Ranchers Challenge New BLM Rule Over Public Land Grazing Rights, Citing Threat to Livelihood and Conservation Efforts

Cheyenne, WY — A coalition of agricultural and livestock groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, has initiated a lawsuit against the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) concerning its recent Public Lands Rule. Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming, the lawsuit argues that the rule introduces unpredictability and could significantly harm the long-standing tradition of grazing on federal lands, which is central to the ranching industry’s sustainability.

Gary Heibertshausen, a Montana sheep rancher and vice president of the Montana Farm Bureau, voiced concerns about the detrimental impact this rule could have on his operations. He highlighted that grazing on federal lands is integral to his ranch’s viability. The current uncertainty introduced by the BLM’s rule jeopardizes the future availability of these lands for grazing, potentially forcing ranchers like him to alter their business models drastically or even shut down.

The rule, finalized by the BLM in May, aims to enhance the health and resilience of public lands. However, ranchers argue it lacks clear guidance and imposes unauthorized policy changes that complicate their stewardship roles. Mark Eisele, president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and himself a Wyoming rancher, emphasized that the rule disrupts the legally mandated balance of multiple land uses, including grazing, recreation, and natural resource development, potentially prioritizing new unratified land uses over established ones.

Opponents of the rule, like Mark Roeber, president of the Public Lands Council, stress that grazing plays a critical role not only in the economic fabric of rural America but also in environmental conservation. Grazing activities contribute over $3 billion annually in ecosystem services, mitigating wildfire risks, controlling invasive species, and supporting land health. Roeber and his constituents fear the rule could be a precursor to phasing out grazing entirely on federal lands, based on its revised regulatory approach.

Since the enactment of the Taylor Grazing Act in 1934, grazing has been recognized as a beneficial use of public lands, helping manage and maintain areas otherwise unsuitable for intensive agriculture. Advocates for grazing argue that the practice is integral to the conservation efforts on public lands, promoted by the BLM.

Zippy Duvall, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, pointed out that ranchers have historically enhanced the lands entrusted to them, playing a crucial role in environmental management tasks such as reducing vegetation that fuels wildfires and managing invasive plant species.

The new Public Lands Rule, critics say, challenges the equilibrium maintained on public lands between conservation, recreation, and commercial uses, raising concerns about the future stability of ranching operations that rely on federal grazing permits.

Joining the lawsuit are several other industry groups including the American Exploration and Mining Association, American Forest Resource Council, and the American Petroleum Institute, among others. These organizations represent a broad swath of interests that could be impacted by changes to public lands management.

At stake is not only the livelihood of thousands of ranchers but also the management and health of roughly 245 million acres of public lands overseen by the BLM predominantly in the Western United States, which serve both public enjoyment and agricultural purposes. As the legal battle unfolds, the future of these lands hangs in the balance, with potential implications for the environmental and economic landscapes of the American West.