# Public Lands Open for Grazing Costs $123 Million a Year



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Report Says Keeping Public Lands Open for Grazing Costs $123 Million a Year

http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=9152

November 01, 2005  By Jennifer Talhelm, Associated Press

WASHINGTON  Federal agencies spend at least $123 million a year to keep public lands open to livestock grazing, according to a government report that environmentalists say bolsters their argument that grazing should be limited. 

"If we are going to allow grazing on our public lands, the very least we should be doing is we should be recovering the costs," said Greta Anderson, a Tucson, Ariz., botanist and the range restoration campaign coordinator for the Center for Biological Diversity. 

Jim Hughes, deputy director of the Bureau of Land Management -- which, with the Forest Service, manages 98 percent of grazing permits -- said the agency charges a fee set by law and is not advocating a change or an increase. 

"We have many programs that cost us more ... to operate than we take in," Hughes said. "It's never been our mission to be run totally like a business." 

Ranching on the millions of acres of public lands has been a mainstay of western life for more than a century. Ranchers pay a fee often based on the amount of grass and other vegetation their cows will eat. The agencies spend the money on managing permits and leases, building fences and developing water projects, among other activities. 

The arrangement increasingly has caused friction as more demands are put on western lands. Environmentalists question whether taxpayers should support public lands grazing. 

According to the analysis released Monday by the Government Accountability Office, grazing fees cover only about a sixth of the cost of managing the program. 

In 2004, the Bureau of Land Management, the Forest Service and several other agencies spent $144 million and generated just $21 million from grazing fees. 

Ranchers who hold public lands grazing permits get a deal, paying as little as $1.43 per animal unit month -- the amount of forage a cow and her calf can eat in a month -- according to the GAO. 

Jeff Eisenberg, executive director of the Public Lands Council, which advocates for ranchers, said the numbers in the report don't represent the whole picture. The benefits of maintaining a way of life and keeping land free from development are difficult to quantify, he said.


----------



## ID-Birddog (Mar 9, 2004)

Better cows than condos........................
As more and more people are relocating out here, this issue is only going to get worse. Our rural lifestyle is under attack from these so called "enviromentalists". THis year we had a really wet spring and the grasses were thick. One of the guys I play cowboy for had to have all his animals moved off his BLM allotment by June 15. As we gathered cows, it was easy to see that only 10% of the available range was even touched. By late summer, all that pretty grass was now fuel for range fires. THere will be no little man cattle producers in the not so distant future. Only the big ag businesses will be able to withstand the buracracy.


----------



## Hamilton Reef (Jan 20, 2000)

Bull-pies! The tall grass prairies are regenerated by the periodic range fires and perfectly natural and beneficial for wildlife and hunting. If a condo is in the way good riddance.

As to the cheap range fees to the cattle ranchers, let them pay their own way. The Republicans are always promoting user pay until they can rip off the public line their pockets and continue to buy off the administration with their campaign contributions. Same as the cost of administering the captive cervid industry in Michigan.


----------



## ID-Birddog (Mar 9, 2004)

Have you even been out here before? You know how many of our homes are threatened and damaged by those "regenerating" range fires? The majority of ranchers out here, particularly the ones I know are careful stewards of the land. If we overgraze, then the land is not any good the following year. As far as paying "only" $1.43 per animal, guess what, that is about the going rate for grazing on private land. If the bureaucrats in big Government are not making a profit, then that is not our problem. How many Government programs do you know of that make profits? I guess you are one of those that would rather see rural westerners pushed off these lands so the feds can then sell off to the developers. Development of lands around here are the biggest threat to wildlife right now. People just have to havetheir trophy homes in critical elk winter range. Very few of the enviros are speaking out about this, only hunters and ranchers.


----------



## Randy Kidd (Apr 21, 2001)

Birddog you are preaching to the choir here when you talk of land being lost due to development.


----------

