the progressive rancher: september/october 2014

NCA 2009 President’s

Award Recipient

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

The Progressive RancherOwner/Editor/Publisher – Leana Stitzel

[email protected] Design/Layout/Production – Julie Eardley

[email protected]

Published 9 times each year, The Progressive Rancher is mailed to more than 7,000 approved addresses, and has digital and print readership reaching more than 30,000.

The Progressive Rancher is published monthly. The views and opinions expressed by writers of articles appearing in this publication are not necessarily those of the editor. Letters of opinion are welcomed by The Progressive Rancher.Rates for advertising are available upon request. Advertising in The Progressive Rancher does not necessarily imply editorial endorsement. Liability for any errors or omissions in advertisements shall not exceed the cost of the space occupied by the error or omission.The Progressive Rancher is free to people working and active in the livestock industry. The Progressive Rancher is donated to the agricultural industry. If you are not currently receiving this magazine on a regular basis, and would like to be a part of The Progressive Rancher family, contact us by e-mail at [email protected], today, so we can include you on our mailing list. If you have moved or changed addresses, please notify us, by e-mail, so we can keep you informed. All requests for the magazine must be made by e-mail.

Leana Stitzel, Owner/Editor1188 Court St., #81, Elko, NV 89801

(208) 733-1828 • [email protected]

Cover: Branding Time 2014 at Spring Cove Ranch.Photo by Stacy Butler

WWW.PROGRESSIVERANCHER.COM

In this Issue...Nevada Cattlemen’s Assn. ...........pgs. 3-5

Talking About NCBA .......................pg. 6

Eye on the Outside ............................pg. 9

NRRC: Sustainable Grazing Coalition ....... pg. 10

Western Video Market Silver Legacy Sale ........................... pg. 11

Nevada CattleWomen .....................pg. 12

Buy Nevada: ....................................pg. 13

Nevada Farm Bureau ...................... pg. 14

Fumes from the Farm.......................pg 15

Churchill FFA ................................. pg. 16

Fallon Ranch Rodeo Stockdog Trial ................................. pg. 17

Mind of a Millennial, Part V .......... pg. 18

American Ranching at Risk ...........pg. 19

Eureka Co. Fair ...............................pg. 20

Wild Horses ..............................pgs. 22-23

Beef Checkoff ........................... pg. 24-25

Look Up: The Good Life ................pg. 26

Make Hay While the Sun Shines ...pg. 27

Coloring Page ..................................pg. 27

Superior Livestock Auction: Video Royale Sale ...........................pg. 28

Range Plants for the Rancher .........pg. 29

NVSRM: ...................................pgs. 30-33

NV Weed Management Assoc. ......pg. 34

NV Priority Weeds ..................pgs. 36-41

Ramblings of a Ranch Wife ............pg. 42

Edward Jones ..................................pg. 43

Decisions made in the past may no longer be what’s best for the future. To help keep everything up to date, Edward Jones offers a complimentary financial review.

A financial review is a great opportunity to sit face to face with an Edward Jones financial advisor and develop strategies to help keep your finances in line with your short- and long-term goals.

When it comes to your to-do list, put your future first.

To find out how to get your financial goals on track, call or visit today.

www.edwardjones.com

Member SIPC

Jason B Land, AAMS®Financial Advisor.

2213 North 5th StreetSuite AElko, NV 89801775-738-8811





www.edwardjones.com

Member SIPC







www.edwardjones.com

Member SIPC



Fall Time is on the

way!

ELKO FEDERAL CREDIT UNION• Share Draft Accounts• Timeshare Certificates• ATM Cards/Debit Cards• IRAs• Visas

• Consumer Loans• Money Orders• Share Savings Accounts

• Free Notary

ELKO2397 Mountain City Hwy.

Elko Junction Shopping CenterElko, Nevada 89801-1496Phone: (775) 738-4083

Fax: (775) 738-2582

SPRING CREEK559 W. Spring Valley Ct., Ste. 7

Spring Creek, Nevada 898015-6811Phone: (775) 753-6272

Fax: (775) 753-6280www.elkofcu.org

The Progressive Rancher www.progressiverancher.com 2 September / October 2014

mailto:[email protected]




WWW.PROGRESSIVERANCHER.COM

www.elkofcu.org

————————— Continued on page 5

————————— Continued on page 5

Ron Torell, President Nevada Cattlemen’s Association

RIDING FOR THE NCA BRAND

My Local Butcher: Saul Mendez

The Need for Young NCA Cattlemen

New NCA Executive DirectorThe Nevada Cattlemen’s As-

sociation (NCA) is pleased to announce that we have selected Stephanie Licht for the all-encompassing position of Executive Director. Stephanie, a longtime Elko county resident, is a well-qualified addition to our association having served the agricultural industry in various capaci-ties over her lifetime. We extend a warm welcome to Stephanie and look forward to having her as our new NCA Executive Di-rector. (See The Progressive Rancher website for Stephanie’s Bio).

The position of NCA Executive Director is wide-ranging and challenging. It’s not a job for the faint of heart. Some of NCA’s past Executive Directors include Desiree Seal, Meghan Brown, Rachel Buzzetti, Betsey MacFarlan, Vicki Turner, Carmen Goicoe-chea, Dave and Sue Abel, Ralph Vance, John Coots and Paul Bottari. Desiree, NCA’s most recent Executive Director, tendered her resig-nation in June in order to return to school to study law. After 2 ½ years of service we wish Desi the very best in her new endeavor.

Originating in 1935 as the sounding voice for Nevada’s livestock industry NCA had the same goals and mission then as it does today: “To promote, preserve and protect a dynamic and profitable Nevada beef industry.” Center to accomplishing these goals and mission has been an ever-important fleet of volunteers as well as the two paid staff positions of Execu-tive Director and Executive Secretary. Sharon McKnight, NCA’s Executive Secretary since 1999, has seen many Executive Directors come and go and is a constant at the NCA office. As always we appreciate Sharon’s con-tinued dedicated service as well as the entire NCA membership’s voluntary commitment to accomplishing the goals and mission of NCA.

Through this monthly column our hope is to update those involved in the Nevada Livestock industry about the issues NCA is working on for our mission continues to be to promote, preserve and protect a dynamic and profitable Nevada beef industry. Should you like to visit with me or the NCA staff, please feel free to contact NCA at 775-738-9214 or my NCA e-mail address [email protected]

Your local butcher has a lot of input as to what meat products are featured

at the meat counter and how much counter space is given to each protein source. If you happen to stop by and talk to your store’s butcher you may learn from him/her how their segment of the business works and what you as a beef producer can do to assist them. In turn, you might share how you strive to produce beef in a safe, wholesome and sustainable manner that is environmentally friendly. Such is the dialog and friendship I have established over the years with my local butcher, Saul Mendez, head butcher at my local Raley’s grocery store in Elko. After a lifetime of service to the beef industry as a butcher, Saul recently re-tired to pursue other interests.

Saul Mendez has helped market beef and as-sure customer safety and satisfaction at the retail level his entire life. Born in a meat cutting family in central Mexico, he learned the trade from his grandfather. Saul explained that in his home town there was no refrigeration in the 1960’s so their

family meat cutting business would harvest and sell the en-tire animal the same day. “Everything on the animal

was sold and consumed, from head to tail. This was grass fed beef which was very lean and

tough compared to today’s U.S. standards. Without refrigeration we had no way to

dry-age the beef. We had to move it on to the consumer before it spoiled. We ground our meat by chopping it up very fine with a cleaver. My grand-father was a great teacher and I give him credit for getting me started as a butcher.”

In 1973 Saul moved to the United Sates. After a few years

working various other professions he wound up in Elko, Nevada where

he joined his Uncle Genaro Mendez as a butcher at Safeway’s. It was here Saul

“learned meat cutting all over again for there is a lot of differences between cutting

meat in the United States and from what I had learned in Mexico.”

Saul immediately saw the importance of “joining the

For one reason or another we have all done it. That is to say we’ve kept fewer replacement

heifers than what we normally would. This may have been for budgetary reasons, a short-age on winter feed or trying to fill a truckload sales con-tract. Regardless of the reason, the long term ramifications are enormous. A few years down the road we have a bunch of smooth-mouthed cows with no quality young replacements to stock the ranch. The importance of maintaining a consistent and quality age distribution in our cow herd is essential for long term sustainability. The same can be said about a bull battery, a cavy of horses, or the membership roster in the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association.

Lack of young cattlemen entering NCA as participating members is a huge long term concern to our now smooth-

mouthed and grey-bearded Board of Directors. For many reasons the young blood is not joining up and

participating in policy setting. The average age of members who participated in our policy setting Annual Convention efforts in No-vember 2013 was estimated to be in the range of 45 to 60 years of age with only a small number of

younger individuals present. Without a constant infusion of new, young and enthusiastic members, the team gets smaller, older and burned out.

NCA recognizes that we have many young cattlemen who are members of the sounding voice of the livestock industry and many do participate in policy setting and other organiza-tion activities. We appreciate that. Oftentimes, however, many

“Lack of young cattlemen entering NCA as participating members is

a huge long term concern…”

The Progressive Rancherwww.progressiverancher.com September / October 2014 3



By Stephanie Licht, Nevada Cattlemen’s Association Executive Director

Put a “WHOA” on WOTUS*New EPA Rule, *WOTUS: “Waters of the United States”

AUGUST has morphed into weeks of flash flood watches, warnings and heroic events across the entirety of Nevada. WATER has been literally EVERYWHERE in the driest state in the nation! Puddles are in every divot. There are lakes in lawns; gravelly hollows overflow down driveways; usually bone dry little creek beds embrace meandering flows, finally dribbling into bigger creek beds and on down country.

Enter: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), The Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) and their new joint, “proposed rule, Waters of the United States (WOTUS).” The leviathans of regulation want to clarify which streams and wetlands are protected under the Clean Water Act.” Huh???

In a separate article in this publication NCBA Region VI Vice President Joe Guild does a great job of breaking down into plain and understandable language the history behind this distressing EPA rule and some of its legal ramifications.

Following are some of the comments from across the country related to this egregious power play underscoring the need for everyone to get involved, TAKE ACTION and submit comments against the rule!

Ron Arnold, Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise said, “…nearly everything wet [falls under this new rule] – and [will] potentially subject us all to permits and fines.”

Specifically limited to “navigable” bodies of water, twice the US Supreme Court ruled against EPA’s stepping out of this Clean Water Act (CWA), mandated limitation.

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said the proposed rule is necessary for clarifica-tion and, “…protection of upstream waters” which are, “…absolutely vital to downstream communities.”

Assistant Secretary of the Army Jo-Ellen Darcy argues the nation’s waters and wet-lands, “…are valuable resources that must be protected today and for future generations.”

The WOTUS rule alleges every local property owners’ activities affect nearby waters and therefore EPA has the right to regulate those activities. Any land disturbance would require expensive permits. Fines for non-compliance could be $37,500/day.

Op-ed pieces across the nation agree - the WOTUS rule would, “…give the EPA au-thority over streams on private property even when the water beds have been dry, in some cases for hundreds of years.”

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Rep. Harold Rogers, R-KY called it, “the biggest land grab in the history of the world…” the “…economic impact [of which] would be profound… and would absolutely freeze economic activity in this country.” Rogers’s opinion is the proposal, “…is proof in and of itself of the mal-intent of this administration toward the private sector.”

Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Washington, chairman of the House Natural Resources Com-mittee said, “Under this plan, there’d be no body of water in America – including mud puddles and canals – that wouldn’t be at risk from job-destroying federal regulation…” and, “This dramatic expansion of federal government control will directly impact the liveli-hoods and viability of farmers and small businesses in rural America

Senator Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska asked EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy how the new WOTUS rule would affect Americans’ civil liberties and their ability to carry on private business activities. McCarthy had no specific answers, saying the proposed rule is currently posted on the EPA website for a 90-day comment period [ending October 20, 2014] and the scientific basis to support [the proposed rule] has not been completed.

Congressman Glenn Thompson, R-PA, wrote his opinion for NCBA’s Beltway Beef News in, “It’s No Misunderstanding: EPA Overreach on Waters of the U.S. Rule”. Thomp-

sons’ comments include:“The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulatory attack on our economy …

has been growing for some time. In recent months, the EPA moved forward with another power grab to redefine the agency’s jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act (CWA), through a new proposed rule commonly known as the Waters of the United States (WOTUS)… the federal government once again has chosen to undercut… [State and federal cooperative] efforts with punitive federal regulations.”

“In March, the EPA [was]… alleging the rule expands neither federal authorities nor the amount of water or land under the agency’s jurisdiction. The EPA has argued the ac-tion will help eliminate ambiguity over which bodies of water are jurisdictional under the law. Unfortunately, this is a far cry from the truth. In reality, EPA’s plan represents an extraordinary expansion of federal power that will further harm our economy and the rights of both states and private landowners.” (Emphasis added)

“Enacted in 1972, the CWA was created as a partnership between the states and the federal EPA… [and] The CWA was never intended to impinge upon states’ authority as the primary managers of water resources within their borders … Unfortunately, that’s exactly what EPA has proposed… essentially all waters in the country could potentially be sub-ject to regulation and permitting approval by the federal government under the EPA’s proposed rule….” (Emphasis added)

“The Obama Administration and the EPA have argued the WOTUS rule and the IR are intended to eliminate ambiguity and offer greater protections for states, farmers and landowners, when in fact, they create new regulatory burdens, more ambiguity, and less certainty… EPA Chief Gina McCarthy earlier this month characterized the growing opposition to the WOTUS rule as “ludicrous” and “silly,” and recently summarized the backlash as a “growing list of misunderstandings” (Emphasis added)

“It’s no misunderstanding. The EPA’s WOTUS rule is a historic power grab that poses a fundamental threat to our economy and way of life… Unfortunately, the only thing ludicrous is how EPA continues to believe a punitive one-size-fits-all approach to environmental stewardship is the only way forward.” (Emphasis added)

EVERYONE’S Voice Can Be Heard! TAKE ACTION! Submit Comments!

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and Public Lands Council strongly oppose this rule because it infringes on private property rights and interferes with the partnerships between state and federal agencies that have contributed to the success of the CWA.

Make No Mistake: this rule affects every property owner and/or land user – and potentially even ground water. EVERYONE needs to submit comments against WOTUS!

The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association website provides a way for everyone, member or not, to submit comments at http://cqrcengage.com/beefusa/app/write-a-letter?2&engagementId=47396. Personal stories have the most impact.

There are other state and national agricultural organizations’ websites featuring “Tell EPA to Ditch the Rule!” Learn from sample letters then JUST DO IT!

One conservative organization sums the issue up saying, “…Let’s cut straight to it. This rule is not about the environment. It’s about giving radical Green gadflies power to interfere with how other people responsibly use their land… Will you stand by and let them succeed?”

THE DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING COMMENTS IS OCTOBER 20, 2014.For the rule itself see:

http://www2.epa.gov/uswaters/definition-waters-united-states-under-clean-water-act.


http://cqrcengage.com/beefusa/app/write

http://www2.epa.gov/uswaters/definition

young members must stay home and work the ranch thus enabling a ranch representative, generally of the older generation, to travel and participate in NCA policy making activities.

NCA also recognizes the enormous contributions our older NCA members have and continue to make through their participa-tion in NCA activities at the state and national level. For many, how-ever, a stick in the eye is easier to tolerate than a day of discussions and participation in the political arena. None of this changes the fact that if you are between the ages of 18 and 45 and actively involved in the production of beef cattle, the beef industry needs your member-ship and/or participation.

Beef producers have a passion for the production of beef cattle, management of our natural resources and the lifestyle that the beef industry offers. The bottom line, however, is if we want to maintain this lifestyle for generations to come, we all need to participate at some level in an agricultural organization. Some feel most comfort-able paying their annual membership dues as a form of hiring-out the political work performed by NCA. This effort is much appreciated. For those who have aspirations of participating on a larger scale such as getting involved in policy setting and working on the vari-ous committees, there is certainly a place for you at that table. We welcome your participation.

Barrick Gold of North America, University of Nevada Co-operative Extension, University of Nevada college of Agriculture and Biotechnology through USDA’s Risk Management Agency are cooperatively funding NCA’s young cattlemen’s educational efforts. These entities recog-nize the need to support the multiple use concept and the livestock industry in Nevada. In

addition, they support NCA’s efforts to recruit “new and young blood” into our organiza-tion. Cooperatively they are offering to pay a one day registration fee for any new young

Nevada Cattlemen (between the ages of 18 and 45) who would like to participate in NCA’s Annual Convention on November 3 to 5, 2014 in Elko. NCA would like to show you how and why you should be a dues paying member and participant of NCA. We offer you this opportunity so you can see firsthand the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association in action as we set policy on the many issues facing the livestock industry. November 4 will also offer a Cattlemen’s College which will cover media training and discussions from older members of the organization as to the importance of involvement. If you are interested in this offer feel free to contact the NCA office.

The Nevada Cattlemen’s Association is a non-profit trade as-sociation that was established in 1935. We provide a means for Nevada’s cattle industry to present a united front on issues that impact us all. Our mission is to promote a dynamic and profitable Nevada beef industry which represents the interests of its produc-ers and consistently meets the consumer’s needs while increasing Nevada’s market share. NCA works hard to protect private property, vested water and grazing rights. We achieve this through increased public awareness of our industry and agriculture in general. NCA feels strongly that the future of rural Nevada depends on healthy vi-able land, responsible stewardship and a strong membership. If the mission of NCA parallel’s your views we encourage you to join our

dues based organization. You can join by calling the NCA office at 775-738-9214 or e-mail ([email protected]).

— CONTINUED FROM PAGE 3 —

Local Butcher

— CONTINUED FROM PAGE 3 —

American society” for both professional as well as personal advancement. It was in Elko he met and married his wife Ellen. He credits Ellen for teaching him to speak and write fluent English. Ellen also encouraged him to complete his GED, receiving a high school diploma and to take classes at the local community college.

For the past twenty-seven years Saul has worked at Raley’s in the meat department. According to Saul, “One of the biggest changes I have seen is the move from swinging or hanging beef quarters to Cryovac wholesale cuts at the retail level. In the early years every butcher knew how to break quartered beef down into wholesale and then retail cuts,” states Saul. “At today’s meat counter, few butchers know how to break carcasses for the meat all comes in pre-cut wholesale Cryovac packages. There is a move to pre-cut and package retail cuts at breaking plants as well. The lo-cal butcher will simply put the Cryovac retail package on display for sale. This is a move that is all about efficiency and food safety”.

Saul has seen a steady improvement with the quality and uniformity of beef over the years. We have had many meat counter discussions as to why such an improvement

in uniformity and quality has occurred including genetic selection, Certified Angus Beef, dollar check off funded product development and promotion, sorting carcasses on the rail, and improved fabrication techniques.

When asked about food safety changes over the years, Saul puts sanitation and food safety at the top of the list and of the highest priority for Raley’s. “We do everything pos-sible to insure a safe and wholesome product at the retail level.” In my meat counter conversations with Saul I have relayed that the cow-calf segment also works hard to insure a safe and wholesome product to the next segments of our industry - the stocker, feedlot operator, then the packer. I have explained our Beef Quality Assurance program as a tool to accomplish this. This exchange of information over the years has proven to be beneficial to both of us.

In regard to his retirement from the meat business, Saul says he will mostly miss his interactions with customers and co-workers. “The retail business is all about one-on-one and customer satisfaction. I have established a good customer base over the years and I will miss that.” Saul went on to say, “Raley’s has been a great employer. The pay and benefits have been good. They are a good company to work for.”

The beef industry salutes Saul and the many other butchers in the business just like him. Sharing dialog with Saul over the years has established a mutual respect be-tween us for what we both have contributed to each other’s segment of the beef industry. I personally will miss my weekly five to ten minute conversations with Saul relative to the retail end of the beef business. I have already introduced myself and started a dialog with the new meat manager at Raley’s, Thomas Morgan.

My challenge to all beef producers is to establish a dia-log with your local butcher by dropping by the meat counter when you’re in the grocery store. At the meat counter ask for the main butcher. Introduce yourself as a beef producer. Shake his or her hand and thank them for presenting our product, BEEF, to the consumer.

Through this monthly column our hope is to update those involved in the Nevada livestock industry about the issues NCA is working on. Our mission continues to be to promote, preserve and protect a dynamic and profitable Nevada beef industry. Should you like to visit with NCA members or staff, please contact NCA at 775-738-9214 or my NCA e-mail address [email protected]

Young NCA Cattlmen

Nevada Cattlemen’s Association

Annual Convention and Trade Show

November 3–5, 2014Elko, Nevada

For more information contact

the Nevada Cattlemen’s

Association office at

775-738-9214 or

visit their website

www.nevadacattlemen.org.




www.nevadacattlemen.org

There is a current threat to ag-riculture so serious I think

it deserves a thorough discussion and whatever benefit my opinion might be so you can make up your minds on what you should do about it.

As many of you know by now, the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) have drafted a new rule which would greatly expand what “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) are subject to their regulatory jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act(CWA).

The head of the EPA, Gina McCarthy has said all of the current exemptions for regular agricultural practices available to farmers and ranchers will still apply after the proposed rule goes into effect. The exemptions she refers to are the practices that do not require a so-called “Dredge and Fill Permit” under section 404 of the CWA.

Currently, if you do not engage in a normal agricultural practice such as plowing a field, creating an irrigation ditch in a newly planted field, or cleaning an existing irrigation ditch, you will potentially pollute a water of the US. In such a case, you must get a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. Furthermore, if your agricultural operations include any of 56 conservation practice standards approved by the Natural Resource Conservation Service, these activities will also be exempt from obtaining a section 404 permit.

I other words, more rather than less scrutiny will be imposed on agriculture after this regulation is enacted. The NRCS has always been an agency to help farmers and ranchers preserve the precious resources such as soil and water needed to have a viable agricultural enterprise. Now, under this proposed rule, they will act as a quasi-enforcement agency in partnership with the EPA and the Corps.

For almost a century,”navigable“water was a water of the United States. People under-stood this to mean this was water used by boats and other devices in interstate commerce as

originally contemplated by the US Constitution in Article I, Section 8. By the way, nowhere in the Constitution is there any authority given to the Executive branch to regulate interstate commerce. That authority rests with Congress.

The EPA says the new rule is needed because the Supreme Court in recent cases has confused the issue of what constitutes jurisdictional water under the CWA. This notion stems from a concurring opinion written by Justice Anthony Kennedy in which he agreed with four other justices that the EPA had overstepped its authority in issuing fines and stop orders to a landowner who wanted to develop some of his land by filling in wetlands. The court plurality(four justices) said the Clean Water Act limited federal authority to “rela-tively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water” which are tradition-ally understood to be “streams, oceans, rivers and lakes “ that are connected to traditional navigable waters.

Justice Kennedy changed the historic understanding to now include his test that there must be a “significant nexus” between the navigable water and the water the Army Corps and the EPA seek to regulate under the CWA. This is the confusion the EPA seeks to clarify under their new rule. It is important to remember Justice Kennedy wrote only for himself and he joined four others whose decision declared the EPA had overstepped its authority.

In fact, to fully understand why the EPA, with this rule, is overwhelmingly exceeding its authority, these quotes from the Supreme Court opinion are quite relevant:

Chief Justice Roberts said there was a point to be made that instead of following the court’s lead in a previous case limiting federal authority under the Clean Water Act, “the Corps chose to adhere to its essentially boundless view of the scope of its power. The upshot today is another defeat for the agency.”

Justice Scalia was more blunt: “In applying the definition [of what constitutes a water of the United States] to ‘ephemeral streams,’ ‘wet meadows,’ storm sewers and culverts, ‘directional sheet flow during storm events,’ drain tiles, man-made drainage ditches, and dry arroyos in the middle of the desert, the Corps has stretched the term ‘waters of the United States’ beyond parody. The plain language of the statute simply does not authorize this ‘Land is Waters approach to federal jurisdiction.”

See Rapanos v. United States, 126 S.Ct. 2208 (2006).Reed Hopper, a respected attorney who represented Mr. Rapanos in the Supreme

Court, had this to say about the conclusions which can be drawn from the Rapanos case:1. “Federal agencies have no authority under the Clean Water Act to regulate truly

isolated, non-navigable intrastate water bodies.2. Federal agencies have no authority under the Clean Water Act to regulate any area

merely because it has a hydrological connection with downstream navigable-in-fact waters.

3. Federal agencies have no authority under the Clean Water Act to regulate remote drains and ditches with insubstantial flows.”

In spite of the above rules of law and expert analysis, in direct contravention of what the Supreme Court has said on the issue, the EPA and the Army Corps are pushing full speed ahead to implement this rule which will give these agencies control of much of the land mass of the United States, in addition to virtually all water, whether flowing year- round or ephemeral across the country.

The implications of this increase in regulation by the Federal Government to large waters users and owners of private property are obvious especially to entities which have had to deal with federal agencies in the past. Municipal water purveyors, flood control districts, irrigation districts in the west and obviously farmers and ranchers quickly come to mind. The NCBA is working with a coalition of folks like these, plus others such as the National Home Builders Association and even the Professional Golf Association to defeat the EPA and Corps efforts to implement this regulation.

What can a rancher do to help the effort to get these agencies to dump their overreach-ing regulation? The NCBA has a web site at BeefUSA.Org which has a link to a comment you can make to tell the EPA to ditch the rule. You do not have to be a member of NCBA to comment. The whole process takes about two minutes. I would urge anyone interested to read the proposed rule or go to the above web site and read the NCBA synopsis and analysis of the proposed rule. Then, if you are so inclined make a comment with the sug-gested language or tell your personal story. This is as serious a matter as I have ever seen in dealing with national agricultural issues for over 30 years. The NCBA goal is to have 10,000 comments submitted to the EPA by October when the comment period ends. Please join in and do your part to defeat this serious government overreach.

I’ll see you soon.

Talking abouT NCBAJoe Guild, 6th Region Vice President

EARLY CASTRATION

HUMANE – BLOODLESS – DRUG FREE

800-858-5974www.CallicrateBanders.com

CALL FOR ADISTRIBUTOR

NEAR YOU.

"The CallicrateBander

is phenomenal."George Chambers, Carrolton, Georgia

"The Callicrate ‘WEE’Bander is well worth

the investment."John Blevins, California

DELAYED CASTRATION

CATTLE GOATS SHEEPMADE IN USA

HORNREMOVAL


S.Ct

BeefUSA.Org

OFFICE: 775-423-7760JACK PAYNE Cell: 775-217-9273

Alt: 775-225-8889

Email: [email protected]

Nevada Livestock Marketing Lowers Their CommissionNevada Livestock Marketing opened its doors in the fall of 2006. We

can’t believe that nearly eight years have gone by. It’s been challeng-ing, yet fun and exciting learning the livestock marketing business. We

wouldn’t change a minute of it even if we could. We have met so many good people along the way.

We were ranchers before we started Nevada Livestock Marketing and know very well the challenges that all ranchers, farmers, and dairyman face. Cattle prices may be at a record high, but so are the costs of production and expenses. We under-stand that every dollar counts and that is why Nevada Livestock Marketing works so hard to put more money back in your pocket through strong market support, rea-sonable feed, freight and most of all lower commission rates. (Nevada Livestock Marketing has always had the lowest commission rates in both CA and NV). Due to record high prices overall commission of gross sales for all livestock commis-sion companies, including video have increased considerably. At Nevada Livestock Marketing we have decided to lower our commission even more as a way of saying “thank you” to our consigners and also to let you know we really do put more money back into your pockets instead of just talking about it. Next time you market your cattle, check the feed, freight, and commission rates and compare it to those at Nevada Livestock Marketing.

What is market support to you? I haven’t made a lot of friends with the buyers over the years by protecting the prices of the consigned cattle. I don’t want to run off any buyers, but as a livestock marketing company, it is my responsibility to protect the prices of the seller’s cattle to make sure the cattle bring what they are worth. It is a very touchy balancing act to say the least. I buy cattle for our own ranch out of sale barns in surrounding states. It is very interesting to watch how other sale barns handle market support. Some are very discreet about it, using what is known as a “House Mouse”, while others make no bones about watching out for their sellers. Meanwhile, others have no market support and rely strictly on the buyers. Look around the next time you are at your local sale barn and see who is watching out for you. Is it the owner, the manager, or the “House Mouse”? Is there anyone watching out for you? If not, that is the sale barn you want to buy cattle at, not where you want to sell them. At Nevada Livestock Marketing we are watching out for you, the consigner.

In conclusion, we would like to say “Thank You” to our sellers and to our buy-ers for the last eight years. We have made a lot of friends and memories and look forward to making more. We are currently looking at two different properties in the Fallon area to build a new sale barn if that becomes necessary. However, we plan to stay at our current location as long as possible. It may be the oldest sale barn in Ne-vada, but it is also the biggest and the best and yes, it has deep well water too!

Sales Results from

AUGUST 6TH AND 20TH, 2014REGULAR BUTCHER COW AND BULL SALE

Seller City State # Head Desc. Type Weight Price CWT

Sale Results from August 6, 2014

Lyle Debraga Fallon NV 1 BLK STR 355 $325.00

Dennis and Sharon Brown Winnemucca NV 2 MIX STR 318 $325.00

Dennis and Sharon Brown Winnemucca NV 2 MIX STR 448 $262.00

Edison Birchim & Debbie O'Neal

Duckwater NV 2 BLK STR 268 $312.50

Jerry Millet Duckwater NV 5 BLK STR 436 $307.50

Matt Hoekenga Fallon NV 1 RED STR 525 $225.00

Gene Heckman Winnemucca NV 4 RED STR 659 $218.00

Gene Heckman Winnemucca NV 2 CHAR STR 658 $216.00

Edison Birchim & Debbie O'Neal

Duckwater NV 2 BLK HFR 295 $290.00

Jerry Millet Duckwater NV 8 BLK HFR 433 $265.00

Roger and Theresa Lambert Fallon NV 5 MIX HFR 467 $237.50

Tomasa Lee Fallon NV 1 CHAR HFR 515 $210.00

John Guerrero Wadsworth NV 6 CHAR HFR 738 $180.00

Sale Results from August 20, 2014

T Quarter Circle Ranch Winnemucca NV 1 BLK COW 1495 $140.50

T Quarter Circle Ranch Winnemucca NV 1 BLK HFRT 1575 $140.00

Jennifer Norcutt Fallon NV 1 BBF HFRT 1080 $140.00

Grass Valley Ranch Austin NV 1 BLK HFRT 1135 $140.00

Grass Valley Ranch Austin NV 1 BLK HFRT 1150 $139.00

Grass Valley Ranch Austin NV 1 BLK COW 1290 $130.00

Lacas Vacas Fallon NV 1 HOl COW 1645 $121.00

Perazzo Brothers Fallon NV 1 HOl HFRT 1145 $111.00

Phil Regli Fallon NV 1 HOLX COW 1460 $109.50

Palisade Ranch Carlin NV 1 CHAR BULL 2085 $140.50

Palisade Ranch Carlin NV 1 CHAR BULL 1795 $136.00

T Quarter Circle Ranch Winnemucca NV 1 BLK BULL 1635 $139.50

Karl Weishaupt Fallon NV 1 BLK BULL 1805 $130.00

Sale EVERY WednesdaySmall Barn At 10:30 AM

Cows At 11:00 AM • Feeder Cattle At 1:00 PM

Upcoming Feeder Salesin conjunction with our Regular Wednesday sale

September 17th October 16th


Livestock Exchange, Inc.

FALLON

For more marketing information, or to arrange trucking needs: Call Monte Bruck, Manager, at 775-426-8279

Fallon Livestock Exchange, Inc.

2055 Trento Lane • Fallon, Nevada 89406 • 775-867-2020

See you and your Friends at Ringside Soon!

www.fallonlivestock.com

TOP OFFERINGSWeight Steer Heifer

300-400 290.00-345.00 232.75-280.00400-500 269.00-332.50 235.25-266.00500-600 235.00-277.50 204.95-232.00600-700 217.00-239.00 208.00-237.50700-800 217.50-229.00 168.50-202.00800-900 189.00-207.00 158.50-173.00Lite Holstein (under 600#) 156.00-210.00Heavy Holstein (over 600#) 130.00-147.00*Single, Small Framed or Plainer Cattle 40.00 to 70.00 less than top offerings

BUTCHER COWS & BULLSBreakers (Fat Cows) 100.00-110.00Boners (Med Flesh) 115.00-130.00Cutters (Lean) 75.00-95.00Holstein Cows 79.00-108.00Butcher Bulls 95.00-138.00Shelly (Thin) Bulls 75.00-85.00Shelly Cutters (Thin) 20.00-40.00Young Feeder Cows 95.00·117.00Heiferettes 95.00·130.00Holstein Heiferettes 102.00-124.00Holstein Bulls 90.00-116.50Feeder Bulls 85.00-95.00Cutting Bulls 95.00-120.00Used Roping Steers 80.00-100.00Preg Tested Cows(3, 4, 5 yr. old solid mouth)

NT

Bred Helfers-(6 to 7 months bred) NTPairs (solid mouth) 3-6 yrs NTPairs (older) NT

CALVES-SHEEP-GOATS-PIGS-HORSESBeef Calves (HD) 150.00-525.00Dairy Calves 2.00-50.00Feeder Lambs 125.00-140.00Fat Lambs 110.00-125.00Ewes (CWT) 30.00-65.00Bucks (CWT) 40.00-60.00Small Goats (under 65 lbs.) (HD) 30.00-95.00Large Goats (over 70 lbs.) (HD) 95.00-220.00Weaner Pigs 45.00-95.00Feeder Pigs 60.00-130.00Top Hogs 75.00-91.50Butcher Sows 20.00-45.00Horses (under 1100 lbs.) 10.00-20.00Horses (over 1100 lbs.) 25.00-33.00

MARKET TREND:Feeder cattle were on same kind and quality depending on fi ll. Higher, higher and higher as much as $40.00 higher, buyers liked all the good cattle. Fallon Livestock is a key market for the live-stock industry, where buyers and sellers meet each week with a professional staff with over 50 years of experience in marketing livestock.PLEASE call us ahead with your consignments. It helps us market your cattle. We talk to buyers all the time - they want to know what’s coming in. We are seeing good demand on weigh up cows & bulls. It sure makes a big difference on how they are sorted. Let our crew sort and class your cows. This will help you receive full market value for your cows.

We have trucks available for your hauling needs, pasture to pasture or from your Ranch to the sale yard.

TODAY’S COWSAvg. Wt Avg. Cost

Top Cow 1110 130.00Top 10 Cows 1240 128.00Top 50 Cows 1210 122.50Top 100 Cows 1150 111.74Top Butcher Bull 1925 138.50Top Holstein Cows 1235 108.00Top 10 Holstein Cows 1301 100.00Top 5 Butcher Bulls 1806 135.80

MARKET REPORTAugust 12, 2014

Head Sold this week: 1490

11th Annual

Early FallGather & Round Up

Special Calf & Yearling

SALETuesday, September 16, 2014

at 1:00 PM

Along with Regular Sale

11th Annual

OctoberfestSpecial

Calf & Yearling

SALESaturday,

October 11, 2014at 1:00 PM

Is Pleased to Announce

Ship ’Em To

Sale Every Tuesday at 11:00 AMSelling All Classes of Livestock: • Cattle • Horses • Sheep • Goats • Pigs

2BIG SPECIAL SALES

G

4


When was the last time you had a fast food restaurant hamburger? If you are like me it wasn’t very long

ago. Out here we drive a lot and I often lunch quickly on the run. I have my preferences, as do most of you, about which are my favorites and which places I would only eat at if I have been on the road for hours and there is nothing else available. I actually

prefer the little café in the small towns I travel through- you know the ones- with a crowd full of trucks at 5:30 every morning and no slow down until closing time about 2:30 every afternoon.

Nevertheless, fast food hamburger restaurants are the cattle industries’ biggest cus-tomer. The top two chains out distance the others by factors of ten. We need them and they need us. However, as I have written in the past, the future may not be ours unless we address some of the issues the younger generations are dealing with such as the concern that farm animals be humanely cared for, food safety and local sourcing of food supplies.

I know it is difficult to understand why, but every young person I talk with (the folks under 30) has some degree of concern about the above issues. They are still eating ham-burgers, but they are very influenced by a growing cadre of self-described food and animal agriculture experts. You have no doubt heard the name Michael Pollin. He wrote “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” part of which was critical of so-called industrialized agriculture. Also, he famously bought a single steer calf at birth in order to follow its journey through life until part of his steer ended up on his plate. He also wrote about this experience. A recent op-ed piece by Alice Waters also caught my attention and made me want to write more on this subject. She is the Berkeley, California restaurateur who is largely credited for starting the locally produced food movement by using only seasonal and nearby ingre-dients in her famous restaurant, Chez Panisse, beginning more than 30 years ago. Both of these trend setters are meat eaters but they do so with an eye to a sustainable and healthier eating experience.

Let me explain. I recently heard Pollin say he enjoys eating beef occasionally, but now when he eats it he thinks about the processes that went into creating the product and he tries to eat beef produced as close to his locality as possible. The reason for this is he thinks the added inputs to creating most of our beef are contributing to the world’s ever increasing carbon imprint. What with big feedlots, the mass produced cattle feed they use and the transportation costs associated with moving truck loads of beef all across the country, he is concerned that such a process is unsustainable.

Likewise, in her op-ed piece, Waters worries about the impacts of “big ag” farming on the planet, as well as the obesity epidemic she partly ascribes to our reliance on fast food for a good part of our nutrition. By the way, she does not mention the sedentary lifestyle most Americans lead as a contributor to the obesity problem. (Just saying) Her commentary is relatively optimistic however. She thinks the local food movement which was once under-ground and centered in urban areas and on college campuses is breaking out and becoming a part of the mainstream consciousness. In her view for the future, more and more young people will take up farming and food distribution thus localizing the access to food more and more. Maybe if more people are outside growing their own food they will be healthier and less obese. She also thinks politicians will be pressured to provide increased subsidies

to small farmers and food distributors and thus the big agriculture recipients of government subsidies now will lose out to the localized farming movement.

I do believe that both Pollin and Waters have a point. As I have written before, and mention above there is a growing awareness among the younger generations not connected to food growing in any way that they must become involved to one degree or another in how, where, and according to what principles is their food produced. After all, the popula-tion in this country of citizens between 15 and 50 is about 153,000,000. Those of us over 50 equal about 100,000,000. Our eating habits are set. The younger folks are still figuring theirs out. I have to give Alice Waters credit for her optimism. Furthermore, as long-time readers know, I believe we will see a revolution in eating habits and awareness about food that Waters predicts. However, my skepticism gets in the way of my sympathy.

Here’s why; people and money. We have all read or heard about the coming world population explosion. We are to be nine billion people in the next 36 years. How are we going to feed each other from our small two to forty acre farms? For those not farmers and ranchers I have big news for you- this is really hard work. Coincidental to writing this, I ran across another recent article by a small aqua-culturist in New York State. He pointed out several truths. One, most small farmers are not making enough off the farm to support themselves in spite of the growing interest in local agriculture and therefore they have second and third jobs to support their farming addiction.

He also had an incredible insight lost among the writings of the elite folks publicizing and invested in the small arm local agriculture movement. His view is the perspective of the people actually out there doing the hard work in the fields and pastures is missing from the dialogue. As a small farmer, how much money do you make? What is your return on invest-ment? If paid by the hour what would your wage be? Do you support your family entirely on what income the farm produces? While you run the ranch does your wife teach school or practice nursing in the county hospital? These are the questions the people criticizing big agriculture rarely ask. By the way, such questions could be relevant to the discussion by asking them of any farmer or rancher running a family farm no matter its size. This, as you know, is about 90 percent of all the farms and ranches in the United States.

I will concede the answer to how to feed 9 billion people lies partly in growing some of our own food. In third world and developing countries small farms will also help solve part of the problem. The lessons learned by big ag in genetics, soil science, improved ir-rigation techniques, rangeland management and other agricultural practices which have evolved from scientific and educational advancements in the developed areas of the world will help the less fortunate nations feed themselves. The developed nations with their big ag will also be continuing to export food to the rest of the world. I believe in technology and the human capacity to solve problems as they arise and challenge us as we always have.

I also think it is healthy that people such as Alice Waters challenge the status quo and make us think how we can improve. How much better off are our cattle since Temple Grandin told us what we were doing wrong and how to do it better? The younger generation is going to vote with their wallets and those of us who change to meet a different demand will do alright. Those who don’t won’t.

I’ll see you soon.

By Joe Guild

The Progressive Rancher ONLINEwww.PROGRESSIVERANCHER.COM Follow us at issuu.com

We have More than we Can Print!

Look what we have

for you on our website:

• Pricing Rain-Damaged Hay (What is it Worth?)

• Incorporating Rain-Damaged Hay into Winter Beef Cow Rations

• SRM Tour Summary: Nevada Division of Forestry Wildfire Protection Program

• Wildfire Suppression Borrowing

• Elko BLM releases Final EA for Drought Management

• Nevada BLM: Monitoring Reveals Deteriorating Conditions On Argenta Allotment


www.progressiverancher.com

issuu.com

Nevada Water Solutions LLC

Thomas K. Gallagher, PEHydrologic Engineer

775•825•1653 / FAX 775•825•1683675 Sierra Rose Dr., #109 / Reno, NV [email protected]

Water Rights / Resource Permitting Expertise

Over 31 years of experience with the Nevada State Engineer’s O�ce

Nevada RanchersCaretakers of ourRangelands

Nevada Rangeland Resources Commission was created bythe State of Nevada to promote responsible public land grazing. Representatives come from Nevada state grazing boards, Nevada

Woolgrowers, Nevada Farm Bureau, and Nevada Cattlemen’s Association.

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

Sheep often graze on steep terrain and can control cheatgrass, a

major fuel for wildfi res.

Grazing cattle and sheep coexist peacefully with native wildlife and, in fact, make a friendlier

habitat for many species.

Cowboys and sheepherders produce food and fi ber for the nation. Growing food

on Open range is a natural biological process.

Grazing actually benefi ts the land with hoof action and natural fertilization. Plants are healthier and regenerate faster after the

herds move to a new range.

Antelope and other game animals and birds take advantage of the

improvements made by ranchers.

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

Nevada Rangeland Resources Commission

by Rachel Buzzetti, Executive Director

The Sustainable Grazing Coalition

In 2006 the Sustainable Grazing Coalition was created as a common source that gathers and researches scientific literature and other origins of information.

The Coalition is a group of livestock grazing advocates including: The Nevada Cattle-men’s Association, the Nevada Board of Agriculture, The Nevada Farm Bureau, The Nevada Central Grazing Committee, and a representative from the NV Rangeland Resources Commission (NRRC).

The primary contractor for the coalition is Rick Orr, a certified rangeland specialist from Caliente, NV. His responsibilities have included keeping track of notices in the Fed-eral Register so that responses can be made on a timely basis. Most of the land management actions announced in the Federal Register must be researched and then made available to all affected permittees throughout the state; subsequently responses by industry can be made in a timely manner. He generates com-ments on proposed decisions at the allotment levels as well as district RMP’s.

By far the largest ongoing project for the Coalition has been related to the Greater Sage Grouse and the relationship to its habitat. An extensive library of scientific literature regarding the bird, its habitat and the inter-relationship with livestock grazing has been researched and compiled. This work has been shared with Nevada’s livestock industry and the Public Lands Council to be used in lobby-ing the agencies and Congress.

Most recently, NRRC’s grant monies have been used for research and writing of exten-sive technical comments for the Greater Sage Grouse DEIS proposed by the BLM. These documents were distributed to the entities of the Sustainable Grazing Coalition to support comments made by the Grazing Boards and industry groups. Association membership, Conservation Districts and permittees were also given access to the documents for use in drafting comments. Directions and assistance were offered to individuals in submitting their comments. Lastly, local governments were able to make use of the compiled research in addressing the socio-economic impacts of the DEIS. The two contractors for the Sage Grouse research and comments were Rick Orr and Resource Concepts Inc. of Carson City.

Furthering the Coalition’s efforts, research has been done just recently on interactions between cattle and the Desert Tortoise. More efforts in research linked to cattle grazing will be completed for future demands.

According to The Sustainable Grazing Coalition, 100% of the funds have been ex-pended on contractors doing the specifically designated research and writing. According to Boyd Spratling, Chairman “The very people who generate these dollars are intended to receive the benefit and this funding is necessary to counter threats to public land grazing, which are bound to intensify into the future.”

An extensive library of

scientific literature regarding

the bird [Greater Sage

Grouse], its habitat and

the inter-relationship with

livestock grazing has been

researched and compiled.


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

or email us at [email protected]

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

Market your cattle with the professionals!

Mark VenturacciFallon, NV

(775) 427-8713

Steve LucasParadise Valley, NV(775) 761-7575

Gary NolanElko, NV

(775) 934-5678

Brad Peek— — (916) 802-7335

WATCH & LISTEN TO THE SALE on the Web at:

UPCOMING SALES

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 3RD

Cottonwood, CA

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 7TH

Cottonwood, CA

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2ND

Silver Legacy • Reno, NV

Silver Legacy Saleby Brad Peek

Western Video Market’s July video sale at the Silver Legacy was a rousing success. Record prices due to a low supply of cattle nationwide, a robust export market, and vastly lower corn prices had our consignors smiling.

Buyers from as far away as Iowa and Texas were extremely active in purchasing all classes of cattle. From yearlings shipping immediately to calves shipping as far out as Janu-ary, demand was tremendous. As well, breeding stock was in demand as those producers fortunate enough to have feed look to rebuild their herds.

The severe drought in the Western States forced many of our consignors to sell their calf crop earlier in the year and many of the stocker operators turned out fewer than normal and also shipped earlier than usual. I would guess that 50% of our consignors in the West that consigned to the July sale, put their shipping dates for earlier delivery than a regular year. Besides the drought itself, agencies put curtailments on irrigation water.

The market looks like it should stay strong for the forseeable future with little bumps in the road as there always are. The cow/calf operator who has the feed and can withstand the drought, looks to be in good position for the next few years.

We are wishing our buyers great success in their purchases. For our industry to suc-ceed, all segments must be profitable. Western Video Market wishes to thank both the con-signors and buyers who put their trust in us. Our family of representatives is a conscientious and professional group. Thanks to all of you.

In closing, we would like to thank those who donated to and purchased items from our annual fundraising auction that benefits Water For Life, the Hirschberg Foundation for Pancreatic Cancer Research, and the Andy Peek Memorial Livestock Scholarship. The incredible generosity touches our hearts.

See you down the road friends!


The Promotion/Education Arm of the Cattle Community

Welcome to the first in a series of articles that will be featured in the Pro-gressive Rancher about the work the Nevada CattleWomen are doing

across the state. As your state president, I’m delighted that the Progressive Rancher has given us this opportunity to tell our members and the rest of Nevada’s cattle community about the important mission that we CattleWomen work to fulfill. We all know there are frequent onslaughts of misinformation about beef in the media, press, and even on Facebook and Twitter. Our group of ladies and supporters work with the Nevada Cattlemen and the Nevada Beef Council on projects aimed at telling the beef story the correct way, with science-based facts, and the sincerity that only farmers and ranchers can provide.

Since this is the first article in a series of several over the next year, I’m going to focus on the overall mission and structure of our organization, the partners we work with, and the programs that we’re currently working on. Basically the mission of the Nevada Cattle-Women is beef promotion, youth development, and legislative activity. Given this mission, we work closely with the American National CattleWomen (ANCW) our national affiliate to implement national programs in Nevada. The Nevada CattleWomen organization works closely with the local CattleWomen groups on these national programs in their geographic areas. Local CattleWomen groups affiliated with Nevada CattleWomen include Elko County, Pershing, Humboldt, White Pine, and Western Nevada. CattleWomen across the state may also partner with the Nevada Beef Council in funding beef promotion activities.

We have seen big changes with our national affiliate ANCW, as many of their national programs have either been dropped or altered over the last couple years. This year ANCW was funded this year to promote beef in new ways with a focus on the millennial genera-tion. Their new focus for 2014 is the M3 - “Moms, Millennials, and More” Plan of Work. The goals and objectives in this 2014 plan include:

• Improve domestic consumer preference for beef - through retail beef sampling promotions, campus beef promotion events, Mom’s day on the farm events, and metropolitan cooking shows.

• Develop and execute creative communication initiatives (e.g. social media) to improve confidence and preference for beef - through quarterly Twitter chats (Twitter parties), content and contests on Instagram and Pinterest.

• Strengthen image of beef and the beef industry - through a national k-12 education research project and the National Beef Ambassador program.

ANCW is on the forefront of addressing the changing demographics of the Millennial Moms out there and as such is not currently running a Na-tional Beef Cook-off this year, but rather recipe contests on Pinterest. Increased focus is being put on social media and getting recipes to consumers through those social media outlets, including developing strong ties with food bloggers with large audiences.

With all these changes at the ANCW level, Nevada CattleWomen Inc. is changing their focus just a bit as well. We have reinstated the Nevada Beef Ambassador contest, and our senior winner - Ashley Buckingham, from Para-dise Valley is doing an excellent job! ANCW and Bayer Animal Health provided Nevada CattleWomen with edu-cational books about raising cattle from the Chaney Twins Series. With the help of local CattleWomen, these books have been read to school children and donated to libraries across the state. Also, in September, Nevada CattleWom-en and our Nevada Beef Ambassador will be participating in a two-day beef promotion event at Sam’s Club in Reno. It is nice to see our organization getting back to retail promotions like we used to do with Costco many years ago when I first got involved with CattleWomen.

Nevada CattleWomen recently partnered with our State Beef Ambassador and Elko County CattleWomen to promote beef at the Ruby Mountain Relay in Elko County,

August 8-9. This 184-mile relay race around the Ruby Mountains draws about 500 run-ners and volunteers from Nevada, Utah, and surrounding areas. The “I Love Beef” team of 12 beef-loving runners won the race for female teams. Through Ashley’s efforts, each participant (including volunteers) received a cooking with beef brochure, bumper sticker, and beef stick provided by Elko County CattleWomen. Ashley had a booth set up at one of the major exchange points educating racers about their protein choices during their athletic pursuits. She had great conversations about beef with many racers throughout the event. It was an excellent promotion opportunity and is similar to the many Beef Council-sponsored running teams that several states have. Future goals for this type of promotion would be to have runners and volunteers promoting beef at similar races in the Reno and Las Vegas urban centers.

Our future goals will be to continue to work with ANCW to implement their M3 Program and more of their events here in Nevada. We look forward to developing a close relationship with the new Nevada Department of Agriculture Literacy Coordinator, Amber Smyer, to continue our efforts in youth education. Also, if you haven’t tried Twitter yet, I’d like to give you a major incentive. ANCW did a Twitter party called #Let Him Eat Beef for Father’s Day this year. During this one-hour Twitter party they achieved 7,095 Tweets with 257 participants, resulting in 11.6 million impressions! The next Twitter party will occur August 27 and I’ll be letting members know how to participate when I have a final hashtag name. There will be another Twitter party in September as well. Setting up a Twit-ter account is very easy and you can make a huge impact through this form of social media.

For 2014 we have a couple fundraising efforts we are doing to help cover the costs as-sociated with the Beef Ambassador and beef promotion activities. CattleWomen are selling raffle tickets for a $500 cash prize. Tickets are $5 a piece or five tickets for $20. The prize will be drawn at the state convention, November 3-5. Also, Z-tags is an ANCW sponsor and they have donated 300 custom ear tags for Nevada CattleWomen to silent auction. So far 200 tags have been purchased at the Humboldt County Fair and the Superior Livestock Auction. The last 100 tags will be available through silent auction at the State Convention. Please keep this in mind, as state convention is right around the corner!

Hopefully now that you know a little about our organization, you’ll want to join us, even if you can only do one event during the year. We have numerous opportunities for members to make a difference in consumer preferences for beef. Currently, to be a member you join a local group, and that also includes state and ANCW membership. Dues are $76 for Elko County and Humboldt County, $73 for Western Nevada CattleWomen, and $71 for White Pine and Pershing County CattleWomen. Dues for collegiate or junior members

are discounted $40 from the listed amounts. You can contact me or your local Cattle-Women to get a membership form, or you can join through the Nevada Cattlemen’s Association membership dues form. We can make a difference together!

Nevada CattleWomenby Tracy Shane, President, Nevada CattleWomen

At Right: Nevada Beef Ambassador Ashley Buckingham educates Ruby Mountain Relay

runners about beef in an athlete’s diet during the race in Elko County, August 8-9.

Above: Twelve beef-loving ladies won the ladies division of the 2014 Ruby Mountain Relay and worked to improve perception of beef in the diets of athletes.


Meet the Nevada Department of Agriculture Communications and Promotions Team

By Amanda K. Wartgow

In 2011, Jim Barbee became the director of the Nevada Department of Agriculture,

which had gone through the economic crash of 2009, and the ensuing budget cuts of the state organization. Since then, Barbee has helped to grow the Department’s marketing team to help advance Nevada’s agriculture. In January of 2013, the position of Inter-national Marketing Coordinator was filled by Jeff Sutich. Soon after, the legislature approved and funded several more positions in order to form a more rounded and ideal team consisting of the International Marketing Coordinator, a Public Infor-mation Officer, an Information and Education Officer, and an Agriculture Literacy Coordinator. Additionally, two interns from the University of Nevada, Reno joined the team, and as of March 2014, the team was completely hired.

Although very new to the Nevada Department of Agriculture, the team does not lack in experience.

Dr. Bob Conrad, the Public Information Officer, was previously the Director of Market-ing and Communications at the University of Nevada, Reno, College of Agriculture, Biotech-nology and Natural Resources from 2000-2006. This experience helped Dr. Conrad with the role of University research and the connections to education and agriculture that wouldn’t have been possible with his more urban background.

“I’m ‘new’ to ag; I hadn’t really been a part of it until that point,” he says. This also put him in a position to be a part of Nevada agriculture and what the industry had been through over the last few decades.

Jeff Sutich is the International Marketing Coordinator. Sutich worked as an economist for the Nevada Department of Employment, Train-ing, and Rehabilitation, as well as a global trade specialist for the Nevada Governor’s Office of Economic Development, before joining the Department of Agriculture team. Sutich fo-cuses on helping expand the Nevada food and agriculture sectors’ export sales internation-ally by assisting companies with their international business plans and market research. Additionally, Sutich helps inform companies of the benefits of expanding or relocating to Nevada.

“Nevada is an upcoming competitor in the food and agriculture global market place,” he says. “Our companies have huge potential in expanding their businesses by accessing it. There is global demand for U.S. food and agriculture products, and I’m excited to see our companies take part of the market share. Even if you’re a small company, it doesn’t hurt to diversify into additional markets.”

Tatjana Vukovic is the Agriculture Information and Education Officer. Her profes-sional history includes working in the Department of Employment Training and Rehabili-tation’s Governor’s Workforce Solution Unit, and doing research for Governor’s Office of of Economic Development. Her background helped to familiarize her with agricultural industries as well as the research component.

“Agriculture is a misrepresented industry in Nevada, and you can find information on almost any other industry except agriculture, and that is one of the challenges that I really like – to be able to collect that information and put it into some meaningful way to present why agriculture is so important to Nevada,” she says.

Mackenzie Campbell, a student at the University of Nevada, Reno, is the Department’s intern from the Western United States Agriculture Trade Association (WUSATA), an as-sociation that matches companies with markets abroad. She is graduating next year with a Business degree.

Amber Smyer is the Agriculture Literacy Coordinator. She received her Bachelor’s degree in Agriculture Education and has a Master’s degree in Public Affairs. Her emphasis is on education and outreach to help the public and youth understand the importance of agriculture.

“My background is in agriculture and education, so this was the perfect mix that al-

lowed me to stay in an industry that I love and that I am passionate about. It’s exciting to come together as a team to creatively and collaboratively promote, train and educate on Nevada food and agriculture,” she says.

The team as a whole shares a strong belief that the general public is disconnected from where their food comes from. As Conrad explains, “we are not really educated as a society to be literate in agriculture because we are so far removed from the food that we eat,” and his hope is to start to bridge that knowledge gap in Nevada’s urban areas.

One of the new programs that this team has released is titled “Buy Nevada.” At its basic level, it is a merchandise branding program, but really it is so much more than that. What the team wanted to accomplish was to build a database of all the organizations and operations involved in Nevada agriculture.

They feature products that are grown, processed, distributed, and sold in the state. It is almost like a roadmap of products from where they were grown, to where they were

processed, to where they were sold. Buy Nevada offers several memberships for producers the first of which is bronze, which is a free membership that includes a listing on their website buynevada.org.

The membership goes up to gold and plati-num, which entail more advertising such as pro-motional videos, and as Campbell says, the team will “shamelessly” promote their products at any event they attend. This program not only benefits those involved in Nevada agriculture but also its consumers. It provides a one-stop shop as to where to find Nevada products in your area. This program is not built on the buy local or organic movement but rather on Nevada’s entire food and agriculture sectors – whether sold in state or abroad. It truly shows how far Nevada reaches.

The latest outreach event for the marketing team was Sutich, Smyer and Conrad attended the

Clark County fair. They were working on the ground trying to promote Nevada agriculture businesses and organizations.

“We’re pretty beat right now,” says Conrad while taking a sip of his black coffee, talk-ing about working multiple 16-hour days straight. Their recent trip to the Clark Country Fair was one example of how they promoted Nevada organizations.

Conrad explains that everyone from the “local foodie” to the “buy American” type seemed impressed with the idea of the “Buy Nevada” program and the benefits to the consumer. By default, this in turn helped to promote all organizations within the program, leading people to the website to see for themselves where they can buy Nevada products and learn about operations within the state.

Another new promotion from this team is the new Nevada Agriculture license plate design. The idea was to create a plate that was more inclusive of all who would like to promote Nevada products, not just those within the agriculture community. If you buy the plate, half of the proceeds go to Nevada FFA and the other half go to the Nevada Depart-ment of Agriculture to promote Nevada agriculture.

One area they would like to improve is the documentation of Nevada agriculture. The team would like to focus on the collection of data in order to gain a better understanding of agriculture within the state. Once that data is collected, they can sculpt it into something that can be used to educate the public. Smyer, the Agriculture Literacy Coordinator, will be working with the Farm Bureau and agriculture in the classroom to create a program to do just that – educate the public on Nevada agriculture.

The Nevada Department of Agriculture has been placed in more of an outreach role, at least more so than in recent decades due to the negative impact the economy had on University extension and other agriculture programs. This in turn promoted the strong emphasis on this team and their contributions towards the promotion of Nevada agriculture. With the support they have received from the state, this newly formed team seems well equipped to potentially change the public’s view of Nevada and the state’s progress in the agriculture arena.


buynevada.org

buynevada.org

Nevada Farm Bureau

Supporting GMOs: Nevada Farm Bureau’s Perspective on Genetic Modification

By James “Hank” Combs, President, Nevada Farm BureauOne of the recent hot topics in the political community

is labeling of products containing genetically modified or-ganisms also known as GMOs. I’d like to take use of this month’s column to discuss GMOs, the misconceptions surrounding this form of agriculture and the negative effect labeling these products would have on our state agriculture industry.

GMO DefinitionGMOs are plants, which have been genetically engi-

neered with desirable traits from other plants. In simple terms that means these plants contain genes from other plants that make them easier to grow and safer for the con-sumer to eat. In reality, the process is taking a naturally occurring event and speeding it up in a workshop. So why do farmers use GMOs if there is push back from media and other groups? It is a no-brainer. GMOs help reduce yield loss and crop damage from weeds, disease, insects and extreme weather conditions like the drought we face here in Nevada. On top of that, these plants also help reduce the need for pesticides and help save plants that may otherwise become completely eliminated by disease.

Misconceptions ExaminedDespite the overwhelming benefits associated with

GMOs for both the farmer and the consumer, GMO op-ponents continue to foster a variety of misconceptions leading consumers to question their food sources. So what are opponents saying? They claim that GMOs will lead to potential health risks and GMO crops will create super bugs due to overuse of pesticides. In reality, neither claim is true. According to independent expert Gregory Conko, it takes an average of five to ten years to develop and test a GMO

crop for consumer and environmental safety. This process is followed by an additional two to four years of review by the Food and Drug Administration, Department of Agriculture and Environmental Protection Agency. Aside from being safer than conventional crops in most cases, GMOs also require fewer pesticides than traditional crops. According to the Genetic Literacy Project, the use of GMOs has helped eliminate the need for 521,000 pounds of pesticides each year in the United States. This reduction is due largely to the ability of GMOs to combat insects without the need for insecticides.

Why We Oppose LabelingThe American Farm Bureau Federation, the Nevada

Farm Bureau Federation and the majority of American farm-ers and ranchers oppose labeling of GMOs for a few simple reasons. First, labeling could create unnecessary fear among general consumers who do not understand the benefits of GMOs. Fear from consumers could drastically affect their demand for food products, forcing farmers and ranchers out of business. GMO labeling also does nothing to inform consumers about the actual ingredients in food products. Currently, the Food and Drug Administration monitors all GMOs in the United States. Their practices inform consum-ers if GMOs do not contain the same levels of nutrients as conventional plants, which in more than 20 years of studies has never been the case.

At the Nevada Farm Bureau, member-driven policy helps to shed light on why GMO labeling is opposed. Ac-cording to Policy 115 – Agriculture Industry, “All forms of agricultural production are important to Nevada.” We support all agriculture, including the use of GMOs because

they provide a livelihood for hardworking farmers and ranchers and these crops help feed our state’s consumers. In addition, Policy 167 – Regulations states that “Farm Bureau supports a reduction in government regulations to allow agricultural producers to focus on their business and operate efficiently without undue government interference.” A GMO labeling initiative on the state government level would affect the ability of many of our farmers and ranchers to operate efficiently and to make a profit in the agriculture industry.

The next step for you as members of the agriculture community is to help educate the public about GMOs. Use resources like GMOAnswers.com to show your friends, family and neighbors that GMOs are safe and the only option to feed our growing population. Inform consumers about the negative effects of labeling and they may in turn share their new knowledge with others.

Heritage Foundation Awards Three Scholarships

to Post-Secondary Education Students

SPARKS, NV — The Nevada Heritage Foundation announced today that three students currently pursuing post-secondary education will each receive a $1,000 scholarship this fall.

The foundation awarded Francisco Chavez, Kelsie Leas and Kaley Sproul the 2014 Continuing Education Scholar-ship. All three students are originally from Clark County, Nev. Chavez attends the University of Nevada, Reno, study-ing agricultural science, Leas is pursuing a degree in animal science at Sam Houston University and Sproul is studying agriculture at Great Basin College.

“We are excited to assist these three outstanding indi-viduals. We strive to promote agriculture and supporting our upcoming agriculturists is one of the best ways to reach this goal,” said Nevada Heritage Foundation President Jill Combs.

Each year, the scholarship is awarded to students cur-rently enrolled in either traditional or non-traditional post-secondary programs. Students must be from a Farm Bureau member family and preference is given to students pursuing career goals in agriculture or the agri-business industry.

The scholarship is paid for by generous donations to the Nevada Heritage Foundation. The Nevada Heritage Foun-dation is the non-profit associated with the Nevada Farm Bureau Federation through which individuals can donate to scholarships and programs such as Ag in the Classroom and the Young Farmers & Ranchers. Interested individuals can send donations to the Nevada Heritage Foundation at 2165 Green Vista Drive, Suite 205, Sparks, Nev. 89431.

For more information about the scholarship recipients and the Nevada Heritage Foundation, visit nvfb.org

Dave Fulstone II Scholarship Winners are AnnouncedSPARKS, NV — The 2014 Dave Fulstone II Schol-

arship committee announced today the awarding of two scholarships to Taylor Kelton and Whitney Weaver. The Dave Fulstone II Scholarship is awarded each year in honor of David Fulstone II.

Fulstone was a past president of the Nevada Farm Bu-reau. He dedicated his life to the well-being of Nevada ag-riculture and was passionate in his support of a sustainable agriculture industry in Nevada. He never feared tackling the tough issues or facing strong opponents in defense of the agriculture industry and producers.

The scholarship committee provided financial assis-tance to Kelton and Weaver because they exemplified those characteristics that Fulstone possessed.

Kelton is a recent graduate of Yerington High School. During high school, she was an active member of the FFA, the high school dance team, cross country, National Honor Society and student government. She also is a member of the California Junior Hereford Association. This fall, Kelton plans to study pre-law at the University of Nevada, Reno after which she plans to attend law school and become an agriculture lawyer.

Weaver is a recent graduate of Douglas High School.

During high school, she was the president of her local FFA chapter, part of the swimming and diving team and a member of numerous clubs. She is currently the 2014-2015 Nevada FFA State President. This fall, Whitney plans to study agriculture science at the University of Nevada, Reno and then to transfer to Texas A&M to study agricultural microbiology.

The Dave Fulstone II Scholarship is awarded to stu-dents graduating from accredited high schools in Nevada who plan to further their education in a course of study pertaining to agriculture. Successful applicants are students who best portray the ability to be successful in their post secondary education and exhibit the potential to give back to the agriculture industry by completing their studies.

The scholarship is paid for by generous donations to the scholarship account managed by the Nevada Heritage Foundation. The Nevada Heritage Foundation is the non-profit associated with the Nevada Farm Bureau Federation through which individuals can donate to scholarships and programs such as Ag in the Classroom.

For more information about the scholarship recipients and the Nevada Heritage Foundation, visit nvfb.org.


GMOAnswers.com

nvfb.org

nvfb.org

Well I had a great adventure in July. I pulled the tongue out of the wagon and had a runaway. Went to

Australia with my pard Trent Loos. It seems that the show called “Rural Routes”, has reached down under. We were invited to “lamb-expo” in Adelaide, South Australia. Trent gave a rousing speech about being pro-active in our struggles against the eco-terrorists, aka environmentalists, more affectionately called fern fairies or bunny huggers or vegetable terrorists. I got to judge the sixty-six entrees in the rack of lamb competition.

Yes that is right, sixty-six entrees in the competition. That would be the equivalent of five times the number of members of the Nevada Woolgrowers just competing for the best tasting lamb in South Australia. The expo issued eight hundred tickets and had over a thousand people wanting in. It was like a giant convention of rural folks amazingly; it was attended by area sheep producers and not the entire nation.

There are seventy three million sheep in Australia. By contrast there are now around five million sheep in America. This is down from a peak of sixty million sheep. The use of Arabian oil for clothing, “synthetics”, and the fact that the modern American house wife is working to help pay for the taxes and inflated prices caused by over regulation by the government, the house wife no longer knows much about cooking other than “take-out food”. The joke is if you wish to hide something from an American housewife, put it in the oven, she’ll never look there. Years ago people had sheep for food as they could butcher a sheep and use the meat before it spoiled, whereas without refrigeration a beef carcass was a lot harder to handle.

I went to a local supermarket and the lamb was more expensive than it is at Costco here in America. Branding in both the lamb and beef was similar. A lot of grass fed labeling and Angus or Waygu branding. The meat case was shared with kangaroo meat, however no labeling touted whether the roos were grass fed or not. The kangaroo is very prolific. We were told that a mother kangaroo is usually pregnant and has a “Joey” at her side and a “pouch Joey”. The kangaroos that I saw may cause a little heartburn if you had to head and heel them for branding. The heeler would have the biggest problem. Double hocking one could prove difficult.

Things were beautiful in the countryside. Green wheat fields and vineyards were everywhere. There were lots of rolling hills for sheep and cattle. The land was fenced and cross- fenced. One family would run several thousand sheep and a few hundred cattle without outside help, except during shearing. The government supports them by poisoning predators with 1080 to kill fox and dingoes. The thing that struck me was that there was lots of abandon farmsteads as consolidation has taken place there too. Another thing that seemed unique was that nearly every rural town and home had a cistern system on the roof for catching rainwater for house use including drinking water.

As Trent and I toured around we were struck by the total lack of pickups. Everybody drove little Toyota type trucks with flatbeds on the back. These were called “Utes”, short for utility vehicles. Lots of farmers used four wheelers or side by sides or motorbikes. Pickups were not to be seen. We asked what up. We were taken to a dealership for pickup trucks and a F350, was $155,000 for a plain Jane truck. No further questions on that subject.

The Australians are very friendly and the folks from rural Australia were salt of the earth people just like American rural folks. We are definitely separated by a com-mon language, English. We learned about ”blockies” and half “blockies”. This term is used when you miss your street and you either have to go around the block or half way around to get on the right street. They drive on the wrong side of the street as the steering wheels in their vehicles are on the wrong side. I figured it must be a factory mistake and they buy these vehicles for half price due to the mistake. Buying these vehicles cost less than regular vehicles with the steering wheels on the right side. It sure scares you driving and it really scares the Aussies when you drive where you are sup-posed to and they have to get out of your

way. When you get in the cabs, the cabbies look at you funny when you open the door and there they sit. I doubt that the cabbies have much trouble seeing that you are not a local. Everybody is “keen on it”, or “GA ‘day”, or “Cheers”. A “Pub” is a hotel not a bar. Nearly every hotel has a bar or two so that doesn’t matter but if you tell your friend from New Zealand that you will meet him in the pub he will set in the lobby of the hotel while you get falling down knee walking drunk in the bar.

The striking thing is the talk at the expo covered all the same problems we have here in America with the greenies. They even have the Green party in parliament. The people at the expo were giving away a puppy as a prize and the greenies picketed the expo as you are to adopt a pet that bonds with you and giving a puppy randomly

is not tolerated, as it may not be all right with the puppy. The greenies took the puppy and it had to be rescued from the loonies. American puppies that I have met bond rather rapidly to feeding and petting and watering. I guess Aussie pups are different? The greenies were taking issue with pasture lambing and other second-guessing of how animals were handled. They are down on muse ling. This is done to remove loose skin around the back end of a sheep to cut down on flies laying eggs in the moist wooly area causing maggots to kill or harm the sheep. As usual it is the animal owner who has the best ideas of how to protect the animals he owns from loss of thrift-ness or death not the bunny huggers. Without the accent or the difference in the language barrier we might have time warped to any conven-tion here in America.

The only bummer was that down under the days were at the shortest as it is winter and getting up at four in the morning when no one in the hotel is up irritates them as it is several hours to daylight. I got shipping fever coming home in the cattle car called an airliner and wound up in the chronic pen for a month. The good news is that I can’t be slaughtered for thirty days as of the antibiotic with drawl period and all. “CHEERS”, Hang and Rattle. Hank

by Hank Vogler

Fumes FROM THE Farm

Jason B. Land2213 N. 5th St. , Elko, NV 89801775-738-8811, 800-343-0077www.edwardjones.com

Call or Stop By!

Nevada!Happy 150th

It was like a giant

convention of rural folks

amazingly; it was attended

by area sheep producers

and not the entire nation.


www.edwardjones.com

Two thousand fourteen is Churchill County FFA’s eighty-sixth year as a bonafide chapter in good standing with National FFA Organization. The chapter currently

has approximately one hundred and sixty-five members that participate in a variety of sub-jects, from welding to plant science. All members have the opportunity to be involved with many community service projects and chapter activities throughout Churchill County. The leaders of Churchill County FFA are our officers that consist of Juniors and Seniors. Josey Moore, our Chapter President, along with Blane Merkley, Chapter Vice President, have specialized in Horticulture and Floriculture over the years. Our Chapter Secretary Trey McGowan along with Chapter Treasurer, Garrett Archuleta, are students that have worked their way up to advanced Agricultural Mechanical Engineering and Technology. The rest of the officer team consisting of Sadie Venturacci, Reporter, Morgan Morris, Sentinel, and Allyson Fulk, Historian, have completed Agriculture Science 1 and Agriculture Science 2 and are now focusing their studies on Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine.

The main goal of the chapter this year is to reinforce its strong community ties by pro-viding opportunities and experiences for students to contribute to the overall social well be-ing in the valley. The community being a priority has made the chapter a source of service to their fellow man (and woman) in several ways. Firstly, every first and third Sunday of the month FFA chapter members volunteer at the local Eagle’s Hall to help provide break-fast for community members and to assist the Fraternal Order of Eagles in hosting events. Next, is their twine recycling program which has recently changed from a fundraiser to one hundred percent volunteerism. The program drives around the valley collecting twine to lessen pollutants and to help farmers get rid of the nuisance. Another pride and joy of the chapter is providing assistance to Churchill County families in need in which members buy

2014-2015 Officer Team Front row left to right: Blane Merkley(VP), Sadie Venturacci(Rep), Josey Moore(Pres), Morgan Morris(Sent). Back row left to right: Trey McGowan(Sec), Garrett Archuleta(Treas), Allysen Fulk(Hist).

Nevada State FFA Champion Dairy Evaluation Team Left to right: Trey McGowan, Blane Merkley, Clay Mulder, and Garrett Archuleta

IT’S CHURCHILL FFA

What We Are All About

food, gifts, and decorations for Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Easter.Churchill County FFA has three main fundraisers that finance most of the travel that

the members do throughout the year across the state and nation like their state winning Dairy Evaluation team that will be competing at the National FFA Convention in Lou-isville, Kentucky at the end of October. The school district hay field which the chapter leases and the FFA advisors and members irrigate, cut, and bale with assistance from local businesses (2014: Hillside Dairy) is eventually sold to the prison farm in Carson City. Depending on the quality of the crop this hay will be fed either to their dairy cows or wild horses. Around the holiday season the chapter sells boxes of fresh fruit from Quail Valley Farms in Oregon as well as local honey donated to the chapter by Rau Bees to sell as a fundraiser.

Finally, Churchill County FFA members also participate in raising money to donate to a program called Heifer International in order to raise awareness of poverty and the lack of food security in third world countries. This program allows the chapter to choose animals based on the amount of the donation to send to impoverished villages where the people will be educated in how to best care for and utilize the animal for the food and fiber that it can provide them

Churchill County FFA would like to take this opportunity to invite all supporters to attend our annual Appreciation dinner at the Old High School Pit on October 3, 2014 @ 6 pm. If you have any questions feel free to contact Ms. Moore via email ([email protected]) or phone (775-423-2181 Ext 228).




Fallon Ranch Rodeo Stockdog Trial

Sponsors• Troy & Nicole

Adams Broken Arrow Horse & Cattle Company

• Berney Realty• Pinenut Livestock

Supply• Lee Stock Horses• Nevada Livestock

Marketing• B & P SilverSage

Express Ltd• Lisa Piccolotti• Billy Lewis

Stockdogs• High Desert

Emporium• TDL Industries

- Kelli & Darrell Laird

• Dave Booganic• Openshaw Saddlery

Beef SalesEvery Tuesday

Selling Stocker and Feeder CattleSlaughter Cows/Bulls

Sale-time: 9:00 AM

Round the clock yard service

JEROME, IDAHO

Call for consignment information

Offi ce: (208)324-4345 Dan Schiffl er: (208)539-4933

[email protected]

Open

Handler Dog Time Place

Shawn McGee Axel 5.33 1 $150

Intermediate


Elliot Roberts GS Chilli 5.00 1 $125

Steve Wight Levi 6.23 2 $75

Nursery


Brian Jacobs Brim 6.05 1 $125

Tom Blasedell Clicker 4.10 2 $75

Finals Open


Brian Jacobs Moose 8 1 $325.00

Brian Jacobs Toots 8 2 $195.00

Sean McGee Axel 8 3 $130.00

Finals Intermediate


Steve Wight Levi 8 1 $399.00

Elliott Robers GS Chilli 8 2 $332.50

John Minor Gunny 8 3 $266.00

Starr Schwoerer Johnny 8 4 $199.50

Paula Gow Jewel 8 5 $133.00

Finals Nursery


Tom Blasdell Clicker 6.58 1 $396.00

Kathy Garner Rango 8 2 $297.00

Brian Jacobs Brimm 8 3 $198.00

Tom Blasdell Nell 8 4 $99.00

Paula Gow Jewel 8 5 $133.00

Finals Cowboy Class


Tom Blasdell Clicker 5.59 1st $250

Fallon Ranch Rodeo Goat Branding6 & Under 2 teams

1st Gracie Laca Each received a check for $15,

A rope bag and rope.Reese LacaAvery Laca From Fallon

Kiara CrutcherEach received a ropeBrianna Sherburn

CJ Crutcdher From McDermitt

7 to 12 yr old 8 Teams

1st

Graycee Tibbals Each received a check for $30 , and a rope.Jaylee McEwen

Maddison Renfroe From Fallon

2nd

Jett Black Each received a check for $20 , and a rope.Kole Black

Jayden Jensen Winnemucca/Fallon

3rd

Jett BlackEach received a check for $10Kole Black

Ali Norcutt Winnemucca / Fallon

The First Annual Fallon Ranch Rodeo Stockdog Trial was held at the Churchill County Fairgrounds August 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, in conjunction with the Churchill Country Fair and Ranch Rodeo.

“For a new event to turn out the spectators and also have them happy and asking for more, I’d say the show was a great success,”

said Leana Stitzel.Dogs and handlers came from Nevada, Idaho, Oregon and

California.The stockdog trial and the goat branding were managed by

Billy Lewis and Gayle Hybarger.

Left to Right: Tom Blasdell, Billy Lewis, John Minor, and Kevin Hancock

Tom Blasdell and Clicker, overall

winner of all stockdog trials at the Fallon Ranch

Rodeo

— Leana Stitzel Photos —


By Jill Scofield, Nevada Beef Council

If you read the current Nevada Beef Council (NBC) update in this issue of The Progressive Rancher (see pages 24-25),

you’ll see that there are a number of beef promotions and educa-tional activities planned for this fall. And many of them highlight the convenience factor when it comes to cooking with beef.

When it comes to the millennial audience in particular, conve-nience is especially important because it is one of three main con-

siderations (along with flavor and cost) for the millennial shopper when planning a meal.

There are a some other patterns that reflect millennial shoppers, all of which help both the NBC and the beef industry as a whole plan marketing and educational efforts that not only communicate the right message, but reach this important audience in the right way.

Millennials are attentive shoppers. Although cost is an important factor (and with current prices, can be a detriment for beef), millennials in particular will not compromise on quality. They recognize the differ-ence between “affordable” and “cheap,” and are willing to pay more for the qualities of a product they deem important.

What’s more, millennials are more willing to buy a brand because they support a specific cause, and are more likely to spend more on goods and services that give back to society in some way. As a specific example, 60 percent are also willing to pay more for a product if it’s good for the environment, according to Rudy Bozas of Polvara Advertising.

Millennials already like beef, but need more information about it. Like other generations, millennials generally like beef. According to John Lundeen of the National Cattleman’s Beef Association, when you look at the overall scope of “beef-eating occasions,” millennials repre-sent 40 percent, while Boomers represent 31 percent and Gen Xers just 29 percent. So comparatively, millennials make up the largest share of beef-eating occasions.

Despite that, the millennial generation still lacks confidences when it comes to beef. It bears repeating that 75 percent would like more in-formation about steaks and how to cook and prepare them, 55 percent would like more information on preparing and serving beef to children, and 54 percent say it is hard to know what cuts to choose in the meat case.

It’s more than just food. The millennial audience places a lot of importance in the social aspect of food. Five out of 10 consider them-selves “foodies,” 92 percent of them consider cooking an art, and they see food as a form of self-expression and entertainment. What’s more, the millennial audience is the most culturally and ethnically diverse than any before it, so cooking with flavors and methods that are reflective of those cultural and ethnic backgrounds is important to this generation.

This multicultural element is also a factor in how this generation seeks its information. While social media and the internet in general are hugely important sources of information (more on that later), mul-ticultural millennials also have strong ties to the recipes of their home country, and their family members (especially older generations such as parents and grandparents) are important food influencers.

Always wanting to know more. Millennials want to know a lot about where their food comes from. Beef production tends to be an area of concern for them, yet is something they generally need more informa-tion about. For example, consider the following response rates by mil-lennials to the question, “what percentage of ranches are family farms?”

• 52 percent answered that 37 percent of ranches are family farms.

• 32 percent answered with 67 percent of ranches.

• 14 percent answered with 87 percent of ranches.• Just 3 percent of respondents answered that 97 percent of

ranches are family farms – the correct answer.

Where do millennials get their information?As we’ve shared previously, 70 percent of millennials go first to

the internet for information on anything – including beef. And when it comes to food, millennials conduct over 5 million food-related searches in just one day! Based on national trends, the top 10 most reliable sources of information about food for millennial parents (an especially important audience for the NBC) are:

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

On food and cooking blogs

Pediatricians

Social media (posts on Facebook, Pinterest, etc.)

USDA

Cooking and lifestyle magazines

Websites with health information

TV cooking or food shows

Talking to family and friends

Websites with recipes

I recently asked Nevada’s own Beef Ambassador Ashley Buck-ingham if this information rings true with her and her peers – who are, after all, millennials. While data and studies are very helpful, sometimes validating that information with a few anecdotal examples helps clarify even further.

Ashley shared that she, too, looks to her parents and grandparents for tips about cooking. She also shared that social media is a huge source, particularly Pinterest when it comes to cooking and recipes. And, like other millennials, she uses her phone to access online information far more frequently than her computer.

For Ashley and her peers, convenience is key because of the hectic lifestyle of a college student, coupled with the fact that cooking tools are relatively limited for this demographic. For the older millennial – one who potentially has children and is establishing a household – conve-nience is just as important, but for different reasons, such as juggling family and career priorities.

This information, combined with the other updates on millennials that have been shared in the past few issues of The Progressive Rancher, confirms why it’s so important to meet this generation where it lives and finds information: online. The social media engagement, online target marketing and sharing of information and infographics that are easily downloadable on mobile devices that the Nevada Beef Council and the Beef Checkoff focus on are based on this research and evidence that shows this era of online engagement is far more effective at reaching the millennial audience than perhaps television and print advertising were for previous generations.

What’s more, reaching this audience with messaging that focuses on the ease of cooking beef, meals using fewer dishes, new recipes, and information on beef cuts helps address areas that consumers are eager to explore and learn more about. Through an integrated approach that engages consumers directly with us and beef producers, we are striving to not just communicate messages about Nevada’s beef community, but prompt new thinking about beef.

In the Mind of a Millennial, Part V

TIPSFrom Ashley:

Sharing Beef Information

When it comes to disseminating information

about beef, Ashley Buckingham has learned a few things in her role as

Nevada’s Beef Ambassador. Here are her suggestions

for where to go to for good information about beef– and share it with others!

BeefItsWhatsForDinner .com

A site created by the Beef Checkoff that is chock full of delicious recipes, nutrition

information, and great tips for choosing and preparing beef.

Social MediaUse the Nevada Beef

Council and Beef Checkoff Facebook pages, Twitter

feeds and Pinterest sites to disseminate great tips (and

bust a few myths about beef production too).

Don’t forget the Nevada Beef Council is a resource for events and conversations as well. If you need materials, recipes, nutrition information

or even just help crafting talking points for an event or presentation you have about beef, use your Beef

Council as a resource!

49%

35%

35%

33%

20%

15%

14%

12%

12%


American Ranching at RiskBy Katie Marvel DeLong

In the United States, a person is innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the accuser. This is known as presumption of innocence. But... what if the reverse were true? What if everything you’ve worked for your entire life, all your parents and grand-parents had worked for, your retirement, savings, assets, home and children’s future could vanish at the whim of a government official’s decision based only on his own findings and opinion? Now the burden of proof is on you. A presumption of guilt ensues.

One might think this could not happen in America. Wrong. This is exactly what hap-pens to many ranchers grazing livestock on public land managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). In this bureaucratic system, one person’s decision can destroy lives.

A district manager for the BLM has the power with a stroke of the pen to take every-thing a rancher has by closing a grazing allotment to all livestock. He can do this without accountability, acknowledgment of private property rights, or unbiased third party review prior to his decision.

The burden of proof to reopen the grazing allotment falls on the shoulders of the rancher who might exhaust his finances in lengthy court battles against an opponent with infinite resources and limitless spending capabilities thanks to your tax-payer dollars. Meanwhile, the rancher must sell off his cattle as his grazing land has become inaccessible. He is forced to go out of business and faces financial ruin.

Yes, this is happening in America, land of the free and home of the brave. How can this be fair? These are Americans. Every man, woman, and child on a ranch in the US would answer with a resounding, “Yes!” if asked, “Are you a hard-working American?” This small subculture of America believes in God, family, and the American way. How can we turn our backs on these people?

Nonetheless, BLM policies and ineffective practices continue to wreak havoc on those ideals. Along with removal of cattle from rangeland and grazing allotment closures, these practices include BLM’s continued failure to meet their own standards for wild horse population numbers and management. In addition, propaganda from misinformed envi-ronmental and animal rights groups, wild horse advocates, and the Endangered Species Act continue to cause financial hardship, put ranchers out of business, and destroy hard-working American families.

With less than 2% of the US population producing food, no room exists for downsiz-ing. By 2050, the world population is projected to grow from 7 billion to 9 billion, and food production will need to double in order to keep pace. Anyone who likes to eat or feed their family, should be concerned.

It is well-known that American ranchers produce some of the safest and highest-qual-ity beef in the world. Unless more Americans want to feel the pangs of hunger or consume lower-quality, imported beef and other foods, they must stand firm with US ranchers and farmers.

Recently in a case in northern Nevada, near the town of Battle Mountain, BLM Dis-trict Manager, Doug Furtado, issued seven Full Force and Effect Decisions completely closing allotments to all cattle grazing, including allotments consisting of as much as 97% privately-owned land. Recovery for drought conditions were the basis of his decisions. However, as a May 17 tour of the allotments showed, recent spring rains have grass growth as much as 16 inches in many places. In addition, Intermountain Range Consultants from Winnemucca, Nevada, completed extensive scientific analysis of rangelands and concluded normal conditions capable of sustaining livestock. Without cattle grazing to control growth, wildfire is likely to run rampant devastating rangeland habitat and wildlife in the area.

Unlike the recent Cliven Bundy case in southern Nevada, permittees in the Battle Mountain District have (like the majority of ranchers across the country) always paid their grazing fees. They have worked with BLM employees to reduce their cattle numbers to compensate for drought conditions and maintain rangeland health and sustainability. This is their livelihood in question.

Actions such as allotment closures devastate ranching families with generations of experience. The Nevada ranching heritage of my children proudly spans six generations on both sides of the family, even ranching on the same mountain range on their father’s side. This is not profound or unusual in any way. In fact, generational ranching is the norm throughout the industry. For the permittees in the Battle Mountain area, it is no different.

Many ranchers today have college degrees. More importantly, they have generations of experience to back their management decisions. They are experts in caring for the land and effectively managing their livestock to best maintain the health of the range. These people have earned respect for their knowledge and effective land use practices.

In Nevada, over 80% of the state is public land managed under federal regulations by agencies such as the BLM or Forest Service. Even so, ranchers own the vast majority of water rights and grazing rights associated with that land. Both of which are valid private-

property rights. Chains of title and documented historical range use verify cattle grazing for more than 100 years on most Nevada rangeland. These documents confirm lengthy precedents of use for livestock grazing- long before the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 or establishment of the BLM.

In the Battle Mountain case, action to close allotments was taken by BLM District Manager, Doug Furtado, without regard to the advice of his own staff, historical land use, or private-property rights. He did not consider rancher knowledge and input, recognize effective cattle-grazing for fire suppression, or acknowledge cattle as established members of rangeland ecosystems. When non-elected government representatives have the power to disregard common sense and destroy families by actions such as these, all Americans suffer. Although many BLM district managers and others diligently work with ranchers and effectively manage the range for multiple use including livestock grazing, accountability must take place for those that do not.

After the rash actions of BLM District Manager, Doug Furtado, ranchers and sup-porters demonstrated their constitutional right of protest by signing a petition asking for accountability with the removal of Furtado from his position. Beginning on Memorial Day in Elko, the petition (with over 1000 signatures) was carried across the state of Nevada in a Pony Express relay of horseback riders for over 300 miles. On Friday, May 30, about 40 horseback riders, a horse-drawn wagon, and an additional 50 or more supporters meet at the Capitol Building in Carson City. Nevada Governor, Brian Sandoval, accepted the petition and vowed support for Nevada’s ranchers by voicing their concerns to the high-est office in the federal agency. Copies of the petition were sent to Nevada’s Senators and Representatives.

Americans cannot look the other way. This is a call for to all to stand firm with US ranchers and farmers. Support those that produce the safest and highest-quality food in the world. Protect all constitutional and private-property rights. Demand accountability and common-sense in government regulation and authority. Believe in the American way, and never falter. Ben Franklin said during the American Revolution which still rings true today, “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”

— 600 Black Heifers —AI’d with Angus bulls Final Answer 2 and Cedar Ridge

(both calving ease)

Will ultrasound June 2nd. For sale immediately after.


The Eureka Gymkhana was held on August 7, 2014 at the Eureka Fairgrounds. There were 50 contestants in three age divisions. The Eureka Gymkhana would like to thank the Eureka County Fair Board, Eureka County Building & Grounds, Eureka Road Department, Local EMT’s, Mark, Amy, Deanna and Beth Damele, Sherri Wilker, John Etchegaray, Jeremy Auch, Chanlie Larsen, Darla Baumann, Stacy Halpin, Brandi and Taylor An-derson and Cathy Neal. We would also like to thank all the parents, grandparents and family members who helped the kids with their horses and took the time to bring them to the event. We look forward to another successful event next year.

All Around (7 & under)1st Place – Eyer Morrison2nd Place – Olen Morrison3rd Place – Hannah Bliss4th Place – Trent Conley5th /6th Place – Ellie

Slagowski & Eli Lancaster7th /8th Place – JT Gorecki &

Ashlyn Ramos

All Around (8-11)1st Place – Breyana Miller2nd Place – Kyra Todd3rd Place – Kole Black 4th Place – Khloe Keppner5th Place – Jette Black6th Place – Jake Baumann

All Around (12-16)1st Place –Catherine Odgers2nd Place – LeAnna McNeff3rd Place – Garrett Todd4th Place – Katie Damele5th Place – Cody Gibbs6th Place – Shayla Bagley

Hi Point: Catherine Odgers & Eyer Morrison

Eureka County Fair Bulls and Broncs 2014 produced by Outlaw Broncs, Jess and Katie Jones.

Bronc Riding1st/2nd - Clayton Souza and JD Brock split 1st/2nd with

a 76 point ride3rd/4th - Dustin Borba and Justin de Braga split 3rd/4th

with a 74 point ride

Steer StoppersBea Venable - 1st, Abby Estes - 2nd, Tess Turk - 3rd

Bulls won in Eureka this year (no qualified riders). Jeff Snook, bull contractor took home the prize buckle for his bull scoring best. The prize money was divided between contrac-tors, Jeff Snook, Stace Drayton (contractors), Bud Bentley the Bullfighter and the pickup men Brad Weaver and Tony Jardine.

MENS Time1st: Jackson/Mori ——————— 4:41:40

John Jackson, Russ Jackson, Michael Mori, Pete Mori2nd: C Ranches ———————— 5:07:60

Steve Miller, Luke Lancaster, Zach Bunyard, Rosie Mitchell, 3rd: Venturacci Livestock 5:22:62Daniel Venturacci, Fred Bailey, Gary Garaventa, Beau Buchanan

4th: Lee Stock Horses ————— 5:40:62Kenny Lee, Flint Lee, Steve Gorden, Clay Gorden

5th: Triangle E Ranch ————— 5:44:79Ira Renner, Peter Scott, Dan Rinaldo, Pete Peters

WOMENS Time1st: Damele Girls ——————— 8:41:47

Emily Damele, Deanna Damele, Beth Damele, Katie Damele

2nd: Tuscareka ———————— 9:17:12Rhonda Garaventa, Danielle Jackson, Renee Jackson, Andrea Sestanovich

3rd: Denim N Diamonds ———— 9:26:31Bea Venable, Natalie Norcutt, Kathy Wines, Rachel Buzzetti

COED Time1st: Northern Nevada ————— 5:41:53

Michael Mori, Abra Snow, Kelsea Krenka, John Jackson2nd: Lee Stock Horses ————— 5:47:03

Kenny Lee, Flint Lee, Tammy Lee, Bea Venable3rd: Buzzetti/Wines —————— 6:32:71

Rachel Buzzetti, Kathy Wines, Andy Wines, Sam Wines4th: Currant Creek —————— 6:51:19

Jesse Norcutt, Natalie Norcutt, Clay Norcutt, Beth Damele5th: Souza Family ——————— 7:15:60

Jerry Souza, Karen Souza, Clayton Souza, Stephanie Souza

August 7 - 10, 2014Eureka, Nevada

Gymkhana Bronc and Bull Riding

Team Branding

Submitted Photos


nsbank.com I 54 years in Nevada

50 branches statewide

*Loans subject to credit approval, restrictions apply.

From operating lines and equipment fi nancing to livestock purchases and real estate, we have supported Nevada’s farmers and ranchers for over half a century. That knowledge and experience is personifi ed by John Hays, our agricultural banking specialist. He’ll come to you, and will get to work fi nding the right fi nancial solutions,* so you can plan, prepare, and grow. Bring your banking home.

A specialized industry deserves our specialized attention.

John Hays, Agricultural Banking Specialist

775.525.6744


It has been said that: “To be given the responsibility to do a job but not the authority to do it is one definition of Hell,” says Ken Jones of

Lamoille, Nevada who has a BLM allotment south and west of Spruce Moun-tain in Elko County. He adds: “The agency should be allowed to remove excess horses from the ranges, but though the personnel on the ground know the horses are destroying their own habitat and, in some cases starving and dying of water deprivation, they say Congress and the BLM office in Washington will not give them the means to deal with the problem; so instead, they remove cattle to try to maintain the integrity of the range and continue to monitor the deterioration of the resource.”

J.J. Goicoechea, Eureka County Commissioner and Nevada Land Action Association (NLAA) president, says that,, “…When the Appropriations Rider was removed a few years ago allowing the BLM to sell excess and unadoptable horses it was ‘direction’ from D.C. office’ that did not allow that to happen.... We can’t gather horses from range in need of rest if there is no holding capacity for the horses if the money is spent on horse hospice. It is not just a Congressional problem. It is an institutional problem that has roots deep within the very agency charged with management of the horses and the land. Until this is changed, future Congressional attempts at relief will quite possibly be ignored or manipulated in similar manner to those that came before.”

Jones has a winter/spring permit. His cattle use the allotment from November through April. They are off the range until the following fall. Since Highway 93 bisects the allotment, Jones uses the range on one side of the highway and rests the other side. Since the implementation of the Wild Horse and Burro Act, wild horse numbers have multiplied dramatically. And whereas they used to be found on the fringes of his allotment, they now graze in large numbers throughout the heart of his range year round, year after year. As a result, some years when it is time for Jones to turn out in the fall the forage has not had a chance to recover through the summer and by November the horses have eaten it down to allowable utilization levels before the cattle get there.

Early this last July, the BLM announced it will remove fewer wild horses and burros from the range across the west this year in comparison to previous years because of budget restraints and overflowing holding pens. It will gather 2,400 animals starting September 30. Of that number, only 285 will be taken from Ne-vada. According to the BLM’s own website, as of July 30, 2014 the bureau itself estimates 40,815 horses roam free on public rangelands in 10 western states and more than half of them in Nevada. The number of feral horses and burros the agency has determined can exist in balance with other resources for these states is 18,315. Current population exceeds this number by 123% or 22,500 animals.

According to an Elko Daily Free Press column by Thomas Mitchell on July 2 of this year, “More than 60 percent of the BLM’s (taxpayer money) $70 million annual budget is consumed by warehousing the animals in corrals, one of the larg-est in Palomino Valley near Reno.”

The Wild, Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of 1971 does not forbid the agency to destroy or sell excess horses, but horse activist organizations used taxpayer money to bring lawsuits to stop any common sense management option.

To qualify for the Premium Nutrition Network, supplementation with an Anipro-approved mineral/vitamin supplement must begin within 75-days

postpartum and must be fed until the calf is weaned.

Anipro & Xtraformance Feeds have created aValue-Added Opportunity

for Cow/Calf Producers

For details, or to enroll your calves, contact Jake Franke (806-683-3285)[email protected]

The Premium Nutrition Network is…

» Expanded marketing alternatives

» Increased value of calf crops through enhanced health and nutrition

» Assistance in building a reputable calf crop that is buyer-demanded every year

» Improved cow-herd health through improved supplementation strategies

» An opportunity to gain feedyard close-out and carcass data

PremiumNutritionNetwork.com

Find us at the Western Video Auction in Reno or the Superior Livestock Auction in Winnemucca!

by Mary Branscomb and Ken Jones


As late as the 1970s, Nevada’s feral horse herds were kept at healthy levels by ranchers who managed the herds at no expense to the taxpayer. No one, ranchers or sportsmen, wants the feral horses to disappear completely.

Dan Zvirzdin the BLM range specialist assigned to the Valley Mountain allot-ment said he had feared that the white sage may not recover before this year’s winter and spring storms came to give some relief from the drought. He pointed to adjacent allotments where horses are allowed to graze year round but where there have been no cattle for the last ten years. Those ranges have not improved though the cattle are gone.

“Passers-by have no concept of life for people or animals on America’s large high desert ranges. What is said and what they see and then write on their blogs is amazing,” said Lorna Jones. The following is a portion of what she wrote of a chance meeting in March of 2011, which occurred on a little traveled road off of Highway 93: “…We crossed the highway with our aged cows. As we started out along the Goshute road a vehicle came from behind and went through our cattle heading east. A while later a vehicle with California plates came through heading west. I was wondering about this when another vehicle approached, so I waved to the driver from my pickup. The driver, Mr. Fitch, from Texas seemed reluctant to stop but did. I told him that we do not see much traffic along this road this time of year and was wondering what was happening. He told me he had been observing the wild horse gather that had just finished and I would soon see horse trailers coming out. I told him I was glad to see that. He seemed in a hurry and left. Our crew that day consisted of me driving one pickup; our daughter and her three young children in another; my husband and our son-in-law and two other riders with the cattle.

“The next day I was surprised to read Mr. Fitch’s account (on his blog) of our meet-ing on the road: ‘…The wranglers stopped us and wanted to know what we were doing on their range as it was so isolated that they rarely saw civilians during this time of the year. When told of the unlawful roundup of federally protected wild horses we were met with the singular comment, “good.” Considering the safety of my passengers and the ratio of cattle wranglers to advocates, the issue was not pressed in normal fashion…’ His blog went on at great length about ‘welfare ranchers’ and the ‘inhumane’ removal of wild horses.

“If we were to have another meeting with Mr. Fitch, I might point out:1. When I met Mr. Fitch on the road, we were approximately 8 miles west

of the Herd Management Area (HMA) boundary that lies within our allotment.

2. There had been no cattle on that part of our allotment since we removed them in February one year ago and our cattle will only graze that range for 6 weeks until we move them off the native range and into a wheatgrass seeding.

3. In order to qualify to hold our BLM permit to run cattle, we were re-quired to purchase private ranch property of sufficient size to provide forage for our cattle through the summer and fall each year.

4. For many years we have worked with the BLM to formulate a grazing plan that is designed to meet the needs of our ranching operation while providing for the physiological needs of native plants on the range. Our grazing plan provides for rotating our time and place of use so that the eastern portion has the entire growing season—March 1 through the summer—free of livestock every other year. The western portion

receives the same treatment on alternate years. Over the last several years the year-round presence of wild horses has basically nullified our efforts at sound range management.

5. In 1976, after privately owned horses were gathered and removed, approximately 30 head of horses remained in that area. Since then the number of horses has ballooned into hundreds and even thousands much to the detriment of deer, elk, and antelope and to the resource itself…

“Other points could be made…Among them is that I was the only ‘wrangler’ with whom Mr. Fitch spoke. I am the grandmother of 18 grandchildren and am quite mild mannered. Mr. Fitch’s insinuation that he was intimidated by me was amazing because he and I both know that he was met with only curiosity and courtesy that day.”

This encounter serves as one example of how a single event can be perceived com-pletely differently based on ones’ background and perspective.

In a letter to the BLM regarding Madeline Pickens’ Eco-sanctuary, Mr. Jones wrote: “This is one more step in the wrong direction taking a valuable resource out of productive use. The Spruce Mountain allotment has a long history of annually convert-ing a naturally occurring renewable resource into $500,000 to $800,000 of new wealth in the form of high quality lamb and beef which add to the national food supply and to the local and national economy…The main underlying circumstance that led the So-rensen family to sell their Spruce allotment was the damage to the range being caused by ever present and increasing numbers of wild horses. The uncontrolled numbers of horses on the allotment year around were literally putting them out of business. We have faced and continue to face the same discouraging challenges on our allotment…Organizations such as Saving America’s Mustangs (SAM) provides a lot of information that is simply inaccurate. Further, SAM supporters have no idea of the practicalities of managing a program on Western ranges…With the unmanaged horses, how can cultural and archeological resources be protected? How will sage grouse and other wildlife habitat be protected?”

Emily Jones, Ken’s granddaughter, researched and wrote a paper about the problem that confronts her family and her future. She writes in part: “While significant damage is being done to the land and other animals, the huge population of wild horses ulti-mately hurts itself. Any species that overpopulates eventually dies off. With the land’s resources being used unchecked and without management, the wild horses starve and become dehydrated. There are many instances in which the animals have suffered from their own growing numbers.”

She wrote, “springs have dried up, leaving muddy bogs that trapped the weak ani-mals until they died. Others, trying to get water, suffocated on the mud, their stomachs filling with silt which turned into cement in their bellies…Others, having to wander too far to get food, couldn’t make it back to water…”

Finally, she said: “The current wild horse population is a detriment to the West in different ways. Their numbers exceed that which the range can handle. Precious resources used by many animal species are disappearing and the land is being irrepa-rably damaged. Emotions that run high in wild horses’ favor are confused with the real problem at hand. While they are beautiful creatures that deserve to roam on the range, the horses must be reasonably controlled and managed like any other wildlife or live-stock. Without humane roundups, breeding limitations and population control, the wild horses have and will continue to be a danger to themselves and the land they call home.”

Mr. Jones summarizes by saying, “The bottom line is that Congress and Washing-ton’s BLM office set the rules and too many people in Washington do not seem to have a clue about the realities of the wild horse problem in the west. In order to come to a real resolution to the problem, the local agencies must be given the authority to fully implement the law which includes allowing for disposal of unadoptable horses, through sale or other means.”


CHECKOFF NEWS:

Whether you’re hosting game day festivities at your house or preparing for some tailgating fun at the game, these Buffalo-Style Beef Bites are sure to

be a crowd-pleasure no matter the location! Check out other mouth-watering tailgating recipes at www.beefitswhatsfordinner.com.

Total Recipe Time: 2 to 2½ hours Makes 8 to 12 appetizer servings

INGREDIENTS1. 1½ to 2 pounds beef Country-Style Ribs, cut into 1-inch pieces2. 1 tablespoon vegetable oil3. ¾ cup beef broth4. 2 tablespoons plus ¼ cup cayenne pepper sauce for Buffalo wings, divided5. 2 teaspoons garlic powder6. 2 teaspoons onion powder7. ¼ cup blue cheese crumbles8. Carrot and celery sticks (optional)

INSTRUCTIONS

1. Heat oil in large stockpot over medium heat until hot. Brown half of beef ribs; remove from stockpot. Repeat with remaining beef.

2. Return beef to stockpot. Add beef broth, 2 tablespoons buffalo sauce, garlic powder and onion powder; bring to a boil. Reduce heat; cover tightly and sim-mer 1-3/4 to 2 hours or until beef is fork-tender.

3. Remove beef from cooking liquid to large bowl; discard cooking liquid or re-serve for another use. Toss beef with remaining 1/4 cup buffalo sauce. Sprinkle with blue cheese crumbles.

Game Day Appetizer: BUFFALO-STYLE BEEF BITES

4. Serve with carrot and celery sticks, if desired. The beef bites can also be served on 6-inch wooden skewers or with wooden toothpicks.

NUTRITIONAL INFORMATION FOR BUFFALO-STYLE BEEF BITES

Nutritional information per serving: 133 calories; 8 g fat (3 g saturated fat; 1 g monoun-saturated fat); 46 mg cholesterol; 453 mg sodium; 1 g carbohydrate; 0.3 g fiber; 15 g protein; 2.0 mg niacin; 0.1 mg vitamin B6; 1.6 mcg vitamin B12; 1.5 mg iron; 15.0 mcg selenium; 4.7 mg zinc; 43.3 mg choline.

This recipe is an excellent source of protein, vitamin B12, selenium and zinc; and a good source of niacin.

Tailgating With the NBC This FallAs Nevada gears up for fall, the Nevada Beef Council (NBC) is planning a variety of

promotions and partnerships that will remind consumers throughout the state that beef is what’s for dinner no matter what season it is.

This year, the NBC is partnering with Reser’s Fine Foods and Save Mart Supermarkets for a tailgating-themed promotion that will touch on one of America’s favorite past times, offer a coupon incentive for shoppers to purchase beef, and coincide with the second year of a popular partnership with the Nevada Wolf Pack.

From September 7 through October 11, Save Mart customers in Northern Nevada who purchase a select package of beef and a Reser’s 3-pound potato or macaroni deli salad can save $3. An extensive social media campaign on Facebook and Twitter will focus on football season, tailgating, football parties at home, and how easy it is to be a game-day hero by feeding everyone beef and Reser’s.

The promotion will also entice people to engage with the NBC’s Facebook page – by “liking” the page, they can enter to win one of two tailgate prize packages that will include a portable propane gas grill, a Reser’s stadium seat, “Beef. It’s What’s For Dinner” gear such as barbecue tools, an apron and a cutting board, and more. By featuring a social media element in this contest, the NBC hopes to expand its digital reach, which will help increase the number of consumers it can engage with to share the Nevada beef community’s story moving forward.

To enhance the social media efforts and in-store promotion, the NBC will also be hit-ting the Reno-area air waves. Tune in to KBUL (98.1) and KWYL (102.9) from September 10 through October 18, and KWFP (92.1) from September 29 through October 11, and you just might hear some beef commercials designed to get consumers excited about tailgating

with their favorite protein.But the tailgating fun doesn’t stop there. For the second season, the NBC will be tail-

gating at the University of Nevada, Reno home games with KWFP 92.1 The Wolf. During select home Wolf Pack games, the NBC will be on hand with the popular radio station to share great beef recipes and cooking information with fellow tailgaters. Be sure to come by and say hello!

Beef Promotion in a Grocery Store Near YouEvery year, the NBC partners with a variety of retail outlets, foodservice distributors,

and restaurants to feature promotions that put beef front-and-center in marketing efforts, consumer communications, and on the menu or at the meat case. With rising food costs, these promotions are increasingly important to offering greater incentive for consumers to add beef to their shopping list.

Over the summer, the NBC wrapped up a promotion at various Smart & Final stores throughout the Las Vegas area that encapsulated the BBQ-heavy Father’s Day weekend. Smart & Final increased its beef featuring in its promotions and ads, and offered a $4-off in-ad coupon from June 11-17.

Along with various other elements, including a social media contest and a friendly competition among store managers to increase the retail chain’s Cattlemen’s Finest beef sales, the promotion included a number of unique elements to add to the effectiveness and reach of the overall program.

During the two-week promotion, Smart & Final saw their Cattlemen’s Finest beef


www.beefitswhatsfordinner.com

News From the Nevada Beef Council

sales increase by 32 percent in dollars and 14 percent in units compared to the same time period the year prior – which also happened to be during a beef promotion with the NBC!

This is just one example of a number of similar partnerships that occur throughout the year, all designed to increase beef purchasing. Look for upcoming promotions at these retail chains throughout the state!

3 Food4Less(Southern Nevada): August 27 – September 9

3 Save Mart (Northern Nevada): September 7 – October 18

3 Raley’s (Northern Nevada): October 22 – November 18

3 Albertsons (Southern Nevada): December 17 – 25

ROI Study Shows $11.20 Return on Checkoff DollarIn the most comprehensive study ever rendered about the Return on Investment (ROI)

of beef checkoff assessments, Dr. Harry Kaiser of Cornell University recently concluded that each dollar invested in the Beef Checkoff Program between 2006 and 2013 returned about $11.20 to the beef industry.

Commissioned through the checkoff’s Joint Evaluation Committee, this new ROI study could be a useful tool for producers who make decisions about how to invest check-off dollars. Some additional key findings in Kaiser’s benefits-cost analysis include:

• Had there not been any Cattleman’s Beef Board-funded marketing between 2006 and 2013, total domestic beef demand would have totaled 15.7 billion pounds – or 11.3 percent less than it was with the checkoff programs in place. Holding the effects of all other demand drivers constant, the activities funded by the CBB resulted in an increase in beef demand of 2.1 billion pounds per year.

• Had the national Beef Checkoff Program not invested in foreign-market devel-opment between 2006 and 2013, foreign demand for U.S. beef would have been 6.4 percent lower.

• The statistical results indicate that all eight CBB demand-enhancing activities — generic beef advertising; channels marketing; industry information; new-product development; public relations; nutrition research; beef-safety research and product-enhancement research — have a positive and statistically significant impact on increasing per capita beef demand.

• At the bottom line, the increase in beef demand due to CBB-funded marketing efforts resulted in higher prices for beef producers and importers, which means higher net revenue than they would have experienced without those checkoff programs.

To see where your checkoff investment goes as a Nevada beef producer, download the NBC’s latest annual report at www.nevadabeef.org, and see a detailed breakdown of checkoff investments on both the state and national level.


www.nevadabeef.org

LookUPWebster’s definion of Life- the time a person is alive or exists- one’s manner

of living- liveliness, vigor.Webster’s definion of Good – healthy or sound – honorable – enjoyable, pleasant – reli-

able, excellent, virtuous, devout, kind – proper, correct – skilledThe good life. Isn’t that what we all aspire to live? Many of us go to work, work long

hours, and maybe get some overtime. Then, drag ourselves home to rise up early again and do it all over again. Why? You might say to pay bills, to buy food and fuel (all cost-ing more everyday, you know). So, we must work harder and longer. Right? NO! What we are seeking and sometimes don’t even know it, is “The Good Life”. What’s the good life? The manner one lives while alive- we want our life to be healthy, enjoyable, pleasant and comfortable. Correct? So we must work harder and longer, to pile up money, if we can. We must worry about the country’s economy. Is that right? NO! That is wrong. That’s being carnally (fleshly) minded (a meat head).

Romans 8:6-14 (NKJV)

6 For to be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. 7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. 8 So then, those who are in the flesh

cannot please God.9 But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His. 10 And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors—not to the flesh, to live ac-cording to the flesh. 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.

What the Apostle Paul is telling the Roman Church (and us) is how to live the good life. We are to be led by the Spirit not head (fleshly) led. If we are born again believers, the Spirit of Him (God) who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in us. IN US! Praise God!

However, we are not saved (born again John 3:3) just because we sit in church every Sunday. We can sit in a garage, but that doesn’t make us a pick-up. No, we must believe (have faith) that He is who He said He is, and ask Him into our heart (Romans 10:9,10,13) AND except what He did for us on the cross (Isaiah 53, Galatians 3:13)

In John 20:19-29, we see the heart of the Risen Christ. In v. 22 He breaths the breath of (Spirit) Life on His disciples (they are born again). Similar to the Father breathing life into Adam (Gen 2:7). The reborn Spirit Life has no room for fear v.19. Notice that Jesus points out the cost of our abundant, peaceful and blessed life in v.20 & 27. Always remember what He did for us and be thank-full.

Jesus gives us the keys for having all our needs meet without toil (hard continuous labor, hard tiring work) in Matthew Chapter 6 (all in red), that’s “The Good Life”. Do we work? Yes, we all have employment or tasks to do, but we should not have to toil or have lack (Psalms 23:1-3). Our Heavenly Father loves us so much, and desires so much for us to have “The Good Life” that He sent His beloved Son to die for us (John3:16, John 10:10).

So, let’s put God and His right way of doing things FIRST, in our lives. Let’s declare Him as our source and no the world. Then, let’s go live “The Good Life”! I double dog dare you.

Read: Matthew 6, John 20, Romans 8, Deuteronomy 8:18, 28:1-14, Proverbs 3:5-6, 10:22, Isaiah 53

Happy trails. May God richly bless you. We love you and would love to hear from you. If you would like someone to pray with, or just have a question, please give us a call at (775) 867-3100. ‘Til next time….

Harmony Ranch Ministry3767 Keyes Way (775) 867-3100Fallon, NV 89406 [email protected] Cell (775) 426-1107

Tom J. Gonzalez | Diana J. Gonzalez, Pastor

You are invited to

COWBOY CHURCH!1st Saturday of every month

Standish, CA @ 6:00 p.m.

Hwy. 395 /A3 — Standish 4-H Hall

You are invited to

COWBOY CHURCH!3rd Saturday of every month

Lovelock, NV @ 7:00 p.m.

1035 Cornell Ave. — Old Variety Store

Are you having a Rodeo or Livestock event? GIVE US A CALL.We would love to come to your event or ranch and host Cowboy Church for you.

The Good Lifeby Pastor Diana Gonzalez

RENO • ELKO • FALLON

Call 800.800.4865 today or visit AgLoan.com

A part of the Farm Credit system. Equal Opportunity Lender.

RAISING EXPECTATIONSWhen you need to purchase livestock — or

anything else for your ranch or farm — we’ll

design a financing plan with terms, rates and

payment options that work for you.

See what we can do for you.



Make Hay When the Sun ShinesRon Torell, President Nevada Cattlemen’s Association and past UNCE Livestock Extension Specialist

There wasn’t a lot of sun shining in much of the Great Basin and Intermountain west during the month of

August 2014. Instead, unseasonably wet weather delivered several inches of moisture to many hay fields during harvest.

The result is thou-sands of

tons of rain-damaged or late maturity harvested beef hay on the market at reduced prices.

Discoloration and bleaching is the least of our concerns relative to rain-damaged hay. In addition to hay harvested and bailed with high moisture content posing the threat of fire in the stack due to spontaneous combustion, rain-dam-aged hay can lose quality in several ways including mold, loss of protein and energy, as well as damage from excessive heating after harvest. Reduction in quality is dependent upon

many factors such as how far into the curing/drying pro-cess the hay was when the rain was received, how much

rain was received, and for how long the rain persisted.Drying conditions after rainfall stops also im-

pacts quality. Plant respiration will take place until it dries to less than 30 percent moisture. Re-wetting the hay will re-start the respiration process which uses carbohydrates (lowering energy value). We often have to mechanically turn hay to expedite the drying process. This mechanical process often causes leaf shatter and loss of leaves, which in turn results in

reduced quality.Wet hay promotes microbial activity and growth

which in turn results in lower quality and potentially moldy hay. Certain molds, when fed to livestock, can

cause abortions in cattle and can cause other health risks in-cluding reduced fertility in bulls. Avoiding the purchase and feeding of moldy hay is always the wisest choice; however,

that option is not always possible.Researchers at Iowa State University provide a general

guide for feeding rain-damaged hay, yet go on to state that these guidelines should not replace testing of hay. The Iowa researchers suggest that newly cut hay receiving a light rain probably loses little quality. Nearly dry hay that receives a light to severe and extended rain may suffer significant quality loss. Dry matter loss can be up to 5 percent per inch of rain, while digestibility can decrease up to 10 percent. The most significant loss will be in energy. Protein will also decrease, however, not as significant as energy. Vitamin A content will also decrease.

An Oklahoma State publication points out that mild and long-term rainfall, such as we saw this summer, will leach more soluble carbohydrates and nutrients than inten-sive short-term rainfall. Up to 50 percent of the dry matter removed might be soluble carbohydrates. This loss of car-bohydrates equates to a loss of Total Digestible Nutrients (TDN) also known as energy.

Caution is warranted when purchasing severely rain-damaged hay and utilizing that hay in a beef cow ration. Every hay field is different and the loss of quality is variable. There is no way to establish value or balance a ration until you know what nutritive value is contained in the hay at time of feeding. Thus, the best advice is to spend the $30 to $50 and have hay tested at a commercial laboratory prior to purchasing and feeding

The Progressive Rancher Coloring Page

Also See:

Pricing Rain-Damaged Hay (What is it Worth?)

and

Incorporating Rain-Damaged Hay into Winter Beef Cow Rations

on The Progressive Rancher Website

www.progresiverancher.com



WINNEMUCCA NEVADA — Over 105,900 head of calves, feeder cattle and breed-ing stock were offered July 28, July 30 & July 31 during Superior’s Video Royale XXII video cattle auction. Broadcast live from the Winnemucca Convention Center, the auc-tion had producers from 28 states consign 33% steer calves 0-595 lbs.; 22% heifer calves 360-590 lbs.; 31% feeder steers 500-1050 lbs.; 12% feeder heifers 500-895 lbs. and 1% breeding stock. Cattle sold on contract to deliver immediately through the end of April.

Type Weight Range Price Range

Weigh Cows —

Pairs $2500.00-$2500.00

Cows $1900.00-$2650.00

Bred Heifers $2000.00-$2650.00

Region 1Type Weight Range Price Range

Steers

390-390 $323.00-$411.50

400-445 $308.00-$401.00

450-490 $265.00-$361.00

500-540 $260.00-$300.00

550-590 $225.00-$286.00

600-640 $206.00-$274.50

650-690 $206.00-$278.00

700-740 $191.00-$261.00

750-790 $214.00-$250.50

800-840 $211.00-$242.00

850-890 $213.00-$238.00

900-930 $218.00-$232.50

990-1010 $209.00-$212.50

Heifers

375-390 $335.00-$361.00

410-440 $278.00-$332.00

450-495 $255.00-$302.00

500-540 $239.00-$275.00

550-590 $230.00-$265.00

600-640 $208.00-$263.00

650-690 $208.00-$250.00

700-730 $217.00-$249.00

750-775 $203.00-$234.00

800-825 $201.00-$230.00

940-940 $207.00-$207.00


Steers

390-390 $390.00-$390.00

400-440 $281.00-$356.00

450-490 $247.00-$318.00

500-535 $243.00-$307.00

550-590 $234.00-$300.00

600-640 $210.00-$260.00

650-690 $215.00-$244.00

700-740 $209.00-$225.00

750-780 $207.00-$223.00

800-840 $208.00-$219.00

850-885 $204.50-$216.00

900-925 $209.00-$209.00

1050-1050 $192.00-$192.00

Holsteins

775-775 $142.00-$142.00

850-850 $178.00-$178.00

900-900 $174.00-$174.00

Heifers

370-380 $313.00-$334.00

400-420 $297.00-$301.00

450-480 $227.00-$296.00

500-540 $234.00-$271.00

550-580 $221.00-$258.00

600-630 $212.00-$241.00

650-680 $206.00-$227.00

700-740 $206.00-$219.50

750-765 $199.00-$213.00

800-800 $209.50-$209.50


Steers

485-490 $288.00-$306.00

500-515 $299.50-$301.00

580-585 $256.00-$259.00

625-635 $235.00-$249.00

650-650 $241.00-$249.00

725-725 $224.00-$224.00

750-785 $214.00-$242.00

825-835 $212.00-$222.00

850-865 $214.00-$216.00

920-920 $196.00-$196.00

Holsteins

725-725 $176.50-$176.50

885-885 $175.50-$175.50

Heifers

445-445 $264.00-$264.00

460-460 $402.00-$402.00

500-545 $237.00-$285.00

650-650 $234.50-$238.00

750-785 $208.50-$218.50

825-825 $210.00-$214.00


Steers

375-375 $292.00-$292.00

400-425 $290.00-$296.00

450-450 $265.00-$275.00

500-525 $241.00-$259.00

550-590 $229.00-$261.50

625-625 $225.00-$225.00

710-735 $216.50-$229.00

775-775 $211.00-$211.00

825-840 $200.00-$201.00

865-885 $198.00-$200.00

950-950 $194.00-$194.00

Heifers

400-440 $252.00-$265.00

500-500 $220.00-$220.00

560-560 $221.00-$221.00

725-735 $209.50-$215.00


Steers

475-475 $240.00-$240.00

600-630 $227.50-$233.50

770-770 $216.00-$216.00

800-800 $206.00-$206.00

875-875 $215.00-$215.00


Steers

425-425 $288.00-$309.00

450-485 $248.00-$302.00

500-545 $273.00-$306.00

550-595 $249.00-$278.00

600-635 $236.00-$265.00

650-675 $230.00-$260.00

725-725 $226.00-$226.00

750-790 $213.00-$225.00

800-800 $209.00-$234.00

850-880 $208.00-$226.50

900-925 $206.50-$222.50

950-960 $205.00-$217.50

Heifers

450-490 $269.00-$292.00

500-540 $243.00-$273.00

550-580 $234.00-$287.00

600-630 $223.00-$264.00

660-670 $235.00-$257.00

740-740 $220.00-$220.00

800-825 $200.00-$212.00

850-895 $205.50-$217.50

750-775 $203.00-$234.00

800-825 $201.00-$230.00

940-940 $207.00-$207.00

This Saddle was donated by Ricardo Mastrejuan of Jordan Valley, Oregon to the Owyhee Cattlemen’s Heritage Foundation Legal Fund in their efforts to renew grazing permits. Superior Livestock Auction gra-ciously donated the air time for the auction and John Falen spoke in behalf of the founda-tion. Sponsored by Oregon Trail Livestock Supply, Ricardo’s Saddlery, Jim Davis, Shaw Cattle Co., Riverbend Ranches. Donations made by: Duane Martin, Jim and Mary Da-vis, Eric Duarte, Sonny Root, Agri Beef Co.

— Video Royale XXII —Superior Livestock Auction

July 29-31, 2014

— Leana Stitzel Photos —


Orchardgrass

Range Plants for the RancherBy Paul T. Tueller, Ph.D., CRMC

For this issue I describe anther grass species Orchardgrass, Dactylis glom-erata L. Orchardgrass is a cool season perennial grass adapted to temperate

climate areas. It was introduced into North America from Europe about 1760, and is now common throughout the continent, where it occupies an important place as a cul-tivated grass for hay and pasture. Orchardgrass is known as “cocksfoot” in Europe, New Zealand, and Australia. This name was derived from the shape of its seed head (inflorescence). The genus name (Dactylis) also was derived from the shape of the seed head; from the Greek word dactulos, meaning a finger, referring to the stiff branches of the seed head.

The branched orchardgrass inflorescence is a compact or partly spreading panicle. It is 2 to 8 inches long (5 to 20 cm). Seed heads are composed of spikelets that bear two to eight florets. Spikelets are attached to panicle branches by pedicels. Flowers are borne in one-sided clusters on stiff branches. Leaves vary in color from green to bluish-green. The lower surface is not shiny and has a distinct keel (center ridge). Leaf margins and leaf sheaths usually are somewhat rough to the touch when mature. Orchardgrass has good tolerance to heat and drought but is not extremely cold tolerant and is not suited for flooded areas. It is a highly productive grass suitable for hay or pasture on well-drained soils under irrigated or nonirrigated conditions. Orchardgrass is very palatable when young, but like all grasses, it tends to become coarse and less palatable if allowed to be overmature. Best used in situations where high quality management can be exercised.

This is a preferred pasture forage wherever it is adapted because of its early spring growth and its rapid recovery following grazing. It has excellent regrowth during the hot summer months when other grasses are not as productive. With adequate moisture, fall growth is good. The best yields from orchardgrass or orchardgrass-legume pastures are achieved when livestock are allowed to graze when growth is about 8 to 9 inches high,

and taken out when the stubble height reaches 4 inches. Since the main food storage of orchardgrass is in the lower stems and leaf parts, it does not tolerate close and continuous grazing.

Orchardgrass is moderately nutritious and highly palatable to deer, elk, bighorn sheep, cattle, and domestic sheep and goats. The persistent, green, basal rosette provides good winter forage for deer and elk. Early spring growth provides green forage for all species. Cattle will eat orchardgrass preferen-tially in early spring and summer, up to 50 per-cent of total diet. Elk and mule deer also prefer orchardgrass over a number of other species. In areas disturbed by fire where orchardgrass has been seeded (usually in a mixture with other grasses and forbs), wildlife use increases over nonseeded areas and nonburned areas. Forest openings, where orchardgrass is domi-nant, are associated with rufous hummingbirds, pine siskins, slate-colored juncos, Ameri-can robins, valley pocket gophers, desert harvest mice, deer mice, Mexican voles, and white-tailed deer. Wild turkeys graze orchardgrass in winter, and poults use it as a source of cover and insects in late summer. Rabbits use orchardgrass for food and cover; Canada geese feed on the seeds and leaves.This then is a useful forage grass native to Nevada and should be identified and used by ranchers wherever it occurs in the state.


leaves.This

SOCIETY FOR RANGE MANAGEMENTNevada Section of Society for Range Management Hosts Summer Workshop

on Rangeland Fire: Management Before, During and After, Part 1

By Ryan Shane, Resource Management Officer for Nevada Division of Forestry, and Maggie Orr, Lincoln County Conservation District and State Conservation Commission

Fire and invasives; fire and invasives. You hear it over and over in the current Sage-grouse

conversation. Is there anything that can be done about these particular aspects of Sage-grouse management to prevent listing the species? This article is Part 1 of a two-part article; the second will offer specific recommenda-tions to use on the landscape.

Each summer the Nevada Section of Society for Range Management offers a summer workshop and field tour to consider topics important to managing Nevada’s rangelands. This June a workshop was organized to help educate mem-bers and partners on activities and management of lands at all stages in the wildfire return cycle. On the tour we saw presuppression and rehabilitation efforts by the BLM in the Montana Mountains, heard from ranchers in the Wildfire Support Group and Nevada Division of Forestry (NDF) leadership about future possibilities for such groups, and learned from researchers studying what works and doesn’t work to manage areas after fire.

The issues that face us are many, as fire researcher Stephen Pyne says, and sometimes conflicting. Rangelands infested with cheatgrass have too much fire. Where pinyon and juniper are expanding, too little fire is a problem. “Fire-borrowing,” which entitles fire programs in the land manage-ment agencies to sweep funds from other non-fire programs, has become normal, leaving non-fire related programs para-lyzed due to lack of funding. Invasive species/fire feedback loops result in habitat and general ecological health declines across rangelands, and increased annual rangelands result in decreased forage dependability for livestock and wildlife. This reduces economic vitality of rural economies. Finally, rehabilitation and stabilization programs are logistically, technologically, and financially out-matched by the scale of lands needing rehabilitation. In this current situation it is imperative that agency fire and resource staffs work together and learn from each other so that both can be more effective at meeting their program’s objectives and mutually accom-plish management leading to resilient landscapes.

Opening remarks by tour leader Ryan Shane reviewed progress made since the 2008 Great Basin Wildfire Forum where seventeen prominent rangeland scientists assembled to express their knowledge and make recommendations for achieving ecosystem restoration in the Great Basin (http://dcnr.nv.gov/wp-content/wildfireforum.pdf). Progress includes:

• The construction of a federal seed warehouse in Ely, NV

• The construction and operation of a state seed bank program and warehouse in Washoe Valley, NV

• The establishment and operation of a state biomass utilization program in Carson City, NV

• Governor Sandoval recently became chairman of the Western Governors Association which has a policy against fire borrowing and is influencing respective legislation in Washington to curtail the

practice.• The establishment of prime sage-grouse habitat as

a third suppression priority for fire agencies imme-diately behind life and property protection.

• Utilization of targeted grazing to control invasives and wildfire fuel loads.

• Landscape scale risk assessments through Landfire and other data collection programs

• Advances in fire policies allowing fires for re-source benefit to burn for ecological improvement and approval to manage separate parts of the same fire differently; one flank may be under full sup-pression while another is allowed to burn for a benefit.

• Advances in and widespread use of Ecological Site Descriptions, State and Transition Models, Disturbance Response Groups, and Fire Effects in the Great Basin (http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_gtr308.pdf )

This workshop was organized to highlight the local-ized progress on ideas from the Great Basin Wildfire Forum within the Winnemucca BLM District and private inholdings near the Montana Mountains. Creative strategies are being tried with success. Much is being tried and learned that can be applied elsewhere:

• Implementation of cooperative landscape scale fuels management projects

• Formation of a localized, voluntary initial attack rangeland fire protection association

• Expansion of state programs to address presup-pression, suppression and rehabilitation

• Formation of a local conservation organization that continues to implement conservation practices on private lands and serves as a conservation partner-ing organization

• Understanding more about alternative range seed-ing and planting techniques to improve restoration and rehabilitation effectiveness

• Understanding how to predict post-fire response and post-fire rehabilitation prioritization using soil seed bank monitoring and analysis procedures

• Implementation of large-scale rehabilitation prac-tices using effective methodology

• Increasing the knowledge and abilities required for implementing targeted grazing, especially related to annual grass and fuels management

Montana Mountains Cooperative Fuels and Habitat Management Plan

The first stop examined landscape scale wildfire presup-pression and fuels management in the Montana Mountains area of the Winnemucca BLM District; discussion was led by Derek Messmer, Supervisory Fire Management Special-ist, Mike Fettick, Fire Management Officer and Victor Lo-

zano, Associate District Manager. The Montana Mountains represents one of the jewels of the Winnemucca District due to its high quality habitat and healthy ecological status.

Winnemucca BLM used fire models and local knowl-edge of fires to design a landscape scale project in coopera-tion with over 40 state, local and NGO partners to enhance fire suppression efforts and conduct habitat improvement projects in the Montana Mountains, an important area for wildlife especially Greater Sage-grouse and Lahontan Cutthroat Trout. BLM proceeded through a lengthy coordi-nated resource management process which drove a NEPA planning document that covered the entire project area of 346,000 acres. The collaborative group worked together to identify fire and resource risks and opportunities, as well as management approaches to manage and preserve the highly valued grazing and wildlife habitat resources in the Montana Mountains. The group continued to meet occasionally from the agency scoping process to the issuing of the Record of Decision (ROD), which took four years.

The plan offers many options including green strip-ping by mowing brush and applying herbicide to reduce annual competition for remaining and seeded perennials, brown stripping by disking to bare soil, relocating roads and troughs out of riparian and meadow areas, aerial and drill seeding in cheatgrass die-off areas, prescribed fire and hand thinning. The plan includes options for grazing to reduce annual fuels or mowed areas along roads where cultural re-source concerns do not allow the extensive soil disturbance of disking. Existing high quality sagebrush habitats sur-rounded by cheatgrass are being protected and /or expanded through the use of herbicides, harrowing, and seeding of pe-rennial grasses to create buffers between highly flammable annuals and highly valued, intact habitats. This has proven to be almost impossible at lower elevations.

BLM has found that 8 oz/acre of the imazapic herbi-cide Plateau works best; cost effectiveness is an economy of scale; a small area costs less than $100/acre. They use a fixed wing or helicopter if they want a focused application as the helicopter can put more volume solution per acre. They always spray in the fall when the winds are less and wait for moisture so the herbicide doesn’t move off-site; they don’t want to spray onto “bug dust” due to soil move-ment potential. Where cultural clearances are obtained seed can be applied with a drill; otherwise broadcasting with an ATV is used to decrease impacts on artifacts and archaeo-logical sites. They usually use Sandberg’s bluegrass, crested wheatgrass and prostrate kochia for seeding green strips. Their monitoring consists of visual assessments to determine whether fuel loads and continuity within the strips would allow fire to carry.

BLM mows strips for fuels management to reduce fuel continuity and total fuel load. The spatial arrangement of strips on the landscape is meant to compartmentalize the landscape from a fire behavior and fuel continuity stand-point; the fuel breaks reduce flame lengths, rates of spread, and fireline intensity, which allows suppression forces to


http://dcnr.nv.gov/wp-content/wildfireforum.pdf

http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_gtr308.pdf

http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_gtr308.pdf

engage. Green strips tend to be about 300 feet wide in big sagebrush communities, although they range from 100 feet at a minimum and greater than 300 feet where fuel loads and continuity dictate. They have found rabbitbrush taking back strips fairly quickly which will require maintenance cycles to be more frequent unless the rabbitbrush is sprayed.

Dollar for dollar the most effective treatment is brown stripping; a 12-foot wide disked to bare soil break along the highway they do with BLM staff and equipment for $20-$30 per acre. These must be maintained annually. Along high-ways through areas with high amounts of cultural artifacts they use herbicide fuel breaks.

Proposed actions of the Montana Mountains project comprise about 14,313 acres of which approximately 3,802 acres exist within previously disturbed areas such as roads or acres already burned or seeded. 10,511 acres will be new disturbance; BLM has implemented 9000 acres; about 5000 acres remain to complete. The original NEPA document was written specifically to allow flexibility in the methods used to meet the objectives as well as the places where the methods could be implemented.

This Montana Mountains project took four years from planning to implementation; maintenance was incorporated into the NEPA so the Winnemucca District can go back at any time and re-treat or re-try where needed. BLM has found it more effective to bundle NEPA under landscape planning as opposed to doing individual project level NEPA. Winnemucca BLM feels comfortable taking on a project of this scale every two years now with their current staffing levels; they are working on another similar plan within the district now.

Rangeland Fire Protection Associations and Legal Support

Local ranchers Erich Hummel and Will Frey of the Wildfire Support Group (WSG) provided insight of their group’s evolution through time, relationship with BLM, and current needs to fulfill their mission. The intent of the WSG is to provide nearby, voluntary Initial Attack (I.A.) capabilities for local fires. The WSG was formed after the 1999 fire season because of multiple large fires, limited suppression resources, exceedingly high acreage losses, and numerous un-staffed fires. Local ranchers affected by heavy resource damage and loss proposed an idea of assisting the Winnemucca District to suppress wildfires. The initial concept provided three primary services; quick detection and on-scene size up, accurate local access knowledge and

information, and access to heavy equipment and personnel close in proximity to fight the fire. The WSG consists of lo-cal ranchers who are trained in basic wildland fire and act as early detection and suppression resources on remote fires within the Winnemucca District.

When the organization began it had a free ability to respond in an I.A. capacity and members felt successful and effective responding to the small size fire starts. While filling this niche, they can be especially effective during days of multiple fires when local agency fire resources are stretched thin across their jurisdiction or even the region. WSG members trained with BLM and took the refresher class each year. Because of this time spent together, the WSG members and BLM fire staff formed a level of crew cohesion which allowed them to communicate and coordinate making their efforts more effective on the fire line. They were able to stop many fires at small acreages and felt the program really worked; for the local folks it was not a matter if they got paid or not; they didn’t want to see the country burn.

A recently employed policy by BLM has somewhat stifled WSG’s ability to perform as they have in the past. Now they must wait for a Type 5 (ICT5) incident com-mander or greater to arrive on scene before they may engage the fire which leaves them feeling frustrated and ineffective at achieving the objective of their organization. To achieve ICT5 status as a WSG member or non-professional fire staff is challenging as the required task books, when issued by BLM, are only good for three years so it is hard for WSG members to complete the books before they expire. This leaves them perpetually at a qualification level less than required to effectively participate in I.A. activities.

Some opportunities were identified by present company related to getting State and Local fire protection programs and districts involved with training record maintenance, training opportunities, and task book completion assistance for the WSG members which would allow them to once again serve in full IA capacity. While the WSG is not a fully recognized Rangeland Fire Protection Association, the op-portunity to become one may be near. In Oregon and Idaho, there are state laws that enable these kinds of organizations to have jurisdictions within legally authorized fire protection districts. Perhaps they are ahead of Nevada since they have more state and private lands and a coordinator to track volun-teers’ status in the fire system. Nevada Division of Forestry’s (NDF’s) number one bill draft request to the 2015 legislature will be to make sure these possibilities get in place by statute in Nevada to allow authority to be given to local govern-

ments. NDF’s new partnership with Humboldt County could help bring the County up to speed to manage such volunteer firefighting efforts. NDF regularly performs prescribed fires in the region; these would be prime opportunities for WSG members to continue to make progress completing task books and achieving levels of qualification needed.

State of Nevada Grows Wildland Fire Protection Program

NDF is in transition today from its previous authorities under NRS 473 to do fire protection and All-Risk (eg. Car accidents, medicals, hazmat, structure fires) responsibilities. By 2015 NDF will be completely out of All-Risk involve-ment and will just do year round wildland fire suppression. Each Nevada county has the opportunity to join the new Wildfire Protection Program; all will likely have done so by 2015 except Esmeralda and Mineral Counties that have virtually no fire history or risk.

The timing has lined up with the sage grouse issue to the effect that NDF will work with all counties to manage wildfire with a strong IA response to keep fires small and reduce landscape events so detrimental to sage grouse. Pete Anderson, State Forester/Fire warden, said on the tour it is an “exciting time” where roles will develop and positive changes implemented; the state role will be to assist a county to deliver what services they want to see. NDF fire resources will be mobile around the state to respond to disasters and fires. For instance, the fire season tends to migrate from southern Nevada early in the year, up to the western side of the state, then to Humboldt and Elko Counties. There will be much work to strengthen ties of interagency coordina-tion. Wildfire Protection Group positions will be year-round; NDF will also provide fire prevention, presuppression and rehabilitation support, so workers may implement fuel breaks in the spring, operate a fire engine in the summer, and then a drill seeder in the winter.

A huge improvement will be to coordinate work be-tween federal agencies and private landowners; if the BLM or USFS is going to do a project in an area, NDF or NRCS should do something adjacent if appropriate and they have the funds. As land managers, we all need to improve how we select projects to get away from a shotgun approach and put the money where success is more likely to occur. The continuing article on this tour will discuss the specific recommendations offered by tour speakers from the USDA Agricultural Research Service, UNR, and BLM on post-fire rehabilitation strategies and effectiveness.

Stephen J. Pyne is a professor at the school of life sciences at Arizona State University and writes often about wildfire issues. He was quoted in an article by Joseph M. Smith in The Forestry Source, April 2014 to say, “We don’t have a fire problem – we have lots of fire problems – and we need a lot of solutions to them.” He went on to say, “Pyne’s point was

that ‘culture trumps science,’ which limits our options for responding to wildfire, particularly on public land.

So what are we to do? Get through it the best we can, said Pyne.

‘We’re not going to get ahead of this. We’re going to have to deal with what’s coming at us. Prescribed fire is too complicated, too expensive, [and] too politically cumbersome. We’re going to take whatever wildfires we get and we’re going to manage those, try to

reduce costs, protect communities… we’re going to get a lot more fire on the land, a lot of it is going to be really bad, a lot of it is going to be really good,’ he said. ‘It’s not about restoration to a condition we liked in the past, it’s not about anticipating a desired future

condition we want to get to, it’s not about applying science to get from here to there – it’s about getting through it.” “We’ve had 50 years trying to resist fire, 50 years trying to restore it; I think we’re looking at 50-plus years of resilience, coming out of it the best we can.”

For more information about the Society for Range Management (summer tours or winter meetings) please see the website at http://nevada.rangelands.org/


http://nevada.rangelands.org

SOCIETY FOR RANGE MANAGEMENTNevada Section of Society for Range Management Hosts Summer Workshop

on Rangeland Fire: Management Before, During and After, Part 2

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

By Ryan Shane, Resource Management Officer for Nevada Division of Forestry, and Maggie Orr, Lincoln County Conservation District and State Conservation Commission

Each summer the Nevada Section of Society for Range Management offers a summer tour

to consider topics important to managing Nevada’s rangelands. This June a workshop was organized to help educate members and partners on activities and management of lands at all stages in the wildfire return cycle. The previous article presented the presuppression and rehabilitation efforts by the BLM in the Montana Mountains and heard from ranchers in the Wildfire Support Group and Nevada Division of Forestry (NDF) leadership about future possibilities for such groups. In this second of two articles we will learn from research-ers studying what works and doesn’t work to manage areas after fire.

Horse Creek Ranch Conservation SeedingJan Schade of the Wildfire Conservation Group (WCG)

presented the benefits and successes of the group includ-ing the Horse Creek Conservation Seeding. The WCG is a non-profit organization dedicated to reducing the threat of catastrophic wildfires through methods for reducing cheat-grass and other fuels and implementing effective pre-fire fuels management and post-fire reclamation practices. They accomplish their mission by collaboration with willing landowners, organizations, and agency partners utilizing applied research, demonstrations, and public education. They have received earmarks from Congress as well as grants from NRCS, NDF, ARS, and BLM. Projects imple-mented by the WCG are spread across northern Nevada at Orovada, Crescent Valley, Kings River and Eureka. One of the applications they use is a Lawson Aerator with a seed dribbler as well as drill seeding, disking, prescribed fire, hand thinning, pile and burning, and herbicide to implement conservation treatments. Seven conservation plans have been written, five are in action. Where the tour group stood was an old potato field owned by Pancho Mquirqiaga which had been double disked to control weeds and bury the seed bank, which allowed the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) to install some trial planting plots; this plan was done at Horse Creek Ranch at the same time as the BLM Montana Mountains Plan.

Charlie Clements, Range Scientist with USDA-ARS, provided specifics of post-fire and seeding within cheat-grass infested areas. At this point, he said, we have no choice but to live with cheatgrass and do our best to man-age it and take advantage of the places where it has not yet invaded or has been reduced to establish more dependable and desirable perennial grass and shrub species. The key to establishing a perennial grass stand within areas known to

have annuals in the soil seed bank is to fallow the site for one growing season. This can be done by simply plowing/disking the site in the spring before cheatgrass seed ripens therefore killing the current year’s seed production as well as burying a large portion of the un-germinated cheatgrass seed deep in the seed bank and further decreasing cheat-grass competition the following spring. The site is fallowed all summer, seeded to desirable species in the fall, leaving the emerging seeded species seedlings with less cheatgrass competition during the very critical seedling stage. Soil ac-tive herbicides also can be used to achieve this on specific locations where wind transport of treated soils to agricul-tural fields is not probable. Applying the herbicide in the fall of the year can effectively eliminate any fall, winter and spring cheatgrass germination. Seed the herbicide-fallow site the following fall to desirable species and those emerg-ing seedlings in the spring will have less cheatgrass compe-tition and experience higher establishment rates. The fallow technique increases available nutrients as well as providing 40-45% more available soil moisture than the untreated site. It is very important to understand that cheatgrass is the number one killer of perennial grasses at the seedling stage. In areas where it is feasible, like Mquirqiaga’s abandoned Horse Creek potato field, the site was disked to bury all of the seeds in the seed bank to prevent germination. In wild-land settings, chemical fallow is more realistic to apply us-ing Landmark (1.75 oz/acre), Plateau (6 oz/acre), or Matrix (4 oz/acre). Warning was given about using these products to herbicide fallow near agricultural fields as soil bound with these products can blow from treatment sites to nearby ag-fields negatively affecting their productivity.

Following the mechanical fallow on the Horse Creek Seeding, the site was drill seeded with a variety of native and introduced grass and shrub species. Natives largely failed to establish while ‘Ephraim’ and ‘Nordan’ crested wheatgrasses, Siberian wheatgrass, and ‘Immigrant’ forage kochia established very well. The new release, ‘Snowstorm’ forage kochia was also tested and performed very well, but was very heavily browsed by the local deer and rabbit population due to drought and associated lack of forage. Given the short viability of ‘Immigrant’ forage kochia seed and the general lack of seed availability, ARS tested the difference between establishment of kochia using freshly collected seed and one-year-old cold storage seed. There was no difference in seed viability, though results indicate both sources can be used to establish stands, and fresh seed did result in 30% more seedlings per square foot. They also tested the effectiveness of broadcast compared to no-till drill seeding of kochia, with no difference seen. ARS

pointed out that it would be more feasible to seed 1-year old cold storage seed with other species in the fall months rather than waiting until winter to get fresh seed and having to apply a second seeding effort.

In areas without extensive annuals in the seed bank, seeding during the fall/winter directly after fire takes ad-vantage of low nitrogen levels as well as improving seeding conditions by avoiding frozen soils and proper seed place-ment limited by snow events or muddy soils. This allows seeding to be much more successful by not competing against a prolific cheatgrass seed bank which can be expect-ed to occur one year post fire. Bluegrasses, wheatgrasses, and forage kochia seem to be the most successful species in low elevation sites similar to the conservation seeding location. In Charlie’s experience the recruitment of peren-nial grass species is a very rare episodic event. In addition, perennial grass seeds are very rarely found in a viable state in the soil seedbank, with the exception of Indian ricegrass which will maintain viability for 7 to 9 years. While pe-rennial grasses are very long-lived, they do not compete well against annuals; this is why seeding perennials is so important. The idea must be rehabilitation, not restoration now that annuals are so pervasive on rangelands; he said if you can step from one perennial grass to the next you are getting somewhere.

Success hinges on gauging the level of cheatgrass pres-ence in the soil seed bank to prioritize rehabilitation efforts and pick which techniques to implement the rehabilitation efforts. Soil seed bank monitoring is the only way to ac-curately gauge these levels, and ARS provided a demon-stration of how to collect samples and grow out sampled seedlings in a greenhouse setting. To their knowledge, there are no feasible professional services established in our area yet that can perform these tests; land managers would need to become proficient at performing these tests themselves or get a local high school or other greenhouse owner to assist. Nevada Division of Forestry nurseries have contract services for performing these tests which would cost clients around $350 per 100 samples labeled and delivered to the nursery. Detailed direction to complete seed bank monitor-ing by bioassay sampling are available on the Nevada SRM website at http://nevada.rangelands.org/index.html. The process is rather simple; gather soil including the litter layer from your plots in small plastic bags to fill a 16 oz cup about ¾ full in the greenhouse. The number of samples collected depends on the available bench space at the greenhouse you will be using to water the samples and record emergence. ARS usually collects 80-100 samples in a one acre plot, but those could be spread across a larger landscape in need


http://www.ag.unr.edu/nsrm

www.rangelands.org

www.rangelands.org

http://nevada.rangelands.org/index.html

of restoration. Mark the samples and cups (eg. disked, un-disked), cut a small hole in the bottom and line with a coffee filter. Wet samples well and count the emergence on the 7th day, pulling the emerging seedlings with the seed still intact. Continue to water and perform this task on the 14th and 28th days. Multiply the total seedlings pulled by nine to get the active seed bank per square foot.

Alternative Seeding Technique PlotsUNR research assistants Amanda Wartgow and Devon

Snyder explained their small plot studies implemented by raking and hand seeding to test differences in seeding methods (drill seeding, cluster broadcasting) and seed pre-treatments of agglomeration of adhesive binder and diato-maceous earth around seeds for water retention. Clustering or agglomeration can increase emergence in Indian rice-grass, bottlebrush squirreltail, basin wildrye, and crested wheatgrass. These strategies also increased establishment of Indian ricegrass and bottlebrush squirreltail. In general, clustering or agglomerating rather than simulated drill rows had better results though it was a small scale study which would have to be tested at larger spatial and longer time scales to determine feasibility and effectiveness before en-dorsement as a preferred rehabilitation practice.

Sagebrush Transplanting Techniques Demonstration

Kent McAdoo of the University of Nevada Cooperative Extension demonstrated the proper techniques associated with planting bare root sagebrush plants. Plants typically had four to six inches of branches and about the same root length. He recommends spring planting in early April to take advantage of soil moisture to harvest wildling trans-plants from loose wet soil, keeping the roots wet with water and burlap and planting within a few hours. A planting bar works great, a hoe-dad or shovel can be used as well. Press the bar in at an angle and push forward, pivoting at the base and creating a hole with the prying action; insert the plant in the a hole large enough for the roots to remain straight and the soil surface level a little above the crown of the plant. Insert the planting bar two inches behind the first hole and push forward to press the soil into the hole and remove air from around the roots. Then back fill the second hole and tamp. Pull gently on the plant to make sure it is firmly held by the ground. The whole process goes fast when laborers are trained and experienced.

Kent reported there is a recorded 70% failure rate for seeding sagebrush. The largest advantage that can be given to the transplants is control of directly adjacent herbaceous vegeta-tion, which increases survival by up to 300%. In Kent’s experiments, planting survival was about half of what can be expected from a comparable native sagebrush stand, so increasing planting densities may be used to offset this difference so that stand establishment densities more closely represent naturally occurring stands. Jackrabbit depredation was significant on his plots. Trans-plants were more successful on native rangelands

compared to cheatgrass areas and crested wheatgrass seed-ings. Nursery stocks were somewhat better at establishing than wildlings but the results from his transplanting trials look good. What was most consistent between his plots was that sagebrush transplant establishment was much better when he controlled the herbaceous vegetation immediately surrounding the transplant prior to planting. The idea is to transplant smaller areas and create islands which will increase in size over time; even one plant that is successful will start an island.

Holloway Fire Low Elevation Rehabilitation Site

The Holloway Fire started 25 miles east of Denio, Ne-vada on August 5 at 6:30 pm as a result of a dry lightning storm. It began in sagebrush dominated rangeland and grew to 400 acres in 1.5 hours. The lack of roads, terrain, windy conditions, and dry fuel conditions created too much risk for ground resources to take direct suppression action, thereby leaving aerial resources as the primary initial at-tack. Due to regional wildfire activity, resource orders for additional ground forces were slow to be filled. Fire activity also increased on August 6, resulting in the retreat of forces. Over the couple weeks, rapid expansion of the fire occurred despite increased staffing and resource levels assigned to the fire. By August 25, the weather provided some breaks and containment was achieved at 460,811 acres burned. Shortly after containment, BLM and other partners began working on burned area assessments for Sage-grouse habi-tat, seeding needs, habitat restoration, livestock closures, and noxious weed management. Part of this process was addressed using Disturbance Response Groups that were developed by Tamzen Stringham at UNR in cooperation with NRCS. Disturbance response groups are a bundling of ecological sites based on similar states and transitions, so the most effective rehabilitation methods can be planned and implemented across similarly-responding ecological sites. With this approach BLM implemented more than 60,000 acres of aerial seedings that included seven different seed mixes. These mixes included a subset of the following species based on site specificity: mountain big sagebrush, Wyoming big sagebrush, fourwing saltbush, prostrate kochia, bitterbrush, blue flax, white yarrow, Palmer penste-mon, bluebunch wheatgrass, Sandberg’s bluegrass, basin

wildrye, crested wheatgrass, and Indian ricegrass. In addi-tion, 120,000 sagebrush seedlings were transplanted by a contractor and 40,000 more are scheduled to be planted this year in high priority wildlife areas.

At a site up the Nine Mile Road, Derrick Messmer showed us a seeding that was implemented in partnership with NDOW. Further up the road, the tour observed higher elevation burned areas that were co-dominated by blue-bunch wheatgrass and cheatgrass with some Sandberg’s bluegrass and bottlebrush squireltail. Some of these sites were aerial seeded, but most were not and generally repre-sented natural recovery.

Post-fire Grazing Management and ResearchWinnemucca District uses Emergency Stabilization

and Rehabilitation (ESR) objectives and livestock closure objectives, not a set standard of two years after a fire to decide when an allotment may reopen after a wildfire. Live-stock closure standards are based on percent of perennial ground cover that should be at the site based on 100% of the low end of perennial cover in the Ecological Site Descrip-tion. Winnemucca District will be putting this in their new land use plan. They did put the option of fall grazing of cheatgrass in their new vegetation management plan. The BLM did engage one permittee to do some fall cheatgrass grazing on the burned areas, but the agreement was nul-lified due to the lack of needed infrastructure to keep the livestock in the areas where targeted grazing was the objec-tive. BLM has allowed some permittees back on in less than one year following a fire where Standards were met and the site was pure cheatgrass. This is also true where there were site-specific determinations that a seeding had failed and the site was strictly cheatgrass.

UNR is currently conducting some post-fire grazing experiments on two larger sites, one on the Oregon side at McDermitt and one at Squaw Valley Ranch north of Battle Mountain. They are located in somewhat higher precipitation areas with clay pan ecological sites, so they are not prone to cheatgrass invasion like lands within the Winnemucca BLM District. They are hoping to gain an understanding of the plant community response to graz-ing and non-grazing immediately following a wildfire, and whether our post-fire management can be more ecologically sound. At the Horse Creek Conservation Seeding, they are

looking to graze portions of the area to also study these same effects so that more knowledge can be gained about managing cheatgrass prone ranges after wildfire for benefit of rangeland health.

Nevada Section of Society for Range Management works hard to provide timely and informative tours and workshops about issues affecting all who live and work on rangelands in Nevada. The Section encourages members of the ranching community to participate to allow the scientists and land managers to hear the ques-tions and comments of those closest to the land. Society for Range Management offers a place for open discussion. We hope you will join us to enrich the conversation.

Charlie Clements of ARS states, “It is very important to understand that cheatgrass is the

number one killer of perennial grasses at the seedling stage…the idea must be rehabilitation, not

restoration, now that annuals are so pervasive on rangelands; if you can step from one perennial

grass to the next you are getting somewhere.”

Would you like to learn more?See:

SRM Tour Summary: Nevada Division of Forestry Wildfire Protection Program

and

Guest editorial, “Wildfire Suppression Borrowing,” by Pete Anderson, State Forester, Nevada Division of Forestry

on The Progressive Rancher Website www.progresiverancher.com



Nevada Weed Management Association

Nevada Weed Management Association Updates Last October the participants in NWMA’s conference elected a new slate of

officers and board. The new board assumed their duties in January of this year. The elected board members are: Betsy Macfarlan, President, works for Eastern Nevada Landscape Coalition; Nate Weber, Vice President, works for Crop Production Services; Paula Day, Treasurer, works for Tri-County Weed Program; Joy Patter-son, Secretary, works for Cooperative Extension; Daryl Riersgard, trustee, rancher; and Michelle Landsdorf, trustee, worked for Mason and Smith Valley Conservation Districts. Unfortunately Michelle left the Board at the end of June to start her new position with Colorado State University. In addition to the elected board members we have two ex-officio members from the Nevada Department of Agriculture: Robert Little and Jamie Greer.

Over the past seven months the Board has met three times. In order to have better coverage/representation of the state on the board the Board modified the bylaws to allow for a third ex-officio member from the Nevada Association of Conservation Districts and a third trustee. With the changes to the bylaws Jake Tibbitts, the current president of the Nevada Association of Conservation Districts has assumed the third ex-offico position and we are currently recruiting someone from the southern part of Nevada to serve as the third trustee. If you are located in the southern portion of the state or the west central portion of the state we are currently looking for two trustees. Please contact me at [email protected] or Nate Weber at [email protected] if you are interested in becoming a trustee.

NWMA is working closely with the Nevada Department of Ag to update the NWMA

list serve. We are revamping the system and trying to get everyone’s name attached to their e-mail address so we know exactly who is on the list. To facilitate this process if you are contacted by the Department and if you still wish to remain on the e-mail list please give them your name. Your name and e-mail address do not go out to everyone when we e-mail out to everyone.

The Board is also strategizing for the 2015 legislative session and the 2017 session. Nevada remains one of the last western states which has not yet established county level weed programs through state statute. Nevada currently has legislation in place to establish and operate weed districts in each county. However, to date few local governments have taken advantage of the ability to establish a weed district. In Nevada, counties with funded weed districts have been successful in assisting landowners with noxious weed control and leveraging additional outside funding.

The Nevada Department of Agriculture currently has two full time staff to assist coun-ties with establishing weed districts. Due to Nevada’s largely publicly managed land, to date Cooperative Weed Management Areas and Conservation Districts have been utilized to combat noxious weeds. CWMAs/CDs are effective in coordinating and creating coop-eration among landowners, stakeholders and agencies. Where CWMAs are not completely effective is in the areas of funding and regulation. Because of the inability to generate funding and conduct regulatory action, the State of Nevada greatly needs to establish local weed districts with the ability to generate funding and carry out regulatory actions.

NWMA promotes integrated pest management (IPM) strategies that include preven-tion, control, and restoration. A state or locally funded weed district or similar mechanism would provide land managers funding to fully implement IPM. NWMA is planning a strategy for upcoming legislative sessions to demonstrate the need and importance of weed districts and consistent funding. Nevada stands apart from its neighbors as we lack a fully funded program. Neighboring states utilize general fund dollars, sunset taxes (Montana), local tax levies for districts and many other mechanisms necessary to fully fund programs. Each state has a variety of potential mechanisms in place. In Nevada, a portion of the pes-ticide registration fee funds the programs two full time staff. Although this is a great start toward funding a statewide program, additional funds are needed to combat the threat of noxious weeds through an effective statewide infrastructure.

The Board has also started preliminary discussions on the 2015 conference. We will keep you posted as we get the conference set up and the presenters recruited.

Lastly, I want to thank Michelle Langsdorf for her time and efforts on the NWMA Board and wish her luck with her new position at Colorado State University.

We look forward to hearing from all of you with questions, concerns, suggestions, and names for trustee candidates.

Have a great remainder of the summer and stay on the offensive against noxious weed invaders.

by Betsy Macfarlan, President

3 0 1 S I LV E R S T R E E T E L K O , N V 8 9 8 0 1

For a complete review of your insurance needs and details on coverage and credits available, contact our Farm & Ranch specialist:

775.777.9771

Farm ■ Ranch ■ Agribusiness

coverage o�ered through:

Oregon MutualInsurance Company

Protecting families and businesses in the West since 1894.

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

Hometown Solutions_EighthPageAd_sans.pdf 1 7/21/11 2:21 PM





Nevada’s Priority Agricultural Weeds:

Russian KnapweedBrad Schultz, Extension Educator, University of Nevada Cooperative Extension, Winnemucca, Nevada.

Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens) is a non-native perennial forb (wild flower) that arrived in the United States in the late 1890’s. The weed is well adapted to damp to poorly drained soils with high salinity and/or alkalinity. Russian knapweed probably affects well over ten-thousand acres in Nevada, but the exact figure is unknown. In the year 2000, the total infestation documented across the 17 west-ern states was about 1.2 million acres, with 425,000 acres in Idaho, 85,000 acres in Oregon, 60,000 acres in Utah, 500,000 acres in Washington, and 64,000 acres in Montana. Large infestations in Nevada can be found in native grass hay meadows, rangelands, riparian areas, agronomic crops, field borders and fence lines, canal and ditch banks, road-sides and other linear corridors used to transport commerce and energy, and waste areas.

Just over 53 percent of the public land managers in Nevada rated Russian knapweed as a problematic weed on public lands. For agricultural producers, over 23 percent rated Russian knapweed as a serious problem. Geographi-cally, Russian knapweed causes more concern in the central portion of the State, from Humboldt County south through Lyon and Mineral Counties. Russian knapweed becomes problematic when the first few pioneering plants are al-lowed to rapidly expand their population and establish a nearly complete monoculture. Dense stands can persist for over 75 years and the typical outcome is reduced crop and livestock production on the affected property. The yield of grain and corn crops has declined as much as 75 to 85 per-cent. Desired species are excluded because mature Russian knapweed plants are excellent competitors for soil moisture and nutrients, and they have allelopathic properties that may inhibit the growth of many desired plants.

Plant BiologyRussian knapweed is a long-lived, relatively shade

intolerant plant with a maximum height of about 3 feet. Widespread reproduction from seed is possible but seldom occurs. Most populations typically increase from vegetative reproduction by rapidly expanding lateral roots. Russian knapweed plants rapidly develop a large root system, reach-ing depths of 8 feet their first growing season and 23 feet their second growing season. Their radial spread can cover as much as 130 square-feet after two growing seasons. Each 1-inch root segment may have a bud capable of producing a new shoot (Figure 1), and root segments as short as 1-inch have produced new shoots when buried as deep as 6 inches. Tillage that cuts the root system into small segments typi-cally creates many new plants. The buds on the root crown and the creeping roots tend to enlarge (grow) throughout the dormant season. This growth feature tends to make Russian knapweed susceptible to soil active herbicides from late fall through the dormant season, as long as the soil is not frozen and there is enough soil moisture to move the herbicide into the root zone where the active ingredient can be absorbed by the buds.

The roots of Russian knapweed store a large amount of soluble carbohydrates as energy reserves. The plant uses the energy reserves to keep the roots and buds alive during winter dormancy, and to initiate new growth the follow-ing spring. Stored energy reserves typically peak at the end of the growing season and are smallest when Russian knapweed initially flowers in the spring or early summer.

Russian knapweed tends to move more carbohydrates to the root crown and the creeping roots in the late summer and fall, as the plants slowly become senescent. Buds on the root crown and lateral roots start to develop shoots in March and April when the ground thaws and soil temperature remains above freezing. The new shoots initially develop a basal rosette of leaves, followed by bolting floral stems in May and June. Most of the carbohydrates produced by the plant during this period are reinvested in additional leaves and stems, and not moved to the root system. Flowers develop shortly thereafter, and flowering may continue all summer if the soil moisture is adequate for continued growth.

A single Russian knapweed plant can produce about 1,200 seeds, but typical seed production is several hundred per plant. Most of the seed is viable for only 2 to 3 years, but a small percentage may remain alive in the soil for about 8 years. Seed germination rates are highest when the soil re-mains wet for a minimum of 7 days, with peak germination requiring about 25 to 32 days of moist soil. These condi-tions often occur in seasonally flooded hay meadows and irrigated crop sites, particularly beneath pivot systems with short rotation intervals. A layer of soil or plant litter above the seed facilitates germination. The initial establishment of Russian knapweed occurs most often in disturbed areas where the desired perennial vegetation (or crop) has been thinned or lost due to disturbance or improper vegetation management.

The flowers and seed of Russian knapweed lack ad-aptations for long distance dispersal. Flooding, however, can transport the seed or dislodged root segments long dis-tances. Mud that contains viable seed can become attached to animals, vehicles, farm equipment or even your boots, and be moved long distances in a short period. Construction activities that transport fill-dirt to new locations can break large roots into small segments and facilitate establishment long distances away in previously uninhabited areas.

Control Approaches

Non-chemicalA single treatment that severs Russian knapweed’s

roots does not kill the plant and typically increases the num-

ber of new plants. However, one study in Russia found that multiple cuttings of the roots to at least 12 inches deep, over a 3-year year period, destroyed the root system in the top 3 feet of the soil. Root fragments up to 16 inches long showed high mortality when buried at least 12 inches deep. This suggests possible control with repeated deep plowing. Root carbohydrate reserves are lowest at flowering; therefore, a deep-plowing treatment that coincides with flowering should have greater chance of success, than deep-plowing later in the season when stored energy reserves are larger. Shallow tillage usually enhances an existing infestation, because new shoots readily emerge from short root seg-ments (1 to 2-inches long) that are buried 6 inches deep, or shallower. Shallow tillage can effectively control young seedlings that have not yet developed buds (i.e., become perennial). This treatment should be successful where seed-lings of Russian knapweed have recently emerged in fallow fields or in fields where an annual crop was harvested early in the growing season. Infrequent and especially single mowing events generally stimulate Russian knapweed to produce new shoots from the buds located on the root crown and the creeping roots. Research in a grain field in Russia, that was infested with Russian knapweed, found that when the crop was harvested for silage for four consecutive years the control of the Russian knapweed reached 99 percent. Mowing the grain crop at a relatively early growth stage co-incided with the flowering stage of the Russian knapweed, which was when the knapweed plants had their lowest stored energy reserves. Repeated harvest when the knap-weed’s energy reserves were lowest slowly depleted the plants energy reserves and they essentially starved to death.

Some species of livestock will graze Russian knap-weed, but livestock grazing usually is not a viable control option. Cattle avoid the weed due to its bitter taste, unless it is the only forge available. Forcing cattle to consume large quantities of Russian knapweed is likely to reduce their production. Sheep and goats will graze Russian knapweed more readily than cattle, and may provide control if the plants are grazed 3 or more times throughout the growing season, for at least three consecutive years. Longer treat-ment periods are often necessary. Within a single grazing season, the best control of Russian knapweed occurs when the weeds are regrazed after their shoots reach 8 to 10 inches tall. Grazing treatments, however, must be man-aged to allow the residual perennial grasses to increase in density, biomass and/or vigor so the desired vegetation can fully occupy the site and competitively exclude the Russian knapweed. Grazing treatments generally do not work well when they are a stand-alone management tool, and should be only one component of an integrated weed management program. Russian knapweed in large quantities (60 percent of body weight over 2 months) is toxic to horses, and horses should not be placed in pastures that have a large population of Russian knapweed.

Fire is not a recommended as a direct control method. Burning eliminates the top growth of Russian knapweed, but does not kill the buds on either the root crown or the roots. Removal of the shoots may stimulate the develop-ment of a large number of buds and increase the scope of the Russian knapweed infestation, particularly if the fire also removed any overstory plants that shade the knap-

Figure 1. New shoots growing from buds on a lateral root of a Russian knapweed plant. This root was about 6-inches deep when harvested. The lens cap above is root is 2-inches in diameter.


Table 1. The list below identifies the active ingredients and many of representative products known to control Russian knapweed in the general sites or crops for which the active ingredient is labeled. Use the information in this table to determine potential products for use based upon your specific needs. Product selection should occur only after the applicator has read all current product labels and identified the appropriate products for their specific situation. Many of the active ingredients listed in this table are available in pre-mixed formulations with other active ingredients. These pre-mixed packages (products) are not listed in this table. A complete list of all active ingredients and products labeled to control Russian knapweed can be searched for at the CDMS (http://www.cdms.net/LabelsMsds/LMDefault.aspx?pd=7607&t=) and Greenbook (http://www.greenbook.net/) websites. The order of chemicals below does not reflect any preference or efficacy. Across the spectrum of available products, some may only suppress Russian knapweed (generally means no seed production).

Active IngredientRepresentative

Products Ran

ge &

Pa

stur

eN

on-

Cro

p

Fallo

w

Bar

e-gr

ound

Smll

Gra

ins

Cor

n

Alfa

lfa

Min

t

Pota

toes

Selective Soil Residual Growth Stage

2,4-D Many x x x x x x x x Yes No

Aminocyclopyrachlor

Method 50 SG or several pre-mixed formulations with

other products

x x Yes Yes

Post-emergence from bud to senescence. Buds on root crown of senescent plants are very susceptible to this herbicide

Aminopyralid Milestone x x Yes Yes


Chlorsulfuron Telar XP x x YesModerate, but long for sensi-

tive crops

Post-emergence from flower bud to full flower-ing, or on fall rosettes

Chlopyralid Clean Slate Stinger Transline x x Yes Moderate


Dichlobenil Barrier Casoron x No YesApply to soil in the fall with or without incorporation, and in spring with incorporation

Glyphosate Accord, Roundup and many others x x x x x x x x No No

Post-emergence to rapidly growing plants at the late bud-to-flower growth stage, particu-larly in late summer or fall

Imazapic Imazapic 2SL Plateau x x Yes Yes

Post-emergence in the fall after senescence starts. Vari-able results if applied af-ter completely dormant

Imazapyr Arsenal, Habi-tat, Polaris x x x No Yes Post-emergence in the fall

after senescence starts

Metsulfuron- methyl Escort, Patriot x x x YesModerate, but long in soils with high pH

Post-emergence from flower bud to full flower-ing, or on fall rosettes

Picloram Tordon 22K x x x Yes Yes


Tebuthiuron Spike x x Variable YesSoil surface application in the fall/dormant season when rainfall incorporates into the soil

weed. Russian knapweed grows very well in high sunlight environments and any additional sunlight after an unsuc-cessful control treatment probably has beneficial feedback for the knapweed plants. Flaming or other heat treatments that kill the top growth can control current seed production if the plants are treated at flowering or the early stage of seed formation. After a flaming treatment, regrowth of new

shoots from the buds is possible if soil moisture is adequate; therefore, several treatments per season may be necessary. Burning the standing dead material can remove physical barriers that reduce herbicide placement on the leaves or soil surface. This should place more of the active ingredi-ent on the leaf surface or the soil (for soil active herbicides), which should improve treatment efficacy. Burning also

can be a valuable seedbed preparation treatment when it removes plant litter that could adversely affect the seeding of desired species.

There are no effective bio-controls of Russian knap-weed at this time. A number of insects have been approved for release but their establishment generally has been poor and there are few if any documented cases of success-

Listing a commercial herbicide does not imply an endorsement by the authors, University of Nevada Cooperative Extension or its personnel. Product names were used only for ease of reading, not endorsement. Herbicides should be selected for use based upon the active ingredient and the specific bio-environmental situation to which it will be applied. Product labels change often; therefore, applicators should always consult the current label prior to applying any herbicide.


http://www.cdms.net/LabelsMsds/LMDefault.aspx?pd=7607&t=

http://www.greenbook.net


ful treatment. At best, these insects stress the Russian knapweed plants but do not effectively reduce existing populations.

To achieve a permanent decline in Russian knapweed, treated sites must establish a dense and vigorous stand of desired vegetation. For most pasture and rangeland set-tings this means a dense stand of tall and robust perennial grasses. Annual or perennial crops also must be managed to maintain a high density and/or cover of the crop. Annual crops that are harvested early on sites that will have suf-ficient soil moisture for continued growth of the Russian knapweed, usually will need a post-harvest treatment (her-bicide or other tool) to reduce the knapweed.

The vegetation/crop management goal is two-fold: 1) provide at least partial shade of the Russian knapweed; and 2) for the crop or pasture plants to have a large robust root system to extract more soil moisture and soil nutrients than are consumed by the knapweed. For many range and pasture systems, the widespread establishment of Russian knapweed coincided with one or more management actions that either thinned the perennial grasses or maintained pre-viously thinned stands in a degraded state (regardless of the initial cause of the degradation). On these sites, vegetation management (e.g., grazing management, harvest manage-ment, fertilization, etc.) probably must change to provide the perennial grasses an opportunity increase and eventu-ally out compete the Russian knapweed. Without a change in management, the weed will probably return and expand toward and possibly exceed its previous level.

Chemical ControlThere are about a dozen active ingredients labeled for

application to Russian knapweed (Table 1). Most are labeled for range, pasture, and non-crop sites: the locations where large infestations typically occur in Nevada. Most, but not all, labeled ingredients are selective, causing little or no damage to desired perennial grasses when they are applied according to the instructions on the product label. None of the active ingredients, however, are safe to apply to broad-leaf crops when they are actively growing. Many should not be applied when the crops are dormant because the active ingredients have a long period of soil activity.

Soil active herbicides that have a long period of soil

Figure 2. A dense, completely senescent stand of Russian knapweed in Paradise Valley, Nevada, that was treated with herbicides on November 24, 2009. Treatment success was up to 90 percent with aminocyclopyrachlor and almost 80 percent with Miletsone.

Figure 3a. Treated and untreated Russian knapweed infestation on July 7, 2010. The side of the photo was treated with Milestone (aminopyralid) in November 2009 when the plants were completely senescent. On July 7, 2010 there were no Russian knapweed plants visible in the treated area and plants in the untreated area were 12 to 18 inches tall. The light green plants in the treated area are poverty weed.

Figure 3b The same area shown in Figure 3a but on August 19, 2010. The scattered, tall, dark green plants in the treated area are Russian knapweed that emerged sometime after July 2, 2010.

residual activity are important for the control and manage-ment of Russian knapweed. These chemicals can effectively kill the buds that form in the fall on Russian knapweed’s roots and root crown, including the period after the plants becomes completely senescent, as long as the soil remains unfrozen. Research completed several years ago in Para-dise Valley, Nevada found that completely senescent plants treated the last week of November resulted in 90 percent control with aminocyclopryachlor and almost 80 percent control with 7 ounces of Milestone (aminopyralid), 11 months after treatment (Figure 2). Many of these herbicides are still active the spring after their application and continue to kill viable buds and roots. Although numerous herbicides can be applied from the bud stage through fall dormancy, treatments completed after fall senescence begins, through complete dormancy, generally are more effective.

The movement of a foliar applied herbicide to, and then through the large root system, largely follows the movement of carbohydrates from the leaves to the rest of the plant. For Russian knapweed, the plant typically moves more carbo-hydrates to the root crown and roots in the late summer to early fall, than in the spring through flowering period. For a foliar herbicide treatment to be effective, however, the leaves must be actively photosynthesizing, which requires adequate soil moisture. The mere presence of green leaves in late summer or early fall does not guarantee the plant is photosynthesizing and moving carbohydrates to the roots. Herbicide applications to green plants under dry soil condi-tions typically are much less successful than when the soil is moist.

There is no single active ingredient listed in Table 1 that is the best herbicide for all Russian knapweed infes-tations. Some factors to consider are: 1) do you need an herbicide that is selective and not going to adversely affect the residual desired species that occupy the site; 2) are your short- and mid-term management objectives compatible with a chemical that leaves a residual amount of the active ingredient in the soil; 3) what will Russian knapweed’s growth stage(s) be when you have the time to fit an herbicide treatment into your overall farming or ranching operation; and 4) can you make the commitment to any follow-up treat-ment that is needed. 2,4-D and glyphosate based herbicides

typically result in less long-term control than the other active ingredients listed in Table 1. Treatment of Russian knapweed with these two chemicals is more likely to need one or more follow-up applications. Are you likely to make that commitment? If not, would a different herbicide be more appropriate?

Any weed control and management program for Rus-sian knapweed must consider using an integrated approach that applies two or more methods of weed control. Very seldom does a single approach work long-term. Further-more, all approaches, except the purposeful management of an area for bare-ground, must consider how to establish and/or increase the desired species on an infested site. A dense, vigorous stand of desired perennial grasses (or crop species) provides the best opportunity to prevent the rapid large scale establishment of Russian knapweed, particularly when combined with periodic scouting to find the initial colonizers and eliminate them before they develop large root systems. Early detection of Russian knapweed and a rapid response to the first few plants that appear provides the best opportunity to prevent large scale establishment and costly, multi-year treatment.

An important question of any herbicide treatment is, was I successful? Your level of success cannot be deter-mined until at least the middle of the first growing season after your treatment is applied. Figures 3a and 3b show a field that was treated with Milestone (aminopyralid) in No-vember after the plants were dormant. The following year, in early July there were no Russian knapweed plants in the treated area and knapweed growth in the untreated area was 12 to 18 inches tall (Figure 3a). By mid-August, numerous Russian knapweed plants had emerged on the treated area (Figure 3b). Without a follow-up treatment these relatively few plants will expand and the site eventually will once again become heavily infested with Russian knapweed. The knapweed plants emerged in the treated area about 4 months after plants in the untreated area, because, the treatment killed virtually all of the buds on the shallow roots, but not all the buds on the deeper roots. It took about four months for the surviving plants to move stored energy to the surviv-ing buds and grow a shoot through the soil until it emerged above-ground. The effectiveness of an herbicide treatment on any weed that has a deep root system with buds that can grow into new plants should not be judged too soon after treatment. The full effect of an herbicide treatment may take a year or more to appear.


Nevada’s Priority Agricultural Weeds:

SandburBrad Schultz, Extension Educator, University of Nevada Cooperative Extension, Winnemucca, Nevada.

In Nevada, Sandbur (Cenchrus spp) is a non-native grass species that was listed as problematic by at least 5 percent of agricultural producers in every county, except Douglas and Carson City. On the high end, 50 percent of the ranchers and farmers in Churchill County and 32 percent in Clark and Lincoln counties rated sandbur as problematic species About 15 to 20 different species of sandbur occur in the United States, but only two, mat sandbur (Cenchrus lon-gispinus) and coastal sandbur (Cenchrus spinifex) currently are known to occur in Nevada. Both species are native to North America but have spread northward from subtropi-cal climates in the southerly portions of the country. Plant taxonomy books list the maximum elevation of these two species at about 3,000 feet, but the lowest geographic point in Elko County is about 4,300 feet. These species obviously grows at higher elevations in Nevada than in other states.

In Nevada, both species sandbur are warm season annuals that can provide good, albeit limited, forage for livestock during their vegetative growth phase. Once the seeds begin to develop the plant becomes non-palatable due to the presence of very rigid spines (similar to goatheads) that can injure the mouths of animals, and the hands and feet of people (Figure 1). The two species are very similar to one-another which makes species specific identification difficult; however, their growth habits, ecological effects, and response to treatments are similar. For this article they are collectively referred to as Sandbur.

Sandbur is adapted to sandy to sandy loam soil, but can grow in heavier soils. This weed typically inhabits disturbed sites where the vegetation has been thinned or eliminated. These may be roadsides, utility and railroad corridors, ditch banks, trails, fence lines, vacant lots or fields, abandoned or fallow crop land, orchards, cultivated crops, the field crops, and hay fields or pasture that has become degraded and thin. In the state of Washington, plants are spreading from roadsides into adjacent grassland and rangeland habitat. Sandbur seeds are easily spread by attaching to clothing, the fur of domestic and wild animals, and machinery and equipment. The seed floats quite well and may be transported for many miles in irrigation ditches, canals or streams.

Plant BiologyReproduction occurs entirely from seed. Germination

typically begins to occur March and April, perhaps earlier if winters are warm and wet, and may continue into the sum-mer if soil moisture is adequate. As seedlings develop they develop a fibrous but shallow root system. Plants typically

begin to produce seed (burs) in July and seed production may continue into October. Each bur contains one to three seeds, and one plant may produce well over 1,000 burs. In each bur, the uppermost seed is the largest (i.e., the primary seed) and typically germinates first, often without having to undergo any dormancy. The two smaller secondary seeds can remain dormant for up to 2 or 3 years, perhaps longer. Seedling emergence appears best when the seed is buried in the 0.4 to 1.2 inch (1 to 3 cm) depth range, but seedlings can emerge in sandy soil from seed buried to almost 10 inches (25 cm) deep. The roots do not have buds from which a plant can regrow; however, the lower nodes on a stem (til-ler) may develop roots if the node has continuous contact with the soil.

Seed germination appears to be inhibited by light and prolonged sunlight may induce seed dormancy, particularly for the smaller secondary seeds. Seed located on the soil surface appears to have a long period of potential germina-tion, often lasting for three years or longer. Seedling sur-vival, however, appears to be much less than for seedlings that originate from buried seed. Disturbances that bury the burs at shallow depths and remove the desired vegetation appear to stimulate seed germination and seedling survival. Flushes of new seedlings readily occur in the summer or early fall following irrigation or adequate rainfall.

Control Approaches

Non-chemicalMechanical treatments can be effective an effective

control for seedlings and young plants. Large plants that have developed tillers with elongated nodes can develop ad-ditional roots when the lower nodes touch the ground. Each additional root system increases the probability that part of the overall plant will survive a tillage treatment, complete its lifecycle, and add seed to the soil. Long-term control of sandbur ultimately requires depletion of the seedbank, which requires a minimum of 2 to 3 years without any new seed being added to the soil, as including seed transported onto the site from distant populations. Mechanical treat-ments will often have to occur several times a year on sites that receive moisture inputs throughout the growing season. Each irrigation or rainfall event may result in additional seed germination and new plants becoming established. Ar-eas with known infestations in the past 2 to 3 years should be scouted after any irrigation or rainfall event to determine if a new batch of seedlings has emerged. One surviving plant may add several thousand seeds to the soil, prolong-

ing treatment an additional three years. Deep plowing can bury the seed below the optimal germination depth of 0.4 to 1.2 inches, which should reduce germination, emergence and establishment in many fields; however, this technique may be less successful in sandy soil, than in silt or clay loams. Subsequent plowing, however, may move deeply buried seed into the shallow depth band where germination potential is high.

Mowing and grazing treatments that occur before sandbur flowers (i.e., boot stage) can often reduce seed pro-duction, but seldom eliminates it. If the soil has adequate moisture, mowed and grazed plants usually regrow from buds located at the base of each stem (tiller). If the regrowth is not treated the new secondary tiller will usually develop viable seeds. For grazing to effectively control sandbur it must be intense enough to remove all of the existing stems to near ground level. If the Sandbur plants are mixed with desired vegetation, the potential outcome of an intense mowing or grazing treatment must consider the effects of the treatment on the desired vegetation. A grazing or mowing treatment that adversely affects the vigor and/or abundance of the desired plants often facilitates an increase in either sandbur or some other weed. This outcome occurs because there is more soil moisture and nutrients available to the weeds, which often germinate earlier or grow faster than the desired vegetation.

There are no biological controls for Sandbur at this time.

There is little information about sandbur’s response to fire. That said, sandbur usually does not occur in a stand large enough carry a controlled burn, to use fire to elimi-nate the weed. Flaming individual young plants (especially seedlings) before they flower effectively controls sandbur, but probably has no effect on seed buried in the soil.

The best approach to reducing the risk of having a large infestation of sandbur in cropland, rangeland or pasture is to manage the vegetation or crop to promote a plant com-munity composed tall, dense, and vigorous plants. A dense stand of vigorous desired plants reduces the probability of sandbur establishment and abundant seed production from existing plants

Chemical ControlThere are over 25 active ingredients that effectively

control or suppress sandbur in wildland, non-crop and com-mon crops found in Nevada (Table 1). These active ingre-dients are packaged into over 250 labeled products, a large

★ A D A M ★ L A X A L T FOR NEVADA ATTORNEY GENERAL

He is ready to fight for NEVADA!! www.adamlaxaltforag.comVote Nov. 4th

Paid for by Adam Laxalt for Attorney General


www.adamlaxaltforag.com

Active IngredientRepresentative

Products Ran

ge &

Pa

stur

eN

on-

Cro

p

Fallo

w

Bar

e-gr

ound

Smll

Gra

ins

Cor

n

Alfa

lfa

Min

t

Pota

toes

Selective Soil Residual Growth Stage

Acetochlor* Breakfree NXT,Harness x Yes Yes, < 1 year

Preplant, preemergence or early pos-temergence. Ineffective on emerged seedlings. Soil incorporation required

Alachlor* Intrro Micro-tech x Yes Yes Preemergence with shallow in-corporation into soil

Benefin Balan x Yes Yes Preemergence with shallow in-corporation into soil

ClethodimClethodim 2E, Section, Select,

and othersx x x x x x Yes No Postemergence to actively grow-

ing sandbur 2-6 inches tall

Dimethenamid-P* Commit, Establish, and others x x Yes Yes Preemergence with shallow in-

corporation into soil

Dithiopyr Dimension x Yes Yes, < 1 year Preemergence with activa-tion by rainfall or irrigation

Diuron Direx, Diuron, Karmex and others x x x x x Variable Yes

Preemergence is best, but maybe ef-fective postemergence to succulent weeds growing rapidly under high humidity and warm temperatures

EPTC Eptam x x x x Yes Yes, but short Preplant with soil incorportion

Fenoxaprop-p-ethyl Tacoma x Yes No Postemergence from the 1-leaf to 2-tiller stage of growth

Fluazifop-p-butly Fusilade Ornamec x x Yes None to 60 days

Postemergence to actively grow-ing, unstressed plants

Flufenacet* Define x Yes Yes Best when preplant or preemergence, and incorporated into the soil

Glufosinate-ammonium

Finale, Ingnite 280 SL, Reckon

280 SL, Rely 280x x No None to

very shortPostemergence to actively growing plants. Repeat treatments may be necessary

Glyphosate Accord, Roundup and many others x x x x x x x x No No Postemergence to rapidly grow-

ing plants less than 6 inches tall

Imazapic NuFarm Imazapic 2SL Plateau x x Yes Yes Postemergence, low rate to plants less than

4 inches tall, high rate to taller plants

Imazapyr Polaris x x x No Yes Preemergence or post-emergence to actively growing weeds

Imazethapyr* Pursuit x Yes Yes Preemergence or postemergence to ac-tive growth less than 3 inches tall

Nicosulfuron Accent x Yes ModeratePostemergence to weeds less than 3 inches tall or wide. Use crop oil concentrate and ammonium N

Norflurazon* Solicam DF x x Yes Yes Preemergence with soil incorporation by irrigation or rainfall within 4 weeks

Oryzalin Harrier x Yes Short to Moderate

Preemergence. Also labeled for many warm season turf grasses

PendimethalinAcumen, Pendant,

Prowl, Stealth and others

x x x Yes Yes Depending on the crop, preplant, pre-emergence or early postemergence

Primisulfuron-methyl* Beacon Herbicide x Yes Yes Postemergence to actively grow-

ing weeds 1-4 inches tall

Pyroxasulfone* Zidua x Yes Yes, up to 10 months

Postemerence with soil incorporation by 0.5 inches of irrigation or rainfall

Quizalofop-p-ethyl Assure II, Se-cure EC, Targa x x Yes Yes Postemergence to actively growing

weeds with tillers 2-6 inches long

Terbacil Sinbar WDG x Variable YesTo dormant stands, preemergence or postemergence when weeds are less than 2 inches tall or wide

Trifluralin Treflan, Trifluralin, Trust and others x x x x x Yes Yes Preemergence with soil incor-

poration within 24 hours


Listing a commercial herbicide does not imply an endorsement by the authors, University of Nevada Cooperative Extension or its personnel. Product names were used only for ease of reading, not endorsement. Herbicides should be selected for use based upon the active ingredient and the specific bio-environmental situation to which it will be applied. Product labels change often; therefore, applicators should always consult the current label prior to applying any herbicide.

Table 1 (at left). Active ingredients and many of the representative products labeled for the control of sandbur in the landscape settings and crops in Nevada. Additional active ingredients may be labeled for turf, ornamentals, or less common crops in Nevada. Information in this table can be used to determine the potential active ingredients for your specific needs. Product selection should occur only after the applicator has read all current product labels and identified the appropriate products for their specific situation. Many of the active ingredients shown below are available in pre-mixed formulations with other active ingredients. Those pre-mixed products are not listed in this table. A complete list of all active ingredients and products labeled to control sandbur can be searched for at the CDMS (http://www.cdms.net/LabelsMsds/LMDefault.aspx?pd=7607&t=) and Greenbook (http://www.greenbook.net/) websites. The order of active ingredients below is alphabetical and does not reflect any preference or efficacy. Across the spectrum of available products, some may only suppress sandbur (i.e., no seed production) and these are marked with an *.

number of which are pre-mixed products of two or more ac-tive ingredients. In addition to the active ingredients shown in Table 1, there are at least 8 additional active ingredients that are labeled for warm season turf gasses, ornamental plants, onions, or minor/small acreage crops (e.g., carrots, lettuce, asparagus, etc.) that are scattered throughout the state. These include: ethalfluralin, imazamox, metribuzin, napropamide, oxadiazon, prometryn, s-metalachlor and se-thoxydim. The heading for Table 1 describes the databases that can be searched to determine the specific settings these additional active ingredients are labeled for. These data-bases permit a user to find the specific herbicides labeled for any crop they intend to grow.

Most of the active ingredients shown in Table 1 are selective, although the degree of selectivity can vary by crop or environmental setting, soil type, growth stage of the non-target plants, and the dose applied. Many chemicals also display some level of soil residual activity, which for some active ingredients can vary considerably and depends upon soil texture, soil moisture, soil pH, and the percent of organic matter in the soil. Most post-emergent herbicides are more effective on young rapidly growing plants, but some can effectively control larger plants; however, the rate of chemical application usually is much larger. The higher rate of application also can lengthen the period of soil residual activity, which may limit the selection of species available for crop rotation following harvest.

No single active ingredient listed in Table 1 is the best herbicide for all sandbur infestations. Every situation is unique and herbicide selection should be based on site-specific conditions. Some factors to consider are: 1) do you need an herbicide that is selec-tive and not going to adversely affect the residual desired species that occupy the site; 2) are your short- and mid-term management objectives compatible with an active ingredient that leaves a soil residual; 3) what will be the growth stage of sandbur when you have the time to fit an herbicide treatment into your overall farming or ranching operation; 4) is control of the plant (i.e., plant death) your primary goal or is partial control and suppression of seed production an acceptable outcome; and 5) can you make the commitment for a follow-up treatment if one is needed. Some chemicals, especially those that lack a soil residual that can control the next germination cohort, provide less long-term control than the other active ingredients. Short duration active ingredients will probably require more extensive follow-up treatments than active ingredients with a lengthy soil residual.

Weed control and management programs for sandbur should use an integrated ap-proach that applies two or more methods of weed control. Very seldom does a single approach work long-term. Furthermore, all approaches, except for the purposeful manage-ment of an area for bare-ground, must consider how to establish and/or increase the desired species on an infested site. A dense vigorous stand of desired perennial grasses (or crop

species) provides the best opportunity to prevent a rapid large scale establishment of sandbur, particularly when it is combined with periodic scouting to find and eliminate the initial colonizers. Controlling the initial colonizers of a site before they add seed to the soil typically results in a one season control program. Once viable seed enters the soil a control program will last at least 2 to 3 years or longer. Early detection of sandbur and a rapid response to the first few plants provides the best opportunity to prevent large scale establishment and costly, multi-year treatments.

An important question of any herbicide treatment is, was I successful? Sandbur reestablishes from seed each growing season, and buried seed can survive at least 2 to 3 years. An herbicide treatment of sandbur can be 100 per-cent effective the year it is applied, but successful control of sandbur may require several more years of completely successful treatment before all of the viable seed in the soil is eliminated. Always revisit treated sites for at least 3 years to ensure that new plants do not establish and produce seed. If the infested area occurs along an invasion pathway for which the movement of sandbur seed cannot be prevented annual inspection should occur to determine if new plants have established. If new plants are found the best control treatment may or may not be a herbicide application. If only a few are present remove them mechanically to reduce the risk of creating an herbicide resistant plant. Repeated use of the same active ingredient or other active ingredients with the same mode of action can lead to herbicide resistance and loss of an effective management tool.

The next article in this series will look at Kochia (Ko-chia scoparia), an annual forb common on degraded pastures and rangeland, roadsides and the boarders of many fields.

Figure 1. Longspine sandur inflorescence. This photo shows the spines that develop on the seed capsule of sandbur. Each capsule contains three seeds, the largest of which has little if any dormancy, while the smaller two often have innate dormancy at the time of dispersal. (Photo obtained from the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board at http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/detail.asp?weed=24)

Since 1959 - Manufactured in Scio, OregonMain Offi cePowell Scales NW39120 West Scio Rd.Scio, OR 97374Ph 503-394-3660Fax 503-394-3502Toll Free: 1-800-451-0787

Spokane Offi ceInland Scales NW

5602 E. Desmet Ave.PO Box 11335

Spokane, WA 99211Ph 509-535-4295

Fax 509-535-4296

Steve Orr • 503-510-3540www.scalesnw.com • [email protected] • SCALES 800-451-0187

TRUCK SCALES • LIVESTOCK SCALES • WAREHOUSE SCALES • RENTAL SCALES

SCALE SERVICE • SYSTEMS • PARTS • SALES & CONSTRUCTION

MOBILE LIVE ST OCK RE NT ALS AVAILABLE AT :

POR TABLE TRUCK SCALE S WIT H ST EE L RAMPOR MOBILE LIVE ST OCK SCALE S AVAILABLE

CER TI FIABLE !AFF OR DABLE !

Bullet Rental - Klamath Falls, OR • ACW Rentals - Burns, OR • Powell Scales - Scio, OR

RentalsAvailable!





http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/detail.asp?weed=24

http://www.nwcb.wa.gov/detail.asp?weed=24

The End of Summer

OF A RANCH WIFE

J. B. Wh i t e l e y

NORTE TRAILERS

Mitch Goicoechea

[email protected]

Call Mitch,to get your Norte Horse Trailer!

500 Commercial St.Elko, NV 89801

GarciaBits & SpursThe gift that won’t be re-gifted!

Bit #122 $475NV. Sales tax 6.85%S&H $12

Spur #273 $475NV. Sales tax 6.85%S&H $12

Phone: (775) 738-5816Fax: (775) 738-8980

capriolas.com

We’ve had a pretty good summer here in Lamoille. We’ve had plenty of moisture and still have a lot of green grass. Our horses are handling good,

our cows are fat, and cattle prices are a good deal higher than last year. It’s a great time to be a rancher. Life is good!

I don’t want the summer to end, but my little cowboys are anxious for school to start. They’ve had a busy summer full of games, weed spraying, fence fixing, cowboy work, and riding with friends. Not much TV and video games at our house.

The boys have come a long way with their riding this summer and are starting to be pretty good help. We’ve been riding for fun with G. and his mom, and have discovered speed. You get done a lot faster if you do everything at a run! Now mom spends most of her time saying “Slow Down!” They’ve started to learn about circles and etiquette, and are starting to read cattle. It amazes me the observations these boys make. While TR is count-ing bugs and horny toads on his ride, QT constantly wants to know what his horse, that cow

over there, the cowdog, or even mom’s horse is thinking.I am struggling with school starting. This year both boys will be in school part of

the day. QT starts kindergarten and TR is a big second grader. On one hand, I am looking forward to a couple of hours without kids to get some work done. On the other hand, I am going to be pretty lost without at least one of my helpers.

Who is going to drive the side by side through gates for me? Or help me block gates when we are moving cows, hold rodeer, or look for foot rot and bad eyes? I’ve tried to talk QT into getting a job cowboying and staying home with me but he won’t have it. Even the threats of vaccinations won’t deter him from going to school. He just tells me “I’ll get the shots mom. I need to go to school so I can learn.”

I tell myself to enjoy it while it lasts because before too long it will be a fight to get them to go to school. I really wouldn’t mind if they wanted to wait a little longer before going! They are growing up too fast!


There’s nothing more important in the world to you than your family. However, your family-owned busi-

ness probably helps support your family. So, when it comes to protecting both your family and your business, you need to carefully consider your moves. As you know, you face plenty of challenges to keep your business running smoothly — but it can be even more difficult to pass the family business on to your children or other relatives. In fact, according to the Small Business Administration, only 33% of family owned businesses survive the transition from first generation ownership to the next generation.

Why is it so hard to keep a family business intact? Sometimes, it’s because no one in the family is interested in running the busi-ness — but family businesses frequently disintegrate because of the lack of a succession plan.

To create a succession plan, your first step — and possibly the most important one — is to collect the thoughts and preferences of family members on their future involve-ment with your business. It’s essential that you know who wants to really do the day-to-day work and who is capable. During these conversations, you’ll also want to discuss other key business-succession issues, such as the retirement goals and cash flow needs of retiring family owners, and the personal and financial goals of the next generation of management.

In developing a plan for the future of your business, you will need to determine who will control and manage the business, and who will eventually own it. These deci-sions will depend on a variety of factors, such as the time horizon, goals and financial needs of the family members involved.

Your succession plan could be based on a family limited partnership. Under this arrangement, you, as general partner, would maintain control over the day-to-day op-eration of your business, but, over time, you could gift or sell limited partnership shares to your family members. Eventually, you would also relinquish control of the busi-ness to whoever is going to run it.

Another component of your succes-sion plan might be a “buy-sell” agreement, which allows you to name the buyer for your business — such as one of your children—and establish methods to determine the sale price. Your child could then purchase a life insurance policy on your life and eventu-ally use the proceeds to buy the business, according to the terms established in the buy-sell agreement.

We’ve just skimmed the surface of techniques that might be used alone or in combination to carry out your business succession. The transfer can be complex, so you will certainly need to consult with your legal and financial professionals. It’s important that you fully understand the business and tax implications of any succes-sion plan as well as the financial impacts of a plan on all your family members.

In any case, once you’ve created your succession plan, you’ll need to work with your legal advisor to put it in writing and com-municate it clearly to all family members. Surprises are welcome in many parts of life — but not when it comes to transferring a family business. You want to leave your family a legacy. And if that legacy is the family business, do whatever it takes to pass it on in a manner that benefits everyone involved. This will take time and planning — but it can be well worth the effort.

This article was written by Edward Jones for use by your local Edward Jones Financial Advisor.

1222 6th St., P.O. Box 368 Wells, NV 89835 • www.bottarirealty.com

North Butte Valley Ranch: 550 deeded acres with Spring fed meadow and hay ground and approx. 2400 BLM aum’s in private allotment. Home is off the grid with power from Solar panels and back-up generator. Located on County road approx. 50 miles South of Wells, Nevada. Price: $950,000.

Elko Co. 10,706 deeded with BLM graz-ing permit: These private sections are in the checkerboard area and are intermingled with pub-lic lands. The ranch has historically been a Spring Sheep range. The BLM permit is only 29% public lands. Price includes 50% of the mineral rights on all but 320 acres. Oil & Gas Lease might pay a big portion of the purchase! Price: $130/acre. Or $1,392,000. Considering adding the property below to it to make a year around unit.

Elko Co. Humboldt River Property: 650 acres located between the Ryndon and Osino Exits on I-80. This property has over 300 acres of sur-face water rights out of the Humboldt River. The BLM permit for the 10,706 acres above is a short distance from this property with a stock driveway on this property. Price: $1.2 million.

Current Mountain Ranch located approx. 54 miles West of Ely, Nevada in Nye County. Great self sustaining ranch with irrigated lands with one 30+acre center pivot, several irrigated meadows, fi sh ponds, apple, grapes, apricot, peach, pears, nectarine, cherry, and more fruit. Acorn tree’s and other shade trees. Mule Deer and Wild turkeys are plentiful. Three homes, large shop building, meat cooler and prep area and more! A multi denomination church just down the road! Price; $1,900,000. Co-listed with Knipe Land Co.

Ruby Valley: 1136 deeded acres of which approx. 129 acres have water rights. On paved State Rt.229. Only 45 minutes from Elko. Good summer range. Would make a great place to live! Price: $700,000

Clover Valley Ranch: 2,489 Deeded Acres with over 500 acres water righted and irrigated with a gravity fl ow system from Stream fl ow and from several underground irrigation wells one of which recently redrilled. Access on paved road and just 7 miles South of Wells, Nevada.

TENT MOUNTAIN RANCH: Closed

PENDING

Work: 775-752-3040Home: 775-752-3809 • Fax: 775-752-3021

Paul D. Bottari, [email protected]

WE NEED MORE FARMS AND RANCHES TO SELL!For additional information on these properties go to: BOTTARIREALTY.COM

Presented by Jason Land, Financial Advisor, Edward Jones in Elko, Nevada2213 North 5th Street, Sui te A | 775-738-8811

Financial Focus

Take Steps To Protect Your Family Business

Clear Creek RanchSouth of Winnemucca, Nevada. Approximately

10,000 Deeded Acres. 11 Month BLM LeaseApprox. 740 irrigated acres, 2 large

diameter irrigation wells. Ranch Manager’s home & equipment yard. Log Cottage

6445 Morning Dove LaneNice,10-acre horse property in Winnemucca.

3 bed/2 bath home with open fl oor plan, large kitchen. Large clean barn with concrete fl oors – stalls, tack room, studio. Lush front & back yard with mature trees. Greenhouse, Chicken house, Hay Storage, ATV Storage. $850,000

Starr Valley PastureUnique fenced 1,104 acres on Boulder Creek bordering U.S. Forest Service in Starr Valley, Nevada. Water-righted with nice meadows. $1,400,000

Recanzone RanchNeat ranch in Paradise Valley.

900+ acres, 300 AUMs, right by town. Original Sandstone House. Easy access to Hinkey Summit

& surrounding mountains. Includes Barn, Outbuildings and Corrals. $1,390,000

Davis RanchGreat little ranch north of Elko about 14

miles out. 157.19 acres. Fenced, cross fenced, large barn, stalls, tack room, corrals,

round pen, arena. 3 Bedroom / 2 bath home with covered deck, 4-car garage.

Flying M RanchGreat ranch! Just minutes from I-80 (Imlay, NV) & not far from Winnemucca. Approx. 23,000 acres of deeded ground with more than 23 miles on the river. Winter outside-no feeding. One of the oldest

water rights along the river. $15,000,000

J and M FarmVery nice farm just minutes from Battle Mountain, Nevada. 169 acres of which 130 are in production. Feedlot, corrals, new shop & equipment shed. New

3 bed, 2 bath mobile with mature landscape.

J M Farm (Winnemucca)58 acre well maintained farm just 3 miles from

downtown Winnemucca. Approx. 43 acres planted in alfalfa/grass mix. Water rights included in

sale. Includes two homes, mature landscaping, several outbuildings, barn and horse corrals. Farm equipment will be negotiated with sale. $780,000

Sherman Hills Ranch1,259.51 acre Private Ranch in Osino, close to Elko, Nevada with year round creek through

the property. Great views! Three large pastures, fenced and cross fenced. Garage, shop,

corrals. Permanent manuf. home. Open fl oor plan with 2 bed / 2 bath. $1,500,000

Sp� ializing in hunting, ranching, and horse properti�

Allie BearReal Estate

775-738-8535

View compl e list ings at:www.ARanchBroker.com

775-777-6416Allie Bear, Broker/Realtor


PRSR

T ST

DU

.S. P

OST

AG

EPA

IDPe

rmit

# 32

80Sa

lt La

ke C

ity, U

T

Buy Nevada is supported with Nevada agriculture license plate sales. Buy a plate today to help promote one of the state’s oldest

and most important industries. } www.dmvnv.com

/BuyNevada | BuyNevada.org

TM

Thank you to Buy Nevada’s Platinum Members

Buy Nevada is a Nevada Department of Agriculture program promoting businesses that grow and make Nevada food and

agricultural products. Free memberships available.

JOIN ONLINE

New Nevada Agriculture License Plate

AvailableLicense plate sales benefit

agricultural education and promotion of state’s agricultural industry

SPARKS, Nev. – The Nevada Department of Agriculture and Nevada FFA announced today that the new Nevada agri-culture license plate is available for sale from the Department of Motor Vehicles starting Monday, July 14, 2014.

“The FFA Foundation redesigned the plate to reflect the breadth of the agriculture industry’s contribution to the state economy, estimated at $5.3 billion total economic impact,” said Jim Barbee, director of the Nevada Department of Ag-riculture. “We also wanted to reflect the importance of this vibrant industry by ensuring Nevada’s youth agricultural edu-cation organizations – Nevada FFA and 4H – were represented on the plate.

“Our children are the future of agriculture, and it’s impor-tant that we continue to demonstrate the critical role of agricul-ture in putting food into grocery stores and on dinner tables.”

The plate is available from DMV offices and online at http://www.dmvnv.com/platescharitable.htm. Sales of the li-cense plate benefit Nevada FFA Foundation and agricultural education throughout the state, as well as the Buy Nevada program (www.buynevada.org), a Nevada Department of Agriculture program that promotes the state’s food and agri-cultural businesses.

The initial plate fee is $61 with an annual fee of $30. Per-sonalized plates are $96.

The existing agriculture license plate may continue to be used on continually registered vehicles, but it will no longer be available for purchase starting July 14, 2014. If the old plate is ever surrendered, or expired for more than the 30 days, a new plate will have to be purchased.

Governor Brian Sandoval and Lt. Governor Brian Krolicki with the new agriculture license plate.

Nevada’s First Annual Governor’s Conference on Agriculture

November 13, 2014, Reno, Nevada http://agri.nv.gov/governorsconference/


http://www.dmvnv.com/platescharitable.htm

www.buynevada.org

http://agri.nv.gov/governorsconference

the progressive rancher: september/october 2014

Documents

progressive rancher

nevada cattlemens

nevada cattlewomen

buy nevada

nevada farm bureau

ranch wife

livestock industry

edward jones