Louis-Alexandre Taschereau retained his position as Premier of Quebec, as he would all the way through 1936.
Taschereau was a member of the Liberal Party (Parti libéral du Québec) and had been elected in 1920 as the Canadian economy started to sink, in advance, into the Great Depression. He was an opponent of Roosevelt's new Deal, comparing it to fascism and communism, and instead encouraged private enterprise to develop Quebec's forest and hydroelectric potential. As he did so, his policies challenged Québécois agrarianism, which would begin to lead to its end.
And therefore, I am not a fan.
That may sound silly, but agrarianism is what allowed the Québécois to remain that. Their agrarian separation and close association with the Catholic Church is what allowed them to remain a people for two centuries of "English" domination.
Taschereau was not a disloyal Francophone or Catholic, but by attacking the agrarian nature of Québécois society he was by default attacking its essence in favor of money. Ultimately that attack would succeed, leading to the downfall of Québécois agrarianism and ultimately to the undercutting of the culture itself. It remains, of course, but badly damaged by the experience.
Wyoming Lands World’s Largest Vertical Farming Research Facility
CHEYENNE, Wyo. – Governor Mark Gordon has announced a historic economic development investment, as the State Loan and Investment Board (SLIB) approved a grant to support development of the world’s largest and most advanced vertical farming research center in Laramie. The project will support the retention and creation of nearly 200 high-paying jobs in the community.
The company, Plenty Unlimited Inc., is dedicated to advancing the emerging technology field of indoor agriculture. The new research center in Laramie expects to utilize an internship-to-employment pipeline to hire local workers, as well as hire recent University of Wyoming graduates. The investment by the Wyoming Business Council supports the new direction of the Council, by adding value to Wyoming’s core industries and activating new economic sectors.
“Wyoming is proud to invest in the continued success of a business that was first innovated here in Wyoming by one of our own and demonstrated at the 2015 World Expo,” said Governor Mark Gordon. “The level at which Plenty will be operating in this new facility will truly advance Wyoming’s preeminence as a global center of indoor agricultural research. This center gives us a tremendous opportunity to promote a state-of-the-art R&D cluster and further diversify our state’s economy.”
The $20 million Business Ready Community Business Committed grant from the Wyoming Business Council to the City of Laramie will be applied to construction and infrastructure costs for the 60,000-square-foot facility, which will be built on 16 acres at the Cirrus Sky Technology Park in Laramie. Additional funding, land and support for the project is being provided by the City of Laramie and the Laramie Chamber Business Alliance (LCBA).
Plenty has its origins in Laramie. Chief Science Officer Dr. Nate Storey co-founded Bright Agrotech as a University of Wyoming graduate student in 2010 and established an innovation center in Laramie.This eventually led Storey and a group of entrepreneurs to found the startup Plenty Unlimited in 2014, which later bought Bright Agrotech. Today, Plenty has more than 400 employees nationwide and the company’s R&D work over the past two years drove more than 100 new patent filings for innovations as diverse as new crop growing systems, a way to detect plant stress and new tomato plant varieties.
“As a Wyoming native, I have devoted my career to advancing plant science in my home state and am proud to be a part of helping the State play a leading role in advancing a new field,” said Storey. "This state-of-the-art facility will not only accelerate our R&D pipeline but will also create an incredible opportunity to attract and employ a talented workforce to further innovation and diversification for Wyoming."
With the SLIB’s approval, the project will be shifting into the design phase, with plans to begin construction later this year and open the facility in early 2025. Plenty’s team and research work will transfer to the new facility from its current Laramie location once it is completed.
-END-
M'eh.
Vertical farming is a real thing, but the expectation that it's going to produce all of our food in the future is frankly unlikely, and a freaking nightmare. It's industrial agriculture at its scariest, often accompanied by a vision of the future in which this has become necessary due to vast overpopulation of the planet.
Careful demographers, even if they provide overpopulation warnings, are now at the point where they tend to give them with a footnote, as it's now well known that we're darned near at the point of peak population right now. That is, while population continues to go up in some places, it's not really going to for that much longer, and it's declining, or even crashing, in much of the world It would be declining in the United States but for the fact that up until recently: 1) the GOP saw all immigrants as their lawn care workers, working cheap; 2) the Democrats saw all immigrants as future Democratic voters, and the entire nation still thinks the "nation of immigrants" thing means that the US has to take in immigrants at an absurd level forever. The falsity of those nations is now beginning to sink in, in no small part as the American people basically fill the country is full up and things need to back off. If they were allowed to, like every other European country, and like Japan, and like China, our population would be declining. At some point in this current century, the entire globe's population will be declining. By next century, it'll be crashing.
And that won't be a crisis.
Part of the reason it won't be a crisis is that it'll allow people everywhere to live more natural lives. But in the meantime we keep getting suggestions like this.
It's interesting how Communist collective agriculture and Corporate industrialized agriculture tends to arrive at the same point. Agriculture that's industrialized and of scale.
People don't really like it.
Moreover, people need a connection with nature, and agriculture is part of that.
Well, if some have their way, there'd be less of that. Rather, we'd be free from the burden of our serfdom comrade and liberated to work in the cubicles.
Lex Anteinternet: The 2023 Wyoming Legislative Session. End of the f...: HB 267 would illegally grant the State of Wyoming a right of first refusal that it hasn't paid for, thereby perpetuating an adverse condemnation on entire state, in instances when somebody wants to sell property to the Federal Government. This bill, which won't ever take effect as its illegal, states:
HOUSE BILL NO. HB0267
Conveyances to United States-right of refusal by state.
Sponsored by: Representative(s) Knapp
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to property; granting the state of Wyoming the right of first refusal for real property conveyances to the United States and federal agencies; specifying conditions for the purchase of property by exercising the right of first refusal; specifying duties for property owners and the board of land commissioners; providing a continuous appropriation; providing definitions; making conforming amendments; and providing for an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1. W.S. 34‑1‑158 and 36‑2‑111 are created to read:
34‑1‑158. Conveyances to the United States; right of first refusal to state; landowner notices; requirements.
(a) As used in this section:
(i) "Board" means the board of land commissioners;
(ii) "Director" means the director of the office of state lands and investments;
(iii) "Property" means all interests in real property and shall include land, mineral rights and water rights;
(iv) "United States" means the United States, the federal government and any agency or office of the federal government.
(b) The state of Wyoming shall have the right of first refusal for any sale, grant or award of property to the United States.
(c) Before entering into an agreement or contract to sell or otherwise grant property to the United States, the owner of the property shall, not less than forty‑five (45) days before entering into the agreement or contract, provide notice in writing to the director and the board that includes notice of the purchase agreement or contract, details of the property to be conveyed in the agreement or contract, the appraised value of the property if known and the agreed‑upon purchase price for the property.
(d) Not later than thirty (30) days after receiving a notice from a property owner under subsection (c) of this section, the board shall, through the director, respond to the notice by:
(i) Declining to exercise the right of first refusal granted in subsection (b) of this section; or
(ii) Declaring that the board intends to exercise the right of first refusal on the property and purchase the property, subject to subsection (e) of this section.
(e) A purchase of property upon exercising the right of first refusal under this section shall comply with all of the following:
(i) The purchase price to be paid for the property shall not exceed the amount offered by the United States for the property or, if the property is to be granted or donated to the United States without consideration, the fair market value of the property. The board may negotiate with the property owner to purchase the property at a lower price than the maximum price specified in this paragraph;
(ii) The purchase shall be made from funds appropriated in subsection (f) of this section or from another legislative appropriation;
(iii) Not later than ten (10) days after exercising the right of first refusal under this section, the director shall report to the joint appropriations committee on the property to be purchased and the known or estimated purchase price;
(iv) Upon completing the purchase, the land shall be managed by the board as state lands as defined by W.S. 36‑1‑101. The board may take any action in managing property purchased under this section as authorized by statute, including selling, leasing or exchanging the land in accordance with law.
(f) There is continuously appropriated to the board from any unexpended, unobligated funds in the legislative stabilization reserve account an amount not to exceed the purchase price of property specified in paragraph (e)(i) of this section. Before expending funds appropriated in this subsection, the board shall report to the joint appropriations committee as required by paragraph (e)(iii) of this section. The board shall not expend funds from the continuous appropriation if other appropriated funds are available for the purchase of the property under this section.
36‑2‑111. Right of first refusal of conveyances to the United States; duties of board.
The board shall review all notices of property conveyances to the United States that the board receives under W.S. 34‑1‑158 and shall respond to each notice in accordance with W.S. 34‑1‑158.
Section 2. W.S. 36‑3‑102 by creating a new subsection (e) is amended to read:
36‑3‑102. Duties generally.
(e) The director shall receive all notices of property conveyances to the United States under W.S. 34‑1‑158 and immediately forward each notice to the board for the board's consideration of exercising a right of first refusal under W.S. 34‑1‑158. The director shall offer any assistance to the board as necessary to help the board make a determination on exercising the right of first refusal in accordance with W.S. 34‑1‑158.
Section 3. This act is effective July 1, 2023.
It's telling that this bill has a single sponsor. It's going nowhere.
Sponsored by: Senator(s) Rothfuss and Gierau and Representative(s) Chestek, Provenza, Sherwood and Yin
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to crimes and offenses; providing an exception to the offenses of criminal trespass and game and fish trespass regarding incidental contact associated with crossing two (2) adjacent parcels as specified; and providing for an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1. W.S. 6‑3‑303 by creating a new subsection (d) and 23‑3‑305(b) are amended to read:
6‑3‑303. Criminal trespass; penalties.
(d) For purposes of this section, a person does not commit criminal trespass if the person incidentally passes through the airspace or touches the land or premises of another person while the person is traveling from one (1) parcel of land that the person is authorized to access to another parcel of land that shares a common corner with or is immediately connected to the first parcel and that the person is authorized to access.
23‑3‑305. Hunting from highway; entering enclosed property without permission; penalty; hunting at night without permission prohibited.
(b) No person shall enter upon the private property of any person to hunt, fish, collect antlers or horns, or trap without the permission of the owner or person in charge of the property. Violation of this subsection constitutes a low misdemeanor punishable as provided in W.S. 23‑6‑202(a)(v). For purposes of this subsection, a person does not commit trespass under this subsection if the person incidentally passes through the airspace or touches the land or premises of another person while the person is traveling from one (1) parcel of land that the person is authorized to access to another parcel of land that shares a common corner with or is immediately connected to the first parcel and that the person is authorized to access.
Section 2. This act is effective July 1, 2023.
As is probably obvious, that's a Democratic bill and will likely go nowhere in this legislature.
It would seem that some old wars which seemingly were behind us are not.
Once again, the forces of "property" wish to exclude. . . violently.
And once again, they have the legislature behind them.
We recently posted on this item:
HOUSE BILL NO. HB0126
Trespass-removal of trespasser.
Sponsored by: Representative(s) Crago and Washut and Senator(s) Kinskey and Landen
A BILL
for
AN ACT relating to crimes and offenses; providing for the use of physical force against a trespasser as specified; and providing for an effective date.
Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Section 1. W.S. 6‑3‑303 by creating new subsections (d) and (e) is amended to read:
(d) A person who is the owner or legal occupant of land or a premises upon which a criminal trespass is occurring, or their agent, is justified in using reasonable and appropriate physical force upon another person when and to the extent that it is reasonably necessary to terminate what the owner, occupant or agent reasonably believes to be the commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the land or premises.
(e) Section (d) of this section does not supersede or add to the responsibilities applicable to the defense of self or another as provided by law.
Section 2. This act is effective July 1, 2023.
Frankly, as this bill is based on what one “reasonably believes”, basically authorizes murder, or could, and probably will be, read that way.
I know Washut who due to his prior career as a policeman ought to know better. I don't know the remainder of them.
This bill, if passed, will get somebody killed.
Let's start with this. What is criminal trespass?
Well, under Wyoming's law, it's the following:
TITLE 6 - CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 3 - OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY
6-3-303. Criminal trespass; penalties.
(a) A person is guilty of criminal trespass if he enters or remains on or in the land or premises of another person, knowing he is not authorized to do so, or after being notified to depart or to not trespass. For purposes of this section, notice is given by:
(i) Personal communication to the person by the owner or occupant, or his agent, or by a peace officer; or
(ii) Posting of signs reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders.
(b) Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than six (6) months, a fine of not more than seven hundred fifty dollars ($750.00), or both.
(c) This section does not supersede W.S. 1-21-1003.
So, under Wyoming's law, if a person comes up to you, and says "you are trespassing", and you remain, and you really are trespassing, you are guilty of criminal trespass.
And, under the proposed amendment to the law, this would be added to it:
(d) A person who is the owner or legal occupant of land or a premises upon which a criminal trespass is occurring, or their agent, is justified in using reasonable and appropriate physical force upon another person when and to the extent that it is reasonably necessary to terminate what the owner, occupant or agent reasonably believes to be the commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the land or premises.
(e) Section (d) of this section does not supersede or add to the responsibilities applicable to the defense of self or another as provided by law.
So the new law would be such that Landowner or Landowner's agent could come up to you and say, "get off", and if they didn't, they could use "reasonable and appropriate physical force" to remove you when they "reasonably believe" that you are criminally trespassing.
Seriously, "reasonably believed"?
What if their reasonable belief was wrong?
Several years ago I was on public lands when a couple of goons for a large Natrona County landowner approached me and informed me that I had to leave as I was trespassing. I had a GPS, and I knew I wasn't.
I was also deer hunting and carrying a rifle and a handgun.
Did the goons believe that I was trespassing? I don't know. It's hard to penetrate the minds of saps who take jobs as regulators. Their belief may have been based on what their employer told them. Mine was based on the United States Geological Survey.
I didn't want to bother with it, and I cleared off.
I frankly wouldn't now. Now, I would have told them to pound sand, particularly as they warned me it was a $10,000 fine is I stayed, which was bullshit.
I got my revenge, I guess, by voting against the guy, a long with a lot of other locals, when he stood for reelection for a local office he was also holding.
But back to the scenario. I'm armed. If they were too, and they believed I was "criminally trespassing", and had invoked the element by telling me I was, could they then draw down on me? Would that be reasonable force, as I was armed?
And if I did, would I have been justified in blowing them away in self defense? I wasn't trespassing, and now I'm in danger of my life.
I probably wouldn't. . . but if I were with my son, wife, or daughter and felt they actually might use the weapons? A scared person resorts to violence quickly, and men protecting their families do as well.
And if that happened, would I be found to have acted in self-defense?
This scenario, if this bill passes, will play out just this way.
Now it'll be incumbent upon anyone going afield to pack heat, least some hired moron tries to drive them off land they believe they have a right to be on. And sooner or later some asshole, probably a landowner on public land, or some out of state landowner's hired flunky, will challenge a fisherman, hunter, or hiker and get gunned down, dying for a moronic belief in the absolute nature of property rights that are, in fact, not absolute, never have been, and never will be.
What about the corner crossing case? Even the Game Warden couldn't tell if it was a trespass or not. The landowner's hired traitor to the state believed it was. Would he have drawn down on them?
Those guys were gentlemen in the whole affair. Most people are. I've known of at least one friend of mine who was confronted in such a fashion and kept a rifle on the jerk confronting him, as he was armed. The armed jerk didn't realize that he was about to meet the business end of a .30-30 if he went too far.
Life preserved by a clam reactant.
Not everyone is calm, and not everyone cares either. Some asshat is going to tell somebody to get off some land, and that person is going to stand their ground. Somebody will probably get killed, and it'll probably be the person yelling "get off my land".
Lots of people now days imagine themselves to be Matt Quigly in the final scene of Quigly Down Under, gunning down the baddy. Some have even taken up carrying all the time so that they can affect the visage of Pistol Pete or maybe Yoesimite Sam. Take our recent wholly unqualified interim Secretary of State, Karl Allred, who packed heat on to the UW campus as he wanted to make a point.
Direct link to WyoFile, "Uinta County committeeman Karl Allred reviews documents at a Wyoming Republican Party Central Committee meeting in Riverton in September 2022. Gov. Mark Gordon appointed Allred as secretary of state. (Mike Koshmrl/WyoFile)"
Mr. Allred, seen packing here complete with a handgun that has an extra magazine, may imagine himself freedom's brave sentinel. but if he had to draw that, let's be honest, he'd be lucky to get it around his gut.
Being fat is no crime, but frankly not one person in fifty knows how to use a handgun in combat, and a lot of those are people who would have the high side of the fight if confronted by a good. Pistol Packing Regulators may imagine that they can draw down on a whole passel of criminal trespasser, but the result is far from certain, particularly if they aren't trespassing.
Think that guy can outdraw and gun down a 20-year-old carrying a .357? I don't think it bloody likely.
And FWIW, there's a whole lot of people now who are packing for self-defense, including a lot of young, agile, men, and women, who actually don't have enormous waste lines to clear, and who the goons aren't going to know are packing.
What the crap has gotten into people?
Wyoming was built on go where you want, when you want. The last time somebody tried to change this, it went badly.
But we're right back at that point once again. Property rights, real or imagined, enforced at the barrel of a gun. Indeed, when we fought that battle before, the legislature was on the wrong side of it then as well.
Moreover, any property, including your very own house, that you own, you are merely renting for, at most, the extraordinary short period of your life. You don't really have a moral right to go around bullying trespassers on the open range or fishing stream. Yes, you can call law enforcement, but do that. That's their job in a civil society.
And let's be honest, if we're returning to that day, equitably, turnabout can be argued to be fair play.
Sponsored by: Representative(s) Winter, Banks, Davis, Neiman and Sommers and Senator(s) Driskill and Laursen, D
A JOINT RESOLUTION
for
A JOINT RESOLUTION requesting the United States Congress to enact legislation and make other necessary policy changes to allow federal land management agencies and agency partners to implement best management practices for wild horses and burros by allowing for equine slaughter and processing for shipment to accommodating markets inside or outside the United States.
WHEREAS, the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971 (the Act), as amended, protects wild horses and burros from harassment or death and declares that wild free-roaming horses and burros are living symbols of the historic and pioneer spirit of the West; and
WHEREAS, under the Act, wild horses and burros are managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the United States Forest Service (USFS) in their respective jurisdictions and within the areas where these animals were found roaming in 1971; and
WHEREAS, the BLM manages public lands for multiple use and a sustained yield, as mandated by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA); and
WHEREAS, when considering the Act and the FLPMA together, the BLM is required to protect wild horses and burros in balance with other public resources and uses, including other wildlife and fish, recreation, range, timber, minerals, watershed and natural scenic, scientific and historical values; and
WHEREAS, responsible management of wild horse and burro populations is critical to protect scarce and fragile resources in the arid West and ensure healthy wildlife and livestock; and
WHEREAS, without responsible management, the resources in the arid West cannot be managed for multiple use because wild horses unduly infringe upon other uses by damaging riverbeds and overgrazing on limited forage, while using and often damaging the infrastructure of other public land users; and
WHEREAS, with virtually no natural predators, wild horse and burro populations can double every four (4) to five (5) years if left unchecked; and
WHEREAS, due to their protected status, if a wild horse or burro strays onto privately owned lands, the private landowners have no recourse for the infringement of their private property rights other than to inform their local BLM or USFS field office to seek removal of the animal; and
WHEREAS, under the Act, the BLM and USFS must inventory wild horse and burro populations periodically to determine appropriate management levels (AMLs) to maintain a thriving natural ecological balance and preserve the multiple-use relationship on public lands; and
WHEREAS, under the Act, the BLM and USFS are authorized to remove wild horses and burros to achieve AMLs upon the respective agency's determination that an overpopulation exists; and
WHEREAS, upon that determination, the Act requires the agency first to order old, sick, or lame animals to be destroyed in the most humane manner possible, second to cause excess wild horses and burros to be humanely captured for private adoption and third, to cause excess animals to be destroyed in the most humane and cost-efficient manner possible; and
WHEREAS, the BLM and USFS are increasingly unable to adequately manage wild horse and burro populations due to exponential increases in the number of wild horses and burros on the range, difficulties in adopting or selling wild horses and burros, lack of effective fertility control measures, lawsuits prohibiting or stalling gathers and removals, insufficient availability of holding facilities and increasing management costs; and
WHEREAS, of the one hundred seventy-seven (177) herd management areas across ten (10) western states under the jurisdiction of the BLM, comprising almost twenty-seven million (27,000,000) acres, only approximately twenty percent (20%) fall within their attendant AML; and
WHEREAS, the BLM recognizes the need for decisive action to reverse the harm to western landscapes and the wild horses and burros occupying them, as demonstrated by the agency's "2020 Report to Congress: An Analysis of Achieving a Sustainable Wild Horse and Burro Program;" and
WHEREAS, off-range holding of gathered animals accomplishes neither free-ranging of the animals nor population control and amounts to great expense, as demonstrated by the BLM fiscal year 2021 off-range holding expenditures of seventy-seven million seven hundred thousand dollars ($77,700,000.00); and
WHEREAS, under the Federal Meat Inspection Act of 1906, United States Department of Agriculture inspection is mandatory to sell meat in interstate or foreign commerce; and
WHEREAS, the United States Congress has effectively banned horse slaughter in the United States for human consumption since 2007 by denying funding for the inspection of equine slaughter facilities throughout the food production process. Federal appropriations laws since 1988 have contained similar prohibitions; and
WHEREAS, the fiscal year 2022 Department of Interior appropriations law prohibited the use of funds for destruction of healthy animals or for sales of animals that result in processing into commercial products; and
WHEREAS, the Act, combined with the effect of the United States Congress' effective ban on equine slaughter facilities, has created an unsustainable issue where wild horse and burro populations continue to expand exponentially; and
WHEREAS, the United States has benefitted from the ability of neighboring countries to provide equine slaughter services. The capacity of those neighboring countries to provide these services is limited, however, and has been degraded by the closure of facilities as well as the challenges associated with transporting animals long distances. Effective and humane management of wild horses and burros can be best accomplished by facilitating the United States' own capacity to transport and process wild horses and burros; and
WHEREAS, the wild horse and burro population's continued exponential growth and the federal agencies' continued inability to adequately manage these populations to attain AMLs presents an urgent concern for management policy and practice; and
WHEREAS, a pragmatic shift in United States' wild horse and burro management policy is prudent and necessary to help address this crisis and achieve protection of wild horses and burros in manageable numbers; and
WHEREAS, policy tools must be implemented to authorize equine domestic slaughter, to allow horse and burro meat inspection and sale and to facilitate the humane transport of wild horses and burros both domestically and to other countries or sovereigns for slaughter.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WYOMING:
Section 1. That the Legislature of the State of Wyoming requests the United States Congress to enact legislation and make other necessary policy changes to allow federal land management agencies and agency partners to implement best management practices for wild horses and burros by allowing for equine slaughter and processing for shipment to accommodating markets within or outside the United States.
Section 2. That the Legislature of the State of Wyoming requests the United States Congress to enact legislation and make other necessary policy changes to allow federal land management agencies and agency partners to work with states and Indian tribes with respect to the management, gathering and disposition of wild horses and burros.
Section 3. That the Legislature of the State of Wyoming requests the United States Congress to enact legislation and make other necessary policy changes to remove impediments to the disposition of gathered wild horses and burros, including equine slaughter and processing.
Section 4. That the Secretary of State of Wyoming transmit copies of this resolution to the President of the United States, to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States Congress, to the Secretary of the Interior and to the Wyoming Congressional Delegation.
