29–006 

113TH CONGRESS REPT. 113–145 " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session Part 1 

GRAZING IMPROVEMENT ACT 

JULY 9, 2013.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, from the Committee on Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

DISSENTING VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 657] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 657) to amend the Federal Land Policy and Management 

Act of 1976 to improve the management of grazing leases and permits, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report 

favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill 

as amended do pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

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’’; 

(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.’’; and 

(3) after subsection (h), insert the following new subsection: 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

2 

‘‘(i) Only applicants, permittees and lessees whose interest in grazing livestock is 

directly affected by a final grazing decision may appeal the decision to an administrative law judge.’’. 

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 applicable Department of Interior resource management plan or Department of 

Agriculture land use plan. 

‘‘(2) SECRETARY CONCERNED.—The term ‘Secretary concerned’ means— 

‘‘(A) the Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to National Forest System 

land; and 

‘‘(B) the Secretary of the Interior, with respect to land under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior. 

‘‘(b) RENEWAL, TRANSFER, REISSUANCE, AND PENDING PROCESSING.—A grazing 

permit or lease issued by the Secretary of the Interior, or a grazing permit issued 

by the Secretary of Agriculture regarding National Forest System land, that expires, 

is transferred, or is waived shall be renewed or reissued under, as appropriate— 

‘‘(1) section 402; 

‘‘(2) section 19 of the Act of April 24, 1950 (commonly known as the ‘GrangerThye Act’; 16 U.S.C. 580l); 

‘‘(3) title III of the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act (7 U.S.C. 1010 et seq.); 

or 

‘‘(4) section 510 the California Desert Protection Act of 1994 (16 U.S.C. 

410aaa–50). 

‘‘(c) TERMS; CONDITIONS.—The terms and conditions (except the termination date) 

contained in an expired, transferred, or waived permit or lease described in subsection (b) shall continue in effect under a renewed or reissued permit or lease until 

the date on which the Secretary concerned completes the processing of the renewed 

or reissued permit or lease that is the subject of the expired, transferred, or waived 

permit or lease, in compliance with each applicable law. 

‘‘(d) CANCELLATION; SUSPENSION; MODIFICATION.—Notwithstanding subsection (c), 

a permit or lease described in subsection (b) may be cancelled, suspended, or modified in accordance with applicable law. 

‘‘(e) RENEWAL TRANSFER REISSUANCE AFTER PROCESSING.—When the Secretary 

concerned has completed the processing of the renewed or reissued permit or lease 

that is the subject of the expired, transferred, or waived permit or lease, the Secretary concerned shall renew or reissue the permit or lease for a term of 20 years 

after completion of processing. 

‘‘(f) COMPLIANCE WITH NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1969.—The renewal, reissuance, or transfer of a grazing permit or lease by the Secretary concerned shall be categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement if— 

‘‘(1) the decision continues to renew, reissue, or transfer the current grazing 

management of the allotment; 

‘‘(2) monitoring of the allotment has indicated that the current grazing management has met, or has satisfactorily progressed towards meeting, objectives 

contained in the land use and resource management plan of the allotment, as 

determined by the Secretary concerned; or 

‘‘(3) the decision is consistent with the policy of the Department of the Interior or the Department of Agriculture, as appropriate, regarding extraordinary 

circumstances. 

‘‘(g) PRIORITY AND TIMING FOR COMPLETING ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSES.—The Secretary concerned, in the sole discretion of the Secretary concerned, shall determine 

the priority and timing for completing each required environmental analysis regarding any grazing allotment, permit, or lease based on the environmental significance 

of the allotment, permit, or lease and available funding for that purpose. 

‘‘(h) NEPA EXEMPTIONS.—The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) shall not apply to the following: 

‘‘(1) Crossing and trailing authorizations of domestic livestock. 

‘‘(2) Transfer of grazing preference. 

‘‘(3) Range improvements as defined under 43 U.S.C. 315c and 16 U.S.C. 

580h.’’. 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

3 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 1976 is amended by adding after the item for section 404, the 

following: 

‘‘Sec. 405. Renewal, transfer, and reissuance of grazing permits and leases.’’. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 657 is to amend the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 1976 to improve the management of grazing 

leases and permits. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Livestock grazing represents one of the earliest uses of federallymanaged lands and continues to represent a multiple use that is 

essential to the livestock industry, wildlife habitat, open space and 

the rural economies of many western communities. While grazing 

has historically been viewed as a ‘‘use’’ of the public lands, it has 

also come to be recognized as an important ‘tool’ for the management of these lands. 

Approximately 40 percent of beef cattle in the West and half of 

the nation’s sheep spend some time on federal lands. Without public land grazing, grazing use of significant portions of state and private lands would necessarily cease, and the cattle and sheep industries would be dramatically downsized, threatening infrastructure 

and the entire market structure. Livestock grazing permit holders 

and public land agencies have been relying on appropriation bill 

riders affecting grazing permit issuance for over a decade. Agencies 

cannot complete the needed National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) obligations due to the backlog of lawsuits filed to delay 

permitting and to advance an environmental agenda of eliminating 

livestock grazing from public lands. 

Like the appropriations riders, H.R. 657 allows for the utilization 

and issuance of permits and leases once they have expired until the 

necessary environmental analyses can be completed. The Grazing 

Improvement Act is an essential step in restoring a stable business 

environment to the public lands grazing industry and retaining an 

important land management tool for the healthy stewardship of our 

nation’s public lands, wildlife habitat and rural economies in the 

West. It also extends the terms of the grazing permits from 10 to 

20 years. 

During Full Committee consideration of the bill, the Committee 

adopted an amendment offered by Congressman Raul Labrador (R– 

ID) to exempt minor administrative decisions relating to range improvements from NEPA. Consistent with the intent of the Taylor 

Grazing Act, the amendment ensures that only public lands grazers 

directly affected by an administrative grazing decision will have 

the right to appeal that decision if they are adversely affected. This 

will close a loophole that is being exploited by off-site, ideological 

extremists who appeal nearly every agency decision for the sake of 

complicating the process and harming the industry. This amendment will ensure that the appeals process returns to a fair and 

timely practice, as was originally intended. 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

4 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 657 was introduced on February 13, 2013, by Congressman 

Raul Labrador (R–ID). The bill was referred to the Committee on 

Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee 

on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation. The bill was also 

referred to the Committee on Agriculture. On April 18, 2013, the 

Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation held 

a hearing on the bill. On June 12, 2013, the Full Natural Resources 

Committee met to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on Public 

Lands and Environmental Regulation was discharged by unanimous consent. Congressman Labrador offered an en bloc amendment designated #1; the amendment was adopted by voice vote. 

Congressman Raul Grijalva (D–AZ) offered an amendment designated .047; the amendment was not adopted by voice vote. No 

further amendments were offered, and the bill, as amended, was 

then adopted and ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by a bipartisan roll call vote of 27 to 15, as follows: 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

5 


WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 6 here HR145P1.001

Date: June 12, 2013 

Committee on Natural Resources 

U.S. House of Representatives 

113 th Congress 

Recorded Vote #: 11 

Meeting on / Amendment on: H.R. 657 - To adopt and favorably report the bill to the House, as amended, 

agreed to by a vote of 27 yeas to 15 nays 

MEMBERS Yea Nay Pres MEMBERS Yea Nay 

Mr. Hastings, W A, Chairman X Mr. Duucan of SC X 

Mr. Markey, MA, Ranking Ms. Hanabusa, HI X 

Mr. Young, AI( X Mr. Tipton, CO X 

Mr. Defazio. OR X Mr. Cardenas. CA X 

Mr. Gohmert, TX X Mr. Gosar, AZ 

~ Mr. Faleomavaega, AS X Mr. Horsford. NV 

Mr, Bishop, UT X Mr. Labrador, ID 

Mr. Pallone, NJ X Mr. Huffman, CA X 

Mr. Lamborn, CO X Mr. Southerland, FL X 

Mrs. Napolitano, CA X Mr. Ruiz, CA X 

Mr. Wittman, VA X Mr. Flores, TX X 

Mr. Holt.NJ X Ms. Shea-Porter, NH X 

Mr. Broun, GA X Mr. Runyan, NJ X 

Mr. Grijalva, AZ X Mr. LOlventhal. CA X 

Mr. Fleming, LA X Mr. Amodei, NV 

Ms. BordaI/o, GU X Mr. Garcia, FL X 

Mr, McClintock, CA X Mr. Mullin, OK X 

Mr. Costa, CA X Mr. Cartwright, PA X 

Mr. Thompson, PA X Mr. Stewart, UT X 

Mr. Sablan. CNMI Mr. Daines, MT X 

Ms. Lummis, ,"YY X Mr. Cramer, ND X 

Ms. Tsongas, MA X Mr. LaMalfa, CA 

Mr. Benishek, MI X Mr. Smith, MO X 

Mr. Pierluisi. PR 

TOTALS 27 15 

Pres 
6 

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII 

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on 

Natural Resources’ oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the body of this report. 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII 

1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of 

the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that Rule provides 

that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Under clause 

3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 

section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate for this bill from the 

Director of the Congressional Budget Office: 

H.R. 657—Grazing Improvement Act 

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 657 would affect offsetting receipts, which are treated as reductions in direct spending; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. However, CBO estimates that 

any such effects would be negligible over the 2014–2023 period. We 

also estimate that implementing the legislation would have no significant impact on discretionary spending. Enacting H.R. 657 would 

not affect revenues. 

H.R. 657 would increase the term of new grazing permits on federal lands from 10 years to 20 years and allow expired and transferred grazing permits to remain in effect until new permits are 

issued by the Bureau of Land Management or the Forest Service. 

Based on information provided by the affected agencies, CBO estimates that enacting that provision would have a minimal impact 

on offsetting receipts each year because those agencies have the authority under current law to extend expired permits. The bill would 

allow the affected agencies to collect offsetting receipts from transferred permits sooner than it would under current law; however, 

because the number of permits that would be affected each year accounts for less than 5 percent of all federal grazing permits, the net 

budgetary impact would be negligible. In 2012, gross federal collections from grazing permits totaled about $20 million. 

Because the bill would allow transferred permits to remain in effect under the terms of the original permit until that permit expires, CBO expects that the agencies would receive fewer requests 

for new permits in the next few years; however, because those permits would need to be renewed in later years, CBO estimates that 

implementing the provision would have no significant net effect on 

agencies’ workloads over the 2014–2018 period. 

Finally, the bill would exclude certain grazing lands from compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and 

would exempt certain renewed or transferred grazing permits from 

NEPA requirements. CBO estimates that those provisions would 

have no effect on discretionary spending because we expect that 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

7 

any reduction in spending on NEPA activities on those lands would 

be spent to reduce the agencies’ backlog of incomplete NEPA activities on other federal lands. 

H.R. 657 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jeff LaFave. The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

2. Section 308(a) of Congressional Budget Act. As required by 

clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, 

this bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or 

tax expenditures. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 657 would affect offsetting receipts, which are treated as reductions in direct 

spending; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. However, CBO 

estimates that any such effects would be negligible over the 2014– 

2023 period. CBO also estimates that implementing the legislation 

would have no significant impact on discretionary spending. 

3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 

clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or objective 

of this bill is to amend the Federal Land Policy and Management 

Act of 1976 to improve the management of grazing leases and permits. 

EARMARK STATEMENT

This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined under clause 9(e), 

9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4 

This bill contains no unfunded mandates. 

COMPLIANCE WITH H. RES. 5 

Directed Rule Making. The Chairman does not believe that this 

bill directs any executive branch official to conduct any specific 

rule-making proceedings. 

Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not establish or 

reauthorize a program of the federal government known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was not included in 

any report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress 

pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111–139 or identified in the 

most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program Information Act (Public Law 95–220, 

as amended by Public Law 98–169) as relating to other programs. 

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law. 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

8 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, 

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

FEDERAL LAND POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ACT OF 

1976 

* * * * * * * 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

TITLE I—SHORT TITLE; POLICIES; DEFINITIONS 

Sec. 101. Short title. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE IV—RANGE MANAGEMENT 

* * * * * * * 

Sec. 405. Renewal, transfer, and reissuance of grazing permits and leases. 

* * * * * * * 

TITLE IV—RANGE MANAGEMENT 

* * * * * * * 

GRAZING LEASES AND PERMITS

SEC. 402. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, 

permits and leases for domestic livestock grazing on public lands 

issued by the Secretary under the Act of June 28, 1934 (48 Stat. 

1269, as amended; 43 U.S.C. 315 et seq.) or the Act of August 28, 

1937 (50 Stat. 874, as amended; 43 U.S.C. 1181a–1181j), or by the 

Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to lands within National Forests in the sixteen contiguous Western States, shall be for a term 

of øten years¿ 20 years subject to such terms and conditions the 

Secretary concerned deems appropriate and consistent with the 

governing law, including, but not limited to, the authority of the 

Secretary concerned to cancel, suspend, or modify a grazing permit 

or lease, in whole or in part, pursuant to the terms and conditions 

thereof, or to cancel or suspend a grazing permit or lease for any 

violation of a grazing regulation or of any term or condition of such 

grazing permit or lease. 

(b) Permits or leases may be issued by the Secretary concerned 

for a period shorter than øten years¿ 20 years where the Secretary 

concerned determines that— 

(1) the land is pending disposal; øor¿ 

(2) the land will be devoted to a public purpose prior to the 

end of øten years¿ 20 years; øor¿ 

(3) it will be in the best interest of sound land management 

to specify a shorter term: Provided, That the absence from an 

allotment management plan of details the Secretary concerned 

would like to include but which are undeveloped shall not be 

the basis for establishing a term shorter than øten years¿ 20 

years: Provided further, That the absence of completed land use 

plans or court ordered environmental statements shall not be 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

9 

the sole basis for establishing a term shorter than øten years¿ 

20 years unless the Secretary determines on a case-by-case 

basis that the information to be contained in such land use 

plan or court ordered environmental impact statement is necessary to determine whether a shorter term should be established for any of the reasons set forth in items (1) through (3) 

of this subsectionø.¿; or 

(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. 

(c) So long as (1) the lands for which the permit or lease is issued 

remain available for domestic livestock grazing in accordance with 

land use plans prepared pursuant to section 202 of this Act or section 5 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning 

Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 477; 16 U.S.C. 1601), (2) the permittee or lessee is in compliance with the rules and regulations issued and the 

terms and conditions in the permit or lease specified by the Secretary concerned, and (3) the permittee or lessee accepts the terms 

and conditions to be included by the Secretary concerned in the 

new permit or lease, the holder of the expiring permit or lease shall 

be given first priority for receipt of the new permit or lease. 

(d) All permits and leases for domestic livestock grazing issued 

pursuant to this section may incorporate an allotment management 

plan developed by the Secretary concerned. However, nothing in 

this subsection shall be construed to supersede any requirement for 

completion of court ordered environmental impact statements prior 

to development and incorporation of allotment management plans. 

If the Secretary concerned elects to develop an allotment management plan for a given area, he shall do so in careful and considered 

consultation, cooperation and coordination with the lessees, permittees, and landowners involved, the district grazing advisory boards 

established pursuant to section 403 of the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1753), and any State or States having 

lands within the area to be covered by such allotment management 

plan. Allotment management plans shall be tailored to the specific 

range condition of the area to be covered by such plan, and shall 

be reviewed on a periodic basis to determine whether they have 

been effective in improving the range condition of the lands involved or whether such lands can be better managed under the provisions of subsection (e) of this section. The Secretary concerned 

may revise or terminate such plans or develop new plans from time 

to time after such review and careful and considered consultation, 

cooperation and coordination with the parties involved. As used in 

this subsection, the terms ‘‘court ordered environmental impact 

statement’’ and ‘‘range condition’’ shall be defined as in the ‘‘Public 

Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978.’’ 

(e) In all cases where the Secretary concerned has not completed 

an allotment management plan or determines that an allotment 

management plan is not necessary for management of livestock operations and will not be prepared, the Secretary concerned shall incorporate in grazing permits and leases such terms and conditions 

as he deems appropriate for management of the permitted or 

leased lands pursuant to applicable law. The Secretary concerned 

shall also specify therein the numbers of animals to be grazed and 

the seasons of use and that he may reexamine the condition of the 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

10 

range at any time and, if he finds on reexamination that the condition of the range requires adjustment in the amount or other aspect of grazing use, that the permittee or lessee shall adjust his use 

to the extent the Secretary concerned deems necessary. Such readjustment shall be put into full force and effect on the date specified 

by the Secretary concerned. 

(f) Allotment management plans shall not refer to livestock operation or range improvements on non-Federal lands except where 

the non-Federal lands are intermingled with, or, with the consent 

of the permittee or lessee involved, associated with, the Federal 

lands subject to the plan. The Secretary concerned under appropriate regulations shall grant to lessees and permittees the right 

of appeal from decisions which specify the terms and conditions of 

allotment management plans. The preceding sentence of this subsection shall not be construed as limiting any other right of appeal 

from decisions on such officials. 

(g) Whenever a permit or lease for grazing domestic livestock is 

canceled in whole or in part, in order to devote the lands covered 

by the permit or lease to another public purpose, including disposal, the permittee or lessee shall receive from the United States 

a reasonable compensation for the adjusted value, to be determined 

by the Secretary concerned, of his interest in authorized permanent 

improvements placed or constructed by the permittee or lessee on 

lands covered by such permit or lease, but not to exceed the fair 

market value of the terminated portion of the permittee’s or lessee’s interest therein. Except in cases of emergency, no permit or 

lease shall be canceled under this subsection without two years’ 

prior notification. 

(h) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as modifying in any 

way law existing on the date of approval of this Act with respect 

to the creation of right, title, interest or estate in or to public lands 

or lands in National Forests by issuance of grazing permits and 

leases. 

(i) Only applicants, permittees and lessees whose interest in grazing livestock is directly affected by a final grazing decision may appeal the decision to an administrative law judge. 

* * * * * * * 

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 applicable 

Department of Interior resource management plan or Department of Agriculture land use plan. 

(2) SECRETARY CONCERNED.—The term ‘‘Secretary concerned’’ 

means— 

(A) the Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to National 

Forest System land; and 

(B) the Secretary of the Interior, with respect to land 

under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior. 

(b) RENEWAL, TRANSFER, REISSUANCE, AND PENDING PROCESSING.—A grazing permit or lease issued by the Secretary of the 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

11 

Interior, or a grazing permit issued by the Secretary of Agriculture 

regarding National Forest System land, that expires, is transferred, 

or is waived shall be renewed or reissued under, as appropriate— 

(1) section 402; 

(2) section 19 of the Act of April 24, 1950 (commonly known 

as the ‘‘Granger-Thye Act’’; 16 U.S.C. 580l); 

(3) title III of the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act (7 U.S.C. 

1010 et seq.); or 

(4) section 510 the California Desert Protection Act of 1994 

(16 U.S.C. 410aaa–50). 

(c) TERMS; CONDITIONS.—The terms and conditions (except the 

termination date) contained in an expired, transferred, or waived 

permit or lease described in subsection (b) shall continue in effect 

under a renewed or reissued permit or lease until the date on which 

the Secretary concerned completes the processing of the renewed or 

reissued permit or lease that is the subject of the expired, transferred, or waived permit or lease, in compliance with each applicable law. 

(d) CANCELLATION; SUSPENSION; MODIFICATION.—Notwithstanding subsection (c), a permit or lease described in subsection (b) 

may be cancelled, suspended, or modified in accordance with applicable law. 

(e) RENEWAL TRANSFER REISSUANCE AFTER PROCESSING.—When 

the Secretary concerned has completed the processing of the renewed 

or reissued permit or lease that is the subject of the expired, transferred, or waived permit or lease, the Secretary concerned shall 

renew or reissue the permit or lease for a term of 20 years after completion of processing. 

(f) COMPLIANCE WITH NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF

1969.—The renewal, reissuance, or transfer of a grazing permit or 

lease by the Secretary concerned shall be categorically excluded 

from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or an 

environmental impact statement if— 

(1) the decision continues to renew, reissue, or transfer the 

current grazing management of the allotment; 

(2) monitoring of the allotment has indicated that the current 

grazing management has met, or has satisfactorily progressed 

towards meeting, objectives contained in the land use and resource management plan of the allotment, as determined by the 

Secretary concerned; or 

(3) the decision is consistent with the policy of the Department of the Interior or the Department of Agriculture, as appropriate, regarding extraordinary circumstances. 

(g) PRIORITY AND TIMING FOR COMPLETING ENVIRONMENTAL

ANALYSES.—The Secretary concerned, in the sole discretion of the 

Secretary concerned, shall determine the priority and timing for 

completing each required environmental analysis regarding any 

grazing allotment, permit, or lease based on the environmental significance of the allotment, permit, or lease and available funding for 

that purpose. 

(h) NEPA EXEMPTIONS.—The National Environmental Policy Act 

of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) shall not apply to the following: 

(1) Crossing and trailing authorizations of domestic livestock. 

(2) Transfer of grazing preference. 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

12 

(3) Range improvements as defined under 43 U.S.C. 315c and 

16 U.S.C. 580h. 

* * * * * * * 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

13 


WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 16 HR145P1.002

~RANKO !U(AS,OHAHOMA 

CHAIRMAN 

BOB GOOOLAlTE.VIRGINIA, 

VICECHAlflMAN 

LETTER EXCHANGE 

'B.~. i1tOllSC of 1R.cprcscntatillcs 

Q:ommittcr on 2ll1ri(ulturc 

Room )iO). Dlngmorrh l1ous< Gf!i[( )5mlding 

lllashington, 'eQ: 20515-6001 

The Honorable Doc Hastings 

Chairman 

Committee on Natural Resources 

1324 Longworth HOB 

Washington, D. C. 20515 

Dear Chairman Hastings: 

(202) 22S-2171 

(202) 22&-0917 FAX 

June 27, 2013 

COUING PEnnSON,MINNESOIA 

RANKING MJNORiIY MFMfieR 

NICOL~lS;f~~'RECTOR 

~~VIN ~H~~A~~UNSE'l 

ROBERTL LAREW 

MI'lORITYSTAFFQIR€CTOR 

Thank you for the opportnnity to review the relevant provisions of the text ofH.R. 657, to 

amend the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 to improve the management of 

grazing leases and permits. As you are aware, the bill was primarily referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources, while the Agriculture Committee received an additional referral. 

I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this legislation before the House in an 

expeditious manner and, accordingly, I agree to discharge H.R. 657 from further consideration 

by the Committee on Agriculture. I do so with the understanding that by discharging the bill, the 

Committee on Agriculture does not waive any future jurisdictional claim on this or similar 

matters. Further, the Committee on Agriculture reserves the right to seek the appointment of 

conferees, if it should become necessary. 

I ask that you insert a copy of our exchange of letters into the Congressional Record 

during consideration of this measure on the House floor. 

Thank you for your courtesy in this matter and I look forward to continued cooperation 

between our respective committees. 

cc: The Honorable John A. Boehner, Speaker 

The Honorable Collin C. Peterson 

1be Honorable Edward 1. Markey 

Mr. Thomas J. Wickham, Parliamentarian 

Sincerely, 

~£).Jc'L~ 

Frank D. Lucas 

Chairman 

Joricuilure.housegov 
14 


WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert graphic folio 17 HR145P1.003

O~~~R~~S, WA 

OON YOUNG. AK 

lOUIE <.>OHMERT. TX 

ROBBISKOF".UT 

~~~M~~;Z. VA 

~~~;l:~~~' ~A TOM McCLINTOCK, CA 

GLENN ntOMPSON. I'A CYNTHIA lUMMIS, WY 

OANSEN1SHEK,MI 

JEFf-OUNCAN,S(; 

SCOTT R. nJ>TON, CO 

PAUL A. GOSAR. Al RAULR.I.AB~.ID 

STEVE SOUTHtRlANO U. FL 

BILL FLOOeS, TX 

l~.~. li{oune of 1Reprencututi ucn 

(!Tommitttt on NlltUl1IllRt.!lllllrm; 

'Illl.!lQingion. ID(!T 211515 

ANDY HARRlS, MO JON RUNYAN, NJ 

MARK AMOOEL NV MARKWAYNE MUWN, OK 

CHRISSTEWAAT,UT 

ST!:lVEOAmES.MT 

KEVIN CRAMER. NO 

DOUG lAMAlFA,cA 

TOODVOUNG 

CHIEFOF$T4FF 

The Honorable Frank D. Lucas 

Chairman 

Committee on Agriculture 

1301 Longworth HOB 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

July 3,2013 

EOWAflDJ,MAAKEV.MA RANKING (JEMOCRA TIC ME'MIl€R 

~~RH~f~~~~~V~GA AS 

fflANKPALlONE.JR..NJ 

GRACEI' NAPOUTANO,CA 

RUSHHOLT.NJ 

RAULM.GA.!JAlVAAl 

MAO£l£!NEZ.BORDAlLO,GU 

JIM COSTA, CA 

GREGORIO KlliU CAMACHO SABLAN. eNMI 

NJKITSONGAS.MA 

PEDRORI'!ERtUISl.Pil 

COLlEENW HANA8USA,HI TONYCARO€NAS.CA 

STEVENHORS~O.NV 

JAREOHUFf-MAN.CA 

RAULRUIZ,CA 

CAAOLSifEA·PQRTER.NH 

ALAN LOWENTHAL. CA 

JOEGARCIA,FL 

MATTHEW CARTWRIGHT. PA 

JEFFREY DUNCAN 

OE'MOCRA TIC srAFF OIRECTOR 

Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 657, the Grazing Improvement Act. As you 

know, the Committee on Natural Resources ordered reported the bill, as amended, on June 12, 

2013. I appreciate your support in bringing this legislation before the House of Representatives, 

and accordingly, understand that the Committee on Agriculture will forego action on the bill. 

The Committee on Natural Resources concurs with the mutual understanding that by 

foregoing consideration ofH.R. 657 at this time, the Committee on Agriculture does not waive 

any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or similar legislation. In addition, 

should a conference on the bill be necessary, I would support your request to have the 

Committee on Agriculture represented on the conference committee. Finally, I would be pleased 

to include your letter and this response in the bill report filed by the Committee on Natural 

Resources, as well as in the Congressional Record during floor consideration, to memorialize 

our understanding. 

Thank you for your cooperation. 

7JLlk 

Doc Hastings 

Chainnan 

cc: The Honorable John A. Boehner, Speaker 

The Honorable Edward J. Markey 

The Honorable Collin C. Peterson 

Mr. Thomas J. Wickham, Parliamentarian 

http://naturalresources,house.gov 
(15) 

DISSENTING VIEWS 

H.R. 657 seeks to make wholesale changes to public land grazing 

law without addressing the cost of grazing to the American taxpayers. As reported from the Committee, the legislation makes two 

major changes in federal grazing policy. First, the legislation doubles the term of grazing permits from ten years to twenty years. 

Second, H.R. 657 provides sweeping exemptions from environmental review of new and renewed grazing permits. 

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is responsible for managing over 18,000 grazing permits on over 160 million acres of public lands in the West. The Forest Service manages over 7000 permits for over 94 million acres of grazing lands. In 1999 the BLM 

experienced a spike in grazing permit renewals which they were 

unable to process before the permits expired. This backlog has continued today, with more than 4,200 permits pending review. For 

more than ten years, Congress has included language in annual 

spending bills providing BLM with the ability to renew expiring 

grazing permits under existing terms and conditions even if the environmental analysis work is not complete. Typically, grazing permit renewals require an environmental analysis through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process to ensure that 

livestock is not negatively impacting forests, grasslands, and 

streams. 

No one denies the need to address the permit renewal backlog. 

However, H.R. 657 goes well beyond dealing with the backlog and 

instead rubber stamps all grazing permits without a meaningful 

analysis of the impact to our forests, grasslands, and waters. The 

bill makes no meaningful reforms to the fee structure and cost of 

grazing to the U.S. taxpayer. Currently, public land grazers pay 

$1.35 per month to graze a cow and calf, a horse, or five sheep or 

goats. This is less than $15 per year, the average cost of one large 

bag of dog food. Meanwhile, states are charging upwards of $12 per 

month which totals nearly $150 per year. The GAO and others 

have estimated that the below-market gazing fee costs the United 

States taxpayer more than $100 million a year. 

During Committee consideration of the legislation, Subcommittee 

Ranking Member Grijalva offered an amendment to address the 

grazing fee issue. The Grijalva amendment reflected the Obama 

Administration’s Fiscal Year 2014 proposal to create a pilot program that would charge a mere $1 dollar administrative fee for 

each grazing permit. This modest administrative fee would generate $6.5 million a year. 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS

16 

H.R. 657 goes too far in making fundamental changes in grazing 

practices and falls short of address the cost of grazing to the America taxpayer. It should be rejected. 

EDWARD J. MARKEY. 

RAU ́ L M. GRIJALVA. 

Æ 

WREIER-AVILES on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with REPORTS