|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
Effects of feeding wet corn distiller’s grains with solubles with or without monensin 4 and tylosin on the prevalence and antimicrobial susceptibilities of fecal food-borne 5 pathogenic and commensal bacteria in feedlot cattle. read here Effects of Dried Distillers’ Grain on Fecal Prevalence and Growth of Escherichia coli O157 in Batch Culture Fermentations from Cattle. read here Feeding Supplemental Dried Distiller’s Grains Increases Fecal Shedding of Escherichia coli O157 in Experimentally Inoculated Calves. read here |
|
Courtesy of: NCBA Public Lands Coucil, Jeff Eisenberg |
| Age and Source Verification: Implications for Cow-Calf Producers 8/27/2007 |
| Livestock Marketing Information Weekly Changes weekly - Please find attached the current livestock markets newsletter. The current and past two newsletters are available at http://animalag.wsu.edu. |
| Country of Origin Labeling Program 7/29/2007 COOL language in Farm Bill here (language is available on pgs. 715-721.) |
| Trust Land Exchanges - Isolated parcels or other trust lands with little or no income potential – or those not suitable for long-term natural resource production – are identified for ‘disposal’ at public auction, or for transfer, or exchange for properties of equal value with more suitable management characteristics. For more information on these, visit http://www.dnr.wa.gov/htdocs/amp/transactions/exchanges.html |
| Please
see the attached News
Release, Closure Notice and
Question/Answer document
to provide information on the requirement for processed pellets or certified
weed free hay products on USFS designated wilderness areas within Oregon
and Washington effective this year. We appreciate your help in ensuring
all individuals or organizations who might be interested are made aware
of this requirement. Thank you for your support.
Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me or Glen Sachet, USFS Public Affairs, 503-808-2790 or at gsachet@fs.fed.us. Nancy Phelps |
| BVD
screening said to pay off in the market place From MSU News Service Summary: Animals that have been screened for persistent infection of the bovine viral diarrhea virus may be worth more when they go to market, say managers of the Montana BVD-PI Herd Screening Project. BOZEMAN -- Animals that have been screened for persistent infection of the bovine viral diarrhea virus may be worth more when they go to market, say managers of the Montana BVD-PI Herd Screening Project. "We think calves screened as PI-negative deserve at least a four-cent per pound price advantage over unscreened calves," said Clint Peck, Montana's director of Beef Quality Assurance. "PI-negative status says the animals are not persistently infected with the BVD virus and greatly reduces the risk of spreading the disease throughout the production chain." The cattle industry has long been aware of the costs associated with the BVD virus, Peck said. It's a nationwide problem, and Montana cattle have not been immune to it. But, it's only been over the last couple of years that commercial cattlemen have had the tools to economically diagnose cattle that have a persistent BVD infection. "We always suggest to ranchers the first reason to screen herds for BVD-PIs should be for herd health purposes," Peck said. "Then if they can use their screening results to gain a market advantage, that's like icing on the cake." The cost of having at least one persistently-infected animal in a beef breeding herd ranges from $14-$24 per cow per year, Peck said. BVD can inhibit conception and/or cause abortions in susceptible females. The virus also suppresses the immune system, making infected animals more susceptible to other diseases. John Paterson, Montana State University Extension beef specialist, said the costs and impacts of the BVD virus can escalate once calves leave the ranch and end up in a feedlot. "The BVD-PI calf that exposes its feedlot pen mates to massive amounts of BVD virus on a daily basis creates economic chaos for the feedlot operation," Paterson said. "Kansas feed yard research indicates there's a $47 cost for every animal going into the feed yard because of PI exposure." Peck said Montana cattle ranchers still have time to screen their herds for animals persistently infected with BVD. So far, about 200 Montana ranchers, representing about 70,000 head of cattle, have signed up for the Montana BVD-PI Herd Screening Project. The goal is to screen at least 100,000 head of Montana cattle during 2007. Participating ranchers receive all screening supplies, plus up to $250 worth of screening services from grants through the Montana Stockgrowers Association. Other project collaborators include Intervet, Inc., and Animal Profiling International of Portland, Ore. "We're still taking applications and signing up ranchers," Peck said. "But for most ranchers, we recommend screening before breeding season starts -- which is right around the corner here in Montana." For more information, contact Peck at (406) 896-9068 or cpeck@montana.edu; Paterson at (406) 994-5562 or johnp@montana.edu This article is available on the Web at http://www.montana.edu/cpa/news/nwview.php?article=4718 |
| Beef Checkoff Enhancements Recommendations (slideshow) |
ESA Information U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service Will Not Conduct In-Depth Review To Consider
Listing Columbian Sharp-Tailed Grouse |
| Farmers - take advantage of new tax exemption programs Farmers Need Certificate
to Obtain Sales Tax Exemption on Farm Machinery and Equipment Replacement
Parts So far, only about 500 farmers have applied for the certificates, while as many as 30,000 may qualify. The certificates must be presented to retailers prior to purchase to receive the sales tax exemption. The Department encourages farmers to download certificate applications from http://dor.wa.gov/docs/pubs/specialnotices/2006/sn_06_farmreplacementparts.pdf - Replacement Parts
and submit them to the Department for approval. Farmers who do not have Internet access can call 1-800-647-7706 to obtain applications. Care should be taken to provide complete supporting documentation, such as a complete federal schedule F or form 1120S for corporations and partnerships. Incomplete applications cannot be approved. To qualify for the
exemption, farmers must annually sell at least $10,000 in agricultural
products that they've grown, raised, or produced. The exemption is expected
to save farmers about $8.4 million per year. |
| WSDA Livestock Rules and Regulations Click here to read the .pdf |
| If you would like to recieve a free e-newsletter from Animal Profiling International log on to their website at www.animalprofiling.com. |
| APPELLATE
RULING BACKS USE OF BMPs TO ADDRESS NONPOINT POLLUTION Date: January 7, 2008 - A recently issued appellate court ruling appears to back the use of best management practices (BMPs) to address nonpoint source pollution, even if it means state water quality standards are violated. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit ruled Dec. 17 in Center For Native Ecosystems, et al. v. Cables, et al. to back the U.S. Forest Service’s authorization of cattle grazing in a national forest despite environmentalists’ claims the nonpoint source pollution it may create will violate the Clean Water Act (CWA). The court said the use of so-called BMPs shields the service from liability, a move supported by the housing development sector, cattlemen and the timber industry. The ruling is available on InsideEPA.com. The ruling upholds the water law’s long-time bar on strict requirements for nonpoint sources, which instead seeks to limit nonpoint runoff by the creation of cleanup plans for impaired waters, known as total maximum daily loads, and BMPs. At issue in the case is environmentalists’ petition to overturn the Forest Service’s approval of cattle grazing at the Medicine Bow National Forest near Laramie, WY. Environmental groups challenged the service’s plan on several grounds, such as its impact on an endangered mouse species in the forest. The groups also charged that the plan is unlawful under the water act’s section 313(a) because it fails to comply with Wyoming’s water quality standards. Section 313(a) stipulates that the federal agencies have to abide by applicable state water laws “in the same manner and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity.” Local farming and cattlemen’s groups intervened in the case at the district court level, while the American Forest & Paper Association, the National Association of Home Builders and the Pacific Legal Foundation, a property rights group, filed amicus briefs supporting the forest service’s authorization of the cattle grazing plan with regard to claims activists brought under the Endangered Species Act. Environmentalists argue the service’s decision will cause fecal coliform levels in the forest’s waters to rise above levels established by the state’s regulations. However, the district court in February 2006 held that the forest service’s plan satisfied the conditions in 313(a). Now the appellate court has upheld that decision on several grounds, largely based on the argument that the forest service is not liable for failing to abide by the state’s water quality standards so long as it has employed the BMPs required under Wyoming law. The activists had previously argued that the use of BMPs or any other measures cannot shield the Forest Service from liability under the water act so long as breaches of fecal coliform limits continue. But the ruling notes that Wyoming’s law “contemplates that [the state] ‘control’ nonpoint source violations of water-quality standards with the implementation of BMPs; only if BMPs have not been implemented is the nonpoint source pollution not under ‘control’ and subject to state enforcement action.” Furthermore, the court notes that nothing in the state’s laws requires the BMPs the forest service implemented to result in water pollutant levels that comply with the state law. “Wyoming water-quality rules acknowledge that BMPs, even when implemented, may not necessarily stop nonpoint-source pollution from exceeding water-quality standards,” the ruling says, adding later that “so long as BMPs have been implemented, the state agency has no authority to take enforcement action, and the Forest Service cannot be said to have failed to comply with state requirements.” |
| USDA Annoucement: The following is the link to the rule announced by USDA 9/14/2007. Most of the official information, regarding this rule, can be found: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/hot_issues/bse/index.shtml The WCA release regarding this issue. |
| |
| Washington
Cattlemen's Association response to the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) PROPOSAL TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL IMPORTS FROM BSE MINIMAL-RISK COUNTRIES See USDA information here Information from the CCA on the impacts of the Minimal Risk Rule 2 (slideshow) |
State grazing project draws threat of lawsuit - Cattle given access to wildlife habitat - article here |
|
Water Quality Risk Assessment Tool for Animal Operations The risk assessment
tool contained in this document has been developed to assist livestock
producers in Washington State Step 1: Determine
if your operation is an animal feeding operation (AFO). Step 2: Determine
the relative risk of having an impact on surface and ground water quality. |
| |
| Effective
immediately, Washington State Department of Agriculture will apply the change
in import requirements for cattle imported from Idaho from Class Free to
Class A standards with respect to brucellosis. page 1 of the letter page 2 of the letter Rule making order |
| |
| The
Department of Ecology received a letter from EPA Region 10 dated March
23, 2006, announcing that they are formally disapproving parts of Washington's
2003 adopted water quality standards because they do not go far enough
to protect salmon and bull trout in certain streams and rivers. Ecology
will propose a new set of rules to fix the deficiencies identified by
EPA. Details on this rule-making process will be announced soon. http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/swqs/epa-status.html For more information, please contact Melissa Gildersleeve at the department of Ecology (360-407-6461) or John Palmer of EPA Region 10 (425-553-6521). |
|
Attorney General opinion addresses livestock watering issue OLYMPIA -- The Department of Ecology (Ecology) recently received a new formal legal opinion issued by the Attorney General's office concluding that state law does not limit the daily amount of underground (ground) water that can be used to provide water for livestock. State law requires that anyone using surface or ground water needs a water-right from the state prior to putting water to beneficial use. However, certain groundwater uses are exempt from state permitting requirements, including providing water for livestock. Prior to the Nov. 18 Attorney General's opinion, Ecology interpreted the 1945 state law regarding groundwater as limiting all exempt uses to no more than 5,000 gallons a day. The new Attorney General opinion concludes that the statute does not impose a quantity limit on exempt wells used to supply water for livestock. As the state's chief legal officer, the Attorney General provides guidance about how state laws should be interpreted by state agencies, including Ecology. "We have great respect for the legal expertise of the state Attorney General and his staff," said Ecology Director Jay Manning. "We will certainly abide by the new legal guidance and implement the opinion accordingly." Accordingly, Manning said Ecology will not take enforcement action against anyone who is using a permit exempt well to supply more than 5,000 gallons of water a day to water their livestock. He said that state law regarding the groundwater exemption has always been ambiguous. "While the statue is not clear, Ecology had consistently interpreted the livestock watering exemption as limited to 5,000 gallons a day," Manning said. "We based that interpretation on our reading of the statute and on several decisions of superior courts and the Pollution Control Hearings Board. The agency's interpretation of the stock-water exemption, however, has changed with the new legal guidance. "We will not take any action to limit groundwater use under the stock-water exemption to 5,000 gallons per day. Our actions will be consistent with the Attorney General's opinion," Manning said. |
| |
|
|
|
|||
|
 |
 |
 |