Water Management

The Hidden Cost of Overgrazing: How It Drains Your Watershed, Rainfall and Bottom Line

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 12:01:30 GMT

Overgrazing is a primary driver of water scarcity on rangelands. When livestock repeatedly remove too much leaf area, soil infiltration rates drop, causing rainfall to become surface runoff rather than stored soil moisture. According to Texas A&M AgriLife Research, heavily grazed sites can lose up to 10% of their annual precipitation to runoff — water that could have driven forage production.

Every drop of rain is precious. On healthy rangeland, most of that rainfall enters the soil (infiltration), is stored in the profile and then drives forage production. Under prolonged overgrazing, however, plant vigor declines, roots shrink, litter disappears and soils compact, reducing infiltration, increasing runoff and erosion and shrinking the water available for grass growth. Over time, that damages both watershed function and ranch profitability.

What Overgrazing Does to Water

Less plant cover → less infiltration. Texas A&M Extension work shows that rangeland sites with robust bunchgrass or oak-understory cover retain more rainfall and lose less to runoff than sites dominated by sodgrasses or bare ground. Heavily grazed watersheds at the Sonora Station have shown runoff approaching 10% of annual precipitation, water that could have been growing grass.
More bare ground and compaction → more runoff and sediment. Vegetation and ground cover are the two attributes managers can influence most to control raindrop impact, maintain soil structure and limit concentrated flow erosion; when cover is lost, rills and sheet flow move soil, nutrients and carbon off the pasture and downstream.
Hydrologic decline scales from paddock to watershed. AgriLife Research modeling in northwest Texas found heavy continuous grazing increased bare ground and reduced infiltration, elevating surface runoff, soil erosion and carbon export to streams, while adaptive multi-paddock (AMP) grazing reduced those losses at both ranch and watershed scales.
Stream water quality takes a hit. Edge-of-field monitoring in northeast Texas showed continuously grazed sites produced more than 24% more runoff than pastures under prescribed grazing and had significantly higher loads of nitrate/nitrite and total suspended solids, reflecting the combined effects of reduced infiltration and increased overland flow.

(West Texas Rangelands)

Why Infiltration Matters for Production

Every inch of rainfall that infiltrates instead of running off becomes soil moisture for roots, cooler soil temperatures and more days of active growth. Texas A&M’s classic “Improving Rainfall Effectiveness on Rangeland” illustrates how management that maintains cover and litter can shift water fate toward infiltration and storage, improving rain-use efficiency which translates to more grass per inch of rain.

From a forage and cattle performance standpoint, prolonged overgrazing repeatedly removes leaf area and growing points, which reduces photosynthesis, root mass and regrowth capacity resulting in the plant having fewer “tools” to capture and use the water that does infiltrate. Texas A&M AgriLife’s grazing series details how timing, intensity, and recovery periods govern these plant responses.

The Compounding Costs You Can’t See — At First

Reduced carrying capacity & higher feed costs. Lower infiltration and more runoff → less forage → lower stocking potential or higher reliance on hay and supplements. Over time, repeatedly “mining” residual cover shrinks both grass base and soil function.
More erosion & infrastructure risk. Concentrated flow cuts rills and gullies, damages roads and water gaps, and fills stock ponds with sediment; and these are costs that show up as repairs and lost storage. (NRCS hydrology guidance emphasizes cover as the first line of defense.)
Water quality liabilities. TWRI studies link poor grazing in creek pastures to higher bacteria and sediment delivery during runoff events; rotational/prescribed grazing and keeping livestock out of wet creek pastures during stormy periods reduce those loads dramatically.
Ecological drift. Overgrazed, drought-stressed sites can shift toward weedy/invasive species that livestock avoid, creating a feedback loop of selective overuse on the remaining palatable plants.

What to Do Instead: Practical Fixes that Pay

Match stocking to forage and recovery. Stocking rate is the “gatekeeper” decision; nothing else works if it’s wrong. Build flexibility to reduce numbers when growth slows, and plan for adequate post-graze recovery that changes with rainfall.
Manage timing, duration and distribution. Shorter grazing periods, longer rest and strategic water/mineral placement prevent chronic re-grazing of regrowth and spread hoof impact — core principles in the AgriLife Adaptive Multi-Paddock guidance.
Monitor cover, litter and bare ground. Simple photo points and transects documenting bare ground and litter depth are sensitive early-warning indicators of hydrologic decline; adjust grazing before the problem is expensive (AgriLife’s West Texas Rangelands site offers practical monitoring how-tos and also check out the Rangeland Analysis Platform for current production estimates).
Invest where infiltration starts: the soil surface. Where chronic traffic has sealed the surface, recovery requires rest + cover, not more grazing. NRCS and AgriLife hydrology guidance are clear: vegetation cover is the most manager-controllable driver of infiltration, compaction and erosion resistance on rangeland.

The Bottom Line

Prolonged overgrazing is more than a forage or drought problem; it’s a management problem that creates water scarcity. It trades infiltration for runoff, soil for loose dirt and carrying capacity for input costs. The fixes are well-known: destock, shorten grazing bouts, lengthen recovery and monitor cover and bare ground. Those steps rebuild infiltration, stabilize soils and turn the same rainfall into more grass and healthier soils.

Visit the West Texas Rangelands website for more information on rangeland management and current research on prescribed fire, wildfires, brush management and grazing management.

Garlic in the Water Trough? What New Research Means for Fly Control in Cattle

Mon, 13 Apr 2026 18:28:13 GMT

For decades, producers across the U.S. and Canada have used garlic-infused minerals or salt as a natural fly control strategy. The biological rationale is straightforward: sulfur-containing compounds from garlic are absorbed, circulated and released through the skin to repel flies.

But when tested under field conditions, the results have been inconsistent.

A two-year Canadian grazing study evaluating garlic-infused trace mineral salt illustrates that variability. In one group, cattle receiving garlic had 47% fewer flies and 41% fewer defensive behaviors compared to controls. In another group, however, no significant difference was observed, despite the same supplementation strategy.

The authors point to several possible drivers, including environmental conditions, genetic differences and variation in supplement intake.

Other controlled work in the U.S. has produced weaker signals. In a 14-week field study in Louisiana, cattle consuming garlic through mineral only achieved about a 25% reduction in horn fly numbers, a level described as not meaningful relative to expected control standards.

Taken together, the North American literature points to a consistent pattern: garlic shows biological potential, but results are not reliable enough to stand alone as a primary control tool.

Intake May Be The Limiting Factor

Both of these studies relied on free-choice mineral or salt delivery, where intake can vary widely between animals and across time. Even when average consumption appears adequate, dose per head per day is not controlled with free-choice delivery, making consistent exposure difficult to achieve.

In practice, this does more than reduce efficacy — it makes outcomes unpredictable at the herd level.

This shifts the conversation from “Does garlic work?” to a more practical question: Can it be delivered consistently enough to produce a repeatable effect?

Delivering Organosulfur Compounds Through Water

A 2026 Australian study published in Tropical Animal Health and Production evaluated that question under commercial conditions. Instead of relying on free-choice intake, researchers delivered garlic-derived organosulfur compounds through drinking water in a grazing beef herd.

This approach directly addresses one of the most consistent limitations identified in North American work: variable intake across animals.

The study followed 266 beef cows split into treatment and control groups with the same stocking density with no changes to routine management. Both groups received the same base ration over the 16-week experimental period, but the treatment group received the garlic-derived supplement through water.

With intake standardized at the herd level, a clearer signal emerged:

Treatment group: ~80% reduction in fly counts within two weeks
Control group: ~20% increase over the same period
By week four:
- Treated: ~110 flies/head
- Control: ~350 flies/head
Seasonal pressure increased fly numbers in both groups:
- Treated: ~550% increase from baseline
- Control: ~6,500% increase

Behavioral Response Aligns With Reduced Fly Pressure

Behavioral indicators followed the same pattern as fly counts. Defensive behaviors — including tail flicking, head tossing and stamping — increased in both groups as fly pressure rose. However, the increase was substantially lower in treated cattle (68%) compared to controls (186%), indicating reduced irritation under similar conditions.

These behavioral changes reflect more than visible discomfort; they are tied to grazing time, stress and overall performance.

Relevance to Fly Control in North American Systems

While the study focused on buffalo flies, the implications extend to horn flies, the primary ectoparasite in U.S. and Canadian grazing systems.

Both species:

Remain on the host for most of their life cycle
Feed frequently on blood
Trigger similar behavioral and production responses

The underlying mechanism — repellency via metabolized organosulfur compounds — is expected to translate across fly species.

Where This Fits in Practice

Water-based delivery of garlic-derived compounds may have a role as part of an integrated fly control strategy, particularly in:

Extensive grazing systems
Herds with inconsistent mineral intake
Operations where labor limits handling-based interventions

North American research has shown garlic-based fly control can produce reductions in some settings, but results have been inconsistent. Across studies, variation in intake has been a recurring limitation.

This new study suggests when intake is controlled through water, the same compounds may produce a more consistent response at the herd level. At the same time, the findings should be interpreted within the study’s constraints. The trial lacked replication, did not measure individual intake and did not assess compound stability in water.

This work emphasizes how a product is delivered can be just as important as what is delivered when it comes to real-world performance.

Finding Value in Livestock Wastewater

Tue, 09 Dec 2025 14:29:08 GMT

Kansas State University researchers are leading an innovative effort to turn livestock wastewater into a reusable resource in a project that helps to conserve the Ogallala Aquifer and strengthen sustainability across the High Plains.

The four-year, $6 million project, led by Prathap Parameswaran, an associate professor in K-State’s Carl R. Ice College of Engineering, brings together engineering, agricultural economics and social science experts from K-State, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Oklahoma State University and Seward County Community College.

At the center of the work is an anaerobic membrane bioreactor that treats wastewater from livestock operations so that it can be reused, while also recovering nutrients and generating biogas for on-farm energy.

“The crux of what we’re doing is about water access,” says Joe Parcell, professor of agricultural economics at K-State. “We’re creating a process to polish and clean water up enough so that it can be reused in the livestock system. At the same time, we’re also pulling in those carbon and nutrient elements to try and add value so it becomes more widely adopted.”

On a recent episode of Agriculture Today, Parcell explains that adding value to wastewater is key to making the technology feasible for producers.

“We’re working on the ability to add value to wastewater,” he says. “When producers see the economic and environmental benefits, they’re more likely to adopt and integrate it into their operations.”

The project aims to reduce freshwater use, manage waste more efficiently, and create new incentives for livestock producers to invest in sustainable technology.

“Part of the adoption equation is where you are at, and how far do you have to pump water now? What are the policies and incentives going to be?” Parcell explains. “We’ve seen incentives to install these types of facilities in the past. What will they look like in the future?”

By capturing nutrients and reusing treated water, livestock operations could improve efficiency, reduce costs and contribute to long-term aquifer protection. Parcell says collaboration between researchers, producers and policymakers will be critical to ensure that conservation practices are practical and economically sound.

“At the end of the day, it’s about finding that balance between sustainability and profitability,” he says. “If we can help producers make decisions that benefit both, we can make a real impact on how water is managed across the region.”

Why EPA Says Farmers and Ranchers Won't Need a Lawyer to Understand the Newly Proposed WOTUS Rule

Fri, 21 Nov 2025 16:10:32 GMT

Agricultural groups have been asking for a new WOTUS rule that eliminates red tape and clears up confusion for farmers and ranchers. As EPA unveiled its latest proposed Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule this week , Deputy Administrator David Fotouhi says the agency’s goal was simple: clarity, consistency and fewer regulatory headaches for farmers and ranchers.

Fotouhi joined “U.S. Farm Report” for an exclusive interview to break down what this new rule means and why EPA believes it hits the mark.

A Rule He Says Brings Clarity and Certainty

Fotouhi says the agency’s top priority is eliminating uncertainty farmers have faced under previous interpretations of WOTUS.

“We really emphasize the need for farmers, ranchers and all stakeholders to have clarity in terms of how broad or narrow federal regulation of waters is in this country,” he says. “From Day 1, we start working on a proposed rule to bring that clarity and certainty to landowners across the country. On Monday, we are able to announce a proposal that is consistent with the law, that provides needed clarity on the extent of federal regulation, and that recognizes the primary jurisdiction of states and localities because they know their resources best.”

He adds that the proposal strikes what he calls a good balance.

“We think we really strike a good balance between protecting our nation’s waters and making sure farmers and ranchers can do the work that feeds Americans and produces the fuel this country relies on — without adding unnecessary regulatory burden to their day-to-day life,” he says.

EPA Says Farmers “Won’t Need a Lawyer” to Understand the New Rule

Fotouhi stresses one of EPA’s biggest priorities in rewriting WOTUS was ensuring farmers no longer need legal help just to determine whether they can work their own ground. He says the agency intentionally crafted the language to be plain, practical and rooted in the realities producers face every day.

“We take a fresh look at the Supreme Court’s direction and try to apply that in language that is easily understandable. Producers should not need a lawyer to understand how this rule applies to their property. We write it in a way that lets farmers look at their land and have a clear sense of whether federal permits are required.”

Fotouhi explains past WOTUS rules often included terminology that was vague, overly technical or open to interpretation, something EPA heard repeatedly during outreach with farm groups.

He says the agency makes a conscious effort to eliminate that ambiguity.

“We listen to farmers tell us repeatedly that the rule has to be understandable,” he says. “So instead of broad definitions that leave too much room for interpretation, we focus on concrete, workable language. We take geographic differences into account, we remove subjective criteria and we make exclusions, like the groundwater exemption, explicit so there’s no second-guessing.”

Fotouhi says that level of clarity is a direct response to years of frustration in rural America.

“We know farmers need certainty,” he says. “They need to know what they can and can’t do without waiting months for an answer. That’s why we put so much effort into making this rule clear, transparent and grounded in what the Supreme Court actually tells us to do.”

EPA Pushes Back on Claims the Proposal Overpromises

Some critics argue the agency risks overpromising. Fotouhi strongly rejects that idea.

“We take a fresh look at all the critical issues the Supreme Court lays out in the Sackett decision,” he says. “We think the previous administration does not faithfully implement that decision when they revise the rule, so we come back, reassess everything and come up with a definition that fully implements what the Court tells EPA and the Army Corps to do.”

He notes the agency made readability a priority.

“We try to apply the Court’s direction in language that is easily understandable, that takes geographic differences into account, and that doesn’t impose unnecessary burdens on farmers when they’re trying to decide if they need a permit,” he says.

Groundwater Exclusion: “We Want It Crystal Clear”

One standout change is the explicit exclusion of groundwater — language EPA says is included to eliminate confusion.

“Groundwater has never been part of the Waters of the United States, but we think it is absolutely necessary to make that exemption clear as day so there is no confusion about whether someone would need a permit for a discharge that may impact groundwater,” Fotouhi says.

He says repeated questions from stakeholders and newer case law convinced the agency to spell it out directly.

“Based on the case law that’s come out in the last few years and the general confusion we hear from stakeholders, we think it is incumbent on us to clarify this as clearly as we can,” he adds.

Final Rule Expected in Early 2026

EPA filed the proposal with the Federal Register , which means the rule’s comment period is officially underway.

“We publish the rule today, and it will be out for public comment for 45 days,” he says. “We know there is an absolute need for certainty and clarity and one nationwide standard, so we move quickly. We are hopeful that in the first few months of 2026, we can have a final rule out for the public.”

RFS: EPA Reviewing Comments, Aims for Certainty

Fotouhi also discusses EPA’s proposed Renewable Fuel Standard volumes, including record-setting biomass-based diesel levels.

“We understand how important it is to get this exactly right. From day one, Administrator Zeldin is laser-focused on ensuring the RFS strikes the right balance,” he says. “We know farmers and all stakeholders implicated by this program need certainty. We are working as quickly as we can to take final action.”

EPA’s Deregulatory Push: More Actions to Come

Fotouhi says the agency’s deregulatory actions announced earlier this year will have significant impact on agriculture.

“Reducing the cost of energy is one of our biggest focuses,” he says. “Many of the actions we identify are aimed at reducing energy prices for farmers, ranchers and manufacturers so we can reduce input costs and ultimately reduce the cost of the products they produce.”

This is evident through their efforts on WOTUS.

“The WOTUS proposal is a prime example; it’s designed to reduce unnecessary and illegal regulatory burden, and we are undertaking a score of additional actions across offices, working with USDA, the Department of Energy and the Interior Department, to identify ways to reduce input costs for agriculture,” Fotouhi says. “A thriving agricultural sector is a priority for the president, and lowering consumer prices is something we have to achieve.”

First-Gen Farmers Unlock New Perspectives With Regenerative Grazing

Mon, 17 Nov 2025 12:03:18 GMT

When Mike and Amanda Butterfield purchased their Pennsylvania farmland, they saw more than just a beautiful patchwork of rolling fields. They saw a new beginning — and a way to raise cattle differently.

The Butterfields wanted to trade the dairy life for a new mission: raising beef cattle while restoring the soil and serving their community.

“We purchased a farm in 2017 and honestly, the property was beautiful,” says Amanda Butterfield. “It was the right price, it was the right place, it was the right timing—and it was a time for us to convert from dairy into something a little less labor-intensive.”

Now they call themselves “reformed dairy farmers.”

Discovering Purpose Through Land Management

The transition wasn’t solely about profit. Their experience working with dairy cattle inspired a deep attention to, and passion for, animal health.

“I think that’s kind of our superpower,” Amanda says. “Since we were dairy farmers, we’re really good at animal husbandry, spending time with our cattle and noticing things to increase longevity.”

Amanda Butterfield is a passionate first-generation farmer managing a sustainable beef cattle operation focused on land stewardship and biodiversity. She is also an advocate for food security and the future of agriculture.

(Joelle Orem)

For Mike, the transition allowed them to have more to show for the dollars and hard work they were putting in.

“When we decided to quit milking, we wanted to stop renting from other people, put our money to work for us, and build something that would be ours—something that would build equity,” he says.

“We decided it was not going to be a dairy.”

Through collaboration with USDA–NRCS , Maple Valley Cattle Company found the opportunity to reorient themselves as land managers as well as animal caretakers. Amanda describes her perspective shift as becoming “grass producers, not beef producers.”

Turning Rough Ground into Rich Pasture

Grazing cattle on what Mike describes as “lower-quality and quite rough” ground required grit, flexibility and patience.

“Instead of having bare soil with corn and soybeans, getting the grass on it and having it year-round makes way more sense,” he explains. “We could take poorer-quality land and make it more profitable with animals than just with row crops.”

In fall 2017, when Mike and Amanda Butterfield purchased the farm, the pastures were overgrazed.

(Amanda Butterfield)

The family’s collaborative approach sets them apart.

“We had never grazed before,” Amanda shares. “We were learning that we’re more grass producers than beef producers. If you take care of the land, the soil and everything else, then the beef comes naturally after that.”

Mike and Amanda’s daughter, Evelyn, is a next-generation contributor to the farm and takes her job seriously. Duties are divided among the family, with each person contributing in unique ways.

“During the summer, I usually help move the cows whenever we have to work them,” she says. “I have my own horses that I rotationally graze as well, and I take care of them. I just really do whatever I can to help on the farm.”

Cattle are rotationally grazed along the hillside of Maple Valley Cattle Company

(Joelle Orem)

The Butterfields are innovators. Amanda describes their approach as fairly low-tech.

“Since we are first-generation farmers, we didn’t want to invest in too much. We don’t own a lot of equipment or anything that depreciates,” Amanda shares.

Still, they adopt new tools when it supports their goals—from better grazing records to experimenting with drones for field spraying.

Partnerships have been key to the transformation of Maple Valley Cattle Company. Amanda highlights several that have been crucial: “NRCS and the resources they have, and other organizations like PASA and Shroud Water Center.” The Butterfields also lean on local agronomists and other producers for support and guidance.

They are driven to increase not just their farm’s productivity, but also its biodiversity.

“One of the projects I’m working on is changing some of the wildlife areas — adding more wildflowers, trees, and shaded spots,” Amanda says.

These small changes add up.

“Even in just seven years, we’ve seen an increase in bobolinks, which are birds that nest in grazing areas,” she adds.

The family has also seen more honeybees and monarch butterflies on their property.

Observation-Guided Grazing

Maple Valley Cattle Company recently welcomed attendees of the Trust In Beef Sustainable Ranchers Tour for a firsthand look at its cattle operation and management practices. During the tour, Noble Research Institute’s Josh Gaskamp evaluated pasture soil and applauded the Butterfield’s approach.

Gaskamp says the Butterfields are a strong example of adaptive, rather than prescriptive, grazing.

“Instead of following a set schedule for moving cattle, they look at their forages and say, ‘Okay, now it’s time to move them,’” he explains. “They’re increasing stock density, which allows them to utilize a larger proportion of the forage species and grow more forage per acre.”

Noble Research Institute’s Josh Gaskamp evaluates pasture soil at Maple Valley Cattle Company during the Trust In Beef Sustainable Ranchers Tour in September, 2025.

(Joelle Orem)

Adapting and Moving Forward

No season is predictable.

“Last year was a complete disaster,” Mike reflects. “We had a devastating drought. We fed hay ten months out of twelve—the weeds got ahead of the grass, and now our pastures are really weedy.”

For the Butterfields, adaptation is constant.

Mike Butterfield uses temporary fencing and a water tub as part of an NRCS-assisted grazing system with 17 hydrants from a main well, boosting forage efficiency and biodiversity while reducing waste.

(Joelle Orem)

“We’re always changing things to make sure that every year becomes more efficient, easier on the cattle—which means easier on us,” Amanda explains.

Tough decisions, like investing in new barn housing or tackling weed problems, are faced as a family, with an eye on the long game.

“Hopefully, if it’s been 20 years and I can’t do it anymore, it’ll be better than when I started — but that’s going to be a long-term process,” Mike adds.

Cultivating the Next Generation

Evelyn’s passion for agriculture extends beyond the property lines. Her work on the farm isn’t just chores—it’s a launching pad for community impact and advocacy.

“My mom has always loved gardening, and she’s gotten me into it too,” Evelyn says. “For the last couple of years, we’ve been growing produce to donate to the Somerset County Mobile Food Bank. It makes me feel really great that we’re helping the community and using our ability as farmers to help people.”

Mike and Amanda’s daughter, Evelyn, is a next-generation contributor to the farm

(Joelle Orem)

She is carving a path through agricultural leadership and advocacy.

“I want to introduce not only young people, but especially girls, to agriculture, because I think that’s a big issue,” Evelyn shares.

Serving their local community is woven into the Butterfields’ routine. Amanda is proud to support programs like Beefing Up for Backpacks , a program she co-founded with the Pennsylvania Beef Foundation and Nichole Hockenberry.

“It’s very important to me to see kids who are hungry get food. It’s very impactful to see this happening, and everyone’s excited about the project and donations that are coming in.”

The Rewards of Stewardship

Mike knows there’s still much work ahead.

“Putting the barn up and building a fence are short projects, but improving the land is our long-term goal,” he says.

Evelyn treasures seeing their progress. “When I get home from school and I just step outside and look around—that’s very rewarding.”

For the Butterfields, this different path has been worth taking and serves as a testament to other producers seeking to pivot.

Trust In Beef works to secure the future of American ranching by providing the information ranchers need to make the decisions that impact the resiliency, profitability and resource management of their working lands. Learn more about Trust In Beef and their Sustainable Ranchers Tour by visiting www.trustinbeef.com

YOUR NEXT READ:

Making Every Acre Pull Double Duty

The Power of a Decision

How to Keep Livestock Waters Open All Winter Long

Thu, 06 Nov 2025 09:50:30 GMT

Extended grazing seasons and fewer days starting the tractor to feed cattle sound nice in theory, but what about the watering constraints? Some producers struggle with where to place watering systems, while others battle freezing temperatures brought on by harsh winters.

“Without water, there is no fall grazing,” says Rocky Brown, owner of Wald Fencing. “Fencing is easy; watering is the real constraint.”

Some might let their cattle fend for themselves with snow, but that’s not a preferred method for most.

“I’m not a big believer that snow gives cattle enough water,” Brown says. “They use up too much energy warming that snow to body temperature to make it useful.”

The good news is there are plenty of tried-and-true options for both temporary and permanent livestock watering systems that work in harsh winter conditions.

“The biggest thing is if water is moving, water is not freezing. So, if you can keep that going and water is always moving, your water is fine,” Brown says. “However, nothing’s foolproof. There’s not one thing that is the silver bullet, but you can monitor and manage to make most systems work.”

For fall grazing and more temporary setups, ranchers should start by considering the water source: wells, rural water, dugouts or natural springs.

“We have customers who put a generator and tank in an old two-horse trailer and pump water from a dugout,” Brown says. “They figure out the timing and gas needed for the generator, and any excess water flows right back to the original source.”

For ranchers using hydrants or other water sources, there are a variety of methods to keep water flowing even while using a float.

“We’ve developed a stainless-steel system using products from Watson Manufacturing that allows for continuous flow using a combination of a float, petcock and copper tubing,” Brown says. “I’ve had customers here in North Dakota use this system into January.”

There’s also a similar Watson Manufacturing product that runs on temperature control, and of course, Freeze Misers are another option for running off a hydrant.

The front system shows the temperature-based Watson System and the back system shows system described earlier in the story.

(Casual Cattle)

For permanent winter watering setups, ranchers should consider whether they’re using energy-free models, the materials of the tank and a concrete pad to go around the outside of the water tank.

“Buy good-quality waterers that will last. Don’t skimp, because cheap ones never fail in the summer; they fail when your cattle need them most,” Brown says.

Even in extreme climates, energy-free waterers can be effective when installed correctly.

“Energy-free waterers can work even in North Dakota and most of Canada if they’re installed right and deep enough to capture geothermal heat,” Brown says.

Tire tanks are a common sight in the Dakotas due to the natural insulation they provide, but they need to be properly cared for to stay effective.

“Fresh water is so important. If you’re using tire tanks, clean them out often,” Brown says. “Additionally, make sure they are set up with stainless-steel bolts and thick bottom plates so they don’t rust out. They don’t fail in July; they fail in January when your hands are freezing.”

Tank heaters — whether floating or sinking — are another option to consider to keep floats from freezing, but Brown finds sinkers to be more effective.

“If you’re using tank heaters, go with a sinking de-icer. Heat rises, and it warms the water from the bottom up instead of just the surface,” he says.

Ritchie tanks are another common brand for colder climates, but there are several factors to consider to make them most effective, starting with material.

“Be careful with all-plastic troughs in cold regions. They might be fine for Nebraska or farther south, but not for North Dakota winters,” Brown says.

He also encourages producers to keep valves below water whenever possible, use thermal cubes and incorporate a small aluminum plate.

The traditional riser tube can be replaced with the following system to keep the valve more protected from the elements.

(Casual Cattle)

“A thermal cube is a $20 game-changer. It turns your heat lamp on at 35 degrees and off at 45 so you’re not wasting power or burning bulbs,” Brown says. “A simple 4x6 aluminum plate under your element spreads the heat and keeps calcium from building up; cheap fix, big difference.”

Concrete pads are also important around permanent tanks.

“Make pads big enough for the animal to fit all four feet on there,” Brown says. “Don’t make cattle step up onto concrete pads. Keep them ground level so they’re not washing out the landing every time they step down.”

If concrete doesn’t seem feasible, there are other options.

“If you can’t get a concrete pad poured, build one out of rough-cut treated lumber,” Brown says. “It lasts, it’s reusable and you can move it if you ever have a water break.”

At the end of the day, it takes a combination of experiences — from the rancher and from others — to find the best solution for an operation.

“Share what you know, but don’t be arrogant about it. The beef industry rises together when we share what works instead of keeping it to ourselves,” Brown summarizes.

Know your constraints, talk to your neighbors or talk to an expert to determine which fall and winter watering systems will be most effective for your operation.

Listen to the full conversation on the “Casual Cattle Conversations” podcast .

Ranchers Make Tough Decisions to Weather Intense Southwest Drought

Tue, 23 Sep 2025 12:24:39 GMT

In the Southwest, dry conditions are the name of the game for cattle ranchers. But something about 2025 feels a little different.

With haboobs shoving dust into the air so heavily that nearby airports must force shutdowns — along with only a fraction of the average yearly rainfall thus far — Arizona producers are left hanging on by a thread. According to the U.S. Drought Monitor, more than 65% of the area has been in drought on some level.

It’s a feeling David and Tina Thompson of YY Ranch know well. Their generational ranch sits in the heart of the Chihuahuan Desert of Cochise County, near the Chiricahua Mountains. Tina grew up on this land. She knows that rains come and go.

But this year’s monsoons were not showing up. Left in the wake, the Thompsons were forced to make some tough decisions for their 300-head Angus cow-calf and seedstock herd.

“Our NRCS stocking rate says we should be able to run about 400 cows, but Tina and I, over the years, have cut that back to about 350 on our own because of water and resources,” David says. “Due to drought, we’re down to about 300 currently.”

Managing the Water

In the summer, Tina says she plans for each cow-calf pair to drink about 30 gallons of water a day.

“It’s life or death for them,” she says. “They are just like people. If they don’t drink enough water, they’ll die.”

But, when the water doesn’t come from overhead, it must come from underground — and sometimes even that is tricky.

“Our water at the house is only about 20' down, but you get to other places on the ranch, and it can be 400' to 500' down,” Tina says. “When you do find a good water source, you pipe it to the places that don’t.”

They have invested in their water management infrastructure to ensure they can pipe enough water for their herd, no matter where they are grazing.

But, with nearly 18 miles of pipeline, there are a number of vulnerabilities. And water loss can be catastrophic.

“Maybe you just checked everything and then a bear comes along and breaks your float, or you have a float break and you’ve lost 12,000 gallons of water in a single day,” Tina says.

With just the two of them on-ranch full time, the Thompsons were wearing themselves out just staying on top of their water. With the help of their local retailer, they found technology that could take the stress out of that water monitoring and place it right in the palm of their hands.

The Thompsons route critical water to their herd through 18 miles of pipeline. Ranchbot’s water management system helps them manage and monitor that water infrastructure for security and planning.

(Trust In Beef)

“Every morning, that’s the first thing I do when I wake up,” David says. “I check my Ranchbot on my phone and make sure everything looks good.”

For Bain Wilson, rancher education and outreach manager, this is precisely the on-ranch pain point the Ranchbot system is designed to alleviate.

“We know a lot of ranchers don’t think about what their hourly rate is,” he says. “They know they pay it out to their crew, but their time is money and we help them save that by not having to make as many of those trips out to check all those water points.”

That maintenance, Wilson says, does more than just cause stress. It impacts the bottom line.

“With Ranchbot, there’s a tremendous amount of time, money, labor savings and reduced wear and tear on vehicles. That’s really helping drive profitability along with the better management of that water resource,” he explains.

Forage Management

The Thompsons know there are two things they need in order to sustain their herd health throughout the year. Along with sufficient water, they need forage. But, the forage is struggling too in the drought.

Breaking up cow/calf pairs earlier than normal has allowed YY Ranch to weather the intense drought that they have experienced this year.

(Tina Thompson/YY Ranch)

It helps, Tina says, that they have been on a generational mission to break their land into smaller pastures.

“My dad started making the pastures smaller,” she says. “When I was a kid, we had a pasture up there that was 4 or 5 square miles and, of course, the cows would always congregate in the favorite areas with the ice cream grasses.”

Now, they run 18 different pastures over two non-contiguous ranches. Tina says it’s basically like running four mini-herds.

Their smaller sections allow them to rotate their herd more and let grasses rest. Rested grasses have a greater potential for bounce-back when the rains come.

“We’re fortunate to have hearty varieties of grass,” David says. “I believe with our rotational grazing we can protect those small plants when we need to.”

At a recent Trust In Beef Sustainable Ranchers event, Hugh Aljoe, director of ranches, outreach and partnerships at Noble Research Institute , praised YY Ranch’s forage management.

“When you get rain, it makes everybody look smart,” he says. “But when you get into severe drought conditions like they deal with here, you find out who really knows how to manage.

“Knowing the severity of the drought, I was delighted to see that their forage is holding everything together. There are a lot of positive signs out there — it’s just waiting for a rain. You don’t get that without managing correctly for a long period of time.”

Herd Management

Just 50 miles north of the Mexico border, YY Ranch has a front-row seat to the epicenter of many of the issues facing America’s cattle ranchers. But, they aren’t wondering how limited cattle inventory will impact their ability to rebuild their herd.

This year, they had to cull strategically, especially given their business as a seedstock producer.

Tina says they sold their calves a few weeks earlier than normal.

Breaking up cow/calf pairs earlier than normal has allowed YY Ranch to weather the intense drought that they have experienced this year.

(Tina Thompson/YY Ranch)

“Our first move when we’re in a drought like this is sell those calves earlier than normal to get them off the cows so that the cows can recover,” she says. “If we do get rain, they’ll have a better time recovering if the calves aren’t on them.”

And, they made the decision to cull 70% of one of their mini-herds.

It’s something they’ve had to do before, and Tina knows the ramifications of a hard cull can last for several growing seasons.

“The thing about selling your herd is a cow that’s been on your ranch is worth more than just the price of beef because she’s learned how to graze and survive in this country,” she says. “There’s a learning and evolution that you have in your herd that you lose.

Tina continues: “If you suddenly get rain, it’s hard to bring in new cows that will survive as well on your ranch.”

Fortunately, recent rains mean YY Ranch can keep their herd size steady for the moment, a move that is critical with cattle inventory prices skyrocketing across the nation.

Trust In Beef works to secure the future of American ranching by providing the information ranchers need to make the decisions that impact the resiliency, profitability and resource management of their working lands. Learn more about Trust In Beef and their 2025 Sustainable Ranchers Tour by visiting www.trustinbeef.com

Breaking News: EPA Backs Existing Wastewater Regulations, Prevents Catastrophe for Processors and Producers

Tue, 02 Sep 2025 13:46:00 GMT

The longstanding Meat and Poultry (MPP) Effluent Guidelines and Standards will stand, announced Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin on Aug. 30. He says the proposed changes to the regulation are unnecessary.

EPA determined existing federal wastewater regulations under the Clean Water Act are effective and the burdens proposed changes would inflict on meat and poultry processors are unwarranted.

“The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) applauds the Trump administration and EPA Administrator Zeldin for taking a common sense approach on the Meat & Poultry Processing Rule,” says Duane Stateler, NPPC president and pork producer from McComb, Ohio. “As proposed by the previous administration, this rule—which provides no environmental benefits—would have been devastating to small- and medium-sized meat processors across the country and the livestock farmers who rely on them as markets for their animals.”

EPA’s action will save not only the nearly 100 local meat processors that EPA itself identified would have to close down but also the thousands of family farmers who rely on them to stay in livestock production, Stateler points out.

“It will help ensure affordable, nutritious American-grown pork can continue to be served on dinner tables across the country,” Stateler says.

Moving Forward
The decision closes the book on a nearly two-year comment and consideration process in which NPPC and other stakeholders have worked with EPA to better inform the agency’s decision and preempt unnecessary harm.

“Under the prior proposal, if it were finalized, major pork processors would have faced significant costs to install new waste water management systems,” explains Michael Formica, NPPC chief legal strategist. “During that period of construction, some plants would likely have needed to temporarily shut down. Others might have had to cut back on how many shifts they run.”

EPA’s internal analysis showed that dozens of facilities, likely small and medium-sized, would be forced to shut down because they would be unable to afford the cost of the technology required to comply, Formica says. Overall, the industry would have realized additional costs estimated at greater than $1 billion a year.

“Producers who rely on those processors would have then been without a market for their livestock,” Formica adds.

Unnecessary Expansions
The Meat and Poultry Products Effluent Guidelines and Standards was enacted in 1974 by the EPA and amended in 2004 to cover wastewater directly discharged by processing facilities. NPPC says the proposed amendment would have established more stringent technological requirements for controlling discharges from processors and significantly increased the scope of plants that were covered by the rules.

While the agricultural industry and the meat and poultry processing sectors support clean water efforts, EPA found these expansions were unnecessary.

NPPC says it appreciates EPA taking no action on the proposal, which would have disrupted packing capacity and livestock markets, in turn inflicting additional financial harm on producers and leading to further industry concentration and the loss of independent farmers.

The Meat Institute says the proposed rule would have also harmed the relationship between meat and poultry processing (MPP) facilities and publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs).

“Indirect discharging MPP facilities often make significant financial investments in maintaining and upgrading the POTW or shouldering major surcharges for the POTW’s continued operation and maintenance, which reduce public treatment costs for residential ratepayers and improve the quality of local and downstream waters,” the Meat Institute wrote in a statement.

EPA To Address ‘Government Overreach’ on Defining WOTUS

Thu, 13 Mar 2025 19:12:03 GMT

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced on Wednesday the agency will undertake 31 historic actions “to advance President Trump’s day one executive orders and power the great American comeback.”

Among the announcements, Zeldin said EPA will work with the United States Army Corps of Engineers to deliver on President Donald Trump’s promise to review the definition of Waters of the United States (WOTUS).

“The agencies will move quickly to ensure that a revised definition follows the law, reduces red tape, cuts overall permitting costs, and lowers the cost of doing business in communities across the country while protecting the nation’s navigable waters from pollution,” Zeldin said in a prepared statement.

“Given the U.S. Supreme Court’s watershed decision in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, it is time for EPA to finally address this issue once and for all in a way that provides American farmers, landowners, businesses, and states with clear and simplified direction,” he added.

Zeldin’s announcement was an important step forward in correcting what the Supreme Court had ruled in 2023 as EPA’s overreach in defining WOTUS. At the time, the agency had charged ahead ignoring concerns raised by the Supreme Court, 26 states, and farmers and ranchers across the country, according to American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) President Zippy Duvall.

“The Supreme Court clearly ruled, almost two years ago, that the government overreached in its interpretation of what waters fell under federal jurisdiction, but inaction and vague implementation guidelines by EPA led to permitting delays, litigation and uncertainty,” Duvall said in a prepared statement on Wednesday.

Listening Sessions Are Being Scheduled By EPA
Mary-Thomas Hart, chief counsel for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory on Thursday the Supreme Court had ruled EPA’s overreach on WOTUS in 2023 amounted to a violation of a landowners’ constitutional rights.

“Because there are criminal liabilities that attach to violation of the Clean Water Act, a landowner has to be able to know when they look at their land or when they look at a water feature, what is or isn’t WOTUS,” Hart said.

A priority for the Trump Administration moving forward will be working cooperatively with state partners, empowering them and local officials to protect water bodies while accelerating economic opportunity. As a result, “decisions will be made efficiently and effectively while benefiting from local knowledge and expertise,” EPA’s Zeldin said.

To inform those decisions, EPA has issued a request for information from stakeholders about how they’re impacted by WOTUS and will host a series of listening sessions from late March through April 2025, according to information on the agency’s website.

EPA will hold at least six listening sessions, with two open to all stakeholders, one open to States, one open to Tribes, one open to industry and agricultural stakeholders, and one open to environmental and conservational stakeholders.

The agency said registration instructions and dates will be forthcoming at the following website: https://www.epa.gov/wotus/public-outreach-and-stakeholder-engagement-activities.

Persons or organizations wishing to provide verbal recommendations during the listening sessions will be selected on a first-come, first-serve basis. Due to the expected number of participants, EPA said individuals will be asked to limit their spoken presentation to three minutes. Once the speaking slots are filled, participants may be placed on a standby list to speak or continue to register to listen to the recommendations.

Listen to the AgriTalk discussion on WOTUS with NCBA’s Mary-Thomas Hart here:

Water Management System Increases Efficiency

Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:20:30 GMT

Rancher Mike Turner manages multiple ranches in the Texas Panhandle, about 45 miles north of Amarillo. The water sources on his ranches are spread out, with the farthest a 32-mile round trip from the headquarters.

Last fall, Turner installed Ranchbot ’s Trough Direct monitors at the far-off ranch to beta test. The system has allowed him to reduce trips to the property from every day to a couple times per week.

Turner says the system was easy to install with a side or top mount to accommodate a variety of trough types.

“Despite the cattle having direct access to the Ranchbot units, I have been pleased with how well the system has held up,” Turner says.

In south Texas, Suzanne Schuchart manages a 5,200-acre cow-calf operation where rainfall is irregular and unreliable. To ensure adequate water, the ranch has 30 pastures, each with a water source, such as a pond or tank, and most are connected by water pipes to supplement with well water as needed.

Like Turner, Schuchart was asked to beta test the Trough Direct system and host a grazing management tour during this year’s CattleCon. The system includes a water level monitor, rain gauge and camera on the main water system, as well as trough monitors and pasture direct monitors in other areas.

Running V Ranch in Jourdanton, Texas, uses a water monitoring system, which alleviates the time and distance it takes to check pastures.

(Ranchbot/Suzanne Schuchart)

“It’s very convenient,” she says about the system. “The app is easy to use, and I like that it’s real-time reporting. When my husband used to ask, ‘Did you check the cistern level when you went down there?’ I used to have to go back and check and climb up on this ladder to make sure the float was not messed up. Now I can just look at the app and tell what level it is.”

Schuchart says she appreciates the monitors are easy to install and can be moved between pastures as cattle are rotated.

“The [Ranchbot system] alleviates a lot of worry about water because the minute you walk away, something can go wrong,” she adds.

Read more: Reduce Water Worry

One Georgia Farmer’s Living Conservation Laboratory

Mon, 02 Dec 2024 15:13:20 GMT

Josh Davis is not one to rest on his laurels – or in his case, his nearly 700 acres of scenic and productive Georgia farmland.

The land his family has stewarded since his great-great-great grandfather won claim to it in the Creek Land Lottery in the 1830’s is still riddled with the hallmarks of a six-generation working farm and former sharecropping community. There is a tin-roofed farmhouse, a long-time shuttered general store with wooden shelves, a blacksmith shop and a cotton storage house.

Surrounded by the living pieces of his farm’s history, it’s not hard to understand Davis’ pragmatic view of his place in that lineage.

“I’m just a caretaker until the next generation can take over,” Davis says.

Davis never thought he’d work here full-time. He fled as soon as he could, leaving to pursue a degree in philosophy and a job in marketing. But the ties that bound him to the Georgia clay of his home were thick enough to reel him back.

Cattle + Conservation

Frolona Farm is a mixture of ecosystems, pairing mixed-aged and mixed-species forest acres with grassland and pasture areas. When Davis returned to the farm and began a direct-to-consumer meat business, he found an immediate need for infrastructure, specifically so he could protect the waterways on the property.

“When Josh first contacted me for assistance, I was impressed from that very first meeting,” recalls Cindy Haygood, USDA-NRCS district conservationist. “His first issue was that he wanted to fence his livestock away from the water on his property, which is really rare to hear.”

“So, I knew that I was in for a good relationship there.”

Josh Davis uses his cow-calf herd to build the soil health of his pastures.

(Josh Davis - Frolona Farm)

Haygood and Davis used funding available through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) to help provide the fencing and water infrastructure needed to fence the cattle and pastured pigs away from the natural waterways.

“He put in 11.5 miles of fence for livestock exclusion on surface water and over 5,000 feet of pipeline to get water out to his livestock and the various paddocks that we were helping to set up,” Haygood says.

Now, Davis implements rotational grazing and plantings of warm and cool season grasses to build the soil health in his pastures and feed his herd, now a cow-calf operation.

Following the Water

Sitting at the base of the Brevard Fault Line in a valley means that Frolona Farm is blessed with water. In fact, there are thirteen different water sources on the farm, part of the Chattahoochee River Watershed.

Thanks to Davis’s work protecting those banks from cattle erosion, they are ready for restoration efforts to bring back plant communities that are ripe with potential for habitat.

“We are working to put all of the water into stream mitigation banks, so each of the stream channels will either be put in restoration or preservation,” he says. “When that is restored, there will be a 200 ft. buffer on each side that is planted in native plants.”

One of those species that Davis says is particularly interesting is the shoal bass, a protected member of the black bass family. He is proud to house shoal bass in the streams on Frolona Farm.

Seeing the Forests for the Trees

Now that Davis has tamed his pastureland through infrastructure and grazing and is working to restore his waterways, it’s only natural for him to turn his attention to the last of the farmland’s ecosystem – the mixed hardwood forest that encompasses both his property and contiguous property owned by family members.

He once again turned to USDA-NRCS for support, enrolling in the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) to steward that forested land.

Josh Davis is the first in the state to tap into USDA-NRCS stewardship for biochar implementation.

(Josh Davis - Frolona Farm)

“This year, I finished a crop tree release for mast management, and it has been a linchpin effort,” he says. “For each of these acres, we selected one or two crop trees that were surrounded by competing trees. We then either girdled or harvested the competing trees to allow the selected tree to produce more mast.”

In most areas, Davis is keeping the treetops in the forest floor, which he will be working with NRCS to turn into biochar. He’s also performing sequential patch burning over 577 acres.

“The prescribed burns are the key to all of this, because that is the most important and effective thing you can do to restore and manage forests,” he says.

On more than 200 of his acres, Davis is creating songbird and pollinator habitats.

A Legacy of Conservation Innovation

Davis is the first farmer in the state to tap NRCS’s CSP enhancement for biochar production.

It’s really no surprise to Haygood.

“Josh is very progressive and always looking for some new way to steward the land,” she says. “He is somewhat unique because he came to us not only for production, but conservation is a top priority for him. His conservation mindset is so sincere.”

Haygood says that the strong partnership means that, sometimes, they are working collaboratively to figure out a program or system, like the CSP biochar enhancement. Now that Davis is working toward a Masters degree in natural resources management at Auburn University, she is expecting even more conservation collaboration in her future.

Davis calls his work he is doing on the farm “landscape-scale restoration.” The tinkering and experimenting that he anticipates will change his landscape are really adding up to two ends for him.

Josh Davis says he the work he is doing on Frolona Farm is “landscape-scale restoration” where he is taking into account the forest, farmland, waterways and ecology.

(Josh Davis - Frolona Farm)

He wants to secure his land’s productivity for future caretakers and, generally, he wants the farm’s ecosystem to improve.

“We have a lot of rare and threatened species here,” he says. “We have a huge variety of ecosystem types.”

“I’m just trying to leave it better than I got it.”

America’s Conservation Ag Movement is a public/private collaborative that meets growers across the country where they are on their conservation journey and empowers their next step with technical assistance from USDA-NRCS and innovation solutions and resources from agriculture’s leading providers. Learn more at www.americasconservationagmovement.com .

Your Next Read:

How One Oklahoma Farmer Used Conservation to Stop Fighting Mother Nature

Making the Most of Land Stewardship Incentives

How One Montana Rancher Secured His Legacy and Saved the Landscape with Heritage Buffalo Practices

Is Regenerative Agriculture Real?

Mon, 02 Dec 2024 14:54:00 GMT

Recently, I spoke to an investor looking for a fund to help farmers transition to regenerative agriculture. The investor thought there was a clear set of procedures to give farmers a measurable reward in a predictable amount of time. This line of thinking is common, but there currently is not a generally recognized standard that is “regenerative.” There are practices that might work in one location but not another, and there have been attempts to measure and monetize components, such as carbon credits.

Building soil health and cutting inputs will have huge long-term benefits, but there isn’t a standardized premium to index potential near-term ROI, especially for third-party investors.

Farming Is Changing

At a recent regenerative agriculture conference (of which the primary attendance was not farmers), a farmer recalled a conversation he overheard between two relatives weighing the pros and cons of adopting no-till farming practices. The audience was amazed this conversation took place 45 years ago, and the family had been using these practices for over four decades.

This disconnect is typical. In the current hype around regenerative ag, we should not miss the long view that farming is changing and will be more diverse in terms of species grown and potentially carbon negative in terms of how we grow. Fewer inputs will be used through advancements in technology.

Every field has different soil and different needs, and a regenerative plan needs to account for that. At the farm gate, the work needs to be monetized based on standards that have value in the marketplace, which currently don’t exist, and impact the production economics by lowering costs, building soil health and managing water.

3 Actions You Can Take Now

Expand use of regenerative practices. There is currently a lot of grant funding for conservation practices . Now is a good time to get started, but don’t get bound into long-term contracts that are going to lock up your data or rights to sell ecosystem credits in the future.
Don’t be afraid to measure. The future will be in selling products from your farm based on how the crop was produced, as well as selling water, carbon and other credits. The key is to get yourself in a position to reap this value without being committed to companies and organizations still trying to figure it out.
Band together and invest in the tools. Groups of farmers working together can coordinate ways to invest in the enabling tools that will lower barriers to entry, collect data, talk to potential downstream customers who might want to pay premiums and share best practices on what it takes to adopt new practices.

No one knows better than you that the future of your farm depends on balancing practices and profits that sustain your land, resources and family . The stakes are evolving based on weather patterns, technology, market demand and more. What actions are you taking to remain resilient?

The Next Chapter of WOTUS

Tue, 07 Dec 2021 22:26:51 GMT

EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers published a rule in the Federal Register on Tuesday, initiating updates to the pre-2015 regulatory definition of the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule.

A June 2021 statement made by the Biden administration detailed plans to repeal the Trump administration’s Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR) promulgated under WOTUS in 2020. New regulations defining federally protected waterways under the Clean Water Act were then announced in November by EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers.

This transition was made possible in August, following a federal judge in Arizona vacating the Trump-era NWPR due to the rule violating the WOTUS objective “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.”

EPA Administrator Michael Regan says the proposed transition was created to bring clarity and consistency to WOTUS: “Through our engagement with stakeholders across the country, we’ve heard overwhelming calls for a durable definition of WOTUS that protects the environment and that is grounded in the experience of those who steward our waters.”

Historically, the original 1986 regulations have been implemented by every administration since their inception 35 years ago, apart from the Reagan and Trump administrations.

EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers are seeking public comment on the proposed rule, to be submitted here .

Kansas Farmers Adjust Practices as Ogallala Aquifer Shrinks

Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:02:36 GMT

HUTCHINSON, Kan. (AP) — Some call it flyover country. It’s not mountainous like its Colorado neighbor. There aren’t hundreds of lakes and streams like Missouri. The landscape is largely flat and treeless. Population is sparse. Yet, those flying east or west across semi-arid western Kansas can see the money, even from 30,000 feet above the Earth. Green circles. Thousands of them. Here, on the High Plains of Kansas, is an economy that grew because of water. Over the years, many farmers have owed their livelihoods to the underground reservoir known as the Ogallala — the nation’s largest freshwater aquifer. Stretching across eight states, it stores almost as much water as Lake Erie and Lake Huron combined, The Hutchinson News reported (http://bit.ly/1kGjimh ). Irrigation transformed this region known by early explorers as the Great American Desert into an oasis of sorts. In an area of limited rainfall and surface water availability, the Ogallala allowed farmers to grow corn, which attracted cattle feedlots, then meatpacking plants, ethanol plants and dairies. Reality, however, rests underneath 86-year-old Rodger Funk’s feet. The Garden City farmer sat at his kitchen table, a running irrigation center pivot visible out the window behind him. The wells across this vast landscape are running dry. More than a half-century ago, Funk attended a meeting where state officials told him and the few others in attendance that the water wasn’t an endless river as they once thought. It is finite, they said, and it is being mined. And, one by one over the years, when it was no longer economically feasible to pump water to his crops anymore, Funk began plugging wells, making the switch to dryland farming. “Everybody believed it, I believed it — this water is going to last forever,” Funk said. Decades later, the landscape is changing, including for Funk and his son, Boyd. As more, like the Funks, switch to dryland with the drop of the water table, it could mean less population and a potential decline in the Main Street that is built on agriculture. “You wonder what this is going to look like 50 years from now,” Funk said. For more than seven decades, farmers and other industries have been mining the Ogallala Aquifer — the lifeblood of the western Kansas economy — faster than nature can recharge it. Those farming the western plains don’t receive enough rain to grow crops like corn. They’ve depended on the aquifer to sustain their crops. However, too many holes have been poked into the Ogallala. It’s been declining a little each year since the advent of irrigation — which largely occurred in the 1940s and 1950s. Some areas already have exhausted the resource to a point where it is no longer viable to pump it anymore, said Kansas Water Office Director Tracy Streeter. Today, however, state leaders, including Gov. Sam Brownback, aren’t hiding the fact that the Ogallala Aquifer is waning due to an overabundance of irrigation wells spewing out water — up to 5 billion gallons a day, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. The amount flowing from an 800-gallon-a-minute irrigation well will fill an Olympic swimming pool in just over an hour, according to the book “Cadillac Desert.” It also conveniently irrigates 100 acres or more of crops. There have been plenty of discussions about the declines over the years, as well as talks about potential solutions. In the late 1970s, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers studied the issue, even unveiling a plan in 1982 to build an aqueduct from the Missouri River to southwest Kansas as a long-term solution. In the early 1990s, while Gov. Sam Brownback was Secretary of Agriculture, his board formed an Ogallala Task Force aimed at investigating ways of maintaining and enhancing the agricultural economy of the Ogallala. The task force held hearings across the state, and issued a report in 1993 on solutions. Most talks so far have never resulted in action. Yet, when Brownback came back from Washington to take the reins as the state’s chief executive, he again brought the dwindling Ogallala to the forefront of his agenda. Last fall, the governor charged his administration to develop a vision for water, saying the state must move forward to preserve its natural resource. He made it clear that the issue is one he wants answered and soon. Continuing the status quo is not an option, Brownback has noted. In southwest Kansas alone, water adds nearly $600 million annually to the local economy. The eventual loss of the Ogallala would be devastating. If Kansans continue down the current path, the state’s water resources could be nearly spent in 50 years, Brownback has said, quoting a Kansas State University study. Roughly 70 percent of Kansas’ Ogallala would be depleted by 2064. About 40 percent of the irrigated area today wouldn’t even be able to support a 400-gallon-a-minute well to pump water to a corn crop. “This is absolutely huge,” said Mark Rude, executive director of southwest Kansas’ Groundwater Management District No. 3, an area with pockets that have experienced declines of 150 feet since development. “What you are talking about here is jobs, opportunity, and opportunity for people to even stay here. If you cut the water — people move where there is water, and if there is no water, people move where there is water. “Water is opportunity and water is life,” he said. The Ogallala’s disappearance, however, has been a slow-motion process — decades in the making, said Rex Buchanan, interim director of the Kansas Geological Survey. And, he noted, the sand-and-gravel aquifer varies across the western Kansas region, making the situation more imminent for some — especially in west-central Kansas, where most wells are pumping well below 400 gallons a minute. For others, the eventual fate is still many years away. Some have 100 to 250 years left under their farms, while others have just 25. The effects of depletion are evident from above the surface, as well, Buchanan said. Back when pioneers first settled the region, the Arkansas River was a wide but shallow swell, with some stretches reaching a quarter- to half-mile wide. A ferry near Pierceville in Gray County in the 1880s allowed horse and wagon to cross the waterway. Today, highway bridges span an arid riverbed. In fact, most of the creeks and rivers that once veined across western Kansas have dried up as 60 years of pumping have pulled groundwater levels below what the rivers need to keep them flowing. As a result, the aquifer is slowly depleting, the water table dropping by as much as two to five feet a year in some areas of southwest Kansas. One farmer in Grant County noted he has wells that have dropped nearly 200 feet since his ancestors drilled them. It would take a few thousand years for the aquifer to fully recharge with rainfall. “We treat this as a crisis, but it isn’t a crisis,” Buchanan said of a reality most have known for decades. “It is not happening overnight. “This is a problem that will solve itself one way or another,” he said. “You will use less water over time. You don’t have any choice.” Sixty-year-old Boyd Funk, however, is making it work on the northern Finney County farm his father and grandfather once irrigated. Except for four circles the family rents out, the Funks are entirely dryland. He is able to manage 36 quarters of dryland largely himself. He relies on the sky, he said, for moisture, and he admits in dry years the yields aren’t there. That includes this year. On this late June day, a poor wheat crop awaits the combine, which sits outside Rodger’s home. June showers after a multi-year drought have kept Boyd out of the field. The end is inevitable. The question is when it will happen and what western Kansas will look like. Boyd Funk already has an idea. It doesn’t take as many farmers to operate dryland, he said. There won’t be the need for some of the businesses that have sprouted from irrigation. It also means a decrease in land values and tax revenue for the state. “When everything goes to dryland, it will take less people, less inputs,” the younger Funk said. “It means a lot less economic activity that will be generated by agriculture when the Ogallala goes.” “That is the real question,” Boyd said. “What are we going to do when the Ogallala is gone?” Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.