Public Lands in the West

The best “rundown” on the public lands situation in the West can be found here: jtl, 419

Land and Livestock International, Inc. is in a position to assist the buyer in purchasing ranches like these anywhere in the Western United States and Northern Mexico. Pre – purchase services include help with due diligence, estimates of carrying capacity and potential for improvement, cash flow projections, etc. Post purchase services include everything from part time consulting to complete turn-key management.

Contact us at info@landandlivestockinternational.com or through our web site at www.landandlivestockinternational.com

Dripping Springs
Mule Creek, Grant County, New Mexico

The Dripping Springs Ranch is a highly improved working cattle ranch in a very desirable part of southwest New Mexico. Access to the Ranch from State Route 78 is excellent, and it is an easy drive to either Silver City, N. or Safford, Az. 232 deeded acres, 13,000 USFS acres, 150 AU. $2,500,000

Walking L Ranch
Wickenburg, Yavapai County

The Walking L Ranch’s 52+ square miles adjoin Wickenburg from the Hassayamapa River into the Wickenburg Mountains. The ranch originally consisted of the 10X Ranch on the south end and the Rincon Ranch on the north end.  The old Rincon Dude Ranch was added to the ranch’s Headquarters by the current owner. The ranch’s land tenure consists of deeded land, State and BLM Grazing Leases.  Topography is rolling to steep with elevation’s ranging from 2,100’ along the river to over 2,700’ on San Domingo Peak.  The ranch borders US 60 on the south side of Wickenburg.  The ranch’s deeded land is in seven non-contiguous parcels throughout the ranch.  The headquarters consists of 110.88 deeded acres on Rincon Road and the Hassayampa River with approximately 30 acres irrigated.  Another headquarters for the 10X is on the state lease. $5,000,000

Dos S Inholding
Fountain Hills, Maricopa County

The Dos S is a 22.78 acre private inholding surrounded by Tonto National Forest on Sycamore Creek.  It is located just off the Beeline Highway behind a locked gate 20 miles from the Shea Boulevard & Highway 87 intersection at Fountain Hills.  Payson is 40 miles to the north. $1,025,100

Posted in Public Lands, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Sustainability of the firm

What went wrong? To many business people and to the general public, sustainability is the buzzword for thrift, resourcefulness, and long-term planning. Aren’t such qualities good for businesses and within families? But sustainability has grown into an ideology marked by dark skepticism toward human ingenuity and progress.
A Handbook for Ranch ManagersIt is what I have called for years, Crypto Commie Jargon — Code Talk. After all, who in his right mind could be opposed to “sustainability?” But, when used among the enviro-wackos, the word means “we will take their property whether they like it or not.” — jtl, 419

Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference ManualIn recent years, aggressive environmentalists in government and the non-profit sectors have successfully pressured many firms to endorse positions that make no sense for their shareholders, employees or the communities in which they operate. Few businesses would publicly endorse central planning or back restrictions on economic growth. But the rational fear of demonization, boycotts or even legal action by government or advocacy groups has encouraged many businesses to seek compromise by endorsing “sustainability.”

Environmental & Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian ViewWhat went wrong? To many business people and to the general public, sustainability is the buzzword for thrift, resourcefulness, and long-term planning. Aren’t such qualities good for businesses and within families? But sustainability has grown into an ideology marked by dark skepticism toward human ingenuity and progress.

The roots of “sustainability” go back to a 1987 UN report, Our Common The Betrayed: On Warriors, Cowboys and Other MisfitsFuture, in which the bureaucrats endorsed the idea that economics is a dismal zero-sum game. Sustainability presumes that using resources now necessarily means having fewer to draw upon in the future, a very dubious assertion. As sustainability became a leading movement in American culture, firms rushed to adopt and brand their “sustainable” business practices. That’s a rational response to their incentive to showcase risk management skills. But much of what goes on in the name of “sustainability” is economically unwise or wasteful.

Combat Shooter's Handbook  A Google search for “corporate sustainability report” will generate roughly 110,000 hits. Sustainability has the allure of vagueness. That frees companies to define the word in different ways. Rachelle Peterson and her colleagues at the National Association of Scholars, which see, have shown light into dark corners of the sustainability movement. Many businesses note that sustainability rhymes with “corporate social responsibility.” Unfortunately, this tune never satisfies activists and is thus discordant.

Reconnaissance Marine MCI 03.32f: Marine Corps Institute As of this writing in January, 2017, the federal government and many states are transitioning to new political leadership. Should the business community take this opportunity to reconsider its stance on sustainability? Is it time to unwind corporate policies executives justifiably felt they had to take in order to avoid persecution by bureaucrats, the plaintiff bar or aggressive advocates?

The Essence of Liberty: Volume I: Liberty and History: The Rise and Fall of the Noble Experiment with Constitutionally Limited Government (Liberty and ... Limited Government) (Volume 1)  The Essence of Liberty: Volume II: The Economics of Liberty (Volume 2) The Essence of Liberty: Volume III: A Universal Philosophy of Political Economy (Liberty: A Universal Political Ethic) (Volume 3)  We asked that of a senior staffer at a leading energy supplier. The firm initiated programs, entered negotiated settlements and joined organizations, the participation in which didn’t pass the smell test. They did so to get along by going along. To summarize his answer, “We exercise discipline so projects flagged as sustainable really deliver operational benefits. There’s continuous pressure to go into areas where [that breaks down.]” Even that discipline couldn’t keep them free from high-profile experiments on air emissions and related technologies. Some were priced in nine digits but the stakeholders’ benefits vanished. At least one negotiated settlement was worded so an environmental regulator and its activist backers could proclaim they inflicted punishment although the “remediation” was previously initiated as part of evolving operational standards.

ExxonMobil’s experience is instructive. During the late 1990s, at the time of the Kyoto Protocol, Lee Raymond, then Exxon’s CEO, took a strong and principled stance on climate change. He made clear and definitive public statements that the company was opposed to the too speculative climate agenda some parties advocated.  The result was the demonization of the corporation by climate activists. Rex Tillerson, the former CEO of ExxonMobil and US Secretary of State-designate, has sought to defuse the controversy by supporting carbon taxes and advertising broadly about ExxonMobil’s research on carbon capture and other technologies.  It’s not at all clear that this approach is helping shareholders, either, because the firm remains a target of fierce criticism and of litigation.

Regulatory and non-profit environmentalists cannot be kept at bay by companies explaining that their operations are clean, safe and energy-efficient, so their businesses are therefore “sustainable.” Caterpillar, for example, issues a “Sustainability Report” every year, while selling $8 billion annually in mining equipment. Komatsu, another major mining equipment manufacturer, is an active member of the World Business Council on Sustainable Development. Joy Global, also a major US firm in that sector, touts its “sustainability” by noting the low carbon emissions of its factories. A significant share of these companies’ well-earned profits comes from sales to the coal-mining industry, which is by far the largest carbon dioxide emitter in the world. Climate activists don’t want the coal industry made more efficient, they want it gone.

How can a firm keep its license to operate, meeting the expectations of both the broad public and of financial stakeholders? By accepting a few facts about today’s American and global society then pulling back the curtains on the sustainability charade.

Don’t Appease: Companies have a natural inclination to try to avoid confrontations with activists. However, a balanced approach better serves companies. That allows firms to respond to appropriate public concerns about safety and the environment. But balance keeps executives from crossing the line into acquiescing to alien viewpoints, appeasing critics or making commitments that they don’t believe or have no intention of meeting.  For years, oil companies Shell and BP publicly supported the disturbing climate agenda and tried desperately to portray themselves as “green.” BP’s “Beyond Petroleum” campaign was perhaps the most embarrassing example of this failed effort. Companies need to recognize that nothing they do will ever get the activists off their backs, since many of those folks simply don’t like private enterprise, shareholder ownership of energy resources or free markets. Appeasement simply invites the next attack.

Scale Hurts: The public doesn’t particularly like big companies, particularly oil companies and utilities. Ordinary people don’t really care what businesses think about public policy issues.  Consumers want to know that companies can do their jobs responsibly without cheating the public or blowing things up.

Confirm Reality: Some public affairs staffers try or hope to redefine sustainability in a harmless way but the reverse is occurring. The term has increasingly come to mean support for the alarming climate agenda and the forced phase-out of fossil fuels through government policy, litigation and divestment pressure. Pretending otherwise is a losing proposition.

Keep Better Company: Appeasing activists is a short-sighted play. Appeals to financial analysts and journalists showcasing the fundamentals of the firm will bring the right sort of investors while reassuring customers and employees. Too many businesses join initiatives such as Ceres, the Paris Pledge for Action and similar organizations in order to get shelter from activists’ downpours. When a business asserts that it has joined one of these clubs, it’s hoping it can hold up an umbrella, at least for a time. Sooner or later, this approach springs leaks. Better to stick to the fundamentals.

Maintain Charity Logic: Basic corporate philanthropy supports brand value and serves shareholders’ interests. Focus on clearly beneficial, local and timeless activities like education, social service, community support and health care.  Few companies are credibly criticized for doing these things. Advertising a company’s strong safety record is also generally above reproach.

Assert Standing: Companies have a right and responsibility to lobby government officials on legislation and regulations that affect their businesses but need to do so in an open and transparent fashion. That avoids any hint of cronyism or rent-seeking. Companies also need to fight back hard against legal persecution, particularly from states’ attorneys general.  Peabody Coal of St Louis signed an accord with Eric Schneiderman in New York. They are now in bankruptcy.  ExxonMobil has mounted a strong counter attack against the cases various attorneys general threaten. The oil company appears to have the stronger case but the process is far from over.

We hope that new leaders in Washington and the state capitals inspire firms to rethink their approaches to these problems. The first step shuts down appeasing the sustainability crowd. We’re better off if companies focus on the basics and enhance shareholder value. That beats the alternatives while providing economic resources people can use for all the environmental investments that they may care to make personally.

FOLLOW FLYOVER PRESS ON FACEBOOK

Check out our WebSite

Check out our e-Store

Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference ManualPlanned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual. This is the ideal squeal to A Handbook for Ranch Managers.  Although the ecological principles remain the same, what was originally known as “The Savory Grazing Method” now answers to a multitude of different names: ranching for profit, holistic management, managed grazing, mob grazing, management intensive grazing, etc. Land & Livestock International, Inc. uses “Restoration Grazing” under its “Managing the Ranch as a Business” program.” No mater what you call it, this summary and synopsis will guide you step by step through the process and teach you how to use it as it was originally intended. No more excuses for failing to complete your grazing plans.

Posted in sustainability, Uncategorized | Tagged | 1 Comment

My Land is Your land

We also see a public and a federal bureaucracy that projects an aggressive attitude that “your land is our land”, and they have the power and the intention of claiming those rights as if they were distinct rights in a vacuum.

A Handbook for Ranch ManagersMurray N. Rothbard, was the father of what some call Radical Libertarianism or Anarcho-Capitalism. “(His) unique contribution was the rediscovery of property and property rights as the common foundation of both economics and political philosophy, and the systematic reconstruction and conceptual integration of modern, marginalist economics and natural-law political philosophy into a unified moral science: libertarianism.” — Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Indeed, private property is the foundation of liberty and prosperity. Without it, you will have neither. — jtl, 419

A Budget

My Land is Your land

True Rights

By Stephen L. Wilmeth via The Westerner

 Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual BJ and I were coming over the hill at “Homestead” when we saw them.

There were two men coming through the corral and headed on up the slope to the old rock house. We slowed to a stop as we reached them.

“Good morning,” was our greeting. “What are you fellows up to this morning?”

Environmental & Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian View “We are going up to take pictures of the old rock house,” was the short terse answer of the spokesperson.

Viewing it in hindsight, the back and forth discussion at that point was somewhat akin to the signaling of bulls arriving at a waterhole. The approaching bulls will always respond to the bull that has arrived first and tries to control or deny entry. Screaming back and forth and pawing the ground in defensive defiance are the visible signals. Each will demonstrate his power until one prevails and the pecking order is reestablished.

Reconnaissance Marine MCI 03.32f: Marine Corps Institute “I am sure you fellows do know this is private land,” was the jab when courtesy on the part of the visitors was not forthcoming.

“We come here all the time when we have company visiting us,” the spokesperson responded as if he held the right to do what he wanted to do on this “public property”.

The Betrayed: On Warriors, Cowboys and Other Misfits   A confrontation was definitely in the offing until the real “visitor” with the camera stepped in.

“I was just so interested in all this and I had no idea this was private land,” was his defusing remark. “I surely understand and didn’t intend to step out of line at all.”

Combat Shooter's HandbookFrom that point, he became the featured intermediary of good will. His buddy had to fall into the conversational change.

The aggressive buddy stirred the water yet another time, though, when he started cussing the State Land Commissioner for raising the cost of “his right to hunt” on these lands.

The Essence of Liberty: Volume I: Liberty and History: The Rise and Fall of the Noble Experiment with Constitutionally Limited Government (Liberty and ... Limited Government) (Volume 1) “How much do you actually pay to hunt on state lands?” he was then asked. He had no idea other than the fact the land commissioner had the gall to raise his access fees.

“You pay a little less than two cents per acre for that right,” was the answer. “At the same time, we pay more than 100 cents for one of those acres for the right to run cattle and that doesn’t count the water, the salt, the mineral, and any degree of protection we provide from predators for the animals you hunt.”

The Essence of Liberty: Volume II: The Economics of Liberty (Volume 2)   The fact that we also rotate our cattle in a formal partnership agreement with the federal government to leave the majority of the ranch cattle free during critical mating, nesting, and fawning seasons to further enhance his hunting opportunities was not mentioned. It was clear he didn’t care nor would he have comprehended what that actually implied. That wasn’t the case of his friend.

“I had no idea of those facts,” the intermediary said.

The Essence of Liberty: Volume III: A Universal Philosophy of Political Economy (Liberty: A Universal Political Ethic) (Volume 3)We then did another rough calculation which suggested our total annual investment (excluding mortgages) ran another 263 cents per acre or a total of 363 cents per acre for the right to run our cattle compared to the hunters investment of about two cents. The mediator was stunned.

“When I come again I will call you when I come to visit if that is alright,” he proclaimed.

“You, Sir, will be welcome,” was the pointed, singular response.

Ranking

The Heritage Foundation has come out with their updated list of countries or city states by measure of economic freedoms. Hong Kong is rated as the number one place in the world for key economic freedoms. Chile fills the last slot in the top ten rankings. Our nation, the United States of America, does not fill any of the other top ten slots.

Not only are we down the list we have the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Why that wasn’t even a subject on the array of talking points by the 2008 defeated party remains a mystery. Even lip service would have accounted for something.

It isn’t just the liberals, though, that don’t get it.

The Republicans are displaying the characteristics that southern intellectuals tried to define after the Civil War. There was rhetoric from the Grand Old Party, but, when the nut cutting actually took place, there was an eerie acquiescence that suggested there was either more bark than bite or their mental capacities weren’t as expansive as their balderdash.

It has become very clear neither party has much respect or understanding of our constitutional personal liberties. On its own recognizance, Congress is incapable of fixing the spending orgy which it created and now self perpetuates. They are so far into fiscal debauchery that two thirds of the budget is fixed and defined by legislation and extra legal regulatory burden as mandatory.

Medicaid, Social Security; food assistance, unemployment, and Medicare are all funded by taking wealth from fewer and fewer producers and giving it to an institutional class of permanent consumers. I heard O’Reilly the other night suggest that the phrasing from the Preamble of the Constitution, “promote the general welfare” gives Congress the right to create such monstrosities.

That is nonsense. There are no delegated congressional powers inherent in the preamble. In fact, the suggestion of “We the People” in the opening phrasing reminds the diligent reader who the entire work was intended. No, this government has instituted the legalized theft of personal wealth in order to guarantee an entire class of people certain rights as if those rights exist in a vacuum.

When there is no fair share commitment on the part of every citizen in every phase of government, true rights don’t exist. That is wrong and it is every bit as bad as murder, rape, and lying. It is theft, and that is a violation of personal and private property rights.

The Budget

The new administration’s budget has been released.

There are many welcome features especially the recommended cuts to agencies. There will be major pushback from the congress when those reductions affect their districts, but at least we have an executive officer who understands that deficit spending has to stop.

The agency that most affects the world I live in, Interior, is being slated for a 12% reduction. That trails its sister agency, USDA, by 9% but it remains to be seen how the BLM and the Forest Service, respectively, will be affected. Since the BLM is our major landlord the expected cuts will have impact on our operation, but I view that as positive. Positive in the aspect that the new Secretary Zinke suggests he will pursue “leverage(d) private investment in federal lands” for the anticipated intensions of “creating innovative streams of revenue”.

If that means simply raising our fees for the purpose of enhancing those revenues, we will further lose the battle we continue to fight trying to stay in business. Through its management, Secretary Zinke’s land management agencies have overseen a continued attrition rate of federal lands ranchers of 1% per year. Our numbers are down a whopping 65% since the data has been summarized. Our cattle numbers are down 46% and it isn’t as if gross protein supplies produced by cattle are down. They aren’t. They have simply been made up in private land holding operations where innovation can not be fully suppressed, parallel enterprises can be installed, and revenue growth can support capitalization without reliance and or approval by the federal landlord.

The BLM and the Forest Service must begin to act like state and private land management where innovation is actually encouraged rather than quashed. Stakeholders with private property at risk must be elevated into the decision making process on the merit and basis of actual partnerships rather than a relationship that must be equated in historical terms to sharecropping with all of the baggage and suppression that it carries. Management plans must be structured to actually enhance production rather than holding it steady or reducing it by opening driving it by environmental and special interest restrictions.

But, that remains to be seen, doesn’t it?

I am with fellow federal lands ranchers all the time. The mood and the outlook must be gauged as subtly hopeful, but the optimism is held largely in guarded reserve. The data demonstrates we have lived in an atmosphere of stepwise suppression and elimination too long. We live in too many counties that have only 10 to 20% private land holdings that must carry the load for all vital infrastructure investments, but we still see federal funds intended to further reduce those holdings and tax base they inherently carry.

We also see a public and a federal bureaucracy that projects an aggressive attitude that “your land is our land”, and they have the power and the intention of claiming those rights as if they were distinct rights in a vacuum.

Stephen L. Wilmeth is a rancher from southern New Mexico. “I’d like to thank that unknown visitor. You, Sir, were reasonable which gives me hope.”

 

FOLLOW FLYOVER PRESS ON FACEBOOK

Check out our WebSite

Check out our e-Store

A Handbook for Ranch ManagersA Handbook for Ranch Managers.  In keeping with the “holistic” idea that the land, the livestock, the people and the money should be viewed as a single integrated whole: Part I deals with the management of the natural resources. Part II covers livestock production and Part III deals with the people and the money. Not only would this book make an excellent basic text for a university program in Ranch Management, no professional ranch manager’s reference bookshelf should be without it. It is a comprehensive reference manual for managing the working ranch. The information in the appendices and extensive bibliography alone is worth the price of the book.

You might also be interested in the supplement to this Handbook: Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual.

Posted in Private Property and Free Markets, Uncategorized | Tagged , | 1 Comment

Rodeo Legend Passes: Harry Vold the “Duke of the Chutes” 1924-2017

Indeed he was a legend in his time. — jtl, 419
Rodeo Legend Passes: Harry Vold the

Rodeo stock contractor, the “Duke of the Chutes” Harry Vold has passed away at the age of 93.We are saddened to hear of the passing of rodeo legend Harry Vold. Harry was born in 1924 outside of Ponoka, Alberta. Vold is one of only two stock contractors to provide rodeo stock to all National Finals Rodeos since it’s inception.

More news will follow in regards to the celebration of life.

To learn more about Harry Vold visit: http://www.harryvoldrodeo.com/

A Handbook for Ranch ManagersLand & Livestock International, Inc is offering a “Free” week-long ranch management-planned grazing seminar-workshop.

What follows is a business model we have been following that has worked very well for us and for our clientele.

Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference ManualWe are seeking individual ranchers to sponsor/host workshops. The sponsor/host (and spouse or key employee) get the training at his/her ranch for no charge. This is an extra special benefit to the host as his/her land will be used for the “lab” work and hands on demonstrations. This provides a great start in the implementation of his/her program.

Environmental & Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian ViewIn return, he/she takes care of the logistics involved in putting on the event. This includes arranging for the venue, booking a block of rooms for lodging, arranging for meals (if any), putting out the advertising, setting and collecting the fees and so forth.

We are then responsible for putting on the workshop.

During the interim we will each keep track of our out of pocket costs (from our end, that will be mostly travel and lodging). Then, when it is all over, we both are reimbursed our out of pocket costs and split any funds remaining 50:50.

If this sounds like something you might be interested in, click here and let us know. If the link won’t work for you, copy and paste info@landandlivestockinternational.com into your browser.

Posted in Rodeo, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Did Obama Spy on Trump?

This has been one of the silliest arguments yet.

The focus has been on the inside–who is responsible (government functionaries) or government entities (CIA, FBI, etc) or legal requirements (FISA) etc. When any moron can go down to his/her local private “Home Security Firm” and hire it to plant surveillance devices just about anywhere. Hell, it might have been the maid at Trump Towers that planted all the bugs.

Also, there has been no mention of what the CIA calls “plausible deniability.” Are they stupid or is it that they think we are? — jtl, 419

Source: Did Obama Spy on Trump?

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Is Crop Insurance on the Budgetary Chopping Block?

 The letters, signed by more than 60 agriculture groups, say true crop insurance spending under the 2014 farm bill will come in $20 billion under budget.

Environmental & Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian View  American Agriculture–the largest welfare recipient on earth. And now even the cowboys are beginning to join in on the largess in the form of “drought insurance” — nothing but a welfare-redistribution of stolen money.

Is Crop Insurance on the Budgetary Chopping Block?
More than 60 agriculture groups sent letters to lawmakers hoping federal crop insurance will survive budget negotiations.
© Farm Journal

A Handbook for Ranch Managers As the White House wrestles with balancing a bipartisan budget able to be passed by both the House and Senate, some fear cuts to USDA programs will be a high priority. One of the programs in question is the federal crop insurance program.

Crop insurance, which falls under the umbrella of farm bill spending, has cost the government billions of dollars since its introduction in 1938. Earlier this week, letters were sent to the House and Senate Budget Committees, House and Senate Appropriations Committees, USDA Secretary-Designate Sonny Perdue, and Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney explaining the need for a federal program. They urged the inclusion of this program in President Trump’s budget.

Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference ManualThe letters, signed by more than 60 agriculture groups, say true crop insurance spending under the 2014 farm bill will come in $20 billion under budget. In addition, the letters’ authors say the federal program helps farmers save money.

“Farmers spend $3.5 to $4 billion per year of their own money to purchase insurance from the private sector,” the letters note. “On average, farmers also must incur losses of almost 30% before their insurance coverage pays an indemnity. Crop insurance allows producers to customize their policies to their individual farm and financial needs.”

Combat Shooter's HandbookThe letters explain crop insurance is a risk management tool that has replaced the “constant demand for ad hoc disaster assistance.” The groups involved also argue the farm bill should not be reopened or renegotiated until it expires in 2018.

“Farmers and lawmakers agree that crop insurance is a linchpin of the farm safety net and is crucial to the economic security of rural America,” they conclude.

Reconnaissance Marine MCI 03.32f: Marine Corps Institute Groups who have signed these letters include:

American Agri -Women

American Association of Crop Insurers

American Bankers Association

The Betrayed: On Warriors, Cowboys and Other MisfitsAmerican Farm Bureau Federation

American Farmland Trust

American Insurance Association

American Malting

The Essence of Liberty: Volume I: Liberty and History: The Rise and Fall of the Noble Experiment with Constitutionally Limited Government (Liberty and ... Limited Government) (Volume 1)  The Essence of Liberty: Volume II: The Economics of Liberty (Volume 2) The Essence of Liberty: Volume III: A Universal Philosophy of Political Economy (Liberty: A Universal Political Ethic) (Volume 3) Barley Association

American Seed Trade Association

American Sesame Growers Association

American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers

American Soybean Association

American Sugar Alliance

American Sugarbeet Growers Association

Association of Equipment Manufacturers

Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies

California Association of Winegrape Growers

Corn Refiners Association

Crop Insurance and Reinsurance Bureau

Crop Insurance Professionals Association

Ducks Unlimited

Farm Credit Council

Florida Sugar Cane League

Independent Community Bankers of America

Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America

National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies

National Association of Professional Insurance Agents

National Association of State Departments of Agriculture

National Association of Wheat Growers

National Barley Growers Association

National Corn Growers Association

National Cotton Council

National Council of Farmer Cooperatives

National Farmers Union

National Grain and Feed Association

National Oilseed Processors Association

National Peach Council

National Potato Council

National Rural Lenders Association

National Sorghum Producers

National Sunflower Association

National Young Farmers Coalition

Panhandle Peanut Growers Association

Pheasants Forever

Quail Forever

Reinsurance Association of America

Rio Grande Valley Sugar Growers

Rural & Agriculture Council of America

Southern Peanut Farmers Federation

Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance

Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership

United Fresh Produce Association

US Apple Association

US Canola Association

US Dry Bean Council

US Rice Producers Association

USA Dry Pea & Lentil Council

USA Rice

Western Peanut Growers Association

Wildlife Mississippi

 

FOLLOW FLYOVER PRESS ON FACEBOOK

Check out our WebSite

Check out our e-Store

Environmental & Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian View

edited by

Dr Jimmy T (Gunny) LaBaume

Is now available in both PAPERBACK and Kindle

BookCoverImageMurray N. Rothbard was the father of what some call Radical Libertarianism or Anarcho-Capitalism which Hans-Hermann Hoppe described as “Rothbard’s unique contribution to the rediscovery of property and property rights as the common foundation of both economics and political philosophy, and the systematic reconstruction and conceptual integration of modern, marginalist economics and natural-law political philosophy into a unified moral science: libertarianism.”

This book applies the principles of this “unified moral science” to environmental and natural resource management issues.

The book started out life as an assigned reading list for a university level course entitled Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian View.

As I began to prepare to teach the course, I quickly saw that there was a plethora of textbooks suitable for universal level courses dealing with environmental and natural resource economics. The only problem was that they were all based in mainstream neo-classical (or Keynesian) theory. I could find no single collection of material comprising a comprehensive treatment of environmental and natural resource economics based on Austrian Economic Theory.

However, I was able to find a large number of essays, monographs, papers delivered at professional meetings and published from a multitude of sources. This book is the result. It is composed of a collection of research reports and essays by reputable scientists, economists, and legal experts as well as private property and free market activists.

The book is organized into seven parts: I. Environmentalism: The New State Religion; II. The New State Religion Debunked; III. Introduction to Environmental and Natural Resource Economics; IV. Interventionism: Law and Regulation; V. Pollution and Recycling; VI. Property Rights: Planning, Zoning and Eminent Domain; and VII. Free Market Conservation. It also includes an elaborate Bibliography, References and Recommended Reading section including an extensive Annotated Bibliography of related and works on the subject.

The intellectual level of the individual works ranges from quite scholarly to informed editorial opinion.

FOLLOW LAND & LIVESTOCK INTERNATIONAL ON FACEBOOK

Check out our WebSite

Check out our Online Rancher Supply Store

Posted in Government Interventionism, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

How should one measure the Endangered Species Act’s performance?

“…only a tiny fraction of the species that have been listed under the Act have recovered.”
And did you know that there are more extinct species than there are species? — jtl, 419
Property rights and other groups that seek reform of the Endangered Species Act oftentimes note that only a tiny fraction of the species that have been listed under the Act have recovered. Environmentalists typically respond that a recovery metric is not a good way to measure the Act’s performance. A good example of this defense, in adumbrated form, was recently made by Professor Eric Biber at LegalPlanet. Many species, he explains, are listed when they are on the verge of extinction. Yet the threats that have led to their imminent disappearance usually will take some time to mitigate. Hence, the Act may very well be “working” but we haven’t given it enough time to show its stuff.In my view, there are at least three significant problems with this defense.

First, the Act has been on the books in substantially the same form for over four decades, and many species have been protected for twenty years or more. I suspect, however, that the recovery rates are not much higher for long-listed species than they are for recently listed ones. If the Act needs more time to work, shouldn’t we see substantially better recovery rates with long-listed species?

Second, a substantial number of species are listed as threatened, which status by definition means that a species is not in imminent danger of extinction. Such species do not implicate Professor Biber’s point about species being nearly extinct when listed and therefore requiring especially time-consuming efforts at recovery. Why, then, hasn’t the Act been more effective at recovery of threatened species?

Third, the Act itself provides the appropriate measure of its performance. Section 1(b) of the Act, entitled “Purposes,” says that the Act is intended “to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved.” Section 2(3) of the Act defines “conservation” as “the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this [Act] are no longer necessary.” Hence, the Act clearly provides that its purpose is to improve the health of listed species to the point that they can be delisted. Even Professor Biber would acknowledge that the Act hasn’t achieved that goal.

I suspect that Professor Biber, and most environmentalists, would acknowledge, at least privately, that the Endangered Species Act needs improvement. Indeed, many otherwise vociferous defenders of the Act have conceded, for example, that the Act is not well-suited to addressing threats posed by climate change, and that its reliance on old-fashioned taxonomy (species, subspecies) as its principal conservation unit is passe. See Damien M. Schiff, The Endangered Species Act at 40: A Tale of Radicalization, Politicization, Bureaucratization, and Senescence, 37 Environs 104, 120-24 (2014). But “reform” efforts are assiduously opposed because they are perceived as insincere. In other words, critiques about the Act’s effectiveness, when pronounced by non-environmentalists, are dismissed as mere pretexts for seeking a substantial weakening of the Act’s regulatory burdens. Even if that were true, green groups should still remain open to suggestions from others. It may well be that there are ways to make the Act more “green-effective” while also making it more sensitive to property rights.

 

Land and Livestock International, Inc. is in a position to assist the buyer in purchasing ranches like these anywhere in the Western United States and Northern Mexico. Pre – purchase services include help with due diligence, estimates of carrying capacity and potential for improvement, cash flow projections, etc. Post purchase services include everything from part time consulting to complete turn-key management.

Contact us at info@landandlivestockinternational.com or through our web site at www.landandlivestockinternational.com

Dripping Springs
Mule Creek, Grant County, New Mexico

The Dripping Springs Ranch is a highly improved working cattle ranch in a very desirable part of southwest New Mexico. Access to the Ranch from State Route 78 is excellent, and it is an easy drive to either Silver City, N. or Safford, Az. 232 deeded acres, 13,000 USFS acres, 150 AU. $2,500,000

Walking L Ranch
Wickenburg, Yavapai County

The Walking L Ranch’s 52+ square miles adjoin Wickenburg from the Hassayamapa River into the Wickenburg Mountains. The ranch originally consisted of the 10X Ranch on the south end and the Rincon Ranch on the north end.  The old Rincon Dude Ranch was added to the ranch’s Headquarters by the current owner. The ranch’s land tenure consists of deeded land, State and BLM Grazing Leases.  Topography is rolling to steep with elevation’s ranging from 2,100’ along the river to over 2,700’ on San Domingo Peak.  The ranch borders US 60 on the south side of Wickenburg.  The ranch’s deeded land is in seven non-contiguous parcels throughout the ranch.  The headquarters consists of 110.88 deeded acres on Rincon Road and the Hassayampa River with approximately 30 acres irrigated.  Another headquarters for the 10X is on the state lease. $5,000,000

Dos S Inholding
Fountain Hills, Maricopa County

The Dos S is a 22.78 acre private inholding surrounded by Tonto National Forest on Sycamore Creek.  It is located just off the Beeline Highway behind a locked gate 20 miles from the Shea Boulevard & Highway 87 intersection at Fountain Hills.  Payson is 40 miles to the north. $1,025,100

Posted in Endangered Species Act, Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Governors Ask USDA for Wildfire Relief Action

The governors of Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas and New Mexico sent a letter Friday to acting Secretary of Agriculture Mike Young asking that restrictions to the CRP be lifted to provide more land for grazing.

A Handbook for Ranch Managers There is one sure way to destroy a perfectly good grassland–take all the grazers off of it. — jtl, 419

There are cost-share programs available for livestock producers to rebuild fences lost to fire.
There are cost-share programs available for livestock producers to rebuild fences lost to fire.

Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual  The governors from four states affected by wildifres are seeking temporary suspension of grazing restrictions in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) for farmers and ranchers because of wildfires.

The governors of Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas and New Mexico sent a letter Friday to acting Secretary of Agriculture Mike Young asking that restrictions to the CRP be lifted to provide more land for grazing. The fires have burned more than 2,300 square miles in the four states, forcing farmers and ranchers to move their livestock.

Environmental & Natural Resource Economics: The Austrian View  “These fires have also devastated critical infrastructure, including fencing, on farms and ranches in our states,” the governors wrote. “The Emergency Conservation Program provides critical financial resources to affected farmers and ranchers to rebuild fences. We urge the Farm Service Agency to expedite the implementation of the Emergency Conservation program in our states.”

Combat Shooter's Handbook According to the agency, emergency grazing of CRP land is authorized under certain conditions to provide relief to livestock producers due to some natural disasters.

Cost-share up to 75% will be available to restore livestock fences if the Emergency Conservation Program (ECP) is renewed. To get the most benefit from ECP, landowners should contact FSA before rebuilding fence.

Reconnaissance Marine MCI 03.32f: Marine Corps Institute The Betrayed: On Warriors, Cowboys and Other MisfitsThe Kansas Livestock Association is urging ranchers to immediately notify their local Farm Service Agency (FSA) office of livestock, fence and feed losses. Notification can come in the form of a phone call, email or in person.

Combat Shooter's Handbook The key to qualifying for any of these programs is documenting losses. USDA recommends photographs, video or veterinary records to verify losses. Purchase, production and financial records could serve as additional documentation.

The Essence of Liberty: Volume I: Liberty and History: The Rise and Fall of the Noble Experiment with Constitutionally Limited Government (Liberty and ... Limited Government) (Volume 1)  The Essence of Liberty: Volume II: The Economics of Liberty (Volume 2) The Essence of Liberty: Volume III: A Universal Philosophy of Political Economy (Liberty: A Universal Political Ethic) (Volume 3)

FOLLOW FLYOVER PRESS ON FACEBOOK

Check out our WebSite

Check out our e-Store

Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference ManualPlanned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual. This is the ideal squeal to A Handbook for Ranch Managers.  Although the ecological principles remain the same, what was originally known as “The Savory Grazing Method” now answers to a multitude of different names: ranching for profit, holistic management, managed grazing, mob grazing, management intensive grazing, etc. Land & Livestock International, Inc. uses “Restoration Grazing” under its “Managing the Ranch as a Business” program.” No mater what you call it, this summary and synopsis will guide you step by step through the process and teach you how to use it as it was originally intended. No more excuses for failing to complete your grazing plans.

Posted in Government Interventionism, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Efficient and Novel Method for Sorting Cow-Calf Pairs

 

The Essence of Liberty: Volume I: Liberty and History: The Rise and Fall of the Noble Experiment with Constitutionally Limited Government (Liberty and ... Limited Government) (Volume 1)  The Essence of Liberty: Volume II: The Economics of Liberty (Volume 2) The Essence of Liberty: Volume III: A Universal Philosophy of Political Economy (Liberty: A Universal Political Ethic) (Volume 3)

FOLLOW FLYOVER PRESS ON FACEBOOK

Check out our WebSite

Check out our e-Store

A Handbook for Ranch ManagersA Handbook for Ranch Managers.  In keeping with the “holistic” idea that the land, the livestock, the people and the money should be viewed as a single integrated whole: Part I deals with the management of the natural resources. Part II covers livestock production and Part III deals with the people and the money. Not only would this book make an excellent basic text for a university program in Ranch Management, no professional ranch manager’s reference bookshelf should be without it. It is a comprehensive reference manual for managing the working ranch. The information in the appendices and extensive bibliography alone is worth the price of the book.

You might also be interested in the supplement to this Handbook: Planned Grazing: A Study Guide and Reference Manual.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Congress Created the Spying Monster

Please read this article by Judge Napolitano. You will discover that we are much deeper in the dark pit of the tyranny of a police state than even the most skeptical of us imagined. It is time boys. — jtl, 419

Source: Congress Created the Spying Monster

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment