According to news reports, U.S. Rep. John Curtis, R-UT, vice chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus, sponsored HR 3397 directing the U.S. Bureau of Land Management to withdraw a proposed Public Lands Rule because it would “undermine the livelihoods of Utah’s farmers, ranchers, recreation businesses and more.”
At a recent legislative hearing, South Dakota, Gov. Kristi Noem and Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon, both Republicans, testified in support of HR 3397 because they believe the rule “would hurt ranchers who depend on BLM land for grazing.”
Those statements are not accurate. The proposed rule “explicitly protects valid existing rights and previously authorized uses, including grazing.”
If the legislators in Western states want to be concerned about grazing, they should take a look at the rate paid by the “nearly 18,000 permits and leases held by ranchers who graze their livestock, mostly cattle and sheep, at least part of the year on more than 21,000 [BLM] allotments.” These permittees pay a highly subsidized rate, underwritten by the American taxpayer, compared to the cost of leasing similar lands owned by the state or private individuals. The price disparity for 2023 is “$1.35 on public lands managed by BLM/USFS,” “$6.65 (Standard) or $11.66 (Block) for State Institutional Trust Lands (SITLA),” and $19.00 on private “non-irrigated pastureland” per AUM (i.e., one cow/calf, five sheep or goats for a month). The cost to BLM to manage the grazing program is many times the revenue from these grazing fees. As many grazing leases are on marginal lands, they are only leased because the cost is incredibly cheap. Indexing the federal grazing fee to the state fee in each state would be a much better and fairer approach. If you are a rancher without a federal permit and have to rent private or state land, with all your other livestock management costs being the same as the rancher with a federal permit, you are at a serious competitive disadvantage in what it costs you to raise the same animal.
Whether BLM withdraws the proposed rule or not, the actions of the Congressional Western Caucus support American taxpayers footing the bill for the ever-dwindling number of ranchers in their respective states who still make part of their income off grazing on federal public lands. In addition, when the Congressional Western Caucus says it is concerned about the livelihoods of farmers and ranchers on BLM public lands, they are not taking into account their other constituents who use these public lands and the millions of Americans who own these lands or the economic value of these lands to each state.
According to the Utah Division of Natural Resources Division of Outdoor Recreation, “outdoor recreation in Utah contributes more than $6.1B to the economy, employs more than 66,000 people, and is the primary driver behind the tourism industry. Not only does Utah outdoor recreation create $737 million in state and local tax revenues, but it’s also the reason for $3.1B in wages and salaries.”
In supporting HR3397, the Utah delegation denies the Bureau of Land Management the 21st-century tools it needs to manage America’s public lands in the face of increased public recreation, historic drought, more intense wildfires, invasive species, renewable energy development and traditional uses such as mining and grazing in ways that protect the land and provide for the most beneficial use now and in the future.
(Carey Dabney)
Carey Dabney lives in Moab, Utah. She is a former seasonal ranger for Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and is concerned about the misinformation spread about U.S. public lands by elected officials.
