Rog's Rod & Nimrod

Today’s column on chemicals might be important. Then again, it might not.

In past columns I have pointed at chemical crop additives as being a possible “X” factor when it comes to our declining pheasant population. My insinuation gives rise to nasty letters and emails from farmers who feel I am pointing a finger at them. I must ask, “What are we doing now that we didn’t do back in the early sixties when we had birds and jackrabbits galore?” Back then farmers used cultivators to control weeds. I can’t remember when I last saw a cultivator turning the soil up and down the rows.

I also had a personal experience that related to residual consequences. Back when we lived on a small acreage north of Wagner, I bought bucket dairy calves at the Avon livestock auction. Bottle feeding the baby calves was a great chore for the kids that proved to be very profitable by fall sale time.

We had a modest pole barn that served as our garage. I built a pen in the rear with a sliding door on the back side that permitted the calves to enter during bad weather. In spite of our efforts to keep the pen clean, our pole barn became inundated with flies. At a friend’s advice, I attempted to control the flies by spraying a product called Malathion.

During this same time the concrete slab in the front of the barn was covered at night by an army of toads that gorged themselves on the insects that were attracted to the area by the barn’s yard light.

We experienced a strange coincidence. Every last toad was gone the night after I sprayed the Malathion. I, perhaps prematurely, concluded that the toad disappearance related to the very effective fly control. If ingesting Malathion-controlled flies did in our toads, might the constant ingestion of beef and pork fattened on herbicide-treated corn lead to some of the problems humans experience heath wise?

Lisa Ladson, our middle daughter, is a recognized authority on autism. (see her book, Lights, Camera, Autism). Lisa is convinced that today’s rampant behavioral problems relate to environmental factors we didn’t face fifty years ago. I certainly hope that my insinuations are wrong, but I suspect that fifty years from now we will be more than horrified by some of today’s practices.

My thinking was somewhat fortified this past week when we headed west to become familiar with the unfamiliar land we will West-River deer hunt in November. I was equally interested in getting to know our host ranchers. One of those ranches produces organic livestock and organic hay bales for feeding organic livestock. Basically, organic ranching features biological and mechanical practices that foster an eco-balance. I think my above statement about cultivating instead of spraying herbicides is a good example. I know that the prairie dogs on this ranch are not poisoned. I’ll call their prairie dog management “positive gun control.”

The hay production called for buffer zones. An established road is a wide enough buffer zone between organic and sprayed alfalfa, but if only a fence separates the two hay fields, a buffer zone must be established. I would guess that organic hay isn’t perfect as wind drift could creep over the line. I did learn that organic farming/ranching is strictly monitored.

* * * * * * *

I want to give my distaste for the SDGF&P’s deer license proposal one last shot. Game, Fish, & Parks is claiming that up to 3800 additional hunters may get to hunt with the new proposal. With all tags being sold as SDGF&P stated at the Mitchell informational meeting I attended, hunter numbers would remain exactly the same. Yes, some of those hunters will have multiple tags while others go without, but this is only because those multiple tag hunters had the gumption to seek additional tags. Those hunters who only apply for one tag are limiting their opportunities by choice. Don’t punish my like-minded hunting friends and me by penalizing us for the lack of initiative by a few.

See you next week.