management practices

Adobe Stock photo

Wyoming producers encouraged to complete NASS surveys

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Agriculture Statistics Service (NASS) announced they will be conducting several agricultural-related surveys at the beginning of the new year. These surveys will be sent to producers across the nation, including those in Wyoming.

Cattle operations

During the first two weeks of January, NASS will survey more than 40,000 cattle operations nationwide to provide an up-to-date measure of U.S. cattle inventories, which will be published in the January Cattle Report released on Jan. 31, 2023.

Producers will be asked to report their beef and dairy cow inventories, calf crop, death loss and cattle on feed operations

“This information helps producers make timely, informed business decisions such as planning for herd expansion or reduction,” states Mountain Regional Field Office Director Rodger Ott in a NASS press release. “It also helps packers and government leaders evaluate expected slaughter volume for future months and determine potential supplies for export. Obtaining the current count of cattle will serve as an important decision-making tool for the entire agricultural industry.”

Milk production

Thousands of U.S. milk producers, including nearly 500 across the states of Wyoming, Montana, Colorado, Utah, Arizona and New Mexico, will also receive NASS surveys focused on milk production. Results will be used for the January 2023 Milk Production Survey.

According to NASS, producers will be asked to provide information on the number of milk cows in their herd, cows milked and total milk production for the first day of the month. They will also be asked to provide information on hay purchased to feed their dairy herds and herd replacement prices.

“The dairy industry is an important component of the Mountain Region’s agricultural economy and it is crucial for all involved to have access to accurate data,” says Ott.

Sheep and goat operations

Additionally, NASS will begin sending out surveys to measure sheep and goat inventories and wool and mohair production numbers beginning in late December. Results will be published in the Sheep and Goats Report, which will be released on Jan. 31, 2023.

“Interest in sheep and goat data continues to grow with increased diversification in agriculture and consumer demands,” says Ott. “The Sheep and Goat Survey gives producers the opportunity to report the latest information on conditions and trends in the industry.”

“Accurate data on sheep and goat inventory and production is a significant decision-making tool for USDA and the industry to be more responsive to domestic and international markets and consumer needs. The information can also help create public appreciation for the many benefits of U.S. sheep and goats and their needed products,” he adds.

Bee and honey production

In addition to sending out livestock surveys, NASS will also be conducting their Bee and Honey Production, Disposition and Income Inquiry to collect information on colony numbers, honey production, stocks and sales. NASS notes this information helps evaluate year-to-year conditions and promotes programs designed to ensure the viability of beekeepers and agricultural pollination services across the U.S.

Information will be published in the annual Honey Report on March 17, 2023.

“The survey results provide a statistical benchmark on U.S. honey production and value,” states Ott. “Information will allow the USDA, beekeepers and any other interested parties to analyze data on a state-by-state basis and monitor changes in honey production and value.”

Farm economics

Lastly, NASS will be contacting farmers and ranchers across the state for the third and final phase of the 2022 Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS). This survey looks at farm economics and production practices and asks producers to report information on their operating revenues, production costs and household characteristics.

“ARMS is the only survey measuring the current financial well-being of producers and their households as a whole,” Ott explains. “The data will help inform decisions on local and federal policies and programs affecting farms and farm families.”

In order to collect the most accurate data possible, NASS says they will be reaching out to more than 35,000 producers nationwide including 2,500 in the Mountain States between December and April of next year. Results will be published in the annual Farm Production Expenditures Report, which will be released on July 28, 2023.

Privacy and other information

When it comes to these surveys, NASS ensures participants’ information provided is kept confidential, as required by federal law, and only published in aggregate form so individual producers cannot be identified.

NASS encourages producers in Wyoming to participate in these surveys, and notes information can be reported online, by telephone or via mail.

All NASS reports are available online at nass. usda.gov/Publications/. State specific questions can be directed to USDA NASS Wyoming Statistician Leslee Lohrenz at 800-392-3202.

Hannah Bugas is the managing editor of the Wyoming Livestock Roundup. Send comments on this article to roundup@wylr.net.

By Brian A. Mealor, UW Extension Director

Learning together to mitigate impacts of invasive annual grasses

We’ve heard it before – how does a person build an airplane while they are flying it? What should they do when their destination seems to change mid-flight and the weather conditions and landscape alter without their awareness?

The best rangeland management seems to combine art and science with a high level of technical skill, creativity, communication and good, old hard work. Knowledge of the land and knowledge of how to best understand its patterns should complement one another.

However, it seems challenging to unite research and management, or science and practice, or knowing and doing. Building stronger connections between these important practices is one primary goal of the University of Wyoming’s Institute for Managing Annual Grasses Invading Natural Ecosystems (IMAGINE).

Working directly with land managers, researchers and educators are flipping the script on how research is often done by evaluating impacts of operationalscale invasive grass management projects with vegetation monitoring, satellite imagery and creative analysis methods. It seems to be a pretty good fit – land managers get access to information on how effective their treatments are while the whole team learns about how to better manage invasive grasses.

Many projects are ongoing, but I promise to give important insights into management practices, how to best use them in given situations and the broader impacts of management programs in this column. Below are some examples of projects currently under way.

Invasive grass management

This cooperative project uses data-science approaches to assess regional relationships among invasive grass abundance and native species composition and diversity. Additionally, the project is evaluating treatmentresponse patterns across a wide geography to identify consistencies and gaps among invasive grass treatment recommendations.

Evaluating grazing management

This graduate studentled project tracks multi-year vegetation trends on multiple sites treated for ventenata control where grazing is either excluded or allowed to occur. Existing recommendations often suggest to defer grazing in an effort to improve perennial grass establishment and recovery, but little empirical data exists to support or refute this practice.

This project will provide initial data to answer the question of whether grazing deferment benefits rangeland recovery following chemical control of ventenata.

Annual grass management

Indaziflam, a rootgrowth inhibiting herbicide, is quickly becoming a preferred tool for annual grass management on rangelands. Its ability to inhibit root growth in the upper soil profile makes it an effective tool for managing annual grasses, but it also has the ability to reduce establishment of desirable species in areas where reseeding is necessary.

This project seeks to better understand how to integrate this effective management tool with appropriate plant materials, seeding depths and seeding times.

Assessing mule deer habitat

As a subset of a larger study, we are collecting global positioning systems (GPS)-locations for multiple mule deer fitted with GPS collars in Sheridan County and investigating whether their habitat use patterns change following control of the invasive annual grasses ventenata and medusahead.

Invasive annual grass technology transfer partnership

This cooperative program seeks to put science into practice, helping land managers address the greatest threat to the sagebrush biome – invasive annual grasses. Centered around the proactive “Defend and Grow the Core” framework, a cooperative team from multiple universities, federal, state and local agencies, nonprofits and the private sector will embark on a campaign to equip land managers with the knowledge, skills and tools needed to implement effective invasive annual grass management.

Experts will translate the latest science into highly usable technical materials, foster experiential learning through field workshops and online modules, and establish an innovative multi-state demonstration and monitoring network enabling adaptive management and ongoing technical support.

Regardless of whether a person is a livestock producer whose animals depend on rangeland forage for part of the year, a conservationist who is concerned about the goods and services provided by diverse rangeland plant communities or an individual who cares about wildlife habitat and the opportunities it provides for our society, invasive annual grasses potentially impact their lives.

For more information on invasive annual grass management in rangelands or to stay up to date on results from the research described here, visit wyagresearch.org/ imagine.

Brian A. Mealor is the director of the Sheridan Research and Extension Center and the Institute for Managing Annual Grasses Invading Natural Ecosystems. Mealor can be reached at bamealor@uwyo.edu.

Farm (Bottom) Dollar

When we think of the holidays, we think of getting together with our families, eating and sharing gifts with loved ones. A giant elephant in the room not often discussed over Christmas dinner prime rib, however, is the cost of holidays and on a broader spectrum, money.

I get it, I don’t like to talk about money either, but today, I’ll grin and bear it because the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) just released their 2021 report on the U.S. food dollar.

For all intents and purposes, a “farm” in this column refers to any agricultural operation, and “farm production” refers to all establishments classified within the agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting industries.

USDA reports the farm share on the U.S. food dollar for 2021 hit an all-time low at 14.5 cents. This number has dominated headlines all week, but what I want to talk about is the sub-groups within the farm dollar, because this is where the money is really going.

Per the USDA, a food dollar represents a one dollar expenditure on domestically-produced food by U.S. consumers. The food dollar is allocated to expenditures on each of the various food commodities sold in proportions representing their share of annual sales in the U.S. market.

The “farm dollar” is actually part of the “Farm Dollar Series,” and has been analyzed by the USDA since 1993. There are three primary series for the farm dollar. These include the marketing bill series, the industry group series and the primary factor series.

For each primary Food Dollar Series, the combined input-component values are equal to the one dollar output-market value. The three series represents distinct perspectives on the sources of market value for the combined annual food dollar expenditures.

And, while 14.5 cents seems like a small number, it’s only the number reported in the marketing bill series. If you dig a little deeper – you reach information on the industry bill series, and this is where you see some super small numbers.

The USDA analyzes 12 industry groups and their share of the farm dollar. Included in these 12 groups is agribusiness, food production, food processing, packaging, transportation, wholesale trade, retail trade, food service, energy, finance and insurance, advertising and legal and accounting – all valuable areas which contribute to food getting from gate to plate.

However, as I write this column for an audience of ranchers and farmers, I realize I am about to be the bearer of bad news. Where one would believe the farm production group should be the king of the castle, pulling in the most percentage of the farm dollar, one would be wrong.

There are four groups taking up way more of the farm dollar than farmers and ranchers with food services raking in 33.6 percent of the Industry Group Series Farm Dollar, followed by food processing at 15.2 percent, retail trade at 12.7 percent and wholesale trade at 10.7 percent.

Farm production takes up 7.4 percent of the Industry Group Series Farm Dollar ahead of finance and insurance at 3.6 percent, transportation at 3.6 percent, energy at 3.2 percent, advertising at three percent, packaging at 2.9 percent and “other” at four percent.

So, to put this into perspective, I bought three chicken breasts at a local grocery store the other day and paid $7.39 for the whole package. If I base my numbers off of the 7.4 percent or 7.4 cents out of every one dollar, this means the farmer who raised the birds keep only got about 55 cents from my purchase.

Now don’t get me wrong here, I appreciate all other industry groups, but food service takes up a third of every food-related dollar? I love eating out at a nice restaurant, but this doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me.

If I’m being honest, this report really bothered me. Farmers and ranchers are constantly being named as the bad guy when food prices spike at the grocery store or restaurants, but when we only have a say in 7.4 percent of the consumers’ food cost, how can we be the greedy ones?

At this point, I wish we were the greedy ones. I wish we had a bigger piece of the pie and more control on how much food in our country costs, but we don’t, and I don’t know if we ever will again. I guess the “direct-toconsumer” people have the right idea. Sure, they have more input costs than the rest of us, but at least they’ve cut out the middle man.

I encourage everyone reading this column to head on over to ers.usda.gov/dataproducts/food-dollar-series/ documentation.aspx to learn more about the food dollar and how we can make our percentage larger in years to come.

I also encourage everyone to not bring the farm dollar issue up over Christmas Day prime rib as it will most likely cause a few fists to pound on your beautifully set table, could make someone choke the minute they heard the number 7.4 and will absolutely incite mothers covering the ears of their children as to not hear the words coming out of your mouth.

Happy researching!

UPDATES continued from page 1

In a recent publication of the Wyoming Livestock Roundup, PLC and the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service (USFS) announced on Nov. 28 they have signed a MOU in regards to National Forest System grazing allotments, which will stay in effect until January 2027.

Johannes noted they expect to have the MOU with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) signed by the end of 2022.

“We have some pretty important changes compared to the last time we went through this process,” she noted. “One change we secured was any range monitoring done by permittees is going to be accepted as a legitimate source of monitoring and the agencies are going to treat this as their own information – it gives a level of legitimacy and acceptance to the work producers are doing every day already.”

“We’re glad we got this change into text, but implementation and rollout is everything, so we’re also working with the USFS and BLM to make sure field offices and permittees can fully utilize these MOUs,” she added.

Another area of focus has been on the BLM’s grazing regulations revision process.

“PLC put together a working group with producers from across the West, with great representation from Wyoming, and we’re working with several folks from the BLM’s drafting team. We’ve been told there will be a draft rule and draft environmental impact study in the spring of 2023,” she said. “The agency needs to stick to this timeline and get this process done.”

PLC and NCBA have both been advocating for several changes impacting the standards of rangeland health, temporary non-use and flexibility with on and off dates.

“We’ve heard from a lot of folks in Wyoming, and from states across the West, about the way cooperating agencies have been handled during this process,” added Johannes. “We’re aware many cooperators were cut out of the process, and we want to make sure these individuals have a seat at the table.”

Also, expected soon from the administration is a beta version of the American Conservation and Stewardship Atlas, which will roll out as a tool for the 30x30 initiative, used to reflect baseline information on lands and waters conserved or restored, she shared.

“The Atlas is meant to document all of the acres being currently conserved,” said Johannes. “We’ve been adamant this process needs to include working lands and grazing as a conservation activity.”

There currently hasn’t been further action in regards to 30x30, but PLC and NCBA will continue to advocate for the industry as developments are made, she mentioned.

Lastly, Johannes flagged the Fish and Wildlife Service’s notice of intent on the reintroduction of the grizzly bear in the Northern Cascades and revisitation of the species status assessment for the North American wolverine.

“In all of these cases, states know what they are doing better than the federal government and this is our goal in every one of these situations. Making sure management is led by the people who know how to handle it best – people on the ground, close to these habitats and understanding the impacts these species have on farmers, ranchers and rural residents while making sure decisions are made based on the best available science,” she said.

Court and litigation focus

In August, PLC received intervenor status to defend the Trump administration’s delisting of the gray wolf across the lower 48 states, according to Johannes.

“At the end of the day, we’re quite adamant we need to continue pursuing the overarching goal and get this listing reversed,” she said. “Our next step is waiting for the Department of Justice to file their appeal by the January deadline.”

Another item on litigation is in regards to three 2019 ESA rules. On July 5, the California U.S. District Court Judge Jon S. Tigar disposed of the Trump administration’s changes to ESA, and on Sept. 21 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the court improperly vacated the 2019 revisions.

This reversal by the Court of Appeals now fully reinstates the 2019 rules regarding economic impacts of an ESA listing and interagency consultation.

“The Biden administration will be getting a chance to redo these rules through a rulemaking process but they are not vacated,” she mentioned.

Congressional focus

After the midterms, the Republican party has a narrow five seat majority in the House. Johannes shared this is not at all the landslide a lot of the industry and many people in Washington, D.C. expected.

Changes in the House of Representatives will make a big difference for future policy priorities.

The appropriations process begins every February or March, and this year PLC and NCBA advocated for several priorities.

“There are two buckets – funding requests and language requests,” she said. “We made a language request that any funding can’t be used for an ESA listing of the sage grouse – it’s something we continue to fight hard for.”

PLC and NCBA also made requests for funding for the U.S. Sheep Experiment Station and the BLM’s Wild Horse and Burro management program.

Congress is also trying to add legislation to the appropriations bill including the River Democracy Act, which would designate massive amounts of Wild and Scenic River miles and the SAFE Act, impacting the travel and movement of equines.

This year, PLC and NCBA put in an appropriations request for funding for the wild horse and burro program of $153.1 million, which was about a $20 million increase. Johannes cited the organizations’ desire for an increased schedule of gathers and removals.

“There’s a reason why we build relationships on both sides of the aisle, so we fully embrace a bipartisan strategy and outreach,”

Industry updates – Public Lands Council and National Cattlemen’s Beef Association Natural Resources Associate Director Sigrid Johannes provided several Washington, D.C. updates during the Wyoming Natural Resource Rendezvous. WYLR photo

The future of ag – Future WSGA members were in attendance at the Wyoming Natural Resource Rendezvous Dec. 5-8. WYLR photo

she concluded. “At the end of the day, it’s extra important to be able to go to the table bringing the voices of producers and permittees we work with from across the West and make these voices and messages as loud as we need to.”

Brittany Gunn is the editor of the Wyoming Livestock Roundup. Send comments on this article to roundup@wylr.net.

of the Campbell County Conservation District, Elise Rose of the Shoshone Conservation District and Traci Berg of the Sublette County Conservation District.

Next, awards were given for 2022 Water Quality Training Certification.

“The WACD Water Quality Monitoring Training and Certification Program was established in 1998,” said Crane. “The goal of the training and certification program is to ensure district personnel are well trained to collect high-quality data meeting the credible data statute.”

Crane noted requirements for certification include attending the Principles of Water Quality Training and Water Quality Monitoring and Analysis Trainings, receiving a score of 90 percent or better on a test given at the training, attending two sampling days with a water quality certified employee and passing a field audit.

Individuals who received Water Quality Training Certification include Cheyenne Love of the Campbell County Conservation District, Jessica Halverson of the Crook County Conservation District, Melanie Purcell and Drew Keller of the Sublette County Conservation District, David Lee of the Teton Conservation District and Katie Lott of the Uinta County Conservation District.

Additionally, to maintain certification under the WACD Water Quality Training Program, employees conducting surface water sampling are required to attend a recertification training every four years and pass a field audit every four years, according to Crane.

Individuals receiving recertification include Jeff Geyer of the Laramie County Conservation District, Steffen Cornell of the Meeteetse Conservation District, Dave Morneau of the Popo Agie Conservation District, Jackie Turner of the Sheridan County Conservation District, Mike Henn and Shari Meeks of the Sublette County Conservation District and Carrie Rogaczewski of the Sheridan County Conservation District.

Outstanding annual plans and reports

Following the certification awards, Crane honored the Sublette County Conservation District for receiving the Outstanding 2022-22 Annual Report and the Teton Conservation District for Honorable Mention.

The Outstanding 202324 Annual Plan also went to the Sublette County Conservation District and the Weston County Natural Resource District received honorable mention.

Poster and photo contest winners

Next, Crane recognized five students from across the state of Wyoming as winners of the WACD poster contest. These individuals received a certificate and $100 cash prize.

Elena Eggleston of Uinta County was the kindergarten through first grade winner, and Oliver Dillree, also of Uinta County, was the winner in the second through third grade division.

Washakie County’s Brianna Cauffman was honored as the fourth through sixth grade division winner, while Abigail Ostrander of Converse County was honored as the winner of the seventh through ninth grade division.

Anna Jo Short of Uinta County had the winning poster in the 10th through 12th grade division.

Additionally, WACD recognized the winners of their 2022 photo contest.

The winning Conservation Practices Photo was Anita Bartlett’s “Doe and Two Fawns.” Bartlett also won the Close-up Conservation Photo with her picture of a swallowtail butterfly.

The winning Conservation in Action Photo was awarded to Natasha Dangler for her photo “Befriending the Beaver,” and the winning Conservation and Agriculture Across America Photo was awarded to Lisa Ogden for her photo “Sunset on the Crop.”

Outstanding individuals

Lastly, Crane called several other individuals to the front of the room to recognize them for their outstanding work in conservation and agriculture.

The Teacher of the Year Award was given to Gretchen GasVoda Kelso of the South Big Horn Conservation District, Carol Hamilton of the Uinta County Conservation District was awarded Outstanding Cooperator, Converse County Weed and Pest Control’s Cheryl Schwartzkopf was awarded Outstanding Technician and Sheridan County Commissioner Terry Cram of the received honors as the Outstanding Elected Official.

Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Conservationist Caleb Owens of the was honored as the Outstanding Conservationist of 2022, Jean Runner of the SER Conservation District was awarded Outstanding Employee and Sublette County Conservation District’s Coke Landers received the Darrell Walker Outstanding Supervisor Award.

Hannah Bugas is the managing editor of the Wyoming Livestock Roundup. Send comments on this article to roundup@wylr.net.

District Employee Certification awardees – During their annual awards ceremony, WACD recognized 10 individuals who received District Employee Certification. Pictured left to right: WACD Executive Director Kelli Little, WACD President Todd Heward, Elise Rose, Bridget Helms, Dawn Arnell, Kirsten Becker, Jessica Halverson, Cheyenne Love, Natasha Dangler and SER Conservation Districts District Manager Joe Parsons. Not pictured: Kelly Kudera, Kathy Sorenson and Traci Berg. WYLR photo

Recertification honorees – This year, seven individuals received recertification through the WACD Water Quality Training Program. Pictured left to right, back row: WACD President Todd Heward, Mike Henn, Steffen Cornell, Dave Morneau and WACD Executive Director Kelli Little. Pictured from left to right, front row: Carrie Rogaczewski, Jackie Turner and Shari Meeks. WYLR photo

Outstanding Annual Plan and

Report awardee – Sublette County Conservation District received awards for publishing both the Outstanding 2022-23 Annual Report and the Outstanding 2023-24 Annual Plan. District Manager Mike Henn accepted the award. WYLR photo

Poster contest winners –

Elena Eggleston, Olivia Dillree, Brianna Cauffman, Abigail Ostrander and Anna Jo Short were the Kindergarten through 12th grade WACD Poster Contest winners. Ostrander made the trip from Converse County to Casper to receive her award. WYLR photos

American agriculture photo

winner – Natrona County Conservation District’s Lisa Ogden received an award for her winning agriculture across America photo, titled “Sunset on the Crop.” WYLR photo

2022 Outstanding Conser-

vationist – Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Conservationist Caleb Owens was honored as the Outstanding Conservationist of 2022. Owens was nominated by the Little Snake River Conservation District who noted he exemplifies what it truly means to get conservation “on the ground.” WYLR photo

2022 Outstanding Coopera-

tor awardee – Carol Hamilton of the Uinta County Conservation District (UCCD) was named the WACD 2022 Outstanding Cooperator. Carol served as the associate supervisor for the UCCD Board since 2007 and represents UCCD on the Coalition of Local Governments. WYLR photo

2022 Employee of the Year –

Jean Runner of the SER Conservation District was named WACD Employee of the Year. “Jean not only excels at her daily duties, but she goes above and beyond those tasks with active participation and leadership in many other community groups and associations,” stated her nominators. WYLR photo Water Quality Training Certification awardees – Six WACD employees received Water Quality Training Certification in 2022. Pictured left to right: WACD President Todd Heward, Cheyenne Love, Jessica Halverson, Melanie Purcell and WACD Executive Director Kelli Little. Not pictured: Drew Keller, David Lee and Katie Lott. WYLR photo

2022 Darrell Walker Outstanding Supervisor – This year’s Darrell Walker Outstanding Supervisor was awarded to Coke Landers of the Darrell Walker Outstanding Supervisor Award. Coke was nominated by the Sublette County Conservation District for his long list of community and civic engagement. WYLR photo

Conservation photos winner

– Anita Bartlett, district manager of the Powder River Conservation District, had the winning conservation practices photo and close-up conservation photo. WYLR photo

Conservation in action photo

winner – Natasha Dangler of the Laramie Rivers Conservation District was the photographer behind WACD’s winning conservation in action photo. WYLR photo

2022 Outstanding Technician

– Cheryl Schwartzkopf of Converse County Weed and Pest was awarded this year’s Outstanding Technician. Her nominators noted Cheryl values hard work and doing the best job possible in all circumstances. WYLR photo

2022 Outstanding Elected Offi-

cial – Sheridan County Commissioner Terry Cram received the honor of the 2022 Outstanding Elected Official. “Terry’s input and participation has always been positive, productive and useful, and she has been a consistent advocate for WACD and their programs,” noted her nominators. WYLR photo

Las Vegas – The Miss Rodeo America Pageant took place Nov. 27 – Dec. 4 at the South Point Hotel, Casino and Spa in conjunction with the Wrangler National Finals (WNFR) Rodeo Dec. 1-10. Contestants across 28 states competed for the coveted title of Miss Rodeo America 2023.

Contestants competed in the categories of horsemanship, appearance, personality, speech and written test. Several contestants representing the Mountain States placed in the top 10.

Schedule

The contestants competed in a variety of events during the weeklong pageant. The contestant judges included Tana Brinkman, Brenda Pickett, Stran Smith and Stan Weaver.

On Nov. 27, contestants checked in and took their written test. They had official contestant introductions, moved into the South Point and finished the day with a fashion show rehearsal.

On Nov. 28, pageant activities included personality interviews, fashion show rehearsal and a Get Acquainted Party, where contestants showcased their decorated Wrangler outfits and answered an impromptu question.

On Nov. 29, contestants started the day with horsemanship by riding two draw horses. They completed a pattern chosen by the judges, a freestyle pattern and a queens run. Contestants had horsemanship interviews and fashion show rehearsal throughout the day and ended with a WNFR welcome reception.

The day started with contestant speeches on Nov. 30, followed by horsemanship interviews, fashion show rehearsals and an awards banquet.

Horsemanship interviews and fashion show rehearsals continued on Dec. 1. Contestants participated in a Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association (PRCA) luncheon where they answered an impromptu question. Contestants then had fashion show rehearsal and attended the first round of the WNFR.

On Dec. 2, contestants modeled several sponsored outfits in the fashion show as well as a trendy Western outfit of the contestant’s choice. The day rounded out with a contestant dinner and coronation rehearsal.

The contestants continued with a coronation rehearsal on Dec. 3 and then attended the Miss Rodeo America Scholarship Auction.

Coronation concluded the week’s activities on Dec. 4.

Results

The top 10 included Miss Rodeo Arizona Kennadee Riggs, Miss Rodeo Washington Lexy Hibbs, Miss Rodeo New Mexico Jamee Middagh, Miss Rodeo South Dakota Adrianne Schaunaman, Miss Rodeo Kentucky Morgan Askins, Miss Rodeo Colorado Ashley Baller, Miss Rodeo Nebraska Bailey Lehr, Miss Rodeo Louisiana Sydney Albritton, Miss Rodeo North Dakota Elise Burwell and Miss Rodeo Oregon Avalon Irwin.

The top five, listed fifth through first respectively included, Louisiana, Washington, Colorado, South Dakota and Arizona.

More information about Miss Rodeo America, Inc. and the Miss Rodeo America Scholarship Foundation can be found at missrodeoamerica.com. The Miss Rodeo America horsemanship competition, fashion show and coronation can be viewed by visiting wranglernetwork.com.

Riggs won the categories of horsemanship, personality, appearance and the title of Miss Rodeo America 2023. Schaunaman won the speech and photogenics category.

Other award winners included the Montana Silversmith Wear The West Your Way Award to Miss Rodeo Florida Makayla Baker, the Written Test Award to Hibbs, the Roxann Harris Memorial Competitive Spirit Scholarship to Riggs, the Traction Financial Award to Baller, the Sherry Lynn Mitchell Smith Memorial Scholarship to Miss Rodeo Minnesota Sophia Hillman, the 50 Pink Horses Challenge to Miss Rodeo Montana Briann Grimshaw, the Bex Beauty Award to Schaunaman, the Desiree Larson Memorial Achievement Award to Miss Rodeo California Jackie Scarry and Miss Congeniality to Miss Rodeo Hawaii Noel Tancayo.

Awards were given for scrapbook winners as well. First through fourth place winners for the digital scrapbook, respectively, were Scarry, Miss Rodeo Arkansas Molly Musick, Middagh and Baller. The traditional scrapbook winners included Hibbs, Miss Rodeo Idaho Taylor Hymas, Askins and Lehr, first through fourth, respectively. The best scrapbook cover was awarded to Scarry.

The Miss Rodeo America Scholarship Foundation awarded every contestant who did not place in the top 10 a $1,500 scholarship. In total, over $100,000 in scholarships was awarded.

Riggs will continue her travels in 2023 representing Miss Rodeo America Inc. and the PRCA.

Results of the WNFR will be published in a future edition of the Roundup after the conclusion of round 10 on Dec. 10.

Brittany Gunn is the editor of the Wyoming Livestock Roundup. Send comments on this article to roundup@wylr.net.

Task force meeting scheduled

The Wyoming Nonpoint Source Task Force will hold a public meeting on Dec. 13-14. The meeting will be held from 1-4 p.m. on Dec. 13, and from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. on Dec. 14. The meeting will be held at the State of Wyoming Casper District Office, Turntable Conference Room, 444 West Collins Drive, Casper, WY, 82601.

The primary order of business will be the presentation of project proposals and funding recommendations for 2023 Clean Water Act Sections 319 and 205(j) water quality improvement projects. All members of the public are welcome to attend. In the event of inclement weather, the meeting will be held virtually via Zoom.

Additional information regarding the meeting, including the Zoom meeting link, may be obtained by contacting the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, Water Quality Division, Nonpoint Source Program at 307777-6733 or alexandria.jeffers@wyo.gov. For more information, visit deq.wyoming.gov.

AGAIN IN 2023!

Unique clouds – An extremely rare cloud formation was witnessed on Dec. 6 above the Big Horn Mountains in Sheridan County. The clouds known as Kelvin-Helmholtz occur when there is a strong vertical wind gradient between two air streams, causing winds to blow faster at the upper level than at the lower levels. Rachel Gordon photo

Austin Snook • 307-290-2161 Taylor Snook • 307-290-2273 Craig Deveraux • 307-746-5690 Dan Catlin • 406-671-7715 Clint Snook • 307-290-4000 Cheyenne Seymour • 605-641-0638 Casey Sellers • 307-217-2614 Jim Forbes • 307-351-5932 Tye Curuchet • 307-351-8666 Daniel Escoz • 307-217-1440

v

"From the ring, to the video, and in the country, we market your livestock the competitive way." Market Report • December 7, 2022

Good run of calves for our last calf special of the year, with a strong market and lots of buyer activity. We will be having a bred cow special next week. Thank you and we appreciate your business!

SPRING CALVES RED FORK RANCH LLC , KAYCEE WY 68 RED-STRCF PC 491 222.50 WT 1,091.55 69 RED-STRCF PC 402 251.50 WT 1,011.64 NORMAN WAYNE OR GAYANN GRAVES , KAYCEE WY 40 BLK-STRCF PC 589 201.50 WT 1,187.59 7 BLK-STRCF PC 473 230.00 WT 1,087.57 14 BLK-HFRCF PC 493 192.00 WT 946.28 4 BLK-HFRCF PC 473 193.00 WT 911.92 DALE GRAVES , KAYCEE WY 6 BK/RD-HFRCF PC 557 178.00 WT 990.86 1 BWF-STRCF PC 470 217.50 WT 1,022.25 RATHBUN TONY , SUNDANCE WY 70 BLK-STRCF PC 607 198.00 WT 1,201.29 11 BLK-STRCF PC 495 227.00 WT 1,124.68 RAFTER STAR RANCH LLC , BANNER WY 22 BLK-STRCF PC 634 194.00 WT 1,230.13 20 RED-STRCF PC 506 221.00 WT 1,117.70 2 BLK-STRCF PC 510 221.00 WT 1,127.10 25 BLK-HFRCF PC 606 173.50 WT 1,050.71 15 RED-HFRCF PC 502 195.00 WT 979.55 TOM & JODY EDWARDS , BUSBY MT 18 BLK-STRCF PC 627 195.00 WT 1,222.00 3 BLK-STRCF PC 507 226.00 WT 1,145.06 14 BLK-HFRCF PC 562 187.00 WT 1,050.53 RONALD OR SUE MARTIN , SHERIDAN WY 18 BLK-STRCF PC 690 183.00 WT 1,262.19 DANIEL & CHASTA MYERS , BUFFALO WY 13 BLK-STRCF PC 687 182.50 WT 1,254.33 4 BLK-STRCF PC 571 202.50 WT 1,156.78 23 BLK-HFRCF PC 623 174.00 WT 1,084.47 JIM & LINDA COXBILL , GILLETTE WY 13 BK/RD-STRCF PC 640 188.50 WT 1,207.12 1 BLK-HFRCF PC 615 172.00 WT 1,057.80 DENNIS L OR JODEE L. DAKOLIOS , BANNER WY 6 RED-STRCF PC 656 185.50 WT 1,216.57 TALBOT & TRACY KOCH , KAYCEE WY 8 BLK-HFRCF PC 524 201.00 WT 1,052.73 MIKE OR JEAN GORZALKA , RANCHESTER WY 16 BLK-HFRCF PC 609 198.00 WT 1,205.32 DAVE WATT RANCH LLC , BUFFALO WY 2 BLK-STRCF PC 630 188.00 WT 1,184.40 3 BLK-STRCF PC 508 222.00 WT 1,128.50 8 BLK-HFRCF PC 518 178.00 WT 922.26 BRAIN OR LORY WING , CASPER WY 7 BK/RD-STRCF PC 582 192.50 WT 1,120.62 4 BK/RD-STRCF PC 476 215.00 WT 1,023.93 24 BLK-HFRCF PC 475 183.00 WT 870.01 TERRY GOODVIN , HULETT WY 4 BLK-HFRCF PC 531 182.00 WT 966.87 JOHNNY KRETSCHMAN , ARVADA WY 2 BLK-STRCF PC 593 197.00 WT 1,167.22 SCOTT & JAYMI BARRY , BANNER WY 15 RED-STRCF PC 467 226.75 WT 1,059.67 12 RED-HFRCF PC 479 186.00 WT 891.25 RYAN OR CONSTANCE HAYDEN , GILLETTE WY 4 RWF-STRCF PC 611 192.00 WT 1,173.60 FIDELITY SERVICES LLC , BUFFALO WY 29 BLK-HFRCF PC 526 181.00 WT 951.49 25 BLK-HFRCF PC 431 200.00 WT 861.20 WILLIAM T FERGUSON , WOLF WY 6 BLK-STRCF PC 430 231.00 WT 993.30 HARLAN LIVESTOCK LLC , KAYCEE WY 10 BLK-STRCF PC 626 196.50 WT 1,229.10 ROBIN L & SUNNY I TAYLOR , KAYCEE WY 22 BLK-STRCF PC 322 236.00 WT 758.95 LS BAR RANCH LLC , WESTON WY 3 BLK-STRCF PC 603 193.00 WT 1,164.43 6 BLK-HFRCF PC 547 182.00 WT 994.93 ROBERTO OR STEFANIE HEP GARC , KAYCEE WY 5 BLK-STRCF PC 525 213.00 WT 1,118.25 7 BLK-STRCF PC 457 212.00 WT 969.14

COWS/HEIFERETTES

COLUMBUS PEAK RANCH LLC , DAYTON WY 1 BLK-COW 1765 70.00 WT 1,235.50 13 BLK-COW 1523 64.00 WT 975.01 6 BLK-COW 1357 68.00 WT 922.53 1 BLK-COW 1495 67.00 WT 1,001.65 10 BLK-COW 1571 68.00 WT 1,068.28 1 BLK-COW 1635 67.00 WT 1,095.45 1 BLK-COW 1795 67.00 WT 1,202.65 12 BLK-COW 1460 62.00 WT 905.20 1 BLK-COW 1370 60.50 WT 828.85 1 BLK-COW 1430 65.00 WT 929.50 DOUGLAS & CHARLENE CAMBLIN , GILLETTE WY 2 BLK-COW 1650 66.50 WT 1,097.25 1 BLK-COW 1625 66.00 WT 1,072.50 1 BWF-COW 1835 66.00 WT 1,211.10 1 BLK-COW 1315 65.00 WT 854.75 DANIEL OR SHERRYL FRAKER , KAYCEE WY 1 BLK-HFRTTE 825 104.00 WT 858.00 JOSEPH D & MICHELE D SIMMONS , NEWCASTLE W 10 BLK-COW 1348 67.50 WT 909.90 HOLE IN THE WALL LIVESTOC , KAYCEE WY 4 BLK-HFRTTE 906 161.00 WT 1,459.06 SCHAUER CATTLE CO , SHERIDAN WY 7 BLK-HFRTTE 1046 103.00 WT 1,077.08

• UPCOMING SALES •

Getting Started in Ag: Managing Risk with RI-PRF Insurance

The deciding factor in forage production for a farm or ranch is nearly always rainfall (or lack thereof). This has been especially true for a large part of the western U.S. over the last several years.

You may not be aware there is a program specifically designed to address risk of loss associated with drought in forage production if you are new or just starting out in production agriculture. Utilizing crop insurance programs is one way to mitigate revenue losses due to drought.

Pasture, Rangeland, Forage ‑ Rainfall Index insurance (RI‑PRF) is an area‑based insurance plan that protects against revenue losses due to reduced forage production stemming from a lack of precipitation. Pasture and hay are eligible for protection under the plan on a county‑by‑county basis. Producers can purchase coverage for both leased and owned acres and can select coverage based on their needs and forage production capacity of the land.

RI‑PRF policies are based on 17x17 mile grid areas for the rainfall index determined by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Coverage is divided into 11 index intervals, each of which cover two months. A county per‑acre base value is established for each grid area. Coverage is established using the county base value and the producer’s selection of coverage level, productivity factor and index intervals. The ending or actual rainfall index is used to determine if an indemnity payment is due and is expressed as a percentage of the expected index. An expected index of 100 would result from average rainfall in a given grid area. Therefore, an ending index value of less than 100 is necessary to trigger an indemnity payment. The rainfall index is calculated using actual precipitation from weather reporting stations and computer estimates. Actual precipitation received at specific locations within the grid area, like your property, does not influence coverage or indemnity payments. In other words, the rainfall index may or may not correspond with the rainfall received at your location. Index intervals selected for coverage must be non‑consecutive, with no more than 70 percent of the coverage in any one interval. For instance, if the April‑May interval is selected, the next closest interval available for coverage is June‑July. Coverage choices range from 70–90 percent of the county base value.

production year for comparison and enter the coverage percentages in the desired intervals (50 percent May‑Jun; 50 percent Jul‑Aug). Taking Applications: GrowinG Internship Program 2023 Clicking the Calculate button at the bottom of the table generates the estimated overall coverage, premium costs and estimated based on the production year selected. The ability Growing Beginning Farmers & Ranchers in Wyomingto compare coverages and potential indemnities can be useful to examine what indemnity payments would have been in past drought years, as well as evaluate how helpful RI‑PRF insurance might be in getting through those years. Producers can also select a productivity factor of up to 150 percent of the county base value. This feature allows producers to better tailor IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS coverage to match their forage resources. For example, if you value forage production in a pasture higher than the per‑acre county base

There are several important factors to consider when analyzing value, you can increase the productivity factor to reflect the estimated potential RI‑PRF coverage. First, remember that the rainfall received forage value. Indemnities are triggered if the actual index value falls on a specific site may not be indicative of the final rainfall index below the expected index and are paid automatically. calculated; it is possible to receive an indemnity with rainfall RI‑PRF DECISION SUPPORT TOOL or vice versa. Second, coverage must be purchased for periods Great resources are available to help evaluate RI‑PRF coverage. where rainfall is most critical to forage production by selecting the Starting at rma.usda.gov and selecting RI‑PRF from the tools menu, users appropriate index intervals. Third, total RI‑PRF coverage results can walkthrough the process of establishing RI‑PRF coverage for their operation. The tool is divided into four sections: Grid Locator, Historical from a combination of the levels selected for maximum coverage, Indexes, Decision Support Tool and Estimated Indemnities. productivity level and insured acres. The level of coverage provided The Grid Locator allows users to identify their location and the should be balanced against the value you estimate the harvested subsequent Grid ID number from a map. Once the Grid ID is determined, the user can select the Historical Index tab to display Grid Index values forage is worth. for each year back to 1948 and for each interval period. This weather data

When evaluating coverage, it is also important to remember that can reveal historical trends for precipitation, as well as allow the user the goal is not to maximize potential indemnities. We frequently see to compare historical data for their location to the reported index from interval periods of interest. producers fall into this trap. RI‑PRF is insurance, not a guaranteed The Decision Support Tool is the next section of the online toolbox. It payout. Instead, the goal should be to purchase coverage that will calculates the coverage, premium, and possible indemnities based on the provide some level of guaranteed revenue if drought conditions occur. coverage levels and production intervals selected by the user. As an example, we select grazing or haying for the Intended Use,

RI‑PRF Finally, reduced premium rates are available to individuals Maximum Coverage of up to 90 percent and a Productivity Level of up SUPPORT who qualify as beginning or veteran farmers and ranchers. More to 150 percent. We enter 2,000 for Insured Acres, select the desired TOOL information and details, including a premium cost estimator, are

AVAILABLE

Visit rma.usda.gov available at rma.usda.gov. and select “PRF Rainfall” from the tools menu. This tool allows users to: • Locate their FOR MORE INFORMATION grid area using Pasture, Rangeland, Forage - Rainfall Index insurance (RI-PRF) is the most satellite maps subscribed federal crop insurance available in Wyoming. Covering forage losses due • Compare various to drought, it can be an important part of managing risk on a farm or ranch. For more coverage levels information on RI-PRF coverage, visit a local crop insurance agent or rma.usda.gov. and historical Further risk management resources related to drought and other topics can be found at RightRisk.org data as far back as 1948 in chart or form • View estimated indemnities and coverage

The Grid Locator allows users to determine a locations’ Grid ID.

production year for comparison and enter the coverage percentages in the desired intervals (50 percent May‑Jun; 50 percent Jul‑Aug). Clicking the Calculate button at the bottom of the table generates the estimated overall coverage, premium costs and estimated indemnities based on the production year selected. The ability to compare coverages and potential indemnities can be useful to examine what indemnity payments would have been in past drought years, as well as evaluate how helpful RI‑PRF insurance might be in getting through those years.

IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS

There are several important factors to consider when analyzing The Historical Index can be used to research precipitation trends. potential RI‑PRF coverage. First, remember that the rainfall received on a specific site may not be indicative of the final rainfall index calculated; it is possible to receive an indemnity with rainfall or vice versa. Second, coverage must be purchased for periods where rainfall is most critical to forage production by selecting the appropriate index intervals. Third, total RI‑PRF coverage results from a combination of the levels selected for maximum coverage, productivity level and insured acres. The level of coverage provided should be balanced against the value you estimate the harvested forage is worth. When evaluating coverage, it is also important to remember that the goal is not to maximize potential indemnities. We frequently see producers fall into this trap. RI‑PRF is insurance, not a guaranteed payout. Instead, the goal should be to purchase coverage that will provide some level of guaranteed revenue if drought conditions occur. Finally, reduced premium rates are available to individuals who qualify as beginning or veteran farmers and ranchers. More information and details, including a premium cost estimator, are available at rma.usda.gov. The Protection Table displays coverage, premium and possible

indemnities for the example situation. FOR MORE INFORMATION IMPORTANT REMINDERS

Pasture, Rangeland, Forage - Rainfall Index insurance (RI-PRF) is the most • RI-PRF sign-up for 2023 coverage subscribed federal crop insurance available in Wyoming. Covering forage losses due deadline is December 1. to drought, it can be an important part of managing risk on a farm or ranch. For more • Planting deadline for fall-planted information on RI-PRF coverage, visit a local crop insurance agent or rma.usda.gov. crops is approaching (check with Further risk management resources related to drought and other topics can be found a crop insurance agent for exact at RightRisk.org dates in your area). Kendra Faucett is the GrowinG Internship Coordinator in the Department of Agricultural and Applied James Sedman is a consultant to the Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics in the University of Wyoming Economics, University of Wyoming College of Agriculture, Life Sciences and Natural Resources. Faucett College of Agriculture, Life Sciences and Natural Resources, and John Hewlett is a farm and ranch management may be reached at (307) 766-3799 or kfaucet2@uwyo.edu. Ben Rashford is Department Head and Associate Professor in the department. Rashford may be reached at (307) 766-2386 or brashfor@uwyo. specialist in the department. Hewlett may be reached at (307) 766‑2166 or hewlett@uwyo.edu.edu. John Hewlett is a farm and ranch management specialist in the department. Hewlett may be reached at (307) 766-2166 or hewlett@uwyo.

The GrowinG Internship Program is now accepting applications for 2023. Internships are funded through a USDA Beginning Farmers and Ranchers project offering educational and practical experience to qualified applicants. “Goals of the program are to provide hands-on internships at working farms and ranches to Wyoming’s beginning farmers and ranchers, in cooperation with state producer organizations and educational institutions,” explained Kendra Faucett, program coordinator. Potential interns and site hosts are encouraged to apply as soon as possible.

The program provides $5,000 stipends for a 10-week work experience. Eligible applicants are 18 years or older who identify as ready to begin farming or who have been involved in managing their own farm or ranch enterprise fewer than 10 years.

You CAN Farm Wyoming! Learning Portal & Online Community Interns GrowinG interns who are also degree-seeking students are encouraged to seek academic credit for participating in the

YCFWyo.com offers resources and assistance to persons looking to get The Historical Index can be used to research precipitation trends.GrowinG Internship Program. Academic credit must be arranged in advance between the student and an academic started in agriculture, including: advisor with the granting educational institution. • Online resources Selected interns will spend 10 weeks on a host farm or • Support, including on-request coaching ranch assisting with daily activities and learning from the services manager and others. Accepted candidates will work with • Networking and mentorship opportunities the site host to establish start and end dates once an award for Wyoming new and beginning farmers has been made. Interns also take part in at least one agriand ranchers. cultural educational event, such as a UW Extension meeting, within the timeframe of their internship.

All at NO COST to the user

See GrowinG-WY.org/You-Can-Farm for “Short work summaries submitted weekly help the intern reflect on day-to-day work and more information or to get started. educational experiences throughout the internship,” noted Ben Rashford one of the project co-directors. (See at GrowinG-WY.org/post/Intern_Tales)

Hosts

Selected hosts agree to provide room and board for the internship experience. Hosts work with the intern to provide safe and educational learning experiences, keeping in mind their learning objectives where possible.

“We encourage interested interns and potential hosts to apply now,” said John Hewlett project codirector. “A state committee will help select candidates and match interns with host sites, beginning in mid-February.” The Protection Table displays coverage, premium and possible

indemnities for the example situation. Applications

Online application forms for 2023 internships are available at GrowinG-WY.org IMPORTANT REMINDERS. The site also offers background information on the • RI-PRF sign-up for 2023 coverage overall project, as well as links to collections of helpful resources and materials for beginning farmers and ranchers. deadline is December 1. • Planting deadline for fall-planted For more information, contact the GrowinG Internship Program at crops is approaching (check with information@GrowinG-WY.org or GrowinG-WY.org. a crop insurance agent for exact dates in your area). James Sedman is a consultant to the Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics in the University of Wyoming College of Agriculture, Life Sciences and Natural Resources, and John Hewlett is a farm and ranch management specialist in the department. Hewlett may be reached at (307) 766‑2166 or hewlett@uwyo.edu.