N A T I O N A L CATTLEMEN
To be the trusted leader and definitive voice of the U.S. cattle and beef industry. NOVEMBER 2022 • Vol. 39, No. 1 • NCBA.org
MARKET SNAPSHOT WEEK OF 10/17/2022
CURRENT VS. LAST YEAR SOUTH CENTRAL 500-600 LB. STEERS
$177.13
$158.59
11.7%
LIVE FED STEERS
$123.84
18.5%
$146.77
CHOICE BOXED BEEF
$280.55
12.2%
$226.31
OMAHA CASH CORN
$5.14
39.6%
$7.18
IN THIS ISSUE
4
BEEF BUCKS
South Dakota non-profit helps communities and increases beef consumption.
6
HONOR FLIGHT
Honor Flight Central Coast California journeys to Washington, D.C., with U.S. veterans to see monuments and memorials.
8,9
FEDERATION
Cattlemen and women across the country have sacrificed their lives to serve our nation.
10
WEATHER
12
REGION REPORT
15
CHECKOFF
Advancements in weather and climate technology in the last year benefit cattle operations moving forward.
States in Region IV are wrapping up conventions and activities while preparing for 2023 legislative priorities.
NATIONAL CATTLEMEN’S BEEF ASSOCIATION 9110 E. NICHOLS AVENUE, SUITE 300 CENTENNIAL, CO 80112
PAID
HATTIESBURG, MS PERMIT 142
PRSRT STD US POSTAGE
The Beef Quality Assurance Transportation program has updated modules and trainings.
Fall Supreme Court Session Opens with WOTUS Case On the morning of Oct. 3, Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts opened the Supreme Court’s fall session with 13 words: “We will hear argument first this morning in Case 21-454, Sackett v. EPA.” With these words, the court considered a case challenging one of the longest standing environmental issues impacting the cattle industry — the definition of “Waters of the United States (WOTUS).” Despite WOTUS’ impact on the cattle industry, the case at the Supreme Court has nothing to do with cattle or even agricultural production. Eighteen years ago, Michael and Chantell Sackett purchased a lot in Idaho and planned to build their dream home. As construction began, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers arrived on the scene and ordered them to halt, arguing that their land contained a wetland adjacent to jurisdictional navigable waters, qualifying the wetland as “navigable water” under the Clean Water Act. Over the following years, the Sacketts sued EPA with their case eventually reaching the Supreme Court this year, asking the Supreme Court to decide, once and for all, which test should be used when determining Clean Water Act jurisdiction over wetlands. The answer to that question has implications far beyond the Sacketts’ home. In the last 50 years, cattle producers have experienced numerous, often conflicting definitions of WOTUS. On average, the federal government has changed the definition of WOTUS every 3.8 years since the Clean Water Act’s passage in 1972, leading to decades of uncertainty. “The Supreme Court’s decision in Sackett v. EPA could finally provide certainty for cattle producers by solidifying where the EPA’s proper jurisdiction lies,” said NCBA Chief Counsel MaryThomas Hart. “NCBA has long fought for a consistent WOTUS definition that offers clarity to producers.” The limits of federal water regulation have been hotly contested since passage of the Clean Water Act in 1972, involving numerous rulemakings and Supreme Court cases. In 2015, following the Supreme Court’s fractured Rapanos decision, the EPA created a widely overreaching definition that subjected nearly every water feature — including isolated features and areas that only held rainwater — to federal jurisdiction. Some of the common water features that fell under the 2015 WOTUS rule included grassed waterways, prairie potholes, rainwater, snow melt, small creeks, dry washes, drainage ditches, isolated wetlands, vernal pools, coastal prairie wetlands, pocosins, waters within a 100-year floodplain, and waters within 4,000 feet of a high tide line or ordinary highwater mark. “The 2015 WOTUS rule was a massive jurisdictional overstep. A water feature that you can step over, a feature that only holds water when it rains, or a feature with no impact on downstream water quality should not be regulated by the federal government,” Hart said. During the Trump Administration, cattle producers saw relief from the onerous 2015 WOTUS rule with the finalization of the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR). The NWPR limited the definition of a WOTUS to substantial bodies of water, like oceans, large lakes, tributaries that run during a typical year or
seasonally, and directly abutting wetlands. While the NWPR was not perfect, it was substantially better than the 2015 WOTUS rule. NCBA supported the NWPR and intervened in several court cases to uphold it before it was struck down by a U.S. District Court in Arizona. Even before the District Court struck down the Navigable Waters Protection Rule, the Biden Administration made their intentions clear to craft yet another regulatory WOTUS definition. The Biden Administration’s proposed rule does not go as far as the 2015 rule but removes longstanding bipartisan agricultural exclusions that prevented isolated water features on farms and ranches from falling under federal jurisdiction. NCBA submitted technical comments calling for the reinstatement of those agricultural exclusions while also launching a grassroots campaign to add producer voices to the conversation. “We were pleased to see over 1,700 cattle producers send comments to the EPA reminding them that an overreaching WOTUS rule would be harmful to their operations. Our staff in Washington have told the EPA every day that farmers and ranchers need flexibility out in the country, but letters from producers proved that point,” Hart said. As the Biden administration finalizes their WOTUS rule, NCBA has urged EPA and the Army Corps to pause its rulemaking until the Supreme Court reaches a decision in the Sackett case. “If the EPA releases a rule now and the court makes a decision in 2023, the rule will almost certainly have to be amended,” Hart said. “This only adds to the longstanding uncertainty cattle producers have faced for decades.” The October oral arguments are the fourth time the Supreme Court has considered the definition of WOTUS, but new justices have joined the bench since the last WOTUS case. The WOTUS issue has come before six of the nine justices. “The makeup of the court is very different from the last several WOTUS cases, and we’re cautiously optimistic for a positive ruling, but we also need to remain focused on pressing agency policymakers and Congressional leaders to craft a longterm WOTUS solution,” Hart said. To ensure that cattle producers’ voices were heard in the non-agricultural Sackett case, NCBA submitted an amicus brief to the court arguing for a new legal test to determine whether a feature is a “water of the U.S.” NCBA’s test would combine the existing significant nexus test and the relative permanence test to create even more narrow WOTUS conditions. Following NCBA’s argument, a WOTUS definition should exclude isolated features (like prairie potholes), exclude ephemeral features (water that only flows when it rains), and maintain agricultural exclusions for features like stock ponds, prior converted cropland, and farm ditches. Now that oral arguments are complete, we look forward to the court reaching a verdict. In the meantime, NCBA will continue defending cattle producers from overreaching environmental rules — like WOTUS — that threaten the success of farms and ranches.