NEPA Process Shouldn’t Be Allowed to Drive Cattle Off Public Lands

Idaho Ranch Operator Testifies Before House Resources Committee

Washington, D.C. (November 10, 2005) – “Businesses, families, and communities cannot fail because the government does not complete paperwork,” says Brenda Richards, a ranch operator from Murphy, Idaho speaking about the procedural requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Representing the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) and the Public Lands Council (PLC), Richards testified today before the House Resources Committee on the problems with NEPA. 

“It is hard to imagine that the authors of NEPA would have intended to harm personal businesses, lives, and communities,” says Richards.  “But the cumbersome consideration of environmental consequences mandated by NEPA leaves public land ranchers on a precipice of uncertainty.”

NCBA and PLC have historically worked with agency officials and called for congressional legislation that would prevent interruption of grazing permits while federal agencies struggle to meet environmental documentation obligations required by the grazing permit renewal process.

“Agencies have been unable to complete NEPA requirements prior to the expiration of grazing permits, which often requires the livestock be removed from the land while the permits go through the renewal process,” says Jeff Eisenberg, PLC executive director and director of federal lands for NCBA.  “This causes disruption and uncertainty for the tens of thousands of small businesses in rural communities that rely on use of public lands for grazing.”

“In a state like Idaho, it would be impossible to sustain a ranching operation such as ours without the use of public lands for grazing,” says Richards.  “In my county, Owyhee County, the federal government owns over 76 percent of the land.”  Nearly 40 percent of all cattle raised in the West spend some of their lives on public land allotments. 

Richards emphasized to the committee that ranchers would generally not seek relief from NEPA nor exemption from environmental requirements.  “But it seems wrong to us that our livelihoods should be harmed because the government is unable to complete its statutorily mandated paperwork,” says Richards. 

Eisenberg says the agency’s charge of balancing multiple uses of public lands is a difficult task.  “But grazing is one of the statutorily recognized uses of public lands,” says Eisenberg.  “The legitimate interests of our industry deserve to be reflected in the laws, regulations, and policies that govern the use of public lands.”

#####