April 2013 Progressive Rancher by The Progressive Rancher

NCA 2009 Presidentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Award Recipient

Living in the Now, Preparing for the Future For many of us, our goals in life remain constant: financial independence and providing for family. Striking a balance between saving for goals, such as education and retirement, and allocating money for daily expenses can be challenging. But you can do it.

In this Issue... Nevada Cattlemen’s Assn..............pgs. 3-4 Photo Contest Winner ........................pg. 5

BQA: Cattle Handling and Stockmanship Skills..................pgs. 26-27

Obituary: Duilio P. Bottari..................pg.8

Beef Checkoff...................................pg. 26

Eye on the Outside...........................pg. 10

Look Up: Superman.........................pg. 28

Flying In the Face of Common Sense ................................ pg. 11

Shaw Cattle Sale Report...................pg. 29

Fumes from the Farm.......................pg. 13

Gateway Leg.: Horse Tripping Today, Your Livelihood Tomorrow?............pg. 30

Learn how you can redefine your savings approach toward education and retirement. Call or visit today.

Cattleman’s Connection Sale Report.......................................pg. 14

Sonny Davidson, AAMS®

Jason B Land, AAMS®

Ramblings of a Ranch Wife.............pg. 14

Domestic Horse Processing:............pg. 31

The Future of Nevada Ranching: Do Rancher’s Property Rights Matter?.. pg. 15

Range Plants for the Rancher:

Financial Advisor

2213 North 5th Street Suite A Elko, NV 89801 775-738-8811

Financial Advisor

2213 North 5th Street Suite A Elko, NV 89801 775-738-8811

www.edwardjones.com

Assembly Bill 227.....................pgs. 18-19 ENLC: Smith Valley Restoration Project – Vegetation Response Report.....pgs. 20-21

Member SIPC

The Return of

Western Yarrow................................pg. 33 Edward Jones: Financial Focus........pg. 34 Humboldt Watershed CWMA

Selecting Alfalfa Varieties................pg. 23

Canada Thistle..................................pg. 35

NVSRM: National Resources Inventory – Grazing Land On-Site Study............pg. 24

Why Control the First

Federal Coordination with County Plans............................pg. 25

Noxious Weeds?........................pgs. 36-37 Coloring Page...................................pg. 39

The Progressive Rancher Owner/Editor/Publisher – Leana Stitzel progressiverancher@elko.net

Graphic Design/Layout/Production – Julie Eardley julie@jeprographics.com

Cover Photo: by Jessica Uhalde, “Nevada”

America’s greatness is the greatness of her people. —Barry Goldwater / George W. Romney

Mailed to more than 6,000 individuals with approved addresses each month. The Progressive Rancher is published monthly. The views and opinions expressed by writers of articles appearing in this publication are not necessarily those of the editor. Letters of opinion are welcomed by The Progressive Rancher. Rates for advertising are available upon request. Advertising in The Progressive Rancher does not necessarily imply editorial endorsement. Liability for any errors or omissions in advertisements shall not exceed the cost of the space occupied by the error or omission. The Progressive Rancher is free to people working and active in the livestock industry. The Progressive Rancher is donated to the agricultural industry. If you are not currently receiving this magazine on a regular basis, and would like to be a part of The Progressive Rancher family, contact us by e-mail at progressiverancher@elko.net, today, so we can include you on our mailing list. If you have moved or changed addresses, please notify us, by e-mail, so we can keep you informed. All requests for the magazine must be made by e-mail.

Leana Stitzel, Owner/Editor

1188 Court St., #81, Elko, NV 89801 (208) 733-1828 • progressiverancher@elko.net

WWW.PROGRESSIVERANCHER.COM Ads sent to or built by The Progressive Rancher become property of this magazine.

2 April 2013

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

health professionals part way and reach a solution we can all live with. The use of additional forms of ID is being accepted and used by more and more producers throughout Nevada. Part of the reason for this is market driven for sure. There will continue to be higher prices paid for cattle that meet identification requirements to be exported to foreign markets. This will most likely lead to a larger percentage of producers using acceptable forms of ID for these markets and programs. The capture of these identifications and application into a database is going to be a challenge for some smaller states with limited budgets such as ours, and we must work with our state agency to facilitate this in any manner we can. There will be much discussion on what type of ID to use and when it is put in. As a producer and veterinarian, I may have a little different outlook on this than some, but I think we all agree that the less time we spend recording IDs and the safer it is on our livestock, the better. That said there has been an increase in the application of RFID tags (electronic) in recent years. The problem is that the subsequent scanning of these tags is still far from perfect. Unless the animals are individually stopped in a chute, we are going to miss some numbers as they pass by in an ally or loading chute. I do believe that this form of ID shows great potential, but we must allow technology to catch up before we implement its use on a wider scale. The uses of bangs vaccination tags and bright tags (the silver tags that resemble bangs tags) have been used to ID cattle for decades. They do work well however retention is an issue and the obvious downside is the reading of these tags and recording of them. This form of ID is time consuming when cattle are to be shipped and errors in recording the numbers are not impossible. Thankfully for Nevada, animals under 18 months of age are not affected by the current rule and the vast majority of our exports will continue pretty much as it has for the past few years. The change is going to be felt when we start selling cows for replacements, shipping cows out of state for pasture, and importing breeding cattle. We are fortunate to have a very supportive Department of Agriculture and Office of State Veterinarian. Many agreements with neighboring states have been worked out for commuter herds. These agreements will require an affidavit stating the animals are individual identified, but allow them to move on a brand without listing all numbers in some cases. Remember that not all states have an agreement with Nevada and there will be additional health requirements (that may require ID’s) in addition to the ADT rule. The take home message from all of this is simple. Plan ahead and communicate with your herd veterinarian regularly. Many state veterinarians are willing to work with producers and their veterinarians when importing and exporting animals, but these requests cannot be made while the trucks are at the chute. In instances when ID is going to be required, the sooner we can start the process the better. If you are planning on shipping cattle out of state, recording IDs at the time of vaccinating or pregnancy testing is a good idea. Together we can figure out how we are going to move cattle under this rule and in the future. There will be changes and they will be for the better in the long run. If we are to remain a leader in the worldwide beef industry, we are going to have to adapt.

The Progressive Rancher

UPDATE UPDATE

s we look forward to spring and turnout, many producers across the west are still facing drought conditions. While some areas of Nevada have received good precipitation from last fall through the winter, many locations are in need of spring rains to help the range. As I travel across the state and look at varying range conditions, areas of rehabilitated burns, and some empty allotments, I can’t help but to think about how the beef industry will rebuild after the last couple of years. On thing is for certain, the low national inventory of beef cows is reflected in the shrinking number of Nevada beef cows. This drought has reached the entire beef industry from the Midwest to Pacific and from the Canadian border to the Mexican border. With the continued uncertainty surrounding much of our federal land grazing system, I expect to see further contraction of the beef inventory in the coming months. Now none of this is breaking news to anyone or should be alarming at this point. The reason I bring it up is to remind us all that we will turn the corner and when we do, there is going to be a huge demand for breeding cattle both here in Nevada and across the country. As the drought weakens in some areas of the country, there will be a movement of breeding stock into those areas, and this stock often comes from areas not yet recovered in addition to replacements bred from across the country. On March 10th, 2013 the federal rule on Animal Disease and Traceability officially went into effect. This rule is going to have an impact on how cattle are moved from state to state and region to region. While we may not be looking to import large numbers of cattle into Nevada yet, we quite possibly will be looking at sending some cattle out of the state, at least temporarily. The process we as producers will go through to accomplish this is most likely going to be different to what we have done in the past. We all celebrated the inclusion of brands in the ADT rule when it was published. The thing we must keep in mind is that the use of brands will be determined by states and tribes and rely upon agreements entered into between these entities. There are cases when the use of brands would be acceptable to animal health professionals and producers alike. Some of these are movement to sale barns, directly to slaughter, and to approved facilities for feeding. Further processing of animals may take palace at these destinations and additional identification such as back tags can be applied at that time. The use of brands is not an acceptable form of identification in all cases however. As I mentioned above, the beef industry is going to experience a period of growth in future years. As this happens, animals will be entering breeding herds from sources that some operations have not used in the past. The Nevada Cattlemen’s Association is committed to protecting the resident cow herd of Nevada and encourages a strong traceability program so that future disease outbreaks can rapidly be investigated. The rules of traceability and the need for more rapid traceability are changing. We must adapt as producers to meet these demands. I am not saying that brands cannot and should not be used. I am saying that as industry, we must meet animal

J.J.

Goicoechea DVM

Nevada Cattlemen’s Association President April 2013 3

Nevada Cattlemen’s Association By Desiree Seal, Nevada Cattlemen’s Association Executive Director

ell, another month has passed, with some much needed moisture I must represent our values and speak for our concerns. There are over 50 BDRs that we are say, as compared to last year anyways. I also have to say that up until this monitoring with staff and our lobbyist. For more information visit the Nevada Legislature point in the month, I haven’t gotten out of the office much. Reviewing many documents website at www.leg.state.nv.us. The website contains full copies of all bills, the option to from agencies and legislative hearings has kept me indoors. Luckily, the last part of watch hearings live, comment on bills you are interested in, and learn more about the legthe month is looking like I may get to be out on the ground with some permittees. The islative process. If there is a bill that you feel may affect our industry that may not be being watched by the Association, please let us know. If you would like one large event that I got to be out of the office (still indoors, but more information regarding these or any other bills please call the not at a desk) was our NCA Legislative Breakfast. “As we approach the deadline Nevada Cattlemen’s Association office at 1-775-738-9214. Next March 7th was this year’s Agricultural Recognition Day at the month, members will attend the PLC/NCBA Legislative ConferLegislature, and it was a huge success! of 2015 for USFWS’ decision ence. Please tune in next month for an update of the annual PLC/ Our Legislative Breakfast kicked off the day with a presentato list or not to list greater NCBA Legislative Conference in Washington D.C. tion by Dr. Tom Harris of the UNR Economics Department. Dr. Lastly for issues updates, the Nevada Sagebrush Ecosystem Harris has been working on a model on the economic impact of sage grouse, we hope to keep Council met in February and will meet again March 27. Top prioripublic lands grazing. He presented his initial research and estimations at the Legislative Breakfast. While we were pleased with his ties for the Council are the discussion of model of mapping efforts members well informed. our for sagebrush ecosystem efforts and development of the Sagebrush presentation, we were even more pleased at the interest of Legismembers about the facts.” Ecosystem Mitigation Bank. At the February meeting, the Council latures in attendance. Ag Day at the Legislature also featured a discussed the various mapping models available to use for maplunch and dinner, and, many booths by agriculture groups such as Nevada Department of Agriculture, Dairy Farmers of American, Nevada Grown, Nevada ping sage grouse habitat. At the March 27th meeting, the Council is prepared to discuss Farm Bureau Federation, Nevada FFA, NV Energy, USDA-FSA and NRCS, Nevada Dairy further one of those such models, Dr. Peter Coates’ model, and the cost and timeframe Commission and Northern Nevada Development Authority. The event was very well at- for implementing this model. The council also tasked the Technical Team with gathering tended for our first year and we hope to continue to put on a successful Ag Day during each inventory of projects being completed or having been completed by local area work groups and sagebrush ecosystem projects between the two meetings. At the March 27th meeting, legislative session. Speaking of Legislature, things are heating up on both the state and national level. the Technical Team will give their report regarding these topics. For more information, With the state legislature in full swing, our lobbyist Neena Laxalt, is working hard to please visit www.sagebrusheco.nv.gov . For more information each month, check out the column in the NCA newsletter Sage Signals, The Power of Conservation and Ranching on: SAGE HEN, SAGEBRUSH AND STEWARDSHIP. As we approach the deadline of 2015 for USFWS’ decision to list or not to list greater sage grouse, we hope to keep members well informed. Each decade brings on Farm ■ Ranch ■ Agribusiness different issues for public lands ranchers, and this decade seems to be the possible listing of greater sage grouse. There is an abundance of information available about sage grouse; we have decided it is best to educate our members about the facts. What is going on with sage grouse in the State and across the west? What opportunities are available to ranchers to encourage stewardship of the range and sage grouse habitat? This column will serve as an area to keep you informed on the progress of the Nevada Sagebrush Ecosystem Council, 301 Silver Street el k o , N e v a d a 8 9 8 0 1 provide you with information to support a sustainable ranch operation while conserving sage grouse habitat, and anything else you may have questions on. A large discussion at NCA is the possibility of changing the office headquarters. At our For a complete review of your insurance needs and details on coverage February Board of Directors meeting last month, the Board voted to explore other options and credits available, contact our Farm and Ranch specialist: for office management for approval during the summer Board meeting. The NCA Officers currently met and made the executive decision to postpone the move until after the 2013 Convention in November to allow for membership awareness and input. Currently, our office is housed next to American Ag Credit and has served as a good location. However, when NCA originally moved into this location, NCA and Nevada Beef Council shared the space, and expenses. With the move of NBC in 2006 and increased operating costs, our current office space is out of our budget. The Office Management Committee, as appointed at Board Meeting, has put together a virtual office proposal. Virtual office is another term for working from home. The current proposal provides a stipend to the Executive Director and Executive Secretary in exchange for office space from their home and staff would be provided all necessary off-site communication needed (i.e. computer, printers, phone, fax). PLEASE NOTE, this is just one proposal. For the full proposal and discussion about the virtual office proposal, refer to the NCA Physical Office versus Implementing a Virtual Office Environment document in the NCA newsletter Sage Signals. Please let us know your thoughts and concerns with this proposal. If you are not currently a member of Nevada Cattlemen’s Association, we encourage Oregon Mutual Insurance Company you to join. Become part of an association that is working to protect the future of ranching in Nevada. To learn more about the Association or to become a member, please call the Protecting families and businesses in the West since 1894 office at 1-775-738-9214 or visit our webpage www.nevadacattlemen.org. We look forward to hearing from you! If you are currently a member, thank you for your continued support. Without your membership, the Association’s voice could not be as strong as it is today.

775-777-9771

HomeownSolutions_Qtr page ad_2.indd 1

4 April 2013

6/21/2010 9:15:38 AM

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive R ancher

WINNERS

newly earmarked angus calf, peeking out from tall grasses was chosen as the winning entry in the recently completed Progressive Rancher photo contest. This is a quintessential depiction of American agriculture: private property, grass, and livestock. The photo submitted by Cindy Sitz of the Sitz Ranch near Drewsey, Oregon, was selected from among sixty-seven submissions from Nevada, Idaho, Utah, and Oregon. Cindy received an iPod from The Progressive Rancher Magazine and her photo was featured on the cover of the March 2013 issue of the magazine. Other “honorable mention” photos are also featured on this page.

Nevada Ranchers Caretakers of our

Rangelands

Cowboys and sheepherders produce food and ﬁber for the nation. Growing food on Open range is a natural biological process.

Grazing actually beneﬁts the land with hoof action and natural fertilization. Plants are healthier and regenerate faster after the herds move to a new range.

Antelope and other game animals and birds take advantage of the improvements made by ranchers.

Here’s Looking at You! by Cindy Sitz

Honorable Mention

Grazing cattle and sheep coexist peacefully with native wildlife and, in fact, make a friendlier habitat for many species.

Heading Out to Gather by Alex Carone New Mexico

Sheep often graze on steep terrain and can control cheatgrass, a major fuel for wildﬁres. Honorable Mention The Hat by Cindy Sitz

Nevada Rangeland Resources Commission was created by the State of Nevada to promote responsible public land grazing. Representatives come from Nevada state grazing boards, Nevada Woolgrowers, Nevada Farm Bureau, and Nevada Cattlemen’s Association.

4780 East Idaho Steet, Elko, NV 89801 • 775-738-4082 WWW.NEVADARANGELANDS.ORG This ad is funded through the NRRC’s assessment of 10 cents an AUM paid by public land ranchers.

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 5

John Hays Agricultural Banking Specialist 775.525.6744

NEVADA AGRICULTURE IS MY BUSINESS. I’m committed to helping Nevada ranchers and farmers succeed. As an agricultural banking specialist, I’ll find the right financial products* for your unique needs. Operating lines. Equipment financing. Livestock purchases. Real estate transactions. I know Nevada agriculture, and I’m ready to roll up my sleeves and get to work for you. Bring your banking home.

53 years in Nevada Over 50 branches statewide nsbank.com | 1.866.451.5018

*Loans subject to credit approval, restrictions apply

6 April 2013

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

Cooperative Extension Announces Weed Management and Grazing Management Workshops University of Nevada Cooperative Extension, in cooperation with the Nevada Department of Agriculture and Northeastern Nevada Stewardship Group, announces two upcoming workshops in the Elko area. •

Weed Extravaganza, April 30 – May 2, California Trail Interpretive Center: This event includes the Elko Weed Summit (4/30), Pesticide Applicator Training and Weed Management & Identification (5/1), and Testing for Restricted Use Pesticide/Herbicide Certification (5/2). A total of 14 continuing education units (CEUs) are anticipated.

Strategic & Targeted Grazing Workshop, May 22 – 23, Great Basin College, Greeenhaw Technical Arts Building Room 130: This workshop focuses on the science and practical use of livestock as a tool for reduction of invasive weeds, wildlife habitat enhancement, and fuel load modification to reduce wildfire threat. Questions can be directed to Kent McAdoo (mcadook@unce.unr.edu; 775-738-1251).

Upcoming Sales Wednesday, April 10TH Holiday Inn, Visalia, CA

•

Thursday, May 2nd Cottonwood, CA

Scholarship Opportunity for Students Studying Natural Resources, Agriculture

The Nevada Association of Conservation Districts (NvACD) is offering a scholarship for students pursuing higher education in the field of renewable natural resources, agriculture, or a related field. Current high school seniors and students already attending a post-secondary program are encouraged to apply. The application form is available online at http://www.nv.nrcs.usda.gov/nvacd.html. Applications with all relevant letters of reference and attachments are due by April 30, 2013. Late and incomplete applications will not be accepted. For more information, contact: Nevada Association of Conservation Districts; Jake Tibbitts, President; PO Box 571; Eureka, NV 89316; (775) 237-6010.

Thursday, May 23rd Cottonwood, CA

WATCH & LISTEN TO THE SALE on the Web at:

IRISH BLACK CATTLE Registered Bulls & Females

Logan River Ranch,

Logan, Utah Lane Parker 435-757-4643 cel. www.Irishblackcattle.net

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 7

Duilio P. Bottari 1922 — 2013

ifetime Lamoille Rancher, Duilio P. Bottari, passed away on February 21st, 2013, after a long battle with Alzheimer’s, surrounded by his loving family. Duilio was born on October 7th, 1922 to Pete and Guiditta Bottari. He spent his entire life on the ranch in Lamoille. Duilio and his brother John would ride their horses to the Lamoille School where he attended school until the eighth grade. At that time Duilio had to quit school and work on the Bottari Ranch. On June 21st, 1950 Duilio married EllaMay Allan. Together they raised six hardworking children. Ranching required long hours, lots of hard work and Duilio rarely had time for anything else except family and friends. Duilio did make some time for hunting deer, elk, bighorn sheep and eventually a mountain goat. Duilio also loved going for a Sunday afternoon drive or for a picnic in his beloved Ruby Mountains. He was a man of few words, had an amazing handshake and a sparkle in his light blue eyes. We will miss him always. Duilio was preceded in death by his parents, Pete and Guiditta, brother John and sister-in-law Betty, daughter Peggy Bottari Roberts, and granddaughter Allison Bottari. Duilio is survived by his wife of 63 years, EllaMay, sons Pete (Karen), Paul (Lori), Perry (Lorri), Bart (Jen) and daughter Pam (Tom Johnson), grandchildren Amber(Dave), Josh(Tory), Jason(Stephanie), Sarah(Ryan), Brooke(Kevin), Brittany, Abby(Rob), Jacob, Megan(Marc), Makenna, Brenden, Gresyn, 7 great grandchildren, many nieces, nephews, honorary children and grandchildren. The Bottari Family would like to thank caregiver, Gail McDaniel, for taking such good care of our husband and dad. Your time and care over the last six years was invaluable.

8 April 2013

Photo by Leana Stitzel, 1993

A Rosary was held on Friday, March 1st at Burns Mortuary in Elko, Nevada. The family will host a celebration of his life in the spring when the grass is green and the cows are turned out. We will let you know the time and place so you can join us in the celebration. The family requests that instead of flowers, donations can be made to the Lamoille Rancher’s Center in c/o Nanette Peterson, 170 Rocking Chair Unit 6, Spring Creek, Nevada 89815.

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

OFFICE: 775-423-7760 JACK PAYNE

Cell: 775-217-9273 Alt: 775-225-8889

Email: nevadalm@yahoo.com

Full-Service Cattle Sales & Marketing serving the Fallon, Nevada and Outlying Areas. Sales Results from

Sales Results from

March 20 & 21, 2013 Regular Butcher Cow, Bull, Feeder, Bred Cow & Pair Sale Seller Truckee River Ranch Woodrow & Linda Cunrod

City

# Head

Desc.

Type

Fallon

4/4

BLK

Cow/Calf

Weight Price CWT 1495

$1,720/hd

REGULAR SALE Every Wednesday

March 20 & 21, 2013 Regular Butcher Cow, Bull, Feeder, Bred Cow & Pair Sale Seller John & Terry Cooper

City

# Head

Desc.

Type

Oakdale

BLK

STR

Reno

1/1

BLK

Cow/Calf

1460

$1,485/hd

Yerington

1/1

BLK

Cow/Calf

1440

$1,300/hd

Austin

3&4 yr Old BLK 7&8 mo Bred 1028

$1,270/hd

Truckee River Ranch

Fallon

BLK

Bred Cow

1441

$1,170/hd

Gardnerville

MIX

Lamar Roche

Parma

BLK

STR

325

$189.00

Brinkerhoff Ranch

Lovelock

BLK

Lamar Roche

Parma

BLK

STR

415

$169.00

Daniel McDougall

Fallon

MIX

Charles & Monte Wadsworth

Hiko

BLK

STR

373

$173.00

Charles & Monte Wadsworth

Hiko

BBF

STR

444

$164.50

Gandolfo Ranches

Austin

BLK

STR

347

$171.00

Gandolfo Ranches

Austin

MIX

STR

411

$170.00

Silver Creek Ranch Inc

Austin

MIX

B/C

360

$171.00

Silver Creek Ranch Inc

Austin

MIX

B/C

360

$171.00

Corkill Bros Inc

Fallon

MIX

STR

434

$164.00

Kevin Cole Rocky Hatch

Star Bar Cattle Jim Cantrelle

Corkill Bros Inc Bill Licklers Windy R Ranch Stone Cabin Ranch LLC

Fallon

MIX

STR

516

$140.25

Jerome

BLK

STR

295

$161.00

Washoe Valley

BLK

STR

327

$160.00

Small Barn at 10:30 AM Cows at 11:30 AM Feeder Cattle at 1:00 PM

CafĂŠ

Open on Sale Days Stop by and have a Homestyle Burger

SALES

Carlin

BLK

STR

509

$139.00

Fallon

MIX

STR

640

$138.50

Guy Fowler

Fallon

BLK

STR

679

$128.50

STR

618

$138.00

STR

573

$136.00

STR

569

$131.00

Simon Fisher

Eve & Benz Tschannen

Fallon

BLK

STR

502

$129.00

Fidel Carricaburu

Battle Mountain

BLK

STR

703

$126.00

Fidel Carricaburu

Battle Mountain

BLK

STR

820

$120.50

Fernley

BBF

STR

770

$124.50

Kevin Jenkins Jessica Brown

Carson City

STR

768

$123.00

Badger Ranch

Battle Mountain

BLK

STR

812

$121.25

Fallon

MIX

STR

807

$120.50

Hiko

MIX

STR

735

$120.00

Stage Stop Ranch

Austin

BLK

HFR

349

$155.00

Silver Creek Ranch Inc

Austin

BLK

HFR

410

$141.50

CHAR

STR

389

$159.50

Brinkerhoff Ranch

Austin

MIX

STR

415

$158.00

Tory Pomi

Donald & Kenneth Harmon

Fallon

BLK

STR

462

$155.00

Fallon

BLK

STR

615

$138.50

C-Ranches Inc

Beowawe

BLK

STR

567

$150.75

C-Ranches Inc

Beowawe

STR

580

$150.25

Anita Fillmore

Fallon

BBF

B/C

433

$150.00

Jim & Maureen Assuras

McGill

BLK

STR

538

$147.00

Trevor & Jake Wade

Alamo

MIX

STR

465

$147.00

Joe Tibbals

Yerington

BLK

STR

611

$146.00

in conjunction with our Regular Wednesday sale

April 17th & 18th

$114.25

Craig & Margie Burbank

Tonopah

Donald & Kenneth Harmon

814

Guy Fowler

Stage Stop Ranch

Feeder Sale

Weight Price CWT

Lovelock

BLK

HFR

413

$140.50

Fallon

BLK

HFR

490

$132.50

Nevada First Land & Cattle Winnemucca

BLK

HFR

609

$131.50

Nevada First Land & Cattle Winnemucca

BLK

HFR

680

$124.00

Manuel Jimenez

Paradise Valley

BLK

HFR

515

$124.50

Gene Heckman

Winnemucca

MIX

HFR

613

$122.75

Fallon

BLK

HFR

765

$116.50

Boomer Ranches

Carson City

MIX

HFR

728

$116.00

Richard & Teresa Braun Winnemucca

Jessica Brown

BLK

HFR

654

$115.00

31 Ranch

Fallon

BLK

HFRTT

1045

$95.00

Joe Tibbals

Yerington

BLK

STR

594

$144.00

Naggin' Woman Ranch

Winnemucca

BLK

HFRTT

1150

$87.50

Robb Goings

Fallon

BBF

STR

438

$143.00

Michael & Marian Gottschalk

Lovelock

COW

1180

$76.00

Truckee River Ranch

Fallon

BLK

B/C

574

$142.00

Sam Lompa

Carson City

BLRN

COW

1445

$73.25

Michael & Claudia Casey

Fallon

MIX

STR

481

$140.50

Butcher cows on Wednesday

Sam Lompa

Carson City

BCHX

COW

1645

$72.00

Michael & Claudia Casey

Fallon

MIX

STR

340

$140.00

Feeder cattle on Thursday

Jeff Whitaker

Fallon

HOLSTEIN

HFRTT

1385

$80.50

John & Terry Cooper

Oakdale

BLK

STR

588

$140.00

Oasis Dairy LLC

Fallon

HOLSTEIN

COW

2020

$68.50

John & Terry Cooper

Oakdale

BLK

STR

677

$127.00

starting at 11 AM

Oasis Dairy LLC

Fallon

HOLSTEIN

COW

1830

$68.00

Look for Weekly Market Reports at www.nevadalivestock.us We have 4 cattle trains available for your cattle hauling needs. We can haul approx. 80,000# of cattle per load either to our sale or in the country. Give us a call for pricing.

TO ALL OF OUR CONSIGNORS & BUYERS www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 9

By Joe Guild

ou have all heard the phrase “she must be living in a were eventually made wilderness by the Lincoln County Lands Act. By the time they had parallel universe”. To me, this means while I and the driven about an hour north out of Las Vegas they were overwhelmed by the open space, other person may be moving or thinking, we are not doing so in a way in which our lack of development and utter silence of the landscape around them. They stopped at the thoughts or bodies will ever converge so we will arrive at the same place. In one re- Pahranagat National Wildlife refuge near Alamo and could not believe how alone they felt spect, no two minds will ever have the exact same thought or conclude exactly the same less than one mile from the US Highway. way on a given subject. Therefore, we are doomed to live in parallel universes. The They stated 99 out of 100 people in the east have no idea about the absence or minimal best we can hope for is to come to similar conclusions or travel similar paths through impact of the hand of man in much of the west. Most of these people if you placed them on life so we have some measure of a mutual understanding. One of the road blocks to the shore of this wildlife refuge would declare unequivocally they were in a wilderness. such a meeting of the minds is the places from which we start may be so distinct from This is an example of the parallel universes occupied by most of the people in this one another we may never come to a productive consensus. This is one of the problems country and the comparative few who live in the vast outback of the American west. people in agriculture, in general and federal land ranchers specifically face all the The protectionists want to lock everything up from commercial use of any kind whethtime. This is because there are so few of us occupying our universe and so many others er it is livestock grazing, timber harvest or wind farm development to aid in our country occupying the other universe. becoming energy independent. However, they have, for the most part, very little personal In recent weeks two small pieces from the New York Times editorial page caused me frame of reference to take such a position. They do not understand the great distances or to ponder and conclude what I have written above. Both pieces had large acreages in question where such commercial activity can relevance to the use of federal lands for livestock grazing. occur at the same time they are using the same lands for their Often when I haven’t had an original thought for a while I personal recreation. They have no concept of what 100,000 acres By the time they had driven turn to the New York Times and my blood boils sufficiently that might look like. A rancher might have a permit to graze 400 cows about an hour north out of Las my brain is recharged and I can’t stop thinking. on an allotment this size. A tourist from St. Louis could pull off The first editorial was entitled “The Gradual Selling of the road, have a picnic with family or friends and none of them Vegas they were overwhelmed America the Beautiful”. There were two messages in this editorial; would know they are sharing this space with a $400,000 commerby the open space, lack of one lamenting the President hasn’t done enough for “conservation cial investment; an investment not disturbing their picnic or their and protection” in the public lands in the west and second, a call aesthetic experience in looking at the 11,000 foot mountain peaks development and utter silence for outright protection from commercial development of the two in the range across the valley. Thus we have parallel universes not thirds of the 640 million acres of public land which is not currently leading to a shared consensus, but a complete misunderstanding. of the landscape around them. enjoying “ complete or high levels of commercial development” By the way I do not mean a misunderstanding by the rancher. He such as that which is attached to National Parks, wilderness, wildhas been to a picnic before. I mean a misunderstanding by the life refuges or National Monuments and National Recreation Areas. well-meaning man from St. Louis. Let’s think about that statement for a moment. About 212 million acres of public land A week after the first editorial appeared there was a second in the New York Times. It is protected forever from commercial development. This includes, of course, national was entitled “The Daunting Politics Facing Sally Jewell”. Most readers know by now Ms. treasures such as Yellowstone, Yosemite, The Grand Canyon, Great Basin National Park, Jewell is President Obama’s choice to be Secretary of the Interior and by the time you read Rocky Mountain National Park and others like Hells Canyon National Recreation Area this, she probably will have been confirmed by the US Senate. on the Snake River between Idaho and Oregon, and Devil’s Tower National Monument The gist of the editorial was a criticism of the Obama Administration’s apparent push in Wyoming. Added to this list of obvious protectable scenic wonders, are hundreds of to use the public lands as the key to our energy independent future by drilling for oil and gas wilderness areas and hundreds of thousands of acres of wilderness study areas which are and creating vast wind and solar farms. The writer of the editorial believes the true value of managed as wilderness. these lands is for national parks, wildlife refuges and sources for clean water. This leaves about 430 million acres of public land which is managed for multiple use. Of course, no mention was made of the potential of these lands for all of these uses In other words, in addition to potential or current commercial use, recreation is a big com- plus supplying our nation with forest products and food and fiber. The reason, I believe, ponent of the use of this land. can only be one of two things. Either the author is ignorant of the potential for the public Last time I checked, no one had discovered a lost or hidden Mount Rainier that needed lands to be commercially developed, where possible, not sacrificing the great places that to be added to our National Treasure list. We have done a pretty good job in finding and deserve our protection because the author is in a parallel universe of misunderstanding; or, protecting these special places. And, lest you get the idea I am a cynical so and so, I sup- the author knows what we know; that development and protection can co-exist, but there is port most of the decisions we have made as a people to protect and minimize commercial a larger protectionist agenda here to shut down all commercial activity on the public lands. development at these places so future generations can be as awed as I have been in seeing In any case, the editorial was an example of the existence of parallel universes regarding them during my life. the use of our public lands. But let’s put 430 million acres into context for this discussion about parallel universes. We in the west know best how to deal responsibly with all of the issues facing all of Nevada is the state with the largest segment of public land in the lower 48 states. There the uses of the public domain. Those in the east especially, but really in every urban area are 110,000 square miles in Nevada. That equates to about 70.5 million acres. Roughly 62 think they should dictate the way in which these uses should occur and how much we should milllion acres is public land. This leaves about 10 million acres of land in private hands. use our public lands and for which purposes. Most have never seen a grazing cow, a timber This amount of land in private property in Nevada is about the size of the entire state of harvest or an oil well but they know best how to do these things in their parallel universe. Connecticut. I only hope Sally Jewell can find a way to build a bridge she can use to walk between I once talked with two Congressional staff members who drove from Las Vegas to Ely, the two universes. Nevada on US Highway 93. They were on a tour to personally view some of the areas which I’ll see you soon.

10 April 2013

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

Flying In the Face of Common Sense I

by Linda Drown Bunch

f one were to ask almost any rancher in the inland west to name the three most press- flies in the face of common sense! ing and or threatening issues to their livelihood in the spring of 2013, their responses The Sage Grouse Conservation Plan adopted in September 2012 by the Elko County would undoubtedly include sage grouse, drought and the federal regulations which spawn Commissioners includes the following provision: therefrom, wildfire, and intrusion from the federal and state agencies into their ability to Develop a Pilot Project to monitor the effects of historical grazing, predator control make a living. Because the 2015 target date for a decision as to whether or not the sage and range management methods and their impacts on the Sage Grouse Populations and grouse will be placed on the threatened or endangered species list is rapidly approaching, Habitat. this issue commands primary concern. One has only to look to western Owyhee County in Issue: Idaho where several ranchers are facing massive cuts of their grazing permits due to sage Lack of current specific data concerning the effects on Sage Grouse Populations and grouse to realize that the threat is real and imminent. Habitat when utilizing historical Livestock Grazing, Predator Control and Range ManageArmed with “shaky” science and revisionist history, the anti-domestic livestock graz- ment policies and measures. ing forces have appropriated the sage grouse as their primary weapon much as similar Actions: forces exploited the spotted owl to cripple the timber industry in the Pacific Northwest 1) Propose the identification of a specific Pilot Project area of approximately 72 square several decades previous. miles to 216 square miles in size to implement historical livestock grazing, predator control There have been literally hundreds of studies and comment documents prepared by in- and range management polices to develop scientific data related to the Sage Grouse populadividuals, sportsman’s groups, livestock and farming associations, as well as local and state tions and habitat. governments to mitigate the negative effects of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service 2) Implement and develop the Pilot Project using historical livestock grazing, predator (USFWS) Status Review and Petition to List the Greater Sage Grouse as an endangered control and range management polices to develop scientific data related to the Sage Grouse species. Central to all considerations for a listing decision are total population and trend populations and habitat. information of a targeted species relative to potential threats. The Owyhee Cattlemen’s 3) Funding through the State of Nevada Department of Wildlife & BLM from Ruby Association/Idaho Cattle Association document using the data of noted researcher W. F. Pipeline Sage Grouse Conservation funds. Price who has relied extensively on diaries and journals of early explorers most notably In March 2013 the Elko County Commission instituted the first known Pilot Project. Meriwether Lewis in 1805, Peter Skene Ogden in 1824-29, John Work – 1830-31, concluded The ranch chosen is the 15,000 deeded acre Devil’s Gate Ranch, owned by the Ken Bowler that the factual historic record clearly shows that the birds were relatively scarce or absent family, located about six miles north of the Elburz Exit on I80 as the crow, or should we over much of the range they occupy today, and that current populations and occupied say raven, flies. Central to the project are sensible livestock grazing which will manage the habitat is significantly greater than during pre-settlement times, indicating a net positive fuel load and reduce the risk of massive wildfire and predator control. The primary target outcome, which is diametrically opposed to the position taken by the USFWS in their list- will be the large resident raven population and the goal is to obtain permitted poison-laced ing petition. According to Price, the pre-settlement claims are “at best a misstatement of eggs which are very effective in destroying the target species – ravens. Also hunting and fact and at worst a deliberate misrepresentation of the historic record…the fabrication of a trapping of coyotes and other predators will be encouraged. pre-settlement history, which did not exist, must cast doubt as to whether any of the purIn the forty year history of the Endangered Species Act, this is the first known privateported documentation of information in the petition is accurate, legitimate, and presented local government agreement with action on the ground to stave off a federal listing, comwithout deception or bias.” missioners said. It is a long-term project, and even if the sage grouse is listed, the project The “Status Review and Petition” claims an adverse relationship between livestock will continue to demonstrate that the bird numbers will improve if the federal government grazing and sage grouse populations. This is of course the position of several environmen- will increase, rather than decrease, grazing to prevent massive fires, and engages in reasontal groups whose mission is to eliminate livestock grazing entirely on federal lands. This able predator control. The aim of the project is not to convince the USFWS, but to show assertion is completely at odds with the historic data. Livestock grazing on the public do- the public and Congress that there is a direct correlation between federal land management main generally began in the 1860’s and reached its peak in the early decades of the 1900’s. policies since the 1950’s and the decline in sage grouse numbers. Perhaps not coincidentally, those figures parallel the sage grouse populations of the same It is encouraging to see local entities and individual stakeholders taking matters into period. Historic journals indicate relative scarcity of sage grouse in the Intermountain West their own hands to come up with creative common-sense solutions to a major problem during the period from 1820-1850 and vast flocks of sage grouse from the 1870’s to the rather than relying on the agencies and their “scientific” studies. The USFWS and some 1950’s. There has been a major decline in numbers of livestock and in sage grouse popula- environmental groups who will automatically close their eyes and plug their ears when tions from the 1950’s to the present. This data does not support the theory that there is an confronted with any information that runs contrary to their stated agendas, are already adverse relationship between livestock grazing and sage grouse. To the contrary, it actually criticizing the pilot project. Since they are not the target audience, the Elko County Comsuggests a positive relationship. mission, and hopefully the people and Congress, will not be deterred by this criticism. The Most studies agree that there are several contributing factors to the decline in sage goal of the originators of the Elko County Pilot Project is for this pilot project concept to grouse numbers. Near the top of the list are wildfires, disease (West Nile Virus), and preda- increase sage grouse to spread to not only other counties in Nevada but to other states as tion – raiding of nests and killing of chicks in the spring, and killing of adults mainly by well. A county in Utah is already considering its own pilot project. It is also hoped that raptors and coyotes during the winter. A series of late, cold wet springs can also have other ranchers will start looking at their operations to see if the Devil’s Gate Model a significant detrimental effect on chick hatch and subsequent survival. At the top could be adapted to them. Anyone interested in developing a pilot project should of the predator list is the raven-which just contact Randy Brown, Assistant Elko happens to be a protected species – folCounty Manager, at 775-738-6816, former lowed at some distance by the coyote. Nevada Assemblyman John Carpenter at Many experts also point to habitat 775-738-9861, or Elko County CommisMany people confuse crows with ravens. Crows are smaller, have squared-off destruction as a primary threat to sage sioner Grant Gerber at 775-738-9258. or fan-shaped tails, and more slender bills. Ravens often soar; crows never do. grouse populations. I am sure that all agree (Linda Drown Bunch, a fourth generation If the bird does a barrel roll, it’s a raven. Crows caw; ravens croak and mutter. that the massive wildfires which have Elko county native, was raised on the famRaven voices are more varied and much deeper and throatier than the crow’s destroyed hundreds of thousands of acres ily ranch on the South Fork of the Humboldt monotonous nasal call. River near Lee, Nevada, at the foot of the Ruby of sage grouse habitat in Owyhee County, Common ravens grow to about 25 inches in length and weigh more than 2 Mountains. Her parents later ranched in the Idaho, and throughout northern Nevada pounds. They can live for more than 20 years and survive almost anywhere. Three Creek area of Owyhee County, Idaho. since 1999 could not have helped but have Linda began her teaching career at the Three By some estimates, raven populations nationwide have grown by 300 perhad a negative impact on sage grouse numCreek School where she taught for six years. cent in the past 40 years. In Nevada, the increase is thought to be more like 600 bers. So what is the answer? Yes, of course She and her husband Randy then settled in percent. remove the cattle and sheep! I am sorry, Independence Valley where she taught at the Ravens are protected by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service under but not only does this approach violate all Independence Valley School before retiring to the “Migratory Bird Treaty Act” historical evidence and research, it just

For What It ’s Worth

raise horses and buck bulls.)

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 11

Ship ’Em To

LLON A F

MARKET REPORT March 19, 2013

TOP OFFERINGS Steer

Weight

300-400 191.00-215.00 400-500 187.00-200.00 500-600 163.00-178.00 600-700 140.00-150.00 700-800 128.00-137.50 800-900 116.00-126.00 Lite Holstein (under 600#) Heavy Holstein (over 600#)

Heifer

187.00-204.00 160.00-171.00 138.00-155.50 121.00-131.50 116.60-123.50

70.00-83.00 65.00-83.00

*Single, Small Framed or Plainer Cattle 15.00 to 20.00 less than top offerings

BUTCHER COWS & BULLS

Livestock Exchange, Inc. Sale Every Tuesday at 11:00 AM Selling All Classes of Livestock: • Cattle • Horses • Sheep • Goats • Pigs

ANNOUNCES

The 9TH Annual

Back to Grass Special Calf and Yearling Sale Tuesday, May 7, 2013 at 1:00 p.m. along with our regular sale You can bring in your cattle early on Sunday or Monday at no extra charge (only feed) and we feed good quality alfalfa hay and have deep fresh well water in our pens. Remember to call us early with your consignments. It pays, so we can notify buyers. It means more buyers on sale days in the seats. The entire crew at Fallon Livestock Exchange would like to thank all the consignors and buyers alike for your business.

Fallon Livestock Exchange, Inc.

2055 Trento Lane • Fallon, Nevada 89406 • 775-867-2020

12 April 2013

The Progressive Rancher

Breakers (Fat Cows) 70.00-75.00 Boners (Med Flesh) 75.00-80.00 Cutters (Lean) 58.00-66.50 Holstein Cows 35.00-69.00 Butcher Bulls 78.00-90.00 Shelly (Thin) Bulls 40.00-60.00 Shelly Cutters (Thin) 20.00-40.00 Young Feeder Cows 60.00-68.00 Heiferettes 83.00-102.00 Holstein Heiferettes 80.00-89.00 Holstein Bulls 81.00-85.00 Feeder Bulls 65.00-75.00 Cutting Bulls 80.00-95.00 Used Roping Steers 72.00-85.00 Preg Tested Cows (3, 4, 5 yr. old solid mouth) NT Pairs (solid mouth) 3-6 yrs NT Pairs (broken mouth) NT

TODAY’S COWS Top Cow Top 10 Cows Top 50 Cows Top 100 Cows Top Butcher Bull

Avg. Wt 1350 1278 1208 1070 1880

Avg. Cost 86.00 75.69 70.82 62.22 90.00

CALVES-SHEEP-GOATS-PIGS-HORSES

Beef Calves (HD) Dairy Calves Feeder Lambs Fat Lambs Ewes (CWT) Bucks (CWT) Small Goats (under 65 lbs.) (HD) Large Goats (over 70 lbs.) (HD) Weaner Pigs Feeder Pigs Top Hogs Butcher Sows Horses (under 1100 lbs.) Horses (over 1100 lbs.)

60.00-500.00 2.00-35.00 105.00-140.00 100.00-110.00 25.00-60.00 35.00-48.00 20.00-90.00 95.00-160.00 45.00-95.00 60.00-130.00 60.00-75.00 15.00-20.00 8.00-15.00 16.00-20.00

MARKET TREND: Feeder cattle sold steady with very strong buyer demand on same kind and quality depending on ﬁll with good butcher cows steady. Fallon Livestock is a key market for the livestock industry, where buyers and sellers meet each week with a professional staff with over 50 years of experience in marketing livestock. PLEASE call us ahead with your consignments. It helps us market your cattle. We talk to buyers all the time–they want you to know what’s coming in. We have trucks available for your hauling needs, pasture to pasture or from your Ranch to the sale yard.

For more marketing information, or to arrange trucking needs: Call Monte Bruck, Manager at

775-426-8279

www.progressiverancher.com

Fumes From The Farm by Hank Vogler

ou can’t make this stuff up!!!!! I have been listening and reading the comments on the sage grouse impending doom for Nevada. The doomsayers have more to gain by the conflict than a solution. The ranchers, miners, hunters and the people are going to be the losers. The fern fairies convinced the Pacific Northwest that tourism would replace logging and lumber mills. The spotted owl was the tool. The result that no one wishes to speak of is the dead and dying forests. Diseases, weeds and decadent brush are replacing multiple use and renewable natural resource concepts. The only tourists are fire fighters to watch the huge destruction of water sheds and wildlife. Back here in Nevada the so called experts or more affectionately referred to as the “fact less” scientists are decrying huge burns on sage brush eco-systems. After further examination, these same experts said we must remove livestock to protect the same ecosystem. The cattle and sheep were removed and the sage burnt up. For job security the same folks don’t seem to remember they caused the problem in the first place with “fact less” science to remove the livestock. Sagebrush is less palatable than grasses and other Forbes. Sagebrush is like the rutabaga of most animals’ diets. They will eat it, but not as a first choice. Also cheat grass is a non-native species so we must hate it rather than find a use or a solution. No biologist has ever gotten tenure by solving a problem or admitting that their idea is culpable in the problem. Being wrong is never discussed because all the little fuzzy critters need their help. Help that is, unless they are non-native, then they are a reminder of the evil human that may have on purpose or by accident introduced them. We have studied the sage grouse for at least the last twelve years. We have meetings and seminars to display the information collected. We have played what if and spoke endlessly on what will happen if the little darling edible morsel is put on the dreaded endangered list, yet no one wants to step up and cure the problem. We know that the number one problem is that the raven eats the eggs of the sage grouse, and I have personally observed a raven killing the chicks. Badgers, coyotes, and raptors all contribute to the demise of the grouse. And the correct answer to the demise of the sage grouse is to stop livestock grazing and mining? Also we must study the problem more, hire more biologists and have more public forums to report on more studies. For the last one hundred fifty years sage hens and livestock have lived side by side, and as livestock numbers have been removed, the number of grouse has declined in tandem. If blaming domestic livestock for the decline of sage hens and removing livestock is the cure for the problem and if this cure makes sense to you, please get some professional help. The real cure to the problem is to limit the number of animals that prey upon the birds and the number of biologists that refuse to solve the problem.

Public Lands Council Unveils Sage Grouse Data Base

The Sage Grouse database is a library containing documents that support the continued presence of public lands ranching on the range as Sage Grouse conservation planning efforts unfold. Grazing is compatible with and beneficial to Sage Grouse habitat conservation, and this library is intended provide members of the public lands grazing community with the scientific, legal, and policy resources to support that fact as plans develop west-wide. The documents provide a balanced perspective and sound scientific information that should shape the policy decisions and legal proceedings that are rapidly developing. The library was funded by PLC and the Public Lands Endowment Trust and developed under contract by Resource Concepts, Inc., a public lands consulting group based in Carson City, Nevada. Find the database at www.GrazingForGrouse. com or at www.PublicLandsCouncil.org. Please feel free to use and share this information widely, and to send us feedback using this link: http://grazingforgrouse. com/feedback.

www.progressiverancher.com

The big meeting in Elko was the bizarre twilight zone for me. People with college educations in fuzzy critters, but zero math skills, had the nerve to stand before the world and declare if you try to cure the problem by killing predators, “ravens” without the knowledge of the area will move in and splinter the territory of the old regular established predator “ravens” that know where all the nests are and splinter the area and make for more predators in the area???????????????? HUH!!!!!!!! Ok boys and girls, pull your shoes off, get you abacus out, fire up your confuser, grab you calculator and we will begin. Agriculture contributes around four BILLION dollars to the state of Nevada. Mining contributes BOZILLONS of dollars to the state of Nevada’s economy and hunting as well adds a few million. The bird will curtail or eliminate these activities if the “fact less” scientists prevail. So why not buy some insurance. Let’s poison some ravens. Why is that so hard? Raven population is up six hundred percent. One suggestion was to pick up road kill. Why not eliminate roads? Then you get two birds with one stone. OR just maybe drive along the roads every morning and as the ravens congregate at the road kill, throw out some poison eggs. The eggs are very specific. They are far more lethal to ravens than other birds. When the ravens migrate around and concentrate in the winter, put out some more eggs. You can get all the eggs you want for municipal dumps now it is just the ravens out on the high wide and lonesome that are left to around three thousand poison eggs state wide. This is not a solution. It is the equivalent of dipping five gallons of water from the ocean and expecting the water level to drop. It is to perpetuate the argument to remove mining and ranching and hunting. The excuse that you can’t kill enough ravens is simply bs. You cannot kill three thousand and do any good, that is for sure. Let’s look at this with common sense. A chicken egg at the store here in Hooterville is around thirteen cents per egg. If you boil them, inject them with the poison and distribute them, and for arguments sake, say the cost is fifty cents per egg, for what the federal biologists will destroy it is well worth it. I say we start by spending a million dollars in poison eggs. A million dollars won’t buy what it used to but if you could deliver without cost-over-runs by the administrators, you could put out two million eggs at fifty cents an egg. If your kill ratio was four eggs to the raven, I believe that would kill five hundred thousand ravens. Anyone in this state that will not eliminate enough ravens to save most of the economies of Northern Nevada should not be allowed around sharp objects or operate heavy equipment. We spend millions on a lot less worthy causes. So unless your agenda is to hire ten more biologists at one hundred thousand per copy to tell the world that things are a changing and to protect my job no solution will be found, or make a bunch of ravens take a dirt nap here is a quarter, call someone who has a strait jacket in your size. Hang and rattle Hank

PINENUT

LIVESTOCK SUPPLY INC. 263 Dorral Way Fallon, Nevada

Reno Highway across from A&K Earth Movers

Call or Stop By!

GOOD LUCK at the NV State 4-H

Livestock/Horse Judging/Skillathon

Contests Sonny Davidson Jason B. Land

2213 N. 5th St. , Elko, NV 89801 775-738-8811, 800-343-0077 www.edwardjones.com

The Progressive Rancher

Stop by and see us, we look forward to seeing you!

PHONE: 775-423-5338 john@pinenutlivestocksupply.com

April 2013 13

of a Ranch Wife Spring Cove Ranch & JBB AL HerefordCattleman’s Connection Sale report Spring Cove Ranch, Bliss, Idaho March 11, 2013 Art and Stacy Butler of Spring Cove Ranch and John and Bev Bryan and James & Dawn Anderson of JBB/AL Herefords 141 Yearling & Fall Yearling Angus bulls averaged $4782. 19 Reg. Angus yearling heifers averaged $1747. 40- 2, fall and yearling Hereford bulls averaged $2729 14 Yearling Hereford Heifers Averaged $1707 10 Commercial Angus yearling heifers averaged $1214

High selling Angus bulls: Lot 9 Spring Cove Emblazon 2003 , $11,750, selling to Rabbit Creek Ranch, Jon & Sue Key, Elko, Nevada. Lot 12 Spring Cove Emblazon 2034, $11,250 selling to Morgan Ranches, David and Ann Rutan, Jordan Valley, Oregon Lot 15 Spring Cove Emblazon 2033, $11,000 selling to Rabbit Creek Ranch, Jon & Sue Key, Elko, Nevada. Lot 8 Spring Cove Emblazon 2025, $10,500 selling to Morgan Ranches, David and Ann Rutan, Jordan Valley, Oregon Lot 20 Spring Cove TL Emblazon 2019, $10,000 selling to Rabbit Creek Ranches, Jon and Sue Key , Elko, Nevada High selling Angus heifer was Lot 158, Spring Cove Blossom 231, sired by SLL Overload T18, selling at $2400 to Robert Allison /AC Ranch, Kuna, Idaho.

High Selling Hereford bulls: Lot 232, AL Advisor 233, $5250, selling to Sherbine Ranches, Bellevue, Idaho Lot 209, JBB/AL 3027 Domino 187, $4400 selling to Williams Farms, Mike Williams, Baker City, Ore. Lot 216, JBB Progressive Prince F101, $4100, selling to Tuccorri Ranch, Gooding, Idaho Lot 247, JBB Prince 267, $4000, selling to Mink Land & Livestock, Cambridge, Idaho Lot 211, JBB/AL 153T Prince 189 selling to Alan Oppio, Gooding, Idaho High selling Hereford heifer sold at $2300, to High Desert Cattle Co., Mt and Cori Anderson, Canyon City, Oregon Volume buyer was Maxine and Dean Haumont, Buhl, Idaho

14 April 2013

ello my name is Jennifer, and it has been said that “Behind every successful cowboy is a wife with a good job in town!” My husband whom I affectionately refer to as the Cow Boss, and I are no exception. Like many ranch wives, I have a job in town. I tried teaching High School Agriculture but quickly learned that I was better suited to older students and now teach Animal Science at Great Basin College in Elko, Nevada. I also hand tie mohair cinches when I can find the time. The Cow Boss grew up in southern Idaho. He cowboyed over quite a bit of southern Idaho and northern Nevada. He met me in 2004. I promptly quit my teaching job, married him and moved to a remote cow camp. He is handy with a horse, braids beautiful rawhide, and likes to rope. We make a pretty good team. I work alongside the Cow Boss on the ranch. We take care of beef pairs but also run yearlings from May to October. You have to be pretty versatile to be a ranch wife. My job description includes helping ride, doctor, branding and moving cows, as well as spraying weeds, brushing meadows, feeding cows, cooking for a crew, and office manager/secretary, besides being a mom and a wife. Lamoille is arguably one of the prettiest places in Nevada and we are so blessed to live where we do. We have an apple orchard in our back yard and the gorgeous Ruby Mountains in our front yard. There is plenty of room for our boys to run and grow. TR will be 6 in June. I still can’t believe how time flies, he was just 3 months old when we moved here. He wants to be a Marine when he grows up, but has finally conceded he will be a cowboy on his days off and help us take care of the cows then. We did home school this year, but are both looking forward to first grade in public school. QT will be 4 in June. He is our little free spirit and is pretty content to just be. Today he says he is going to be a knight when he grows up, so he can protect princesses. They try our patience from time to time, love us despite our short comings and make every day an adventure. One of the best things about our job here is that we work for a family ranch and we get to take our boys to work with us whenever we want to. This is very important to my husband and me. We both grew up on ranches working with our families. It is not uncommon to drive past one of our fields and see me riding a horse with QT in front of me and TR trotting along behind, see my boys helping us rebuild fence, or playing in a supplement trough while the The Progressive Rancher

J. B. Wh i te l e y Cow Boss and I rope and doctor a yearling nearby. Most parents buy expensive playground equipment for their kids. We have trees to climb, antique farm equipment and miles of pasture for ours to play. I grew up on a ranch in northeastern Nevada. My great grandparents originally purchased the ranch in the 1930’s, and our family has lived on this ranch ever since. My great granddad brought the first Black Angus cows to Northeastern Nevada. They have run strictly Black Angus since then; my dad has worked really hard to make it one of the best herds in the state. I hope to one day go home to the ranch, making my boys 5th generation ranchers in the area. The Cow Boss and I come by ranching very naturally as you can tell. We have started our own herd of black cows and look forward to teaching our boys where their food comes from and the same lessons of hard work, determination, and perseverance our parents have taught us. I love all aspects of raising cattle. I remember being 4 years old and my mom gathering up my little sister and me in the middle of the night to help my dad pull our first calf out of a Registered Angus cow our parents bought for us from Thomas Angus, making calving and winter one of my favorite times of the year. There is nothing cuter to me than watching a baby calf switching its tail as it nurses. I also love spring and branding, all of the saddle time in the summer as we doctor yearlings and check on calves, and fall with the weather turning cooler comes shipping time – that bittersweet time of the year when we sell our calves and we can see what all our hard work was for. Every day is a new adventure for us. We do this because we love this way of life and the livestock. It gives us great satisfaction to know that maybe we made a difference somewhere. Maybe it was for the calf we saved from the creek, or the person who buys one of our steaks, but a difference none the less, and we enjoy our job! I always tell the Cow Boss a bad day cowboying beats a good day teaching!

www.progressiverancher.com

Invited Property Rights Editorial Note: The opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the author. The Progressive Rancher does not endorse submissions, but allows all to voice their views.

The Future of Nevada Ranching:

Do Rancher’s Property Rights Matter?

ver 20 years ago, thirty Clark County ranchers were driven out of business when the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) began using the terms and conditions of grazing permits to protect the desert tortoise instead of rancher’s who had preexisting rights to run livestock. While the tortoise was never actually listed as “endangered” under the Endangered Species Act, cows were deemed to be a threat because they might step on tortoise eggs. The fact that cows, sheep and tortoises had cohabitated for more than a century was ignored. Then in 1998, the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act was passed by Congress. The Act legalized public land sales in Clark County, lands which included some of those same rancher’s adjudicated grazing allotments. The Clark County ranchers were never compensated for their vested water rights, forage rights, range improvements, easements and rights of ways. They were simply eradicated by the heavy hand of BLM regulations. Lands that were formerly deemed to be tortoise habitat were sold to developers armed with excavators and paving equipment. Meanwhile, environmentalists and the BLM are mostly mute on the subject of the desert tortoise. So far 39,378 acres have been sold in Clark County for over $3 billion dollars for an average of $77,253 per acre. According to the BLM 2010 Report to Congress (http:// www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/nv/field_offices/ las_vegas_field_office/snplma/pdf/reports.Par.90311.File. dat/SNPLMA_FY2010_Annual_Report.pdf), ten percent of those moneys were funneled to the Southern Nevada Water Authority and five percent to education. The remaining funds went to the Department of Interior for land acquisition and conservation. To date, a total of 69,120 acres of mostly ranch lands have been acquired—in a state which is already 87 percent government controlled. The BLM and U.S. Forest Service pursued policies burdening grazing permits with so many conditions, they forced many ranchers to become “willing sellers” of their devalued ranches and prime targets for land acquisition. The sage grouse is the new desert tortoise or spotted owl to be deployed against the Nevada rancher, the mining industry, hunter and recreationalist. The objective is the same—force ranchers to walk away from their vested water rights, forage rights, range improvements and easements without compensation, or at the very least convert them into “willing sellers” at a discount. Since 1982 Nevada has lost over one-third of its cattle production, down from 700,000 to 450,000. Sheep production, which peaked at 3 million in the 1920’s, is now down to a mere 70,000. These losses are largely due to the cuts the BLM and USFS have imposed on ranchers through grazing permits. Computing both direct and indirect economic impacts, Nevada has lost well over one billion dollars in economic activity as a result.1 Rather than following the land management laws of 1

by: Ramona Hage Morrison Congress which specifically protect rancher’s preexisting property interests in vested water rights, forage rights, easements, rights of ways and range improvements, the agencies promote policies that eliminate livestock. By extension, their policies encourage massive rangeland fires and the infestation of weeds and cheat grass—something previously not witnessed in Nevada. The agencies assigned to protect and manage the western rangelands and forests instead have created what can only be described as an ecological disaster. Conversely, rangeland grazing by livestock has always corresponded to greater wildlife populations, better access to areas for recreation, and greater water yields from watersheds that supply irrigation and recharge aquifers. The question remains—what can individual ranchers do to protect their property rights from the sage grouse? The short answer is we need to force the federal land management agencies to follow their own laws. Additionally, we need to document preexisting rights and learn to defend those property rights. Finally, seek the protection of the courts, armed with an exhaustive chains of title, attorneys experienced in this area of law, and carefully framing the issues in a manner which recognizes preexisting rights. Every land law passed by Congress has provisions protecting preexisting rights. For example, Congress was very clear in the 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act when it stated: “Nothing in this Act, or in any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed as terminating any valid lease, permit, patent, right-of-way, or other land use right or authorization existing on the date of approval of this Act...” (43 U.S.C. 1701 notes). Nevada’s ranches were settled well before the creation of the Forest Reserves and the passage of the Taylor Grazing Act. Nevada’s prior appropriation water law is based upon recognition of preexisting beneficial use of water. Vested stock water rights and range (i.e. forage rights) were put to beneficial use well before the statutory water law in Nevada, and an equitable estate was created under the local laws, customs and court decisions of the time. Most of Nevada’s range and stock waters were bought, sold, or transferred by inheritance for 40 years before the creation of the Forest Service or BLM. Property taxes were assessed on the use of the range by taxing the livestock. Inheritance taxes were also assessed on the value of the range, and still are by the IRS. (See Griffith v. Godey, 113 U.S. 89 (1885)). These rights can and should be documented with an exhaustive chain of title. (See previous article in The Progressive Rancher, February 2013, page 7) The road ahead for the ranching industry is riddled with attacks on our property rights, and on our very liberty. The past is riddled with bad case law as it relates to the rangeland ranching industry. Many of the worst court decisions were cases where ranchers argued they had rights by virtue of a grazing permit, rather than that they owned preexisting property rights acquired by their predecessors un-

der the local laws, customs and court decisions of the time. We are a nation of laws, but to some extent our industry has been ineffective in forcing the federal agencies to follow their own laws. When it comes to the federal grazing programs, often government employees ignore those very laws in the enforcement of their own rules and regulations. When bureaucrats act outside their lawful delegated authority, they are no longer protected by immunity from personal liability afforded a government employee. In the 1991 Fifth Amendment takings case of Hage v. U.S. filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, and in U.S. v. Hage, the 2007 forage right case filed in Nevada Federal District Court, as well as the Southern Monitor Valley Water Adjudication, the primary evidence before the court was an exhaustive chain of title documenting the preexisting use of and rights to the range and vested waters. My family, thankfully, has prevailed in all of these cases against great odds and adversity. Even in the July 26, 2012 Federal Circuit Court of Appeals decision, which reversed, upheld and remanded narrow portions of Judge Loren Smith’s eight published rulings from the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, all of Judge Smith’s property findings were left intact by the court. The Federal Circuit also reversed its previous disastrous ruling from Colvin v. U.S., when it ruled in the Hage case that we did, in fact, have a right of access to our waters. (The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Hage v. U.S. is currently on appeal to the United States Supreme Court.) The future of the ranching industry will depend, in my opinion, in great part on how effective we are in protecting our property rights. We’ve come a long way. Prior to my father, Wayne Hage, writing “Storm Over Rangelands”, many ranchers had no idea they owned anything, including their water rights, on the public domain. Twenty year ago, most judges and lawyers would argue the same position. Today, however, copies of “Storm Over Rangelands” are housed in the U.S. Supreme Court law library as one of the few authorities on western federal land law not funded or published by a government entity. The numerous published decisions in the Hage cases have clarified the issue of whether or not ranchers own property interests in the nature of an equitable estate on lands managed by the BLM and Forest Service. And we have learned a little along the way about how to plead cases for the greatest chance of success in the court system. There have also been mistakes made from which we have learned as well. But either way, the objective was that we could blaze a trail for defending the western rancher’s property rights which others can follow. I am optimistic that is being accomplished. I am also optimistic that Nevada’s ranchers can defend their property rights against a plethora of environmental schemes, including the sage grouse. The rancher’s preexisting property rights are the only real line of defense to stop the continued abuse of powers.

The Economic Impact of Nevada Livestock Industry, Anthony L. Lesperance, Ph.D. (2002)

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 15

PLC and NCBA Ask Supreme Court to Settle Hage Case

Amicus Curiae

—Call for a Limit on the Federal Government’s Reach WASHINGTON (Feb. 26, 2013) —Public Lands Council (PLC) and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take up and settle a decades-long property rights case, Hage v. United States. The high court would determine whether the U.S. Forest Service violated the Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution when it interfered with Nevada ranchers Wayne and Jean Hage’s stock water rights. PLC and NCBA were joined by Nevada Cattlemen’s Association, Oregon Cattlemen’s Association and Washington Cattlemen’s Association in their brief of amicus curiae, filed by Western Resources Legal Center (WRLC). “We believe that the case’s precedent-setting nature and importance to livestock producers’ property rights merits the Supreme Court’s consideration,” said Brice Lee, Colorado rancher and PLC president. “They deserve compensation for what the Forest Service took from them. Ranchers cannot operate without access to the water that is legally theirs.” The U.S. Forest Service had denied the Hage family access to ditches supplying their stock and several meadows with water. The agency demanded that the family file for a permit in order to maintain and use the water. Although a federal claims court decided the Hages were owed compensation by the agency for the water taking, the Federal Circuit Court

of Appeals reversed this determination in part. “This case threatens the ability to carry out livestock activities both on and off federal land,” said WRLC Executive Director and representing Counsel Caroline Lobdell. “The federal agency, in effect, would be armed with the authority to unilaterally determine what constitutes reasonable or routine maintenance, and therefore empowered to subjugate vested 1866 Mining Act rights-of-way in favor of whatever policy rules the day.” According to NCBA President and Wyoming rancher, Scott George, if the agency is allowed to demand a permit for Hage’s ditch right-of-way, county road rights-of-way established under the Mining Act (known as “R.S. 2477 roads”) would also be in jeopardy. This would further threaten ranchers’ ability to stay in business, George said, since they often depend on those roads to access their grazing allotments. Lee summed up the case’s importance to livestock producers nation-wide. “The implications to livestock producers at-large are undeniable. This case, if not overturned, stands to remove the protective boundaries surrounding what constitutes a property right versus a ‘permitted use.’ It will lay a marker regarding individuals’ right to compensation for government takings. We strongly encourage the Supreme Court to take up this case.”

Paula Wright Memorial Scholarship

Definition: Latin term meaning “friend of the court”. The name for a brief filed with the court by someone who is not a party to the case. “... a phrase that literally means “friend of the court” — someone who is not a party to the litigation, but who believes that the court’s decision may affect its interest.” William H. Rehnquist, The Supreme Court, page 89. Amicus Curiae briefs are filed in many Supreme Court matters, both at the Petition for Writ of Certiorari stage, and when the Court is deciding a case on its merits. Some studies have shown a positive correlation between number of amicus briefs filed in support of granting certiorari, and the Court’s decision to grant certiorari. Some friend of the court briefs provide valuable information about legal arguments, or how a case might affect people other than the parties to the case. Some organizations file friend of the court briefs in an attempt to “lobby” the Supreme Court, obtain media attention, or impress members. “An amicus curiae brief that brings to the attention of the Court relevant matter not already brought to its attention by the parties may be of considerable help to the Court. An amicus curiae brief that does not serve this purpose burdens the Court, and its filing is not favored.” Rule 37(1), Rules of the Supreme Court of the U.S. (Wikipedia on-line dictionary)

IT’S NOT JUST CATTLE IT’S YOUR LIVELIHOOD

Together with the family of the late Paula Wright, the Silver State Stampede Association would like to make known the availability of a $2,500 memorial scholarship. The scholarship will be awarded to an Elko County graduate, but is not limited to 2013 graduates. Any past graduate of an Elko County high school who is currently pursuing higher education is eligible to apply. While 2013 will be the first year that this scholarship will be awarded, in future years, former recipients will be eligible to reapply.

Purchase livestock, machinery, real estate and more with our intermediate term loans. We’ll design a plan that’s right for you.

Paula touched the lives of literally thousands of people through her work and dedication to community service; thus, the scholarship will be awarded according to applicants’ extracurricular and community service activities as well as goal-setting and plans for the future. All applicants will submit a resume and essay that will be reviewed and scored by a panel of Paula’s family and friends, and finalists will be interviewed in person. Finalists will also have the opportunity to earn additional points through hands-on volunteer work at the 2013 Silver State Stampede.

Interested students can call Becky Lisle at 775-934-9201 or email paulawrightmemorial@hotmail.com for more information and application materials. Interested individuals will be given the actual judging criteria to help with preparation.

Call 800.800.4865 today or visit AgLoan.com

Deadline for resume and essay submissions will be JUNE 1, 2013. Entries can be dropped off or mailed to Paula Wright Memorial Scholarship, c/o JM Capriola’s at 500 Commercial Street, Elko, NV 89801.

RENO • ELKO • FALLON

The scholarship will be awarded at the 2013 Silver State Stampede rodeo; monies will be paid directly to the institution of higher learning.

16 April 2013

A part of the Farm Credit system. Equal Opportunity Lender.

The ProgressiveAAC_ProgRanchr_cattlefinancing_4.8x5.425_bw.indd Rancher

1/22/2013 12:34:24 PM

www.progressiverancher.com

Nutrition & Health Your success depends on it. Opportunity is knocking. Cattlemen are seeing some of the most favorable market conditions they may see in their lifetimes. More than ever, every pound counts. Loss of gain due to stress, sickness, poor nutrition, late calving, etc. does not have to happen. With good nutrition and animal health, producers can reduce unnecessary performance losses and add to their bottom line. For more than 20 years, Anipro has been designing supplement programs that will help make the most of your herd and feed dollar. Now is the time to work with your Anipro consultant to anyalyze feedstuffs and design a program to maintain cow body condition, calf health and optimize breed-back. Call 800-558-3341 today.

Liquid Supplements Molasses and Distillers-Based Tubs Weatherized Minerals

Complete Livestock Nutrition Programs for Profitability

Anipro.com | 800.558.3341 www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 17

AB 227 Creates Nevada Lands Management Implementation Committee AB 227, a bill being considered in the Nevada legislature, would create an interim committee for the purpose of conducting a feasibility study of the ramifications of federal land being returned to the states in 2015 as a result of the Transfer of Public Lands Act which was passed and signed by the governor in Utah in 2012. Sixteen other states currently have similar bills pending in their legislatures. The Nevada Land Management Implementation Committee will be made up of one county commissioner from each county. This bill only authorizes research, fact finding and

education. AB227 is based on the recent law that passed in Utah. Sixteen other states currently have bills pending in their Legislatures. The Nevada Land Management Implementation Committee will be made up of one County Commissioner from each County. It will conduct a study during the 2013-2014 Interim to address the transfer of public lands in Nevada from the Federal Government to the State of Nevada, in contemplation of Congress turning over the management and control of these public lands to the State

A.B. 227 Assembly

Bill No. 227–Assemblymen Ellison, Wheeler, Hansen, Hickey, Hardy; Paul Anderson, Bustamante Adams, Carrillo, Duncan, Fiore, Flores, Grady, Hambrick, Healey, K irkpatrick, K irner, Livermore, Neal, Ohrenschall, Oscarson, Spiegel, Stewart And Woodbury March 11, 2013

Joint

Sponsors: Senators Goicoechea, Gustavson, Roberson, Hutchison, Hammond; Atkinson, Brower, Cegavske, Denis, Hardy, Jones, Kieckhefer, Kihuen, Manendo, Parks, Settelmeyer, Spearman and Woodhouse

Referred to Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections SUMMARY—Creates the Nevada Land Management Implementation Committee to conduct a study addressing the transfer of certain public lands in this State. (BDR S-594) FISCAL NOTE: Effect on Local Government: May have Fiscal Impact. Effect on the State: Yes. AN ACT relating to public lands; creating the Nevada Land Management Implementation Committee to conduct a study addressing the transfer of public lands in Nevada from the Federal Government to the State of Nevada; and providing other matters properly relating thereto. Legislative Counsel’s Digest: 1 This bill creates the Nevada Land Management Implementation Committee, 2 consisting of a representative from each county in this State appointed by the board 3 of county commissioners, to conduct a study during the 2013-2014 legislative 4 interim to address the transfer of public lands in Nevada from the Federal 5 Government to the State of Nevada, in contemplation of Congress turning over the 6 management and control of those public lands to the State of Nevada on or before 7 June 30, 2015. The Committee is required to submit a report of its findings and

11 12

transfer of public lands in Utah from the Federal Government to the State of Utah. (House Bill No. 148, 2012 Utah Laws, ch. 353, § 5)

1 WHEREAS, Unlike the eastern states that received dominion over 2 their lands upon joining the Union, the western states have been 3 placed in an inferior position as a result of the Federal Government 4 withholding a significant portion of land from those states as a 5 condition of admission to the Union; and 6 WHEREAS, According to the Congressional Research Service, as 7 of 2010, the Federal Government manages and controls 8 approximately 640 million acres, or about 28 percent of the 2.27 9 billion acres, of land in the United States; and 10 WHEREAS, The highest concentration of land managed and 11 controlled by the Federal Government is in Alaska (61.8 percent) 12 and the 11 coterminous western states, namely Arizona (42.3 13 percent), California (47.7 percent), Colorado (36.2 percent), Idaho 14 (61.7 percent), Montana (28.9 percent), Nevada (81.1 percent), New 15 Mexico (34.7 percent), Oregon (53.0 percent), Utah (66.5 percent), 16 Washington (28.5 percent) and Wyoming (48.2 percent); and 17 WHEREAS, In contrast, the Federal Government only manages 18 and controls 4 percent of the land in the states east of those western 19 states; and 20 WHEREAS, The state with the highest percentage of lands within 21 its boundaries that is managed and controlled by the Federal 22 Government is Nevada, with over 80 percent of its lands being 23 managed and controlled by various federal agencies, including the 24 Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, the United 25 States Forest Service, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service 26 and the Department of Energy; and 27 WHEREAS, Increased control by the State of Nevada over the 28 public lands within its borders would benefit the residents of 29 Nevada significantly by allowing the State to balance the economic, 30 recreational and other critical interests of its residents, with special 31 emphasis on the multiple uses that are allowed presently on the 32 public lands; and 33 WHEREAS, In March 2012, legislation was enacted in the State 34 of Utah that, among other things, requires the Federal Government 35 to turn over management and control of the public lands in Utah to 36 the State of Utah and requires the study of various issues that may 37 arise during such a transfer; and 38 WHEREAS, Other western states are considering the enactment 39 of similar laws and momentum is building towards the Federal – page 3 –

– page 2 – 8 9 10

recommendations to the 78th Session of the Nevada Legislature on or before February 1, 2015. This Committee is similar to an interim commission that is being recommended for creation in the State of Utah to study issues relating to the

18 April 2013

on or before June 30, 2015. The Western States came into the Union on an unequal basis to states east of the Mississippi River. This has placed us in an inferior position as a result of the Federal Government withholding a significant portion of land as a condition of admission to the Union. Nevada is treated not as a coequal state but like a territory, being subjects of the BLM, Forest Service, National Park Service, the Department of Energy, and the Federal Fish and Wildlife Service. The entire bill as it now reads is below.

1 Government turning over management and control of certain public lands 2 to the western states; and 3 WHEREAS, In light of the magnitude of federal management and

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

4 control of public lands in Nevada, a study by the State of Nevada, in 5 contemplation of Congress turning over the management and 6 control of public lands in Nevada to the State of Nevada on or 7 before June 30, 2015, would assist in ensuring that the transfer 8 proceeds in a timely and orderly manner; now therefore 9 10 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, REPRESENTED IN 11 SENATE AND ASSEMBLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: 12 13 Section 1. 1. The Nevada Land Management 14 Implementation Committee, consisting of 17 members, is hereby 15 created. Within 30 days after the effective date of this act, the board 16 of county commissioners of each county shall appoint one member 17 to the Committee. 18 2. A vacancy on the Committee must be filled in the same 19 manner as the original appointment. 20 3. The Committee shall hold its first meeting on or before 21 July 1, 2013. At the first meeting, the Committee shall elect a Chair 22 and Vice Chair from among its members. 23 4. While engaged in the business of the Committee, each 24 member of the Committee is entitled to receive such per diem 25 allowance and travel expenses as provided by the board of county 26 commissioners that appointed the member. Each board of county 27 commissioners shall pay the per diem allowance and travel expenses 28 required by this subsection to the member that is appointed by that 29 board of county commissioners. 30 5. The Legislative Counsel Bureau shall provide such 31 administrative support to the Committee as is necessary to carry out 32 the duties of the Committee. 33 6. The Committee shall conduct a study to address the transfer 34 of public lands in Nevada from the Federal Government to the State 35 of Nevada in contemplation of Congress turning over the 36 management and control of those public lands to the State of 37 Nevada on or before June 30, 2015. The study must include, without 38 limitation: 39 (a) An identification of the public lands to be transferred and the 40 interests, rights and uses associated with those lands; 41 (b) The development of a proposed plan for the administration, 42 management and use of the public lands, including, without 43 limitation, the designation of wilderness or other conservation areas 44 or the sale, lease or other disposition of those lands; and – page 4 – 1 (c) An economic analysis concerning the transfer of the public 2 lands, including, without limitation: 3 (1) The identification of the costs directly incident to the 4 transfer of title of those lands; 5 (2) The identification of sources of revenue to pay for the 6 administration and maintenance of those lands by the State of 7 Nevada; 8 (3) A determination of the amount of any revenue that is 9 currently received by the State of Nevada or a political subdivision 10 of this State in connection with those lands, including, without 11 limitation, any payments made in lieu of taxes and mineral leases; 12 and 13 (4) The identification of any potential revenue to be received 14 from those lands by the State of Nevada after the transfer of the 15 lands and recommendations for the distribution of those revenues. 16 7. On or before February 1, 2015, the Committee shall submit a 17 report of its findings and recommendations to the Director of 18 the Legislative Counsel Bureau for transmittal to the 78th Session of the 19 Nevada Legislature. During that session, one or more members of 20 the Committee must be available, upon request, to present the 21 recommendations of the Committee to the Legislature or the 22 appropriate standing committees with jurisdiction over public lands 23 matters. 24 Sec. 2. This act becomes effective upon passage and approval 25 and expires by limitation on June 30, 2015. www.progressiverancher.com

Snyder Livestock Co. “Bulls for the 21st century” Sale Report March 10, 2013

High selling bull was a Red Angus consigned by Lana Trotter. 3625 was sired by LJT Citadel 812, and topped his test group for RFI, Ribeye area, and had an ADG of 4.42. He sold to Silver Spur Ranch and Genex for $14500. An Objective T510 son consigned by Westwind Angus won the calving ease Angus division and sold to Fred Wilkerson Ranch for $6600. Thanks to all of you for your support for our 2013 sale. Averages Breed

Average Sale Price

Head Count

3054 3308 2500 2827

24 12 1 11

3768 3085 3300 3333 9100 3436 3453 3033 3340 4100 3022 3411

19 13 1 3 2 69 45 3 5 7 9 112

Early Fall Angus Limousin Red Angus Late Fall Angus Balancer Hereford Red Angus Spring Angus Balancer Charolais Hereford Red Angus Overall totals

382000

Join us in celebrating another year of achievement for the

Nevada Agricultural Foundation at our Annual Meeting and Banquet Friday, May 10, 2013 Please contact our office for details

775-673-2468

sue@nvagfoundation.org

P.O. Box 8089 Reno, NV 89507 | 2165 Green Vista Dr., Suite 204, Sparks, NV 89431

The Progressive Rancher

www.nvagfoundation.org

April 2013 19

Eastern Nevada Landscape Coalition

Smith Valley Restoration Project — Vegetation Response Report —

n 2007, the Eastern Nevada Landscape Coalition (ENLC) in collaboration with the Ely District Bureau of Land Management (Ely BLM), and funding partner, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), completed the implementation phase of the Smith Valley Vegetation Restoration Project, located 15 miles north of Ely, Nevada. A variety of mechanical treatment methods were applied on the valley’s benches, impacting a total of 900 acres. Today, several years after implementation, we checked in with the progress of the vegetation response to the treatments, and here is

Figure 1

what we found. The project’s primary goal was to restore the valley’s sagebrush shrublands to a healthy and resilient ecological condition or state. Pinyon and juniper trees were increasing in the sagebrush communities and were competing with shrubs, grasses, and forbs for resources. Like many sagebrush shrubland ecosystems in the Great Basin with similar environmental attributes, tree cover needed to be reduced, and in subsequently, increase abundance of native herbaceous vegetation and shrub vigor. In addition, cutting trees would reduce potential for large, catastrophic fire. Often these large, hot fires result in conversion to an ecosystem dominated by non-native annual grasses, or what we know as cheatgrass. Conversion to stands of cheatgrass changes the ecological function and processes of the watershed, including degradation of wildlife habitat. To measure changes in vegetation and its response to various treatment methods, we incorporated a research component to a portion of the project. The study site we discuss in this article was implemented on 240-acres of a pinyon and juniper-encroached black sagebrush vegetation community. Soils for the site are classified as calcareous loams. Elevations range from 6800 to 7200 feet, and receive approximately 8-12 inches precipitation annually. The study consists of 18 13-acre units. (See Figure 1) One vegetation-monitoring plot (200 data points) was established in each treatment unit. Vegetation composition, cover, and structure data was collected for each plot. Six treatments compared at this study site were lop and scatter, feller-buncher and chipper, masticator, lop and pile and burn, and veg-crusher (bulldozer-no chain) and control unit (no treatment). Each treatment had three replications. Vegetation plot data was collected before treatments in 2006. Post-treatment data was collected in 2007, 2008, and 2010. Percent cover data for 2006 and 2010 were totaled separately and totals are shown for each vegetation functional group or life form (Table 1). Percent cover refers to the percent of area covered by vegetation. For example, (as if looking down from above) trees covered 23.72% of the 200-square-meter plot and in 2010 only 1.96%. Measuring cover in this way documents abundance for all vegetation or species. Summary of the results for the 240-acre project shows tree cover decreased, as would be

Table 1. Mean Change in Percent Cover for All Plots in Study Area 2006

2010

Trees

23.72

1.96

Shrubs

9.73

14.2

Forbs

2.84

10.75

Perennial Grasses

15.53

18.33

Cheatgrass

0.69

0.3

Treatment Descriptions Lop and scatter: All trees are cut using chainsaws. Cut trees are bucked and limbed. Slash is scattered to a height of less than 3 feet. Lop, pile and burn: All trees are cut using chainsaws. Slash is piled in six-foot high mounds within treatment unit and mounds are burned in fall/winter months.

20 April 2013

Feller buncher and chipper: All trees are cut and piled using a feller-buncher. Chipper grinds piled biomass into small chips that are broadcast evenly over site. Masticator: All trees are ground to base by a rotational head, slash left on site.

The Progressive Rancher

Veg-crusher: D-8 CAT bulldozers are used to knock over and uproot trees instead of dragging chain between two bulldozers. This method is used because of the small size of research units, and thus having maneuvering constraints.

www.progressiverancher.com

Table 2. Vegetation Cover by Treatment, 2006 and 2010

expected after mechanical treatment. Shrub, forb and perennial grass totals increased, shrubs and forbs substantially. For simplicity, the tables do not include statistical analysis technicalities. Results shown are consistent with statistical analysis results currently submitted for publishing. We also grouped the data by treatment method to demonstrate any differences in vegetation response between the methods (Table 2). Looking at the data by treatment, we see total reduction in tree cover for all treatments except the veg-crusher/bulldozer method, which left several live trees. Shrub cover increased similarly across all treatment methods. Forb cover more than doubled for all treatments except for mastication. Alternatively, the mastication treatment showed a large increase in perennial grass cover. Other treatments showed a very small increase in perennial grass cover and a decrease for the bulldozer method. Cheatgrass cover did not change. Its presence was minimal before treatment and did not increase. The method leaving the least amount of slash or biomass residue was lop, pile and burn. The largest variation among the treatment methods was cost. Table 3 shows the costs for each method used in the research project and the current going rates. Due to the small acreage for the research project, costs for some methods were inflated. The chaining was conducted at normal cost since there were 700 more acres chaining within the project area. The least expensive method was the bulldozer and one-way chaining. The most expensive was the feller-buncher and chipper. The lop, pile and burn method was effective in reaching objectives, however it is very labor intensive, and thus, expensive. Mastication is at least double the cost of lop and scatter.

Table 3 Treatment Methods Lop and scatter

Project Rates $/acre

Normal Rates $/acre

$525

$100-200

Lop, pile, burn

$935

$400-500

Fecon shredder/masticator

$460

$400

Bulldozer or one-way chaining

$83

$100

$2,000

$1000

Feller-buncher-chipper

We can infer from the results that we met our goals for the project. We reduced tree cover and increased shrubs, forbs, and grass cover without introducing more cheatgrass onto the site. We have minimized the potential for a large fire moving through the study area and the rest of the project area. Flourishing shrubs and herbaceous species should improve wildlife habitat for ungulates and birds. We, also, more fully understand the variety of methods used to accomplish mechanical removal of trees. Finally, monitoring protocols are in place for future analysis and evaluation. All treatment options seemed to meet project objectives…perhaps some better than others, primarily economically. Though veg-crushing or one-way chaining is cheap, it does not accomplish thorough removal of pinyon and juniper. More expensive two-way chaining increases tree and shrub mortality. Shredding machines like the feller-buncher and masticator can be expensive, but wood chip residue is preferable to logs and limbs when considering aesthetics, fire, and pathogen hazards. On the other hand, dead biomass nutrients remain on site that may benefit living organisms. Machines are restricted by topography and road access, while chainsaw crews are more versatile on difficult terrain. Pinyon and juniper trees with low to medium cover are optimal for chainsaw crew lop and scatter methods. Options and considerations are plentiful in planning treatments to reduce pinyon and juniper cover. Among many things, we must consider available funding, terrain and access difficulty, and last, but not least, our desire of healthy and resilient ecological condition of our valuable sagebrush ecosystems.

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 21

Alfalfas that Lead in the Field!

GROW MORE FEED,

Conventional Alfalfa Varieties

NOT THE WEEDS!

      

6306Q-Somerset 6442Q-Boulder Expedition 6475 (New) 6552 (New) 919 Brand 919 MF Gold

     

Cinch I (ML) Cinch II Ron’s Blend Haymaker (ML) Blazer XL Genoa

     

Dryland & Reclamation Seed

Round Up Ready Alfalfas FD     

Liberator 6497R (New) Mutiny 6516R (New) Revolt

4 4 4.3 5 6



VH VH VH H



  

Oats • Cayuse • Monida Wheat • Twin • PR 1404 Peas Corn Soghum Sudan • BMR • Piper Sudan Grass • Sweet RN Honey



    

Grain & Miscellaneous 



Triticale • Forerunner (Beardless) Ryegrain • Gazelle - Spring • Prima - Fall • VNS Beardless Barley Millet Milo Sunﬂower Garrison Meadow Foxtail

 

Wheatgrasses Nordan Crested Thickspike Bluebunch Hycrest Crested Siberian Wheatgrass Oahe Intermediate Pubescent Indian Recegrass Big Sagebrush

        

Ron’s Dryland Mix Ron’s Rangeland Mix Forage Kochia Great Basin Wild Rye Ladak Alfalfa PNW Dryland Tall Wheatgrass Shadescale 4 Wing Saltbush

Pasture Mixes 

Olympic Elite



University w/Clover



University w/No Clover



Northwest Pasture



Horse Pasture



PNW Dryland Mix

Field Grasses 

We Have Varieties Available That are Organically Approved

Clovers        

Alsike Ladino Red Clover Strawberry White Dutch New Zealand Yellow Blossom Trefoil

Turf Grasses      

Manhattan Special Ky Blue Grass Athletic Turf Mix TT Perennial Ryegrass Chewings Fesque Deﬁance XRE (Drought Tolerant)

Tahoe Common Ladak Vernal Ranger Renograzer

 



Orchard Grasses • Stampede • Dawn XL • Seco (Dryland) • Haymate XL • Potomac • Paiute • Teff Grass Meadow Brome Smooth Brome • Annual Rye Grass • Perennial Rye Grasses Timothy’s • Climax • Telon Express • Treasure Fawn Tall Fesque

Call or Stop In For Our Complete List of Seeds & Grains!

RON’S SEED & SUPPLY Serving Agricultur e for 31 Years

22 April 2013

710 Grass Valley Road • Winnemucca, NV 89445 775-623-5053 or 1-800-603-5053

YOUR SEED, FERTILIZER & CHEMICAL HEADQUARTERS FOR NEVADA The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

Selecting Alfalfa Varieties: Fall Dormancy, Winter Hardiness and Pest Resistance A

By: Brent Johnson, Alfalfa Brand Manager, NEXGROW ® alfalfa

s you’re planning for the upcoming planting year, it is crucial to consider your planting environment and what traits best suit that climate. Fall dormancy and winter hardiness are key aspects to consider when choosing the best seed option for your acreage. Some think that these qualities are only important in terms of winter survival, but they also promote growth during the spring months. And the difference between the two is vital as well. For instance, fall dormancy relates to how quickly a plant shuts down in the fall and when it greens up in the spring, while winter hardiness determines a plant’s ability to survive over multiple winters and the longevity of the alfalfa stand.

What is Fall Dormancy? Fall dormancy is rated on a scale of 1 to 11 and stem growth in the fall serves as the basis for assigning varieties a relative fall dormancy rating. A fall dormancy of 1 indicates the crop is very dormant and will demonstrate the least height of growth during the fall. Typically, the more dormant the variety, the slower it regrows after harvest but the better it survives adverse winter conditions. In contrast, a rating of 11 indicates the least fall dormancy and greatest height of fall growth. These very non-dormant varieties are highly susceptible to winterkill. Higher fall dormancy varieties tend to green-up faster in the spring and continue growing later in the fall. This extra growth period could make the difference when attempting to gain one additional cutting during the growing season. Higher fall dormancy varieties tend to have the highest yields, while lower fall dormancy ratings are associated with higher forage quality. During the fall, dormant varieties – typically those with a ranking of 2 to 4 – alter their chemical processes to prepare for winter survival. Starch in the crown and root is converted into sugars that function as antifreeze and helps keep the crown, crown buds and root from freezing at temperatures below 32˚F. Crown buds form during the fall and are ultimately the source of growth during the spring, providing healthy and strong plants for summer harvest.

Separating Fall Dormancy and Winter Hardiness Like fall dormancy, winter hardiness is also ranked on a scale, in this case from 1 to 6 (extremely winter hardy to not winter hardy). Winter hardiness determines a crop’s potential to survive multiple winters and often has a direct correlation to stand longevity and crop yield. Until recently, lower fall dormancy varieties were thought to provide the best winter hardiwww.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

ness. While fall dormancy may have an impact on winter hardiness, other factors such as disease and pest resistance ratings also play a role. Through advanced breeding techniques in recent years, however, researchers have separated the correlation between fall dormancy and winter hardiness. Today, growers can plant later fall dormancy varieties without sacrificing the winter hardiness and persistence that can lead to longer stand life. For instance, in most areas in central and northern Nevada, suggested fall dormancy levels are usually between 3 and 5 with some fall and late winter growth.

Know Your Climate & Pests Understanding your geography and climate will help when the time comes to selecting a variety. If the alfalfa is cut every 35 to 40 days, select a variety with low fall dormancy. If you are on an aggressive cutting schedule, such as 26 to 30 days, select a variety with a higher fall dormancy rating. Aside from cutting schedules, another factor affecting fall dormancy is elevation. This is especially true in Nevada where elevation varies greatly throughout the state. Typically, a safe rule to follow is the higher the elevation, the lower the fall dormancy. High yield, quality and outstanding persistence are all essential qualities for strong, durable alfalfa stands. Beyond fall dormancy and winter hardiness, pest resistance is essential when choosing which variety to plant in the upcoming season. For instance, stem nematode is a pest that is particularly harmful in the Nevada climate. Parasitic or stem nematodes are microscopic roundworms which can cause reduced yield and stand life to alfalfa fields. Several species of stem nematodes have been identified as being parasitic to alfalfa and it is not unusual for several different species of nematodes to be present in a single alfalfa field. Symptoms of nematode damage are varied and are often confused with other problems. In addition to direct feeding injury, nematodes cause wounds on roots and stems that allow other diseases such as Fusarium or bacterial wilt to invade the plant.

Thriving in Nevada Two specific NEXGROW® alfalfa varieties that are made to thrive in the Nevada climate are Roundup Ready® Mutiny and 6516R. Mutiny offers a fall dormancy of 4 and is very hardy to survive cold Nevada winters. It offers a large yield potential of high quality forage from first cut to last with excellent stand persistence and very fast recovery after cutting with high leaf retention. Variety 6516R has a fall dormancy of 5 and is also hardy. It offers rapid recovery after cutting which enables the maximum number of harvests. This variety offers excellent forage quality and very good drought stress resistance. Both Mutiny and 6516R have high pest and disease resistance, specifically to stem nematodes. Considering the climate you’re growing in is essential to achieving maximum yield potential. Be sure that fall dormancy, winter hardiness and pest protection are topics you discuss with your seed representative when selecting future varieties for planting. Visit http://www.plantNEXGROW.com for additional infor mation. ©2013 Nexgrow Genetics, Nampa, ID 83653 Read All Bag Tags. They contain important conditions of sale, including limitations of warranty and remedy. Genuity® Roundup Ready® Alfalfa seed is available for sale and distribution by authorized Seed Companies or their dealers for use in the United States only. This seed may not be planted outside of the United States, or for the production of seed, or sprouts.

April 2013 23

SOCIETY FOR RANGE MANAGEMENT National Resources Inventory – Grazing Land On-Site Study

by Patti Novak-Echenique — NRCS Nevada State Rangeland Management Specialist

125°W 120°W 115°W 110°W 105°W 100°W 95°W 90°W he National Resources Inventory (NRI) is a statistical survey Non-Federal Rangeland Where designed to help gauge natural resource status, conditions, and Non-Native Plant Species are Present trends on the Nation’s non-federal land in the United States – about 75 Non-Na tive percent of the total land area. The NRI is conducted by the USDA-Natural Pla nts Percent Acres Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in cooperation with the Iowa Over 75 45°N State University’s Center for Survey Statistics and Methodology. The NRI 50 - 75 is carried out under the authority of a number of legislative acts including 25 - 50 the Rural Development Act of 1972, the Soil and Water Resources Con25 or less None servation Act of 1977, the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform No data Act of 1996, and the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. The Federal a re a NRI provides a nationally consistent database that allows for resources Water 40°N assessment and plays a key role in development of conservation policy and State lines programs for the Nation. Region lines The NRI Grazing Land Study began in 2003 in 17 western states, encompassing those states from North Dakota to Texas and West. A limited amount of data was also collected in Louisiana and Florida. The initial study focused on rangeland – defined as land on which the climax or potential plant cover is 35°N composed primarily of native grasses, grasslike plants, forbs or shrubs suitable for grazing and browsing, and introduced forage species that are managed like rangeland. An interagency group – USDA-NRCS, USDA-Agricultural Research Service, USDI-Bureau of Land Management, USDI – U.S. Geological Survey, and the USDA – Forest Service – worked together to develop the field data collection protocols and data elements for the grazing land study. In 30°N 2011, the Bureau of Land Management partnered with NRCS in implementing a national approach to monitoring rangeland resources by expanding the NRI 85°W 80°W on-site data collection to BLM managed lands. This year the Grazing Land 30°N Study will expand to the 48 contiguous states and will include rangeland and pastureland on non-federal lands, as well as the BLM managed lands. The NRI on-site data are collected at a scientifically selected subset of NRI Source: National Resources Inventory 25°N sample points. The NRI program is based upon scientific and rigorous sample Rangeland Resource Assessment Scale October 2010 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 0 survey protocols. These protocols include maintaining and protecting the inU.S. Department of Agriculture Kms Natural Resources Conservation Service Alber s E qual A rea tegrity and confidentiality of the data gathering sites. The geographic locations 25°N m11152 of the sites are not public information and all data gathers are required to sign a NRI Confidentiality Certification Agreement prior to starting data collection. NRI data that identify landowners, operators, data collection sites, or unreleased data are rangeland on-site data – the ‘National Resources Inventory Rangeland Resource Assessnot released to the public. NRCS policy also requires permission from the land owner/ ment’. The NRI rangeland results addressed current conditions based on data collected at 10,000-11,000 NRI rangeland field locations. The findings focus on key issues in rangeland operator before entering private property. The data collection is done by teams of two or three data collectors. With the assis- science, including rangeland health, non-native plant species, native and non-native invatance of a global positioning system (GPS), data collectors navigate to sample locations and sive plant species, bare ground, intercanopy gaps, and soil surface aggregate stability. The collect on-site data. The inventory process involves collecting data along two intersecting complete report by chapter is available online at: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ 150-foot transects and in a macro plot formed by the two transects (150-foot diameter cir- nrcs/detail/national/technical/nra/ceap/?cid=stelprdb1041620 One key finding is that non-native species are present on nearly half (49.9%) of the cular plot). Photos are taken at the end of each transect and optional pictures may also be taken of noxious weeds, soil erosion, fence line contracts, conservation practices, and other Nation’s non-federal rangeland. This year, the Nevada-NRI sample includes 62 locations in the following counties: points of interest. Types of data collected include: land cover/use; soil component name; slope gradient, length and shape; ecological site information; rangeland trend; plant pro- Churchill, Douglas, Elko, Eureka, Humboldt, Lander, Lincoln, Lyon, Mineral, Nye, Pershduction, composition, cover, density and height; soil surface aggregate stability; rangeland ing, and Washoe. Permission letters will be sent out in early April and data collection is health; presence of invasive/noxious plants; and the presence of any resource concerns, scheduled to begin in May. NRCS appreciates your support of this valuable inventory of our Nation’s range and pasturelands. disturbances, and conservation practices. The Society for Range Management supports the expansion of NRI to include all Quality assurance is an integral part of the NRI Grazing Land Study. All field data collectors must be training and authorized before collecting data. They must participate in lands. Implementation of a large statistically valid sampling procedure, as exemplified by an annual training, pass a written test, perform calibration exercises, pass a performance- NRI, is necessary to provide accurate assessments of the status of the Nation’s rangelands. Use of a uniform inventory and assessment methods of all ownerships will make such based test, and sign an NRI Confidentiality Certification Agreement. In October 2010, the NRCS prepared a summary of the first four years (2003-2006) of determinations possible.

The Society for Range Management (SRM) is “the professional society dedicated to supporting persons who work with rangelands and have a commitment to their sustainable use.” SRM’s members are ranchers, land managers, scientists, educators, students, conservationists – a diverse membership guided by a professional code of ethics and unified by a strong land ethic. This series of articles is dedicated to connecting the science of range management with the art, by applied science on the ground in Nevada. Articles are the opinion of the author and may not be an official position of SRM. Further information and a link to submit suggestions or questions are available at the Nevada Section website at http://www.ag.unr.edu/nsrm/. SRM’s main webpage is www. rangelands.org. We welcome your comments.

24 April 2013

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

Federal Coordination with County Plans By Floyd W. Rathbun, Certified Range Management Consultant, Fallon, Nevada

Federal Agencies Are Required To Resolve Inconsistencies We have all experienced meetings where the earnest federal employees ask us for what they call the public opinion. This process promises that the voices of citizens will be included in federal decisions, but what we say very rarely shows up in their documents. The agency employees are paid to do such things as consultation, cooperation, collaboration, and coordination, but they are not instructed to incorporate what they hear into their plans or regulations. However, words are important, and the word “coordination” has more than one meaning in the federal vocabulary. Federal laws also require that Federal agencies “coordinate” their activities on federally controlled lands with plans prepared by state and local units of government. That means federal proposals are to be consistent with the policy of local government or clearly explain why they are taking actions that conflict with official local plans. In this context, “coordinate” means the action that federal agencies are required to take to resolve inconsistencies between a federal proposal and an official local plan or policy. Webster’s Dictionary defines “coordinate” as an action between two parties of equal rank, importance, or degree. Congress directs the federal agencies to place a county on an equal footing with the federal agency. In other words coordination is negotiation on a government to government basis and is not just a form of public input. First the local community must write a natural resource plan or strategy that describes the local environment and what land uses are endorsed locally within federal and state lands. Most of the local plans have been prepared by a committee selected by a County Commission, although some are being prepared by other local units of government such as Conservation Districts. A local environment consists of the natural features such as air, water, plants and soils; it also includes farms, ranches, mines, retail business, industry, and recreational pursuits. The local strategy describes the current custom, culture, and economy and what is acceptable to the community. Once it is written, the local government must notify the federal agencies that an officially approved plan has been adopted and usually that includes providing the agency with a copy of the plan.

Authority for local Natural Resource Strategies in Nevada was established over twenty years ago with the passage of SB40. Soon after passage, several Nevada counties established what were called Public Land Use Advisory Committee and completed what were called public lands plans. Definition of the term “public lands” has caused some real confusion so emphasizing natural resource qualities is a way to avoid the controversy. SB40 is codified in the Nevada Revised Statutes within NRS321.

Local Process: 1. Establish by ordinance a Natural Resource Advisory Committee (NRAC). 2. Select the committee members that best represent your area. For example Owyhee County, Idaho, ordinance specifies that people will be appointed to the committee on the basis of: “...involvement in, an interest in, and expertise in the various multiple uses of the federally and state managed lands and the custom, culture, and economic stability of Owyhee County.” 3. Write a land use and natural resource management plan or strategy for lands administered by federal and state agencies, in order to clearly communicate the policies of your County to these other entities. 4. Save time and effort by following the examples of communities which have been successful, including: Eureka County Nevada, Pershing County Nevada, Owyhee County Idaho, Modoc County California, Wallowa County Oregon, and Walla Walla County Washington. Copies of their plans and other materials are available for The County to use. 5. Officially approve the completed strategy by ordinance, deliver the plan to each of the various federal and state agencies, and be prepared to insist that the policies of the County be recognized in accordance with the various federal and state laws. If the local government has no plan or policy then it (the County) is just one more voice that the federal agents will ignore as public input. On the other hand, an official local plan or strategy can be used to require the government employees to stay within the scope of their authority and often provides the best course of action. A local planning committee is much more likely to find real solutions for real problems.

Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service and NACo Renew Public Lands Management Partnership Sign MOU to Continue, Strengthen Working Relationship

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Forest Service (FS) and the National Association of Counties (NACo) have officially renewed their longstanding partnership that allows them to tackle public lands issues across boundaries. By signing the Memorandum of Understanding, the BLM and FS recognize the important role counties play in locally based decision-making and the need to emphasize a landscape-level approach across local, state and federal boundaries. The agreement, signed March 3, establishes a framework for the Bureau, the Forest Service and NACo to work cooperatively to address fire, weed management, planning and other areas of common concern, as well as seek creative solutions to issues impacting local communities such as recreation, grazing, wild horses and burros and energy development. It ensures that broad lines of communication are opened to county officials to contribute to federal land management initiatives and policies. At a national and local level, the groups will collaborate to proactively address potential conflicts and achieve results that benefit each organization. “Counties are key partners on-the-ground in the successful management of public lands,” BLM Principal Deputy Director Neil Kornze said. “The BLM values the spirit of partnership, goodwill and cooperation we have enjoyed in this longstanding relationship.” “It’s essential that we continue our strong, productive partnership with the National Association of Counties,” said U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Tidwell. “We appreciate the association’s interest and participation in the wide variety of land management issues we face every day on forests and grasslands cross the country.” www.progressiverancher.com

NACo President Chris Rodgers said he is pleased that our federal partners recognize the unique role and perspective counties play in the management of public lands. “This agreement strengthens our intergovernmental relationships and ensures that county officials have input on federal decisions affecting counties and communities.” The BLM is a federal agency that manages approximately 245 million acres of public land, primarily in the West, and 700 million acres of federal mineral resources. In addition, the BLM is responsible for managing public lands scattered throughout the 31 states bordering on, and east of the Mississippi River. The agency’s mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of these public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Forest Service is a land and resource management agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture responsible for managing and protecting approximately 193 million acres of public lands. The Forest Service provides leadership in the management of the Nation’s state and private forests, forest research, and international assistance for the protection and sound management of the world’s forest resources. National Association of Counties is a national organization that represents county governments in the United States. Founded in 1935, NACo provides essential services to the nation’s 3,069 counties. NACo advances issues with a unified voice before the federal government, improves the public’s understanding of county government, assists counties in finding and sharing innovative solutions through education and research, and provides value-added services to save counties and taxpayers money.

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 25

Beef Quality Assurance: Cattle Q

uality assurance in livestock production focuses on raising safe, wholesome products for the consumer. The way producers interact and move their livestock has been shown to affect the quality of the products from those animals. Stressed livestock results in decreased production, and adversely effects meat quality during animal harvest. It is important to understand proper animal handling techniques to minimize stress, ultimately benefitting both the animal and the producer.

Curt Pate, renowned horse trainer and livestock stockman, believes the basis for cattle handling is simple: always be in a spot where you can see the animal’s nose. Pate, who is also a rancher, says a mistake people commonly make is to walk behind the animal (or the herd) when trying to push them forward. But, once you recognize that cattle’s range of vision is different than humans, you will quickly realize that walking behind the animal is the wrong approach.

Handling cattle To handle cattle correctly, it is essential to understand animal behavior. In fact, the greater the handler’s knowledge of cattle behavior, the better his ability to predict an animal’s response. This results in a quicker, easier job and a lower probability of injury to both animals and people. Cattle, because of their size, strength, speed and potential for aggression, need to be handled thoughtfully and with confidence. The most important aspect of handling any livestock is to be able to recognize and interpret an animal’s reactions.

Flight zone The flight zone is an important concept in livestock handling. It can be described as the area around an animal where it feels safe. When working with new animals for the first time, slowly approach them in their line of sight, avoiding the animal’s blind spot. Livestock animals have wide-angle vision, which allows them to see everything around them except the area directly behind them—the blind spot. To effectively move animals through a lot or chute, recognize how to position your body in relation to the animal. The shoulder is

BEEF CHECKOFF NEWS

News From the Nevada Beef Council: CHECKING-IN ON YOUR BEEF CHECKOFF

Addressing Beef Quality Issues Since release of the National Beef Quality Audit (NBQA) in July 2012, Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) have presented or will present a summary of the data in nine states. The summary begins by asking the question “Who are the beef consumers in the U.S.?” and “What are they asking for from producers?” The presentation also addresses myths and realities of beef production and an in-depth participant discussion of NBQA. In response to the 2011 Audit, the checkoff is developing programs around three emphasis areas: product integrity; eating satisfaction; and telling the beef story. Dr. John Paterson will be presenting a summary of the data in Wilton, CA on April 27th. For more information, email Janel Fisher, Manager of Producer Communications, at iheartbeef@nevadabeef.org.

Record. Check. Go. At your local auction market, you may see posters and displays for the new Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) residue avoidance campaign, Control residues. Every animal, every time. The communications effort was created to build awareness of the checkoff-funded BQA program and its residue avoidance guidelines. Recently, the Federal Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) reassessed the beef carcass inspection testing-level requirements for residue risks. After their evaluation, FSIS recommended an increase in the number beef carcasses tested. In response to this recommendation, the Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) advisory board, state coordinators and staff decided to create a communications effort to build awareness of the checkoff-funded BQA program and its residue avoidance guidelines. The campaign’s message is that residue avoidance is easy if you follow three simple steps: 1. Record – pertinent information when you treat an animal 2. Check – ship date against required withdrawal times 3. Go – determine if the animal is healthy for shipping Often, inadequate record keeping is cited as a major problem during on-farm residue violation investigations. The 2011 National Beef Quality Audit (NBQA) findings released in July also revealed that proper record keeping and written protocols throughout the system were identified as areas where improvement would help strengthen consumer confidence in beef products.

Producer Support of the Beef Checkoff Remains High Support for the beef checkoff among its investors remains high, according to a recent survey of beef and dairy producers nationwide. Support, at 76 percent, remains at the historic high reached in January 2012. The nationwide survey of 1,200 beef and dairy producers conducted by the independent firm Aspen Media & Market Research in late December 2012 and early January 2013 found that an overwhelming majority of beef and

26 April 2013

dairy producers continue to believe their beef checkoff has value for them in many ways. • Eight out of 10 producers say the beef checkoff has helped to contribute to a positive trend in beef demand. • Seven out of 10 producers say the beef checkoff contributes to the profitability of their operations, is there for them in a crisis and represents their interests. • Seven out of 10 beef producers believe the checkoff is well-managed. For more information regarding the survey, go to MyBeefCheckoff.com.

Introducing Schmacon™ The checkoff’s new-product exchange at the 2013 Cattle Industry Convention showcased a new beef product from Schmaltz Retail Products, LLC, touted as “beef’s answer to bacon.” The product, Schmacon™, is a new patent pending product/process made from beef and said to offer flavor, convenience and nutrition advantages over conventional bacon. More than 30 state beef council representatives attended the presentation by Schmaltz Retail Products, LLC President Howard Bender, then had opportunities to taste the product in its strip form, as well as in beef-slider and eggs Benedict applications. The company expects Schmacon™ to be available for distribution into the retail, foodservice, healthcare, and military market segments in the next few months.

Adding More Beef to Menus Final results indicate that BJ’s Restaurants sold nearly 107,000 of featured beef products during its 2012 holiday beef promotion partnership with the checkoff. The national checkoff team partnered with beef councils in Arizona, California, Florida and Texas to market steak (in combination with the restaurant’s seafood offerings) throughout BJ’s 126 restaurants nationwide. New York strips, ribeyes and top sirloins were promoted via menu “outserts,” in addition to a Free Standing Insert in newspapers across the country; promotional activity on the restaurant’s website and social media pages; as well as loyalty-club and e-club loyalty mailings. Funds from the participating state beef councils helped support a wait staff incentive contest in individual states.

Getting Results! A recent checkoff-funded survey of more than 1,700 health professionals and influencers found that 94 percent would be somewhat likely or extremely likely to recommend eating lean beef as part of a healthy diet; and 64 percent would feel comfortable recommending that consumers incorporate lean beef into a healthy diet at least three to five times per week. Learn more about how your checkoff helps these important messengers teach consumers about beef and heart healthy eating at www.BeefNutrition.org.

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

Handling and Stockmanship Skills By moving towards the front of the animal, the beast will move backward or turn away. From the front, you can deflect cattle sideways by moving to either side of an imaginary line drawn through the middle of the animal’s length.

Flight Zone

If Handler Stands Here, Animal will not Retreat

If Handler Stands Here, Animal will Retreat

recognized as the point of balance; this is a neutral zone of movement for the animal. To move an animal past you, approach the animal from the side, behind the shoulder, and walk towards the tail of the animal. To make an animal back up, walk from the shoulder towards the head of the animal. When a person penetrates the flight zone, the animal moves away. A good stockhandler knows when to penetrate this zone and when to retreat so that the cattle move quietly in the desired direction. Cattle move most effectively if they can see the handler at all times. Cattlemen often think the best way to move cattle is to get behind. However, when a person is directly behind the animal, that animal can’t see the person. The most important point to remember about the flight zone is not the flight zone itself, but the area before the flight zone. When approaching an animal, it is important to be able to predict the animal’s response to your entering the flight zone. If the desired movement is not going to occur, you need to back out, reposition and approach at a different angle. Position and movement Experienced stock handlers use the point of balance of an animal to move it. Looking from a side view, this means behind the shoulder; from in front, it is from the center of the head. When close to cattle, the stockhandler’s position in relation to an animal’s shoulder can affect which direction the animal will head. The line through the shoulder is the point of balance. If the stockhandler goes behind this line, the beast moves forward.

On a fence beast moves backwards www.progressiverancher.com

With no fence beast turns away.

Stockmanship skills The role of a stockman is to create movement in cattle and then use position to control and manage that movement to the desired result. When cattle lose movement, they become reluctant to work. When movement is lost, excessive pressure, force and driving aids are more likely to be used. Creating and managing movement is key to achieving effective stockmanship. There are five basic principles of cattle behavior that, when used properly, can improve the ease and speed of working cattle while reducing stress and increasing efficiency. Those principles are: 1. Cattle want to see you. Understanding how cattle see is basic to getting cattle to respond to your position. Cattle can see everywhere but directly behind them. 2. Cattle want to go around you. This allows you to position yourself such that, when they do go around you, they are pointed directly at the gate of destination you had in mind. 3. Cattle want to be with and will go to other cattle. Cattle know there is safety in numbers. Stockmen can take advantage of this natural instinct when working with herds. 4. Cattle want to return to where they have been. The natural instinct of a cow is to return to the last safe or comfortable place they were. 5. Cattle can only process one main thought at a time. Fear is the biggest distraction for cattle. Any perception that the handler is a “predator” must be avoided. These five behavior principles form the core of cattle handling and effective stockmanship. Employing these behavior principles to improve management skills has two important benefits: improved cattle performance may also improve your income without adding costs to the process; and, perhaps most importantly, effective stockmanship promotes animal welfare, an important part of today’s increased transparency in our industry.

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 27

LookUP

Superman

by Pastor Diana Gonzalez

emember the old Superman series on TV? How cool it was when the poor weaklings got saved from the bad guys when the man of steel came to their defense. We might think how convenient it would be to have Superman on speed dial. Right now I have some aggravating cows I’d like him to work over if they don’t stay in the pasture! When I think back on that TV series, I don’t think about how strong and fast Superman was, I think on the people who thought they were poor and weak. And while the show was only make-believe, it reminded me of the Hebrew children when they came out of Egypt. The good Lord had rescued the nation of Israel out of slavery, bondage and abuse. He showed himself strong, powerful and faithful through signs, wonders and miracles over and over and over again. Still, the people murmured and complained over and over and over again. The Lord promised them a good land; a land filled with milk and honey. Numbers 13:1-2 — Then the Lord spoke to Moses saying, “Send out for yourself men so that they may spy out the land of Canaan, which I am going to give to the sons of Israel; you shall send a man from each of their fathers’ tribes, every one a leader among them.” NAS When the spies returned they had a good report, and a bad report. Numbers 13:25-28 — When they returned from spying out the land, at the end of forty days, they proceeded to come to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation of the sons of Israel in the wilderness of Paran, at Kadesh; and they brought back word to them and to all the congregation and showed them the fruit of the land. Thus they told him, and said, “We went in to the land where you sent us; and it certainly does flow with milk and honey, and this is its fruit. Nevertheless, the people who live in the land are strong, and the cities are fortified and very large; and moreover, we saw the descendants of Anak there.” NAS Twelve spies went into the promised land. Two men, Joshua and Caleb, saw the exceedingly good land, and ten men saw only the giants. Now all of the Hebrews, including the twelve spies, had seen the mighty miracles of God. Two were convinced. Ten were not convinced that God could do what He said He could do. What was the problem here? Ten men had a heart condition: hard, unbelieving hearts. In Numbers 11:23, the Lord asked Moses, “Is the Lord’s power limited? Now you shall see whether My Word will come true for you or not.” NAS God’s power is unlimited! And God’s Word is true. So who got to enter the promised land? The two believers whose hearts were tender to the Word of God, whose hearts were full of faith in God. The same is true today; the receivers are the believers. In a way we have our own Superman. John 3:16 says that God so loved the world (in spite of us and our sins) that He

You are invited to COWBOY CHURCH!

Are you having a Rodeo or Livestock event? Give us a call.

1st Saturday of every month Standish, CA @ 6:00 p.m. Hwy. 395 /A3 — Standish 4-H Hall

We would love to come to your event or ranch and host Cowboy Church for you.

Harmony Ranch Ministry 3767 Keyes Way Fallon, NV 89406

Tom J. Gonzalez Diana J. Gonzalez, Pastor

28 April 2013

threecrossls@cccomm.net

(775) 867-3100 Cell (775) 426-1107

gave His only begotten son, Jesus. Jesus came to Earth as a man. Everything He did He did as a man, with the power of the Holy Spirit. The gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are a blueprint of how we are supposed to walk on this Earth, with the same power and authority that Jesus has. He died for us to have it! Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father. Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it. If you love Me, you will keep My commandments. John 14:12-15 NAS Greater works than Jesus! How on Earth are we going to do that? Jesus answers that question in John 14:16-20: I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. After a little while the world will no longer see Me, but you will see Me; because I live, you will live also. In that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you. NAS The mighty Holy Spirit gives us the power to be little Christs (Christians). So what’s the key to this power and authority? Key #1: Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.” John 14:6 NAS Ask Jesus into your life. Jesus said in John 3:3 you must be born again (spiritual regeneration). Key #2: Read and believe the Word of God with a tender, loving heart. John 15:7-11 — If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples. Just as the Father has loved Me, I have also loved you; abide in My love. If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love. These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full. NAS James 4:6-8 — But He gives a greater grace. Therefore is says, “God is opposed to the proud, but gives grace to the humble.” Submit therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners; and purify your hearts, you double-minded. NAS Key #3: Dare to live (your choice) the abundant life, with all the power and authority Christ died to give you. The thief (Satan) comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly. John 10:10 NAS You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him. While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. Acts 10:38, 44 NAS Let’s purpose in our hearts to humbly submit to the Word of God. Then with faith in that Word we can live the superman (and woman) lives that bring us peace, no matter what is going on around us. Read Mark 11:22-26 and Luke 10:17-20. Happy trails. May God richly bless you. We love you and would love to hear from you. If you would like someone to pray with, or just have a question, please give us a call at (775) 867-3100. ‘Til next time… If you would like a Cow Country Church booklet for yourself or a friend, email or call us with your request and we will mail it out to you free of charge. Pastor Diana, threecrossls@cccomm.net. (775) 867-3100

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

Shaw Cattle Co.

Allie Bear

Real Estate

Production Sale Report

Specializing in hunting, ranching, and horse properties

February 20, 2013 87

Hereford Bulls

Black Angus

$4,178.00

Lot #

Amount

123

$7,000.00

T Five Ranch

$3,769.00

126

$8,000.00

Desert View

$1,072.00

132

$6,750.00

Thomas O Leary

191

$9,500.00

Rees Bros

223

$9,500.00

G J Livestock

221 Black Angus Bulls

$4,732.00

Red Angus Bulls

114 Commercial Heifers Hereford Amount

Buyer

$7,000.00

Harrison Herefords

$6,000.00

Lord Ranch

$6,250.00

J Spear Ranch

$7,000.00

Lambert Ranch

$6,750.00

Desert View Ranch

“It’s not happy people who are thankful; it is thankful people that are happy.” Courtesy PCC Update www.progressiverancher.com

Buyer

Red Angus

Lot #

COWBOY LOGIC

Cattle Ranch South of Eureka (Duckwater)

Buyer

4851 deeded acres, of which 600 acres are hayable meadows & 410 irrigated pasture meadows from year-round springs. 3820 acres of native grazing lands) will run 830 head of cattle. Family owned for generations. 807,954 BLM acres out the gate for spring, summer & winter grazing. Also, 134,865 acres summer Forest grazing. $3,500,000.

Lot #

Amount

320

$5,500.00

Aldecoa & Sons

325

$5,250.00

Baker Ranch

Sherman Hills Ranch All Private. Approx. 1,259 acres, six pastures, with corrals, shop, garage, newer 2040 sq. ft. perm. man. home, landscaping, nice BBQ deck. Year-round creek. In Osino within 15 min of Elko! NEW PRICE $1,500,000

326

$5,250.00

Alan Johnstone

333

$5,250.00

Carlton Anderson

WESTERN NEVADA CATTLEWOMEN

Flying M Ranch

Invite you to our Scholarship Bar-B-Que Dinner and Western Dance

Great ranch, Just minutes from I-80 (Imlay, NV) & not far from Winnemucca. Approx. 23,000 acres of deeded ground with over 23 miles on the river. Winter outsideno feeding. $15,000,000

Music by Sierra Express Band Auction W Raffle W Door Prizes

April 20, 2013 W 6:00 PM Dinner Smith Valley Community Hall, Smith, NV Adults $20 per person Ages 4-12 – $10 W 3 and under Free

Get Your Tickets Before It Is Sold Out! For Tickets: Gardnerville: Vicki Hone 775-783-8198 Terri Chichester at Pine Nut Livestock 775-901-6274 Smith Valley: Linda Huntsberger 755-720-3106

Nevada CattleWomen, Inc. is a voice for women in the Nevada beef cattle industry to promote a positive image of the livestock industry; by educating and informing the public; to build and maintain demand for beef as a product; and to support the agricultural lifestyle; through a strong and enthusiastic membership to achieve such goals.

Bear Ranch Great Development Possibilities. Meadow & Range Ground, East Idaho St., Elko. Cattle Operation & Open Space!, Meadow Water Righted; Produces Grass Hay! $1,700,000, (Ranch Headquarters not included)

Wildhorse Ranch Approximately 4,500 deeded acres north of Elko, Nevada. 2,123 accepted water-righted acres. Borders the forest & Wildhorse Reservoir.

View comple liﬆings at:

www.ARanchBroker.com

775-738-8535 Allie Bear, Broker/Realtor 775-777-6416

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 29

Mustang Facts ll The 1971 Wild Horse & Burro Act states: “The Secretary shall cause additional excess wild free roaming horses and burros for which an adoption demand by qualified individuals does not exist to be destroyed in the most humane and cost efficient manner possible.” ll A 2008 GAO report found the BLM to be in noncompliance, and states: “The act provides that unadopted excess animals shall be humanely destroyed or, under certain circumstances, sold without limitation.” However, BLM only manages these animals through sales with limitations. BLM is concerned about the possible reaction to the destruction of healthy animals. ll It is estimated that there are currently 11,000 more wild horses and burros on public lands than what can exist in appropriate balance with other rangeland resources and uses. From Fiscal Year 2012: State

Horses

Burros

Total

Max. AML

502

3,194

3,696

1,676

1,965

939

2,904

2,063

967

812

640

617

170

120

18,425

1,456

108

2,093

2,128

2,715

3,040

217

3,257

1,956

3,543

3,725

Total

31,453

5,841

19,881 12,778

37,294 26,545

ll As of Feb. 7, 2013, there were 15,705 horses and 1,348 burros in corrals and 33,664 horses in pastures. The combined figure of 50,717 animals in holding compares to the BLM’s total holding capacity of 52,986. ll Congress appropriated $74.9 million to the Wild Horse and Burro Program in Fiscal Year 2012, which ended September 30, 2012. Of that year’s expenditures ($72.4 million), holding costs accounted for $43 million (59.3 percent). Gathers and removals cost $7.8 million (10.8 percent); adoption events cost $7.1 million (9.8 percent). (The $2.5 million difference between appropriations and expenditures is the amount of money “obligated” to certain activities but not actually spent.) ll The BLM removed 8,283 animals (7,269 horses and 1,014 burros) from the range in Fiscal Year 2012, which ended September 30, 2012. The Bureau placed 2,598 removed animals into private care through adoption in FY 2012 — down from 5,701 in FY 2005. Sources: www.blm.gov, www.gao.gov

30 April 2013

Gateway Legislation: Horse Tripping Today, Your Livelihood Tomorrow? S

by Becky Lisle

ponsored by Sen. Mark Menando (D) of Las Vegas and introduced to the current Nevada legislative session, SB 72, known as the horse tripping bill, is: “AN ACT relating to cruelty to animals; prohibiting a person from engaging in horse tripping or steer tailing for sport, entertainment, competition or practice; prohibiting a person from knowingly organizing, sponsoring, promoting, overseeing or receiving admission money for a horse tripping or steer tailing event; prohibiting a person from using a cattle prod on the face of an animal; providing a penalty; and providing other matters properly relating thereto. “ Similar legislation was held up in committee two years ago, and therefore did not go before the legislature for a vote. The 2011 version focused on horse tripping and did not include language prohibiting other events or practices. It is vital that the current special interest bill also be kept in committee, since bills like SB72 might be called “gateway” bills, which are commonly created and endorsed by extremist animal rights groups in their efforts to first limit, and then eventually ban, the use of animals for recreation, entertainment, sports, and even food. Once their foot is in the proverbial door, precedents are set with legislation like SB72, and the pathway is paved for the gradual whittling away at the use of animals. While this may sound unlikely and dramatic, one has to look no further than California for an example of the way the animal rights movement has taken hold. Bills like SB72 are pieces of a much bigger puzzle. Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States, once said: “We have no ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced through selective breeding. One generation and out. We have no problem with the extinction of domestic animals.” In a concerted effort to incite emotion, the animal rights movement chooses easy targets—such as horse tripping—for their initial attacks, aiming at events or practices that are misunderstood or even unknown by lawmakers and the general public. At the center of the horse tripping issue is a video, which was shown to legislators, taken at a Winnemucca charreada (Mexican rodeo). An article in the Reno Gazette Journal stated: “Many in the crowded legislative hearing room gasped as that video and another showed horses crashing to the dirt after being roped by the legs and subsequent footage of severely injured horses.” There was no irrefutable proof that the “severely injured horses” shown were even at that particular event, or at any horse tripping event, and veterinary inspection of the actual horse that fell found no lasting injuries. Os-

car Peralta of the Hispanic Legislative Caucus reported that in thousands of horse tripping runs since 1995, only three falls have been reported. No distinction is made between horse tripping and the long-held Great Basin tradition of horse roping, which has been proven through the decades to be a safe and effective method of handling horses for necessary practices such as branding and castrating. Apathy is our worst enemy. When we allow ourselves to believe “it doesn’t apply to me,” we are actively choosing to ignore one of the greatest threats to our traditions, lifestyles, and livelihoods. Let’s say horse tripping is banned, then by default, horse roping. Really then, what’s the difference between roping a horse, and roping a steer at a rodeo, or a calf at a branding? If tailing a steer down is cruel, wouldn’t PRCA bulldogging be? Why is it crueler to use a cattle prod on one part of an animal than on another? A good demonstration of the “foot in the door” method employed by the animal rights movement is Oregon’s Measure 97, which was thankfully defeated by voters in the 2000 general election. Measure 97 would have banned the use of “body-gripping” traps on animals. Meant to eliminate the practice of trapping , the ambiguous language would have not only banned the trapping of coyotes, bobcats, beavers, and the like, but also the trapping of mice and gophers! In addition, squeeze chutes and even “trapping” a calf at a branding with a rope would have been illegal. It is in this way that the insidious animal rights movement wedges its way in and, through legislation and litigation, works to tear down and destroy use of animals—ANY use of animals. As urbanization encroaches, rural voices must grow louder so as not to be drowned out. Make yourself heard. SB72 has been referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and a hearing on March 12 produced no action. Members of the committee include: Aaron D. Ford – Chair Aaron.Ford@sen.state.nv.us, 702-772-5544 Mark A. Manendo – Vice Chair Mark.Manendo@sen.state. nv.us, 702-451-8654 Tick Segerblom tsegerblom@sen.state.nv.us, 775-684-1422 James A. Settelmeyer James.Settelmeyer@sen.state.nv.us, 775-450-6114 Pete Goicoechea Pete.Goicoechea@sen.state.nv.us, 775-237-5300 Please submit all documents in support of your testimony electronically to SenNR@sen.state.nv.us. Please see agenda for specific deadlines. Agendas can be found through the Nevada Legislature website: http:// www.leg.state.nv.us/.

Becky Prunty Lisle is an occasional free-lance writer, full-time mother, and 5th generation Elko County rancher.

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

The Return of an Domestic Horse Processing: O

by Becky Lisle

n November 18, 2011, President Obama signed legislation that allowed for the return of horse processing in the United States. For the previous five years, USDA funding bills had included language that prohibited funding for the inspection of horse meat; no such prohibition was in the 2011 bill. Opponents of horse processing immediately filed a petition to the White House through its interactive website in protest. At the time, 5,000 signatures were needed in order to have a petition considered. The opponents were shocked when supporters of humane horse processing easily got the necessary 5,000 signatures on their petition before the deadline—for years, opponents have fallaciously claimed that 80% of Americans were opposed to horse processing, when in actuality, that number was taken from a single poll of 1,000 urbanites. Almost a year and a half later, with several plants ready to operate and no inspectors having been assigned, a New Mexico company has taken action. When funding was restored for USDA horse inspection, Valley Meats LLC invested in modifying their existing cattle facility to put humane horse processing in place. They allege that the USDA is wrongfully refusing to provide the final inspection for horses that allows for interstate and international trade. Joining Valley Meats in the lawsuit are several prominent agricultural organizations, including the International Equine Business Association, R-CALF, the South Dakota Stockgrowers Association (SDSGA), the New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association (NMCGA), and several individuals, who all filed motions to intervene. ( In an attempt to block horse processing’s return to the US, the Humane Society of the United States also filed a motion to intervene in the lawsuit, as well as a motion to dismiss.) It is certainly significant that Christie Vilsack, the wife of Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack, ran for office in Iowa’s 4th Congressional District in 2012, and listed among her campaign contributors the Humane Society Legislative Fund Political Action Committee. Interestingly, Tom Vilsack chose National Agriculture Day, March 19th, to call on Congress to find alternatives to horse processing, even while the USDA is required by law to provide the necessary inspections. Progress is also being made in Oklahoma toward the restoration of much-needed horse processing. Sister bills are currently before the legislature: House Bill 1999, which would allow commercial horse processing, has passed the House and been referred to the Senate, and Senate Bill 375, which would repeal the ban on the sale of horse meat for consumption within the state, has similarly passed the Senate and been forwarded to the House for consideration. In early March, opponents of horse processing staged a protest that boasted approximately 100 people, most of them from out of state. In contrast, a March 13th rally in support

Nevada Department of Agriculture Signs Cooperative Agreement with Non–Profit Horse Group.

MARCH 14, SPARKS — The Nevada Department of Agriculture (NDA) has signed a cooperative agreement between Return to Freedom, Inc. (RTF), a non-profit organization located in Lompoc, CA, that is a sponsor of the American Wild Horse Preservation Campaign. Currently, NDA limits it’s collection of Virginia Range estray horses to urban areas and roadways for public safety purposes. RTF may purchase all such horses collected by NDA for $100 per horse on an as-is basis. Any horses tendered to but not accepted by RTF within two business days after being notified shall be subject to disposition by NDA in any manner permitted by law. RTF will work with third-parties who adopt or purchase the estray horses ensuring that the horses will not be released back on the Virginia Range, a violation of Nevada Revised Statute. RTF will provide NDA with an annual report of all horses resold/or placed during the previous 12 months. The cooperative agreement applies to Washoe, Storey and Lyon Counties and the Consolidated Municipality of Carson City. www.progressiverancher.com

Uphill

Bat tle

of the return of horse processing brought an estimated 400 people to the Oklahoma capitol. In response to the overwhelming support for the return of domestic horse-processing, a bill was introduced on the national level by Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) . Having lent her support to numerous”save the horses” bills, Landrieu has been a perpetual favorite of the animal rights and wild horse advocacy crowds. Ironically, in 2011 Landrieu introduced legislation to protect the Louisiana coast from “invasive” wild pigs and rodents, citing problems almost identical to western issues with wild horses, such as irreparable damage done to the ecosystem and competition with native wildlife for resources. The Senate version of Landrieu’s SAFE (Safeguard American Food Exports) Act would “prevent human health threats posed by the consumption of equines raised in the United States,” and the House version would”prohibit the sale or transport of equines and equine parts in interstate or foreign commerce for human consumption.” This would mean the end of the ability to ship unwanted, unusable horses to Canada or Mexico—over 150,000 have been processed across the borders annually since the closures of domestic plants in 2007. The purported “health threats” in Landrieu’s bill are based on the fallacy perpetuated by animal rights activists that American horse meat is toxic because of the presence of medications, and that virtually ALL of American horses are regularly, repeatedly given medication such as phenylbutazone (bute). The claim that horse meat is toxic is based on the fact that withdrawal times for some drugs like “bute” have not been established for equines by the FDA, and because phenylbutazone proved to be carcinogenic when administered directly to humans. In spite of such alarmist claims, there has never been a documented illness resulting from the consumption of horse meat. A report by four equine science PhDs (Drs. Day, King, Henneke, & Evans) dispelled the claims of “bute-tainted meat,” stating that “The half-life for PBZ in horses is 5 to 6 hrs (MERCK Veterinary Manual). This is the time needed for a horse to naturally remove 50% of the drug from its system. So, by 6 hours post-administration, half of the PBZ has been eliminated from the horse; by 12 hours, half of this remaining half-concentration has been eliminated, and so forth.” It is interesting to note that when finding no traces of bute (or any other drugs) in American horse meat while testing at parts per million, some Canadian plants have implemented testing at parts per BILLION. In the event that any drug residue was found, meticulous safety protocol is in place to ensure that affected meat never makes it into food supply. Consumers are at far greater risk of contracting a food borne illness from improperly washed produce than from drug-contaminated horse meat. Not surprisingly, during and after the recent uproar over horse meat being found in hamburger, there have been no reports of illness resulting from its consumption. Great Britain has actually seen a tremendous curiosity-driven upswing in the demand for horse meat following the media frenzy. Horse meat is consumed all around the world, and while it seems obvious that America’s excess horses would help meet the demand, the emotion and ethnocentrism of horse “advocates” has been the proverbial squeaky wheel getting the oil. An ironic and largely ignored result has been the suffering of horses caused by the down economy, high hay prices and an insufficient, overwhelmed equine rescue network. Now, as we find ourselves with the tide turning back toward the humane and practical management of America’s privately owned horse population, we must never forget that the imminent return of domestic horse processing has been a very hard-won battle. The war will wage on, especially considering that the very head of the US Department of Agriculture shows an extreme disconnect from the industry. The misguided emotional efforts by horse “advocates” to end the practice of horse processing completely will not stop, and will need to be continually thwarted. The recent progress made is a very significant yet small portion of what will be an on-going fight to keep a vital component of the horse industry alive. To help in the ongoing fight, please visit http://www.united-horsemen.org and consider joining or donating, or contact UH president, Dave Duquette, directly at (541) 571 7588.

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 31

NEVADA STALLION STAKES & Elko County NRCHA Show NRCHA Approved

Working Cowhorse ★ Aged Event ★ August 24-25 ★ Elko, Nevada Judge: Blue Allen Stallion Nomination Deadline: July 1st Nomination fee: $200.00 Late Nominations will be accepted until August 1st with an additional $100 late fee.

★ NOMINATED STALLIONS to Date ★ Twist of Docs Fate RC Yankee Slider

★

Gary & Candace Wines

★

Tamara Casey

Check the website, after July 1st, for updated list.

Nevada Stallion Stakes Show Entry deadline: August 1 with late entries accepted to Aug 15th. ECNRCHA Show Entry Deadline Aug 23th, Noon Late entries accepted up to show start time with penalties.

Entries forms available at www.elkocountyfair.com E-mail entries to elkocountyfair@hotmail.com

Applications Now Being Accepted:

2013 Youth Range Camp

Carson City, Nev., Feb. 25 — Applications are now being accepted from high school students to attend the 53rd Nevada Youth Range Camp to be held June 16-22 at the U.S. Forest Service’s Big Creek Campground in central Nevada. Applications must be submitted by Tuesday, April 30. Nevada Youth Range Camp is a teenager’s best opportunity to learn about Nevada’s desert and mountain rangelands and diverse ecosystems, while experiencing them first hand. The Society for Range Management operates the week-long camp for 14-18 year olds from Nevada and eastern California. University of Nevada Cooperative Extension conducts the program with staff from various State and Federal agencies including University of Nevada Cooperative Extension, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Nevada Division of Forestry, Nevada Division of Conservation Districts, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Nevada Department of Wildlife. Financial sponsors include Nevada Wildlife Federation, Nevada Conservation Districts, Nevada Bighorns Unlimited, and Nevada Society for Range Management. Campers will have the opportunity to learn from range management professionals who are knowledgeable in the ecology and management of the Great Basin’s desert and mountain rangelands. Students learn basic surveying and map reading, identification and importance of rangeland plants, evaluation of sagebrush and woodland ecosystems, wildlife surveying techniques, evaluation of stream health, and many other topics related to rangelands. While the camp is educational, it also offers an enjoyable, outdoor experience with activities such as swimming, fishing, hiking, volleyball, horseshoes, campfires and photography. Interested students must submit an application and letter of recommendation from an adult other than a parent or sibling. The cost to attend Range Camp is $180, which includes meals and camp activities. Applicants can be sponsored to attend Range Camp by contacting their local conservation district or other organizations. Forms and information can be found on the Nevada Youth Range Camp Web site at http://nevada.rangelands.org/ Range%20Camp.html or by contacting Kathryn Dyer (775) 885-6012 or kdyer@blm.gov. Completed applications with enclosures can be mailed to NV Youth Range Camp, c/o Bureau of Land Management, attn. Kathryn Dyer, 5665 Morgan Mill Road, Carson City, NV 89701; e-mailed to kdyer@blm.gov ; or faxed to 775-885-6147 (attn. Kathryn Dyer). If sent by e-mail, letters of recommendation must be on the adult’s official letterhead or must be a scanned copy of the adult’s letter and signature. Applications must be submitted by Tuesday, April 30. Approved applicants will be notified within two weeks. Camp is held every June at the US Forest Service Big Creek Campground in central Nevada’s Toiyabe Mountain Range. The Toiyabes are one of Nevada’s most impressive mountain ranges with several peaks over 10,000 feet in elevation. June is an ideal time to be in the Toiyabes when numerous wildflowers are in bloom and the vegetation is green from the recent snowmelt.

Mail entries and payments to: Elko County Fair Board, PO Box 2067, Elko, NV 89803 For More Information contact: JJ Roemmich 775-397-2769 or elkocountyfair@hotmail.com

Elko County Fair August 23 - September 2

www.elkocountyfair.com 32 April 2013

Garcia Bits & Spurs -gifted! The gift that won’t be re Bit #122 $475 NV. Sales tax 6.85% S&H $12

The Progressive Rancher

Spur #273 $475 NV. Sales tax 6.85% S&H $12

500 Commercial St. Elko, NV 89801 Phone: (775) 738-5816 Fax: (775) 738-8980

capriolas.com

www.progressiverancher.com

Range Plants for the Rancher By Paul T. Tueller, Ph.D., CRMC

Western Yarrow I

n the course of preparing these articles I have described numerous grasses and grass-like plants and fewer woody and herbaceous plants. Woody plants, primarily shrubs, are important for understanding the ecology of the Great Basin vegetation since the “cold desert” is primarily shrub dominated. Grasses tend to occur as an understory to shrubs and rarely occur in pure stands. Perhaps of greatest importance is the vegetation found along streams or in wetlands. For this reason I have recently been describing plants that are found in these areas. For this issue I describe a plant found across Nevada in a variety of habitats including riparian areas. This plant is called Western Yarrow (Acillea millifolium). Achillea millifolium known commonly as yarrow or common yarrow, is a flowering plant in the family Asteraceae. It is native to temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere in Asia, Europe and North America. In parts of the southwestern United States it is called plumajillo (Spanish for ‘little feather”) due to it’s leaf shape and texture. Yarrow grows from sea level to 11,500 feet in elevation. Yarrow is a native perennial cool season erect forb, arising singly or as a loose cluster 6 to 24 inches tall. The stems have dense wooly hairs. Plants flower April to July, and reproduce from seeds and rhizomes. The flowers are white to pink or pinkish-white colored, all with yellow centers. They are borne in a flat-topped corymb. The fruit is a flattened achene. The leaves are alternate, simple and fern-like with pubescent surfaces and from 5 to 20 cm long. They tend to be aromatic. The plant has a strong, sweet scent, similar to rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus). They are evenly distributed along

www.progressiverancher.com

the stem, with leaves near the middle and bottom stem being the largest. Yarrow plants are found in prairies, sagebrush plains, pastures, roadsides, and disturbed sites. They often grow in or near streams. They are found from semi-arid shrub dominated areas up to the subalpine zone and are somewhat shade and drought tolerance. They are adapted to a broad range of soils, but grow best on sandy and gravelly loam. Associated species often include aspen, big sagebrush, wheatgrasses, and bluegrasses. Yarrow provides poor to fair cattle forage and fair to good sheep forage, especially the inflorescence. It is usually grazed only when it is green, and it may contain toxic alkaloids and glycosides. An excess of this plant on mountain ranges indicates the need for lighter grazing or rest. Of general interest is the fact that Native Americans used tea made from yarrow to reliever ear-, tooth-, and headaches; as an eyewash; to reduce swelling; as a cold remedy; and as a tonic or stimulant. Yarrow varies in taste and in potency, depending on where it grows and at what stage of growth it is in. The best time to collect yarrow for tea is right before the flowers are produced, using only the new succulent leaves. Green leaves were used to relieve itching, chewed for toothaches, and used as a mild laxative. During the Civil War, yarrow was widely used to treat wounds and become known as “soldiers woundwort.” An ethanol extract of yarrow has mosquito-repelling properties. So you can look upon this pinkish-flowered plant with fern-like leaves with renewed respect.

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 33

Financial Focus Presented by Sonny Davidson and Jason Land, Financial Advisors, Edward Jones in Elko, Nevada 2213 North 5th Street, Suite A | 775-738-8811

Help Yourself Reduce Investment Stress

ou probably aren’t too worried about it, but April is Stress Awareness Month. Each year, the Health Resource Network sponsors this “month” to inform people about the dangers of stress and to share successful coping strategies. Obviously, it’s important to reduce stress in all walks of life — including your investment activities. How can you cut down on the various stresses associated with investing? Here are a few possible “stress-busters”: • Know your risk tolerance. If you’re constantly worrying about the value of your investments, your portfolio may simply be too volatile for your individual risk tolerance. Conversely, if you’re always feeling that your investments will never provide you with the growth you need to achieve your long-term goals, you might be investing too conservatively. • Know what to expect from your investments. Uncertainty is often a leading cause of stress. So when you purchase investments that are mysterious to you, you shouldn’t be surprised if they perform in ways that raise your stress levels. Never invest in something unless you fully under-

stand its characteristics and risk potential. • Be prepared for market volatility. Over the long term, the financial markets have trended upward, though their past performance can’t guarantee future results. Yet for periods of months, and even years, these same markets can sputter and decline. So when you invest, be aware of this volatility; if you’re prepared for it, you won’t be shocked when it happens, and you should be able to better keep stress at bay. • Maintain realistic expectations. If you think your investments are going to earn a very high rate of return, year after year, you are more than likely going to be disappointed — and you could easily get “stressed out.” You’re much better off, from a stress standpoint, not to expect eye-popping results. • Diversify your portfolio. If you were only to own one asset class, such as growth stocks, and that particular segment took a big hit during a market drop, your whole portfolio could suffer, and it could take years to recover — causing you no end of stress. But if you spread your investment dollars among a range of vehicles — stocks,

neVaDa ranCHes For saLe

Pristine Locations PARADISE VALLEY 2,290 acres plus BLM and USFS grazing. 300 plus acres of cropland for winter feed. Surface and groundwater. River frontage. $2,400,000

BUTTE VALLEY +/-7,200 acres plus summer and winter grazing for 600+ cows and 5,000 sheep. Many springs, creeks and meadows. 4 pivots for additional winter feed. $6,500,000 Contact:

34 April 2013

This article was written by Edward Jones for use by your local Edward Jones Financial Advisor.

Clover Valley Farm: 243 Acres with 160 acres with underground water rights, two irrigation wells, a stock well and a good domestic well. Large modern home with detached 5 car garage, 4000 and 5000 sq. ft metal buildings and greenhouse. All for only $500,000. Elko Co. 10,706 deeded with BLM grazing permit: These private sections are in the checkerboard area and are intermingled with public lands. The ranch has historically been a Spring Sheep range. The BLM permit is only 29% public lands. Price includes 50% of the mineral rights on all but 320 acres. Price:$130/ acre. Or $1,392,000. Considering adding the property below to it to make a year around unit. Elko Co. Humboldt River Property: 650 acres located between the Ryndon and Osino Exits on I-80. This property has over 300 acres of surface water

rights out of the Humboldt River. The BLM permit for the 10,706 acres above is a short distance from this property with a stock driveway on this property. Price:$1.2 million. Tent Mountain Ranch: Approx. 3500 deed acres in Starr Valley. Nice larger home on paved road plus mountain cabin. Great summer range with water from numerous creeks and seeps. This ranch is made of up of over 20 separate parcels if a buyer were more interested in Investment property vs. Agricultural property. Over 135 acres with surface water rights. Price $3.7 million based on recent appraisal. Indian Creek Ranch: 126 acre Homestead with large Spring and at the foot of the Cherry Creek Range in White Pine County. Certiﬁcated and permitted water rights on the spring for 60 acres. Price reduced to $275,000.

For additional information on these properties go to: BOTTARIREALTY.COM SOLD IN 2012: Antelope Peak Ranch -5000 deeded; Z Bar Ranch- 2400 deeded;

Kelton & associates real estate Tom Gunn 775-343-0200 www.NevadaFarmland.com

bonds, government securities and so on — your portfolio has a better chance of weathering the ups and downs of the market. (Keep in mind, though, that while diversification may help you reduce the effects of volatility, it can’t prevent losses or guarantee profits.) • Think long term. If you only measure your investment success by short-term results, you can feel frustrated and stressed. But when you stop to consider your objectives, you may find that the most important ones, such as a comfortable retirement, are all long-term in nature. Consequently, it makes more sense to measure the progress you’re making with your investments in periods of years, or even decades, rather than days or months. Instead of fretting over your monthly investment statements, compare where you are today versus where you were 10 or 15 years ago. The results may well surprise and help “de-stress” you. Stress Awareness Month will come and go. But by making the right moves, you can help take some of the stress out of investing for a long time to come.

and Mason Mountain Ranch-3700 deeded. We need more ranch listings! Sold in 2013: 113 Ranch at Panaca

Paul D. Bottari, Broker

Work: 775-752-3040

paul@bottarirealty.com

1222 6th St., P.O. Box 368 Wells, NV 89835

The Progressive Rancher

Home: 775-752-3809 • Fax: 775-752-3021

•

www.bottarirealty.com www.progressiverancher.com

Canada Thistle

Canada thistle rosette.

Background Photo: UAF Cooperative Extension Archive, University of Alaska – Fairbanks, Bugwood.org

Individual Canada thistle plants.

Canada thistle flower.

ello from the Humboldt Watershed Cooperative Weed Management Area! This month we would like to introduce you to another state listed noxious weed, Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense). Though its name would indicate otherwise, Canada thistle is a native of the Mediterranean region and southeast Europe. It likely was introduced into North America in contaminated hay and grain seed during early colonization in the 17th century. Canada thistle has become very well established in North America and is now considered a noxious weed in at least 35 states and much of Canada. Canada thistle usually grows 2 to 3 feet tall with alternate, dark green leaves that vary in size. The leaves are generally oblong, the length 3 to 5 times the width, usually deeply lobed, and have spiny toothed edges. The leaf edge spines vary in size and number according to variety. Canada thistle is a perennial spreading both by seed and underground rhizomes. It generally forms colonies and is found in cropland, roadsides, and disturbed pasture soils. However, Canada thistle is not very competitive in healthy turf. Canada thistle grows best in the northern regions of North America where temperature and rainfall are moderate. Canada thistle rosettes require at least 14 hours of day length to bolt and flower. Its growth is limited or stopped when temperature exceed 85° F for extended periods. Although it will grow in a wide range of soils, Canada thistle produces deeper roots in clay or muck soils than in sand or gravel. Once the plant becomes established, roots are the most important means of propagation. Canada thistle has an extensive underground root system that may penetrate the soil to a depth of 10 feet or more and grow laterally 12 to 15 feet per year. Root buds occur randomly along the roots and initiate new shoots whenever environmental conditions are favorable. Root segments as small as 0.6 inch can initiate shoot growth and become established. The key principle to Canada thistle control is to stress the plant and force it to use stored root nutrients. Canada thistle can recover from almost any stress, including control attempts, because of root nutrient stores. Therefore, returning infested land to a productive state occurs only over time. Success requires a sound management plan implemented over several years. Cultural control. Grasses and alfalfa can compete effectively with Canada thistle if their growth is favored by good management. Maintain fertility and, if possible, moisture at optimum levels to favor grass or alfalfa growth. Soil analysis can easily determine fertility needs. Be cautious with nitrogen fertilizers, because excess available soil nitrogen may favor weed growth. These are essential management steps to ensure optimum desir-

able plant growth and competition. However, competition alone seldom is effective against Canada thistle. Mechanical control. Mowing hay meadows can be an effective tool if combined with herbicide treatments. Mowing alone is not effective unless conducted at one-month intervals over several growing seasons. Always combine mowing with cultural and chemical control. Mowing at hay cutting stimulates new Canada thistle shoots to develop from its root system. Chemical control. Read the label, follow directions and use precautions. Research has shown that Tordon 22K (picloram), Milestone (aminopyralid), Transline (clopyralid), Banvel/ Vanquish/Clarity (dicamba) and Telar (chlorsulfuron) are effective against Canada thistle. Canada thistle is difficult to control and retreatment for one to three or more years after the initial application is common. Refer to following table for use rates and application timing. These herbicides are most effective when combined with cultural and/or mechanical control. Please notify the HWCWMA if you see Canada thistle growing along the Humboldt River. Our staff can provide the property owner or appropriate public agency with site-specific advice on how best to remove it. We have an opportunity to stop it from spreading if we act quickly. We map all known locations of regulated noxious weeds in order to help us and others locate new infestations in time to control them. The Humboldt Watershed CWMA has also developed a website to serve as a clearinghouse for information on weeds in the Humboldt Watershed. Our website (http://www.humboldtweedfree.org) contains fact sheets for state listed noxious weeds in Nevada, Board of Director’s information, funding partner’s links, and many more features including a detailed project proposal packet that you can print, fill out and mail back to us at your convenience. We are looking to expand our project area outside of the Humboldt River and always welcome new funding opportunities and partnerships. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Andi Porreca, HWCWMA Coordinator at (775) 762-2636 or email her at aporreca@humboldtweedfree.org. Or you may speak with Rhonda Heguy, HWCWMA President at (775) 738-3085, email: hwcwma@gmail.com.

Herbicide to control Canada thistle in pastures, rangeland, natural and noncrop areas. Herbicide

Rate (Production/A)

Application timing

Comments

Tordon

1 quart

Anytime when weeds are rapidly growing

Fall applications consistent results; may need re-treatment 1 to 2 years

Milestone

5 to 7 fl oz

Spring at prebud growth stage; or fall

Use higher rate for older or dense stands; Milestone may be used to edge of ponds or streams; may need re-treatment 1 to 2 years

Transline

0.67 to 1.33 pints

Spring after all shoots have emerged, rosette to early bud growth stages; or fall

Apply 1 pint/A or more in fall; may need re-treatment 1 to 3 years

Telar

1 oz

Spring bolting to bud growth stages; or fall

Fall applications most consistent results; essential to use non-ionic surfactant at 0.25% v/v; may need retreatment 1 to 2 years

Banvel, Vanquish, or Clarity (diacamba)

2 quarts

Spring rosette growth stage; or fall

Fall applications most consistent results; may need re-treatment 2 to 4 years

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 35

Why Control the First Noxious Weeds? N

Brad Schultz, Kent McAdoo and Steve Foster. Extension Educator, Winnemucca; Natural Resource Specialist, Elko; Extension Educator, Lovelock.

oxious weeds are an ever increasing problem on range and pasture land in Nevada and surrounding states. Many landowners, for a variety of reasons, do not control weeds on their property when they are first observed and populations are small. Among their reasons are: 1) someone else brought them here, so they should control them; and 2) there are only a few plants, they have not spread and herbicides are costly. The first line of reason may seem to have merit, but is also pointless. Most of the individuals who brought our current suite of noxious weeds into the Great Basin and Intermountain West passed away years ago. If dead men don’t tell tales, it is just as likely they will not be killing their

weeds. The statement about few plants, slow spread and high treatment cost may be true at first; but given time, most weeds increase rapidly when the right conditions occur for optimum seed germination and seedling survival. Then control becomes very, very costly. Remember, all weed problems started with only a few plants. The University of Nevada Cooperative Extension recently published a number of papers that clearly demonstrate why landowners should control noxious weeds when they are first observed (see list at the end of this article). Live seeds that germinate and grow into a mature plant originate from a pool of seeds called the seedbank. There are two general types of seedbanks: transient and persistent. A transient seedbank is shortlived, with all seeds either germinating or dying within one germination (growing) Table 1. Seed production and maximum longevity for some of the noxious weeds found in Nevada. season following the seed’s maturation (ripening). A persistent seedbank lasts for at least two and often many growing seasons. Seed Production Seed Production Longevity Seedbanks function much like your bank account. There are annual inputs Common Name Scientific Name Seeds/Plant Years (deposits) when seed ripens and is dispersed, and withdrawals when seeds germiCanada thistle up to 12,000 22 Cirsium arvense nate, die or are buried too deep to germinate. When the annual inputs exceed the St. Johnswort 15,000 to 33,000 10 Hypericum perforatum annual losses, the seedbank increases; thus, the potential for new weeds to establish increases. Successful weed management programs must focus on reducing Dalmation toadflax up to 500,000 10 Linaria dalmatica the seedbank by reducing inputs and/or increasing losses so they exceed inputs. Diffuse knapweed 10,000 12 Centaurea diffusa One reason to control the first weeds is to prevent them from establishing Dyers woad 500 to 10,000 10 Isatis tinctoria a long-lived seedbank. Table 1 lists 22 noxious weeds that occur in Nevada and provides information about seed production per plant and how long some of those Hoary cress 1,200 to 4,800 3 Cardaria spp. seeds can survive in the soil. Most weeds produce at least several thousands of Jointed goatgrass up to 3,000 5 Aegilops cylindrica L seeds per plant, with many species typically producing tens of thousands to hunLeafy spurge hundreds 10 Euphorbia esula dreds of thousands of seeds per plant. For each annual batch of seed produced, Mayweed chamomile 550 to 7,000 25 Anthemis cotula some will survive at least one year. For many species, additional seeds will survive at least 10 years, and for a few species a small percentage will survive for 20 Mediterranean sage up to 100,000 10 Salvia aethiopis years or more. For a plant that produces 10,000 seeds and has only one-half of one Medusahead tens to hundreds 2 Taeniatherum caput-medus percent alive after 10 years, that means 50 live seeds will reside in the seedbank. Musk thistle 10,000 10 Carduus nutans Those seeds may remain where the mother plant dropped them, or any number of Perennial pepperweed tens of thousands ? Lepidium latifolium processes could have been moved them new locations, perhaps where weeds did not previously exist. If the right dispersal, germination, and survival conditions Purple loosestrife up to 2,700,000 15 Lythrum salicaria occur, an entirely new population can establish years after seed-drop, and quite Rush skeletonweed up to 10,000 2 Chondrilla juncea possibly at locations far from the mother plant. Once a noxious weed goes to seed Russian knapweed 1,200 8 Acroptilon repens once, it can create a weed problem that lasts for many years. Cooperative Extension also has been addressing noxious weed issues at Scotch thistle 7,000 to 40,000 16 Onopordum acanthium Chimney Dam Reservoir in Humboldt County for a number of years. Two recent Salt cedar 500,000+ 1 Tamarix ramosissima publications clearly show that excellent control of perennial pepperweed (tall Silverleaf nightshade 4,500+ 15 Solanum elaeagnifolium whitetop) can occur when herbicide is applied to seedlings. In Figure 1, the redSpotted knapweed 1,000 to 30,000 8 Centaurea biebersteinii dish brown plants are new seedlings of perennial pepperweed shortly after they were treated with full label rate Cimarron®Max herbicide in early June 2007. Yellow starthistle up to 100,000 10 Centaurea solstitialis The seedlings established on the lakebed in early May when the rapid decline in Yellow toadflax 15,000 to 30,000 10 Linaria vulgaris water levels created an ideal germination environment. The brown leaves are the Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figures 1 and 2. The treatment area 13 days after treatment (1) and one year later (2). The brownish hue in figure 1 is the leaves of treated perennial pepperweed (tall whitetop) plants. The predominant species in figure 2 is foxtail barley, a short-lived perennial grass.

36 April 2013

Figure 4

Figures 3 and 4. A mature stand of perennial pepperweed (3) 13 days after treatment in 2007 and in August of 2008 (4). There was evidence of extensive top kill in 2007 (yellowish chlorotic plants) but abundant regrowth in 2008.

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

Spotted Knapweed appeared near Missoula before 1925 and is now in every county in Montana.

effect of the herbicide. Figure 2 shows the same spot one year later. The herbicide application eliminated over 99 percent of the seedlings and facilitated establishment of foxtail barley. Foxtail barley generally is not considered a desired species, but on a lakebed that is flooded every few years and has alkaline soil when exposed, foxtail barley probably is the best vegetation one can expect. At this location, cattle consume the foxtail barley quite readily in the fall and winter. The area shown in Figure 3 is about 200 yards from the location of Figures 1 and 2, and was inhabited by a very mature stand of perennial pepperweed. This site location was treated on the same day, and with the same chemical and application rate, as the perennial pepperweed seedlings shown in Figure 1. One year later there was no effective control of the mature perennial pepperweed plants (Figure 4). The mature stand of perennial pepperweed was eventually controlled (not eradicated), but it took several more annual treatments. One critical reason for successful control of the seedlings and unsuccessful control of the mature perennial pepperweed is the respective root structure of the different age classes. For about the first 6-8 eight weeks of growth, perennial pepperweed seedlings behave as an annual, not a perennial plant. The roots are short and they have not developed any perennial buds. The buds that develop on the root crown and the roots after eight weeks of age are what allow this weed to regrow the next year. When the leaves are killed before the seedling can develop perennial buds on the roots and root crown the plant dies. Mature perennial pepperweed plants have roots that extend several feet or more into the soil and can extend laterally for 10-20 feet or more. Every inch of these roots has developed a bud that can produce a new plant. It is literally impossible to place enough herbicide on the relatively small amount of leaf area of mature plants to kill all of the buds found on their very large root system. Some buds will survive and eventually produce stems that emerge the following growing season. Furthermore, emergence may not occur until the middle or latter part of the next growing season. Another challenge with applying herbicides to mature perennial pepperweed is appropriate location of the chemical. The lower leaves are the ones that export most of their carbohydrates from photosynthesis to the roots, and thus move the herbicide to the roots. The upper leaves deliver most of their energy production to the flowers and seed. It is very difficult to get herbicide, especially from an aerial application, through the flowers and upper leaves to the lower leaves, where it is most effective. As Figure 1 shows, all of the seedlings had leaves that were completely exposed and therefore had the maximum potential for herbicide contact, uptake and movement to the site of action in the plant. The work at Chimney Dam showed that perennial pepperweed up to two years old could be successfully treated with Cimaron®Max provided their leaves were readily accessible to the herbicide. Complete documentation of the effort to control perennial peppewrweed at Chimeny Dam Reservoir can be found in two publications available on the internet at the URL addresses found at the end of this article.

Specializing In Long Term Farm & Ranch Real Estate Loans Call Or Visit Today 2420 Main St. Baker City, OR 97814

Incredibly table Comfor

Toll Free: 800-444-7101 Website: www. pacificim.net

Furniture as as You Are! LEATHER: • Outlasts Fabric Four-To-One • Offers Year Round Comfort • Is Extremely Durable • Ages Well • Color Stays Vibrant

Papers described in the text. Please see these for additional discussion of this topic and photos of the success of the treatments applied. Schultz. B. W. 2012. The Noxious Weed Seedbank: Out of Sight – Out of mind and eventually out of control. UNCE Fact Sheet 12-01. Available at: http://www.unce.unr.edu/publications/ search/details.asp?searchby=keywordsearch&searchtext=seedbank&submit=Search

• Is Easy To Care For La-z-boy



Ashley



Sunny Designs

Serta Mattresses



Schultz, B. W. 2012. Response of seedling and two-year-old perennial pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium) plants to herbicide control. Journal of the NACAA, Volume 5, Issue 1. May. Available at: http://www.nacaa.com/journal/index.php?jid=136. Schultz, B. W. 2011. Differential Herbicide Effectiveness on Adjacent Populations of Young (Seedling) And Mature Perennial Pepperweed (Lepidium latifolium). Journal of the NACAA. Volume 4, Issue 1. November. Available at: http://www.nacaa.com/journal/index.php?jid=103 The use of herbicide names in this paper does not imply any recommendation from the University of Nevada Cooperative Extension. Perennial pepperweed can be treated successfully with a number of herbicides and any applicator should know the benefits and constraints of each herbicide and make their selection based upon their specific circumstances. www.progressiverancher.com

Hours:

Phone: 775-738-9500 Fax: 775-753-7169

The Progressive Rancher

Mon-Fri 8:30-5:30 Saturday 9-5

2990 Idaho St. Elko, NV 89801

Closed Sundays

April 2013 37

The Best Gift

it’s in the bone

To know you’re not chained to stay

Jake Telford on Nabisco Roan (full brother to Frettin)

but are free to go

Boonlight Dancer x Crackin

But stay because you want to. Bring as much to the table as you take! And really ask for nothing in return But honesty!

2007 Red Roan Stallion

At the beginning of the day be thankful And at the end of day be grateful and gracious. Honor your traditions, heritage, and culture Always show your friends – no matter who they are You see them! And they matter! — Leana Stitzel, March 2013

Fret’s First Foals

Since 1959 - Manufactured in Scio, Oregon Main Ofﬁce Powell Scales NW 39120 West Scio Rd. Scio, OR 97374 Ph 503-394-3660 Fax 503-394-3502 Toll Free: 1-800-451-0787

Frettin

with Cory Shelman

Spokane Ofﬁce Inland Scales NW 5602 E. Desmet Ave. PO Box 11335 Spokane, WA 99211 Ph 509-535-4295 Fax 509-535-4296

Steve Orr • 503-510-3540 www.scalesnw.com • SteveOrr@ScalesNW.com • SCALES 800-451-0187

TRUCK SCALES • LIVESTOCK SCALES • WAREHOUSE SCALES • RENTAL SCALES MOBILE LIVESTOCK RENTALS AVAILABLE AT:

Bullet Rental - Klamath Falls, OR • ACW Rentals - Burns, OR • Powell Scales - Scio, OR

Rentals Available!

standing to a limited number of mares

PRIVATE TREATY

CERTIFIABLE! AFFORDABLE! PORTABLE TRUCK SCALE S WITH STEEL RAMP OR MOBILE LIVESTOCK SCALE S AVAILABLE

SCALE SERVICE • SYSTEMS • PARTS • SALES & CONSTRUCTION

Linda Bunch Tuscarora, NV

38 April 2013

775-756-6508

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher Coloring Page

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

April 2013 39

PRSRT STD U.S. POSTAGE PAID Permit # 3280 Salt Lake City, UT

The Fort Ranch welcomes TED ROBINSON 7 Time NRCHA World Champion

Saturday

d June 22n 2013

36th ANNUAL PRODUCTION SALE Doc Quixote Colonel Freckles Doc Oak Young Gun

Mr Peppy Olena Doc’s Rondo Doc’s Hickory Playin Stylish

COW KWACKER High Brow Cat x Kwackin

Spots Hot Son Ofa Doc CD Lights

Doc Ray Olena Cat Ichi Holey Sox Jr.

SMART ZEE DUALLY Smart Little Lena x Zee Dually

High Brow Cat Dual Rey Peppy San Badger Freckles Merada

TR Dual Rey Haidas Little Pep Hickorydickery Doc Doc’s Dulce Bar

RICOCHETS SUE

Smart Lil Rocochet x Meradas Little Sue by Freckles Merada

BET ON BINION Bet On Me 498 x Sangelina

SUES DUAL PEP

Dual Pep x Meradas Little Sue by Freckles Merada

QUITE A BOON

Peptoboonsmal x Maradas Little Sue by Freckles Merada

LITTLE PISTOL BADGE

Young Gun x Little Peppy Holly by Peppy San Badger

Buckskins, Red Duns, Blacks, Roans, Palominos, Grullas, Sorrels, and Bays with Plenty of Chrome Sale Terms: 1/3 down payment with balance to be paid in September when foals are weaned and picked up by their new owners. Foal Guaranteed to be alive and sound or your down payment will be refunded.

SATURDAY, JUNE 22nd 2013 AT THE RANCH IN PROMONTORY, UTAH

Eric Duarte - Auctioneer 541-533-2105 www.duartesales.com

Ted Robinson - Pedigrees 805-649-9028 www.tedrobinsoncowhorses.com

40 April 2013

The Progressive Rancher

FOR INFORMATION & CATALOG CONTACT: Rick Ellis 208-681-9829 435-471-7411 Brian Anderson - Trainer