SEATTLE – A judge allowed hay production and cattle grazing on certain lands designated for conservation Thursday, helping farmers and ranchers struggling with high grain prices.

U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour said the U.S. Department of Agriculture did not conduct an appropriate environmental review before it opened 24 million acres of conserved land to haying and grazing, but that a reversal would be unfair to farmers and ranchers counting on using that land.

The land at issue is enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program, a $2 billion-a-year federal program which pays farmers not to plant crops in order to return fields to native vegetation.

Jack Field, executive vice president of the Washington Cattlemen's Association, said he was “ecstatic” with the decision.

“This isn't just something that benefits the rancher,” he said. “This is an economic stimulus package for rural America.”

The National Wildlife Foundation and its Washington, Indiana, South Dakota, Arkansas, Louisiana and Kansas chapters sought an injunction to stop the emergency haying and grazing program, which was announced in May.

Although the grazing and haying would only be allowed after primary nesting season ends – July or August, depending on the location – the damage to bird habitat and water quality could last for years, they argued.

The government responded that although 24 million acres were eligible, farmers and ranchers were expected to apply to use only about 2.5 million. That eased the concerns of the environmentalists somewhat.

The judge is limiting the program to those farmers and ranchers who applied to use conservation land for haying or grazing by July 8. The USDA may approve other applicants who show they made investments before that date in anticipation of using their conserved land.

“Our problem was not with the individual farmers and ranchers by any means, but with the government's failure to analyze the environmental impacts of taking such a broad, sweeping action as opening 24 million acres to haying and grazing,” said Sarah McMillan, a Western Environmental Law Center attorney who represented the National Wildlife Federation. “Some of those farmers and ranchers are in a crisis, and we did understand they had made investments.”

Danielle Quist, assistant general counsel for the American Farm Bureau Federation, said she appreciated the consideration the judge showed the ranchers, farmers and local economies.

“You've got to understand, farmers and ranchers work on very tight profit margins,” she said. “When you've purchased fences, livestock, the transportation and medicine that goes with that, bailers, dug stock wells, and you're not going to get anything for it, that'll put you out of business.”

Tom Hendrickson, a rancher with a 450 cow-calf pair operation in Washington state's rural southeastern corner, said he spent $40,000 on haying equipment. Furthermore, he didn't order hay from his usual source. If he had not been able to use the conservation land, he might have been forced to buy as much as 1,000 tons of hay at the exorbitant price of $240 a ton, he said – and $240,000 is more than all of his calves sell for.

“This is real good news,” he said. “We've been sitting on the middle of the fence. It would have put a lot of people out here out of business.”