Ranchers concerned about grazing fees if state takes over from feds

Should Montana Republican lawmakers saddle up to take control of federal lands, they might be without one important, generally conservative group – cowboys. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management manages 7.8 million acres of land in Montana and all but a few hundred thousand acres are leased for grazing at the incredibly low rate of $1.34 for enough forage to feed an animal for a month. The U.S. Forest Service also leases grazing land for the same low price. Montana also leases grazing land using the same forage formula, but the state charges no less than $11.41, with the possibility of the price being driven higher by competitive bidding. The price difference between the state and federal government, as well as the difference in leasing terms, has ranchers pulling back on the reins as Republicans, who have made a state takeover of federal lands part of their party platform, ride ahead. “I think it’s a pretty big decision,” said Jay Bodner of the Montana Stockgrowers Association. “The topic has been discussed, but I don’t know if we’ve ever gotten down to the finer details.” The ranch groups that tend to align themselves with Republican lawmakers are being cautious in what they say about a state takeover of federal land. As one industry representative said, there’s a real “with us or against us” attitude among Republicans supporting a takeover. No one wants to be alienated for pointing out the potential negatives for the livestock industry. The Montana Farm Bureau Federation, the state’s largest agriculture group, recognizes a need to at least discuss the state taking over federal lands, but stops short of endorsing the move. “I think it’s a discussion that should be held because of the mismanagement of our federal lands,” said John Youngberg, Montana Farm Bureau Federation CEO. “Do I think we should just take over 30 million acres of federal land in Montana tomorrow? I don’t think that’s reasonable.”...more

Nobody is saying this will happen "tomorrow", so I don't understand Youngberg's comment.  After all, that's why the states are setting up these study committees.

There are fees and there are costs.  At the federal level there are the "costs" of scoping, EAs, EISs, Land Use Plans, AMPs and myriad appeals and lawsuits by outside interests, plus dictates on type of livestock, where and when you can place salt or feed, and on and on.

The total cost of doing business on state land will be, in many instances, less than the total cost of dealing with the feds.

Let's hope its not the livestock industry who kills the deal in Montana.  Better read the tea leaves ladies and gentlemen.  Look back at what's happened over the last thirty years and surely you can see what's going to happen in the future.