Rethinking Ranchers and Government: A Fresh Look at an Old Debate

For decades, the conventional wisdom has portrayed Western ranchers as caught in a paradox—an industry built on independence that criticized federal regulation while relying on government programs. It’s become the accepted narrative—and according to Dr. Tim Gresham, it misses the real story.

Dr. Tim Gresham, Professor of History at St. Mary’s College.

The St. Mary’s College history professor spent ten days at the American Heritage Center examining extensive meeting minutes and correspondence, funded by the Alan K. Simpson Fellowship. What he discovered helps to reshape our understanding of how the meat industry really worked with government from the 1930s through the 1950s.

His findings join scholarship by Karen Merrill, Leisl Carr Childers, and Michelle Berry in painting a more nuanced picture of the American West—one where ranchers weren’t simply for or against government, but engaged in constant negotiation about what their relationship should look like.

Dr. Gresham challenges what he calls the “hypocritical rancher” perspective that dates back to Jimmy Skaggs’ 2000 book Prime Cut: Livestock Raising and Meatpacking in the United States. This long-standing interpretation portrays ranchers as simultaneously resisting federal presence while accepting government subsidies. But his examination of the actual records reveals something far more interesting—a sophisticated partnership between the meat industry and government that operated largely out of public view.

Mining the Archives for Answers

Dr. Gresham’s research arsenal at the AHC was impressive. He pored over National Live Stock & Meat Board minutes—some biannual meetings generated hundreds of pages of detailed conversations between industry titans and government scientists that had previously gone unexplored. The National Cattlemen’s Association records revealed heated internal debates about the industry’s future. Papers from Wyoming politicians Joseph C. O’Mahoney and Lester C. Hunt showed how elected officials navigated between their ranching constituents and federal agencies.

A 1941 Meat Board poster contest encouraged high school students to promote “Meat and the Nation.” Such campaigns demonstrated the Board’s sophisticated public outreach efforts. Box 289, National Live Stock and Meat Board Records, Coll. No. 11744, American Heritage Center, University of Wyoming.

But perhaps his most surprising discovery came from the Wyoming Hereford Ranch (WHR) records—a collection he hadn’t initially planned to examine. He came across references to dwarfism in other collections and knew that “the WHR was ground zero for the outbreak.” In the early 1950s, this devastating crisis threatened the entire Hereford breed. Government scientists discovered the method of transmission and “possibly saved the Hereford breed from ruin.”

A comparison chart showing the difference between standard cattle and those affected by dwarfism. The 1950s dwarfism crisis at Wyoming Hereford Ranch demonstrated the high stakes of industry-government cooperation when public scientists helped identify the genetic cause and saved the Hereford breed. Source: Bucking V Outfit, Donna Vickery, “Dwarfism ~ Chondrodysplasia in miniature cattle.”

“The Meat Board leaders used public sector scientists essentially as a research arm that would appear to the public as an impartial third party,” Dr. Gresham explains. Rather than conducting their own research, “its leaders chose to provide grants to top scientists throughout the country, and pressured universities to create meat departments, thus creating more centers for research.”

When Beef Became a Belief System

The archives revealed an unexpected ideological split within the meat industry itself. While the Meat Board embraced what sociologist Gyorgy Scrinis calls “the ideology of nutritionism”—essentially holding “that only the nutrients mattered, not the type of meat”—the National Cattlemen’s Association developed something Dr. Gresham terms “beef fundamentalism.” As he puts it, “they viewed beef as a unique food that is valuable for qualities beyond its nutritional composition.”

Winners of the Meat Board’s Third National Meat Story Contest in 1929. The Board offered university scholarships to shape the next generation’s understanding of meat’s nutritional value. Box 289, National Live Stock and Meat Board Records, Coll. No. 11744, American Heritage Center, University of Wyoming.

This philosophical divide had real consequences. The groups clashed over funding priorities after World War II, with the NCA demanding separate beef promotions. Even as NCA leaders proclaimed that “free markets make free men” in a 1953 executive meeting, they simultaneously called for increased USDA beef purchases for school lunch programs.

Rather than simple hypocrisy, Dr. Gresham sees something more complex: industry leaders believed they were fixing problems created by earlier government interventions like wartime price controls. They weren’t abandoning free-market principles so much as trying to work within a system already shaped by decades of federal involvement.

During World War II, the Meat Board’s 1943 essay contest framed meat as a “Weapon of War,” offering war bonds as prizes. The contest reveals how the industry leveraged patriotic sentiment to promote consumption. Box 289, National Live Stock and Meat Board Records, Coll. No. 11744, American Heritage Center, University of Wyoming.

Beyond the Archives

Over the next two years, Dr. Gresham will present his findings at major history conferences and submit articles to leading journals. His ultimate goal is a book that reveals the hidden architecture of cooperation between industry and government that shaped not just the meat on American tables, but the political identity of the West itself.

The Alan K. Simpson Fellowship made this research possible by covering Dr. Gresham’s travel, lodging, and meals during his archival work. “Because the records at the AHC are central to my project,” he explained, “the Simpson fellowship is easily the most important grant I will receive.”

The Alan K. Simpson Fellowship in Western Political History is one of several research opportunities offered by the American Heritage Center. For more information about grants and fellowships, visit the AHC Grants and Fellowships page.

The fellowship honors retired U.S. Senator Alan K. Simpson of Wyoming, who passed away in March 2025. The AHC’s Alan K. Simpson Institute for Western Politics and Leadership continues his legacy of fostering understanding of Western political history and civic engagement.