Barrasso bill would double length of grazing permits

Reprinted with permission from Environment & Energy Publishing, LLC. Not for republication by Wyoming media.

By Phil Taylor, E&E reporter

A Wyoming senator has reintroduced a bill that would double the length of grazing permits on millions of acres of public lands and instruct the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service to issue routine permits more quickly.
Sen. John Barrasso’s (R) “Grazing Improvement Act” would also automatically extend permits that the agencies aren’t able to review before they expire.The bill’s introduction this week drew praise from livestock groups that said it would provide much-needed certainty for their businesses, but was panned by one environmentalist as a giveaway to ranchers at the expense of clean water and wildlife.

A version of Barrasso’s bill sponsored by Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) passed the House last Congress but stalled in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, where it was opposed by Obama administration officials.

Barrasso yesterday said his bill would provide relief to ranchers whose activities have been attacked by lawsuit-happy environmental groups.

“These endless lawsuits, aimed at eliminating livestock from public lands, overwhelm the permitting process and hurt ranchers by jeopardizing much-needed grazing permits,” Barrasso said. “My bill will give our ranching communities the certainty and stability they need by extending permits and preserving grazing rights.”

Barrasso’s S. 258 would amend federal law to allow grazing permits to last 20 years. The agencies would also be given greater authority to issue categorical exclusions, which accelerate the review process. It would also institutionalize a legislative rider Congress has enacted for several years that extends expiring permits until agencies are able to officially review them.

“This bill would end some of the instability in the permitting process that plagues the grazing industry in the West,” said Brice Lee, a Colorado rancher who is president of the Public Lands Council.

But the bill last Congress was opposed by the Obama administration, a fact that could hamper its progress in the Democratic-led Senate. BLM’s then-Deputy Director Mike Pool said last March that the bill would limit public comment and hamstring the agency’s ability to protect the range. Leslie Weldon, deputy chief of the National Forest System, expressed similar concerns (E&E Daily, March 23, 2012).

Environmentalists are unlikely to support the bill. Many groups argue that grazing degrades water quality, can introduce invasive species and competes with native wildlife, and that it is a drain on taxpayer dollars.

Andy Kerr, a consultant who advises environmental groups, said grazing permits should not be issued for 20 years because the resource management plans on which they are based last for only 15 years.

“Federal law pertaining to grazing on public lands already provides sacred-cow status to elite and privileged ranchers,” said Kerr, who noted a Government Accountability Office finding that federal agencies lose $10 for every $1 paid in grazing fees. “The so-called Grazing Improvement Act would further elevate the exalted position of welfare ranchers at the public trough at the expense of the taxpayers, clean water and native wildlife.”

Pool said BLM manages about 17,750 livestock grazing permits and leases on more than 160 million acres of public lands in the West.

Due to a spike in permit renewal requests in 1999 and 2000, BLM by the end of fiscal 2012 expected to have a backlog of about 4,200 permits, Pool said. The agency for more than a decade has relied on a year-to-year appropriations rider to reissue grazing permits, Barrasso said.

On Forest Service lands, more than 6,800 individuals are permitted to graze livestock on 94 million acres.

Join the Conversation


Want to join the discussion? Fantastic, here are the ground rules: * Provide your full name — no pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish and expects commenters to do the same. * No personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats. Keep it clean, civil and on topic. *WyoFile does not fact check every comment but, when noticed, submissions containing clear misinformation, demonstrably false statements of fact or links to sites trafficking in such will not be posted. *Individual commenters are limited to three comments per story, including replies.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Barrasso is slime! Talk about special interest whoring this is it as it’s best! AND – more wildlife will be killed for the benefit of right hobby farmers and ranchers! This is a very bad bill and benefits only very bad people!

  2. “Many groups argue that grazing degrades water quality, can introduce invasive species and competes with native wildlife, and that it is a drain on taxpayer dollars.”

    These impacts have been established as facts and are not mere arguments.

  3. Few outside the livestock biz realize that the federal public land grazing fee established under the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 is the same in real dollars as it was 80 years ago… $ 1.34 per month for a cow and her calf, or several sheep. If the grazing fee were adjusted for inflation , it would inherently be $ 20.00 a month. Even that figure is affordable to modern public lands grazers when you consider that in a 4-month alottment time on the public’s grass, a cow andcalf put on well voer 500 lbs. of carcass weight which translates to more than $ 500 in the sale ring, yet pay the US Treasury only $ 5.40 for that grass and access etc. In other words, the rancher gets back 99 dollars for every dollar out of pocket for the grass. Of course the rancher whines that he has allt hese other expenses and must run fences and provide water, etc etc etc. Those , too, are called ” cost of doping business” and are separate from grazing fees. Loom around and you will find that graze fees on State lands and private lands range from $ 5.00 per AUM up to as much as that $ 20,00 figure.

    The federal public grazing fee program is simply a taxpayer giveaway. it costs more to administer the leases that the dollars returned, and the USDA and BLM are now cutting back on monitoring and enforcement of leases, which was always less than needed and now is desperately needed. The taxpayer is subsidizing public lands grazing in the worst possible way.

    And Barrasso want to take a bad situation and raw deal for the taxpayer and make it twice as bad and twice as raw.

    Oh by the way …when that cow and her calf come home from the mountains in September and October, they bring with them the grass that would have gone to four elk and seven mule deer.

  4. I am by no means a lawsuit happy environmentalist, but Barrasso’s actions have made me choose sides. I’ve seen first hand the damage caused by over grazing and all this welfare ranching going on in Wyoming. Our public lands are in horrible condition, and with the latest drought, things are only going to get worse if they try and push more leases through. I’ll also be voting against you Barrasso.