About 15 years ago, I sat with Ron Lanner's Book about the Pinon Pine. reading it cover to cover over the course of a few days. I took up my calling. Those who write, just never know how far their words will travel or how important their ideas may become. Being a reasonably bright woman - I imagined it might take 10 years or so - but, policy would change, agency culture would change and Americans would be happily chowing down on their own species of pine nuts while protecting huge swaths of public lands from deforestation for cattle grazing. (We are never as smart as we think we are.)

Early on, I called a gentleman by the name of Elbert Little. Dr. Little was 92 or 93 when I spoke to him. He had tried valiantly to get the US government engaged with pinon pine nuts as a legitimate federal land use in the 1930's (with some success on USFS land). He wrote some great scientific papers. I read each and every one I could get my hand on and found his words work inspiring. It was completely contrary to the other research about pinyon. In 1999, I found him alive - not so well, but alive, somewhere in near Washington D.C. I explained my mission to change public lands policy. In response to my lofty goals, he said, "Young lady, it will never happen. I tried all my proffessional life." I blessed him for his work and the legacy of his words and kept working. If he passed away, I hope he passed knowing his words and work were important and powerful to me.

I kept talking to government restoration people and high flying agency people. They were skeptical as they had all been taught about the invading pinyon (as if a native plant requires 75 to 100 years to reach reproduction maturity could have the capacity to take over the desert landscape). I put together alot of my reasoning and refenced it with research done in the 1930's by Dr. Little wrote lots of letters and papers yawda, yawda, yawdas. In 2003, I sort of switch gears. I was wore out and did not have much belief that I could impact public lands policy with common sense backed by sustainable economics. But, in 2009, I got a kick in the pants and here I am again. I dig deeper and work harder than I have for several years for many reasons. I found another voice yesterday. It was one like Dr. Lanner' s and Dr. Little's. It is was a voice coming from 1912 talking about Nevada's Pinyon forest:

In a rambling mountaineering journey of eighteen hundred miles across the state, I have met nine species of coniferous trees, -- four pines, two spruces, two junipers, and one fir, -- about one third the number found in California. By far the most abundant and interesting of these is the Pinus Fremontiana 18 (My note, this later became P. Monophylla or Jumbo Soft Shell), or nut pine. In the number of individual trees and extent of range this curious little conifer surpasses all the others combined. Nearly every mountain in the State is planted with it from near the base to a height of from eight thousand to nine thousand feet above the sea. Some are covered from base to summit by this one species, with only a sparse growth of juniper on the lower slopes to break the continuity of these curious woods, which, though dark-looking at a little distance, are yet almost shadeless, and without any hint of the dark glens and hollows so characteristic of other pine woods. Tens of thousands of acres occur in one continuous belt. Indeed, viewed comprehensively, the entire State seems to be pretty evenly divided into mountain ranges covered with nut pines and plains covered with sage -- now a swath of pines stretching from north to south, now a swath of sage; the one black, the other gray; one severely level, the other sweeping on complacently over ridge and valley and lofty crowning dome.

So, another chalk mark in the column of proof that invading pinyon is myth and that sleezes scientists worked it all up to justify pasture conversion at tax payer expense. Oh, that voice I heard yesterday- follow the link and read more, yourself about Nevada's pine nut forests as seen 100 years ago.