Saying things that need to be said.
Tariff Time
Liberals and progressives are drowning in their own tears as a result of the 2024 election. The libs are coming apart at the seams over Trump’s promise to usher in a “manufacturing renaissance” by luring American companies back home to where they began by proposing to lower the corporate tax rate from 21 to 15 percent for corporations that make their products here.
As this story was going to press, Trump was also promising a new 10 percent on ALL imports, a 25 percent tariff on all imports from Mexico and Canada and as much as a 60 percent on imports from China. Trump says, “We’ll lead an American manufacturing boom. When they have to pay tariffs to come in, but they have incentive to build here, they’re going to come roaring back.”
jobs and our money are shipped overseas. If you’re wondering where middle class America went it was shipped overseas lock, stock and barrel.
Now Tariff Man wants to bring those jobs back home and one of the biggest tools in his toolbox will be tariffs. While that may invigorate manufacturing companies it may also
Forgive your enemies. It messes up their heads.
hurt some of the very people who helped Trump get elected.
News Flash: The World Isn’t Flat After All Tariffs are a direct response
So Orange Man has morphed into Tariff Man and his critics say that will only lead to more inflation and higher interest rates. The left-wingers are still hanging on to the religion of globalism even as American
to globalization and all the glorious things it was supposed to accomplish for citizens of rich and poor countries alike but didn’t. I remember reading a best-selling book back in 2005 called ‘The World Is Flat’ written by the Godfather of Globalization, Thomas Friedman. In the book, Friedman, a journalist for The New York Times, argued that technological innovation had so “flattened” the world that it had become a level playing field to include more input and contributions from nations outside the industrialized West. Friedman urged America to offshore our manufacturing jobs to countries with cheaper labor.
At the same time America would become a “service econo-
D.C. Circuit Throws Out Over 40 Years of NEPA Regulation
BY
MOLLY A. LAWRENCE, JONATHAN D. SIMON, MICHAEL R. PINCUS , RACHAEL L. LIPINSKI
OF VAN NESS FELDMAN LLP – HYDRO NEWSLETTER / NATIONAL LAW REVIEW
On November 12, 2024, in Marin Audubon Society v. Federal Aviation Administration, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the Council on Environmental Quality (“CEQ”) lacks authority to issue government-wide National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) regulations. Although none of the parties raised the issue in their briefs, in an opinion issued by a split 2-1 panel, the court found CEQ’s regulations—which have been in force for over 40 years—to be invalid. The case is likely to have far-reaching implications.
■ Despite many uncertainties regarding the decision’s potential impacts, a few things are not in doubt:
■ The NEPA statute remains in effect.
■ CEQ NEPA guidance (as distinct from regulation) is unaffected.
Confusion about the decision poses a risk of delays in ongoing and upcoming NEPA reviews until the dust settles, which could take several years.
The Court’s Opinion Petitioners, including the Marin Audubon Society, challenged the Federal Aviation Ad-
continued on page 4
Riding Herd
by
The War On Food
my” where the middle class supposedly would earn its living by waiting on each other. I remember thinking at the time that if we followed Friedman’s advice that one day there’d be a heavy price to pay. That day of reckoning has finally arrived.
Bill Bullard, CEO of R CALF, explains, “Over three decades ago economists suggested the United States would be better off if we opened our markets to the world and the world opened its markets to us. So inviting was this suggestion that policy makers set out to achieve this ideal by reducing or eliminating tariffs on imported goods. But expectations that the world would reciprocate were never fully met,” says Bullard.
He continues, “When the prospects of accessing the most affluent consumer market in the world while paying low or no tariffs became a reality, many manufacturers moved offshore
continued on page 2
Change The Debate and Take Back Liberty Locally
BY TOM DEWEESE / AMERICAN POLICY CENTER
Most Americans tend to think of private property simply as a home – the place where the family resides, stores their belongings, and finds shelter and safety from the elements. It’s where you live. It’s yours because you pay the mortgage and the taxes. Most people don’t give property ownership much more thought than that.
There was a time when property ownership was considered to be much more. Property, and the ability to own and control it, was life itself.
John Adams said, “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
The great economist John Locke, whose writings and ideas had a major influence on the nation’s founders, believed that “life and liberty are secure only so long as the right of property is secure.”
Locke warned that human civilization would be reduced to the level of a pack of wolves and cease to exist because lack of control over your own actions caused fear and insecurity. Private property ownership, Locke argued, brought stability and wealth to individuals, leading to a prosperous society of man. That’s because legal ownership of property is the key to productive development.
Private property ownership is the reason the United States became the wealthiest nation on
continued on page 3
Caren Cowan, owner and publisher of the New Mexico Stockman, always offers up a lot of food for thought in her monthly column. Speaking of food, Caren’s latest missive makes you wonder if supposedly smart people have any idea where their food comes from.
For example, according to Caren, “Big banks are being urged to defund the farming industry to limit meat and dairy consumption.”
Caren also ran a story written by Frank Bergman from slaynews.com that claimed, “A collective of over 100 climate groups, led by Friends of the Earth, is pressuring JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and other private banks to stop financing global meat and dairy companies.”
According to Martin Bowman of Feedback Global, “Industrial livestock companies are incompatible with a safe future for our planet, so it’s time for banks and investors to turn off the taps and stop providing financing that is enabling them to grow.” He specifically called on banks to quit lending money to food companies like Tyson, JBS and he called out Bank of America for holding over half of the 134 billion in loans to meat and dairy operators across the country.
It sounds like the green weenies want farmers to plow under all their banking customers in order to control the food that people ingest. While not a fan of the Big Four packers, I think that if the big banks do buckle under the pressure from the climate fanatics, people will starve to death around the world. Which is probably what the Friends of the Earth want in the first place. They seem to think this world would be a lot better off without any people.
A disturbing report done for Great Britain by Oxford University and the Imperial College of London not only urged everyone to give up meat and dairy products, they also demanded that airports everywhere be closed and the general public banned from using airplanes. Anyone caught doing so would be jailed for violating the Climate Change Act. Of course, the university professors didn’t call for government employees, greenies, rock stars, Climate Czar
LEE PITTS
Volume 66 • No. 12
LEE PITTS
John Kerry or university professors to quit flying, because their work is so important and their time so valuable.
In order to reach the United Nations and the World Economic Forum’s NET ZERO goals, the university professors also demanded that no new construction should be allowed. The U.N. and the World Economic forum also said that people should stop doing anything that causes emissions. Evidently they haven’t been amongst their fellow man after a bad bean day at the Mexican food restaurant otherwise they’d realize that this would rid the world of people too because we are huge emitters, if you get my drift, and I think you do. All of this makes you wonder, ARE THESE PEOPLE NUTS?
Of course they are.
After the greenies finish ridding the world of ranchers they will come after the farmers because of the emissions caused by their tractors. This will mean everyone will start roaming the forests to find roots, shoots and berries to eat and then they’ll be killed by all the wolves, bears and mountain lions the govern-
ment turned loose. Which begs the question, who will save the wolves, fairy shrimp and pond scum after all the humans starve to death?
Time will tell if the big banks “lose interest” and buckle under the pressure from the coalition of greenies to stop loaning money to farmers and ranchers. As for myself, I quit the big banks over 40 years ago when I figured out that they were, in the words of President Andrew Jackson, “a den of vipers and thieves.” Ever since I’ve banked with our small-town bank.
Personally, I don’t think the big banks will stop loaning money to meat and dairy producers and I’ll tell you why. For years I spotted bids at the California Bankers auction for my auctioneer friend Jim.
The biggest difference I noticed between the big bankers and the ranchers I hang around with is the ranchers have manure on the outside of their boots. The bankers held their convention at one the poshest locales in the state and I noticed when they were served their filet mignons and baked potatoes heaped with real butter and sour cream you’d have thought it was feeding time at the zoo. ▫
Take your marketinJ.{ program to the topf
Advertise in the Contact
Randy Summers
ADVERTISING REPRESENTATIVE
Office: 505/243-9515 Cell: 505/850-8544 rjsauctioneer@aol.com
to avail themselves of lower production costs, due largely to lower wages and less stringent regulatory requirements. And over time, the U.S. became increasingly dependent on foreign manufacturing to meet rising consumer demands for goods, as well as for maintaining our national security. This dependency is measured by our trade deficit. Last year we imported $3 trillion worth of goods, and our trade deficit was about $785 billion.”
“And then someone asked a fundamental question,” says Bullard. “What if we began producing here more of what we consume here, what would that do for America? And that fundamental question is the reason that ‘To tariff or not to tariff’ became a critical question in the 2024 elections.”
No Help For The Heartland
As with most issues, there are pros and cons to each side. According to Bullard, “The con is the impact of any negative price inflation that might ensue. To say that tariffs will not impact any prices would be disingenuous. Studies show that some price inflation would be expected from increased tariffs though that price inflation would not likely occur for all goods, and prices would not likely increase dollar for dollar based on the amount of the tariff.”
According to The Peterson Institute for International Economics, Trump’s tariffs would cost a typical American household more than $2,600 a year. The National Retail Federation said, “The tariffs could cost American consumers $46 billion to $78 billion in spending power each year! The price of $50 athletic shoes would jump to as high as $64, and a $2,000 mattress and box spring set would cost anywhere from $2,128 to $2,190.”
As for our farmers and ranchers, we have to only look at what
For advertising, subscription and editorial inquiries write or call:
Livestock Market Digest P.O. Box 7458 Albuquerque, N.M. 87194
transpired during Trump’s first term. “Trump’s tariffs aimed at China in early 2018 hit agricultural producers hard,” recalls Katharina Buchholz, a senior data journalist at Statista. And a report from the USDA shows that, “Between mid-2018 and the end of 2019, more than $27 billion had to be paid to farmers to make up for the retaliatory tariffs and loss of markets.”
It wasn’t just Trump making life more difficult for farmers and ranchers. President Joe Biden kept Trump’s tariffs and even added to them. Bucholz says, “Farmer advocates pointed out that the subsidies were going to large farms predominantly, leaving smaller producers out in the rain.”
A study by David Autor concluded, “The 2018–2019 tariffs failed to provide economic help to the heartland: import tariffs had neither a sizable nor significant effect on US employment in regions with newly‐protected sectors and foreign retaliation by contrast had clear negative employment impacts, particularly in agriculture.”
That was all during Trump’s first shot as President but what should we expect during his second? A joint economic study completed for the American Soybean Association and the National Corn Growers Association found that U.S. soybean farmers could lose between $3.6 billion to $5.9 billion as a result of Trump’s tariffs due to retaliatory measures taken by our trading partners. And American corn growers could lose between $1 and $1.4 billion.
The Price for Protection
Now here are some good things to say about tariffs...
portunity to expand and grow without the stifling burden of cheaper market-depressing imports.”
“If you believe achieving a high degree of food self-sufficiency is important to the national security of our nation, then the potential that lamb prices might increase if the volume of cheaper imports is reduced is a trade-off worth making. And when you consider that when we produce here more of the lamb consumed here, then we will see additional economic growth in lamb processing and more employment throughout the entire lamb supply chain, a growth and expansion that will again lead to improvements to U.S. household incomes.”
In an article in the Journal of Ag Econ called “Tariffic or Trouble”, authors William Ridley, Jeff Luckstead, and Stephen Davad concluded that, “Meat is one of the most important traded food products currently accounting for around 14 percent of total world food trade, yet meat trade tends to face more onerous trade barriers than most other agri-food products.”
Trump’s tariffs will probably affect American cattle ranchers more than any other segment of agriculture. That’s because the United States is the world’s largest producer of beef and its second-largest importer. Currently, imports account for 12 percent of total U.S. beef supply.
Chinese Food
Livestock Market Digest (1SSN 0024-5208) (USPS NO. 712320) is published monthly except semi-monthly in September in Albuquerque, N.M. 87104 by Livestock Market Digest, Inc. Periodicals Postage Paid at Albuquerque, N.M. POSTMASTER-Send change of address to: Livestock Market Digest, P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194
— MY CHECK IS ENCLOSED FOR —
One Year: $35 Two Years: $45 Single copy: $10
Clip & mail to: Livestock Market Digest, P.O. Box 7458, Albuquerque, N.M. 87194
Telephone: 505-243-9515 Fax: 505-349-3060 www.aaalivestock.com
EDITORIAL and ADVERTISING STAFF
CAREN COWAN Publisher
LEE PITTS Executive Editor
CHUCK STOCKS Publisher Emeritus
RANDY SUMMERS Sales
FALL MARKETING EDITION AD SALES
RANDY SUMMERS, 505-850-8544 email: rjsauctioneer@aol.com
FIELD EDITOR
DELVIN HELDERMON, 580/622-5754 1094 Koller Rd, Sulpher, OK
ADMINISTRATIVE and PRODUCTION STAFF
KRISTY HINDS Graphic Designer
All subscriptions non-refundable.
R CALF’s Bullard writes, “Tariffs have three basic purposes: Stimulate domestic production; Protect domestic industries; and Raise revenues. By setting tariffs on imported goods at an amount that offsets the offshore advantages of lower wages and lesser regulatory costs, tariffs level the playing field for domestic producers, enabling them to compete head-to-head with lower-priced imports. This would be expected to stimulate domestic production which would be expected to generate more good-paying jobs. By setting tariffs on imported goods considered critical to our national security, at levels that afford our domestic production of critical goods a competitive advantage in our domestic market, tariffs can be used to protect our domestic production of critical goods. And tariffs would be expected to generate revenues for the United States, which could reduce tax burdens on both U.S. industries and on U.S. consumers.”
Bullard states emphatically, “That tariffs can protect domestic industries is inarguable. We can readily understand how this works by considering the current state of the U.S. sheep industry. Our domestic sheep industry has been decimated by imported lamb arriving in the U.S. tariff-free and produced under less stringent standards. As a result, imports have captured about 70 percent of the U.S. market from our domestic sheep producers. Instituting a tariff on imported lamb at a level that discourages unlimited imports will provide the domestic sheep industry an opportunity to breathe – an op-
We can’t talk about tariffs without talking Chinese. Forbes Senior Contributor, Stuart Anderson writes “After a series of tariff increases on Chinese imports, the government of China retaliated against U.S. exporters, as predicted by trade analysts outside of the administration. As a result, U.S. exports, particularly of agricultural goods, dropped significantly.”
“Losing the world’s most populous country as an export market has been a major blow to the agriculture industry,” reported the New York Times in August 2019. “Total American agricultural exports to China were $24 billion in 2014 and fell to $9.1 billion last year, according to the American Farm Bureau.” In 2018, U.S. farmers’ soybean exports to China declined by 75 percent!
The $28 billion the Trump administration authorized to pay farmers was a result of miscalculating that other countries would retaliate against its trade actions, thereby costing farmers billions of dollars in lost sales. “Farmers would have been better off if the trade war had never started, to say nothing of the American businesses and consumers who continue to pay exorbitant tariffs,” said Bryan Riley, director of the National Taxpayers Union’s Free Trade Initiative.
A National Foundation for American Policy analysis found the tariffs were on pace to eliminate potentially all of the economic benefits the Trump administration has claimed from its deregulation efforts.
On the other hand, the case can be made that China only lives up to its trade bills and pays tariffs only when its 1.41 billion population is in the midst of a food shortage.
A Price We Have to Pay
Trump detractors assume Trump’s tariffs will start the minute he takes office. What
is more likely to happen is that Trump, ever the dealmaker and negotiator, will threaten our trading partners with the higher tariffs and instead of paying them, the exporters will build their factories in America to avoid the tariffs. That’s what the car companies did and many of those missing jobs came home where they belonged.
That is all well and good for car companies but what about cattle companies? Are we to be the sacrificial lamb, so to speak?
Bill Bullard says, “The U.S. has long had tariffs and tariff-rate quotas in both our cattle and beef and sheep and lamb industries. The only problem with these tariffs and tariff-rate quotas is that the TARIFFS ARE WAY TOO LOW TO BE EFFECTIVE.”
“When set at adequate levels, tariff-rate quotas restrain enough imports to provide breathing space for domestic producers. They can provide greater market certainty enabling domestic producers to maintain profitable operations and invest in expansion. This itself will help reduce risks of shortages and prevent sudden price swings, again enabling domestic producers to remain profitable and invest in expansion.”
“The U.S. is the largest beef consuming market in the world, and yet our cattle industry is shrinking in terms of the number of producers, number of cattle, and number of marketing outlets, with imports capturing an ever-greater share of our domestic market. And while this is certainly true in our beef market, our lamb market is now largely captured by imports causing our domestic sheep industry to shrink at an alarming rate,” says Bullard.
“Why wouldn’t we want to deploy tried, proven, and already in effect economic tools to strengthen our nation’s food security by providing the breathing space for our domestic cattle and beef and sheep and lamb industries to remain profitable and expand?”
“But that’s certainly not what we’ve been doing for the past
several decades. Instead, we’ve been dismantling our tariffs and tariff-rate quota systems to give certain countries unlimited access to our domestic market, creating a huge imbalance in the trade of cattle, beef, sheep and lamb.” (For beef, there are now no tariffs or tariff-rate quotas for Australia, Canada or Mexico and that’s a major reason for our nearly 1.6-billion-pound trade deficit in 2023.)
Concludes Bullard, “Until and unless we update our tariffs and our tariff-rate quota system for cattle, beef, sheep, and lamb, then our domestic beef and lamb industries will continue to shrink, threatening our nation’s food security and worsening the ongoing hollowing out of rural communities across America.”
There could very well be some inflation from Trump’s tariffs but that seems to be the price we’ll have to pay to bring back more higher paying middle class jobs to this country and to rebuild our infrastructure as well as our military. If you’ve watched the news lately you know that Russia, North Korea and China are joining together to attack the dollar and America’s might in the world. It makes absolutely no sense to put more money in the hands of those who would destroy us. The use of strategic application of tariffs to divorce ourselves from China is simply a step we must take.
Sure, we may lose business from China as a result of Trump’s tariffs but that could be more than offset by Trump’s 25 percent tariffs on Mexican and Canadian beef coming across the border. In the January through June 2024 period, Canada’s beef exports to the U.S. accounted for 22.9 percent of the grand total, while Mexico exported 12.8 percent of all imports into the U.S. Canada ranked as the number one exporter to the U.S. while Mexico was number four. ▫
earth almost overnight. Free individuals, using their own land to create commerce and build personal wealth through the equity of their property, are the root of American success. Sixty percent of early American businesses were financed through the equity of property ownership. And sixty percent of American jobs were created through those successful businesses. That’s how a free-market economy is built. Private property ownership is the source of personal individual wealth for the average American.
John Locke advocated that if property rights did not exist, then the incentive for an industrious person to develop and improve property would be destroyed; that the industrious person would be deprived of the fruits of his labor; that marauding bands would confiscate, by force, the goods produced by others; and that mankind would be compelled to remain on a bare-subsistence level of handto-mouth survival because the accumulation of anything of value would invite attack.
One must only look to the example of the former Soviet Union to see clearly what happens to society when an outlaw government exercises brute force to take control of private property. Under that tyrannical government, each of Locke’s predictions came true. Throughout its history, the Soviet government excused its every action under the banner of equality for all. There were no property rights, no freedom of enterprise, and no protections for individual actions. Instead, the Soviet government enforced redistribution of wealth schemes, confiscating homes from the rich and middle class. Shelves were bare, freedom of choice was non-existent, and personal misery ruled the day.
The same basic redistribution schemes of the Soviets were later used by Zimbabwe’s former dictator, Robert Mugabe, to destroy that agriculturally-rich
African nation. Mugabe confiscated farmland owned by white farmers and gave it to friends of his corrupt government – most of whom had never even seen a farm. The result was economic disaster, widespread poverty, and hunger in a land that had once fed the continent. The nation of South Africa is now following in the murderous footsteps of Robert Mugabe as it attacks white farmers, taking their property and again putting it in the hands of those who know nothing about running a farm.
Clearly, John Locke’s warnings have been vindicated. Private property ownership is much more than a house. It is the root of a prosperous, healthy, human society based on the individual’s freedom to live a life of his own, gaining from the fruits of his own labor. Take that option away, and people will always react the same way. They stop producing.
The Lost Definition of Private Property Rights
In the 1990s, an all-out assault on property rights was well underway, led by a radical environmental movement, resulting in massive federal land grabs in the name of conservation. As one can imagine, courts across the nation were flooded with cases of people attempting to defend their property rights from government takings.
In the state of Washington, one of the major targets for such programs, the state Supreme Court realized it didn’t have an adequate definition of property rights to use in considering such cases. That’s when State Supreme Court Justice Richard B. Sanders wrote a “Fifth Amendment Treatise,” which included the following definition of property rights:
“Property in a thing consists not merely in its ownership and possession, but in the unrestricted right of use, enjoyment, and disposal. Anything which destroys any of the elements
of property, to that extent, destroys the property itself. The substantial value of property lies in its use. If the right of use be denied, the value of the property is annihilated, and ownership is rendered a barren right.”
“Use” of the land is the key. Using the land in a productive way that is beneficial to the owner is what gives the land value. According to Justice Sanders, paying the taxes and mortgage while some undefined government entity can rule and regulate how the property is used, is a “barren right” that annihilates its value.
When you purchase property, how much of the land do you own? What is the depth of the soil? Do you own the water on the land? Do you own the air above it? As property rights expert Dr. Timothy Ball wrote, “All these questions speak to political issues that transcend
private, regional, and national boundaries. Nationally and internationally, lack of this knowledge is being exploited by those who seek control…”
How To Fight Back?
For several decades, the radical Left has been dedicated in its efforts to organize at every level of government while advocates of limited government failed to do the required “dirty work” of local organization and activism to protect our freedoms. We gave the Left a pretty clear playing field to organize and seize control, and now we are suffering under the result.
For the dedicated Left, no position is too small. No appointed board is ignored. When was the last time local Conservative activists cared about positions like City Attorney?
Yet these are the very officials who enforced the COVID-19 lockdown policies. Local government is now infested with Planners, NGOs, and federal agencies dictating policies. And the only reason they have power and influence now is because the Left fought to elect representatives who then gave it to them.
Today, too many elected officials, even the honest ones, fail to understand the roots and goals of the “Sustainable” policies they are enforcing. In
their ignorance they respond to critics, saying, “well, that’s just the way it’s done.” As they surrender their elective powers to appointed boards, do they even think of asking themselves, “Who do they actually represent – the voters or the NGOs and appointed boards?”
The threat of man-made climate change is the center of the Deep State’s hold on power. That’s the unrelenting fear tactic that claims the earth will become uninhabitable in ten years unless massive government power controls every human action. Power for the state!
Yet there is ample scientific proof that such claims about man’s effect on the environment are basically non-existent. However, many leaders of the freedom movement wrongly assume that all we need to do to counter the misinformation from the climate alarmists is to simply write a scholarly paper disproving it and set the record straight. It doesn’t work because few will understand it, fewer still will ever attempt to read it. In short, we badly overestimate the knowledge, intelligence and attention span of the average citizen and government official whom we are trying to convince. Emotions tend to decide debates rather than facts.
The first step in fighting back is to stop depending on one per-
son, one icon, one president to lead us forward. We must take responsibility ourselves to ensure that the government does not move forward unattended. We need to be directly involved at every level, especially on the local level.
Change the debate to attack anti-freedom policies and expose non-governmental (NGO) carpetbaggers hiding in the shadows dictating policy. You can change the debate by making private property protection the key to your local fight. Sustainable policy cannot be enforced if private property is protected. Challenge local elected officials to stand with you in protection of private property. If they refuse – expose them. Force elected officials to be personally responsible for their actions.
Picture how different our nation would be if we dug in to elect a majority of governors across the nation who understood and operated under the Tenth Amendment, which acknowledges the States’ power to stand against Federal overreach. What if you had a county commission that refused to participate in non-elected regional government? How would your life change if your city council was made up of individuals who guided your community under the three pillars of freedom, including protection of private property, encouragement and support for local businesses, and the lifting of rules and regulations that stifled personal choices in your individual life? How do we make all of that a reality?
Set a goal to turn your local community into a Freedom Pod. Simply focus on making these goals a reality in your community and if successful, as prosperity spreads, the idea will certainly spread to a neighboring community and then to the next. The challenge is to create a successful blueprint and a cadre of dedicated elected representatives that will begin to move from the local to the state level of government.
That will set the stage for effecting a federal government as conceived by our forefathers. The result will be the growth of Freedom Pods across the nation. Here is the end game for the forces of freedom. No matter who is president, we must take control of our cities, counties, state legislatures, and governors. Only then can we stand up to the potential tyranny from Washington, DC. To live your life as YOU choose, start right there in your community – build that Freedom Pod. Act Local and Stop Global! ▫
ministration’s (“FAA”) and the National Park Service’s (“NPS”) decision not to complete an environmental review under NEPA of an Air Tour Management Plan governing tourist flights over national parks near San Francisco, California.
The court noted that, although the parties’ arguments focused on whether the FAA and NPS complied with the CEQ NEPA regulations, the court would “not address these regulations.” Instead, and despite the fact no parties raised the issue, the court held on its own accord that CEQ’s NEPA regulations, “which purport to govern how all federal agencies must comply with [NEPA], are ultra vires,” or beyond CEQ’s legal authority. Tracing the origins of CEQ’s NEPA regulations, the court pointed out that CEQ’s claimed rulemaking authority was tied to a Presidential Executive Order that did not provide CEQ with “lawful authority to promulgate these regulations.”
The court acknowledged that NEPA provides other federal agencies authority to adopt their own NEPA implementing regulations. The court considered the question of whether CEQ’s NEPA regulations could be effectively revived if another federal agency had lawfully adopted or incorporated them into their own regulations. The court, however, did not clearly answer the question, instead noting that here, the agencies at issue had not adopted or incorporated the CEQ regulations. dispatched with CEQ’s rulemaking authority, the court returned to the merits of Marin Audubon Society’s arguments and declared arbitrary and capricious the FAA’s and NPS’s use of the existing level of flights under interim operating authority as the baseline for measuring the environmental effects of their Air Travel Management Plan. The court then vacated and remanded the plan to the FAA to comply with the opinion.
What Comes Next?
Applicable federal and local rules, parties have 45 days to seek rehearing en banc of the court’s opinion. If granted, the court clerk will enter an order vacating the original panel’s judgment. If denied, any petition to the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari is due within 90 days. There is also a potential for the parties to seek a stay of the decision. If granted, a stay would delay the effect of the decision.
Implications
If upheld, this case is likely to have sweeping implications for project developers and all federal agencies, the totality of which is currently unknown.
Impacts on Ongoing NEPA Reviews
This decision does not eliminate the requirement for major federal actions to undergo NEPA review. Federal agencies conducting those reviews must
still comply with the NEPA statute, which includes the requirements to prepare Environmental Impact Statements and Environmental Assessments for certain federal actions. Agencies with ongoing NEPA reviews may continue to rely on CEQ’s NEPA regulations as persuasive guidance given the uncertainty around a potential reversal of the decision and the impact of the decision outside of the D.C. Circuit. But it remains to be seen what each agency will in fact choose to do. Several key provisions of NEPA were integrated into statute last year as part of the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act. Those amendments remain in effect. Additionally, CEQ guidance remains valid, but is only guidance and not binding on agencies.
Another potential complicating impact from this decision is that many projects involve approvals from multiple federal agencies, which benefitted from common, government-wide regulations. Absent government-wide regulations (such as CEQ’s), projects may have to adhere to multiple, and potentially differing, agency NEPA regulations.
Impacts on Agency NEPA Regulations
Although the court’s decision held that CEQ’s NEPA regulations are invalid, it is less clear how this decision impacts other agencies’ NEPA regulations. As the court noted, many agencies have adopted their own NEPA regulations intended to supplement CEQ’s regulations. The court opinion indicates, however, another agency’s adoption or incorporation of CEQ’s NEPA regulations does not revive the validity of CEQ’s NEPA regulations. Further, depending on how an agency’s NEPA regulations refer to or treat the CEQ regulations, it is possible that an individual agency’s NEPA regulations could also be deemed invalid. This would likely have an agency-by-agency impact, based on the specific language of that agency’s NEPA regulations.
Impacts on NEPA Litigation
If this decision stands, parties (applicants, agencies, and project opponents) may be circumspect about relying upon CEQ’s NEPA regulations as the basis for their arguments. Instead, parties are likely to try to find support in the language of the NEPA statute, and applicable case law derived from the statute (rather than regulations). However, even with last year’s regulatory NEPA amendments, key terms like “environmental impacts” are undefined in the statute. This decision may also have an impact on, or be addressed in, another major NEPA case, Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado (Docket 23975), set to be argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on December 10, 2024. ▫
• Custom Home on 36+ acre estate in Dragoon Mountain Ranch
• 36+ acre homesites in St David, AZ
• 80 Acre Farm land with 16” Irrigation Well in Willcox, AZ
• Custom Home on 4+ acres in Cochise, AZ
• 40 acre off grid land in Portal, AZ
THE SAND CAMP RANCH
The election is over and there is optimism in the ranch real estate and cattle markets. It is time to invest in a quality cattle ranch. The Sand Camp Ranch fits the bill with an excellent grass cover and above average very functional improvements. It has been blessed with abundant moisture and is in excellent condition. Located in southern Chaves County east of the productive Pecos River Valley. The ranch is comprised of 2,380 +/- deeded acres, 6,074 NM State Lease Acres, 23,653 Federal BLM Lease Acres and 480 acres Uncontrolled, 32,107 +/- total acres (50.17 Sections). Grazing Capacity set by a Section 3 BLM grazing permit at a realistic 405 Animal Units Yearlong. The ranch is watered by five primary wells and an extensive interconnected pipeline system. This ranch is ready to go, no deferred maintenance. Price: $3,672,000 This is one of the better ranches in the area. It is nicely improved and well-watered. You won’t find anything comparable for the price. Call or email for a brochure and an appointment to come take a look.
SCOTT MCNALLY, QUALIFYING BROKER • BAR M REAL ESTATE, LLC P.O. Box 428, Roswell, NM 88202 • Office: 575-622-5867 Cell: 575-420-1237 Website: www.ranchesnm.com
Flatulence Tax: Denmark Agrees to Deal for Livestock Emissions Levy
BY HAFSA KHALIL / BBC NEWS
Denmark has agreed on how to implement the world’s first tax on agricultural emissions, including flatulence by livestock.
This comes after months of negotiations between the country’s major parties, farmers, the industry, trade unions and environmental groups. The Green Tripartite agreement was first announced in June.
Beginning in 2030, farmers will have to pay a levy of 300 kroner ($43; £34) per ton of methane (as per carbon dioxide equivalent) on emissions from livestock including cows and pigs, which will rise to 750 kroner in 2035.
The Green Tripartite minister said they will “do what it takes to reach our climate goals” after receiving a “broad majority” in parliament.
“[It is a] huge, huge task that is now underway: to transform large parts of our land from agricultural production to forestry, to natural spaces, to ensure that we can bring life back to our fjords,” Jeppe Bruus said.
Part of the Green Tripartite agreement between the government, the agriculture industry and environmental organizations is to also reduce nitrogen pollution in an effort to restore the coasts and fjords. Nitrogen emissions could be reduced by 13,780 tons annually from 2027, AFP news agency reported.
A concerted effort will also be made to improve the country’s biodiversity.
According to Danish daily The Copenhagen Post, 250,000 hectares of new forest will be planted, and 140,000 hectares of peatlands that are currently being cultivated will be restored to natural habitat.
Peatlands are wetlands characterized by waterlogged conditions and are known carbon stores.
Around 60 percent of Denmark’s territory is currently cultivated, making it together with Bangladesh the country with the highest share of cultivated land, according to a Danish parliamentary report.
“Danish nature will change in a way we have not seen since the wetlands were drained in 1864,” Mr Bruus said, as quoted by AFP news agency.
Speaking about the agreement, the Danish minister for climate, energy and utilities, Lars Aagaard, said it showed the country’s “willingness to act.”
“It also shows the Danish model - broad political majority in the Danish parliament [and] involvement of the sectors that will be affected by the tax and involvement of environmental stakeholders,” he added, explaining these are “things that we could all benefit from if the rest of the world could foster such cooperation in the climate fight.” ▫
New Saddle and Sirloin Portrait Gallery Inductee Honored
Jim S. Williams of Boling, Texas was officially inducted into the Saddle and Sirloin Portrait Gallery on Sunday, November 17 at the 2024 North American International Livestock Exposition in Louisville, Ky. Williams is the 379th member added to the historic gallery of livestock standouts. For more about Williams and his contributions to agriculture, please visit the NAILE website. ▫
US Tightens Import Restrictions on Mexico after Screw Worm Detection
BY CHRIS MOORE / MEATINGPLACE.COM
USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has elected to restrict the import of animal commodities from Mexico as it assesses the impact of a New World screwworm (NWS) detection in a cow in the southern Mexico state of Chiapas.
Mexico’s Chief Veterinary Officer alerted the USDA in late November about the detection, according to a release from APHIS.
NWS larvae infest the living tissue of warm-blooded animals, causing severe infections.
Producers along the U.S.-Mexico border are urged to monitor livestock and pets for NWS signs, including draining wounds and discomfort. Suspected cases should be reported to veterinarians immediately.
“Given the northward movement of NWS, APHIS has stepped up efforts in Central America to combat this pest,” said Dr. Rosemary Sifford, U.S. Chief Veterinary Officer. “With this detection in Mexico, we will intensify measures to protect American agriculture and reestablish the barrier in Central America.”
NWS infestations have spread northward in recent years, reaching Panama, Costa Rica, and now Mexico due to increased cattle movement and disrupted fly control zones. APHIS is deploying sterile flies in Central America to curb the spread. The USDA said it will continue collaborating with regional partners to contain and eradicate NWS and restore the biological barrier in Panama.
US Department of Labor Extends Public Comment PeriodfFor Proposed Heat Injury, Illness Prevention Rule Until January 2025
The U.S. Department of Labor today announced that its Occupational Safety and Health Administration has extended the public comment period for its proposed rule to protect workers from extreme heat exposure in indoor and outdoor workplaces to remain open until January 14, 2025.
As published in the Federal Register on August 30, 2024, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Heat Injury and Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings had an initial 120-day public comment period scheduled to end on December 30, 2024. OSHA is extending the deadline for submitting comments to provide stakeholders more time to review the proposed rule and gather relevant information and data for their input.
OSHA also announced an informal public hearing on the proposed rule will begin on June 16, 2025.
“Reducing the dangers of workplace heat exposure and illness is critical to saving lives and preventing workers from suffering needless illnesses,” said Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health Douglas Parker. “This 15day extension to the already lengthy comment period will take the deadline past the holiday season and help ensure that stakeholders can share valuable insights we need to craft a rule that protects workers from extreme heat indoors and outdoors effectively.”
Comments at: www.regulations.gov/ commenton/OSHA-2021-0009-4761 ▫
Beef, Hog Packer Margins Erode Further
BY LISA M. KEEFE / MEATINGPLACE.COM
Short-term financial performance at the packer level is worsening, and long-term trends indicate that margins won’t improve soon.
Negotiated cash cattle increased $3.67 per cwt. the week ending November 30, while feedlot margins increased $38 per head to an industry average of $130.42 per head, according to the Sterling Beef Profit Tracker, as summarized in Drovers. Meanwhile, beef packers saw losses increase $29 per head to a loss of $91.33 per head. That puts the packer/feeder margin spread at $222 per head in favor of the feeder.
Cash cattle averaged $190.03 per cwt. the week ending November 30. Cattle marketed last week carried a total feed cost of $442.30 per head, about $17 more than feed costs for cattle sold the same week a year ago. Cattle placed last week are calculated to have a purchase price for 750800 lb. feeder steers at $253.92 per cwt., similar to a month ago. The estimated total cost for finishing a steer last week was $2,671 per head, up from last year’s estimate of $2,400 per head. Fed cattle slaughter totaled an estimated 442,400, down 76,094 head from the same week last year.
Packing plant capacity utilization was estimated at an unsustainable 72.5 percent, compared with 85.1 percent last year.
“We have substantially more capacity to slaughter and fabricate cattle than we’ve got cattle to fill that,” noted John Nalivka, principal with Sterling Marketing Inc. and author of the Sterling Beef Profit Tracker and Sterling Pork Profit Tracker. “And even if [capacity is] not used it still costs money to maintain.”
In the pork supply chain, farrow-to-finish hog producers found positive margins of $36.52 per head last week, up $6.11 from the previous week, according to the Sterling Pork Profit Tracker. Pork packers, meanwhile, saw average losses of $5.87 per head, down from a profit of $14.38 from the previous week. Last year, pork packer margins were $47.38. Hog slaughter was estimated at 2.238 million head, down 373,726 head from the same week last year.
Pork packer capacity utilization was estimated at 85.4 percent compared to 99.6 percent last year.
Pork producers also are being conservative about rebuilding their herds, Nalivka said: “I think the producers will be cautious about any kind of rapid buildup in sow numbers and in the breeding herd. We were hit bad in 2020 when the plants closed, and to have to euthanize livestock is never a good deal.” ▫
Lone Star Open Auctioneer Championship Awards Scholarships for Auctioneer School
The Lone Star Open (LSO) Auctioneer Championship annually awards a full-tuition scholarship to a young person aspiring to attend auctioneer school. This scholarship covers all tuition costs at the recipient’s school of choice, offering a launchpad into the dynamic field of auctioneering.
Eligible applicants must be either high school seniors, undergraduates, or graduate students enrolled at an accredited college, university, or technical school. Applications are due by January 15, 2025, and full details can be found under the LSO tab at www.texasauctioneers.org.
The scholarship recipient will be announced at the upcoming Lone Star Open on Sunday, February 2, at the Roundup Inn on the grounds of the Fort Worth Stock Show & Rodeo. The event will showcase 25 top auctioneers from across the U.S. competing for a $20,000 grand prize, along with a custom saddle, buckle, and the distinguished LSO title. The public is invited to attend, enjoy the spirited bidding, and purchase from over 100 items on offer. ▫
Online Direct Sales Course For Producers: Where’s the Beef?
BY FRANK FUHRIG / MEATINGPLACE.COM
Ashort version of Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service’s “Where’s the Beef? Legal and Economic Considerations for Direct Beef Sales” is now available online for producers exploring direct-to-consumer marketing.
The course, which has previously been delivered through in-person seminars across Texas, has been summarized in an abbreviated, three-hour version.
Certificates of completion can be obtained at the end of the course, which addresses legal and economic aspects of direct beef sales as well as giving participants background on permitting requirements, marketing options and labeling considerations. The course contains three modules: Farm to Plate; legal issues; and economic considerations.
The course is offered with financial support from the Southern Extension Risk Management Education Center. AgriLife Extension offers a “Where’s the Beef?” handbook and video series. The online course will be available for $50 for the first 100 registrants and $75 thereafter. It can be found on the AgriLife Learn site using the product code AGEC-CO-032. ▫
TFROM THE BACK SIDE
hat was an incredible election that needed to happen. There was just too much going awry in this country and it did not make any sense.
I have never seen a group so determined to undermine the United States Constitution, religion, freedom, and everything else that makes America great. Don’t forget that these folks are still around and will continue their barrage of hopelessness and chaos.
However, at least they are no longer in power for the most part. I was a little disillusioned by the Senate electing Mitch McConnell’s number two-man, John Thune as majority leader. You would have thought that after 18 years of McConnell they would want to get away from all that.
The best thing about President Trump is that he is an independent thinker and no one’s patsy. As we all know, most politicians are under someone’s thumb these days.
Here in the Southwest we still have lots of work to do even with the change in Washington, DC. We are still stuck with leftist democrat governors and senators in Arizona and New Mexico.
I’m sure you have noticed their complete disregard for anything that makes sense for agriculture. However, Governor Grisham did join ranchers to oppose the shooting of feral
Common Sense America
BY BARRY DENTON
dough head cowboys that were hired to help the government with that operation? Who would sign up to ride against a fellow rancher?
Hopefully most of this government contempt for agriculture will come to an end with the new administration. Heads rolling at the USFS, EPA, and some law enforcement agencies should greatly improve the lives of hard-working ranchers and farmers across the west.
I know President Trump is announcing lots of picks for department heads, but I have not yet heard who the Secretary of Agriculture will be. I know that Sarah Frey, “America’s Pumpkin Queen” is one of the candidates and Charles Herbster the Nebraska cattle farmer is another.
No telling who will end up with it. There are probably other considerations that I am not aware of.
This should be a very positive administration regarding fuel. Hopefully, we once again become the world’s leader in fuel production, and it will send our own fuel prices south.
Taking away a mountain of foolish regulation should create a surge in production, which
will mean cheaper prices for American consumers. Farmers and ranchers know exactly what they spend on fuel each year. This should be a huge boon to them.
Then stop and think what great help it will be to the trucking industry. The cost of consumer goods will have to fall eventually.
The other thing that I suspect will end are these ridiculous subsidies to wind and solar projects. Why are we propping up an industry as old and ineffective as wind power is beyond me?
Granted it may work in a few areas or in a few specific applications, but I do not see any industrial plants opting for it. Can you imagine a windmill providing 3 phase power? That’s why we have nuclear power folks. It is clean, safe, and very efficient.
My guess is that the climate change movement will fold up and go away. Now you won’t have to worry about paying an emissions tax on your cattle. That’s about as absurd as it could get.
The stock market is going crazy with anticipation as is most of America. This is the dawning of a new day in America. Enjoy
ctioneer@aol.com
