Page 1

NCA 2009 President’s Award Recipient


IN THIS ISSUE 3

NCA

24

Horizons

4

Fallon Bull Sale

28

Look Up

7

Snyder Bull Sale

30

Cow/Calf Order

10

Diamond Valley Water Mgmt

32

Plain and Brown

12

NV Drought Forum

33

NV Farm Bureau

14

Eye on the Outside

36

SRM

16

Checkoff News

38

GBWN

18

Fumes From the Farm

39

Mind of Millenial

20

WSRRA Finals Rodeo

40

Secretary Jewell

22

Amodei and Heller

42

NDA

44

American Lands

23

USDA News

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

Graphic Design/Layout/Production – Joshua Rinard Josh@LifeSpringDesign.com

Cover Photo by: Stacy Butler “The Man”

NV Public Land Managment Task Force Final Report of 78th NV Legislature and Implementation through Federal Legislation Presidential Proclamation -- Establishment of the Gold Butte National Monument Leveling the Eminent Domain Playing Field

HRBWA Presentation to Legislative Subcommittee to Study Water Latest Conifer Science Helps Bird + Herd

Published 9 times each year, The Progressive Rancher is mailed to more than 7,000 approved addresses, and has digital and print readership reaching more than 30,000. The Progressive Rancher is published monthly. The views and opinions expressed by writers of articles appearing in this publication are not necessarily those of the editor. Letters of opinion are welcomed by The Progressive Rancher. Rates for advertising are available upon request. Advertising in The Progressive Rancher does not necessarily imply editorial endorsement. Liability for any errors or omissions in advertisements shall not exceed the cost of the space occupied by the error or omission. The Progressive Rancher is free to people working and active in the livestock industry. The Progressive Rancher is donated to the agricultural industry. If you are not currently receiving this magazine on a regular basis, and would like to be a part of The Progressive Rancher family, contact us by e-mail at progressiverancher@elko. net, today, so we can include you on our mailing list. If you have moved or changed addresses, please notify us, by e-mail, so we can keep you informed. All requests for the magazine must be made by e-mail. © The Progressive Rancher Magazine. All rights reserved.

Leana Litten Carey, Owner/Editor

1188 Court St., #81, Elko, NV 89801 (208) 733-1828 • (208) 358-2487 • progressiverancher@elko.net

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

 2 February 2017

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


By Kaley Sproul, Nevada Cattlemen’s Association Executive Director

W

NCA Happenings

ithin the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association we strive to promote a dynamic and profitable Nevada Beef Industry. One way to achieve that is to create/support opportunities for education for Nevada producers. There have been many opportunities for education this past January. During the second week in January the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR) hosted the Cattlemen’s Update. This update is a weeklong series that goes around the state that includes speakers from the Nevada Department of Agriculture (NCA), College of Agriculture Biotechnology and Natural Resources (CABNR), Nevada Cattlemen’s Association and the various sponsors. We are very grateful for the University’s efforts with putting on this update. The following week in January we hosted a weeklong series of Permittee Outreach Workshops. These workshops provided updates about the implementation of the Greater Sage Grouse Land Use Plan

By Kaley Sproul

Amendments in regards to livestock grazing programs in Nevada and Northeastern California. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) gave several presentations followed by a question and answer discussion with a panel of representatives from the Nevada Department of Wildlife, Nevada Department of Agriculture, BLM, USFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Unfortunately due to weather the workshop that was supposed to be held in Ely was postponed and will be happening sometime this spring. We appreciate everyone that took time out of their schedules to be at these workshops and hope that any questions you had were answered. Please contact the NCA office if you were not able to attend any of these educational opportunities and we will provide you with the information that was presented. Lastly, we are thankful for all those that work hard each day to protect what is theirs and work for what’s not. Over the

years the membership of Nevada Cattlemen’s Association has changed and now encompasses not only ranchers but interested individuals who care about the industry. Many of the new members of the association are people and students that care about the land and the people that cultivate the values they hold dear. We value the continued operation of cattle and sheep ranches. The use of livestock can be beneficial to the landscape and wildlife. If you are one of those individuals that care about the land, the livestock industry, rural communities, rural families, and wildlife, then Nevada Cattlemen’s Association is the place for you. We work to protect the future of ranching that provides open space, wildlife, healthy streams, and viable rural communities. If you are interested in learning more about the association or about becoming a member please contact the office at 1-775-738-9214 or visit the web page at www.nevadacattlemen.org

NCA Fallon Bull Sale 51st Annual Fallon All-Breeds Bull Sale will be Saturday, February 18, 2017 at the Fallon Livestock Exchange beginning at 11:00 a.m.. One-hundred and thirty-nine quality, range-ready bulls 14 to 24 months of age have been selected from Balancer, Charolais, Hereford, Angus, Murray Greys and Red Angus Breeds. Sale catalogs can be seen on the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association website at www.nevadacattlemen.org. For more information on the sale and events contact the NCA Office at 775-738-9214. We look forward to seeing you at the sale!

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 3 


S L L U

B 9 13

Friday, February 17 Sifting in the morning Churchill Co. Cowbelles Dinner/Dance and FBS Awards Presentation Social Hour: 5:30 pm; Dinner 6:30 pm; Dance 8:00 pm; Fallon Convention Center

11:00 a.m. February 18, 2017 Fallon Livestock Exchange, Fallon Nevada

Balancer ♦ Charolais ♦ Hereford ♦ Angus ♦ Murray Grey ♦ Red Angus FBS Invitational Stock Dog Trial February 17, 2017 To benefit families in need of help in the livestock industry Cowdog Auction will take place during the sale

For more information or a sale catalog, please call the Sale Office: Nevada Cattlemen’s Association 775-738-9214

www.nevadacattlemen.org

nca@nevadabeef.org

O g lo

e

n nli

ata C e

th w ie

V  4 February 2017

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


Raising Top Quality Polled Hereford Cattle with the range rancher in mind

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 5 


HONE

RANCH 5 Bulls

Fallon Bull Sale

Feb. 17-18th 2017

Angus Best of Breed Lot #28 at Fallon All Breeds Bull Sale 2014 Featuring two sons of Silver State 10X 310, the high indexing high efficiency bull at the 2014 Midland Bull Test , raised by Hone Ranch.

For Sale Catalog: nevadacattlemen.org

15 Bulls Snyder’s

Bulls for the 21ST Century Sale March 11th-12th 2017

8 Bulls Midland Bull Test

Son of Granger Pioneer 052

2014 Over all Champion Bull at Snyder’s Livestock Bulls for the 21st Century Bull Sale

Sires represent all Bulls Available

AAR-10-X

Connealy Capitalist Silver State 10X 310 Stiz Vance 579A Leadore RS Retail Value 4108 For Snyder Bull Sale Catalog: www.slcnv.com

WWW.HONERANCH.COM• (775) 691-1838

 6 February 2017

The Progressive Rancher

Gardnerville, Nevada

www.progressiverancher.com


www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 7 


Selling a Half-brother to Our 2016 Snyder Livestock champion bull Pictured Here!

Our bulls, sired by Deer Valley All In and our Connealy Consensus 7229 son, are backed by top females out of the heart of the Byrd Cattle Co. program. THD ©

All 10 bulls tested for feed efficiency will will sell. In the most recent test period at Snyders, the average daily gain (ADG) on this group of bulls was 3.92.

LOt 7021 cALViNG-eASe: RJR ALL time 504

DOB: 8-20-15 Sire: Deer Valley All In • MGS: Mytty In Focus • BW 68 • Adj. WW 717 • ADG 4.11 BW -.6

WW YW MILK +58 +102 +21

MARB RE $W $F $G $B +.92 +.48 +58.29 +69.31 +46.41 +140.02

Rick & JeRRie Libby

l

Our bulls are athetlic, sound and ready to work in any environment. The bulls are low-birth and loaded with carcass value. Watch for them selling March 12!

 8 February 2017

Our 2017 top consignment, also by Deer Valley All in, is Lot 7021 (listed below).

The Progressive Rancher

Cell: 530-218-1841 Email: rlibby@syix.com P.O. Box 128 • Live Oak, CA 95953

THD ©

www.progressiverancher.com


Big Time Bulls from

BAR LR BAR LR BULLS ARE PERFORMING:

• Average daily gain of our 12 bulls for December 2016 was 5.03 lbs/day • • #623 a GAR Composure son was the top gainer at 5.96 lbs/day•

Selling 4 GAR Composure sons, 4 WR Journey sons, 2 AAR Ten X sons, 1 VAR Index son and 1 Quaker Hill Rampage son

G A R COMPOSURE CED +15

REG #:16496980

BW

WW

YW

MK

MB

RE

$B

-1.2

+62

+111

+38

+.96

+.81

+135.07

BAR LR

Robin and Linda Richey (520) 975-2833 PO Box 1120, Benson, AZ 85602 www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 9 


Diamond Valley Water Management Local Development of a Groundwater Management Plan

D

iamond Valley is a major farming area in the State of Nevada almost totally reliant upon groundwater for irrigation. There are about 25,000 acres of irrigated land primarily producing premium-quality alfalfa and grass hay. In 2013, approximately 110,000 tons of hay was produced annually for a total farming income of approximately $22.4 million. About 126,000 acrefeet of irrigation groundwater rights are appropriated in Diamond Valley while the perennial yield recognized by the State Engineer is 30,000 acre-feet per year and current groundwater pumping is about 74,000 acre-feet per year. Annual groundwater pumping has exceeded the perennial yield of Diamond Valley for nearly 40 years. Average groundwater levels since 1960, when pumping for irrigation purposes was initiated, have declined at an average rate of about two feet per year. While the primary groundwater usage is irrigation, nearly two-thirds of Eureka County’s residents receive their domestic water needs from groundwater in Diamond Valley including most of the water needed by the Town of Eureka, two General Improvement Districts, and dozens of domestic wells. Groundwater also supplies water needs for mines, other commercial and industrial uses, and stock water for numerous livestock production operations. Nevada is the driest state in the nation; water is the most limiting and critical ingredient necessary for sustenance of life or enterprise. Nevada adopted the prior appropriation doctrine as its legal basis for water rights, in contrast to the Riparian Doctrine used elsewhere, because its supply of water, even during the early gold rush period, was often insufficient to supply the demand. Prior to Statehood in 1864 and the first statutory development of water law in 1866, the prior appropriation doctrine – first in time, first in right - became the accepted practice. The prior appropriation doctrine pertains to both surface and underground sources of water. In addition to first in time, first in right, the prior appropriation doctrine also provides that appropriated water must be put to beneficial use thereby defining and limiting the amount of water held by an appropriator, and that once appropriated, the water be continually used or the right may become forfeited or abandoned – “use it or lose it”. The continuous beneficial use concepts was intended to limit water appropriation to that which was actually put into and maintained in a beneficial use, thus discouraging hogging, stockpiling, and monopolizing of water by any particular entity. The prior appropriation doctrine, in perfect practice, a) pro 10 February 2017

By Gary McCuin, Eureka County Extension Educator

tects senior interests and the appurtenant beneficial use (enterprise) of a fixed amount of water from other future appropriators; b) that appropriated water is in fact put to and maintained in beneficial use; and c) deters water monopolization or speculation to a certain degree. By and large, Nevada water law based upon the prior appropriation doctrine has served people of Nevada well; however problems have evolved in its administration by the State Engineer’s office over time. Approximately 45 of Nevada’s 256 hydrographic basins are over-appropriated; this means that more groundwater is allocated for use than is available (perennial yield equal to the annual natural recharge limited by the annual natural discharge). The State Engineer’s office provides the following reasons for why these basins are considered over-appropriated: 1) some were already over-appropriated prior to the perennial yield being known. New data changed the perennial yield in some basins, which meant that the basins ‘became’ over-appropriated; 2) in some cases when water was allocated, not all of the water rights would be put to their maximum beneficial use. The Las Vegas Valley was purposefully allowed to overdraft water resources with the hope that infrastructure would eventually be in place to deliver Colorado River water and thereby replace the groundwater pumping; 3) some basins can be over-allocated based on the number of domestic wells alone that are not required to file for a water right; and 4) in some basins, the success rate of the Desert Land Act entries exceeded expectations of putting water to beneficial use, and therefore the basins became over appropriated; for example, the success rate of Desert Land Entries in Diamond Valley was very high compared to the success rate statewide (3% at best). Many water applications under Desert Land Entries were approved in Diamond Valley by the State Engineer expecting most to be unsuccessful. Regardless of the reasoning why some basins are over-appropriated, it is argued by many that the State Engineer did not strictly follow prior appropriation doctrine in these basins, especially the severely overappropriated basins. If he had, so many “junior” water rights would not have been granted. The over-appropriation is not the fault of the junior water rights holders. They have acted in good faith to do what they were permitted to do legally. An entire community has been built and livelihoods staked while acting in good faith. Therefore, because the prior appropriation doctrine has not been strictly adhered to and in recognition of the continuing depletion of the groundwater resource by the State Engineer, the Diamond Valley Hydrographic Basin (153) in Eureka County has the dubious distincThe Progressive Rancher

tion of becoming the first, and presently only, designated “Critical Management Area” (CMA) in Nevada. This designation, allowed under Nevada Water Law, provides ten years for the groundwater rights holders to come together to develop a local Groundwater Management Plan (GMP) to reduce groundwater pumping to sustainable levels. If this GMP is not developed, approved by the State Engineer, and implemented by the end of ten years, the State Engineer is mandated by law to regulate by strict priority (i.e., cutting the pumping of junior groundwater rights totally off, including domestic wells). The law does not provide the State Engineer with any discretion or flexibility. The economic, social, and environmental effect of immediate curtailment in Diamond Valley would be catastrophic. Immediate curtailment would cut off all water flow to junior rights which are nearly two-thirds of all farming and other water use in Diamond Valley. Many senior right irrigators also depend upon junior rights for a portion of their total farming operations. There are few “only senior” or “only junior” farm operations. Immediate loss of all irrigation water to junior rights would likely result in bankruptcy of many farmers and leave irrigated ground and farmsteads to go to weeds, rodents, and disrepair, resulting in spiraling land degradation. The environmental and legal ramifications of immediate curtailment would leave the local agricultural community with a tremendous economic burden and severely diminished tax base from which to respond. Remaining farmers would not have the production capacity to entice buyers and vendors, or negotiate prices, and would be left to deal with the degraded land with diminished income and a depleted labor force. The impacts would also be felt by local homeowners and businesses as the State Engineer would be required to curtail consumptive use of domestic and municipal water. By the State Engineer’s own estimates, only two domestic wells and a small percentage of municipal rights in Diamond Valley are considered senior enough to avoid curtailment. These burdens would also be shared with contiguous counties and the State as the economic, legal and environmental impacts reverberate across the landscape. So while Diamond Valley farmers and county residents respect and support the underpinning prior appropriation doctrine, its historic lack of strict enforcement by the State Engineer has resulted in a situation where the effects of immediate curtailment are untenable. They argue that for prior appropriations doctrine to work, it must be strictly adhered to from the inception of water development when the first well is put in, and so on. Allowing over 50 years to go by in www.progressiverancher.com


Diamond Valley where a community, businesses, and livelihoods become rooted in over-appropriation of water and then retroactively applying immediate strict “cuts” to nearly two-thirds of the water use is unacceptable. Although “net” pumping reductions down to perennial yield (sustainable levels) are required, allowing local irrigators the time to collectively determine how to best achieve that reduction within a reasonable timeframe, while maintaining some level of economic and environmental viability of their farming operations appears to be desired by many local farmers and the State Engineer. In order to reduce pumping in Diamond Valley, individual irrigators working with Eureka County, Eureka Conservation District (ECD), Diamond Natural Resources Protection and Conservation Association (DNRPCA), Eureka Producers Cooperative, Cooperative Extension, and others have accomplished the following: • Multi-year Joint Funding Agreement with USGS to study and refine the hydrology of the entire Diamond Valley Flow System, including the groundwater resources in Diamond Valley and the reduction in spring discharge there. • Comprehensive groundwater monitoring in Diamond Valley through a network of 12 wells, with good geographic distribution, equipped with tranducers and dataloggers. • Irrigation efficiency projects in partnership with US Bureau of Reclamation (Agrimet Program), University of Nevada Cooperative Extension, and University of Idaho. A BoR Agrimet site is in Diamond Valley (and has been for over 30 years now) to assist farmers with real-time weather and ET estimates to schedule efficient irrigation. These data are used by many irrigators in DV. • Multiple fields under center-pivot irrigation are now equipped with state-of-the-art nozzle packages and in situ soil moisture probes to assist with irrigation scheduling. Multiple workshops over the last few years have been held to present irrigation research results and assist in efficient irrigation practices. The most recent being held this year before irrigation began. A large portion of the DV irrigators push the limits of water conservation through application of these learned practices. • Hansford Economic Consulting June 2013 study of financial feasibility of a General Improvement District (GID) to execute a water management program to enhance the sustainability of underground water supply and storage for Basin 153. • Hansford Economic Consulting May 2014 study of potential water use set-aside programs for Diamond Valley. • Numerous irrigator meetings strategizing

www.progressiverancher.com

on opportunities for pumping reductions concepts to local needs, desires, and constraints giving and water right retirement. recognition to senior rights and priority. The collective efforts of many irrigators in DiaThe group’s desired goals of the proposed GMP mond Valley have resulted in major “self-curtailment” are for: of pumping. Nearly every farmer irrigates through • Stabilize groundwater levels of the aquifer center-pivots which leaves about 35 acres per water • Net groundwater pumping not to exceed perighted quarter section unirrigated. And of the 125 rennial yield acres per pivot irrigated, an average of 3 acre-foot per • Increase groundwater supply acre is applied while irrigation water rights are allowed • Maximize groundwater users committed to to apply 4 acre-foot per acre. As noted above, pumpachieving vision statement ing in Diamond Valley is estimated to be about 74,000 • Preserve economic outputs acre-feet per year when there is the right for pumping to • Maximize viable land-uses of private land be over 126,000 acre-feet per year. This is nearly a 41% • Do not impair vested rights reduction in pumping from what is legally allowed. • Preserve the socio-economic structure of DiaWell before CMA designation, many groundwater mond Valley and southern Eureka County rights holders, primarily irrigators, came together to By allowing local development of a GMP in a start making progress towards a Groundwater Manage- CMA to avoid strict curtailment by priority, current ment Plan (GMP) in anticipation that the State Engineer State Water Law infers additional flexibility in manwould designate Diamond Valley as a CMA. In March of aging groundwater usage in CMAs through a GMP 2014, groundwater rights holders held a meeting where that would not be allowed without CMA designation. it was determined to have the Eureka Conservation Most importantly, a concerted effort to reduce pumpDistrict (ECD) take the lead role in facilitating develop- ing in Diamond Valley to sustainable levels is needed ment of a GMP. Additionally, the State Engineer held a for protection of the resource itself. As the only CMA workshop in Eureka on February 25, 2014 outlining his currently designated in Nevada, many Diamond Valdesire that local solutions be developed through a GMP, ley water users wish to find local solutions through regardless of CMA designation. It is required by law that development of a GMP that is specific and unique to any GMP receives the endorsement (through petition) Diamond Valley. They do not wish for their efforts to of a majority of groundwater rights holders in the basin resolve the challenge in Diamond Valley and keep their before being officially submitted to the State Engineer for agricultural community intact to affect anywhere else his approval. Therefore, ECD and the groundwater right in Eureka County or the balance of the state of Nevada. owners attending the meetings chose to move forward The information provided in this article is inwith a formal approach utilizing a professional meeting tended to provide facts concerning how and why facilitator in an effort to involve everyone affected to Diamond Valley Hydrographic Basin (153) has been build consensus on a GMP. Over the course of many designated, by the NV State Engineer, as the first months there were numerous facilitated workshops held Critical Management Area in Nevada. And to reflect developing a major portion of the GMP and a GMP Ad- the efforts of local irrigators to address this issue visory Board was elected. The composition of the GMP strictly within the boundaries of the Diamond Valley Advisory Board is intended to represent all major uses of CMA as allowed by State Law. Whereas DV GMP degroundwater in Diamond Valley including individuals liberations are ongoing and no formal plan has been that are fully senior water rights holders. After election offered for approval or rejection by water right holdof the GMP Advisory Board, development of the GMP ers in Diamond Valley, this article is not intended to shifted from being professionally facilitated to adminis- influence ongoing local planning, or future planning tration by the Advisory Board with their recommenda- anywhere in the State of Nevada regarding water or tions being considered by the entire group of groundwa- water law. It is a simple statement of the situation and ter rights holders in attendance at the GMP meetings the potential impacts of immediate curtailment if for inclusion in the GMP. During this process, the that were to be deemed necessary. groundwater rights holders have received presentations on the potential development and implementation of a water market-based system meant to Senate Bill 73 provide ultimate flexibility in - Adds tools to what can be accepted by the using water, while incentivizing conservation and allowing quick State Engineer when considering a Groudwater sale, lease, trade, etc. of water in Management Plan times when needed by willing participants within the Dia- Adds Clarity to how a Critical Management mond Valley Hydrographic Area and Groundwater Management Plans Basin. The GMP is currently are initiated and carried out. under development by many PR Editors Note local irrigators adapting those

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 11 


Nevada Drought Forum: Recommendations Report Presented to Governor Brian Sandoval - December 2015 1 WATER CONSERVATION

Water conservation is an important tool to help water users manage demands and extend the use of available resources. In many cases, conservation can help to ease the impact of water supply shortages during drought and reduce needs for additional water supplies. In 1991, the state enacted laws requiring municipal, industrial and domestic water suppliers to adopt water conservation plans based on the climate and living conditions of their service area. For public water systems, NRS 540.121 through 540.151 was added to specify content requirements of the plans and the process and timeframes to be followed. NRS 704.662 through 704.6624 was also added to establish conservation plan requirements for those utilities regulated by the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada. The Forum reviewed existing statutes and agreed that additional provisions could be enacted to increase water efficiency, while still recognizing regional differences in climate and other factors. The Forum recommended changes to water conservation plan requirements that include new provisions for watering restrictions, metering, conservation water rate structures and water efficiency standards for new development. The Forum agreed that technical support should be provided to help water suppliers develop meaningful and actionable plans (see also “Financial and Technical Assistance”), and compliance with submission requirements should be enforced. The Forum also discussed the need for additional water conservation actions among agricultural water users by encouraging agricultural producers to continue to pursue water saving technology and/or best management practices. The Forum also agreed that metering all water uses in the state would be an appropriate next step. This action could significantly enhance overall water use efficiency among all water users and allow for better accounting of the state’s limited water resources. Nevada’s appropriative rights system was another key conversation topic among the Forum and agricultural producers. Many producers discussed perceived risks associated with conservation, including potential loss of unused water saved as part of conservation efforts. Nevada water law is based on a “use it or lose it” doctrine (see also, “Nevada Water Law”), which requires users to demonstrate a beneficial use of water and restricts users from speculating in water rights or holding on to water rights that they do not intend to place for beneficial use in a timely manner. The Forum agreed that these provisions should be reviewed to promote conservation efforts among agricultural users and help resolve potential conflicts. The Forum also discussed and recommended implementation of a policy directive addressing water efficiency within the power industry, and recommended  12 February 2017

strategies to improve conservation efforts within homeowner associations.

RECOMMENDATIONS •

Amend the current statute that requires all water purveyors to submit a water conservation plan to the Division of Water Resources. Amendments would add the following additional areas that purveyors must require as part of their plan, unless the requirement is deemed unnecessary by the State Engineer: • Meters on all connections • Water efficiency standards for new development • Tiered rate structures to promote water conservation • Time-of-day and day-of-week watering restrictions Ensure compliance with water conservation plan submittal requirements by amending the water conservation plans statute to provide enforcement capability for the State Engineer after attempts to achieve submittal compliance, including technical assistance, are unsuccessful. Clarify and strengthen the law to allow the State Engineer to require the installation of water meters for all water uses in the state, including domestic wells, unless such installation is deemed unnecessary by the State Engineer. Review potential changes and clarifications to the “use it or lose it” provisions in Nevada water law to increase opportunities and incentives for water conservation during drought and nondrought conditions. Encourage development and use of water saving technology and/or best management practices by agricultural and livestock producers (including, but not limited to, crop covering, drip irrigation, variable rate irrigation, center pivot irrigation, laser leveling and crop selection). Issue a state policy directive that requiresall newly developed thermoelectric powerplant projects, or all additions to existing thermoelectric facilities, to utilize dry cooling or other similar water efficient technology. Request local political subdivisions to explore implementation of water conservation measures where Home Owner Association Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) are to the contrary.

The Progressive Rancher

NEVADA DROUGHT Forum Members

Leo Drozdoff, P.E. (Chairman) Director, Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources John Entsminger (Vice Chairman) General Manager, Southern Nevada Water Authority Jim Barbee Director, Nevada Department of Agriculture Jason King, P.E. State Engineer, Nevada Division of Water Resources Dr. Douglas Boyle Nevada State Climatologist, University of Nevada, Reno Dr. Mark Walker Dean, University of Nevada Cooperative Extension Dr. Justin Huntington Associate Research Professor, Desert Research Institute Caleb Cage Chief, Nevada Division of Emergency Management

Attention.

Current Announcement Jan 2017

Nevada Division of Water Resources Measuring water levels in Nevada wells February through March

CARSON CITY, Nev. – Beginning in the middle of February and continuing into March, weather dependent, staff from the Nevada Division of Water Resources, Office of the State Engineer, will be measuring groundwater levels in permitted wells throughout various hydrographic basins in the state. The data collection is part of an ongoing effort to assess hydrologic conditions throughout Nevada. Division staff will be measuring water levels primarily in irrigation and stock wells. Contact Mark Beutner at 775-684-2821 or Shannon McDaniel at (775) 684-2842 for more information. Water level measurements may be reviewed at http://water.nv.gov/data/waterlevel.

www.progressiverancher.com


2 NEVADA WATER LAW

Nevada’s first water law was passed in 1866 and has been amended many times since. The Office of the State Engineer was created in 1903 to protect existing water rights and to improve methods for utilizing the state’s limited water resources. The State Engineer is responsible for administering and enforcing Nevada water law, which includes the appropriation of surface and groundwater in the state, and the adjudication of pre-statutory vested rights, dam safety and other duties. Nevada water law is considered one of the most comprehensive water laws in the western United States. It is based on two basic principles: prior appropriation and beneficial use. Prior appropriation—also known as “first in time, first in right”—allows for the orderly use of the state’s water resources by granting priority to senior water rights in times of shortage. This concept helps to ensure senior water users are protected, even as new uses for water are allocated. The Forum’s meetings and the Drought Summit generated significant discussion regarding Nevada water law, particularly in regard to the management of over appropriated basins; pumping impacts to senior groundwater right holders by junior pumpers; the relationship between groundwater pumping and surface water flows; adaptive management through monitoring, management and mitigation (“3M Plans”); and the nexus between Nevada’s “use it or lose it” doctrine and water conservation needs (see also “Water Conservation”). Other conversations centered on place of use; management of supplemental water rights; terms of use for temporary rights; and the need for greater flexibility to manage resources during times of drought to help minimize impacts. Forum members and participants generally agreed that current drought conditions have intensified the conversation, particularly in light of declining stream and groundwater levels, as well as dwindling storage reserves. These issues have the potential to create and/or exacerbate conflict, particularly in over-appropriated basins. The time it takes to resolve conflicts through the courts is also a concern, especially since many fundamental water management principles are not clearly defined in statutes. The Drought Forum agreed that these issues need to be addressed, with an incremental approach to guard against unintended consequences. To help ease drought-related impacts, the Forum recommended changes to Nevada water law that clarify and strengthen the State Engineer’s authority related to water management tools such as 3M Plans, Critical Management Areas and Groundwater Management Plans. Members also agreed that in times of curtailment (when water supplies are reduced or restricted), access to water for indoor use by domestic well users should be preserved. The Forum also discussed the topic of rainwater collection and use for domestic or wildlife needs. NRS 533.030 does not specifically address the permissibility of rainwater capture and use, but does limit the diversion and use of water in the state to those entities that have a granted water right. The Forum agreed that changes to www.progressiverancher.com

law could be implemented to allow for the use of smallscale precipitation capture devices without significant impacts to state resources, although limitations must be defined to restrict the magnitude of these activities.

RECOMMENDATIONS •

• • •

Continue refinement of Nevada water law to strengthen the State Engineer’s ability to address Critical Management Areas and provide flexibility in the development of Groundwater Management Plans for over-appropriated basins. Clarify Nevada water law related to the State Engineer’s inherent authority to provide for adaptive water management through implementation of 3M Plans. Clearly define fundamental water management principles in statute. Seek an addition to Nevada water law that clarifies that, in times of curtailment, only outdoor use by domestic well users may be prohibited. Explore changing water law to allow for the use of small scale precipitation capture devices in areas where capture increases the water supply and does not conflict with existing rights.

3 MONITORING AND RESEARCH DATA

tor through the development of new tools to increase the accuracy and accessibility of data, and improve drought forecasting through technology. The Forum agreed these coordinated efforts may help to defray expenses on mutually beneficial projects, make better use of limited staffing resources, reduce duplication of efforts and enhance interagency/stakeholder coordination and cooperation. The Forum recognized that enhanced forecasting and monitoring tools may also be of value to other western states that are experiencing significant drought conditions. To this end, members recommended that the U.S. Drought Monitor be expanded to include multiple indicators, including state impact reporting. They also supported the addition of another Drought Monitor author in the western states and other drought-related research.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Direct the formation of a working group of climate professionals and other relevant disciplines to set goals and assess recommendations for drought monitoring, including information gaps/site needs, prioritization of efforts, implementation strategies, and cost identification/funding strategies. This working group is encouraged to: Develop a statewide monitoring network that utilizes diverse information sources to strengthen Nevada information sharing and monitoring coordination as well as centralized availability of real-time data. Partner among network organizations to increase and enhance the accuracy of data, in part, by establishing standards for data collection and reporting. Work with other organizations (such as NIDIS—National Integrated Drought Information System) and/or explore implementation of new technologies to improve drought monitoring, drought early warning systems and forecasts. Work with other western Governors to request an additional U.S. Drought Monitor author to represent western states and encourage expansion of the U.S. Drought Monitor to include multiple indicators (vegetative and hydrologic drought), including state impact reporting. Support development of research data related to the impacts of drought, including state tourism’s offer to include questions related to drought and visitation as part of its scheduled research efforts.

• Produced by the National Drought Mitigation Center, the U.S. Drought Monitor provides summary information on the location and intensity of drought conditions occurring across the United States and Puerto Rico. The map isupdated weekly by combining • data and local expert input. The Drought Monitor is produced by a rotating group from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Drought Mitigation • Center, incorporating the review from a group of 250 climatologists, extension agents and others across the nation. Within Nevada, the Drought Monitor is used by state and federal agencies to establish policy and management tools and to assist local planning agencies • and other water users with real-time information on hydrological conditions. While the Drought Monitor is a useful tool for reporting current hydrological conditions, participants at the Forum meetings and the Summit agreed that additional information and analysis is needed to improve decision-making efforts related to • livestock grazing, as well as land and environmental resource management. The Forum agreed that narrowing information gaps through additional data collection and monitoring could significantly improve coordination between various stakeholder groups throughout the state and allow for the development of more flexible resource management strazegies. As such, READ THE FULL ARTICLE ON the Forum recommended the formation PROGRESSIVERANCHER.COM of a working group to set monitoring and research goals, and to assess monitoring recommendations. The work group’s efforts will complement and enhance the applicability, value and effectiveness of the U.S. Drought MoniThe Progressive Rancher

February 2017 13 


By Joseph Guild

!0,000 Years of GMO’s

E

very once in a while I come across things that knock me back on my heels. In one of these cases, what seemed obvious to me most of my life was confirmed in a prestigious, respected magazine. The other was the amazing power of knowledge to change human thought and conviction if only our minds are open to other points of view and possibilities. First, the journal “Nature” recently compiled research going back almost a decade and reported the human brain could not have developed to its phenomenal capacity to think, create and innovate without two things. One, we learned that cooked food was more tasty and nutritious than raw food. Cooking releases more nutrients and needed calories for us to exist and evolve. With the discovery of fire and the ability to cook our food we did not need as much and the delivery to our needy systems was more efficient and desirable. Two, meat was full of necessary nutrients, vitamins such as B12 (only available from meat) and is a more effective way to deliver the protein we needed. Both of these developments were necessary factors in the progress of the human brain from our primate cousins. We now know the modern human brain consumes 20 percent of our body’s energy at rest. That small softball-sized organ needs a lot of fuel of a specific type. We thus evolved to be omnivores and any suggestion that we didn’t is simply false. Obviously, a person could survive and people do survive on an all-vegetable or even a vegan diet. That isn’t in doubt. However, we all still need protein and meat producing animals utilizing otherwise land unsuitable for crops is one way to help feed the growing human population. This leads me to the other item of interest I recently came across. As most readers know, there has been a building back lash against the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) over the last 25 years or so. Farmers, ranchers and well-informed others know humans have been modifying plants and animals for over 10,000 years. Every crop or animal raised in agriculture today has been genetically modified and without human manipulation of these organisms we would not have the agricultural bounty that today feeds the

 14 February 2017

growing population of our planet. The challenge, of course, is how to produce more because the population will continue to grow. It is estimated there will be 20% more people in 2050 than there are today. That is about 9.5 billion more persons on the earth. One of the leading anti- GMO advocates was the British environmental activist Mark Lynas. He is quoted as saying: “I believed that there was something fundamentally unnatural and inescapably evil about technology and genetic modification”. He is famous for having attempted to steal Dolly, a sheep, the first animal ever cloned by humans. About this time, according to an article I just read, Lynus began to focus his attention on climate change. (This column is not about that topic- maybe another time) He rationalized his concern about the climate by using the science supporting a theory of human caused change. He realized if he was doing this he had to get beyond the emotionalism about GMOS and look to the science there too. Doing this he changed his beliefs about GMOS. The science supports the notions that GMO crops actually use less water and chemical fertilizer and use fewer acres to produce more of the crops genetically modified. A simple google search will show the growing body of science which backs up these precepts. Also, a you tube search will provide the searcher with a great deal of information about Lynus in his own words. For instance, in one you tube clip he says his research showed that one after another the assertions by anti-GMO advocates turned out to be nothing more than green urban myths. I have written about Norman Borlaug and the so-called “Green Revolution attributed to him in this column before. Lynus quotes Borlaug extensively in his writings and speeches. Through the use of technologically improved seeds Borlaug saved literally 100s of millions of lives and probably saved the Indian sub-continent from an ecological and human disaster between the 1960’s and 1980’s. Lynus has acknowledged this simple fact. Because of our brain power, humans are both capable of destroying or saving ourselves from monumental disasters. We can discover and put to use the technologies we need for survival or destruction. One of the technologies we can use for our survival is the GMOs in agriculture.

The Progressive Rancher

Our direct ancestors ate meat, learned to cook and developed better brains- a more human than other primate brain, if you will. This brain created the nuclear bomb and arguably is the cause of climate change, (Again another column in the future). Humans have used this brain to start countless wars and kill billions of people in the last 2 million years. And yet the same brain is capable of and did create agriculture by modifying wild plants and animals for domesticated human use. And now it is taking that technology a step further and developing GMOs for human use. It is indisputable GMOs reduce the need for pesticides and herbicides. GMO crops require less tillage or plowing and thus reduce the need to use fossil fuels. They increase the production of food using the same acreage which results in forests and pasture land not converted to crop agriculture. Less water is required to grow GMO crops which reduces the pressure to overuse this precious resource. Over a trillion meals of GMOs have been eaten with no case of human harm. So why is there such resistance to GMOs for human use? The same web sites I reviewed for this column have many anti GMO articles and expressions of fear and loathing for human use of GMOs. We humans have a history of being afraid of things we know nothing about. From refrigerators to railroads there has always been a naysaying faction resistant to technologic change. The arguments against GMOs run the gamut: there is very little government oversight of GMOs; GMOs pollute water ways; when given a choice animals prefer non- GMO food to food that is GMO; and ironically, GMOs require more pesticide and herbicide use, which directly contradicts the favorable point quoted above. So what is a thinking person to do when deciding a position on human use of GMOs? I would favor the Lynus approach. I would rely on that cooked meat developed brain. I would occupy the camp that says technology can help us survive because it has done so throughout the existence of our species. Our meat fed brains gave us agriculture and astronomy. We have walked from the cave to the computer and I believe we should rely on that fact with optimism. I’ll see you soon.

www.progressiverancher.com


Carey Hawkins

Jack Payne

Cell: 208-724-6712

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

OFFICE: 775-423-7760

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

City

#

Desc

Type

Weight

Price CWT

Green Goat

Winnemucca

3

Mix

STR

360

$175.00

Flat Creek Ranch

Orovada

26

Blk

STR

402

$183.50

C-Ranches

Beowawe

23

Blk

STR

411

$170.00

Steve Hansen

Pioche

7

Mix

STR

414

$173.00

C or L Kretschmer

Tonopah

2

Blk

STR

473

$168.00

Steve Hansen

Pioche

20

Mix

STR

483

$168.00

Martin Bunyard

Fernley

1

Blk

STR

497

$160.00

John Bunyard

Cedarvillee

4

Blk

STR

497

$160.00

6J Livestock

Alamo

8

Blk

STR

502

$157.50

Timothy Puckett

C Valley

8

Mix

STR

502

$159.00

C-Ranches

Beowawe

6

Blk

STR

513

$163.00

Susan & David Kern

P Valley

18

Mix

STR

513

$162.50

C V Horse & Cattle

Ely

8

Blk

STR

515

$163.00

Rosie Garaventa

Eureka

6

Blk

STR

517

$163.00

Dale Barrett

Jordan Valley

12

Blk

STR

520

$170.50

Tao Masterjuan

Jordan Valley

13

Blk

STR

526

$161.75

H & J Brackenbury

Yearington

16

Blk

STR

528

$162.50

Robert Parasca

Winnemucca

19

Blk

STR

550

$160.50

Fork Over Ranch

Lovelock

4

Blk

STR

553

$164.00

Alan & M Mendes

Reno

21

Mix

STR

555

$159.50

Etchegara

Eureka

5

Blk

STR

558

$160.50

Tao Masterjuan

Jordan Valley

11

Blk

STR

646

$142.00

Demar Dahl

Fallon

11

Blk

STR

704

$129.75

Lester Debraga

Fallon

4

Blk

STR

726

$129.50

Casey Kiel

Lovelock

10

Mix

STR

737

$126.00

Marvin Casey

Denio

17

Blk

STR

824

$123.75

Casey Kiel

Lovelock

14

Blk

STR

846

$122.00

Fred Rogne

Fallon

1

Blk

STR

390

$163.00

Ronald & D Cerri

Orovada

8

Blk

STR

406

$162.00

Alan & M Mendes

Reno

13

Blk

STR

452

$169.00

Bruce Ranch

Jordan Valley

9

Blk

STR

468

$165.00

JWF Ranching

Cre Valley

12

Mix

STR

469

$166.50

Kylie Amos

Fallon

8

Mix

STR

474

$165.00

Whipple Ranch

Hiko

2

Blk

STR

515

$155.00

Donald Quintero

Schurz

10

Blk

STR

539

$159.00

Steve & G Medlin

Alamo

42

Blk

STR

542

$159.50

Tyson Torvik

Fallon

6

Mix

STR

546

$156.00

Lazy D Livestock

Pioche

36

Mix

STR

548

$158.75

Lester Debraga

Fallon

2

Blk

STR

565

$157.00

Dellis Bone

Reno

14

Mix

STR

609

$138.00

Steve & G Medlin

Alamo

20

Mix

STR

624

$136.50

Ira or M Renner

Spring Creek

25

Mix

STR

627

$138.00

Susan & David Kern

P Valley

17

Mix

STR

646

$131.00

Jersey V Cattle Co.

Winnemucca

3

Mix

STR

648

$135.00

Peraldo Bros.

Fallon

7

Blk

STR

788

$126.00

Blake & D Lambert

Winnemucca

3

Blk

STR

822

$118.00

www.progressiverancher.com

Sales Results from January 19th Feeder and Bred Cow Sales

NEXT Feeder SALE

February 16th 2017 Starting at 11:30am

Mark your calendar early for March 16th 2017 Feeder Sale starting at 11:30am

Buyers are still looking for good quality calves. We had over 2300 come through our sale in January. Thanks again to all the buyers and sellers! For all of your animal health needs see us at

Nevada Livestock Vet Supply LLC 131 Industrial Way Fallon NV 89406

Store Hours M-F 8:00 til 5:00 Store # 775-423-3038 After hours # 775-624-4996 The Progressive Rancher

Seller

City

#

Desc

Type

Weight

Price CWT

Whipple Ranch Star Bar Cattle Crawford Cattle Co. Demar Dahl Wayne Hage Fork Over Ranch Marvin Casey Donald & K Quintero Jake & L Dempsey

Hiko Yearington Win Fallon Tonopah Lovelock Denio Schurz Win

7 6 8 28 12 5 5 4 7

Blk Blk Mix Blk Mix Mix Blk Blk Mix

STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR STR

826 856 856 863 398 430 493 510 531

$118.00

Branton Genco Aaron & D Williams Lequerica Bros. Wayne Hage Crawford Cattle Co. Ray & James Jensen C V Horse & Cattle Kirk Mader Fred Rogne Bruce Ranch

Alamo Fallon Arock Tonopah Win Tonopah Ely Orovada Fallon J Valley

11 6 10 9 9 2 19 14 2 15

Mix Mix Mix Mix Mix Mix Blk Blk Blk Blk

STR STR STR STR STR STR HFR HFR HFR HFR

544 553 588 642 646 703 344 376 378 411

$150.00

Etchegara Tao Masterjuan C V Horse & Cattle

Eureka J Valley Ely

5 4 14

Blk

HFR HFR HFR

423 426 435

$150.00

JWF Ranching Ronald & D Cerri Tyson Torvik Tao Masterjuan Bell Ranch Dale Barrett Martin Bunyard John Bunyard Lazy D Livestock Crawford Cattle Co. Seven Dot Cattle Co. Pinson Ranch Bell Ranch Casey Kiel Seven Dot Cattle Co. Pinson Ranch Wesley Viera Juniper Mountain Bruce Ranch El Torito Juniper Mountain Lazy D Livestock Peter & Kathy Marvel Crawford Cattle Co.

Cr Valley Orovada Fallon J Valley P Valley J Valley Fernley Cedarvillee Pioche Win Golconda Golconda P Valley Lovelock Golconda Golconda Fallon Fallon J Valley Fallon Fallon Pioche P Valley Win

10 8 7 7 20 25 1 7 7 18 22 5 30 15 36 8 6 4 2 6 4 8 6 4

Blk Blk Mix Blk Blk Blk Blk Blk Mix Mix Mix Mix Blk Blk Mix Mix Blk 3-4yr 3-4yr BrkMo 3-5yr BrkMo BrkMo CHAR

438 446 469 497 501 501 504 504 514 594 611 613 614 689 696 697 779 1128 1318 1669 1060 1231 1383 1149

$143.00 $149.00 $141.00 $136.00 $130.00 $133.00 $134.00 $134.00 $132.00 $125.00 $125.50 $125.50 $126.00 $124.00 $122.75 $122.75 $108.50 $1,480.00 $1,620.00 $1,280.00 $1,210.00 $940.00 $910.00 $1,270.00

Lazy D Livestock

Pioche

7

SHTSLD

HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR HFR PAIR PAIR PAIR Bred Bred Bred BredHFR Bred

1382

$985.00

Blk Blk

$120.25 $121.50 $122.25 $154.00 $159.00 $159.00 $150.00 $148.00 $145.00 $141.00 $137.00 $137.50 $122.00 $155.00 $154.50 $149.00 $151.00 $148.00 $152.50

Consign Early - Call Jack Payne 775-225-8889 Carey Hawkins 208-724-6712 February 2017 15 


CHECKOFF NEWS: National Ibotta Campaign Launches, Featuring Beef Rebates in Nevada and Nationwide

I

n the January issue of Progressive Rancher, we shared some new technology being used to help enhance beef checkoff and retail promotional partnerships, particularly through the increasingly popular mobile app, Ibotta (pronounced “I bought a”). This month, we have some exciting updates about a national Ibotta promotion that will help bring more consumers to the meat case to pick up beef – including at numerous Nevada retailers. Last month, the beef checkoff launched a national Ibotta promotion that will run through February. The promotion is offering rebates on ground beef, beef steaks and roasts at all national grocery stores that currently partner with Ibotta. And just how many retailers does that include? Ibotta works with over 160 grocery retail chains, and over 300 general retailers and shops. A number of Nevada retailers are among the partners, including Safeway, Raley’s, Albertsons, Smith’s Food & Drug, WinCo Foods, Sam’s Club, Wal-Mart, Costco, Food4Less, and many others. (For a full list of participating retailers, visit www. ibotta.com/where.) Ibotta is one of the most frequently used smartphone apps for shopping that is making waves in the marketplace. The company partners with leading brands and retailers to offer rebates on groceries, electronics, clothing, gifts, home and office supplies, restaurant dining, and more. The consumer unlocks the qualifying rebate on the app, purchases the item at the store, and verifies the purchase for a rebate that comes in the form of cash or gift card from Ibotta. As we’ve previously shared, consumer research has indicated for years that shoppers – particularly those in the millennial audience – are turning away from the physical or on-pack coupons and moving more toward mobile-based apps or digital coupons. This trend is part of the lure of the current national promotions, which will provide savings on all brands of beef – including ground beef, steaks and roasts – at the retailers. As an added element, the brands featured on Ibotta can use their placed rebate as an opportunity to poll consumers. Thus, working with Ibotta allows a company or organization to not only offer incentives to sell their product, but also engage with app users to gain additional consumer insight to shape future campaigns and consumer outreach. For this current national promotion, to qualify for a beef rebate, the user will have to either watch a brief video or answer a poll question, such as the following:

Which of the following ingredients packs the biggest protein punch in the fewest amount of calories:

• • • •

Ground Beef Quinoa Black Beans Peanut Butter

In addition to answering the question, a link is provided for the user to see the nutritional difference between the four proteins listed.

How Does Ibotta Work, Anyway? • Download the free Ibotta app on your Apple or Android device. • Find qualifying rebates on products at local retailers • Unlock the rebate by answering a question or watching a brief video • Purchase the items at a participating store • Verify your purchase through the app • Receive a rebate for all purchases in the form of a gift card, or directly in to your bank account via PayPal •

Sound Like a Lot of Steps? You might be surprised – the numbers back up the app’s wide use. Ibotta has been downloaded over 18 million times, has paid out more than $100 million in cash back to its users, and has experienced massive growth – in both size of the company and in numbers of partnering retailers and products – since its launch in 2012. In addition, 79 percent of app users are female, and 89 percent are under age 45, which speaks directly to our target market.

How can I help move more beef through this promotion? Download the app yourself and use it, and share it with your friends, neighbors, community members, etc., and encourage them to not only download the app, but use it for savings on BEEF!

For more about the Nevada Beef Council, visit www.nevadabeef.org.  16 February 2017

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


SZECHUAN BEEF STIR-FRY From James Winstead, RDN, Director of Food and Nutrition Outreach for the Nevada Beef Council

UPcoMiNG SaLES

March 3rd Cottonwood, CA

Consignment Deadline: February 23rd

April 12th Visalia, Ca

It’s February and those New Year’s resolutions have had a full month to take effect – or hit the side lines. If you are feeling guilty that those 2017 goals haven’t been going well, not to worry – no matter what your resolutions might have been, there is always room for better nutrition, and more flavor in your life. This month, enjoy a new recipe from the beef checkoff’s 30 Day Protein Challenge that will certainly help you with both health and taste. A classic beef stir-fry, ready in 15 minutes, using pre-cut veggies and prepared Asian sauce. Can it get any easier? For more great beef recipes, visit www.beefitswhatsfordinner.com. Total Recipe Time:approximately 15 minutes

Ingredients - Makes 4 servings • 2 beef Ranch Steaks, cut 3/4 inch thick (about 8 ounces each) • 1 package (10 ounces) fresh vegetable stir-fry blend • 3 tablespoons water • 1 clove garlic, minced • 1/2 cup prepared sesame-ginger stir-fry sauce • 1/4 teaspoon crushed red pepper • 2 cups hot cooked rice or brown rice, prepared without butter or salt • 1/4 cup dry-roasted peanuts 1. Combine vegetables and water in large nonstick skillet; cover and cook over mediumhigh heat 4 minutes or until crisp-tender. Remove and drain vegetables. Set aside.

Catalog Deadline: March 28th

WATCH & LISTEN TO THE SALE on the Web at:

For details call (530) 347-3793 or the representative nearest you:

Gary Nolan

Mark Venturacci

(775) 934-5678

(775) 427-8713

Elko, NV

Steve Lucas

Paradise Valley, NV

(775) 761-7575

Brad Peek— (916) 802-7335

2. Meanwhile cut beef steaks into 1/4-inch thick strips.

or email us at wvm@wvmcattle.com

3. Heat same skillet over medium-high heat until hot. Add 1/2 of beef and 1/2 of garlic; stir-fry 1 to 2 minutes or until outside surface of beef is no longer pink. Remove from skillet; keep warm. Repeat with remaining beef and garlic. 4. Return all beef and vegetables to skillet. Add stir-fry sauce and red pepper; cook and stir 1 to 2 minutes or until heated through. Spoon over rice. Sprinkle with peanuts.

Fallon, NV

Look for the catalog and video on our website www.wvmcattle.com

Market your cattle with the professionals!

Recipe as seen in The Healthy Beef Cookbook, published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 17 


FUMES FROM THE FARM By Hank Vogler

I

Predator Control Mandatory

n today’s world, being involved in Agriculture is like living in a mother goose fable. Agriculture is the goose that lays the golden egg and being attacked from all angles only shows how unaware the modern person is of its abundant food supply. People have a total disregard for the production of that abundance. Killing the goose that lays the golden egg will not net you more eggs as the fable goes. The constant attack on agriculture is the blind leading the blind. Food independence will keep America strong and remaining vigilant is paramount. Keeping your belly button from banging into your backbone should be a high priority. It is a little hard to sell that concept when you walk into a super market. Only the human haters could wish people to starve, yet this is what a lot of the activism against agriculture is all about! It is even worse for those of us involved in animal agriculture. It is real easy to point to cute cuddly Walt Disney perception of animals to advance the cause. Of the earth’s surface, only ten percent of the ground out of the oceans is conducive to farming. The rest is forests, ice capped or grazing land. The argument against the control of predators is a modern version of emotions over ruling common sense. Wildlife Services started in the thirties in Texas to help get a handle on a rabies epidemic. The cute cuddly folks point to an experiment prior to that with Theodore Roosevelt going after predators to protect the Kaibab deer genetics as a disaster. Fur trapping was allowed for years that helped control predation. The modern human haters have implemented so many restrictions they have about killed trapping out. In the nineteen seventies with horrible base line data, an effective control of coyotes was lost with the use of junk science. It nearly wiped out the sheep industry along with deer herds, sage grouse, and many other prey animals. Billions of dollars have been lost and untold numbers of people’s lives have been destroyed by this pseudo science. Hunting brought in millions to rural counties. The propagation of hunt able wildlife was a great source of revenue for local, state and federal governments and part of that money was put back into conservation of Wildlife. Somewhere along the line the cute  18 February 2017

and cuddly crowd took over and wildlife hunting opportunities plummeted. The sage grouse alone threatens to end the Western culture of mining, ranching and hunting. Oh and with the coyote, dog, wolf hybrids now quite visible, nature walks to get right with ones inner child might be a hassle. Yes, several predators were eliminated not only because they harm domestic animals, they also look at people like a lamb chop and you can easily be on their food pyramid. That doesn’t even address the fact that wildlife services limits birds that destroy crops; it also monitors diseases like bubonic plague that are carried by animals. Also they are in charge of preventing “bird Strikes” with aircraft like the airplane that was landed on the Hudson River. Just since the touchy feely science started in the seventies, as grazing and animal agriculture has been curtailed in the West, huge swaths of forest and grazing lands have burned and are in a rapid metamorphous of invasive species. At the end of the day when you drive people out of business and the dependence on other countries for food increases, the people of this country will suffer. The ones that are affected first are the poor. The well to do fern fairies can always dine on peacock tongues; but the poor get poorer. The consumer always wins with a steady cheap food supply. As long as the tools used to produce food and fiber are protected from the ill informed the American producers will remain in business. No government controlled agriculture endeavor has ever worked. An incentive to free enterprise always works best to feed the masses. The wildlife services wears many hats, protecting wildlife and domestic crops and animals is just one of its many functions. The real beneficiary of their efforts is the poor. I am assessed a fee every year that goes to wildlife services. The state sees a value, the grazing boards contribute and yes the federal program is proportionally funded by federal budgets. If you want to cheapen the cost and increase the efficiency of the program give them back the tools they have had taken away from them and billions in revenue will be generated. Instead of taking away an effective poison and making trapping more difficult show your support for the human being. Predator control is like capital punishment. Eliminate a predator and he will never steal food from the poor again Hang and rattle. Hank Vogler

Attention

“The Predatory Animal and Rodent Control (PARC) budget was fully restored in Governor Sandoval’s recommended budget for the next biennium,” Director Jim Barbee said. “Currently there are no impacts to PARC efforts expected in the 2018-2019 biennial budget.” Dir. Jim Barbee

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 19 


7th Annual Western States Ranch Rodeo Association National Finals Rodeo

T

By Naomi Loomis, WSRRA Representative

he most successful ever seventh-annual Western States Ranch Rodeo Association National Finals Rodeo was held November 3 - November 6 at the Winnemucca Events Complex in Winnemucca, Nevada. Teams came from thirteen western states including far away states like Nebraska and Wyoming plus, new this year, two teams from Canada. Established in 2010, the WSRRA has experienced incredible growth, each year growing in number of events and members. The association currently has more than 700 members. Throughout 2016, WSRRA sanctioned more than 48 open ranch rodeos, 22 women’s ranch rodeos, 25 women’s steer stoppings and over 100 ranch bronc riding events. The top open and women’s teams from each of the ranch rodeos, and the top 15 women’s steer stoppers, and top 15 ranch bronc riders competed for cash and prizes at the National Finals. Prizes included Gist buckles, custom made gear made by Ricardo’s Saddlery and Mincer Silversmiths, John and Kristen Mincer, halters, stirrups by Weber Stirrups, and custom made hats donated by Chaz Mitchell Hatz. The Nationals Finals kicked off Thursday with the women’s long go team events, the opening of the Christmas Buckaroo Trade Show and jack pot roping events. The jackpot roping winners were Gary Grockett and Jesse Jolly in the Big Loop, Gene Harry and Daxton Jim in the team roping and Kyndall Tibbits in the steer stopping. Friday, November 3, one member of each open team started the day showing off their highly skilled ranch horses in a working ranch contest. Then the teams competed in long go events of load & tie and team roping. The evening’s performance featured “Tough Enough to Wear Pink” theme. Grand Marshal, Governor Jim Gibbon from Nevada, made an exciting grand entrance in a refurbished horse drawn stagecoach. If that wasn’t enough, the first two rounds of the Professional Wild Horse Racers Association (PWHRA) national finals got everyone’s blood pumping! Rodeo clown, Tuffy Gessling entertained the crowd with his rope tricks and laughs. Joining us for the first time was J and R Rodeo with mini bareback horses for kids ages 6- 14. In between specialty acts, WSRRA Ranch Bronc riders and open and women’s teams showed their talents in featured performances. Saturday morning started with three rounds of Women’s Steer Stopping, followed by open team long go’s of sort & rope doctoring, and team branding. Later in the day WSRRA National Sponsors, the Boot Barn, sponsored a dummy roping contest and a stick horse barrel race for the kids. Gist Buckles were given as prizes. The second annual Great Basin Gathering; music, poetry and trading gear was a spotlighted event.  Afternoon rodeo action featured jackpot family branding won by Tyler Miller, Tub Blanthorne, Bea Lee and Will Knight. As the sun was going down, the second evening performance started. This performance was full of Wild West action and western traditions. Featured performances of more of the open and women’s teams, along with two rounds each of PWHRA and WSRRA ranch bronc riding kept the arena dust stirred up and the crowd’s excitement high! Performances by Tuffy Gessling and R and R Rodeo, mini barebacks lived up the evening’s experience. Saturday ended with yearend and long go awards at The Winners at Winners WSRRA awards party, followed by dancing to music by the Jeff Palmer Band, both hosted by the Winners Inn & Casino. Sunday, November 6th, WSRRA held Cowboy Church by Bo and Kathy Lowe it was well attended.  After Cowboy Church, WSRRA held the short go of the national finals for the open and women’s divisions and the final rounds of PWHRA wild horse racing and WSRRA ranch bronc riding. At the end of the afternoon, champions were crowned with Gist Silver buckles, homemade headstall by Ricardo’s Saddlery with Mincer Silversmith WSRRA conchos and silver stirrups by Weber Stirrups were handed out.  20 February 2017

Congratulations to all the contestants not just the winners. First time visitors to the event were totally impressed with the quality of the competition and the stock. A huge thank you to all the office help, chute help, announcers, judges, vendors, stock contractors, and particularly Hot Creek Ranch, owned by Bobbi and Dave Murphey, who supplied nearly 250 top quality Corriente cattle for the event. The WSRRA wouldn’t be around without the help of our sponsors and major supporters which include: Winnemucca WVCA Board, Ram Trucks/Ram Rodeo, Boot Barn, Performix Nutrition, Les Schwab Tires, 8 Seconds Whiskey, Twisted X Boots, Gouveia Ranches, Working Ranch Magazine, Mary Williams Hyde/Buckaroo Country, Rodeo News, Yeti, Big Bend Trailers and Chaz Mitchell Hatz, and host hotels, Winnemucca Inn and Winners Inn Casino.

The 2016 Western States Ranch Rodeo World Champions are as followed: • • • •

World Champion Women’s Steer Stopper: Chelsea Hoff Rookie Steer Stopper of the Year: Courtney Medley World Champion Open Ranch Rodeo Team: Eiguren Ranch from Nevada. Members: Teo Maestrejuan, Richard Eiguren, Shawn Lequerica, Brian Grenke • World Champion Women’s Ranch Rodeo Team: Miller Livestock from Nevada. Members: Carmen Buckingham, Katie McFarlane, Kayla Tiegs and Bailey Bachman • World Champion Ranch Bronc Rider: Justin Quint • WSRRA ROOKIE of the YEAR: Braxton Adams • WSRRA ROOKIE of the Finals: Aaron Mercer • ALL AROUND COWGIRL: Tierani Brusett • ALL AROUND COWBOY: Hyland Wilkinson • TOP HAND COWGIRL: Carmen Buckingham • TOP HAND COWBOY: Richard Eiguren • ALL AROUND RANCH HORSE – OPEN: • Richard Eiguren from the Eiguren Ranch Team • ALL AROUND RANCH HORSE – WOMENS: • Bailey Bidwell from the Diamond Y • STOCK CONTRACTOR OF THE YEAR: Gene King, King Rodeo • PRODUCER OF THE YEAR: Shane Flanigan • BRONC OF THE YEAR SELECTED BY JUDGES: #200 Paddle Foot owned by Gene King, King Rodeo • PICK UP MEN OF THE YEAR: Jess Jones • HIGH AVERAGE CONTRACTOR OF THE YEAR (Based on top 5 Horses): Gene King, King Rodeo Make plans to attend a sanctioned WSRRA Ranch Rodeo in 2017!!

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


Gene King Stock contractor of the year

World Champion Womens Team Miller Livestock

Hyland Wilkinson All Around Cowboy Eiguren Ranch World Champion Mens Ranch Rodeo Team

Gene King Stock contractor of the year

World Champion Womens Team Miller Livestock

Aaron MIller Rookie Bronc Rider of the Finals with Chaz Mitchell www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

Richard Eiguren, World Champion and All Around Ranch Horse and Top Hand Cowboy.jpg

Justin Quint February 2017 21 


Amodei and Heller Partner to Protect Nevada Public Lands from Executive Overreach By Logan Ramsey

W

ashington, D.C. – Congressman Mark Amodei (NV-02) partnered with United States Senator Dean Heller (R-NV) today to introduce the Nevada Land Sovereignty Act (H.R. 243, S. 22). The legislation prevents the threat of executive action designating or expanding national monuments without Congressional approval or local support. “Whether you agree with our proposals or not, I have always supported a public and transparent process which includes input from interest groups, local communities, and elected representatives,” said Congressman Amodei.  “Unlike all of our Nevada lands bills that allow stakeholders an opportunity to voice their concerns and ultimately reach a consensus agreement that achieves bipartisan support, the Obama Administration has repeatedly bypassed Congress and local input. I continue to be amazed by the fact that some people hug unilateral, non-transparent monument

designations, while at the same time, protesting vehemently over the introduction and public discussion of Congressional lands bills proposals. In contrast to the last eight years of this Administration’s one-sided approach on major land management decisions in Nevada, our bill simply ensures local stakeholders have a seat at the table going forward.” “Late last month, without even having a say in the matter, Nevadans witnessed the executive branch quickly lock up hundreds of thousands of acres of local, public land with an effortless stroke of the pen. No matter which political party is occupying the White House, these types of unilateral federal land grabs by the executive branch should not be allowed. Public input and local support remain critical to the decision-making process of federal land designations. This legislation prevents actions like last month’s Gold Butte land grab from occurring without input from Congress and local officials. I’d like to thank Congressman Amodei for his partnership on this bill,” stated Senator Heller.  

January 4th 2017

Background: Over the past two years, President Obama unilaterally placed restrictions on over one million acres of public land in Nevada alone via the American Antiquities Act of 1906. One million acres amounts to more land than the entire state of Rhode Island. Since the expansion or establishment of monuments under the Antiquities Act does not require the consent of Congress, the President, with the swipe of a pen, can bar millions of acres of federal lands from multiple uses. Because of this, presidential powers under the Antiquities Act have been reduced twice. President Obama has utilized this executive action more than any other president in American history. As recently as last week, the President locked-up 300,000 acres of land in Nevada, making this the second time in less than six months Nevada has been subject to a unilateral land grab. The Nevada Land Sovereignty Act of 2017 seeks to address this abuse of executive power by ensuring Congress and local officials are not bypassed before the designation or expansion of national monuments in the state of Nevada.

Amodei and Heller Team Up on Critical Minerals Bill

W

ashington, D.C. – Congressman Mark Amodei (NV-02) recently teamed with U.S. Senator Dean Heller (R-NV) to introduce key mining legislation, H.R. 520, to more efficiently develop domestic sources of minerals in Nevada and across the country. After introducing the legislation, both members released the following statements: “Critical and strategic minerals are essential to the technologies that make our daily lives and economy work,” said Congressman Amodei. “Unfortunately, when it comes to mining strategic and critical minerals in America, duplicative regulations, bureaucratic inefficiency, and lack of coordination between federal agencies unnecessarily threaten our economy and jeopardize our national security. In Nevada, permitting delays stand in the way of good-paying jobs and revenue for local, often rural, communities. Our bill would simply bring transparency to the permitting process without changing any environmental regulations, protections, or opportunity for public input. This is a necessary piece of legislation that has already passed the House five times over the past three Congresses. I’m pleased to have Senator Heller join me as we work to streamline the permitting process to leverage our nation’s vast mineral resources, while paying respect to economic, national security, and environmental concerns.” “Nevada possesses some of the richest hard rock mineral reserves in the world, fueling our nation’s economy even before statehood. Today, the industry is responsible for over 13,000 jobs and $11 billion in annual economic output in Nevada alone. Unfortunately, these natural resources are not being developed as efficiently as they should be, increasing our nation’s dependence on foreign sources of minerals. This legislation improves the burdensome permitting process, increasing American mineral security while creating blue collar mining and manufacturing jobs. I am pleased to team up with Congressman Amodei, who has championed this bill in the House for years, to advance these common-sense reforms in the 115th Congress,” said Senator Heller  22 February 2017

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


News Release

USDA Offers Flood Impacted Nevada Farmers and Ranchers Immediate Disaster Assistance By Annie Smith

Farm Service Agency Stands Ready to Assist Agricultural Producers Slammed by Recent Heavy Rains and Snow

R

ENO, NEVADA – January 25, 2017 - Nevada USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA) Executive Director Janice Kolvet reminds farmers and ranchers across the state of federal farm program benefits that may be available to help eligible producers recover from recent heavy rains and flooding. FSA offers disaster assistance and low-interest loan programs to assist agricultural producers in their recovery efforts following floods or similar qualifying natural disasters. Available programs and loans include: • Non-Insured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) - provides financial assistance to producers of non-insurable crops when low yields, loss of inventory, or prevented planting occur due to natural disasters (includes native grass for grazing). Eligible producers must have purchased NAP coverage for 2015 crops. • Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP) - offers payments to eligible producers for livestock death losses in excess of normal mortality due to adverse weather. Eligible losses may include those determined by FSA to have been caused by hurricanes, floods, blizzards, wildfires, tropical storms, tornados lightening, extreme heat, and extreme cold. Producers will be required to provide verifiable documentation of death losses resulting from an eligible adverse weather event and must submit a notice of loss to their local FSA office within 30 calendar

days of when the loss of livestock is apparent. •

Tree Assistance Program (TAP) – provides assistance to eligible orchardists and nursery tree growers for qualifying tree, shrub and vine losses due to natural disaster. Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees, and Farm-Raised Fish Program (ELAP) - provides emergency relief for losses due to feed or water shortages, disease, adverse weather, or other conditions, which are not adequately addressed by other disaster programs. ELAP covers physically damaged or destroyed livestock feed that was purchased or mechanically harvested forage or feedstuffs intended for use as feed for the producer’s eligible livestock. In order to be considered eligible, harvested forage must be baled; forage that is only cut, raked or windrowed is not eligible. Producers must submit a notice of loss to their local FSA office within 30 calendar days of when the loss is apparent. ELAP also covers up to 150 lost grazing days in instances when a producer has been forced to remove livestock from a grazing pasture due to floodwaters. For beekeepers, ELAP covers beehive losses (the physical structure) in instances where the hive has been destroyed by a natural disaster including flooding, high winds and tornadoes.

Emergency Loan Program – Available to producers with agriculture operations located in a county under a primary or contiguous Secretarial Disaster designation. These low interest loans help producers recover from production and physical losses due to drought, flooding. • Emergency Conservation Program (ECP) provides emergency funding for farmers and ranchers to rehabilitate land severely damaged by natural disasters; includes fence loss. • HayNet - is an Internet-based Hay and Grazing Net Ad Service allowing farmers and ranchers to share ‘Need Hay’ ads and ‘Have Hay’ ads online. Farmers also can use another feature to post advertisements for grazing land, specifically ads announcing the availability of grazing land or ads requesting a need for land to graze. www.fsa.usda.gov/haynet. To establish or retain FSA program eligibility, farmers and ranchers must report prevented planting and failed acres (crops and grasses). Prevented planting acreage must be reported on form FSA-576, Notice of Loss, no later than 15 calendar days after the final planting date as established by FSA and Risk Management Agency (RMA). For more information on disaster assistance programs and loans visit www.fsa.usda.gov/ or contact your local FSA Office. To find your local FSA county office, visit http://offices.usda.gov. •

Livestock Indemnity Program Benefits Available to Nevada Producers

R

ENO, NEVADA – January 25, 2017 - Nevada USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA) Executive Director, Janice Kolvet today announced that producers who suffered qualifying livestock losses due to natural disasters including winter storms, flooding or blizzards could be eligible for the Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP). “LIP provides livestock producers with a vital safety net to help them overcome the damaging financial impact of natural disasters,” said Kolvet. LIP compensates livestock owners and contract growers for livestock death losses in excess of normal mortality due to an eligible adverse weather event, including losses due to hurricanes, floods, blizzards,

www.progressiverancher.com

By Annie Smith

disease, wildfires, extreme heat and extreme cold. “A notice of loss must be filed with FSA within 30 days of when the loss of livestock is apparent,” said Kolvet. “Livestock that die within 60 days of the date of the qualifying event will be considered eligible for loss benefits.” The LIP national payment rate for eligible livestock owners is based on 75 percent of the average fair market value of the livestock. According to Kolvet, producers should contact their local County FSA Office to schedule an appointment to submit a notice of loss and application for payment. Producers are encouraged to bring supporting evidence, including documentation of the number and kind of livestock that died, supplemented if possible by

The Progressive Rancher

photographs or video records to document the loss, purchase records, veterinarian records, production records and other similar documents. For more information on LIP, please contact the local county office or visit FSA online at http://www. fsa.usda.gov/nv. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender. To file a complaint of discrimination, write: USDA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Office of Adjudication, 1400 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (866) 632-9992 (Toll-free Customer Service), (800) 877-8339 (Local or Federal relay), (866) 377-8642 (Relay voice users).

February 2017 23 


CALVING OR FINISHING?

A

BECOMING A REAL BEEF STATE

year and half ago, Dr. Payne (Dean of CABNR) and I had an interesting discussion about beef production in Nevada. It was not new for any of us that cattle and calves are the most important agricultural commodity in the state. Also, based on data available online, cowcalf operations are predominant when compared to stocker and feedlot operations. Nevada has a huge potential for beef production. Although ranches may be few in number, they rank third in the U.S. in size. But the questions that Dr. Payne and I couldn’t answer were: Why don’t NV producers finish cattle instead of calving? How UNR and our new Animal Science program could collaborate with producers in order to explore new possibilities? In few words, how could we establish NV as a real beef state? Over the last whole year, I can’t tell how many times I caught myself thinking about how to show that finishing cattle would be and interesting alternative for NV ranchers. Obviously there are a lot of limitations that should be addressed and they include facilities where animals would be harvested, where feedstuff would be acquired from, and how we could change production culture and beliefs. Last week, during a meeting with the dean we discussed about this again. How can NV shift from cow-calf operations to finishing? I wish I could have all the answers to come up with a magic formula to improve revenues. Although this is not simple, there are some facts that can make NV ranchers think about this new adventure.

increases the probability of obtaining USDA Choice beef and is definitely required to obtain USDA Prime beef. Cow-calf operations focus their activities on specific seasons that include calving, breeding, and weaning. Most of times, cows are just fed with forage and supplementation is not provided on a regular basis. Finishing cattle with grains require daily routines including consistent and frequent feeding management. More information about finishing diets will be discussed on the next issues of this newsletter.

HOW ABOUT PROFITABILITY?

Profitability of cow-calf operations depend on several variables based on pasture availability, animal fertility, area, and number of calves produced. For finishing systems, the margin of profit is also affected by factors that may include feeding costs and labor. However, final beef quality and marketing programs

(e.g. conventional, natural, organic, local) can significantly play an important role in increasing revenues when finishing cattle. The important point that must always be considered by feeders is that consumers are the ones who make the final price decision. There is an abundance of niche markets that can be explored in order to improve profitability. However, animal efficiency and low production costs will always be the most important points to consider for both systems. When shifting from one system to another, it is very important to establish goals and plan costs ahead. Each rancher and property has a different scenario and depending on what resources are available, the easiness of transition from one system to another may be different. It is always recommended to look for an UNCE extension agent specialized in agriculture economics to provide additional help. The Wallace Center has on its website an Excel file that allow ranchers to predict revenues for calving and finishing by inputting basic data.

CALVING VERSUS FINISHING

Cow-calf operations usually require less labor than finishing cattle in feedlots for example. However, it is important to mention that there are different ways to finish cattle and they directly depend on what the market demands. The term “finishing cattle” means stipulating target weights that automatically optimize carcass quality and yields. Finishing systems are usually implemented to generate carcass with acceptable weight, adequate fat covering, and desirable marbling attributes. Finishing systems always require the utilization of different diet. Producers can finish steers only with grass or use combinations including grains. The addition of grains

 24 February 2017

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


(http://www.wallacecenter.org/s/Grass-Fed-Beef-Calculator-4mic.xlsx)

FEEDSTUFF SOURCES

A major concern from many ranchers is the availability of feedstuff in NV. Mainly how far NV is from the Midwest corn belt. However, the distance from Elko County (where most of NV livestock is located) to the Midwest is relatively similar than areas in Texas and Arizona where large beef feedlots are located. Nevada is also a major hay producer, fact that favors cattle feeding. Last, there are other feedstuffs that may be used during finishing. Producers must be able to use different energy sources according to their availability, regionally and nationally.

SLAUGHTER AND PROCESSING FACILITIES

Although this seems to be a drawback for NV, there are beef processing companies that have slaughter plants located in adjacent states where NV ranchers can easily sell their livestock. Nevada has a few small USDA harvest and processing plants in the state including the University one and two private ones in Fallon. Obviously, due to low volume processing capacity, those plants only satisfy a limited number of small producers by harvesting their cattle and custom-cut its carcasses. Upon receiving their cuts back, those small producers also sell their product to customers and stores. Although this type of market is important for the local community, it has its limitations since there is no possibility of growth. Custom-kill plants will never operate like large processing facilities. This encourages ranchers to pursue calving rather than finishing. Nevada ranchers must be aware that there are slaughter plants that

www.progressiverancher.com

will be able to harvest animals raised in the State. Recently, a new beef packing plant with killing capacity of 1700 hd/day initiated its operations in Kuna, ID. This plant is located exactly 244 miles from Winnemucca and Elko (4 h drive). There is also a large beef plant in Hyrum, UT located approximately 269 miles from Elko (4 h 12 min) (killing capacity of 2000 hd/day). On the West side, there is another large beef slaughter and processing facility in Selma, CA, located 310 miles West from Reno (6 h drive). Therefore, there are harvest and processing plants nearby and harvest cattle finished in northern NV is commercially possible. Ranchers can easily contact these companies’ buyers to estimate how much they would pay for their finished cattle.

UNR BEEF RESEARCH

Last year, CABNR professors established a new research group called UNR BEEF. This group will focus on developing projects related to animal growth, performance, and meat quality from cattle raised and finished in conventional systems, pasture, and rangeland conditions. Our goal is to generate important information to be used by Nevada Ranchers so they can improve their production systems.

CULTURE CHANGE

Finishing cattle instead of calving may be an alternative for NV ranchers if they are willing to try. As always, changing what it has been done for years is not an easy process. It requires entrepreneurism skills, sense of adventure, and willingness to take risks. However, possibilities exist.

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 25 


 26 February 2017

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 27 


Peter

I

by Pastor Diana Gonzalez

get a kick out of studying the character and nature of Jesus’ disciples. Like me, I’m sure it took all Jesus’ patience to put up with these guys who could be real goofs at times. I like to look at the contrast between Peter and John. Peter was bold, sometimes quick to speak and slow to think. (Some of us know what that’s like). In Matthew 16:13-23 Jesus asked His disciples “But who do you say that I am?” (vs. 15). Peter boldly declares, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” (vs. 16). Then Jesus calls Peter blessed. (vs.17). In the same chapter, as Jesus explains that He must suffer and die, Peter is bold enough to rebuke the Lord, (vs. 22), “Far be it from You Lord; this shall not happen to You!” Now the same Lord who called Peter blessed in vs. 17, turns and says to Peter, “Get behind Me satan! You are an offense to Me.” Wow! From being blessed to being called an offense, Peter’s boldness brought about both. Matthew 17 - Now after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John his brother, led them up on a high mountain by themselves; 2 and He was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and His clothes became as white as the light. 3 And behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them, talking with Him. 4 Then Peter answered and said to Jesus, “Lord, it is good for us to be here; if You wish, let us[a] make here three tabernacles: one for You, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.” 5 While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!” 6 And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their faces and were greatly afraid. 7 But Jesus came and touched them and said, “Arise, and do not be afraid.” 8 When they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no one but Jesus only. Matthew 17:1-8 NKJV Here in Matthew 17:1-8, Jesus takes Peter, James and John up on a high mountain and He’s transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun and His clothes became as white as the light. (vs.1, 2). Moses and Elijah appeared to them (the disciples), talking with Him (Jesus). (vs. 3). Now Peter can’t stand it; he has to do or say something! In Luke’s account; Luke 9:33 Peter says, “Master, it is good for us to be here; and let us make three tabernacles (tents); one for You, one for Moses and one for Elijah”, not knowing what he said. (vs. 33). Good ol’ Peter, he had to say something. In Luke 22:33, 34 we see Peter boldly declaring, “Lord, I am ready to go with You, both to prison and to death.” (vs. 33) Jesus replied (in vs. 34), “I tell you Peter, the rooster shall not crow this day before you will deny three times that you know Me.” Yes, Jesus knew Peter’s boldness, but He also knew Peter’s human weakness. Boldness – John 18:10 – Peter cuts off the right ear of the high priest’s servant, Malchus. Weakness – Luke 22: 54-62 – Peter denies Jesus three times, then goes away weeping bitterly. (vs. 62). We don’t read about Peter again until after Jesus is raised from the dead. However, John and the women stayed with Jesus throughout His suffering and death on the cross, (Luke 23:27, Luke 24:1, John 19: 25-27) the humble, quiet ones. The story of Peter could have ended here as it did for Judas (Matthew 27:3-6). One is restored. One is not. One was forgiven. One did not seek forgiveness. The angel at the tomb (Mark 16:5-7, Matthew 28:2-7) instructs the women, “He is risen, He is not here. But go, tell His disciples AND PETER that He is going before you to Galilee”. (Mark 16:6, 7).  28 February 2017

Peter is reassured of acceptance, restoration and forgiveness after denying Jesus 3 times. Now see the heart of Jesus as He restores Peter in John 21:15-17 NKJV: 15 So when they had eaten breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of Jonah,[a] do you love Me more than these?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You. ”He said to him, “Feed My lambs.” 16 He said to him again a second time, “Simon, son of Jonah,[b] do you love Me?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Tend My sheep.” 17 He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of Jonah,[c] do you love Me?” Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, “Do you love Me?” And he said to Him, “Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.” Jesus said to him, “Feed My sheep. The love of Jesus ministered special attention to Peter and Peter declares three times his affection for the Lord. Now let’s look at Peter in the book of Acts. We see Peter’s boldness used with the power of the Holy Spirit; (Acts 1:8, 2:1-4) preaching the gospel with tremendous results. Read Acts 2:14-42 where in vs. 41 three thousand are saved. Now read Acts 3. Note Peter’s boldness, but he also touches on refreshing (vs. 19), restoration (vs. 21), blessing (vs. 26); things he himself had received. Now read Acts chapter 4, (five thousand are saved). In verse 4 notice Peter’s boldness with the power of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 4:8-14). After Peter and John were released and told to shut up about Jesus, what did they pray for? Safety? The power to keep quiet? NO! They prayed for BOLDNESS! (Acts 4:23-31). I pray that in these last days that we Christians will operate in the power of the Holy Spirit and the boldness of Peter and love like John. Now Lord look on their threats, (Christians are being attacked and killed daily) and grant to Your servants (Christians) that with all boldness they may speak Your Word, by stretching out Your hand to heal, and that signs and wonders may be done through the Name of Your Holy Servant Jesus. Amen. Reference: Acts 4:29-31. Scripture reading Acts chapters 1-4. Happy trails. May God richly bless you. We love you and would love to hear from you. If you would like someone to pray with, or just have a question, please give us a call at (775) 867-3100. ‘Til next time….

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


NRRC Accepting Proposals and Setting Priorities at Upcoming Meeting

E

ach year the Nevada Rangeland Resource Commission (NRRC) meets and sets their budget priorities for the upcoming year. This year the Commission will meet early March in Winnemucca and listen to proposals relating to projects on marketing, advertising, and/or communication of public land ranching. The application for funding includes a brief description, a proposed budget, timeline, and who the targeted audience will be. The applications for funding are available on the NRRC’s website and are due by February 17th. The NRRC is governed by a commission of nine voting members. These members are nominated through each of the grazing boards, Nevada Cattlemen’s Association, Nevada Woolgrowers and the Farm Bureau; then appointed by the Governor. The NRRC has one part-time staff person. Please if you would like to make a proposal, e-mail us for an application for funding at NRRC08@yahoo.com. or get it from our website at www.nevadarangelands.org.

Nevada Ranchers Caretakers of our

Rangelands

Cowboys and sheepherders produce food and fiber for the nation. Growing food on Open range is a natural biological process. Grazing actually benefits the land with hoof action and natural fertilization. Plants are healthier and regenerate faster after the herds move to a new range.

The NRRC Meeting has been scheduled for Monday, March 6th in Winnemucca. We will begin at 10:00 a.m.

Antelope and other game animals and birds take advantage of the improvements

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

Sheep often graze on steep terrain and can control cheatgrass, a major fuel for wildfires. Nevada Rangeland Resources Commission was created by the State of Nevada to promote responsible public land grazing. Representatives come from Nevada state grazing boards, Nevada Woolgrowers, Nevada Farm Bureau, and Nevada Cattlemen’s Association.

4780 East Idaho Steet, Elko, NV 89801 • 775-738-4082 WWW.NEVADARANGELANDS.ORG

This ad is funded through the NRRC’s assessment of 10 cents an AUM paid by public land ranchers.

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 29 


COW/CALF CORNER From the Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service January 9, 2017

Beef market price dynamics

D

errell S. Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension Livestock Marketing Specialist. Retail beef prices will continue adjusting down in 2017 due to retail market dynamics and continued growth in domestic beef consumption this year. The most recent All Fresh retail beef prices in November were $554.20/cwt., down 7.5 percent from one year earlier.  All Fresh retail beef prices peaked in July, 2015 and have decreased 9.8 percent from the peak through November, 2016.  The average monthly price decrease since the peak has been 0.6 percent per month but the rate of decrease accelerated in the fourth quarter (Q4) of 2016.  November All Fresh beef prices were down 1.7 percent from October following a 1.9 percent monthly decrease in October from September.  A faster decrease is not surprising given the jump in beef consumption in Q4 of 2016.  Fourth quarter beef production was up a projected 8.3 percent year over year and, when adjusted for fewer beef imports and increased beef exports, resulted in a projected 6.5 percent increase in per capita retail beef consumption compared to Q4 of the previous year.  Sharply higher Q4 beef production in 2016 contributed to a projected annual increase in per capita beef consumption of 3.1 percent for the year. Beef production is forecast to increase year over year by 3.5-4.0 percent in 2017 leading to an expected increase in consumption of 1.3 percent year over year.  The consumption increase on a quarter by quarter basis will be relatively modest compared to the sharp jump in domestic consumption in late 2016.  The current projection for 2017 domestic beef consumption hinges on the projection for total beef production as well as continued improvements in the net beef trade balance.  Increased beef consumption may be interpreted by some as better beef demand while lower retail prices might suggest lower beef demand.  In reality, it is the magnitude of retail price adjustments relative to increased consumption that defines the level of beef demand.  In general, lower retail prices in the face of increased beef supplies are the expected response for a given level of demand.  However, other factors such as pork and poultry prices and macroeconomic conditions may shift beef demand. The fact that retail beef prices will be lower in 2017 does not inevitably imply additional pressure on cattle prices.   The dynamics of retail price adjustments are slower than for cattle and wholesale beef markets.  This is true for both price increases as well as decreases.  For example, from early 2013, calf prices increased nearly 80 percent to a monthly peak in November 2014.  All Fresh retail beef prices did not peak until eight months later in July 2015 having increased just over 25 percent from early 2013 levels.  Likewise cattle prices have adjusted down more and faster whereas retail beef prices have adjusted less and more slowly.  This is because, not only is it typical for retail prices to adjust more slowly, but also because retail prices began adjusting down eight months after peak cattle prices.  Even if beef supplies were unchanged in 2017 we would expect retail beef prices to continue adjusting for several more months.  Of course, total beef supplies are expected to increase in 2017 and overall market price pressure will depend critically on both domestic and international demand for U.S. beef in 2017. Oklahoma State University, in compliance with Title VI and VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Executive Order 11246 as amended, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and other federal laws and regulations, does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, religion, disability, or status as a veteran in any of its policies, practices or procedures. This includes but is not limited to admissions, employment, financial aid, and educational services.  References within this publication to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, service mark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply endorsement by Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service.  30 February 2017

X - President Claims another 1.5 Million Acres through Antiquities Act

W

ASHINGTON (Dec. 28, 2016) – The Obama administration on Tuesday declared two new monument designations - 1.35 million acres at Bears Ears in Utah and 350,000 acres at Gold Butte in Nevada. Both designations were made unilaterally and despite overwhelming local opposition. Public Lands Council President and Utah rancher Dave Eliason criticized the outgoing administration for both their disregard for local input and the manner in which these latest designations were executed.   “Designating a monument in this manner – under the cloak of darkness and without even the decency of notifying the local communities, the states, or the congressional delegations of Utah or Nevada – speaks volumes about the disregard this administration has for local input,” said Eliason. “If the administration was proud of this action, they would have touted it proudly yesterday when the designation was made. Instead, the administration hid out while no one impacted by this monument was given the courtesy of a simple phone call until a full day after the papers were signed.” The designations of the Bears Ears National Monument in Utah and the Gold Butte National Monument in Nevada make it the 29th time President Obama has used his executive power under the Antiquities Act, more than any other president before him.

W

BLM Releases Flawed Planning Rule in the Closing Days of Presidents Term

ASHINGTON (Dec. 1, 2016) – The Bureau of Land Management today released a final version of BLM planning 2.0. Ethan Lane, Executive Director of the Public Lands Council and National Cattlemen’s Beef Association federal lands said this process radically alters federal land management planning and moves the agency away from its mandate to manage for multiple use on federal lands. “We are continuing to review how much, if any, our input has been incorporated into the final plan, but regardless, we object to the Administration moving forward in the final days of the President’s term with this hastily-released regulation – particularly with one that will have such dramatic economic impact on western states,” said Lane. Of the final rule, Chairman-Elect of the Congressional Western Caucus, U.S. Congressman Paul A. Gosar (R-Ariz.) said the following: “Once again, the Obama Administration believes that Washington knows best and continues to defy the principles of federalism, subjugating Americans to another erroneous rule and more government red tape that strips away the authority and expertise of local land managers. BLM 2.0 is a bureaucratic nightmare that will kill jobs and create unnecessary permitting delays. This fundamentally flawed regulation will also impose costly and duplicative mandates on job creators and local communities. Local planning decisions should be made by the experts on the ground at the local level, not Washington bureaucrats. The Congressional Western Caucus will work with the Trump Administration, Republican leadership and important industry groups like the Public Lands Council and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association to scrap misguided directives imposed by Obama’s political hacks during their waning days.” The BLM must scrap BLM 2.0 and go back to the drawing board, this time with real input from stakeholders across the West, Lane emphasized.

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 31 


 32 February 2017

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


N Farm Bureau Nevada evada Farm Bureau

Nevada Farm Bureau Expresses Appreciation For Humboldt River Basin Update Meetings

W

ith the critical nature of resolving the complicated water issues of the Humboldt River, a Nevada Farm Bureau spokesperson who attended one of the recent public meetings expressed his view that the update sessions, organized by the State Engineer, were very beneficial. “Although some of the technical details presented during the meeting were challenging to fully understand by a non-hydrologic expert, I think it was very useful to receive the presentations and have the ability to get answers about the way things are advancing,” Doug Busselman, Nevada Farm Bureau Executive Vice President said. January 17 and 18 the State Engineer held three public workshops in Lovelock, Humboldt and Elko to provide the first-year’s status update on the four-year study and modeling project which is underway to identify the hydrologic connection and interaction of groundwater and Humboldt River streamflow. Joining

the representatives of the State Engineer’s office, the two entities involved in carrying out the study and modeling project, the United States Geologic Service (USGS) and the Desert Research Institute (DRI) provided their respective insights on the activities carried out and plans for further work. The amount of groundwater pumping taking place along the Humboldt River corridor is considered as a factor for the lack of water reaching Rye Patch Reservoir near Lovelock, NV. This contention forms the basis for a legal challenge, by the Pershing County Water Conservation District. The irrigation district maintains that over-appropriation of groundwater resources and the amount of pumping which is being carried out along the www.progressiverancher.com

Humboldt River is depleting stream flows that would otherwise reach Rye Patch and be available for meeting water rights in the irrigation project. Addressing the matter of considering necessary protection for the senior water rights of surface water right owners, served by the irrigation district the State Engineer has launched the multi-year study paid for by a 50-cent per acre-foot assessments on groundwater right owners within the 34 water basins along the stretch of the Humboldt River. The process for conducting the study involves the development of modeling assessments for three sections of the Humboldt River. DRI is involved with the modeling and assessment of the Upper Basin, USGS is responsible for the Middle Basin modeling and study and the two are working together to handle the Lower Basin model. In addition to the modeling for groundwater pumping impacts which will determine a capture analysis of the degree that wells are impacting water being pulled from the river, the outcome will also update the data used “balancing” recharge and water withdrawn from the basins through the use of groundwater evapotranspiration estimates. Field verification, surveying and a host of other activities are being carried out to compile the information to be used in better understanding the system as well as the hydrological boundaries for what is connected as well as the extent that various groundwater users are impacting streamflow. “It is very apparent from the information being collected and the processes being used that the State Engineer is working to pursue the best possible science in moving forward,” Busselman observed. “It might not make the necessary follow-up management steps any easier to deal with, but the foundation for those requirements will be based on what seems to be shaping up to be solid data.” The eventual outcome from the Humboldt River Basin Modeling project is intended to be a scientifically and technically sound basis for the State Engineer to achieve improved management of water resources dealing with connectivity and interactions of surface and ground water. It was reported on, during the information meetings, that a legislative proposal from the State Engineer has been submitted for the 2017 Legislative Session to cover conjunctive surface and ground water management. The Senate bill, SB 73, includes language which would amend state law to indicate that the Legislature The Progressive Rancher

intends the State Water Engineer... “To manage conjunctively the appropriation, use and administration of all waters of this State, regardless of the source of the water, and to encourage the use of augmentation plans to maximize the beneficial use of the water.” It was also reported that work has been advancing on proposed conjunctive management regulations for the waters of the Humboldt River Basin. The regulation draft is anticipated to be ready for public workshops to be held in February and the idea is that these workshops would take place in public meetings that would follow the same route of local sessions which were used for the January public workshops. A nine-member working group of representatives from the Humboldt River area have been involved in the discussion process with the State Engineer’s office to prepare the draft regulations. It was noted that the State Engineer’s stated goals for the ultimate management of surface and ground water in the Humboldt River Basin would include maximizing beneficial use and honoring the state’s prior appropriations doctrine. These principles would be accomplished through using the best science to provide for water models that establish the necessary understanding of the dynamics of the system. Further work will be focused on determining the degree of the conflict, considering the available supply of water for the senior water right owners within the irrigation district. The extent of impact for not having sufficient water would use information of scheduled deliveries and actual deliveries. Hints for what will likely be included in the framework of management actions, suggest that there will be provisions for multiple methods to mitigate or augment depletions and there will also be a basin-wide mitigation plan with mitigation through means of financial compensation. Nevada Farm Bureau will be working to encourage strong levels of engagement in the discussion and input phase of the regulation development workshops. “As the State Engineer’s regulation development process unfolds, it is extremely important that all those directly impacted in the Humboldt River Basin be active participants in understanding what is being proposed and provide their input to make for the best possible outcome.” Busselman said. “Ideally, there will be early announcements for the schedule of the public workshops…with lots of reminders to help get the kind of involvement necessary.” February 2017 33 


N Farm Bureau Nevada evada Farm Bureau

Recap of the American Farm Bureau Annual Convention in Phoenix, AZ

T

By James Linney - Director of Communications

he American Farm Bureau Federation Nevada Farm Bureau President Hank Combs (AFBF) held its 2017 Annual Conven- and Vice President Bevan Lister both partook in the tion in Phoenix AZ January 6th to Delegate Session on Tuesday of the Convention. Bevan the 11th. Every year AFBF puts on an Lister spoke on behalf of Nevada Farm Bureau presentAnnual Convention in different places ing the issues the State Farm Bureau delegates saw fit all over the country for State Farm Bureau’s to come for discussion at the National level. State Delegates together as one and network, socialize, be presented from all over the country spent an entire day voting on nationwide issues, and for the nationwide voting on policy presented by AFBF President Zippy Duvall. delegates accept the AFBF Policy for the coming Overall the AFBF Annual Convention in Phoenix year. In attendance from Nevada Farm Bureau were was a success and a very warm thank you to the event President Hank Combs and his wife, Vice President planners of the convention and Nevada Farm Bureau Bevan Lister and his wife, Area 2 Director Craig can’t wait until next year’s convention in Nashville. Shier, Area 1 Director Jim Hardy, Women’s Leadership Chair Cindy Hardy, Women’s Leadership Vice Chair Marlene Shier, and Young Farmer & Rancher President Hank Combs and his wife member Charles Mann. Jill with Payton and Archie Manning AFBF President Zippy Duvall gave a very inspirational speech to the crowd during the Opening Ceremonies highlighting the main points of what is to come in the next year with farming and with a new Donald Trump administration and what that may mean for the future of farming in America. Past AFBF President Bob Stallman was also honored by Duvall in the Opening Ceremonies with the Distinguished Service award for his years of service to AFBF. Other awards were given to states with outstanding membership. Nevada Farm Bureau Young Farmer & Rancher member Charles Mann of Carson City Nevada competed at the convention in the National YF&R Discussion Meet. Mann Young Farmer Rancher who went up against other young people from member competing at nationals Entire group that went to the convention all over the country had to address hot topics within modern agriculture in an open panel style discussion where competitors are judged on how they address the issue and how they interact with other panel members during the discussion. Mann represented Nevada well and showed strength and courage through the preliminary rounds of the competition. Payton Manning and his father Archie Manning were the highlighted speakers of the Closing Ceremonies of the convention. They both discussed their football careers and what it was like for Payton Manning to grow up in President Hank Combs on stage with other state a football household as a child to only President Hank Combs carrying our state flag across the stage during the opening ceremonies of the convetnion presidents during the opening ceremonies become a star quarterback himself.  34 February 2017

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


N Farm Bureau Nevada evada Farm Bureau

I

Community Garden is Oasis in Middle of Food Desert in Las Vegas

n the middle of one of the highest food insecure neighborhoods in the City of North Las Vegas is blossoming an oasis of kale, spinach, carrots, and other fresh produce at the Zion Garden Park Community Garden at Zion United Methodist Church. For area residents, the community garden is a welcome addition to the neighborhood. “I never thought that could be a garden,” said Shirley, a member of Zion United Methodist Church about the development of the demonstration garden. “It was always just a desert full of trash and broken glass.” The church which celebrated its 99th anniversary in November and has about 100 members, is located in a low income, low access food desert, with 11 percent of households without vehicles and distances to a supermarket more than half a mile away. Zion is surrounded by the three highest food insecurity zones with rates of 27.5 percent, 23.2 percent, and 21.5 percent, which is above Nevada’s 14.7 percent food insecurity rate. Food insecurity is household-level economic and social condition of limited access to food, the higher the percentage the higher the food insecurity rate. “People need access to quality, nutritious, and affordable food and the way to get that is to grow it locally,” said Amber Bosket, the Project Director and Board Secretary of the Conservation District of Southern Nevada, one of the forces behind this growing partnership. She is also owner and executive director of State Renewable Energy with her husband, Corrie Bosket, who donated the design and 3D model of the community garden. In order to bring fresh produce to the community and teach them how to grow and prepare their own food, the Conservation District of Southern Nevada in partnership with Zion United Methodist Church applied for an Urban Agriculture Initiative grant from the National Association of Conservation Districts (NACD). The $47,800 grant received in August was one of the grants awarded by the NACD, in partnership with USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). NACD awarded $2 million in grants to 42 conservation districts in 25 states to boost technical assistance capacity for urban agriculture conservation projects. The grant along with contributions from local, state and federal entities has allowed the group to clean the land and install 40 raised garden beds, surrounded by a wrought iron fence donated by the City of North Las Vegas. They are in the process of installing 24 American Disability Act (ADA) raised beds, which are taller and narrower to accommodate wheel chairs, permeable walkway, patio with shade structure, 30 shade trees, six benches, and a composting area. The grants funds were matched two to one within three months from the start of the project. “NACD and the conservation districts we represent work on a scale that no other conservation organization

www.progressiverancher.com

By James Linney - Director of Communications or coalition does,” NACD President Lee McDaniel said at District of Southern Nevada, Zion United Methodist the funding announcement. “We have the reach we need Church, University of Nevada Cooperative Extension, to engage the 98 percent of folks who don’t necessarily Terra Firma Organics, Inc., State Renewable Energy, produce our fuel, fiber, and food, but still can make a siz- Green Chips, Nevada Division of Environmental Protection and USDA-NRCS. able and positive difference on the landscape.” The University of Nevada Cooperative Extension is Teri Knight with the USDA-NRCS worked with the group on technical assistance and to acquire their farm helping with garden services and workshops. Terra Firma number with the USDA-Farm Service Agency (FSA). Organics donated all the soil for the garden and the NeThe farm number will allow the group to apply for a sea- vada Division of Environmental Protection has lead efforts sonal high tunnel and pollinator garden with windbreak to promote landfill diversion by reclaiming wood to be through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program used for the ADA beds. The project has been supported (EQIP). The seasonal high tunnel will extend the grow- and sponsored by many additional local organizations ing season and help protect against temperature variations. to include West Career and Technical Academy, PD Knight is also helping secure fruit and nut trees through Landscaping, University of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada a grant with the U.S. Forest Service Community Forest Partners, Impact Sand and Gravel, Star Nursery, Ahern, Lowe’s, and the Nevada Division of Forestry. Other orgaProgram. The group is also working with West Career and nizations such as the Las Vegas Culinary Academy, Create Technical Academy, a local high school with a licensed a Change Now, MGM Resorts International, Wolfgang nursery who helped grow more than 500 seedlings for Puck Fine Dining Group, Southern Nevada Arborist transplanting to the garden. The students worked with Group, and many others are looking to participate in this a group of disabled young adults to plant the seedlings as program. The program also supports local, federally grantfunded initiatives such as Southern Nevada Strong, City part of one of their mentoring programs. They also plan to host workshops, interactive educa- of North Las Vegas Choice Neighborhood, and City of tional classes, and live chef’s demonstrations at the Zion Henderson, Local Foods, Local Places. Ray Dotson, Nevada NRCS State Conservationist United Methodist Church demonstration garden on said, “The raw power of partnerships is on full display backyard conservation, healthy soils, planting crops, comwith this community based project that is led by the loposting, integrated pest management and healthy eating cal leaders in conservation. The Conservation District of cooking classes. Southern Nevada made this happen – NRCS just followed At the annual Nevada Association of Conservation their lead!” District (NVACD) meeting in November in Las Vegas, U.S. Deputy Secretary of Agriculture, Michael Scuse, a tour was provided of the community garden. NACD CEO Jeremy Peters was in attendance to see how the was recently in Las Vegas and visited the Zion Community Garden to learn more about the program. He expressed Urban Agriculture Initiative grant was being put to use. “I am pleased to see the community support for his congratulations on a job well done. Just as the community garden continues to grow and the Zion Garden Park Agricultural Assistance Program blossom, so does the partnerships and friendships that will project,” said NACD CEO Jeremy Peters. “In addition to allow this effort to make a positive change in the lives of technical assistance provided through the urban agriculurban residents in the City of North Las Vegas. ture conservation grant from the Conservation District of Southern Nevada, it is remarkable to see the strong level of interest and support from the project’s many partners and comUnder New Ownership/Management munity members.” Custom gates and fencing The NVACD at their Specialized feeds for 4-H show season annual banquet also recAll your calving, branding and weaning supplies ognized and awarded Heating and bbq pellets Chicks, ducks, geese and turkeys Zion Garden Park Agriask us about our delivery options cultural Assistance Program and its partners, Monday-Friday 8 a.m. - 6 p.m. the 2016 Conservation Saturday 10 a.m. - 4 p.m. Excellence in Agriculture 775-625-1515 • 775-421-6816 award. The core partners 4320 W. Winnemucca Blvd., Winnemucca, NV 89445 include Conservation

Rose Feed and Supply

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 35 


Big Sagebrush Seed Bank Densities Following Wildfires By Charlie D. Clements and Dan Harmon Authors are Rangeland Scientist and Agricultural Research Science Technician, USDA-ARS Great Basin Rangelands Research Unit, 920 Valley Road, Reno, NV 89512 charlie.clements@ars.usda.gov

B

ig sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) is a critical shrub to many wildlife species including sage grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus), and pygmy rabbit (Brachylagus idahoensis). Big sagebrush is killed by wildfires and big sagebrush seed is generally short-lived and do not survive wildfires. Opinions continue to differ on the importance of seeding big sagebrush following wildfires from “we have plenty of sagebrush” to “we have lost millions of acres of sagebrush”. Another opinion that differs is whether big sagebrush has the ability to build seed banks and return following wildfire events. This is important as big sagebrush is a common species purchased and seeded

chance, rate, spread and season of wildfires throughout the Intermountain West. Pioneer USDA-ARS researchers, James A. Young and Raymond Evans reported that when conducting soil bioassay and germination tests of over 1,000 surface soil samples from burned habitats, that no big sagebrush emerged, suggesting that big sagebrush does not build persistent seed banks. The top three plant communities in the Great Basin are dominated by Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. wyomingensis/bunchgrass communities 54%, followed by salt desert shrub communities 28%, and mountain brush 9%. The loss of Wyoming big sagebrush following wildfires is very apparent on Nevada rangelands. The return of big sagebrush to a community following wildfires can be a very slow process, especially with the increase in wildfire frequencies throughout the Intermountain West, largely from cheatgrass fueled wildfires. Due to the various conversations concerning big sagebrush

in northwestern Nevada that burned in wildfires that year during the summer months to test any possible seed bank potential of big sagebrush (Figure 2). The first site, Empire Fire, is located 75 miles north of Reno, NV and is a degraded Wyoming big sagebrush habitat with an understory dominated by cheatgrass, with a sparse density of bluegrass (Poa secunda), squirreltail (Elymus elymoides), and Indian ricegrass (Achnatherum hymenoides). The second site, Sand Hills Fire, is located 10 miles north of Reno, NV and is a mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata ssp. vaseyana) community in good to excellent ecological condition. Other dominate shrubs at this site are antelope bitterbrush (Purshia tridenata) and Golden Currant (Ribes aureum). Sandberg bluegrass (Poa secunda formerly sanbergii) dominates the understory. Following the wildfires that took place in these two habitats we established 54 paired 10’ x 10’ plots at each site at the north and south end of the burned habitat. Nine paired plots were established at 3’ from the unburned fires edge and again at the 30’ and 100’ distance (9 x3 = 27 paired plots x 2 directions = 54). At each paired plot, one plot was seeded (0.10 lbs/ac rate) to the occurring big sagebrush species for that site. The other plot was bioassayed (surface soil collected) and brought back to the greenhouse for germination tests, 5 bioassay tests per plot were conducted.

Figure 1. Former Big sagebrush/bunchgrass community converted to annual grass dominance. Despite attempts to seed and transplant big sagebrush back into this community, without extensive/high cost weed control you have no chance of success.

in restoration/rehabilitation efforts throughout the Intermountain West. Formerly big sagebrush/bunchgrass communities that provided critical habitats to wildlife and sustainable grazing resources have been converted to annual grass dominance. With the increase in wildfire frequency throughout the Intermountain West from cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum) fueled wildfires, many habitats have been converted to cheatgrass dominance with no sight of shrub return, especially Wyoming big sagebrush (Figure 1). Cheatgrass has increased the

 36 February 2017

seed banks and its’ ability to return following wildfires we initiated a study back in 2006 to address this concern. In the sum- Figure 2. Southern edge of the 2006 Empire Fire. Wyoming big sagebrush seeding failed and mer of 2006 we no big sagebrush seed bank was recorded. Without a successful rehabilitation of long-lived selected two areas perennial grasses, the chances of any real return of big sagebrush at this site are slim to none

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


sagebrush has an active seed bank (Figure 3). We recorded 6.7 emerging mountain big sagebrush seedlings/10 ft² in the 30’ plot and 1.8 emerging seedlings in the 3’ and 100’ plots on the south edge of the burn which is the northern edge of the unburned habitat. Figure 3. Mountain big sagebrush seedling successfully emerging from an small but The north edge recorded active mountain big sagebrush seed bank. an active seed bank at the Bioassay tests ran in the greenhouse environ3’ plots, at 1.8/plot. Sevment for 14 weeks (included nitrogen enrichment en of the 54 seeded plots recorded recruitment of big and gibberellic acid treatments to break dormancy). sagebrush which average 1.3/plot. Wyoming big sageBig sagebrush emergence was recorded in these bioas- brush sites are more xeric and have less site potential. say tests weekly, while the paired seeded plots were The difficulty in restoring or revegetating these xeric recorded weekly from April 2007 through May 2007. sites following wildfires is well documented. Once We found no evidence that Wyoming big sagebrush these sites burn, if there is not an active and successhas an active seed bank following wildfire as we re- ful weed control and restoration/revegetation plan

of wildfires. Mountain big sagebrush communities on the other hand have much more site potential and therefore experience a greater potential to re-establish on their own. Mountain big sagebrush communities also stay green longer into the summer months and decrease the risk of wildfire during that this green period. In the Sand Hills area, a variety of past wildfire events have indeed come back to desired mountain big sagebrush densities on their own. The question though is, are resource managers willing to allow this process to take hold on their own even though it may be 20+ years for this event to unfold, or are they more apt to seed the site in an effort to speed up this process. Does this effort in fact speed up this process? Plots that we have established in other mountain big sagebrush communities often yield shrub densities 73% lower than unburned islands 15 years after the wildfire event, not significantly different than those habitats that were not seeded with big sagebrush species. The importance of wildfire suppression on rangelands is paramount to providing productive big sagebrush/bunchgrass communities for wildlife and sustainable grazing resources (Figure 4), especially in Wyoming big sagebrush plant communities, which just happens to make up the largest plant community in the Great Basin.

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

Figure 4. Successful rehabilitation of long-lived perennial grasses has decreased the wildfire frequency and allowed shrubs and other browse species to return to this habitat and provide critical browse for wildlife as well as a grazing resource.

corded no seedlings in our bioassay measurements or the non-seeded field plots. We experienced very poor success in our seeded plots as only 3 out of the 54 plots recorded Wyoming big sagebrush recruitment, averaging less than one per plot. The mountain big sagebrush plots at the Sand Hills site did however, yield results that suggest that mountain big

www.progressiverancher.com

implemented these sites are often converted to cheatgrass dominance. Wyoming big sagebrush sites tend to dry out earlier in the season, therefore increasing the risk

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 37 


Tell Nevada Legislature Not To Undermine Water Law

O

ur state’s top water official – the State Engineer – wants the “flexibility” to manage conflicts if it turns out the State allowed water pumping that impacts the environment or other users of that water re- source. That might sound reasonable, but unfor- tunately various loose interpretations, over- optimistic assumptions, and loopholes since the start of Nevada water law have led one in every five water basins in our state to become overappropriated, with more rights on paper than water to supply them. Past State Engineers have ignored the links be- tween ground and surface water, failed to count thousands of domestic wells against a ba- sin’s yield, or assumed that not all water rights will be put to beneficial use. Their actions have allowed for the most development, and left fu- ture generations on the hook for the results of over pumping. Our state’s water law was designed to protect water resources from being overused, and to protect those that came first from having their water taken by thirsty newcomers. That’s why Great Basin Water Network, White Pine County, and others have been successful in court, challenging State Engineer decisions to approve water rights for a massive groundwa- ter pipeline from Eastern Nevada to Las Vegas. Flexibility is the problem, not the solution. What the state needs is clear guidance to be prudent, not a blank check to rubber stamp water rights now and deal with the problems later. The State Engineer’s broad proposal would also contradict Federal and state constitutional protections for due process and property rights. Lawsuits over the government’s “takings” could be plentiful and costly for taxpayers as senior rights holders seek compensation for their di- minished resources. On August 26, the Nevada Legislative Commis- sion’s Subcommittee to Study Water finalized its recommendations to change water law during the 2017 Legislative session. State Senators Pete Goicoechea and Aaron Ford committed to drafting a bill to allow flexi- bility through “adaptive management.” Great Basin Water Network asks them to work with us to make sure changes strengthen our state’s water law, not weaken it. Anything half as vague as the State Engineer’s plan should be a non- starter. To be clear, GBWN doesn’t oppose mitiga- tion plans. But that process has to happen before rights are granted, with specific trig- gers and remedies. The burden and man- date must be on the applicant as a junior rights holder to scale back when conflicts occur. We believe that language is already in state law and said as much in our comments to the Water Subcommittee. Perhaps the State Engineer needs it spelled out even more, but giving broad authority to grant water rights now, with a promise to deal with conflicts later is a mistake. It jeopard- izes senior water rights and exacerbates, rather than controls, the state’s chronic over- appropriation problems. It’s essential that legislators hear from all Nevadans who depend on consistent and fair water policy— including farmers and ranchers, well owners, and others whose livelihoods depend on water — before the state’s law is changed in ways that jeop- ardize senior water rights and provoke lawsuits over the takings of property rights. —Howard Watts III, GBWN Communications Specialist

 38 February 2017

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF GBWN WHITE PAPER

S

ubmitted to Legislative Commission Subcommittee on Water, August 2016. Prepared by Simeon Herskovits and Iris Thornton, Advocates for Community and Environment Find full paper at: http://greatbasinwaternetwork.org/doc/gbwn_recommendations_8316.pdf The Nevada State Engineer has proposed new statutory language that allows him to grant new water rights applications even if there has not been a showing either that water is available for the new use or that the new use will not conflict with senior existing water rights, so long as the State Engineer says he is satisfied that the applicant will engage in mitigation of such conflicts. The State Engineer has proposed that he be given essentially carte blanche discretion to determine what kind of “adaptive management” will be satisfactory, and that new water rights applicants be given a “right of mitigation” that would put the burden on the owners of senior existing water rights to prove that the new applicant needs to mitigate a conflict. Deficiencies Compared to the Standards of other States and Federal Agencies and Courts: The State Engineer’s proposal falls far short of the requirements that sister western states and federal agencies have insisted on before relying on mitigation or adaptive management. Both federal agency guidance and federal case law require that specific information be developed and provided up front concerning the ability to manage affected natural resources, the thresholds that will trigger mitigation action, the specified concrete mitigation measures that will be implemented, and how the effectiveness of those mitigation measures will be assessed and improved as necessary. Similar specific information and demonstrable scientific viability also are required by other states in the West. Because the State Engineer’s proposed statutory changes do not provide any of the minimal requirements and safeguards that other agencies and legal authorities hold to be necessary, the Sub-Committee should reject those proposals of the State Engineer. Constitutional Defects and Exposure to Likely Claims for Constitutional Violations: Because the State Engineer’s proposed amendment of NRS § 533.370 would allow water rights applications to be approved without opposing parties having an opportunity to challenge evidence regarding the effectiveness of the applicant’s proposed mitigation plan, the change would result in violations of the Due Process Clause of the United States and Nevada Constitutions. Under binding U.S. and Nevada Supreme Court decisions stretching back decades it is clear that merely changing the statutory language as requested by the State Engineer will do nothing to remedy the procedural deficiency of the after-the-fact approach to mitigation that he seeks to take. The proposed new statutory language also would encourage the State Engineer to approve water rights applications where there is not adequate unappropriated water available, which would result in new water uses taking water from already existing, senior, water rights. This approach would result in a plethora of gradually worsening conflicts between new and senior water rights holders, and in a proliferation of claims of unconstitutional takings by senior water rights holders. A review of the applicable federal and Nevada law indicates that there is a substantial likelihood that such takings claims by senior water rights holders would be successful and would expose the State to potentially immense financial liability and onerous court orders to restore water rights and depleted water systems on which those rights depend. These constitutional defects provide an even more compelling reason why the Sub-Committee should reject the State Engineer’s proposals concerning mitigation plans and a “right of mitigation” in the water right application review process.

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


In the Mind of a Millennial By Jill Scofield, Nevada Beef Council

W

hen it comes to cooking steak at home, we’ve all had experiences where the end product hasn’t turned out quite as expected or desired. Maybe the phone rang while we were searing the meat. Perhaps an argument between siblings distracted us from the stovetop for a few crucial minutes. Or maybe we just were not on our culinary game on a particular evening. We aren’t alone in having such an experience. Consumers – particularly Millennial consumers – often experience issues when cooking steak at home, taking away from their positive beef eating experience. And since consumers who are less satisfied with their steak experience at home are less likely to purchase beef steak at the retail level in the future, identifying the barriers to a perfect steak allows the beef industry and state beef councils to develop the best tools to aid these consumers with successful steak and beef cooking. The good news is that the Beef Checkoff Program compiles and analyzes a significant amount of consumer data each year to gain such insights, and help direct the development of new tools and resources that will aid consumers in their beef purchasing, cooking and eating experiences. Past research has shown that consumers (particularly those in the Millennial generation) do need some guidance when it comes to choosing beef. Over half say it’s hard to know which cut to choose at the meat case, 56 percent have had a disappointing result in a beef meal they prepared, and a whopping 75 percent want more information about steaks and how to prepare them. More recent research conducted by the beef checkoff at the Beef Culinary Center sought to delve into this issue a bit more, and study consumer reaction to demonstrations of proper steak cooking methods, as well as better identify the Millennial consumer’s practices, problems and pain-points that lead to failure in steak cooking. When it comes to falling short in cooking steaks, the number one reason isn’t all that surprising: distraction during the cooking process. True to their generational nature, many of these consumers are multi-tasking while cooking – prepping side dishes, socializing, watching children, etc. But the second and third reasons largely have to do with inaccurate knowledge and unawareness of a definitive source of information for steak cooking. What knowledge they do have, they feel, is good enough – even if the steak is not cooked to perfection, it’s still a steak and they’ll eat it. In terms of where they look for information, the Internet and specifically Google search is how they report they look for new cooking knowledge or for a specific tip. Often finding conflicting information online, they generally end up cherry-picking the tips and information that fit their cooking style and dinner prep timeframe. And while beefitswhatsfordinner.com is a treasure trove of helpful information about all things beef, it is not necessarily the immediate go-to for consumers. (This highlights the importance of things like Google ads for the site so it appears as one of the first items when consumers search for beef-related topics.) In terms of choosing beef at the retail level, the top three considerations of Millennial consumers are appearance of the meat, portion size of the cut, and the price point. And finally, when it comes to steak, it’s hard to replicate the “gold stan-

www.progressiverancher.com

dard” at home, many consumers feel. No matter how good the preparation or cut is, the home experience cannot compete with the ambiance and other qualities that come with eating a steak in a restaurant.

Did you know?

Checkoff-funded Beef Culinary Center Finds Innovation in Beef Products Beef checkoff investment in product development and innovation has helped bring thousands of new products to market over the last decade in an effort to continue to meet consumer beef demand. The Beef Culinary Center (based in Denver) includes a state-of-the-art commercial kitchen and a consumer test kitchen. The commercial kitchen is dedicated to providing food professionals with reliable, applicable and comprehensive beef information they can use. It serves as the industry’s “showcase” for beef products to beef producers and all associated influencers and partners, including restaurants and grocers. Fully equipped with foodservice equipment, the commercial kitchen includes foodservice-quality cookware, prep areas, and walk-in cooler and freezer to test restaurant and other foodservice recipes, including school cafeterias. A checkoff team of food professionals focus on maximizing beef ’s appeal and ensuring that processors, operators and retailers are all providing the best-tasting beef possible to their customers through a variety of methods – including catering that features checkoff-funded recipes to these foodservice providers; and providing them with educational opportunities. The consumer test kitchen includes four testing stations fully equipped with appliances, cookware and equipment as specifically determined through market research to mirror a standard consumer kitchen. Recipe concepts are based strategically upon beef-checkoff objectives – to incorporate flavor and food trends in new beef products and recipes. Food professionals at the checkoff’s Culinary Center test recipe concepts a minimum of three times. They use detailed test sheets to record data – such as national available ingredients; varied appliances and equipment; timings; results; and tester feedback – throughout the process. In addition, a Registered Dietitian calculates a nutrition analysis for each recipe, using USDA guidelines for portion size, fat content and sodium levels – information consumers demand Jill Scofield is Director of Profor the food they eat. ducer Relations for the Nevada and California Beef Councils. You can reach her at jill@calbeef.org.

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 39 


Secretary Jewell Directs Continued Work on Crucial Colorado River Basin Water Agreement

W

Further steps needed to reduce risk of water shortages in West

ASHINGTON – U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell today issued a Secretarial Order directing the Department of the Interior and its bureaus to continue collaborative efforts to finalize important drought contingency actions designed to reduce the risk of water shortages in the Upper and Lower Colorado River Basins and build on recent progress to complete “Minute 32X” – a long-term Colorado River bi-national cooperative agreement with Mexico. “I am proud of the tremendous progress we have made over the last eight years to work with our basin states, tribal and Mexican partners to address water resource challenges in the Colorado River Basin,” said Secretary Jewell. “With water from the Colorado River supporting the life and livelihood for an estimated 40 million people, it is absolutely critical for the Department of the Interior to continue to build on this progress and finalize these agreements.” “The Department of the Interior has worked tirelessly with its partners to come to agreements to ensure that all the basin stakeholders move forward with coordinated plans to address the increasing challenges facing all Colorado River communities,” said Deputy Secretary Michael L. Connor. “This Secretarial Order ensures that Interior will continue to provide essential support for critical actions and paves the way to help carry these important agreements across the finish line.” The Order describes hydrologic conditions in the basin and ongoing challenges associated with a 17year period of historic drought and an ongoing deficit of available water compared to demands. Although water stored in reservoirs in the Colorado River Basin has protected the Basin from crisis during the current drought, those reservoirs are now at near-historic lows; basin-wide reservoir storage ended water year 2016 at just 51 percent of total capacity. In 2016, the lower basin narrowly avoided a shortage declaration, which would trigger mandatory cuts to water deliveries from Lake Mead. Although recent precipitation brought some relief to northern California, there has been no measurable improvement in the Colorado River System. In addition to drought contingency actions and updating the water agreement with Mexico, the agreements referenced in the Secretarial Order will maintain significant hydropower production and associated financial support for critical environmental programs,  40 February 2017

Contact Interior_Press@ios.doi.gov

and they will help protect Indian treaty rights and recognized water rights. The Secretarial Order provides direction for Interior, particularly the Bureau of Reclamation, to continue work with the basin states, Indian tribes in the Colorado River Basin and Mexico to finalize these agreements during the first half of 2017. It calls for three actions: 1. Finalizing the Drought Contingency Plan. The order directs Reclamation to work with and support the efforts of the seven basin states and key principals of several water management agencies to finalize a Drought Contingency Plan that includes federal operations of Lower Basin facilities and proposed water conservation actions. Reclamation will participate in remaining negotiations and actions that are required to finalize agreements and provide information in support of any legislation that might be necessary to implement the final agreement.

2. Investing to Support Drought Contingency Actions. In connection with the order,

momentum going in the days and weeks ahead.” In addition, under the order, Reclamation will continue to invest in drought contingency actions such as the recent Salton Sea Memorandum of Understanding with the State of California. Interior also amended its current Memorandum of Understanding with the State of California to provide greater certainty on mitigation actions over the next decade.

3. Completing Minute 32X Negotiations with Mexico. The order directs Reclamation to

continue to work with the International Boundary and Water Commission, the Republic of Mexico, the basin states and non-governmental organizations to finalize the bi-national cooperative agreement with Mexico – “Minute 32X.” Over the past twenty years, collaboration between Interior and its bureaus along with American Indian tribes, the seven Colorado River basin states—Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming—and others has resulted in significant success in collaboratively addressing water resource challenges across the basin. Today’s order includes information on these important successes, while highlighting the need for prompt action to respond to historic drought conditions and the increasing risk to water supplies in the basin from climate change and other factors. These successes include the Minute agreements Numbers 316 through 319 with Mexico; a historic 12 Indian water rights settlements totaling $3 billion in funding; historic water conservation agreements adopted in 2014 and a Memorandum of Understanding to strengthen coordination of management activities to benefit the Salton Sea. 

Reclamation Commissioner Estevan López today executed an agreement with Governor Stephen Roe Lewis of the Gila River Indian Community to provide the community with $6 million for water conservation in fiscal year 2017 funding to acquire system water consistent with the drought plan to protect levels in Lake Mead. This agreement between Reclamation and the Community also sets the stage for future drought contingency planning to occur within Arizona. On the agreement, Governor Stephen Lewis stated, “Our agreement with the Department of the Interior is an essential step toward a plan for comprehensively addressing Arizona’s pressing drought problem. The Community is working hard to try and create a framework that will work for all in the State and is pleased with this You are invited to You are invited to very successful first step COWBOY CHURCH! COWBOY CHURCH! in that right direction. We want to thank the Bible Study Fri @ 9 am Sunday @ 11am services Commissioner of Reclamation, Estevan López, 4275 Solias Rd Fallon, NV Bible Study Wed @ 6 pm and his entire team for Are you having a Rodeo or Livestock event? Give us a call. their tireless efforts and We would love to come to your event or ranch and host Cowboy Church for you. we very much appreciate our cooperation with them. This is just the Tom J. Gonzalez | Diana J. Gonzalez, Pastor beginning, but it an es3767 Keyes Way  (775) 240-8870 sential first step, which Fallon, NV 89406  threecrossls@cccomm.net  Cell (775) 867-3100 hopefully will keep the

Harmony Ranch Ministry

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


Cattle Outlook - Plain & Brown By Ron Plain and Scott Brown

January 17th 2017 Futures Market Summary Nearby Elec. Contract Close Live Cattle $119.575 Feeder Cattle $130.925 Lean Hogs $65.800 Class III Milk $16.79 Corn $3.6550 Soybean $10.6925

Change $1.050 $0.475 $0.200 ($0.02) $0.0700 $0.2300

High $119.725 $131.225 $65.975 $16.81 $3.6650 $10.7550

Low $118.825 $130.475 $65.050 $16.78 $3.5850 $10.5200

USDA Beef Complex Item Price Change Choice $191.62 $0.23 Select $187.23 ($0.23) Drop Credit $11.99 ($0.01)

AG IS OUR MIDDLE NAME Money for agriculture. It’s what we know. It’s all we do.

Call 800.800.4865 today or visit AgLoan.com A part of the Farm Credit System. Equal Opportunity Lender.

AAC_ProgRancher_Overarching_Cattle_4.8x5.425_4c.indd 1

12/15/2016 3:19:43 PM

Tuesday Recap The live and feeder cattle futures markets continued higher today with live cattle futures closing $0.37 to $1.07/cwt. higher and feeder cattle futures closing $0.10 to $0.75/cwt. higher. Lean hog futures closed $0.10 to $0.35 higher except the Oct. ’17 contract closed $52/cwt. lower. The CME lean hog index moved $2.25 higher to $64.0/cwt. and the CME feeder cattle index moved $0.04 lower to $132.56/cwt. Corn futures closed 4-1/2 cent to 7-1/2 cents higher, soybeans 1-1/4 cent to 23 cents higher in the nearby contract, and KC wheat closed 2-1/2 cent to 6 cents higher. The U.S. dollar index has moved 1.22 lower at the time of writing to 100.35 down 2.9 percent from the first trading day of 2017. Monday’s USDA estimated cattle slaughter was revised down 3,000 head to 69,000 and hog slaughter was revised 15,000 head lower to 315,000 head. Check out today’s Chart of the Day For recent market news and analysis, visit CattleFax.com To prevent CattleFax emails from being blocked by antispam software, include CattleFax.com and cfax@cattlefax.com to your list of contacts and safe senders, and please ask your ISP to include them as well.

Chart of the Day

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 41 


36th Annual Bull and Female Sale Monday, March 13th, 2017 at Spring Cove Ranch, Bliss, Idaho 1:00 pm MDT

Selling: 40 Hereford bulls 10 Red Angus Bulls 26 Open & Bred Hereford Heifers

b+.78 Rib+1.02 115.64 $B+180.89

JBB/AL 0152 DOMINO 6037 reg 43686692 Sire:C 860U Domino 0152 ET

CED-1.7 BEPD+4.6 WEPD+62 YEPD+102 Milk+28 M&G+59 SC+1.1 CW+71 Rib+.32 Marb+0.10 CHB+$29

BHAR PINNACLE 6008 reg 354633 Sire:KCC PINNACLE 949-109

CED+8 BEPD-2.0 WEPD+62 YEPD+93 Milk+23 Marb+.69 YG+.11 CW+22 REA-.09

JBB/AL MS 1101 ABOUT TIME 5129 reg P43637055 SHE SELLS BRED TO CALVE FALL 2017 Sire: C GOHR 9158 ABOUT TIME 1101

CED+3.2 BEPD+1.5 WEPD+55 YEPD+83 Milk+27 M&G+55 SC+.50 CW+65 Rib+.43 Marb+0.15 CHB+$27

JBB/AL Y1334 REDEMPTION 6033 Sire:BROWN JYJ REDEMPTION Y1334

CED+7 BEPD-1.8 WEPD+78 YEPD+124 Milk+16 Marb+.66 YG+.15 CW+41 REA+.05

Selling progeny of : Schu-Lar Red Bull 18X reg 43084009

JBB MS JUICY 5130

SHE SELLS BRED TO CALVE FALL 2017 Sire:MPH 10H JUICE BOX Z3

Sire:R Puckster 2013 Dam by: Feltons Legend 242 CED+8.5 BEPD-.2 WEPD+57 YEPD+96 SC+.80 M&G+49 Rib+.41 Marb-.03 CHB+$29

CED+4.6 BEPD+1.9 WEPD+60 YEPD+92 Milk+33 M&G+63 SC+1.2 CW+66 Rib+.39 Marb+0.16 CHB+$31

For Sale Catalogs call: 208-280-1505

 42 February 2017

The Progressive Rancher

JBB/AL Herefords James & Dawn Anderson/ Bev Bryan James: 208-280-1505 Skeeter: 208-280-1964 1998 S 1500 E Gooding, Idaho 83330 jbbalherefords@hotmail.com Find us on Facebook

www.progressiverancher.com


www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 43 


Zinke needs to tackle federal lands mismanagement

A

s you may know, yesterday Congressman Ryan Zinke of Montana had his confirmation hearing for Secretary of the Interior with the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Jennifer Fielder, CEO of the American Lands Council, made the following statement today: Congratulations to Congressman Ryan Zinke, a fellow Montanan, for his nomination to head the U.S. Department of the Interior. In remarks made at the Senate’s Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing [video link] [Zinke’s written remarks (PDF)] yesterday, Congressman Zinke spoke eloquently about the diverse purposes that can be served by America’s public lands. Yet the reality today is that those purposes are not being fulfilled. Indeed, the federal government’s mismanagement of those lands, particularly in the western USA, has led to the demise of people’s livelihoods as well as environmental degradation — at an immense cost to the U.S. taxpayer. We earnestly hope that Congressman Zinke will work to change this situation by working with local communities and states, as he has stated. While he adamantly maintained during the hearing that he opposes the transfer of public lands, it is still of

 44 February 2017

utmost importance that he enables the U.S. Department of the Interior to tackle federal mismanagement head-on. This means implementing drastic reforms, imposing targets and timetables, and supporting the possibility and practicality of decentralized management, whether that is through local or state entities. The American Lands Council is dedicated to legally pursuing the transfer of nonCongressionally designated Federal public lands to willing local and state government public lands. Although the political landscape may be changing, the American Lands Council needs YOUR HELP to raise funds to combat the numerous vocal opponents of public lands transfer.

How can you help? •

Spread the word by sharing our information and posts through Facebook and Twitter • Help us to identify likeminded businesses, organizations, associations to become members of our alliance • Encourage your county to become a member • Join the American Lands Council and invite your friends to join • Donate to support the American Lands Council Thank you for your help and support! American Lands Council http://www.americanlandscouncil.org/

Zinke confirmation for Interior secretary postponed indefinitely

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee said Monday night that it was delaying a vote on the nomination of Rep. Ryan Zinke to become Interior secretary. The committee posted on its website that it was delaying a business meeting scheduled for Tuesday until further notice. The business scheduled for Tuesday had been votes on the nominations of Zinke and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who had been nomined by President Donald Trump to lead the Energy Department.

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com


www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 45 


SALT TOLERANT AND DROUGHT-HARDY VARIETIES AVAILABLE

Conventional Alfalfa Varieties )

6442Q

Cinch I (ML) Cinch II

Ladak Vernal

6585Q

6475 (New)

Ron’s Blend Haymaker (ML)

Ranger WL-343HQ

6305Q

Blazer XL

WL-354HQ

919 Brand

Spreador5

WL-363HQ

6410N (New)

Round Up Ready Alfalfas 6409 HVXR 6497R Mutiny 6516R Revolt WL 336 HQRR WL 356 HQRR WL 372 HQRR

FD 4 4 4.3 5 6 3 4 5

WH Lowlignin VH VH H VH VH VH

Grain & Miscellaneous Oats • Cayuse • Monida Wheat • Twin • PR 1404 • Patrone Peas Corn Sorghum Sudan • BMR • Piper Sudan • Sweet RN Honey

Triticale • Forerunner • Merlin Ryegrain • Gazelle - Spring • Prima - Fall • VNS Beardless Barley Eureka Chowford Stockford Milo

Dryland & Reclamation Seed Wheatgrasses Nordan Crested New Hy/Saltlander Bluebunch Hycrest Crested Siberian Wheatgrass Oahe Intermediate Pubescent Indian Ricegrass Big Sagebrush Forage Kochia

Immigrant Kochia Snowstorm (New) Great Basin Wild Rye Roadcrest Tall Wheatgrass Shadescale 4 Wing Saltbush Garrison Creeping Meadow Foxtail Range Changer

We Have Varieties Available That are Organically Approved & Non Detect Non GMO Free Seed

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

Turf Grasses

Pasture Mixes Olympic Elite University w/No Clover Northwest Pasture Horse Pasture PNW Dryland Mix Ron’s Dryland Mix Ron’s Rangeland Mix

Field Grasses Orchard Grasses • Seco (Dryland) • Tucker • Potomac • Paiute

Ron’s Special Turf Mix Ky Blue Grass Athletic Turf Mix TT Perennial Ryegrass Chewings Fesque

Mountain Meadow Brome

(Drought Tolerant) Bentgrass

Fawn Tall Fescue

Smooth Brome Annual Rye Grass Perennial Rye Grasses Climax Timothy Brutus Tall Fescue

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

RON’S SEED & SUPPLY S er v i n g A gr i cu l tu r

e for 3 5 Y e a r s

 46 February 2017

710 Grass Valley Road • Winnemucca, NV 89445 775-623-5053 • ronsseed@gmail.com

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

www.progressiverancher.com


www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

February 2017 47 


Spring Cove Ranch

98

Years in the Registered Angus Business

36th Annual Bull and Female Sale Monday, March 13th, 2017 at Spring Cove Ranch, Bliss, Idaho

Angus since 1919

1:00 pm MDT

Selling 160 Angus Bulls & 100 Angus heifers Selling Sons and Daughters by these breed leading sires:

Spring Cove Reno 4021 reg 17926446 Selling 5 Reno ET sons out of a Whiskey daughter

CED+10 BEPD-.4 WEPD+72 YEPD+122 SC+1.10 MEPD+29 CW+46 Marb+.82 Rib+.59 $W+82.59 $F+102.07 $B+166.39

Quaker Hill Rampage 0A36 reg 16925771 “20 high performing Rampage sons sell”

CED+9 BEPD+1.5 WEPD+81 YEPD+140 SC+1.32 MEPD+34 CW+84 Marb+.39 Rib+1.73 $W+82.17 $F+111.76 $B+187.33

Basin Bonus 4345 reg 17904142

Sire: Basin Payweight 1682

15 sons sell

CED+10 BEPD-.6 WEPD+73 YEPD+125 SC+.61 MEPD+30 CW+67 Marb+.92 Rib+.93 $W+82.39 $F+100.65 $B+174.50

SLL Titleist X23 reg 16801416

“An X23 son adjusted to 958 lbs at weaning”

CED+13 BEPD+.2 WEPD+62 YEPD+100 SC+.94 MEPD+22 CW+21 Marb+.73 Rib+.35 $W+58.53 $F+74.00 $B+118.61

Sitz Longevity 556Z reg 17179073

“Longevity daughters are model Angus cows”

CED+5 BEPD-.1 WEPD+62 YEPD+107 SC+.90 MEPD+35 CW+26 Marb+.75 Rib+.50 $W+74.89 $F+65.99 $B+98.36

S A V Ten Speed 3022 reg 17633563 “13 Ten Speed sons sell March 13th

CED+5 BEPD+.9 WEPD+70 YEPD+126 SC+1.32 MEPD+30 CW+62 Marb+.86 Rib+.97 $W+70.79 $F+99.07 $B+178.95

For Sale catalogs call: 208-352-4332

 48 February 2017

The Progressive Rancher

Art & Stacy Butler Spring Cove Ranch 269 Spring Cove Rd Bliss, Idaho 83314 Home office : 208-352–4332 www.springcoveranch.com info@springcoveranch.com Find us on Facebook

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher February 2017  
The Progressive Rancher February 2017