Get reliable rangeland science

Overview 

The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) are managed to provide and sustain resources for a wide variety of users, from ranchers to loggers to recreationists. According to the Forest Service Organic Act of 1897, the primary purpose of national forests was timber production, protection of forests, and preservation of water flows. Among other uses, livestock grazing was a secondary purpose. In the 1950’s, conflict began to arise between different groups of national forest users. Congress responded by formally implementing a multiple-use mandate. The Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act (MUSY) was signed in 1960. The act defined multiple-use as “the management of all the various renewable surface resources of the national forests so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the needs of American people”, and sustained-yield as “the achievement and maintenance in perpetuity of a high level annual or regular periodic output of the various renewable resources of the national forests without impairment of the productivity of the land”. MUSY also redefined the primary purposes of the national forest as “outdoor recreation, range, timber, watershed, and wildlife and fish purposes” equally.  

Over time, Congress would reinforce the multiple use, sustained yield mandate of both the BLM and USFS through the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and National Forest Management Act, which provide additional requirements for planning to balance different uses of the land. Today, multiple use, sustained yield remains the primary management principle that guides land use decision making on BLM and USFS lands.

Overview 

State trust lands are lands that were given to western states at the time of statehood for the purpose of generating revenue. While some states immediately sold most of their trust lands to raise funds, approximately 46 million acres remain across 23 of the lower 48 states. Most remaining state trust lands are concentrated in the nine western states: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.  Many states also own additional lands that they acquired through other means, such as wildlife management areas and parks, but these lands are not governed by trust mandates.  

States are legally required to manage trust lands in perpetuity for the financial benefit of specific beneficiaries. Public schools are the designated beneficiary for majority of state trust lands, but a smaller portion of these lands also support universities, hospitals, and other public institutions.  State trust lands earn revenues from a variety of activities, including timber harvesting, grazing, mineral extraction, and recreation, but most revenue is generated through sale of trust lands for development. Revenues from sales of land and extraction of non-renewable resources are invested to provide long-term interest income for the beneficiaries. It is this trust responsibility that sets state trust lands apart from other state and federal lands. 

Overview 

In 1872, Yellowstone became the first national park.  Protected for its unique natural beauty, it was only the first of what would eventually become a system of 419 national parks and historic sites managed by the NPS. The NPS is different from the USFS and BLM in that its mission is not multiple use. Rather, the NPS is tasked with keeping land under its management “unimpaired for future generations.” This means that the NPS has an explicit preservation mission, in contrast to the conservation and sustainability missions of the USFS and BLM. As a result, most resource development activities, including livestock grazing, are not allowed in national parks except under exceptional circumstances. 

The US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is also different from the USFS and BLM. Its mission is to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. This mission is achieved through the acquisition and management of wildlife refuges and enforcement of the provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973. Many of the earliest refuges were human-made wetlands to replace natural wetlands lost to agriculture. These wetlands provided habitat for imperiled migrating waterfowl. Today, there are 567 national wildlife refuges across the country and 2,531 species (Animals, invertebrates, and plants) listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Although, livestock grazing is generally excluded from national wildlife refuges to protect wildlife habitat, some FWS locations that still have grazing and agriculture (Loomis 2002). There are also cooperative agriculture opportunities that are announced for participation by local landowners (see https://www.fws.gov/refuges/get-involved/landowners/cooperative-agriculture.html and https://www.fws.gov/policy/620fw2.html). Because of the way the law was written to establish the FWS reserve system, other extractive things could occur there, such as drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Or another example, a new executive rollback that allows hunting of predators on both refuges and national parks https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/2020/05/hunting-in-national-preserves-and-wildlife-refuges-in-alaska/.  

The Endangered Species Act applies to all lands and makes harming a threatened or endangered species on public or private land illegal. As a result, the ESA is one of the most important laws ranchers and other public lands users are likely to encounter. However, the FWS has policy mechanisms and economic incentives that aid private landowners and public lands users (e.g. grazing) to help avoid an illegal taking of an endangered species (see Outside Resources - Working Together for further information). The process of collaborative conservation strategies is one tool the FWS uses to prevent listing at risk species such as the greater sage grouse. 

NPS land map: https://nationalmap.gov/small_scale/printable/images/pdf/fedlands/NPS_1.pdf  

USFWS land map: https://nationalmap.gov/small_scale/printable/images/pdf/fedlands/FWS_1.pdf  

Overview

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM)and the U.S.Forest Service (USFS) have similar missions. Both agencies are required to manage public lands according to multiple use, sustained yield mandates. However, BLM manages much less forest land and much more rangeland than the US Forest Service. Unlike the US Forest Service, the BLM manages essentially no land in the eastern U.S. This is because BLM managed lands were created from “surplus” public lands that the federal government had not designated as National Forests or given to homesteaders. As a result, BLM land is commonly used by ranchers to support livestock operations in the western U.S. The U.S.Forest Service manages millions of acres of land in both the eastern and western U.S. While in its early years, the primary mission of the U.S.Forest Service was sustainable management of the nation’s timber reserves, it also regulated grazing. In fact, the U.S.Forest Service has been issuing grazing permits on national forests since 1906, nearly 30 years longer than the BLM.

In 1891, Congress passed the Forest Reserve Act, which established the first forest reserves on public lands. These Forest Reserves would eventually become what we call National Forests today. In 1905, Congress transferred the Forest Reserves into the Department of Agriculture, establishing U.S. Forest Service and in 1907, forest reserves were renamed National Forests. In the late 1800s and early 1900s millions of acres of forest and rangeland were designated as National Forests, nearly all in the western United States. Unlike other types of public lands, National Forests lands were generally unavailable for homesteading and conversion into private property. The purpose of the National Forests was to secure sustainable supply of timber for the growing U.S., as well as provide for other uses such as grazing. Mining, livestock grazing, hunting, and timber harvesting, and recreation are all allowed in National Forests. The USFS is mandated by law to allow this full range of uses on National Forests, while also sustaining natural resources for future generations.

The BLM has existed in different forms since 1934, when the Taylor Grazing Act was signed into law. The Taylor Grazing Act created grazing districts to improve the management of ranching on public lands and ended homesteading on western public lands. Initially, these grazing districts were managed by the U.S. Grazing Service. The Grazing Service had the responsibility of improving range conditions, authorizing grazing permits, and collecting grazing fees. In 1946 the BLM was established through the merger of the General Land Office and the Grazing Service. 

Today, the BLM manages nearly 250 million acres of public land, mostly in the western US. Mining, livestock grazing, hunting, recreation, and timber harvesting are allowed in BLM Public Lands. The BLM is mandated by law to allow this full range of uses on BLM lands, while also sustaining natural resources for future generations.

NEPA comes into play whenever a federal land management agency, including the BLM or US Forest Service, considers making a decision or carrying out a project that could potentially impact natural resources on public lands. Included in this is issuance of 10-year grazing permits and any projects that are not specifically included as improvements in current grazing permits. This includes new fencing, establishing access to or maintaining waters, and other range improvements. The NEPA process can take a long time, often years. Because of this it is essential that ranchers engage at the outset to ensure their opinions are considered throughout the process.

How can ranchers engage in NEPA? What does it mean to “do NEPA” on a grazing allotment? This topic section steps through the NEPA process, highlights key points where and how ranchers should engage in the process. The information on these NEPA pages is also available from the University of Arizona Cooperative Extension as a book, NEPA for Ranchers. No matter if you use this webpage or the NEPA for Ranchers  guidebook, the most important thing is to be involved in the process so the agency understands your perspective, needs for range improvements, and the effect of decisions on your operation.

Since the turn of the last century the federal government has regulated domestic livestock use on its lands through grazing permits. Such practices began on the National Forests in the early 1900s and expanded to other public lands with the passage of the Taylor Grazing Act in 1934. These new policies and laws sought to protect public lands from the widespread overgrazing that occurred during early settlement, when range and forest lands were over-exploited in the absence of rules restricting their use.

Under the Taylor Grazing Act and subsequent laws regulating grazing, livestock operators can apply for a permit from the U.S. Forest Service or the BLM. These permits provide ranchers with exclusive access to specific areas of public lands in return for a fee, agreement to establish and maintain certain infrastructure, and conditional on following management requirements established by federal agencies. Eligibility for a grazing permit is established in part by ownership of adjacent private land. These private lands are generally the original homesteads of ranchers and the establishment of the grazing permit system was supported by ranchers as a way to end overgrazing and provide greater certainty about how public lands would be managed.

Livestock grazing on public lands generally declined after the Taylor Grazing Act as government agencies worked to regulate grazing, reduce overgrazing, and recover degraded rangelands. Livestock numbers have stabilized over the past 15 years. In 2016 The Forest Service allowed livestock grazing by 5,863 permittees on 102 million of 193 million acres it manages (53%). The BLM allowed grazing on 155 million of 245 million acres managed (63%) through 18,000 permits. 

Overview

As the population of major western U.S. cities has grown and surrounding rural areas have become more suburban, the users of public lands have changed. Ranchers are still important, but more than ever urban residents look to public lands for recreation, retreat, and solitude. Sometimes, these users see livestock production as harmful or incompatible with their enjoyment of public lands. In the 1980s, these changes resulted in increasing conflicts between ranchers, environmentalists, and the agencies responsible for the management of public lands. By the 1990s, some people, tired of unproductive conflict, began looking for other ways to improve conservation outcomes on public lands. As a result of this change, three major trends emerged in management of public lands in the West: adaptive management, collaborative conservation, and co-production of management science. The links below provide more information on the importance of each of these trends and how they influence public lands management today.

The scientific exploration of the use and management of rangelands began in the early 1900s. Rangeland ecology and management is an applied science that was developed in direct response to the negative impacts of overgrazing on natural ecosystems and to enhance the economic viability of ranching as a livelihood. Ranching has unavoidable impacts that must be managed to prevent impacts that exceed the capacity of natural systems to recover and society’s tolerance for use and alteration of public lands. One hundred years of rangeland science has provided many of the tools needed to manage undesirable impacts while maintaining production. At the same time, we still have much to learn. Today three approaches are commonly used for the management of public lands to limit the negative impacts, expand our knowledge of how these systems function, and balance different uses and management goals: adaptive management, co-production of science, and collaborative conservation.

Overview

Beyond economic goals, many ranchers also value the culture of ranching and work to manage in a way that balances conservation of natural resources and livestock production.  How do ranchers balance economics with conservation values? What is meant by cultural values and why are they important?  Economic, conservation, and cultural issues are linked. Many studies have been conducted to understand what drives ranchers to continue ranching. The economics of ranching are difficult: ranchers are dependent on many outside forces for their income, from livestock markets over which they have no control, to year-to-year variations in weather that can affect both the long-term and short-term productivity of a ranch. At the same time, land in many rural areas continues to increase in value and is ripe for development. Given these challenges and opportunities, why do ranchers continue ranching? For many ranchers it is a combination of culture and conservation. Surveys of ranchers show that those that continue working in ranching do it because they like the lifestyle, tradition, and community around ranching. Other research shows that ranchers who use public lands also tend to have strong conservation motivations. The resources included below provide more information about what motivates public lands ranchers and why they continue to ranch.

Overview 

National forests, parks, wildlife refuges, national monuments, and state trust lands. Each of these land designations come with different rules and regulations that effect the goals, management, and outcomes on these public-owned lands. The links below provide an introduction to the goals of the different federal and state agencies involved in the management and regulation of grazing on public lands in the U.S. There are also links to additional resources to learn more about how public lands are managed, the goals of different agencies, and how and why decisions about land management are made.