csmonitor.com - The Christian Science Monitor Online
 
USA>Society & Culture
from the January 08, 2002 edition

CATTLE DRIVE: A herd moves across land in New Mexico that is maintained by the Bureau of Land Management. Several environmental groups are launching a national campaign to end all ranching on public lands.
HOWARD PARMAN/BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT/AP/FILE

Bidding wars escalate over ranch land

At auctions, environmental activists buy leases on public lands to keep ranchers from using the acreage for grazing.
| Special to The Christian Science Monitor
It's one of the most long-standing feuds in the West - the face-off between environmentalists and ranchers over who, besides beefy cattle, really benefits from letting herds nibble away at public lands.

The fight over grazing seems far from resolution and, if anything, is bringing out environmentalists' crafty side. One recent tactic: outbid ranchers for the right to lease the land - and then just watch the grass grow, uneaten.

E-mail this story
Write a letter to the Editor
Printer-friendly version
Related stories:
08/09/01
04/17/01
02/29/00

Get all the Monitor's headlines by e-mail.
Subscribe for free.

It's a strategy used of late on state-managed lands in Arizona, Idaho, New Mexico, and Utah. Known as state trust lands, these parcels - which cover more acreage than Pennsylvania - are environmentalists' newest club to wield against ranchers and their hungry herds.

In the most recent development, the Arizona Supreme Court in November ruled that environmental groups have the right to bid for leases on state trust lands. The case dates from 1997, when a coalition of environmentalists and hunters were initially rebuffed in efforts to bid on leases for several parcels of state trust land designated for grazing. The would-be bidders intended to clear the land of cattle in order to repair damage that they alleged had been caused by grazing.

The highly publicized case turned on the distinguishing feature of state trust lands: the mandate that they be used to generate revenue for public schools and other beneficiaries.

In its ruling, the high court opened the door to bidding by nonranchers, implying that leasing the land to ranchers might not always meet "the best interests" of the beneficiaries.

The practical effect of the ruling may be limited: So far, parcels converted from grazing cover fewer than 100,000 acres of land across the West - a relatively small number, given that more than 30 million acres of state trust land are used to graze livestock.

But the victorious environmentalists nonetheless see the ruling as an important achievement. "The Supreme Court decision turns a paradigm on its head," says John Horning, conservation director of an environmental group that was a party to the Arizona lawsuit. "It tells the old guard that the Western landscape is not exclusively valuable when it can produce commodities - that these lands are also valuable for the noncommodity values they can produce."

It is also clear that the environmentalists' tactic is as much about publicity as it is about the particular parcels up for lease. The requirement that state trust lands be managed to generate revenues for beneficiaries provides a showcase for their argument that ranching on all public lands - including those administered by the federal government - does not make economic sense.

State lands "draw attention to the subsidized nature of all public lands, whether state or federal," says Jon Marvel, the head of an environmental group that now holds former grazing leases on state lands in Utah and Idaho. "They underline that a market rate is not being paid, that ranchers do not compete for what they receive."

Several environmental groups from across the West - including Mr. Horning's and Mr. Marvel's - are launching a national campaign to end all ranching on public lands.

They argue that such grazing is a money-losing enterprise for taxpayers, and that the US government should offer ranchers a voluntary buyout of grazing rights on all federal land.

Ranchers, for their part, play down the impact of the Arizona ruling - and continue to argue that driving ranchers out of business will harm rural communities.

Doc Lane, spokesman for the Arizona Cattlemen's Association, says that ranchers offer the state long-term stability - and he questions whether that outweighs the short-term value of the higher bids submitted by the hunters and environmentalists.

"The only thing the [court] decision will do," says Mr. Lane, "is force the state land department to be a lot more specific about what is good for the trust and what isn't."




For further information:
Giving cattle the boot SierraTimes/Arizona Daily Star
Leasing to save grazing land OK'd Arizona Republic/Western Gamebird Alliance
Cash Cows: The Giveaway of the West Mercury Center (1999)
Please Note: The Monitor does not endorse the sites behind these links. We offer them for your additional research. Following these links will open a new browser window.



Get Monitor stories by e-mail:
(Your e-mail address will be protected by csmonitor.com's tough privacy policy.)

Photos In Pictures
Open road to the finals

ELECTION '08 Patchwork Nation
The American voter beyond red and blue

FISHERIES Empty Oceans Series
The sea is no longer so vast.


Daily podcast

Monitor Reports

Discussions with Monitor reporters from around the world


Today

Pat Murphy

Sen. John McCain prepares for his big night




Today's print issue
Today's Issue of The Christian Science Monitor