Opinion ID: 761771
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Effect of the Secretary's New Permitted Use Regulation

Text: 138 The Secretary's new permitted use rule ends the long-standing DOI recognition of the adjudicated levels of grazing known as the grazing preference. The Secretary argues that AUMs are protected and not eliminated under the new rules, and the language in the new term 'permitted use' ... does not effect a substantive change from the previous regulation. Appellant's Br. at 20 (emphasis in original). The Secretary does not acknowledge that the new regulations end recognition of the adjudicated grazing preference. Rather, the Secretary asserts that the new permitted use encompasses all of the essential elements of the prior term [i.e., grazing preference]. Id. 139 The pre-1995 grazing preference was defined as the total number of [AUMs] of livestock grazing on public lands apportioned and attached to base property owned or controlled by a permittee or lessee. 43 C.F.R. § 4100.0-5 (1994). Under this regulation, the number of AUMs apportioned and attached to the permittee's base property was the number of AUMs allocated to the permittee (or her predecessor) by an individual grazing adjudication. See McLean v. BLM, 133 I.B.L.A. 225, 232-33 & n. 12 (1995) (noting that while 1978 regulations drastically changed grazing preference system, new system continued to recognize individual adjudications made prior to 1978); see also 43 Fed.Reg. 29,058 (July 5, 1978) (addressing permittees' concerns about post-1978 regulatory scheme and stating that permittees' adjudicated grazing use ... will be recognized under these grazing regulations) (quoted in McLean, 133 I.B.L.A. at 233). 140 The permitted use introduced in the 1995 regulations is defined as the forage allocated by, or under the guidance of, an applicable land use plan for livestock grazing in an allotment under a permit or lease and ... expressed in AUMs. 43 C.F.R. § 4100.0-5 (1995). Unlike the old grazing preference, the permitted use no longer refers to the number of AUMs determined by individual grazing adjudications. The Secretary's own interpretation of the permitted use rule makes this clear. 141 Grazing preference is redefined to mean the priority to have a Federal permit or lease for a public land grazing allotment that is attached to base property owned or controlled by a permittee.... The definition omits reference to a specified quantity of forage, a practice that was adopted ... during the adjudication of grazing privileges.... BLM will identify the amount of grazing use (AUMs), consistent with land use plans, in grazing use authorizations to be issued under a ... permit. 142 .... 143 A definition of Permitted use is added to define the amount of forage in an allotment that is allocated for livestock grazing and authorized for use ... under a grazing permit.... The term replaces the AUMs of forage use previously associated with grazing preference. 144 60 Fed.Reg. at 9921 (emphasis added); see also id. at 9922-23 (The objectives set in the [land use] plan are refined in the permit ..., and permitted use is then expressed in AUMs of active use ..., as well as suspended use and temporary nonuse during a particular time period.). The majority never squarely addresses whether the new regulations end recognition of the original adjudications because it concludes that the adjudications have not been recognized under any regulations since the enactment of FLPMA in 1977. See Maj. Op. at 1298. I refer to my above discussion in section I.B of this dissent to make the point that the adjudications were indeed recognized until the 1995 regulations. 145 Under the permitted use rule, the maximum amount of forage that a permittee can graze is established solely by a land use plan adopted by the BLM, with no reference to the results of the grazing adjudications. By contrast with the old system, the new permitted use approach ends recognition of the grazing preference across the board, for all permittees, without reference either to their individual circumstances or to the condition of the land covered by their permits. Under the new regulations, a permittee's grazing privileges consist of the right to use the AUMs specified in the grazing permit for a ten-year term and a bald right to preference at renewal time. Gone is recognition of the underlying adjudication in which the Secretary made a determination that, vis-a-vis other applicants, the permittee was a member of a priority group entitled to graze up to a maximum amount of forage on a particular allotment, and to which the Secretary previously always referred in renewing grazing permits. 146 There is no guarantee that the permittee will be allowed to graze predictable amounts of forage upon renewal, nor that the permittee's priority position is secure. I think this difference is significant, for it erases the certainty and predictability that existed under the pre-1995 regulatory scheme and that I am certain was required by Congress under the TGA. The result is that the agency has nearly unfettered discretion to collectively increase or decrease permittees' maximum allowed forage use without reference to the individual grazing decisions laboriously adjudicated by the Secretary following passage of the TGA.