The Progressive Rancher - NOV/DEC 2022 by The Progressive Rancher

Nevada Department of Agriculture (NDA) NOTICE OF PUBLIC WORKSHOP: NAC 590 (E15 Gasoline)

Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:00 am

The Nevada Department of Agriculture (NDA) Division of Measurement Standards is hosting a virtual public workshop on Monday, Nov. 7, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. to solicit comments on proposed regulation changes. Your voice is important to the NDA! This workshop is being held so the NDA can receive verbal and/or written feedback through public comment from all interested persons regarding the proposed amendment of regulations addressed in LCB File No. R038-21 (www.leg.state.nv.us/ Register/2021Register/R038-21RP1.pdf ) pertaining to Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) Chapter 590 which governs certain activities of the NDA and interprets law or policy. NAC 590 revisions pertain storage/sale of E15 gasoline and are in response to passage of Assembly Bill 411 of the 81st Session of the Nevada Legislature. Proposed regulation changes are contained within LCB File #R038-21. The meeting notice and virtual meeting link are available on the NDA website here: agri.nv.gov/Protection/Weights_and_Measures/Workshop_and_ Hearing_Meetings/Workshops_and_Hearings/ NOTICE OF PUBLIC WORKSHOPS: NAC 571 (Animal Disease)

Wednesday, Nov. 16 at 1:00 p.m. in Winnemucca Thursday, Nov. 17, 2022 at 11:00 a.m. in Elko These meetings both have remote and virtual participation options to solicit comments on proposed regulation changes. NAC 571 revisions pertain to the movement and sale of certain animals and disease traceability management. View proposed regulation changes here: https://agri.nv.gov/Animals/Animal_Industries_Hearings,_Workshops,_Meetings/ Public comment is built into the State rule-making process and is your opportunity to influence the rule or regulation, help identify solutions and propose alternatives, and make your voice and experience heard. Learn more here: agri.nv.gov/Administration/ Administration/NDA_Administrative_Rulemaking_Process/

Seeds of Hope | An Edible Reno-Tahoe story

IN THIS ISSUE 02 NDA - Nov. Public Workshops 19 UNR | Data Modeling, Fuels Mapping, Aids in Mitigating 02 Meetings & Save The Dates! Catastrophic Wildfire Risk 03 NCA - President's Perspective 20 UNR | New Resource Sheds 04 NCA November Update & Light on Tree Encroachment Joint Annual Convention 21 UNR | Pinyon Juniper Trees 06 NBC - Checkoff News Declining in West Ranges 07 NBC - Recipe: Wild 22 USDA | Intertribal Ag Council Mushroom and Beef Stew Retreat Focuses on Arid Pasture Recovery Efforts in Nevada 08 Let's Talk Ag - Editorial 10 Eye On The Outside - Editorial 24 Farm Bureau | Revising Disaster Programs in Farm Bill 12 Society for Range Management: 26 Churchill County FFA Report Performance of Indaziflam 14 NFB | Balance Back to Basins 29 TF | Diagnostic Testing for Trichomoniasis in Cattle 15 NFB | Annual Mtg Schedule 30 Moocall | Calf Scours 16 BLM | Addressing Drought and Annual Grass Grazing on 32 Van Norman Sale Results Public Lands in Nevada 34 Elko Co Fair 2022 Results 17 NDA | Protect Horses and 38 Outcome-Based Mgmt & Cattle from Pigeon Fever Federal Rangeland Admin 18 UNR | Nevada Hunters 39 Obituary Generate Millions Peter Douglas Bottari

Owner/Editor/Publisher – Leana Litten Carey progressiverancher@gmail.com Graphic Design/Layout | athena@athenart.com

Featuring tribal-College partnerships to advance food security and sovereignty

www.unr.edu/cabnr/newsletter/vol-4-iss-10 2022 NvACD Annual Meeting Fallon, NV • November 15, 16, 17

COVER: "Peter Bottari" Leana Carey / LL Moore®

Fish & Game • 15950 N. Gate Blvd. • Nampa, Idaho

Published 8 times a year. View all issues at www.progressiverancher.com Readership reaches more than 30,000. The views and opinions expressed by writers of articles appearing in this publication are not necessarily those of the editor. Letters of opinion are welcome; submit via email. Advertising rates available upon request. Advertising does not imply editorial endorsement. Liability for errors or omissions in advertisements shall not exceed the cost of the space occupied by the error or omission.

VIEW ADDITIONAL ARTICLES AT

Leana Litten Carey, Owner/Editor

Save The Date! Idaho Rangeland Conservation Partnership 2023 Annual IRCP Meeting | January 17 & 18

www.progressiverancher.com

2040 Reno Hwy 432 • Fallon, Nevada 89406 (208) 358-2487 • progressiverancher@gmail.com

Read the magazine and more articles online at

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

2 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

president ' s perspective If you hold a Bureau of Land Management grazing permit, you know that the dates your livestock can graze specific allotments are pretty much set in stone. Sometimes the range of dates is broad enough to allow flexibility within them to change your timing of use to allow for some growing season rest when needed. Often though, those dates lack that flexibility and lock us in to grazing the same way every year.

I mean, it’s nice to be able to plan your work on a calendar but it’s definitely not the way to adapt to drought or other challenges we face. It’s been an ask of the land management agencies from your Association to find ways to afford us the flexibility we need to adapt. I’m proud to report that a couple of tools are coming on line soon to help us change permits- temporarily or permanently- to adapt to drought and cheat grass on BLM permits. BLM Range team lead Kathryn Dyer along with individual Districts in Nevada have

completed the first step- an environmental analysis and will be ready soon to field our requests. Your Association, along with the BLM and Nevada Department of Agriculture are hosting workshops to answer questions and discuss the types of flexibilities that have been analyzed and how to request drought or cheatgrass related adjustments. They will be held: • • • •

Ely, Dec. 5, 3-5 p.m. at the Bristlecone Convention Center Elko, Dec. 7, 3-5 p.m. at the Western Folklife Center

Winnemucca, Dec. 9, 3-5 p.m. at the Convention Center

On-line virtual workshop, Dec. 13, 3-5 p.m.

Which is the week following our Annual Convention in Reno, can’t wait to see you there!

Jon Griggs

President, NCA

Special Sheep & Goat Sale

November 5 • 11am Drop off until 5pm Nov 4 and 10am Nov 5 - NO LATE DROP OFFS

November 8, 2022 Silver State Classic Feeder Sale

December 10, 2022 For info about our Team Roping, please visit FallonLivestock.com www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

by Martin Paris | NCA Executive Director | O: 775-738-9214 Happy November all! I hope everyone is getting through their fall work and enjoying the change in seasons. Recently, Congress averted a government shutdown by passing the Continuing Appropriations and Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act. The measure provides federal funding through December 16, 2022, and included several funding and policy provisions relevant to the livestock industry including: • A Cattle Contracts Library Pilot Program • Livestock Mandatory Reporting Extension of Authorization • Electronic Logging Device Exemption for Livestock Haulers • Clean Air Act/Greenhouse Gas Reporting Prohibitions • Greater Sage Grouse Listing Prohibition

While the stopgap spending essentially kicks the can down the road for two and a half months, it did include the key provisions noted above that will hopefully serve as a placeholder as Congress debates a broader budget deal for Fiscal Year 2023. While these provisions are all important to the industry, Congress maintaining a prohibition on listing the Greater Sage Grouse under the Endangered Species Act is vitally important, especially as the Dept of Interior considers new Sage Grouse Land Use Management Plans.

Also ongoing in Washington D.C. is the Sackett v EPA case. The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in the case which is a direct challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority under the Clean Water Act and what qualifies as a “navigable water”. In a nutshell, the Sacket family purchased an empty lot near Priest Lake in Idaho with plans to build a home on the property. The family began prepping the lot with gravel and dirt and were shortly thereafter notified by the EPA that they had violated the Clean Water Act by not obtaining the appropriate permits. The EPA had determined that the lot contained wetlands that qualified as “navigable waters” under the Waters of the U.S. rule.

For years, livestock producers and others have faced these same inconsistent interpretations regarding the federal governments jurisdiction over Waters of the United States. The Nevada Cattlemen’s Association joined an amicus brief with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and several other state cattlemen’s associations calling for a clear, limited Waters of the U.S. definition. Now that the oral argument portion of the case has concluded, the Supreme Court will hold a private conference where they will vote to decide the case. The justices will also write an opinion on the case which we expect to be released early to mid-2023.

This is the fourth time that the Supreme Court has considered the definition of WOTUS and hopefully will be the last.

On a different note, I want to extend an invitation to everyone to join us in Sparks, NV at the Nugget from November 30th through December 2nd for the 87th Annual Nevada Cattlemen’s Association Convention and Trade Show. This year we are merging forces with the California Cattlemen’s Association and have a great convention planned. There will be meetings on all aspects of our industry and several general sessions with speakers presenting on items that are important to you. For more information or to register please check out https://www.nevadacattlemen.org/eventsmeetings

Finally, if you have heifers and steers for sale this fall/winter and are looking to get the best bang for your buck, please consider consigning them to the upcoming Silver State Classic Calf and Yearling Sale. The special sale will start at noon on December 10th at Fallon Livestock LLC in Fallon, NV. Fallon Livestock LLC donates a portion of the sale commission back to the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association which helps us represent you on the issues that matter. Till next time.

NCA 2022 Joint Annual Convention Draft Agenda *subject to change. All agenda items located at the Nugget Casino and Resort in Sparks, NV.

Wednesday, November 30 7:00 – 6:30 p.m. CA/NV Registration Opens 7:30 – 11:30 a.m. NV Wool Grower’s Breakfast 8:00 – 10:00 a.m. NCA Animal Health Committee 9:00 – 10:00 a.m. Mandatory Tradeshow Exhibitor Meeting/ Allied Industry 10:00 – 11:00 a.m. NCA Research and Education Committee Meeting 10:00 – 11:30 a.m. NV Rangeland Resources Commission 12:00 – 9:30 p.m. Tradeshow Opens 12:00 – 1:30 p.m. NV Beef Council Lunch 1:30 – 4:00 p.m. NV Central Grazing Committee Meeting 2:00 – 3:30 p.m. NV Cattlewomen’s Board of Directors Meeting 4 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

2:30 – 4:00 p.m. 3:00 – 4:00 p.m. 4:00 – 5:30 p.m. 5:30 – 6:30 p.m. 6:30 – 9:30 p.m.

Media Training NV Land Action Association Opening General Session Allied Industry Wine and Cheese Reception Tradeshow Welcome Party

Thursday, December 1 6:30 – 5:00 p.m. CA/NV Registration Open 7:00 – 1:00 p.m. Allied Industry Tradeshow 7:00 – 8:00 a.m. Breakfast in the Tradeshow 7:00 – 8:00 a.m. Bloody Mary Bar 8:00 – 10:00 a.m. General Session #2 10:00 – 12:00 p.m. NV CattleWomen General Membership Meeting The Progressive Rancher

10:00 – 12:00 p.m. 12:00 – 1:00 p.m. 1:00 – 2:00 p.m. 2:00 – 3:30 p.m.

NCA Public Lands Committee Lunch in the Tradeshow General Session #3 NCA Private Lands & Environmental Health Committee 3:30 – 5:00 p.m. NCA Legislative Affairs Committee 6:00 – 7:00 p.m. NCA President’s Reception/ Cocktail Hour 7:00 – 10:00 p.m. NCA Awards Banquet Friday, December 2 8:00 – 9:15 a.m. CattleFax Breakfast 9:30 – 10:30 a.m. NCA General Membership Meeting 10:45 – 12:15 p.m. NCA Board of Director’s Meeting www.progressiverancher.com

11” x 11”

The University of Nevada, Reno College of Agriculture, Biotechnology and Natural Resources (CABNR) with financial support from local sponsors P R E S E N T S

2023

Cattlemen’s Update MONDAY

January 9, 2023

THURSDAY

Virtual Program

January 12, 2023

10 a.m. A Zoom Registration Link will be Provided

Elko, NV 12:30 p.m. Dalling Hall 600 Commercial Street Elko, NV 89801 Dinner Provided

TUESDAY

January 10, 2023

Fallon, NV 5:30 p.m. Fallon Convention Center 100 Campus Way Fallon, NV 89406 Dinner Provided

WEDNESDAY

January 11, 2023

Ely, NV 5:30 p.m. Ely Convention Center 150 W. 6th Street Ely, NV 89301 Dinner Provided www.progressiverancher.com

FRIDAY

The agenda will be released soon For additional information, contact: Staci Emm emms@unr.edu

Jamie Lee

jamielee1@unr.edu Cost of workshop is $20 per Ranch

The Progressive Rancher

January 13, 2023

Winnnemucca, NV 10 a.m. Humbolt County Extension 1085 Fairgrounds Road Winnemucca, NV 89445 Lunch Provided

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

BUSTING BEEF CHECKOFF MYTHS IF I ONLY HAD A $1.00, OR $11.91

CATTLE MARKETS Myth: The Checkoff isn’t doing anything to fix the broken cattle markets.

Fact: Meatpacking capacity and other economic factors impact today’s cattle markets — but that’s completely outside the scope of the Beef Checkoff. The Checkoff was created to increase demand for beef and not to play favorites or influence markets. It has no power to increase the price of cattle. By helping generate greater demand, though, consumers will pick beef over other proteins and be willing to pay more for beef and beef products.

HIT THE ROAD, CHUCK

Myth: The Beef Checkoff isn’t doing much to get U.S.-produced beef into foreign markets.

Fact: Au contraire! The Checkoff has contracted with the U.S. Meat Export Federation for decades to put U.S.-produced beef on the world’s table. U.S. beef exports greatly exceeded previous volume and value records in 2021, surpassing $10 billion for the first time, according to year-end data released by USDA and compiled by the U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF). And since many foreign markets desire underutilized cuts like tongue and liver, exporting those increases the overall carcass value.

Myth: I pay $1.00 per head, and I never see that money back in my pocket.

Fact: According to the National Beef Checkoff Return on Investment study, for every $1.00 invested from 2014 to 2018, $11.91 was returned to the beef industry. Additionally, had there not been any domestic Cattlemen’s Beef Board demand-enhancing activities over the latest 5-year period, total domestic beef demand would have been 14.3% lower than actual demand. Read the Return on Investment Report here: www.beefboard.org/return-on-investment/ All that to say, your $1.00 matters.

YOU CAN LEAD A HORSE TO WATER…

Myth: As usual, another year has come and gone, and producers have no idea what the Cattlemen’s Beef Board spent our Checkoff dollars on.

Fact: Beef Board meetings are open to those who pay into the Checkoff, and the CBB’s website, DrivingDemandForBeef.com, is transparent about how funding decisions are made, current programs and their budgets, the producer-led Checkoff Program Committees that review and provide input on the programs, the most recent Annual and Evaluation Reports, audited financials, and more. Plus, you can sign up for a complimentary subscription to The Drive for updates about how your Checkoff dollars are invested.

Fallon: 8-5:30 M-F Gardnerville: 8-5 M-F Snyders Pinenut Livestock Supply

800-513-4963 • www.pinenutlivestocksupply.com 6 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

Courtesy of Beef. It’s What’s For Dinner.

WILD MUSHROOM AND BEEF STEW This hearty autumnal stew features tender chunks of beef with potatoes, garlic, assorted mushrooms and carrots. Ingredients • 2 pounds beef Stew Meat, cut into 1-inch pieces • 1/4 cup all-purpose flour • 1 teaspoon salt • 1/2 teaspoon dried thyme leaves • 1/2 teaspoon pepper • 3/4 cup reduced-sodium beef broth • 1/4 cup tomato paste • 1/4 cup dry red wine • 2 teaspoons minced garlic • 1 pound baby red-skinned potatoes, quartered • 8 ounces assorted mushrooms, such as shiitake, cremini and oyster, cut into quarters • 1 cup baby carrots Garnish: Chopped fresh parsley leaves

Why This Recipe is Good For You There is nothing like cozying up with a hearty stew for dinner during fall and winter. This recipe is filled with essential nutrients, rich in protein and key vitamins, like B6 and B12, to help keep you healthy and strong. The best part about this recipe is that the slow cooker helps make mealtime easier. With easy-to-assemble recipes like the one, you can turn busy days into simple and nutritious meals the whole family can enjoy. To find more information on beef nutrition, visit Beef-It’s-What’s-For-Dinner.com

- Carlo Tueros, SDSURF WIC Dietetic Intern - Kori Dover, RD

Preparation

Combine beef Stew Meat, flour, salt, thyme and pepper in large bowl; toss to coat. Place beef mixture in 4-1/2 to 5-1/2-quart slow cooker. Combine broth, tomato paste, wine and garlic in small bowl; mix well. Add broth mixture to beef. Add potatoes, mushrooms and carrots; mix well.

Cover and cook on HIGH 5 to 6 hours, or on LOW 8 to 9 hours, or until beef and vegetables are tender. (No stirring is necessary during cooking.) Stir well before serving. Garnish with parsley, if desired. ALTERNATE COOKING METHOD : PRESSURE COOKER

This recipe can be made in a 6-quart electric pressure cooker. Combine beef Stew Meat, flour, salt, thyme and pepper in large bowl; toss to coat. Place beef in pressure cooker. Combine broth, tomato paste, wine and garlic in small bowl; mix well. Add broth mixture to beef. Cut potatoes into 2-inch pieces or, if smaller, keep whole. Cut carrots into 2-inch pieces. Add potatoes, whole mushrooms and carrots; mix well. Close and lock pressure cooker lid. Use beef, stew or high-pressure setting on pressure cooker; program 25 minutes on pressure cooker timer. Use quick-release feature to release pressure; carefully remove lid. Stir well before servings. Garnish with parsley, if desired. (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.) www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Let’s Talk Ag The livestock industry was able to access price supports for livestock as a result of agricultural COVID-19 relief programs, but the producer financial supports right now are in the details. The federal government has released funds that will provide additional support for USDA programs. However, finding the flow of what programs are fully funded, state allocations, and if there are new programs, is difficult. Some of this is due to offices not fully be open or staffed, and the other part of this is producers having the time to do the research to find out where programs supports are. When you go to farmers.gov, there is a list of programs, and you get shipped to another site, and then another site. The best thing that producers can do is keep your records and make an appointment or have a relationship with your USDA Service Center; and use the website as a reference to ask questions of USDA staff. There has not been anything released regarding another round of Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP) that provided support to livestock producers the last two years. There were press releases sent out last week regarding the loan forgiveness program for distressed borrowers. The details of how this is working is still being released, and comments can be accepted for how to implement the USDA discrimination loan forgiveness program.

USDA PROGRAMS: WHAT IS WHERE? By Staci Emmn | Editorial

We also know that funding allocations for our older USDA programs are receiving funding. For example, the USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) does have funding and the deadline for applications is November 1, 2022. The increase in input costs is making it difficult out there right now. I don’t even want to discuss hay prices as an example. I would like to highlight some of the programs that may be useful to you, and that producers can ask USDA program staff about. USDA, Farm Service Agency • Water hauling & hauling feed – Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honey Bees, and Farmraised Fish (ELAP) + ELAP Program: https://www.fsa.usda.gov/ programs-and-services/disaster-assistanceprogram/emergency-assist-for-livestockhoney-bees-fish/index

• Livestock Feed Program (LFP): https://www. fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/disasterassistance-program/livestock-forage/index • Livestock Indemnity Program: https://www. fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/disasterassistance-program/livestock-indemnity/index

• Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP): https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-andservices/disaster-assistance-program/noninsuredcrop-disaster-assistance/index • There are also several farm loan programs depending on a producer’s specific situation. USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Program • Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP): https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programsinitiatives/eqip-environmental-quality-incentives • Agricultural Management Systems (AMS): https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs-initiatives/ ama-agricultural-management-assistance • Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP): https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs-initiatives/ csp-conservation-stewardship-program Above are just a few of the programs used in Nevada. I would expect more details to be released by the end of the year and as offices increasing staffing after COVID-19. Also, remember that the new federal budget year begins October 1, 2022, or a continuing resolution will be passed. We are also facing mid-term elections that may impact the federal budget process and the flow of funding into programs.

Nevada Snow Survey website has moved

New URL: www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/wcc/home/quicklinks/states/nevada/ The Nevada Snow Survey website has moved as of 10/21/22. The new website has improved navigation links at the top of each page. Please update your bookmarks! If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact Jeff Anderson at jeff.anderson@usda.gov

8 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

The Clean Water Act of 1972 Fifty years is a long time and looking back on events during my lifetime, it is a wonder how quickly the years add up. We all obviously experience many things of a personal nature and collectively as a country, a society, and a human race which impact the way we live and conduct our business and personal affairs. Specifically, when it comes to issues impacting the way ranchers operate to provide food for our country and the rest of the world, Congress and the Federal Agencies have a way of listening to the loudest voice rather than the voices with the most experience backed by common sense and science.

One of those collective experiences which cannot seem to get out of the news and about which I cannot seem to stop writing is the Clean Water Act of 1972 (CWA). I am old enough to remember the Ohio River that was literally on fire in 1969 and the Santa Barbara Channel oil spill in the Pacific Ocean waters off the coast of California around that same time. These events are thought by many to believe were the catalyst which provided the consensus in Congress to pass this act. A fish count in the Ohio River at the time of the fiery water revealed no live fish in the river. Today 70 species thrive in the river and there are no oil covered birds on the beaches of Santa Barbara. So, in some sense the CWA has been a success. The purpose of the CWA was to make the nation’s waters fishable and swimmable. Who can seriously argue that we don’t all want such water? The Act gave jurisdiction for enforcement to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). One of the requirements under the Act is industries that have the potential to pollute Waters of the United States (WOTUS) and sewage treatment plants must get permits which conditionally limit releases into those waters. By all accounts, the CWA has been very successful in cleaning up our polluted waters. But, as in all things legislative, the devil is always in the details.

One of those important details is defining a WOTUS for the EPA to have jurisdiction to regulate waters under the CWA. Along the way, in general, farming and traditional agricultural practices such as flood irrigation and farm ponds were exempted from jurisdiction for regulation by the EPA. Early in the discussion, a WOTUS was a water that was “navigable”. This decision was further tested by deciding whether a water course was used in interstate commerce. This led to interesting conclusions. For instance, the Carson River in Eastern California and Western Nevada 10 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

was navigable because pine trees harvested in the high Sierra mountains were formed into huge rafts which were floated out of the mountains to Carson Valley during the very brief Spring high water flows of melting snow which sometimes only lasted for a few weeks. These logs were used in the Comstock Load mines in Virginia City. The river was navigable because the logs were interstate commerce.

Fast forward about a century and the Supreme Court of the United States became involved in cases which questioned the EPA interpretation of jurisdictional waters under the CWA. The term “adjacent” became the focus of some controversies because if water adjacent to a WOTUS could be determined to connect, then it too was a WOTUS and the EPA could regulate activity on the land that water was a part of. The EPA developed regulations and denied permits to develop land they decided had water adjacent to a WOTUS.

In a famous water of the United States case Justice Kennedy developed a test which said if there was a “significant nexus” between a WOTUS and adjacent land with water that land could be regulated by the EPA. Unfortunately, the case did not outline what constituted a significant nexus. This has resulted in attempts by the courts and the agency via regulation to try and create a reasonable nexus outcome.

However, there is no one size fits all solution to this problem. For instance, in the same case I mentioned above, Justice Scalia created his own analysis of what was an adjacent WOTUS, and this has added to the confusion. He stated a water of the United States is one that is “relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing… water forming geographic features that are described in ordinary parlance as ‘streams, oceans, rivers [and] lakes’. He went on to say in his definition ephemeral waters were not waters of the United States. This, of course, is an important distinction in Nevada where so many of our surface streams are ephemeral.

Recently, the Supreme Court the case Sackett v. EPA. This case has been pending since 2012. The Sacketts own a small piece of land in northern Idaho upon which they have tried to build a house. The Progressive Rancher

Unfortunately, the EPA has denied them a permit to do that because it has ruled the wetland on the land is a water of the United States. The question argued before the Supreme Court was whether this wetland is a WOTUS under the significant nexus test or the flowing stream definition. The EPA argues to be under its jurisdiction, the wetland does not have to be connected to a WOTUS and the Sacketts argued the wetland is not flowing or connected in any way to a WOTUS and is therefore not jurisdictional. Confused yet?

Meanwhile, the EPA has been hard at work over the last seventeen years trying to create a definition that satisfies the dictates of the CWA, answering the question what a water of the United States is. There was a 2015 rulemaking, a reversal of that rule, and a 2020 effort by the Trump Administration which created the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (the 2020 Rule). Since the election of President Biden, his EPA has undertaken to repeal the 2020 Rule which has exemptions for agricultural practices and ephemeral waters. The frustration over this is that the Sackett case deliberated by the Supreme Court and described above may create a new definition of a WOTUS different than the EPA’s new definition. Thus, the bureaucracy is seriously muddying the waters. (Pun Intended)

A decision in the Sacket case will probably not be published until late Spring 2023. I hate to say this, but I do not think we will be less confused than we are now, but I hope I am wrong. I’ll see you soon.

Nevada Water Solutions LLC Water Rights / Resource Permitting Expertise

Thomas K. Gallagher, PE 775•825•1653 / FAX 775•825•1683 333 Flint Street / Reno, NV 89501 tomg@nevadawatersolutions.com www.progressiverancher.com

UPCOMING SALES

Tues • Nov 29, 2022 Silver Legacy Casino • Reno, NV Consignment Deadline: Nov 10 Internet Sale and DISH Network Sale

Thu • Jan 5, 2023

WVM Headquarters • Cottonwood, CA Consignment Deadline: Dec 28 Internet Sale

WATCH & LISTEN TO THE SALE on the Web at:

For more information, please call

(530) 347-3793 or email us at wvm@wvmcattle.com Look for the catalog and video on www.wvmcattle.com

Market your cattle with the professionals!

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Performance of the Pre-Emergent Herbicide Indaziflam on Cheatgrass Rangelands By Charlie D. Clements and Dan Harmon Resource managers are constantly looking for effective tools to restore or rehabilitate degraded habitats. Throughout the Intermountain West, the accidental and subsequent invasion of cheatgrass has converted former big sagebrush/bunchgrass habitats into annual dominance, especially cheatgrass. Cheatgrass competition on rangelands is a major issue as cheatgrass outcompetes desirable perennial species at the seedling stage for limited resources. Mechanical and chemical treatments to reduce cheatgrass densities and associated fuels have been conducted and reported with varying degrees of success. Mechanical, disking, of cheatgrass in the spring, prior to seed maturity, can effectively reduce current years density while at the same time burying the remaining cheatgrass seed bank to depths that reduce future germination resulting in nearly 80% decrease in cheatgrass densities and associated competition with desirable perennial species. Following the disking treatment the site must be seeded the following fall with desirable species that have the inherent potential to germinate, emerge and establish in the given environment and in the face of cheatgrass completion. A major problem with mechanical treatment of cheatgrass-infested rangelands is they are very limited by topography and physical constraints of the rangeland. Chemical, herbicide, use on rangelands to reduce cheatgrass densities and associated fuels is much more popular and widely used, especially soilactive, pre-emergent herbicides. Imazapic (Plateau) is the most common pre-emergent herbicide used on cheatgrass-infested rangelands. Treated sites are recommended to be applied in late summer/early fall prior to any effective moisture that can trigger fall cheatgrass germination and emergence, that is why they are called pre-emergent herbicides. Application of pre-emergent herbicides in late fall may very well end up in a less than optimal control of cheatgrass that is necessary in the restoration/ rehabilitation seeding efforts. A more recent herbicide that has introduced itself into the conversation of cheatgrass control is Indaziflam. Indaziflam is a broad-spectrum pre-emergent herbicide that was first released in 2011 for use in several perennial cropping systems. In 2016, a supplemental label for Indaziflam was approved for release for the restoration of natural areas as well as fire rehabilitation areas, and more specifically 12 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

to target winter annual grasses such as cheatgrass. Currently, the Indaziflam product registered for use on rangelands is Rejuvra, at a recommended rate of 5 oz/acre. In 2018 we started investigating the efficacy of Indaziflam compared to the more widely used, Imazapic, at two sites in northern Nevada (TS Ranch, Boulder Valley and Bedell Flat north of Reno). In the fall of 2018, 2019 and 2020 we applied Indaziflam in replicated 1.5 acre plots at 5 oz/acre rate. We also applied Imazapic at 6 oz/acre rate in adjacent plots of the same size. Following early fall herbicide applications, the following May and June we recorded cheatgrass densities. Cheatgrass densities over this 4-year period were reduced from 36.8 – 98.6% with Indaziflam compared with Imazapic, 94.2 – 97.8% (Fig. 1). Indaziflam treated plots also resulted in significantly more broadleaf annuals, such as Russian thistle, compared to Imazapic. The best-known method at suppressing cheatgrass densities is with the establishment of perennial grasses, therefore all treated sites are fallowed for 1-year (herbicide activity of 12-15 months) and seeded to native, introduced and native/introduced perennial grass seed mixes. Indaziflam treated plots resulted in less than 1 perennial grass/ft² in both the 2018/19 and 2019/20 plots, ranging from 0.1/ft² in the native mix to 0.7/ ft² in the introduced mix, while the Imazapic treated plots ranged from 0.2/ft² in the native mix to 1.2/ft² in the introduced mix. Precipitation was a major limiting factor in both the 2018/19 and 2019/20 plots as the TS Ranch site only received 6.3” and 6.0” in each of those two years, respectfully. The Bedell Flat site received 5.7” and 7.4”, respectfully. Indaziflam is reported to have continued activity up to 3-years, which we witnessed on our plots, therefor we seeded the failed seeding plots of 2019 and 2020 at the same time we seeded the 1-year fallow 2021 plots in early October 2021 at both sites (Fig. 2). The Bedell Flat site received 11.2” of annual precipitation from October 2021 through September 2022, with 5” and 3” falling in October and December, respectfully. The TS Ranch site started out great with 2.3” falling in October, but then went dry as the site only received a total of 5.9” for the year. Even though the TS site was quite dry, the exceptional October started the The Progressive Rancher

germination process and we recorded increased seedling emergence and density in both the Indaziflam and Imazapic plots (Fig. 3a and 3b). The best performing Indaziflam plot at the TS Ranch site was the 2018 plot, 3-years post spray with 3 perennial grasses/ft² in the introduced mix plots compared to 1.2/ft² and 0.5/ft² in the native/ introduced and native mix plots, respectfully. This compared to 10.2/ft², 5.2/ft² and 1.3/ft² in the Imazapic treated plots. The best performing Indaziflam plot at Bedell Flat was also the 2018 treated plots, 3-year post-spray with 2.4/ft², 0/ft² and 1.2/ft², respectfully, compared to the Imazapic 2019/20 plot of 9.8/ft² in the introduced mix plot, 7.2/ft² native/introduced mix plot and 2.2/ ft² in the native mix plot (Fig 4). Although Indaziflam has longer lasting residue activity that appears to have negative affects on seedlings of seeded perennial grasses compared to Imazapic, we have also witnessed the benefits of this longer lasting activity on cheatgrass control and perennial grass performance. When Indaziflam was applied over exiting perennial grasses, the control of cheatgrass in the community was nearly complete, 98.6%, and the perennial grasses increased in vigor due to the increase in available moisture and nitrogen that the cheatgrass and other weeds were utilizing (Fig. 5). Also, this added vigor increased the green period of perennial grasses by as much as 5 weeks, therefor, perennial grass stands not treated with Indaziflam dried out by early July, whereas perennial grass stands treated with Indaziflam provided green plant material until mid-August. This is an important factor in wildfire prevention as the decrease in cheatgrass as a fuel source is significantly decreased and the added green period decreases the chance of ignition. At this point, we have not concluded that Indaziflam is effective at controlling cheatgrass and rehabilitating the site back to perennial grasses in the short-term, but the use of Indaziflam on exiting intact herbaceous communities or greenstrips would provide added benefits to improve stand vigor, improve maintenance of greenstrips and decrease the fine fuels associated with cheatgrass, therefor decreasing the chance, rate, spread and season of wildfires that are so destructive to Great Basin rangelands. www.progressiverancher.com

Figure 1. TS Ranch fall 2021 herbicide application and annual weed control with Rejuvra (left) and Plateau (right), July 2022. Figure 4. Initial seedling emergence of seeded species in 2018 introduced mix/Plateau treated plot re-seeded in October 2021.

Figure 2. Re-seeding of 2019 Rejuvra treated plot at TS Ranch following prolonged drought. Indaziflam activity continues to control cheatgrass.

Figure 5. Rejuvra application (Left) significantly reduces cheatgrass densities and associated fuel loads that are so dangerous throughout the Intermountain West as well as increasing perennial grass vigor due to increase in limited resources.

Figure 3a and 3b. Rejuvra 2018 treated plot (Left) and Plateau treated plot (right) following re-seeding efforts. Perennial grass emergence and initial establishment show promise in future persistence and suppression of cheatgrass and associated fuels.

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Nevada Farm Bureau

Bringing Basins Back Into Balance By Doug Busselman | NFB Executive Vice President

Perennial yield is the maximum amount of groundwater that can be salvaged each year over the long term without depleting the groundwater reservoir. In a state where we rely in perennial yield as a foundational principle, Nevada’s current status of over-committed, over-pumped basins should cause serious concern. A map prepared by the Nevada Division of Water Resources shows in colorful context that there are a number of the state’s 256 groundwater basins which are being depleted beyond their capacity through over-commitment and over-pumping. Doing the rough math and using the map as a point of reference, just under 40 percent of Nevada’s groundwater basins are committed by more than 100 percent of the identified perennial yield, with some of this category reaching as far as 200 and 300 percent. Out of the 256 total basins in the state, over 19 percent are over-pumped. Responding to the different circumstances throughout the state will require a variety of actions. First, there needs to be an understanding of what is happening in the groundwater basins on the local level. Not all of the same conditions are relevant in the various groundwater basins which need attention. In some cases, the function of how water use is taking place, including surface water use and how that translates to groundwater interaction might result in less of a reduced reason for concern. Other possible actions might best be addressed by limiting any additional allocation of water, preventing further expansion of basins currently beyond the verge of being over-committed. Local activities could also address over-pumping contention with better reporting on how much water is actually being used. (In many cases, the full authorized water for that area is not being utilized.) Within Nevada water law there are additional provisions available for these problem areas. In recent years, attention has been focused on fully completing the necessary proof of beneficial use and managing the timeframe and process for those extensions. While not currently used for groundwater, there is an option for curtailment by priority that is provided for in state law. Before considering further changes to state law, getting an updated handle on where we actually are today, through a basin-by-basin base line inventory would be in order. This type of analysis 14 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

should use the most modern scientific techniques in determining whether perennial yield fits with the historical assessment made in setting perennial yield. It might also be necessary to re-evaluate if circumstances have changed the ability for perennial yield to be capable of remaining as a legitimate level of use. Nevada’s Interim Legislative Finance Committee has granted the authority for the Division of Water Resources to use $6.4 million of federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) for the purpose of funding a Water Resource Initiative to update data to inform water resource management. What this initiative looks like in detail is not totally clear, but the general understanding is that it will involve a fresh look at groundwater perennial yield numbers. Whether the $6.4 million is sufficient to do the necessary job has been a point of contention with any number of persons believing that it won’t be sufficient to complete the task that should be carried out. Learning more specifics of what’s in the details for the Water Resource Initiative is essential and there should be an understanding on the part of the Legislature that if more funding will be necessary to get the complete picture, they need to be prepared to fund the completion of the essential work. Nevada Farm Bureau policy positions stress the importance of having current, scientifically based data that provides the baseline information needed to understand where things stand on a basin-bybasin basis. The organization’s policy also supports addressing over-appropriated groundwater basins with solutions oriented to bring water rights and water being pumped into balance with perennial yields. Ongoing monitoring reports need to be shared with water right owners in the groundwater basin to assist in better understanding the conditions and status of their groundwater basin. In the mix of possible solutions, Nevada Farm Bureau policy supports a buyout/retirement program as a means to solve over-appropriation, as long as it does not significantly diminish another property owner’s property rights. As alternative actions are considered and pursued, Farm Bureau’s top priority is adherence to the state’s Prior Appropriation Doctrine. Short-cuts or workarounds that diminish the rights of senior water right owners need to have the agreement of those senior water right owners, and anything less constitutes an inappropriate taking of private property. The Progressive Rancher

Along with determining the base-line scenario on a local basis there a needs to be a commitment on the part of the local stakeholders being impacted by the conditions that they are facing with a willingness to take some control of their situation. Once again recognition of senior water right owners is essential. Those who are more junior in water right status cannot just run-over other people’s rights and trample the property rights of more senior water right owners. Nevada’s priority system should not be subject to being tossed out because there are more people who are junior than there are senior water right owners. If you aren’t interested in recognizing other people’s rights – what makes you believe that your rights will matter to others? The current situation will not be an easy thing to reverse. Drought conditions and increased demand don’t make it any simpler. Having as much of an exact understanding as possible of where we are is critical in figuring out where we need to go.

www.progressiverancher.com

2022 Nevada Farm Bureau Annual Meeting Schedule Casino Fandango • Carson City, NV Thursday • November 10, 2022

Friday • November 11, 2022

7:00 a.m. – Registration Area Opens

7:30 a.m. – Registration Area Opens

8:00 a.m. – Opening Session

8:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. – Nevada Farm Bureau Women’s Leadership Committee Meeting

• President’s Report • County Farm Bureau Reports

8:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. – Young Farmers & Ranchers (YF&R) Meeting

10:00 a.m. – Break 10:30 a.m. Breakout Session I – Chad N. Walling, P.E. of Nevada State Engineer’s Office on proof of vested water rights and the deadline for submitting proper paperwork 10:30 a.m. Breakout Session II – Woody Worthington, Director of Ag. Education & Advocacy Nevada Farm Bureau “Planning A Successful Ag In The Classroom Program” 11:15 a.m. Breakout Session III – What’s new with Nevada College of Agriculture, Biotechnology and Natural Resources – also what’s new Nevada Cooperative Extension (New staff and program areas) 11:15 a.m. Breakout Session IV – Social Media. “I’ve Set It Up, Now What?” (YF&R Leaders | Kari Brough, Monica Washburn Schroeder & Sarah Stallard)

8:30 a.m – 9:30 a.m.– Breakout Session VII – “Using Drones in Agriculture” 8:30 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. – Breakout Session VIII – Eric Vanasdale, COUNTRY Financial - "Liability Protection For Agri-Tourism Related Events On Your Farm" 10:00 a.m. – YF&R Discussion Meet Prep Meeting 11:00 a.m. – YF&R Discussion Meet Round 1 NOON – COUNTRY Financial Lunch (Discussion of Effective Working Relationships With Country Agents and County Farm Bureau Leaders) 1:30 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. General Session & Voting Delegates 4:30 p.m. – YF&R Discussion Meet Round 2

NOON – Lunch

5:30 p.m. – Social | Lobby

1:30 p.m. General Session – Legislative Panel

6:30 p.m. – Awards Dinner

2:30 p.m. – General Session – Water Panel

7:00 p.m. – YF&R Discussion Meet Final Round

3:30 p.m. District Caucus Meetings 4:00 p.m. – Nomination Committee 4:30 p.m. – Pesticide Information Update & Training Session (Nevada Department of Agriculture) 5:30 p.m. – Social | Lobby 6:30 p.m. – Opening Dinner

www.progressiverancher.com

Saturday • November 12, 2022 7:30 a.m. – Registration Area Opens 8:00 a.m. – Voting Delegates – Policy & Elections | Closing and adjournment at the conclusion of the delegate session

The Progressive Rancher

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Options for Addressing Drought and Annual Grass Grazing on Public Lands in Nevada By Kathyryn Dryer, Nevada Range Program Lead Dear Progressive Rancher Readers, If you have worked with the Bureau of Land Management, you have probably heard that you need “NEPA and a decision” to take action. It is true that most actions on public land managed by the BLM first need to be analyzed and disclosed to the public under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and then authorized through a decision under the Code of Federal Regulations. However, some common grazing issues can be addressed more efficiently than you might think. Read on to find out how you can benefit from administrative tools developed by BLM Nevada that can help you adjust grazing to address two landscape issues: drought and cheatgrass. Drought and cheatgrass are so common across Nevada that NEPA analysis has been completed on a variety of actions addressing them. These NEPA analyses can make it more efficient either to modify your permit terms and conditions (temporarily or permanently) or to plan a project outside your permit. In this article, I will discuss two tools that are available, and give some basic information on how to use them. These tools are the Drought Environmental Assessments (Drought EAs) (https://on.doi.gov/3CSBo5Y bottom right of page), and the Targeted and Prescribed Grazing Environmental Assessment (https://bit.ly/3MsVEhR) In addition to reading this article, you may also wish to attend one of the upcoming workshops: • Ely, Dec. 5, 3-5 p.m. Bristlecone Convention Center

• Elko, Dec. 7, 3-5 p.m. Western Folklife Center

• Winnemucca, Dec. 9, 3-5 p.m. Convention Center

• On-line virtual workshop, Dec. 13, 3-5 p.m. • To register for the virtual workshop please email m.brown@agri.nv.gov

The purpose of these workshops is to answer questions and discuss the types of flexibilities that have been analyzed and how to request drought or cheatgrass related adjustments or projects and provide information to assist BLM in collaboratively developing project plans with you. These workshops will not be the time to develop adjustments or projects for individual grazing permits. Instead, they will give you an idea of the information and lead time your BLM grazing staff will need to help you develop these. 16 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Step 1: Know your Permit/Lease The first thing you want to do is re-read your actual permit. Can you adjust operations within your existing terms and conditions? What temporary modifications would you need in order to meet management goals? In some authorizations, terms and conditions are minimal, and include livestock kind, numbers, total AUMs, on date, off date and allotment. Other authorizations may include more involved terms and conditions, including individual pasture dates, multi-year rotations, or other intricacies. If you have an Allotment Management Plan (AMP) you will need to read that thoroughly also. All permit Terms and Conditions are available in the BLM Reporting Application - Rangeland Administration System Reports: https://reports.blm.gov/reports. cfm?application=RAS. Step 2. Look at the Drought EA for your District Each BLM district in Nevada, except Southern Nevada, has a “Drought EA.” District Drought Management Environmental Assessments were finalized in 2013, and are still very relevant. The purpose of these documents is to identify the effects of drought on rangelands in order to alleviate the impacts of authorized uses and activities on natural resources that are at risk of being adversely affected by drought. This broad purpose allowed for alternatives with a variety of possible management responses to conditions. These alternatives provide flexibility on how each modification is shaped, depending on specific conditions. Step 3. Consider Specific Impacts and Proposed Responses Drought Indicators such as the U.S. Drought Monitor generally show where drought impacts may be greatest, but actual confirmation of on-the-ground drought impacts is needed to confirm the most appropriate response. It’s important to gather information and photographs from throughout your permitted allotment(s) documenting impacts such as amount of forage in different locations, and water availability. This information will greatly assist your conversation with your Rangeland Management Specialist, and will likely help expedite the process. Once the drought impacts have been confirmed, the suite of potential responses can be explored. There are opportunities to change the season of use outside the terms and conditions of the grazing authorization, change the timing or rotation of pastures, add temporary water developments or other infrastructure, as well as a variety of other responses. The outcome of any proposed drought response must include a reduced impact on the ecosystem resources that are already being taxed during the drought. The Progressive Rancher

Step 4. Remember the Decision Timeframe: 45 Days Plus Your Planning Time Start your conversation early with your BLM grazing staff! According to Federal regulations, the decision process itself requires 45 days for a 15-day protest period and 30-day appeal period. This is in addition to whatever time is needed to get the information and data together, develop the plan with your BLM grazing staff, and allow them to write the decision and issue it. Full Force and Effect Decisions not Appropriate for Many Situations Although there are sometimes situations in which decisions can be expedited, the ability to issue a decision in full force and effect, in accordance with 43 CFR 4110.3-3(b) is limited to changes to terms and conditions to the permit, and is not available for range improvements, including water hauls and temporary fencing. In addition, there is a high standard required for justification for using full force and effect, and it is not appropriate for many situations, so please do not expect this option to be available. Targeted and Prescribed Grazing The Targeted and Prescribed Grazing EA is ready for use in 5 of the 6 districts in Nevada. This tool is not available in southern portion of Nevada because it only analyzed the Great Basin Ecoregion. The project purpose is to manage invasive annual grasses by using a variety of livestock grazing practices in the Great Basin Ecoregions of Nevada. This allows for projects to be developed that are within the scope of the EA, including either targeted and prescribed grazing projects and include various monitoring components and criteria. Once the projects are completely cooperatively developed, there would be a decision issued that would describe the objectives of the project as well as defining when the project would end, both by treatment application as well as long term. The decision would also include project specific terms and conditions and monitoring required pre or post treatment (such as production). So, this does not actually change your permit or lease, but it can run for multiple/many years from one decision if conditions are met. These videos have more details on this topic:

Targeted Grazing of Annual Grasses in the Great Basin Ecoregions in Nevada (Pt. 1) https://vimeo.com/430768958 Targeted Grazing of Annual Grasses in the Great Basin Ecoregions in Nevada (Pt. 2) https://vimeo.com/430768777 www.progressiverancher.com

Protect horses and cattle from pigeon fever this fall The table above depicts the variety of options and alternatives for project development. The analysis was done to understand the impacts and benefits of both targeted and prescribed grazing practices during different seasons and in different ecological sites. All projects issued with a decision based on this EA use the following definitions: Targeted grazing is used to achieve the objective of creating fuel breaks to protect adjacent areas, and therefore does not have an objective of maintaining the ecological integrity on the project site itself. Due to the nature of these projects, they will be conducted in areas already dominated by annual grasses and will not include other resources such as riparian areas or important habitats. Prescribed grazing is used to achieve the primary objective of vegetation management to meet resource objectives other than the production of livestock forage. Prescribed grazing can be used to manipulate vegetation composition and structure or increase, reestablish, or stabilize desired vegetation communities for the purpose of promoting, enhancing, and/or sustaining ecological integrity on the treatment site. These treatments would be available for use as tools on BLM-administered lands in future proposed projects to reduce fuel loads from invasive annual grass species in order to address increased wildfire risk and diminished ecological integrity.

and/or written authorization from the BLM prior to each project treatment cycle. It is important to set up these targeted or prescribed grazing projects well in advance; cheatgrass matures quickly when it does come up, and you need to be ready to respond to it. If you have a landscape that is dominated by cheatgrass that may benefit from a fuel break, or if you have a mixed system that could benefit from some change in use to focus cheatgrass removal and minimize perennial grass disturbance, please consider looking into a cheatgrass reduction option. BLM Nevada has an application available for permittees/leasees that are interested in pursuing a targeted or prescribed grazing treatment. It can be found at this link: https://on.doi.gov/3VsxVlI. In short, there are opportunities in Nevada to adjust grazing management to account for drought impacts or annual grass reduction needs. Any authorization adjustment or project will take time to create and authorize prior to implementation, so initiate the discussion with your Rangeland Management Specialist a minimum of 3 months ahead of time. If this article was unclear or left you with questions, feel free to contact Kathryn Dyer at kdyer@blm.gov or (775) 861-6647

The Nevada Department of Agriculture (NDA) is encouraging horse owners to practice good horse health safety measures to mitigate the risk of disease as numbers of confirmed cases of pigeon fever rise in the fall. Year to date, the NDA Animal Disease Laboratory has confirmed 23 cases of pigeon fever, 18 of which have been confirmed since Sept. 1, highlighting the spike commonly seen in this disease this time of year. A reportable disease in Nevada, Pigeon fever is a bacterial infection that can occur in cattle and horses. It can cause large abscesses to form and are most commonly found on the chest and under the belly. Horses are infected when the bacteria enters through broken skin or small scrapes or wounds. Peak season for infection is late summer and into the fall. “The key to limiting the spread of pigeon fever is good horse health safety practices,” said NDA interim state veterinarian Dr. J.J. Goicoechea. “Biosecurity practices at home and at events are important.” Good horse health safety practices include fly control, not sharing water buckets and equipment, and avoiding tying horses in high traffic areas. If a horse owner suspects their animals might be affected, they should contact their veterinarian.

The 45-Day Plus Planning Timeline Still Applies – Think 3 Months in Advance If you are interested in pursuing a targeted or prescribed grazing project, please talk to your range specialist sooner rather than later, because a decision with a 45day protest and appeal period is still required. It will take additional time if temporary range improvements are required to facilitate the grazing treatments. The decision may be written to allow the treatment for several years contingent on objectives, project design www.progressiverancher.com

23 cases of pigeon fever have been confirmed this year

CONTACT: Ciara Ressel | Public Information Officer II Division of Administrative Services NDA 405 South 21st Street, Sparks, NV 89431 Office: 775-353-3603 The Progressive Rancher

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Nevada hunters generate millions in economic impact for rural communities

New study reveals spending on big game & upland game hunting Contact: Claudene Wharton, UNR Senior Marketing & Communications Specialist | 775-784-7072 | whartonc@unr.edu

A new study by researchers at UNR documents that hunting generates millions of dollars in economic impact in Nevada, especially in rural communities where wildlife is plentiful, including Elko, White Pine and Lincoln counties. The study, led by researchers in the University’s Department of Economics, Extension and Experiment Station, found that hunters spent about $380 million in 2020 on hunting in Nevada, on both travel and hunting expenses, as well as big-ticket items such as off-highway vehicles, firearms, ammunition and campers. Spending in 2020 was almost identical to spending in 2019, despite the COVID-19 pandemic. Researchers worked with the Nevada Department of Wildlife, the state agency tasked with conserving wildlife and managing sustainable, hunting opportunities in Nevada, to find out how much hunters spend on hunting licenses and tags each year. In addition to using NDOW’s administrative data and figures from the “Big Game Hunt Stats,” researchers worked with NDOW to distribute an expenditure survey to gather spending on hunting activities from 2,000 hunters. The result was two companion reports: Hunting-Related Economic Activity in Nevada and Hunter Expenditure in Nevada. The reports were produced in partnership with Extension’s Nevada Economic Assessment Project (NEAP), which aims to provide county, state and federal agencies and their partners, with quantitative and qualitative baseline data and analyses to better understand trends in each county's demographic, social, economic, fiscal and environmental characteristics. The timing of the research, which used data from the 2019 and 2020 hunting seasons, wasn’t planned to coincide with the COVID-19 pandemic, but ended up allowing the researchers to look at spending on hunting during different economic conditions. “More people want to hunt big game animals here in Nevada than there are available big game hunting tags,” said Michael Taylor, a co-author of the reports. “That’s what makes hunting kind of a recession-proof industry. There are so many people who want to go, that demand stays strong even during an economic downturn.” Hunting is a unique and sought-after experience, and hunters are committed to being outdoors and having a connection with the landscape and wildlife, Taylor added. If hunting opportunities weren’t available in Nevada, hunters would likely seek out hunting or other outdoor activities in other states.

18 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Taylor is associate professor of economics in the University’s College of Business. He spent two years collaborating on the research project and co-authoring the two reports with three University colleagues: Alec Bowman, economics research scientist and lead author of both reports; Tom Harris, economics professor, Extension specialist and Experiment Station researcher; and Buddy Borden, community and economic development associate professor and Extension specialist. Extension and the Experiment Station are part of the University’s College of Agriculture, Biotechnology & Natural Resources.

“Generally, people are aware that hunting exists and support legal, regulated hunting, but are not hunters themselves, and even hunters might not sit down and pencil out exactly what they spend on hunting each year,” he said. “Before this report, there was not enough information available to show exactly how hunting in Nevada impacts our economy.”

The team found that the majority of hunters in the state live in Washoe and Clark counties, but that the economic impact of hunting is greatest in counties where the most tags are issued – Elko, White Pine and Lincoln counties – and that economic impact varies based on the type of tag issued. For example, on average across counties, an increase of 10 hunting tags for antlered mule deer will increase total economic output by nearly $4,500, but an increase of 10 tags for antlered elk will increase total economic output by $19,000.

“It’s not agriculture, it’s not mining, but it’s a nice industry bringing people into these counties,” he said.

That’s not to say that more tags will become available to boost the economy, as the number of tags available to hunters each year is not influenced by the economy or revenue in any way. Tag quotas are set by the Nevada Wildlife Board of Commissioners through a public process, and recommendations for the number of tags available each year from NDOW are based on survey data and population modeling to manage for a sustainable, harvestable surplus, which benefits conservation and supports healthy wildlife populations. Bobby Jones, the outdoor connection coordinator for NDOW, said the hope is that information from the report will help small businesses, county commissioners and other decisionmakers better understand how conserving Nevada’s natural resources and providing sustainable opportunities for Nevadans to hunt, fish, hike and camp supports the state’s economy.

And although hunting isn’t going to be a transformational driver of economic development, it does create a substantial number of jobs in some of the state’s rural communities, Taylor added.

Taylor said he and his colleagues are now following up on the first survey to look at the economic benefits for hunters. Jones added that NDOW may look to conduct more follow-up surveys with the University in the future as well. “In comparison to this report, most national survey data severely underestimate hunter spending in Nevada,” Jones said. “Knowing this, we’re curious to know if that is the same for other outdoor pursuits, or not. If hunting generates almost $400 million per year, are fishing or wildlife viewing bigger economic drivers than we realize? Possibly, but we can’t know without moving forward with a similar effort if we want to know for sure.” Mule deer are one of the big game animals that attract hunters to Nevada’s rural communities, generating millions of dollars in economic impact, according to a report by researchers at UNR. Photo by NV Dept of Wildlife.

“Our goal is to simply share this information broadly so Nevadans can make more informed decisions that best serve their communities when it comes to conservation, outdoor recreation and hunting,” he said. Jones said there just wasn’t much information on the economic impacts of hunting in the state before this research. The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

Big data modeling, forest fuels mapping aids in mitigating catastrophic wildfire risk

UNR researchers team with CAL FIRE and California Air Resources Board Contact: Mike Wolterbeek, UNR Communications Officer | 775-784-4547 | mwolterbeek@unr.edu

Modeling and mapping firevulnerable forest vegetation across millions of acres in California, scientists at the University of Nevada, Reno are using a variety of new technologies with massive amounts of data and computational power. This research will help optimize fuel management to reduce fire risk, support carbon sequestration and improve water quality.

The research team, led by Jonathan Greenberg and Erin Hanan in the University’s College of Agriculture, Biotechnology & Natural Resources, is working on a set of interrelated initiatives that are collectively called the "GigaFire Project." Their overarching goal is to understand, using remote sensing technology and process-based models, how vegetation and fuels are changing over large landscapes. Greenberg and Hanan are researchers with the College’s Experiment Station and Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Science. Their research will produce statewide and localized fuel maps that will help identify where fire risk is the greatest. They will also inform modeling scenarios designed to predict how management can mitigate fire risk while also promoting carbon retention and water security.

With $570,000 from the California Air Resources Board and nearly $1.8 million from CAL FIRE, the researchers are mapping surface and canopy fuels across the state using: multi-sensor remote sensing data with Landsat and Airborne LiDAR (LiDAR stands for Light Detecting And Ranging, and is a remote sensing method used to examine the three dimensional structure of vegetation); field-based sampling with terrestrial laser scanning and ground based photogrammetry (the use of photography in surveying and mapping to measure distances between objects) to calibrate and validate changes over time; machine learning; and cloud and high-performance computing to map surface fuel model types, canopy base height, and canopy bulk density across the state. www.progressiverancher.com

Lessening the severity of wildfires through enhanced ground and resource management is important. That’s where the GigaFire team is making a difference with their recently funded research and collaboration with CAL FIRE and the California Air Resources Board. Part of the work is focusing on quantifying the first 2 meters of the forest’s understory, as that is the most crucial for predicting fire behavior. Looking toward the future, the team is working to project carbon gains and losses under varying forest treatment scenarios.

These data will be used by the California Air Resources Board to develop new standardized inputs for their program. The GigaFire team aims to prototype an open, transparent and automated scientific modeling framework that can be updated as new data and algorithms become available for improved fuels mapping throughout California.

“We’re using remote sensing and modeling to find all the fuels, especially ladder fuels,” Associate Professor Greenberg said. “It will be a system that is updated regularly and automatically. It will be for the entire state of California, and a few parts of Nevada. Other attempts at this modeling have been made. Greenberg and Hanan are improving upon that using big data and cloud computing with present and hindcast data since the 1980s for fuels management.

“Analyzing the amount and location of fuel accumulation allows us to understand the situations where you go from low-intensity ground fires, to high-intensity crown fires," he said. "Crown fires are the real danger – those are the wildfires where things blow up. Our department contributes to the science behind fuels management. When a fire does break out, and they will break out, you want to have already managed the fuels to minimize the risk of catastrophic wildfires.”

are often used to mitigate fire risk in forests where decades of suppression have increased fuel loading. However, forest density reductions can sometimes have unintended consequences for water quantity and quality, and such effects can be difficult to predict. Modeling work is aimed at understanding how fuels influence fire behavior and the effects of fire behavior on vegetation, soil and hydrological processes. “We are using simulation models to determine when, where and under what circumstances fuel treatments can mitigate the risk of severe crown fire, maintain stable forest carbon, and promote water security for millions of residents across the West,” said Assistant Professor Hanan, who leads the Fire & Dryland Ecosystems Lab and also leads the modeling portion of the GigaFire project.

“Models enable us to make predictions about complex responses to future climate and management scenarios that would not otherwise be possible with measurements alone,” she said. “However, to be valid and to advance our scientific understanding, models need to be continually confronted with field data. This is where Greenberg’s big data research is crucial.”

Greenberg runs the University’s Global Environmental Analysis and Remote Sensing Lab, known as GEARS, that is helping to transform the understanding of forest ground coverage with their research using LiDAR technology. LiDAR to examine the three dimensional structure of vegetation. Before implementing LiDAR technology to map forests before and after fires, the only way to figure out

Through their research, Greenberg and Hanan also work with land and resource managers who can target specific areas that need treatment, such as forest thinning, collection of material for pulp and controlled burns. Fuel treatments

The Progressive Rancher

how much ground cover was in a certain area was to deploy teams into the field – an expensive and time-consuming endeavor. However, with LiDAR the researchers can figure out down to the branch what burned and what didn’t during a fire, helping them to better understand the ways in which fires move, and the best ways in which to reduce the chances of extremely severe forest fires.

All of this research requires gathering, moving and storing massive amounts of data. Some of the technology that helps to enable this research is done with Pronghorn, the University’s high-performance computing system housed at Switch, the data storage center in northern Nevada. While the hardware is necessary for the success of the research, the critical technological piece that makes the difference is the human capital, the research-computing professionals who help the researchers scale their science by leveraging these technologies.

“Dr. Greenberg’s wildfire project is a great example of how the University’s research efforts are evolving with modern technologies in a very datacentric way," Scotty Strachen, director of cyberinfrastructure in the University's Office of Information Technology, said. "Being able to capture key data at scale, rapidly process and analyze it, and then distribute science-based information to decision-makers and the public requires a new way of thinking about networking, computing and data at the University. "Our emerging research cyberinfrastructure team is facing this challenge head-on, and working with our scientists and campus leadership to evolve Nevada’s capabilities to bring real solutions to real problems in real time.” Ladder fuel loss from the 96,000acre Ferguson Fire in the Sierra Nevada in 2018 is captured with LiDAR. Red indicates biomass that was consumed in the fire, blue indicates biomass that survived the fire. NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

New resource sheds light on tree encroachment on sagebrush ecosystems Up-to-date science-based information available on new website details how trees are taking over sagebrush ecosystems, the impacts, and what is being done to manage the issue Extensive research shows that native conifer trees, such as juniper and pinyon pine, have been increasing their footprint on the landscape at an unprecedented rate for the past 150 years, especially in places such as the Great Basin, where 1.1 million acres have transitioned from shrubland or rangeland to woodlands since 2000. This accelerated conversion of shrubland and grassland ecosystems to woodlands is having undesirable impacts, including the loss of unique wildlife and wildlife habitat, reduced water availability and increased runoff and erosion, less land available for livestock grazing, and greater fuel loading for wildfires. A new website by the collaborative “PJ (pinyonjuniper) Encroachment Education Project” sheds light on the issue. The site is also a resource for those trying to manage this threat, particularly in the Great Basin, where encroaching pinyon pine and juniper trees are taking over sagebrush ecosystems and contributing to the decrease of imperiled species such as the sage grouse. “The whole thrust of this project is to provide sciencebased information on the ecology and impacts of the problem, as well as the collaborative work being done to address it,” said Christina Restaino, natural resource

specialist with University of Nevada, Reno Extension, the organization leading the project. “The website is intended to help people understand the issue and serve as a clearinghouse of information to help land managers, professionals and agencies throughout the West in their collaborative efforts.” Restaino, who is also an assistant professor in the University’s College of Agriculture, Biotechnology & Natural Resources, said a new report by the U.S. Geological Survey and Western Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies identifies tree encroachment as one of the top three threats to sagebrush ecosystems – the other two being invasive species and land development. The website launched today and includes sections explaining the ecology of how and where the conversion is happening, as well as outlining the impacts of sagebrush range converting to woodlands. The “Resilience in Action” section shows projects being done around the West to manage the issue. Finally, there is an impressive “See the Science” section, where online viewers can search a database with over 400 peer-reviewed articles on an interactive map for information on the issue by location, topic, key word or year.

Junipers have begun to encroach upon this sagebrush ecosystem in Oregon. Photo by Jeremy Maestas, USDA-NRCS.

The partners in the project worked for two years to build the website, diving into research; holding multiple stakeholder working sessions; working with web designers to create an organized, easy-to-navigate site; and working with a technical illustrator to provide clear, accessible graphics for the site. Partners in the project include the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Working Lands for Wildlife partnership, the Bureau of Land Management, and the Intermountain West Joint Venture’s Partnering to Conserve Sagebrush Rangelands initiative. “Communicating why more trees everywhere isn’t always a good thing is a real challenge for land managers charged with conserving nonforest lands,” said Jeremy Maestas, who is part of the working group and a sagebrush ecosystem specialist with the USDANRCS. “With Extension, we were able to build a website that helps broad audiences understand the science behind the problem.” Besides the devastating effect on sagebrush-dependent wildlife, Maestas points out there are also economic impacts of the encroachment. “In the Intermountain West, 90% of tree encroachment has occurred in sagebrush shrublands, a habitat type that has already been reduced by half due to a wide variety of threats. Species like sage grouse, found nowhere else in the world, will abandon breeding habitats when there are just a few trees per acre. Encroaching trees also suck up precious soil moisture needed on arid lands to grow other native grasses and wildflowers, which means less food and cover not only for wildlife, but also for livestock that sustain rural agricultural economies in the West.” Mandi Hirsch, sagebrush collaborative conservation specialist for the Intermountain West Joint Venture and leader of the Partnering to Conserve Sagebrush Rangelands initiative, is also part of the project’s working group. She knows firsthand the impact the encroachment of trees on rangeland can have to ranchers. Hirsch is a rancher at heart and by trade who now also works toward the conservation and sustainability of Western rangelands. “The conservation of a unique species like sage grouse is very important, but it’s only part of the entire picture when managing natural resources at a landscape scale. What many people don’t realize is there are many other potentially devastating impacts of encroachment – including jeopardizing the livelihoods of our ranchers and their ability to produce food. I really think this website can help people to understand that, and all the other impacts of this encroachment. And, I think it will be a tremendous ongoing resource for those trying to do something about it.”

20 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

Four of five pinyon-juniper tree species declining in their ranges in the West UNR study shows warmer, drier conditions taking toll on pinyon-juniper woodlands Pinyon-juniper woodlands host unique wildlife and wildlife habitat, as well as areas for hiking and outdoor recreation. They are also part of a web of healthy ecosystems that, together, help to balance water availability, storage and runoff; and prevent erosion.

osteosperma (Utah juniper) was the only species that did not show a decline.

“We found that four of the five species were declining,” said Shriver, an assistant professor in the University’s College of Agriculture, Biotechnology & Natural Resources. “And, in the driest, warmest locations, up to about 50% of populations are declining. It’s pretty severe in those locations, which are usually at lower elevations that tend to be hotter and get less water than woodlands at higher elevations.”

Gathering the data and building the models

A new study published in Global Ecology and Biogeography and led by University of Nevada, Reno researcher Robert Shriver sheds new light on what is happening in pinyon-juniper woodlands across the West. The research is unique, in that it looks at both tree mortality, as well as recruitment, or new seedlings and saplings, to calculate a “net effect.” And, the news isn’t necessarily good, particularly in warmer, drier locations.

Shriver said that when looking at all locations studied, which included over 6,000 plots and more than 59,000 tagged trees, up to 10-20% of populations were declining. Of the five species, including two pinyon pines and three junipers, Pinus edulis, more commonly referred to as two-needle pinyon or simply pinyon, showed the greatest declines, with about 24% of its populations in decline. The other pinyon species and two of the juniper species showed more moderate declines overall, but still quite severe declines in the hotter, drier areas. These species include Pinus monophylla (single-leaf pinyon), Juniperus monosperma (one-seed juniper) and Juniperus scopulorum (Rocky Mountain juniper). Juniperus

“Utah juniper was the exception to everything,” Shriver, who conducts research as part of the College’s Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Science and Experiment Station, said. “What we found pretty much matches up with what we know about that species’ resiliency. It’s the most abundant in the Great Basin, and is typically less vulnerable to hotter, drier climate conditions, so it could mean that there might be compositional shifts occurring in the future, where some areas that are mixed species might become more juniperdominated.”

In part, Shriver used data from the Forest Inventory and Analysis, a nationwide survey of forested lands in the U.S., conducted by the U.S. Forest Service.

“They tag the trees and return to the same plots for comparison at least every 10 years, but they have a systematic scheme to determine where,” he explained. “They are making sure they are getting a broad sample of both federal and private land. The result is a representative sample of what all forests look like across the U.S., even covering some very remote locations. It’s staggered, with 10% of plots surveyed in a given year.” Shriver said the plots that were included in this pinyonjuniper research were first sampled between 2000 and 2007, and were surveyed the second time between 2010 and 2017. It is data obtained within those 10-year spans that he used for the research. He pointed out, however, that the Forest Service survey doesn’t capture as complete data on recruitment, or seedlings, since they don’t tag anything under 1 inch in diameter. Trees of this size are counted, but not tagged.

“Recruitment is the really hard part,” he said. “Tree mortality is easy to see, but recruitment is harder to observe, so it’s been harder to account for. Having a stable population is dependent on both mortality and recruitment. So, we developed a new statistical approach that allowed us to understand and factor in recruitment. Using these modeling approaches, we were able to quantify what the recruitment rate is in these different areas, and then combine that data with the mortality data to get a more clear, accurate picture of what is really going on in terms of change in species’ populations under different climate conditions and woodland densities in different regions.” The research excluded plots where fire mortality or intentional tree harvesting occurred, allowing the researchers to more directly observe changes occurring due to climatic conditions across each species’ range.

Impacts of the findings

Shriver says the declines in populations they calculated could be significant for a number of reasons.

“In regard to wildlife, probably the most significant effect is on the pinyon jay, which has been in decline for the last couple of decades, and is really dependent on the seed that is produced by pinyon pine,” he said. “The areas www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

where the pinyon jay tends to choose are on that border of the sagebrush and the pinyon. It likes those habitats that are probably the most vulnerable. But, beyond the pinyon jay, certainly a number of species could be affected – mule deer, and other birds and wildlife.”

In addition, Shriver said pinyons and pine nut harvesting are culturally important, to Native Americans and others, and pinyon-juniper woodlands provide recreational value for hikers and outdoor enthusiasts. Importantly, he adds, there’s the functions that pinyon-juniper woodlands play in our watersheds. Pinyon-juniper woodlands play an important role in water and soil retention in some locations.

What does the future hold?

“We are likely to see pretty big changes in where we find forests in the Great Basin and the Southwest over the next few decades,” Shriver said. “A lot of places where we saw forests, we may not see them, especially in lower elevations, because they tend to be the hottest and driest.” Shriver said there has been a lot of expansion in these woodlands since the mid-1800s, and that some declines may not be a bad thing everywhere. For example, in some areas the pinyon-juniper woodlands have encroached on shrubland ecosystems that provide important ecosystem services and unique wildlife habitat. And, the trees, especially when packed in too densely and without enough moisture, also increase the intensity of wildfires. “Our results also suggest that for some locations, management actions could slow down or reverse the woodland declines,” Shriver said. “As it gets warmer and drier, the density of trees a landscape is able to support lessens, so reductions in tree density might expand the envelope of where the trees can be, reducing the chance of large tree mortality events.”

While woodland decline could create an opportunity for expansion of native shrublands such as sagebrush, Shriver cautioned that other, less beneficial vegetation could also take hold. “Just because the pinyon and juniper die off, doesn’t mean something desirable would establish in their place,” he said. “You might get cheatgrass or other undesirable vegetation.”

Shriver said the purpose of the research and models is to help anticipate the vulnerability of woodlands and forecast coming range shifts, so that we might be able to sway the outcomes to be more positive ones.

“If we know where this is likely to happen, we can do the best we can to influence what might happen next,” he said. “We might be able to direct these into ecosystems that might support native plants and animals in the Great Basin and the Southwest, and fit into our watersheds in a beneficial way.” Funding for the study was provided by the US Geological Survey North Central Climate Adaptation Science Center. Coauthors include Charles B. Yackulic and John B. Bradford, with the USGS Southwest Biological Science Center; and David M. Bell, with the USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station. NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Intertribal Agriculture Council Retreat Focuses on Arid West Pasture Recovery Efforts In Nevada By: Jim Komar, NRCS, Reno, NV Photographs by: Jim Komar, NRCS, Reno, NV and Shanna Bernal-Fields, NRCS, Boise, ID

An inspirational mix of new and established partnerships came together in August to share the progress one northeastern Nevada Ranch is making to reverse decades of soil degradation and riparian area damage through innovative, regenerative management strategies.

For Ranch Manager McKenzie Molsbee and her Dad, Agee Smith, collaboration has always been at the core of the Cottonwood Ranch brand, even in times of significant conflict on riparian area management and other resource issues that touch people beyond the borders of the ranch.

On August 10 and 11,The Cottonwood Ranch near Wells, Nevada hosted the Intertribal Agriculture Council (IAC) for a workshop retreat.

Over the past five years, ranch manager McKenzie Molsbee and her Dad, Agee Smith, have re-examined the question of what does the 1,200 acre ranch need to thrive and restore ecological function again?

“The Cottonwood Ranch opportunity embodied three pillars - regenerative ag applications, riparian restoration, and the restoration of arid rangeland systems – that IAC was looking for on this retreat,” said Emily Luscombe, the new Natural Resources Director of the Intertribal Agriculture Council. IAC staff recruited tribal representatives from across Nevada, including members of the Yerington Paiute, South Fork Band of TeMoak, Yomba Shoshone, Duck Water Shoshone, and the Walker River Paiute Tribes to participate. IAC works with Tribes and Tribal Producers across the nation, promoting Indian-use of Indian resources for the benefit of Indian People. Programmatic offerings include legal and policy development, USDA technical assistance, natural resources management, marketing support, and Native youth in food and agriculture leadership development. IAC seeks to address systemic inequities to better serve Native producers, and Indian Country as a whole. For the folks at Cottonwood Ranch, bringing IAC in was another step in their continuing effort to share their story and bring a fresh set of eyes and minds to the challenges of returning the land to a healthy, functioning state. 22 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Decades of managing animals on pastureland under an uncontrolled wildland flood irrigation system had fragmented the riparian corridor, compacted the soil, broken the air, water, and nutrient cycles, leaving the plant and soil biological community on life support. Needing to make a change, the ranch turned to neighbors, consultants, and conservation professionals like NRCS District Conservationist Jaime Jasmine in nearby Elko for help formulating a new approach, beginning with two key irrigated pastures. First, NRCS and the state of Nevada helped the Ranch convert the inefficient flood irrigation system to center pivot sprinklers. Soil and pasture experts from Missouri to New Zealand weighed in with soil health improvement strategies focused on managing the “underground livestock” that govern soil air, water, and nutrient cycling. Pastures were re-seeded and nutrient rebalancing treatments begun that continue through a second season of change for the Cottonwood Ranch. With much of the shift in management now complete, the Ranch and IAC’s Luscombe sought outside expertise to assist in learning from the early results of the Ranch’s new regenerative management strategy. Part of their

request was to employ a rainfall simulator to see how the restoration areas were performing, something Emily had seen used effectively at another event. The problem was, rain (simulated or otherwise), can be a pretty scarce commodity in Nevada. NRCS Nevada State Soil Scientist Jim Komar reached out to NRCS Idaho, and Curtis Elke, Idaho State Conservationist and Idaho State Soil Scientist Shawn Nield came to the rescue.

But, as Komar said, “you can talk an hour about what to expect when a drop of water hits the land, but nothing speaks more clearly than showing what happens using a rainfall simulator.” The rainfall simulator showered a steady rain on five trays representing various conditions the participants had probed onsite. As expected, the rainfall simulator received great response from IAC participants and Smith, who called it “one of the most effective visuals I’ve ever seen”.

Not only did the Idaho NRCS team offer their Soil Health trailer with the rainfall simulator, they also offered two of Idaho’s best – Resource Soil Scientist Shanna Bernal-Fields, and Courtney Cosden, a joint NRCSUniversity of Idaho Extension Soil Health Instructor - to assist with the request.

The simulator showed very little of the roughly one inch of rain applied penetrated into the heavily compacted pasture subject to decades of wildland flood and grazing by livestock while the treated pivot-irrigated pasture samples showed more water infiltrating into the soil profile, a hopeful sign of progress.

The Retreat began with Agee Smith recounting the Ranch history, engaging in an open discussion of the ongoing challenges managing a highly-degraded system, and the inspiration that had caused their shift to regenerative management principles. Participants then toured the Ranch, observing the degraded conditions on the ground that had led to change, and the treatments underway aimed at restoring soil function.

The “well-managed irrigated pasture” site delivered the performance Molsbee and Smith aim to regenerate across the Ranch, with one inch of water soaking in without any runoff.

“We were able to select four sites illustrating the current range of conditions, from a never having been degraded site all the way to a sample site representing a still-degraded, non-functioning site,” explained Komar. NRCS staff employed various infield assessment tools to evaluate soil function across the four-site progression to help tune everyone’s five senses to the clear differences between healthy and unhealthy soils.

The Progressive Rancher

“It took quite a long time to get here, and it will still take some time to recover,” said Molsbee of their progression towards functioning pasture. “We’re optimistic we are heading in the right direction.” Following the simulator demonstration, participants closed by touring restored riparian and burn recovery areas where management practices are promoting recovery, and a closing session focused on ecosystem function, pollinator protection, and sources of assistance to Tribes with their resource concerns. For more information about how NRCS can assist with soil related issues, contact your local USDA Service Center. www.progressiverancher.com

IAC, Cottonwood Ranch retreat group photo

Idaho NRCS educator Courtney Cosden prepares a rainfall simulator sampling tray reflecting the benchmark degraded condition on a Cottonwood Ranch pasture.

NRCS Idaho Resource Soil Scientist Shanna Bernal-Fields (blue shirt, right) conducts a field discussion at one of the sites on Cottonwood Ranch.

Agee Smith checks for soil compaction along a transect in a treated irrigated pasture on the Cottonwood Ranch.

Nevada – Idaho NRCS teams up to help with the Intertribal Agriculture Council at the Cottonwood Ranch in Elko County, Nevada. Pictured left to right: NRCS Nevada State Soil Scientist Jim Komar, NRCS Idaho Resource Soil Scientist Shanna Bernal-Fields, and NRCS – U. of Idaho Soil Health Instructor Courtney Cosden. www.progressiverancher.com

IAC Cottonwood Ranch rainfall simulator setup. The various trays included different soil types and water collected in the jars showed how much rain ran off or was absorbed by the different soil types.

The Progressive Rancher

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Disaster Programs in the Farm Bill NRevisiting evada Farm Bureau Contact: Daniel Munch, Economist (202) 406-3669 dmunch@fb.org

Going back almost 100 years, the history of the farm bill largely tracks the history of food production in the United States as the legislation evolves to meet the needs of its modern-day constituents – farmers and consumers. Agriculture’s role in providing food security, and in turn national security, to the United States is more important than ever. And now, work on the next farm bill has started during a period of volatility on every front – political, economic, weather and beyond.

In 2021 alone, farmers and ranchers faced over $12.5 billion in crop and rangeland losses associated with events including extreme drought, wildfires, hurricanes, derechos, freezes and flooding. Of that figure, over $6.5 billion in losses were not covered by existing Risk Management Agency (RMA) programs. To help address these losses and others, the farm bill generally authorizes a range of disaster assistance programs to help producers recover from natural disasters. Understanding these existing programs and the ad hoc disaster assistance that has supplemented farm bill programs will provide clarity as 2023 farm bill discussions ramp up.

The 2014 farm bill permanently authorized four agricultural disaster programs for livestock and trees: the Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP); the Livestock Forage Disaster Program (LFP), the Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honey Bees, and FarmRaised Fish Program (ELAP) and the Tree Assistance Program (TAP). Producers do not pay a fee to participate in these programs and advanced sign-up is not required. They are all administered through the Farm Service Agency (FSA) and funded via the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC). In fiscal year 2021, $544 million was paid through LFP, $76 million was paid through ELAP, $16 million was paid through LIP and $9 million was paid to producers through TAP. Program expenditures in fiscal year 2022 are expected to increase by 195% across the four programs, with LFP estimated to pay $1.65 billion, ELAP estimated to pay $211 million, LIP estimated to pay $35 million and TAP estimated to pay $8 million. Payments cannot exceed $125,000 per year through LFP. There are no limits on payments for LIP, 24 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

ELAP or TAP, though to be eligible a producer’s average adjusted gross income over three recent taxable years cannot exceed $900,000.

ELAP). The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 removed LIP from the $125,000 payment limitation; the limitation now only applies to LFP.

LIP provides payments to eligible livestock owners and contract growers for livestock deaths in excess of normal mortality caused by extreme or abnormal damaging weather, disease, and attacks from wild animals reintroduced or protected by the federal government. The program also compensates producers when an animal is injured as a direct result of an eligible loss condition but is not killed and is sold at a lower price. Covered livestock includes beef and dairy cattle, bison, hogs, sheep, goats, alpacas, deer, elk, llamas, reindeer, caribou, horses, emus, chickens, ducks, geese and turkeys. LIP does not cover wild roaming animals, pets or livestock used for recreational purposes. The payment rate is 75% of the average fair market value of the deceased animal. Rates are reported by the USDA for each type of livestock annually (for example $1,077.94 for adult beef bull, $21.72 for a tom turkey, and $108.52 for a boar 451 pounds or more). A complete list of 2022 payment rates can be found here: www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA-FSAPublic/usdafiles/FactSheets/2022/ fsa_lip_livestockimdemnityprogram_ factsheet_2022.pdf.

LFP makes payments to eligible producers who have experienced grazing losses on drought-affected pastureland or on rangeland managed by a federal agency due to a qualifying fire. Producers must own, cash or share lease, or be a contract grower of covered livestock (beef and dairy cattle, bison, deer, elk, emus, horses, goats, llamas, reindeer, and sheep) during the 60 days prior to the beginning date of a qualifying drought or fire. They must also provide pastureland for livestock that is physically located in a county affected by a qualifying drought during the normal grazing period for the county or is managed by a federal agency where grazing is not permitted due to fire. For drought, payments are 60% of the estimated monthly feed cost. For producers who sold livestock because of drought the payment is equal to 80% of the estimated monthly feed cost. Payment frequencies are dependent on drought intensity levels published weekly for a specific county by the U.S. Drought Monitor. Categories are displayed in Table 1. No changes were made to LFP in the 2018 farm bill.

The 2018 farm bill amended certain parts of the LIP program; these changes went into effect in 2019. They provided eligibility flexibility to unweaned livestock losses from extreme cold regardless of vaccine protocol or management practice. They also expanded coverage for livestock losses due to disease cause or transmission by a vector that is not controlled by vaccination or an acceptable management practice (diseases previously covered under

ELAP provides payments to producers of livestock, honeybees and farm-raised fish and compensation for losses due to disease, adverse weather, feed or water shortages, or other conditions (such as wildfires) that are not covered under LIP or LFP. Since honeybees and fish are not covered by LIP or LFP, ELAP provides assistance for losses in colonies and fish in excess of normal mortality due to eligible adverse weather or conditions such as colony collapse disorder. For livestock losses ELAP covers livestock feed and grazing losses not due to drought or wildfires on federally managed land and losses resulting from the additional cost of transporting water to livestock due to an eligible drought.

Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP):

For eligible contract growers the payment is based on 75% of the natural average input cost for the applicable livestock. Payments for livestock sold at reduced prices are calculated by multiplying the national payment rate for the livestock category minus the amount the owner received at sale multiplied by the owner’s share.

Livestock Forage Disaster Program (LFP):

Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honey Bees, and Farm-Raised Fish Program (ELAP)

The Progressive Rancher

The 2018 farm bill expanded ELAP to assist for costs related to inspection for cattle tick fever regardless of findings. It also provided that payments made to veteran farmers and ranchers will be based on a national payment rate of 90%. As mentioned earlier, livestock losses due to diseases transmitted by vectors that cannot be controlled by vaccines were moved from ELAP to LIP. Lastly, the 2018 farm bill removed the $125,000 payment limitation for ELAP. In September 2021, USDA updated ELAP to cover feed transportation costs for drought-impacted ranchers. Many ranchers who transported livestock to new feed sources were left out in the original policy, so transporting livestock to feed was added in a later version. The policy allows reimbursements of 60% (90% for socially disadvantaged, beginning, or veteran farmers or ranchers) of feed transportation costs above what would have been incurred in a normal year. This rate is then multiplied by the national average price per mile to transport a truckload of eligible livestock or livestock feed, multiplied by the actual number of additional miles the feed or livestock was transported by the producer in excess of 25 miles per truckload of livestock or livestock feed and for no more than 1,000 miles per truckload of livestock or feed during the program year. The restriction on providing assistance for transportation of water to animals on Conservation Reserve Program land was removed. It also amended “eligible drought” to cover situations in which any area of a county has been rated by the drought monitor as D2 (severe drought) or worse for at least eight consecutive weeks. Tree Assistance Program (TAP):

TAP makes payments to qualifying orchardists and nursery tree growers to replant or rehabilitate trees, bushes, and vines damaged by natural disasters. Losses in crop production are generally covered by crop insurance or the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP). Nursery trees include ornamental, fruit, nut and Christmas trees produced for commercial sale. Trees used for pulp or timber are ineligible. Producers must incur a mortality loss in www.progressiverancher.com

excess of 15% after adjusting for normal mortality or damage. For replacement, replanting and rehabilitation of trees, bushes or vines the payment calculation is the lesser of (a) 65% of the actual cost of replanting (in excess of 15% mortality) and/or 50% of the actual cost of rehabilitation (in excess of 15% damage), or (b) the maximum eligible amount established for the practice by FSA. Acres planted with program payments cannot exceed 1,000 acres annually. The 2018 farm bill increased reimbursement amounts for beginning farmers and veteran farmers from 65% to 75% of the cost of replanting in excess of 15% mortality. It also makes the same change for pruning, removal and other costs incurred by salvaging plants. A final rule in April 2022 added the term “commercially viable” as a requisite for eligible tree, bush or vine losses. Ad Hoc Disaster Assistance Programs

Though permanent disaster assistance programs, crop insurance and NAP provide a substantial safety net to livestock and crop producers, the losses that occur outside the scope of an existing policy or coverage level can be detrimental to a farm business, especially those resulting from recent large-scale weather disasters. Congress has responded to these situations by authorizing additional disaster funds via ad hoc disaster programs like the Wildfire and Hurricane Indemnity Program Plus (WHIP+) and, most recently, the Emergency Livestock Relief Program (ELRP) and Emergency Relief Program (ERP). Wildfire Hurricane Indemnity Program + (WHIP+)

WHIP+ has been discussed extensively in previous Market Intels including: Reviewing WHIP+ and Other Disaster Assistance Programs, 2020 Disaster Estimations Reveal at Least $3.6 Billion in Uncovered Losses, 2020 Disasters Reveal Gaps in Ad Hoc Aid Legislation , Continuing Resolution Extends Disaster Coverage , and Kentucky, Arkansas Tornadoes, Midwest Derecho Renew Calls for Timely Disaster Assistance. WHIP+ has its origins in the 2017 WHIP and was established under the Additional Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Relief Act of 2019 with $3.005 billion in funds that were used to provide financial assistance for crop losses many farmers and www.progressiverancher.com

ranchers experienced in 2018 and 2019 because of record precipitation, extreme cold and snowfall, flooding, hurricanes, wildfires and tornadoes. Eligible crops include those covered under federal crop insurance or the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program. The payment formula for WHIP+ was based on the expected value of the crop and a WHIP+ payment factor and took into consideration the value of the crop harvested and the insurance indemnity. Emergency Relief Program (ERP)

On May 16, USDA announced that some commodity and specialty crop producers impacted by natural disasters in 2020 and 2021 will soon be eligible to receive emergency relief payments totaling about $6 billion to offset crop yield and value losses through FSA’s new Emergency Relief Program (ERP), previously known as WHIP+. The funding was from $10 billion authorized in a September 2021 continuing resolution that also expanded ad hoc disaster coverage for additional causes of loss including derechos, winter storms, polar vortexes, freeze, smoke exposure and quality losses for crops. ERP was designed to pay producers in two phases. Phase 1 focuses on streamlining payments to producers whose crop insurance and/or Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) data are already on file. Phase 2 focuses on filling payment gaps to cover producers who did not participate or receive payments through existing programs or with other special cases. As of the writing of this article, FSA expected most payments to have been made in Phase 1 while details on Phase 2 have still yet to be released, leaving many producers waiting to receive assistance from disasters that occurred nearly three years ago. ERP program specifications and payment examples for Phase 1 can be found in a prior Market Intel: From WHIP+ to ERP: A New Name for 2020-2021 Ad Hoc Disaster Assistance. Losses in 2022 have not yet been addressed by Congress via an ad hoc program. Emergency Livestock Relief Program (ELRP)

The same $10 billion that established funds for ERP also supported a livestock-focused ad hoc disaster assistance program called ELRP. The Secretary of Agriculture was allotted $750 million to assist producers of livestock for losses incurred during

calendar year 2021 due to qualifying droughts or wildfires. The livestock producers who suffered losses due to drought are eligible for assistance if any area within the county in which the loss occurred was rated by the U.S. Drought Monitor as having a D2 (severe drought) for eight consecutive weeks or a D3 (extreme drought) or higher level of drought intensity during the applicable year. Like ERP, ELRP operates in two phases, also with Phase 2 details not currently available. ELRP assists eligible livestock producers who faced increased supplemental feed costs as a result of forage losses due to a qualifying drought or wildfire in calendar year 2021. For eligible producers, ELRP Phase 1 will pay for a portion of the increased feed costs in 2021 based on the number of animal units, limited by available grazing acreage, in eligible drought counties. Phase I utilizes data from LFP to determine which producers qualify and to calculate payments to assist with supplemental feed costs – with almost identical program requirements to LFP. The payment will be the producer’s gross 2021 LFP payment multiplied by an ELRP percentage (90% for historically underserved producers and 75% for all other producers).

Restoration Program (EFRP) and Emergency Watershed Protection Program (EWP). The former two programs are administered by the FSA, which pays participants a percentage of the cost to restore land to a productive state. ECP also funds water for livestock and installing water conserving measures during times of drought. Administered by USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service and U.S. Forest Service, EWP assists and sponsors landowners in implementing emergency recovery measures for runoff control and erosion prevention to relieve imminent hazards to life and property created by a natural disaster.

Other Programs

The 2018 farm bill reauthorized many programs that provide producers a safety net against unexpected crop and livestock losses associated with natural disasters.

When the President or Secretary of Agriculture declare a county a disaster area or quarantine area, agricultural producers in those or contiguous counties may be eligible for low-interest disaster loans through FSA called Emergency Loans, or EM loans. EM loan funds may be used to help eligible farmers, ranchers and aquaculture producers recover from production losses (when the producer suffers a significant loss of an annual crop) or from physical losses (such as repairing or replacing damaged or destroyed structures or equipment or for the replanting of permanent crops such as orchards). A qualified applicant can then borrow up to 100% of actual production or physical losses (not to exceed a loan total of $500,000). EM loans are permanently authorized by Title III of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act. In fiscal year 2022 the program received $37.7 million of new loan authority. Several other USDA programs assist producers in repairing, restoring and mitigating disasters on private land including the Emergency Conservation Program (ECP), Emergency Forest

The Progressive Rancher

The Dairy Indemnity Payment Program (DIPP) allows the Secretary of Agriculture to indemnify affected dairy farmers and manufacturers of dairy products who, through no fault of their own, suffer income losses with respect to milk or milk products containing harmful pesticide residues, chemicals, or toxic substances, or that were contaminated by nuclear radiation or fallout. The program is further described in a dairy programs-focused Market Intel here. Conclusion

Additional congressional authorizations through ad hoc programs like WHIP+ and ELRP/ERP intend to fill the gaps in crop insurance and existing disaster assistance programs. While ad hoc assistance is a welcome addition in supporting farmers and ranchers, continued improvements to existing programs and crop insurance offerings can help fill gaps that leave some producers vulnerable. As discussions ramp up for the 2023 farm bill, understanding the history of existing disaster assistance programs and how they’ve performed under unprecedented volatility will allow for more informed recommendations. Much of the above information is based on summaries provided by the Congressional Research Service and in the Federal Register. Full Article & Images/Charts HERE: www.fb.org/market-intel/revisitingdisaster-programs-in-the-farm-bill

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

By Liam Few, FFA Reporter Churchill County FFA is planning for an exciting year! We have a new officer team, a new Ag Teacher and we have amazing members and Alumni. We kicked this year off with the Greenhand and Colt training. Then we continued the great year with our amazing CDE teams and the Fall Classic Trap Shoot!

Speaking: Liam Few Next, CCFFA has a new Ag teacher, Ms. Johnson! She has a lot of plans for the chapter, most of which are to help better the chapter and the events in which the chapter participates. Included in these plans will be cleaning up and bringing the greenhouses back to their proper use. Ms. Johnson also wants to start working with the program's test plot and correcting the chapter's finances. The goal is to work with our chapter's members and alumni to create the ultimate environment for our chapter's success.

This brings us to our first major event of this school year: the Greenhand and Colt training, which happened on September 20, 2022. This event is a great opportunity for new FFA members to learn about FFA, our creed, our standards, and our goals as a national community. By attending the Greenhand event, FFA members learn the basic knowledge of FFA and can apply to earn their Greenhand degree, which is one of the first steps to becoming a life-long FFA member.

26 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

To start, in May we had our annual FFA banquet. The night started off with an amazing silent auction and dinner. We continued with the awards ceremony in which we talked about all the wonderful achievements from the previous year. However, the greatest part of the night was when our new officer team was announced! We all thanked our retiring officers for their hard work and dedication to the Churchill County FFA chapter and they then called the role of our new officers. The 2022-2023 school year CCFFA officers are as follows: Caitlyn Dock as President, Addison Diaz as Vice-President, Madison Gregory as Secretary, Jeremiah Prinz as our Treasurer, Liam Few as the Reporter, Kara Herbert as Sentinel and finally Dana Buckmaster as Historian! While the Greenhand training was happening, our FFA officers were in the Chapter Officer Leadership Training event (COLT). This is a very useful event to help Officers to learn to work as a team. This allows the officers to provide a much better experience for the chapter members. The training first started with an ice breaker activity. This allowed us to get to know other chapter officers better and learn how they run their chapters. This continued through the morning as we discussed, learned about, and interacted with the other chapters. Thanks to the knowledge we gained from this, our officer team is planning on having a great year as we work toward our goals as a closer officer team.

Finally, the most recent event our chapter participated in was the Trap Club’s Fall Classic. All attending members were to go through a training on Thursday, September 22, and the shoot started the next day, Friday, September 23 and lasted until Sunday, September 25. We helped score the shooters, reload

The Progressive Rancher

the throwers and at the end of the night we served dinner for the Basque Shoot. Our chapter has been helping in this event for the past couple years! This is an amazing event that we are proud to be able to help with, and we hope to be able to help with it again next year.

In conclusion, the Churchill County FFA chapter is planning for a great year. We have attended many events to help build and strengthen the chapter in many different ways. It all started when our new officers were elected in May. Then we got a new Ag teacher/ advisor over the summer. We also participated in the Greenhand and COLT training, and were asked to help out at the Trap Club’s Fall Classic in which we thankfully obliged. Now we are planning many more events for the upcoming year.

www.progressiverancher.com

If you’re looking to sell a farm or ranch, give me call! McGill Area Farm 160 acres with nice Log Home, 2 center pivots, one covering approximately 100 acres and the other 30 acres. Lots of nice metal fencing, big shop/barn. Priced to sell at $775,000.

Wells Area Deeded Range with Irrigation Permit 3,796 deeded acres in 6 pastures watered by spring and stock water well. Irrigation permit on 130 acres. Well to be drilled this year. The well costs will be added to price of $2,277,559. For additional information on these properties, go to: BOTTARIREALTY.COM

Paul D. Bottari, Broker Nevada License No. B 015476

paul@bottarirealty.com

1222 6th St. PO Box 368 Wells, NV 89835 www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

Work: 775.752.3040 Cell: 775.752.0952 Fax: 775.752.3021 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

YOUR FUTURE GROWS HERE.

COMMITTED TO SERVING YOUR NEEDS. The change in agriculture today is just a glimpse of what lies ahead. It’s why, more than ever, we are committed to being the partner you can trust, who understands your needs and delivers value to help you achieve your goals. Wherever agriculture goes, we’ll be there, alongside you, as you lead the way.

Your future grows here

Visit agloan.com/growyourfuture

A Part of the Farm Credit System.

28 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

The Progressive Rancher

SCAN ME

Equal Opportunity Lender.

www.progressiverancher.com

Diagnostic Testing for Trichomoniasis in Cattle By Behind The Bench Staff www.thermofisher.com/blog/behindthebench/diagnostic-testing-bovine-trichomoniasis-cattle/ Test for Trich as Part of Herd Management Biosecurity Avoid Devastating Economic Losses

Performing diagnostic testing for bovine trichomoniasis, commonly referred to as Trich, 60 days prior to the breeding season and at the end of the breeding season should be a critical component of a producer’s plan for herd management biosecurity. While Trich may not be a day-to-day concern, an outbreak will devastate your cow–calf operation. What is Trichomoniasis? Bovine Disease Caused by T. foetus

Bovine trichomoniasis is caused by Tritrichomonas foetus (T. foetus). It’s a sexually transmitted protozoan parasite that infects bulls. Bulls are asymptomatic carriers of the disease but are responsible for trichomoniasis transmission. Older bulls are more at risk of having the disease than younger bulls. Unfortunately, bulls that test positive must be removed from the herd and culled since there is no treatment for the disease.Tritrichomonas foetus (T. foetus) parasite as seen through a microscope Infection and Reinfection Infection of the cow is caused by sexual contact with an infected bull. In the first stage of infection, cows do not have rapid conception failure. Most cows will naturally clear the infection within three months after breeding. However, immunity doesn’t last long and reinfection can occur, which would continue the infection cycle if not identified. Infection Rates Suggest Strain Differences

When cows are bred naturally by an infected bull, 30% to 90% become infected, which suggests that strain differences exist.1 In 2016, a novel South African genotype of T. foetus in cattle was discovered that is distinct www.progressiverancher.com

from other T. foetus genotypes in Europe, South and North America, and Australia.2 Global Variations in Prevalence of T. foetus

Prevalence of T. foetus is not the same in all regions of the world. Where artificial insemination (AI) is primarily used for breeding, the disease is limited. T. foetus has been considered endemic in the US since the 1980s, but some states show a higher incidence—for example, in Midwestern and western states like Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, and California. Many other parts of the world experience a similar epidemiological situation. Countries like Brazil and Argentina also experience a higher incidence due to natural service being the primary means of reproduction.3 What Are the Signs of a T. foetus-Infected Herd? Increased Number of Short-Bred or Open Heifers

The first sign of a T. foetus issue that a producer will see is an increased number of short-bred or open heifers or cows. After conception, the pregnancy of an infected cow can progress up to 120 days, but abortion may occur at about 70–90 days. At that time, the embryo dies and is either reabsorbed or expelled.3 Repeated Heat and Breeding

Due to the embryonic death, cows will come back into heat and repeat breeding occurs. Often, producers or veterinarians identify a cow in heat that should be pregnant. If T. foetus is not identified during the breeding season, then producers can expect a reduced number of cows to calve during the regular calving season. T. foetus -Infected Herd Will See Significant Losses

Unfortunately, by the time a producer realizes they have a T. foetus-infected

herd, significant economic losses cannot be avoided. Losses will include culling bulls that are infected and, more important economically, abortion losses and cows that are unable to get pregnant, resulting in fewer calves born and marketed in a season. What Biosecurity Measures Can Reduce the Introduction and Incidence of T. foetus in Your Herd? • If purchasing a new bull, a negative trichomoniasis real-time PCR test should be required; if purchasing replacement females, ensure those cows or heifers come from a negative herd or require a negative PCR test. Alternatively, replacement cows should be isolated from the existing herd during their first breeding season. • Implement a defined breeding season, as it’s much harder to detect foetus in a continuous breeding program. • Good fences make for good neighbors—this old adage applies to foetus–infected herds. It’s best to maintain a solid perimeter fence to separate cows and bulls of unknown status, including cattle on your farm and neighboring herds.

• Keeping younger bulls can be sensible, as older bulls are more at risk of having the disease. • Keep records of bulls and their breeding group; this will make identifying infected bulls easier, so you can isolate and test quickly. • Monitor pregnancy rates closely, as a low number is a key indicator that foetus has entered the herd. • Quarantine bulls of unknown status until they can be tested.

• If infection is found, consider using AI short-term to help break the cycle; most AI companies regularly test semen for pathogens, including foetus. • Don’t share or lease bulls with neighboring operations.

• Annual foetus testing is recommended for all breeding herds. Since every bull goes through a breeding soundness exam once a year before they’re put into the pasture with cows and heifers, producers can use this time to collect a Trich sample to avoid running the bull through the chute twice.

The Progressive Rancher

Diagnostic Testing for Trichomoniasis Diagnostic testing for trichomoniasis is only available for bulls. All nonvirgin bulls should be tested on-farm prior to breeding season or comingling in the herd. Some states and countries require testing prior to import/export or prior to bull sales across state lines. The Presence of T. foetus Can Be Confirmed by a Real-Time PCR Assay Real-Time PCR Provides Faster Results Than Culture

Real-time PCR is the ideal test to use for Trich because it provides faster results than culture (usually one day) and a higher level of confidence in the results. To reduce costs, it’s possible to pool tests, which involves testing a group of nonvirgin bulls using one diagnostic reaction to meet the state or country requirement. In herds where Trich has been identified, individual tests are required. Identify Infections Quickly, Reduce Risk of Infections and Economic Losses

Using real-time PCR testing as part of a herd management biosecurity plan, T. foetus infections can be identified more quickly, allowing pregnancy rates to increase and limiting the economic consequences of this disease. Other Resources & Information

Tritrichomonas foetus Can Be Devastating to Calving Rates: www.thecattlesite.com/ news/52495/tritrichomonas-foetus-can-bedevastating-to-calving-rates/ Trichomoniasis Management Helps Increase Calving Rates: www.thecattlesite.com/ articles/4367/trichomoniasis-managementhelps-increase-calving-rates/ Trich PCR Testing for Cattle is Booming Business in Idaho, USA: www.thecattlesite. com/news/51718/trich-pcr-testing-forcattle-is-booming-business-in-idaho-usa/ REFERENCES: 1 Casteriano, A., Molini, U., Kandjumbwa,K., Khaiseb, S., Frey, C., & Slapeta, J. (2016) Novel genotype of Tritrichomonas foetus from cattle in Southern Africa. Parasitology, 143(14), 1954-1959. 2 Trichomoniasis In Cattle – Reproductive System (2022) MSD Veterinary Manual, https://www.merckvetmanual. com/reproductive-system/trichomoniasis/trichomoniasis-incattle 3 Dąbrowska, Joanna et al. (2019) Tritrichomonas Foetus As A Causative Agent Of Tritrichomonosis In Different Animal Hosts. J Vet Res, vol 63, no. 4, pp. 533-541. Walter De Gruyter Gmbh, doi:10.2478/jvetres-2019-0072.

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Poor Nutrition

The term scours is commonly used in the cattle industry to describe diarrhea in young animals. Scours lead to dehydration and various other problems, and often result in the death of very young calves. www.moocall.com/calf-scours/#

Inadequate nutrition is one of the most common causes of calf scours. It is very important that calves receive proper nutrition as they are in a phase in their lives where they require plenty of nutrients in order to grow as well as manage to fight off any pathogens. Without adequate nutrition the calf will not be able to gain weight as well as have enough energy to provide adequately for its immune system. Feeding at Inconsistent Times

It is very important to feed calves on a regular schedule. Otherwise inconsistent timing can lead to stress, and calves can develop acidosis. Fed Milk at Incorrect Temperature

What are Calf Scours? Scours, or enteritis as they are sometimes referred to, describes diarrhea and an inflammation of the intestinal tract. Unfortunately cattle of any age can develop this condition. But most calf scours cases tend to occur in calves that are less than one month old.

Causes of Calf Scours

Calf scours can be caused as a result of various reasons, including viruses, parasites and bacteria. There are in fact both infectious as well as non-infectious causes, as we shall be discussing in more detail hereunder.

Infectious Causes

Research has shown that most adult cattle shed various infectious agents that can cause calf scours. These are mostly shed in fecal matter.

While the feces of healthy cattle appear to be normal, there will still be pathogens that are responsible for scours present, especially in the feces of pregnant cows that have approached their calving date, and in that of heifers, particularly following cold weather. Healthy older calves can become infected quite easily. Even if they remain otherwise healthy, they will be contributing to the shedding of a higher amount of these agents in their environment, leading to even higher numbers of calf scours outbreaks.

Rotavirus, cryptosporidium and coronavirus cause around 95% of infectious calf scours cases for calves who are less than 3 weeks old. These 30 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

three agents may also be present together.

While all calves are exposed to these three pathogens, the determining factor whether a calf ends up getting sick or not lies on the dose. Hence the more pathogen a calf receives, the bigger the probability that it will develop scours.

Rotavirus infects those cells that are considered to be essential for the absorption of nutrients in the small intestine. Since there will be a lower nutrient absorption, the calf will suffer from nutritional deficiencies and this will lead to problems in its digestive tract’s functioning. For instance, there will be problems associated with water absorption, and this will lead to diarrhea.

Coronavirus also infects cells in a similar way as rotavirus does. However, in the case of coronavirus, there will not be only a problem with absorption, as the coronavirus actively kills cells found in the lining of the intestine. As a result there will be a considerable destruction of this lining, leading to the calf being unable to absorb nutrients, while also ending up suffering from a massive inflammation. Severe diarrhea will result thereafter.

The cryptosporidium, or crypto, is a protozoan. This is not bacteria, but rather microscopic animals. Crypto implants itself in the wall of the intestine. It then leads to severe inflammatory damage to the lining, which results in diarrhea. These crypto infections are very painful.

Non-Infectious Causes

There are also non-infectious causes of calf scours, including:

It is very important to feed calves milk that is at body temperature. A cow’s body temperature lies between 101º and 102.5º Fahrenheit. Milk Replacer Issues

If milk replacer powder is used, it is very important to make sure that it is being accurately measured and properly mixed with water. In cases where milk replacer is too concentrated, it can lead to osmotic diarrhea.

Symptoms of Calf Scours

Diagnosing calf scours is carried out by evaluating the following symptoms. Manure Consistency

A calf ’s feces cannot be solid since they ingest a liquid diet. The manure consistency should be slightly loose, and semi formed. It should be able to sit on top of straw bedding. Should the manure be similar to water in terms of its consistency, then it will most probably be scours manure. One way to check is to see if it runs immediately through straw bedding. The watery stools may be yellow, green, brown or grey, and occasionally there could be blood and even mucus in them. Weakness

Calves are often weak and look depressed. In many cases they will lose any desire to nurse. Sick calves will also be noticeably weak in their walking as they often stagger, and they are generally not able to stand. Examination

A visual and physical examination of the calf will need to be carried out in combination with checking the manure consistency.

The Progressive Rancher

A sick calf will look lethargic and depressed. It will typically have dull eyes and drooping ears. If you notice that the calf is remaining lying down while other calves its age have stood up, then it could also be a warning sign. A sick calf may also show reluctance to eat. Many calves with scours will also be breathing much faster and with more effort.

Preventing Calf Scours

Prevention is of utmost importance, and it is always preferable to treatment. The following preventative measures can help to avoid calf scours from developing in your cattle. Mother Cow

As a general rule, a healthy mother cow has a higher probability of giving birth to a healthy calf. Thus during pregnancy, the mother cow should be well taken care of. You should ensure it has a good body condition score, and is properly fed, including the amount of minerals it receives. Adequate protein, energy and micronutrient nutrition is important for the dam throughout its gestation. The cow should also be kept in a clean and dry environment. There is also the option of making use of vaccines in order to influence the antibodies that the cow will have in its colostrum, as this will then be passed on to the calf. Vaccinating at the right time during pregnancy can greatly improve the quality of the colostrum and target pathogens which could cause scours. Colostrum

As soon as the calf is born, within its first two hours of life, four quarts of colostrum need to be fed to it. This colostrum needs to be clean and of good quality. In the next hours the calf ’s ability of absorbing protective antibodies in the colostrum will start to decrease. Hence, managing the quality of the colostrum is one of the most important preventative measures in improving the calf ’s health.

In case the delivery was a difficult one, and the dam is either in pain or too tired, it is best to milk the colostrum from the dam and feed it to the calf by means of an esophageal feeder. Another option is to obtain fresh colostrums from a local dairy and freeze them. Colostrum replacer may also be used, although not the best option. Calving Pens

As soon as the calf is born, it will be exposed to pathogens. Hence the www.progressiverancher.com

importance of a clean calving pen can never be emphasized strongly enough. Hygiene

Besides maintaining a clean calving pen, proper hygiene measures are key. Anything that the calf comes in contact with should be clean. Make sure that anything within their reach, which they could end up chewing on, is clean. Feeding equipment needs to be cleaned and disinfected on a regular basis. Making use of chlorine dioxide is a good way of ensuring proper disinfection. Nutrition

As a general rule, calves need to be fed at least 8 quarts, or 2 gallons, of whole milk or a high quality milk replacer, per day. Adequate nutrition is of huge importance, as calves need it to grow and to have enough energy.

In case you are using milk replacer, it is very important to ensure that it is properly mixed. Its consistency is critical as it could lead to problems. Thus, accurately weighing and mixing is important. There should not be any clumping and any other problems which could make the volume of the milk replacer inconsistent. Vaccination

Colostrum, proper nutrition and feeding consistency, and maintaining a clean environment are the most important factors for preventing calf scours. However you may also wish to consider vaccination, even though it is not as important as the previously discussed factors.

is what ultimately ends up killing the sick calves. Using supplemental electrolytes is generally a key part of the treatment protocol. This is carried out in conjunction with milk feedings.

As much as possible, it is recommended to leave the sick calf with its mother. Make sure to monitor that the calf is drinking the milk provided. The electrolytes will supplement this, and it is important to make sure that they are mixed properly, according to the particular instructions. If the calf is fed electrolytes which are too concentrated, it could end up making things worse as scours will increase. Fluid therapy may be carried out by means of oral or intravenous administration, although the former is preferred. Painkillers

Calf scours are both painful as well as uncomfortable. As a result, painkillers are required. The veterinarian will prescribe these and it is important to follow the instructions as to the administration. Antibiotics

Most calf scours cases are not caused by bacteria, and hence in the vast majority of cases there is no need to resort to antibiotics. The veterinarian will determine whether there is the need for antibiotics after carrying out an exam, which includes taking a rectal temperature. Should the temperature be very high, over 102.5º Fahrenheit, antibiotics will generally be prescribed.

Conclusion

The veterinarian will be able to discuss vaccination as an option, but it is important to point out that while they could reduce calf scours if given at birth, they are not a cure-all solution in any way.

Calf scours is unfortunately quite common, but with proper prevention it can be reduced and avoided. Considering that it could end up being a deadly condition for young calves, one needs to be careful.

The following are key ways to treat calf scours. As mentioned earlier, prevention is always better than having to treat the disease or condition. But if preventative measures did not suffice and there are any calves that have calf scours, the following treatment methods can help. Needless to say, calling a veterinarian to check the sick calves is always best, especially if the calves in question are unable to stand.

You can learn more about health conditions in calves in our blog: www. moocall.com/blogs/ Also check out our range of calving products to help assist with successful breeding on the farm.

Treating Calf Scours

Hydration

Proper hydration is importance. In fact,

of utmost dehydration

www.progressiverancher.com

Having proper preventative measures in place all along, accompanied by a well planned treatment protocol in case there are any sick calves is paramount.

EDITOR'S NOTE: These two articles are from agricultural writers in the United Kingdom; there may be some unfamiliar spelling and terms herein.

Reasons Behind Abortion in Cows www.moocall.com/the-reasons-behind-abortion-in-cows/ It’s tricky enough to get a cow in calf, and that’s before the worries that come with the gestation period itself. Abortion in cattle is a big fear many farmers have at this time of year, and they can happen for the simplest of reasons. A cow may ‘throw a calf ’ after catching an infectious disease, or even if they have a small injury. Stress can also result in the calf being lost. Here are a few of the more common diseases that bring about abortion in Irish Cattle (as an example). Brucellosis: This disease normally causes abortion after the first five months of pregnancy. It is very contagious and it is required by law that you report it to government authorities. Additionally, farmers are legally obliged to have any cow or heifer that aborts tested twice for the disease. The placenta and fluids released at calving are highly infectious, so it is imperative that you treat a Brucellosis infection and abortion with the highest urgency.

Leptospirosis: This disease can cause an abortion at any stage of the pregnancy, and needs to be detected via a blood test. Tests on the foetus are unsatisfactory. It's among the main causes of abortion in Irish suckler herds, so vaccination should be carried out to ensure the herd is free from the disease if it does appear. It also causes infertility and poor milk yield, so it is cause for concern even if the cow is not in calf. Leptospirosis affects humans causing influenza-like symptoms with severe headaches but can be treated effectively. Salmonellosis: This disease causes abortions from the fourth month of pregnancy onwards, and can also cause other illnesses in the herd. It is highly contagious and can be difficult to control, as many animals don’t show signs of having it. However, unlike other infections, aborting animals can sometimes display signs of illness. If this disease is confirmed (it can be detected from the aborted fetus, placenta or blood test) then the herd needs to be vaccinated. Neosporosis: This disease is especially damaging, as once an animal is infected, they have it for life. Neosporosis is caused by a parasite found in the faeces of dogs and foxes. It brings about abortion between the third and eighth months of gestation in the dam. If a calf makes it through the full term alive, they may be born infected, and it will be able to pass from generation to generation. There is no vaccine available for this infection, so prevention is the only cure.

The Progressive Rancher

Infected animals should not be part of the breeding herd, and pets and wildlife shouldn’t have access to animals’ feed.

Mycotic Abortion: This typically occurs between the third and seventh month of pregnancy. It is caused by a fungus that can be found on silage that is poorly preserved. (Silage is essentially “pickled pasture,” or fodder that's been fermented to feed cattle or sheep during dry seasons.) There is also a slight risk of obtaining it from bedding, but the chances are significantly slimmer. Silage can also carry the listeria and bacillus bacteria that were mentioned above. They are common in silage that has picked up soil during harvesting. Bovine Viral Diarrhoea (BVD): BVD abortion is more prone to happen in the early stages of gestation in suckler herds, however it can happen at any stage. If the animal is persistently infected, the Animal Health Ireland recommend it be eliminated from the herd. You can vaccinate the herd against BVD, but if a persistently infected animal is not removed, vaccination will not effectively protect it. Tissue tagging will identify whether BVD caused the abortion, and all farmers in Ireland are required to carry is practice out. Infectious Bovine Rhinotracheitis (IBR): IBR is a highly infectious virus pneumonia that can be transmitted by the semen of infected bulls. This disease can cause abortion in beef herds, and can be spread from animal to animal rapidly. If the calf makes it through their full term alive, there’s a chance the mother may have passed it on. From there, it can be passed from one calf to another. This disease can be controlled with a rigorous vaccination program.

Prevention: As with most things, prevention is the most effective treatment. Cattle should be kept in clean, well ventilated and disinfected pens. If there is a large variation in size and BCS, they should be separated (frailer cows are more prone to abortion if a larger cow rams into them in the pen). Good hygienic practices should be adopted, especially when it comes to handling discharge from the aborting animal. It's advised to quarantine the aborting cow from other cattle, especially from other pregnant cows for 2-3 weeks until vaginal discharge has ceased. If one of your cows aborts, you should keep a close eye on the rest of your pregnant herd. If you can vaccinate your animals to prevent the same thing from happening again, do. NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

26TH ANNIVERSARY 2022 SALE RESULTS 76 Horses | $161,350 For more information visit www.vannormansale.com

The 26th Annual Van Norman & friends Production Sale was held on September 16 and 17 at the Elko County Fairgrounds. Despite the challenges of a three-year drought over most of the western US, unprecedented increases in the cost of fuel and resulting astronomical rise in the cost of hay and forage, the bubble of skyrocketing prices across the industry held! This sale was the by far the highest grossing sale to date, with a strong demand across the board for all ages and types of horses. A total of 76 horses sold for a sale average of $10, 689.47 with lively competition among telephone, internet, and in-person bidders. Prospective buyers were presented with several opportunities to see their catalog picks in action Friday and Saturday mornings with commentary by Matt Mori and Ty Van Norman as well as to visit with owners and riders. Sale day dawned with a steady rain which forced planners to revert to Plan B which was to go back to the dry, albeit cramped, auction barn. As the rain stopped and the sun came out, the sale kicked off with the national anthem beautifully sung by Marrina Mori as the colors were presented by Maggie Van Norman and Natalie Mori followed by a prayer and inspirational message by renowned auctioneer, Colonel Steve Friskup of Muleshoe, Texas. Friskup rolled through the 80 cataloged horses with his signature style and humor, keeping energy and enthusiasm high throughout the afternoon. He was accompanied by Matt Mori providing insight and commentary about the horses, riders, and breeding programs represented. Bid spotters Bucke Waite, Clint Menchew and James Johnson assisted by phone ringmen Pete Mori, Allie Bear, and Darci Riggins along with Katie Colyer(LiveAuctionsTV) on the computer kept Steve on his toes throughout the afternoon. The highlight of the afternoon came near the halfway point when Anna Van Norman’s ten year-old sorrel multi-event gelding , JP DOUBLE DOWN VEGAS, by speed-bred FRENCH STREAKTOVEGAS and cowbred DOUBLE LENA DOLL brought a rafter shaking final bid of $90,000! Quill Filippini, daughter of Jim and Mindy Filippini of Eureka, NV, will pursue Anna’s path to competitive excellence in the rodeo arena! Absentee participation was also at a record high, undoubtedly precipitated by the high cost of travel, but also due to a user- friendly enhanced internet platform, the availability of videos of every horse, and accessibility to information from consignors as buyers did their presale homework. Mark September 15 and 16th on your 2023 calendar and continue to follow us at www.vannormansale.com and on Facebook at Van Norman and friends Production Sale. High-Selling gelding, JP DOUBLE DOWN VEGAS | $90,000

32 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

2022 Van Norman & Friends Production Sale Results LOT# CONSIGNOR HORSE SALE PRICE 33 Van Norman JP DOUBLE DOWN VEGAS $90,000 40 Van Norman JP TUCKER ROAN BAR $43,000 5 Wakley MERADAS BADGERINA $30,000 44 Leighton JP APRIL THUNDER $26,000 69 Alexander RUBY RED GUN $24,000 19 McKay, R LITTLE ELMER BUKCHEX $20,000 26 Dennis CATTY ANNA $20,000 29 Van Norman JP SPIKES STARLIGHT $20,000 77 Dominguez TUFFER THAN CHICS $20,000 45 Osborn DOC N JESSIE JAMES $19,000 67 Van Norman JP COLONEL MAXIMUS $18,500 31 Blanthorn MAXIMUS N AMERICA "Max" $17,000 82 Rhoads DR PEPTO OAKIE $15,500 65 Mori, Matt AMBER ROCKS $15,300 53 Van Norman JP THUNDER N FAME $15,000 59 Wakley METAL BADGER $15,000 62 Van Norman JP DASH TA FRECKLES $15,000 70 McKay, J TUFF LITTLE CAT $15,000 81 Leighton TIME FOR BOURBON $15,000 10 Van Norman JP PLAYIN LENAS RIO $14,500 24 Berrett(Bourdett) FAMOUS MUSIC T60 $14,500 83 Duffurena TD DOUBLE COLONELS $14,200 7 Leighton IM NO HICK $14,000 76 Burroughs, Zeb MZ BET SHESA JUNE BUG $13,500 35 Lisle YY SMOKE N DIAMONDS $13,000 73 Van Norman JP HIGH BROW BUDGEE $13,000 39 Van Norman JP ZIPPO STARLIGHT $10,250 17 Van Norman JP FABNFAMES MELODY $10,000 36 Rhoads SR ZING BLING $9,000 52 Rhoads SR CHEX FOXTROT $8,700 71 Rhoads BIG RED $8,500 25 Goemmer DK CANDY WRANGLER $8,200 56 Rhoads COLONEL BUTTERMILK $8,200 11 Mori, Matt SMOKUM SILLY ROCKS $8,000 48 Lisle TS NO SHAKEN MY GUNS $8,000 23 Rhoads DR PEPTO AGLOW $7,700 30 Rhoads DR SHINEY HONEY $7,500 14 Haws, Shamus THE SWEETEST CAT $7,000

BUYER Jim Fillipinni David Sampson Gary McManus Haley Hastie Lightning 7 Cattle Co Lee Brown James Eade Barry Wilkinson Wayne Tex Alexa Maley Eric Roberts Wade Small Alexa Becker Hannah Peirano Pete Arritola Woodie Bell Lynn Bachman Donald James Nathan Wilson Jason Petersen Mike Lucas Dick Rolleri Barry Wilkinson Quinn Mori Greg Renz Marilyn Bafus Pete Arritola Kaycee, Golden Perry Whittle Tom Richards Braydon Reuck Dick Rolleri Tom Richards Kyla Rianda Heather Coombs Mac Higby Kenneth Northcut Jay Hocomb

CITY, STATE Eureka, NV Gainesville, TX Lakeview, OR Round Mountain, NV Grace, ID Riverton, UT Paso Robles, CA McDermitt, NV Bishop, CA Princeton, OR Cameron, MT Winnemucca, NV Princeton, OR Austin, NV New Plymouth, ID Paradise Valley, NV Bruneau, ID Tooele, UT West Haven, UT Clarkfork, ID Bakersfield, CA Altaville, CA McDermitt, NV Tuscarora, NV Tres Pinos, CA Liberty Lake, WA New Plymouth, ID Winnemucca, NV Angels Camp, CA Melba, ID Madeline, CA Altaville, CA Melba, ID Winnemucca, NV Battle Mountain, NV Payette, ID Ely, NV New Harmony, UT

LOT# CONSIGNOR 32 Van Norman 37 Haws, Shamus 42 Duffurena 84 Rhoads 46 Mori, Matt 66 Mori, Matt 41 Van Norman 15 Van Norman 16 Van Norman 80 Lisle 1 Van Norman 12 Van Norman 13 Van Norman 22 Mori, Matt 64 Rhoads 78 Van Norman 2 Rhoads 47 Stoeberl 57 Bunch 18 Lisle 20 Burroughs, Zeb 58 Van Norman 6 Buckmaster 3 Van Norman 63 Shelman, 21 Bunch 34 Mori, Matt 38 Shelman, 43 Bunch 54 Journigan, M 8 Lisle 60 Rhoads 27 Van Norman 51 Lisle 68 Shelman, 74 Buckmaster 79 Bunch 9 Goemmer

HORSE SALE PRICE JUST APLAINBOONGIRL $6,500 COLONEL WHISKEYSHOT $6,500 TD THUNDER ONTHEMTN $6,500 DR TOFFEE GIN $6,200 MISS SIERRA PEPPER $6,000 A TRAVELIN SPARK $6,000 JP FLYING RED BEE $5,750 JP FABULOUS FANCY $5,700 JP LILL CATT $5,500 YY CHASIN GLORY $5,200 JP PUDDIN POP $5,000 ALL STAR YANKEE CHIC $5,000 FRECKLED ANNIE B $5,000 HUMMINGBIRDS ROCK $5,000 SR SHINEY RAY OF LIGHT $5,000 JP SIP OF GLORY $5,000 SR ZING PRINCESS $4,750 HIGH BROW BOURBON $4,500 DW DRINKIN PROBLEM $4,200 YY SMART BLUES $4,100 MZ BET SHESA LENA $4,000 ANNIES LIL BIG CHIEF $3,750 PRETTY DASHING BOY $3,700 JP SAFFORD CATT $3,500 DRIFTIN BLACK VELVET $3,500 DW STAR DANCER $3,300 TRAVELIN TWIX $3,200 SANTARI DRIFTIN SMOKE $3,200 DW ROLLIN ANNIE $3,000 KCR PEP SAN REY $3,000 YY COYOTE DANCIN $2,750 SR ZING FLASHY OAKIE $2,750 JP ZIPPIN FAME $2,500 YY LORI DARLIN $2,500 TIVIOS ROAN LADY $2,500 PRETTY BOY PETER $2,500 DW MY MAN WALKER $2,500 GR LILYELLOWWRANGLER $1,800

BUYER Mario Walther Daniel Richards Chad Watterson Tom Richards Heather Coombs Ben Schiew Carlos Pacheco Steve McCarley Kent Wedell Katie Ross Joe McDade Patrice Stewart Nolan Kirkman Linda Bunch Tom Richards Josey Ames Ray Aiken Corinne Buckingham Kirstie Harris Georgia Mueller Casey Ladner Kent Wedel Aden Helmuth Rick Jones Steve McCarley Kathi Wines Albert Lopez Dennis Bieroth Cassidy Vorst David Wanner Kandi Umphred Austin Anderson John Bell Clair Kempton Andy Duckett Andrea Van Leuven Kirstie Harris Mario Walther

CITY, STATE Yerington, NV Wilson, ID South Rim, UT Melba, ID Battle Mountain, NV AZ Dayton, NV Shasta Lake, CA Grant, NB Elko, NV Lee, NV Paradise Valley, NV Tremonton, UT Tuscarora, NV Melba, ID Gerber, CA Grangeville, ID Paradise Valley, NV Pine Grove, CA Lamoille, NV Klammath Falls, OR Grant, NB Doryan, IA Stevinson, CA Shasta Lake, CA Lamoille, NV Hollister, CA Mountain City, NV Prather, CA Spring Creek, NV El Dorado, CA Grantsville, UT Paradise Valley, NV Rogerson, ID Mellba, ID Fallon, NV Pine Grove, CA Yerington, NV

Total: $161,350 | Average on 76 horses: $10,689.47 www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

2022 Results Non Pro Snaffle Bit | Entries: 8

Horse SR Whiskeys Last Little Cowboy HTS Howln At the Boon Sparking My Fancy Stella

Rider

Owned By

Score

Earnings

Malikia McLain Pook Hoots Gina Liberini Rachel Wines

Same Same Same Same

212.5 207 203.5 201.5

$652.00 $414.00 $276.00 $163.00

Owned By Same Mitch & Clayre Moiola Jim Filippini Boyd Ranch

Score 216.5 214.5 211.5 211

Earnings Fence $608.00 $381.00 $254.00 $152.00

Open Snaffle Bit | Entries: 7

Horse Oliver Flashy Nu Star Hidis Radar Pistol

Rider Amelia Wakley Michael Mori Matt Mori Matt Mori

Non Pro Cowhorse | Entries: 7

Horse Cee Miss Everboon Jax Smooth N Shiney 45 Dancing Ms Freckles

Rider Carissa Bieroth Renee Jackson Liz Younger Candace Wines

Owned By Bieroth Ranch Same Same Same

Senior Non Pro Cowhorse | Entries: 7

Horse One Stitch A Diamond Gunnaberrya Sis Smooth N Shiney 45

Rider Owned By Gail Kolbe Joi Brackenbury Gary Wines Liz Younger

Non Pro Hackamore | Entries: 4

Horse One Rusty Diamond Aint Waisting Time U Rang TI Stylish Bo

Rider Gianna Martin Kyla Rianda Payten Feydr Isaac Spratling

Nevada Hackamore | Entries: 3

Horse Cats Eticket Time Bugs Lovie Kitty

Rider Matt Mori Amelia Wakley Jasmine Koberstein

Two Reined | Entries: 4

Horse Paisley Sandy Dilly This Rooster Rocks

Rider Jennifer Black Matt Marvel Pat Wines Isaac Mori

Score 143.5 140 132 130

Fence

Earnings Fence $608.00 $381.00 $254.00 $152.00

Score 140.5 138 132 132

Earnings Fence $608.00 $381.00 $254.00 64 $152.00 62

Owned By Gail Kolbe Same Dustin & Lisa Feyder Dr Boyd & Audrey Spratling

Score 207.5 202.5 201.5 189.5

Earnings Fence $476.00 $282.00 $188.00 $119.00

Owned By Betsy Searle/Louise Klarr Same Same

Score 215.5 205.5 201.5

Earnings Fence $523.00 $274.00 $191.00

Judge: Becky Hurst Scribes: Bailey Hurst

Ranch Horse Class | Entries: 25

Horse Carsen Kaboon Cadillac Color Me In Starlight

Rider Dustin Feyder Matt Wines Abby Jackson Gina Liberini

Nevada Cattle Working | Entries: 18

Horse One Smart Tart Carrie Cayenne Cat Rey Too Much

Rider Michael Vipham Flint Lee Kimberlyn Fitch Casey Bieroth

Women's Class | Entries: 9

Horse Gotta Getta Goose Itsy Bitsy Boon Cayenne Cat Nics Highbrow

Rider Dally Goemmer Elizabeth Billman Kimberlyn Fitch Jymme Dominguez

34 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Score 201 196 195.5 139

Earnings Fence $476.00 $282.00 $188.00 $119.00

Score 209 207 205.5 203.5

Earnings Fence $1,400.00 $975.00 $650.00 $350.00

Owned By Same Taylor & Amelia Wakley Kenneth Jones Gail Manoukain

Score 144.5 144 143 139

Earnings Fence $1,092.00 $744.00 $496.00 $273.00

Owned By Shawn & Mindy Goemmer Same Kenneth Jones Same

Score 215.5 215 215 212.5

Earnings Fence $696.00 $447.00 71 $298.00 69.5 $174.00

Owned By Kenneth Jones Matt & Leah Mori Taylor & Amelia Wakley Jolynn Maynard

Score 291 288 287 274.5

Earnings Fence $608.00 $381.00 $254.00 $152.00

Owned By The Mori Family Ty Van Norman Matti Delong Ben Marvel

Score 211 205 200 194

Earnings Fence $226.00 $134.50 $88.00 $56.50

NV Champion CowHorse | Entries: 5

Horse Cayenne Cat This Rooster Rocks Carrie Kit Kat

Rider Kimberlynn Fitch Isaac Mori Flint Lee Jennifer Black

Junior Riders 13-16 | Entries: 8

Horse DW Dun Frettin Cowboy Fairlea Cherlena Gun Moonshine Amigo

Rider Marinna Mori Maggie VanNorman Matti Delong Ben Marvel

Young Buckaroos 8 and under | Entries: 9 Horse Fairlea Mischevious Tumblin Rose Bonnie Luke Groot

Owner Rider Stetson Steele Kim Hooper Hadlee Steele Kim Hooper Hannah Nelson Mathew Nelson Harris Wakley Maisie Melarkey Maisie Melarkey

Junior Riders 9-12 | Entries: 14

Owned By Jolynn M Same Same Matt & Leah Mori

Owned By Same Joe Wines Same Same

Horse Rosalyn Smart Fetuccine Cindy Lady Bug Boomer

The Progressive Rancher

Owner Hadley Denier Daxton Melendez Cray Tervort Anna Marvel Quirt Mckay

Score 1st 2nd Best Girl 3rd 4th Best Boy 5th

Rider Helen Heathcock Cachu Melendez TS Ranch Anna Marvel Squaw Valley Ranch

Score 1st 2nd Best Boy 3rd 4th Best Girl 5th

www.progressiverancher.com

2022 JM Capriolas Outstanding Stockhorse Paula Wright Memorial Award This Rooster Rocks Shown By Isaac Mori • Owners: Matt & Leah Mori

2022 Outstanding Rider Dustin Feyder www.progressiverancher.com

2022 Nevada Champion Cow Horse Cayenne Cat Shown by Kimberlyn Fitch Owner: Kenneth Jones

Nevada Hackamore 1st Place Cats Eticket Time & Matt Mori Owners: Betsy Searle/Louise Klarr The Progressive Rancher

Non-Pro Hackamore 1st Place One Rusty Diamond & Gianna Martin. Owner: Gail Kolbe NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

2022 Results

Judge: Becky Hurst Scribes: Bailey Hurst

Roping and Branding Team Roping #11 #15

Open Incentive Josie Periera Jim Berrett

Jake Bourdett Jaylen Eldridge

Women's Branding | Entries: 12 Placement First Place

Second Place

Third Place

Teams GOEMMER RANCHES Mindy Goemmer Dally Goemmer Riata Goemmer Abby Jackson FILIPPINI Tess Turk Kaylee Filippini Sandy Kiel Andrea Sestanovich NK RANCH Timmy Lyn DeLong Jette Black Kati Cavasin Jessica Kelly

Times 6.01.12

6.36.62

6.53.22

Second Place

3rd Place Team

Teams WARR LAND & LIVESTOCK Mason Warr Taylor Loyd Brayden Evans Quirt Boyles JIM RANCH Dirk Jim Dalton Jim John Schutte Jaylen Eldridge LAZY A RANCH Jim Berrett Logan Anseth Jake Bourdet Quinton Anseth

Teams WARR LAND & LIVESTOCK Mason Warr Taylor Loyd Brayden Evans Quirt Boyles Second Place Team LAZY A RANCH Jim Berrett Logan Anseth Jake Bourdet Quinton Anseth Third Place Team U CROSS QUARTER HORSES Garrett Brown Isaac Mori Clay Siddoway Clayton Coope

Times 5.45.90

Placement First Place

Times 5.45.90

5.48.35

6.01.9

Teams MARTIN RANCH Justin Martin Montana W Masa Martin Kaden W Second Place Team HARNEY/GOEMMER Woody Harney Junior Harney Dally Goemmer Kaitlyn Harwell Third Place Team LAZY A RANCH Jim Berrett Josie Periera Bailey Bachman Travis Bachman

Placement First Place

Teams QUARTER CIRCLE S Cowboy Rodriguez Wylin McLain Second Place Team WESTON RANCH KC Weston Calgary Martin

Times 2.52.03

4.31

Youth Branding Division 11-14 Placement First Place

6.01.91

7.49.03

Teams MALOTTE 1 Malikai Malotte Alan Malotte Second Place Team BROTHERS TEAM Walker Jones Jason Jones Third Place Team MATSON Luke Matson

Times 2.33.87

2.54.81

3.38.53 Bodie Maton

Senior Branding Placement First Place

Co-Ed Branding

Open Branding | Entries: 33 Placement First Place

Placement First Place

Youth Branding Division 7-10

Times 4.31.22

5.03.50

Teams EVERITT / POWERS Randy Everitt Shawn Powers Second Place Team ZUNINO TEAM Rocky Roa Tony Zunino Third Place Team SHARP RANCH Lanny Morrison

2.09.81

2.23.44 Rocky Roa

Drawpot Branding | Entries: 41 Placement First Place

5.16.10

Times 2.06.88

Teams NATHAN KELLY JR Jason Jones Andrea Sestanovich Ryan Haze Second Place Team WILL KNIGHT Josue Madrigal Josh Mansanares Berto Salas Third Place Team WALKER JONES Hannah Kelly Will Knight Asher Freeman

Times 4.21.57

4.23.50

4.42.28

More results and photos can be found at: www.facebook.com/ElkoCountyFair 36 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

The Progressive Rancher

www.progressiverancher.com

Team Roping | #11 Josie Pereira & Jake Bourdett | #15 Jim Berrett & Jaylen Eldridge

Senior Branding | 1st Everitt / Powers | Randy Everitt & Shawn Powers

Co-Ed Branding | 1st Place: Martin Ranch - Justin Martin, Montana Waddello, Mesa Martin, Kaden Waddello

Woman's Branding | 1st Place: Goemmer Ranches - Mindy, Dally & Riata Goemmer; Abby Jackson

Open Branding | 1st Place: Warr Land & Livestock - Mason Warr, Taylor Loyd, Brayden Evans, Quirt Boyles

Draw Pot | 1st Place: Nathan Kelly Jr - Andrea Sestanovich, Jason Jones, Ryan Haze

Youth Branding 11-14 | 1st Place: Malotte 1 | Malikai Malotte & Alan Malotte

Youth Branding 6-10 | 1st Place: Quarter Circle S | Cowboy Rodriguez & Wylin McLain

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Outcome-Based Management and Federal Rangeland Administration: Reframing Adaptive Management on a Complex Institutional Landscape Katie Wollstein1, Chloe Wardropper2, Emily Jane Davis1, and Dennis Becker3

Researcher affiliations: 1. Oregon State University, 2. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, 3. University of Idaho. This research was part of the Doctoral Dissertation of K. Wollstein conducted at the University of Idaho.

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has recently sought to integrate greater flexibility into federal rangeland management through a series of initiatives collectively termed “outcome-based rangeland management” (OBM). In contrast to traditionally prescriptive approaches to rangeland administration, OBM was envisioned to offer a collaborative means for BLM staff and livestock grazing permittees to adaptively respond to placespecific challenges by: (1) identifying desired social, economic, and ecological outcomes for grazing allotments, and (2) adaptively managing to achieve desired outcomes. Outcome-based initiatives include the BLM’s Outcome-Based Grazing Authorization demonstration projects as well as guidance from BLM leadership encouraging field staff to incorporate elements of OBM into existing grazing permits (IM2018-109). Most livestock grazing permits contain few or no mechanisms for accommodating annual variation (e.g., in forage production or fuel loads) or responding to unexpected events such as wildfire. This highlights a fundamental tension in rangeland administration: it is difficult to develop policies or programs for sustainable resource management while also offering avenues for experimentation, learning, and adaptation to occur. Thus, there is a need to understand the social and policy conditions that enable or limit OBM and similar efforts to adaptively manage federal rangelands. Research Questions This research was comprised of two studies, organized around the following research questions: 1. How do rules and norms interact and enable (or constrain) the use of outcome-based approaches to manage fire risk? 2. What learning, institution-building, and legitimation is occurring (or needs to occur) for broadscale OBM implementation? Activities and Findings Because OBM was taking shape in real-time, this research was largely exploratory and used a combination of document analysis, in-depth interviews, comparative case studies, and qualitative induction. Research protocols were approved by the University of Idaho’s Institutional Review Board for compliance with human subjects research requirements (protocol #17-232).

How do rules and norms interact and enable (or constrain) the use of outcome-based approaches to manage fire risk? Using three comparative case studies comprised of 70 semi-structured interviews with permittees, BLM staff, and other agency and nongovernmental stakeholders in three Idaho BLM Field Areas, we examined how rules and norms interact and create or eliminate arenas of discretion for implementing outcome-based approaches to address wildfire risk on Idaho’s BLM rangelands. We find the following: • Within BLM Field Areas, rules, current norms, and resource condition are mutually reinforcing and together create perceptions of barriers or avenues for OBM implementation. • Different norms among BLM Field Areas have a large role in participants’ interpretations of latitude found within rules and policies. This is evidenced by different uses of administrative tools among the BLM Field Offices to create or limit flexibility within the Field Area.

Implications Barriers to OBM are not solely derived from inflexible policies. Latitude can be found within existing rules, and the social conditions within BLM Field Areas determine if and how this latitude is interpreted and applied. That is, differences in norms and culture among BLM Field Areas lead to different interpretations of latitude found within formal rules. We also find that OBM implementation is largely dependent upon staff within BLM Field Offices. Their actions can clarify the boundaries of new practices, generate knowhow and legitimacy, and produce new institutions. If supported by concurrent development of further formal guidance, these actions can eventually lead to the creation of conditions within BLM Field Areas that are receptive to outcome-based approaches.

• Whether participants “saw” flexibility within rules and policies were related to BLM-permittee relationships, staff experience (e.g., history with litigated grazing decisions), and leadership.

Funding

In short, this study underlines the role of social conditions within individual Field Areas in creating or reducing the discretion BLM Field Offices perceive they can exercise within existing rules and policies.

• US Dept of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture McIntire Stennis projects (#1019024 and #1015330)

What learning, institution-building, and legitimation is occurring (or needs to occur) for broadscale OBM implementation? Through 32 in-depth interviews with BLM staff and analysis of documents and media, we examined the learning that occurred or will need to occur to legitimate OBM and lead to the creation of new institutions (i.e., rules and/or cultural acceptance) to support broadscale implementation. • A lack of formal guidance on OBM implementation limits initial perceptions of legitimacy and uptake within BLM Field Offices. • Some savvy BLM Field Office staff are implementing elements of OBM, but seek to legitimize their actions through: (1) approval from higher levels of the BLM, and/or (2) successfully defending them in court. • BLM District Offices have a large role in facilitating knowledge-sharing between Field Offices

38 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Individual Field Office staff have an outsized role in clarifying was is or is not acceptable under OBM, sharing this knowledge, and generating legitimacy. But without the development of further rules or guidelines for OBM, legitimization of OBM (and subsequent institutionalization) will be limited.

The Progressive Rancher

• Joint Fire Science Program Graduate Innovation (GRIN) Award (#18-1-01-18)

• 2020 UI College of Natural Resources Curt Berklund Graduate Research Scholar Award • UI Office of Research and Economic Development Research Infrastructure and Scholarly Excellence (RISE) Graduate Research Fellowship For more information contact: Dr. Katie Wollstein; 541-573-8924; katherine.wollstein@oregonstate.edu

ADDITIONAL READING: Rangeland Ecology & Management

www.elsevier.com/locate/rama Outcome-Based Approaches for Managing Wildfire Risk: Institutional Interactions and Implementation Within the “Gray Zone” by K. Wollstein, C.B. Wardropper, D.R. Becker www.progressiverancher.com

In Loving Memory of

Peter Douglas Bottari May 31, 1952 — October 27, 2022

ete was born to Duilio and EllaMay Bottari of Lamoille on May 31st, 1952. He was a busy little boy who was always hammering on something. At 4 years old Pete was already helping his dad drive the feed truck and he didn’t stop working the ranch until cancer stole his ability to do so just shortly before his death on October 27th, 2022. Pete attended grade school at The Lamoille School House until 1961 when the school was closed. They were then bussed to Elko to attend school. Pete was very active in the FFA where he held chapter and state offices. Pete graduated from Elko High School in 1970. In 1971 Uncle Sam had a thing called the draft. Pete’s number was 18 so he was drafted into the army where he spent 2 years serving our country before being released because the ranch and his family really needed him. Pete decided to attend Ferrier school to learn the trade and again was very good at his job. He worked the ranch with his dad and shoed horses on the side. Pete married Jan Alexander and became step-dad to Bill, Chad, and Kim. He and Jan later divorced. One of the highlights in Pete’s life was the Elko County Fair. He enjoyed going to visit, having a few adult beverages and dancing the night away. He was a member of the Fair Board for a few years and in charge of the Stock horse portion. On December 7th, 1994 Pete was finally granted a date with the Love of his Life, Karen Marvel. Pete had asked Karen out several times and was turned down but, Pete was always persistent! She finally said yes and from that time on “Petey” and Karen were a team! The ranch took most of his time but we always knew that Karen wasn’t far from his thoughts.

www.progressiverancher.com

The Progressive Rancher

Pete put his heart, his soul and his time into becoming a good stockman, horseman and rancher. He was up at dawn every day and didn’t get done until well after dark. Karen often called Pete “Rip Van Winkle” because if he sat down in a comfortable chair, he was fast asleep! Pete is preceded in death by his dad, Duilio Bottari, his sister, Peggy Bottari Roberts, all of his grandparents, all of his Aunt and Uncles, his niece Allison Bottari, his Mother-in-Law, Lorraine Urriola. and Karens Aunt, Theresa Paoletti. Pete is survived by the love of his life, Karen Marvel, her children Mandi(Darin) and Dusty(Allison), his mom, EllaMay Bottari, his brothers Paul(Lori), Perry(Kim), Bart( Jennifer) and sister Pam(Tom), nephews, Josh(Tory), Jay(Callie), Jacob(Alex), Brenden and Grysen, Nieces, Amber(Dave), Abigail(Rob), Sarah, Brooke, Brittany(Ian), Megan(Marc) and Makenna(Kaleb). He is also survived by step-children, Bill(Kim), Chad(Elizabeth) and Kim, step grandchildren, Aviana, Bridger, Race, Hunter, Cody, Jessie and Amos and many honorary family members as well as many cousins and great friends. Pete requested no services but there will be a celebration of his life in late spring after the calves are branded and before it’s time to hay! We will put a notice in the paper and on social media. If you would like to send a donation in Pete’s memory you could do so to: the Elko County Fair Stockhorse class, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Lamoille Fire Station, Lamoille Ranchers Center, Lamoille Conservation District or a charity of your choice.

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2022

Presort Standard U.S. Postage PAID Permit #40 Tooele, UT

The Progressive Rancher - NOV/DEC 2022

Articles inside

Obituary Peter Douglas Bottari

TF | Diagnostic Testing for Trichomoniasis in Cattle

Outcome-Based Mgmt Federal Rangeland Admin

Van Norman Sale Results

Moocall | Calf Scours

Churchill County FFA Report

UNR | Pinyon Juniper Trees Declining in West Ranges

Farm Bureau | Revising Disaster Programs in Farm Bill

UNR | Data Modeling, Fuels Mapping, Aids in Mitigating Catastrophic Wildfire Risk

USDA | Intertribal Ag Council Retreat Focuses on Arid Pasture Recovery Efforts in Nevada

UNR | New Resource Sheds Light on Tree Encroachment

NDA | Protect Horses and Cattle from Pigeon Fever

UNR | Nevada Hunters Generate Millions

BLM | Addressing Drought and Annual Grass Grazing on Public Lands in Nevada

Eye On The Outside - Editorial

NCA - President's Perspective

NCA November Update Joint Annual Convention

Let's Talk Ag - Editorial

NBC - Recipe: Wild Mushroom and Beef Stew

Society for Range Management Performance of Indaziflam

NFB | Balance Back to Basins

NBC - Checkoff News