One of the most rewarding opportunities at Virginia Farm Bureau Federation is the summer internship program. Not only do the students gain valuable experience, but the staff benefits from fresh perspectives and ideas brought by the interns.

Past interns have gone on to successful careers in various fields such as advocacy, association management, research and state government, which is a testament to the program’s effectiveness. Stefanie Taillon and Martha Moore, for example, started their journey as interns in the Virginia Farm Bureau’s Governmental Relations Department and are now play key staff roles in that same department.

This year we have two interns working with staff. Both have been doing a wonderful job and we want to share a little about them.

Haley Bennett

Raised on her family farm in New Market, Virginia, Haley Bennett’s earliest memories involve steering the Gator while sitting on her grandmother’s lap and checking the chicken houses for any black or speckled chicks among the masses of yellow. 

She recently graduated from Virginia Tech with a degree in Political Science and two history minors. Haley has always appreciated the agriculture industry, but only when she left home did she gain an entirely new perspective and appreciation for agriculture policy. She served as an intern in Virginia Tech’s Hokies on the Hill program, where she discovered an entirely new side of agriculture. During her time in Washington, she learned the importance of policy and the effects it has downstream. 

Through her internship with Farm Bureau this summer, she is working with the Government Relations Department on AgPAC where she is gaining a better understanding Virginia politics and the policy impacting agriculture.

Jacob Ver Beek

Growing up in Chesterfield County, Virginia, Jacob Ver Beek’s surroundings were more suburban than rural. However, from a young age, he had a fascination with agriculture.

Jacob is currently a student at Virginia Tech where he is pursuing an Agricultural Business degree with a minor in Global Food Security. During his time as a Hokie, he has taken advantage of every opportunity to learn more about agriculture. One of the most rewarding experiences he’s had so far was an internship with the World Food Programme in Cambodia, where he worked create a commercialization strategy for fortified rice.

Jacob is especially excited to work close to his hometown this summer while having the opportunity to experience many different facets and departments at Virginia Farm Bureau. After he completes his undergraduate degree, he hopes to continue his education at Virginia Tech and pursue a masters in Agriculture and Applied Economics.

The Virginia Farm Bureau Federation’s summer internship program continues to provide an exceptional opportunity for students and staff alike. We can’t wait to see what amazing things Haley and Jacob will accomplish in the future!

The Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources (DWR) is convening a stakeholder engagement process to promote meaningful dialogue and mutual solutions between landowners and hunters who use hounds to pursue deer and bear. DWR is working with the UVA Institute for Engagement & Negotiation (IEN) to facilitate the engagement process. This process is intended to bring stakeholders together and resolve associated conflicts.

You are invited to complete this survey if you are someone who hunts with hounds in Virginia, if you are a landowner impacted by this type of hunting, or if you are someone who is interested in these issues. This survey is being administered by IEN and responses are anonymous, unless you choose to include your name at the end of the survey (this is not required). General themes from the survey will be shared with DWR, and responses will be used to inform next steps in stakeholder engagement, which will include interviews and facilitated stakeholder group meetings.

The deadline to complete the survey is 5:00 p.m. on June 23, 2023.

For more information on the upcoming “Hound-Hunters & Private Landowners Stakeholder Advisory Committee”, click here.

In a major victory for farmers and property rights, the U.S. Supreme Court has sided in favor of an Idaho couple, the Sacketts, in a significant environmental case against the EPA and Army Corp of Engineers. This decision has national implications for the agriculture industry and affirms the long-standing position Farm Bureau has taken on the Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule.

What is the history of the case?

The case began in 2008, when private property owners Chantell and Michael Sackett purchased a residential lot near a lake in Idaho and began preparing the lot for home construction. The EPA then ordered the Sacketts to halt construction and return the lot to its natural state, arguing that the lot fell under EPA jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act. The Sacketts challenged this claim, and the legal dispute eventually made it to the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals, and then rose all the way to the Supreme Court. During that same time period, a series of WOTUS rules were issued and replaced under three different Presidential Administrations.

On May 25, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court released the long-awaited decision. The Court was unanimous in their ruling to reverse the 9th Circuit of Appeals decision, decided for the Sacketts and have remanded the case back to the lower courts for review. This decision has national implications for water quality, ag, development and the Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule.

What is included in the ruling?

While the Court ruled unanimously in favor of the Sacketts, they were split 5-4 on further specifics in their decision. The majority opinion was authored by Justice Alito with concurrence from four other justices (Roberts, Thomas, Gorsuch and Barrett) largely adopting the Rapanos plurality decision, stating that wetlands that are separate from navigable waterways cannot be considered part of those waters, even if they are located nearby. This is exactly what Farm Bureau has advocated for, for years.

The Court’s majority decision states the following precedent:

• The previous “significant nexus” determination can no longer be used. Going forward, for a wetland to qualify as a WOTUS, that wetland must have a continuous surface water connection to a body of water that is itself a WOTUS. (For example, a continuously flowing body of water, river, lake or ocean. No longer can a water feature be considered a WOTUS just because it is close by or adjacent to a flowing feature.
• Wetlands must not only be adjacent, but must be adjoining, to a WOTUS by a continuous surface connection with that water to be considered part of the WOTUS.

What does this mean for farmers and property owners?

Keep in mind that the Sackett case began well before the current, flawed 2023 WOTUS rule. While it does not directly overturn the Biden Administration’s 2023 rule, it removes that rule’s ability to utilize the “significant nexus” test. The Biden administration will likely see major pressure to withdraw and replace its 2023 WOTUS rule. This pressure comes in addition to court decisions in roughly half of the country, including Virginia, that already block the rule.

In order to develop a new rule, the EPA and Army Corps will now have to work within the determinations of Sackett. This is a major win for the agriculture industry, as the next rule must be framed around continuous surface water connections, instead of the vagaries of the previous rule that allow for “significant nexus” that often required a team of engineers to identify.

Still, wetlands and features that do not meet the “continuous surface connection” test for a WOTUS determination may still be regulated under other federal laws, state laws, and Chesapeake Bay regulations here in Virginia. In is every property owner’s responsibility to understand the law as it pertains to development and soil disturbance.

For the time being, Virginia farmers and property owners can breathe a sigh of relief that the difficult WOTUS rule is unenforceable and clearer rules may be on the horizon. As the WOTUS issue continues in its second decade and third Presidential Administration only one this is for certain: this will not be the last time we see this issue litigated and we must remain vigilant to respond to future rulemaking.