Grazing rights in Nevada

The United States purchased land from Mexico in 1848 known as the Mexican Cession (the southwestern region of the U.S.) as part of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The Nevada Territory, which was partitioned in 1861 from the Utah Territory, became a state in 1864. Since then, the US government has continuously owned land in Nevada, including the Bunkerville Allotment.Gray, Tom. [https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/guadalupe-hidalgo/ "Teaching With Documents: The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo"]. National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved April 24, 2014. Federal rangelands in Nevada have been since 1934 managed principally by either the Bureau of Land Management, its predecessor the United States Grazing Service, or the United States Forest Service. Currently, 56,961,778 acres of land in Nevada are managed by the BLM. Over 18,000 grazing permits and leases are known to exist on BLM managed public lands. Season of use and forage use are stipulated on the permits and leases; grazing control can be targeted.{{cite web|title=Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data|url=https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42346.pdf|work=Table 1. Federal Land by State, 2010|publisher=Congressional Research Service|accessdate=28 April 2014|author=Ross W. Gorte|author2=Carol Hardy Vincent |author3=Laura A. Hanson |author4=Marc R. Rosenblum |date=8 February 2012}}{{cite web|url=http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/grazing.html|title=Fact Sheet on the BLM's Management of Livestock Grazing|accessdate=April 24, 2014|date=March 28, 2014|publisher=United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141129063736/http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/grazing.html|archive-date=November 29, 2014|url-status=dead}}

File:US federal land.agencies.svg

Laws that apply to management of public land grazing are generally codified in Title 43 of the United States Code and include the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 (TGA), the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, the Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978, and the Wild and Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act of 1971.

In 1933, Edward T. Taylor, a Representative from Colorado, reintroduced a bill to set up the grazing bureau or service in the Department of Interior to administer range lands.Steen, Harold K. The United States Forest Service A History University of Washington Press, 1976, p. 205 {{ISBN|0-295-95523-6}} The TGA{{efn|43 U.S. Code §§ 315-316o (P.L. 73-482)}} regulates grazing on public lands (excluding in Alaska) to improve rangeland conditions. The Grazing Service was merged with the United States General Land Office in 1946 to form the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).{{cite book|last=Muhn|first=J|title=Opportunities and challenge: The story of the BLM|date=1988|publisher=Government Printing Office|location=Washington, DC|author2=Stuart, H.R.|page=[https://archive.org/details/opportunitychall00muhn/page/54 54]|url=https://archive.org/details/opportunitychall00muhn}}

Prior to the enactment of the TGA, an open-range system existed on public domain land.[http://www.wyohistory.org/essays/wyoming-sheep-business wyohistory.org: "The Wyoming Sheep Business" (Western)] The TGA was enacted by Congress to prevent overgrazing of rangelands,Donahue D. 2005. Western grazing: the capture of grass, ground, and government. Environmental Law 35:721-806. and authorized the permitted use of lands designated as available for livestock grazing while specifying that grazing permits convey no right, title, or interest to such lands.[https://archive.today/20120707154351/http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr;sid=65dfe1cec94944c989e83b4eb39cd3ba;rgn=div5;view=text;node=43:2.1.1.4.92;idno=43;cc=ecfr%23PartTop "PART 4100—GRAZING ADMINISTRATION—EXCLUSIVE OF ALASKA"]. United States Code of Federal Regulations 4130.2 (c) April 22, 2014. This definition was unanimously upheld by the United States Supreme Court in 2000.[http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/529/728/case.html Public Lands Council v. Babbitt], 2000 The TGA allows the BLM to increase or decrease the utilization of a grazing area in response to changing ecological conditions, and specifies that permits are subject to periodic review at least every 10 years, with holders having preferential rights to renew "in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior."

An article written by University of Nevada Cooperative Extension Educators Gary McCuin and Steve Foster, highlights the Nevada Open Range Law of 1893, a state statute under which "owners of ... livestock running at large on the ranges or

commons” were exempted from state civil liability for trespass, and the open range was defined as “all unenclosed land outside of cities and towns upon which cattle, sheep or other domestic animals by custom, license, lease or permit are grazed”.[http://www.unce.unr.edu/publications/files/ag/2010/fs1069.pdf unr.edu: "Fact Sheet-10-69 NEVADA OPEN RANGE LAW" (McCuin and Foster)] However, the federal Taylor Grazing Act has further regulated grazing on federal land since 1934, and violators may be subject to federal civil and criminal liability.

The Bureau of Land Management manages about 167 million acres (676,000 km²) of publicly owned rangeland in the United States, with the United States Forest Service managing approximately 95 million acres (380,000 km²) more. Permittees on federal rangelands are required to pay a fee, and the permit cannot exceed ten years but is renewable.

Any US citizen or validly licensed business can apply for a BLM grazing permit or lease. To do so, one must either buy or control private property (known as "base property") that has been legally recognized by the Bureau as having preference for the use of public land grazing privileges, or acquire property that has the capability to serve as base property and then apply to the BLM to transfer the preference for grazing privileges from an existing base property to the acquired property (which would become the new "base property").

The grazing rules for the land went through changes over the years, including some updated grazing rules in 1993 in the Gold Butte and Bunkerville land area of Nevada.{{citation needed|date=April 2014}} Among other issues, the 1993 rules were changed to protect the vulnerable desert tortoise.{{cite web|last=Fuller|first=Jaimie|title=Everything you need to know about the long fight between Cliven Bundy and the federal government|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/04/15/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-long-fight-between-cliven-bundy-and-the-federal-government/|work=Washington Post|accessdate=28 April 2014|date=28 April 2014}} Other rules included limits to the number of cattle allowed in certain areas{{cite web|last=Bureau of Land Management|title=Environmental Assessment Temporary Land Closure Corrals and Cattle Impoundment|url=http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/nv/field_offices/las_vegas_field_office/cattle_trespass.Par.49759.File.dat/Gold%20Butte%20Cattle%20Trespass%20EA%20DOI-BLM-NVS010-2014-0020-EA%20(2).pdf|archivedate=April 13, 2014|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140413144331/http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/nv/field_offices/las_vegas_field_office/cattle_trespass.Par.49759.File.dat/Gold%20Butte%20Cattle%20Trespass%20EA%20DOI-BLM-NVS010-2014-0020-EA%20%282%29.pdf|url-status=dead}} to protect the lands from the severe overgrazing caused by less regulation in previous years and to help the land recover from recent wildfires.{{cite web|title=Nevada Governor Calls Federal Cattle Roundup 'Intimidation'|url=http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2014/04/09/nevada-governor-calls-federal-cattle-roundup-intimidation/|publisher=CBS Las Vegas|accessdate=April 14, 2014|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140414062445/http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2014/04/09/nevada-governor-calls-federal-cattle-roundup-intimidation/|archivedate=April 14, 2014|date=April 9, 2014}} Currently there are no grazing permits on the Bunkerville allotment, and any livestock on that land are there illegally.

{{main|Bundy standoff}}

The Bundy standoff is a 20-year legal dispute between the United States Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and cattle rancher Cliven Bundy in southeastern Nevada over unpaid grazing fees that eventually developed into an armed confrontation between protesters and law enforcement. The dispute began in 1993, when in protest against changes to grazing rules, Bundy declined to renew his permit for cattle grazing on BLM-administered lands near Bunkerville, Nevada.{{cite book|title=Decision and Order - United States v Bundy - 1998|date=November 3, 1998|publisher=United States District Court for the District of Nevada|pages=5|url=https://www.scribd.com/doc/218116757/1998-U-S-Dist-LEXIS-23835}} In 1998, Bundy was prohibited from grazing his cattle on the Bunkerville Allotment by the United States District Court for the District of Nevada in United States v. Bundy. In July 2013, the BLM complaint was supplemented when federal judge Lloyd D. George ordered that Bundy refrain from trespass on federally administered land in the Gold Butte, Nevada, area in Clark County.{{cite web|publisher=Justia|title=United States of America v. Bundy - Document 35 - Court Description: ORDER Granting 18 Motion for Summary Judgment. Denying as moot 28 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Lloyd D. George on 7/9/2013.|url=http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/nevada/nvdce/2:2012cv00804/87613/35|date=July 9, 2013}}

On March 27, 2014, 145,604 acres of federal land in Clark County, Nevada were temporarily closed for the "capture, impound, and removal of trespass cattle". A trespass cattle roundup commenced on April 5, an arrest was made on April 6. On April 12, a group of protesters, some of whom were armed{{cite web|last=Kavanaugh|first=Shane Dixon|title=American Militias Emboldened by Victory at Bundy Ranch|url=http://www.vocativ.com/culture/society/american-militias-emboldened-victory-bundy-ranch/|publisher=Vocativ|accessdate=29 April 2014|date=14 April 2014|archive-date=30 April 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140430014410/http://www.vocativ.com/culture/society/american-militias-emboldened-victory-bundy-ranch/|url-status=dead}} advanced on what the BLM described as a "cattle gather."[http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/fo/lvfo/blm_programs/more/trespass_cattle.html Cattle Gather Operation Concluded] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140502033026/http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/fo/lvfo/blm_programs/more/trespass_cattle.html |date=2014-05-02 }}, Bureau of Land Management, April 12, 2014 Sheriff Doug Gillespie negotiated with Cliven Bundy and newly confirmed BLM director, Neil Kornze,{{cite web|last=Itkowitz|first=Kolby|title=Senate confirms Neil Kornze as BLM director|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/in-the-loop/wp/2014/04/08/senate-confirms-neil-kornze-as-blm-director/|work=The Washington Post|accessdate=29 April 2014|date=8 April 2014}} who elected to release the cattle and de-escalate the situation.{{cite news|last=Tom Ragan and|first=Annalise Porter|title=BLM releases Bundy cattle after protesters block southbound I-15|url=http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/nevada/blm-releases-bundy-cattle-after-protesters-block-southbound-i-15|accessdate=April 14, 2014|newspaper=Las Vegas Review-Journal|date=April 12, 2014}}[https://www.hcn.org/blogs/goat/in-nevada-delicate-20-year-standoff-with-blm-ends-in-a-tense-roundup Rancher vs BLM: a 20-year standoff ends with tense roundup], Christi Turner, High Country News, April 11, 2014

Cliff Gardner, a defendant in an illegal cattle grazing court case in Nevada, United States v. Gardner,{{cite web|last=United States Court of Appeals|first=Ninth Circuit|title=UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Clifford GARDNER; Bertha Gardner, Defendants-Appellants|url=https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1061959.html|publisher=US Federal Government|accessdate=April 16, 2014}} drew comparisons to his case when he said, "I think Cliven is taking a stand not only for family ranchers, but also for every freedom-loving American, for everyone. I’ve been trying to resolve these same types of issues since 1984." Gardner argued and lost on states' rights, similar to Bundy, and eventually served time for ignoring court orders and contempt. The Gardner case is cited in Bundy court filings. In United States v. Gardner, decided in the District Court and later affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, the Gardners did not contest that they grazed livestock without a permit, nor the amount of the fee assessed. Instead, they asserted that the Nevadan lands where they grazed did not belong to the United States, and therefore the Forest Service did not have jurisdiction to regulate use of the lands or levy fees for unauthorized activities within them. In March 2002, Cliff Gardner was sentenced to a month in a Reno halfway house, along with a $5,000 fine and a year of probation.{{cite news|last=Fuller|first=Jaime|title=Everything you need to know about the long fight between Cliven Bundy and the federal government|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/04/15/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-long-fight-between-cliven-bundy-and-the-federal-government/|accessdate=April 15, 2014|newspaper=Washington Post|date=April 15, 2014}}

The case of United States v. Bundy played out over many years in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. It involved court orders, injunctions, and notices. Bundy argued pro se that the land belongs to the state, while the Bureau of Land Management was represented by the US Attorney's Office for Nevada and the United States Department of Justice.{{cite news|last=Martinez|first=Michael|title=Showdown on the range: Nevada rancher, feds face off over cattle grazing rights|url=http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/10/us/nevada-rancher-rangers-cattle-showdown/?hpt=zite_zite3_featured|accessdate=April 10, 2014|newspaper=CNN|date=April 10, 2014}} The court ruled that the land on which Bundy was grazing his cattle was indeed owned by the federal government, that he had not been paying to use it as he should have been, that Bundy and his cattle were trespassing, and that the government had the right to enforce the injunctions against trespass. The court found that Bundy repeatedly violated the court orders and continued to have his cattle trespass.{{cite web|publisher=United States District Court for the District of Nevada|title=United States v Bundy|date=October 9, 2013|url=http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/nv/field_offices/las_vegas_field_office/cattle_trespass.Par.40211.File.dat/Dkt%2056%20Order%20Granting%20Motion%20to%20Enforce%2010-9-13.pdf|url-status=dead|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20140514070132/http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/nv/field_offices/las_vegas_field_office/cattle_trespass.Par.40211.File.dat/Dkt%2056%20Order%20Granting%20Motion%20to%20Enforce%2010-9-13.pdf|archivedate=May 14, 2014}}

Elko County commissioner, Nevada rancher, and conservative Republican political activist Demar Dahl "notes that Bundy might benefit from following Nye County rancher Wayne Hage, who won a protracted battle with the federal government by successfully arguing that he had the right to graze his cows within two miles of water sources he developed."{{cite news|last=Smith|first=John L.|title=Nevada rancher questions Bundy's legal strategy|url=http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blogs/john-l-smith/nevada-rancher-questions-bundy-s-legal-strategy|accessdate=April 17, 2014|newspaper=Las Vegas Review-Journal|date=April 16, 2014}} In a similar case to Bundy's, ranchers in 2007 were sued by the Justice Department for trespassing on public domain lands in Nevada.{{cite web|last=US Government|first=Department of Justice|title=United States Sues to Stop Illegal Grazing on Federal Lands|url=https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2007/August/07_enrd_672.html|publisher=US Government|accessdate=April 14, 2014}} The ranchers were alleged to have repeatedly grazed livestock without federal permits, despite repeated trespass notices from the BLM and the Department of Agriculture's Forest Service. In 2013, the court found in favor of the ranchers for all other charges, including water rights, grazing rights, and all but two livestock trespass charges in United States v. Wayne Hage. In the ruling, the judge said, "government officials ... entered into a literal, intentional conspiracy to deprive the Hages not only of their permits but also of their vested water rights. This behavior shocks the conscience of the Court and provides a sufficient basis for a finding of irreparable harm to support the injunction described at the end of this Order."{{cite web|publisher=United States District Court for the District of Nevada/Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund|url=http://www.r-calfusa.com/property_rights/130524FindingsOfFactAndConclusionsOfLaw.pdf|title=UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. ESTATE OF E. WAYNE HAGE et al., Defendants.|date=May 23, 2013|quote=2:07-cv-01154-RCJ-VCF|access-date=May 3, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140423010942/http://www.r-calfusa.com/property_rights/130524FindingsOfFactAndConclusionsOfLaw.pdf|archive-date=April 23, 2014|url-status=dead}}

• Grazing rights
• Conservation grazing
• List of United States federal environmental statutes

{{notelist}}

{{reflist|30em}}

Category:Agricultural law

Category:Nevada law

Category:United States federal environmental legislation