LMD Jul 13

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

– JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL JULY 15, 2013 • www. aaalivestock . com

MARKET

Digest W

by LEE PITTS

Hogs Gone Wild

Volume 55 • No. 7

Commie Pigs

by Lee Pitts n what is being called the “biggest acquisition in history of a U.S. corporation by a Chinese company,” Smithfield Foods is being bought by China’s Shuanghui International, China’s biggest pork producer.

While the U.S. Justice Department sat on its hands and let huge packers monopolize the U.S. meat market, Smithfield became the world’s largest pork producer by going on a shopping spree, snapping up over 40 companies including many of the crown jewels of the meat packing industry. Now Smithfield owns more hogs than the next eight largest hog producers combined.

We were told while all this was conglomerating was going on how glorious it was and how the American producer and shareholder would benefit from Smithfield’s power grab. Now the company, including venerable old brands like Armour and Farmland, will be owned by a company in a communist country. (Yes, members of the ruling party in China are all communists and we both still have nuclear bombs aimed at each other.) And all those American hog farmers who signed on the dotted line to become contract hog farmers for Smithfield will soon find themselves producing little commie pigs.

Hey, we’ve already sold our

NEWSPAPER PRIORITY HANDLING

I

A penny saved is a government oversight. nation’s soul to China in the form of trillions of dollars of our bonds, why not sell them our best businesses too?

“Absurdly Big” Smithfield will be purchased

by Shuanghui International Holdings, who offered a whopping 31 percent premium over Smithfield’s stock price at the time the deal was announced.

What are they getting for their money? The world’s largest pork producer and processor with facilities in 26 states, including

the biggest meat-processing plant in the world. Smithfield employs over 46,000 people and has facilities in the U.S., Mexico and in 10 European countries, with an annual revenue of $13 billion. Interestingly, Smithfield slaughtered two and a half times as many hogs in 2012 as Shuanghui did. It’s like a fly swallowing a frog.

Smithfield started gobbling up companies like a greedy pig in 1981 and went on to buy Gwaltney of Smithfield, Patrick Cudahy, Schluderberg-Kurdle,

John Morrell & Co, Circle Four Farms, Carroll’s Foods, Tyson Foods Pork Group, Cook’s Ham, Krakus Ham, Stefano’s, Murphy Family Farms of North Carolina, Farmland Foods of Kansas City, Sara Lee’s European Meats, ConAgra Foods, Butterball Turkeys, Premium Standard Farms, Carando, Curly’s Foods, Eckrich, Healthy Ones, Kretschmar, Margherita, and dozens more. The Chinese will also get brands like Weight Watchers and the Paula Deen Collection, although the Deen assets might not be as valuable as they were before she used the “n” word and got kicked off the Food Network. Several acquisitions ago the USDA said that Smithfield had already become “absurdly big” and it later got substantially bigger.

Now it raises 16 million pigs a year.

One company who must really like the deal is WalMart as Farmland is their main meat provider. And we all know how much WalMart likes to buy its goods from China! continued on page two

Water cutoff will impact wildlife

BY FRANK GALUSHA, MYOUTDOORBUDDY.COM

here is another wrong being done in the Upper Klamath Basin that could affect all of us including those who love the outdoors, all wildlife and the small agricultural communities who supply people, animals, and wildlife with food.

Family ranchers and farmers, supporters of agriculture, and people who love and treasure the pastoral landscapes of Klamath County, Oregon are being threatened with a water shutoff by court order that will threaten their livelihoods as well as our food supplies and the food wildlife need to survive in this area. These ranchers and farmers have planned a rally for July 1 at 9 a.m. at the Klamath County Fairgrounds. They are asking for support by inviting the public to attend this rally. “The rally will be held at government buildings in Klamath Falls but participants can also meet at the Fairgrounds and carpool downtown,” said Jennifer Newman, one of the event organizers.

A recent court order has placed all agricultur-

T

Riding Herd

al use of irrigation water in the Upper Klamath Basin in jeopardy by establishing required stream flows that preclude the use of irrigation water in all but the wettest years. Without irrigation, over 100,000 acres of ranch land in the Upper Basin would become unviable for agriculture.

Not only would this cost Klamath County over 4,000 jobs, it would wipe out a community of historic family ranches and erase a rural landscape treasured by all who visit Klamath County’s scenic back roads. (See more background below.)

These fellow citizens are seeking a fair distribution of water rights in order to sustain the region’s agriculture-based economy, foster understanding in our diverse communities, and preserve the rural character of the area, which in turn supports big game, upland game, waterfowl, birds and all other life in the area. If their water is cutoff much is at stake.

Every day, more ranchers in the Upper Kla-

hen you think about it, wild hogs are no different than wild horses in that they both either escaped from domestic herds, or were turned loose on purpose by their owners.

And yet all the city dudes want to save the horses but shoot the wild hogs. It makes no sense. We have liberal soccer moms crying crocodile tears and protesting over the treatment of wild horses while several states urge their hunters to shoot wild hogs on sight.

Most states have no season or bag limit on wild hogs so feel free to blast away. But can you imagine the howling if we allowed wild horse hunting?

There are 201 areas in this country where wellintentioned ignoramuses are trying to save wild horses, which researchers tell us are genetically identical to domestic horses. At the same time, wild hogs have been declared an invasive species and there is not single wild hog sanctuary in the country. Nor is there a single rescue mission for racing hogs that have grown too big for the starting gate. Shame on us.

Nor do wild hogs have a comparable spokesman like the ex-wife of billionaire Boone Pickens who has become the face of wild horses. As far as I know, no one has stepped forward to be the face of the wild hogs.

I vow to be that face, and if you’ve ever seen me in person, you know I’m the right guy for the job. I have been compared favorably to the Berkshire breed on more than one occasion.

It is with a great deal of greed that I am proud to announce the formation of a nonprofit group to raise cash, and cain, for wild pigs.

Please send your money in unmarked bills so that I can buy up land to create a string of wild pig sanctuaries across the country, where I might also run a few cows.

And no, even if the ex-Mrs. Pickens would be willing to share her horse sanctuaries it won’t work because her wild horses have already grazed them down till they continued on page seven

continued on page four

www.LeePittsbooks.com

Livestock Market Digest

Page 2

July 15, 2013

Commie Pigs Chinese Food

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

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

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

Subscribe Today

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

NAME

ADDRESS

CITY

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

STATE

ZIP

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

ADMINISTRATIVE and PRODUCTION STAFF: MARGEURITE VENSEL . Office Mgr. CAROL PENDLETON . . Special Assistance CHRISTINE CARTER . . . . Graphic Artist

Fearing a backlash from Americans who don’t like the idea of depending on the Chinese for their baby spare ribs, top executives at Smithfield have proclaimed that this deal is a win/win for everyone, citing Smithfield’s ability to increase pork exports to China. No doubt, there is potential for growth because last year all the pork we exported to China only equaled one half of one percent of Chinese pork production.

Smithfield execs say American hog farmers will profit by sending a lot more of their hogs to China, but of course they would say that seeing as how top execs at Smithfield will get to put $85 million in stock and options in their pockets when the deal is wrapped up. The CEO of Smithfield, Larry Pope, will get to keep his job and the value of his stock and options ballooned to $25.4 million after the deal was announced.

Not that Pope and his fellow execs did much to really earn their windfall. According to Bloomberg News, Smithfield’s financial performance has lagged behind their competitors for years. Continental Grain, a major shareholder, has complained that Smithfield has paid no cash dividends for seven years while Hormel and Tyson paid hundreds of millions of dollars over the same period.

According to Bloomberg, Smithfield posted a negative return of 18 percent over the past five years, the secondworst performance of any U.S. food company with annual sales of $10 billion or more.

Hey, if you can’t compete, buy up all sorts of companies to grow the books and then find a foreign buyer to bail you out.

It’s a winning formula that has been used several times the last few years by once-proud American companies. I suppose we should just be grateful that our government isn’t loaning the Chinese company the purchase price as part of some “stimulus package”. At least we hope they aren’t.

This Little Piggie Went To China It’s true, there is a growing demand for all U.S. meat in China, including beef. According to Chris Hurt of Purdue, “U. S. pork exports have been rising steadily in recent years and will represent about 17 percent of our production in 2013.” Says Hurt, “There is a 3 percent annual growth rate in Chinese pork business while U.S. consumers will consume the same amount of pork in 2013 as they did in 2005. The U.S. market is nearly flat, so exports are the primary growth opportunity for the U.S.” Still, in the back of everyone’s mind is the possibility that some day China may be sending their pork back to us, and in light of China’s food

continued from page one

scares the last few years, that possibility should send shivers down the spine of all consumers. Shuanghui was caught selling pork tainted with clenbuterol, an additive we wrote about a few months back that is illegal in China. And in the Chinese press it seems like there is a daily story about highly toxic food being served for supper. Remember the tainted baby formula scare? It’s gotten so bad in China that consumers don’t trust anything they eat.

The deal is being hyped up as an export opportunity but some folks are worried that when Smithfield is Chinese owned there will be pressure to import more product from China where it can be produced cheaper. (It’s the same worry about JBS being owned by the

And all those American hog farmers who signed on the dotted line to become contract hog farmers for Smithfield will soon find themselves producing little commie pigs.

Brazilians.) Right now, the USDA won’t let in Chinese pork but it’s reconsidering bringing in poultry and with a little political pressure they could do the same with pork.

After all, Smithfield knows how to play the political game.

If you go to Smithfield’s web site and look at who sits on its Board of Directors you will find listed the “Honorable” Carol T. Crawford, a director who served as an assistant Attorney General and as a commissioner on the U.S. International Trade Commission for nearly a decade. Just for fun go online and see all her activity in the buying and selling of Smithfield shares she’s been given through the years. Also on the Board of Directors is the “Honorable” Paul S. Trible, Jr., a lawyer and Virginia politician who served in the U.S. House of Representatives for three terms, and in the U.S. Senate for one term. We wonder, what did these folks do while serving in government that merited a seat on Smithfield’s board? And isn’t it about time we did away with the word “honorable” when talking about any member of Congress?

Sweet And Sour Pork Smithfield’s CEO Larry Pope says, “This is not a strategy to import Chinese pork into the United States. This is a strategy to export pork out of the United States.” Pope says continued on page three

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

July 15, 2013

Page 3

Commie Pigs

This Chinese purchase might also explain why Smithfield gave at least $683,900 to a campaign known as “The Coalition Against The Costly Food Labeling Proposition.” charges that the company engaged in illegal merger activity during its takeover of Premium Standard Farms.

This Chinese purchase might also explain why Smithfield gave at least $683,900 to a campaign known as “The Coalition Against The Costly Food Labeling Proposition.” After all, who would want mandatory country of origin labeling or the labeling of foods containing genetically modified ingredients when you’re shipping in product from China? We don’t know if Dave Warner, director of communications for the National Pork Producers Council was speaking on behalf of all the pork producers who pay the pork checkoff when he said, “This does have the potential to increase U.S. pork exports to China, which would benefit all U.S. pork producers.” But then again, the NPPC gets their checkoff money no matter where the pork is produced. It’s really not hard to envision the day when Chinese pork will be touted in ads paid for by the pork checkoff.

For a number of years now the government of China has been sending people to America to study our production methods for pork. After all, pork is very important in their country as half the world’s pork is produced and consumed there. With the purchase of Smithfield the Chinese company will get intellectual property that Smithfield spent years

developing.

Oh well, at least in this case China is having to pay for that knowledge. Usually they just steal it.

Sending Up A Red Flag Some folks are squealing like a sow with her snout caught under a gate at the prospect of Smithfield becoming Chinese owned. Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, called it “birth of a cross-border bacon behemoth.

Merger mania in the meat industry in recent decades has led to more factory farms in the U.S., with 95 percent of hogs now raised in operations of over 2,000 animals. We may export the pork, but we keep millions of gallons of manure right here in U.S. hog-raising communities in North Carolina and Iowa.”

She may have a point. In one four-year period in North Carolina 4.7 million gallons of hog fecal matter were released into the state’s rivers, and workers and residents near Smithfield plants have reported numerous health problems, and have complained about the constant, overpowering stenches of hog feces. The company was fined $12.6 million in 1997 by the Environmental Protection Agency for nearly SEVEN THOUSAND violations of the Clean Water Act. Wenonah Hauter asks, “Are the health and pollution costs of these farms staying here and all that pork and profits going overseas worth the profits to those farmers and suppliers when the rest of us must bear the costs for their operations cleanup and environmental degradation? The pollution stays here, the corporate profits and produce go to China. And farmers and supplies will be squeezed even harder by a global corporation that is less answerable because it is overseas. This merger tightens the grip of multinational agribusinesses and Wall Street on America’s kitchens, as Shuanghui is partially owned by U.S. investment bank Goldman Sachs. While U.S. consumers will likely not take notice of the change, it will show up on their plates in the form of farmer exploitation, more factory farms and a more complicated supply chain that leaves consumers at higher risk of food contamination.”

Sachs to help them explore all their options. Keep in mind that five years ago Goldman Sachs purchased the Chinese government’s shares in Shuanghui to take the company private. It’s all very cozy, isn’t it?

“About two months later, wrote Baxter, “Shuanghui announced that they had entered into a deal to buy Smithfield at about $7.1 billion, which included all of Smithfield’s debt. It worked out to be the magic number of $34/share.

I say magic, because this was the area that would make Continental’s investment whole.”

Baxter wrote that if authorities do not approve the deal (it’s subject to approval by the Committee on Foreign Investment), there are two companies waiting in the wings to buy Smithfield, one of these being

ELM

wings? Pardon me for disagreeing but I think there are many of us who would prefer to keep all of our greedy pigs of the capitalist breed.

TO SACRAMENTO

SALE SITE

HWY 4

STOCKTON

J17 M ARIPO SA RD

VALLEY HOME

HWY 99 OAKDALE

HWY 120 ESCALON

SALE MANTECA HEADQUARTERS

N

MODESTO

TO FRESNO

Facility located at: 25525 East Lone Tree Road, Escalon, CA 95320

ESCALON LIVESTOCK MARKET, INC. SPECIAL FEEDER CATTLE SALE: August 19, 2013 at 1:00PM

Carving Up The Pig In an article titled “Cutting to the Chase,” Raoul Baxter, a former Smithfield executive, wrote that just a few months ago “Continental Grain sent a letter to the Smithfield board of directors, telling them how unhappy they were with Smithfield's performance over the past five years and suggested that the board carve up Smithfield into three separate businesses. About two weeks later, Smithfield brought in Goldman

JBS, which is the Brazilian based largest beef packer in the world and at least partially financed by the Brazilian government.

Regarding Smithfield’s sale, Purdue’s Hurt wrote, “Growth of demand is generally good for the individual people and firms that are in that industry.” But don’t tell that to the impoverished American poultry producers who, after years of increased consumption of chicken, are barely making poverty wages. Hurt also said, “While the outcomes are uncertain, the hopes are that the Smithfield Foods merger can be a new model for meat production and processing in a world increasingly dominated by global sourcing and distribution.”

So this is the new business model? What’s next, will Tyson sell to the Russians because they are known to like chicken

FARMINGTON

the prospect of using this purchase as a springboard for future imports of Chinese pork is “not even a remote possibility. This is the one place America can absolutely compete,” he stated. Chuck Dohrenwend, a public relations hired gun echoed those words: “Any discussion of the American food supply is just not relevant.”

Both men said that there is no Chinese government ownership of Shuanghui and that Chinese management would be hands off. Pope said, “It will be business as usual — only better — at Smithfield.”

Those words may or may not be of comfort considering that in January 2009, Smithfield was assessed nearly a one million dollar penalty by the U.S. Justice Department to settle

continued from page two

LIVESTOCK SALES: 3 days per week on Monday, Wednesday, & Friday MONDAY: Beef Cattle WEDNESDAY: Dairy Cattle CONSIGNMENTS WELCOME! Call for more information on consigning your stock.

MIGUEL A. MACHADO President Office: 209/838-7011 Mobile: 209/595-2014

FRIDAY: Small Animals Poultry – Butcher Cows JOE VIEIRA Representative Mobile: 209/531-4156 THOMAS BERT 209/605-3866

DUDLEY MEYER Field Representative 209/768-8568

www.escalonlivestockmarket.com • escalonlivestockmarket@yahoo.com

Livestock Market Digest

Page 4

Livestock & Poultry Groups Urge Congress to Repeal the Renewable Fuel Standard ollowing an announcement by Sens. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) that they have introduced the bi-partisan Renewable Fuels Standard Repeal Act (S. 1195), the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), National Chicken Council (NCC) and the National Turkey Federation (NTF) urge Congress to repeal the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS).

“The RFS has been such a poorly managed mess, it’s time to drain the swamp,” said NTF President Joel Brandenberger.

“The RFS needs a fresh start in order to put in place a smarter policy on the mix of fuel and feed.”

The RFS last year required 13.2 billion gallons of cornbased ethanol to be blended into gasoline; it mandates that 13.9 billion gallons be blended in 2013, an amount that will use about 4.9 billion bushels of corn, or about 40 percent of the nation’s crop.

“Chicken producers are already competing with the weather,” said NCC President Mike Brown. “Why must we also compete with an inflexible federal mandate that voluntarily places another strain on our limited resources? I commend

F

Sens. Barrasso, Pryor and Toomey for taking an approach that would let the free market decide whether corn should go to food or to fuel.”

Livestock and poultry groups called on the administration last fall to waive the RFS for the second time since 2008. And for the second time, in spite of the widespread drought and lowered harvest, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) refused to use the safety valve built into the biofuels mandate.

“Cattlemen and women are self-reliant, but in order to maintain that we cannot be asked to compete with federal mandates like the Renewable Fuels Standard for the limited supply of feed grains,” said NCBA Policy Vice Chair Craig Uden, an Elwood, Neb., cattle feeder. “When EPA is unable to provide even a temporary waiver of the RFS during the worst drought in 50 years, it is apparent the RFS is broken and we appreciate the efforts of Sens. Barrasso, Pryor and Toomey to fix this flawed program.”

NCBA, NCC and NTF call on Congress to repeal the RFS to ensure market stability certainty for rural American economies.

Rabo AgriFinance Report Finds Cattle Feeding Recovery Key to Rebuilding Beef Industry tructural shrinkage in the North American beef industry is expected to continue, perhaps even worsen in the near term, according to a new report from the Rabobank Food & Agribusiness (FAR) Research and Advisory group.

“It is a rare occurrence that all sectors within the cattle industry are profitable at the same,” says report author and Rabobank Food & Agribusiness Research and Advisory (FAR) group analyst, Don Close. “However, before the U.S. cattle industry can begin to fully rebuild after several years of contraction, it is necessary for equity recovery to take place in the cattle feeding sector.”

The report, “North American Beef: The Liquidation Continues,” finds high feed prices and severe drought challenges have placed significant pressure on the industry in recent years. At the beginning of 2013, the market was optimistic that the industry could turn the corner and begin to grow again. However, the second half of the year is bringing a less optimistic view as the industry contracts and, as a result, is at risk of becoming a higher-priced luxury protein.

“A number of complex chal-

S

lenges, including growing price spreads between beef and alternative proteins, excess capacity along the supply chain and dwindling profitability along the chain, are contributing to the shrinkage,” notes Close. “Rabobank expects domestic beef supplies to continue to contract and the supply chain to continue restructuring, making a rebound in the beef industry unlikely in the near term.”

The industry has settled into a painful process of contraction, excess capacity and restructuring.

As a result, consumers are seeing beef prices escalating. The spread is widening between beef and other protein sources, and people are not only downgrading between selected beef items, they are more frequently opting for the other proteins.

This report outlines how feeder supplies, contracting North American supplies and Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling (MCOOL) legislation are contributing to the challenges faced by cattle feeders and processors.

The report, “North American Beef: The Liquidation Continues,” is available exclusively to clients of Rabobank and Rabo AgriFinance. Media can obtain the full report by contacting Sarah Kolell at Rabo AgriFinance.

July 15, 2013

Lawmakers praise 6-month postponement of prairie chicken decision PHIL TAYLOR, E&E REPORTER

awmakers of both parties praised the Fish and Wildlife Service’s decision to postpone by six months its decision on whether to list the lesser prairie chicken as a threatened species.

FWS Director Dan Ashe informed lawmakers from Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Texas that the agency would not finalize its listing decision until the end of next March, as lawmakers had requested earlier this month (Greenwire, June 17).

“Public comments received by the Service since publication of the proposed rule have highlighted substantial scientific disagreement regarding the sufficiency or accuracy of the available data relevant to the listing proposal,” Ashe wrote in a letter to senators and representatives of the states.

The lawmakers had argued more time is needed to complete a five-state conservation plan that encourages landowners to commit to voluntary conservation steps to preserve the bird's native grassland and prairie habitat.

L

“This extension is the right decision for New Mexico and the West,” said Rep. Steve Pearce (R-N.M.). “In the past, we’ve seen hasty listing decisions needlessly cost thousands of jobs, destroy communities and even have a detrimental impact on the environment and the species itself.”

Senators earlier this month had lauded the “groundbreaking nature of the five-state plan” and said participants should be given the maximum amount of time to enroll in the plan to demonstrate its effectiveness. The plan aims to eliminate the need for a listing.

While lawmakers had asked FWS to consider postponing its decision until next summer, Ashe said the agency does not intend to ask a federal judge for any additional time.

The agency is obligated by legal settlements with the Center for Biological Diversity and WildEarth Guardians to issue a listing decision for the prairie chicken, which has been a candidate for protection since the early 1980s.

The iconic bird, known for its elaborate mating dance, is in

Water Cutoff math watershed are losing their access to irrigation water. Without the ability to irrigate, ranchers cannot grow a hay crop to feed their cattle through the winter, let alone have adequate forage for summer months. No water and no hay means these ranches are no longer viable for agriculture, and will be forced out of business.

What does this mean to their community and to all those who love the outdoors?

■ Disappearance of scenic rural landscapes ■ Loss of prime wildlife habitat ■ Elimination of over 4,000 jobs in Klamath County ■ Loss of agriculture-related businesses ■ Loss of a major source of Oregon-grown meat and fiber ■ Disappearance of family ranches, many with 150-year histories For the past 150 years, the crystal waters of Klamath County have been used by the ranchers in the Upper Klamath Basin to irrigate their high desert hay meadows. In 1975, the United States Government, acting through the Department of Indian Affairs, brought a claim for these waters on behalf of the National Forest Service, the Klamath Tribes, and the Bureau of Reclamation. This claim was intended to supersede ranchers’ state adjudicated water rights dating back to 1864.

In March 2013, after nearly 40 years of ongoing litigation, the adjudicator, Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) issued its Findings of

danger of extinction in the foreseeable future due to threats including grazing, tree encroachment, conversion of rangeland to crop and nonnative forage, and energy development, FWS said in November (Greenwire, Nov. 30, 2012).

“We are committed to working with the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the states to further lesser prairie chicken conservation,” Ashe said in his letter to the lawmakers. “We strongly support the efforts to develop a rangewide conservation plan and are working closely with states to refine that plan.”

ESA allows FWS to extend its decision time frame “if there is substantial disagreement regarding the sufficiency or accuracy of the available data relevant to the determination, for the purposes of soliciting additional data.”

Such a determination was made in December 2010 in the case of the dunes sagebrush lizard. Six months later, the Fish and Wildlife Service decided to withdraw its proposal to list the 3-inch lizard as endangered, angering environmental groups.

continued from page one

Fact and Final Order of Determination (FOD). This FOD has placed all agricultural use of irrigation water in the Upper Klamath Basin in jeopardy by establishing required stream flows that preclude the use of irrigation water in all but the wettest years. Without irrigation, over 100,000 acres of ranch land in the Upper Basin would become unviable for agriculture. Not only would this cost Klamath County over 4,000 jobs, it would wipe out a community of historic family ranches and erase a rural landscape treasured by all who visit Klamath County’s scenic back roads.

Allowing productive irrigated lands to dry up and rural communities to wither, is not in anyone’s best interest. The life-giving waters of the Upper Basin are a fundamental resource that needs to be shared by all stakeholders. The ranchers and farmers want to find a fair and equitable way to distribute this water that will give all parties some of

what they need, though no one will receive all of what they want.

Ranchers need to continue to ranch and in-stream flows for the Klamath Tribes need to be adequate for historic uses.

These are the Economic impact projections for Klamath County Oregon, as prepared by county Assessor Leonard Hill in April 2013 if the present water re-adjudication is allowed to continue: 1. Affected Acres-115,000 2.

Livestock sales$144,635,000.00 3. Labor- full and part-time jobs lost- 4355 (not including Northern California counties that use Klamath County as an economic hub) 4. Land values –115,000 acres value loss– @ $2250/acre= $258,000,000.00 5. Total area Impact in dollars – $516,000,000.00.

These economic losses would seriously affect Klamath County's ability to function in the future.

Advertise to Cattlemen in the Livestock Market Digest

July 15, 2013

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

Page 5

BPI’s defamation lawsuit vs. ABC News ordered back to S.D. state court

BY LISA M. KEEFE, MEATINGPLACE.COM

U.S. District Court judge in mid June ruled that Beef Products Inc.’s $1.2 billion defamation lawsuit against ABC News and others should be moved back to state court, where the company had initially filed last September.

The ruling, by Judge Karen E. Schreier of the Southern District of South Dakota, is a victory for BPI. It was widely thought that ABC News was seeking a more sympathetic venue in its motion to move the case to federal court.

However, in its request to have the case moved to federal court, filed last October, ABC had argued that only BPI — not its related companies, Freezing Machines Inc. and BPI Technology Inc. — are “parties of interest” to the case. Therefore, BPI’s argument that their co-location in Union County, S.D., gave the state court jurisdiction is invalid, ABC said. Moving the case to federal court in South Dakota was proper because the case remains in the “district and division” where it first was filed, but accounts for the fact that the parties to the case, including the defendants, encompass several different states.

Judge Schreier rather harshly dismissed ABC News’s argument, however, saying that it not only went against legal precedent, “it also goes against reason.”

A

“Defendants’ argument . . . proposes that the court first entangle itself with the facts of the case in order to make a legal determination about whether BPI Tech’s claim has merit. Put simply, defendants are suggesting that the court make a determination about the merits of BPI Tech’s claim before even deciding whether it has the authority to make such a determination. This is putting the cart before the horse.

“Thus, the court finds that BPI Tech is a real party in interest.

Because BPI Tech is a real party in interest, complete diversity of citizenship does not exist between plaintiffs and defendants. Accordingly, it is ordered that . . . the Clerk of Court will remand this case to the Circuit Court of Union County, South Dakota, from which it was removed.”

In response to the decision, Erik Connolly, a partner with Winston & Strawn law firm in Chicago and one of BPI’s attorneys, told Meatingplace, “We originally filed the lawsuit in state court because that was the proper jurisdiction. The court’s decision confirms that we were correct. We look forward to presenting our case in state court.”

An ABC spokesman told Reuters that, “This is purely a decision on what court will hear the case. The court stated that ABC and the other defendants have the right to move to dismiss the case in the state court, and ABC intends to do just that.”

If Cows Could Talk

“I

f you are in a hurry, be deliberate.”

Neil and his wife were young Alabama cattle farmers. He was very attentive to his stock, subscribed to many livestock publications, kept up on new management practices and was always in a hurry. Jenny was a practical but kind-hearted livestock person herself. Both had jobs in town.

Their first-calf heifers had started their calving season.

On the evening of the ‘incident’, Neil had checked the heifer lot and found one of the thinner ones in labor. After supper he and Jenny drove out to have a look and see how her parturition was progressing.

Low and behold, the heifer had twins! One of the calves was standing but the smaller one was laid out on the ground. It wasn’t moving and somehow didn’t look right.

Neil assumed, as often happens with twins, one of the

calves is born healthy and strong, while the other was born weaker.

The standing calf was trying to find his way around. Neil eased up to it, picked it up and carried it into a little panel pen with a head gate. The new mother followed and, after several minutes, the calf was sucking.

“What about the other calf?” asked Jenny.

“He won’t make it,” Neil said. “He looks poorly, isn’t moving, maybe didn’t get his share in the womb. Besides, the heifer ain’t got milk enough for two.”

“Well, you can’t just leave it there,” she protested.

“I know best, It’s nature’s way, Dummy calf, These things happen, Won’t make it anyhow, Better for them both, etc.” he explained.

“It’s just not right!” she mumbled, climbing back in the pickup and slamming the door.

Little was said the rest of

the evening. She scolded him for his lack of compassion. He belligerently clung to the “some must be sacrificed for the common good” argument.

It was chilly in bed that night.

Next morning at daybreak Neil climbed in the pickup and drove out to the calving lot. A good feeling arose in him when he saw the calf, head in mama’s breakfast nook, contentedly nursing. Neil scanned the lot for the lost twin. For a moment he thought maybe the coyotes had drug off the body.

He looked back to the new mother and spoke out loud to her, “Where did he go?”

She looked back over her other shoulder at the second twin who was nursing heartily.

“If you’d taken a moment to check last night you’d have known that the one on the ground was born first, got his colostrum, and I put him down for a nap. Then you showed up.” (Or something of the sort if cows could talk.)

Page 6

To place your ad, contact Caren at 505/243-9515, ext. 21 or caren@aaalivestock.com

Livestock Market Digest

July 15, 2013

HSUS Sued for Defamation, Malicious Prosecution, Conspiracy, and Abuse of Process SOURCE: WWW.HUMANEWATCH.ORG

everal years ago we wrote about the case of Denisa Malott, an Arkansas woman who had her horses seized by HSUS for allegedly not caring for them —only to find that the horses were, after the seizure, apparently dropped off in a field and left without adequate food and water, despite HSUS’s promise that the animals would be taken to a care facility.

Previously, Malott had filed a complaint with the FBI asking for an investigation under the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act. And now the other shoe has dropped: Malott has filed a lawsuit. Read it here.

The suit, filed in February in the Circuit Court of Stone County, Arkansas, seeks unspecified damages for defamation, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trespass to real property, trespass to chattels, and conspiracy. The defendants are the Humane Society of the United States, HSUS’s state legislative director Desiree Bender, the

S

Humane Society of Missouri, and three other individuals.

The seizure occurred in November 2009, after which Malott was charged with 25 felony counts of animal cruelty.

Those charges were later dropped to misdemeanors — and then those charges were completely dropped altogether, in November 2011. In short, Malott had to sit under the looming threat of criminal prosecution for two years after the seizure that was conducted by HSUS and others.

Following the seizure, HSUS put out a press release in which HSUS state director Desiree Bender alleged the horses were living in “deplorable conditions” and HSUS claimed that the “horses are being taken to The Rescue Wranglers’ pasture in White Hall, Ark., where they will receive the attention they deserve.”

But Malott alleges that the attention the horses got was far from what they deserved.

Instead of going to The Rescue Wranglers’ pasture three hours away, the horses were found close to the seizure site.

What’s more, they allegedly were found to be without ade-

quate food and water — essentially dropped off in a pasture, from the sound of it.

Malott wasn’t allowed to feed her horses because of the pending criminal charges, but she eventually won physical custody of the animals and was able to feed them. The June/July 2010 edition of MareConnection has more details about the seizure and subsequent events.

In short, Malott’s lawsuit asserts that the allegations of HSUS and others were false, which damaged her reputation and business. She’s essentially saying: “Prove it.” So we’ll see what HSUS has got to back up its actions. But if her horses were seized under false pretenses or HSUS made defamatory statements, then the organization could be pretty deep in manure.

Two other HSUS “raids” have spurred lawsuits: One in South Dakota and one in Hawaii. The South Dakota case is still active and is slowly progressing. HSUS is also facing a federal lawsuit filed under antiracketeering statutes. As always, we’ll keep an eye on this case and keep you posted as to any developments.

Idaho ranchers still waiting on wolf-kill cash WWW.SEATTLEPI.COM

daho wildlife managers have yet to receive federal funding to compensate ranchers for 2012 livestock losses from wolves, as other Western states are also competing for a share of just $850,000 meant to offset sheep and cattle losses from the predators.

The Times-News (http://tinyurl.com/neebwjv) reports Dustin Miller, who heads Idaho’s Office of Species Conservation, said the money will eventually be divided between paying ranchers for losses and funding efforts to avoid wolf-livestock conflicts.

In 2011, the program paid Idaho ranchers about $100,000 for livestock losses.

“Unfortunately, we usually have the highest level of depredations in the country, and if it’s competitive, we may receive more funding than other states.

But we can’t be sure,” Miller said. “We have no idea what we are going to receive, and I can’t guarantee producers who lost livestock . will be compensated at market rates.”

Federal officials say wolves killed 75 cattle and 330 sheep last year, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services agency that’s tasked with assisting livestock producers in Idaho and the United States in protecting their herds from predators.

Hunters’ success rates for the

I

canine predators also improved significantly last year: Hunters and trappers killed 320 wolves in the 2012-2013 season, up from 200 in 2011, to trim wolf numbers statewide to roughly 638.

Last year, federal government wildlife agents also killed 69 wolves after determining they were targeting livestock.

Todd Grimm, the director of Wildlife Services in Idaho, says it’s difficult to draw too many conclusions from the number of cattle, sheep or wolves killed in a given year, as the number varies depending on numerous circumstances.

For instance, wolves killed 103 cattle and 411 sheep and lambs in 2009, a year he remembers as particularly hard on producers’ herds.

“Sometimes things happen,” Grimm said, on fluctuating predation numbers. “We just don’t know. It’ll be interesting to see what this year’s numbers point out.”

Livestock fall victim to other predators, too, he pointed out.

In 2012, 23 cows and calves were killed by members of Idaho’s roughly 50,000-strong population of coyotes. Coyotes also killed 141 sheep and lambs last year, according to Wildlife Services records.

Grimm’s officers killed 3,048 coyotes in Idaho in control actions in 2012, according to the agency’s statistics.

Ranchers say they’ve come to acknowledge, if begrudgingly,

the presence of wolves on Idaho’s landscape, following Congress’ lifting of federal Endangered Species Act protections for the state’s population in 2011.

But they want to see active measures to control problem predators.

“We’re going to get by,” said sheep rancher John Faulkner, of Faulkner Land and Livestock in Gooding in south-central Idaho.

“But we are going to kill some of them. That’s all there is to it.”

Environmentalists who have opposed federal delisting on grounds they don’t trust Idaho to manage its wolf population responsibly say simply killing the predators in a bid to keep them from attacking livestock isn’t appropriate.

Suzanne Stone, Northern Rockies representative for the Defenders of Wildlife, said ranchers should focus on deterrents including guard dogs, human herders, lighting, electric fencing and corrals bedecked with flags that flap in the wind, rather than rely on hunting or Wildlife Services’ lethal controls that she contends disrupts wolf packs.

That leaves juvenile wolves to wander without a social structure that would otherwise teach them to hunt elk or deer, Stone said.

“You’ve then got basically a bunch of teenagers running around, and they are the ones who tend to get in trouble more with people because they are not very savvy at hunting,” she said.

July 15, 2013

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

Page 7

Anti-cattle group abuses Freedom of Information Act

BY KAREN BUDD FALEN, ATTORNEY, CHEYENNE, WY

ince 2009, Western Watersheds Project (“WWP”) has issued at least 675 Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) requests just to the BLM and Forest Service, related to livestock grazing on the public lands. Although I did not read all 675 requests, I did find some letters that demanded information for as many as 50 allotments in one single FOIA request. Most WWP FOIAs also wanted documents from multiple years and on multiple subjects. Many of the requests included instructions to the BLM or Forest Service offices stating that the response to WWP should be sent electronically or in a certain format. While the FOIA requires that the federal government make certain documents available, can a requester really dictate the format of the response?

Additionally, for every request, WWP argues that they should receive all information free of charge because they are: ■ a non-profit membership organization dedicated to protecting and conserving the public lands and natural resources of watersheds in the American West. WWP has over 1200 members . . . WWP is active in seeking to protect and improve the riparian areas, water quality, fisheries, wildlife, and other natural resources and ecological values of western watersheds. To do so, WWP actively participates in agency decision-making concerning BLM [Forest Service] lands

S

Riding Herd look like the Sahara Desert.

I am also proud to announce that every four years during our Presidential and Congressional elections we will celebrate Hog Awareness Week in which I will attempt to educate the public about wild pigs. For example, did you know the reason wild hogs look wilder than their counterpoint equines is because during the 1930s ranchers in this country released wild Russian boars for the purpose of creating wild hogs to hunt. That’s right, the wild hogs in this country are a bunch of pinko-commie pigs, so liberal left wingers really ought to love them. Another reason wild pigs look like a bunch of razorbacks with distended abdomens is because people turned their pot bellied pigs loose to fend for themselves when that bubble burst bigger than the Beanie Babies.

Wild hogs are the perfect species to ruin all the BLM land because they reproduce much faster than horses, having two litters per year with as many as ten pigs in each litter.

Nor do the hogs practice safe sex or birth control like many

...some of WWP FOIAs request documents and information about named individuals. Of the FOIAs I reviewed where WWP wanted information about named ranchers or other individual ranchers, not one of the ranchers was contacted by the BLM or Forest Service before their information was released to WWP. throughout the West, and the BLM’s management of livestock grazing in Idaho, Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming.* ■ WWP is effective at increasing public awareness of environmental matters, such as protection of the diverse and valuable sagebrush-steppe ecosystem, through public education and outreach, participation in administrative processes, litigation and other enforcement of federal environmental laws. (*WWP uses this same language to justify its fee waiver requests in Montana, California, Arizona and New Mexico as well).

In contrast, if a rancher/permittee requests that very same information about his allotment requested by WWP, the BLM or the Forest Service will charge him $42.00 per hour for administrative search time and $.15 per page for each photocopy made.

continued from page one

BLM horses do. Just think, at this rate the Feds could tie up Iowa and half the West in just a few short years and the land in the pig sanctuaries could be just as mismanaged as the wild horse lands. We’ll have feedlots bursting with wild hogs and it won’t be long before we have millions of worthless pigs on government welfare. Oh, I forgot, we already do.

Soon I’ll be sponsoring our first wild hog adoption, although rounding up the wild hogs may prove more daunting that rounding up wild horses.

You just don’t call out, “soooeey” and expect the wild hogs to come a runnin’. And I doubt a helicopter would be of much use. The choppers might run the hogs so hard they’d pull a hamstring.

There is a method to my madness. After we start saving wild hogs the next step will be to ban slaughterhouses that kill pigs. That will leave 51 pounds of the other white meat per person per year that could theoretically be replaced by beef.

So, save a wild pig. Eat more beef. Tell me that wouldn’t make a great bumper sticker!

It seems backwards to me that a rancher is charged for “administrative search time” and photocopy costs to see what is in his own files, yet a group whose stated goal is to “get cows off the public lands ASAP” gets that exact same information for no charge at all (not even charging out-of-pocket costs).

In addition to the shear volume of FOIA requests and the mass of information requested in each of the individual requests

by WWP, other issues are of note: First, in addition to requesting information about individual allotments or groups of allotments, some of WWP FOIAs request documents and information about named individuals. Of the FOIAs I reviewed where WWP wanted information about named ranchers or other individual ranchers, not one of the ranchers was contacted by the

BLM or Forest Service before their information was released to WWP. Second, a great number of FOIAs requested the same information over and over. For example, in 2009, a FOIA would request all monitoring data “gathered or generated to date” for an allotment or large group of allotments. The exact same FOIA will then be filed in 2010 requesting all monitoring data “gathered or generated to date” about the same allotment or groups of allotments. The same FOIA will then be filed in 2011.

There is no mention in any of these FOIAs that the BLM or Forest Service had already supplied a great deal of the requested information in the past – the agency simply has to relocate and copy the same information over and over again–all at the public’s expense.

Third, if these radical groups do not receive the information they want – for free – federal court litigation follows, again at the taxpayers’ expense. The vast amount of FOIA cases filed by environmental groups only included the filing of a federal district court complaint, a settlement agreement for the release of the requested information and the payment of attorneys fees.

Fee payments were anywhere from $5000 to $50,000.

In May, 2013, the Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform for the U.S. House of Representatives, the Ranking Members of the Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Commit-

tee on the Judiciary for the U.S. Senate sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) strongly questioning EPA’s practice of “readily grant[ing] FOIA fee waivers for liberal environmental groups – effectively subsidizing them – while denying fee waivers and making the FOIA process difficult for states and conservative groups.” It is clear from the above research that the EPA is not the only agency who engages in such practice. Ranchers who should have the information that is kept in their files are forced to pay excessive amounts for information while radical environmental groups pay no fees for using this exact same information to file substantial numbers of administrative appeals and federal court litigation against these ranchers. With these radical groups, it is not a matter of providing fair public information; it is a matter of pushing a political agenda being subsidized by the taxpayers.

While there is no question that FOIA is an important statute to allow the public to get information from the federal government, this short essay points out the serious inequities in how the statute is implemented. Individuals are forced to pay search time and copy costs for the information gathered about them and located in their own files, while radical environmental groups can get the same documentation for free to use in litigation against the federal agency and rancher. Is that really the purpose of FOIA?

Livestock Market Digest

Page 8

July 15, 2013

Up In Smoke Is the US Forest Service killing the last best chance to save the Southwest’s forests?

BY CLAUDINE LOMONACO, SANTA FE REPORTER

ommie Martin points out across a dense thicket of low shrubs that stretches for miles. Blackened ponderosa pine trunks stab up at the sky.

“We’re looking at the skeleton of a forest,” she says.

It’s all that remains 23 years after eastern Arizona’s devastating Dude Fire killed six firefighters and burned 24,000 acres of overgrown ponderosa pine forest. Scientists say the forest will likely never return. The blaze was the first of the so-called “mega-fires” that now threaten forests across the West. This summer, in New Mexico, more than 100,000 acres have already burned.

Martin, 62, is a supervisor in Arizona’s Gila County and fourth-generation Arizonan. She wears her brown hair piled atop her head in curls, like a pioneer barmaid, harkening back to the days when her great-grandparents first came to Arizona as loggers. She remembers stories her great-grandmother used to tell about when Arizona’s ponderosa forests were more like savannas—open grasslands punctuated by massive, old-growth trees.

“Back then, girl, you could ride a horse in one direction for miles without stopping,” Martin says.

But that was a hundred years ago, just around the time the US Forest Service began stamping out the natural, low-burning grass fires that had kept the Southwest’s forests thin and healthy for thousands of years.

The policy was meant to protect logging and grazing interests, but it turned the forests into overgrown tinderboxes.

For the last several years, Martin’s been a member of a precedent-setting collaboration that aims to prevent catastrophic fires. Known as the Four Forest Restoration Initiative, or 4FRI, it brought together environmentalists, industry and the US Forest Service, among others.

Their aim is to thin and restore 2.4 million acres along the Mogollon Rim in northern Arizona, an enormous swath of land on four national forests stretching from Flagstaff to the New Mexico border, and reintroduce the natural fire regime.

The idea was to have a business do the work—because the government can’t afford to—and make a profit by selling wood products.

It’s the largest restoration project attempted in the US, and it’s a model for what might happen with smaller, similar projects around the country, like the plan to protect 150,000 acres in the southwest Jemez Mountains just outside Santa Fe, says Bryan Bird, the wild places program director for Santa Fe’s

T

WildEarth Guardians.

“Southwest Jemez is the little stepsister to 4FRI,” says Bird, who’s been watching the Arizona project for years. What happens in Arizona, he says, is likely to play out in New Mexico.

Which makes what’s going on within Arizona all the more concerning, because the project has gone haplessly awry.

In May 2012, the Forest Service regional office in Albu-

er the proposal of Pioneer’s most serious competitor—a legitimate company with a widely vetted business plan, broad community support and solid financial backing.

Making matters worse, the Forest Service has known about these problems for nearly a year, but seems to have done nothing about them.

And as the ambitious 4FRI plan falters, forests around the

According to documents from the National Archives and Records Administration in Denver, Hauck’s business, then called Hauck Mill Work Co., actually filed for bankruptcy in 1969. By Hauck’s own admission, that was the last wood business he ever ran, and he later went into real estate.

In a telephone interview, Hauck initially denied the bankruptcy. When confronted with

In May 2012, the Forest Service regional office in Albuquerque awarded the 4FRI contract to an under-the-radar company from Montana called Pioneer Forest Products. But more than a year later, Pioneer hasn’t thinned a single overgrown tree, because it’s failed to attract any investors, and the project has stalled. querque awarded the 4FRI contract to an under-the-radar company from Montana called Pioneer Forest Products. But more than a year later, Pioneer hasn’t thinned a single overgrown tree, because it’s failed to attract any investors, and the project has stalled.

This infuriates Martin, but it doesn’t surprise her. She was one of several collaboration members who blasted Pioneer from the start for a business plan that didn’t make sense. The company says it wants to manufacture products like window frames, doors and furniture that are currently made in Asia at far less cost, and turn tree branches into an experimental fuel called cellulosic biodiesel.

“They claim they are going to run their logging trucks on it,” Martin said. “I say nonsense. No they’re not. That’s not even out of the lab yet.”

In addition, one of Pioneer’s main partners is a former Forest Service supervisor who worked at the same regional office in Albuquerque that selected the company. This link has fueled further questions. Critics say missed deadlines, insufficient funding and a harebrained scheme suggest that even though Pioneer may have lacked the ability to fulfill the contract, political connections trumped reason.

The Forest Service has continued to back Pioneer, praising nonexistent “progress” in cheery press releases.

But Martin’s concerns seem warranted. SFR has found Pioneer had very little chance of ever gaining investors or succeeding as a business. It turns out the company lied about its work history in its proposal to the federal government, hiding a record of failure and bankruptcy.

The Forest Service failed to catch this, along with other glaring problems, or perform basic due diligence when reviewing Pioneer’s proposal.

It also appears the Forest Service failed to properly consid-

country are left to burn.

The Four Forest and Jemez Mountains projects are both part of the US Department of the Interior’s Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program.

Created in 2009, the program aims to carry out large-scale, science-based forest restoration by bringing together scientists, environmentalists, industry, local government and the Forest Service. It’s an attempt to build trust through transparency and consensus, and avoid the litigious “timber wars” of the 1990s that pitted environmentalists against the Forest Service and shut down logging around the West.

That’s why Pioneer’s selection came as such a surprise: Collaboration members knew so little about the company. To date, Pioneer has failed to discuss the details of its business plan, and the Forest Service has refused to release it, citing “trade secrets.”

Before winning the bid, Pioneer’s president, 84-year-old Herman Hauck, spent years trying unsuccessfully to secure a Forest Service contract in New Mexico.

Pioneer’s Four Forest proposal says the company will build a $200 million plant in Winslow, Ariz., and claims Hauck started a similar business in North Dakota. Hauck sold that business—known as TMI Systems— but, the 4FRI proposal reads, “his skill in designing and managing a start-up wood processing business is shown by the fact that it is still successfully operating more than 30 years later.”

The Forest Service has repeatedly touted this “long, successful history in the wood industry” as one of the main reasons Pioneer got the contract.

TMI is indeed a successful business. Its president, Dennis Johnson, however, was surprised to learn Hauck was trying to take credit for it.

“We bought his assets in bankruptcy proceedings,” Johnson says, adding that Hauck could take “very little credit” for the company’s success.

the legal documents in a followup call, he said it “didn’t matter.”

Coincidentally, the man who is supposed to run Pioneer’s Winslow plant, Mike Cooley, also ran his last wood business into bankruptcy. Cooley Industries, Inc. filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy on Dec. 27, 2012, after racking up over $9 million in debt, according to the US bankruptcy court documents in Phoenix.

The bankruptcy occurred six months after Pioneer won the contract, but interviews with loggers last summer reveal that Cooley has a long history of unpaid debts.

During an interview with SFR last August, Corbin Newman, who headed the Forest Service’s regional office in Albuquerque until January, said he hadn’t known about Hauck’s bankruptcy, and said that agency would investigate.

“I don’t know that he asserted anything wrong or fraudulent in his proposal,” Newman said.

“That’s what we’ll have to take a look at.”

It is illegal to lie in a proposal to the federal government, but in a written follow-up, Newman said Hauck’s bankruptcy “over 30 years ago” was irrelevant, and that the contract would remain with Pioneer.

Last June, the Forest Service released a brief technical analysis of Pioneer’s plan, meant to answer detractors’ questions about what the company intends to do. But a close inspection of the plan reveals a series of improbable or false claims.

It states Pioneer will produce biodiesel out of tree branches to fuel its trucks and sell at a gas station on I-40. That’s a risky proposition in itself, given the fuel has never been produced commercially.

The largest attempt, by Range Fuels in Soperton, Ga., went bankrupt in 2011 after getting more than $150 million in government subsidies.

And Concord Blue, the German company Pioneer claims will make its biodiesel, has never

even tried to produce the stuff.

Thomas Sonntag-Roesing, the former engineer for Concord Blue’s test plant in Herten, Germany, said the plant tried to turn biomass like wood into energy, not fuel. He left after the company stopped paying him in 2005, and the plant closed soon after. It’s remained shuttered ever since.

Today, Concord Blue barely exists beyond its glossy website.

The site gives no email address, and no one answers at its German or Los Angeles offices.

Repeated voicemail messages requesting an interview were never returned.

“The company is a fake,” Sonntag-Roesing says. “It’s like a frame, but there’s nothing behind it.” He says he was surprised to the learn the US government had given a large contract to a company claiming it was going to use Concord Blue technologies.

“With every new project, we have to prove that we can do it by providing references,” says Sonntag-Roesing, who now manages billion-dollar projects for the international energy firm Hitachi Ltd. “I cannot really understand why the US government or any other government in the world would give a contract to a company without any references.”

Pioneer’s technical proposal has left many industry experts scratching their heads.

When David Jones, a wood science and products professor at Mississippi State University, first saw the Forest Service’s technical analysis of Pioneer, he printed it out.

“I took it down the hallway to my colleagues and we all had a good laugh over it,” he says.

“Either they don’t understand what they are doing, or they’ve just worded it badly.”

Jones says much of Pioneer’s proposal doesn’t make scientific sense. In one section, the company says it’s going to “densify” pine and turn it into high-priced hard woods, like walnut and mahogany.

“There’s fallacy in that statement,” Jones said. “You can’t take a pine, which is a soft wood, and turn it into a hard wood.

That’s not possible.”

In another section, Pioneer says it plans to produce wood panels “35 to 40 percent lighter than competitors’ panels” that will “substantially reduce shipping expenses.”

“In talking with other people in wood science,” Jones says, “we don’t know of any technology that would lighten the wood.”

Jones questioned whether a wood scientist at the Forest Service had even reviewed the proposal.

“If they did,” he asked, “why didn’t anybody raise any quescontinued on page nine

July 15, 2013

Up in Smoke continued from page eight

tions about this?”

It turns out, Jones was right.

The Forest Service regional office in Albuquerque made the decision without consulting a wood scientist. Once Newman’s office selected Pioneer, the former head sent the proposal to Washington, DC, for review.

“I knew that we probably didn’t have all the technical expertise to assess the proposals,” Newman says. “That’s why I asked for a secondary review at the national level to say, ‘Let’s get technical experts to look at this to make sure these things are feasible.’”

At the time, he admitted he wasn’t sure if that had taken place. In a written follow-up, he said that two technical experts reviewed the proposal at the national level. In response to a written request to speak to them, or anyone else from the government that could defend Pioneer’s technical proposal, Newman wrote: “Federal law and regulations prohibit us from disclosing the identity of the evaluators and subject matter experts…That information does not contribute significantly to the public understanding of the operations or activities of the government.”

Further, he wrote that releasing information about the evaluators would be “an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

Hauck, Pioneer’s president, also said he couldn’t speak about his technology.

“That is not open for discussion,” he said. “It is my own program that I have learned from foreign countries, and I cannot divulge that information.”

Late last June, more than a month after receiving the contract, Hauck publicly admitted for the first time that his company had no investors, and no money to begin the project. The announcement sent jitters among many of those watching 4FRI. It wasn’t normal, “and it was concerning,” says Rich Bowen, the president and CEO of the Economic Collaborative of Northern Arizona. By then, Pioneer’s financing should have been much further along, he says. Bowen began to worry the company might not succeed, so he asked the Forest Service to investigate its ability to complete the project.

Instead, in December 2012— around the time Pioneer was supposed to have begun thinning trees—the Forest Service extended Pioneer’s deadline to raise the money. They extended it again last month, and dramatically reduced Pioneer’s expected work schedule from 15,000 acres in 2013 to 1,000 acres over the next 18 months.

Urs Buehlmann, a wood scientist and products expert from Virginia Tech University, says he wasn’t surprised to learn Pioneer doesn’t have investors. He read the company’s technical propos-

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper” al, and echoes many of Jones’ concerns.

“It’s all so vague,” Buehlmann says. “I wouldn’t invest 1,000 bucks in that. Because, hey guys, tell me why this should work?”

For some critics, the most galling aspect of the Forest Service’s decision to give Pioneer the contract was that another, more qualified company was waiting in the wings.

At first glance, Pascal Berlioux’s pink Polo shirts, leather loafers and thick French accent seem oddly out of place amidst the ponderosa pines of northern Arizona. But Berlioux has spent nearly a decade—and

“We viewed Pascal as an opponent,” says Todd Schulke, cofounder of the Center for Biological Diversity, which had also been looking for a way to restore the forest. “The Oriented Strand Board market is tied to housing, and it has a history of boom and bust. So we were very concerned about that.”

But Berlioux gained the center’s trust, says Schulke, who’s based out of Silver City, NM. This was no small feat: In 1996, the center famously stopped all logging on federal land in Arizona and New Mexico over lawsuits to protect the Mexican spotted owl, and it still wields

Pioneer’s technical proposal has left many industry experts scratching their heads. emptied his sizable personal bank account—analyzing these woods and how to save them.

“What we’re looking at here is a typical thicket,” Berlioux says, snapping off a branch to get through a remote stand of spindly, densely packed ponderosas just outside Flagstaff.

“This is not a healthy ecosystem, and obviously, it is a firebomb,” he says, pointing to a crinkly blanket of dried pine needles underfoot.

Back in his native France, Berlioux ran Europe’s first Oriented Strand Board, or OSB, factory. OSB is like plywood made out of wood chips, and it’s a huge, $2 billion-a-year industry. After founding and selling a successful optoelectronics firm in the US, Berlioux moved his family to Flagstaff. It was just as the devastating 2002 RodeoChediski Fire broke out. The fire burned 480,000 acres and more than 400 homes, and it got him thinking: Could an OSB plant help the forests that lured him here?

In 2005, he began working on a plan to restore northern Arizona’s forest—and get business to pay for it. Together with a partner, Berlioux formed a company called Arizona Forest Restoration Products, or AZFRP. Their plan was to turn the crowded, small trees in Arizona’s forests into OSB, and let the large trees grow. OSB has largely replaced plywood in construction, but the closest plants are more than 1,200 miles away, in Canada or the Southeast.

Transporting that wood to Arizona is expensive.

“When all is said and done, that will account for 20 to 30 percent of what you pay when you get a sheet of OSB at Home Depot,” Berlioux says. “So, one of the critical economic advantages of an OSB plant in the Southwest is you don’t have to pay the shipping costs.”

Berlioux was an outsider, but he knew the region’s contentious history. Plan in hand, he went about building a broad base of community support, from conservative county supervisors to the region’s most litigious environmental group.

considerable clout when it comes to the Southwest’s forests.

Berlioux convinced them his idea was viable, even in the lowest housing and construction market, by sharing the details of his business plan and market analysis. And he fine-tuned his plan to incorporate their concerns. Berlioux did this dozens, if not hundreds, of times with environmentalists, local governments, community groups and investors.

“I thoroughly analyzed their business model,” says Jim Miller, real estate director for John F Long Properties LLLP, one of Arizona’s oldest and largest development companies. “Even if you diluted some of their assumptions 50 percent, it was still a profitable operation.”

Miller and John F Long Properties’ president together committed $30 million to Berlioux’s company if it got the 4FRI contract. In all, Berlioux had pledges of up $400 million dollars when he submitted his proposal.

But the contract went to Pioneer instead, and AZFRP disbanded.

After announcing its decision, the Forest Service gave Berlioux an analysis of his losing bid. But the analysis gets several things wrong.

For example, it says no one at the company has experience managing a project of this type and scale. That’s hard to square with AZFRP’s management team, which includes—among others—Berlioux, Miller and Don MacInnes, a Canadian who’s built seven OSB plants in North America and retrofitted another 10 plants.

“Did they not read what we sent them?” Berlioux asks. “Did they ignore what we sent them?”

Even Newman had a hard time explaining what his review committee was thinking.

“I have no idea why they drew that conclusion. None,” he said during an interview last summer.

“You would think that with that kind of bio, someone would clearly have shown that they’ve got experience doing it.”

In a written follow-up, he said the agency only considered forest restoration experience, and

didn’t look at the manufacturing experience.

The analysis also suggested there wasn’t a strong enough market for OSB. For Miller, that meant the Forest Service hadn’t actually analyzed the company’s business plan.

“Obviously, they didn’t go into as much as they should have, as an investor would have, as I did,” Miller said. “I’m very disappointed in that.”

David Tenney’s white GMC pickup winds through the charred hills near his house in Linden, Ariz.

“You can see the entire hillside; all the trees are gone,” he says, pointing out the window at what used to be a thick ponderosa forest. “It will be centuries before the pine trees are back, if then.”

It’s been 11 years since the Rodeo-Chediski Fire ravaged this land. Tenney’s home narrowly escaped.

Tenney’s family made its living from this forest for more than a century. His great-greatgreat-grandfather, a Mormon pioneer, brought the first sawmill to Arizona during the 1800s.

Even after the Center for Biological Diversity’s lawsuits shut down the family business, Tenney, a widely respected Republican supervisor from Navaho County, which borders New Mexico, still knew the forest was northern Arizona’s most vital asset.

After Rodeo-Chediski, Tenney threw his considerable energy and weight (at 310 pounds, the former high-school offensive tackle is a large man) into finding a way to restore the forest.

He’s been one of 4FRI’s most vocal supporters—even flying to DC to lobby for it—but he’s slammed the Forest Service for selecting Pioneer.

His chief concerns: Pioneer has a sketchy business plan, never courted environmentalists, and offered to pay the government $6.3 million for the contract, 40 percent less than Berlioux’s company.

For Tenney, none of it adds up.

“It can’t be that it was the best price. And if it’s not that it’s the best product, then what would it be?” he asks. “That’s why you’re opening the door for some in the environmental community to say, ‘Well, you’re giving it to your buddy that used to work there.”’

He’s referring to Marlin Johnson, a former Forest Service supervisor who now heads Pioneer’s logging and restoration program.

“While he was at the Forest Service, he was the liaison for Pioneer,” notes Taylor McKinnon, an environmentalist who worked on 4FRI with the Center for Biological Diversity until earlier this year. “Within months of his retirement, he was representing Pioneer to the Forest Service. That is, he switched sides.

It’s the perfect example of the revolving door.”

Critics say Johnson’s former position gave Pioneer an unfair

Page 9 advantage in gaining the 4FRI contract.

In his last years at the Forest Service, Johnson was involved in 4FRI’s precursor, a study to determine whether there were enough small-diameter trees available to support a large business. During that time, he worked with both Pioneer and AZFRP. Email records show he had access to Berlioux’s confidential, detailed business plan as far back as 2007.

Many credit Berlioux’s plan as the blueprint for 4FRI, which didn’t officially form until 2009.

Once Johnson joined Pioneer, the company’s focus changed to more closely mirror Berlioux’s, including using wood from northern Arizona, not New Mexico, and building a large processing plant in Winslow.

Raising more questions, Johnson’s former co-workers, including one of his former employees, sat on the selection committee that chose Pioneer.

Johnson says it was his qualifications—including 40 years at the Forest Service—that helped Pioneer get the contract, not his political connections. And he dismisses concerns about access to a competitor’s business plan dating back to 2007.

“I would assume they would have changed since then,” he says. “I don’t remember any details from a long business plan.”

Newman knew people might have concerns about a former Forest Service employee receiving the 4FRI contract, so once his office chose Pioneer, he says he sent its proposal to Washington, DC, for a national review.

“We asked folks at the ethics group to take a look and see it’s appropriate if a past employee would be associated with this company,” Newman says, “and we got an assurance that it was.”

4FRI’s most prominent ecologist, Wally Covington, who heads the influential Ecological Restoration Institute at Northern Arizona University, also backs Pioneer, and Johnson.

“I have known Marlin for years,” says Covington, whose fire and restoration research shaped the science behind 4FRI. “He’s a strong and ethical person, in my view, and I have no doubt that he intends to operate at the highest ethical standards.”

Pioneer’s selection has been the most dramatic rift within the 4FRI collaboration, but it isn’t the only one. After years of detailed discussions, environmentalists say the Forest Service is reneging on key agreements meant to protect the environment.

They center around preserving large trees, protecting the endangered Mexican spotted owl and northern goshawk, and building 500 additional miles of roads at great risk to the watershed. Any one of these issues could provoke environmentalists to take legal action—potentially derailing the project—and the Forest Service knows this, continued on page ten

Livestock Market Digest

Page 10

Up in Smoke Schulke says.

“It’s almost as if they’re baiting us,” he says.

Similar problems are cropping up in New Mexico’s Southwest Jemez Mountain project, which worries

Newman said Hauck’s bankruptcy “over 30 years ago” was irrelevant, and that the contract would remain with Pioneer.

WildEarth Guardians’ Bird.

“There’s a very good chance that the same train wreck could play out right here in our local mountains and forests,” he says.

The problems have led many to question whether the Forest Service’s regional office in Albuquerque is impeding projects in order to retain control. Collaboration represents a dramatic shift from the days when the Forest Service called the shots.

But something needs to change, and fast, says Tom-

with it, the collaboration.

She worries Arizona will have lost the last best chance to save its forests.

Martin points to the charred trees around her.

“Look at it,” she says.

“Look what you’re going to have. We won’t have a forest, and we’ll have a million excuses why.”

Claudine LoMonaco is a freelance reporter based in Germany. Her work has appeared on NPR, the BBC and Frontline/World, among other outlets. This story was reported with the support of the Fund for Investigative Journalism.

CHANGE OF ADDRESS INSTRUCTIONS

iss a If you’re moving or changing your mailing M t ’ Don gle Issue! address, please clip and send this form to: Livestock Market Digest Sin P.O. Box 7458 Albuquerque, NM 87194 or FAX to: 505/998-6236

Name

Old Address

City, State, Zip

New Address

City, State, Zip

ng Space NOW! Reserve Your Advertisi

f For the 2013 Edition o s t’ Livestock Market Diges ION IT FALL MARKETING ED

The best read annual publication in the livestock industry!

My Cowboy Heroes

continued from page nine

mie Martin. The Forest Service must be held accountable for 4FRI’s missteps, and needs to turn the project around. There’s a growing consensus that Pioneer will inevitably fail, and

FEATURING THE . . .

cuss Please contact me to dis your advertising plans!

5-6011 RON ARCHER, 505/86 om ol.c @a ron her arc Livestock Market Digest 87194 7458, Albuquerque, NM Box P.O.

July 15, 2013

Lucille Mulhall - First Cowgirl

by Jim Olson o see a petite young lady roping and tying a steer or performing stunts a-horseback is special. To do it in the early 1900s, an era of rough and tough, “real” cowboys, and do it as well as, or better than the men is incredible.

Lucille Mulhall was born October 21, 1885, in St. Louis, Missouri, to Colonel Zack and Agnes Mulhall. The family relocated to Oklahoma during the great land rush of 1889 and homesteaded one-hundred-sixty acres. The Mulhalls eventually laid claim to about eighty-thousand acres of rangeland located north of Guthrie —some of which was leased land. However, much of it was open range they simply controlled and claimed by virtue of use and being on it (a common practice of the day).

By age seven, Lucille was riding the range, being taught cowboy ways by the men who rode the plains, in what was then “Indian Territory.” Zack Mulhall once claimed that when his daughter was only thirteen, he told her she could keep as many of his steers as she could rope in one day. He bragged, “She didn’t quit until catching more than three-hundred head!”

Col. Zach Mulhall (a title bestowed upon him despite never serving in the military) started a “Wild West show” in the early 1900s. Many early movie cowboys, including Tom Mix, and Will Rogers got their start in Mulhall’s Congress of Rough Riders and Ropers. Lucille also starred in the show. She was among the first women to compete in roping and riding events with men and earned many championship titles. Today she is celebrated as the first cowgirl.

Will Rogers wrote, “Lucille’s achievement in competition with cowboys was the direct start of what has since come to be known as the Cowgirl. There was no such a word up to then as Cowgirl.”

The term was coined to describe Lucille when she dazzled Easterners in her first appearance at Madison Square Garden in 1905. “Against these

T

bronzed and war-scarred veterans of the plains, a delicately featured blonde girl appeared,” a New York reporter wrote. “Slight of figure, refined and neat in appearance, attired in a becoming riding habit for hard riding, wearing a picturesque Mexican sombrero and holding in one hand a lariat of the finest cowhide, Lucille Mulhall comes forward to show what an eighteen-year-old girl can do in roping steers. In three minutes and thirty-six seconds, she lassoed and tied three steers. The veteran cowboys did their best to beat it, but their best was several seconds slower than the girl’s record-breaking time . . . The cowboys and plainsmen who were gathered in large numbers to witness the contest broke into tremendous applause when the championship gold medal was awarded to the slight, pale-faced girl.”

However, Lucille was a cowgirl long before becoming an entertainer. “By the age of fourteen,” the New York Times reported, “She could break a bronco and shoot a coyote at five-hundred yards.”

Newspapers tagged her with titles like “Daring Beauty of the Plains,” Queen of the Range” and “Deadshot Girl,” but the one that stuck was “Cowgirl.” It has been argued that the term “cowgirl” had been in use since before she was even born, but few would argue that Lucille was the first to give it national meaning.

Even the great Geronimo was an admirer of Lucille’s talent and

once gave her a beaded vest and decorated Indian bow — items she reportedly treasured her entire life.

Teddy Roosevelt was also among Lucille’s fans. While campaigning in Oklahoma as a vice presidential candidate in 1900, he saw her perform. It was the Fourth of July, and she roped in front of a large crowd at a “Cowboy Tournament” in Oklahoma City.

The Daily Oklahoman reported, “Roosevelt was most enchanted with the daring feats of Lucille Mulhall. She rode beautifully throughout the contest and lassoed the wildest steer in the field.”

Teddy Roosevelt was so impressed by Lucille’s skills that he invited the Mulhalls to join him and a select group of the Rough Riders for a private dinner. That night Lucille gave the hero of San Juan Hill a silk scarf she had worn during the contest.

Zack Mulhall then invited Roosevelt to stay at his ranch — Teddy accepted. After watching Lucille’s skills with a horse, rope and gun on the ranch, Roosevelt encouraged her father to get her more exposure. “Zack, before that girl dies or gets married or cuts up some other caper,” Roosevelt reportedly said, “you ought to put her on stage and let the world see what she can do.”

The rest, as they say, is history.

Legend has it that during the visit, Roosevelt went riding with Lucille and they spotted a grey wolf. This whetted Roosevelt’s appetite for a hunt. The wolf eluded them that day but Roosevelt told Lucille if she could catch the wolf, he would invite her to his inaugural parade.

Some claim she later roped the wolf, then killed it, others say she shot it at five-hundred yards.

But by all accounts, she sent the pelt Roosevelt who displayed it in the White House after he and McKinley won the election.

Lucille and family attended the inauguration and Roosevelt reportedly gave her a saddle and an 1873 Winchester.

Besides starring in Mulhall’s Wild West show, Lucille also performed in the Miller Brothers 101 Ranch Wild West show (another well-known wild west show from the day), in Vaudeville, and Lucille’s career even took her to Europe, where she performed for heads of state and royalty. In 1913 she and her brother, Charley, formed a company and produced “The Lucille Mulhall Roundup.”

Lucille became known worldwide as the greatest (and first) cowgirl — the result of her fine roping skills and an uncanny knack with horses. Her talents were, in part, fine-tuned by another natural cowboy — Will Rogers, who was a life-long friend of Lucille’s (both came continued on page eleven

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

July 15, 2013

Page 11

Lawsuit threatened for City of Sierra Vista, Arizona ‘pollutants’ SHAR PORIER,| HERALD/REVIEW

ast year, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) went after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for the negative impact that Sierra Vista’s wastewater treatment plant may have on the San Pedro River and the endangered Huachuca water umbel.

That legal action went nowhere, according to Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) member Dr. Robin Silver in an interview. So, a new strategy was devised, and now Sierra Vista is the target.

The CBD is putting the city on notice that a lawsuit based on an allegation that the city’s wastewater treatment plant, also known as the Environmental Operations Park or EOP, is discharging “pollutants including, but not limited to, nitrogen, pharmaceuticals, antibiotics, and hormones (collectively hereafter as pollutants) into waters of the United States without a permit as required by the federal Clean Water Act,” according to the documentation provided.

The center’s attorney for the case, Charles M. Tebbutt, states in the notice: “The discharge of reclaimed wastewater into surface water requires a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit or the Arizona state equivalent called the Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System from the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.

The City of Sierra Vista does not have the permit necessary for the discharge of its reclaimed wastewater into the surface water of the San Pedro River.”

Tebbutt states, “The pollutants that Sierra Vista has discharged, is discharging and will continue to discharge include, but are not limited to, nitrogen associated with human waste, caffeine, prescription seizure medications such as carbamazepine, primidone, and dilantin, antibiotics

L

such as sulfamethoxasole, and other pollutants. All pollutants being discharged not set forth specifically in this letter are violations that are or should be known to Sierra Vista and may be included in any future legal actions by the Center. Such pollutants may only be known to Sierra Vista.”

Staff of the BLM and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted water quality and groundwater elevation monitoring in June 2010 and noted an increased flow in Curry Draw and elevated groundwater levels attributable to artificial recharge occurring upstream at the EOP. Pharmaceuticals coming from the City of Sierra Vista’s reclaimed wastewater are now found in Murray Springs that flows into the San Pedro River. The samples taken indicated the presence of prescription drugs in Murray Springs. Earlier in April, 2010, USGS found seizure medication in the WWTP and in Murray Springs, indicating to the Center that these medications came from the city’s percolation of reclaimed wastewater into the ground.

The presence of the pharmaceuticals originating from the wastewater treatment plant confirms the connectivity between the wastewater treatment plant and the San Pedro River,” states Tebbutt.

In addition to the pharmaceuticals, nitrogen from the EOP poses possibly more of a threat by inducing growth of non-desert native species that may live along and in the river. It can be a major threat to the endangered Huachuca water umbel, a tiny water plant that requires a very specific water environment, suggests Tebbutt.

The center alleges the city ignored surveys that indicated the site chosen for the recharge basins was not an optimal setting for accomplishing recharge to the aquifer and providing clean water to the San Pedro River.

First Cowgirl from Oklahoma ranching backgrounds).

Couple that with her slight figure and ladylike demeanor and you had a cowgirl anomaly. More important however, she was authentic, genuine and generous — crowds loved her.

It has been said that she had a natural connection with horses. She claimed her horse, Governor, knew many tricks.

In an interview Lucille said, “My system of training consists of three things: patience, perseverance, and gentleness.

Gentleness I consider one of the greatest factors in successful training. Governor, the horse I ride in our exhibitions has nearly forty tricks. He can shoot a gun; pull off a man’s coat and put it on again; can roll a barrel; can walk up stairs and down again — a difficult feat; is perfect in the march and the Spanish trot; extends the forelegs so that an easy mount may be made; kneels, lies down and sits up; indeed, he does nearly

Since 1999, when a USGS hydrologist indicated that the proposed Sierra Vista recharge project may be sited in the wrong area, more information has been developed. It confirms that the EOP is in the wrong location for recharge and for longterm San Pedro River protection, added Tebbutt.

The current wastewater treatment plant’s location originally was chosen as an “ideal evaporative site because it is so poor for recharge as it is situated on top of a low permeability, rechargeretarding, underground clay layer.” The USFWS was told by the BOR that it would take 200 years for any effluent from the EOP site to appear in the San Pedro River and that the water umbel would not “likely be adversely” effected, he continued.

However, in 1999, a BOR memorandum stated that some of the percolating water that would otherwise flow subsurface toward the river may actually be intercepted by the clay layer, flow easterly over the top of the layer and daylight at Murray Springs or create new springs between the recharge site and the river.

The city responds City Manager Chuck Potucek said in an interview that the matter would be brought before the city council in an upcoming meeting.

“We have been talking with ADEQ for a permit for the wastewater facility, and that may include the discharge to the surface water at Murray Springs. We do not know why the water we are putting into the ground surfaces at Murray Springs,” continued Potucek. “We just do not know what the parameters of the permit are yet and we need to have those surface water discussions with ADEQ.” The city does have to file reports with ADEQ on the aquifer water permit, and a number of chemicals, minerals and

organics are included, he added.

“I’m not sure if there are requirements for pharmaceuticals in water,” noted Potucek.

Scott Dooley, Public Works Director, stated that as far as he knew, there were no such limits on medications found in water on the state or federal level. He also noted that the city’s reports on the water quality at the EOP have consistently been well within federal limits.

Once Potucek and Dooley get the information they need from ADEQ and move forward with that permitting process, Potucek will meet with the city council and apprise them of that progress and what the response to the CBD’s claims will entail.

The problem of pharmaceuticals The enigma of pharmaceutical occurrence in drinking water has especially alarmed the public and regulators despite the fact that relatively few pharmaceuticals have been detected and only at concentrations tens of thousands of times smaller than the therapeutic doses.

Fortunately, pharmaceuticals have the most robust database of any environmental contaminant in terms of human health as these compounds undergo rigorous clinical trials during registration and post-registration monitoring.

Although adverse human health consequences from the existing trace levels of pharmaceuticals in U.S. drinking water is highly unlikely (at least based on current knowledge), the resulting impacts to aquatic ecosystems are more nebulous. Several studies have demonstrated that fish exposed to wastewater treatment effluents can exhibit reproductive abnormalities.

Moreover, fish exposed to trace levels of birth control pharmaceuticals in the range of concentrations found in the environment show dramatic decreases in reproductive success, suggesting

continued from page ten

everything but talk.”

She was briefly married in 1907 to Martin Van Bergen, a cowboy singer who was an opening act in the show.

Together they had a son. She was also married in 1919 to Tom Burnett, whose father had established the Four Sixes Ranch in Texas. Each marriage lasted only a few years and it was reported that Zach Mulhall remained the most important man in her life.

population level impacts are plausible.

Although there are currently no federal regulations limiting the levels of pharmaceuticals in wastewater or drinking water, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has added some pharmaceuticals to the most recent contaminant candidate list. However, only four of the compounds on this list are exclusively used as human pharmaceuticals: three birth control substances and one antibiotic.

Treatment processes can and do reduce the concentrations of pharmaceuticals in water, however, the degree of efficacy is often a function of chemical structure, cost, and energy. All treatment processes have some degree of side effects, such as generation of residuals or bi-products. Thorough life-cycle analyses should be undertaken to ensure that the solutions for environmental control are not more risky than the problem. Source control of contaminants to wastewater treatment plants should always be considered when unknown or questionable occurrence in effluents is predicted or observed.

While pharmaceutical take-back programs may not lead to significant reductions in environmental loading, such activities are helpful in communicating to the public that toilets are not suitable receptacles for a diversity of consumer products.

The application of ultra-sensitive analytical technologies to detect anthropogenic substances in water at one trillionth of a gram or less per liter will undoubtedly reveal that nearly every compound known to man will be detectable. The question is not whether these compounds occur, as they certainly will, but rather whether they pose a risk of harm to humans and wildlife that are exposed.

From a report by the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) and the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA).

Lucille basically retired from world-wide travel in 1917 as live Wild West performances were being overshadowed by the up and coming Hollywood westerns.

However, she continued to perform throughout the 1920s and ‘30s, mostly in Oklahoma and Texas. She made her last known public appearance in September of 1940.

Lucille Mulhall died near the home ranch in an automobile accident on December 21, 1940. She was only fiftyfive years old. She was posthumously inducted into the Rodeo Hall of Fame in 1975 and National Cowgirl Hall of Fame in 1977. Long live Cowgirls!

Livestock Market Digest

Page 12

July 15, 2013

Carbon pollution and wealth redistribution hatever the weakness of the evidence on greenhouse gases (GHG) and climate effects, the real goal of carbon policy is a regional redistribution of wealth, a reality that explains the inability of Congress to enact such policies since the Clinton administration. President Obama too was unable to convince even a fully Democratic Congress to adopt such policies, and so he now proposes that his Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Energy implement regulations reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and other GHGs, says Benjamin

W

Zycher, a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

■ The president proposes the imposition of a GHG emissions standard on both new and existing electric generating plants; expansion and tightening of energy-efficiency standards for buildings, appliances, and some vehicles; and an increase in (subsidized) renewable power generation from federal lands.

■ Policies making some energy sources more expensive inexorably will create such redistribution because states and regions differ in the proportions of their energy use derived from alternative technologies.

■ In particular, the presi-

dent’s proposals will penalize areas and industries disproportionately dependent on coalfired power.

■ A recent MIT study concludes that under a policy to reduce GHG emissions “California, the Pacific Coast, New England, and New York generally experience the lowest cost . . . while the South Central [Arkansas, Louisiana, and Oklahoma], Texas, and Mountain States face the highest cost.”

That conclusion is consistent with the data on average retail electricity prices reported by the Energy Information Administration.

■ The winners are states with high power costs or with significant inexpensive hydroelectric resources that would be unaffected by GHG policies.

■ The losers are states with low power costs driven by disproportionate use of cheap, coal-fired power.

■ By driving power costs up in the latter group of states, the GHG policies would reduce the competitive disadvantages of the former group.

The policies examined in the MIT study surely differ from those that will emerge from the regulatory processes given force by the president. But if the effect of the latter is some sub-

stantial reduction in GHG emissions, in particular from electric power generation, then it is difficult to see how the distributional impacts might differ substantially from those reported by MIT, and it also is difficult to believe that the basic red-to-blue transfer is accidental. Instead, given that the actual climate effects of reductions in U.S. emissions would be trivial, it is straightforward to hypothesize that the direction of the wealth transfer is the central motivating objective of this policy proposal.

Source: Benjamin Zycher, “‘Carbon Pollution’ and Wealth Redistribution,” The American, June 26, 2013.

Health insurance costs are set for a jolt ealthy consumers could see insurance rates double or even triple when they look for individual coverage under the federal health law later this year, while the premiums paid by sicker

H

people are set to become more affordable, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of coverage to be sold on the law’s new exchanges.

A review of rates proposed by carriers in eight states shows

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

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

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

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

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

the likely boundaries for the least-expensive and most costly plans on the exchanges. The lower boundary is particularly important because the government wants to attract healthy people to the exchanges, and they may choose to pay a penalty and take the risk of going without coverage if they believe they can’t get an acceptable deal.

■ For a 40-year-old single nonsmoker – in the middle of the age range eligible for exchanges – a “bronze” plan covering about 60 percent of medical costs will be available for about $200 a month in most places, the proposals show.

■ Though less generous than “silver” and “gold” plans on the exchanges, a bronze plan would still include fuller benefits than

many policies available on the individual market today.

The challenge for the law is that healthy 40 year olds can typically get coverage for less today, especially if they are willing to accept fewer benefits or take on more costs themselves.

Virginia is one of the eight states examined and offers a fairly typical picture.

■ In Richmond, a 40-year-old male nonsmoker logging on to the eHealthInsurance comparison-shopping website today would see a plan that costs $63 a month from Anthem. That plan has a $5,000 deductible and covers half of medical costs.

■ By comparison, the leastexpensive plan on the exchange for a 40-year-old nonsmoker in Richmond, also from Anthem, will likely cost $193 a month,

according to filings submitted by carriers.

The law is likely to offer a benefit to those who have difficulty getting insurance now or are pushed out of the market because they have had illnesses.

Under the current system, the rate on the $63-a-month plan could be revised higher if a consumer indicates prior health problems in a medical questionnaire that must be filled out before buying the plan. The application also could be rejected entirely based on specific answers given. Under the new health exchanges, plans are available regardless of health status, and a price can’t change once it is offered.

Source: Louise Radnofsky, “Health Insurance Costs Set for a Jolt,” Wall Street Journal, June 30, 2013.

Regulation slows economic growth he growth of federal regulations over the past six decades has cut U.S. economic growth by an average of 2 percentage points per year, according to a new study in the Journal of Economic Growth.

As a result, the average American household receives about $277,000 less annually than it would have gotten in the absence of six decades of accumulated regulations – a median household income of $330,000 instead of the $53,000 we get now, says Ronald Bailey, a science correspondent for Reason Magazine.

Economists John Dawson and John Seater constructed an index of federal regulations by tracking the growth in the number of pages in the Code of Federal Regulations since 1949. The number of pages, they note, has increased six-fold from 19,335 in 1949 to 134,261 in 2005.

■ The Bureau of Economic Affairs estimates that real gross domestic product (GDP) in 1947 was $1.8 trillion in 2005

T

dollars.

■ The real GDP growth rate between 1949 and 2011 averaged 3.2 percent per year. Compounded over the period, that would yield a total real GDP of about $13.3 trillion in 2011; that's the same figure the bureau gives for that year.

■ If regulation had remained fixed at 1949 levels, GDP growth would have averaged 2 percent higher annually, yielding a rate of about 5.2 percent over the period between 1949 and 2011.

■ Compounded, that yields a total GDP in 2005 dollars of approximately $43 trillion, or $49 trillion in 2011 dollars, which is in the same ballpark as the $53.9 trillion figure calculated by Dawson and Seater.

But let’s say that the two economists have grossly overestimated how fast the economy could have grown in the absence of proliferating regulations. So instead let’s take the real average GDP growth rate between 1870 and 1900, before the Progres-

sives jumpstarted the regulatory state.

■ Economic growth in the last decades of the 19th century averaged 4.5 percent per year.

■ Compounding that growth rate from the real 1949 GDP of $1.8 trillion to now would have yielded a total GDP in 2013 of around $31 trillion.

■ Considerably lower than the $54 trillion estimated by Dawson and Seater, but nevertheless about double the size of our current GDP. Defenders of regulation will argue that regulations also provide benefits to Americans. But the measure devised by Dawson and Seater accounts for both the aggregate benefits and the costs of the regulations. The two researchers note their results “indicate that whatever positive effects regulation may have on measured output are outweighed by negative effects.”

Source: Ronald Bailey, “Federal Regulations Have Made You 75 Percent Poorer: U.S. GDP Is Just $16 Trillion Instead of $54 Trillion,” Reason Magazine, June 21, 2013.

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

July 15, 2013

Page 13

Democrats see farm bill, rural voters as key to 2014 election

BY ALEXANDER BOLTON, THEHILL.COM

enate Democrats hoped to pass a five-year farm bill and bolster their appeal with rural voters, who they see as crucial to retaining their majority in 2014.

Democrats have stepped up their outreach to rural constituencies this year as they head into a daunting midterm election year with a slew of seats in conservativeleaning rural states to defend.

The quest to keep their Senate majority became more complicated with the death of Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.). New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (R) is expected to appoint a Republican, which means Democrats will likely have to battle a GOP incumbent to regain the seat.

Agriculture is a major industry in Montana, South Dakota, Arkansas and North Carolina, four states that are huge GOP targets next year. Montana and South Dakota are open seats following the announced retirements of Senators.

Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Tim Johnson (D-S.D.). Meanwhile, Senators. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) and Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) are two of the chamber’s most vulnerable incumbents.

Other rural states where Democrats face competitive races are Alaska, Louisiana, New Hampshire and West Virginia.

Pryor and Hagan have listed the farm bill among their highest priorities and have urged colleagues to act on it.

Passing a bipartisan farm bill will give Democrats in those states a strong argument to make on the campaign trail.

Dan Glickman, who served as secretary of Agriculture under former President Clinton, said Democrats need to show voters that government can have a positive impact on their lives. Passing the farm bill would be an important step, he said.

“It shows that in the area of agriculture the Congress can operate in a bipartisan manner. It’s really one of the most bipartisan pieces of legislation,” he said. “Anything that

S

can be done in a bipartisan way helps build trust, and that should help Democrats.”

Glickman recently spoke at a rural summit hosted in the Dirksen Senate Office Building by the Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee.

The three-hour meeting highlighted ways the farm bill would improve lives in rural areas by supporting business development through competitive grants, expanding access to broadband services, promoting conservation and lowering energy bills.

It also promoted a measure included in tax legislation passed at the end of last year creating a nationwide public safety communication network for first responders in rural areas and the E-Rate program, which provides $2.3 billion to libraries and schools in rural areas to purchase telecommunications services.

Democrats want to change the perception that they are primarily the party of big cities and the East and West Coasts.

“We have made great strides in enacting legislation to help spur economic activity in rural America, but there are still too many pockets where Americans do not have access to the same resources, like education and infrastructure enjoyed by residents of more urban areas,” said Sen. Mark Begich (Alaska), chairman of the Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee.

“We need to make efforts to expand broadband access to strengthen disaster mitigation, telehealth access and provide greater access to educational resources.

These are programs and ideas that Democrats have long supported that are critical to the success of rural America, and issues that I will continue to advocate for in the Senate,” he said.

Begich is one of several incumbent Democrats facing a tough reelection.

Democrats have seen their support erode in rural areas in the South and Midwest over the last 25 years as the country has become more ideologically divided and Democrats have become more

DigestClassifieds Auction Schools

COME TRAIN WITH THE CHAMPIONS. Join the financially rewarding world of auctioneering. World Wide College of Auctioneering. Free catalog. 1-800/423-5242, www.worldwidecollegeofauctioneering.com.

BE AN AUCTIONEER – Missouri Auction School, world’s largest since 1905. Free CD and catalog. Call toll-free 1-800/835-1955, ext. 5. www.auctionschool.com.

LEARN AUCTIONEERING for the 2000s!

Nashville Auction School “Free Catalog” 800/543-7061, learntoauction.com, 112 W. Lauderdale St., Tullahoma, TN 37388.

Equipment POWDER RIVER LIVESTOCK EqUIPMENT. Best prices with delivery available.

CONLIN SUPPLY CO. INC., Oakdale, CA. 209/847-8977.

To place your Digest Classified ad here, contact RANDY SUMMERS at randy@aaalivestock.com or by phone at 505/243-9515

identified with liberal social values.

In 2008, President Obama helped sweep a group of Senate Democrats to victory in conservative-leaning states, but the political winds will be blowing in their faces next year.

“We now have a class of Democrats up for reelection who managed to get elected to the Senate in a good Democratic year,” said Steven S. Smith, a political science professor at Washington University in St. Louis. “They were elected when the party was strong nationwide, and that put them over the top and in states that had been trending against their party over the last quarter century.

“They now have a pretty serious challenge, and their own leaders recognize the nature of the challenge,” he said.

Smith added the challenge for

Democrats is to make the case for the role of government in parts of the country where “the balance of opinion is for reducing government.”

The $955 billion farm bill establishes subsidy levels for crops and pays for the federal food stamp program. Much of the funding will go to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

It would eliminate some subsidies in the form of direct payments, but create other new subsidies and expand crop insurance. In a significant concession to Republicans, it cuts $23 billion in spending over 10 years, including $4 billion from food stamps.

“There’s probably no piece of legislation that’s more important to rural America than the Farm Bill.

More than 16 million Americans have jobs because of agriculture and

many of those jobs are found in rural communities,” said Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) “The Farm Bill is a game changer for rural communities and it’s one of the many reasons why passing a five-year bill is so critical.”

Democrats passed a multi-year, bipartisan farm bill through the Senate last year, but it stalled because of opposition from conservative House Republicans, a point Democratic leaders repeated in the final weeks of the 112th Congress.

Democratic aides said last year’s battle over the farm bill highlighted Republican obstruction and helped them expand their majority.

Republicans say the 2014 election will be a referendum on Obama, the controversies that have plagued his second term and the implementation of the new healthcare law.

Energy efficiency rising he rising demand for more electronics, appliances, bigger vehicles and homes is creating more pressure on the available energy resources. By improving energy efficiency, both the increased pressure on the energy supply industry and fossil fuel use will be reduced, says Catrina Rorke, director of energy policy for the American Action Forum.

Consider recent trends: ■ Gasoline consumption fell more than 10 percent over the last decade.

■ Electricity use has stabilized in recent years and has a downward trend in 15 states.

■ Connecticut alone has seen per-capita electricity demand drop by 8 percent since 2005.

While changes in consumer behavior in the face of higher fuel costs and in response to the recession are undoubtedly responsible for a portion of this trend, public and private initiatives to promote efficiency also played a significant role.

Private sector action: ■ The private sector can lower costs through energy efficiency improvements.

■ These improvements include: demand-side management techniques, leveraging smart metering technology, innovative financing, informational software.

T

■ Organizations can improve their energy efficiency in their internal processes to reduce operating costs.

■ Electric utilities can encourage consumers to use energy more efficiently to reduce pressure on the electric grid.

■ Increased interest from both corporate and individual markets in minimizing costs is encouraging new efficiency business ventures.

Government action: ■ Government interventions have a limited ability to improve energy efficiency that will improve economic efficiency.

■ Labeling programs that provide information on lifetime energy costs lower the burden on gathering or processing energy use information and leverage the presumption of consumer rationality to increase investments in energy.

■ Government subsidies promote the consumption of more efficient energy.

■ Command and control mandates restrict the availability of items that do not meet government standards. The benefits of these standards are much lower than the cost imposed on the market.

Source: Catrina Rorke, “Efficiency Policy,” American Action Forum, June 2013.

Working to Protect the Rich Tapestry of the West What They are Saying About Us… • The $206,098,920 Endangered Species Act Settlement Agreements — Is all that paperwork worth it?

• Leveling the Playing Field: Support for the Grazing Improvement Act of 2011 • Support for the Governmental Litigation Savings Act of 2011 — Reform of Excessive Litigation Pay-outs • Foreign & Domestic Train Wreck in the Making — More of the ESA • The Secret World of the Animal Rights Agenda TO SUPPORT THESE CAUSES AND MORE, JOIN US!

I am/our organization is committed to protecting the open spaces, private property, private businesses & ensuring the responsible use of public lands. Please list me/my organization as a member of the Western Legacy Alliance.

I have included my membership dues and my $____________ additional contribution.

Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Organization: _______________________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________ City: __________________________ State: _____ Zip: __________ Phone: __________________ Fax: __________________ Email: ______________________

KADDATZ

Help You Can

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

ORDER PARTS ONLINE.

www.kaddatzequipment.com • 254/582-3000

Individual Membership: $25 Association Membership: $500 Corporate Membership: $1,000

936 West 350 North • Blackfoot, ID 83221 westernlegacyalliance@gmail.com • 208-681-6004 www.westernlegacyalliance.org

JOIN TODAY!

Livestock Market Digest

Page 14

July 15, 2013

THE LIVESTOCK MARKET DIGEST

Real Estate GUIDE

!

Approximately 22,200 deeded acres - 1,200 +/- irrigated – private BLM – owner rated @ 2,200 animal units year round. PRICE REDUCED - $15,000,000 !

Approximately 4,100 deeded acres – 450 +/- irrigated (FREE WATER for most irrigated land) – private BLM – rated at 500 animal units – quality improvements plenty of live water including man-made lake and pond for both irrigation, fishing & waterfowl. A special place - $5,285,000 Approximately 920 acres – 742 irrigated – 7 pivots – low cost water plus back up wells – potatoes, hay, grain – cash lease available for investor if desired – $3,900,000 – Nevada/Oregon border – traditional buckaroo country – west of Mc Dermitt, NV – 3,345 +/- deeded – 1,300 irrigated - FREE WATER - private BLM with approximately 65% burn in 2012 will make a premier grass ranch in the near future - 2 set of improvements - private – a lot of history – approximately 800 cows year round or 1,500 stockers 5 to 6 months - $7,000,000

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

To place your Real Estate Guide listings, contact RANDY SUMMERS at 505/243-9515 or at randy@aaalivestock.com

Jack Horton

!

Rae H Anderson

SOUTHERN PLAINS LAND !1)2 %7!2 %7#%,,%.3 0!2341% 0!5%$ 1/!$ &1/.3!'% (4'% ,!+% -!.2)/. (/-% ). 3(% 2(!$/6 /& !,,!2 %#,4$%$ ,!+%2 31%%2 %7#%,,%.3 '1!22 4.3).' &)2().' $1%!(/-% 2)3%2 !# !. !$$ -/1% !#1%2 /.,8 -),%2 /43 /& !, ,!2 #!33,% 1!.#( /& ,!1+25),,% %$ )5%1 / .)#% "1)#+ (/-% "!1.2 0)0% &%.#%2 '//$ $%%1 (/'2 $4#+2 (4.3).'

6)3( ! "%$1//DING!.$ 2(/0 "!3( !.$ L!E P#!1EN'!1!'% A S &/1 /6.%1 &).!.#%$ 6)3( #!2( $/6. /13(!%7!2 !# 4.3).' !.$ #!33,% 1/.32 68 9 !33,% !.$ /-% )3% 0!

ENDING 9 LE 6P2(/0 SA!,,!2 9 4.3 /4.38 7 2411/4.$%$ "8 ,!1'% (/-%2 %7#%,,%.3 2#(//,2 0!

C

$%

M

P

A

N

oklahoma $ % ! )$ !

$ "(%

O

Y

!

"

! $ %

$ $

$ % "!

TEXAS )$ !

!

"

$$

& "! # '"&

"(%

Missouri Land Sales ■ 675 Ac. Excellent Cattle Ranch, Grass Runway, Land Your Own Plane: Major Price Reduction. 3-br, 2ba home down 1 mile private lane.

New 40x42 shop, 40x60 livestock barn, over 450 ac. in grass. (Owner runs over 150 cow/calves, 2 springs, 20 ponds, 2 lakes, consisting of 3.5 and 2 ac. Both stocked with fish. Excellent fencing. A must farm to see. MSL #1112191

See all my listings at: paulmcgilliard.murney.com

PAUL McGILLIARD Cell: 417/839-5096 1-800/743-0336 MURNEY ASSOC., REALTORS SPRINGFIELD, MO 65804

■ 113 acres SOLD / 214 acres REMAINING: “Snooze Ya Loose.”

Cattle/horse ranch. Over 150 acres in grass. 3/4 mile State Hwy. frontage. Live water, 60x80 multi-function barn. 2-bedroom, 1-bath rock home. Priced to sell at $1,620 per acre. MLS #1204641 68

%!'/5),,%

9

9 !7 */%01)%231% .%3 9 */%01)%231% %!13(,).+ #/-

■ NEW LISTING - RARE FIND - 226 ACRES 1.5 miles of Beaver Creek runs along & thru this "Ozark Treasure." Long bottom hay field, walnut grove, upland grazing, excellent hunting, deep swimming hole, 4 BR, 2BA older farm house. Don't snooze and loose on this one. Call today! MLS #1303944

HEADQUARTERS WEST LTD. ST. JOHN’S OFFICE: TRAEGEN KNIGHT P.O. Box 1980, St. John’s, AZ 85936 || www.headquarterswest.com 928/524-3740 • Fax 928/563-7004 • Cell 602/228-3494 info@headquarterswest.com

/% "0 $' 4 ++/':"% 4 $; 49' %"$ 0 &'/4 ' 4 % "& 04/ 4 , $ 8 $ & 4/ 4- "& 4. ' &0 4 4 "&4 /0 4"'& ' 4 / 4/ 4 & 6& 04 4/ 4. / "0 5= / 0 9"4 0 / 0 ' 4. ' &0 //" 4"'& & "4 '%+ &;.

"44$ '$'/ ' "8 / /7&0 4 /'7 4 +/'+ /4; /'% 04 4' 9 04 ++/':"% 4 $; ) %"$ . /%$ & "0 "//" 4 8" $'' / 8"4; $'9 "4 '& & 4"8 & "%+/'8 + 047/ 74"$"< '/ $"8 04' # / <"& . /" 51 ===

NEVADA FARMS & RANCH PROPERTY

' 4 "& &4/ $ >+ '7&4; >/"<'& 49 & >$+"& & +/"& /8"$$ $'& " 9 ; ( = "& 4 74/"'0' $$ ; 4 4 '& $7 & ' '$4 / / # & 74/"'0' / # 9"4 '8 / ) %"$ ' % & /"& 74/"'0' / # /7&&"& 4 /'7 4 +/'+ /4;. & $7 0 '8 / (( / 0 4'4 $ 9"4 / & ! 4 / 9 4 / /" 40 '/ 55. / 0 ' "//" 4 + 047/ . /% $ / 0 & 74"$"< '/ $"8 04' # / <"& '& "%+/'8 + 047/ & "0 "//" 4 8" / 8"4; $'9 "/4 "4 0.

74" 7$ 8" 90 ' 0 7 "$$ '7&4 "& $' 4 "& 4 /4 ' 4 "4 '7&4 "&0. / / &7% /'70 '% 0"4 0 '& 4 +/'+ /4; 9"4 : $$ &4 00 "& $7 "& '8 / * %"$ ' + 8 /'&4 $'& " 9 ; ( =. > "4"'& $ 00 "0 +/'8" ; '7&4; % "&!

4 "& /' 0 '& '4 4 &'/4 & 0'74 '7& /" 0. /" ( 6== ===

Farm near Wells, NV: 90 acres in hay; 2 homes; shop and storage three miles from town. $450,000

'/4 ' 4. ' &0 "& >+ '7&4; "& $7 0 ( 12= / 0 9"4 44 $ 0 0 '/ (6( &"% $ 7&"40 ; /$'& .

9$; "%+/'8 9"4 0 8 / $ %"$ 0 ' & 9 +"+ $"& &7% /'70 04'/ 4 &#03 /"&# /0 07++$" ; '7/ 9 $$0. '4 $ / & "0 '8 / (( === / 0 9"4 "8 + 047/ /'4 4"'& $ / <"& 0;04 % & '& 0% $$ '$ "& 4/ +. >$$ / & & 0 8 & / 9'/# "& $7 "& '8 / 49' %"$ 0 ' & 9 & "& . /" 1== ===

Bottari Realty Paul Bottari, Broker • 775/752-3040 www.bottarirealty.com

“America’s Favorite Livestock Newspaper”

July 15, 2013

Page 15

Sierra Club claims to be “100 percent certain” that the President will designate a new National Monument in Utah INTEREST RATES A S L OW A S 3% Pay m en t s Sch ed u l ed o n 25 Year s

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

Scott Land co.

# % ).+ / ,$- , !)+ $(!) )( -#$, *+)* +-0 ( ' (0 )-# +,

Ranch and Farm Real Estate 1 known coastto-coast and in all parts in between 4 ac. +/- on the edge of town. Nice metal frame horse stables w/piperail pens. Nice brick home, 3 bdrm., 2 bath. Excellent opp.!

1 1,200 ac. +/-, 600 ac. of corn for 2013, cheap pumping from two pumping stations on the little river, pivot sprinklers, balance in choice grassland, barn w/apartment, steel pens, on pvmt., 800 mature pecan trees, very scenic.

-3,120 ac. +/- of choice grassland w/houses, barns & steel pens, lays in 3 tracts, priced separately!

1 Choice ½ section, sprinkler irr., nice set of preconditioning pens (steel) w/concrete bunks on pvmt. just out of Hereford. (

)-+0,- & &,)( +)% +, +0,- & &,)( . &$!$(" +)% + 800-933-9698 day/eve www.scottlandcompany.com • www.texascrp.com 1301 Front Street, Dimmitt, TX 79027

W-R RANCH

18,560 ACRES 20 MILES NORTHEAST OF ROSWELL, N.M. ❙

680 Deeded Acres

❙

17,900 State Lease Acres

❙

927 BLM Acres

❙

300 Animal Units Year Long

❙

Good fences; 4-strand barbwire

❙

Newly remodeled Southwestern Home

❙

Good water; windmill and submergible tanks

❙

$1,800,000

CHARLES BENNETT United Country / Vista Nueva, Inc. 575/356-5616 www.vista-nueva.com

!

T I L L E S In the Digest

n June 11, 2013 the Sierra Club held an event in Moab, Utah to promote the establishment of a new national monument known as Greater Canyonlands. The Sierra Club’s executive director Michael Brune stated before an audience in Moab that he is “100 percent certain” that a monument would be created unilaterally by President Obama through his use of the Antiquities Act. Congressman Rob Bishop

O

(UT-01), who has launched a new Public Lands Initiative in eastern Utah that focuses on land use through a collaborative process, announced his disappointment with Michael Brune’s statements.

“A diverse group of stakeholders has come together to work toward finding solutions for ongoing public land policies that have stymied progress for decades.

These conversations have been overwhelmingly positive and have the potential to provide new con-

servation areas as well as opportunities for new economic development. This process, which is being driven at the local level, is ongoing and requires continued cooperation amongst all participants. Mr. Brune’s statement that a unilateral monument designation is the ‘the best and most politically viable way’ undermines the collaborate effort and to suggest that he is ‘100 percent’ certain a new national monument will be designated in Utah is further harmful to the

process. Fortunately, the Utah Public Lands Initiative is bigger than just one Washington, D.C. politico and while Mr. Brune may continue to lobby for a unilateral policy out of Washington, the rest of us will continue to work together along with Utah communities to build consensus around new and responsible land policies. Any other approach ignores the diverse interests of the many different land-users,” said Congressman Bishop.

Center for Biological Diversity & others can participate in lawsuits over endangered frog

BY ROBERT RHODEN, NOLA.COM THE TIMES-PICAYUNE

federal judge has granted a request by two environmental groups to intervene in lawsuits brought by St. Tammany Parish property owners who object to their land being designated as critical habitat for an endangered frog. U.S. Magistrate Judge Sally Shushan ruled Tuesday that the Center for Biological Diversity and the Gulf Restoration Network have a right to participate in the lawsuits brought against the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and others over the dusky gopher frog, which was placed on the endangered species list in 2001.

“We’ll do everything we can to make sure these lawsuits don't interfere with the survival and recovery of these highly endangered frogs,” center attorney Collette Adkins Giese said in a statement. “Protection of all their remaining essential habitat is

A

absolutely necessary.

Every species we lose forever is a loss that can never be undone.”

Although the frogs no longer live on the land west of Pearl River, the property is essential for frog recovery because they contain five ephemeral ponds, each within hopping distance of the next, the center said. Dusky gopher frogs lay their eggs only in such temporary ponds – which are free of fish that would devour their eggs – and the St. Tammany property was the frogs' last known Louisiana breeding ground, it said.

St. Tammany landowner Edward Poitevent II said in a statement “We regret yesterday’s ruling that left-wing environmental groups, Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) and Gulf Restoration Network (GRN), can intervene in our lawsuit . . .

“The ruling is incorrect as CBD and GRN have no valid interest in the suit and the U.S. Department of Justice lawyers assigned to the case are highly skilled and will ably

represent the FWS to uphold the frog rule.”

At issue is the federal government’s decision in 2012 to label some 1,500 acres of land in St. Tammany and several thousand acres in southern Mississippi as “critical habitat” for the frog, a warty and dark-colored specimen with ridges along the sides of its back. The species has only about 100 adults still living in the wild in Harrison County, Miss., north of Gulfport, but hasn't been seen in St. Tammany since 1965.

Poitevent, of New Orleans, whose family owns most of the property in question in St. Tammany, has said that the timberland is not home to any of the frogs, nor does it contain the habitat the species needs to survive. He said the federal government's action is a land-grab that could cost his family millions of dollars by blocking future development.

Edward Poitevent II of New Orleans stands on family-owned timberland along Louisiana 36 in

St. Tammany Parish. NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune archive A lawsuit brought by Poitevent called the critical habitat designation on his land “illegal, improper and illogical.”

Suits also were brought by landowner Markle Interests LLC, which is owned by cousins of Poitevant, and Weyerhaeuser Co., which has a lease on the timberland and owns a small part of it.

Once prevalent throughout Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, the frogs are nearly extinct.

More than 98 percent of long-leaf pine forests – upon which the frog and many other rare animals depend – have been destroyed, the center said.

The two environmental groups in December filed a formal notice of intent to sue the Interior Department for failing to develop a recovery plan for the frogs. The agency has since assembled a team that is working on such a plan, the groups said.

Manuello Elected Colorado Cattlemen’s Assocation President ene Manuello was inducted as the new Colorado Cattlemen’s Association (CCA) President during the Colorado Cattlemen’s Association’s Convention, held at the Beaver Run Resort in Breckenridge, CO in June.

Gene was born and raised in Sterling, Colorado. He is a third generation farmer/rancher. He raises corn and hay, summers yearlings and has a cow-calf operation and feedlot. He is the president of the Sterling Irrigation

G

Company, is the ag representative for the South Platte Round Table, the Vice President of the Lower South Platte Water Conservancy District, Vice President of the Logan Well Users; and is an original member of CAWA (Colorado Ag Water Alliance). He has been on the CCA board for nearly ten years, and lists one of his priorities as water policy.

“My vision for the coming year for CCA is to remain a strong voice for the beef industry. We plan on being involved and devel-

oping Colorado’s water plan. One of my many goals is to raise the remaining money needed for the building fund, and to continue improving the relationship between CCA and the Colorado Livestock Association in order to strengthen our industry as a whole.” said CCA President, Gene Manuello.

Current members of the 20132014 Colorado Cattlemen’s Association Board include: Manuello; President Elect Frank Daley, New Castle; 1st Vice-President Bob

Patterson, Kim; 2nd Vice-President Tim Lehmann, Powderhorn; Treasurer Brett Datteri, Greeley; NE Quarter Reps Troy Marshall, Burlington and Todd Inglee, Arvada; NW Quarter Reps Phil Anderson, Walden and Mike Hogue, Steamboat Springs; SW Quarter Reps Janie Van Winkle, Fruita and Roy Oliver, Alamosa; SE Quarter Reps Steve Wooten, Kim and Bill Hancock, Rocky Ford; Immediate Past President T. Wright Dickinson, Maybell and Past President David Mendenhall, Rocky Ford.

Bradley 3 Ranch selected as 2013 BIF Seedstock Producer of the Year radley 3 Ranch, Memphis, Texas, was recently named the 2013 Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) Seedstock Producer of the Year.

Awards were presented during the 45th annual BIF Research Symposium & Meeting in Oklahoma City.

“The success of the Angus breed has been built by operations, such as the Bradley 3 Ranch, that are committed to excellence,” says Bryce Schumann, American Angus Association chief executive officer.

B

“When the entire beef industry recognizes that effort, we could not be more proud. Congratulations to the Bradley 3 Ranch for a much-deserved honor.”

Bradley 3 Ranch was started in 1955 with the purchase of 20 registered Angus cows. Today, the herd is one of the few Angus herds in the country that has maintained more than 200 registered Angus cows for more than 50 years. Located in the southeast part of the Texas Panhandle, much of the ranch is rough with canyons, draws, mesquite and

cedar trees. Bradley 3 Ranch is currently home to 400 registered Angus cows, and managed by Mary Lou Bradley-Henderson, Minnie Lou Bradley and James Henderson.

Early on, the Bradleys were committed to a disciplined approach to performance. As one of the first members of the American Beef Cattle Performance Registry, they maintained an emphasis on performance that is still the foundation of the herd today.

In 1986, the Bradleys started

B3R Country Meats. In the next 16 years, they built the all-natural meat company to a 125-head-perday harvest facility that harvested more than 30,000 head in 2002, the year it was sold. Customers were both beef producers and beef consumers. The beef producers were part of one of the earliest value-based marketing systems in the United States.

To learn more about the Bradley 3 Ranch: www.bradley3ranch.com.

For more news and information from the 2013 BIF conference: www.bifconference.com.

Livestock Market Digest

Page 16

July 15, 2013

Why won’t President Obama let the Defense Department face the rare earth security risk?

BY RON ARNOLD, WASHINGTONEXAMINER.COM

are earths aren’t a celebrity security scandal like blabbermouth Edward Snowden, but these 17 minerals, which are essential for advanced energy technologies, new healthcare tools and cutting-edge strategic weapons systems, are dominated by the Chinese.

America was once the world leader in rare earth output. Now we’re 95 percent dependent on China. That’s a shadow scandal begging for some light.

Rep. Mike Coffman, R-Colo., recently wrote that the action video game, “Call of Duty: Black Ops II,” has a plot focused on a “cold war” between the United States and China over access to rare earth materials. The game designers provided several player options for winning that video

R

war — unlike President Obama.Coffman thinks it’s “unclear whether the Obama administration, which is neglecting proven mining and development strategies that could develop a domestic rare earth supply, is playing to win in the real world.” Obama’s Defense Department seems okay with our vulnerability.

Obama must be oblivious to Deng Xiopeng’s cryptic 1992 prophecy, “There is oil in the Middle East; there is rare earth in China.” With vast rare earth deposits and power rather than profit in mind, China began supplying the Free World's needs at dirt cheap cost that the free market could not match.

The goal was to bring the entire rare earth supply chain into China’s control: mining, refining, processing into metal alloys, manufacturing finished products — and direct supply of bolt-on-ready components—

then force energy, healthcare, and defense industries to move their advanced manufacturing to China, as Japan’s Toyota has done.

Obama is so submissive to Big Green’s anti-development demands that it is impossible under his regime to develop anything in the rare earth supply chain — no mines, no refineries, no metal alloying mills, no component factories. The Catch 22 is that even if he was bold about it, the economics of China’s stranglehold would defeat us.

Since China temporarily yanked Japan’s rare earth supplies over a 2010 boundary squabble, the supply question has become stark. Molycorp Inc. — the only domestic producer of rare earth oxides — and its Canadian acquisition, Neo Material Technologies Inc., send MolyCorp's U.S. oxides through Neo to Chinese processing

plants.

The Congressional Research Service recently noted that such rare earths are subject to Chinese export restrictions should U.S. industry need them back.

Would they be allowed to return to the United States? We don’t know.

The irony, rare earth mine owner and industry consultant Jim Kennedy told me, is that there are enough rare earths waiting to be mined — and already piled up in American throwaway mine tailings — to supply the world. The tailings were dumped because the highest-value rare earth ores occur with small amounts of thorium, a minimally radioactive mineral too weak for use in a nuclear bomb. Thorium is not hard to remove, but the liability burden for removing and safely storing pure thorium has relegated the ore to mine tailings.

Stockpiling rare earths is silly: What would we do with them

with no processing infrastructure? Much as I dislike publicprivate projects, I don't see another solution than a consortium. In the U.S., it would require federal sanction for private rare earth interests in the U.S. and possibly internationally to form a cooperative that shares the cost of setting up the full family of processing facilities to get the full value of our abundant U.S. deposits.

The details are fuzzy, but key members of the Armed Forces House and Senate Committees have been bouncing the idea around. U.S. Senator Roy Blunt, R-Mo., isn’t ready to introduce a bill yet, but told me, “By encouraging the domestic production and refinement of rare earth minerals, we can reduce our dependency on other countries and encourage economic development here in the U.S.” RON ARNOLD, Washington Examiner Columnist is executive vice president of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise.

Angus Names Director of Activities, Events and Education Robin Ruff promoted to lead the American Angus Association’s event-planning efforts he American Angus Association® named Robin Ruff as the new director of activities, events and education for it’s nearly 25,000-member organization. Ruff’s commitment during her 6-year tenure in the junior activities department has earned her the opportunity to manage the Association’s entire event schedule and further develop educational programs.

“With Robin’s background and enthusiasm for the breed, the Association is confident she will lead our members in the right direction,” says Bryce Schumann, Association chief executive officer. “We are eager to see the new life and ideas she will bring to our activities and events.”

In her new position, Ruff will work with members to coordinate events, such as the Beef Leader’s Institute, Cattlemen’s Boot Camps, National Western Stock Show, and more. She will also oversee the Association’s award programs, including the Angus Heritage Foundation, Historic and Century Awards.

“The American Angus Association represents more than a breed,” Ruff says. “It symbolizes a group of people who believe in something bigger than themselves, and I want them to feel that way when they walk into an Association event, large or small.”

Most of all, Ruff says she is looking forward to expanding the Association’s educational outreach. One example will be the 2014 National Angus Conven-

T

tion and Trade Show in Kansas City. The event marks a dramatic departure from the traditional annual business meeting, which has been in Louisville, Ky., during most of the last four decades.

The 2014 event will include educational workshops, a trade show featuring allied industry partners, top-flight keynote speakers and several social activities.

“Planning the 2014 convention is an opportunity of a lifetime,” Ruff says. “I am excited to start brainstorming ideas and make this conference the event Angus members and cattle enthusiasts deserve.”

In addition, Ruff is responsible for coordinating about 17 nationwide Roll of Victory Shows throughout the year.

During her time with the Association, Ruff has served as the junior activities assistant and director of junior activities. She planned and managed the premier event of the beef industry, the National Junior Angus Show; served as advisor the NJAA Board of Directors; arranged annual Leaders Engaged in Angus Development conferences; and coordinated several other youth leadership events.

A Kansas native, Ruff grew up in Hanston on a familyowned operation with around 200 head of cattle. She holds a bachelor’s degree in agribusiness from Kansas State University, and is expected to graduate with her master’s degree in youth development in 2014.

Ruff is active in the community through the Saint Joseph Junior League, Trails West® Arts and Musical Festival and Big Brothers, Big Sisters.