Nevada Cattlemen's Association favors rider in defense bill

Although defense spending has nothing to do with the livestock industry, a rider attached to the 2015 National Defense Authorization Act is good news for Nevada ranchers. The yearly bill passed through both houses of Congress this month and includes amendments to the Federal Land Policy and Management Act’s section regarding grazing permits and leases. Among the provisions, the proposed changes would restore some grazing permits on public lands. “The terms and conditions in a grazing permit or lease that has expired, or was terminated due to a grazing preference transfer, shall be continued under a new permit or lease until the date on which the Secretary concerned completes any environmental analysis and documentation for the permit or lease,” it reads. The amendments would also allow federal land agencies to grant livestock operators a “categorical exclusion” – which don’t require an extensive environmental assessment or environmental impact statement – in the permitting process. In the same vein, ranchers whose livestock cross public land could be granted a categorical exclusion. Nevada Cattlemen’s Association President Ron Torell expressed support for the NDAA add-ons. “It’s good news all around,” he said. “It makes it faster to renew permits.” Because so much of the land in northeastern Nevada is federally managed, many ranchers work with agencies so they can run their cattle or sheep on portions of public land. Any changes that can expedite the re-permitting process, Torell said, are a positive for the industry. Environmental groups, however, view the livestock operators’ gain to be the sage grouse’s loss. Randi Spivak, Center for Biological Diversity public lands director, blamed livestock for spoiling various aspects of the environment, such as degrading water and spreading invasive plants, and specifically harmful to sage grouse. “This is a terrible deal for the American public and a devastating blow to the sage grouse,” Spivak said in a statement...more

Say you're running 200 head on federal land and your permit comes up for renewal with essentially the same terms and conditions.  That situation didn't evoke NEPA, as you were just continuing an activity that was already occurring.  Then the same enviros who are hollerin' now filed suit.  The Forest Service caved and the BLM soon followed along.  Now we spend millions of dollars to allow something to continue. Ridiculous.  NEPA analysis should occur at the land use planning level or when there is a significant new activity on the allotment.