UPDATE on January 30, 2014: According to Michael McHatten at the City of Angels, "While I was in favor of the services that were provided I wasn't "happy" with the thought of paying
for something that had been free for a number of years.
While I have no idea what it is like to run a goat business, it was brought to the Council at the providers request, since they have put capital expense (including fencing) into providing this service and we at least owed them the opportunity to have their day before the City Council.
I just needed clarification from the Council (which they ultimately provided) which direction the Council wanted to go.
We are researching a number of options as requested by the Council including cattle ranchers so that we can see what the best deal is for the City. More to come as we start getting quotes.
********
January 26, 2014: The City Council of Angels Camp is looking for ranchers who are interested in finding grazing land that is irrigated.
Contact Michael McHatten at the City at 736-2181 if you are interested.
5 comments:
Hey, how come you're not watching Robin Thickeee destroy Chicago's
"what time it is"
Should that be annexable land?
Irrigated land becomes prime land. Why would anyone want to graze it? Unless the rancher wants to grow his own hay, cut, bale and graze what's left. Permanent pasture, the cost of water for irrigation compared to relying on Mother Nature would require a comprehensive benefit analysis.
So, what's the City offering, the City's spray fields?
Yes, its the spray fields. The city was forking out $1700 a month to someone to keep their goats out there. Why waste the tax payers money by "paying" someone to keep their livestock out there. The council can't manage money let alone the city. So......I think the council is feeling pressure from the article in the local paper on their last council meeting on it.
In another county, non-irrigated grazing land is worth $20.00 per head to the property owner.
Something smells?
Post a Comment