Summary

2/13/2013--Introduced.Grazing Improvement Act - Amends the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (the Act) to double from 10 to 20 years the period of a term... Read More

Status

This bill was introduced on Jun 12, 2013, in a previous session of Congress, but was not passed.

Bill Text

A BILL

To amend the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 to improve the management of grazing leases and permits, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Grazing Improvement Act''.

SEC. 2. TERMS OF GRAZING PERMITS AND LEASES.

Section 402 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1752) is amended-- (1) by striking ``ten years'' each place it appears and inserting ``20 years''; and (2) in subsection (b)-- (A) by striking ``or'' at the end of each of paragraphs (1) and (2); (B) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; or''; and (C) by adding at the end the following: ``(4) the initial environmental analysis under National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) regarding a grazing allotment, permit, or lease has not been completed.''.

SEC. 3. RENEWAL, TRANSFER, AND REISSUANCE OF GRAZING PERMITS AND LEASES.

(a) Amendment.--Title IV of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 405. RENEWAL, TRANSFER, AND REISSUANCE OF GRAZING PERMITS AND LEASES.

``(a) Definitions.--In this section: ``(1) Current grazing management.--The term `current grazing management' means grazing in accordance with the terms and conditions of an existing permit or lease and includes any modifications that are consistent with an...

Read Full Text

Sentiment Map

Select:

Nation

105 Supporting
570 Opposing
16% 84%

State: CA

7 Supporting
50 Opposing
12% 88%

District: 1st

0 Supporting
1 Opposing
0% 100%

Popularity Trend

Organizations Supporting

The Public Lands Council (PLC) and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) strongly support the Grazing Improvement Act of 2013, introduced last night in the U.S. House of Representatives. Rep. Raúl Labrador (R-Idaho), Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.), Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Nev.), Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), Rep. Kristi Noem (R-S.D.), Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.), Rep. Scott Tipton (R-Colo.) and Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) introduced the bill as companion legislation to S. 258, which was introduced in the Senate last week by Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.). The bill seeks to improve the livestock grazing permitting process on lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service (USFS). The bill was debated during the last session of Congress in both the House and Senate; it passed the House with bipartisan support as part of the Conservation and Economic Growth Act (H.R. 2578). PLC Vice President Brenda Richards, an Owyhee County Idaho rancher, expressed PLC’s support for the bill, adding that the uncertainty surrounding grazing permit renewals is threatening the ability of federal lands ranchers to keep their businesses operating. “This legislation will contribute greatly to providing a stable business environment to federal lands ranchers, who face ever-increasing uncertainty as to the future of our livestock grazing permits,” said Richards. “By increasing the term of grazing permits from 10 to 20 years, ranchers will have certainty that their operations will remain in business and continue to operate without the fear of losing their permits on process-based grounds.” NCBA President Scott George, a dairy and beef producer from Wyoming, said that the bill is commonsense legislation, as it proposes to allow the BLM and USFS to renew federal lands grazing permits under existing terms and conditions while the backlog of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analyses is being addressed. “These ranchers risk the loss or delay of their grazing permits due to the BLM and USFS’ overwhelming NEPA backlog, and this bill would alleviate this problem,” said George. “Most of this backlog is caused by extremist environmental groups, who frequently file lawsuits on minor paperwork issues in an attempt to put ranchers out of business. Decreasing the backlog will conserve agency resources and create more efficient government processes, allowing agency personnel to focus on actual range management, out in the field.” Richards and George stated that the Grazing Improvement Act is important to ranchers, whose operations are the backbone of many communities, providing jobs and economic stability in much of rural America. “The continued success of our members’ ranching operations holds great implications for the landscapes and rural economies of the West. Communities that depend on the continued presence of federal lands ranchers are already experiencing the hardships that accompany the loss of grazing permits,” said Richards. “This legislation is of great importance to our members and to America’s agricultural economy and we urge all House members to support it.” - See more at: http://www.beefusa.org/newsreleases1.aspx?NewsID=2821#sthash.agMk9ENJ.dpuf

Organizations Opposing

Excludes the renewal, reissuance, or transfer of a grazing permit or lease by the Secretary concerned from the NEPA requirement to prepare an environmental analysis

The only thing this legislation will improve is the ability of ranchers to have increased influence over the management of America’s public lands. It is a huge giveaway to the livestock industry coming at a time when many of our western public lands are in dire condition due to public lands grazing. If this bill passes, the situation is only going to worsen at the expense of native wildlife, clean water, and healthy ecosystems

Users Supporting

I support H.R. 657: Grazing Improvement Act because we need to assist our Ranchers in having access to federal lands to continue to provide quality beef for our nations consumption. Without this legislation, the Ranchers may have to curtail operations and even go out of business. This would be disasterous for our State and Nation. The opponents to this bill state that the main reason is the Ranchers restrict the wild buffalo from using federal lands. This is effective in only one local area and that is in the vicinity of Yellowstone National Park. But this bill will affect ALL federal lands and prevent thousands of Ranchers from affectively grazing their cattle. We must provide for our Ranchers ability to produce top quality and quantity of beef. As the elected representative of Idaho, I expect that you will support this legislation that is important to our Idaho Ranchers.

Share
ID
2
DocSUSMC69
ID-2
1 year ago

Users Opposing

I oppose The Grazing Improvement Act because...oh come on. They are feeding their cattle on public land, MY land, for free. In the process this over grazing is destroying the wilderness, polluting with excessive cow flops and giving excuses to those who then want to kill off the wildlife that rightfully belongs there. Enough already please. Tell them to use their own land and leave mine and the wildlife God put there alone. How greedy, self serving and stupid can these people get? A lot more if we let them I suspect so please don't let them. Thank you

Share
OH
2
KatofOhio
OH-2
1 year ago

I oppose The Grazing Improvement Act because... It is just another classic giveaway of our PUBLIC lands to further private greed. It is also exactly what the BLM wishes to have happen: An actual 'legal reason' for them to remove even more of our wild horses herds from lands these horses were assigned to live their lives on, since the LAW of 1971 was passed. BLM is engaged in collusion with Corporate Agriculture, Big Oil, and now fracking interests. The National Academy of Science (NAS) report of Summer 2013 is still being ignored, as is the advice of the equine science and veterinary communities. "Sec. Sally", self-proclaimed 'scientist', has shown no respect for the science needed to manage equine herds. Her employees work for BLM because many, if not most, could not land a job on even the smallest real horse operation in our country. -- This is NEITHER a Grazing Bill nor an improvement. It is another PERMIT for the BLM to continue to break a LAW. They need to observe the ratios designated for horses-to-cattle on all public lands, where there is plenty of room for wild horses, sage grouse, or any of the other excuses being peddled by cattlemen. Do NOT buy it.

Share
AZ
2
Dunbaygal
AZ-2
1 year ago

I oppose The Grazing Improvement Act because...wildlife and America's public lands do not need any more taken from them. We have enough cattle and the means to feed them commercially.

Share
MI
9
Anonymous3450940
MI-9
1 year ago

I oppose The Grazing Improvement Act because it is a threat to wildlife, clearn water, and America's ecosystems.

Share
MI
9
DrEricMiller
MI-9
1 year ago

I oppose The Grazing Improvement Act because...it gives undue influence to ranchers! You are forgetting these are the lands of the American People to which MOST are not rancher's. And the last thing we want or need is rancher's extending their herds and policies into the lands of our wildlife....since the government does not deem then necessary anymore! We have more tourists come to see the beauty of the land and it's wildlife....I mean who wants to go see sheep or cattle? No one... Please use your brains for a change.

Share
MN
2
BobbieTruman
MN-2
1 year ago

Bill Summary

2/13/2013--Introduced.Grazing Improvement Act - Amends the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (the Act) to double from 10 to 20 years the period of a term for grazing permits and leases for domestic livestock grazing on public lands or lands within national forests in 16 contiguous western states. Permits the issuance of permits and leases for a period shorter than 20 years (under current law, shorter than 10 years), including where the Secretary concerned determines that the initial environmental analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) regarding a grazing allotment, permit, or lease has not been completed. Directs that grazing permits or leases issued by the Secretary of the Interior respecting lands under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior and grazing permits issued by the Secretary of Agriculture (USDA) respecting National Forest System lands that expire, are transferred, or are waived after this Act's enactment be renewed or reissued, as appropriate, under the Act, the Granger-Thye Act, the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act, or the California Desert Protection Act of 1994. Excludes the renewal, reissuance, or transfer of a grazing permit or lease by the Secretary concerned from the NEPA requirement to prepare an environmental analysis if: (1) such decision continues to renew, reissue, or transfer current grazing management of the allotment; (2) monitoring indicates that such management meets objectives contained in the land use and resource management plan of the allotment; or (3) the decision is consistent with the policy of the Department of the Interior or USDA regarding extraordinary circumstances. Makes NEPA inapplicable to domestic livestock crossing and trailing authorizations and transfers of grazing preference.

H.R. 656The Restore our Neighborhoods Act H.R. 658 To authorize and request the President to award the congressional Med...