Page 1

NCA 2009 President’s Award Recipient





NCA - Roundup


Master Stockman Consulting


Livestock monitor




Nevada Cattlewomen


NV Farm Bureau


Eye on the Outside


NCBA - Public Lands Council

10 Livestock Monitor



12 Good News! 8 Bills Dead!



14 Testimony of Stephanie Licht


Water in Nevada


Checkoff News




Fumes From the Farm


Coloring Page




Range Plants for the Rancher


Look Up


Nevada Division of Forestry


NV Cooperative Extension


Financial Focus

The Progressive Rancher Owner/Editor/Publisher – Leana Litten Carey

Graphic Design/Layout/Production – Joshua Rinard

Cover Photo by Pamela Wickkiser

Sagegrouse On the Range, Water Is Life

“Our Future Cowmen” 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) 358-2487 •

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

 2 May/June 2017

The Progressive Rancher

FroM the desk oF yoUr nCa president By David Stix Jr. NCA President


attlemen and Cattlewomen, I’m so sorry for being gone for so long, it’s been very busy and it becomes very hard with so many things going on to just decide what subject to share with you all. So, for this month I’ve de- cided to title my message to all of you “there’s bad news and good news” The bad news is the Legislature is in session! Wow! One of the biggest chal- lenges this session is that with so many new elected folks, coupled with the fact that so many of them are urban based people, there’s just no understand- ing or care for the rurals and the issues that we face. Big thanks need to go out to the rural caucus and their folks for watching out for all of us. Let’s just look at a few bills and you’ll better understand what I’m talking about. A.B. 101 is a bill that is sponsored by an Assemblymen (Assemblyman) Sprinkle that’s being pushed by the anti-predation people to help curtail the number of predators harvested by letting the commission decide where and how they spend the $3 fee assessed on tag applications. Right now, the law reads that 80% percent of the money collected must go towards predation. Hunters as well as Cattlemen oppose this bill and we are hopeful that if it makes it to the Senate, cooler heads will prevail, and/or the Governor will prevail. A.B. 407 is a bill that will allow Clark County to sweep the Cooperative Ex- tension accounts even in the north. Yes, we are opposed. A.B. 386 that recently died was a bill proposing that if you owned private property in the checker board areas, a person could cross your land without permission to access cornering public lands. Oh yes, this stuff is for reals my friends. Thank goodness, this time around it won’t happen. A.B. 373, also dead, would have allowed the NDOW Commission to be re-or- ganized so that five members would come from Clark County, and the other four from other parts of the state, and NO Agriculture representation on the Commission. S.B. 73, or what we’ve referred to as the Diamond Valley water bill, sponsored by the State Engineer to create a Critical Management Area, was pulled by the Engineer do to in-fighting and no consensus of water right owners in the area. Some may have heard that Cattlemen’s opposed this bill, we did not!! We just don’t want to see the degradation of the Senior Priority of a right that’s been the cornerstone of Nevada water law. There’s some good news, and that is we’re hopeful the Dept. of Ag’s budget will most likely be funded so that the four Brand Inspection officers will stay in place and brand fees won’t be discussed this go around. The Elko Vet lab hopefully will stay open and our State Vet will stay mobile. It was looking like a southern assembly person was trying to close the lab as well as making the state vet office bound. As always, we here at the NCA will keep a watch as we get closer to the end of this session, as well as keeping all of you in mind and fighting for you. Many thanks go out to our lobbyist Neena Laxalt who has been tough on representing us as well as being able to articulate our position. And now the “Good News” Several decisions lately from our public lands friends show that there is a positive change taking place out there. The Forest Serviced listened and opened their eyes to ridiculous language that was set to be added to Forest Service grazing permits for the Sage Grouse Plan

David Stix Jr.

imple- mentation. As of right now, no FS permits will be modified! Many worked hard on this with the Forest Service, Ethan Lane and the good folks at PLC working the ground back in DC, Congressman Amodei and his staff, as well as NCA. On the BLM side, it’s time to say good things when it’s called for, too many times and yes, some time justified, we focus on the negatives. While visiting with Mitch Heguy in Elko the other day he informed me of some exciting news on one of his three BLM permits. Mitch and his family were just issued a new 10-year permit and his grazing period was extended to nine months. This is so exciting and when I extended the good news to Kathryn Dyer and John Ruhs, Kathryn responded with a very modest and humble quote. “The BLM recognizes and appreciates that the Heguy’s have been land stewards that have accomplished land health improvement through their approach to manage- ment. The ability to renew the permit with increased f lexibility in terms and conditions is largely due to this.” Boom! I’m ending on this note. Good luck this year and may we all brand lots of good calves!

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 3 

NCA Happenings By Kaley Sproul, NCA Executive Director


n March the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association traveled to Washington D.C. to attend the Public Lands Council (PLC) and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) Annual Legislative Conference. This conference serves as an important part of the year for every State Cattlemen’s Association to meet with state delegation, and to address the unique issues and circumstances that face the cattle industry around the nation. The theme “Boots on the Hill” brought together numerous representatives of the beef industry all impacted by the policy decisions made in Washington D.C. Before working with our legislators, NCA members Davey Stix Jr., Ron Cerri, JJ Goicoechea, Joe Guild, Shane Bell, Katie Roberti and I attended briefings from our national affiliates at PLC and NCBA. The topics discussed ranged from federal land and environmental issues, to trade and more. The PLC Legislative Conference took place the first two days. Seeing how Nevada consists of more than 85% of public lands, a large portion of the committee meetings mirrored concerns of the NCA. On Monday, I attended the AUM Focus meeting where the group divided into two committees, one for Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the other for U.S. Forest Service (USFS). Each committee included ranchers and government officials; they focused on key issues affecting both sides. The next meeting I attended that day was about public relations. At this meeting we learned about the “Power of the Pen” and how to commuKaley Sproul, NCA Executive Director nicate effectively with

reporters and the media. Some big points I wanted to bring back to the NCA from this meeting are as followed. 1. Prep before meeting with the reporter and know who your audience is; 2. Be prepared with four or five key points to make; 3. Repetition is key, remember to ensure your point is made and; 4. Make your point first and be sure to translate the issue in a way the audience understands. Within my job at the NCA and our role in the livestock industry it is important to share our story the way we want our story to be told. The next day at PLC we heard from several Legislative representatives. We had the pleasure of hearing from U.S. Department of Interior Secretary

Ryan Zinke during the PLC luncheon. He explained how he understands the need for collaboration and working with the neighbors to regain trust. “We’re going to manage our properties just like you (ranchers) would manage your private lands,” said Zinke, “Washington D.C. needs to understand that we work for the people, not the other way around.” After lunch the NCBA portion of the Legislative Conference started. We then had the opportunity to hear from the U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, as he addressed his beliefs in federalism, partnership and working together at a local level. “Looking forward, we will build a partnership with landowners across the country and create commonsense rules

NCA with Congressman Mark Amodei during their visit to Washington D.C.

 4 May/June 2017

The Progressive Rancher

Legislators and members of the Ag Industry enjoying breakfast and meeting one another during the NCA Legislative Breakfast in Carson City

David Stix and Joe Guild Speaking with Attorney General Adam Laxalt at the NCA Legislative Breakfast in Carson City

Administration in the future. I found our day on Capitol Hill to be very productive and lengthy with Congressman Amodei, Congressmen Kihuen’s staff, Congresswoman Titus, Senator Heller, and Senator Masto. The receptiveness from our leadership was gratifying. We were able to spend constructive time discussing issues that matter to Nevada producers. I have found that it is very important that we work closely and build relationships with our legislators in Washington D.C. to promote sound public policies that create a stable business environment for producers, and promote conservation for the natural resources and wildlife.

NCA with Senator Dean Heller during their visit to Washington D.C

NCA with Congresswoman Dina Titus during their visit to Washington D.C.

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 5 

This last April we held the NCA Legislative Breakfast in Carson City. This gave ranchers the opportunity to network with legislators regarding upcoming bills and issues that affect the livestock industry. We had a great turn out this year and we thank everyone who came to help celebrate Nevada Ag Day at Legislature. After our breakfast the Nevada Department of Agriculture held their “My Day in Ag” lunch, they also had a good turn out and had very educational/interactive displays. We are very thankful for all of the members in the agricultural industry that are spending their time back at Legislature, especially our lobbyist Neena Laxalt. She does a great job for the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association and we are very grateful for her! I believe we all have the chance to make an impact. Our voices and our time are valuable and can make a difference. Having “Boots on the Hill” in D.C. and in Carson City at Legislature prove to be beneficial in protecting the way of life we enjoy day in and day out. If you are not currently a member of the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association, I encourage you to join. Become part of an Association that is working hard to protect and promote the future of ranching in Nevada. To learn more about the association or to become a member, please call the office at 775-738-9214 or visit our webpage at www.nevadacattlemen. org. We look forward to hearing from you! If you are currently a member, we thank you for your continued support. Without your membership the voice of the Association wouldn’t be as strong as it is today.

NCA with Congressman Kihuen during their visit to Washington D.C.

NCA with Senator Catherine Cortez Masto during their visit to Washington D.C.

Zinke Interior  6 May/June 2017

Shane Bel JJ Goicoechea Ron Cerri David Stix Kaley Sproul and Katie Roberti in Washington DC The Progressive Rancher

Nevada CattleWomen and Nevada Beef Council name Nevada’s first Collegiate Beef Advocate


shley Huntsberger, daughter of Dick and Linda Huntsberger from Smith, Nevada was named the 2017 Nevada Collegiate Beef Advocate. Runner-up in the competition was Connor Billman from Genoa, Nevada. Ashley and Connor both did an excellent job putting together their appli-

cations, which consisted of: an application form, interest statement, social media outreach proposal, and video educating consumers about a beef cattle industry issue. Ashley chose to create a video about the nutritional aspects of beef and Connor made a video myth-busting various misconceptions about the beef industry. Ashley will be serving the Nevada Beef Industry in a variety of ways in the coming year. She will be attending the Clark County Fair, helping the Nevada Beef Council reach as many as 10,000 people during the threeday event. Ashley will also be working on several social media campaigns designed to target college-age millennials as well as complete at least two campus beef

promotion events at UNR. Ashley will compete to be on a nation-wide team of advocates at the NCBA convention in Phoenix Arizona in February 2018. Ashley is a Junior at the University of Nevada, Reno. She is majoring in Elementary Education, with a minor in Human Development and Family Studies. She grew up on her family’s cattle ranch and has her own cattle and horses. She has been a member of Western Nevada CattleWomen for eight years. During high school she was involved in 4-H, FFA, sports, and academic clubs. Now she is a member of her university’s Range Club. After graduating in Fall 2018, she wants to work on ranches and substitute teach; eventually returning to her family ranch, H-C Cattle Company, Inc. as the owner. We have a great bunch of young cattlemen and women in Nevada and hopefully through this program, and with Ashley’s help, we can get more of these young people trained in grassroots advocacy about the land, the cattle, and the people that they so dearly love.

Ashley Huntsberger

You are invited to

You are invited to



Bible Study Fri @ 9 am

Sunday @ 11am services

4275 Solias Rd Fallon, NV

Bible Study Wed @ 6 pm

Are you having a Rodeo or Livestock event? Give us a call. We would love to come to your event or ranch and host Cowboy Church for you.

Harmony Ranch Ministry 3767 Keyes Way  Fallon, NV 89406 

Tom J. Gonzalez | Diana J. Gonzalez, Pastor

(775) 240-8870 Cell (775) 867-3100

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 7 

By Joseph Guild


t is one thing to read about the events in Washington D.C. occurring right now as we transition from one Presidency to Another. It is quite another to actually be there for a few days and be part of the experience. Some other Nevada ranchers and I recently attended the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association annual Legislative Conference in Washington. There is a new atmosphere and attitude evident in that town I haven’t witnessed in a long time. We were briefed by key members of the new administration and we visited staff or actual members of our Congressional delegation. As I have written many times before, it is always educational to be in the Capital and meet face to face with our representatives and key members of an administration who have so much sway over rancher’s significant interests. Before talking about some specific impressions of the key administration officials we heard from, I would like to briefly review the NCBA 2017 legislative and regulatory agenda. Topping that agenda are attempts to roll back overly broad rules and regulations. An example of an early victory for public land ranchers was the Congress rescinding the BLM Planning 2.0 rule which would have concentrated a great deal of resource planning away from the states and local governments and back to Washington D.C. Such a concentration would have limited the ability of the BLM to make decisions that make sense at a regional and even an allotment specific level in favor of a one size fits all national perspective. This view could more than likely result in decisions that actually have negative rather than positive effects on the ground. Other efforts underway are asking the Department of Agriculture to cease working on the new GIPSA rule which would inhibit creative marketing opportunities for cattle producers; creating a new WOTUS rule; working on our continued ability to prescriptively use antibiotics in livestock production; reform of the Antiquities Act and the Endangered Species Act; sage grouse and wild horses and reform of the NEPA process; tax reform; border security and early work on the 2018 Farm Bill. As you can easily see, there is much to be done and the NCBA Washington D. C. lobby team is working hard every day on behalf of all of the Nation’s beef producers. A couple of highlights during the week were speeches from the new Secretary of the Interior, Ryan Zinke, the incoming Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt, Ray Starling of the White  8 May/June 2017

DC and More House Economic Council and the Assistant U.S. Trade Representative, Sharon Bomer. We even heard from the South Korean Ambassador to the United States wearing his own cowboy hat while he spoke to us about the importance of the relationship to our two countries. The read I got from the Bomer and Starling presentations was the new administration is tuned into helping businesses, including agriculture stay in business, create jobs and bolster a stagnant economy. From their point of view, they want to help, not hinder the ability of American business to thrive and be profitable while abiding by the law and those regulations necessary to keep Americans safe. Specifically, as to agriculture, the President has heard loud and clear the importance of free trade to America’s farmers and ranchers and understands the way to grow the agricultural sector is to open up foreign markets. A recent illustration of that understanding and commitment was the announcement last week by the Chinese Premier his country would reopen their markets to US beef. This would not have happened if the President had not made it a topic of discussion when he and the Chinese leader spent the weekend together in Florida. These markets have been closed for about thirteen years since our last BSE outbreak. There is much to be done in hammering out the details before the China market is actually open to U.S. beef imports but I can report that work is being done. One of the impediments to that opening is the issue of traceability. The Chinese want the capability of trace back to the farm of meat imported into their country. Obviously this is a difficult problem to solve because the American beef industry is so diverse in so many ways. A delegation of The Progressive Rancher

Chinese agricultural officials toured several Nebraska ranches and feedlots last fall, sponsored by NCBA, to illustrate the problem from an American point of view. This tour was well received and appreciated by the Chinese and opened their eyes to our complexities. If I could put both Pruitt and Zinke’s messages into one sentence it would be: We trust your judgement because you are on the land every day and know it from a multi –generational viewpoint; therefore, we are going to look for your input in making our decisions here in Washington; one size cannot fit all and we can certainly not determine that fit from thousands of miles away east of the Potomac. Now obviously they did not say these exact words, but the tone and message was there. We have much to be hopeful for but I remain skeptical until the results are in. I’ll see you soon.

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 9 

Livestock Monitor Trends . . .


Milk prices have trended lower throughout the first three months of the year. Class IV milk prices(milk destined for the butter and milk powder market) averaged $16.19 per cwt. in January and sank to $14.32 in March, an 11% decline. Class IV milk prices were caught in a riptide of poor demand for butter in the U.S. and declining milk powder prices in Western Europe. Wholesale non-fat dry milk prices in the Midwestern U.S. started the year at $1.02 per pounds and three months later were struggling to hold the 80 cent mark. Meanwhile, U.S. butter usage during the first two months of the year (based on USDA-Economic Research Service calculations) was down 13% year-over-year in January and fell 21% in February. The Leap Year effect was in play in February, with one less day this year being a factor in the magnitude of the decline. The decline in butter usage is a notable difference from the last quarter of 2016, when usage was up 7% from 2015’s comparable quarter. The slowdown in usage resulted in frozen butter inventories in cold storage accumulating at a rapid pace, as shown in USDA-NASS Cold Storage reports. At the beginning of the year butter cold storage stocks were 11 million pounds above a year earlier, a 7% increase. By the end of March, frozen butter inventories were up 30 million pounds from twelve months prior, a 12% jump. Wholesale butter prices have moved sideways, even with the build-up in inventory. Average butter prices in February and March were close to unchanged from

 10 May/June 2017

A Newsletter for Extension Staff Livestock Marketing Information Center

State Extension Services in Cooperation with the USDA

December 2016. Butter production in January was 1% higher than in the prior January and February production was down 6%, with one less day this year accounting for the majority of that difference. U.S. non-fat dry milk prices started out the year at an equivalent price to Western European product. At the end of March, U.S. milk powder was priced at a 10% discount to that in Western Europe. Non-fat dry milk prices during the last quarter of 2016 averaged 15% to 20% below Western European prices. That discount supported bigger U.S. exports during the first quarter of 2017. U.S. milk powder exports in January were up 10% from a year earlier and February exports were up 26%. A 10 cent decline in non-fat dry milk prices during March is probably an indication that exports during that month were not as impressive as the first two months 2016. Export data for March will be available in early May. The discount on Class IV milk to Class III milk (milk used for cheese production) went from 58 cents per cwt. in January to $1.49 per hundredweight in March. The widening discount should have encouraged more milk moving into cheese manufacturing and less into butter and milk powder. U.S. cheese production in February was down 1% from a year earlier, a more modest decline than the 6% decline in butter production for the same month. This suggests that the shift in price relationships between Class III and Class IV milk was working fairly quickly to create a response. Dairy product production during March could show an even more prominent shift towards cheese production. Cheese prices in March were under pressure, with cheddar prices dropping 20 cents per pounds from February to March. USDA data on butter, cheese and milk powder production in March will be available in the first week of May.

The Progressive Rancher


Cattle prices have strengthened since the beginning of 2017. So far this year, beef demand has been strong both by domestic customers and foreign buyers. That demand has fed-back to strong demand for fed cattle by packers. Cattle feeders have been willing sellers because they have been making profits in recent months and the “market structure” has supported turning-over their feedlot inventories. By market structure we refer to two keys. First, deferred futures prices have been indicating sharp price drop-offs. Second, the cost of feeder animals has made replacing animals currently onfeed rather attractive. The feeder animal cost profile and return to profitability are in stark contrast to the last few years which tended to delay marketing of slaughter ready cattle. The rate at which fed cattle have been marketed in recent months provided a foundation for recent increases in U.S. cattle prices. As shown in recent USDA-NASS Cattle on Feed reports, feedlot marketing’s have been aggressive. March marketing’s increased by 9.5%, year-over-year, and was 8.1% above the prior 5- year average (2011-2015). For the first quarter of this year, marketing increased 7.8% and 2.1% compared to 2016’s and the 2011-2015 average. In recent months, year-over-year increases in animals placed into feedlots and marketed have largely offset. For example, even though placements during March were up 11.1% (210,000 head) from 2016’s the April 1st on-feed count was only increased 0.5% (51,000 head). Here we will define “marketing rate” as the proportion (percent) of cattle marketed by feedlots relative to the inventory. Small percentage changes in the marketing rate are important. In March of this year it was 17.8%, which was up 1.6% year-overyear and 1.8% above the prior 5-year average. For 2017’s first quarter, the marketing rate was up 1.1% from 2016’s and increased 1.0% compared to the 2011-2015 average. Biologically, the higher marketing rate has contributed to lower fed animal dressed weights. For the week ending April 8th (latest data available), U.S. average Federally Inspected dressed weight dropped 10 pounds week-over-week and was down 28 pounds (3.2%) year-over-year. That is reducing the tonnage of meat each animal slaughtered provides to the marketplace Since mid-January, the factors described above have resulted in weekly fed steer prices (5-market average reported by USDA-AMS Market News) increasing about $10.00 per cwt. That has contributed to higher yearling and calf prices, too.

COW/CALF CORNER May 1st, 2017

How beef trade adds value to the beef industry


By Derrell S. Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension Livestock Marketing Specialist

.S. beef exports continue the 2016 trend with additional improvement so far in 2017. February total beef exports were up 19.3 percent and combine with the January total for a year to date increase of 20.1 percent year over year for the first two months of the year.  This extends the annual 12.6 percent year over year increase in 2016.  Japan remains the top destination for U.S. beef exports, up 44.4 percent year over year for January and February.  Beef exports to Japan represented 29.9 percent of beef exports so far this year.  Japan accounted for 25.7 percent of total beef exports in 2016  South Korea is the second largest beef export market for the U.S., up 26.5 percent in the first two months of the year compared to the same period in 2016.  South Korea has had a rising share of U.S. beef exports in the last four years and represented 17.8 of total beef exports in 2016.  Mexico is third largest beef export market, up 25.8 percent year over year for the year to date.  Beef exports to Mexico have generally decreased in recent years but did show a year over year increase of 8.6 percent in 2016.  Mexico’s share of U.S. beef exports has dropped sharply in the last few years to a 2016 level of 15.4 percent of total beef exports. Canada is the number four beef export market and is up 17.0 percent so far this year compared to the first two months of 2016.  Canada’s share of beef exports has also declined some in the last five years with a 2016 share of 12.1 percent of total exports.  Hong Kong has had a larger share of U.S. beef exports in the last four years but dropped from the previous year to 11.5 percent of total exports in 2016.  Beef exports to Hong Kong so far in 2017 are down 23.6 percent year over year.  The top five beef export markets (Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Canada and Hong Kong) represented 83.7 percent of total beef exports in the first two months of 2017, similar to the 82.6 percent share in 2016.  2017 beef exports are up year over year to all of these markets except Hong Kong. Beef imports are down 17.4 percent year over year in the first two months of 2017. This follows a 10.5 percent year over year decrease in 2016. Australia, historically the largest source of U.S. beef imports, is down 45.5 percent so far this year following a 39.0 percent year over year decrease in 2016.  In fact, Australia is currently the fourth largest beef import source so far in 2017.  Australia is in roughly the same relative position as the U.S. beef industry was in 2014/2015, with drought-reduced animal inventories restricting production and herd rebuilding further restricting beef production at the current time. New Zealand is the largest beef import source so far in 2017 but is down 21.1 percent year over year, following a 7.3 percent year over year decrease in 2016.   Mexico is the second largest beef import source thus far in 2017 and is up 37.2 percent year over year in the first two months of the year.   Imports of Mexican beef have grown sharply in recent years, jumping 25.9 percent in 2016 and accounting for 16.4 percent of total beef imports.  Canada is the third largest beef imports source, with year to date imports down 12.7 percent.  After an annual year over year increase of 14.3 percent, Canada represented 23.8 percent of total beef imports in 2016.  The top four import markets represented 85.9 percent of 2016 beef imports.  Significantly smaller import shares include Brazil, which accounted for 5.1 percent of total imports along with 4.1 percent from Uruguay in 2016. Beef imports are largely driven by the demand for lean trimmings used in the ground beef market.  On average, an estimated 72 percent of U.S. beef imports are lean trimmings. 

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 11 

Good News! 8 Bad Bills Dead! You did it with emails & calls!!! Nevada Families for Freedom

When you forward please delete bottom portion which says unsubscribe or someone will unsubscribe for you. Thank you for Acknowledgement. Please pray for Legislature and Governor.

186 Ryndon Unit 12, Elko, Nevada 89801, 775-397-6859, Sparks 775-356-0105 Some Good news! I will have more updates as I have time to research and write Janine Hansen, them. Keep up the good work...emailing, calling, and posting your opinion on the April 12, 2017 In the Year of Our Lord, U.S. Constitution Art. VII Legislative website. Thank you for Acknowledgement. Please pray for Legislature and Governor.   Dead AB43 raises the Property Tax Cap so they can collect more according to   the formula. The property tax floor for homes goes up to 3% per year. Clark County Manager King stated in the Review Journal. “If that formula were already in effect for VICTORY! fiscal year 2017, commercial property tax would have risen 4 percent, and residential It is confirmed. SB271 is dead!!! property tax would have risen 3 percent. You made all the difference with your calls and emails even after it passed out of committee!!! Dead AB193 Fluoride in Washoe County water. Truckee Meadows Water People power and the Grace of God! Authority unanimously opposed AB193. In 2002, 58% of Voters in Washoe County Please send thank you’s to: opposed fluoridating the water. Fluoridation will cost nearly $70 million for TMWA Senate Majority Leader:, to fluoridate the water raising customers rates by 8.83%. This rate hike would be withCommittee Chairman:, out giving customers the right to vote on fluoridation. 23+ human studies and 100+ Committee members: animal studies link fluoride to brain Damage.  41% of American children have dental,, James.Settelmeyfluorosis caused by excess fluoride, according to the Centers for Disease Control and,, Prevention (CDC). 99% of all fluoride added to water goes down the drain and into   the environment. This will harm the fish in the Truckee River and Pyramid Lake. This is the email I received from Chair Yvanna Cancella’s Legislative Assistant Most fluoride used in water is waste products from the scrubbing systems of fertilizer Guicela M Sandoval-Lopez, “Thank you for your email. Senator Cancela has confirmed industry and is classified as hazardous waste. this response and will not be moving forward with the bill even after receipt of amendment.” Dead AB237 Abolished Capital Punishment   Water is Life! SB271 violates the human rights of people who are dependent on Dead: AB274 National Popular Vote. If this compact had been in force in 2016, water from their domestic wells to live. Human Rights vs Developers who want to Hillary Clinton would be President.  National Popular Vote would make Nevada a steal the water so they can make more money.  Stop the developers from taking our meaningless flyover state for Presidential elections.  Large population states would dewell water. cide the election. The National Popular Vote violates the Constitution which requires SB271 GIVES the State Water Engineer AUTHORITY over Domestic Wells Congress to authorize state Compacts and circumvents the Electoral College.  that he has never had by placing domestic wells (where they have never been) under regular water law where priority rights take precedence. It allows the State Engineer Dead AB308 authorizes a Legislator to request a disparate impact statement esto restrict domestic wells to indoor use, watering pets and livestock OR Any domestic timating the effect that a bill or joint resolution will have on persons in Nevada based use as long as the withdrawal does not exceed 0.5 acre-feet of water per year, which on race, ethnicity, gender or status as a senior citizen or veteran. must be recorded by a water meter. This means no more trees and gardens. Current   domestic wells allow 2.0 acre-feet of water. DEAD AJR6 Abolishes the Constitutional offices of State Treasurer and Vote by Entire Senate on SB271 is coming within days, unless Senate Majority State Controller and places their duties under the Governor. You will lose your right Leader Aaron Ford Stops it by putting it on the Secretary’s Desk. to vote for these offices. Divided government, even if it isn’t as efficient, is what our Nevada Legislative Hotline connects with all offices: founders designed understanding that consolidation of power leads to tyranny.  800-995-9080, Las Vegas 702-486-2626, Reno/Carson 775-684-6800   Share your opinion with Legislature: DEAD SB271: Gives State Water Engineer power to curtail domestic wells Opinions/79th2017/A/ from 2 acre feet a year to .05 acre feet per year.

Bill Text SB271: SB/SB271.pdf

Amendment text: ExhibitDocument/OpenExhibitDocument?exhibitId=30263&fileDownloadNam e=SB%20271%20Work%20Session%20Document%20Alysa%20Keller%20Policy%20Analyst.pdf It costs money for Janine to be in Carson full time...Rent and gas. Please help! We depend on your individual free will gifts! Thank you! You can help Nevada Families for Freedom by contributing online: Please make checks payable to Nevada Families, not tax deductible, 186 Ryndon Unit 12, Elko, NV 89801  12 May/June 2017

DEAD SB272 Allowed State Water Engineer to limit wells drilled after July, 2017 to .5 acre feet per year. Update: SB174 Renames McCarran International Airport as Harry Reid International Airport received a waiver so it is still alive. However, on the Legislature’s website “Share Your Opinion” link, SB174 received by far the largest number opposing it of any other bill with 3,113 opposed to 61 in favor. We depend on your individual free will gifts! Thank you! You can help Nevada Families for Freedom with our work at the Legislature by contributing on line at: Please make checks payable to Nevada Families (not tax deductible), 186 Ryndon Unit 12, Elko, NV 89801

The Progressive Rancher


Stephanie Licht

To the 2017 Senate Committee on Natural Resources: RE: SB 364 and SB 365 Relative to Trapping


adam Chairman, Members of the Committee, Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony in opposition to both SB364 and SB365 regarding “trapping” of “certain animals”. Trapping has been practiced globally for thousands of years for survival food and clothing or protection of health, well-being and welfare of people worldwide by control and management of “animals” that sicken, injure, kill or annoy humans, hamper human activities, damage our crops or food products, harm or kill pets or livestock, damage buildings or reduce land fertility. Nevada trapping predominantly occurs in rural areas, comprising small interfaces of Nevada’s two urban/suburban counties, and 86.79% of Nevada’s lands lying in the other fifteen rural counties populated by only 9.98% of Nevadans. Not all rural Nevadans trap. Clark County occupies 7.29% of Nevada’s lands and holds 74.59% of the state’s population. People relocate there from many states and countries diversifying cultures, customs, traditions, values, beliefs, principles, national origins, races, religions and personal practices. County government considers citizens’ concerns, including minorities. Clark County alone controls 46+/63 or 73.01%+ of Nevada’s Legislative seats. State representatives should consider citizens’ statewide concerns, including minorities. One-hundred percent of SB364 and SB365 sponsors are from Clark County’s urban/suburban Legislative Districts. Probability exists not one of the sponsors engages in the activities addressed in these two bills. SB364 and SB365 narrowly target a small minority of Nevadans practicing the one-hundredyear plus culture, customs, traditions, history, values, beliefs, principles, practices and in innumerable cases protect health, welfare and well-being of rural Nevadans and communities. SB364 and SB365 are as discriminatory and intolerant of rural Nevadans as discrimination incident to national origin, disability, genetics, pregnancy, sex, sexual orientation, race, color, religion or age, all explicitly prohibited by Federal laws.

Anti-trapping legislation is strongly encouraged by persons profoundly engaged in the Animal Rights Movement, championed, financially engendered and supported by such organizations as the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), whose objective is saving “animals” from exploitation or slaughter. Personal opinion, agendas, social pressure and emotions govern their actions. Interestingly only certain “animals” are picked or chosen to “save” while the inherent “rights” of many other “animals” are ignored, so the movement is discriminatory by nature. SB364 and SB365 fail to include other dangerous devices or chemicals that harm, sicken, maim or destroy “animals” and pets. If indeed preventing “animal” suffering is the intent, these bills would include restrictions of all “animal” trapping devices and chemicals, and should apply to all “animals” everywhere across Nevada. Restrictions therefore should include all trapping or chemicals intent on ultimately harming pigeons, rats, pack rats, mice, bats, skunks, racoons, mosquitos, cockroaches, ticks, fleas, lice (head, body, pubic), spiders (black widow, brown recluse, wolf), snakes, scorpions, tarantulas, bedbugs, wasps, yellow jackets, killer bees, flies (house, fruit, horse), maggots, spider mites, grasshoppers, tomato worms, potato bugs, cut worms, aphids, clover mites, earwigs, moles, gophers, voles, ants (house, carpenter), woodpeckers, starlings, swallows, porcupines, armadillos, city coyotes, bobcats, feral cats, rabbits, beavers, opossums, squirrels, chipmunks, groundhogs, frogs, toads,silverfish, termites, grubs, beetles (Japanese, dung), snails, slugs, dust mites, root weevils, nematodes, centipedes,millipedes, stink bugs, mealybugs, caterpillars, and/or any other creature deemed an “animal” species, that sickens,injures, kills or annoys humans, hampers human activities, damages crops or food products, harms pets or livestock, causes damage to buildings or reduces land fertility any and everywhere in Nevada. Thank you for your time and consideration. I would be happy to answer questions.

Thank you for your time and consideration of my comments regarding both SB364 and 365 regarding changes to the trapping laws in Nevada. The same has been provided to staff and members of the Senate Natural Resources Committee which is scheduled a work session on SB364 on Tuesday, April 11.  Staff said in a telephone conversation the “letter” would be provided to Committee members as “Public Comment”, but that it was a work session and thus would not be considered “testimony”.  If you think any of the comments worth merit you may share them as you see fit.  Thanks.

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 13 

Oldest Amateur Rodeo in Nevada – Since 1898 –

lund pioneer days

7 1 0 2 h t 3 1 9 t s u g u A

Lund, Nevada


20, 2 1, 2 2 Thursday – July 20


Eureka County Fairgroun Eureka, Nevada


• Ranch Rodear Style Cutting,Corraling & Branding Jacob B Carter is director for thursday events Contact Kathy Neal (775) 296-2167 for entries Entries close July 14th Starts 8:30am

Friday – July 21 •

• •

Bull Riding, Saddle Bronc, Steer Riding, Sr. & Jr. Barrels, Team Roping, Calf Roping, WSRRA Ladies Steer Stopping | $1,000 Addeed money in each roughstock event. WSRRA sanctioned ranch bronc - estimated purse $5,000. Mutton Bustin’ - Age 8 years and under, Max weight limit 60lbs., Entry free $10, Must ride in friday Gymkhana. Call or text Jones for entrie 775-296-2511 or email 9:00pm Western Dance

Saturday – July 22

• 5K Run, Parade, Pioneer Program, Bar-B-Que, Children’s Games, Adult Horseshoes,Vendor Booths • Rodeo 5:00pm - ages 6 & up $8.00, Ages 5 & under free • Fireworks at dark • Jacob Carter - (775) 296-2167 Contact for Rodeo Director

Gymkhana ck Youth Rough Sto 4-H Livestock Show and Sale Team Branding

Team Roping Bronc Old West Saddle and Bull Riding

Mud Volleyball st Pie Eating Conte ance Live Band and D Exhibit Hall 775-237-6026

July 21 & 22 — Team Roping: Lanes Arena, 9:00 am

Top 10 Teams daily qualifiers go To rodeo ConTaCT Ben noyes for informaTion 435-691-2536

 14 May/June 2017

Visit our website:



The Progressive Rancher

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






Price CWT








Daniel Berg

Round Mtn.













Miles Hastie







Travis Berg

Round Mtn.






Keystone Ranch

Paradise V.






Tom Madole














Robert Mackey














Colvin & Son







S& M Goemmer

Battle Mtn.






Scott Buck







6J Livestock














Green Goat














Deanna Porter







Jersey Valley Cattle. Fallon






Sunrise Ranch







S & M Goemmer

Battle Mtn.






Keystone Ranch

Paradise V.






Peter & K Marvel

Paradise V.







Round Mtn.






Sales Results from April 20th, 2017 Feeder Sale

NEXT Feeder SALE May 17th 2017 1:30pm

to be held in conjunction with the regular Wednesday sale.

Still looking for grass calves...We’ve had a banner year for rain and that means lots & lots of grass! REGULAR WEDNESDAY SALES SMALL BARN, SLAUGHTER COWS & BULLS - APPX 11:30AM FEEDER CALVES - 1:30PM

It’s branding time! Come see us for all of your livestock needs. Shop in store or We deliver!

Nevada Livestock Vet Supply LLC 131 Industrial Way Fallon NV 89406

Shop in store or call for delivery


The Progressive Rancher







Price CWT

Stone Cabin Ranch Brackenbury Bert and Jill Paris Deanna Porter Colvin & Son

Tonopah Yerington Battle Mtn. Orovada Dammeron

9 6 5 5 4



513 520 522 563 564

171.00 150.00 140.00 151.00 155.50

Buckingham Sunrise Ranch Stone Cabin Ranch Green Goat Jim& M Assuras Bert and Jill Paris Jim& M Assuras Peraldo Bros. James Sloan Churia Holsteins

P Valley Yerington Tonopah Winnemucca McGill Battle Mtn. McGill Fallon Fallon Gardnerville

18 2 10 4 3 10 20 9 9 5



564 600 622 626 635 637 723 731 796 1111

164.00 147.00 148.00 150.00 140.00 130.00 130.50 130.00 122.00 95.50

Keystone Ranch

Paradise V.






Daniel Berg Kretschmer

Round Mtn. Round Mtn.

3 3



345 392

140.00 148.00

Wayne Hage Stone Cabin Ranch Keystone Ranch Raymond Jensen David Hinkey Jersey Valley Cattle Roger & T Lambert Brackenbury Five Fingers Grazing Benton Snow Seven Dot Cattle Pinson Ranch Peter & K Marvel Welch Jim Champie Welch Chance Rossi George & Linda Hucke Leroy Hicks El Torito Cattle

Tonopah Tonopah Paradise V. Tonopah McDermitt Fallon Fallon Yerington Paradise V.

5 7 24 1 2 3 5 11 9



404 406 420 450 475 500 504 542 543

143.00 158.00 152.00 125.00 131.00 135.00 128.00 136.50 138.00

Fallon Golconda Golconda Paradise V. Winnemucca Austin Winnemucca Bishop Fallon

1 7 4 5 5 8 4 1 1



555 570 571 575 620 641 803 835 525

131.50 130.00 130.00 132.50 126.00 125.00 106.00 108.00 140.00

Schurz Fallon

1 2


660 1345

116.00 1350.00/ HD

Denis & Kathy Lee





1385.00/ HD

George & L Hucke




B/C 4Y.O. May Calver 4Y.O. May Calver BULL



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

May/June 2017 15 

CHECKOFF NEWS: Checking on the Checkoff Spring Beef Promotion Underway Another Nevada Beef Council (NBC) beef promotion involving the popular consumer app Ibotta is underway, this time centered around Cinco de Mayo festivities. The promotion, which started in early April and extends through early May, allows consumers to get a $1.00 rebate on any brand fresh ground beef using the Ibotta app, which will be good at any participating Nevada retailer.  The promotion has primarily focused on Cinco de Mayo and recipes, with a supplemental digital campaign specifically targeting the greater Las Vegas and Reno markets. Once the promotion concludes later this month, the NBC will work with Ibotta and other partners to collect and assess results. 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. 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. To learn more about Ibotta – including the retailers it partners with – download the free app for your smartphone, or visit

Beef Achieved Big Results This St. Patrick's Day Again this year, the checkoff delivered St. Patrick’s Day beef recipes to more consumers than ever before! With a different approach to St. Patrick’s Day content, including a new video and online advertisements, the checkoff was able to generate more than 3.7 million impressions and over 507,000 video views across Facebook, YouTube and paid search. The Beef with Red Currant-Mustard Sauce recipe (also featured in the How to Make Corned Beef video) landing page on the “Beef. It’s What’s For Dinner.” website received more than 22,000 page views, and the St. Patrick’s Day Favorites recipe collection received more than 18,000 views during the same time period. St. Pat’s-specific Facebook carousel ads resulted in more than 344,000 impressions among 189,000 unique users, with higher click-thru rates than average carousel performance. Additionally, the ad generated more than 6,000 engagements during the St. Patrick’s Day holiday. Disseminating the checkoff’s triple-tested recipes and cooking information when consumers are looking for it, helps ensure that consumers have a positive beef-eating experience every time. It also continues to build consumer confidence in as their go-to, trusted resource for all things beef.

Digital Advertising Starts New Year with a Bang

As consumers focused on sticking to their New Year’s resolutions, beef checkofffunded advertising used a variety of online ad tools to educate consumers on the clear advantages of including beef in their family meals. Messages related to beef’s nutritional value, superior taste and competitive prices were delivered during the months of January and February 2017 to consumers across the U.S. During this time period, checkoff-funded advertising reached millions of consumers via online video advertising (generating more than 2.9 million video views), the “Beef. It’s What’s For” website (812,000 visits), social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest (over 455,000 likes, shares, comments and re-pins) and digital banner advertising. Collectively, more than 86 million consumer impressions were generated.

For more about the Nevada Beef Council, visit  16 May/June 2017

The Progressive Rancher

CHIPOTLE-BRAISED COUNTRY STYLE BEEF RIBS From James Winstead, RDN, Director of Food and Nutrition Outreach for the Nevada Beef Council


May 25th Cottonwood, CA

Consignment Deadline: May 17th

June 8th

This delicious beef rib recipe offers a variety of cooking methods to suit your needs. Cook them up in a stock pot, throw the ingredients in a slow cooker and check in later, or, for the quickest cooking method, put it all together in a pressure cooker for 60 minutes. No matter how you cook them, these ribs will offer a flavor-filled meal that have just the right amount of kick.

Ingredients - Makes 4-6 Servings

Cottonwood, CA

Consignment Deadline: May 31st

Total recipe time: 2 to 2.5 hours

Ingedients • 2 pounds beef Country-Style Ribs • 1 tablespoon vegetable oil • 1/2 teaspoon salt • 1 cup chopped onion • 1 can (28 ounces) crushed tomatoes, undrained • 3 medium poblano peppers, seeded, coarsely chopped • 1 to 2 chipotle peppers in adobo sauce, finely chopped Toppings • Chopped onion, cilantro and lime wedges (optional) Instructions 1. Heat oil in stockpot over medium heat until hot. Brown half of beef ribs; remove from stockpot. Repeat with remaining beef. Season with salt. 2. Add onion to stockpot; cook 3 to 5 minutes or until tender, stirring occasionally. Stir in tomatoes, poblano and chipotle peppers. Return beef to stockpot; bring to a boil. Reduce heat; cover tightly and simmer 1-3/4 to 2 hours or until beef is fork-tender. 3. Remove beef; keep warm. Skim fat from cooking liquid. Spoon cooking liquid over beef. Garnish with chopped onion, cilantro and lime wedges, if desired. Tips for Alternative Cooking Methods SLOW COOKER (3.5 to 5.5 quart): Brown beef ribs if desired. Place ribs, onion, poblano peppers and chipotle peppers in 3-1/2 to 5-quart slow cooker. Top with tomatoes. Cover and cook on LOW 7-1/2 to 8-1/2 hours, or on HIGH 5 to 6 hours or until beef is fork-tender. (Do not stir during cooking.) Continue as directed in Step 3. PRESSURE COOKER (6 quart): Brown beef ribs if desired. Place ribs, onion, poblano peppers and chipotle peppers in pressure cooker. Top with tomatoes. Close and lock pressure cooker lid. Use beef, stew or high-pressure setting on pressure cooker; program 60 minutes on pressure cooker timer. Use quick release feature to release pressure; carefully remove lid. Continue as directed in Step 3. (This recipe variation was tested in an electric pressure cooker at high altitude. Cooking at an altitude of less than 3000 feet may require slightly less cooking time. Refer to the manufacturer’s instructions.) Find more delicious beef recipes, nutrition information, and prep tips at

July 10th-12th

Nugget Resort & Casino Reno, Nv Consignment Deadline: June 22nd


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

Gary Nolan

Mark Venturacci

(775) 934-5678

(775) 427-8713

Elko, NV

Fallon, NV

Steve Lucas

Paradise Valley, NV

(775) 761-7575

Brad Peek— (916) 802-7335 or email us at Look for the catalog and video on our website

Market your cattle with the professionals!

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 17 



e just got through giving the sheep haircuts and they are on the way to the lambing ground. As per usual haying, branding, and shearing always generate high volumes of wind and rain. You can’t cuss the rain but you can sure get to dislike, ”with emphasis”, wind. We stacked the wool bales in front of the wool press to break the wind. It did help; but as you watched the wool entering the jet stream, you knew it would land in China duty free. Eighty percent of the fiber, synthetic and natural, goes through Chinese hands any way so at least it isn’t lost to the world. If we got in a war with China we would have to go naked. Which might scare any enemy into surrender during a fixed bayonet charge. As I hunkered down behind the wool bales during one of the seventy mile an hour gusts, it occurred to me that had I taken up dentistry or had become a lab rat in a laboratory, at least I would be indoors. Our next big adventure will be getting the, “athletically inclined, bovine bombers”, ready for their annual pilgrimage to the San Jacinto grazing

 18 May/June 2017

Mountain Sheep association. This juggernaut begins with lining up trucks and receivers at San Jacinto and more paper work than a loan after Congress passed the Dodd Frank regulations. I am surely not the only person in the state that crosses district lines. I don’t believe that any district lines were changed that only effect one person; but mine did. I used to fill out the crossing certificates for the Korean DMZ, paper work going to San Jacinto. On the return trip, one corner of my winter allotment was in Elko County so I could unload there saving me ninety triplicate papers. Without consultation the line was changed and now not just in triplicate once a year, now I must do it twice a year times three, FUN, FUN, FUN!!!! The winnable suit will be easy to prove for causing a carpel tunnel operation. I looked it up; carbon paper was invented in 1806. I am sure that only my operation is tired of holding up cranky truck drivers as the triplicate papers are filled out. Only the need more sheep Co. has issues after all, running two species, how crass! I am sure that all the two bit cattle thieves are more than happy to accommodate the state department of agriculture and with due diligence cross all the T”S and dot all the eyes so if they get caught surely their

The Progressive Rancher

sentences will be reduced. As a terminal techno-tard, the thought of web sights or texting messages might scare me to extinction; but would be willing to take a big leap from 1806 or at least with carbon paper, get caught up to 1806! I am sure there is a strong argument to how vital to the survival of the cattle industry this program is; but making it this onerous and repetitive only perpetuates why “regulation nation” is failing in the world; but an even stronger argument can be made it merely makes more busy work for bureaucrats to justify jobs and budgets. I thought ranchers voted their staunch independence this last election; but still love state department of redundancy department department paperwork? Don’t forget to turn your copies into Elko as if you should forget you would not be able to get any more DMZ crossing permits the next year. A quick note, keep your windows rolled up on your pickup after saving your copy and Elko’s copies as the voice of experience is telling you, some of mine are on their way to China in the jet stream with the wool. Hang and Rattle! Hank Vogler

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 19 

Nevada native seed forum opens lines of communication to grow industry By Russell Wilhelm, Nevada Department of Agriculture seed program manager


ore than 45 participants representing farmers, ranchers, educators, non-profit organizations and state and federal government gathered in Winnemucca on March 28 for the first Nevada native seed forum. The event, hosted by the Nevada Department of Agriculture (NDA), brought producers, technical experts and land management agencies together to discuss the future of native seed production in Nevada. Our conversations focused on the cycle of seed collection, development and production.

The right seed at the right place at the right time

Questions during the panel discussion highlighted producer involvement and determination of practical native species and achieving quality seed for successful reseeding efforts. Other topics included coordination of federal, state and county agencies, how producers can benefit and native seed implementation including fire, roadside and erosion control.

Nevada seed strategy partners have diverse expertise

With the insight of presenters Michael Taylor and Dick Bartholet, researchers from UNCE, we examined the unpredictable economic market facing the native seed industry. Taylor and Bartholet discussed major issues including lack of research, inconsistent supply and demand and uncertainty regarding species selection. They also provided suggestions to improve market stability.

This conversation continued after lunch as Ed Kleiner of Comstock Seed spoke about his experiences in the industry, highlighting several additional approaches to counteract instability, including the importance of diversification and following industry trends. I also provided information about seed certification and protocol, source identification, lab services available at the NDA. Jeff White, director of rangelands for Newmont North America and vice president of Elko Land and Livestock Company, appreciated the diverse input offered by the forum. “Of course, interaction with those involved in plant materials is of benefit to share ideas and approaches – certainly involving development of new or expanding existing ranch-related enterprises,” White said. “The forum provided detailed information concerning native plant programs, agency and private sector resources for native plants and production of native plant materials.”

Our first session included a panel discussion with representatives from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Forest Services (USFS), Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW), University of Nevada Cooperative Extension (UNCE), Nevada Division of Forestry (NDF), Nevada Department of Agriculture (NDA), and U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). The discussion focused mainly on the national seed strategy and the federal government’s vested interest in assisting in the advancement of native seed. The national seed strategy concentrates nationwide seeding efforts on planting the right seed at the right place at the right time. Through this streamlined strategy, federal partners hope to ensure the availability of genetically appropriate seed reserves that will restore viable and productive plant communities and sustainable ecosystems. Attendees like Jerry Annis of the Saval Ranch in Battle Mountain found the panel discussion valuable to the future health of their Nevada rangelands. “My introduction to the national seed strategy and the chance to meet and network with various agency and private stakeholders was helpful and appreciated,” Annis More than 45 people came together on March 28 for a discussion about the strategies and struggles in native seed. The said. “I look forward to using what I panel included Meghan Brown of the NDA, Michael Taylor of UNCE, Russell Wilhelm of the NDA, Eric Roussel of learned to help improve the health and the NDF, Dirk Netz of the USFS, Sara Kulpa of the USFWS, Lee Turner of NDOW, Fred Edwards of the BLM and resilience of the South Buffalo allotment Christopher Bernau of NRCS. in north central Nevada.”  20 May/June 2017

The Progressive Rancher

Next steps in stimulating Nevada’s native seed industry

Overall, the forum showed that native seed is in demand and there is interest in research, collection and cultivation to see the industry flourish. Our seed producers and buyers identified a variety of tools they would like to see available from government and nonprofit partners: • • • • • • • • • • •

Best practices for native seed production How to get started in native plant production Seed menu describing what agencies want to purchase List of buyers Seed transfer guidance Seed need database Seed producer database Seed/plant fact sheets Formation of a Nevada Native Seed Association Presentations to agriculture related trade associations Essential contacts at the state and federal agencies and how to start selling to them

Attendees said they would like to see recurrence of this forum to maintain open communications in order to see the industry thrive.

Native-grown sagebrush seeds can both be collected off of public lands, with the appropriate permitting, to aid in the production of native grown seed varieties.

Eric Roussel of NDF showed attendees wildland collected rabbitbrush seeds, one step in the process of getting locally sourced native seed.

Native seeds from Antelope bitterbrush (purshia tridentata).

Look for upcoming forums

The NDA is planning a biannual meeting structure to facilitate strategic development of this industry in Nevada. The NDA will announce its next meeting, which is slated for October. Future meetings will address topics such as: • Seed mixes • Monitoring • Storage • Case studies featuring successful rehabilitation and restoration • Economics of seed supply and demand Russell Wilhelm is an agriculturist with the Nevada Department of Agriculture and manages the seed certification program and its seed laboratory. The seed certification program protects the interests of Nevada’s seed industry through inspection of crops and enforcement of state and federal seed laws. The seed laboratory provides testing services for seed identity, viability, purity and seed-borne disease.

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 21 

Strong’s dictionary, word #5544, defines kindness as “goodness in action, sweetness of disposition, gentleness in dealing with others, benevolence, affability; the ability to act for the welfare of those taxing your patience.” Sounds like my husband, Tom. If we yield to the leading of the Holy Spirit, we will not only walk with the power of Jesus, but we will also walk with the character of Jesus, and thereby produce fruit as He bore fruit. So let’s make sure we are grafted into the Tree of Life; then let’s bear the sweet fruit of the Spirit. It’s time. Read: Galatians 5:16-26 (good and bad fruit) James chapters 3 and 4 I Corinthians chapter 13

Happy Mother’s Day! Happy Father’s Day! Have a great summer!

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….

Time for Fruit


by Pastor Diana Gonzalez

ebster’s defines fruit as “often sweet containing seeds; the result of any action”.Summertime is the time for fresh fruit. Makes your mouth water just thinking about fresh cherries and strawberries, doesn’t it? We have a young lady in our home church who enjoys fresh cherries so much that we try to remember to get her some when they are in season. There isn’t an abundance of fruit trees in Nevada is there? Not as you might see in some other states. And the ones you do see seem to bear fruit grudgingly. A Nevada Spring with frost and wind can be hard on fruit trees that try to bloom and bear fruit. However, the blooms that survive produce a very sweet fruit. Although the fruit may not be very large and flamboyant, it is usually sweet. We as Christians should bear fruit also. Jesus said in Matthew 7:20, “Therefore by their fruits you will know them”. We need to realize that our lives affect people either in a positive way or a negative way. If we are Christians, we should want to affect people in a good way, thereby bringing glory to our God. Our actions, or works, are better indicators of our hearts and motives that are flamboyant appearances and claims. Actions speak louder than words, right? As my daughter says, “Preach the Gospel at all times, and if necessary, use words”. We are not saved by works, but we are saved by grace (unmerited favor), through faith (trusting and believing) in Jesus – Ephesians 2:8. However, James said in chapter 2, verse 17, that faith without works is dead. So we should bear fruit, but we should do it with Godly wisdom, not worldly wisdom. In James 3:13-18, James compares worldly wisdom (unspiritual) to heavenly (Godly) wisdom. Both produce fruit of one kind or another. James 3:13-18: Who among you is wise and understanding? Let him show by his good behavior his deeds in the gentleness of wisdom. But if you have bitter jealousy and selfish ambition in your heart, do not be arrogant and so lie against the truth. This wisdom is not that which comes down from above (heavenly), but is earthly, natural (unspiritual), demonic. For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there is disorder and every evil thing. But the wisdom from above is first pure then peaceable, gentle, reasonable, full of mercy and good fruits, unwavering, without hypocrisy. And the seed whose fruit is righteousness is sown in peace by these who make peace. NAS If we are born again believers, we should be yielding to the leading of the Holy Spirit inside of us. He will teach us discernment between carnal living and Godly living. He teaches us as we progress and grow in the Lord through the reading and teaching of the Word. As we grow in the Word, we learn to walk with and abide in His (Holy Spirit) presence. And the more we walk in His presence, the more we’ll learn to walk in love toward one another, and operate with the fruit of the Spirit. Galatians 5:22-25: But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. (Walk in love and you will effectively disarm your enemy.) And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live (abide) in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit (love). NKJV  22 May/June 2017

The Song of the Spurs by Rose It’s an early morning, The sun is peaking over the mountains. I sit up in delight, To see the delicate, weaving colors in the sky. A touch of teal, A hint of blue. A dab of peach, So neat and so fine. All seem to mix, As if in a bowl Of the painters, Painting the sky. I get ready for the day, Calm and peaceful in His presence You could feel Him there. Covering this room I’m ready for this day. My hat, my chaps and my boots. I went to the barn to get some hay, And listen to my spurs sing a tune. Ah! That’s music to my ears, The light tinkle of the rowel. The constant tune for everyone to hear, And always happy, it never sighs. A light beam glows on my steed, Running to and fro. Begging for her feed, And eager to start the day. I grab her halter, Lead her out. Brushed her off, And threw on the saddle. I dance along to the song of the spurs, It always makes me feel happier, To know that you have good companions, And a good day ahead. My mare is ready,

The Progressive Rancher

I swing my leg over, Nice and steady, Looking at the horizon just ahead. Deep breath, Calm down. Fear no death, And ride like the wind. I charge my horse, Attacking the woods. Exploring a new trail. And listening to my spurs. When I’m afraid, I listen for their sound, They’re my aid, Through the whole day. I don’t look to the side, But I see out of the corner of my eye. A wolf trotting with pride, Like a spirit, dancing alongside you. My heart beats faster, My spurs sing louder. I tried to turn around, But my horse flared up. Shortly I was on the ground, The wolves circle ‘round. They came in closer, I could see their fangs, White as clouds, Sharp as stone. I pray to God, And in a beat, He gave it to me, My answered prayer. I saw the leader, Come out of the den. He is quiet and gentle, As a lamb.

He helped me up, And let me go. I wasn’t sure what to do, Or if this could really be Him.

They are special, And I’ll go look for them, If I don’t find them, That is no problem.

By the way he looked at me, I instantly knew that he was The miracle from Heaven, The one that I needed.

Next morning, Same time as always. Pulled my boots on, Pushed my hat on.

I backed away from the pack, Some still wanted to attack But he held them back And gave me room to move.

Walked out the door, and found the wolf. Standin’ with my spurs, Just waiting for me.

His eyes became a gleam of light. This is my chance. I hop on my pony, And never look back.

I took the spurs, Thanked the wolf. He gave me a wink, And hurried back to his pack.

The day passed on, My mare is settled down. I need to rest, And I know she needs it too.

I stared at them, Wondering why he did that. He probably knew that they were special to me

As I walk inside the house, I thought about that old wolf. About the look in his eye, And how he saved my life.

Now when I wear these spurs, They sing a different tune, That brings me back to that day, And what He did for me.

I forgot, my spurs I was so caught up in the day. But I don’t really need them. They’re only a helper.

It’s a possibility that He Did want me to remember Him that day. And to remember him, Always.

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 23 

Nevada’s Best Kept Secret

Conservation Districts (History and Functions) part 2 of 2 University of Nevada Cooperative Extension Gary McCuin, Eureka County Extension Educator

Second VP Nevada Association of Conservation Districts


“People don’t have horse problems, Horses have people problems” Ray Hunt. The same can be said for natural resources

he first article about Conservation Districts outlined the history and philosophy of CD development and the purpose and structure of CD’s at the national and state level in Nevada. The concept of conservation can be traced back to 1662 with John Evelyn’s Sylva – A Discourse of Forest Trees and the propagation of Timber. Later in the 19th century European concerns over depletion of Teak trees used for ship building further advanced forestry conservation and set the foundations of Forestry and conservation in the United States. Since its inception, conservation has focused on the sustainable use of natural resources expressly for their continued use by humans. When Congress, and subsequently the states, created and empowered CD’s, they believed that conservation decisions should be made at the local level and that CD’s should have positive influence and involvement on natural resource issues. CD’s could significantly multiply funding and subsequent local benefits through “on-the-ground” conservation projects and management that is beneficial to both the local community and natural resources. Towards those ends CD’s operate under the following general policies: • That conservation should be led by local citizens; • That the final responsibility for conservation lies with the landowner; • That landowners have legitimate operating goals; • That conservation districts are responsive to landowners, operators, and the community as a whole; and • That the best agricultural land should be maintained for agriculture. This article attempts to define Community Based Conservation and some of its sociological underpinnings. Given this background, I will describe what I believe are fortuitous and significant events that provide opportunities for local communities and industry to affect policy and management of natural resource conservation at the local level on both private and federal lands. Involvement through your local Conservation Districts provides the authority, power and potential for local citizens to manage or co-manage local natural resources for sustainable multiple use for the benefit of the community and their natural resources, i.e. real Community Based Conservation. Wikipedia defines Community Based Conservation “as a conservation movement that emerged in the 1980s through escalating protests and subsequent dialogue with local communities affected by international attempts to  24 May/June 2017

protect the biodiversity of the earth. The object The terms cooperate, coordinate and consult of community-based conservation is to incorpodenote a desire by Congress that federal, state rate improvement to the lives of local people”. and local governments work together for the Federal wildlife and land management agencies philosophy of management has developed very general welfare of all citizens with special differently. These agencies were created and emphasis on localized needs. authorized by Congress to manage and protect natural resources through law and regulation. working partnerships can be built between managers and Generally speaking, their management begins at the resource users, i.e. Community Based Conservation. national level and devolves to the local level. Particularly Adaptive management, or as social scientists term in Nevada, this philosophy of “top down, command and “Adaptive co-management” is often crucial to the success control” management has created significant controversy of these partnerships and ultimately a workable solution, and conflict between the federal agencies, local citizens which recognizes, as a starting point, that information and communities. Resource management professionals will never be perfect. The use of imperfect information have long recognized that social factors and communica- for management necessitates a close cooperation and tion are increasingly essential in resolving conflict and risk-sharing between the management agency and local achieving meaningful conservation and application of people. Such a process requires cooperation, transparency, constructive management. and accountability so that a learning environment can be Many of our environmental problems, including created and practice can build on experience over time. those related to conservation, do not lend themselves Adaptive co-management captures two key elements to to analysis by the conventional, rational approach of making community-based conservation work: sharing of defining the problem, collecting and analyzing data as management power and responsibility—as opposed to the basis for making decisions and crafting regulations. token consultation and passive participation—and creatThere is too much variability which creates uncertainty; ing a context that encourages learning and stewardship goals keep shifting and objectives are often not defined and builds mutual trust (Berkes, 2004). This approach, and are difficult to achieve in the timeframe we desire. bringing the community actively into the management Issues must be constantly redefined and regulatory con- process, is fundamentally different from the top down straints/gridlock often obstruct the ability of users and command-and-control style that has historically defined managers to achieve timely management adaptations. All federal wildlife and land management. Incentives to of these factors combined create a class of problems that Community Based Conservation and management are social scientists have termed “wicked problems” (Rittel, multidimensional. Equity –fairness in the distribution 1973). They have “no definitive formulation, there is of benefits-and empowerment are often more important incomplete or contradictory knowledge, there are a large than monetary incentives (Chambers, 1983). Workable number of people and opinions involved, there can be Community Based Conservation helps inform and implelarge economic burdens, and any one problem or issue is ment decision making processes that are legitimate, acinterconnected with other problems. There is no template countable, and inclusive and that take into account multo follow when tackling a “wicked problem” and teams tiple stakeholders and interests. Knowledge is power, and that approach wicked problems must literally make things the use of local and traditional ecological knowledge is a up as they go along. There is no definitive right or wrong mechanism for co-managementand empowerment. Local answer and it is very difficult to measure success because indigenous knowledge is utilized in the cooperative pro“wicked problems” bleed into other “wicked problems” cess of creating conservation projects and management (think about Sage-grouse planning and the Wild Horse strategies. Two key processes: (1) sharing of management and Burro controversy). Thus, a new approach to natural power and responsibility through multiple institutional resource science and management is evolving through a partnerships that involve government agencies, Nonprocess by which researchers, managers and stakeholders Governmental Organizations (NGO’s), and communities interact, often with professional facilitation, to define im- and (2) feedback learning and building of mutual trust portant questions, objectives of study, relevant evidence among the partners are necessary for sustained successful and incorporate local knowledge and needs to develop Community Based Conservation. a course of action. To deal with these complex systems, The Progressive Rancher

Given the background just provided, we can review the statutory authorities of CD’s, legislative factors and events that I feel has poised and empowered CD’s to have real positive impact and power through Community Based Conservation. In Nevada and many other western states, where the federal government administers and manages significant portions of the land within the state, CD’s serve a vital role connecting private and public interests. NRS Chapter 548 grants CD’s specific duties and powers to develop and carry out the District policies or Conservation Plans for the conservation and management of renewable natural resources across both private and federal land. NRS 548.113, recently passed by the State Legislature, officially recognizes that CD’s “may be recognized as having special expertise regarding local conditions, conservation of renewable resources and the coordination of local programs which make conservation districts uniquely suitable to serve as cooperating agencies for the purpose of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 et seq., and any other federal laws regarding land management, and to provide local government coordination for the purposes of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. §§ 1701 et seq., and any other federal laws regarding land management”. As a “cooperating agency,” CD’s get a seat at the table with the proposing agency and other cooperating agencies to provide comments, offer suggestions and assist in the development of the management action being drafted. This provides the opportunity to ensure that local natural resource plans and policy of the CD and county is considered at the very beginning of the NEPA process, not merely as a member of the public commenting on the proposed action after the action is drafted. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLMPA) provides explicit directives for the BLM to coordinate federal land use planning with county governments (including CD’s), and to ensure that federal land use plans are consistent with local plans to the maximum extent possible. Federal agencies are required to coordinate with state and local agencies 43 CFR 46.155 (DOI). In 2008 the Farm Bill provided an allowance to expend EQIP funds on federal lands where resource issues and impacts extend across ownership and management boundaries creating new opportunity. It is essential to recognize, understand, and utilize, to the fullest extent possible, the authorities granted by state and federal statute to CD’s in the planning, development, and implementation of resource management plans and policies at the local level. A general lack of recognition of these duties and powers of CD’s by federal land and wildlife management agencies, and more significantly, by CD’s themselves may be one of the reasons that CD’s, in general, across Nevada are not functioning at their full potential. When dealing with federal agencies locally developed natural resource conservation plans are crucial to local guidance, acceptance, and management of natural resources on federally administered lands. On July 16, 2013 the National Association of

Conservation Districts (NACD) and the United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) providing for a cooperative working relationship between the NACD and the BLM. The MOU provides for similar arrangements between State BLM offices and State Conservation District Associations such as the Nevada Association of Conservation Districts (NvACD) The intent is to “form a framework for cooperation that supports common goals and interests in managing, developing, and protecting federal and private land and water resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner, consistent with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements”. This MOU recognizes and supports the role of Conservation Districts taking the leading role in administering locally led conservation practices and provides for national and local sharing of technical, fiscal and administrative support to local conservation districts. This relationship will help to develop and implement specific plans of action for cooperative conservation activities on private land that can benefit neighboring public land resources and vice versa. The Nevada Collaboration Conservation Network (NCCN) was kicked off with a two and one-half day training (November 29 through December 2, 2016) where more than 80 participants from across Nevada came together to learn collaborative processes and develop relationships among the people who will implement the sage-grouse plan amendments and the people who will be affected by them. The State of Nevada, the Bureau of Land Management, and the US Forest Service sponsored the workshop in partnership with the BLM National Collaborative Action and Resolution Office. During this training, trainees identified that there was a lack of cross-agency, cross-partner conservation and communication in sagebrush management to promote this collaborative network. Participants identified an overall desire for this network to achieve Sagebrush ecosystem enhancement in addition to implementation of the sage-grouse plan amendments. As obstacles participants specifically identified a lack of: 1) Trained available facilitators, 2) A strategy to pool funding, and 3) A designated position that will help elevate sagebrush local conservation efforts The NCCN workshop recognized and identified that Nevada is a unique and diverse state where implementation of federal land use plan amendments is best understood and accomplished by incorporating local science and knowledge provided by those closest to the land. In order for federal land management agencies like the BLM and U.S. Forest Service to successfully implement the actions described in the sage-grouse plan amendments for Nevada, collaboration between state, federal, and local partners operating in an adaptive management environment is essential. Community Based Conservation, which is initiated and developed at the local level and is beneficial to both the community and natural resources is imperative in order to regain local trust, input and acceptance for implementation of any meaningful land management actions going The Progressive Rancher

forward. To help promote this bottom up approach to sagebrush ecosystem collaboration, the State of Nevada’s Sagebrush Ecosystem Council approved the concept of developing the NCCN in late 2016. For more information go to the Sagebrush Ecosystem Website at and click on Collaborative Network under ABOUT at the bottom of the page. Sage grouse with all the controversy, fear and consternation surrounding this species has initiated a conversation in Nevada creating a unique opportunity where local communities, state and federal partners and numerous NGO’s are all supportive of cooperative joint efforts to streamline conservation delivery in Nevada and have the opportunity to craft their own local version.

“It is about creating a space and a place for the community to come together.” Laura Van Riper, Facilitator Conservation Districts across the nation continue to identify, prioritize, plan and implement community based local conservation programs on vast acreages; across ownership boundaries; utilizing private and federal partnerships and leveraging private and federal funds on projects and resource management that is beneficial to the local community and society at large. Conservation Districts in Nevada are accomplishing great things within their Districts. However, due to a general lack of funding and recognition in Nevada of the potential CD’s have to identify, implement and manage natural resources within local communities keeps Nevada CD’s from realizing and accomplishing what has been accomplished in other states. History bears out that there is a pervasive independent spirit of the citizens of the “Battle Born” state to demand local governance particularly in regards to management of land and natural resources. Utilizing the full potential and authority of the Conservation Districts Program and Conservation Districts offers a very real and legal means to accomplish that desire. There is more opportunity for involvement and real beneficial impact at the local level than ever before. But in order to realize the benefits, local people must become involved at the local level with their Conservation Districts and the NCCN to make the opportunity become the reality. Contact your local CD and become involved, attend meetings, ask questions, offer solutions and help identify and plan projects, volunteer to help accomplish what you want to see happen in your area. Then Nevada’s best kept Secret may become her best Success Story. Works Cited Berkes, F. (2004). Rethinking Community-Based Conservation. Conservation Biology, 18: 621–630. Chambers, R. (1983). Rural development: putting the last first. London: Longman. Holling, C. S. (1996). Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management. Rittel, H. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 155-169.

May/June 2017 25 

Nevada Ranchers Caretakers of our


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

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.

 26 May/June 2017

The Progressive Rancher

Nevada Ranchers Launch Aggressive Ad Campaigns in 2017


n behalf of Nevada’s Public Land Ranchers, the Nevada Rangeland Resources Commission has approved an aggressive advertising effort scheduled throughout 2017. Annually, the Commission has the responsibility of considering funding proposals that educate or inform the public about the ranchers role in public land grazing. This year they considered requests all with programs designed to promote responsible grazing on Nevada’s rangelands. Nevada ranchers with public land grazing allotments fund the NRRC based on the number of AUM’s they are authorized to graze on their respective allotments. A major portion of the funding will, be allocated to a year long, multimedia advertising campaign that will include the airing of two hour long documentaries, a television advertising campaign and the launch of a social media program. All will be tied to an expanded educational series targeting both our state’s young people and their teachers, according to Rachel Buzzetti, NRRC Commission Secretary. Specific projects proposed by Golden Productions approved by the NRRC commission include: Golden Productions videographer, Alex Muench A 30 minute docucaptures footage for the NRRC funded documentary targeting both mentary “The Arid West’. Muench has filmed ranchers and “Future and edited four award winning documentaries Stewards of the Range” in the “Stewards of the Rangeland” series. will be filmed at Smith Creek Ranch in the Desatoya Mountains in June. The documentary will air in the Fall of 2017 on Charter media channel 195 available in 101,000 households in Western Nevada. “The Arid West”, a 60 minute documentary, exploring the many issues that the prolonged drought in Nevada caused for Nevada Ranchers, particularly the Argenta grazing controversy of 2014-15, will be updated and aired summer of 2017. The successful advertising campaign launched in 2016 on Reno TV channels KAME Fox 11and KRXI My21 will again be aired in 2017 and include 30 second and 15 second commercials under a “Responsible Ranching” theme that will inform viewers of the ranchers perspective on the wild horse issue, sagegrouse, grazing fees and sustainable grazing. All commercials can be viewed on www.nevada by clicking on advertising campaigns. The Stewards educational series originally funded and created in 2013 will be expanded and given new life in an alliance with the Nevada Department of Agriculture’s “Ag in the Classroom” program. Created to conform to current Nevada curriculum standards NRRC funded series will now be presented to educators in a Ag in the Classroom teachers workshop in the summer as well as through the students attending the Rangeland summer camp. 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. Current commissioners include: Hank Vogler, Chairman, Rama Paris, Vice Chairman, Tim Delong, Hank Combs, Bert Paris, Joe Kircher, Mike Riordan, Richard Huntsberger and Mitch Heguy.

Gabe and Dennis Golden have produced five television documentaries for the Nevada Rangeland Resources Commission. “The Arid West”, to air in 2017, targets the controversy between ranchers and the Battle Mountain BLM relative to grazing policy on the Argenta Allotment in central Nevada.

Nevada Senators vote to keep their pensions hidden from taxpayer scrutiny


By Robert Fellner Nevada Policy Research Institute April 21, 2017

oday, 11 state senators — most of whom are PERS members themselves — just passed a completely unenforceable law aimed at making private their taxpayer-funded pensions.Such a singular focus on keeping the public in the dark, and perhaps a lack of proper understanding of the subject matter, resulted in language that plainly states the names of all public employees in Nevada would be confidential under the just-passed SB384. Passing laws that place every Nevada government in a continual state of lawbreaking and, thus, subject to legal action, is bad policy. “In their zeal to place the public pension system — not to mention their very own pensions — under a shroud of secrecy, Nevada senators have just passed a bill that would place an unenforceable requirement on every government agency,” explained Nevada Policy Research Institute Transparency Director Robert Fellner. 10 senators — all 9 Republicans and Democratic state Senator Nicole Cannizzaro — stood up for transparent government and sound policymaking by voting against SB384 today. “NPRI applauds the Republican caucus and Senator Cannizzaro for supporting the principles of a transparent and accountable government,” commented Fellner. “But, unfortunately, it wasn’t enough to keep this blatant affront to transparency from moving forward.” If SB384 passes the Assembly and is not vetoed by the Governor, Nevada will have undone the will of multiple legislative bodies who fought for a transparent and accountable government. “Unfortunately, the law was so poorly written, it goes even further,” explained Fellner. “This vote shows just how blindly focused on reducing transparency many of our elected representatives seem to be. “Does this Legislature really want to reverse Nevada’s history of bipartisan agreement on the importance of a transparent and accountable government, particularly for a bill that was rammed through the Senate on the narrowest of margins, and is based entirely on a claim that is demonstrably false? Especially given the blatant conflict of interest illustrated by the fact that almost all of the 11 senators who voted in favor of SB384 are PERS members themselves.”

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 27 

Marketing Calves and the Price Slide


e always enjoy driving around the country this time of year seeing all of the new calves on the ground. For ranchers it is a time of long days and nights, but also a time of renewed optimism as new life brings new opportunities. Now that there are calves on the ground and a few more to come it is not too early to think about marketing. Ok, so we admit, marketing is always near the top of our list, but now really is a good time to give it some thought. One of the common methods of marketing is forward contracting, with ranchers utilizing both video sales and order buyers to secure sales early in the summer. One question or concern that we hear quite often is; What is the price slide? This question is usually followed by the question; Is the price slide fair?

What is the price slide? When a buyer and seller enter into a forward contract on calves there is an agreed upon price per cwt. and an agreed upon shipping weight. As we all know price per cwt. fluctuates with weight. Lighter calves bring a higher price and as weight increase bid prices decline. It is not always easy to make sure that the average calf weight comes out to the exact agreed upon figure. We can have good years and bad years in the West and both affect calf weights. Generally, when a seller enters a forward contract they are conservative on the estimated weight of their calves. If they contracted 500 lbs. calves at $135 per cwt., they would not want to end up selling 450 pound calves at the same price. While being conservative on the weight estimate usually works to protect the sellers interest, it is not very helpful for the buyer. The buyer wants to be protected against overweight calves. In the previous example if the contract was for 500 lbs. calves at $135 cwt. the buyer would not want to pay that same agreed upon price for 550 calves. Hence we get the price slide. The price slide is an agreed upon discount to protect against overweight calves. The price slide can vary from contract to contract, but generally ranges from $5 - $10 per cwt. If the agreed upon slide is $5 that means for every 100 pounds above the agreed upon weight, the agreed upon price will be $5 per cwt. less. Does that mean that the price slide only works in 100 pound increments? No, the price slide adjusts to the exact weight of the calves. Let’s look at an example to clarify.  28 May/June 2017

by Master Stockman Consulting

Example – Calves are contracted at 500 lbs. at $135 with an overweight price slide of $5. The actual shipping weight of the calves ends up at 515 lbs. The new market price would be $135 – ((15 lbs. / 100) X $5) = $134.25. Is the price slide fair? As sellers, ranchers generally don’t like getting less per pound for their calves. However, often times the per pound discount is still in the sellers favor. The answer to the question of is the price slide fair depends on the cost of gain. If the difference in value due to the added weight is equal to or less than the cost of gain, then the seller should be comfortable with the slide. • • • •

Projected value: 500 lbs. X $135/100 = $675 Actual value: 515 lbs. X $134.25/100 = $691.39 Value difference: $691.39 - $675 = $16.39 Break-even Cost of Gain: $16.39 / 15 lbs. = $1.09 According to this example if the seller can add 15 lbs. of weight on their calves for less than $1.09 per pound then the negotiated price slide is a benefit to the seller.

Conclusion Forward contracting can be a good way to mitigate price risk. The answer to the question, Is the price slide fair, is “it depends”. Use the calculator to find out the break-even cost of gain and make your decision from there is my recommendation. Bridger Feuz – Owner Master Stockman Consulting University of Wyoming Livestock Marketing Specialist Hudson Hill – Master Stockman Consulting University of Wyoming Area Educator Barton Stam – Master Stockman Consulting University of Wyoming Area Educator

New Wyoming Ranch Tools Calculator We developed a calculator on the Wyoming Ranch Tools website (www. to help ranchers analyze the price slide. The calculator works through the same math in the example to provide a break-even cost of gain. Users can enter their own contracted price and weight, as well as the agreed upon price slide. The user then enters the actual shipping weight the complete the calculation. This is a great way to analyze a forward contracting opportunity on calves. The Progressive Rancher

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 29 

News Release

Low Interest Emergency Physical Loss Loans Available for 16 Idaho Counties with Assistance to Producers in Surrounding States Contact: Annie Smith


OISE, Idaho, April 24, 2017 – U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Service Agency (FSA) Acting Administrator Chris Beyerhelm today announced that physical loss loans are available for 16 counties in Idaho. Farm operators who have suffered major physical losses caused by blizzard, excessive snow, excessive rain, freeze, flooding, flash flooding and high winds that occurred on Dec. 22, 2016, and continuing, may be eligible for emergency loans. This Administrator’s Physical Loss Notification has been issued for Adams, Benewah, Blaine, Bonner, Boundary, Butte, Custer, Gooding, Jerome, Kootenai, Lemhi, Lincoln, Payette, Shoshone, Twin Falls and Washington counties as the primary damaged area. Additionally, 16 Idaho counties are contiguous to this designated disaster area, making these producers also potentially eligible for programs based on this designation. The contiguous counties are: Bingham, Boise, Camas, Canyon, Cassia, Clark, Clearwater, Elmore, Gem, Idaho, Jefferson, Latah, Minidoka, Owyhee, Power and Valley. The following contiguous counties in surrounding states are also eligible for emergency loans:

Montana: Beaverhead, Lincoln, Mineral, Ravalli and Sanders counties Nevada: Elko County Oregon: Baker, Malheur and Wallowa counties Washington: Pend Oreille, Spokane and Whitman counties Emergency loans may be made available to any applicant with a qualifying loss in the counties named above. Approval is limited to applicants who suffered severe physical losses only. Physical loss loans may be made to eligible farmers and ranchers to repair or replace damaged or destroyed physical property essential to the success of the agriculture operation, including livestock losses. Examples of property commonly affected include essential farm buildings, fixtures to real estate, equipment, livestock, perennial crops, fruit and nut bearing trees, and harvested or stored crops and hay. Producers in eligible counties have eight months from the date of the declaration to apply for loans for physical losses. Please contact FSA for more information on loan eligibility and the application process. FSA office information is available at Additional FSA disaster assistance program information is available at

News Release

USDA Designates Pershing County in Nevada as a Primary Natural Disaster Area


Contact: Latawnya Dia

ASHINGTON, April 12, 2017 — In response to a request from Janice Kolvet, Farm Service Agency’s (FSA) acting State Executive Director in Nevada, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has designated Pershing County in Nevada as a primary natural disaster area due to losses and damages caused by a drought that occurred from Jan. 1, 2016, through Dec. 31, 2016. Farmers and ranchers in Churchill, Humboldt, Lander and Washoe counties in Nevada also qualify for natural disaster assistance because their counties are contiguous. All counties listed above were designated natural disaster areas on April 12, 2017, making all qualified farm operators in the designated areas eligible for FSA’s emergency (EM) loans, provided eligibility requirements are met. Farmers in eligible counties have eight months from the date of the declaration to apply for loans to help cover part of their actual losses. FSA will consider each loan application on its own merits, taking into account the

 30 May/June 2017

extent of losses, security available and repayment ability. FSA has a variety of programs, in addition to the EM loan program, to help eligible farmers recover from adversity. Other FSA programs that can provide assistance, but do not require a disaster declaration, include Operating and Farm Ownership Loans; the Emergency Conservation Program; Livestock Forage Disaster Program; Livestock Indemnity Program; Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honeybees and Farm-Raised Fish Program; and the Tree Assistance Program. Interested farmers may contact their local USDA service centers for further information on eligibility requirements and application procedures for these and other programs. Additional information is also available online at http:// FSA news releases are available on FSA’s website at via the “Newsroom” link.

The Progressive Rancher

News Release Secretary Zinke Appoints Skipwith and MacGregor to key Interior posts Contact: Annie Smith


ASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke announced the appointment of two Deputy Assistant Secretaries to serve as leaders at the Department and help carry out the President’s priorities to put America first. Aurelia Skipwith will serve as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks and former House Natural Resources senior staffer Katharine MacGregor will serve as a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management. “I’m excited to appoint two women of extremely high caliber to help lead the Department of the Interior into the next century of service for the American people,” said Secretary Zinke. “Ms. Skipwith and Ms. MacGregor bring with them decades of experience on natural resources, wildlife, agricultural, and legal matters. I have no doubt they will help shape and strengthen the Department and allow

us to better serve the American people as we manage and conserve our land and resources.” Aurelia Skipwith will serve as a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks. In that role, Skipwith will assist in the development and implementation of the Administration’s policy objectives on matters relating to our public lands and wildlife. Skipwith brings with her years of national and international experience in both the public and private sectors and nonprofits. Skipwith is graduate of Howard University and earned a J.D. from the University of Kentucky. She is a licensed member of the Kentucky Bar. Katharine MacGregor will serve as a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management. MacGregor will advise the Assistant Secretary and Secretary on energy development and public land use. Before joining the Department, MacGregor was a senior staff member of the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources of the House Natural Resources Committee. Prior to that, MacGregor served as the Legislative Director for then-Majority Leader Eric Cantor. She is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania with a Bachelor of Arts and Sciences.

Aurelia Skipwith, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks

Katharine MacGregor, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 31 

N Farm Bureau Nevada evada Farm Bureau

April Legislative Update


he rush for the deadline to process legislative proposals in the various committees of the Assembly or Senate (depending on where they were introduced) has passed -- (April 14) Those measures which did not come out of committee in time to meet the deadline and which didn’t have an exemption granted to cover them, are no longer in the mix for further consideration. April 25 marks the next major legislative deadline where the Senate must send their non-exempt bills down the hall to be considered, and the Assembly must do the same. Legislation not meeting this crossover deadline will meet the same fate as those bills, which did not make the April 14 committee deadline.

Nevada Farm Bureau’s top priority for this legislative session has been water and the schedule to this point has been filled with a number of different water proposals being offered by legislators, the State Engineer, the interim committee that was assigned to study water and others who worked to bring their ideas forward in bill drafts. Most of the water bills received a hearing by the natural resource committees they were assigned to. Not all of the bills are still alive for further consideration and most of those which are still being considered on the floors of the Senate or Assembly have been amended from their original versions. SB 47 is one of the significant water proposals that Nevada Farm Bureau has been involved with. The bill was introduced by the State Engineer and covered operational details for applications for water rights and corrections to terms used in various water-related statutes. Nevada Farm Bureau was specifically interested in dealing with the notification process used by the State Engineer in responding to water right owners who are pending forfeiture of their groundwater rights for non-use. Farm Bureau policy supports a one-year notification to be issued, prior to any forfeiture. Practices by the State Engineer in use for responding to the notification process were not meeting what Farm Bureau and others felt as respecting the due process. Of amendments attached to SB 47 by the Senate Natural Resources Committee, prior to passing it forward for action by the entire State Senate, a one-year notification for forfeiture was included to make the process much more explicit. Last minute additions also adjust the timeframes for the  32 May/June 2017

By: Doug Busselman, Nevada Farm Bureau

State Engineer to use in treating extensions for those seeking continued time to put their water to beneficial use. This adjustment is intended to provide something other than a limited year-to-year option for extensions by non-municipal water right owners, giving the State Engineer flexibility to consider every water right owners’ request for an exemption from forfeiture to cover more than a single year. Forfeiture consideration is also part of a proposal brought forward by Assemblyman James Oscarson of Pahrump. AB 209 is intended to avoid water being used needlessly in order to avoid forfeiture for non-use in situations of drought or in areas that have been designated as critical management areas or are in basins where groundwater pumping consistently exceeds perennial yield. The request for an extension must come within the timeframe prior to the forfeiture process running its appropriate course and the extension is not allowed to exceed three years. In order for the consideration to be given for drought conditions, the basin where the water right is located needs to be in a county that has been officially designated as being in a drought. Protection of existing water right owners continues to be a major priority for Farm Bureau’s involvement in working on AB 298. This proposal gained significant redrafting work from the time of introduction to gaining passage by the Assembly Natural Resources, Agriculture and Mining Committee on April 13. The amendments were brought forward for consideration by a working group of stakeholders who have been involved in discussions about the legislation even before the Legislative session began. Nevada Farm Bureau is one of the members of this working group of stakeholders, who will also be continuing to be meeting to discuss sticking points that haven’t been finalized. AB 298 covers formalizing details and creating a legislative framework for 3M Plans (monitoring, management and mitigation) when the State Engineer responds to major water applications which fit within the prior appropriations process, but still might create conflicts with existing water right owners. A Senate version of this concept was brought forward in the form of SB 134, but was not successful in gaining passage prior to the committee deadline. The Senate bill, by Senators Pete Goicoechea of Eureka and Senator Aaron Ford of Las Vegas, also was narrower in scope than the AB 298 proposal.

The Progressive Rancher

Beyond water bills remaining on Nevada Farm Bureau’s radar, two Assembly bills related to Cooperative Extension are of major interest going forward for the remaining legislative schedule. AB 16 was brought forward by the Nevada Association of Counties (NACO) and was amended prior to passage by the Assembly Natural Resources, Agriculture and Mining Committee. The aim of the bill is to provide greater transparency and awareness for the cooperative operations of partnership funding coming from counties, the state and the federal government. This would come in the form of annual reports from Cooperative Extension to the Nevada Legislature on the program of work carried out the previous year as well as the funding from the various sources used to carry out this work. Also provided as a requirement for the annual report are updates that have been made to the cooperative agreements with Cooperative Extension and counties. Increased funding for Cooperative Extension is also a major part of AB 16, calling for the Nevada System of Higher Education, to boost the funding from state appropriations to match the funds raised by counties who assess for Cooperative Extension as part of their property taxes. Nevada Farm Bureau testified in support of AB 16 on the basis of support for the increased transparency and improved funding for Cooperative Extension in Nevada. AB 407 is a bill regarding Cooperative Extension that Nevada Farm Bureau is not supporting. It proposes to split Cooperative Extension into a Northern and Southern regional organization with the University of Nevada in Reno (UNR) directing operations for counties in the Northern region and the University of Nevada in Las Vegas (UNLV) direction operations for three counties (Clark, Lincoln and Nye) in the Southern Region. The amended language of AB 407 also designates UNLV and the Desert Research Institute as formally being considered (along with UNR) as the state’s “Land Grant University”. AB 407 was amended and passed by the Assembly Education Committee on April 14. For further information on legislative information, we welcome your contact by email at We also encourage you to follow along using the Legislature’s website at

N Farm Bureau Nevada evada Farm Bureau

Traveling to DC and Back Again By James “Hank” Combs, President, Nevada Farm Bureau Federation


arch was a busy month for us at the Nevada Farm Bureau. Several Farm Bureau leaders from Nevada traveled to Washington D.C. to attend the 2017 American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) Farm Bureau Advocacy Conference. This group was lead by Nevada Farm Bureau Vice President Bevan Lister. While in Washington D.C. the group met with Senator Dean Heller and Congressman Mark Amodei. They discussed important issues Nevada Farm Bureau members are concerned about including: tax reform, land bills and immigration. Also in March, the American Farm Bureau Federation and 11 other farm and ranch groups asked congressional budget and appropriations committees to increase funding for farm programs in the 2018 farm bill. The bill highlighted the importance of a farm safety net. With the warmer weather approaching we are preparing for the busy season ahead. The Nevada Farm Bureau is participating in an exciting events this month I would love to see our members be apart of. Next, we have the 2017 Ag-Day at the Nevada Legislature; with the theme “My Day in Ag” will be held on Tuesday, April 25 from 11:30 am to 2pm on the legislative mall (located adjacent to the Legislative Building) in Carson City. Activates and information available for the event are geared to give legislatures and others associated with the legislative process the opportunity to explore how agriculture impacts their lives everyday. Farm Bureau members are welcome to attend and participate. Interact you’re your representatives and advocate for Nevada agriculture. Lunch tickets are available for $25. We strongly encourage are members to participate in Ag-Day at the Nevada Legislature. The bigger the turnout the more our voices are heard. Lets all have a Fantastic April!

The Progressive Rancher

Nevada Agriculture Outlook 2017 By: Brittney Pericoli, Director of Communications


he Nevada Agriculture Outlook was held on April 7th covering topics that included: Nevada Ag outlook highlights, Internet security for agriculture and analysis of impacts of public land grazing. It was originated from the Washoe County Cooperative Extension Office and included multiple local sites throughout the state through compressed video. The first speaker was Mike Helmar, Research Analyst, and Agricultural Economist at University of Nevada Reno. Helmar focused his speech on Nevada Ag outlook highlights. The notable highlights of his speech included points, which suggest:

• Beef cow profitability will decline for a few more years • Dairy returns could still constrain herd expansion • Hay and other feed prices will stay low • Overall Nevada agricultural sector will be modestly profitable, but no record ranch/farm income Helmar provided his research in variety of data graphs to support his findings. The other speaker was James Elste, Information Systems and Faculty Adviser at the University of Nevada Reno. Elste focused his speech on Internet security for agriculture. Agriculture and cyber technology are combining forces in a rapidly changing sector as many farm/ranch operations are using datadriven innovations. The overall message of his speech was for individuals to understand the importance of protecting themselves and their operations from the growing cyber threats the world is facing. A simple way to protect yourself from a cyber threats is by using a six word phrase password (bookskittenslambsporkdockpuppy). By creating this six-word password you are creating additional protection that goes beyond using your traditional uppercase lower case password that can be easily guessed. The wrap-up speaker was Thomas R. Harris, Professor and Director of Center For Economic Development at the University of Nevada Reno. Harris’s focus was on the analysis of impacts of public land grazing on the Elko County economy. This part was an update on his work to fine tune the economic needle used to analyze the values of livestock grazing permits for federal lands as well as the economic contributions to the local economy. May/June 2017 33 

White House Takes Important First Step to Reining in the Antiquities Act


By Ed Frank and Shawna Newsome

ASHINGTON (April 26, 2017) – The Public Lands Council and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association applaud the executive order signed today that calls for a review of designations made under the Antiquities Act by previous presidents. Dave Eliason, PLC president, said while the Act was intended to preserve Native American artifacts and areas of historical importance, Presidents have instead used the Act to bypass Congress and local communities to place heavy restrictions on massive swaths of land. Most recently, President Obama boasted of using the Antiquities Act more than any previous president— locking up 256 million acres of land and water in 30 separate designations. “Western communities have been calling on Congress for years to address the continued abuse of the Antiquities Act. Elevating millions of acres to monument status without local input or economic analysis results in unrecoverable losses to the local communities.” In 1996, southern Utah faced a devastating reality when President Clinton designated 1.9 million acres as the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. Livestock grazing was drastically reduced from 106,000 AUMs. Now there are only 35,000 AUMs in use. The Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument in Oregon was initially created in 2000 by President Clinton and comprised 53,000 acres of public land. In the final days of his tenure in the White House, President Obama went on to expand the monument by another 48,000 acres. This expansion will effectively prohibit logging on approximately 35,000 acres, adding to the risk of wildfire as fuel loads increase, and negatively affecting the economy of multiple counties within the monument. “The Executive Order is an important first step to reining in past designations that were pushed through without local input,” said NCBA President Craig Uden. “However, in order to bring the Act back to its original intent, Congress must act. Sen. Murkowski’s bill S. 33 Improved National Monument Designation Process Act would require Congressional approval of new designations, taking the power away from the Administration and placing back into the hands of those most impacted.” The livestock industry, which supports many of the western communities, stands ready to work with the administration and assist in their review of designations and calls on Congress to pass Sen. Murkowski’s legislation without delay.  The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) has represented America’s cattle producers since 1898, preserving the heritage and strength of the industry through education and public policy.  As the largest association of cattle producers, NCBA works to create new markets and increase demand for  34 May/June 2017

beef. Efforts are made possible through membership contributions. To join, contact NCBA at 1-866-BEEF-USA or PLC has represented livestock ranchers who use public lands since 1968, preserving the natural resources and unique heritage of the West. Ranchers who utilize public lands own nearly 120 million acres of the most productive private land and manage vast areas of public land, accounting for critical wildlife habitat and the nation’s natural resources. PLC works to maintain a stable business environment in which livestock producers can conserve the West and feed the nation and world. 

The Progressive Rancher

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 35 

My Road to the Nevada High School Youth Forum Letty Vega and Dan Harmon Nevada Section, Society for Range Management High School Youth Forum Representative and Agricultural Science Research Technician, USDA-Agricultural Research Service, Reno, NV


y name is Letty Vega and I am a 17 year old senior from Elko, Nevada (Figure 1). Since I was 13 years old I have been attending the Nevada Youth Range Camp. This is by far one of the best decisions that I have ever made. Not only did I learn a little bit of everything about rangelands and range management, but I also made forever lasting friendships, and was given amazing opportunities (Figure 2). When range camp was first introduced to me, I was a freshman at Elko High School. My best friend suggested we go to range camp over the summer, which is put on by the Nevada Section-Society for Range Management. I had no previous knowledge of what range camp was, but it didn’t stop me from saying, “of course!” Who wouldn’t want to go camping for a week somewhere new with their best friend? After that first camp, held on the 3rd week every June, I was hooked. It didn’t take long for me to realize these were my kind of people. We were all from different parts of the state with a common interest; our rangelands. Throughout the week, campers worked with counselors on topics ranging from soil texture to riparian restoration. Curriculum mainly focused on land management issues. My favorite part about the first year was going to Smith Creek Ranch and helping with a stream channel improvement project. Right away I felt the positivity of working together to benefit the land. I have been fortunate enough to return to Smith Creek Ranch the years following for additional projects including planting willows, water developments and reducing pinyon and juniper encroachments. I grew up in Elko, Nevada and my family has been ranching in Northern Nevada since the 1890’s. My great- great grandfather came from Spain and my great-greatgreat grandmother from Italy. They started the ranch in North Fork when they originally homesteaded the property. On the ranch they ran three bands of sheep, 200 head of horses, 700 head of cows, and grew their own hay. When I was little, my family reunions were the brandings out on the ranch. All the cousins that weren’t quite working age would play together in the pasture, barn, and horse trailers. After all the work was done everyone would go into the house where my Uncle Guy would sit in his old chair and my Aunt Diana would be setting up for lunch. Everyone would be going back and forth from the kitchen and the living room talking and helping with whatever needed to be done. These are some of my fondest childhood memories (Figure 3). My grandpa was in FFA and my aunt was a state officer for Nevada. I am now in FFA where I compete in range science and veterinary medicine. The life that I lived everyday was not just daily life, it was a life filled with science and management that I began to appreciate even more when I started attending range camp. Besides being a fun outdoor experience, range camp uses applied science to teach basic principles and management tools to use when addressing rangeland issues. At the end of the week there is an awards ceremony in which the counselors determined the “Trail Boss”- the camper who had gone above and beyond to work hard, expand their learning, and help others. Not only is this an award of proud achievement but this person is chosen to go to the Society for Range Management National Meeting that is held annually, to represent the Nevada Section and participate in the Society for Range Management High School Youth Forum. Last year right before my senior year of high school, I was awarded Trail Boss and was chosen to attend the Society for Range Management National Meeting in St. George, Utah. Prior to leaving for the National Meeting, I presented my presentation to the Nevada Section at their annual winter meeting.  36 May/June 2017

In the high school youth forum, students from all over the United States, Canada and South America compete by giving a presentation and submitting a paper on a rangeland topic of their choosing. I knew immediately that I wanted to choose a topic representing the world that I grew up in, especially my appreciation for the land, and to discuss conservation from a rancher’s perspective. When I started writing my paper, I didn’t realize how broad of a topic conservation is. After a couple of extremely rough drafts my mentor, Dan Harmon, Agricultural Science Research Technician for USDA-ARS, Great Basin Rangelands Research unit, asked me what I myself contributed to conservation. I have fond memories of helping my Dad with chores on the ranch like mending fences, moving livestock and rotating pastures as well as

Figure 1. Letty Vega, senior at Elko High School and 3rd Place Award Winner in the Society for Range Management High School Youth Forum.

The Progressive Rancher

Figure 2. Students at the Nevada Section-Society for Range Management Annual range Camp learning one of the many facets of range management. observing wildlife species and their habitats, such sage grouse. And it hit me… I want to talk about the cowboy conservationist! As I did more research I learned how much there was to range management in the Great Basin. I found that there are many people contributing to conservation in Nevada in different ways. There are conservation projects ranging from restoring wildlife habitat, to predator control to managing wildfires. I realized that all these

Figure 3. Letty and her dad Guy, out on the range at an early age. This connection to natural resources at an early age is beneficial to the profession of natural resource management. require many people from different fields working together. Just like my family at branding time, it takes determination and teamwork. I had my focus and my title “Keeping Up with Conservation.” Now fast forward many late nights of rewrites to late January in St. George. I finally arrived at the annual Society for Range

ment Meeting. I had heard stories regarding the amazing experiences at the SRM conference, but they did not compare to my experience. I arrived at the Meeting on Sunday afternoon after doing some exploring in the Red Rocks of Southern Utah. The first evening was introductions, icebreakers, plant identification, and listening to last year’s 1st place delegate’s presentation. Needless to say, it was going to be an insanely busy week, but the week didn’t feel as much of a competition as a group of friends on a road trip together. Monday we went exploring and on tours through various towns and Zion National Park. We stopped at an old homestead that originally produced all the dairy products for St. George. Throughout the day we saw plenty of wildlife and were privileged with guest speakers whom spoke to us about the rangelands of southern Utah. I think that they kept us so busy that day so we wouldn’t think about the next day’s competition. Tuesday was all about our presentations. After only a few hours rest we started the speeches. I wasn’t nervous until about two speeches before I presented. I had gone through my presentation over a 100 times but there were really some amazing topics and I was worried people wouldn’t be as interested in mine. When it was my turn it seemed like I was stumbling over every word. Then I saw my friends, family, and people from the Nevada Section there to support me and I had a sudden feeling of relief. I made it this far and I can do this. Things were smooth sailing from there. I was done. I did it. I had presented at a professional meeting. Wednesday was a great day to decompress. What a relief to have my speech done, it felt like 100 pounds had been lifted off my shoulders. That night was the annual dance, the highlight of every year and I celebrated with my new friends. Thursday was the last day and the awards ceremony. I was sitting at a table with my best friend and a few other delegates, when I heard my name announced. I received 3rd place and was ecstatic about receiving an award. I was, and still am, most proud that the judges understood my appreciation for my community and the conservation efforts we all work on together to conserve the beautiful rangelands that we stewards grew up on. Six months of hard work and I couldn’t have been happier. My week was now over and I was going to miss all the great people that I met. Being involved in the Society for Range Management’s range camp has given me the opportunity to travel to new places and meet new people who have greatly supported me along the way. I will never forget my time at range camp and the amazing week I had at the Society for Range Management National Meeting.

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 37 



By Tony Lespeance

DOW recently certified that wolves have finally returned to Nevada, with a verified video of a single male wolf. Those that live in Nevada’s “outback” have known that wolves have been around for quite a few years now. But wolves that kill antelope, deer, sheep and cattle aren’t the only predators out and about. No, there is another kind; there is a wolf breed out there that likes to steal water. I call them “water wolves”. There are two basic types of water wolves, those that steal water for so called environmental reasons and those that steal water for the dazzling urban growth occurring in Nevada’s two major metropolitan areas, Reno and Vegas. Sometimes, just to keep things interesting the two types of wolves get a bit mixed up. For the poor folks in the outback that use water for productive reasons, this can all get pretty confusing. So trapping or discouraging water wolves can get pretty difficult. This year has been even more difficult in the constant battle to control water wolves; the damned legislature is meeting. In case you haven’t looked, the illustrious legislators have concocted more ways to tamper with Nevada’s long-standing water laws than any time in history. And believe me, none of their efforts have much to do with conserving water for Nevada’s all important agriculture industries. Have the wolves been successful so far? Well, if you study what the recent history has been, water wolves have damaged, or will potentially damage, four rural counties pretty significantly. White Pine and Lincoln have pretty much either been bought out, or controlled by the Southern Nevada Water Authority. True enough, Vegas hasn’t built their pipeline yet, but the skids are greased. When the need for that water overcomes the cost of the project White Pine and Lincoln can kiss what’s left of their agriculture communities good by! The wolves have slowly strangled another county, kind of by causing death by a thousand cuts. Because a goodly share of the water that flows through Reno and Sparks gets to Fallon via the Derby Dam and canal, it didn’t take promoters so very long in the greater Reno area to realize that they could buy agricultural property in Fallon, transfer the rights to Reno, and start building houses. Because this is a relatively slow process in relation to the total amount of water delivered to Fallon via Derby and Carson River, it just hasn’t been noticed too much. Nevertheless, transfer of water from agricultural use in Fallon to quasi/ municipal use in the greater Reno area has had a significant impact on Churchill agricultural production to date. And then there is Walker Lake. The story goes that one fine spring day Harry Reid was making one of his too many trips to Carson when he noticed Walker Lake appeared to be drying up. Being a native born Nevada environmentalist, Harry rapidly decided something needed to be done about this tragedy. Harry learned that the Walker flowed through Mason Valley and that way too much water was being used for agriculture. So Harry initiated a program to buy out the farmers, dry up the land and let the water flow to the Lake. The program hasn’t been too successful thus far, but it has been successful enough to knock Lyon out of first place amongst Nevada Counties as far as agriculture production goes. The sad  38 May/June 2017

fact of the matter is that if you transferred all of Walker River to Walker Lake, it wouldn’t solve their problem. Annual evaporation simply exceeds the average flow of Walker River. Course most of the “outback” crowd didn’t trust Harry on this boondoggle to begin with. The general thinking that once Harry got his hands on the Walker, it might go to California in a trade allowing Vegas to get more water from the Colorado.

“ Nevada’s urban and rural communities must work together to build, operate and maintain a sustainable water supply which will eliminate drought’s unique ability to prevent Nevada from achieving its maximum economic potential: Yes indeed, the wolves are out there, but perhaps the legislature finally even got their eyes opened the other day, April 4, 2017 to be exact, by a presentation made before the Senate Natural Resource Committee by one Disquel Deane, Jr., a principal of Water Asset Management LLC (WAM). Deane’s presentation to the solons was titled “Water Abundance for Nevada’s Future” and centered around constructing two major water delivery systems; one from the terminus of the Humboldt River near Lovelock to the Fernley area, and the other to be constructed from the beginning of the Humboldt near Wells, Nevada, to Las Vegas. To quote Deane; Deane’s presentation continued along the lines that initiation of such futuristic projects will stabilize the economy in Nevada’s rural counties. He may be right, removing every available ounce of water from Nevada’s rurals will stabilize their economy to the point that it will be flat zero! Deane may represent the latest version of the old wolf in sheep’s clothing. On the surface, discounting the absurdness of it, his presentation had the fuzzy feeling of something good. But don’t trust a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Deane’s company, WAM, already owns an undivided 50 percent interest in Winnemucca Farms. That not only includes 14,486 acres of irrigated lands and 36,261 acre-feet of appurtenant certified water rights. I seriously doubt that Deane’s long term plans center around the continuous production of spuds, alfalfa or grain. Deane, and his company WAM are water purveyors, plain and simple. Their goal is to make money by buying agricultural use water as cheaply as possible. Then when the nearest urban growth exceeds their water reserves; Deane has a ready solution for their thirst. The cost to the municipality will likely be many, many thousands of dollars per acre-foot in excess of the original purchase price. I seriously doubt that a wolf dressed in sheep’s clothing like Deane will shed too many tears over the economic plight that rural Nevada counties will suffer when they finally loose their agricultural water.

The Progressive Rancher

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 39 



Western Watersheds Project (W W P) herein appeals of the Boise District, Idaho Bureau or Land Management’s Owyhee Field Office’s and Vale District, Oregon Bureau Of Land Management’s Malheur Field Office’s (BLM) pecision forthe Soda Fire Fuel Breakspecision) delivered to W W P ‘s Boise office on March 15.2017, as required by 43 C.F.R. 4.21. W WP also petitions for a stay or the decision, pursuant to 43 C,F.R. 4.21 because of the numerous violations or law and policy that underlie the proposed actions.


W WP submitted timely scoping comments for this project in an April 5, 2016 letter and comments on the Draft EA in a June 10, 2016 letter. W WP has will be harmed by this decision, and have members who use the project area. Appellants Western Watersheds Project thus has standing to bring this appeal. Western Watersheds Project works to protect and conserve the public lands, wildlife and natural resources ofthe American West through education, scientific study, public policy initiatives, and litigation. Western Watersheds Project and its staff and members use and enjoy the public lands, including the lands at issue Ilere, and its wildlife, cultural, and natural resources for health, recreational, scientific, spiritual, educational, aesthetic, and Other purposes. Western Watersheds Project has specific interests in the protection and preservation of both the sage grouse and the public lands that provide habitat for the species. Western Watersheds Project and its members will be harmed by this decision because this project will impact resident sage grouse, vegetation, fisheries, pygmy rabbits, and other special status species in the vicinity of the Soda Fire Fuel Breaks and will affect the interests that Western Watersheds Project and its members have in sage grouse and its conservation and recovery. WWP hereby requests that all prior comments and referenced literature for this project be included in the Administrative Record for this Decision.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND The Soda Fire Fuel Breaks

The Soda Fire Fuel Breaks plan is a complex and interconnected set of actions slated to occur along 271 miles or roads (DR at l) and on approximately 12,986 acres Of public land (DR at 4) on the Owyhee and Malheur Districts of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The proposed action is to to authorize the development and maintenance of fuel breaks along 271 miles or roads that would be up to 200 feet on both sides of roads (DR at l). Of the 271 miles Of fuel breaks authorized, 36 miles would be treated along the Owyhee Front  40 May/June 2017

using biological thinning (targeted grazing) or by seeding prostrate kochia. The remaining 235 miles Of fuel breaks would be built along roads which transect the burned area Of the 2015 Soda Fire and into areas outside or the Soda Fire perimeter using methods such as mowing, hand cutting, prescribed burning. seeding native and/or non-native species other than kochia, and herbicide application. The fuel breaks would require ongoing maintenance ror the life or the plan, or 10-30 years, (EA at 5) and road improvements on approximately 14 miles to allow access for fire suppression equipment and to meet fuel break objectives (EA at 2 13), Temporary fences. which can pose collision hazards to wildlife, may be required to protect seeded plants in fuel breaks or to protect riparian areas may also be used. The Soda Fire Fuel Breaks project area supports a wide array Of wildlife and its habitat, including the Greater sage-grouse, pygmy rabbit, mule deer, pronghorn antelope, California bighorn sheep, mountain lion Bridgelip sucker, brook trout, Columbia River redband trout, longnose dace, redside shiner, speckled dace, numerous migratory birds. Golden eagles, and Columbia spotted frog. EA at 48.


Western Watersheds Project hereby petitions ror Stay Of the Soda Fire Fuel Breaks Decision of 2017 pursuant to 43 CFR 4.21. W WP is required by Congressional actions to request a stay provision in order to exhaust its remedies and maintain the opportunity to bring this case fonvard to federal court, should the need arise. In Order to prevail on a stay petition, sufficient justification must be shown based upon the following factors: (A) the relative harm to the parties if the stay is granted or denied; (B) the likelihood Of success on the merits; (C) the likelihood of immediate and irreparable harm if the stay is not granted; and (D) whether the public interest favors a stay. 43 C.F.R. 4.21.

A. The relative harm to the parties if the stay is granted Or denied.

Western Watersheds Project’s interest in protecting the watersheds or the western United States from further livestock-related degradation is ensured by a Stay pending adjudication on the merits. Because the impacts Of the decision have not been analy/ßd and will cause unknown effects on these public lands, and to species already in dire population declines, the harms io WWP’s interests are great. Additionally, WWP will be seeking to stay the ruel breaks decisions, and the proposed action herein would be affected by the BLM’s timeframe for getting those vegetation projects completed, Additionally, because the proposed action entails new construction, it is beneficial to all parties to Stay the decision and the associated efforts and expenses of new construction The Progressive Rancher


April 14th, 2017 until it is determined that the basis or the projects is legally valid. There would be little to no harm to BLM from a stay. BLM may claim that a stay would result in economic harm to the project proponents. That is not, however, harm to BLM or the public. Further, economic harm is not irreparable, especially in the context of a preliminary injunction where such alleged harms are temporary. See S. Fork Band Council, 588 F.3d at 728 (economic injuries to mining operations temporary); S.E. Alaska Conservation Council V. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 472 F.3d 1097, 1 101 (9th Cir. 2006) (“there is no reason to believe that the delay in construction activities caused by the court’s injunction will reduce significantly any future economic benefit that may result from the mine’s operation”); Nat’l Parks & Conservation Ass’n v. Babbitt, 241 F.3d 722, 738 (9th Cir 2001 of anticipated revenues . does not outweigh the potential irreparable damage to the environment”), Where there is a threat of irreparable environmental harm, “more than pecuniary harm must be demonstrated” to avoid a preliminary injunction. N, Alaska Envtl. Ctr. v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 466, 471 (9th Cir. 1986) (irreparable environmental harm outweighed competing harm to miners despite potential for “real financial hardship”); Save Our Sonoran, 408 F.3d at 1124-1125 (affirming preliminary injunction because, while developer “may suffer financial harm,” without injunction “unlawful disruption to the desert is likely irreparable”). For these reasons, any potential economic harm fails to Outweigh the concrete harm that would occur to the environment from construction.

B. The likelihood Of success On the merits.

Western Watersheds Project has a high likelihood of success on the merits, warranting a stay or the flawed decision at issue here. The BLM’s failure to analyze alternatives to its proposed action is a basic railing of law and policy, as is the issue of impacts to sensitive and special status species. There can be no dispute based on the record that BLM’s decision does not have a solid basis in the NEPA analysis of it, and thus, W WP is likely to prevail. The violations are wide ranging and they will be further discussed in a förthcoming Statement or Reasons. The Final Environmental Assessment (FEA) employed an overly narrow Purpose and Need statement in Order to prevent consideration or a reasonable habitat restoration alternative with reduced grazing. The FEA failed to analyze the reduction and removal of hiding cover next to roads and sage-grouse leks that lie nearby or adjacent to fuel breaks treatments The FEA failed to disclose the amount of priority, general, sage-grouse habitat as well as the amount of

sagebrush focal area habitat that will be impacted by the decision. The FEA relied on inadequate research into the effectiveness or fuel breaks and targeted grazmg. At a minimum, these issues raise “fair ground for litigation and thus ror more deliberative investigation,” Wyoming Outdoor Council, et al., 153 IBLA at 388, showing that the decision should be stayed pending final resolution of WWPis appeal.

C. The likelihood Of immediate and irreparable harm if the stay is not granted

The EA contains no timeline for implementation Of the plan, so it is unknown how immediately the construction or new fences, road improvements, vegetation “treatments” would proceed. Assuming, arguendo. that BLM were to proceed With its plans in Spring 2017, the impacts of construction disturbance to sage-grouse leks, nests, and spring seasonal habitat could be immediate and irreparable if the few remaining sage-grouse and other rare species in the project area are displaced or affected by new predation and strikemortality threats, displaced by treatment disturbance, poisoned by herbicides Or adversely impacts by the Cumulative impacts of all of the above. Removal Of vegetation could also affect the movements and hiding or escape cover for several prey species such as sage-grouse, pygmy rabbits, reptiles, and small mammals. Construction of the project will irreparably damage sage-grouse habitat determined by

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to be Priority Areas for Conservation. For instance, fuel breaks will be constructed within feet of an occupied sage-grouse lek with limited escape and hiding cover. The Supreme Court has acknowledged that environmental harm, by its nature, is often permanent or irreparable, and that the “balance of harms usually favors issuance of an injunction to protect the environment.” Amoco Prod. Co. v. Village of Gambell, Alaska, 480 U.S. 531 , 545 (1987). This is certainly true for heavy construction on Idaho’s arid public lands. Save Our Sonoran v. Flowers, 408 F.3d 1 1 13, 1 124 (9th Cir. 2005) (irreparable harm caused by roading, utility, & fill project because “once the desert is disturbed, it can never be restored.”)•, San Luis valley Ecosystem Council v. FWS, 657 F.Supp. 2d 1233, 1241 (D.Colo. 2009) (“complete vegetation recovery will take up to 15-20 years; such a long recovery time may constitute irreparable damage”). In the case or the Soda Fire Fuel Breaks, the BLM intends to maintain the fuel breaks for many years into the future and improve road access which would ensure irreparable harm. Similarly, Federal courts have repeatedly recognized that noncompliance with NEPA and Other environmental laws, in itself, generally causes irreparable injury, both by threatening permanent environmental harm and by injuring the rights of affected members Of the public to participate and be fully informed of the agency’s decision-making process under NEPA. See, eg, Save Our Ecosystems v. Clark, 747 F.2d 1240, 1250 (9th Cir. 1984); California v. Block, 690 F.2d 753 (9th Cir. 1982) The Ninth Circuit has repeatedly recognized that injunctive relief is appropriate for noncompliance with environmental laws, including NEPA violations. See Blue Mtns. Biodiversity Project v. Blackwood, 161 F.3d 1207, 1208, 121 1 (9th Cir. 1998), Muckleshoot Indian Tribe v. USFS, 177 F.3d 800 (9th Cir. 1999); National Parks Conservation Assoc. v. Babbitt, 241 F.3d 722, 736 (9th Cir. 2001); Earth Island Institute v. USFS, 351 F-3d 1291 (9th Cir. 2003); Sierra Club v. Bosworth, 510 F.3d 1016, 1033-34 (9th Cir. 2007). Indeed, courts have underscored that injunctive relief is particularly appropriate to protect sensitive and declining wildlife species from irreparable harm — including Greater sage-grouse. See ONRC v. Goodman, 505 The Progressive Rancher

F.3d 884, 897-99 (9th Cir. 2007) (granting injunction to protect Forest Servicedesignated sensitive species); Western Watersheds Project v. Bennett, 392 F.Supp.2d 1217 (D. Idaho 2005) (enjoining livestock grazing on nearly I million acres Of Jarbidge Resource Area to protect sage-grouse),

D. Whether the public interest favors a stay.

Finally, the issuance of a stay would serve the public interest. The public interest favors maintaining the status quo until the merits of a serious controversy can be lillly considered. Valdez v. Applegate, 616 F.2d 570, 572-573 (10th Cir. 1990). And there is an inherent public interest in upholding federal environmental law, See Earth Island Inst. v. U.S. Forest Service, 442 F.3d 1 147, 1177 (9th Cir. 2006) (public’s interest in preserving the environment favors injunctive relief); ONRC v. Goodman, 505 F.3d 884, 897-99 (9th Cir. 2007) (same). To allow the BLM to construct the Soda Fire Fuel Breaks before BLM has fully analyzed the project’s impacts under NEPA, and before Appellant can obtain review through this administrative appeal, would harm the public’s interest in the values protected by these regulations and statutes.


For the foregoing reasons, Appellant W WP respectfully asks the Administrative Law Judge to stay the decision for the Soda Fire Fuel Breaks and vacate and remand the decision to BLM. Respectfully filed this 14th day or April 201 7: Sincerely, Kenneth Cole Idaho Director Western Watersheds Project PO Box 2863 Boise, Idaho 83701 208-429-1679 208-475-4702 (fax)


I hereby certify that on the 14th of April, 2017, caused copies to be mailed to the list of the parties named in the decision in accordance with the regulations and I sent true and correct copies of the preceding document, by certified mail to: Michelle Ryerson, O»hee Field Office Manager 20 First Avenue West Marsing, ID 83639 Office Of the Solicitor Boise Field Solicitors Office University Plaza 960 Broadway Ave., Suite 400 Boise, Idaho 83706 Kenneth Cole Idaho Director Western Watersheds Project P.O. Box 2863 Boise, Idaho 83 701 208-429-1679 208-475-4702 (fax) May/June 2017 41 

Progressive Rancher Coloring Page

 42 May/June 2017

The Progressive Rancher

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 43 


Indian Paint brush


s we move around our range landscapes we view numerous plant species. Many are excellent forage species and some are more for show and aesthetics. One of these is commonly known as Indian paintbrush (Castilleja species). This is a genus of about 200 species of annual and perennial herbaceous plants native to the west of the Americas from Alaska south to the Andes and to northern Asia. These plants are classified in the broomrape family, Orobanchaceae. They are hemiparasitic on the roots of associated species. The generic name honors Spanish botanist Domingo Castillejo and was named by Aven Nelson in 1902. According to Jerry Tiehm, Curator of the University of Nevada Reno herbarium there are 23 species of Indian Paintbrush in Nevada and the two most common species are Castilleja chromosa and Castilleja linearifolia. These species are found in all counties in Nevada. The Indian paintbrush of the West was first seen by the earliest Spanish explorers and adventurers who penetrated that wild and unknown wilderness of sage and rocks and rattlesnakes in search of the fabled Seven Cities of Cibola. The photos shown in this article are of Castilleja chromosa or Desert Indian Paintbrush. Desert Indian Paintbrush plants have bristly gray-green to purple-red herbage. What look to be flowers are actually the colourful red-orange bracts that hide the tubular yellow-green flowers that have a thin coat of white hairs. The leaves are 20–70 mm long linear/lance-shaped and are lower down the stem from the colourful bracts and are comprised of 3 or 5 narrow fingerlike lobes. Castelleja. chromosa can be found blooming in a range of colors from vivid red through to bright lemon yellow. It is stunning to see plants with different colored flowers blossoming next to each other. Large plants are about a foot tall and eight inches across. Most are half as wide. They normally stand as clumps of erect stems, each topped with the colored bracts. The centimeter-long capsule fruits contain honeycomb-patterned seeds. This Desert Indian Paintbrush is not limited to the desert alone, often growing well above the desert and sage landscapes into pinyon/juniper woodlands or higher in mountain brush communities. Specimens have found it growing as high as 8500” on dry windblown crests. In those sights it is dwarfed to four to six inches. Indian Paintbrush is considered to be a hemiparasite plant which means it needs a host plant in order to survive. The roots of Indian Paintbrush will grow until they touch and couple with the roots of a nearby plant. Once the roots of both plants are entwined, Indian Paintbrush will take nourishment and water from the host plant. There seems to be confusion over which host plants are best for Indian Paintbrush, however, it has been found hosting from native grasses, sagebrush, and several other species in the sagebrush and pinyon/juniper vegetation as well as higher elevation shrub types. Indian Paintbrush is also an herb as the flowers are edible and many Native American tribes would eat them. One must be careful though because the leaves and roots of Indian Paintbrush are poisonous. Indian Paintbrush is one native plant that we’d all like to see in our yards. If you do find one in your yard, do not try transplanting it as you’ll probably kill it. Instead, consider it a gift from Mother Nature and leave any Indian Paintbrush where you find it. They are not an important forage species but as you ride the range on your horse or on your side-by-side in the spring and summer it will add to your pleasure as you work on your allotment or pasture.

 44 May/June 2017

The Progressive Rancher

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 45 

Forest Legacy Program Proposal Solicitation By Heather Giger


ARSON CITY, Nev. – The Nevada Division of Forestry (NDF) is currently soliciting proposals for the Forest Legacy Program (FLP) competitive grant funding. Funded through the U.S. Forest Service, the FLP is a voluntary program that assists private landowners with protecting working forests from conversion to non-forest uses through the creation of conservation easements and the direct acquisition of property. Forestlands that contain important scenic, cultural, recreation, and water resource(s), as well as fish and wildlife habitat, and other ecological values that will support continued traditional forest uses are considered priority projects. Local governments, land trust organizations and other nonprofit conservation organizations may apply for FLP funds on behalf of interested private landowners. Nevada may request up to $10 million in FLP funding for a total of three proposed legacy projects. Those interested in submitting a FLP proposal can view eligibility requirements and application instructions at: Please contact NDF Legacy Program Coordinator, Heather Giger, with any questions about the FLP program or proposal process at 775-6842552 or Consultation with NDF staff prior to submitting an application is highly recommended to ensure that your proposal meets state and federal FLP eligibility requirements. ### The Nevada Division of Forestry is a division within the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. The Division coordinates and manages all forestry, nursery, endangered plant species and watershed resource activities on certain public and private lands. The Division provides protection of life, property and natural resources through fire suppression, prevention programs and provides other emergency services as required.


Funding available for volunteer fire department equipment and training

ARSON CITY, Nev. – The Nevada Division of Forestry (NDF) is seeking applications for the Volunteer Fire Assistance grant program. Approximately $200,000 from the U.S. Forest Service’s State and Private Forestry program will be available for rural (local and volunteer) fire departments statewide. The purpose of this funding is to improve rural fire departments’ readiness for and response to wildfires, particularly those in the wildland urban interface. Funds must be used to purchase wildland fire personal protective equipment, new generation fire shelters, P25-compliant radios, and other supplies such as fire hoses.  46 May/June 2017

The Division is also requesting a prioritized list of each Department’s wildland fire training and wildland apparatus needs/requests for future funding opportunities. Applications must be submitted on the application form that has been mailed directly to individual fire departments or found on the Nevada Division of Forestry website at Applications must be received by the Nevada Division of Forestry no later than 5 p.m. June 1st 2017. Late and/or incomplete applications will not be accepted. For more information contact Ryan S. Shane at 775-684-2511.

The Progressive Rancher

Financial Focus P re sente d by Ja s o n L a n d , F in a n c ia l A d v is o r, E d wa rd J o n e s i n E l k o , N e v a d a 2 2 1 3 No rt h 5 t h S t re e t , S u it e A | 7 7 5 -7 3 8 -8 8 11

Don’t Let Your Investments Take A “Vacation”


t’s summer again – time for many of us to take a break and possibly hit the open road. But even if you go on vacation, you won’t want your investments to do the same – in summertime or any other season. How can you help make sure your portfolio continues to work hard for you all year long?

Here are a few suggestions:

• Avoid owning too many “ low growth” investments. As you know, different invest- ments have different characteristics and can help you in different ways. For ex- ample, you typically own stocks because you want them to grow in value so that you can eventually sell them for a profit. Other investments, such as certificates of deposit (CDs), provide you with a regular source of income and stability of principal – two valuable contributions to your port- folio. However, investments like CDs don’t offer much in the way of growth. So if you own too many of them, you might be slowing your progress toward your important financial goals, such as a com- fortable retirement. You can maximize the productivity of your portfolio by owning a variety of investments – domestic stocks, inter- national stocks, corporate bonds, U.S. Treasury securities, CDs and more. How much of each investment should you own? The answer depends on a variety of factors, including your age, income, risk tolerance, family situation and specific objectives. Over time, your ideal investment mix may change, but you’ll likely need at least some growth potential at every stage of your life.

• Don’t let your portfolio go “un- supervised.” Your investment portfolio can be subject to “drift” if left alone for extended time periods. In fact, without your making any moves at all, your portfolio can move in directions that may not be favorable to you. Suppose you think your holdings should be made up of 70% stocks, but due to strong gains, your stocks now make up 80% of your portfolio. This development could lead to a risk level that feels uncomfortably high to you. That’s why you should review your portfolio at least once a year, possibly with the help of a financial professional, to check your prog- ress and make adjustments as needed. • Don’t stop at the nearest “resting place.” Some people hope that if they can get that one “winner,” they will triumph in the investment arena. But the ability to “get rich quick” is much more of a myth than a reality. True investment success typically requires patience, persistence and the resilience to continue investing even during market downturns. In other words, investing is a long-term endeavor, and you need a portfolio that reflects this reality. The investment moves you make today may pay off for you decades from now. You need to establish your goals and keep them constantly in mind as you invest. And you will never really reach the end of your investment journey, because you’ll need to make choices and manage your portfolio through- out your retirement years Hopefully, you will enjoy a pleasant vacation sometime this summer. But your investment portfolio shouldn’t take time off.

The Progressive Rancher

May/June 2017 47 

 48 May/June 2017

The Progressive Rancher

The Progressive Rancher May 2017  
Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you