Sunday, June 07, 2015

Filippinis turn out cattle

After years of struggling with the Battle Mountain Bureau of Land Management, ranchers Dan and Eddyann Filippini decided they would turn out their hungry cattle in spite of one more last-minute reversal of an agreement made by the BLM. “The grass is green and tall, the cattle are hungry and the allotment is part of the Badger Ranch,” Eddyann Filippini said Tuesday. They bought the ranch in 1989from Leroy Horn, who got it from the Rufi brothers whose parents settled it in the 1800s. Its water rights go back to 1862. Although the Bureau of Land Management can claim only about three percent of the 100,000-acre North Buffalo Allotment attached to the Badger Ranch and none of the water rights, the federal agency controls the whole allotment and therefore, the viability of the ranch. The rules are made by non-involved bureaucrats who have no “skin in the game,” said Filippini. “Our cows are tapped out and so are we.” she said. “Badger ranch has made a stand and these cows are not coming home. If we keep backing down, we lose the ranch.” She said the latest harassment began on May 28 when the ranchers went to the BLM office to pay the grazing fee for the North Buffalo Allotment. They were told there would be no bill issued until there was agreement about the Argenta Allotment, which is being held up by Western Watershed activists. Argenta is not connected to North Buffalo. The Filippinis had advised the BLM’s acting District Manager, John Ruhs, of their intention to turn out last Tuesday in spite of the BLM’s recent ruling and they called interested people to come to Valmy at 10 a.m. when the first truckloads would arrive. Monday night Filippini received a phone call from Ruhs saying the BLM would not stop them, that they were “authorized for their Exchange of Use AUMs (Animal Unit Months)”. Filippini said, “We have verbal authorized use of our own private ground.” No agency employees were present at Valmy on Tuesday but Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Allen and two deputies were there just in case there was trouble. There was none. Two Elko County Commissioners also showed up. Demar Dahl and Rex Steninger arrived with horses to help push the cows up the canyon after they were unloaded several miles from the highway. Altogether there were eight riders. Former Assemblyman John Carpenter opened the gate...more

US won't enforce Nevada grazing restrictions in new dispute

Federal land managers say they won't immediately enforce drought-related grazing restrictions in northern Nevada so as to avoid confrontation with ranchers openly defying the order. Conservationists say it's another example of the government caving in to scofflaw ranchers like Cliven Bundy, who continues to graze his cattle illegally in southern Nevada after the Bureau of Land Management backed down from an armed standoff last year. Ranchers Dan and Eddyann Filippini have been notified they are violating the closure ordered in 2013 in an area covering more than 150 square miles near Battle Mountain about 200 miles northeast of Reno, Bureau of Land Management spokesman Rudy Evenson said Thursday. But he said BLM acting-state director John Ruhs told them the agency won't try to stop them while they continue negotiating a compromise. "We're not going to come out there and have a big confrontation," Evenson told the Elko Daily Free Press...more

Commentary: Watersheds statement on Filippini grazing

Following in Cliven Bundy’s lead, ranchers in Battle Mountain, Nevada have defied drought closure orders and turned livestock onto the North Buffalo allotment managed by the Battle Mountain District of the Bureau of Land Management. Despite ongoing good faith negotiations by the agency and conservation organizations to authorize limited turnout in a different allotment this year, the Filippini family has apparently decided their livestock operations are above the law. “It’s unbelievable, really, but not surprising, given the fact that Bundy’s cows are still trashing desert tortoise habitat over a year after armed militias defied government closures,” said Ken Cole, Idaho Director for Western Watersheds Project. “The BLM is enabling this kind of behavior by coddling Nevada ranchers who are surely emboldened by the lack of law enforcement within the agency and the lack of a commitment on behalf of our government to protect the public trust – the lands, waters, and wildlife that are already suffering from the drought and will now be further abused by these private cows.” The Battle Mountain ranchers have even set up a Facebook page, “Stand with Battle Mountain” to generate support for their open defiance of the BLM’s authority to close these allotments for resource protection where they have posted pictures of the release of cattle onto the allotment. There has been ongoing opposition to the BLM staff, including a protest across the street from BLM offices. Instead of offering support for the local employees following rulings by an Administrative Law Judge that upheld the drought closure decisions on the North Buffalo allotment and the adjacent Argenta allotment, the only action from the national office has been to send a temporary State Director to Nevada to try to cut a deal with the scofflaw ranchers. “It’s sick, really. We’re ceding control of important public lands to private interests, an allotment at a time,” said Cole. “The ranchers generate public sympathy for their custom and culture, all the while despoiling the land, wildlife, and water and disregarding the laws that govern the heavily-subsidized grazing permits they feel so entitled to.”  Elko Daily Free Press

Commentary: Cattlemen statement on Filippini grazing

The Nevada Land Action Association and Nevada Cattlemen’s Association are pleased that cattle have been turned out onto private lands in the North Buffalo Allotment. While the cattle are grazing in an allotment that is primarily private property exchange of use based (greater than 95 percent), it is important to note that the public lands portions of the allotment are still closed to grazing. Permittees and the BLM are aggressively working to find a solution to the closed public land grazing areas in North Buffalo Allotment. Until such time as an agreement is reached, permittees are aggressively working to keep cattle off of closed areas. It should be noted that no grazing permit was authorized on public lands in the North Buffalo Allotment, the AUMs tied to the public lands remain inactive. The use of private lands for grazing and the reduction of fuels ahead of the fire season in these areas are welcome positive steps and we applaud all those involved. Creative thinking, adaptive management, and cooperation are the critical tools needed in moving forward with grazing management in the Great Basin.  Elko Daily Free Press

Cowgirl Sass & Savvy

Chap or be chapped

by Julie Carter

The language of the cowboy is full of words that serve as both noun and verb. The cowboy phrase that says “rodeo is a verb and try is not” exemplifies that. Another quite common, mispronounced and misunderstood word and its variations is “chap.”

A pair of chaps is a covering of leather for the legs worn over jeans for protection from brush and the elements of severe weather.  The word is rooted in the Mexican term “chaparejos” or “chaparreras” both ultimately derived from the Spanish “chaparro.” Since at least the end of the 19th century, the term became simply “chaps” which is pronounced as “shaps”, not the phonetic “ch” sound as it is spelled.

Because the word is mispronounced repeatedly decade after decade, some cowboys just give up and call them “leggin’s” whether they are a leggin’ style of chaps or not. Chaps come in many styles, usually dictated by the geographical location of the cowboy, ranging from the “woolies” of the northern cold country, to the chinks (short chaps) of hotter regions.

The word “chap” is the verb form of the word and chaps is a noun. To chap someone or be chapped (still using the “sh” pronunciation) is the action taken by cowboys in a number of instances that I’ll explain. “We gave that greenhorn a good chapping,” you’ll hear the cowboy crew say.

Chapping is method of in-house cowboy punishment for an etiquette infraction committed by a cowboy. If a cowboy blunders in his work such as riding ahead of the boss, riding into a herd uninvited or many other such possibilities, his shortcomings will be pointed out by a chapping.

As per usual, boys will be boys and this requires restraining the cowboy that stepped out of line which involves a tackling tussling moment by his fellow cowboy crew.

He’ll be pinned to the ground face down and the “administrator” will hold a pair of chaps by the waist and bring them down on the perpetrator’s posterior like a big leather paddle. This can be a little tricky since there are usually a handful of cowboys holding down the receiver of such punishment, and staying out of the way of the heavy leather is a feat.

This isn’t a heathen or savage event. These are usually young cowboys, full of themselves and only paying back some of the lessons they learned in their “freshman” year with a crew. Cowboys are big on cowboy etiquette but not all of them come to the ranch knowing what it is. Every cowboy that participates in a chapping needs to keep in mind he at one time may be on the receiving end of one. That’s just how it works.

Because this event is as much a joking threat of some fun as it is a real punishment, it also takes place at weddings and birthdays. Keeping in mind this might involve some good clothes you don’t want to tear up and the purpose isn’t to humiliate, only to have some fun. And nothing entertains the buddies of a groom more than to see the new bride whipping her husband into shape at the end of the reception. 

The “victim” will usually fight back a little, but who wouldn’t? However, the fun for the cowboys is really in the wrestling match. As long as the first rule of the plan is to not let it get out of hand, it’s an age-old tradition that gleefully carries into each young generation. I might add that the practice seems to be somewhat geographically dictated as there are a bunch of cowboys that have worked in a lot of places that have never heard of such a thing.

Hope this hasn’t chapped your view of chaps and the men who wear them. Julie has never chapped or been chapped, but can be reached for comment at jcarternm@gmail.com

Ranching and Generational Knowledge


Ranching versus Sustainability
The matter of History
Generational Knowledge
By Stephen L. Wilmeth



            Kern County rancher, Kenneth Mebane, endured a series of hip replacements in order to continue his historical calling. Mebane’s close friend and fellow Californio, Chuck Hitchcock, was no different. Chuck suffered many injuries and woes to remain active in the only thing that mattered … being a participant in the California ranching and horse culture.
            Kenneth was the model of the western slope rancher. Chuck was the epitome of the California vaquero. They were brothers born of a culture that time and the collision of circumstances created. As time passed, they both mourned the attrition of their culture as much or more than they mourned the loss of their own vitality.
            Kern County gave them life and a common soul born of sun and the gifts of the earth, and … it is there they will now rest forever.
            Ranching versus Sustainability
            Change the names, but Kenneth and Chuck’s counterparts are scattered across the width and breadth of North America. They speak Spanish on the southern tier and varying degrees of English elsewhere where grass grows and cattle convert sunlight into protein. Most accounts suggest that it is a uniquely American culture, but it isn’t. The progenitors of the Iberian Peninsula would view the similarities with great interest. So would the modern day Australians, Argentines, Mexicans, and Canadians, but what each version of range steward would agree upon is that the cow now receives the central spotlight. She is the queen of modern sunlight conversion. To replace her American annual contribution of 25 billion pounds of protein, there would be a gigantic and unsustainable slaughter of frolicking deer, antelope, and bison.
            The generic story of the creation of the American ranching industry has become dreary monochrome. What has always been absent is the description of the true nature of the relationship the self supporting rancher has with the land, the immensity and importance of his cultural heritage, and the ecological validity of his continuing existence.
Advocacy for these factors is necessary, but some will argue it was never present.  Certainly over the last half century there has been little substantive cultural or political defense. Underwritten by the federal land management agencies, the ranching industry in the West is being subjected to updated resource management plans on the basis of a) considerations for closing lands to grazing, b) grazing to be reduced 25%, c) grazing to be managed on the basis of watershed priority bases, and or d) livestock adjustments will be done on a case by case basis. There is no intention of seeking improvements in production.
This demonstrates that antagonists of the culture long ago found an unbounded niche to become dominant in policy and management formulation. Similar to the suggestions that civilization took root when advances were sufficient to allow enough leisure time to tinker with ideas, the environmentalists found adequate governmental and societal welfare to devote time and effort to laying the foundations of what has become a cultural assault. Those efforts have grown exponentially and have spread like cancer to all corners of society.
            Enforced private property rights would have done much to retard the assault, but that didn’t happen. As a result, rural cleansing is now occurring. It has huge implications of structural despair. The environmental assault against the cow is based upon a philosophy of science that has grown and has now been accepted through the element of moral standing. That corrupted moral implication is the salvation of the earth. That is being force fed to us on the basis of Sustainability. In this context, it is an environmental and political invention.
            As Thomas Kuhn has noted, this is a paradigm of science that has been professionalized on the basis of hijacked moral implications. It, like global warming and social welfare, is nearly impossible to displace after reaching the institutionalized realm of primary policy.
            Sustainability came about with the nebulous notion of biodiversity following the United Nations publication of the World Conservation Strategy in 1980.  Similar high brow reports came in 1987, 1991, and 1992. By the time the 2006 report Livestock’s long Shadow was printed, Sustainability was regarded as the guiding principle for all future development. Biased science had proven that development is sustainable only if it is ecologically sound.
            The element of elitism in this hoax is staggering.
In order to identify and map this soundness, the demand on the United States and this president is the matter of future funding. Human and institutional capacity is not fluid and properly distributed hence American taxpayers are being expected to come up with funding to field human resources (e.g. scientists), and institutional resources (e.g. systematic reference collections such as botanic gardens and genetic depositories) in order to make this all happen. The bottom line is, while we fight for our ranching existence, too many career paths and political capital expectations are riding on the outcome of the United Nations global warming funding decisions.
History will show this is being based on the professionalized and false science of … Sustainability.
Cultural cleansing
Less than two percent of American families are now engaged in primary production agriculture. Less than half are ranchers. The average age of that demographic is just under 60 years of age, and, collectively, they manage something just under 800 million acres of grasslands, pastures and grazed forests. That means that an aging cultural resource of less than one percent of the American population is serving as the front line management of 33% of the nation’s footprint.
There will be those who suggest that statistic proves that too few people are actively managing a disproportionate share of the American landscape. Those of us who know the cultural assault that is being waged against the industry will counter by saying this is a vital business sector that is being systematically dismantled. Hope is being vanquished, parallel enterprises have long been suppressed, regulatory burdens are unrelenting, and cultural despair is endemic. Young people are being driven away by the inability to create opportunities for them to remain. Next generation recruitment is a major indicator of the problem and there are huge implications. If there is a true and pending cataclysm of real sustainability, it lies with the destruction of local ecological stewardship.
Kimberly D. Kirner, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, Cal State Northridge, is starting to identify this dilemma. In her work, she elevates why experiential learning forges emotional ties to the land and local communities for cultural continuity. She maintains that site specific knowledge is absolutely necessary for all adaptive co-management, monitoring, and conservation strategies. Furthermore, continuity of local ecological knowledge is a significant factor in the resilience of ranching culture, rural pastoral economies, and working landscapes.
 The Kirner emphasis relates to the importance of Cultural Heritage. Cultural heritage or history is the traditions, knowledge, places and artifacts that people inherit from past generations. This can be tangible (trails, roads, fence placement, homesteads, physical infrastructure, tack, and working heirlooms), intangible (stories, experiences, learned insight, and other, more esoteric ecological knowledge), and natural (places, livestock and wildlife patterns and habits, turf responses to rainfall, and, other, biorhythmic nuances).
As a cultural anthropologist, she has come to equate continuity of this heritage, this history, with natural system integrity. Her own words best describe her research.
Cultural heritage is part of an integrated system that ensures that knowledge is passed on from one generation to the next. It generates a sense of identity and motivates younger generations to learn the lifeways of their parents and grandparents. In the case of family ranchers, cultural heritage is an integral part of the continuity of local ecological knowledge. Local knowledge is complementary to formal scientific approaches to management … (it) contains deep and rich data on a single locale over long periods of time in ways that science rarely can provide.
Voices from the land
The problem is local management systems cannot exist without the whole. Threats to the integrity of the combined cultural history are coming from a wide array of places far removed from these systems. When too many ranches fail in a given locale, the integrity of the entire system is put at risk. In a nation that is losing direct ties to the land at an alarming rate, it must become incumbent on American leadership to recognize the cultural, economic, and ecological risks inherent in the decline.
In this case, it is time to recognize that the history value of ranching is not just an academic debate. It is the cornerstone that must be preserved for the genuine sustainability of nearly a third of the landmass of the United States all of which remains what even the environmentalists acclaim as their goal … permanent open spaces.

Stephen L. Wilmeth is a rancher from southern New Mexico. “In this series of essays mapping the importance of the History Value, cultural integrity appears first. The heart of the debate, cattle, will appear in the second installment.”

I'm not sure about the phrase History Value, but we'll see how Wilmeth develops it.  Note how this relates to the Filippini situation.


Baxter Black: Dealing with Hurricane Charlotte


Every now and then a feller has a weekend that is hard to forget. I had one years ago on a beautiful ranch in southern California.

It was one of those trail rides you read about in Western Horseman magazine. There were about 200 head of assorted real estate agents, bankers, insurance men, judges, lawyers, doctors and a hand full of "token cowboys" to catch runaway horses, sing ol' campfire ditties and add "color" to the project. It's kind of a boys camp for big boys. Now I'm here to tell ya these fellers do it up right! It's catered by a famous cook. None of this ol' salt pork and beans, no sir! Chalupas and tacos made from homemade tortillas, crab legs, barbecue, steaks, lobster meat and chicken wings!

Mariachi and bluegrass music filled the air every time the ride stopped for refreshments. I planned on sleepin' in the big tent but I heard some of the celebrants around the campfire makin' plans to set the tent afire. I drug my bedroll out into the grass. I woke at 5 to the sound of "Under the Double Eagle" played by a marching band complete with a bass drum marching through the camp.

At noon they entered me in a horse race. They said I won.

I was just about to fall asleep on my feet when they brought out the mud wrestlers! Harley said we better stay. Now I had never heard of this mud wrestlin' but it's where two opponents get out in this mud arena and rassle. In this case it was two ladies who appeared to me to be 'professionals'. There was some debate over who won but then the mud rasslin' ring master announced that he's got a mud rassler who'll rassle anybody in the crowd. To make it interesting they auctioned off the right to choose the opponent. An ex-friend of mine bought the rights and selected me to represent the "boys club." Two big ol' boys caught me halfway to the car and helped me change into the mud rasslin' costume furnished by the management.


Friday, June 05, 2015

Sharon

Took Sharon to the Dr. yesterday morning and they immediately had her admitted to the hospital.  She has a bad infection and they can't figure out where its coming from.  Hope to find out more today.

UPDATE - Sunday

Good news, doc says Sharon can come home today.

Thursday, June 04, 2015

EPA About to Make Air Travel More Expensive

The Obama administration is set to announce that it will require new rules to cut emissions from airplanes, expanding a quest to tackle climate change that has included a string of significant regulations on cars, trucks and power plants. The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to report as early as Friday its conclusion that greenhouse gas emissions from airplanes endanger human health because they significantly contribute to global warming, although people familiar with the agency’s plans said the announcement could slip into next week. That announcement, known in legal parlance as an endangerment finding, will prompt a requirement under the Clean Air Act for the agency to issue new regulations to reduce airplane emissions. The agency is expected to limit the rule to commercial aircraft, leaving out small craft and military planes...more

Second Yellowstone visitor injured in bison encounter

The sheer size and wildness of Yellowstone National Park's signature bison provide a magnificent subject for camera-toting tourists. But officials caution visitors not to come within 25 yards of the animals, noting that they are unpredictable and able to sprint three times faster than people can run. A 62-year-old Australian man who ventured to within 3 to 5 feet of one bison was injured Tuesday when the animal charged and tossed him into the air several times, park officials said. He was released from a hospital later in the evening. This is the second such incident within weeks. A 16-year-old Taiwanese exchange student was gored by a bison on May 15 while posing for a photo. Both encounters occurred in the popular Old Faithful portion of Yellowstone...more

Eel-like fish drop from the air in Fairbanks

Adult Arctic lampreys have fallen from the sky four times this week in Fairbanks, including at the Value Village parking lot, according to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. That's unusual for a fish that's seldom seen in the water up here. The Arctic lamprey is a roughly foot-long eel-like fish with a no jaw and a nightmarish looking set of teeth. Gulls are probably to blame for picking up and dropping the lampreys, according to the post...more

Wednesday, June 03, 2015

At least 75 researchers study methane leaks in Four Corners

From the air, the rocky, sprawling San Juan Basin comes into focus like a scene in a classic Western. As a team of researchers board an aircraft on an April day to examine what’s below, a mysterious concentration of methane continues to spew around dramatic alpine peaks, desert canyons and ancient cliff dwellings. It is this methane seepage that has researchers both excited and worried ever since it was detected after a NASA report last year. The so-called “hot spot” in the Four Corners is responsible for producing the largest concentration of the greenhouse gas in the nation, in which methane can be seen leaking in real-time through thermal observations. With the Fruitland Formation of the San Juan Basin being the second largest gas-producing basin in the United States – covering portions of northern New Mexico and Southwest Colorado – the region provides a unique opportunity for researchers. “We’ve changed the composition of the atmosphere mainly by putting in carbon dioxide and methane, and that has changed the heat,” said Russ Schnell, deputy director of the Boulder-based National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Global Monitoring Division. “By changing the physics of the atmosphere, we’ve changed the thickness of the warm blanket that surrounds the Earth, and we’ve added a huge number more of down feathers to this blanket.” Schnell coordinated a team of at least 75 researchers who descended on the Four Corners for a month to determine what is causing the mysterious concentration of methane. The work has significant national and global implications, because findings could guide policymakers and the oil and gas industry in how they go about regulating and reacting to the venting of concerning gases, specifically methane...more

Podesta and Heinrich were the key players on NM national monument



In an excellent new article on the High Country News website titled John Podesta: Legacy maker, Elizabeth Shogren, formerly of the Los Angeles Times, deftly lays out the behind-the-scenes environmental influence of Mr. Podesta:

As the 66-year-old Podesta embarks on yet another adventure — this time 
as Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager for the 2016 election — he can list some remarkable achievements: He directly had a hand in six of 16 national monuments Obama
 has created or expanded so far by executive order, including New Mexico’s Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks, Colorado’s Browns Canyon, Southern California’s San Gabriel Mountains, and the country’s largest marine reserve, the Pacific Remote Islands National Monument; and steered a landmark climate deal with China to control greenhouse gas, as well as the first proposal to regulate climate emissions from U.S. coal-fired power plants. Add in his record under Bill Clinton — the sweeping 2001 “Roadless Rule” protecting 58 million acres administered by the U.S. Forest Service, and the 19 national monuments and conservation areas, many in the West, that Clinton declared in his second term in office — and Podesta can claim a green legacy that even Teddy Roosevelt would be proud of.  “Nobody in the 21st century in U.S. government has had the influence that he has had on public lands and climate change,” says Douglas Brinkley, a Rice University professor of history.  Podesta rarely gets public credit, but those who do — from the presidents he has served to Cabinet members and agency heads — are quick to acknowledge his contributions. Says Bruce Babbitt, Clinton’s Interior secretary, “The hidden hand of John Podesta is involved in every environmental advancement accomplished in the Clinton and Obama administrations.”

The article should be of interest to anyone interested in how environmental policy is actually made, but will be especially interesting to those involved in the wilderness/monument proposals for southern NM:

...In early 2014, when a group of Western senators, frustrated by the lack of progress in preserving public lands, invited Podesta to Capitol Hill, he first asked if they had public support for their proposal. New Mexico Sen. Martin Heinrich cited a broad coalition of local residents, who had spent decades trying to get Congress to protect a rough-and-tumble chunk of mountains, canyons and grasslands outside Las Cruces as a wilderness area. Would the president consider creating a national monument there now?  Some Cabinet members hesitated, unwilling to promote new monuments that were guaranteed to anger the powerful Republicans who controlled the federal budget. “The secretaries knew they were in for it with their congressional overseers,” says Podesta, “and I think they weren’t certain about whether the president would back them up. I tried to reassure them that indeed he would.” Within a few months, President Obama had designated the half-million-acre Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument. Sen. Heinrich gives Podesta credit for getting “the wheels turning within the White House” to make it happen. “He personally gets these issues and he understands the West and he understands the importance of lands issues,” Heinrich says. Podesta also understands how public lands can be leveraged to benefit his boss and political party.

No mention of outside environmental groups, no mention of Senator Udall.  Just as I predicted, Heinrich, who sits on the Senate Committee on Energy & Natural Resources and Podesta, from his White House perch, got the deal done.  Recall too that it was Heinrich who negotiated the Columbine-Hondo Wilderness in northern NM and the transfer of Valles Caldera to the Park Service as part of the NDAA bill last year.

Udall may have the name, but Heinrich is the player on these issues.

Looking towards the future, Heinrich is going nowhere except up in seniority and influence and Podesta will be Hillary's campaign manager.  And that portends...


Senator: Use RICO Laws to Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics

That's right -- a sitting U.S. Senator is suggesting RICO laws should be applied to global warming skeptics.Top men like Sheldon Whitehouse can make sure we don't hear anything that we don't need to hear about scientific research and legally punish anyone who publicly disagrees. Otherwise, the natives get restless and start opposing whatever economic restrictions seem necessary to save us from ourselves. And as we all know, everything about the global warming debate is guided by altruism. No one's looking to get rich by artificially inflating the cost of fossil fuels and benefiting from green energy subsidies, right?  Of course, this isn't the first time someone has suggested prison for global warming deniers. Gawker's Adam Weinstein did that last year, because "First Amendment rights have never been absolute. You still can't yell 'fire' in a crowded theater. You shouldn't be able to yell 'balderdash' at 10,883 scientific journal articles a year, all saying the same thing: This is a problem, and we should take some preparations for when it becomes a bigger problem." Then Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. also joined the chorus last year. After saying he wants to jail climate deniers, he moderated his position by saying he merely wants to legally go after corporations and think tanks who disagree with climate science, noting that "Koch Industries and ExxonMobil have particularly distinguished themselves as candidates for corporate death." This is pretty rich coming from someone who's still insists vaccines cause autism, all scientific evidence to the contrary. And if we really want to compound the irony here, do note this headline at Think Progress last month: "Robert Kennedy Jr. Blasts Vaccine Science, Compares It To Tobacco Companies Denying Cancer Link." No doubt RICO charges are in order for vaccine makers. But those two men are effectively cranks. In February, Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., attempted a McCarthyite witch hunt against climate scientists he found disagreeable. And Sheldon Whitehouse is a sitting U.S. Senator. He's now publicly encouraging legal persecution of people who conduct scientific research and/or those that have opinions about it he disagrees with.

Another global warming catastrophe: the Sahara Desert is getting greener

by

A few thousand years ago, a mighty river flowed through the Sahara across what is today Sudan. The Wadi Howar—now just a dried-out riverbed for most of the year—sustained not just fish, crocodiles, and hippopotamuses, but also agriculture and human settlement. As late as 1,000 B.C., a powerful fortress stood on its shores. But then the Sahara dried out, turning from a green savannah into an inhospitable desert. The culprit: climate change. According to desert geologist Stefan Kröpelin, who has studied geological data for the eastern Sahara going back 6,000 years, the desert spread as temperatures dropped. Global cooling meant that the air had less capacity to hold moisture from the oceans, leading to fewer rains and more arid climes.

Now, that same process is happening in reverse. As temperatures rise, the Sahara and other dry areas are greening on the edges. “I’ve been studying the Sahara for 30 years and can definitely say that it’s getting greener,” says Kröpelin, who specializes in desert archaeology and climate history at the University of Cologne. Where there used to be nothing but desert, he says, there is now not just grass but shrubs and acacia trees--and he has the photos from 30 years of extensive field study to prove it. “The nomads are taking their camels to graze in areas where they’ve never been able to graze before.” Satellite data showing more green on the southern edge of the Sahara also bear him out. "There are always winners and losers if weather patterns change," he says. “But as a general rule, warmer temperatures inevitably mean that the air picks up more moisture from the oceans, which will lead to more rainfall. If you look at the geological records in the Sahara, there have been repeated periods where the Sahara was greener when temperatures were warmer than today.”

Kröpelin’s geological data seem to question the popular notion that climate change will bring negative, if not outright apocalyptic effects: A dying Amazon, failing rains, drought, and desertification. The latest IPCC report predicts a decline in rainfall across large swaths of Africa of 20 percent or more, leading to deadly famines like the one raging in Somalia now. Millions of “climate refugees” might one day roam the earth.

Kröpelin is not the only scientist chipping away at these scenarios. An increasingly rich trove of data suggest that in large parts of the world, the more likely outcome is that warmer temperatures lead to more rainfall, richer plant growth, and the re-greening of areas that have been inhospitable for many centuries.
Farming is expanding again in frosty Greenland, which got its name because farming was possible when the Vikings first settled there during the “Medieval Warm Period,” a previous phase of global warming. In the Alps, the tree line--meaning the altitude above which trees no longer grow because of the cold and wind--has been steadily rising, with forests growing thicker, according to researchers at the Swiss Institute for Forest, Snow and Avalanche Research in Davos. In arid Namibia, stuck between the Namib and the Kalahari Deserts, farmers say the last decade has seen increased rainfall, higher grass, and more of the wildlife that feeds on it.

In the latest issue of Nature, a U.S. Department of Agriculture study discovered that the higher temperatures and CO2 levels forecast by the IPCC boost the growth of prairie grass, a surprising find that suggests a greener, more fertile future for the world’s semi-arid grasslands, which cover one-third of the global land mass.

Widely reported scenarios that higher temperatures will dry out the Amazon rain forest also seem to be contradicted by evidence assembled by Smithsonian researcher Carlos Jamarillo. Jamarillo has studied the fossilized remains of ancient rainforests and concludes that warmer temperatures went hand-in-hand with greater plant growth and higher species diversity. It was the opposite of what the researchers expected.



Writing about this at Hot Air, Jazz Shaw speculates the Sahara Desert was caused by hydraulic fracturing in the Garden of Eden...hee, hee

Video - Cliven Bundy, 'If I was armed, they'd kill me'

There were no helicopters overhead, no gunmen in the hills, no scuffles or threats, just miles of quiet desert scrub dotted with the occasional cow. Cliven Bundy smiled. “Well, we definitely won.”
A year ago, his Nevada ranch crackled with tension as federal agents squared off against a so-called citizen militia, which rallied from across the US to defend Bundy, as members saw it, from government tyranny.  But this week, 14 months later, his 500-strong herd grazed as normal, as chickens clucked in the yard – and the feds were a memory. “From the moment that they left, we have felt freedom on this ranch,” said Bundy, 69, seated in his rambling wooden home, the porch draped in US flags. “We might be the freest place on earth.” He has not seen a single federal official or vehicle on his 600,000-acre property, which sprawls 80 miles north of Las Vegas, and feels no pressure to pay a cent of the $1.2m, he said. A banner on the highway proclaims “freedom” and “liberty”, followed by a sign indicating “Bundy melons”.  Wearing trademark jeans, boots, cowboy hat and bolo tie, the Mormon father of 14 was upbeat in an interview with the Guardian, speaking from the family home – which as a boy he helped his father build – and as he inspected cattle pens, trailed by his two dogs.  “I don’t think this is a battle that Cliven Bundy won. It’s a battle that the American people won. They’re just not going to put up with abuse by the federal government.”  Bundy said he was no outlaw, that he pays all taxes and state duties – but not federal fees for grazing, which he stopped paying after the BLM imposed restrictions as part of an effort to protect the endangered desert tortoise...more

Here is a video of The Guardians interview:

Editorial - Attack on ATV use continues


In November 2013, U.S. District Judge Dale Kimball handed down a ruling with the potential to devastate regional tourism economies as well as the public’s ability to access federally administered land.

For the past two years, officials have been waiting to see what this ruling would ultimately mean.

Kimball’s ruling put a resource management plan designed for 2.1 million acres of land administered by the Bureau of Land Management’s Richfield office into question.

A memorandum decision and order issued by Kimball May 22 gives everyone a better indication of what his earlier ruling will ultimately mean.

Unsurprisingly, it will mean millions of dollars will have to be spent over the course of the next three years to study the effects of off-highway vehicle use on archaeological sites and other resources inside the BLM administered land.

Judge Kimball said in his ruling that just because the BLM is going to re-review these routes, doesn’t mean it will necessarily come to a different conclusion about whether they should remain open or not.

In all likelihood, some routes will be shut down, such as on the Henry Mountains, which the court implicitly ordered to be declared an area of critical environmental concern.

Once the court mandated three-year review period is over, the overall plan may or may not see significant change.
The only certainty is that no matter how much the plan changes due to this ruling, it will not be enough for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, the plaintiffs of the original case.

SUWA’s suggestion to the court was to simply close all designated routes on the Richfield resource management plan while the review is conducted. While the court didn’t grant that request, it is very telling of SUWA’s ultimate goal.

SUWA will sue the BLM again and try to close down more trails. By using litigation, SUWA’s plans seem to be aimed at ultimately shutting down any use of public lands — off-highway vehicle use, mining, petroleum exploration or grazing.



Which BLM officials will sign final sage grouse documents?

The greater sage grouse planning strategy is such a massive undertaking for the Bureau of Land Management that officials are unsure who will sign the final environmental documents. “I don’t think that’s been determined yet,” said Mitch Snow, a spokesman for the BLM’s Washington, D.C., office. The agency has 60 days to figure it out. Although typically a final environmental impact statement, or EIS, would be signed by the state director, the agency is discussing whether to have the director of the BLM, the assistant secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell sign the documents. “Given the nationwide scope of the sage grouse plan, who that will be I don’t know,” said Al Nash, chief of communications for BLM’s Montana/Dakotas office in Billings. Last week, the BLM announced that it had completed environmental impact statements for areas in 10 western states, including Wyoming. Since they have been finalized, the only way to alter the documents now is for a group or individual to file a protest before June 29. The documents also must pass a governor’s consistency review. Each state has 60 days to conduct that assessment. “Then we can move forward and operate under the new plan,” Nash said...more

Its so massive they can't even figure out who should sign it (them)!




New lawsuit planned against seven-year-old Arctic drilling auction

A 2008 government sale of Arctic drilling leases to Shell and other companies is set to face fresh scrutiny in the federal courts, with a dozen environmental and Alaskan groups preparing to file a new challenge to the auction. At issue is Interior Secretary Sally Jewell’s March decision to affirm the long-disputed Chukchi Sea lease sale, after federal regulators conducted a court-ordered reassessment of how much crude could be recovered from drilling rights that were on the auction block. The environmental groups planning to challenge Jewell’s move say the Interior Department paid short shrift to the potential damage that drilling activities under those auctioned leases could pose to Pacific walruses in the Hanna Shoal area of the Chukchi Sea. And, they argue that the decision to affirm the auction runs afoul of the Obama administration’s vow to combat climate change, because it would unleash new fossil fuels — including 4.3 billion barrels of oil estimated to be contained in the Chukchi Sea leases — and the greenhouse gases produced when they are burned...more

Ranch Radio Song Of The Day #1441

Some Roots Music as Uncle Dave Macon & His Fruit Jar Drinkers perform Hold That Wood-Pile Down.  Recorded in NY City on May 7, 1927 for Vocalion Records.  That's Sam & Kirk McGee backing him up in the studio.

https://youtu.be/DrwhbPPHacI

Tuesday, June 02, 2015

Simpson's 'water war' is here

In October, U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson warned that Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy had “fired the first shot across the bow in what could potentially become a water war.” The war is here. The Idaho Republican was talking about a seemingly minute redefinition of the term “Waters of the United States” the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers had proposed earlier that year. The definition matters because it determines which waters are covered by the Clean Water Act, and which waters are either left to state regulators or left unregulated. The rule change has sparked a backlash from conservative lawmakers, while conservationists marshal behind what they see as a key protection for clean water. “I find it extremely disappointing, though not surprising, that the EPA has moved forward on this controversial rule in spite of widespread opposition from members of Congress, the states, and the American public,” Simpson said in a statement. “In Idaho, water is life, and I don’t intend to sit back and watch the EPA take control of state waters, leaving Idaho farmers, ranchers, and landowners at the mercy of federal regulations.” Some of the biggest controversy surrounds whether the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers have the authority to regulate small streams that only flow for part of the year. The EPA says protecting those waters are key to ensuring people have clean water to drink. The EPA claims one in three Americans draws drinking water from a stream that would not be protected by the Clean Water Act if the proposed rule is blocked. But efforts to block the rule change are well underway. Even before the EPA had published its rule, the House passed a bill blocking its implementation. So far, that bill hasn’t made much progress in the Senate. President Barack Obama has threatened to veto any such bills. But Simpson — who is chairman of the committee that sets the Army Corps of Engineers’ budget and sits on the committee that oversees the EPA’s budget — has considerable power over whether the proposed rule moves forward. In the past, spokeswoman Nikki Wallace said, Simpson has inserted language into agency budgets to block such rule changes. “I anticipate that he will continue down that path as a result of EPA’s most recent ruling,” she said...more

Filippinis asks for support in turning out cows

Ranchers who have been at the center of a contentious grazing dispute are hoping supporters will help turn out cattle 10 a.m. today on an allotment near Valmy, about 15 miles west of Battle Mountain. Eddyann Filippini said cowboys will initially turn out 90 head of cattle on the North Buffalo allotment. The Filippini ranch was one of several family-operated permit holders that grazed cattle on the Argenta allotment. Last year, the Bureau of Land Management told livestock operators that cattle would not be allowed on the mountain due to drought. That decision sparked protests, including an Elko-to-Carson City horse ride spearheaded by the late Elko County Commissioner Grant Gerber. The BLM and ranchers then agreed to allow conditional grazing. After certain “drought triggers” were met, the agency closed nine of 20 areas in the allotment. Because of a lack of fencing, permittees worried that cows would wander into closed areas, however. n September, riders saddled up again for the Grass March/Cowboy Express, which carried petitions from California to the U.S. Congress. The dispute ended up before the Interior Board of Land Appeals, but all parties involved agreed to mediation, which began last week. A BLM spokesman said mediation is still ongoing...more

Squaring sage grouse with drilling poses feds' toughest test

JONAH GAS FIELD, Wyo. -- The sound of drill rigs and fracking trucks now rules the high desert here. Gone is the mating call of the greater sage grouse, a showy bird that once strutted among blue-green hills puffing its chest and sounding odd rhythmic pops, squeaks and whistles. A decade ago, the Bureau of Land Management approved a Canadian energy firm to drill up to 3,200 gas wells on this scenic patch of lands, with views of the snow-capped Wind River Range. But it was an unusually dense project that fragmented habitat for the several dozen male grouse that danced and sparred here. Today, government biologists report that there are just six male grouse left. The birds gather at a single breeding ground, known as a lek, but have abandoned three other sites here, a couple dozen miles south of Pinedale. The mottled, brown bird faces a panoply of threats across its 11-state range, including wildfire and invasive species in the Great Basin and sod busting in Montana as well as the encroachment of juniper trees, predatory ravens, disease and intensive grazing. But a top threat across much of the sage grouse's eastern range in Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and Montana is energy development -- namely oil and gas. Alleviating those threats will be key if the Fish and Wildlife Service hopes to avoid listing the bird. The science is clear: Sage grouse don't like the sights and sounds of drill rigs, tanks and truck traffic...more

Gohmert to BLM: ‘Keep Up The Arrogance’ - We’ll Cut Your Budget

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) told two federal land officials, “I come bearing good news. I think if your employees keep up the arrogance, keep denying access to the land then very soon we’ll be able to dramatically cut your employees back and start turning those powers over to the states.” Gohmert’s comments came during a Joint Legislative Hearing "To protect and enhance opportunities for recreational hunting, fishing, and shooting, and for other purposes” in late May.

See a video of his comments here.

More diverse gene pool key to wolves

Last month, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shot the last captive-born Mexican gray wolf in the wild for “escalating nuisance behavior” after it came too close to Catron County neighborhoods. It was a fairly routine kill, but the take of Mexican gray wolf No. 1130 marked a shift in the program to recuperate the endangered species: Today all 110 wolves roaming the wild of eastern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico were born in the wild. On the surface, that sounds like a milestone. Just crossing the 100 mark for wild wolves sounds significant, especially for a program that began with just seven known wolves left in the species. The authors of the original 1982 Mexican gray wolf recovery plan – which badly needs an update – set 100 as a goal but could hardly imagine ever reaching such numbers. Shouldn’t wolf advocates be celebrating, then? Shouldn’t ranchers, many of whom oppose the reintroduction of a top predator, be able to say enough is enough? New Mexico Game Commissioner Ralph Ramos posed a question to the federal Fish and Wildlife Service at a recent commission meeting in Farmington. With more than 100 wolves successfully reproducing and surviving in the wild, he asked, “Why don’t we support their natural breeding? Why do we want to keep adding more?” Here’s why: Because the Mexican gray wolf population isn’t nearly as strong as its numbers suggest. Maggie Dwire, the Fish and Wildlife Service’s assistant wolf recovery coordinator, said most of the animals in the wild are related to one another – too closely related to ensure the survival of the species, the goal of the reintroduction program...more

Interior Department Approves First Solar Energy Zone Projects

WASHINGTON, D.C. – June 2, 2015 – (RealEstateRama) — As part of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan to cut carbon pollution and create clean energy jobs, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell today announced the approval of the first three solar energy projects to benefit from the streamlined permitting process of the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Western Solar Plan. When built, the three solar energy projects on public lands in Clark County, Nevada, will generate up to 440 megawatts of energy – enough electricity to power roughly 132,000 homes – and are expected to create up to 1,900 construction jobs. The Western Solar Plan allows for a more efficient and predictable permitting process by focusing development in solar energy zones with the highest resource potential and lowest conflicts. The expedited reviews of these three projects were completed in less than 10 months, or less than half the amount of time it took under the previous project-by-project system. These reviews also include consideration of the first regional mitigation strategy for solar energy zone projects...more

Steve Kay - Drumbeat to reduce antibiotics in the meat industry will only get louder

...While I don’t regard science as infallible, I have never doubted the rigor with which it is applied. However, the largely false claim that human resistance to antibiotics is due to antibiotic use in the livestock industry illustrates how you can repeat the facts over and over, and people will still ignore them. The key fact is that the vast majority of antibiotics used by animals are not used by humans. Tetracyclines and ionophores account for 72% of animal use, but only 4% (tetracyclines only) of human use. Here’s another thing: To my knowledge, there are no scientific data that link antibiotics used in meat production to antibiotic resistance in humans. Many consumers, though, don’t care about the facts. They want any kind of antibiotic out of their food. The result so far has been enormous pressure on the chicken industry, with consumer groups persuading chains like McDonald’s and Chipotle to get rid of antibiotics. The poultry giants have responded. Tyson Foods says it is striving to eliminate the use of human antibiotics from its U.S. broiler-chicken flocks by the end of September 2017. Given that Tyson is the largest fed-beef processor as well, its move has implications for the U.S. beef industry. Public pressure over antibiotic use continues to mount, and the calls for red meat to act will get even louder. Tyson has anticipated this. It is forming working groups with independent producers and others in its beef, pork and turkey supply chains to discuss ways to reduce the use of human antibiotics on cattle, hog and turkey farms. These groups will begin meeting this summer...more

Kit Carson: History and the Myth

by Marshall Trimble

In October 1849, a trader named James White, his wife Ann and their infant daughter were traveling on the Santa Fe Trail to New Mexico when they were attacked by a band of Apache. James was killed while Ann and the child were taken captive. Major William Grier and a company of Dragoons went in pursuit of the raiders. Their scout was Kit Carson whose sensational, bigger-than-life adventures were being chronicled in popular dime novels of the day.

On the twelfth day out they spotted a large camp and attacked. As the warriors were fleeing, one fired an arrow into the breast of Mrs. White. Her child was never found.

Mrs. White had been dead only a few minutes and her body was still warm.  Among her possessions was a copy of the popular dime novel Kit Carson: Prince of the Gold Hunters, a story about Carson saving a beautiful woman from death at the hands of a band of Indians.  Carson couldn't read nor write and when the story was read to him, he muttered "Throw it in the fire!"

He was deeply shaken by the fact that this woman probably died hoping the famous scout would come to her rescue. Life doesn’t always imitate art. Unlike in the dime novels, he got there too late. It was said the incident haunted Carson for the rest of his life.


Johnny Gimble & Junior Daughtery

 J.R. Absher also sent along this video of Sally Gooden, with Junior doing the fiddling.

https://youtu.be/AT-PSV8-X18

Ranch Radio Song Of The Day #1440

This is Gimble's live version of La Zinda Waltz, available on his 1976 album Johnny Gimble's Texas Dance Party

https://youtu.be/gNDE2Du1nvY

Drumbeat to reduce antibiotics in the meat industry will only get louder

...While I don’t regard science as infallible, I have never doubted the rigor with which it is applied. However, the largely false claim that human resistance to antibiotics is due to antibiotic use in the livestock industry illustrates how you can repeat the facts over and over, and people will still ignore them. The key fact is that the vast majority of antibiotics used by animals are not used by humans. Tetracyclines and ionophores account for 72% of animal use, but only 4% (tetracyclines only) of human use. Here’s another thing: To my knowledge, there are no scientific data that link antibiotics used in meat production to antibiotic resistance in humans. Many consumers, though, don’t care about the facts. They want any kind of antibiotic out of their food. The result so far has been enormous pressure on the chicken industry, with consumer groups persuading chains like McDonald’s and Chipotle to get rid of antibiotics. The poultry giants have responded. Tyson Foods says it is striving to eliminate the use of human antibiotics from its U.S. broiler-chicken flocks by the end of September 2017. Given that Tyson is the largest fed-beef processor as well, its move has implications for the U.S. beef industry. Public pressure over antibiotic use continues to mount, and the calls for red meat to act will get even louder. Tyson has anticipated this. It is forming working groups with independent producers and others in its beef, pork and turkey supply chains to discuss ways to reduce the use of human antibiotics on cattle, hog and turkey farms. These groups will begin meeting this summer...more

Monday, June 01, 2015

GOP attack on water rule part of wider bid to 'rein in' EPA

The Obama administration says a new federal rule regulating small streams and wetlands will protect the drinking water of more than 117 million people in the country. Not so, insist Republicans. They say the rule is a massive government overreach that could even subject puddles and ditches to regulation. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., is promising to "rein in" the government through legislation or other means. It's a threat with a familiar ring. What else are Capito and other Republicans pledging to try to block? — the administration's plan to curb carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants. — its proposal for stricter limits on smog-forming pollution linked to asthma and respiratory illness — a separate rule setting the first national standards for waste generated from coal burned for electricity. The rules are among a host of regulations that majority Republicans have targeted for repeal or delay as they confront President Barack Obama on a second-term priority: his environmental legacy, especially his efforts to reduce the pollution linked to global warming...more

Conservation group uses litigation to influence environmental enforcement

WildEarth Guardians, an environmental advocacy group known for aggressive litigation, is making waves in the sagebrush sea. Through a series of federal lawsuits, Guardians is reshaping the way the federal government enforces environmental laws. The most recent example is a claim brought against the Department of the Interior’s Office of Surface Mining, Enforcement and Reclamation regarding the approval of plans to mine federal coal at two locations in Northwest Colorado. On May 8, a federal judge ruled against the Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell, stating that the environmental analyses for operations at Colowyo and Trapper mines did not meet standards established in the National Environmental Policy Act. The ruling ordered the Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement to complete a new analysis for Colowyo within 120 days and issue a recommendation to Jewell concerning continuation of mining. As a part of his opinion, federal Judge R. Brooke Jackson set precedent by stating that the effects of coal combustion must be considered in environmental analyses for proposed coal mining operations. Although NEPA states that direct and indirect impacts on the environment must be considered before development on federal land, coal combustion has historically been absent from the equation. WildEarth Guardians is also a main character in the story of the greater sage grouse. In 2011, Guardians filed a claim in federal court asking the court to order the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to make a decision on the status of 251 potentially endangered species, including the greater sage grouse. Guardians received a favorable settlement and Fish and Wildlife agreed to evaluate 200 out of the 251 species by Sept. 30 of this year. WildEarth Guardians’ persistent litigation has not gone without notice. Americans for Prosperity Foundation funded a study to analyze the impacts of Guardians’ litigation on local communities. It was released in March 2012. The study was designed and preformed by Ryan Yonk, Ph.D., Department of Political Science and Criminal Justice at Southern Utah University and Randy Simmons, Ph.D., Department of Economics and Finance at Utah State University. “What our study found was a negative impact on household income (in) places where WildEarth Guardians are active,” Yonk said. Yonk said household income is $2,500 less in areas where WildEarth Guardians conduct “litigation for the wild.” “This approach is successful in meeting their own goals, but it comes a cost to local communities,” he said...more

The 2012 study is here.

Bacon and Eggs Won’t Kill You (but the USDA might)

by

Most of us “know” that eating too much saturated fat (which includes red meat, dairy products, and eggs) raises our cholesterol levels and puts us at risk for heart disease. While we’re at it, we should greatly cut down on the salt too. These lessons are reinforced in our health classes and what the media has been telling us for decades. After all, this is the consensus reflected in the “Dietary Guidelines for Americans” issued by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and backed up by allegedly solid, objective science from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). As extra reassurance, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will use its regulatory authority to crack down on trans fats, the worst villain of them all.

Despite the appearance of a seemingly united front in the war on obesity, sharp dissent over sound nutrition policy is silently bubbling beneath the surface. It may be a sign of the times that fundamental challenges have come to the forefront and are becoming increasingly accepted. Growing numbers of scientists are expressing public skepticism toward the federal government’s official low-salt guidelines. Back in February of this year, the government’s top nutrition panel withdrew its nearly forty-year-old warning on restricting cholesterol intake and grudgingly concluded that “available evidence shows no appreciable relationship between consumption of dietary cholesterol and [blood] cholesterol.”

The Health Consensus Unravels
 
In one of the Wall Street Journal’s top-shared op-eds of 2014, investigative journalist Nina Teicholz threw down the gauntlet on the mainstream diet guidelines on fat:
“Saturated fat does not cause heart disease” — or so concluded a big study published in March in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine. How could this be? The very cornerstone of dietary advice for generations has been that the saturated fats in butter, cheese and red meat should be avoided because they clog our arteries. For many diet-conscious Americans, it is simply second nature to opt for chicken over sirloin, canola oil over butter.
The new study’s conclusion shouldn’t surprise anyone familiar with modern nutritional science, however. The fact is, there has never been solid evidence for the idea that these fats cause disease. We only believe this to be the case because nutrition policy has been derailed over the past half-century by a mixture of personal ambition, bad science, politics and bias.
Teicholz elaborates upon her thesis in her eye-opening, best-selling book The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet. With over 100 pages of footnotes and an extensive bibliography, it is clear that Teicholz has done her homework. In her nine-year investigation, she extensively reviewed the scientific literature and interviewed many of the key personalities in government, private industry, and advocacy groups who played influential roles in crafting official nutrition policy. While many people might be tempted to blame “the nefarious interests of Big Food,” Teicholz came to discover that the “source of the our misguided diet advice ... seems to have been driven by experts at some of our most trusted institutions working towards what they believed to be the public good.”


'Five Freedoms' - Farm animal treatment guidelines

By Seymour Klierly
 
Before the Memorial Day weekend, Wal-Mart announced new farm animal treatment guidelines for its suppliers. Wal-Mart asked suppliers to make sure that food animals have sufficient space, mentioning concerns over gestation crates for pregnant sows, battery cages for hens and veal crates for calves. In addition, Wal-Mart expressed support for the “Five Freedoms” of animal care—touchy, feely aspirations that are also adopted by animal rights groups (most of which are considered enemies of animal agriculture). They include: freedom from hunger and thirst; fear and distress; discomfort; pain or disease; and freedom to express normal behavior. Talk about playing on people’s emotions here. Can’t you just hear the sad music in the background?

Again, farmers and ranchers not only talk this talk, but they also walk this walk.
Hailed as “improved standards” in many news stories, the announcement was of course boasted by the Humane Society of the United States, arguably the biggest (size and dollar-wise) enemy of animal agriculture.

But another unsuspecting group came out praising the announcement—the National Pork Producers Council (the lobbying organization for pork producers). Targeted and picked on for years by HSUS, I was a little surprised to see this support. I see where they’re coming from: Pork producers already take care of animals humanely. But this is a departure from their normal reaction to decisions influenced by HSUS.

HSUS has claimed victory for every food company or restaurant the deep-pocketed organization bullied into eliminating the use of gestation crates (which are deemed humane by the American Veterinary Medical Association) for the protection of pregnant sows. A couple years ago, it seemed there was a daily announcement.

It was like dominos. And, speaking of Domino’s, the pizza chain was the only major food or restaurant chain that didn’t cave to animal rights extremists.

This didn’t happen in Washington, so why am I rambling on about it? Well, this brings me back to just a few short years ago when HSUS made a strong, but failed, attempt at federal legislation to mandate the minimum size of cages for egg-laying hens to be housed. This legislation was the first of its kind to dictate on-farm production practices.

Though this legislation was backed by a large group of egg farmers (many believe HSUS strong-armed egg producers into it), a lot of other animal agriculture groups fought hard against the rule, fearing it was a slippery slope to other sectors of animal agriculture. If HSUS can bully egg producers into it, they can likely do it to other animal agriculture industries.

On the bright side, the legislation flopped, and I think it’s safe to say that sort of on-farm federal legislation has been put to bed (for now, at least). Fingers crossed.



Wildlife groups take aim at lethal control of predators

Federal trapper Chris Brennan is the go-to guy in Mendocino County when sheep or cattle are being threatened by predators, which, it is generally acknowledged, don’t stand much of a chance when he is on the case. He is an excellent tracker, an expert with snares and other traps and a pretty good shot. He has the added benefit, say wildlife advocates and quite a few neighbors, of being a merciless killer. Brennan, a 55-year-old trapper for the U.S. Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services, has killed coyotes, mountain lions, bears, skunks, raccoons, bobcats and, by his own estimate, 400 dogs. “He represents a kind of mind-set, a culture,” said Camilla Fox, the executive director of Project Coyote, a wildlife advocacy organization that is calling for government support and training in nonlethal methods and techniques for controlling natural predators, and for widespread adoption of programs like one that has succeeded in Marin County for 15 years. Brennan and his fellow trappers are the target of a nationwide campaign by Project Coyote and other wildlife conservation organizations to stop what they characterize as indiscriminate killing of wildlife by a rogue agency that still lives by the outdated slogan “the only good predator is a dead predator.”...more

Editorial - Repeal 'Country of Origin Labeling' Law

The World Trade Organization on May 18 denounced a U.S. law requiring labels on meat products to specify where the animal was raised and slaughtered. The law, the WTO said, discriminates against Canadian and Mexican suppliers.

The ruling on America's country-of-origin labeling, or COOL, law, first enacted in 2002, set off alarm in some quarters. Foes of U.S. free-trade pacts smelled doom, arguing both the food supply and consumer choice were at risk. Yet the decision also prompted an immediate push for repeal from Congress, an effort led in part by Rep. Tom Rooney, R-Fla.

Rooney, in a statement that likely summed up the sentiment of the House Agriculture Committee, which passed a COOL repeal with overwhelming bipartisan support Wednesday, said the mandate violated U.S. trade agreements — and if not ditched, it could ignite a "trade war" as Canada and Mexico would slap higher tariffs on U.S. products. "This bill is critical to avoiding a trade war that could devastate U.S. farmers and ranchers, hamper economic growth and damage agriculture and manufacturing industries across the country," Rooney said.

Some critics of the House measure argued that we should be concerned that an international body, unaccountable to U.S. lawmakers or taxpayers, can readily force a change in our policies.

Last month, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's chief economist reported that since COOL regulations were updated in 2009, compliance has cost U.S. producers, packers and retailers — of meats as well as fruits, vegetables and nuts — $2.6 billion, half of which was related to beef sales.

The industry, of course, does not want a mandate that drives up its costs and regulatory burden. But that's not why COOL should be repealed. As outlined in the USDA chief economist's report from last month, public health was not a factor for implementing COOL — advertising was and it didn't work.

"COOL is a retail labeling program and as such does not provide a basis for addressing food safety," the agency noted. "Existing research has not revealed that consumer demand for country of origin information is sufficient to lead to measurable increases in demand for labeled beef and pork in the marketplace. However, including COOL requirements causes the industry to incur costs." The report added, "Any increases in costs translate into losses for both consumers and producers relative to the situation without such requirements."  link