http://txlandtrends.org, is an interactive website and database detailing current land use trends within the state. It also shows the impacts of rural land loss and fragmentation on water, agriculture and other natural resources.

Todd Snelgrove, associate director of the institute, said the goal of Texas Land Trends is to provide public and private decision-makers with information needed

T

to plan for the conservation of Texas farms, ranches and forests.

“Texas Land Trends is a critically important data source for policy makers, conservation organizations, state agencies and federal agencies in terms of looking at what is happening to our land base in Texas,” he said.

Blair Fitzsimons, chief operating officer for the land trust, agreed. “Farms, ranches and forests in Texas are undergoing a fundamental change, and Texas Land Trends provides a valuable source of information for anyone in the natural resources community,” she said.

“Through Texas Land Trends, we have been able to raise awareness that ‘Yes, we have a lot of land in Texas,’ but we are losing it at a faster rate than most other states in the country, and that loss is having profound impacts on our agricultural base, our water resources and our native wildlife habitat,” Fitzsimons said.

Primary data sources for Texas Land Trends were the Texas State Comptroller of Public Accounts, which provided a 1997-2012 annual compilation of land use and land value data from 1,021 independent school districts, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service. Data from the U.S. Census Bureau, USDA National Resources Inventory, and the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis-Regional Economic Information System were also used.

Lopez said the institute will continue to release a series of reports based on current tax appraisals and USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service data.

All reports will be available on the Texas Land Trends website at http://txlandtrends.org as they are published.

Texas Land Trends was developed in cooperation with Texas A&M AgriLife Research, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service and Texas Agricultural Land Trust. It was funded by the Meadows Foundation, Houston Endowment, Mitchell Foundation, Hershey Foundation and AgriLife Extension.

Page 7

ment as you know they will gladly waste your tax dollars protecting some turtle from the evil cattle.

However, it’s doubly insulting when you have to pay a tax to a cattle lobby you do not believe in.

There is no sense complaining about something you can’t control. You should use that energy in a positive manner to be successful in spite of the government and the cattle lobby.

There are a few outfits here in Arizona that still run a wagon and I’m glad they do. However, those big ranches that do that are owned by large corporations and are used as tax havens. There may be a few private ranches that run a wagon, but I’m not aware of them.

The good things that corporation owned ranches bring to cowboys are better wages, an insurance plan, a more stable working environment, and better working conditions. We that are traditional may not want to see corporation owned ranches, but many of our family and friends are doing well working for them. This has been a big adjustment for traditional cowboys. However, cowboys are still getting hired and not eliminated all together.

One eye opening experience you can have is visiting an agricultural university and see what

they are teaching. The courses are now geared much more to getting a good job working for an ag corporation than they are toward starting up your own ranch. It would be nice to see a course in catching wild cattle or tying wild cattle to trees at Texas A&M. The realization is that government doesn’t want you working for yourself anymore. Somehow you are supposed to fit into the system and behave yourself.

There are no differences in trading television sets on a computer or trading cattle on a computer.

We normally are ranchers because we like the lifestyle and the freedom that it brings. There are bigger powers at work that don’t want you to have that freedom.

Like those first astronauts that went to the moon we ranchers and cowboys have to be very dedicated to what we do. We have to be so dedicated that we have to find new ways to survive when forces are against you. Being a gambler also helps as you are gambling with your well being, sanity, and livelihood. We may not be on the moon, but it certainly feels like it compared to ranching just twenty years ago.

Keep going forward and “May The Horse Be With You”!

WILLCOX

Livestock Auction

You can view our Auctions live Online at www.dvauction.com

"+ ")&$'' *$ %''#(+ ! (+ %''#(+ !

w w w. w i l l c o x l i v e st o c k a u c t i o n . c o m

Livestock Market Digest

Page 8

October 15, 2014

Philip F. Anschutz named 2015 Citizen of the West he National Western Stock Show has named Philip F. Anschutz the 2015 Citizen of the West, an award that recognizes those who embody the spirit and determination of the Western pioneer and perpetuate the West’s agricultural heritage and ideals.

Anschutz, entrepreneur and philanthropist, has had a major impact on many institutions in the state of Colorado. He will receive the award on January 12, 2015 at the National Western Events Center. A committee of community leaders selects the recipient. Proceeds from the event support 80 college scholarships awarded annually by the National Western Scholarship Trust.

“There is no one I know more deserving of the title Citizen of the West than Phil Anschutz,” said 2014 honoree Fred Hamilton. “He is a great guy and has done more for the city, the state and the Rocky Mountain region than any other person. His generosity and philanthropy are boundless.”

Anschutz, 74, is a native of Kansas who comes from a farming and ranching background. He founded The Anschutz Corporation in 1965. It has achieved success in the fields of transportation,

T

natural and renewable resources, communications, lodging, sports, entertainment and real estate. He started the Anschutz Foundation in 1983 and remains chairman of its board. The Foundation’s support has been crucial to innumerable community, cultural and health-related initiatives.

Among the Foundation’s many notable efforts are contributions that led to the naming of the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus in 2006. It is one of the leading health-care facilities in the world and one of the only health-care campuses in the nation that brings together clinical, educational and research activities on one site. The campus is home to CU’s schools of medicine, pharmacy, nursing and dental medicine, University of Colorado Hospital and Children’s Hospital Colorado. While the campus is still under development, a study by Sammons/Dutton LLC, an economic research firm, estimates the site at full development will consist of 18.5 million square feet, employ 44,600 people and contribute $4.3 billion in personal income and $11.5 billion in total economic output annually.

“We expect the Anschutz Medical Campus in the next five or six

years will be the second largest economic generator in the Rocky Mountain Area, behind DIA.” said Tom Clark, CEO of the Metro Denver Economic Development Corp.

“Phil’s vision and commitment have been transformational in making CU’s Anschutz Medical Campus a leading health-care destination where people from around the world come for the best and the latest in treatment,” said University of Colorado President Bruce Benson. “In a short time the campus has become a world leader in research and clinical care in areas including health and wellness, precision medicine,

ophthalmology, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, pediatrics and others. He was also instrumental in establishing CeDAR, an outstanding facility for treatment of alcohol and drug addiction, on our campus.”

Anschutz’ philanthropic efforts go beyond health care and research. According to Tom Petrie, Chairman of Petrie Partners and founder of the Petrie Institute of Western American Art at the Denver Art Museum, “Phil has made significant contributions that have enriched the cultural environment of Colorado. Most notably, his establishment of the American Museum of Western

Art at the iconic Navarre Building represents the greatest survey of American Western Art assembled over the past four decades. It spotlights a comprehensive array of the best works of our country’s most accomplished artists of the last two centuries. The AMWA is available to teach about the history of Western Art and the evolution of the American West.”

In addition to his business and philanthropic endeavors, Anschutz has served in the past on various boards and committees of charitable, civic, industry, financial and sports-related organizations.

Anschutz and his wife Nancy live in Denver.

Administration seeks $900M for conservation program

BY TIMOTHY CAMA, THEHILL.COM

he Obama administration is pulling out the stops to renew and expand a littleknown program that uses offshore drilling revenue for conservation.

The administration has pushed Congress to triple the amount of money available for the Land and Water Conserva-

T

tion Fund, which officials use to acquire land, build recreation facilities and maintain parks.

The program is likely to be renewed before it expires next year, given the strong bipartisan support for conservation, but President Obama’s push for a funding increase is meeting resistance.

House Republicans say the additional funding would be wasteful and allow the federal

government to unnecessarily snatch up more private and state land.

“Just acquiring more and more federal land that’s not receiving the stewardship that can be provided to that land by either private owners or states, I fail to see the logic behind that,” said Rep. Cynthia Lummis (RWyo.), a member of the House continued on page nine

THE LIVESTOCK MARKET DIGEST To place your Real Estate Guide listings, contact RANDY SUMMERS at 505/243-9515 or RON ARCHER at 505/865-6011 Missouri Land Sales

See all my listings at:

paulmcgilliard.murney.com 361 Acres - Absolutely the Ultimate Hunting/Retreat being offered this close to Springfield/Branson, Missouri. Many options for this PAUL McGILLIARD property - hunting, recreational, church camp, jeeping, horseback riding Cell: 417/839-5096 facility, or just your own personal retreat. A-1 built 60x100 all steel insu1-800/743-0336 lated with 2-16’ elec. overhead doors. Inside is a fabulous 900sq ft. 2 BR, MURNEY ASSOC., REALTORS 1 BA living quarters. Open fields, heavy woods, timber, rolling hills, bluffs, SPRINGFIELD, MO 65804 springs, creeks, a cave and breath taking views. Only 60+ miles south of Springfield, minutes to Bull Shoals Lake.

113 acres SOLD / 214 acres REMAINING: “Snooze Ya Loose.” Cattle/horse ranch. Over 150 acres in grass. 3/4 mile State Hwy. frontage. Live water, 60x80 multi-function barn. 2-br, 1-ba rock home. Priced to sell at $1,620 per acre. MLS #1204641 GREAT INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY CLOSE TO SPRINGFIELD. El Rancho Truck Plaza. MLS #1402704; Midwest Truck Stop MLS #1402703; Greenfield Trading Post MLS # 1402700. Owner retiring. Go to murney.com, enter MLS #, CHECK THEM OUT!!!

4+= 54 :.+ 3'81+: 8'8+ ,/4*E'6685>/3':+2? *++*+* ')8+9 B /88/-':+* .'? '4* 6'9:;8+ 9+'954'2 9:8+'3 B ! & # ! 93'22 6+83/:9 B 8':+* '6685>/3':+2?

'4/3'2 ;4/:9 ?+'8 254- B 35*+9: /3 685<+3+4:9 B 542? 3/2+9 :5 '/92+? ')8+ (/- +45;-. ,58 9+2, 9;9:'/43+4: 93'22 +45;-. ,58 8+:/8+3+4: '4* 58 .5((?

6685>/3':+2? :5:'2 *++*+* ')8+9 B /88/-':+* .'? 685*;):/54 *8? -8'@/4- :5:'2 /88/ -':+* 2'4* /9 );88+4:2? /4 .'? 685*;):/54 '2,'2,' (+'8*2+99 ('8 2+? 6+'9 (85'3 '4* 58).'8* -8'99 B 9:++89 ,58 -8'@/49+'954 =':+8 )59: 5, '(5;: B 65=+8 '(5;: B =.++2 2/4+9 05/4:9 D .'4* 2/4+ B 35*+9: /3 685<+3+4:9 )5362+:+ 3'4'-+3+4: );88+4:2? /4 62')+ B 56 658:;4/:? ,58 '(9+4:++ 5=4+8 58 /4<+9:3+4: 6685>/3':+2? *++*+* ')8+9 B 54- 8++1 ! B 9+'954'2 B 354:.9 9;33+8 6'9:;8+ ,58 )5= )'2, 6'/89 B 3/2+ )8++1 9/*+ 9:8+'39 '4* 968/4-9 B 6.54+ 65=+8 45 ;9'(2+ /3685<+3+4:9 B ?+'8 85;4* '))+99 B2'4*5=4+8 .;4: /4- :'-9 ,58 3;2+ *++8 '4* +21

## " %%%

'

&# !

$"

!

$"

$"

"# #

#' "

6685>/3':+2? *++*+* ')8+9 $ C9 68/<':+ B 8+-54 +<'*' (58*+8 ) +83/:: % B !':+* B ?+'82/4-9 A 354:.9 58 )5= )'2, ?+'8 254- B 685*;)+* '(5;: :549 -8'99 .'? /4 = 5 ,+8:/2/@+8 B ! & # ! B 8+': '9/4 3?9:/) B +:C9 </9/: 54 68/)+ /, ?5; '8+ ' 9+8/5;9 ;?+8 6685>/3':+2? *++*+* ')8+9 $ C9 68/<':+ 93'22 68/<':+ 2+'9+ B 8':+* '4/ 3'2 ;4/:9 ?+'8 254- B $ # & # ! =./). /9 ('9/)'22? ! ?8 /88/-':/4')8+9 B 2'4*5=4+8 .;4:/4- :'-9 B *++8 +21 '4:+256+ ,/9./4- B 7;'2/:? /3685<+3+4:9 6685>/3':+2? *++*+* ')8+9 B :/3(+8 ')8+9 /88/-':+* 3+'*5= 9;( 3+'*5= B ('2'4)+ 4':/<+ 8'4-+ B .* $" " 6+83/: B .;4:/4- :'- *++8 +21 B (58*+89 $" " B 5,, -8/* B 542? 3/2+9 :5 '1+</+= B :/3(+8 '4* 2/<+9:5)1 3'1+ ,58 ' 9+8/5;9 8+)8+':/54'2 .52*/4-

&

Ranch Properties now available through Bottari & Associates Realty, Inc & (/ ' " 1 !*(-' %%(,& ', (& #+ ( ," $ -) ! ' * ,(* ( +(-," ( %%+ .

* + /#," +)*#'! ' ))*(0 -&2+ #' )*#. , !*# /#," )(/ * *(& +(% * ) ' %+ ' , (' (-',1 *( ))*(0 &#% + *#

',#'! ,( (/' + % +-+, #'#'! )*() *,1 /" * 1(- !*(/ %% 1(- ' " $ ,"#+ (' (-, (,+ ( *-#, ,* + #' %- #'! ) * )*# (, " **1 ' , *#' ))% !* ) + % $ **1 ' &(* #' %- #'! %&(' + ' ', * )#.(, /#," % % )%-+ (," * & (/ ) +,-* + (' + /#," ,*(-, ++ ' %- !#%%+ (,+ ( * ' /#% ,-*$ 1+ & , "(-+ /#," ((% * ' -,,#'! *((& "(& + *# /#," ) *&#, (' &#' * % *#!",+ ' ! + +" %

,#.

% ' + #' %- + ( ," 0)%(* ,#(' '(/ #' )*( ++ (* (#% '

Bottari Realty and Associates PAUL D. BOTTARI, BROKER www.bottarirealty.com • paul@bottarirealty.com 775/752-3040 • Cell: 775/752-0952 • Fax: 775/752-3021 Bottari Realty & Associates • 1222 6th St., Wells, NV 89835

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

October 15, 2014

Page 9

Conservation Program

continued from page eight

Natural Resources Committee.

“I just don’t see it happening. I don’t see full funding,” she said.

Interior Secretary Sally Jewell has led the administration’s promotional efforts for the fund. While touring the country, she was joined at times by agency leaders other federal officials, lawmakers, state or local officials.

In addition to renewing the 50-year-old program, Jewell wants access to the full $900 million annual budget it is supposed to have. Revenue from offshore oil and gas drilling deposits $900 million into the fund every year, but congressional appropriators have only given the Interior Department and the Forest Service one-third of that, amounting to $305.5 million in fiscal 2014.

Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), another member of the Natural Resources panel, said he wants to see the conservation program renewed with the entire fund made available.

“It’s very important that we do that,” he said. “This is something that used to be very bipartisan, still should be.”

Huffman balked at proposals he said would add “ideological baggage” to the program, such as restricting the government’s ability to acquire more land. Federal officials can also use the fund to establish conservation easements on private property.

Prospects for a funding increase look better in the Senate.

Sens. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have signed onto a bill with 40 Democrats that would renew the fund indefinitely and give federal officials access to the full $900 million.

“It is something that Republicans should embrace, and it’s good for the country,” Graham said.

Even though Graham and Burr are the only Republican supporters of the measure, Graham said it’s something conservatives could get behind.

“It’s a good approach: preserving land, rewarding the private sector when they do it.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) is also working toward giving the conservation program the full funding amount.

“I’m a very strong supporter of it, and I’m working on both a temporary effort and making it permanent,” he said. Wyden declined to provide details of his proposal, saying he and his colleagues are still hashing it out.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said the program is ripe for a vote during the lame-duck session after the midterm elections, even though it won’t expire until September of next year.

Some senators are against a funding increase.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said she supports the fund, especially the money set aside to help states with their own conservation efforts but said budget constraints

continued on page three INTEREST RATES A S L OW A S 3% Pay m en t s Sch ed u l ed o n 25 Year s

should argue against an increase.

“It’s all fabulous, but where are you going to get the money to pay for it? What I’d like to do is, instead of using so much money to buy more land, let’s figure out a way we’re going to take care of what we’ve got.”

Alan Rowsome, who leads the Wilderness Society’s advocacy efforts for land programs, predicted that the conservation program would be renewed with full funding after the election.

“We’re working with members on both sides of the aisle for opportunities in the lame duck and believe that the program is so supportive to local communities that it really does need to be reauthorized,” he said.

“It has a 50-year history of an incredible track record of land conservation around the country that has led to livable urban communities, as well as additions to some of the most iconic national parks, wildlife refuges and national forests around the country.”

Bar M Real Estate SCOTT MCNALLY www.ranchesnm.com 575/622-5867 575/420-1237

J o e Stu b b l ef i el d & A s s o c i at es 13830 Wes ter n St ., A m ar i l l o , TX 806/622-3482 • c el l 806/674-2062 joes3@suddenlink.net Mi c h ael Per ez A s s o c i at es Nar a Vi s a, NM • 575/403-7970

Scott Kr1y3st0a1l MFr.oNntelSstorne,eBtN,eMDn imGQ.umSaicltiotf,ytitTnX–g 7BB9rroo0kk2ee7rr Land co. www8.0sc0o-9tt3la3n-d9c6o9m8pdaanyy/.ceovme.

Ranch & Farm Real Estate

w w w . t e xa s c r p . c o m

C 346:; :,*;065: 46:;3@ +,,+,+ >,33 04796=,+ > /64,: )(95: :,=,9(3 :,;: 6- 7,5: > :*(3,: >(;,9,+ )@ :63(9 ,3,*;90* 76> ,9,+ :<): >05+4033: (5 ,?;,5:0=, 707,305, :@:;,4 :7905.: :7905. -,+ +9(>: *(5@65: ,(9;/,5 +(4: 90=,9 -965;(., 7=4; (33 >,(;/,9 96(+: C (:; +., - #(5;( "6:( C >@ -965;(., 65 )6;/ :0+,: 6- />@ -965;(., 65 )6;/ :0+,: 6- >@ />@ -965;(., 65 >@ (* +,,+,+ (* :;(;, 3,(:, >,33 04796=,+ ,?*,33,5; >(;,9 :@:;,4 796=0+,+ )@ ( 3(9., :7905. (; ;/, /,(+8<(9;,9: >,33: ,8<077,+ > :<): >05+4033: 796=0+05. >(;,9 -69 (5 ,?;,5:0=, 707,305, *6> *(3- @,(9 305. *6<5;9@ " @,(9305. 69 *6> *(3- *6<5;9@ (4(A05.

04796=,4,5;: (* +,,+,+ (* :;(;, 3,(:, -965;(., 65 ;/, >,:; >@ 65 ;/, 569;/ #7905.,9 C 05<;,: -964 "<0+6:6 4<3;0 7<976:, 7967,9;@ > (* 3()69(;69@ 6--0*, *6=,9,+ 7,5: /64, +,(3 -69 <:, -69 /69:, 69 *(;;3, )9,,+05. ,4)9@6 ;9(5:-,9 -(*030;@ =,; *3050* 69 4(5@ 6;/,9 <:,: 05 ( ),(<;0-<3 (9,( 6" C (* =,9@ 50*, /69:, )6(9+05. ;9(0505. -(*030;0,: > 30./;,+ (9,5( 5,(; )<52 /6<:, 8 C (* 6- .66+ 9(5*/ *6<5;9@ > /64, " 9 C , (*( <(+(3<7, 6 (* ,?*,33,5;04796=,4,5;: -,5*,: >(;,9,+ *6> *(3- @,(9 305. *6<5;9@ 05 ,?*,33,5; *65+0;065 65 7=4; C (* >,33 04796=,+ > /64,: )(95: 7,5: >,33 >(;,9,+ 7=4; (33 >,(;/,9 96(+: -964 ;/, 05;,9:;(;, 8 04(9965 6 (* 5(;0=, .9(:: 569;/>,:; 6- (3/(9; $,?(: 3(9., +9(> ;/96<./ :6<;/ 7(9; 6- 7967,9;@ (--69+: .66+ /<5;05. >05;,9 796;,*;065 -69 30=,:;6*2 >03+30-, >(;,9,+ )@ ( 4033 ( :<) :;,,3 7,5: 099 76;,5;0(3 65 569;/ 769;065 !" " % " 7(:;<9,:9<505:0A,-9 (* ,(*/<7;6 (* > 3(2, 70*2 ;/, :0A, 6- 9(5*/ ;/(; @6< >(5; > ( ;6;(3 6(* 6;3,@ 6 $' 9(5*/3(5+ > ( 3(9., 7,940;;,+ +(4 796=0+05. ( /<., ),(<;0 -<3 3(2, > >(;,9 )(*2,+ <7 05 ( 5<4),9 6- :4(33,9 *(5@65: -69 )6(;05. -0:/05.

6;/,9 9,*9,(;065 ;6.,;/,9 > .66+ /<5;05. 65 ;/, 9(5*/ 5 7=4; (:; #367, 6- ;/, #(*9(4,5;6 6<5;(05: ;96<; -0:/05. 4<3, +,,9 (9)(9@ :/,,7 ;<92,@ ),(<;0-<3 5,> *<:;64 )<03; /64, > ,?*,7;065(3 3(5+:*(705. .<,:; /6<:, 6--0*, 5,>3@ 9,46+,3,+ 50*, ,4736@,, /6<:05. )(95: :;,,3 7,5: >6=,5 )(9),+ >09, -,5*,: (* +,,+,+ :;(;, 3,(:,: 65 7=4; 8 !

C (* 70=6;: +0;*/ >(;,9 90./;: ,32 /<5;05. 65 7=4; 8 C >,33 36*(;,+ 65 >@: B :,*;065: ,?*,33,5; 707,305, :@:;,4 > 4<50*07(3 >(;,9 67,5 963305. 9,7<;(;065 @,(9305. *6<5;9@ *6> *(3=,: (3:6 9<5 05 ;/, (9,( +6<)3, >0+, 46+<3(9 /64, 3(9., 4,;(3 )(95: 7,5: ( :*(3, 8 " C 65 7=4; 9,7 <;(;065 (9,( -69 >05;,9 >/,(; 796+ .9(A05. (* 5(;0=, .9(:: -(943(5+ -<33@ -,5*,+ >(;,9,+ -69 .9(A05.

8 " ,?*,33,5; *(;;3, -(9405. 67769;<50;@ -69 >05;,9 >/,(; .9(A05. :7905. :<44,9 4036 796+<*;065 ;6 ), /(9=,:;,+ 69 .9(A,+6<; (* 05*3 (* *9673(5+ )(3(5*,5(;0=,.9(::-69,?*,3 3,5; (9,( 65 >/0*/ ;6 79,*65 *(3=,: -69 >05;,9 .9(A05.

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

Advertise to Cattleman in the

Livestock Market Digest

! , "'3'"# !

2. /'0 #5 0 #5!#**#,1 . 012/# . 3#" /- " $/-,1 %# &2%# * )# + ,0'-, &-+#

Fallon-Cortese Land

NEW MEXICO % "

Ranch Sales & Appraisals

# %

$$$

2,1 -2,16 #5 0 11*# &2,1',% #/ !/# , "'3'"# , & 3# 0-+# -4,#/ $', ,!#

! !

-/1& + #5 0 #/ !/# 2,1',% ," /-,10 46

! 11*#

&2,1',% ! 11*# + , -2,16 #5 0 #/ !/#

2$

2,1 -2,16 -++#/!# #4 -+# /,0 /#" '/-, !-,01/2!1'-, 11*# 0&-4 %#/ #**#/ To place your Real Estate Guide listings, contact RANDY SUMMERS at 505/243-9515 or RON ARCHER at 505/865-6011

46

# %-3'**# 7

7 5 (-#./'#01/# ,#1 7 (-#./'#01/# # /1&*',) !-+

!

!

!

!# !12%0- %5 %6)#. !-#( %07 1#%-)# !-$ 1.,% '!,% %++ 5!2%0%$ 5)2( 5)-$ ,)++1 -%5%0 &)"%0 12.0!'% !-$ $0)-*%0 23"1 .3/+% .& 1,!++ 1/0)-'1 %0),%2%0 &%-#)-' !-$ ! #0.11 &%-#% )#% "$0, "2( (.,% 5)2( &)0%/+!#% !-$ 1#0%%-%$ )- /.0#( 4%07 /0)4!2% "32 -%!0 /!4%,%-2 #0%!'% )1 !//0.6),!2% !-$ )2 )1 #. +)12%$ !++ (!0+%1 !7 !# 07 !0,+!-$ %!12 .& .'%01 %5 %6)#. 5)2( !# /!71 !4' .& 7%!0 3-2)+ !1 ! 1,!++ !# '0!11 1/.2 !2 5)-$,)++ 5)2( 5%++ !-$ %+%#20)#)27 2. 13",%0')"+% /3,/ ,.+ !# &!0, +!-$ 0%!$7 &.0 !#2).- 6#%++%-2 1.)+ !++ !#* %00)#* .,% /)#230%1 .- 5%"1)2%

!++ 31 5)2( 7.30 -%%$1

37%01 !'%-21 !+1.

!

! "

!

! !

Livestock Market Digest

Page 10

My Cowboy Heroes

Samuel Thomas Privett The Legend of Booger Red

by Jim Olson

T

he legend started in Texas, but soon grew across the West. The legend was

Booger Red, who reportedly could ride any bronc alive!

There are so many stories about Booger Red that it is sometimes hard to separate fact from fiction. One writer

wrote, “It is estimated he rode between 25,000 to 40,000 broncs in his life.” Well, since he was fifty-nine when he died, that would be an average of 424 to 678 per year for every year of his life, or one to two broncs per day for every day he lived!

Across the West there are bars, eateries, shops, bucking and even breeding horses named after him. The legend of Booger Red continues to grow to this day, even though most do not know who he really was.

Samuel Thomas Privett was born in Williamson County, Texas on December 29, 1864 into a ranching family. His father, Sam Privett Sr., moved the family to Erath County, Texas when young Sam was six. There they established the SP ranch.

According to rodeo historian, Willard Porter, “At ten, while gathering wild horses for his father, young Privett was nearly captured by Indians. He escaped by securing his rope to a stout bush and lowering himself into a cave. At twelve, he was already a bronc buster of considerable reputation in his area.” He was known as “that Redheaded Kid Bronc Rider” because of his flaming red hair.

Another event involving the local Indians puts young Privett in a rock throwing battle with some of them. They say the only thing saved his skin that day was the appearance of some of his father’s cowhands who helped put the odds in Sam’s favor. His father reportedly had trouble with the Indians over that event for some time to come and was not happy about it.

Something happened when Privett was only thirteen years of age that forever changed his life. A person of lessor spirit may have lived a life, wallowing in self-pity had this happened to them. But he made the best of a bad situation instead.

Young Sam and another kid were playing around with gunpowder. They packed a hole in a tree stump full of it, intending to make a sort of fireworks display for Christmas. However, the gunpowder ignited, badly burning Privett’s face

For advertising, subscription and e ditorial inquiries write or call: Livestock Market Digest P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194 Telephone: 505/243-9515

October 15, 2014 (the blast reportedly killed Sam’s friend). On the way to the doctor, another youngster jumped up in the wagon to get a look at “Red” and commented, “Gee, Red sure is a booger now, ain’t he?”

It took several months for his badly burned face to heal.

His lips, nostrils and area around his eyes were disfigured from burning. People kept commenting that Red was sure “Boogered” up. He took the comments good naturedly however, and even started calling himself, “Booger Red, the ugliest man alive.” From then on, folks just knew him as Booger Red. He did not care about the nickname, or the fact he was disfigured, he decided to let his uncanny ability riding broncs speak for him.

By the time he was fifteen, his father had died (his mother passed before) and Booger Red moved to West Texas where he had an uncle. He started riding broncs for a living on big ranches there. It was not long till his reputation spread. He was a top hand where it came to bronc riding.

At one point, he was hired by the US army to break horses. They started off paying him “by the head,” but soon learned he could ride way to many broncs in a day and his paycheck was off the charts. The Army then switched him to a regular salary.

During this time period, Booger Red won many contests and side bets for his ability to ride the bad ones. He also met and married Mollie Webb. The couple had seven children together. They purchased a ranch near San Angelo, Texas with money gained from riding broncs.

It has been said that Red had a standing offer of $100 (some rumors even say $500) to anyone who could bring a horse who could buck him off.

Legend has it, he never had to pay off. One such horse brought for him to ride was a bad bronc from Montana. He rode the horse to a standstill at the San Angelo Fair. Afterwards, Red purchased the horse and named him “Montana Gyp.” With this horse, Red started his own Wild West Show, the “Booger Red Wild West Show.”

For many years during the early 1900s, Red and Mollie put on Wild West Shows where they and their children would perform. Red’s bronc riding exhibitions were always the star attraction.

Fog Horn Clancy, an earlyday announcer, writer and contemporary of Reds, once wrote,

“Booger Red was the originator of looking back on a bucking horse. Up to that time bronc riders either had to, or thought that they had to, keep their eyes right on their bucking mount and try to anticipate in advance the way the animal was going to jump next, but Booger just seemed to get in time with the bucking bronc and would look over his shoulder and make jokes with spectators while the horse was bucking. For more than a quarter century, Red was regarded as the greatest bronc rider in the world.”

After several years of putting on Wild West Shows, Booger Red took the opportunity to disburse his company among some of the larger productions then touring. He knew the smaller, family owned operations, were a thing of the past. He and Mollie then hired out their talents and performed for some of the better-known Wild West productions including the Miller Bros., Buffalo Bill and Tom Mix. Booger continued to ride broncs in exhibition all the way up into the 1920s. It got so that spectators were not satisfied with a show unless Red put on a bronc riding show. Having his name on the program was definitely a draw.

Along the way, the Privett family moved to Miami, Oklahoma, where he lived until his death. He is one of the few men who actually became a legend in his own time. As Red got older, his bronc riding exhibitions slowed down a bit, but not by much. He was a timeless bronc rider.

In 1924, at the Fort Worth Stock Show and Rodeo, Red was attending the rodeo as a spectator. He witnessed a bad bronc toss his rider high into the sky. The crowd then starting hollering that “Booger Red could ride that horse” and chanting, “Bring on Booger!”

So Booger Red jumped over the fence and appeared in the arena, much to the delight of the crowd.

The horse was caught again and brought around for Booger to ride, which he did to a standstill. At fifty-nine years of age, he could still outride the younger cowboys on the baddest of horses.

Folks who witnessed that ride could not tell it, but Red’s health had been failing him by then. He suffered from Bright’s Disease (Kidney Disease) and actually died from it a few weeks after his famous last ride. On his death bed, he told his family, “Always be honest for it pays in the long run. Have all the fun you can while you live for when you are dead, you are a long time dead.”

The great Booger Red died in March of 1924. Samuel Thomas “Booger Red” Privett was posthumously inducted into the National Cowboy and Western Heritage Museum Rodeo Hall of Fame in 1975.

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

October 15, 2014

Brand Name Beef ROADSIDE CHUCK – Delicious cuts of beef collected from scenic highways around the country. Flattened to the peak of tenderness.

COUNTY LINE CUTS – (A division of Borders Beef Co.) Steaks and stew meat with an exotic history. Green card available upon request.

PENCIL THIN MEATS – The closest thing you can get to

jerky and still pay fresh meat prices.

HYDEN HARE – Novelty meats for teething babies and dog training.

NO FAT PATS – Ground meat from aged, exercised beef, supplied by Vold Rodeo Productions.

HOLIDAY HELPER – Pressed patties preformed in the shape of the occasion; Santa, a

turkey, a football, the judge’s gavel.

SPACE FOODS – Shrink wrapped, unidentifiable portions intended to be served a long way from point of purchase.

SWEET MEATS – Chocolate covered chicken kidneys, beef liver or sliced pork tongue, expensively and individually wrapped in foil.

MARINATED MERRY MEAT – Your choice of brisket or flank steak marinated in the fruit juice of the day. Hawaiian punch, grape, etc.

CHURCHILL DOWNS SPORTS MEAT – A line of highly select steaks and specialty cuts from near winners.

CERTIFIED BEEF BEEF – Guaranteed to contain less than .2% by wt. rodent hair, weevils, water buffalo. Sho Glo, Wildroot Cream Oil and Spam.

MA’S DEHYDRATED

Page 11

DELI MEATS – Excellent for busy traveler. Simply open the handy zip lock bag and add water. Makes its own gravy!

SIERRA SAM’S ALL NATURAL TRAIL MIX – A delightful concoction of dried beef, pine needles, shredded Environmental Impact Statements and quaky bark.

BILLY BOB’S BEEF TALLOW – Great for your complexion. Eat it, drink it or rub it on!

LO TAR TIBITS – Small portions from non-smoking steers.

WYOMING ONE SHOT SELECT – Stew meat marinated in liquid smoke. Contains a tantalizing hint of antelope.

Digest

Classifieds

McCraine to be Arizona National Featured Artist ivestock Photographer, Kathy McCraine was selected as the Featured Artist for the 26th annual Cowboy Classics Western Art & Gear Show held in conjunction with the 67th Arizona National Livestock Show December 27-31, 2014.

Born in Texas, Kathy McCraine grew up on a ranch at Walnut Grove, after moving to Arizona at the age of nine in 1958. She has been involved with ranching work, writing about it, and photographing it all her life.

On graduation from the University of Arizona in 1971 with a degree in journalism and minor in art, she wrote for and edited several livestock publications, including the Record Stockman, Western Livestock Journal, and Brangus Journal. When she and her husband, Swayze, moved to Woodville, Mississippi to take over his family ranch in 1978, she founded one of the first advertising agencies to specialize in livestock. There she utilized her ranching background to become a successful livestock photographer.

After the McCraines moved to

L

Arizona in 1984 to be involved in her family’s ranch, she continued that business, and also edited the Arizona Cattlelog and Arizona Quarter Horse. From 1993-95 she published the Arizona Rancher magazine, a bi-monthly devoted to the Arizona cattle and horse industries. She also helped edit and illustrate Keepers of the Range, the 100-year history of the Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association. In addition, she wrote and photographed two chapters for the Western Horseman book, Legendary Ranches.

Over the years, Kathy published three cookbooks, illustrated with art and photography, including Cow Country Cooking: Recipes and Tales from Northern Arizona’s Historic Ranches. The book won the Will Rogers Medallion Award and was named a Southwest Book of the Year in 2010.

As a freelance journalist and photographer, Kathy’s photos and/or stories have been published in such magazines as Western Horseman, Arizona Highways, Range, Cowboys & Indians, Ranch & Reata, Thunderbird Alumni Magazine, Acadiana Profile, and Latina. Her photos have been includ-

ed in exhibits such as “Trappings of the American West” at the Museum of Northern Arizona, “Click – The West Through the Lens” at the Phippen Museum, and “Cowgirls with a Camera” at the Desert Caballeros Museum.

Today Kathy and Swayze own and operate Campwood Cattle Company near Prescott, where they run about 1,200 commercial cows and stockers, and raise registered Quarter Horses.

For over 20 years, Kathy has had the privilege of photographing on some of Arizona’s biggest outfits, including the O RO Ranch, Babbitt Ranches, and Diamond A’s. Her background as a rancher has enabled her to realistically capture a way of life that is rapidly changing, and express it artistically through her photography, with a goal of documenting and preserving the heritage of Arizona ranching.

Kathy will be honored December 27th at the Opening Night Event of the Arizona National Livestock Show and her art featured in the Cowboy Classics Western Art & Gear Show December 28-31, 2014 at the Arizona State Fairgrounds.

Agriculture Career Day Attracts Record Number of Recruiters

A

!

"

#

!

"

!

KADDATZ Auctioneering and Farm Equipment Sales New and used tractors, equipment, and parts. Salvage yard, combines, tractors, hay equipment and all types of equipment parts.

ORDER PARTS ONLINE.

www.kaddatzequipment.com • 254/582-3000

g•u•i•d•e HEREFORD

Registered Polled Herefords Cañones Route P.O. Bulls & Abiquiu, N.M. 87510 Heifers MANUEL SALAZAR FOR SALE AT THE FARM

P.O. Box 867 Española, N.M. 87532

Phone: 575/638-5434

angus

Bell Key Angus

RED ANGUS

Phillips

RED ANGUS

Dennis Boehlke 208/467-2747 Cell. 208/989-1612

A few Choice Bulls Available at Private Treaty.

NAMPA, IDAHO

Spring & Yearlings For Sale CeCil FelKiNS • 209/274-4338 email: CwCowboY@att.Net 5500 bueNa ViSta Rd. ioNe, Ca 95640

Bradley 3 Ranch Ltd. www.bradley3ranch.com

Our Next Bull Sale: February 14, 2015 at the Ranch NE of Estelline, TX Ranch-Raised ANGUS Bulls for Ranchers Since 1955

A SOURCE FOR PROVEN SUPERIOR RED ANGUS GENETICS

M.L. Bradley 806/888-1062 Fax: 806/888-1010 • Cell: 940/585-6471

14298 N. Atkins Rd., Lodi, CA 95240

BRANGUS

SANTA GERTRUDIS

209/727-3335

Dan Wendt

R.L. Robbs 520/384-3654

S

4995 Arzberger Rd. Willcox, Arizona 85643 Willcox, AZ

Santa Gertrudis Cattle Polled and Horned HERD ESTABLISHED 1953

S

es for the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences at ISU. “This is a positive sign for all students in agriculture and related sectors but more importantly, illustrates the strong reputation our students and programs carry throughout this industry.”

The college’s placement rate for recent graduates has been 97 percent or higher for 17 consecutive years. More than 70 percent of graduates begin their careers in Iowa.

Enrollment in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences set a record for the third straight year this fall. The college’s enrollment is 5,205 students, 222 more than the previous year.

A list of the organizations recruiting at Ag Career Day is available at: http://www.career. cals.iastate.edu/ag-career-day

%

$

S

griculture Career Day, set for Oct. 14 at Iowa State University, is expected to bring more than 250 employers, a record number recruiting for jobs in agriculture and natural resources.

Last year, 225 employers and nearly 2,500 students participated in the annual job fair.

The nation’s largest agricultural career fair of its kind is open to the public. It will begin at 9 a.m. Oct. 14 and conclude at 3 p.m. in the Lied Recreation Athletic Center on the eastern edge of the Iowa State campus (http://www.fpm.iastate.edu/maps/).

“We are encouraged by employer interest given the recent concerns of a softening ag economy and the corresponding employment implications,” said Mike Gaul, director of Career Servic-

# #!" $$$

S

Call: 979/245-5100 • Fax 979/244-4383 5473 FM 457, Bay City, Texas 77414 dwendt@1skyconnect.net

Livestock Market Digest

Page 12

Riding Herd

continued from page one

that were worthy of his museum.

We picked up a lot of flat tires and flotation cushions that flew out of boats. We also picked up Studebaker hubcaps and chromed car graffiti that would be worth a fortune today on eBay. We also found some weird stuff like a chicken coop (empty) and handgun (not empty). We even found a watch that had probably followed a beer can out the window when the passenger threw it. Speaking of beer, that’s mostly what we picked up, empty cans of Olympia, Falstaff, Schlitz and Pabst Blue Ribbon.

We found prophylactics (unused), baby diapers (used), bed springs, tire irons and broken car jacks, no doubt flung aside by an angry motorist. Once we even found a garbage disposal, which seems redundant.

There were broken Thermos bottles and furniture that my Grandpa just couldn’t abide being trashed. We even found a bunch of mail once that must have been discarded by a lazy postman who wanted to take the rest of the day off. It only took

one day a year for us FFA members to know all the town secrets because we had looked through its collective trash.

The biggest prizes for my Grandpa were license plates and he had quite a collection.

Although he was a little overaggressive and premature in one instance when a driver who couldn’t wait for the next rest stop came out of an orchard after answering nature's call and found Grandpa unscrewing the license plates on his old and battered Chevy Nova. Talk about road rage!

Grandpa was also constantly on the lookout for road signs and he always claimed to have only taken ones that were laying on the ground, although in some cases he had to lean mighty hard on the post to get them there.

I am constantly reminded of the all good being done by FFA chapters all across the country because I inherited most of my Grandpa’s belongings and if it wasn’t for FFA roadside cleanup, my wife and I would be living in an unfurnished house.

October 15, 2014

Irreparable damages Cibola Controversy one year later

BY JULIE CARTER

he initial gut-wrenching shock has worn off over the course of the past year, but the financial and emotional impact to the grazing allotment owners in the U.S. Forest Service Mountainair District may never be far from the raw edge that it is still today.

In the February 2014 issue of the New Mexico Stockman, Frank DuBois wrote “The Cibola Controversy” detailing the devastating June 11, 2013 order to 19 allotment owners for the blanket removal of livestock from the entire Mountainair grazing district “due to severe drought conditions.”

The letter from District Ranger Karen Lessard came in the mail with no meaningful discussion a clear mandate that there was no appeal process available to the allotment owners. They were given approximately six weeks to completely vacate their allotments.

The Mountainair District is made up of two separate mountain ranges. The Gallinas range is to the southeast of

T

Mountainair blanketing the county line between Lincoln and Torrance County. The Manzanos run north from Mountainair and are primarily in Torrance County with relatively small parts spilling over into Valencia and Bernalillo Counties.

The unilateral decision for complete livestock removal attributed to “drought” in such a vast area made no logical sense and ultimately would be found to have no basis in documentable science.

Never before in the history of the Mountainair District or presumably in the state of New Mexico had a district-wide removal been ordered and certainly not without at least some individual area assessments.

And then it rained Mike and Loretta Sanchez have spent their entire married life (37 years) building their cattle herd to the point they could be proud of the uniform conformation, fertility and hardiness bred into them. It only took one “by my authority as the District Ranger” letter to undo those decades of plan-

By Frank DuBois

My column asks, “are we under attack or what?”

Are we under attack? he answer is “yes” and let me begin to count the ways: n n The Forest Service has issued a policy directive on Groundwater Resource Management. The directive would claim that surface water and groundwater are “hydraulically interconnected” and allow the agency to object to state-regulated projects on “adjacent” land that might harm groundwater. The New Mexico State Engineer has testified before Congress that this is a violation of state water law and several well established Supreme Court decisions. n The EPA and Army Corps of Engineers have proposed regulations that would give them control over not only “navigable” waters, but in addition control over ditches, canals and wet spots. AFBF President Bob Stallman says the proposal is a serious threat to farmers, ranchers and other landowners. “Under EPA’s proposed rule, waters — even ditches — are regulated even if they are miles from the nearest ‘navigable’ waters,” Stallman said. “Indeed, so-called ‘waters’ are regulated

T

P.O. Box 7458 Albuquerque, NM 87194 505/243-9515 • Fax 505/998-6236 caren@aaalivestock.com www.aaalivestock.com

Have that “hard to buy for” friend or relative?

Why not gift them with a subscription to the Livestock Market Digest? They will get a reminder of you every month AND stay up with the news and views of the livestock and ranching business!

~Gift Certificate ~ To:_________________________________ From:_______________________________ You have received a ____ year subscription to the Livestock Market Digest.

SUBSCRIPTION RATES: 1-year $19.95, 2-year $29.95

even if they aren’t wet most of the time. EPA says its new rule will reduce uncertainty, and that much seems to be true: there isn’t much uncertainty if most every feature where water flows or stands after a rainfall is federally regulated.” n The U.S Fish and Wildllife Service has proposed a huge expansion of the area in New Mexico and Arizona where the Mexican Grey Wolf would be protected. The Chairman of the Arizona Game Commission says he is “profoundly disappointed” in the proposal and adds that resistance by ranchers, hunters and residents of the towns in the expanded wolf recovery area could doom the program. n Under a rule finalized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service jaguars will have 1,194 square miles of critical habitat in southern Arizona and New Mexico for their recovery. The Arizona Game and Fish Department does not support the designation. Assistant Director for Wildlife Management Jim deVos states, “I find it difficult to justify designating critical habitat for a species that is so rarely found in Arizona. In looking at the available data on the presence of jaguars, there has been no documentation of a female jaguar in Arizona for nearly a century. There have been long periods when no

ning and sacrifice.

“It completely destroyed me,” said a frustrated Mike Sanchez sitting at the table in his home tucked up against the Gallinas and surrounded by U.S. Forest land. “Right now we are fighting to survive, but I don’t know if we are going to make it.”

Sanchez’s Gallinas Springs Ranch, home to four generations of the family, is comprised of 18,000 acres of U.S. Forest and 320 acres of private. The 244 head of cattle allowed by his grazing permit had already been substantially reduced during the previous two years of drought. The allotment grazing numbers represented 90 percent of Sanchez’s total operation.

“And if they’d told us to cut down more,” said Loretta, “we would have. But to just move them all off was the end of us.

We didn’t have anywhere to go with the cattle. ” Mike Sanchez added, “We had plenty of forage to wait for the rains that, if they were going to come, would come a continued on page thirteen

jaguar was even found in the state.

Such designations should be based on good science and effective conservation, which are both lacking with this designation.” n The President issued a proclamation to create the 243,000 acre Rio Grande del Norte National Monument. Rather than following the precedent in previous proclamations, this one contained new, discriminatory language against livestock grazing in spite of written testimony provided by New Mexico livestock organizations. n The President issued a proclamation to create the 496,000 acre Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument in southern New Mexico, again containing the anti-grazing language. In addition, the designation creates problems for law enforcement and flood control efforts, and was opposed by the Las Cruces Chamber of Commerce, the Hispano Chamber of Commerce, the Sheriff of Doña Ana County, the Mesilla Valley Sportsmen’s Alliance and many other groups. n The Environmental Protection Agency, in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, publicly released to three environmental groups a huge database of personal information about thousands of livestock producers and their families in 29 states. The database included the names of the producers and other family members, home addresses, GPS coordinates, telephone numbers and emails. n The Bureau of Land Management has issued a management plan for the Sabinoso Wilderness in continued on page thirteen

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

October 15, 2014

Irreparable Damages little later in the summer. If they didn’t, we’d have taken the cattle off ourselves. This wasn’t our first drought.”

Adding salt to the fatal wound, it rained two weeks after the order to remove went out.

And it rained again and again.

Inches of rain. By the time the July 30 deadline rolled around there was a good stand of grass, tanks were full of water and there were muddy roads to navigate in moving out the cattle.

But still no reprieve, no reversal, no discussion ever came from the forest service.

After many sleepless nights, anguishing over what to do, Mike Sanchez took the money he got for his cattle, sold in a low market flooded with cattle from drought stricken ranches, and bought a semi-truck to begin hauling cattle. He had to make a living for his family.

“I am angry, really angry,” Mike said. “I’m very bitter.

We’ve tried to restock a little but the money isn’t there. The prices are now three times higher to buy than what we sold for. It’s very depressing to go to the sale and see what cattle are bringing now, knowing what we had to sell ours for. And now I’m supposed to be friends with them (Forest Service) and act like nothing has happened?”

Six months later, after meetings, range assessments, letters, resolutions from both Torrance and Lincoln County Commissions opposing the order to remove, support from three Soil and Water Conservation Districts and intervention from Congressman Steve Pearce and Congresswoman Michelle Lujan Grisham, an authorization for the return of the livestock to the allotments was given.

Page 13 continued from page twelve

Loretta and Mike Sanchez with son Frankie (far left) at ranch headquarters in front of the mountainside razed by fire in 2004. Photo by Julie Carter

Financial devastation Bob and Diane Hudgens have run cattle for 15 years on what was the Joe Atkinson permit in the Gallinas. By 2013 they had already voluntarily cut their numbers from the 245 allowed on the allotment to 120 due to drought conditions. Then the letter from Ranger Lessard came in the mail.

“There was no discussion, no warning, no opportunity for any input from us,” Bob said. “They (the Forest Service) had no value for our opinion or to hear the plans we had for surviving the drought. They never asked. It was very difficult to accept knowing that there was never any science involved in the decision on the part of the Forest Service. Ranchers assess their

Under Attack northern New Mexico. Senator Udall and other members of the New Mexico Congressional Delegation pushed for this designation, with Senator Udall saying the Wilderness “will now be open for grazing, hunting and other recreational uses.” Most recently, however, Senator Heinrich tells us, “It’s surrounded by private land and there is currently no legal access — not so much as an easement for a trail” and “It’s completely landlocked by private land.“ As a result, the Bureau of Land Management has proposed that as condition of their grazing permit the ranchers must grant public access across their private property. The BLM has the authority to condemn private property to gain access to federal land, but then they would have to pay for it. n As a result of an out-of-court settlement, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has declared the New Mexico jumping mouse as endangered, and identified almost 200 linear miles along streams in New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado as critical habitat. The Forest Service is constructing eight foot high pipe fences to restrict livestock access to water, saying “livestock grazing has the potential to jeopardize the species.” New Mexico ranchers have filed a lawsuit challenging the federal government’s moves to block cattle from reaching water in order to protect the habitat of the mouse and doing so without finalizing the critical habitat designation nor completing a required environmental analysis. n The Mountainair District of the Cibola National Forest ordered the blanket removal of all livestock based on a weather map and without performing any type of range analysis on the nineteen allotments involved. Five months later and after the appropriate

range every day. It’s how they survive.”

Because of the general drought in the state, there was no place to go with the cattle. “I did find a little farm land so I could keep a very few head, but most of those pairs went for $1100 and it will take three times that to replace them now.”

The Hudgens said this has been financially devastating to them. Had they been able to predict the surge in the cattle market, they would have done things differently. “We worked so hard to just maintain during the drought and then to get that letter with no recourse to us, it completely undid all we worked for.”

Recovery will take years Rand Perkins cares for the

continued from page twelve

on-the-ground analysis was completed, the Forest Service recanted and allowed the return of livestock.

However, the economic damage to the ranch families had already occurred and relations and respect for the Forest Service had been permanently wounded. n The Secretary of Interior issued an order directing the Bureau of Land Management to inventory all lands with wilderness characteristics, administratively designate them as “Wild Lands”, and take action to protect them during the planning process. After a storm of protest from Congress, Western Governors and various user groups, the Secretary withdrew the order.

However, that has not stopped the BLM from implementing the policy. Current BLM land use plans are incorporating the lands with wilderness characteristics concept and has changed their field manuals accordingly. n The First Lady, first with reforms to the School Lunch Program, and now through changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps), continues her anti-meat crusade. As of June there were 46 million folks on food stamps and 32 million kids in the School Lunch Program, all of whom are touched by her efforts.

This is just a partial list. But it’s a list you should keep in mind as you saunter into the voting booth next month.

Till 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 (http://www.nmsu.edu/~duboisrodeo/).

DuBois Family allotment where the obliteration is not just financial, but in the years of building a herd with the desired genetic traits. “We had planned for

drought,” he said. “We were still supplemental feeding and knew that if it didn’t rain when the monsoons usually come, we’d have to cut numbers again.”

Ironically, they gathered the cattle for removal off the allotment in mud and shin-deep grass. “It broke my heart,” said Rand. “It’ll take years to recover.

A lot of years.”

These three ranchers are representative of several more with forest allotments in the Gallinas mountain range where drought had not been absent but the monsoon rains quickly brought forgiveness as ranchers know it will do. Their science of survival has sustained them for decades and yet was so easily erased with an unyielding directive.

The losses in dollars and cents quickly tally into the hundreds of thousands dollars. There is no price that can be put on the grievous wounds to the spirit of the families that will now try to hang on to a way of life, a family heritage.

(Part 2 of this follow up from the Mountainair district will be in the November 2014 Livestock Market Digest.

Livestock Market Digest

Page 14

October 15, 2014

Ranch Planning – Where to Start

BY NICK ASHCROFT, PH.D., EXTENSION RANGELAND MANAGEMENT SPECIALIST

“By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.” – Benjamin Franklin “If you don’t know where you are going, you’ll end up someplace else.” – Yogi Berra “The time to repair the roof is when the sun is shining.” – John F. Kennedy am frequently asked about ranch plans, or have been in situations where a ranch plan would have helped explain resource conditions, pasture/ grazing management, or ranch objectives. Most ranchers have goals and objectives, and a plan in mind on how to manage their livestock and the land. Yet, do most ranchers formalize their goals, objectives and management plans by writing them down? Increasingly, documentation of ranch plans is important on federal and private lands especially as it relates to increased federal regulations and agency oversight regarding management of natural resources. Even in the absence of federal regulations, writing a ranch plan encourages ranchers to slow down and consider specific objectives for infrastructure, finance, livestock production, wildlife enterprises, and range management in relation to overall ranch goals, objectives

I

and operations. This newsletter will attempt to address a few of these questions. My colleagues and I are in the process of writing a more comprehensive publication about ranch plans that we hope to have available to you soon. If you have experience or thoughts with ranch plans we would be like to hear from you.

Reasons for developing a ranch plan: n You are the expert on your ranch. A written plan helps you stick to that plan rather than allowing externalities to dictate management. n Economic efficiency and profit. n Inform management and provides direction. n Encourages annual and consistent documentation regarding budgets, natural resource conditions, goals, and objectives. n May assist and inform a successor in ‘how the ranch is/was run’. n Could be used to acquire financial credit. n Required for federal grazing allotments [e.g., Allotment Management Plans (AMP), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Endangered Species Act (ESA)]. n Inform and communicate to federal land management agencies when management changes or analysis are required. n Required for conservation programs.

n Required for federal-based programs administered through multiple agencies on private lands.

A ranch plan can seem like a daunting task. In fact, just knowing where to start can be a challenge. A simple approach to get started is to break it in to steps, make it a living document, using it, modifying it, and improve it at regular intervals and the task will be become second nature. Most businesses have mission statements, goals and objectives – start with these. Write something, think about it and review or modify it. We hear a lot about goals and objectives, however not everyone may know the differences. Goals are an overarching principle that guides decision making. They are typically broad, general intentions that are intangible and difficult to measure.

Objectives are accomplishable actions that are specific, measureable, time constrained and by their completion lead to attaining a goal. Several objectives may need to be accomplished to attain a goal. Developing ranch goals and objectives provides a positive direction in the ranch planning process and stabilizes ranch management.

Note that plans change and by actively using your ranch plan and making changes when needed, it will assist in improving efficiency of ranching operations and attaining goals for the ranch business.

Next gather or record historical information on the ranch, many people know the history of their ranch, but few have written it down. This information should be included throughout the ranch plan to help explain why conditions may exist, to document climate or management, or demonstrate an improvement / degradation in resource conditions. You now want to develop and inventory of the ranch and a physical description of the ranching operation. With current and historical information or data you can begin to identify where you are now and what is necessary to accomplish new or existing goals.

Developing and accomplishing objectives will begin moving you towards attaining ranch goals.

Below are a series of questions you may ask to get started and headed in the right direction. Consider both the historical and current conditions.

What do you want the ranch to look like in 5, 10, 20, or 50 years?

What is the land base for the ranch? n Locational description n General description of vegetation communities n How many deeded acres?

Federal acres? Leased acres?

What are your management options or restrictions on these lands? continued on page fifteen

Genetic Engineering Can Help Fight the California Drought

The Best of the Bunch

alifornia continues to battle extreme drought, with water usage restrictions being levied throughout the state. According to Henry Miller of the Hoover Institution, it is agriculture that is especially affected by the problem. Of all of the water consumed in California, farming uses 80 percent of it.

There is one technology that could do much to lessen the impact of the drought on California’s farmers: genetic engineering. Genetic engineering (also known as genetic modification, or GM) can tweak plant properties – including making crops more drought-resistant by engineering them to conserve more water.

But genetic engineering has continuously faced strong opposition, despite the opportunities that it offers. Miller provides a few facts about GM: n Over the past 20 years, over 3.7 billion acres of GM plants have been cultivated by over 17 million farmers worldwide, without causing a single environmental or health problem. n Globally, the economic

C

& !) % *&&# &, ( *& * , (. # )* )*&(. /) % - )* &&" %$ ! !) '+( !**) % * *( !*!&% & !(* & ) % & /) &+%*(. /) # * )* -!## %* ( * !% % !%)'!( )*!% *& # ))!

(--0% !,4 &-2/ -& %%60 "--*0 !,$ .!4 !,$ 1(!1 -,+4 ),#+2$%0 /)-/)14 -01!'% 5 1 !++ !$$0 2. 1- ! .-1%,1)!+ 0!3),' -& -3%/

benefits of GM farming have amounted to $116.6 billion from 1996 to 2012. n Herbicide-resistant GM plants allow farmers to plant crops without plowing the soil, reducing soil erosion and chemical runoff. n No-till crops also reduce the use of farm equipment, thereby lowering carbon emissions. Shifting to GM crops reduced carbon emissions by 19.4 billion kilograms from 1996 to 2012, equivalent to removing 8.6 million cars from the road for one year. n GM crops allow for high levels of production that would otherwise require tens of millions of additional acres of land to achieve.

The ability of GM plants to become more drought-tolerant, writes Miller, could be the greatest achievement of genetic plant modification.

Such GM varieties are able to grow using less, and lower quality, water.

Unfortunately, instead of receiving widespread support, these technologies have been misrepresented and discredited by the media, writes Miller.

Source: Henry I. Miller, “California’s Drought,” National Review, July 17, 2014

October 15, 2014

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

Page 15

TSCRA survey indicates ranchers anticipating rebuilding any Texans are looking forward to rebuilding their herds, according to a survey done by the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association (TSCRA) marketing committee.

TSCRA members provided information on herd reductions, rebuilding intentions and primary

M

rebuilding challenges. When asked about plans for herd rebuilding, responses indicated that members are positioning their operations for growth. If grazing and profitability conditions remain the same, 49 percent of ranchers expect to increase their herd size by an average of 34 percent.

If grazing and profitability con-

ditions were to improve, 65 percent of responding ranchers expect to increase their herd size by an average of 35 percent. If grazing profitability conditions were to decline, 65 percent of respondents indicated they would either make no changes to or increase their herd size.

When respondents were asked to rank the most important factors

when making decisions about the size of their breeding herds, the results showed grass conditions continue to be the single largest limiting factor. ninety-one percent of the respondents ranked grass conditions as one of the top two challenges to future growth. water availability was second largest, as 44 percent of the participating mem-

bers ranked water in their top two factors.

Most survey participants indicated their herds are at 71percent of their 10-year average herd size.

This is in-line with previous drought surveys in 2011.

To view the TSCRA marketing committee survey executive summary, visit www.tscra.org

Farm Bill conservation information now available in Spanish NRCS invites Latino farmers/ranchers to seek technical and financial help nformation on the new Farm Bill conservation opportunities is now available in Spanish, in time to help farmers plan for the 2015 planting season. With the new federal fiscal year that began October 1st, a new round of funding opportunities will open to all interested farmers and ranchers.

Under the new Farm Bill, signed into law on February 7, 2014, conservation programs were modified slightly, streamlined, and extended to continue helping landowners and managers keep their farms and ranches—as well as the natural resources—sustain-

I

able.

“We welcome Latino and Latina farmers and ranchers to come discover the services and programs we offer,” says Carlos Suarez, State Conservationist for the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service in California.

“For over 75 years we have helped farmers keep their soil healthy and fertile, conserve and protect water on their land, protect the quality of wildlife habitat and the air we breathe, keep rangelands healthy, and more.” Today the need to comply with many state, local and federal environmental laws is an additional burden that farmers face, and with which, NRCS can often assist. Services through

Ranch Planning n Past and present management, Allotment Management Plans (AMPs). n What other multiple uses may affect the ranching operation? n How involved were you in these plans and how do they work with the current goals and objectives? n Existing right-of-ways? n Agreements or leases?

What are the current and historic conditions of the land? n Soils (sources: Soil Surveys, Ecological Site Descriptions (ESDs), historical records or data) http://websoilsurvey.sc .egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm – Soil type n Potential vegetation n Forage production n Timber production n Identify issues areas (excessive erosion, toxic plants, invasive or noxious plant) n Precipitation (sources: Soil Surveys, Ecological Site Descriptions (ESDs), historical records or data) http://websoilsurvey.sc .egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm, http://www.wrcc.dri .edu/CLIMATEDATA.html – Annual average – Seasonal average – Fluctuations – Locations – Precipitation form (snow, rain) n Temperature – Highs and lows – Duration – Seasonal – Wind n Other climate conditions – flooding, droughts etc. n When does the ranch receive precipitation and where (historical records)? n How has vegetation

NRCS are voluntary, free and are not associated with regulatory agencies or sanctions.

Suarez says that last year, in California alone, NRCS provided over $165 million to help farmers solve conservation issues, achieve high levels of stewardship, and establish easements to protect farmland, rangeland or wetlands.

“Our technical services are available to all. Projects are selected for funding based on the environmental benefits that will result. Farmers of all backgrounds, with farms of all sizes—and whether or not you own the land—are invited to apply for funding.”

In general the funding helps pay for about half of the cost of a continued from page fourteen

responded to historical precipitation?

What are the natural resources on these lands (forage production, timber, fuelwood, wildlife )? n How has vegetation changed on the ranch, what trends have been observed? n Current composition, production, condition, and cover of vegetation. n What are the current uses? n What is the potential vegetation for the soil type, slope, aspect, and climate? n What is the forage trend by pasture or site? n What areas have riparian vegetation types? n What are the wildlife resources on the ranch? n Has a wildlife enterprise been part of ranch diversification? n Have there been changes in wildlife populations? n Are there threatened or

endangered species?

What water resources exist and are available? n Location by pasture, water type (spring, dirt tank, well, live water). n What are the priority dates of the water? n What is the dependability and volume of each water source? n Have water rights been filed on the ranch? n Where do water developments need to be repaired/replaced? n Where should new water developments be located?

What have been the current and historic grazing practices or grazing systems of the ranch (seasons, timing, stocking rates, intensity, and duration)? n Number and size of pastures n When each pasture is grazed and for how long (currently and historically)

project. However, some farmers will qualify for higher rates of funding. Those who have farmed less than ten years (called beginning farmers/ranchers) and those with limited financial resources (defined on a county-by-county basis) may receive higher rates.

NRCS employees will help interested farmers obtain the correct forms to get started. “You need to invest some time up front, but we have thousands of satisfied

customers who agree it is worth the investment,” says Suarez.

“NRCS will work very hard to match farmers who need bilingual assistance with a technical expert that is fluent in their language,” said Suarez.

Farmers are invited to visit NRCS soon to take advantage of conservation planning assistance and of the new round of funding opportunities that begin October 1st with the new fiscal year.

Livestock Market Digest

Page 16

October 15, 2014

Curtis Fort: Storyteller in Bronze

BY SHARON NIEDERMAN

hen you listen to Curtis Fort tell a story about growing up on the family ranch in Tatum, NM, or working as a guide on the Vermejo, you think, “There’s no way even Bob Wills could imitate that twang.

This is the real deal. This fellow lives his talk.”

That authentic cowboy speech, with its singsong rhythm and way out west drawl expresses the genuine spirit that makes western art lovers fans of Curtis Fort’s bronzes. His expressive, detailed figures simply seem too good to be true.

Blessed with a voice and character that loves to tell stories, this self-taught master puts

W

all his God-given natural storytelling abilities plus some into his artwork. He traces his own artistic development through some key memories, recalling the seemingly chance events in his life that are like links, one right after another, in the chain of his destiny. While he originally intended to be a cowboy like his dad, his ability to depict cowboys, Indians, wildlife, and ranch life with uncanny realism in a distinctive style has shaped his life into that of an artist.

“Every kid tries to do art,” he says. “I loved to look at bank calendars with Charlie Russell pictures. My first book on Russell was a present from my parents around 1958. He has continued to build a collection of books that he uses for his

research.

After the drought of the early 50s passed, his family took their only vacation, when he was about ten or eleven. He’d never seen a bronze until they went to the Buffalo Bill Museum in Cody, Wyoming on that vacation. “I was just enthralled,” he says.

“Then about nine years later, when I was at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces, I visited Don Case and saw a bronze on a stand at his home and asked about it. When he told me he’d made it, I asked him, “How did you make it?”

“You just sculpt the clay,” he told me.

From then on, Curtis spent every spare minute working with clay. He had another revelation

when Don invited him to come with him to the foundry at Sedona, Arizona in 1969 to see the clay cast into bronze. There he met artist Joe Beeler, working in the foundry. “I was so impressed with him,” Curtis recalls. “He was so down to earth. He invited us to his studio,” a place that opened yet another world of possibility.

His success is as homegrown and natural as his work itself, one thing just effortlessly leading to the next as people in a position to appreciate what he was doing continued to fall in love with his work and support it.

While studying for his Bachelor of Science in Range Management at NMSU, Curtis worked summers at the Bell Ranch.

“That was good times,” he remembers. At the Bell, he earned his first commission from Don Hoffman, and he was finally able to get a piece of his own clay sculpture cast in Lubbock. “I finally got something in metal!” he says.

Then, around 1973, friends in Roy helped him get his first show, at Harriet DeLissio’s gift shop in Raton. While in Raton, he called the Vermejo Ranch, where he was offered a job starting Sept. 5, 1973. His years there as a hand and a guide introduced him to collectors.

His work was popular with the hunters he guided. “Those Vermejo contacts helped out,” he says. “Many of those connections made back then have continued over the years.”

He got his big break while at the Vermejo, when writer John Neary came to the ranch to do a story about the place. Neary featured Curtis’ work in an article in Smithsonian Magazine in Nov., 1975. Curtis still gets comments from people who remember seeing that story.

After a few more years, Curtis decided to choose a life of making a living as an artist over ranching, though he continues to “punch cow now and then” for friends and neighbors. He and wife Carol, his business manager, live on the family ranch in Tatum.

His work has been exhibited in the Panhandle Plains Historical Museum, Canyon, Texas, The Museum of the Big Bend, Alpine, TX, Western Heritage Museum Complex, Hobbs, NM, and is featured in many western publications. It is certainly familiar to anyone who regularly sees the New Mexico Stockman. He also wrote a series of columns for three-and-a-half years, in a vivid cowboy voice, about ranch life for the Stockman. Those columns are now being collected for an anthology to be published by Oklahoma University Press.

Branding, bronc busting, mama cows and calves, are all favorite subjects of his.

“I love history, hunting, wildlife, and Native America,” he says. “I try to portray the working cowboy. It’s a real compliment when someone says, “Now that’s exactly the way it is,” of my work. I want to portray cowboy life.”

Fort likes to render scenes that “tell a story” and is a sucker for history. “I like to put history in a piece,” he says. “But it’s like putting too much matting on a picture—you can overdo it. I found out doing sculpture, you can get authentic in the clothing, but if you can capture a feel, a feeling, where there’s some feel to it, that’s the big thing. That’s the biggest comment I get. ‘I feel happy.’”

Sharon Niederman is a writer and photographer living in Raton and the author of many books of NM history and culture. Her forthcoming book is: Enchanted Plate: New Mexico Farm to Table.