WRCA Membership & WRCF Contributor Breakfast

Posted by

0


If you are a member of the WRCA or a contributor/donator of the WRCF we would like to show appreciation by extending an invitation to a Cowboy breakfast. This is a great opportunity to fellowship with each other and learn more about the growth of both the WRCA & WRCF.  We ask that you RSVP by email or call the WRCA office no later than November 2nd! Join us as we celebrate you and some great country cookin’.

Email:   wrca@wrca.org
Phone:   (806) 374-9722

Where & When:
Sunday, November 11th @ 8:30a.m. – 10:00a.m.
Amarillo Civic Center – Hospitality Room (Regency Room)
Working Ranch Cowboys Association
408 SW 7th Avenue, Amarillo, Texas 79101
806-374-9722

Liphatech’s® Rozol® Prairie Dog Bait approved for use in ten states. Updated label permits use with Mechanical Bait Placement Machines; label reinstated in MT, ND, NM, & SD.

Posted by

0

Rozol Prairie Dog Bait (PDB),  a “Restricted-Use Pesticide”, has an updated Federal EPA, FIFRA Sec. 3 registration following a Biological Opinion completed by US Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS).  Additionally, the EPA issued a Supplemental Label, which must be in the user’s possession at the time of application, for mechanical baiting of product already in the chain of distribution. This supplemental label is valid until March 15, 2014.  Rozol PDB  can be easily distinguished by the bright green color scheme on its packaging.  Rozol PDB is offered in two packages:  a 30 lb. re-sealable pail and 50 lb. easy-to-dispose-of  bag.  There is no need to pre-treat, and its quick acceptance means less repeat applications, resulting in labor savings and a low applied cost per acre.

 

Rozol is an effective tool that landowners, ranchers and custom applicators can use to manage infestations of black-tailed prairie dogs, a range rodent that consumes up to two pounds of grazing grasses every week.  Under normal rainfall conditions, an active prairie dog colony can cut grazing capacity by over 50%, requiring ranchers to allocate up to 40 acres per steer, whereas un-infested rangeland can often carry a steer on only 10 acres.  Pastures with 20% prairie dog occupancy reduced the estimated value of livestock weight gain by over $14 per steer, while 60% occupancy reduced that value by $37 or more per steer.

 

New Label Requirements:  Rozol PDB’s label now has several new requirements to reduce potential risks to non-target and endangered species (ES).  In all areas users must follow the measures contained in the ES protection bulletin, for the county(s) where Rozol PDB will be applied, no more than 6 months prior to application and for the month of planned application.  Current county bulletins can be found by consulting www.epa.gov/espp/ or by calling 1-800-447-3813.  Liphatech may be holding a product stewardship educational presentation in your area.  Contact your local cattlemen’s association, county weed board, or Liphatech for more information.

 

In most areas, Rozol PDB can still be applied between October 1 and March 15.  In some ES areas, such as Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse or Grizzly Bear habitat, users must delay the start of baiting until Nov. 1 or Dec. 1, respectively.   In parts of southeastern NM and southwestern Texas – within the habitat of the Northern Aplomado Falcon – the USFWS must be notified prior to baiting.

 In Black-footed Ferret (BFF) reintroduction areas, on some tribal lands including the Blackfoot and Crow Reservations in MT, as well as in certain counties in NM, prairie dogs can no longer be managed using Rozol PDB.  If BFF’s are found before, during or after application, authorities must be notified to allow for ferret capture and relocation.

 

Application Timing:  Ranchers are encouraged to bait early, or during snow melt-offs, before cold or recurring snow cover makes bait application more difficult.  Rozol PDB is a “Restricted Use Pesticide” requiring applicators to be state-licensed to purchase and apply product.  The list of states approving the use of Rozol PDB includes: Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas and Wyoming, (new states).

Application Methods:  Ranchers find that Rozol Prairie Dog Bait is easy to use, with treatment involving the placement of ¼ cup of bait at least six inches down active burrows.  Application may be made by hand, or (NEW) by using a mechanical bait application machine that is designed, constructed and operated in a manner that ensures the bait is properly placed and that the proper amount of bait is dispensed.  For users possessing older product packaging without this mechanical baiting language, a supplemental label is available from dealers, or from  www.liphatech.com. Supplemental labels must be in the applicator’s possession at the time of bait application.

After Application:  Applicators must now return to treated areas within 4 days and perform carcass searches using a line-transect method that completely covers the baited area, every 1-2 days for at least two weeks.   Applicators must also immediately bury any PD carcasses found, and notify the appropriate authorities if any dead or dying non-target animals are found.  It is the user’s responsibility to read the Rozol PDB label carefully, completely and to follow all label information.

About Liphatech
Headquartered in Milwaukee, Liphatech has a long history of advancing the science of rodent management through research and product innovation.  Combining the most advanced technology available with the highest level of customer service, product stewardship, and technical support, Liphatech delivers solutions that allow growers, landowners and certified applicators to quickly achieve the cost-effective management of rodent populations.

Liphatech specializes in servicing agricultural and animal health markets, in addition to pest management professionals.  Liphatech’s Ag/AH product line includes:  FastDraw®Hombre™, BootHill®, and Gunslinger® rodenticides, as well as fastest-to-service Aegis® tamper-resistant bait stations.  Bait formulations include:  soft bait, treated grains, manufactured mini-blocks, bulk pellets, and pellet-place-packs.  For more information about Liphatech and its comprehensive line of products, call 888-331-7900or visit www.liphatech.com.

Dear Mr. President …

Posted by

0

YES I have had help in life. I was blessed with a great-grandfather who traveled from Canada to Tombstone, Arizona in 1881 where he contributed to the economy and other business by being a banker and a cattle rancher. He helped build roads, developed water sources for man and beast, and whatever else was necessary for him, his family and others to survive.

I was blessed with a grandfather who carried on in his father’s footsteps in ranching. He also contributed more than 20 years of service in the Arizona Legislature — as a Democrat. He had three sons who carried on in his image. My uncles served in the military. My father served well over 30 years on the Tombstone School Board.

They all taught me to work hard and care for others. And that’s just one side of my paternal family. On the maternal side my great-grandfather helped to build the Episcopal Church in Tombstone, one of the first in the area.

Today I am supported by a strong group of men, women and children who just want the right to raise their families in the country with wholesome values — and for the government to let them do it. Last but certainly not least, I have the Lord to watch over and lift me up every day.

YES, Mr. President, I am thankful to many for what I have and what I am able to do. But I am NOT beholding to the government for much besides the right to pay taxes and the job security of the battles that are brought down on ranching and farming families in our state and country.

One-Tree Fires

It seems that the fires just won’t leave the news and there are many large fires in western states that haven’t even made the news. The New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association (NMCGA) was honored to have President Elect Jose J. Varela Lopez invited to testify before the full U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Resources in Washington, D.C. on the subject. The Committee was interested in not only the impact of this year’s fires, but what role the Endangered Species Act and litigation may have played in them.

As expected, Jose did New Mexico and the Southwest proud. If you missed the live hearing, you can locate the link to the hearing on the NMCGA website at http://www.nmagriculture.org . The entire hearing lasted about two hours and Jose’s testimony is at the beginning.

But watching the entire hearing is worth the time and certainly demonstrates the great divide in our nation’s Capitol on issues that would seem to be no-brainers

. . . like fires destroying our land, our homes, our wildlife, and our water supplies for decades to come. The partisanship started at the onset with the opening statements by the Chairman and the Ranking Member of the Committee.

I was particularly offended by a statement, not a question, directed to Jose by Oregon’s Peter DeFazio. The gentleman has never been a supporter of livestock even though he is from the West, and he stopped just short of questioning Jose’s integrity.

It is no secret that New Mexico’s largest and most devastating fires ever started with a lightning strike and fire in a single tree. We know this because our members saw some of them start. Had U.S. Forest Service policy been to extinguish rather than “contain,” over 300,000 acres in the Gila and 250 homes in Lincoln County would have been untouched. While there is overwhelming evidence of these facts, Mr. DeFazio simply doesn’t believe it. Seems he had some “one-tree” fires in his state years ago and he had the problem fixed. If only it were that easy.

Another reason to watch the entire hearing is to catch the testimony of Alison Berry, Energy & Economics Specialist with The Sonoran Institute, a Tucson based group, with an office in Bozeman, Montana where Ms. Berry works.

Her take on the fire situation ads a new twist. Those who live near the woods are being subsidized by the rest of Americans.

According to Ms. Berry, “As housing subdivisions are built in fire-prone areas, however, there is an increasing risk to people and property. This results in higher costs to taxpayers for federal fire prevention and suppression, and greater property losses and risk to life in the event of catastrophic wildfires.

“Successful fire suppression often creates a false sense of security in fire-prone areas, effectively encouraging development on the edge of these forests, in the so-called “wildland-urban interface, or WUI,” she continued.

“An early study of fire suppression in the wildland urban interface found that when fighting large fires, between 50 and 95 percent of federal spending goes towards protecting private homes,” Berry said.

To date, most efforts to reduce risks of fire in the WUI have focused on reducing “fuels” — removing small trees and brush, either mechanically or with prescribed burning. Local land use planning efforts generally consist of requiring new subdivisions to incorporate “firewise” characteristics such as fire-resistant building and landscaping materials, adequate water supplies for firefighting, and road access for emergency vehicles.”

And who is to blame?

“Guiding development away from high risk areas is primarily a state and local responsibility,” according to Berry.

“If western counties and communities promoted responsible development patterns in forested areas, it would save millions of taxpayer dollars needed for fire suppression, reduce risks to people and property, and restore forests to healthier conditions,” she concludes.

“State and federal agencies — such as the U.S. Forest Service — cover the majority of the costs for fire suppression in the WUI. This amounts to a taxpayer subsidy for development in fire-prone areas, increasing the amount of land converted to residential uses in these areas,” she continued.

“Most existing WUI maps are notoriously vague, making it difficult to implement local growth management efforts in fire-prone areas. Better mapping would allow more effective growth management in these areas; the investment by the federal government would be recouped by reduced federal fire suppression costs,” said Berry.

“The insurance industry can also help discourage development in risky locations. As they do in floodplains, insurance companies should require higher premiums in areas of higher fire risk.”

“There are very specific actions the federal government can take to help reduce taxpayer costs associated with wildfires, including partnering with local jurisdictions and the private insurance industry to provide resources and incentives for policy reform. With federal leadership, there is every reason for local governments to use well-established, effective growth management tools to limit or prohibit development in the high risk areas for wildfire,” Berry finished.

There were members of the Committee who did ask if many of these lands Ms. Berry wants local government to control with “federal leadership” are private. Clearly it isn’t the land that The Sonoran Institute suggests needs controlling, it is people.

So who is The Sonoran Institute? You should figure it out because its mantra is “Shaping The Future Of The West.” It calls itself “community-based collaborative conservation.” The Institute came into being in 1990 — so surely they know the West better than those of us who have been here for generations. According to its IRS 1099, the Institute generates more than $3 million a year in contributions and grants and has assets of over $1.2 million. The group’s website profiles some of its major donors. As expected, there are more than a few who come from east of the Mississippi.

However, no matter how much we might disagree with groups like these, there are things to be learned from them. The Institute is part of the “One Percent for the Planet – Keep Earth in Business. When you patronize a 1 percent member business, 1 percent of their profits are donated to Partners.”

Speaking of disagreement . . .

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) never ceases to amaze at the depths they will go to garner publicity. The latest outrage is wagering on when Senator Chuck Grassley from Iowa will die — because he eats meat.

With all of that said

The House Committee on Resources recently passed H.R. 6089, the Healthy Forest Management and Wildfire Prevention Act of 2012, with a bipartisan vote of 28 to 19. Introduced by Colorado Members Scott Tipton, Doug Lamborn, Mike Coffman, and Cory Gardner, the bill would reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires, address factors that contribute to insect infestation, and restore forest health by prioritizing and implementing hazardous fuels reduction projects on federal land.

Although New Mexico has two members on this Committee it is disappointing that they did not vote in the majority.

Food Or Fuel?

With the nation suffering the worst natural disaster in its history, a drought that encompasses some 60 percent of the continental United States there are more hard choices coming. Over the past several years the federal government as well as some state governments, including New Mexico, have imposed renewable fuel standards. The theory is that the nation needs to move away from non-renewal fossil fuels and to renewables like wind, solar and ethanol. Given that there isn’t a way, at least yet, to put wind or solar in the your vehicle’s fuel tank, corn based ethanol is one way to achieve the mandates.

The current drought is impacting not only food prices, but fuel costs as well. Here is yet another place that government intervention/regulation doesn’t meet the needs of Mother Nature and thus citizens.

In a piece entitled “Corn for Food, Not Fuel” on the New York Times Opinion Page, Colin A. Carter and Henry I. Miller write, “It is not often that a stroke of a pen can quickly undo the ravages of nature, but federal regulators now have an opportunity to do just that. By suspending renewable-fuel standards that were unwise from the start, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could divert vast amounts of corn from inefficient ethanol production back into the food chain, where market forces.

“As a result [of the drought] , global food prices are rising steeply. Corn futures prices on the Chicago exchange have risen about 60 percent since mid-June, hitting record levels, and other grains such as wheat and soybeans are also sharply higher. Livestock and dairy product prices will inevitably follow.

“More than one-third of our corn crop is used to feed livestock. Another 13 percent is exported, much of it to feed livestock as well. Another 40 percent is used to produce ethanol. The remainder goes toward food and beverage production.

“Previous droughts in the Midwest . . . resulted in higher food prices, but misguided energy policies are magnifying the effects of the current one. Federal renewable-fuel standards require the blending of 13.2 billion gallons of corn ethanol with gasoline this year. This will require 4.7 billion bushels of corn, 40 percent of this year’s crop. Common sense dictates it should go.

“Other countries seem to have a better grasp of market forces and common sense.

“Another large ethanol producer uses sugar instead of corn to make ethanol. It has flexible policies that allow the market to determine whether sugar should be sold on the sugar market or be converted to fuel. Our government could learn from the approach and direct the EPA to waive a portion of the renewable-fuel standards, thereby directing corn back to the marketplace. Under the law, the E.P.A. would first have to determine that the program was causing economic harm. That’s a no-brainer, given the effects of sharply higher grain prices that are already rippling through the economy.”

Like I said at the beginning . . .

It is time for government to get out of the way and let Americans not just survive but thrive, as we have in the past without this oppression. As Americans, we can no longer sit by and think the problems are someone else’s.

With the general election just 90 days away, we CAN change government, one vote at a time. Make sure you and everyone you come in contact with is registered to vote. Make sure you and everyone you know gets involved in this election. Get to know ALL the candidates so that whoever wins will know your face and your issues. One by one, we can and WILL make a difference.

See you at the State Fair!

Big Green lawsuits cause megafires, destroy endangered species

Posted by

0

by Ron Arnold / Washington Examiner 

Professional foresters have known for years that environmentalists are the forests’ worst pest. Green groups’ lawsuits block federal forest health improvements and catastrophic wildfire prevention measures, leading to destroyed communities, dead animals and forests and timber jobs exported to foreign suppliers.

Last Tuesday, House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings, R-Wash., convened an oversight hearing on the problem, titled, “The Impact of Catastrophic Forest Fires and Litigation on People and Endangered Species.”

A single panel of four nongovernment witnesses laid out different perspectives on the hearing’s major premise: For decades, environmental groups have used the Endangered Species Act, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act to file dozens of lawsuits that block timber fuels reduction and thinning projects that would decrease the risk of wildfires that decimate species’ habitat.

The issue doesn’t register on many people because it’s too technical. What are timber fuels? How could thinning prevent wildfires? Any number of past surveys show that the American psyche sees forests as either Disneyland or Chartres cathedral: clean, safe, well-managed playgrounds or temples for the faithful.

Timber fuels are anything in the forest that gets dry or combustible — grass, brush, trees, dead or downed wood — or whatever. Thinning is the removal of these things through such methods as logging, junkwood hauling, chipping and mulching, pile and controlled burn, livestock grazing to crop tall grasses in open forests, et cetera. Such management of the woods keeps them clean and safe.

However, the green faithful hate development, including firefighting roads, tree cutting in fire-prone stands, and water catchments to put out megafires. When imposed by lawsuit upon an actual forest, the Big Green Bible produces a Crispy Critters National Wasteland. Humor aside, such behavior should be a felony.

Committee Chairman Hastings made this point tellingly by placing a superscription over the hearing’s briefing paper. It was a 2009 quote from Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Tucson, Ariz.-based Center for Biological Diversity.

Suckling said: “When we stop the same timber sale three or four times running, the timber planners want to tear their hair out. They feel like their careers are being mocked and destroyed — and they are. So, they become more willing to play by our rules and at least get something done. Psychological warfare is a very underappreciated aspect of environmental campaigning.”

It’s not just wretched hidden agendas that thwart forest managers and fire fighters. The law itself, piled high with old environmental agenda items, is wildfire’s best friend. Rick Dice, president of the National Wildfire Suppression Association, told the hearing panel, “Our environmental laws individually provide important safeguards. But collectively, they overlap in contradictory ways that make it nearly impossible for the federal land managers, local elected officials, partnership groups and private firefighting companies to navigate through the legal paperwork.”

American environmental law has only STOP buttons. There are no GO buttons that can force a development through special interest litigation.

Witness Alison Berry, an energy and economics expert at Montana’s Sonoran Institute, said as much. She recommended that the Forest Service “overhaul the public land laws that are dragging down federal land management. Reform should be directed at making national forests less vulnerable to seemingly endless litigation.”

Hastings and his staff posted a video of this crucial hearing on the committee’s website, which everyone should watch. In the meantime, how do we put STOP buttons on the environmentalists’ psychological warfare against development, and give GO buttons to rational management of our nation’s forests?

Examiner Columnist Ron Arnold is executive vice president of the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise.

Lee Anderson: Horseman of the Old School

Posted by

0

by Jim Olson 
Living historian, author and superb horseman, Lee Anderson, is a student – shall we say master – of the old Vaquero “Bridle Horse” methods. He jokingly admits, “I am probably the only Swedish vaquero you’ll ever meet.”

Born in Iowa, Lee has had a life-long affection for horses. He has ridden and trained in just about every genre of horsemanship, from Western to English and from the show ring to the pasture. He can drive two, four, six and even an eight-up team hitched to a wagon! He has trained and shown in reining, pleasure and trail and also worked with dressage, hackney, jumpers . . . and of course, the western cow-horse. His passion however, is the “Bridle Horse.”

For those who aren’t quite sure what a “Bridle Horse” is – it refers to a horse trained in the old Vaquero methods – methods not seen much in this country for 100-plus years. A layman will recognize a bridle horse as one which eventually ends up in the use of a spade bit. Many people are taken back by the spade and automatically assume it is a harsh bit based upon its appearance. Not true. In the wrong hands, any bit is harsh. Lee quotes, “All souls criticize that which they do not understand.” A horse trained in this method responds to a feather’s touch of the reins.

In the hands of a true bridle horseman, a well-trained bridle horse is pure poetry in motion. For example, it has been recorded that the old Vaqueros were big sportsman and loved to show off at festive occasions. One such game played went something like this: A hair was plucked from the horse’s tail and the “breakaway” in the reins was replaced with said tail hair. This meant if you pulled any harder than necessary to break the hair, your reins broke. The horse was then blindfolded and put through a series of intricate moves, showing its pure trust in the rider. For the finale, horse and rider ran full-tilt, straight at a solid wall. The team stopping closest to the wall, without hitting the wall or breaking the “breakaway hair” was the winner and the Vaquero considered a top horseman. (Before criticizing a contest such as this, keep in mind it was a different time, place and culture.)

When asked why old methods such as these are fading, Lee responds, “In today’s day and age, not many are willing to spend half a lifetime learning the proper methods of horsemanship so they can spend four or five years training a horse this way.” Lee is passionate about it however and says, “It’s like driving a high performance sports car. Whatever you want is there . . . and at a touch.

To a learned master such as Lee, he realizes every piece of the horseman’s and horse’s gear work intricately together to achieve an eventual result with the slightest of effort. He says, “The spade is a bit of signals. When properly used, a horse receives signals long before he ever feels the bit and responds before the bit is ever actually used.” Each piece of the tack and gear are a part of that signal system, not to mention the rider himself. Lee can pull the bridle off his horse and perform intricate maneuvers using nothing more than body language. Anderson uses a piece of string as a “breakaway” in his reins every day. Much like the old Vaqueros and their horsehair, if he uses more than just a slight tap of pressure on the reins, they break!

After many years of being fascinated with horses, Lee chose to concentrate on this old style of horsemanship because he felt it most in tune with the horse. After a lifetime of studying what makes a horse tick, Anderson has even written a book on the subject. Developing the Art of Equine Communications is all about how to communicate with your horse, from a horse’s understanding and point of view. In Lee’s opinion, the bridle horse style of horsemanship comes closest to that.

He studied horses and how they react to certain situations for over half a century. He noticed that most times, communications with a horse are approached from a human point of view, yet a horse can only understand things from a horse’s viewpoint. Lee has made it his life’s work to understand more from the horse’s view.

Lee has been known to spend hours sitting in a pasture full of horses just watching them. He studies their moves with each other in natural surroundings – how they interact together. Most people know, by nature, a horse is a “prey” animal, but few think of that when dealing with a horse. Man is, by nature, a predator and horses are easily scared of them. Lee is probably one of the best modern-day trainers who understands the philosophy of a horse, from the horse’s perspective. He felt compelled to write Developing the Art of Equine Communications to clear up some of the myths and misinformation out there.

As a historian, Lee does a presentation called “Four Hundred Years of Southwest Cowboys.” He does this in any one of three different outfits: A 1750 Spanish Colonial Caballero, an 1850 Mexican Vaquero or an 1890 American Cowboy. For each look, he has all of the period correct clothing and gear for rider and horse. The outfit may change depending upon what the situation calls for, but the historical presentation is tailored to fit what the client asks for. Lee goes over the evolution of the cowboy from its origins, beginning with the Spanish Hacendado (rancher) of the mid-1500s up through today. The first brand laws were recorded in New Spain (now Mexico) in 1529 and Lee is well versed in the history of the Vaquero – Cowboy from then through today.

Lee says, “We must include the Spanish origins in the history of the cowboy because the Vaquero was rounding up, roping, and branding cattle more than 300 years before the first American cowboy ever threw a leg over a horse. By 1800 a highly sophisticated Vaquero culture had reached its peak in what is now the state of California. To this day, no mounted herdsman on earth has ever achieved the elegance, the presence, the beautiful equipment, the exquisite horsemanship or the sheer artistry of the everyday working Californio.”

He has spent much time and research in getting his outfits correct for each time period as well. Everything Lee puts on he and his horse is either an authentic antique piece or a reproduction from the period, made by Lee himself. He says, “The Vaquero was a flashy dresser. He was extremely proud of his status amongst his peers. Then, due to the influence of the emerging American Cowboy culture the Mexican Vaquero lost quite a bit of the elegance and finesse of the Spanish Colonial Vaquero but he never fully accepted all of the trappings and methods of the American cowboy culture . . . these things are covered at length in a presentation. The heyday of the American Cowboy only covered about 20 years . . . The modern image of the cowboy is loosely based on the drovers that made the three month long (cattle) drives. The cowboy most people are familiar with today is purely a Hollywood creation. However, my preference just happens to be the real cowboys and I am well aware of the difference between ‘reel cowboys’ and ‘real cowboys.’”

Besides having a life-long passion for understanding what makes a horse tick, and the history of the cowboy, Anderson is a study of human nature as well. He is extremely good-natured and has a wry sense of humor. Lee claims, “I intend to live to be 125 and not die from natural causes, but at the hands of a thirty-year-old, jealous spouse!” You gotta love a man past seventy with an attitude like that!