Thursday, January 16, 2014

Senate Grazing Improvement Act Spells Disaster for Federal Lands Users

In a move hailed by the National Beef Cattlemen’s Association (NCBA) and the national Public Lands Council (PLC), the U.S. Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee passed a measure entitled the Grazing Improvement Act sponsored by Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) in late November 2013. In reality what was passed was “a substitute in the nature of substitute” that looked nothing like the original measure.

            Not only does the bill not contain many improvements for federal lands ranch families, says Jose Varela Lopez, New Mexico Cattle Growers Association President, La Cieneguilla, New Mexico, it does just the opposite.

            “The measure was intended to provide stability for ranchers grazing on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) as part of the multiple use mandate for these lands,” Varela Lopez explained. “Instead, the amended bill reduces stability and provides a path for eliminating lands from multiple use.”

            For example, he said, Senator Barrasso’s original bill would have provided term permits for grazing of 20 years rather than the current 10 on healthy allotments. The substitute will allow for up to 20-year permits, but it removes the stability of even a 10-year permit.
              
According to Denver, Colorado based environment and land law attorney Connie Brooks, “The grazing permit renewal bill provides for 20-year renewal and categorical exclusion under NEPA if:
 
 monitoring of the allotment has indicated that the current grazing management has met, or has satisfactorily progressed towards meeting objectives contained in the land use and resource management plan of the allotment, as determined by the Secretary concerned.
 
             “In more recent land use plans, the Forest Service adopts management objectives that are based on the “natural range of variation.”  The objectives are not tested by data and assume management to mimic pre-western civilization.  It is possible if not probable that most grazing permits will not achieve such objectives. 
 
`“In North and South Dakota, the Forest Service had adopted objectives for the National Grasslands that required vegetation density measured by “visual obstruction rating” or “VOR.”  Despite expert opinions that the prescribed ratings cannot be achieved on most North and South Dakota range sites due to soils, climate and lack of precipitation, the Forest Service insisted that the land was biologically capable of producing tall and dense vegetation.  Rigorous studies have proven that the western North Dakota range sites are not biologically capable of meeting the management objectives.  To this day, the Forest Service proposes significant reductions in grazing for the very reason that they do not meet the LRMP management objectives. 
 
“Similarly the same plans called for 20 percent of the land area to be native plant species, even though the Department of Agriculture conservation programs planted most of the land with non-native crested wheat grass that still dominates the areas.  Crested wheatgrass is very difficult if not impossible to convert to native grasses.  So once again, the grazing permit will not conform to management objectives.

The legislation should be revised to remove the section in its entirety, Brooks concludes.

         It is the “categorical exclusion” language that is poison pill for Karen Budd-Falen, Cheyenne, Wyoming federal lands attorney who was instrumental in drafting the original Grazing Improvement Act.

         “The amended bill codifies National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis on federal grazing allotments,” she explained. “This bill would congressionally mandate actions that are currently discretionary.”

         In an unprecedented move, the amended Grazing Improvement Act takes dead aim at ranchers in New Mexico and Oregon, Varela Lopez points out.

         “The bill contains a provision for “voluntary relinquishment” of up to 25 allotments in New Mexico and Oregon,” he said. “Those allotments would be mandated to permanently exclude grazing.”

         Not only does this undermine the small business of ranching in those states, but it unmanaged allotments will certainly provide more fuel for the catastrophic wild fires the West has suffered in recent times, Varela Lopez noted. Further frustrating New Mexicans is the fact that no one was contacted regarding this substitute bill prior to its’ committee passage he said.

         The substitute bill offered as an amendment was offered by Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Martin Heinrich (D-NM) is now ready for action on the U.S. Senate Floor.

         The U.S. House of Representatives has an un-amended version of the measure awaiting action as well. Neither measure is scheduled for action in Congress at this time.
           
            Thus far neither NCBA nor PLC have provided any information that might alleviate ranchers’ concerns or opposition to the senate bill, says Varela Lopez.

No comments: