Sheep grazing limits proposed to protect bighorns
Payette National Forest officials are considering a ban on domestic sheep grazing in some areas frequented by wild bighorns.
If approved, the plan would force several ranchers to give up grazing areas in parts of Hells Canyon and the Salmon River canyon. The draft plan is open to comment for 90 days.
Once a final decision is made, each individual grazing decision will be handled separately, forest Supervisor Suzanne Rainville told The Idaho Statesman.
The environmental review and draft plan followed an order by U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill in 2007 that ranchers move their sheep off of five allotments in Hells Canyon to protect the wild sheep.
Domestic sheep carry some diseases to which they have resistance but that can spread to more vulnerable wild bighorns.
In the draft, the Forest Service said Canada and the United States have a long history of large-scale, sudden, all-age die-offs in bighorn sheep populations, many of them associated with domestic animal contact.
Hearings on the draft plan are scheduled Oct. 6 at the Holiday Inn on Vista near Interstate 84 in Boise and Oct. 29 at the Payette National Forest supervisor's office in McCall, both at 6 p.m.
Monday, September 22, 2008
NM Game and Fish recommends cougar hunting changes
Conservationists who have been seeking changes in the way New Mexico wildlife officials manage cougar hunts are throwing their support behind agency recommendations that they say will help maintain the big cats' population.
The state Game and Fish Department is recommending that the agency provide information on its Web site to teach hunters the difference between male and female cats to ensure that more breeding females are left in the wild and kittens are not orphaned.
The department is also recommending that a cougar control program aimed at reducing depredation of livestock in the southeastern part of the state come to an end.
Those recommendations and others dealing with New Mexico's big game hunting rules for the 2009 and 2010 seasons will be taken up by the state Game Commission at its Oct. 2 meeting.
"We try to present what we think are valid recommendations, whatever the species is," said Marty Frentzel, a department spokesman.
Wendy Keefover-Ring, director of carnivore protection for WildEarth Guardians, said she could not be more pleased with the department's proposals.
"I think this takes New Mexico out of the dark ages of mountain lion management and puts it up into the front in terms of adopting the best available science," she said.
WildEarth Guardians and Animal Protection of New Mexico had requested that the department require hunters to take an online cougar education and identification course prior to obtaining a hunting license.
Keefover-Ring said she hopes the Game Commission approves the course. Colorado is currently the only state with a mandatory cougar ID program, and she said it took several years to make that happen.
If approved, Frentzel said it would be up to the commission to decide whether the course is voluntary or mandatory.
While New Mexico game officials have said the state's cougar population is healthy, WildEarth Guardians and Animal Protection of New Mexico contend that too many female cats are being killed during hunting season.
The groups say more than two-fifths of all cougars killed in New Mexico since 1999 have been females. They say mother cats play an important role in protecting, feeding and teaching their kittens survival skills.
As part of its recommendations, Game and Fish suggests that only a quarter of cougar harvests in each hunting zone be females. If the number of female kills comes within 10 percent of that limit, the department could shut down hunting in that area.
Keefover-Ring called that "a huge step forward toward protecting females," but she said the department should consider dropping the percentage of female kills even lower.
The groups also wanted the department to stop spending tens of thousands of dollars each year on snaring mountain lions in southeastern New Mexico to benefit livestock owners.
Keefover-Ring called the depredation prevention program "expensive and stupid," saying sheep grazing in the area has declined tremendously in just a few years and that ranchers have other non-lethal means of ensuring that their livestock do not become prey.
Frentzel said the current contract to trap cougars in the southeast will expire in January. While the department recommends ending the program, he said it will be up to the Game Commission to decide whether that happens in January or the trapper is given 30 days' notice.
The department is still receiving comments on other aspects of mountain lion hunting—for example, whether year-round hunting on private land should be allowed. Frentzel said the commission will have to make that decision after hearing from the public.
Conservationists who have been seeking changes in the way New Mexico wildlife officials manage cougar hunts are throwing their support behind agency recommendations that they say will help maintain the big cats' population.
The state Game and Fish Department is recommending that the agency provide information on its Web site to teach hunters the difference between male and female cats to ensure that more breeding females are left in the wild and kittens are not orphaned.
The department is also recommending that a cougar control program aimed at reducing depredation of livestock in the southeastern part of the state come to an end.
Those recommendations and others dealing with New Mexico's big game hunting rules for the 2009 and 2010 seasons will be taken up by the state Game Commission at its Oct. 2 meeting.
"We try to present what we think are valid recommendations, whatever the species is," said Marty Frentzel, a department spokesman.
Wendy Keefover-Ring, director of carnivore protection for WildEarth Guardians, said she could not be more pleased with the department's proposals.
"I think this takes New Mexico out of the dark ages of mountain lion management and puts it up into the front in terms of adopting the best available science," she said.
WildEarth Guardians and Animal Protection of New Mexico had requested that the department require hunters to take an online cougar education and identification course prior to obtaining a hunting license.
Keefover-Ring said she hopes the Game Commission approves the course. Colorado is currently the only state with a mandatory cougar ID program, and she said it took several years to make that happen.
If approved, Frentzel said it would be up to the commission to decide whether the course is voluntary or mandatory.
While New Mexico game officials have said the state's cougar population is healthy, WildEarth Guardians and Animal Protection of New Mexico contend that too many female cats are being killed during hunting season.
The groups say more than two-fifths of all cougars killed in New Mexico since 1999 have been females. They say mother cats play an important role in protecting, feeding and teaching their kittens survival skills.
As part of its recommendations, Game and Fish suggests that only a quarter of cougar harvests in each hunting zone be females. If the number of female kills comes within 10 percent of that limit, the department could shut down hunting in that area.
Keefover-Ring called that "a huge step forward toward protecting females," but she said the department should consider dropping the percentage of female kills even lower.
The groups also wanted the department to stop spending tens of thousands of dollars each year on snaring mountain lions in southeastern New Mexico to benefit livestock owners.
Keefover-Ring called the depredation prevention program "expensive and stupid," saying sheep grazing in the area has declined tremendously in just a few years and that ranchers have other non-lethal means of ensuring that their livestock do not become prey.
Frentzel said the current contract to trap cougars in the southeast will expire in January. While the department recommends ending the program, he said it will be up to the Game Commission to decide whether that happens in January or the trapper is given 30 days' notice.
The department is still receiving comments on other aspects of mountain lion hunting—for example, whether year-round hunting on private land should be allowed. Frentzel said the commission will have to make that decision after hearing from the public.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Inspector General Starts Investigation Into Improper Coordination Between NLCS Employees & Environmental Advocacy Organizations
U.S. Rep Rob Bishop (R-Utah), called on the Interior Department to act quickly to halt any improper activities involving the National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) and environmental advocacy organizations.
Bishop is the Ranking Member on the National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Subcommittee.
Department officials have told Bishop’s office that the Department’s Inspector General has started an investigation into the NLCS, a division of the Bureau of Land management, after reviewing documents related to the agency.
Bishop further asked that employees involved in the investigation step aside from their positions and relinquish their duties until the investigation is completed by the Inspector General.
Federal law generally prohibits federal employees from using appropriated funds or their official positions to lobby Congress. Emails and other documents being reviewed by the Department show extensive coordination between top NLCS officials and lobbyists for environmental groups.
“The Department must insist that any employee involved in violations of the Anti-Lobbying Law step aside until the Inspector General or the Justice Department has reviewed his or her conduct,” Bishop said. “Just as the employees of the royalty-in-kind program at MMS learned, we will not tolerate misconduct by public officials.”
Federal law generally prohibits federal employees from using appropriated funds or their official positions to lobby Congress. Emails and other documents being reviewed by the Department show extensive coordination between top NLCS officials and lobbyists for environmental groups.
U.S. Rep Rob Bishop (R-Utah), called on the Interior Department to act quickly to halt any improper activities involving the National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) and environmental advocacy organizations.
Bishop is the Ranking Member on the National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Subcommittee.
Department officials have told Bishop’s office that the Department’s Inspector General has started an investigation into the NLCS, a division of the Bureau of Land management, after reviewing documents related to the agency.
Bishop further asked that employees involved in the investigation step aside from their positions and relinquish their duties until the investigation is completed by the Inspector General.
Federal law generally prohibits federal employees from using appropriated funds or their official positions to lobby Congress. Emails and other documents being reviewed by the Department show extensive coordination between top NLCS officials and lobbyists for environmental groups.
“The Department must insist that any employee involved in violations of the Anti-Lobbying Law step aside until the Inspector General or the Justice Department has reviewed his or her conduct,” Bishop said. “Just as the employees of the royalty-in-kind program at MMS learned, we will not tolerate misconduct by public officials.”
Federal law generally prohibits federal employees from using appropriated funds or their official positions to lobby Congress. Emails and other documents being reviewed by the Department show extensive coordination between top NLCS officials and lobbyists for environmental groups.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Wolf population in MT, WY, ID is decreasing or 'static'
For the first time since reintroduction, the wolf population in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho is decreasing or at best is static, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The mid-year wolf population was estimated at 1,545 in 2007. This year the estimate is 1,455, which means a decrease of 90.
Since wolf re-introduction 10 years ago, the population has grown an average of 24 percent a year, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service.
This year 400 pups were expected to survive to adulthood, but that's not happening. In the greater Yellowstone area, pups are dying at a high rate, the FWS said. The cause of those deaths is suspected to be distemper contracted from domestic dogs.
The FWS said the new population estimates have nothing to do with this week's decision not to seek wolf delisting, but an attorney for groups who sued to stop the delisting claims it points to a problem.
"Where we have state laws that promote the eradication of wolves and that wolf population had not even met Fish and Wildlife's own recovery standards, that's not good enough. It may be good enough for government work, but it's not good enough for Yellowstone wolves," said Doug Honnold of the Earth Justice Legal Defense Fund.
Last year 186 wolves were killed in the three states. This year FWS estimates the number will be as many as 250.
FWS spokesperson Ed Bangs said it could be that wolf populations are leveling off or that this is simply a one year anomaly.
For the first time since reintroduction, the wolf population in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho is decreasing or at best is static, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The mid-year wolf population was estimated at 1,545 in 2007. This year the estimate is 1,455, which means a decrease of 90.
Since wolf re-introduction 10 years ago, the population has grown an average of 24 percent a year, according to the Fish and Wildlife Service.
This year 400 pups were expected to survive to adulthood, but that's not happening. In the greater Yellowstone area, pups are dying at a high rate, the FWS said. The cause of those deaths is suspected to be distemper contracted from domestic dogs.
The FWS said the new population estimates have nothing to do with this week's decision not to seek wolf delisting, but an attorney for groups who sued to stop the delisting claims it points to a problem.
"Where we have state laws that promote the eradication of wolves and that wolf population had not even met Fish and Wildlife's own recovery standards, that's not good enough. It may be good enough for government work, but it's not good enough for Yellowstone wolves," said Doug Honnold of the Earth Justice Legal Defense Fund.
Last year 186 wolves were killed in the three states. This year FWS estimates the number will be as many as 250.
FWS spokesperson Ed Bangs said it could be that wolf populations are leveling off or that this is simply a one year anomaly.
Feds keeping Northern Rockies wolf listed for now
The government won't immediately try to take gray wolves in the Northern Rockies off the endangered species list, a federal wildlife official said Tuesday.
Ed Bangs, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service coordinator, said the government in the next week expects to withdraw a rule that declared wolves fully recovered. That rule, issued in March, would have allowed public hunting for the region's approximately 1,500 wolves.
Wildlife agencies in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming have already started preparations for such hunts. But they had been in doubt since July, when U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy blocked the states from going forward pending resolution of a lawsuit by environmentalists.
"Hopefully, they'll go back to the drawing board and come up with a new plan that better protects wolves," said Earthjustice attorney Doug Honnold, who had sued on behalf of a dozen environmental groups that argue wolves in the region remain imperiled.
The decision to withdraw the recovery rule is subject to final approval by the Department of Justice. Molloy also would have to sign off before it could take effect.
In his July injunction against the planned hunts, Molloy raised concerns about whether wolves would have enough genetic diversity, through breeding, to sustain their population.
Molloy also questioned Wyoming's lack of regulations on the killing of wolves. Outside Yellowstone National Park and adjacent areas, wolves are classified as predators, allowing them to be shot on sight.
Bangs, coordinator for the government's Northern Rockies wolf recovery program, said he still believes there are enough wolves to merit public hunting. But he said the government needs to adequately explain why wolves no longer need federal protection before making a new proposal.
"This means you do away with the de-listing rule and give it back to the Fish and Wildlife Service to think about more," he said. "There's going to be a thorough, fine-toothed comb going through it to decide what we can do better."
The government won't immediately try to take gray wolves in the Northern Rockies off the endangered species list, a federal wildlife official said Tuesday.
Ed Bangs, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service coordinator, said the government in the next week expects to withdraw a rule that declared wolves fully recovered. That rule, issued in March, would have allowed public hunting for the region's approximately 1,500 wolves.
Wildlife agencies in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming have already started preparations for such hunts. But they had been in doubt since July, when U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy blocked the states from going forward pending resolution of a lawsuit by environmentalists.
"Hopefully, they'll go back to the drawing board and come up with a new plan that better protects wolves," said Earthjustice attorney Doug Honnold, who had sued on behalf of a dozen environmental groups that argue wolves in the region remain imperiled.
The decision to withdraw the recovery rule is subject to final approval by the Department of Justice. Molloy also would have to sign off before it could take effect.
In his July injunction against the planned hunts, Molloy raised concerns about whether wolves would have enough genetic diversity, through breeding, to sustain their population.
Molloy also questioned Wyoming's lack of regulations on the killing of wolves. Outside Yellowstone National Park and adjacent areas, wolves are classified as predators, allowing them to be shot on sight.
Bangs, coordinator for the government's Northern Rockies wolf recovery program, said he still believes there are enough wolves to merit public hunting. But he said the government needs to adequately explain why wolves no longer need federal protection before making a new proposal.
"This means you do away with the de-listing rule and give it back to the Fish and Wildlife Service to think about more," he said. "There's going to be a thorough, fine-toothed comb going through it to decide what we can do better."
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Grazing sheep to protect Carson City from wildfire
Next spring, four-legged firefighters will gather in the hills west of Carson City in a battle against an invading grass that's boosting the risk of wildfire.
For the fourth straight year, sheep will be used to munch away at fields of grasses growing in an area already seared by fire near Nevada's capital.
"The idea is to use sheep to hit that area a little harder," said Genny Wilson, chief of the U.S. Forest Service's Carson Ranger District.
The primary target is cheatgrass, an invasive annual grass that first appeared in Nevada in 1906 and has since spread across tens of millions of acres in the Great Basin, crowding out native vegetation on many hills and fields in Northern Nevada.
The stuff thrives in areas already burned by fire and when dry can fuel future fires in the same place.
"Its flammability is like gasoline," said Mike Dondero, state fire management officer.
Experts have mowed and used herbicides and toxic fungus to battle the spread of cheatgrass.
Sheep grazing is another tool being tried. After a successful 1999 test on Carson City's C Hill by the University of Nevada Cooperative Extension, sheep have been used to graze the region in 2006, 2007 and 2008.
The effort beginning in May targets 5,500 acres. It's part of more than 17,000 acres that have burned in the area since 1980, including 8,799 acres consumed during the Waterfall Fire of 2004, according to a Forest Service report.
In addition to cheatgrass, the sheep, provided by rancher Ted Borda for only the cost of transportation, also will remove Medusahead, another nonnative annual grass.
And these hungry critters also will be munching on wheatgrass, which was deliberately planted in the wake of the Waterfall Fire to help stabilize soil but is now flourishing in areas to the detriment of native vegetation.
"Now, we want to take that plant out and get the natives back in," Wilson said.
That's particularly important because the affected area of the Carson Range serves as critical winter habitat for mule deer, which need native forage like bitterbrush to survive.
The program builds upon Carson City's active program to protect open space, going beyond efforts to simply preserve scenery, said Juan Guzman, the city's open space manager.
"Now, we're managing land, and the emphasis is on reducing the fuels," Guzman said. "It's something really meaningful to our community, I hope."
While the effort looks promising, the long-term effectiveness of sheep control cheatgrass spread is unknown, Wilson said.
Nevada State Forester Pete Anderson said the use of sheep, as well as goats, offers "a lot of potential" to reduce fire danger, particularly in places where communities abut wild areas such as at the targeted area of Carson City.
"It can be very effective," Anderson said. "One of the problems is we don't have the number of livestock we used to. They can be hard to get."
Next spring, four-legged firefighters will gather in the hills west of Carson City in a battle against an invading grass that's boosting the risk of wildfire.
For the fourth straight year, sheep will be used to munch away at fields of grasses growing in an area already seared by fire near Nevada's capital.
"The idea is to use sheep to hit that area a little harder," said Genny Wilson, chief of the U.S. Forest Service's Carson Ranger District.
The primary target is cheatgrass, an invasive annual grass that first appeared in Nevada in 1906 and has since spread across tens of millions of acres in the Great Basin, crowding out native vegetation on many hills and fields in Northern Nevada.
The stuff thrives in areas already burned by fire and when dry can fuel future fires in the same place.
"Its flammability is like gasoline," said Mike Dondero, state fire management officer.
Experts have mowed and used herbicides and toxic fungus to battle the spread of cheatgrass.
Sheep grazing is another tool being tried. After a successful 1999 test on Carson City's C Hill by the University of Nevada Cooperative Extension, sheep have been used to graze the region in 2006, 2007 and 2008.
The effort beginning in May targets 5,500 acres. It's part of more than 17,000 acres that have burned in the area since 1980, including 8,799 acres consumed during the Waterfall Fire of 2004, according to a Forest Service report.
In addition to cheatgrass, the sheep, provided by rancher Ted Borda for only the cost of transportation, also will remove Medusahead, another nonnative annual grass.
And these hungry critters also will be munching on wheatgrass, which was deliberately planted in the wake of the Waterfall Fire to help stabilize soil but is now flourishing in areas to the detriment of native vegetation.
"Now, we want to take that plant out and get the natives back in," Wilson said.
That's particularly important because the affected area of the Carson Range serves as critical winter habitat for mule deer, which need native forage like bitterbrush to survive.
The program builds upon Carson City's active program to protect open space, going beyond efforts to simply preserve scenery, said Juan Guzman, the city's open space manager.
"Now, we're managing land, and the emphasis is on reducing the fuels," Guzman said. "It's something really meaningful to our community, I hope."
While the effort looks promising, the long-term effectiveness of sheep control cheatgrass spread is unknown, Wilson said.
Nevada State Forester Pete Anderson said the use of sheep, as well as goats, offers "a lot of potential" to reduce fire danger, particularly in places where communities abut wild areas such as at the targeted area of Carson City.
"It can be very effective," Anderson said. "One of the problems is we don't have the number of livestock we used to. They can be hard to get."
Friday, September 12, 2008
How Might Climate Change Affect Native Grasslands?
Ten miles west of Cheyenne, carbon-dioxide levels are nearly twice as high as they are in the city.
Well, at least in some test plots at the High Plains Grasslands Research Station.
Thirty plots of native grasslands are part of an experiment to determine how local prairies could react to climate change. The results could shape congressional policy decisions, as well as rangeland management in the Rocky Mountain region.
Wyoming's semi-arid landscape also is a good place to start, since grasslands cover more than 40 percent of the Earth's surface.
"What makes it tricky is that weather and climate, by nature, are variable," said project leader and plant physiologist Dr. Jack Morgan from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. "You look out at this field, and there are probably 100 different plant species. To predict which ones will be the winners and losers is difficult."
Experts know that the environment changes when a rancher puts cattle out to graze. What they don't know is how climate change will impact the animals' preferred meals or the invasive weeds that share the same space. Wyoming and southern New Mexico share similar precipitation levels, but dissimilar temperatures shape the scenery within each state.
"Ranchers stock grasslands according to how much forage is available when," he added.
Ecologists, plant physiologists and soil scientists at the High Plains Grasslands Research Station are comparing the effects of elevated levels of carbon dioxide, temperature and rainfall on spring and summer plant species. Morgan said the 2 -year-old project is a collaborative effort between the USDA, the University of Wyoming and Colorado State University.
Rings of pipe corral each site above ground, while a thin layer of plastic carves through the soil two feet down. Some of the rings "hiss" with the constant release of carbon dioxide. Infrared heaters hang over other locations to simulate a planet that is a few degrees hotter than it is today.
He said cool-season plants like western wheatgrass seem to thrive with additional carbon dioxide. But warm-season species such as the blue gramma are better at adapting to the extra heat. The challenge for scientists is to determine the overall result of the combination of factors.
Morgan said the experiment is only one of a handful worldwide that evaluates more than one feature of climate change. Part of the reason is time. It takes several years to accumulate solid data. Another problem is the cost. He said it takes $250,000 each year to run the carbon dioxide and heating equipment.
High-tech cameras also are used to gauge the topsoil and root system changes under each scenario, said Dan LeCain, site field manager and plant physiologist with the USDA. He added that 80 percent of a grasslands ecosystem is located underground, making root depth an important factor to consider.
But if Wyoming's researchers know the impacts of climate change on one grasslands environment, they will have a pretty good idea how global warming could impact similar ecosystems across the globe, he said.
Ten miles west of Cheyenne, carbon-dioxide levels are nearly twice as high as they are in the city.
Well, at least in some test plots at the High Plains Grasslands Research Station.
Thirty plots of native grasslands are part of an experiment to determine how local prairies could react to climate change. The results could shape congressional policy decisions, as well as rangeland management in the Rocky Mountain region.
Wyoming's semi-arid landscape also is a good place to start, since grasslands cover more than 40 percent of the Earth's surface.
"What makes it tricky is that weather and climate, by nature, are variable," said project leader and plant physiologist Dr. Jack Morgan from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. "You look out at this field, and there are probably 100 different plant species. To predict which ones will be the winners and losers is difficult."
Experts know that the environment changes when a rancher puts cattle out to graze. What they don't know is how climate change will impact the animals' preferred meals or the invasive weeds that share the same space. Wyoming and southern New Mexico share similar precipitation levels, but dissimilar temperatures shape the scenery within each state.
"Ranchers stock grasslands according to how much forage is available when," he added.
Ecologists, plant physiologists and soil scientists at the High Plains Grasslands Research Station are comparing the effects of elevated levels of carbon dioxide, temperature and rainfall on spring and summer plant species. Morgan said the 2 -year-old project is a collaborative effort between the USDA, the University of Wyoming and Colorado State University.
Rings of pipe corral each site above ground, while a thin layer of plastic carves through the soil two feet down. Some of the rings "hiss" with the constant release of carbon dioxide. Infrared heaters hang over other locations to simulate a planet that is a few degrees hotter than it is today.
He said cool-season plants like western wheatgrass seem to thrive with additional carbon dioxide. But warm-season species such as the blue gramma are better at adapting to the extra heat. The challenge for scientists is to determine the overall result of the combination of factors.
Morgan said the experiment is only one of a handful worldwide that evaluates more than one feature of climate change. Part of the reason is time. It takes several years to accumulate solid data. Another problem is the cost. He said it takes $250,000 each year to run the carbon dioxide and heating equipment.
High-tech cameras also are used to gauge the topsoil and root system changes under each scenario, said Dan LeCain, site field manager and plant physiologist with the USDA. He added that 80 percent of a grasslands ecosystem is located underground, making root depth an important factor to consider.
But if Wyoming's researchers know the impacts of climate change on one grasslands environment, they will have a pretty good idea how global warming could impact similar ecosystems across the globe, he said.
Wrangling more water than cows
When the branding begins, Brandon Humphries is on horseback, his lasso turning slow loops in the air above a herd of nervous calves.
One by one, he snares the animals by their hind legs and drags them to a waiting group of ranch hands, who go to work with vaccine guns and an electric iron.
The air fills with white smoke and the smell of scorched hair.
After about an hour of this, Humphries climbs down from the saddle and right into the path of a calf that has slipped away from the ground crew. He wrestles the 200-pound animal to the ground, then pops back up with a grin on his face and a splash of green manure across the front of his long-sleeved work shirt.
He looks down at the stain and shrugs. "Shirt was going to get dirty eventually anyway," he says.
A scene like this is not unusual in the lonesome valleys of White Pine County. This kind of work has been going on here for more than a century.
What's strange is who Humphries' boss is.
Last year the Southern Nevada Water Authority hired him to run the string of ranches it now owns in Spring Valley, about 40 miles east of Ely. His authority-issued business cards identify him as "ranch manager," a position that rarely, if ever, shows up in the staff directory of a major municipal water supplier.
Humphries' job is to oversee Great Basin Ranch, a collection of seven agricultural operations the authority has snapped up since 2006.
The water agency's holdings in Spring Valley now include more than 23,000 acres, 4,000 sheep, 1,700 cows, a working hay farm, and the rights to more than 13 billion gallons of surface water and groundwater each year.
The authority also has acquired more than 1 million acres of federal grazing rights, including a sheep range that stretches more than halfway to Las Vegas, some 250 miles away.
The purchases were made to support a scheme to tap groundwater across eastern Nevada.
By as early as 2013, the authority hopes to start sending water south through a pipeline that is expected to cost between $2 billion and $3.5 billion. Authority General Manager Pat Mulroy has described Spring Valley as the "anchor basin" for the project. More than half of the water destined to one day fill the pipeline is expected to come from there.
The water project has stirred fierce opposition, and so have the purchases in Spring Valley.
Critics say the authority paid way too much for the ranches and now runs them with a mixture of incompetence and reckless spending.
Rancher and Assemblyman Pete Goicoechea considers it public money down the drain.
"If they had to pay for those ranches with the way they're running their livestock, they'd be broke in three years," says the Republican from Eureka. "It doesn't matter who's running them, though. Christ couldn't come off the cross to run those ranches and break even with what they paid for them."
But water authority officials insist the deals make sense in the proper context: They didn't buy the ranches for the livestock or the land. They weren't looking to break into the cattle industry or set up a rural retreat where city folk could play cowboy for a weekend. They were after one thing.
"We're paying market value for water," Humphries explains. "We're not buying a ranch for a ranch."
And if authority officials have their way, at least some of their new groundwater holdings in Spring Valley will be sent down the pipeline to Las Vegas one day.
Beyond that, the authority hasn't developed a long-term plan for the ranches yet. Though they are projected to operate at or near the break-even point starting this year, it might not make sense to keep them running as they are forever, officials say.
One idea is to open up the land to the state's university system as a sort of living laboratory for agricultural and environmental research. Another idea involves setting aside a portion of the property as a public natural area.
Authority Deputy General Manager Dick Wimmer says some changes undoubtedly will be made, but it's too early to say what those might be.
In the meantime, authority officials have one very compelling reason to keep ranching and farming on their property: Under Nevada law, you either use your water rights or you lose them.
The team
In the first two hours of branding, the water authority's calves stop lowing only once, when a single clap of thunder crashes down from a dark cloud gathering over nearby Wheeler Peak.
The animals wait in stunned silence for a few seconds to see what might happen next. Then they start up again.
The ranch hands greet the thunder with a holler.
Now it's a race against the weather. As any rancher will tell you, it's damned hard to brand a wet calf.
Most of these cows and steers were born in Spring Valley within the last 50 days. Each is roped and dragged backward across the grass to ground crew members who restrain it with a metal device known as a Nord fork.
In addition to the brand burned onto its right hip, each animal gets two vaccine shots. The males get castrated.
When it's over, the calves are turned loose to rejoin their mothers, which seems to calm them instantly.
The whole process takes about a minute and moves in a way that suggests an assembly line or a pit stop at a NASCAR race, with one key difference: Cars don't fight back.
"It's interesting to see how they do their business, how quick it is," says water authority biologist Zane Marshall, who stops by the corral to watch for a few minutes.
After snapping some pictures on his digital camera, he tries his hand once with the branding iron, then heads back out to continue his work.
Marshall is in Spring Valley to check on a contract crew hired by the authority to map the area's vegetation. The crew's work will help fill in the detail on aerial photos of the valley.
The goal is to catalog the existing flora and fauna so any impacts from the groundwater transfer can be tracked more easily once the pumps are turned on.
"It supports long-term monitoring," says Marshall, who manages the authority's Environmental Resources Division.
His team is also tracing the movements of sage grouse in the valley. Five of the birds have been fixed with radio telemetry collars, a process that sounds a lot easier than it ought to be.
Basically, Marshall says, you find them where they roost at night, shine a spotlight in their eyes and crank some loud music.
"Def Leppard or Metallica," he says. "It depends on when you were born."
Then you just scoop up the stunned birds with a net.
Humphries, who went along on one of the grouse roundups, says ranchers and wildlife biologists don't often mix, let alone collaborate as they do at Great Basin Ranch.
"Usually he doesn't like what I'm doing, and I don't like what he's going to do," Humphries says of a biologist like Marshall. "Here we're colleagues on the same team working for the same purpose."
On the ground
Spring Valley is a patchwork quilt of sagebrush, greasewood and meadow grass, stitched here and there with stream-fed ribbons of willow and silver maple trees. It is also a science textbook flipped open to the chapter on basin and range geology.
At about 25 miles wide and 110 miles long, it runs north-south between mountain blocks that rise sharply on either side like Cenozoic parentheses.
To the west is the Schell Creek Range, to the east the Snake Range, crowned by Wheeler Peak, Nevada's second highest summit at 13,063 feet.
The so-called "Loneliest Road in America," U.S. Highway 50, crosses the valley's midsection like a belt, its buckle the junction where U.S. 93 arrives from the south.
The authority bought its first ranch here in 2006. Within a year, Nevada's largest wholesale water supplier owned more private land in the valley than anyone else.
The almost $79 million buying frenzy has led some to predict that the authority could one day own all of the private property in Spring Valley.
The water authority's Mulroy won't rule that out, but she doesn't think it will be necessary.
"The strategic ranches we needed to protect sensitive species in the area we got. And the ranches with the greatest opportunity for reinjecting water into the groundwater table, we got those, too," she says.
As Wimmer explains it, Great Basin Ranch is "not looked at as a profit center" but as a "holistic" way to manage Spring Valley's water and environmental resources. As a result, he says, what goes on there at times might bear little resemblance to a typical livestock operation, where the bottom line is all there is.
Already, the authority is busy upgrading equipment, examining ways to improve water efficiency, and opening the property up to a small army of hydrologists and biologists whose primary mission is to make the pipeline pay off.
The authority's opponents see a more sinister motive at work.
"The only reason they bought those ranches was to provide a buffer. If they own them there's no one there to cry foul" if the water table drops, Assemblyman Goicoechea says. "They can say what they want, but that's why they bought the valley."
The cowboy lawmaker does agree with Las Vegas water officials on one point: They aren't running their ranches in a way he's ever seen.
"There's some things they've done that have some people in the industry grinning," he says.
At a recent livestock auction, for example, Great Basin Ranch agreed to some unusual sale conditions for its calves that could needlessly stress the animals and reduce their value when they are weighed for delivery in the fall, Goicoechea says. "They were the laughingstock of the auction."
Not everyone is upset by the authority's presence in Spring Valley.
Dennis Eldridge ranches on neighboring land that has been in his family since 1917. He thinks the authority is "doing fine" so far.
"They do things a little differently, but they've been fine with us," he says. "They've been a good neighbor."
It should be noted that the Eldridge family is in talks to sell its 6,300-acre spread to the authority. It should also be noted that Dennis Eldridge has a reputation for speaking his mind.
He says some fellow ranchers are jealous of Great Basin Ranch's new equipment and bottomless financial backing. Others just don't like change.
He says people are always anxious at first when a "foreign entity" moves into the valley, especially one affiliated with the government, which he jokingly refers to as "the big thumb."
As far as Eldridge is concerned, though, it's the people on the ground who count.
"Brandon's always been a good neighbor," he says. "He's helped us even before they (the authority) came along."
Along with Humphries, the authority directly employs three ranch hands, two of them college graduates with degrees in plant or animal science.
About 30 contract workers make up the rest of the staff. Some are here from Mexico and Peru on work visas that allow them to stay for months or years at a time.
There's plenty of work to go around, especially on branding day.
Several members of the day's crew were up before the sun, moving wheel lines that keep the alfalfa green and tending to the two dairy cows that keep the ranch supplied with milk.
Ranch hand Latara Pickering has logged 127 hours of work in the last two weeks.
Her brother, Matt Pickering, literally can't remember the last time he had a vacation. Ask him, and he has to think about it for a minute. "I went and picked up my brother at the airport," he finally says.
To brand every new calf on the ranch takes six full days scattered over three weeks. After that, the animals are turned out for five months to graze and pack on about 250 pounds each.
In early November, the animals will be loaded into trailers and trucked to their final stop before the slaughterhouse: a ranch near California where they will be "finished" with more grazing aimed at adding another 500 pounds of beef.
Humphries says the cattle operation near Bakersfield, Calif., agreed to buy the authority's first full batch of calves based on a video of the animals that was shown during an Aug. 1 auction in Winnemucca.
When a smaller group of cows and steers were sold and shipped off the ranch last fall, the line of cattle trucks stretched for a mile, he says.
Back in the saddle
A water utility with ranch property is not as unusual as you might think.
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California leases some of its land for agricultural use. So do Denver Water, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and several municipal water companies in Arizona.
What makes the arrangement in Spring Valley unusual is the water authority's decision to staff its property rather than lease it.
For Humphries, that meant a new opportunity at an opportune time.
"At that point, I needed a job," he says. "I knew the ranch, and they needed someone to look after their investment."
Humphries moved to Spring Valley eight years ago from Cedar City, Utah, to help his uncle run a hay farm.
When his uncle sold the place to the water authority in April 2007, Humphries suddenly found himself out of work.
Mulroy says Humphries seemed like the natural choice to look after the authority's livestock.
"It's not like we plucked somebody who has never done this before," she says. "We're going to the people who know how to do these things.
"The decisions on running those (ranches) are Brandon's."
Before he landed in Spring Valley, Humphries ran a landscaping company, a Mormon bookstore, and a side business that sold old railroad ties in Cedar City.
But cowboy life is in his blood.
When he was a kid, his family used to spend part of the year on a spread near Gunlock, Utah, where his grandfather kept 120 head of cattle and "we did everything by hand."
Humphries first climbed into the saddle at age 6, and within a year he was spending whole days on the range with his grandfather. He rode with blocks of wood taped to his stirrups so his legs would reach.
Today, the 36-year-old Humphries lives with his wife and five children in a house with a white rail fence and a sweeping view of Wheeler Peak from the front window.
"Basically, I went from operating a 600-acre farm for my uncle to operating a ranch with 1.2 million acres" of rangeland, he says. "It was quite a change."
Show 'em
On this day, Humphries and his branding crew get lucky. The clouds hold off until the last calf is done.
When the sky finally opens up around noon, what comes down is snow, a rarity for early June on the more-than-mile-high valley floor.
The weather is a mixed bag, Humphries says. It's good for the hay crop, but it also means two guys will have to go out on graders the next day to make sure the roads through the ranch are passable.
"In the ranch business in Spring Valley, what you deal with is too much water or not enough water," he says. "Both are occurring right now on the ranch."
Reaction to Humphries and his employer in White Pine County seems a little like that, too. It arrives in a trickle or a flood, some of it good, most of it bad.
Humphries predicts the anger and suspicion will fade over time, as "people come to realize we're here to be part of the community."
Until then, he knows only one surefire way to silence the critics: "Show 'em."
"That's what we do day by day," Humphries says. "We're under the microscope."
A new brand for a new ranch
When the Southern Nevada Water Authority bought the El Tejon ranch in White Pine County last May, the agency also acquired some livestock and an unusual problem.
Suddenly, the wholesale water supplier for the Las Vegas Valley needed its own cattle brand.
The design job fell to senior public information coordinator Lisa Riess and graphic artist Cathy Leece.
"It was absolutely the most unusual thing I have been asked to do," says Riess, an eight-year employee of the water authority.
Since neither of them knew the first thing about branding, they began by hitting the books.
What they discovered was a rich Nevada tradition dating back well over a century, one with its own complex set of rules and conventions.
It was a little like learning a new language, one Riess compares to Morse code or hieroglyphics, with letters and symbols that contain entire phrases if you know how to unlock them.
"This is not the typical brand you're used to in marketing," she says. "This was an entirely new subculture for us."
In other words, the authority could not simply burn a version of its water-droplet logo into the hides of its newly acquired cattle and sheep. Developing the brand had to be a "very careful, very deliberate" process, says Brandon Humphries, the authority's ranch manager in White Pine County.
Riess and Leece
knew going in that their design would have to be unique, so it wouldn't be confused with any other brand on file in Nevada. They didn't realize that would mean paging through the state's brand book, a 600-page tome crammed with about 4,000 different symbols.
"I would liken it to a copyright search," Riess says.
They also had to consider the landscape in which the livestock roam, since tradition dictates that a brand be "symbolic of the land it represents," Riess says.
Humphries had an additional requirement. He needed the brand to be easy to identify from a distance, but not so easy as to "rub it into people's faces" that the Southern Nevada Water Authority now owns livestock in the area. After all, Las Vegas water officials aren't exactly popular in White Pine County, what with their plans to export billions of gallons of groundwater from the area.
Finally, Riess and Leece had to consider the technical constraints of brand design, namely that the symbol they selected must be easily rendered in iron. And in the interest of being humane, they had to avoid the use of multiple symbols and enclosed spaces in their design that might cause painful "hot spots" in the finished brand.
The process took about nine months and involved dozens of drafts, including one that translated to "small fancy g."
Riess says the water authority's administrative team helped pick the final version, and the Nevada Department of Agriculture's Division of Livestock Identification gave its approval last October after a few weeks of review.
The authority's brand looks like an uppercase G with a waterfall tumbling out of it. And for good reason. The symbol literally translates to "falling water G."
The G stands for Great Basin Ranch, the name under which the water authority operates the more than 23,000 acres it has acquired in White Pine County's Spring Valley since 2006.
"A brand to us is a literal brand, but it still represents the company," Humphries explains.
The new brand was seared onto the right hip of about 1,500 calves in late May and June.
Asked how she feels about that, Riess says she has no moral objections to the practice of branding or cattle ranching in general. She used to be a vegetarian, but now she enjoys a good steak once in a while.
That's where she draws the line, though.
Riess says she has no interest in actually burning her "falling water G" onto the side of a live animal.
"I'll leave that to the professionals," she says.
Contact reporter Henry Brean at hbrean@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0350.
When the branding begins, Brandon Humphries is on horseback, his lasso turning slow loops in the air above a herd of nervous calves.
One by one, he snares the animals by their hind legs and drags them to a waiting group of ranch hands, who go to work with vaccine guns and an electric iron.
The air fills with white smoke and the smell of scorched hair.
After about an hour of this, Humphries climbs down from the saddle and right into the path of a calf that has slipped away from the ground crew. He wrestles the 200-pound animal to the ground, then pops back up with a grin on his face and a splash of green manure across the front of his long-sleeved work shirt.
He looks down at the stain and shrugs. "Shirt was going to get dirty eventually anyway," he says.
A scene like this is not unusual in the lonesome valleys of White Pine County. This kind of work has been going on here for more than a century.
What's strange is who Humphries' boss is.
Last year the Southern Nevada Water Authority hired him to run the string of ranches it now owns in Spring Valley, about 40 miles east of Ely. His authority-issued business cards identify him as "ranch manager," a position that rarely, if ever, shows up in the staff directory of a major municipal water supplier.
Humphries' job is to oversee Great Basin Ranch, a collection of seven agricultural operations the authority has snapped up since 2006.
The water agency's holdings in Spring Valley now include more than 23,000 acres, 4,000 sheep, 1,700 cows, a working hay farm, and the rights to more than 13 billion gallons of surface water and groundwater each year.
The authority also has acquired more than 1 million acres of federal grazing rights, including a sheep range that stretches more than halfway to Las Vegas, some 250 miles away.
The purchases were made to support a scheme to tap groundwater across eastern Nevada.
By as early as 2013, the authority hopes to start sending water south through a pipeline that is expected to cost between $2 billion and $3.5 billion. Authority General Manager Pat Mulroy has described Spring Valley as the "anchor basin" for the project. More than half of the water destined to one day fill the pipeline is expected to come from there.
The water project has stirred fierce opposition, and so have the purchases in Spring Valley.
Critics say the authority paid way too much for the ranches and now runs them with a mixture of incompetence and reckless spending.
Rancher and Assemblyman Pete Goicoechea considers it public money down the drain.
"If they had to pay for those ranches with the way they're running their livestock, they'd be broke in three years," says the Republican from Eureka. "It doesn't matter who's running them, though. Christ couldn't come off the cross to run those ranches and break even with what they paid for them."
But water authority officials insist the deals make sense in the proper context: They didn't buy the ranches for the livestock or the land. They weren't looking to break into the cattle industry or set up a rural retreat where city folk could play cowboy for a weekend. They were after one thing.
"We're paying market value for water," Humphries explains. "We're not buying a ranch for a ranch."
And if authority officials have their way, at least some of their new groundwater holdings in Spring Valley will be sent down the pipeline to Las Vegas one day.
Beyond that, the authority hasn't developed a long-term plan for the ranches yet. Though they are projected to operate at or near the break-even point starting this year, it might not make sense to keep them running as they are forever, officials say.
One idea is to open up the land to the state's university system as a sort of living laboratory for agricultural and environmental research. Another idea involves setting aside a portion of the property as a public natural area.
Authority Deputy General Manager Dick Wimmer says some changes undoubtedly will be made, but it's too early to say what those might be.
In the meantime, authority officials have one very compelling reason to keep ranching and farming on their property: Under Nevada law, you either use your water rights or you lose them.
The team
In the first two hours of branding, the water authority's calves stop lowing only once, when a single clap of thunder crashes down from a dark cloud gathering over nearby Wheeler Peak.
The animals wait in stunned silence for a few seconds to see what might happen next. Then they start up again.
The ranch hands greet the thunder with a holler.
Now it's a race against the weather. As any rancher will tell you, it's damned hard to brand a wet calf.
Most of these cows and steers were born in Spring Valley within the last 50 days. Each is roped and dragged backward across the grass to ground crew members who restrain it with a metal device known as a Nord fork.
In addition to the brand burned onto its right hip, each animal gets two vaccine shots. The males get castrated.
When it's over, the calves are turned loose to rejoin their mothers, which seems to calm them instantly.
The whole process takes about a minute and moves in a way that suggests an assembly line or a pit stop at a NASCAR race, with one key difference: Cars don't fight back.
"It's interesting to see how they do their business, how quick it is," says water authority biologist Zane Marshall, who stops by the corral to watch for a few minutes.
After snapping some pictures on his digital camera, he tries his hand once with the branding iron, then heads back out to continue his work.
Marshall is in Spring Valley to check on a contract crew hired by the authority to map the area's vegetation. The crew's work will help fill in the detail on aerial photos of the valley.
The goal is to catalog the existing flora and fauna so any impacts from the groundwater transfer can be tracked more easily once the pumps are turned on.
"It supports long-term monitoring," says Marshall, who manages the authority's Environmental Resources Division.
His team is also tracing the movements of sage grouse in the valley. Five of the birds have been fixed with radio telemetry collars, a process that sounds a lot easier than it ought to be.
Basically, Marshall says, you find them where they roost at night, shine a spotlight in their eyes and crank some loud music.
"Def Leppard or Metallica," he says. "It depends on when you were born."
Then you just scoop up the stunned birds with a net.
Humphries, who went along on one of the grouse roundups, says ranchers and wildlife biologists don't often mix, let alone collaborate as they do at Great Basin Ranch.
"Usually he doesn't like what I'm doing, and I don't like what he's going to do," Humphries says of a biologist like Marshall. "Here we're colleagues on the same team working for the same purpose."
On the ground
Spring Valley is a patchwork quilt of sagebrush, greasewood and meadow grass, stitched here and there with stream-fed ribbons of willow and silver maple trees. It is also a science textbook flipped open to the chapter on basin and range geology.
At about 25 miles wide and 110 miles long, it runs north-south between mountain blocks that rise sharply on either side like Cenozoic parentheses.
To the west is the Schell Creek Range, to the east the Snake Range, crowned by Wheeler Peak, Nevada's second highest summit at 13,063 feet.
The so-called "Loneliest Road in America," U.S. Highway 50, crosses the valley's midsection like a belt, its buckle the junction where U.S. 93 arrives from the south.
The authority bought its first ranch here in 2006. Within a year, Nevada's largest wholesale water supplier owned more private land in the valley than anyone else.
The almost $79 million buying frenzy has led some to predict that the authority could one day own all of the private property in Spring Valley.
The water authority's Mulroy won't rule that out, but she doesn't think it will be necessary.
"The strategic ranches we needed to protect sensitive species in the area we got. And the ranches with the greatest opportunity for reinjecting water into the groundwater table, we got those, too," she says.
As Wimmer explains it, Great Basin Ranch is "not looked at as a profit center" but as a "holistic" way to manage Spring Valley's water and environmental resources. As a result, he says, what goes on there at times might bear little resemblance to a typical livestock operation, where the bottom line is all there is.
Already, the authority is busy upgrading equipment, examining ways to improve water efficiency, and opening the property up to a small army of hydrologists and biologists whose primary mission is to make the pipeline pay off.
The authority's opponents see a more sinister motive at work.
"The only reason they bought those ranches was to provide a buffer. If they own them there's no one there to cry foul" if the water table drops, Assemblyman Goicoechea says. "They can say what they want, but that's why they bought the valley."
The cowboy lawmaker does agree with Las Vegas water officials on one point: They aren't running their ranches in a way he's ever seen.
"There's some things they've done that have some people in the industry grinning," he says.
At a recent livestock auction, for example, Great Basin Ranch agreed to some unusual sale conditions for its calves that could needlessly stress the animals and reduce their value when they are weighed for delivery in the fall, Goicoechea says. "They were the laughingstock of the auction."
Not everyone is upset by the authority's presence in Spring Valley.
Dennis Eldridge ranches on neighboring land that has been in his family since 1917. He thinks the authority is "doing fine" so far.
"They do things a little differently, but they've been fine with us," he says. "They've been a good neighbor."
It should be noted that the Eldridge family is in talks to sell its 6,300-acre spread to the authority. It should also be noted that Dennis Eldridge has a reputation for speaking his mind.
He says some fellow ranchers are jealous of Great Basin Ranch's new equipment and bottomless financial backing. Others just don't like change.
He says people are always anxious at first when a "foreign entity" moves into the valley, especially one affiliated with the government, which he jokingly refers to as "the big thumb."
As far as Eldridge is concerned, though, it's the people on the ground who count.
"Brandon's always been a good neighbor," he says. "He's helped us even before they (the authority) came along."
Along with Humphries, the authority directly employs three ranch hands, two of them college graduates with degrees in plant or animal science.
About 30 contract workers make up the rest of the staff. Some are here from Mexico and Peru on work visas that allow them to stay for months or years at a time.
There's plenty of work to go around, especially on branding day.
Several members of the day's crew were up before the sun, moving wheel lines that keep the alfalfa green and tending to the two dairy cows that keep the ranch supplied with milk.
Ranch hand Latara Pickering has logged 127 hours of work in the last two weeks.
Her brother, Matt Pickering, literally can't remember the last time he had a vacation. Ask him, and he has to think about it for a minute. "I went and picked up my brother at the airport," he finally says.
To brand every new calf on the ranch takes six full days scattered over three weeks. After that, the animals are turned out for five months to graze and pack on about 250 pounds each.
In early November, the animals will be loaded into trailers and trucked to their final stop before the slaughterhouse: a ranch near California where they will be "finished" with more grazing aimed at adding another 500 pounds of beef.
Humphries says the cattle operation near Bakersfield, Calif., agreed to buy the authority's first full batch of calves based on a video of the animals that was shown during an Aug. 1 auction in Winnemucca.
When a smaller group of cows and steers were sold and shipped off the ranch last fall, the line of cattle trucks stretched for a mile, he says.
Back in the saddle
A water utility with ranch property is not as unusual as you might think.
The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California leases some of its land for agricultural use. So do Denver Water, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and several municipal water companies in Arizona.
What makes the arrangement in Spring Valley unusual is the water authority's decision to staff its property rather than lease it.
For Humphries, that meant a new opportunity at an opportune time.
"At that point, I needed a job," he says. "I knew the ranch, and they needed someone to look after their investment."
Humphries moved to Spring Valley eight years ago from Cedar City, Utah, to help his uncle run a hay farm.
When his uncle sold the place to the water authority in April 2007, Humphries suddenly found himself out of work.
Mulroy says Humphries seemed like the natural choice to look after the authority's livestock.
"It's not like we plucked somebody who has never done this before," she says. "We're going to the people who know how to do these things.
"The decisions on running those (ranches) are Brandon's."
Before he landed in Spring Valley, Humphries ran a landscaping company, a Mormon bookstore, and a side business that sold old railroad ties in Cedar City.
But cowboy life is in his blood.
When he was a kid, his family used to spend part of the year on a spread near Gunlock, Utah, where his grandfather kept 120 head of cattle and "we did everything by hand."
Humphries first climbed into the saddle at age 6, and within a year he was spending whole days on the range with his grandfather. He rode with blocks of wood taped to his stirrups so his legs would reach.
Today, the 36-year-old Humphries lives with his wife and five children in a house with a white rail fence and a sweeping view of Wheeler Peak from the front window.
"Basically, I went from operating a 600-acre farm for my uncle to operating a ranch with 1.2 million acres" of rangeland, he says. "It was quite a change."
Show 'em
On this day, Humphries and his branding crew get lucky. The clouds hold off until the last calf is done.
When the sky finally opens up around noon, what comes down is snow, a rarity for early June on the more-than-mile-high valley floor.
The weather is a mixed bag, Humphries says. It's good for the hay crop, but it also means two guys will have to go out on graders the next day to make sure the roads through the ranch are passable.
"In the ranch business in Spring Valley, what you deal with is too much water or not enough water," he says. "Both are occurring right now on the ranch."
Reaction to Humphries and his employer in White Pine County seems a little like that, too. It arrives in a trickle or a flood, some of it good, most of it bad.
Humphries predicts the anger and suspicion will fade over time, as "people come to realize we're here to be part of the community."
Until then, he knows only one surefire way to silence the critics: "Show 'em."
"That's what we do day by day," Humphries says. "We're under the microscope."
A new brand for a new ranch
When the Southern Nevada Water Authority bought the El Tejon ranch in White Pine County last May, the agency also acquired some livestock and an unusual problem.
Suddenly, the wholesale water supplier for the Las Vegas Valley needed its own cattle brand.
The design job fell to senior public information coordinator Lisa Riess and graphic artist Cathy Leece.
"It was absolutely the most unusual thing I have been asked to do," says Riess, an eight-year employee of the water authority.
Since neither of them knew the first thing about branding, they began by hitting the books.
What they discovered was a rich Nevada tradition dating back well over a century, one with its own complex set of rules and conventions.
It was a little like learning a new language, one Riess compares to Morse code or hieroglyphics, with letters and symbols that contain entire phrases if you know how to unlock them.
"This is not the typical brand you're used to in marketing," she says. "This was an entirely new subculture for us."
In other words, the authority could not simply burn a version of its water-droplet logo into the hides of its newly acquired cattle and sheep. Developing the brand had to be a "very careful, very deliberate" process, says Brandon Humphries, the authority's ranch manager in White Pine County.
Riess and Leece
knew going in that their design would have to be unique, so it wouldn't be confused with any other brand on file in Nevada. They didn't realize that would mean paging through the state's brand book, a 600-page tome crammed with about 4,000 different symbols.
"I would liken it to a copyright search," Riess says.
They also had to consider the landscape in which the livestock roam, since tradition dictates that a brand be "symbolic of the land it represents," Riess says.
Humphries had an additional requirement. He needed the brand to be easy to identify from a distance, but not so easy as to "rub it into people's faces" that the Southern Nevada Water Authority now owns livestock in the area. After all, Las Vegas water officials aren't exactly popular in White Pine County, what with their plans to export billions of gallons of groundwater from the area.
Finally, Riess and Leece had to consider the technical constraints of brand design, namely that the symbol they selected must be easily rendered in iron. And in the interest of being humane, they had to avoid the use of multiple symbols and enclosed spaces in their design that might cause painful "hot spots" in the finished brand.
The process took about nine months and involved dozens of drafts, including one that translated to "small fancy g."
Riess says the water authority's administrative team helped pick the final version, and the Nevada Department of Agriculture's Division of Livestock Identification gave its approval last October after a few weeks of review.
The authority's brand looks like an uppercase G with a waterfall tumbling out of it. And for good reason. The symbol literally translates to "falling water G."
The G stands for Great Basin Ranch, the name under which the water authority operates the more than 23,000 acres it has acquired in White Pine County's Spring Valley since 2006.
"A brand to us is a literal brand, but it still represents the company," Humphries explains.
The new brand was seared onto the right hip of about 1,500 calves in late May and June.
Asked how she feels about that, Riess says she has no moral objections to the practice of branding or cattle ranching in general. She used to be a vegetarian, but now she enjoys a good steak once in a while.
That's where she draws the line, though.
Riess says she has no interest in actually burning her "falling water G" onto the side of a live animal.
"I'll leave that to the professionals," she says.
Contact reporter Henry Brean at hbrean@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0350.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Hydrocarbons found in Wyo. stock well
Trace amounts of hydrocarbons have been found for the first time in a livestock water well bordering a natural gas drilling area in southwest Wyoming.
Officials say the concentrations of hydrocarbons found in the well were minuscule and posed no threat to human or animal health. But they were still concerned.
"We found this detection for hydrocarbons, which shouldn't be there, and we're trying to figure out how it got there and where it's coming from," Chuck Otto, director of the Bureau of Land Management's office in Pinedale, said Tuesday.
The stock well is just south of the town of Boulder, in Sublette County. The well is on the outside edge of the Pinedale Anticline, where gas drilling has been occurring, Otto said.
The BLM is close to issuing a final decision on a plan allowing oil and gas companies to drill some 4,400 more natural gas wells on the 200,000-acre Anticline.
Local residents opposed to the intense drilling have expressed concern about water and air pollution from the activity.
Linda Baker, community organizer for the Upper Green River Coalition, noted Tuesday that the discovery of pollution in the livestock water well follows the discovery of benzene in more than 80 industrial water supply wells in the area last year. Benzene is a hydrocarbon that can be harmful to human health.
"The problem is that if you're not in the town of Pinedale, anyone in the county gets their water from their own domestic water well," Baker said.
Baker said she regards the water pollution in the area as "a very dangerous situation that the BLM has not even begun to address as they consider approving 4,400 more wells."
The state hasn't determined the source of the hydrocarbons found in the livestock water well, but the nearby oil and gas drilling is a likely suspect, according to Mark Thiesse, hydrogeologist with the state Department of Environmental Quality.
However, Thiesse said subsequent tests have found barely measurable traces of the pollutant, making it difficult to identify a source definitively.
"We're certainly keeping an eye on it," Thiesse said. "And we're trying to figure out where these low levels are coming from, and we keep sampling a variety of wells just to try to get a feel for how widespread the problem is and is there really a health risk to humans or to critters or the environment out there. And so far we're not really finding any significant risk."
Some 250 water wells within a half mile of Anticline drilling must be tested routinely for any change in water quality, he said.
Most of the wells are on the drilling site and are used by the industry in their drilling operations. It's not unusual to find traces of hydrocarbons in such industrial wells.
The pollution found in the stock well was discovered in August, Otto said.
Trace amounts of hydrocarbons have been found for the first time in a livestock water well bordering a natural gas drilling area in southwest Wyoming.
Officials say the concentrations of hydrocarbons found in the well were minuscule and posed no threat to human or animal health. But they were still concerned.
"We found this detection for hydrocarbons, which shouldn't be there, and we're trying to figure out how it got there and where it's coming from," Chuck Otto, director of the Bureau of Land Management's office in Pinedale, said Tuesday.
The stock well is just south of the town of Boulder, in Sublette County. The well is on the outside edge of the Pinedale Anticline, where gas drilling has been occurring, Otto said.
The BLM is close to issuing a final decision on a plan allowing oil and gas companies to drill some 4,400 more natural gas wells on the 200,000-acre Anticline.
Local residents opposed to the intense drilling have expressed concern about water and air pollution from the activity.
Linda Baker, community organizer for the Upper Green River Coalition, noted Tuesday that the discovery of pollution in the livestock water well follows the discovery of benzene in more than 80 industrial water supply wells in the area last year. Benzene is a hydrocarbon that can be harmful to human health.
"The problem is that if you're not in the town of Pinedale, anyone in the county gets their water from their own domestic water well," Baker said.
Baker said she regards the water pollution in the area as "a very dangerous situation that the BLM has not even begun to address as they consider approving 4,400 more wells."
The state hasn't determined the source of the hydrocarbons found in the livestock water well, but the nearby oil and gas drilling is a likely suspect, according to Mark Thiesse, hydrogeologist with the state Department of Environmental Quality.
However, Thiesse said subsequent tests have found barely measurable traces of the pollutant, making it difficult to identify a source definitively.
"We're certainly keeping an eye on it," Thiesse said. "And we're trying to figure out where these low levels are coming from, and we keep sampling a variety of wells just to try to get a feel for how widespread the problem is and is there really a health risk to humans or to critters or the environment out there. And so far we're not really finding any significant risk."
Some 250 water wells within a half mile of Anticline drilling must be tested routinely for any change in water quality, he said.
Most of the wells are on the drilling site and are used by the industry in their drilling operations. It's not unusual to find traces of hydrocarbons in such industrial wells.
The pollution found in the stock well was discovered in August, Otto said.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Wildflowers anchor watershed
Hilda Sexauer is a fisheries biologist.
But on this day, instead of wading streams and counting trout, she's following a ribbon of measuring tape across a field of wildflowers, inventorying plants, organic litter, barren soil and rock.
She's crouched in a meadow at 9,700 feet in the Wyoming Range, about 45 miles as the crow flies west of Pinedale. There's no fish -- or water for that matter -- in sight. Yet, this floral survey is all about water.
'Whatever happens in your headwaters is eventually going to go downstream,' says Sexauer, a Wyoming Game and Fish Department regional fisheries supervisor in Pinedale.
This high-elevation meadow is called a 'tall forb' community -- fields of wildflowers that grow between 6,300 and 11,000 feet in parts of Montana, Idaho, Utah and Colorado. The unique meadows culminate in wildflowers, not trees. According to experts, a healthy 'tall forb' meadow can stand thigh and even waist high. This particular meadow, though, is only tickling our shins.
But now a unique partnership between a rancher and some government and conservation groups has created an opportunity to give this high-elevation meadow a break from domestic sheep grazing in an attempt to accelerate its recovery. Ultimately, the plan is to return sheep grazing to the mix -' albeit at lighter frequencies than in the past.
Overgrazing hurts fragile plants
The benefits of restoration could be significant. Increasing organic matter by 5 percent on the ground can allow the meadows to hold seven times as much water per square foot, says retired Forest Service ecologist Alma Winward.
'That's what they were made for,' he says, explaining how the fluffy, black topsoil absorbs water like a sponge.
When functioning properly, the meadow captures moisture from rain and snowmelt and filters out sediment, thus preventing soil from washing down slope and, ultimately, downstream to cutthroat trout spawning beds. When too much sediment settles in the spawning gravel where native trout lay their eggs, the sediment suffocates the eggs and young fish fry.
On this late-summer day in the high country, Sexauer; Nellie Williams, Trout Unlimited's Wyoming coordinator, and habitat biologists from Game and Fish are here to survey plants. They will set up monitoring plots for the new Triple Peak Forage Reserve, which straddles the Snake River and Green River watersheds on the Bridger-Teton National Forest.
A multi-use paradise for hunters, anglers, hikers and horseback riders, the area also serves as spring, summer and fall range for mule deer and moose from the state's largest herds as well as bighorn sheep and elk. The forage reserve falls within a 1.2 million-acre chunk of the Wyoming Range, which U.S. Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., has proposed for withdrawal from oil and gas leasing.
Roughly four miles down the trail at the trailhead near Soda Lake sits a natural gas well with a fresh coat of green paint. But up in the high country it's wildflowers ' not wells ' that have everyone's attention.
In the early 1900s, ranchers ran an estimated 150,000 to 200,000 sheep from the south end of the Wyoming Range to the north and back again each summer, explains Steve Kilpatrick, a habitat biologist for Game and Fish.
'That was before we knew how fragile the tall forb communities are,' Kilpatrick says. 'Once it unravels it's just difficult to get it back.'
Historically, heavy grazing meant there was less plant material on the land to anchor the soil and soak up the rain. So the black, loamy topsoil washed away, leaving bare ground.
Those are the conditions Jim Magagna's family inherited when they started grazing sheep in the Wyoming Range in the 1940s. Moreover, concerns about predators encouraged ranchers to bed sheep at night in big numbers to protect the lambs and ewes from coyotes and other carnivores, Magagna says. Over time, however, Magagna acquired and consolidated nearly 60,000 acres of grazing leases on the national forest. By using guard dogs to protect the sheep from predators, he was able to spread them out to lighten their impact on the land, he says.
'That gave me an opportunity to do some things that weren't possible historically when there were a lot more sheep in the area,' Magagna says. 'I feel personally that over the average of 30-some years that I had those allotments, that I was able to significantly improve them.'
Even so, studies show that these fragile meadows can take as long as 75 years to return to the fully functioning plant communities they were prior to turn-of-the-century grazing.
With that in mind, Trout Unlimited brokered a deal with Magagna to give the high-elevation meadows time to heal. Under the agreement, Magagna waived his option to graze four bands of sheep yearly on nearly 60,000 acres in exchange for $209,904 in compensation. The payment comes from a variety of contributors including fishing, hunting and conservation groups.
Magagna said he wanted to downsize his ranching operation to dedicate more time to other activities. A politically active representative of agricultural interests, Magagna serves as executive vice president of the Wyoming Stock Growers Association. He first offered the grazing leases to fellow sheep ranchers in eastern Idaho and western Wyoming and received interest from one Idaho rancher, who later decided not to take it, he said.
Working with Trout Unlimited on the forage reserve concept allowed him to give up the leases while keeping ranching in the picture, he says.
'I was not willing to dispose of them and see them closed,' he says. 'I didn't agree to this until I felt that we had come up with a system that I thought was both positive to the resource, but also provided some benefits to the sheep industry.'
Under the agreement, nearly 54,000 acres have been set aside for the forage reserve. This marked the first year the reserve was open for emergency grazing on roughly 60 percent of the acreage ' for ranchers displaced by wildfires or habitat enhancement projects. No ranchers applied to use it this year. The agreement allows ranchers to graze the land for up to three out of every 10 years.
Meadows service wildlife populations
A small portion of the allotment -- 5,115 acres -- has been closed to grazing to protect spawning gravel used by cutthroat trout at North Piney Lake and creeks that drain into it. The lake contains a genetically pure population of Colorado River cutthroat trout. The state collects native trout from the lake to produce eggs for the Daniel fish hatchery, which raises the native trout. The hatchery fish are then used to restore Colorado River cutthroats to streams throughout the Green River basin. The grazing closure aims to safeguard the clean gravel along the lakeshore where the cutthroat lay their eggs.
Both the Colorado River and Snake River cutthroat trout, which occupy the two watersheds covered by the new forage reserve, have been petitioned for listing as threatened species. Although those petitions have been denied, Trout Unlimited's Williams says proactive efforts to keep sediment out of streams could help prevent a future listing.
In addition to the cutthroat conservation area, another chunk of the 54,000 acres ' about 40 percent ' is off limits to sheep grazing for now. The agreement calls for restoring those lands to 80 percent ground cover and a healthy mix of plants before reopening it to domestic sheep. The area encompasses the wildflower meadows above 9,700 feet.
This summer, biologists set up study plots in order to monitor the land in the absence of grazing. Game and Fish has hired Winward to help establish and oversee the monitoring. Winward has been studying tall forb communities for decades. While these meadows can typically withstand light, once-over grazing, he says, that's not always the case.
'If it gets taken down too far ' it can't recover,' he said. That's when the land needs a rest from grazing, he says.
The wildflowers' ability to anchor moisture in the mountains has long been known, he says. Overgrazing at the turn of the 20th century caused flooding that washed out towns and roads, he says. Yet, it's taken decades to get a handle on how to manage these fragile systems.
'Nobody really took time to realize all the values they served and to really know what they looked like,' Winward said. 'Most of them were disturbed at various degrees of severity from 1885 to 1915.'
In addition to benefiting cutthroat, the meadows provide other services for wildlife. For example, research indicates that mule deer feeding on healthy wildflowers put on more fat, have higher pregnancy rates, give birth to bigger fawns and produce more milk for their young, Kilpatrick says. The Triple Peak Forage Reserve encompasses birthing areas for mule deer.
Kilpatrick says mule deer summering in the Wyoming Range are facing habitat challenges on their winter range, with drilling under way on the Pinedale Anticline.
'If we can beef up these animals before they hit winter range, they'll have a better survival rate,' he says.
These high-elevation monitoring plots have a long way to go, but once they demonstrate 80 percent ground cover, with a healthy mix of flowers, domestic sheep can return to this high country. Like the rest of the allotment, the land will provide alternative pasture for ranchers who need to give their own forest allotment a rest ' for reasons such as recovery from wildfire or habitat restoration.
'It gives us flexibility to do (habitat) treatments in surrounding allotments,' Kilpatrick says. It's 'another tool,' he says, for ranchers and land managers to use as they try to balance the needs of wildlife and livestock.
Hilda Sexauer is a fisheries biologist.
But on this day, instead of wading streams and counting trout, she's following a ribbon of measuring tape across a field of wildflowers, inventorying plants, organic litter, barren soil and rock.
She's crouched in a meadow at 9,700 feet in the Wyoming Range, about 45 miles as the crow flies west of Pinedale. There's no fish -- or water for that matter -- in sight. Yet, this floral survey is all about water.
'Whatever happens in your headwaters is eventually going to go downstream,' says Sexauer, a Wyoming Game and Fish Department regional fisheries supervisor in Pinedale.
This high-elevation meadow is called a 'tall forb' community -- fields of wildflowers that grow between 6,300 and 11,000 feet in parts of Montana, Idaho, Utah and Colorado. The unique meadows culminate in wildflowers, not trees. According to experts, a healthy 'tall forb' meadow can stand thigh and even waist high. This particular meadow, though, is only tickling our shins.
But now a unique partnership between a rancher and some government and conservation groups has created an opportunity to give this high-elevation meadow a break from domestic sheep grazing in an attempt to accelerate its recovery. Ultimately, the plan is to return sheep grazing to the mix -' albeit at lighter frequencies than in the past.
Overgrazing hurts fragile plants
The benefits of restoration could be significant. Increasing organic matter by 5 percent on the ground can allow the meadows to hold seven times as much water per square foot, says retired Forest Service ecologist Alma Winward.
'That's what they were made for,' he says, explaining how the fluffy, black topsoil absorbs water like a sponge.
When functioning properly, the meadow captures moisture from rain and snowmelt and filters out sediment, thus preventing soil from washing down slope and, ultimately, downstream to cutthroat trout spawning beds. When too much sediment settles in the spawning gravel where native trout lay their eggs, the sediment suffocates the eggs and young fish fry.
On this late-summer day in the high country, Sexauer; Nellie Williams, Trout Unlimited's Wyoming coordinator, and habitat biologists from Game and Fish are here to survey plants. They will set up monitoring plots for the new Triple Peak Forage Reserve, which straddles the Snake River and Green River watersheds on the Bridger-Teton National Forest.
A multi-use paradise for hunters, anglers, hikers and horseback riders, the area also serves as spring, summer and fall range for mule deer and moose from the state's largest herds as well as bighorn sheep and elk. The forage reserve falls within a 1.2 million-acre chunk of the Wyoming Range, which U.S. Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., has proposed for withdrawal from oil and gas leasing.
Roughly four miles down the trail at the trailhead near Soda Lake sits a natural gas well with a fresh coat of green paint. But up in the high country it's wildflowers ' not wells ' that have everyone's attention.
In the early 1900s, ranchers ran an estimated 150,000 to 200,000 sheep from the south end of the Wyoming Range to the north and back again each summer, explains Steve Kilpatrick, a habitat biologist for Game and Fish.
'That was before we knew how fragile the tall forb communities are,' Kilpatrick says. 'Once it unravels it's just difficult to get it back.'
Historically, heavy grazing meant there was less plant material on the land to anchor the soil and soak up the rain. So the black, loamy topsoil washed away, leaving bare ground.
Those are the conditions Jim Magagna's family inherited when they started grazing sheep in the Wyoming Range in the 1940s. Moreover, concerns about predators encouraged ranchers to bed sheep at night in big numbers to protect the lambs and ewes from coyotes and other carnivores, Magagna says. Over time, however, Magagna acquired and consolidated nearly 60,000 acres of grazing leases on the national forest. By using guard dogs to protect the sheep from predators, he was able to spread them out to lighten their impact on the land, he says.
'That gave me an opportunity to do some things that weren't possible historically when there were a lot more sheep in the area,' Magagna says. 'I feel personally that over the average of 30-some years that I had those allotments, that I was able to significantly improve them.'
Even so, studies show that these fragile meadows can take as long as 75 years to return to the fully functioning plant communities they were prior to turn-of-the-century grazing.
With that in mind, Trout Unlimited brokered a deal with Magagna to give the high-elevation meadows time to heal. Under the agreement, Magagna waived his option to graze four bands of sheep yearly on nearly 60,000 acres in exchange for $209,904 in compensation. The payment comes from a variety of contributors including fishing, hunting and conservation groups.
Magagna said he wanted to downsize his ranching operation to dedicate more time to other activities. A politically active representative of agricultural interests, Magagna serves as executive vice president of the Wyoming Stock Growers Association. He first offered the grazing leases to fellow sheep ranchers in eastern Idaho and western Wyoming and received interest from one Idaho rancher, who later decided not to take it, he said.
Working with Trout Unlimited on the forage reserve concept allowed him to give up the leases while keeping ranching in the picture, he says.
'I was not willing to dispose of them and see them closed,' he says. 'I didn't agree to this until I felt that we had come up with a system that I thought was both positive to the resource, but also provided some benefits to the sheep industry.'
Under the agreement, nearly 54,000 acres have been set aside for the forage reserve. This marked the first year the reserve was open for emergency grazing on roughly 60 percent of the acreage ' for ranchers displaced by wildfires or habitat enhancement projects. No ranchers applied to use it this year. The agreement allows ranchers to graze the land for up to three out of every 10 years.
Meadows service wildlife populations
A small portion of the allotment -- 5,115 acres -- has been closed to grazing to protect spawning gravel used by cutthroat trout at North Piney Lake and creeks that drain into it. The lake contains a genetically pure population of Colorado River cutthroat trout. The state collects native trout from the lake to produce eggs for the Daniel fish hatchery, which raises the native trout. The hatchery fish are then used to restore Colorado River cutthroats to streams throughout the Green River basin. The grazing closure aims to safeguard the clean gravel along the lakeshore where the cutthroat lay their eggs.
Both the Colorado River and Snake River cutthroat trout, which occupy the two watersheds covered by the new forage reserve, have been petitioned for listing as threatened species. Although those petitions have been denied, Trout Unlimited's Williams says proactive efforts to keep sediment out of streams could help prevent a future listing.
In addition to the cutthroat conservation area, another chunk of the 54,000 acres ' about 40 percent ' is off limits to sheep grazing for now. The agreement calls for restoring those lands to 80 percent ground cover and a healthy mix of plants before reopening it to domestic sheep. The area encompasses the wildflower meadows above 9,700 feet.
This summer, biologists set up study plots in order to monitor the land in the absence of grazing. Game and Fish has hired Winward to help establish and oversee the monitoring. Winward has been studying tall forb communities for decades. While these meadows can typically withstand light, once-over grazing, he says, that's not always the case.
'If it gets taken down too far ' it can't recover,' he said. That's when the land needs a rest from grazing, he says.
The wildflowers' ability to anchor moisture in the mountains has long been known, he says. Overgrazing at the turn of the 20th century caused flooding that washed out towns and roads, he says. Yet, it's taken decades to get a handle on how to manage these fragile systems.
'Nobody really took time to realize all the values they served and to really know what they looked like,' Winward said. 'Most of them were disturbed at various degrees of severity from 1885 to 1915.'
In addition to benefiting cutthroat, the meadows provide other services for wildlife. For example, research indicates that mule deer feeding on healthy wildflowers put on more fat, have higher pregnancy rates, give birth to bigger fawns and produce more milk for their young, Kilpatrick says. The Triple Peak Forage Reserve encompasses birthing areas for mule deer.
Kilpatrick says mule deer summering in the Wyoming Range are facing habitat challenges on their winter range, with drilling under way on the Pinedale Anticline.
'If we can beef up these animals before they hit winter range, they'll have a better survival rate,' he says.
These high-elevation monitoring plots have a long way to go, but once they demonstrate 80 percent ground cover, with a healthy mix of flowers, domestic sheep can return to this high country. Like the rest of the allotment, the land will provide alternative pasture for ranchers who need to give their own forest allotment a rest ' for reasons such as recovery from wildfire or habitat restoration.
'It gives us flexibility to do (habitat) treatments in surrounding allotments,' Kilpatrick says. It's 'another tool,' he says, for ranchers and land managers to use as they try to balance the needs of wildlife and livestock.
Friday, September 5, 2008
Judge rules for government in falcon dispute
A federal judge has rejected the final part of a challenge by environmental groups to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decision to designate the northern aplomado falcon as a nonessential, experimental population in New Mexico and Arizona.
The environmentalists alleged the designation violated federal policy and stripped the falcon of needed protections under the Endangered Species Act. They wanted U.S. District Judge William Johnson to declare the designation illegal and force the Fish and Wildlife Service to respond to their petition for critical habitat in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona.
Johnson's legal opinion Tuesday upheld the federal agency's determination that there was no native population of falcons in New Mexico before a 2006 program to release them in the state.
The program has released about 120 birds since its inception.
The judge rejected the environmentalists' contention that New Mexico fell within the species' current range and that New Mexico's population was not "wholly separate geographically" from nonexperimental populations across northern Mexico or those released in West Texas.
He said Fish and Wildlife's interpretation did not conflict with the Endangered Species Act.
"The court supported us on everything," said Elizabeth Slown, a spokeswoman for Fish and Wildlife in Albuquerque. That means the reintroduction program can continue, she said.
Even though the government and environmental groups were in court, they were fighting for the same goal — the recovery of the northern aplomado falcon, Slown said.
"Our disagreement was with how we were going to recover it," she said. "We're pleased that the court supported us all the way."
Environmentalists are disappointed by the judge's ruling, said Nicole Rosmarino, wildlife program director for WildEarth Guardians, one of several groups that sued over the falcon two years ago. WildEarth Guardians has not decided whether to appeal, she said.
"We think there was overwhelming evidence of wild falcons in this state, and those wild falcons were denied protections by the Fish and Wildlife Service and now by Judge Johnson," Rosmarino said.
Slown said nonessential populations still are protected by the Endangered Species Act. Fish and Wildlife uses the designation in returning a species to its former habitat because that gives the agency "flexibility on how we're going to do it," she said.
The environmental groups sued the Fish and Wildlife Service and The Peregrine Fund in 2006, the year the federal agency designated the falcons an experimental population in New Mexico and Arizona. The designation cleared the way for The Peregrine Fund to begin releasing captive-bred falcons in southern New Mexico.
Environmentalists argued that reintroduced animals can be designated experimental only if they're outside a species' current range. They contended New Mexico already had aplomado falcons because there were more than two dozen sightings in the two years before the first 11 birds were released in August 2006 under reintroduction.
Government attorneys, however, argued that sporadic sightings in New Mexico didn't mean there was a breeding population.
In late May, Johnson denied environmentalists' claims that the agency violated the Endangered Species Act by not responding to their petition within a set period and that it did not rely on the best science in designating the New Mexico and Arizona populations as experimental.
However, he agreed with the environmentalists' argument that Fish and Wildlife unreasonably delayed action on critical habitat for the bird in Texas. He stressed his decision meant only that Fish and Wildlife had to answer the groups' petition within 30 days.
Rosmarino said the agency has since told WildEarth Guardians it does not plan to designate critical habitat in Texas. She said the group was considering appealing that decision because of degradation of important falcon habitat at national wildlife refuges in that state.
A federal judge has rejected the final part of a challenge by environmental groups to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decision to designate the northern aplomado falcon as a nonessential, experimental population in New Mexico and Arizona.
The environmentalists alleged the designation violated federal policy and stripped the falcon of needed protections under the Endangered Species Act. They wanted U.S. District Judge William Johnson to declare the designation illegal and force the Fish and Wildlife Service to respond to their petition for critical habitat in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona.
Johnson's legal opinion Tuesday upheld the federal agency's determination that there was no native population of falcons in New Mexico before a 2006 program to release them in the state.
The program has released about 120 birds since its inception.
The judge rejected the environmentalists' contention that New Mexico fell within the species' current range and that New Mexico's population was not "wholly separate geographically" from nonexperimental populations across northern Mexico or those released in West Texas.
He said Fish and Wildlife's interpretation did not conflict with the Endangered Species Act.
"The court supported us on everything," said Elizabeth Slown, a spokeswoman for Fish and Wildlife in Albuquerque. That means the reintroduction program can continue, she said.
Even though the government and environmental groups were in court, they were fighting for the same goal — the recovery of the northern aplomado falcon, Slown said.
"Our disagreement was with how we were going to recover it," she said. "We're pleased that the court supported us all the way."
Environmentalists are disappointed by the judge's ruling, said Nicole Rosmarino, wildlife program director for WildEarth Guardians, one of several groups that sued over the falcon two years ago. WildEarth Guardians has not decided whether to appeal, she said.
"We think there was overwhelming evidence of wild falcons in this state, and those wild falcons were denied protections by the Fish and Wildlife Service and now by Judge Johnson," Rosmarino said.
Slown said nonessential populations still are protected by the Endangered Species Act. Fish and Wildlife uses the designation in returning a species to its former habitat because that gives the agency "flexibility on how we're going to do it," she said.
The environmental groups sued the Fish and Wildlife Service and The Peregrine Fund in 2006, the year the federal agency designated the falcons an experimental population in New Mexico and Arizona. The designation cleared the way for The Peregrine Fund to begin releasing captive-bred falcons in southern New Mexico.
Environmentalists argued that reintroduced animals can be designated experimental only if they're outside a species' current range. They contended New Mexico already had aplomado falcons because there were more than two dozen sightings in the two years before the first 11 birds were released in August 2006 under reintroduction.
Government attorneys, however, argued that sporadic sightings in New Mexico didn't mean there was a breeding population.
In late May, Johnson denied environmentalists' claims that the agency violated the Endangered Species Act by not responding to their petition within a set period and that it did not rely on the best science in designating the New Mexico and Arizona populations as experimental.
However, he agreed with the environmentalists' argument that Fish and Wildlife unreasonably delayed action on critical habitat for the bird in Texas. He stressed his decision meant only that Fish and Wildlife had to answer the groups' petition within 30 days.
Rosmarino said the agency has since told WildEarth Guardians it does not plan to designate critical habitat in Texas. She said the group was considering appealing that decision because of degradation of important falcon habitat at national wildlife refuges in that state.
Study: Grazing not a factor in Murphy blaze
Agencies should investigate grazing as fire tool, report says
Restrictions on cattle grazing in the Jarbidge area didn't really contribute to the massive, 600,000-acre Murphy Complex Fire in 2007, states a new report compiled by a team from the Bureau of Land Management, University of Idaho and other state and federal researchers.
The study found that any effect grazing, or the lack of it, had on the fire was far overshadowed by the extreme temperatures and other weather factors at the time. But targeted grazing could have the potential to affect fire behavior in "less intense" conditions, the authors state, and should be investigated further as another fire management tool.
The peer-reviewed study was released last week after an Aug. 28 presentation for the BLM and the other agencies that contributed, said Heather Feeney, state BLM spokeswoman. It's now posted on a University of Idaho Web site for anyone to read.
The authors also call for more-refined fire models to be developed for rangeland fires. The models most commonly used were developed for forests, which burn differently, Feeney said. But that does not mean the grazing study is not accurate, she said, citing the peer review as assurance that the science was vetted.
The presentation was also attended by a few outside groups who asked to participate, including representatives of the Western Watersheds Project, an environmental group that has opposed ranchers' push for expandedgrazing. In a release put out Tuesday, the group appeared delighted to note members of the study team were "flummoxed" by their own findings.
"They couldn't show that levels of grazing made any real difference in reducing the impacts of the Murphy Complex wildfire," said Katie Fite, WWP's biodiversity director, "but it looks as if BLM and the public lands ranchers are still trying to promote increased grazing disturbance and turn our public lands into dust bowls."
That assertion is completely wrong, Feeney said, pointing to repeated recommendations in the study against large-scale grazing as one example. The BLM simply wants to add to its repertoire of ways to prevent intense fires.
"I don't think there's anyone who would say that there's no need for having as many tools as possible for fuels management," she said.
State Sen. Bert Brackett, R-Rogerson, is a rancher and one of the more vocal critics who called for a change in grazing practices after the Murphy fire. After a first cursory read of the study on Thursday, he said he was encouraged by the suggestion to look further into grazing as a fire management option.
"If that could happen, it's to the benefit of all the other (public lands) uses out there," he said. "Again, they need to use all the tools in the toolbox, if you will."
He also noted the study team's description of the Murphy fire as a "perfect storm." Fire officials on the East Slide Rock Ridge Fire currently burning in the Jarbidge Wilderness have used similar terms for their fire, Brackett said, and he questioned how unique the "phenomena" are if they've happened for a few years in a row now.
"If they keep happening, then there's maybe more there," he said.
BLM officials are eager to use the study as a starting point for more research, Feeney said, cooperating with state and other federal agencies to do so. The next step will be a technical report gathering all existing data on grazing as a fire tool, she said. Scientists will move over the next couple of years to organize and begin a pilot project or two to test the effect of grazing, including an environmental analysis of any test ground before a project begins, she said.
Nate Poppino may be reached at 208-735-3237 or npoppino@magicvalley.com.
Agencies should investigate grazing as fire tool, report says
Restrictions on cattle grazing in the Jarbidge area didn't really contribute to the massive, 600,000-acre Murphy Complex Fire in 2007, states a new report compiled by a team from the Bureau of Land Management, University of Idaho and other state and federal researchers.
The study found that any effect grazing, or the lack of it, had on the fire was far overshadowed by the extreme temperatures and other weather factors at the time. But targeted grazing could have the potential to affect fire behavior in "less intense" conditions, the authors state, and should be investigated further as another fire management tool.
The peer-reviewed study was released last week after an Aug. 28 presentation for the BLM and the other agencies that contributed, said Heather Feeney, state BLM spokeswoman. It's now posted on a University of Idaho Web site for anyone to read.
The authors also call for more-refined fire models to be developed for rangeland fires. The models most commonly used were developed for forests, which burn differently, Feeney said. But that does not mean the grazing study is not accurate, she said, citing the peer review as assurance that the science was vetted.
The presentation was also attended by a few outside groups who asked to participate, including representatives of the Western Watersheds Project, an environmental group that has opposed ranchers' push for expandedgrazing. In a release put out Tuesday, the group appeared delighted to note members of the study team were "flummoxed" by their own findings.
"They couldn't show that levels of grazing made any real difference in reducing the impacts of the Murphy Complex wildfire," said Katie Fite, WWP's biodiversity director, "but it looks as if BLM and the public lands ranchers are still trying to promote increased grazing disturbance and turn our public lands into dust bowls."
That assertion is completely wrong, Feeney said, pointing to repeated recommendations in the study against large-scale grazing as one example. The BLM simply wants to add to its repertoire of ways to prevent intense fires.
"I don't think there's anyone who would say that there's no need for having as many tools as possible for fuels management," she said.
State Sen. Bert Brackett, R-Rogerson, is a rancher and one of the more vocal critics who called for a change in grazing practices after the Murphy fire. After a first cursory read of the study on Thursday, he said he was encouraged by the suggestion to look further into grazing as a fire management option.
"If that could happen, it's to the benefit of all the other (public lands) uses out there," he said. "Again, they need to use all the tools in the toolbox, if you will."
He also noted the study team's description of the Murphy fire as a "perfect storm." Fire officials on the East Slide Rock Ridge Fire currently burning in the Jarbidge Wilderness have used similar terms for their fire, Brackett said, and he questioned how unique the "phenomena" are if they've happened for a few years in a row now.
"If they keep happening, then there's maybe more there," he said.
BLM officials are eager to use the study as a starting point for more research, Feeney said, cooperating with state and other federal agencies to do so. The next step will be a technical report gathering all existing data on grazing as a fire tool, she said. Scientists will move over the next couple of years to organize and begin a pilot project or two to test the effect of grazing, including an environmental analysis of any test ground before a project begins, she said.
Nate Poppino may be reached at 208-735-3237 or npoppino@magicvalley.com.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Feds in the Fishbowl
Whatever floats your boat
Under the Clean Water Act of 1972, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers are granted jurisdiction over the “navigable waters” of the United States. If a boat can float on it, it’s theirs to regulate. Over the years, the definition of “navigable waters” overflowed its banks, expanding to include virtually anywhere with detectable levels of H2O.
“What began as a reasonable attempt to control water pollution in our nation’s interstate rivers, lakes, and streams,” says Peyton Knight at the National Center for Public Policy Research, “spiraled into unreasonable federal regulation of isolated wetlands, ponds, dry lakebeds, intermittent streams and drainage ditches.” As time went on, landowners were required to obtain permits for everything from draining a field for plowing to building a dock to filling in a low wet spot.
In 2006 the U.S. Supreme Court issued a muddled opinion in Rapanos v. United States that reined in some of the more exotic interpretations of “navigable waters.” Now Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.) and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) have introduced the Clean Water Restoration Act, which would replace the phrase “navigable waters” with “waters of the United States,” by which they mean “all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds, and all impoundments of the foregoing.”
If the bill passes, it will create new regulatory barriers for fishermen, boaters, hunters, and even some conservationists, who may find that their favorite hobbies no longer pass muster. The act leaves it up to the courts to decide if “waters of the United States” also includes your kitchen sink.
Whatever floats your boat
Under the Clean Water Act of 1972, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Army Corps of Engineers are granted jurisdiction over the “navigable waters” of the United States. If a boat can float on it, it’s theirs to regulate. Over the years, the definition of “navigable waters” overflowed its banks, expanding to include virtually anywhere with detectable levels of H2O.
“What began as a reasonable attempt to control water pollution in our nation’s interstate rivers, lakes, and streams,” says Peyton Knight at the National Center for Public Policy Research, “spiraled into unreasonable federal regulation of isolated wetlands, ponds, dry lakebeds, intermittent streams and drainage ditches.” As time went on, landowners were required to obtain permits for everything from draining a field for plowing to building a dock to filling in a low wet spot.
In 2006 the U.S. Supreme Court issued a muddled opinion in Rapanos v. United States that reined in some of the more exotic interpretations of “navigable waters.” Now Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.) and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) have introduced the Clean Water Restoration Act, which would replace the phrase “navigable waters” with “waters of the United States,” by which they mean “all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds, and all impoundments of the foregoing.”
If the bill passes, it will create new regulatory barriers for fishermen, boaters, hunters, and even some conservationists, who may find that their favorite hobbies no longer pass muster. The act leaves it up to the courts to decide if “waters of the United States” also includes your kitchen sink.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Grazing lawsuits spawn talks
Costly litigation has cattlemen searching for new answers
Ranchers and environmental activists have taken steps toward a dialogue over grazing on public lands, although the path has been rocky so far.
Concerned about ongoing lawsuits challenging grazing, a few ranchers from Grant and Harney counties approached the Oregon Natural Desert Association (ONDA) earlier this summer to see if they could resolve the organization's concerns.
The outreach came after similar talks brought a compromise in the deadlock between timber and environmental interests over wildfire salvage sales on Forest Service land in Grant and Harney counties.
Ken Brooks, a Fox Valley rancher, said Grant County Judge Mark Webb and the ranchers were seeking ways to prevent ongoing lawsuits from undermining the cattle industry in the region.
"We can't afford to just keep litigating, so we thought we could try to find some common ground," Brooks said.
The ranchers met with ONDA representatives in June. They came away from the meeting with the sense that ONDA wasn't pushing to eliminate all grazing, but did want to "retire" some land considered to be critical habitat for steelhead-salmon runs.
The grazing permittees expected that as a next step, ONDA would review areas that it would propose for retiring, set priorities and identify the grazing allotments that would be affected.
In July, the permittees received a draft proposal from ONDA that they say went beyond that. Harney County rancher Jeff Hussey, a participant in the talks, said the proposal was "more extreme than what ONDA has requested in the court cases."
The ONDA proposal called for eliminating grazing on 33 percent of the Malheur National Forest land now being grazed, restrict grazing on another 33 percent, and require implementation of conservation plans for the other 33 percent.
"The economic impact of this proposal could be severe," said Brooks. "Agriculture is the only viable industry left in Grant County and most of Eastern Oregon. Our area is already economically depressed. We can't sustain any more economic loss."
Webb also was concerned after viewing the ONDA draft. In a news release, he said the County Court would not support a proposal that eliminates most of the grazing on federal lands in the county, "especially one that lacks scientific credibility."
The proposal also calls for the Forest Service to permanently close an allotment or area where a grazing permit has been relinquished, and to follow specific National Marine Fisheries Service "mitigation terms" - measures that define stubble height and other factors.
The ranching community has protested the use of some of those standards, contended that they are a "one height suits all" approach that doesn't account for differences in plant species and specific habitat and terrain.
In a response to ONDA last week, the ranchers said the proposal seems both unfair to the permittees and unrealistic. They questioned the rationale for the reallocation percentages, closure of grazing permits, and other aspects of the proposal.
However, they didn't close the door on further talks. The response said the county and the permittees would continue to work with ONDA, but only if the litigation over grazing ends. They also want the discussion to deals with other factors - such as wild horses, fishing, and poor forest health - that have an impact on fish recovery.
The ranchers remain critical of monitoring by the Malheur National Forest, contending that it has been inconsistent and that makes it difficult to defend their grazing practices.
Costly litigation has cattlemen searching for new answers
Ranchers and environmental activists have taken steps toward a dialogue over grazing on public lands, although the path has been rocky so far.
Concerned about ongoing lawsuits challenging grazing, a few ranchers from Grant and Harney counties approached the Oregon Natural Desert Association (ONDA) earlier this summer to see if they could resolve the organization's concerns.
The outreach came after similar talks brought a compromise in the deadlock between timber and environmental interests over wildfire salvage sales on Forest Service land in Grant and Harney counties.
Ken Brooks, a Fox Valley rancher, said Grant County Judge Mark Webb and the ranchers were seeking ways to prevent ongoing lawsuits from undermining the cattle industry in the region.
"We can't afford to just keep litigating, so we thought we could try to find some common ground," Brooks said.
The ranchers met with ONDA representatives in June. They came away from the meeting with the sense that ONDA wasn't pushing to eliminate all grazing, but did want to "retire" some land considered to be critical habitat for steelhead-salmon runs.
The grazing permittees expected that as a next step, ONDA would review areas that it would propose for retiring, set priorities and identify the grazing allotments that would be affected.
In July, the permittees received a draft proposal from ONDA that they say went beyond that. Harney County rancher Jeff Hussey, a participant in the talks, said the proposal was "more extreme than what ONDA has requested in the court cases."
The ONDA proposal called for eliminating grazing on 33 percent of the Malheur National Forest land now being grazed, restrict grazing on another 33 percent, and require implementation of conservation plans for the other 33 percent.
"The economic impact of this proposal could be severe," said Brooks. "Agriculture is the only viable industry left in Grant County and most of Eastern Oregon. Our area is already economically depressed. We can't sustain any more economic loss."
Webb also was concerned after viewing the ONDA draft. In a news release, he said the County Court would not support a proposal that eliminates most of the grazing on federal lands in the county, "especially one that lacks scientific credibility."
The proposal also calls for the Forest Service to permanently close an allotment or area where a grazing permit has been relinquished, and to follow specific National Marine Fisheries Service "mitigation terms" - measures that define stubble height and other factors.
The ranching community has protested the use of some of those standards, contended that they are a "one height suits all" approach that doesn't account for differences in plant species and specific habitat and terrain.
In a response to ONDA last week, the ranchers said the proposal seems both unfair to the permittees and unrealistic. They questioned the rationale for the reallocation percentages, closure of grazing permits, and other aspects of the proposal.
However, they didn't close the door on further talks. The response said the county and the permittees would continue to work with ONDA, but only if the litigation over grazing ends. They also want the discussion to deals with other factors - such as wild horses, fishing, and poor forest health - that have an impact on fish recovery.
The ranchers remain critical of monitoring by the Malheur National Forest, contending that it has been inconsistent and that makes it difficult to defend their grazing practices.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Rains reopen grassland for foraging
Recent rains have led to improved forage conditions on the Pawnee National Grassland in rural Weld County, allowing more cattle that were removed earlier this summer to return to graze. Because of drought conditions, 12 of 76 grazing allotments on the Pawnee National Grassland were vacated this summer, according to the U.S. Forest Service. Cattle were removed when forage dropped below 300 pounds per acre, a standard used for range management to provide sustainable grazing, habitat and forage for other grassland animals, the Forest Service said. The number of cattle returned to each allotment is less than 100 percent, but still provides relief for those with grazing permits, said the Forest Service. The two remaining allotments are vacant because of low forage production. On other Pawnee National Grassland allotments, cattle will remain unless available forage drops below 300 pounds per acre or will be removed in the fall at the end of the grazing season.
Recent rains have led to improved forage conditions on the Pawnee National Grassland in rural Weld County, allowing more cattle that were removed earlier this summer to return to graze. Because of drought conditions, 12 of 76 grazing allotments on the Pawnee National Grassland were vacated this summer, according to the U.S. Forest Service. Cattle were removed when forage dropped below 300 pounds per acre, a standard used for range management to provide sustainable grazing, habitat and forage for other grassland animals, the Forest Service said. The number of cattle returned to each allotment is less than 100 percent, but still provides relief for those with grazing permits, said the Forest Service. The two remaining allotments are vacant because of low forage production. On other Pawnee National Grassland allotments, cattle will remain unless available forage drops below 300 pounds per acre or will be removed in the fall at the end of the grazing season.
Friday, August 22, 2008
NM Game and Fish's version of Catch-22
It turns out that 8-8-08 really was a lucky day, at least for New Mexico's lesser prairie chicken population. On that day, the news headlines proclaimed "State puts prairie chicken hunt on hold," except the actual headline should have been "What was the state Game and Fish Department thinking?" I guess the thought from the department is that there certainly should be lesser numbers of the species.
Ten years ago, in an effort to increase the prairie chicken population in southeastern New Mexico, the state declared millions of acres off-limits during the bird's 90-day mating season. Fast forward to July 2008, when through some unexplained reasoning the Game and Fish Department recommended and sought approval from the Game Commission for a nine-day fall hunt. And it was approved! The decision was done without consulting any of the working groups involved, which includes the Bureau of Land Management which was caught totally by surprise by the July decision.
Fortunately, an outcry from a wide group of people ranging from environmentalists to oil and gas companies prompted Game and Fish to reconsider the planned hunt. The department issued a news release in early August stating that permits will not be issued while a decision to list the species on the federal endangered list is pending. We understand the role of the Game and Fish department as it pertains to the species population and the department's desire to foster hunting in New Mexico, but not a bird that is on the threatened list of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Department.
Why are the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association members involved in this issue? It's simple, we practice what we preach, we are indeed "good neighbors," and that extends to our state's native wildlife. The New Mexico oil and gas industry works with state and federal agencies as well as conservation groups to protect all species of wildlife.
The industry and the state of New Mexico lose millions of dollars ever year during the 90-day prairie chicken mating season. Together we all worked hard to raise those numbers. Consider this: currently there are about 8,000 prairie chickens in the state and seven years ago there were just 3,000.
How did the state oil and gas industry assist in saving the prairie chicken for future generations? Our member companies participated in land management planning efforts. The companies modified their development practices and protected certain areas where the species live. The industry also contributed financial assistance for projects to enhance habitat conditions, provided funding for legacy oil field restoration and contributed dollars to research.
If the lesser prairie chicken is put on the federal endangered list, nobody wins. Ranchers, farmers, the state oil and gas industry all lose, and in the end all the citizens of New Mexico are harmed. The economic effect from the loss of jobs, lost production and lost revenue would be hundreds of millions of dollars and would ripple across the state. All because the New Mexico Game and Fish Department decided that there are way too many lesser prairie chickens in the state. Thank goodness wiser heads prevailed and stopped the agency from sending the wrong message to the general public. I trust we will soon not see a fishing season for the silvery minnow?
Bob Gallagher is president of the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association and is also president of the NMSU Board of Regents.
It turns out that 8-8-08 really was a lucky day, at least for New Mexico's lesser prairie chicken population. On that day, the news headlines proclaimed "State puts prairie chicken hunt on hold," except the actual headline should have been "What was the state Game and Fish Department thinking?" I guess the thought from the department is that there certainly should be lesser numbers of the species.
Ten years ago, in an effort to increase the prairie chicken population in southeastern New Mexico, the state declared millions of acres off-limits during the bird's 90-day mating season. Fast forward to July 2008, when through some unexplained reasoning the Game and Fish Department recommended and sought approval from the Game Commission for a nine-day fall hunt. And it was approved! The decision was done without consulting any of the working groups involved, which includes the Bureau of Land Management which was caught totally by surprise by the July decision.
Fortunately, an outcry from a wide group of people ranging from environmentalists to oil and gas companies prompted Game and Fish to reconsider the planned hunt. The department issued a news release in early August stating that permits will not be issued while a decision to list the species on the federal endangered list is pending. We understand the role of the Game and Fish department as it pertains to the species population and the department's desire to foster hunting in New Mexico, but not a bird that is on the threatened list of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Department.
Why are the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association members involved in this issue? It's simple, we practice what we preach, we are indeed "good neighbors," and that extends to our state's native wildlife. The New Mexico oil and gas industry works with state and federal agencies as well as conservation groups to protect all species of wildlife.
The industry and the state of New Mexico lose millions of dollars ever year during the 90-day prairie chicken mating season. Together we all worked hard to raise those numbers. Consider this: currently there are about 8,000 prairie chickens in the state and seven years ago there were just 3,000.
How did the state oil and gas industry assist in saving the prairie chicken for future generations? Our member companies participated in land management planning efforts. The companies modified their development practices and protected certain areas where the species live. The industry also contributed financial assistance for projects to enhance habitat conditions, provided funding for legacy oil field restoration and contributed dollars to research.
If the lesser prairie chicken is put on the federal endangered list, nobody wins. Ranchers, farmers, the state oil and gas industry all lose, and in the end all the citizens of New Mexico are harmed. The economic effect from the loss of jobs, lost production and lost revenue would be hundreds of millions of dollars and would ripple across the state. All because the New Mexico Game and Fish Department decided that there are way too many lesser prairie chickens in the state. Thank goodness wiser heads prevailed and stopped the agency from sending the wrong message to the general public. I trust we will soon not see a fishing season for the silvery minnow?
Bob Gallagher is president of the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association and is also president of the NMSU Board of Regents.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Grazing talks bog down
Officials with the Sheyenne Valley Grazing Association say talks with the U.S. Forest Service have stalled as the two sides try to negotiate a new grazing agreement.
A district ranger for the federal agency says he thinks progress is being made on a new 10-year agreement to replace one that expired in 2003.
“We’ve done a lot of work,” ranger Bryan Stotts said. “You’re dealing with people’s livelihoods. It should be a thoughtful process.”
Stotts said one of the main issues still to be worked out is eligibility rules for grazing permits.
“You get a group of people, I don’t think all of them will agree on what the rules should be,” he said.
Mark Huseth, a director of the grazing group, said the association feels it is getting “the short end of the stick.”
“We had made some headway at portions of time where we thought we were almost to an agreement, and we’d send our notes back to each of our ... legal counsel,” he said. Huseth said the Forest Service would then ask for changes, and “We just seem to be hitting a stone wall.”
The grazing agreement with the Sheyenne Valley group would cover nearly 78,000 acres of land in southeastern North Dakota. Until a new deal is in place, ranchers are working under terms of the agreement that expired five years ago, Stotts said.
He said discussions do not include the amount of grazing that will be allowed on the grasslands. Officials plan to start work on stocking rates on the 53 grazing allotments in a few months.
“In the agreement (the grazing association) agrees to participate in it,” the ranger said.
In addition to grass for cattle, the Sheyenne National Grasslands provide habitat for a rare prairie orchid and a rare prairie chicken. The area is considered a vestige of the once-sweeping tall-grass prairie on the Great Plains.
Officials with the Sheyenne Valley Grazing Association say talks with the U.S. Forest Service have stalled as the two sides try to negotiate a new grazing agreement.
A district ranger for the federal agency says he thinks progress is being made on a new 10-year agreement to replace one that expired in 2003.
“We’ve done a lot of work,” ranger Bryan Stotts said. “You’re dealing with people’s livelihoods. It should be a thoughtful process.”
Stotts said one of the main issues still to be worked out is eligibility rules for grazing permits.
“You get a group of people, I don’t think all of them will agree on what the rules should be,” he said.
Mark Huseth, a director of the grazing group, said the association feels it is getting “the short end of the stick.”
“We had made some headway at portions of time where we thought we were almost to an agreement, and we’d send our notes back to each of our ... legal counsel,” he said. Huseth said the Forest Service would then ask for changes, and “We just seem to be hitting a stone wall.”
The grazing agreement with the Sheyenne Valley group would cover nearly 78,000 acres of land in southeastern North Dakota. Until a new deal is in place, ranchers are working under terms of the agreement that expired five years ago, Stotts said.
He said discussions do not include the amount of grazing that will be allowed on the grasslands. Officials plan to start work on stocking rates on the 53 grazing allotments in a few months.
“In the agreement (the grazing association) agrees to participate in it,” the ranger said.
In addition to grass for cattle, the Sheyenne National Grasslands provide habitat for a rare prairie orchid and a rare prairie chicken. The area is considered a vestige of the once-sweeping tall-grass prairie on the Great Plains.
Ranchers seek Smith's help in grazing battle
Cattlemen face ‘perfect storm’ over public lands
Cattle ranchers gathered in John Day Monday to press their case for proactive monitoring by the Forest Service in the face of what U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith termed a "perfect storm."
"Whether it's the peas or trees, or cows, times are good or times are bad," said Smith. "Right now there's sort of a perfect storm as it relates to cattle, and the cattle industry."
Contributing to that storm are rising hay and fuel prices, a sluggish market, and - the subject of the Aug. 18 meeting - environmentalists' litigation over grazing practices on public lands.
Smith's comments came at a meeting called by the Oregon Cattlemen's Association to discuss the difficulties facing the cattle ranching industry. About two dozen ranchers from Grant and Harney counties attended the session, held in a meeting room at Old West Federal Credit Union.
The session, moderated by Long Creek rancher Sharon Livingston, included a panel of area ranchers who talked about their concerns and experiences.
Smith said he hears the concerns of ranchers and also sees that the Forest Service is caught in the middle, facing lawsuits from environmental groups over grazing and also from ranchers defending themselves.
"I know you'd rather meet at the cattle yard than the courtrooms, and I would like that too," he said.
Smith said he shares both the concerns and the questions, the latter including a query about why other national forests are working with Oregon State University scientists on monitoring programs, but that has not been done on the Malheur. Monitoring the conditions and impacts of grazing in riparian and streamside areas is a focal point in recent lawsuits.
Bill Moore, OCA president, said this is a time "of great concern" for the cattle industry.
He told Smith that federal judges are creating laws, rather than interpreting them. And he asked for help in resolving that situation.
A panel of ranchers - Ron Burnett, Loren Stout, Jeff Hussey, and Pete McElligott - discussed their experiences and their long tenure on the land.
Burnette told Smith of his family's history of stewardship. He said his granddaughter - if she chooses to follow in the family's chosen lifestyle - could be the ninth generation to run cattle in John Day country.
But the challenges are many. He said that despite the investment he has made to improve his grazing allotment, he has been stymied by vague or changing rules and standards. This year he was one of several Malheur National Forest permittees locked out of some allotments for the grazing season.
Burnette said the permittees can't be sure they will meet standards if the Malheur National Forest staff doesn't keep good statistics and set reliable protocols. Handshake approvals and verbal OKs no longer assure permittees that that they are in compliance.
"Six months from now, someone can come in and want to see what took place - on a piece of paper," he said.
Ranchers said that proof is not being provided by the Malheur.
Stout urged the senator to help the Malheur get a monitoring system that's reliable in court, and that "throws out the personal agendas."
Concerns raised Monday were that forest staff haven't monitored the allotments consistently, and haven't used scientific standards that will hold up in court. That leaves judges to decide grazing challenges based on the proofs submitted by environmental groups, the ranchers contend.
The ranchers also said the attempts at monitoring don't take into account damage to the habitat by other animals, particularly the wild horses that roam parts of the MNF.
The threat to grazing goes beyond the livelihood of individual ranchers, the panelists said.
"I feel that our culture, our heritage, is at stake," said Hussey.
Ranchers cited the cost of litigation they bear, as well as the impact that lawsuits have on the Forest Service.
"If they're litigating, they can't work," Hussey said. "If I'm litigating, I can't work, either."
He and the others pushed for a monitoring protocol that would work.
MNF Supervisor Doug Gochnour, on the job just two months, told the group that he understands the struggle they face.
While he wasn't able to discuss ongoing litigation over MNF allotments, he said he believes the Forest Service will vigorously defend the legal challenges.
"The grazing program on the Malheur and in Eastern Oregon is important to me," he said.
He said the staff is working long hours on the current cases, and that there will be changes in the legal defense.
"I understand that the attorney from the U.S. Department of Justice didn't do a very good job," he said of the most recent case. "She's since resigned."
Gochnour also said the MNF monitoring has been challenged by staff turnover. The ranger coordinator, Chance Gowan, recently left his post due to health problems, and the forest is bringing in a new coordinator from California.
In additon, the MNF and all the other forests in the region are facing a financial hit to pay for some $24 million in firefighting costs. The MNF's share of that bill is about $1.6 million, said Gochnour.
Larry Larson, a professor in range ecology for Oregon State University, said the bottom line on the grazing issue is that the Forest Service has not been doing an adequate job of monitoring or permit administration.
Larson said he wasn't speaking for the university, the Forest Service or the permittees, but from his own research.
On the Malheur, good data is not available, he said, and that's what the courts are demanding.
Gochnour compared the situation to the challenges facing the timber industry 20 years ago, when the agency was continually defending itself in court.
Smith noted that it takes three branches of government to make change, but he urged the ranchers not to give up hope. He noted that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, criticized for embracing environmental positions, is starting to reverse its past trends toward rulings that went "beyond science."
He also said that if the rules for grazing change frequently, as claimed by the ranchers, "you're not getting due process of law."
He said it sounds as if the agency is working to cope with the threat of litigation, rather than working proactively to protect the environment and keep ranchers in business.
Smith said he has contacted Sen. Ron Wyden to arrange for a joint hearing on resource issues including grazing. Wyden chairs the Senate's Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests.
He said it takes all branches of the government to bring about change, but Congressional hearings "can also bring heat and light to these issues."
Cattlemen face ‘perfect storm’ over public lands
Cattle ranchers gathered in John Day Monday to press their case for proactive monitoring by the Forest Service in the face of what U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith termed a "perfect storm."
"Whether it's the peas or trees, or cows, times are good or times are bad," said Smith. "Right now there's sort of a perfect storm as it relates to cattle, and the cattle industry."
Contributing to that storm are rising hay and fuel prices, a sluggish market, and - the subject of the Aug. 18 meeting - environmentalists' litigation over grazing practices on public lands.
Smith's comments came at a meeting called by the Oregon Cattlemen's Association to discuss the difficulties facing the cattle ranching industry. About two dozen ranchers from Grant and Harney counties attended the session, held in a meeting room at Old West Federal Credit Union.
The session, moderated by Long Creek rancher Sharon Livingston, included a panel of area ranchers who talked about their concerns and experiences.
Smith said he hears the concerns of ranchers and also sees that the Forest Service is caught in the middle, facing lawsuits from environmental groups over grazing and also from ranchers defending themselves.
"I know you'd rather meet at the cattle yard than the courtrooms, and I would like that too," he said.
Smith said he shares both the concerns and the questions, the latter including a query about why other national forests are working with Oregon State University scientists on monitoring programs, but that has not been done on the Malheur. Monitoring the conditions and impacts of grazing in riparian and streamside areas is a focal point in recent lawsuits.
Bill Moore, OCA president, said this is a time "of great concern" for the cattle industry.
He told Smith that federal judges are creating laws, rather than interpreting them. And he asked for help in resolving that situation.
A panel of ranchers - Ron Burnett, Loren Stout, Jeff Hussey, and Pete McElligott - discussed their experiences and their long tenure on the land.
Burnette told Smith of his family's history of stewardship. He said his granddaughter - if she chooses to follow in the family's chosen lifestyle - could be the ninth generation to run cattle in John Day country.
But the challenges are many. He said that despite the investment he has made to improve his grazing allotment, he has been stymied by vague or changing rules and standards. This year he was one of several Malheur National Forest permittees locked out of some allotments for the grazing season.
Burnette said the permittees can't be sure they will meet standards if the Malheur National Forest staff doesn't keep good statistics and set reliable protocols. Handshake approvals and verbal OKs no longer assure permittees that that they are in compliance.
"Six months from now, someone can come in and want to see what took place - on a piece of paper," he said.
Ranchers said that proof is not being provided by the Malheur.
Stout urged the senator to help the Malheur get a monitoring system that's reliable in court, and that "throws out the personal agendas."
Concerns raised Monday were that forest staff haven't monitored the allotments consistently, and haven't used scientific standards that will hold up in court. That leaves judges to decide grazing challenges based on the proofs submitted by environmental groups, the ranchers contend.
The ranchers also said the attempts at monitoring don't take into account damage to the habitat by other animals, particularly the wild horses that roam parts of the MNF.
The threat to grazing goes beyond the livelihood of individual ranchers, the panelists said.
"I feel that our culture, our heritage, is at stake," said Hussey.
Ranchers cited the cost of litigation they bear, as well as the impact that lawsuits have on the Forest Service.
"If they're litigating, they can't work," Hussey said. "If I'm litigating, I can't work, either."
He and the others pushed for a monitoring protocol that would work.
MNF Supervisor Doug Gochnour, on the job just two months, told the group that he understands the struggle they face.
While he wasn't able to discuss ongoing litigation over MNF allotments, he said he believes the Forest Service will vigorously defend the legal challenges.
"The grazing program on the Malheur and in Eastern Oregon is important to me," he said.
He said the staff is working long hours on the current cases, and that there will be changes in the legal defense.
"I understand that the attorney from the U.S. Department of Justice didn't do a very good job," he said of the most recent case. "She's since resigned."
Gochnour also said the MNF monitoring has been challenged by staff turnover. The ranger coordinator, Chance Gowan, recently left his post due to health problems, and the forest is bringing in a new coordinator from California.
In additon, the MNF and all the other forests in the region are facing a financial hit to pay for some $24 million in firefighting costs. The MNF's share of that bill is about $1.6 million, said Gochnour.
Larry Larson, a professor in range ecology for Oregon State University, said the bottom line on the grazing issue is that the Forest Service has not been doing an adequate job of monitoring or permit administration.
Larson said he wasn't speaking for the university, the Forest Service or the permittees, but from his own research.
On the Malheur, good data is not available, he said, and that's what the courts are demanding.
Gochnour compared the situation to the challenges facing the timber industry 20 years ago, when the agency was continually defending itself in court.
Smith noted that it takes three branches of government to make change, but he urged the ranchers not to give up hope. He noted that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, criticized for embracing environmental positions, is starting to reverse its past trends toward rulings that went "beyond science."
He also said that if the rules for grazing change frequently, as claimed by the ranchers, "you're not getting due process of law."
He said it sounds as if the agency is working to cope with the threat of litigation, rather than working proactively to protect the environment and keep ranchers in business.
Smith said he has contacted Sen. Ron Wyden to arrange for a joint hearing on resource issues including grazing. Wyden chairs the Senate's Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests.
He said it takes all branches of the government to bring about change, but Congressional hearings "can also bring heat and light to these issues."
Editorial: Ranchers, county need solution to monitoring gap on national forest
To say that one of Grant County's most important industries - cattle ranching - is threatened by environmental litigation is just too simplistic. The fact is, the immediate threat stems not so much from the demands of environmentalists, but from the lack of adequate monitoring of grazing practices and their effects.
The issue of monitoring is at the heart of still unresolved litigation over grazing allotments on the Malheur National Forest. Without adequate monitoring, the Forest Service - and the permit-holders - are at a loss to prove that their grazing program is a positive aspect of the forest's management.
The issue is getting some attention in high places. U.S. Sens. Gordon Smith and Ron Wyden recently sent a joint letter to Mark Rey, Department of Agriculture undersecretary, supporting a proposed collaborative effort to develop appropriate monitoring that will draw on resources at Oregon State University and also involve the permittees.
The letter confirmed the importance of ranching and of forest grazing programs to Grant and Harney counties - and to Oregon's rural economy.
"The absence of Forest Service monitoring data on grazing activities in Malheur National Forest prevents objective confirmation of the success and sustainability of these grazing programs," the senators wrote.
They asked that money be allocated to provide the necessary monitoring, and that adequate protocols for it be developed before the end of this year's grazing season.
The Grant County Court last week added its voice to the effort. Judge Mark Webb and Commissioners Scott Myers and Boyd Britton wrote a letter Aug. 13 to Smith and Wyden, lauding the senators for recognizing the need for sustainable management and the critical importance of grazing.
"We appreciate your willingness to draw attention to and address the lack of appropriate protocols or monitoring by the Malheur National Forest," the Court wrote. "The lack of appropriate protocols or monitoring causes potentially serious consequences for many of our ranching families."
The plea for more funding for monitoring comes at a difficult time, as wildland firefighting across the West saps the Forest Service budget. That's an issue that also needs addressing. But the larger question of how to separate firefighting costs from other forest operations could take a long time and a lot of Congressional maneuvering to sort out. Our ranching communities may not be able to wait that long.
It's time for the Forest Service to step up on the monitoring issue, make use of the resources available through Oregon State University, and work with the permittees to solve the problem. It would be a travesty if an industry that has long been a mainstay in Grant County foundered because of something so fixable.
To say that one of Grant County's most important industries - cattle ranching - is threatened by environmental litigation is just too simplistic. The fact is, the immediate threat stems not so much from the demands of environmentalists, but from the lack of adequate monitoring of grazing practices and their effects.
The issue of monitoring is at the heart of still unresolved litigation over grazing allotments on the Malheur National Forest. Without adequate monitoring, the Forest Service - and the permit-holders - are at a loss to prove that their grazing program is a positive aspect of the forest's management.
The issue is getting some attention in high places. U.S. Sens. Gordon Smith and Ron Wyden recently sent a joint letter to Mark Rey, Department of Agriculture undersecretary, supporting a proposed collaborative effort to develop appropriate monitoring that will draw on resources at Oregon State University and also involve the permittees.
The letter confirmed the importance of ranching and of forest grazing programs to Grant and Harney counties - and to Oregon's rural economy.
"The absence of Forest Service monitoring data on grazing activities in Malheur National Forest prevents objective confirmation of the success and sustainability of these grazing programs," the senators wrote.
They asked that money be allocated to provide the necessary monitoring, and that adequate protocols for it be developed before the end of this year's grazing season.
The Grant County Court last week added its voice to the effort. Judge Mark Webb and Commissioners Scott Myers and Boyd Britton wrote a letter Aug. 13 to Smith and Wyden, lauding the senators for recognizing the need for sustainable management and the critical importance of grazing.
"We appreciate your willingness to draw attention to and address the lack of appropriate protocols or monitoring by the Malheur National Forest," the Court wrote. "The lack of appropriate protocols or monitoring causes potentially serious consequences for many of our ranching families."
The plea for more funding for monitoring comes at a difficult time, as wildland firefighting across the West saps the Forest Service budget. That's an issue that also needs addressing. But the larger question of how to separate firefighting costs from other forest operations could take a long time and a lot of Congressional maneuvering to sort out. Our ranching communities may not be able to wait that long.
It's time for the Forest Service to step up on the monitoring issue, make use of the resources available through Oregon State University, and work with the permittees to solve the problem. It would be a travesty if an industry that has long been a mainstay in Grant County foundered because of something so fixable.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
New Mexico Environment Department Hosts Series of Public Meeting on NM’s Surface Water Quality Standards Triennial Review
WHAT: The New Mexico Environment Department’s Surface Water Quality Bureau (Bureau) will hold informational meetings to discuss proposed changes to State of New Mexico Standards for Interstate and Intrastate Surface Waters (20.6.4 NMAC). The Standards establish designated uses for surface waters of the state and water quality criteria to protect those uses. To gather input on the proposed changes, the Bureau has scheduled five public meetings. The meetings are being held in advance of the Water Quality Control Commission’s Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards Hearing, which is tentatively scheduled for fall 2009.
Proposed changes include new narrative biocriteria, revision of designated uses for unclassified waters, revision of segment descriptions to exclude waters under tribal jurisdiction, updates to human health and domestic water supply criteria, clarification of recreational designated uses, addition of public water supply as a designated use and revisions to segment-specific criteria.
The Bureau will publish its discussion draft of the proposed revisions by August 12, 2008, at www.nmenv.state.nm.us/SWQB/Standards/index.html. For more information, contact Pam Homer, Standards Coordinator, Surface Water Quality Bureau (contact information below).
WHERE & WHEN: Statewide
Carlsbad - Monday, August 25, 2008, 6:00 p.m.
Riverwalk Recreation Center, Powerhouse Room, 400 Riverwalk Dr.
Two Pecos River proposals may be of particular interest to people in the Carlsbad vicinity: to raise the criterion for boron downstream from the mouth of the Black River and to set benchmarks based on existing conditions for preventing salinity increases from Santa Rosa downstream to the state line.
Las Cruces – Tuesday, August 26, 2008, 6:00 p.m.
NMSU Campus, Hernandez Hall, Room 106.
Statewide revisions only, no area-specific changes proposed.
Albuquerque – Wednesday, August 27, 2008, 6:00 p.m.
NMED District 1 Office, 5500 San Antonio Dr. NE
Proposals that may be of particular interest to people in Albuquerque and surrounding areas include: the addition of public water supply designations and radionuclide criteria for the Albuquerque, Santa Fe and Española reaches of the Rio Grande; new segments for the Rio Puerco, the lower Jemez River, and the Rio Nutria and Ramah Lake in the Zuni basin; and a revised pH criterion on lower Sulphur Creek.
Farmington – Thursday, August 28, 2008, 6:00 p.m.
Farmington Civic Center, Meeting Room C, 200 West Arrington.
Proposals that may be of particular interest to people in the Farmington vicinity include a new segment for Lake Farmington (Beeline Reservoir), and the addition of public water supply designations for the El Rito, Rio Brazos, Rio Chama, Rio Vallecitas, the Los Pinos and Navajo Rivers, Heron and El Vado Lakes.
Raton – Wednesday, September 3, 2008, 6:00 p.m.
NM Game & Fish Conference Room, 215 York Canyon Road.
Proposals that may be of particular interest to people in the Raton vicinity include revised classifications for the Dry Cimarron River and Corrumpa creek and the addition of public water supply designations for Cimarroncito and Chicorica Creeks.
HOW: The public is invited to submit written comments on the discussion draft. Please submit written comments (email preferred) by Tuesday, September 30, 2008 to:
Pam Homer, Water Quality Standards Coordinator
Surface Water Quality Bureau
PO Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM 87502
Phone 505-827-2822
Fax 505-827-0160
pamela.homer@state.nm.us
Additional information about water quality and the standards in general is available on the Surface Water Quality Bureau’s website: http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/SWQB/.
WHAT: The New Mexico Environment Department’s Surface Water Quality Bureau (Bureau) will hold informational meetings to discuss proposed changes to State of New Mexico Standards for Interstate and Intrastate Surface Waters (20.6.4 NMAC). The Standards establish designated uses for surface waters of the state and water quality criteria to protect those uses. To gather input on the proposed changes, the Bureau has scheduled five public meetings. The meetings are being held in advance of the Water Quality Control Commission’s Triennial Review of Water Quality Standards Hearing, which is tentatively scheduled for fall 2009.
Proposed changes include new narrative biocriteria, revision of designated uses for unclassified waters, revision of segment descriptions to exclude waters under tribal jurisdiction, updates to human health and domestic water supply criteria, clarification of recreational designated uses, addition of public water supply as a designated use and revisions to segment-specific criteria.
The Bureau will publish its discussion draft of the proposed revisions by August 12, 2008, at www.nmenv.state.nm.us/SWQB/Standards/index.html. For more information, contact Pam Homer, Standards Coordinator, Surface Water Quality Bureau (contact information below).
WHERE & WHEN: Statewide
Carlsbad - Monday, August 25, 2008, 6:00 p.m.
Riverwalk Recreation Center, Powerhouse Room, 400 Riverwalk Dr.
Two Pecos River proposals may be of particular interest to people in the Carlsbad vicinity: to raise the criterion for boron downstream from the mouth of the Black River and to set benchmarks based on existing conditions for preventing salinity increases from Santa Rosa downstream to the state line.
Las Cruces – Tuesday, August 26, 2008, 6:00 p.m.
NMSU Campus, Hernandez Hall, Room 106.
Statewide revisions only, no area-specific changes proposed.
Albuquerque – Wednesday, August 27, 2008, 6:00 p.m.
NMED District 1 Office, 5500 San Antonio Dr. NE
Proposals that may be of particular interest to people in Albuquerque and surrounding areas include: the addition of public water supply designations and radionuclide criteria for the Albuquerque, Santa Fe and Española reaches of the Rio Grande; new segments for the Rio Puerco, the lower Jemez River, and the Rio Nutria and Ramah Lake in the Zuni basin; and a revised pH criterion on lower Sulphur Creek.
Farmington – Thursday, August 28, 2008, 6:00 p.m.
Farmington Civic Center, Meeting Room C, 200 West Arrington.
Proposals that may be of particular interest to people in the Farmington vicinity include a new segment for Lake Farmington (Beeline Reservoir), and the addition of public water supply designations for the El Rito, Rio Brazos, Rio Chama, Rio Vallecitas, the Los Pinos and Navajo Rivers, Heron and El Vado Lakes.
Raton – Wednesday, September 3, 2008, 6:00 p.m.
NM Game & Fish Conference Room, 215 York Canyon Road.
Proposals that may be of particular interest to people in the Raton vicinity include revised classifications for the Dry Cimarron River and Corrumpa creek and the addition of public water supply designations for Cimarroncito and Chicorica Creeks.
HOW: The public is invited to submit written comments on the discussion draft. Please submit written comments (email preferred) by Tuesday, September 30, 2008 to:
Pam Homer, Water Quality Standards Coordinator
Surface Water Quality Bureau
PO Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM 87502
Phone 505-827-2822
Fax 505-827-0160
pamela.homer@state.nm.us
Additional information about water quality and the standards in general is available on the Surface Water Quality Bureau’s website: http://www.nmenv.state.nm.us/SWQB/.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)