Another example of enviro deception - this time on livestock grazing in OMDPNM

Embedded below is a July 14, 2017 Congressional Research Service memo from Carol Hardy to Senator Udall. The memo was prepared at the request of Senator Udall and is fairly straightforward recitation.

However, in an opinion piece today for The Hill , Brett Myrick of Gila, NM and a former Navy SEAL, states his case on why Secretary Zinke should "recommend no changes" to the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument. (For grant-funded involvement of veterans see the Vet Voice Foundation) In his piece, Myrick writes:

In fact, a recent Congressional Review Service memo found that “there have been no changes to livestock grazing on the ground as a result of the establishment of the monument.”

And if we go to the website of the New Mexico Wilderness Alliance, we find the following:

In July, 2017, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) issued a memorandum on livestock grazing in the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument. CRS is works [sic] exclusively for the U.S. Congress, providing policy and legal analysis to committees and Members of both the House and Senate, regardless of party affiliation. It has been a valued and respected resource on Capitol Hill for more than a century.
The memorandum found that in Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument,

“there have been no changes to livestock grazing on the ground as a result of the establishment of the monument, according to BLM. For instance, there have been no changes to terms and conditions of grazing leases and permits, or the number of acres grazed, as a result of the monument proclamation, according to the agency.”

What they don't quote, however, is the following  language which is in the paragraph immediately preceding the language they do quote:

The proclamation for Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks calls for the development of a management plan for the protection and restoration of identified objects, but no management plan for the monument has been developed to date. BLM also has not issued interim guidance regarding livestock grazing within the monument. The agency has indicated that such guidance is not necessary, as livestock grazing on lands in the monument is being managed under existing authorities. (Underlining is mine)

What any novice can see is the following: The management plan to implement the proclamation has not been written, therefore there have been no changes in guidelines, terms and conditions of permits, or acres grazed. No plan, no change. The memo states since there is no plan, livestock grazing is being managed using "existing authorities", i.e., they are being managed just as they were before the monument was designated. So of course there has been no significant change.

Nothing in the memo addresses what will happen to livestock grazing once the plan is completed and the anti-grazing language in the proclamation is implemented. No one can say with one-hundred percent certainty exactly how that management change will affect the ranching families involved. But with more than forty years experience dealing with these issues, including experience in both the administrative and legislative side of government, I have a definite opinion which I have most recently shared here.

What I do know with certainty is that flaunting this memo to try and convince the public these ranching families will not be harmed by this designation is a clear distortion of the contents of the memo and a disservice to reasonable dialogue on the issue.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8Yd5M8kgeNteTlZQ0l0YWYtd2s/view?usp=sharing