In the American West, alfalfa weevil is a nightmare for ranchers after the frost melts, causing widespread damage to crops by devouring leaves. While there are ways to mitigate its harm – such as early harvesting, grazing livestock, and crop rotation between alfalfa and grass – most farmers still choose to use insecticides.
R.C. Carter, a third-generation rancher in northern Wyoming, recalled the experience of spraying 60 acres of alfalfa grassland with 1.5 gallons of concentrated pesticide.
“When I was spraying this chemical to kill the alfalfa weevil, the instructions said not to touch it with my skin. But somehow, I got it on my armpit, then on my eyelid. It stung like hell, three days of pure pain that even water couldn’t relieve, impossible to wash off,” he recounted in an interview with The Epoch Times on his ranch.
In the past, alfalfa growers used arsenic-based insecticides, but these have largely been phased out, and even the use of DDT, due to its persistence in the body and carcinogenic properties, has been banned.
In recent years, pests have developed resistance to new generation chemical pesticides, posing a significant challenge for ranchers.
R.C. Carter’s wife, Annia, a fifth-generation rancher in Wyoming, still remembers the smell, “I thought at the time, ‘People get sick when the elderly see a doctor.'”
Soon after, they found out about the health risks of glyphosate, the most widely used herbicide in the US, with early research showing that under certain soil conditions, glyphosate can remain in the soil for up to 22 years.
“This means that even if applied in the first year, residues can still be found in the soil. It permeates everything and does not disappear,” Annia Carter said.
This experience became a turning point for the Carter family. Since then, they have turned to “regenerative” or holistic agricultural practices to cultivate their ranch, grazing over 1,400 head of cattle, focusing on regenerating local grass species, avoiding chemical pesticides, fertilizers, tilling, or planting monocultures to improve soil health.
Carter bends over lush tall grass and alfalfa, revealing healthy dung beetles and knobby earthworm castings.
This “soil biology” phenomenon excites him, indicating soil regeneration and signs of improved water infiltration. The Carter family regularly tests the organic matter content of their fields and found that organic matter levels continued to rise in areas where they grazed cattle.
Their ranch spans 7,000 acres near the town of Ten Sleep. Situated at the foot of the Bighorn Mountains, the ranch lies at the intersection of arid plains and verdant valleys.
“We have always been engaged in traditional cash crops, not knowing what was wrong at the time,” he says. “Later we realized this was wrong, so we began searching for a way out.”
This realization led them to become alienated from the community and caught between conflicting debates. On one side are ranchers using traditional practices, while on the other are conservationists who view regenerative agriculture as a greenwashing of harmful practices.
According to the Carter family, all of this stemmed from misunderstandings.
Navigating through lush grasslands, stepping over fresh cow droppings, attracting curious stares from around 700 Black Angus cows and a string of moos, the Carters call out the name of one cow – Stacey.
“How are you, pretty girl?” R.C. Carter says as Stacey steps closer for a pet. Stacey is an ‘orphan,’ abandoned by her mother, and was hand-raised by the Carter family and their three sons all summer, residing on their ranch as a pet cow.
“Here she is,” he says, giving Stacey a firm scratch on her haunch, while the little cow graciously lifts a hind hoof in appreciation.
In addition to their own lands, the Carter family has grazing rights on 32,000 acres of land managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which has sparked protests from conservationists who try to limit livestock numbers on public lands.
The Carters note that critics from both sides of the argument have accused them of overgrazing, but fail to understand the process or the vision.
“People call the BLM and say we’re damaging the land, it’s illegal, it looks bad,” R.C. Carter says. “But they don’t understand our strategy; this is a long-term plan.”
The Carter family has not chosen to graze fewer cattle in one area for extended periods but rather adopt short-duration, high-intensity grazing – sometimes moving the herd daily or every other day, using virtual fencing to achieve this.
This concept is based on an age-old practice.
“We’re just mimicking the behavior of wild bison, the ecology here before the fences and our arrival,” Annia Carter says.
Large grazing herbivores such as bison, antelope have historically roamed the plains, eating grass, naturally fertilizing, compacting the soil, and mixing seeds into the soil.
For thousands of years, millions of bison and other herbivores roamed Western ranches, creating carbon-rich soils and diverse ecosystems – a blueprint that Carter and other ranchers hope to emulate to restore the ecosystem.
“We need to create impact for cows’ hooves to mix dung into the soil, and stomp seeds into the soil,” says R.C. Carter.
Each cow, including Stacey and the approximately 700 cows, wears a collar with a solar charger that communicates with a satellite. An app on Carter’s phone accurately displays the number of cows on the ranch, allowing him to adjust fence boundaries with a swipe of his finger.
Annia Carter explains that it’s an electric collar that doesn’t sound as intimidating; once a cow touches the boundary, it receives a shock, and the collar emits an audio warning.
“As the cows approach the new virtual boundary, they feel the vibration, the boundary beeps, and they see it – the cows think they’re communicating with God, like ‘Oh my God!’ It’s like, ‘Yeah, I’ve been struck by thunder before!'” R.C. Carter says. “They quickly learn to respect that boundary.”
By controlling livestock wearing collars through satellites, ranchers can “precisely manage” their grazing activities, guiding them to consume all the grass and alfalfa on the entire ranch, even potentially eliminating invasive species, rather than selectively grazing.
“We’re rotating more cows in smaller areas – we’re really intensively grazing,” he says. “But our rest period is also longer; we don’t return to the same place every year; the land needs time for breakdown and the life cycle to replenish for the land to recover.”
Virtual fencing doesn’t eliminate ranch boundaries or fences, but the Carters say it brings them closer to a more natural, historic migration pattern – a pattern that can be repeated in smaller areas.
This significantly lightens the burden on ranchers. Riding horses to herd cows daily, moving traditional fences every few days, is a full-time job that requires the entire family’s effort. If someone or something breaks a fence – a situation more common than believed, according to Annia Carter – repairs can take several days.
There are many oil and gas development projects in the area, so “weekend warriors” come out to drink, drive through fences, and then you have to lament, “The cows are out, they’re all out – here we go again!” It’s a nightmare, riding horses to find cows until your hands are numb.
Environmentalists point out that rotational grazing may only be a rumor at best, imitating the migratory patterns of wild grazers such as bison or antelope. At worst, it’s a harmful fallacy spread by the cattle industry to divert attention from the damage livestock causes to public lands.
According to the Biodiversity Center, regenerative grazing requires 2.5 times more land area than traditional grazing. The center argues that if everyone switched to grass-fed beef and adopted regenerative grazing, existing ranches in the US would only be able to meet 27% of the current output.
The Biodiversity Center and other organizations believe that, given current consumption levels, achieving sustainability for any beef production method is challenging because the US’s beef consumption is four times the global average, according to data from the UN Food and Agriculture Organization.
The Western Watersheds Project, a non-profit organization, wildlife biologist Eric Molvar, says it ultimately comes down to the scientific evidence.
“We are willing to accept grazing that is entirely compatible with maintaining healthy, vibrant ecosystems,” he tells The Epoch Times. “We just haven’t seen it yet.”
Regarding achieving true regenerative grazing, Molvar adds, “What is needed isn’t these fancy rotational grazing schemes – it’s fundamentally about dramatically reducing the number of livestock grazed to very low levels.”
While a recent study from Idaho State University showed “quite good” results, Molvar says these results are based on an 18% vegetation utilization rate.
Molvar says that this study overstates the universality of its results. He states, “They’re using that study to whitewash grazing practices all over public lands.”
This ten-year study, involving federal and state government agencies as well as industry groups, aimed to assess the impact of livestock grazing on sage grouse numbers, a focus of concern for conservationists.
The study indicated that “properly managed” grazing doesn’t create negative impacts and can actually help with species conservation by reducing invasive grasses and establishing healthy habitats.
Despite supporting cautious optimism towards the Carters’ use of this cutting-edge virtual fencing technology, Molvar acknowledges there’s much to learn.
“Concerning how to apply this technology to livestock management and whether we can effectively herd cattle to designated places, we all have a lot to learn,” he says.
Of course, this is much better than destroying grasslands with barbed wire fences and obstructing migration corridors, Molvar adds.
Moreover, virtual fencing may allow more cows to enter areas traditionally not grazed – relieving pressure on “over-grazed areas,” such as along streams or near springs.
“In those places, you might actually be able to make some real gains,” Molvar says.
The Carter family says they’ve already started doing this.
R.C. Carter admits that natural water sources are high-impact areas. “So we try to spread the cows out to reduce disturbances. By using the collars, we can lead cows into areas they wouldn’t usually go, expanding their positive impact.”
However, Molvar suggests that significant improvements are more likely to come from reducing overall grazing density in combination with high-intensity, short-duration grazing plans, rather than relying solely on the latter.
Environmentalists believe that natural grasslands and their recovery after grazing are key indicators of ecosystem health.
Molvar says that areas that have been damaged by grazing in the past, such as vast regions of the Bighorn Basin, have turned into “wastelands” dominated by cheatgrass, an invasive weed that not only displaces natural grasslands but also increases the risk of fires.
Once invaded by cheatgrass, “no matter how much effort you put into soil organic matter,” wildlife habitat becomes “extremely barren” until natural grasses grow back.
R.C. Carter says that the health and quantity of natural grasslands at his ranch have improved. He adds, “The biomass of cheatgrass is decreasing; we can see the ecological shift.”
He notes that most of the grassland areas on their ranch are a mix of various grass species, viewed as Grazing-resistant or moderately grazing-resistant species under rotational management, and a mix of grasses with alfalfa or other leguminous plants helps maintain moisture and promote growth.
Molvar acknowledges that rapid, intensive grazing facilitated by virtual fencing has brought about new elements.
When asked if a day of intensive grazing on the ranch can indeed cause irreversible damage to the land, he says, “That’s a hypothesis to be tested.”
Another side of the issue is that local wildlife also needs to forage in the same land.
Under the Carters’ current management strategy, the area’s vegetation is lush enough to satisfy wild animals’ food needs.
“The BLM told me I could bring 700 cows up there, and we could stay for two and a half to three months,” R.C. Carter says.
“We abided by this arrangement and only grazed less than half of the entire ranch. So we essentially fit within their requirements, but if we adjust our management approach, we could double the number of cows grazed.”
It requires legitimate scientific research that is not influenced by industry interests, Molvar notes. He says, “When studies funded by the livestock industry conclude that grazing is harmless or even beneficial, it raises suspicions; just check the sources of funding, and it’s clear.”
“Throughout the West, we often hear someone claim that a specific grazing method works in a specific location, only to find that the damage is similar to elsewhere when we visit, and we are skeptical of such claims.”
Over the past five years, the Carter family has increased organic matter levels on parts of their ranch from 1.1% to around 5%. For the previous 60 years, this figure remained relatively stable at 1.1% until they began attempting to change it.
To standardize such practices, they have established a non-profit organization that provides regenerative ranch certifications through third-party testing, including soil organic matter content, carbon sequestering practices, vitamins and fatty acid content, and heavy metals and other pollutants.
The final food scores reflect both soil health conditions and nutritional density, aiming to help independent ranchers enter premium markets and educate consumers on the food production process and ingredients in the food.
R.C. Carter says this system is more useful than organic certification. He mentions that many mothers feel confused when interpreting labeling information – “Is it grass-fed? Is it grass-finished? What does that mean exactly?”
(Grass-finished refers to cows fed on fresh pasture or hay from birth to slaughter without adding any grains or other artificial feed.)
He says people are willing to pay a higher price for meat that is antibiotic-free or pasture-raised. “But do you trust verbal promises or concrete evidence?” he asks.
Supporting this fundamental change, R.C. Carter says he finds himself between two unwelcoming camps for change.
“An organic agriculture guy told us that organic agriculture had reached its limit, there was no more room for improvement. That’s exactly what the guy across the street told me.” He meant the traditional farming methods.
“The rules of the game have changed because we have this technology; it’s cheaper, with significantly reduced error rates. And it’s going to be easier for people if they want to change; the threshold has been lowered.”
For the Carter family, the path to regenerative agriculture is both challenging and unprofitable. “All of our additional income goes into this project,” Annia Carter says. “We live very simply.”
But their efforts align with the increasingly concerning global issue of soil degradation and the threats it poses to biodiversity, climate change, and global food security.
For the first time, they may feel that people in positions of power are listening to their voices.
R.C. Carter was one of a group of ranchers who met with Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins in August, and the government not only expressed support for increasing grazing on public lands but also support for regenerative agriculture.
“I’ve always thought politics was not worth my time, all talk and no action,” he says. “But with this experience, I was truly amazed! They’re genuinely listening.”
“When we asked Rollins about regenerative agriculture, she responded, ‘We love the concept! But we have no idea. What should we do?'” They are yet to respond to The Epoch Times questions about expected policy changes on regenerative agriculture practices, western ranch management issues, or regulatory or legal changes.
Small family farmers are facing increasingly severe crises: large-scale consolidation, aging rural populations, multiple economic pressures, and continually decreasing farmland areas, making them increasingly vulnerable.
The Carter family understands the difficulty of transitioning and knows they need to inspire confidence.
“The situation is so dire; they have fallen into a predicament and someone needs to step up and say, ‘I’m willing to try and fail; will validate the feasibility of this model and then share the experience.”
The Carters envision establishing a network consisting of multiple regional centers, including their own ranch, where people can come to learn, share experiences, and draw lessons learned.
“No matter the terrain, location, or region, people simply need to utilize existing resources,” says Annia Carter.
She says that current incentives are all misplaced, overly emphasizing taking and for small family ranchers, who are just focused on survival, neglecting sustainability.
“For survival, you need to make money, but this often comes at the expense of human health when we can balance both. If rotational grazing is adopted, it’s not just about taking; it’s about giving back to the soil, giving back to the land,” she says.
Investing in a high-tech comprehensive approach might help ensure longevity.
“Show them a new path, perhaps more kids will be willing to stay on their ranches,” she says. “We hope to leave better land than we inherited to the next generation; as landowners, it’s our responsibility, nurturing the next generation to continue this legacy.”
Recently, the Carter family applied for funding from the National Geographic Society, and they plan to lease 400 acres of land about 25 miles west of Ten Sleep, a site once planted with traditional cash crops like beets, corn, and barley.
“We’re going to conduct this research,” R.C. Carter says. “The goal is to use cows as tools to assist crop-growing farmers in returning to sustainable patterns, increasing organic matter. At the same time, we can improve water quality, increase organic matter content, and prove to crop-growing farmers that this is a viable economic model.”
This land was previously treated with chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and glyphosate, growing genetically modified monocultures.
The Carters plan to have third-party scientists test the soil and record the progress of soil improvement. “Then we’re going to come in to plant; we’re going to move cows into the land, like others here do,” R.C. Carter says.
They will test various plant species to help supplement missing nutrients – constantly experimenting, observing, and adjusting.
“This process may take several years, but improvement can be seen in the first year,” he says.
If this model becomes the new norm, R.C. Carter believes it might also be transformed into commercial value.
“This should be motivating for ranchers. If you are genuinely enhancing your land, water quality, and runoff, you should receive a corresponding return,” he says.
“In that case, you can make a small ripple that ultimately turns into a huge wave.”