Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 820.0

529US3

Unit: $U57

[09-26-01 12:19:03] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 529 U. S. 728 (2000)

745

Opinion of the Court

B

The ranchers’ second challenge focuses upon a provision of
the Taylor Act that limits issuance of permits to “settlers,
residents, and other stock owners . . . .” 43 U. S. C. § 315b
In 1936, the Secretary, following this re-
(emphasis added).
issued a regulation that limited eligibility to
quirement,
those who “ow[n] livestock.”
2 App. 808 (Rules for Adminis-
tration of Grazing Districts (Mar. 2, 1936)). But in 1942, the
Secretary changed the regulation’s wording to limit eligibil-
ity to those “engaged in the livestock business,” 1942 Range
Code § 3(a), and so it remained until 1994. The new regula-
tion eliminates the words “engaged in the livestock busi-
ness,” thereby seeming to make eligible otherwise qualiﬁed
applicants even if they do not engage in the livestock busi-
ness. See 43 CFR § 4110.1(a) (1995).

The new change is not as radical as the text of the new
regulation suggests. The new rule deletes the entire phrase
“engaged in the livestock business” from § 4110.1, and seems
to require only that an applicant “own or control land or
water base property . . . .”
Ibid. But the omission, stand-
ing alone, does not render the regulation facially invalid, for
the regulation cannot change the statute, and a regulation
promulgated to guide the Secretary’s discretion in exercising
his authority under the Act need not also restate all related
statutory language. Ultimately it is both the Taylor Act and
the regulations promulgated thereunder that constrain the
Secretary’s discretion in issuing permits. The statute con-
tinues to limit the Secretary’s authorization to issue permits
to “bona ﬁde settlers, residents, and other stock owners.”
43 U. S. C. § 315b (emphasis added).

Nor will the change necessarily lead to widespread issu-
ance of grazing permits to “stock owners” who are not in the
livestock business. Those in the business continue to enjoy
a preference in the issuance of grazing permits. The same
section of the Taylor Act mandates that the Secretary accord
a preference to “landowners engaged in the livestock busi-