Feeding in the Public Trough

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/7940666p-8877994c.html

Grazing Rules Put Ranchers in the Saddle.

The White House proposals call for considering economic effects, not just habitat protection.

By Michael Doyle --Sacramento Bee Washington Bureau
Published 2:15 a.m. PST Friday, December 12, 2003

WASHINGTON -- California ranchers gain while environmentalists seethe under sweeping new grazing rules unveiled by the Bush administration this week.
In a marked reversal from previous public-land policies, the Interior Department now is pushing grazing plans that largely ease ranchers' burdens.

If adopted, the rules also could shape millions of federally owned acres in California.
"We're very pleased, actually," Ben Higgins, executive vice president of the California Cattlemen's Association, said Tuesday.

"They took the industry's input into consideration," Higgins said, "and we're hopeful that these rules at the end of the day will provide for greater management flexibility."

The new proposals, for instance, will make federal land managers take into account economic and social circumstances, not just habitat protection, when deciding whether to reduce grazing levels.

"That brings some business judgment to the decisions that are made," said Steve McDonald of Sanger, treasurer of the California Rangeland Trust.

Besides, he added, "we think the cattlemen themselves are the best stewards of the land."

But others gave the proposals decidedly mixed reviews, including the one to consider ranching economics when evaluating grazing levels.

"That's an extremely unbalanced requirement," said John Buckley, executive director of the Twain Harte-based Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center, "unless they're also requiring that the public's costs are taken into account."

Buckley said that would mean the economic costs associated with degraded watersheds and damaged wildlife habitat also should be weighed in determining the future of public-land grazing.

Such conflict has become customary over grazing on public lands, which are vast. The Bureau of Land Management oversees 15 million acres in California and the Forest Service an additional 20 million acres.

Forest Service grazing land is not affected directly by the policies proposed for the BLM, which is part of a separate federal agency.

Forest Service officials said Tuesday that they are not aware of plans to adjust their agency's grazing policies.

There are currently 637 California ranchers who hold grazing allotments through the BLM, much of it in the Southern California desert or in the northeast corner of the state.

The ranchers pay $1.35 per animal unit month -- the amount of forage required to feed a cow and a calf for one month.

This fee has remained unchanged for years, and is lower than fees charged for state or private lands. Past efforts to revise the grazing fee -- including a 1991 proposal passed by the House to boost it to $8.70 -- have collapsed on Capitol Hill.

"It really, truly is an abuse of the taxpayers to not at least charge fair market value," Buckley said.

The proposals, published Monday in the Federal Register and now open for public comment, do not address grazing fees. They do touch on many other facets of grazing policy, however. These include:

* Significant grazing reductions will be phased in over five years, giving ranchers more time to adjust.

* Federal officials will cooperate more closely with state and local grazing advisers.

* Ranchers whose grazing operations degrade the environment will have longer to take remedial action, as the BLM's deadline for initiating those changes will go to two years instead of one.

* Ranchers will be encouraged to install rangeland improvements like fences and wells by letting them share title for the improvements with the federal government.

The Bee's Michael Doyle can be reached at (202) 383-0006 or mdoyle@mcclatchydc.com.