Sep 01 2018

Animal Crackers fall prey to animal rightists.

by Caren Cowan, Executive Director,
New Mexico Cattle Grower’s Association
Read this article & more in New Mexico Stockman Magazine

Destroying the circus wasn’t enough for PETA. In an article entitled “Nabisco Forced to Uncage Animal Crackers” author Greg Henderson on , wrote “the beasts on boxes of animal crackers have been turned loose. Under pressure from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), Nabisco has redesigned packaging of Nabisco’s Barnum’s Animal crackers removing – after more than a century – the cages.

PETA, which has been protesting the use of animals in circuses for more than 30 years, also had their sights set on Nabisco’s cracker boxes. In 2016, PETA wrote to Mondelez International, the parent company of Nabisco, with a mockup design without bars and an explanation that circuses often mistreat animals. Illinois, where Mondelez has its headquarters, became the first U.S. state to ban circuses with elephant shows at the start of this year.”

“Given the egregious cruelty inherent in circuses that use animals and the public’s swelling opposition to the exploitation of animals used for entertainment, we urge Nabisco to update its packaging in order to show animals who are free to roam in their natural habitats,” PETA said in its letter.

The redesign of the boxes, now on U.S. store shelves, retains the familiar red and yellow coloring and prominent “Barnum’s Animals” lettering. But instead of showing the animals in cages – implying that they’re traveling in boxcars for the circus – the new boxes feature a zebra, elephant, lion, giraffe and gorilla wandering side-by-side in a grassland.

MGM Sues Las Vegas Massacre Survivors

In another outrage, in mid-July dozens of survivors of last year’s mass shooting in Las Vegas have started to receive some startling legal notices, according to a LA Times story by By Matt Pearce, Richard Winton  and David Montero.

“A lawsuit has been filed against you,” the notices say.

The plaintiff? MGM Resorts International, the casino and hotel company, owner of both the fairgrounds where 58 people were shot to death at a country music festival and the Mandalay Bay Hotel, where the gunman perched himself on the 32nd floor to carry out the October 1, 2017 massacre.

In a bold legal maneuver, MGM has sued survivors to claim immunity under a federal law passed in the wake of September 11 that was designed to protect corporations from lawsuits after terrorist attacks. Experts said it was the first time such a lawsuit had ever been filed under the law.

MGM is facing lawsuits from more than 2,500 people after the massacre, which also wounded hundreds.

Survivors, backed by high-profile attorneys, have said the company did not do enough to prevent the attack or limit the extent the harm.

To defend itself, the company is turning to the little-known federal statute called the Safety Act, passed by Congress in 2002 to limit the liability of companies that provide anti-terrorism services.

The idea was that companies might not introduce new security technologies designed to thwart terrorist attacks if the companies would then face expensive — and potentially business-ending — lawsuits when those technologies fail to stop killings.

So policymakers offered companies a deal: With approval for their services by the Department of Homeland Security, they are protected from terrorism-related lawsuits.

“They’re basically giving you a get-out-jail-free card for something that hasn’t happened yet,” said Bob Karl, a managing partner for Safety Act Consultants, a Milwaukee firm that advises companies seeking Safety Act designations.

Safety Act designations can be an attractive legal protection for event and security companies. In recent years, several National Football League and Major League Baseball stadiums have obtained them.

So did Contemporary Services Corp., also known as CSC, the contractor that provided security for MGM during the music festival.

The company prominently features its Safety Act designation on its website.

MGM is arguing in two federal lawsuits against the survivors — filed in Nevada and California — that the hotel company is, by extension, shielded from the survivors’ lawsuits, because of the terrorism law’s protections. The statute also requires that related litigation be pursued in federal courts.

In a statement, MGM Resorts spokeswoman Debra DeShong suggested that its lawsuits would ultimately help the victims.

“The federal court is an appropriate venue for these cases and provides those affected with the opportunity for a timely resolution,” the statement said. “Years of drawn-out litigation and hearings are not in the best interest of victims, the community and those still healing.”

Though the Safety Act is aimed at terrorist attacks, MGM argued that the federal statute is written broadly enough to include mass shootings where the motive is unknown, such as the Vegas massacre.

MGM’s lawsuits referred to statements made in November by Elaine Duke, who was acting secretary of U.S. Department of Homeland Security: She “noted the emphasis of ‘terrorists and other violent criminals … on attacking soft targets,’ including ‘recent tragedies in Nevada.’”

Karl, the Safety Act expert, said he believes the lawsuits are the first of their kind and could lead to a highly public throw-down between victims and MGM.

“That whole thing is going to be a mess,” Karl said. “The only people who will come out of it well is high-priced attorneys.”

MGM drew backlash as news spread of the company suing survivors.

Craig Eiland, an attorney for several victims, said the attempt by MGM to insulate itself from a lawsuit using the Safety Act was “unprecedented.”

“CSC had nothing to do with Mandalay Bay not having security stop Stephen Paddock from unloading luggage with 23 assault rifles, carrying them up to his room and not noticing anything for three to five days,” Eiland said. “They had nothing to do with allowing him to deadbolt the stairwell — all of these things. And Mandalay Bay is saying because this yellow T-shirt company got this safety designation, everybody is immune?”

Mark Robinson, an Orange County attorney who represents hundreds of potential plaintiffs against MGM, called the company’s behavior “outrageous.”

“They are re-victimizing the victims and their families,” Robinson said, adding that MGM had asked for a list of clients he represented and that after receiving it MGM “responded by suing them all.”

Oh What a Difference…

A decade or two makes. In 1990, movie star Kevin Costner had a huge hit directing and starring in the moving Dances with Wolves. Dubbed a “American Epic” at a time when Westerns were out of fashion, the movie was over three hours in length and came in millions of dollars over budget. However, in the end the movie made over $400 million.

Costner is currently involved in what may be an epic television series that has him as a multi-generation Montana rancher who isn’t dancing with wolves — he is in a fight for the future with wolves, developers and water grabbers, oil operations, a near-by Indian reservation, recreations who want land use only for themselves, and even his family.

Yellowstone just finished its first season on the Paramount Channel and is available on Netflix. It is worth the time to watch it. While there is more violence than necessary, Costner is a meaner patriarch than necessary, and the language isn’t fit for public consumption, once in awhile it is as close to real as any film depiction I have seen.

On the subject of profanity…

There was a debate on Fox News the other day about whether or not the f-word is profanity. It was mind boggling. The lack of civility in our speech is appalling and even scary. If we don’t have the vocabulary to find a word to express our sentiments, we all better start carrying dictionaries around.

The unbelievable one-liners…

On another news network they were touting the next story – the headline was “On the investigation of the Russian investigation.” Does anyone but me think that no matter what the story was, the whole thing is ridiculous?

Another line that has been bandied around a lot since President Trump made a statement that the media is the enemy of the people is “Free press is not the enemy of the people.” Newspapers across the country published editorials in mid-August making that statement. The effort, initiated by the Boston Globe, has brought both positive and negative attention.

For my two cents, the President didn’t say a free press is an enemy, he said the media. That may be distinction without a difference, but a press that is biased can be an enemy. If news outlets reported the news rather than making it, there wouldn’t be a need for this entire conversation.

Drug Residue Story is ‘Pseudoscience’ & ‘Scare Tactics’

In a strongly worded official statement released in late August, U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA )Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) Acting Deputy Under Secretary Carmen Rottenberg took issue with the conclusions of a newly published Consumer Reports (CR) article that suggests that banned or restricted drugs may appear in the U.S. meat supply more often than was previously known according to a story on by Julie Larson Bricher.

“You may have seen a Consumer Reports story claiming that the poultry and meat you purchase in the grocery store and feed your families could contain harmful drug residues,” Rottenberg wrote in the FSIS statement. “That is not true. This story is sensational and fear-based infotainment aimed at confusing shoppers with pseudoscience and scare tactics.”

The article, “Are Banned Drugs in Your Meat?”, asserts that data obtained from the agency via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request show that trace amounts of prohibited drugs — including ketamine, phenylbutazone and chloramphenicol — were found in meat and poultry samples taken between October 2015 and September 2016. Based on analysis by CR’s food safety scientists, the report calls into question FSIS drug residue testing methods and acceptable level cutoffs and accuses the agency of “failing to ensure that meat is free of potentially unsafe drug residue.” 

In her response, Rottenberg stated that the FOIA data on which the CR report is based are misleading.

“On March 3, 2017, in our haste to be transparent and responsive, we mistakenly released in response to a FOIA request, unconfirmed, preliminary test results for samples taken from poultry,” she wrote. “We corrected our mistake with the requestor. However, the unconfirmed sampling results continue to be passed around as accurate, truthful information – they are not.”

FSIS performed the complete screening and testing process on all the samples represented, wrote Rottenberg

“The final, confirmed and validated test results show that there were no drug residues in the chicken. If violative drug residues are found in any meat or poultry product, FSIS does not allow that product to be sold for human food.

“Consumer Reports admits in their closing paragraph that the real agenda behind this piece is to convince Americans to eat less meat,” she added. “Shame on Consumer Reports for attempting to advance a rhetoric that lacks scientific support or data, at the expense of American producers and the 9,000 food safety professionals who ensure the safety of meat and poultry in this country every day.”

Wayne Pacelle Returns Despite #Metoo Claims

Wayne Pacelle is back on Capitol Hill lobbying for an animal rights agenda, according to Greg Henderson.

The former president of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) who was forced to resign in February over sexual harassment allegations, is working for a friend’s PAC (political action committee) lobby for animal welfare issues on Capitol Hill. Despite efforts to keep a low-profile, Pacelle’s re-emergence with the PAC Animal Wellness Action has stirred friction with HSUS.

According to Politico, legal action is under consideration by HSUS because Pacelle had a non-compete clause in his contract. A memo obtained by Politico says, “The board leadership is aware of the situation and will be considering our options.”

Animal Wellness Action was registered in May by David Harvilicz, a lawyer and entrepreneur. Politico reported the new PAC already had deep ties with HSUS as Marty Irby, a former HSUS executive who oversaw its rural equine protect ion and rural outreach departments, is now Animal Wellness Action’s executive director.

Pacelle’s resignation came after an investigation into claims of sexual misconduct by three HSUS employees. Days before stepping down, Pacelle told The Washington Post, “I absolutely deny any suggestion that I did anything untoward.”      

Source: New Mexico Stockman, September 2018
Aug 20 2018

Lack of civility… or is it man’s inhumanity to man?

by Caren Cowan, Executive Director,
New Mexico Cattle Grower’s Association
Read this article & more in New Mexico Stockman Magazine

Is it too much national news? Are manners of any kind ancient history? Do we even know what respect and self-respect are anymore? Can we no longer have an opinion that differs with anyone else without being evil? Is the art of agreeing to disagree lost?

At the national level clearly there are no longer any rules of civility. Just tune in to any news broadcast and you will see people calling the President and others liars. People claiming he is evil just because they disagree with him. We see well-funded marches across the country to protest what appears to be the best economic change in decades.

Some of it is a lack of knowledge, but I fear most of it is disinformation with malice of forethought.

I think I have become almost numb to the national stuff, but what causes me despair is when folks I have known, liked and worked with for literally decades sink into shouting matches and name calling or calling someone a liar in a room full of people. I probably use that word way too often and will do better — unless you have worked to earn the title.

The cattle industry in the Southwest has been here for centuries. Our families have been friends and neighbors over that same period. Now, when we have less people in our circles, it is not time to circle the wagons, aim and fire. We have plenty of groups that take great glee when we cannot get along.

Let’s not hand them anymore ammunition.

Drop that straw and put your hands up!

2018 will forever be remembered as the year that hating plastic straws went mainstream. Once the lonely cause of environmental cranks, now everyone wants to eliminate these suckers from daily life, according to Christian Britschgi, Assistant Editor at

In July, 2018, Seattle imposed America’s first ban on plastic straws. Vancouver, British Columbia, passed a similar ban a few months earlier. There are active attempts to prohibit straws in New York City, Washington, D.C., Portland, Oregon, and San Francisco, CA. A-list celebrities from Calvin Harris to Tom Brady have lectured us on giving up straws. Both National Geographic and The Atlantic have run long profiles on the history and environmental effects of the straw. Vice is now treating their consumption as a dirty, hedonistic excess.

A California coastal city has become the latest municipality to ban plastic straws, enacting what is potentially the strictest plastic prohibition in the country. Santa Barbara earlier this month passed the ordinance authorizing hefty fines and even a possible jail sentence for violators who dole out plastic straws at restaurants, bars and other food establishments.

According to the ordinance, violators on their first offense will be given a written warning notice. But the second time a purveyor of plastic straws defies the ban is when the heavy hand of the law could clamp down.

In that case, the ordinance cites penalties from the city’s municipal code for a “fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), imprisonment for a term not exceeding six (6) months.”

In comparison, Seattle, which in the beginning of July became the first major city in the U.S. to ban plastic straws, only fines businesses $250 per offense.

Not to be outdone by busybody legislators, Starbucks, the nation’s largest food and drink retailer, announced that it would be going strawless.

The coffee giant says that by 2020 it hopes to have eliminated all single-use plastic straws at its 28,000 stores worldwide. It will now top all its cold drinks with fancy new strawless lids that the company currently serves with its cold brew nitro coffees. (Frappuccinos will still be served with a compostable or paper straw.)

As is to be expected, Starbucks’ decision was greeted with universal adulation.

Yet missing from this fanfare was the inconvenient fact that by ditching plastic straws, Starbucks will actually be increasing its plastic use. As it turns out, the new nitro lids that Starbucks is leaning on to replace straws are made up of more plastic than the company’s current lid/straw combination.

Right now, Starbucks patrons are topping most of their cold drinks with either 3.23 grams or 3.55 grams of plastic product, depending on whether they pair their lid with a small or large straw. The new nitro lids meanwhile weigh either 3.55 or 4.11 grams, depending again on lid size.

(I got these results by measuring Starbucks’ plastic straws and lids on two separate scales, both of which gave me the same results, said Britschgi)

This means customers are at best breaking even under Starbucks’ strawless scheme, or they are adding between .32 and .88 grams to their plastic consumption per drink. Given that customers are going to use a mix of the larger and smaller nitro lids, Starbucks’ plastic consumption is bound to increase, although it’s anybody’s guess as to how much.

Can we (who can afford it) go back to fur???

Not to be outdone in the assault on plastics, the Animal Activist Watch bailed in with “Fake Fur is Plastic Poison, Research Finds.” The lead was buried at the end of the story with “The tests also looked at the average biodegradation of a number of natural products and found that real fur degrades at the same rate as an oak or willow tree leaf.” Imagine that.

The synthetic fibers of fake fur do not biodegrade, experts have found. The findings are a blow to other animal rights activists who claim fake fur is environmentally friendly.

They examined how both real and fake fur degraded in conditions set up to mimic closed landfill conditions. Natural fur samples biodegraded swiftly, starting to disintegrate within days as microorganisms consumed the carbon inside the fur. But fake fur showed no biodegradation at all.

According to the researchers, this was not unexpected due to the composition of the synthetic fibers. In addition, synthetic fur materials are also known to break down into ever-smaller pieces, eventually forming microplast fibers—a major contributor to plastic pollution.

More Social Engineering…

Do you regularly heat up leftovers in plastic food-storage containers? Do you put plastic reusable water bottles in the dishwasher when they need a deep clean? A new study published by the American Academy of Pediatrics highlights food safety mistakes that many people may be making, without understanding the consequences. According to, the study outlines an increasing amount of evidence that points to the dangers of food packaging materials, especially plastic.

The study advises people against microwaving food in plastic containers or placing plastic containers in the dishwasher, as these habits can cause the plastic material to release harmful chemicals. BPA serves as a hardening ingredient in plastic, and it has been associated with adverse health effects, including heart disease and type 2 diabetes. BPA exposure or ingestion can also cause harm to fertility, the immune system, and even body fat percentage, according to the AAP. Plastic materials that have recycling codes 3, 6, and 7 — corresponding to phthalates, styrene, and bisphenols, respectively — should also be avoided. The AAP reminds parents that the consequences of exposure to dangerous chemicals may be particularly harmful for children, as their bodies are still in the process of developing.

And, oh by the way, they recommend choosing whole foods over processed food also to reduce risk of contamination, as well as washing hands and produce during food preparation.

Finally, a grain of truth

As the US Department of the Interior begins work on revising endangered species regulations, some media is once again in a frenzy about the world going extinct if even a comma is changed in anything relative to the Endangered Species Act.

The Washington Post ran an article by Kristoffer Whitney, an assistant professor in the department of Science, Technology and Society at the Rochester Institute of Technology. The story is way too long to reprint and the vast majority of it about how the world will come to an end if we change anything regarding endangered species.

The subhead on the story did however make a startling admission. “The ESA does control land use…” but in at least the writer’s opinion that’s okay because he and many other believe that controlling land, and thus people, is “essential to protecting species.”

Fall NMCGA Board Meeting

The Fall Board meeting will be held in Santa Rosa on September 17 and 18. Meetings will be held at the Blue Hole Convention Center and all NMCGA members are welcome to attend.

Additionally the NMCGA is inviting anyone who sits on the board of directors of an agricultural organization to participate in the Board Training being offered at 1:30 p.m. on the 17th. The IRS is increasing the responsibilities of board members and everyone needs to be aware of them.

Watch for registration materials in the mail or your email, contact the or call the NMCGA office for details.

Special thanks to all our wolf litigation donors!      

Source: New Mexico Stockman, August 2018
Jul 17 2018


by Caren Cowan, Executive Director,
New Mexico Cattle Grower’s Association
Read this article & more in New Mexico Stockman Magazine

July has started off with a bang… and it wasn’t just the neighbor’s fire crackers going off at after 10:00 p.m. on July 5 in the street in front of my house.

In early July a federal judge in Nevada rejected prosecutors’ request to reconsider her dismissal of the conspiracy case against Cliven Bundy, his two sons and Ryan Payne stemming from their 2014 armed standoff with federal agents over cattle grazing near Bunkerville, according to a story by Maxine Bernstein for The Oregonian/OregonLive

U.S. District Judge Gloria M. Navarro found prosecutors raised arguments she had already considered. She dismissed their contention that the dismissal of the case with prejudice was “unjust,’’ or that she should have ordered a less severe sanction for their failure to share evidence that could assist the defense as required by the 1963 landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Brady v. Maryland.

“The Court’s finding of outrageous government conduct was not in error,’’ Navarro wrote in her 11-page ruling. “On the contrary, a universal sense of justice was violated by the Government’s failure to provide evidence that is potentially exculpatory.’’

In a motion urging the judge to reconsider the dismissal, prosecutors reiterated their unsuccessful argument that the evidence they failed to share until too late wouldn’t have been admissible anyway because they didn’t believe the defendants could argue that they acted in self-defense, were provoked or intimidated.

But the judge called that argument “outrageous’’ and made it clear that the government was not allowed to withhold evidence that would enable the Bundys and Payne to argue they acted in self-defense, or evidence they could use to challenge the charges in their indictment.

In fact, her prior order should have placed prosecutors on notice that any evidence that could bolster a theory of self-defense might become relevant at trial, Navarro wrote.

“The evidence that the Government failed to disclose, such as the insertion and positioning of snipers and cameras surveilling the Bundy home, is evidence of provocation,’’ Navarro wrote. “The Government’s theory of prosecution relies on the fact that Defendants were acting offensively instead of defensively. The evidence that the Government failed to disclose could have assisted Defendants in showing that the officers were engaging in provocative conduct and that Defendants were not the aggressors. Therefore, the undisclosed evidence might have supported a theory of self-defense.’’

The judge said she had considered alternative sanctions, such as a potential retrial or lesser penalties.

“However, the Court found that no lesser sanction would adequately deter future investigatory and prosecutorial misconduct,’’ Navarro wrote.

The judge also said she concluded the indictment could not survive as a result of the government’s violations, and did consider the potential ramifications that could result from the dismissal.

Ammon Bundy, who was released from custody in December and is now back at home in Idaho with his wife and children and trying to rebuild his fleet vehicle business, has become outspoken in recent days, arguing that the convictions of co-defendants Todd Engel and Greg Burleson, found guilty in an earlier trial, should be thrown out due to evidence that wasn’t shared at their trials but only came out piece meal during pretrial hearings and the start of the Bundys’ Nevada trial.

Burleson was sentenced in 2017 to more than 68 years in prison, found guilty of threatening a federal law enforcement officer, obstruction of justice and interstate travel in aid of extortion. Engel has yet to be sentenced for obstruction of justice and interstate travel in aid of extortion. “I just can’t sit here and say this is OK,’’ Bundy told The Oregonian/OregonLive

“I don’t believe they got a fair trial. The judge probably thinks this is all done because the Bundys went home. But I’m not going to let it be done and forgotten.’’

Hammonds Pardoned

The Bundy news was followed quickly by word that President Trump granted clemency to 79-year-old Dwight Hammond Jr., and his son Steven, 49. The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board wrote, “Trump corrects a federal injustice against two Oregon ranchers.”

The pardon power has its most compelling use when correcting a government injustice. President Trump used his authority for precisely such a purpose in pardoning the Hammonds. For details on the Hammond case and more from the Wall Street Journal, see the story on page 198.

Stampede Bets Big in New Mexico

An Illinois meat company is expanding to New Mexico, bringing with it nearly 1,300 new jobs.

Stampede Meat plans to invest $36 million renovating the former Tyson plant in Sunland Park. 1,295 new food processing and manufacturing jobs will be created over the next five years.

The company processes and distributes portioned meat for restaurants, retail, home delivery and other channels.

“This is great news for New Mexico and another example of what’s possible when businesses know they’re welcome here,” said Economic Development Secretary Matt Geisel. “The Governor’s critical reforms and steadfast commitment to economic development are showing companies from around the country and the world that New Mexico is open for business.”

The expansion was made possible through funds in the Local Economic Development Act, or LEDA. The closing fund is used as a tool to help recruit new businesses to New Mexico and help existing businesses grow and thrive.

“We are very pleased to invest in Sunland Park and are grateful to the Governor as well as the state, county and local officials who have helped us,” said Brock Furlong, CEO of Stampede Meat. “We look forward to expanding our workforce to continue to provide quality products for our customers.”

New Mexico beat out Oklahoma, Texas, and Iowa for the competitive expansion. Stampede’s headquarters is in Bridgeview, Illinois and was founded in 1995.

There will be more details on this project in the days to come.

Wolf Tally (dollars I mean)

The wolf issue is one that I will probably die working on no matter how far away my demise might be. As I hope you have heard, we are in a howl of a need for funds still or again.

The current crisis is two-folds. In April we got a bad decision on the case regarding the new 10J rule. The ruling went totally against us and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS). The court ruled that the agency must go back to the drawing board. There was also some of the ruling that sets a really bad precedent if it stands. The judge has never issued a final ruling, so the decision on whether or not to appeal doesn’t have to be made yet.

There are lots of pros and cons to an appeal. If we don’t the case will apply to all endangered species, not just wolves. If we do appeal it will be in the 9th Circuit Courts of Appeals based in San Francisco. Enough said?

The 9th has had more cases overturned than any other appeals court in the country. Rarely have their opinions been favorable to those working the land. However there have been some appointments made by this administration. If I cannot be optimistic, I couldn’t get up in the morning.

The other drawback is, of course, the cost. There is an outstanding balance with the Budd-Falen Law Offices from this case which has been going on since early 2015. And, there is a more pressing need before we cross the appeal bridge.

In May there was a status conference call between the judge and all the parties in the case. The judge asked the FWS how long it will take them to re-write the rule under the ruling. The answer was 24 to 29 months.

The judge was okay with that time frame. However, the radical environmental groups came up with a new ask. While they didn’t argue the length of time, they had a new wrinkle. They want lots of wolves released while the rule is under rewrite — starting in New Mexico this summer. The judge granted them leave to file a motion to that effect.

Initially their brief was due on June 20. They didn’t make that deadline and requested another 30 days to file it. As things sit now, their brief is due on July 20. Any briefs in opposition are now due on August 20.

In May the decision needed to be made whether or not to file a brief on this part of the case. The New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association (NMCGA) made an early decision to proceed. It took a little while longer for the Arizona/New Mexico Coalition of Counties (Coalition) to make a decision, but they have come along.

Then came the issue of raising the funds to continue and finish the balance. NMCGA had some members and supporters step up to the plate in a big way.

Past President and current Chairman of the Litigation Committee Alisa Ogden pledged $5,000 for a match dollar for dollar with anyone donating funds for the cause. Within days, CKP Drought Insurance stepped up with a pledge of an additional $5,000.

We were able to start a fund raising campaign offering a $2 match for every $1 donated. Folks have stepped up in a big way.

During Mid-Year, John and Megan Richards and their boys donated another $5,000. AND the Coalition began receiving more donations. Special thanks to the counties in New Mexico and Arizona who have generally funded the 10J suit. Cochise County, Arizona has been a real champion.

County cattle growers’ groups and soil conservation districts have opened their checkbooks as well. The Gila County Cattle Growers’ in Arizona donated a generous amount as did the Southern Quay Soil & Water Conservation District.

We now have the funds to retire the debt and pay for the upcoming brief on the release of more wolves in the immediate future. Perhaps we will end up with enough left over to think about an appeal. Thank you to every one for every single dollar that has been donated. We will have a full list of those folks in the August Stockman.

Additionally, the FWS released their wolf recovery plan, which we have talked a lot about, in late 2017. The enviros have already filed cases against that action. A determination hasn’t yet been made if an intervention in that case is worthwhile.

Among the news July news blitz was a press release from the radicals demanding that three packs of wolves be released in the Gila Wildness this summer.

This is hollow news for those in the Gila National Forest who are suffering wolf kills daily. One member found six dead calves in one spot — four of them were confirmed kills, two were determined to be “probable.”

Fall Board Meeting

Plans are in the works for the NMCGA Fall Board meeting slated for September 17 and 18 in Santa Rosa. Like all Board meetings, all NMCGA members are invited to this meeting and we hope you will join us.

The agenda will include board training, which we hope board members from any agricultural board will join us for. There are other educational presentations in the plans, including a presentation from the New Mexico Department of Game & Fish on their newly proposed elk license plan.

In the meantime please visit to view the proposal.

Cattlegrowers Foundation

There is big news coming out of the Cattlegrowers Foundation, Inc. and New Mexico State University. We can’t share even a peep. Hopefully by next month we will have lots of details and big plans for the future.

Don’t forget that the Foundation is celebrating its 20th year. Please consider making a $20, $200 or more donation to the Foundation as it charges forward with raising the next generation of ranchers. For more information on the Foundation, please visit

See you in September in Santa Rosa!         

Source: New Mexico Stockman, July 2018
Jun 05 2018

Counting my blessings…

by Caren Cowan, Executive Director,
New Mexico Cattle Grower’s Association
Read this article & more in New Mexico Stockman Magazine


uring the Legislature when the conversation turned to joint replacements, I missed another good opportunity to keep my mouth shut. Instead I said, “I plan on going to the grave with my original parts.”

Apparently my body decided to bring me down a peg.

Since the end of Legislature, I had been working slowly on my total gym. In mid April I thought I had pulled a muscle in my chest. I was having some pain, but gee whiz it was quite a ways from my heart and there was no blood. According to the Cowan philosophy of life, just keep plugging. It will get better. Besides, I was busy.

The pain got worse over the next several days, but it was manageable. I attended the Binational Meeting in Las Cruces where the wind blew like a son of a gun and it was cold the day we were outside. A little pain is no big deal.

I came home and a few days later we went to Florida for some training. Things got worse, but who wants to go to an ER or Urgent Care so far from home?

I was home for less than 24 hours and headed southwest to the Spur Ranch near Luna, New Mexico to prepare with several members for a wolf meeting called by Arizona Department of Agriculture Mark Killian. He was kind enough to include New Mexico in the meeting. He had initially requested a meeting with Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke, who delegated the event to U.S. Forest Service Region 3 Supervisor Cal Joyner and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Southwest Regional Director Amy Lueders. Both of those regions include both Arizona and New Mexico.

I was still having some pain, but no pain no gain, right? However, once the meeting started, the pain began getting worse… a lot worse. I ended up pacing the room during most of the meeting.

The meeting was at least the start of a success with both Regional Directors hearing stories they had never heard before. Ranchers in the room have and are losing $100,000s of thousands of dollars either in wolf losses or expenses directly related to the wolves, including transportation to move away from the wolves, additional leased land costs, wear and tear on the animals like decreases in weight, lower calving or lambing rates, not to mention the time and money spent in documenting wolf kills and working with the federal agencies in trying to get at least some compensation for their losses.

We were to continue to work with the Directors, including Ms. Lueders, Mr. Joyner, Mr. Killian and New Mexico’s Secretary of Agriculture Jeff Witte to see if we could accomplish something meaningful to ranchers. My hopes are dimming however, it has been well over a month and we haven’t heard a word from the feds.

I had a get well card from a friend in Arizona who said that I had set a whole new meaning for the illness felt after wolf meetings. I was the first he had heard of requiring surgery after such a meeting.

But I digress. Meanwhile back at the Spur Ranch my pain was getting worse. I skipped dinner and by the next morning it was clear that I wasn’t in any shape to attend Margie McKeen’s Ranch Days, which I have been promising to attend for years.

In addition to hosting New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association members, Tom and John Paterson were taking care of their father Alex, who was on his last legs. He wanted to spend some time at the ranch before the end. Tom and John hosted 35 people during the weeks that Alex was at the ranch.

April 24 was the day that Alex was going back to Silver City. Given that I wasn’t able to drive myself, it made sense to ride to Silver City and seek medical attention there.

The ER made a fairly quick diagnosis that it was gall bladder. They wanted to admit me and do surgery the next day. While I am certain that the medical facilities were more than adequate, I just couldn’t make myself stay in a hospital so far away from family.

Thank God for the Roland Sanchez Family. In about nothing flat they had me lined up with a surgeon in Albuquerque. Although I had plenty of folks ready to drive me back to Albuquerque, Randy found a flight that would get me there with less than an hour of airtime… and it only cost $59.

The flight was delayed so I was later getting away than scheduled, but we finally got in the air. It was a small plane and there was a doctor on the flight for his own reasons, so what could go wrong?

Wind shear in Albuquerque. Given the cockpit was open, the drama of the attempted landing was there in full view, complete with flashing danger lights. At that point I was like that southern comedian who told the story about being caught in a tree with a bear or a lion (I cannot remember which). He yelled to his friend, “Just shoot up in here… somebody will get some relief.” I just wanted on the ground one way or another.

After a couple more laps over Albuquerque we made it to the ground. I had an appointment the next morning with Dr. Joseph Lopez, a renowned New Mexico transplant surgeon who hails from Las Vegas, New Mexico. There wasn’t a surgery opening until the next morning so home we went for another 24 hours.

I knew going in that they might not be able to take the gall bladder out laparoscopically, but I wasn’t fully prepared for how long the recovery process might be for a full surgery. The surgery took a while and once inside, the gall bladder had ruptured and was gangrenous. Things went well but the next day things were not quite as they should be. There began to be talk of an ectopic procedure to address what appeared to be the problem. As you might imagine, I wasn’t wild about that thought… I wanted to go home.

The following Tuesday morning the doctors decided that there was a blockage in the bile duct and off we went again. The procedure was ectopic. They found a gall stone blocking the duct. They removed that and put in a stint. That stint will have to come out in another procedure scheduled for late June. Hopefully that will be a day thing.

Early the next morning the doctors came in and said I could go home! And, have food for the first time in over a week. I have another couple of weeks of recovery, but I am getting stronger every day and hope to be at the Mid-Year Convention in Ruidoso. I may have a shock collar on so Michelle can sit me down when she thinks I might be over doing…

Now for the thanks!

I don’t even know where to begin with the thanks for all the prayers I have received since this odyssey began. Thank you for the cards and flowers, the texts and emails, calls, a visit or two and the space to heal. My care team has been Johnnie on the spot for weeks. There will never be enough thanks for Randy, Marguerite, Connie and Michelle. There have been lots of sleepless nights for them and waiting on me hand and foot can’t be all that much fun. Although ordering me around may have it’s jollies.

The New Mexico Stockman staff in the form of Kristy Hinds, Carol Pendleton, Marguerite and even Publication Printers went well beyond over and above in getting out the May issue while I was in a drug-induced haze. I didn’t get a column done, but clearly we didn’t need it.

I cannot fail to leave out Tom and John Paterson. Things could have been a lot worse had it not been for them. I can’t even imagine the problems associated with a house guest who falls serious ill. They took it in stride and provided the best of care. Tom even drove my brand new convertible back to Albuquerque after I flew back. I am sorry I didn’t show him how to put the top down!

Thank you to all!

Just when you thought…   

As a resident of Albuquerque for more than 20 years, I have always hated to hear folks talk about how bad Albuquerque is. Yes, there is more crime than there should be and the police department gets a bad rap, which may or may not be deserved depending on the instance. But I support the men and women in blue… now changed to at least most of the time.

You all know about my beloved dogs Abby (now 13 years old and even more protective of me), and Bullet (our half Minnie Aussie, half Minnie Corgi). One of the highlights of their day is getting to ride with us in the truck. As I have recovered, we have taken a few short trips to the store. It seems to be easier to get the steps in while shopping.

On a trip to Bed, Bath & Beyond, one of my first trips, the day was overcast and the heat wasn’t bad. There was a breeze blowing and with all the windows more than half way down, the dogs were quite comfortable.

After I gave out, which wasn’t very long, I went back to the truck and Randy went to get me something to drink. You can imagine my surprise when the flashing lights of a cop car pulled up, blocking the truck. About that time a woman walked by my door and said, “She wasn’t in there when I called you.”

The cop came to the other door with a flashlight in broad daylight, drawing the ire of both dogs, and told me to get out of the truck. I walked behind the truck and he began lecturing in a not too kind of a tone about the Albuquerque law that requires that no dogs be left alone in a vehicle no matter what the temperature.

I explained to him that I had been in the store for a few minutes but was back in the truck because I wasn’t feeling well. He then told me that ignorance of the law was no defense and started the lecture all over again. In the meantime a dog catcher arrived on the scene.

During the second lecture the cop did add that, oh by the way, you cannot leave children in the car either. I made the mistake of telling him that I didn’t have children. That really made him mad. He then explained that he was offering me a courtesy and started the lecture a third time.

I guess I must have gotten pale somewhere during the process because finally the cop asked if I was in need of medical assistance. What a thoughtful guy. I didn’t need medical assistance if I could only sit down.

I haven’t had the energy to look up the ordinance supporting this cop, but I don’t have a lot of doubt that it isn’t there. What I did think about then was the fact that there had been two shootings, one deadly in Albuquerque late the night before and we saw two auto accidents with no police on the scene while we were out that day.

Aside from watching the evening news, you don’t have to search very far to find that Albuquerque is the worst in the nation for property crime according to a report issued in September 2017. The report goes on to say that “Much of New Mexico’s reported crime is driven by Albuquerque, the state’s largest city. About 27 percent of the population calls Albuquerque home, but the city was home to 42.7 percent of violent crime and 47 percent of property crime in New Mexico.

More than 65 percent of stolen vehicles were reported stolen from Albuquerque in 2016, which had an increase of 49 percent over 2015.

A January 2018 news story in the Albuquerque Journal stated “For the third year in a row, the city has seen a significant increase in the number of killings, ending 2017 with a preliminary total of 75 – the highest number of homicides in recent history.”

Yet the police department spends it’s time chasing down terrible criminals like me, who love their dogs enough to keep them by our sides.

Get real people! And, oh by the way, since the cop didn’t find the dogs by themselves, I don’t think he could have seized them anyway.

I hope to see you at convention and I promise not to be so self-centered next month.      

Source: New Mexico Stockman, June 2018
Apr 01 2018

Cowboy-isms … & Sexual Harassment

by Caren Cowan, Executive Director,
New Mexico Cattle Grower’s Association
Read this article & more in New Mexico Stockman Magazine

In these days of hyper sensitivity about real or perceived sexual harassment, there are things that cowboys need to be aware of. Not everyone appreciates or understands the statement that “someone has been rode hard and put up wet” the way you do.

A little web research indicates that the problem is that this cowboy-ism was hijacked in the 1970s that put a whole different connotation to the statement. I need not do much more explanation.

It seems that there are a lot of terms we in the West use with great regularity that we might reconsider how they sound to an urbanite or a millennial. Cowboys have a way of looking at things a little differently than the rest of the world. Their wisdom is simpler and more down to Earth, one website says.

  • If you get thrown from a horse, you have to get up and get back on, unless you landed on a cactus; then you have to roll around and scream in pain.
  • A cowboy is a man with guts and a horse.
  • If you climb in the saddle, be ready for the ride.
  • The horse stopped with a jerk – and the jerk fell off!
  • When in doubt, let your horse do the thinkin’.
  • Speak your mind, but ride a fast horse.
  • Don’t squat with your spurs on.
  • Don’t let your yearnings get ahead of your earnings.
  • Don’t dig for water under the outhouse.
  • Don’t go in if you don’t know the way out.
  • Don’t mess with something that ain’t bothering you.
  • Never drive black cattle in the dark.
  • Never approach a bull from the front, a horse from the rear or a fool from any direction.
  • Never miss a good chance to shut up.
  • Never slap a man who’s chewing tobacco.
  • If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging.
  • It’s better to keep your mouth shut and look stupid than open it and prove it.
  • When you give a lesson in meanness to a critter or a person, don’t be surprised if they learn their lesson.

Nuff said.

Humane Society of the United States taking hard fall

Things just keep getting worse following the sexual harassment scandal at the Humane Society of the United States. Following the resignations of CEO Wayne Pacelle and Vice President Paul Shapiro earlier this year, the “charity” has now lost its accreditation from the Better Business Bureau’s charity-accreditation arm, the Wise Giving Alliance (BBB WGA), according to Humane Watch. This news comes after Charity Navigator downgraded its rating of HSUS to just 2 stars out of 4—including a lowly 1 star for financial metrics, indicative of financial waste at the nonprofit. Animal Charity Evaluators, which recommends animal-rights nonprofits, has formally rescinded their 2016 Standout recommendation of The Humane Society of the United States’ Farm Animal Protection Campaign.

While the BBB hasn’t issued a statement for the removal of HSUS’s accreditation, it’s safe to assume the HSUS board’s initial decision to retain Pacelle after its internal investigation turned up several credible accusations of sexual harassment was the impetus for BBB WGA to initiate a review.

HSUS’s accreditation drop should serve as a wakeup call to charity donors, according to Arizonan Mike Russell writing to KTARNEWS. Charities might not be what they seem.

To be clear HSUS is NOT the Humane Society of Arizona or any other state. HSUS pulls in $150,000,000 per year in part because they know that donors are giving, thinking that the money will funnel down to the state level. This is not the case. HSUS knows this is the intent of their donors yet lends very little help to the struggling animals.

HSUS is working in Arizona, gathering signatures for a ballot initiative that will leave animal population control up to the voters. It will also take that responsibility out of the hands of the trained biologists that are effectively managing healthy populations of more animal species than any other non-coastal state in the nation. They are masked sweetly as “Arizonans for Wildlife.”

It’s actually the HSUS operating under a different name. Once again, not what they seem. But the title “Arizonans for Wildlife” sounds like something that everyone in Arizona can get behind and HSUS knows that. They also know that rallying cries like “Arizonans for Wildlife” works almost as well as tugging at your heartstrings.

Heartstrings are tied to your purse strings. Getting to those heartstrings costs a lot of money. Producing ads for radio or TV is not cheap. The airtime on both mediums is even more expensive. But those ads that we see of scared, cold, and hungry puppy dogs work and nonprofits like HSUS know this. They will spend millions of donated dollars to draw in more donated dollars.

Charity Watch reports that HSUS spends $22 to raise $100. That’s a big chunk that could actually be used by local Humane Societies to save the scared, cold, and hungry puppy dogs that HSUS uses to tug at your purse string connected heartstrings.

If you have done some homework before giving to a charity…good for you. You are in a very small group of philanthropists. If you have not, don’t worry…you are not alone.

Doing the RIGHT homework means going the extra mile before donating. If you are thinking about heading over to the Better Business Bureau to check out your charitable target…you might want to read about the BBB coming under fire for receiving thousands from the charities that it rates.

Keep in mind that the BBB is a business and consumers are the product. The rated businesses are the BBB’s clients. Those stickers and web banners are bought by businesses that are paying membership to the BBB. Sites like Charity Navigator and Charity Watch seem to have their act together.

New Plan to Deal With Coyotes

But not in New Mexico or even the West. North Carolina is dealing with a growing coyote population across that state. The growth is most noticed in urban areas where one neighborhood has lost 22 cats and a Yorkie in a short period of time. Calls for coyote control are peaking because a coyote has attacked a 9-year-old girl.

Officials with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission say coyote attacks on people and pets are pretty rare – especially when the attacks are unprovoked. But they do admit they’re seeing a spike across the state.

The North Carolina General Assembly asked the wildlife commission to look at the impacts and threats coyotes have on people, pets, livestock and other wildlife. A new North Carolina report outlines ways to manage the coyote population. It focuses on educating people about the animals, ways to avoid coyote encounters altogether and handle them properly, and encourages legal hunting and trapping. Some people don’t think these measures go far enough.

“Instead of spending all those months coming up with ‘trying to educate us,’” said one resident. “We know all of that. They need to get a plan in place to get rid of the coyotes. They need to step up to the bat.”

She thinks coyotes are more than just a nuisance; she called them downright dangerous.

“They need to be dead, because they’re just going to multiply and multiply, and I hate to say that about an animal, but it’s an animal that’s attacking a child now,” she said.

Perhaps with the growing incidence of coyote attacks people can come to the conclusion that predator management is something that must be done routinely.

The Bitter Pill

On March 23, 2018 the New Mexico Legislative Finance Committee was presented with a report entitled “Program Evaluation: The Modern-Day Role of the Agriculture Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service.” The report is #18-02 and can be found on the Legislature’s website under the Legislative Finance Committee, which is an interim committee. We will soon put it up on the New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association website along with some additional, clarifying information.

I encourage everyone to find and read the document, then consider the consequences of such negative view of one of New Mexico’s major industries and the lifeblood of the vast majority of the lands in this state. It probably isn’t too much to say that this report is an indictment of agriculture and the land grant university we depend on.

Ostensibly the report was requested because New Mexico State University’s Agricultural Experiment Stations (AES) and Cooperative Extension Service (CES) were not spending all of the funds available to them annually. In the case of AES, for Fiscal Year (FY) 2017, the entity spent about $5 million less than budgeted by the state. CES spent about the same amount less as well.

One who is charged with taking care of themselves and perhaps others might think that being thrifty or frugal might be an excellent quality. No so with government, the more you spend the more you get. That is a really scary thought when you consider that government spending is one of New Mexico’s top economic drivers.

But I digress. The Finance Committee wanted an in-depth review of the two areas of NMSU’s College of Agricultural, Consumer & Environmental Sciences (ACES) to determine if it could, in dry budget years sweep more funds from them. NMSU suffered some pretty severe sweeps since 2008.

Red lights started flashing on page two, where there is recommendation that AES and CES “need to be more responsive to the changing needs of all of New Mexicans, not just their traditional stakeholder communities.”

On page 23, the report notes “extension still focuses a significant portion of its financial resources and human capital on agriculture… despite agriculture only accounting for 2.6 percent of the total state employment and 1.3 percent of gross state product.” I don’t think those numbers are quite correct and will continue reaching, but even if agriculture only accounted for 2.5 percent of state employment, I think it is a pretty safe bet that 100 percent of the state’s people count on agriculture three or more times a day.

Not to be completely negative, on page 9 notes that AES and CES payments for “institutional support” to NMSU have grown approximately 500 percent between FY 2008 and FY 2017. This has been an issue that the New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association (NMCGA) and others have complained bitterly and worked endlessly to stop. “Intuitional support” are the funds that the University skims from the various colleges and departments for using buildings, telephones and so on. As budgets were cut over the last nine years the intuitional charges have increased.

Page 7 waves a huge red flag where it says “Notably absent from … top funders are groups representing dairy and beef producers ad forage crop producers.” Further into the report there is a recommendation to eliminate support for these groups. Page 26 says CES should “consider conducting less agricultural research on established agricultural industries (e.g. forge crops, beef cattle) if associated commodity groups are unable to contribute meaningful monetary support for said research, and instead, focus its research agenda on nascent and emerging industries.” (Yes, I had to look up nascent.)

It was also interesting to learn that “home economics and household management are now not necessarily a core skill for managing a household.” (Page 22) Hello! How long would it take to do a Google search on “Foodies?” You know, the groups that are all about local foods, new recipes and refocusing on the home.

While assessing the need for Agricultural Experiments Stations is already underway, the report recommends that the College of ACES consider eliminating one-third of those stations to bring itself into line with peer organizations – like North Dakota State University, Oklahoma State University, Auburn University, Mississippi State University, Montana State University, University of Wyoming and Utah State University.

The report questioned the need for a new feed mill on campus where there is one in Clayton that needs repair. Sure, let’s figure out how much that feed will cost factoring in transportation costs.

But the topper on page 18 is the recommendation that CES administrators should conduct a feasibility study on potential fees for 4-H and other programing and develop clear guidelines for county offices on charging fees.”

I freely admit that I am reviewing this report through a very negative lens. Hopefully there is some value to all the work that has gone in to it. But I don’t see what can offset the issues I have mentioned.

Thankfully, the Legislative Finance Committee was filled with representatives and senators who do understand and appreciate the value of agriculture to New Mexico and the value of our land grant university. Most of them politely, yet firming offered their support to agriculture and NMSU.      

Source: New Mexico Stockman, April 2018

Multimin Health