[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 81 (Thursday, April 28, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page ]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-10031]
[Federal Register: April 28, 1994]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part VI
Department of Agriculture
_______________________________________________________________________
Forest Service
_______________________________________________________________________
36 CFR Part 222
Management of Grazing Use Within Rangeland Ecosystems; Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
36 CFR Part 222
RIN 0596-AA35
Management of Grazing Use Within Rangeland Ecosystems
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture proposes to revise the National
Forest System rangeland management regulations to update direction for
management of domestic livestock, to place grater emphasis on
stewardship of the rangeland resource, to clarify the link between the
livestock grazing permit and forest plans, and to clarify the range
management planning and decisionmaking process. In addition, the
Department proposes to improve administration of livestock grazing
permits, and to achieve greater consistency between the grazing
management regulations of the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land
Management, U.S. Department of the Interior. The intended effect of
this proposed rule is to provide for healthy, diverse, sustainable
rangeland ecosystems on National Forest System lands.
By separate rule published elsewhere in this separate part of the
Federal Register, the Forest Service is proposing a revised system for
determining livestock grazing fees on National Forest System lands and
other lands under Forest Service control.
DATES: Comments must be received in writing by July 28, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Rangeland Reform '94, P.O. Box
66300, Washington, DC 20035-6300.
Comments on the proposed rule will be made available for public
inspection during the regular business hours (7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m.),
Monday through Friday. Viewing of the comments can be arranged by
contacting the Forest Service.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David M. Stewart, Range Management Staff, (202) 205-1746.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The existing rule governing rangeland management and livestock use
on National Forest System lands and other lands under Forest Service
control (36 CFR part 222, subpart A) provides guidance for management
of the range environment and addresses the issuance and modification of
grazing and livestock use permits, compensation for permittees'
interest in authorized permanent improvements, cooperation in
management, rangeland improvements, the use of the range betterment
fund, and grazing advisory boards. The current rule was adopted October
28, 1977 (42 FR 56732).
As required by Departmental Regulation 1512-1, Forest Service
personnel involved with rangeland management participated in a review
of the existing grazing regulations in 1987. This review identified
some parts of the existing regulations that required revision and
clarification, and other parts that were outdated and required removal.
In addition, several issues not covered by the regulations were
identified that need to be addressed in the rules. The Forest Service
published a proposed rule responding to the findings of the review on
August 16, 1988 (53 FR 30954). That proposed rule was not finalized,
but principal features of and comments received on that proposed rule
have been considered in the current effort to identify needed changes
to the rangeland management and grazing regulations.
The 1990 RPA Program, entitled ``The Forest Service Program for
Forest and Rangeland Resource,'' states the following: ``The condition
of public rangeland is better today than it has been at any other time
this century. However, the Forest Service is deeply concerned about
those rangelands in unsatisfactory condition, which, in 1989, consisted
of 27 percent of all suitable National Forest System rangeland acres.''
The 1990 RPA Program further discussed the role of rangelands in
providing forage, habitat, water, recreational opportunities, and open
space and signaled the agency's commitment to improve rangeland
conditions and management.
More recently, the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of
the Interior sponsored a series of public meetings on livestock grazing
on federal lands. Issues and concerns raised at those meetings have
provided additional momentum to develop grazing regulations that are
more responsive to the current need for improved management of
rangeland resources.
Accordingly, on Friday, August 13, 1993, an advance notice of
proposed rulemaking (ANPR) was published in the Federal Register, (58
FR 43202), in which the Department of Agriculture gave notice of its
intent to revise its grazing and livestock use and grazing fee (36 CFR
222 subpart A and subpart C) rules to respond to the Administration's
commitment to implement federal rangeland management reform. The
Department of the Interior issued an ANPR concurrent (58 FR 43208) with
the Department of Agriculture's in which it announced its proposed
grazing regulation changes for BLM lands, including the grazing fee
system.
A total of about 12,600 letters were received on the ANPR's
published by the Department of the Interior and the Department of
Agriculture. These letters included over 56,000 separate comments on
various aspects of grazing administration and fees. The greatest number
of comments addressed possible changes in the grazing fee. Comments
also identified a need for protection of rangeland ecosystems through
an ecosystem approach to management and the use of locally developed
standards and guidelines. Other concerns included the suitability of
land for grazing and the need for balance between livestock grazing and
other forest uses with the ability to implement and enforce the
necessary management. A healthy and productive human environment with
opportunities for public participation in planning decisions also
received support from many respondents. Also, frequently noted in the
comments was the longstanding role of land steward played by grazing
permittees. A large number of comments highlighted the need for
consistency between regulations of the Bureau of Land Management and
the Forest Service.
Based on the comment received on the ANPR, the Secretary of
Agriculture has decided to separate the rulemaking for grazing fees
from the rulemaking for other grazing and livestock use proposals
identified in the ANPR. Comments on the grazing fee portion of the ANPR
will be considered in the development of the final grazing fee rule.
Reviewers need not resubmit comments they filed on the Department of
Agriculture's ANPR in order for them to be considered by the agency in
the preparation of the final rule. All comments received on the
Department of Agriculture's ANPR and this proposed rule will be
considered in the preparation of a final rule.
Also, by separate rule, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is
proposing a revision of their grazing management regulations and a
revised system for determining livestock grazing fees on the public
lands they administer. The fee system proposed by the BLM is similar to
that proposed by the Forest Service.
Proposed Revisions to 36 CFR Part 222, Subpart A
The rules of Subpart A currently focus exclusively on issuance and
administration of livestock grazing permits. Under the proposed rule,
this Subpart would be retitled ``Management of Grazing Use Within
Rangeland Ecosystems'' signaling the Department's intent to plan for
rangeland activities and to regulate grazing use within an ecosystem
management framework. In addition, the structure of the Subpart would
be extensively revised to improve the flow and order of the text. To
assist readers, a redesignation table which shows the disposition of
provisions of the current rule is set out at the end of this preamble.
Finally, extensive editorial revisions have been made to existing
provisions to improve clarity of the rule, to remove gender specific
pronoun references, to remove passive voice, and to correct spelling
and punctuation.
A discussion of the proposal, keyed to the section numbers of the
proposed rule, follows.
Proposed Section 222.1--Purpose and Scope
This section sets forth the purpose of the rule as governing
domestic livestock grazing on National Forest System lands and other
lands under Forest Service control. The scope of the rule, as described
in this proposed section, is to specifically address decision points
related to NEPA procedures for determining suitability for and
authorization of grazing use and to address specific and general
requirements and standards related to the issuance and administration
of grazing permits.
Proposed Section 222.2--Definitions
In the current rule, definitions are set out in Sec. 222.1 entitled
``Authority and definitions.'' Because existing paragraph (a) of
Sec. 222.1 is a restatement of the authority delegated to the Chief of
the Forest Service by the Assistant Secretary at 7 CFR 2.60, this
paragraph would be removed and Sec. 222.2 would be limited solely to
definitions.
Under this proposed rule, a number of terms would be added,
revised, or removed.
Terms Proposed To Be Added
The following terms and their definitions would be added:
1. The term affiliates is used to denote entities that have a
business relationship with permit applicants or holders. The term is
used in proposed Sec. 222.7 in relation to determinations that the
applicants have satisfactory records of performance. The definition is
derived from the definition of affiliation used by the Small Business
Administration and found at 13 CFR 121.3.
2. The term authorized officer needs to be defined because it is
used throughout the subpart. The term and the definition is consistent
with the use of this term under 36 CFR part 251, which governs
administration of special use authorizations.
3. The term escrow waiver is used within the subpart and needs to
be defined. The term has been used by permittees and the Forest Service
since 1938. The definition in the proposed rule is derived from the
definition currently found in the Forest Service Grazing Permit
Administration Handbook 2209.13, Chapter 10 (36 CFR part 200).
4. The term National Forest System lands in the Eastern States
would be added for ease of reference and to distinguish certain
livestock management provisions that apply solely in the Western United
States.
5. Where grazing permit requirements apply only to lands in the
Western United States, the term National Forest System lands in the
Western States would be added.
6. The term NEPA procedures is used throughout the subpart to refer
to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
7. A definition of rangelands would be added to reflect that
rangelands are a category of land, not a type of use. This proposed
definition of rangelands is derived from the definition provided by the
Society for Range Management following consultations with the Soil
Conservation Service and the Bureau of Land Management. This definition
is qualified to note that rangelands may include other lands that do
not fall within the technical definition of rangelands if there is
grazing activity by wild and domestic herbivores on these lands.
8. The term rangeland improvement is used to denote any structural
or nonstructural improvements which occur on or benefit rangelands.
9. The term unauthorized use would be added to define all livestock
use except for certain temporary livestock uses explicitly provided for
in the rule that is not authorized by a grazing permit.
Proposed Revisions of Existing Terms
The following terms in the current rule are proposed to be revised:
1. The definition of allotment management plan would be limited to
defining allotment management plans and removes regulatory text that is
inappropriately included as part of the definition in the current rule.
While under proposed Sec. 222.3 the agency is proposing to eliminate
allotment management plans, the term is needed to address authorization
of grazing within the transitional procedures established in this
section of the proposed rule.
2. The definition of base property would be slightly reworded for
clarity with no change in meaning.
3. The definition of grazing permit would be revised for clarity.
4. The term 16 contiguous Western States would be reworded for
clarity and brevity.
5. The definition of livestock would be clarified by specifying
that the term means foraging animals and by adding that the animals are
raised for livestock production.
6. The definition of National Forest System lands would be revised
to conform to the statutory definition found in 16 U.S.C. 1609.
7. The definition of other lands under Forest Service control would
be shortened and clarified by substituting the words ``other means''
for ``otherwise.''
8. The definition of permitted livestock would be expanded to
include those livestock grazed under a permit during the preceding
season, including offspring retained for herd replacement. This change
reflects the current practice of recognizing these animals as permitted
livestock when approving waivers of permits based on the sale of
permitted livestock.
9. The definition of range betterment fund is shortened and makes
clear that the funds are available for range rehabilitation,
protection, and improvement.
10. The definition of transportation livestock would be expanded to
include other lands under Forest Service control.
Terms Proposed To Be Removed
The following terms found in the current rule are not included in
the proposed rule:
1. The term livestock use permit would be removed since this type
of use would be covered through a temporary permit as described in
Sec. 222.6.
2. The definitions of the terms temporary grazing permit, term
permits, on-and-off grazing permits, and private land grazing permits
would be removed since they can be defined and better understood in the
context of the rule.
3. The definitions of cancel, modify, on-the-ground expenditure,
suspend, and term period would be removed since the meanings of these
terms are easily understood from common usage and in the context of the
regulation.
4. The definitions of person, land subject to commercial livestock
grazing, and range betterment would be removed as these terms would no
longer be used in the regulatory text with special meanings.
Proposed Section 222.3--Framework for Rangeland Planning and Decisions
This section of the proposed rule provides the context in which
plans and decisions regarding rangeland management on National Forest
System lands are made. This includes the decision to authorize grazing.
This section would adopt the two-tiered planning and decisionmaking
framework established by the Chief of the Forest Service through two
key administrative appeal decisions (Panhandle LRMP Appeal #2130,
August 15, 1988, p. 7 and Flathead LRMP Appeals #1467 and #1513, August
31, 1988, p. 8) and subsequently endorsed by the United States Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Idaho Conservation League vs. Mumma,
956 F.2d 1508 (9th Cir. 1992).
Specifically, proposed paragraph (a) would recognize that rangeland
planning and decisions occur through the land and resource management
planning process set out in 36 CFR part 219 and that forest plans,
establish the programmatic direction for rangeland management on the
forest which includes goals, objectives, standards, guidelines, and an
identification of lands suitable for livestock grazing. Finally,
proposed paragraph (a) makes clear that a determination in the forest
plan that lands are suitable for grazing is not a decision to authorize
grazing. This latter declaration is included in the rule to eliminate
recurring permittee and public confusion over the distinction between a
grazing suitability determination and a grazing authorization decision.
The first determination--the suitability of lands for grazing--must be
made before a decision to authorize grazing can be made, but a grazing
suitability determination does not necessarily lead to a decision to
graze those lands. Even though lands may be suitable for grazing, other
resource objectives may take precedence over grazing livestock; for
example, protection needs of wildlife habitat might have a higher
priority in a given area and thus grazing use would be incompatible
with that objective.
While programmatic rangeland management direction is made in forest
plans, proposed paragraph (b) makes clear that, except as otherwise
provided in this section, a rangeland project decision would be
required when site-specific activities that implement management
direction in the forest plan are proposed. Examples of rangeland
project decisions given in the proposed rule include, but are not
limited to, maintenance or modification of specific plant communities
or riparian, aquatic, soil, or other resource conditions needed to
promote the achievement of goals and objectives of the forest plan;
rangeland improvements needed to promote the achievement of goals and
objectives of the forest plan; and authorization of livestock grazing,
where it is suitable and appropriate.
A significant aspect of the framework for planning and
decisionmaking as proposed in this rule is the streamlining and
simplification of rangeland planning. Under this proposed rule,
allotment management plans, currently prepared on an allotment-by-
allotment basis, would be eliminated. There has been considerable
permittee and internal agency confusion over how allotment management
plans fit into the agency's decisionmaking and environmental analysis
framework. These allotment management plans appear to create a middle
tier of planning and decisionmaking related to rangeland management
that does not conform to the two-tier planning and decisionmaking
process used in planning for all other forest resources. By eliminating
allotment management plans, the proposed rule would conform rangeland
management planning to the process applicable to all other uses and
thus, clarify when and where livestock grazing and livestock use
decisions are made. While the agency proposes to eliminate the use of
allotment management plans, the Forest Service still intends to fully
consult with and involve grazing permittees and other affected parties
in rangeland planning and decisionmaking as required in both NEPA and
the National Forest Management Act.
It is generally at the site-specific project level that
authorization of livestock grazing is made and the site-specific
environmental effects of alternatives are fully analyzed and disclosed.
For this reason, proposed paragraph (b)(l)(iii) specifies that, where a
rangeland project decision authorizes livestock grazing, the decision
must also specify the maximum permissible amount of grazing use, the
timing and duration of such use, and other appropriate livestock
management requirements or measures needed to promote the achievement
of goals and objectives of the forest plan. Further, paragraph (b)(3)
clarifies that where a rangeland project decision has been made that
authorizes livestock grazing, the timely issuance of the grazing permit
is an administrative act and not a separate decision subject to
additional NEPA analysis and disclosure. Inclusion of this provision is
intended to avoid any confusion about administrative appeal points and
to make clear that issuance of a grazing permit is not the decision
point, provided the grazing permit is issued within a reasonable
timeframe of the authorization decision and the environmental effects
disclosed in the rangeland project decision are still current.
Although a decision to authorize grazing use may be made in a
forest plan as long as there is adequate analysis and documentation of
the environmental effects, it is generally more practicable to make a
livestock grazing use decision and disclose the environmental effects
of grazing at the project decision level.
While the agency intends to move toward rangeland project
decisionmaking at broader ecological scales, these project level
decisions cannot be undertaken and completed immediately upon adoption
of the final rule. In light of the approximately 4500 Forest Service
grazing permits subject to renewal in 1995, transitional procedures are
thus needed to guide the agency over the short term. Under proposed
paragraph (c), the agency would utilize a screening approach that
permits a smooth transition for the reauthorization of grazing permits
and completion of rangeland project decisions. This approach balances
the interests of permittees with the need for compliance with
environmental law.
Proposed paragraphs (c)(1), (2), (3), and (4) address the
situations where a rangeland project decision to authorize grazing use
does not exist. Specifically, proposed paragraph (c)(1) would permit
the authorized officer to issue a term grazing permit for up to ten
years on allotments where there is a current allotment management plan
and where the NEPA documentation associated with that management plan
is also current. This provision is necessary since in many cases there
are current allotment plans that are consistent with forest plan
standards and guidelines and are sufficient to guide rangeland
management in the foreseeable future. This provision would allow for
the smooth transition from allotment management plans to rangeland
project decisions.
Proposed paragraph (c)(2) would permit the authorized officer to
issue a term grazing permit for up to ten years based on an approved
forest plan for allotments that are meeting, or moving toward
achievement of forest plan goals and objectives. In this situation, the
forest plan must contain applicable standards and guidelines that can
be incorporated as terms and conditions of the grazing permit and the
environmental effects of applying the standards and guidelines on the
land must be analyzed and disclosed pursuant to NEPA procedures.
However, if the allotment is meeting or moving toward achievement
of forest plan goals and objectives but the forest plan does not
contain applicable standards and guidelines that can be incorporated as
terms and conditions of the permit, the authorized officer would be
prohibited, pursuant to proposed paragraph (c)(3), from renewing or
issuing a new term permit of more than three years duration. In those
situations where allotments are meeting or moving toward achievement of
forest plan goals and objectives, paragraph (c)(3) would allow the
authorized officer to issue a term permit of up to three years duration
while the agency gathers information and conducts the necessary
analysis to determine if grazing should be authorized or a different
term should be established. Issuance of 1-3 year term permits in this
situation would require disclosure of the short term environmental
effects of grazing under the permit pursuant to NEPA procedures. This
term permit provision is needed to prevent undue impact on operators
who are in compliance with the terms and conditions of their permit.
Paragraph (c)(4) addresses those situations where allotments are
not meeting or moving toward forest plan goals and objectives. In this
situation, the authorized officer cannot issue a new ten year term
permit until a rangeland project decision and disclosure of
environmental effects are accomplished. However, the authorized officer
may issue a term permit for a period of up to three years until a
rangeland project decision is completed. The term permit to be issued
during this transition period must include applicable forest plan
standards and guidelines and/or any other measures necessary to move
management of the allotment toward forest plan goals and objectives.
Prior to issuance of the 1-3 year term permit, the environmental
effects of continuing grazing under the permit must be disclosed
pursuant to NEPA procedures. This term permit provision provides for
resource protection and prevents undue impact on operators while
rangeland project decisions are being prepared.
Fundamental to proposed paragraphs (c)2, 3, and 4, is the necessity
for the agency to make a determination as to whether management of a
given allotment is or is not meeting or moving toward forest plan goals
and objectives. The programmatic direction in forest plans establishes
goals, objectives, standards, and guidelines for management of the
resources on the National Forests, including management of rangelands.
Forest plan goals and objectives are designed to promote achievement of
desired resource conditions on the land. Site specific projects
implementing the forest plan must be consistent with forest plan
standards and guidelines, which provide for resource protection in the
achievement of forest plan goals and objectives. Under the transitional
procedures proposed in this section, agency employees would determine
whether management of an allotment is meeting or moving toward
achievement of forest plan goals and objectives through forest plan and
allotment monitoring and evaluation, allotment field inspections, other
existing resource information, and professional judgment.
The exhibit at the end of this document outlines the tiered
screening approach proposed in paragraphs (c)(1)-(4) to guide issuance
of grazing permits in compliance with NEPA procedures.
Additionally, the Klamath, Mendocino, Shasta-Trinity, and Six
Rivers National Forests in the state of California are without approved
forest plans. Under the provisions of the planning regulations (36 CFR
219.29) these national forests continue to be managed under existing
land use and resource plans. In such cases, provisions of proposed
paragraph (c)(1), (3), and (4) would provide a reasonable mechanism for
the continuation of livestock operations which are in compliance with
the terms and conditions of their permits.
The agency is committed to the long term improvement of rangeland
condition. Therefore, proposed paragraph (c)(5) would require the
authorized officer to develop and maintain a schedule for rangeland
project decisions and site specific disclosure of environmental effects
on affected allotments pursuant to NEPA procedures. These schedules
will be developed in consultation with grazing permittees and other
interested parties. Priority for scheduling the completion of rangeland
project decisions will be given to those areas with significant
resource concerns such as protection of threatened and endangered
species, riparian and aquatic habitat, and water quality. These
schedules are necessary to ensure an orderly transition for completion
of rangeland project decisions through both the short term (1-3 years)
and long term (10-13 years). It it not the intent of the transitional
procedures proposed in this section to avoid or delay the completion of
rangeland project decisions, but rather to complete rangeland project
decisions on all allotments within 13 years from the effective date of
the final rule.
Paragraph (c)(6) of this section clarifies that where grazing
permits are issued under the transitional procedures of paragraphs (c)
(1), (2), (3), and (4), the timely issuance of a grazing permit is an
administrative act and not a separate decision subject to additional
NEPA analysis and disclosure.
Paragraph (c)(7) of this section states that adoption of these
rules would not compel the agency to immediately initiate rangeland
project planning and decisionmaking. This provision is necessary to
prevent any claim or assertion that, upon the effective date of this
rule, the agency would intend to immediately initiate rangeland project
decisions for issuance or renewal of all grazing permits. This
provision also provides the necessary transitions from the current
allotment-by-allotment decisionmaking process to a more streamlined
process for future decisionmaking in an orderly and planned manner.
Paragraph (d) of Sec. 222.3 of the proposed rule requires the
authorized officer to delineate lands suitable and authorized for
grazing use into allotments. The introductory text retains the current
policy of including nonfederal lands in an allotment where doing so
would form logical management units. Proposed paragraph (d)(1) would
require that maps delineating allotments must be on file at the office
of the District Ranger. Proposed paragraph (d)(2) would make clear that
the delineation of allotments is merely an administrative act and not a
decision subject to further NEPA analysis for disclosure of
environmental effects. The intent is to eliminate confusion and future
disputes over the decision point, the requisite environmental
disclosure requirements, and administrative appeal opportunities.
In summary, proposed Sec. 222.3 would make clear that planning and
decisionmaking for National Forest System rangeland management,
including authorization of livestock grazing use, is a two-level
process, just as is the case for all other National Forest resources.
As a consequence, the agency would discontinue the use of the allotment
management plan. Additionally, this section signals the agency's intent
and provides the foundation for moving toward an ecological approach to
rangeland management decisions. Under an ecological approach, the
agency will seek to focus on appropriate larger geographic scales for
ecological analysis purposes, while incorporating and building on the
best science available to ensure the sustainability of the land to
continue to produce goods and services to meet public demand.
In the ANPR, the Department specifically asked the public for input
on appropriate scales of rangeland ecosystem analysis. Public comments
received support a broader scope of analysis and planning with
consideration of the human element of the ecosystem. However, mandating
a particular hierarchical level of analysis for planning is
inappropriate in this proposed rule on rangeland management. The
framework for overall agency land management planning and planning for
all resources must be set out in a cohesive and integrated way in the
agency's land management planning regulations in Part 219. Accordingly,
the comments received on the scales of rangeland ecosystem analysis and
planning in response to the ANPR on rangeland management will be
considered in the agency's development of a proposed revision of the
land management planning regulations, which is now underway.
Proposed Section 222.4--General Provisions Applicable to All Grazing
Permits.
This section of the proposed rule establishes some of the
fundamental ground rules governing grazing on National Forest System
land and other lands under Forest Service control.
Section 222.4(a) of the proposed rule is essentially the same as
Sec. 222.3(a) of the current rule and provides that grazing activities
require written authorization in the form of a grazing permit. Similar
to current practice, certain minor exceptions for temporary grazing are
allowed under proposed Sec. 222.6(c).
At Sec. 222.4(b), the proposed rules describes the permit as a
privilege subject to the terms and conditions contained therein. As in
the current rule, Sec. 222.3(b), proposed Sec. 222.4(b) states that the
grazing permit does not convey any right, title, or interest in United
States lands, resources, or permanent range improvements to the
permittee. This is entirely consistent with statutory and case law
which, for nearly a century has recognized grazing permits as a license
or privilege to use federal lands for grazing activities which can be
revoked at anytime without requiring the payment of compensation.
Proposed Sec. 222.4(c) states that the issuance of the grazing
permit implements an existing decision to authorize grazing and that
issuance of the permit is an administrative act that is not a decision
point subject to NEPA procedures as provided in Sec. 222.3(b)(3) of
this subpart. This provision is intended to eliminate the confusion of
permittees and the public regarding the role of the grazing permit in
management of National Forest System rangelands.
Proposed paragraph (d) would require the authorized officer to
prescribe the terms and conditions of each grazing permit in accordance
with applicable law and administrative direction. Paragraph (d)(1) of
Sec. 222.4 of the proposed rule parallels the intent of the current
rule at Sec. 222.2(c). However, in contrast to the current rule,
proposed paragraph (d)(1) makes clear that terms and conditions of the
permit include applicable standards and guidelines from the forest plan
and/or from applicable rangeland project decisions. This provision of
the proposed rule replaces the allotment management plan as the basis
of the terms and conditions of the permit and ties the permit terms and
conditions to the two-tiered planning and decisionmaking process, as
discussed earlier.
The current regulations recognize an allotment management plan
(AMP) as the mechanism for carrying out forest plan direction on a
grazing allotment. The proposed rule would phase out the AMP as a
source of direction for rangeland management and grazing use and,
instead, make applicable standards and guidelines from forest plans
and/or from applicable rangeland project decisions a part of the terms
and conditions of the grazing permit. This provision is significant in
that it would provide the means for ensuring that those current grazing
operations authorized without benefit of rangeland project decisions
would comply with the direction of forest plans. As previously noted,
many of those who submitted comments on the ANPR recommended adoption
of local standards and guidelines because they would be relevant to the
land being affected by the action. On National Forest System lands, the
forest plan and project decisions fulfill this role.
Under paragraph (d)(2) of Sec. 222.4 of the proposed rule, the
permittee may be required to collect and submit monitoring, inventory,
or other resource information related to the permitted livestock
grazing activity. Information of this nature is essential for
identifying progress toward forest plan goals and objectives and
changes in operational practices which may be necessary. This
information is vital to proper rangeland management and in some
instances the permittee is in a better position to gather the
information than the agency.
Paragraph (e) of Sec. 222.4 of the proposed rule allows the
authorized officer to issue written annual operating instructions that
document temporary stocking adjustments and/or provide additional
direction necessary for proper management of the range resource. While
not explicitly covered in the current rule, this is a long-standing
agency practice provided for in the agency's internal directive system
and in part 2 of the term grazing permit (Form FS-2222-10). Until now,
most written instructions have been contained in annual operating plans
provided to the permittees. These annual operating plans have been the
subject of increasing controversy over whether decisions made therein
are subject to NEPA procedures. Proposed paragraph (e) would make clear
that where operating instructions fall within the scope of the decision
authorizing the grazing use and NEPA documentation associated with that
decision, a new decision and additional analysis is not required. If,
however, they fall outside the scope of the decision authorizing
grazing use, additional environmental analysis would be required before
those annual operating instructions can be issued.
Annual adjustments documented in operating instructions would be
prepared with the involvement of the permittee. This approach conforms
to current practices and helps insure permittee involvement and mutual
understanding of rangeland management and operational objectives. The
agency believes the elimination of annual operating plans and the
adoption of operating instructions will reduce current confusion over
how grazing use decisions are made and lead to more uniform
understanding of grazing permit administration by both agency employees
and external groups who are interested in national forest rangeland
resources.
Proposed Section 222.5--Term Grazing Permits; Types and Duration
This section of the proposed rule describes the types of term
grazing permits which may be issued. This includes term permits, term
private land permits, term permits with on-and-off provisions, and
grazing agreements. These four types of permits are necessary because
of the various grazing use and land ownership patterns which occur on
National Forest System lands.
Proposed Sec. 222.5(a) contains descriptions of the various types
of term permits authorized. This same information is covered at
Sec. 223.3(c)(1) in the current rule and in the Forest Service
directives system. The types of term permits listed in the proposed
rule are the same as those provided in the current rule. This section
of the proposed rule contains no change in current practice and,
therefore, would have no effect on permittees.
Proposed paragraph (a)(1) covers the circumstances where a term
permit is appropriate. In addition, a provision for a term grazing
association permit, which is presently provided for in Forest Service
Manual (FSM) Chapter 2230, would be incorporated into the proposed
rule. Proposed paragraph (a)(2) describes a term private land permit
which is issued to a qualified applicant who owns or controls land
within an allotment. The permit waives exclusive grazing use of the
private land to the United States and in return the applicant is
authorized to graze livestock on the allotment. The amount of livestock
grazing use authorized in a term private land grazing permit is
determined by the authorized officer. A term permit with on-and-off
provisions described in proposed paragraph (a)(3) is issued when the
grazing area includes grazing lands other than the lands under Forest
System control. Under this type of permit, the livestock graze
concurrently on National Forest Service lands and other lands
controlled by the applicant. Proposed paragraph (a)(4) describes the
circumstances when a grazing agreement is appropriate.
Proposed Sec. 222.5(b) establishes the duration of term grazing
permits which, normally, is for a 10 year period. Proposed paragraph
(b)(1) contains direction presently found in Sec. 222.3(c)(1) of the
current rule which describes those instances when a term grazing permit
on National Forest land in the 16 contiguous Western States may be
issued for a period less than the maximum ten year time period as
provided for in FLPMA. Under proposed paragraph (b)(2) of this section,
the authorized officer may issue permits on all other National Forest
System lands or other lands under Forest Service control for up to a
ten year period as determined to be in the best interest of sound land
management.
Propsed Section 222.6--Authorization of Temporary Grazing
The proposed rule provides that, when term permits are not
appropriate for administration of livestock grazing, a paid or free
temporary permit can be issued or free grazing without a permit can be
allowed. Issuance of these permits or allowance of free use is
dependent upon the availability of forage.
Current regulations found in Sec. 222.3(c)(2) provide for either a
temporary or a livestock use permit depending on the particular
situation. Section 222.3(c)(2)(i) provides for temporary grazing
permits to be issued for a period of up to one year for a variety of
purposes. Section 222.3(c)(2)(ii) provides for the issuance of
livestock use permits for periods up to one year for a variety of
purposes.
Using two types of permits to cover temporary livestock grazing
uses is often confusing and requires maintenance and use of two
policies and procedures, applications, and permits. Thus, the
Department proposes to eliminate livestock use permits, combine them
with temporary permits, and extend the term period for temporary
permits for up to three years. These changes will streamline and
simplify the issuance of temporary permits.
The proposed rule eliminates the provision in the current rule at
Sec. 222.3(c)(2)(ii)(D) for free livestock grazing use for persons who
reside on ranch or agricultural lands within or contiguous to National
Forest System lands for not to exceed 10 head of owned or kept
livestock whose products are consumed or whose services are used
directly by the family of the resident who distinctly needs National
Forest System lands to support such animals. The proposed rule does not
retain this provision since a review of permit administration revealed
no use of or need for this authority.
Paragraphs (a)(1)-(4) of Sec. 222.6 of the proposed rule provide
the same requirements as found in the current rule at
Sec. 222.3(c)(2)(i)(A)-(D) for the issuance of temporary permits for a
variety of purposes. The proposed rule makes not substantive change
from the current rule; however, the text of these paragraphs is revised
and reduced for clarification.
The current rule specifies that temporary permits may be issued in
times of national or regional drought or emergency where such use would
not result in permanent resource damage. This provision is retained in
this proposed rule at Sec. 222.6(a)(5), but is revised. Limiting this
provision to drought or emergency that is ``national or regional
scope'' is excessive to the qualifications established for temporary
grazing use of other lands by permitted livestock from an affected
allotment. Additionally, the qualifying phrase ``* * * where such use
would not result in permanent resource damage,'' would be removed since
this qualification is unnecessary. Part of a determination that the
capacity exists to graze animals is that any such grazing use permitted
will be done in accordance with appropriate standards and guidelines in
a forest plan or rangeland project decision to prevent resource damage.
Paragraphs (a)(6) and (a)(7) of Sec. 222.6 of the proposed rule
provide the same requirements as found in the current rule at
Sec. 222.3(c)(2)(ii) (A) and (H), concerning temporary permits for
transportation livestock an animals used for breeding purposes. The
proposed rule makes no substantive changes from the current rule;
however, the text of these paragraphs is revised and reduced for
clarification.
The current rule at Sec. 222.3(c)(2)(ii)(C) allows free or paid
permits for trailing livestock that graze along the way as they cross
National Forest System lands. Issuing free permits for such use is not
in the public interest and must be closely administered to prevent
excessive use and potential resource damage. As a result, the proposed
rule at Sec. 222.6(a)(8) would allow authorized officers to issue only
paid temporary permits for trailing livestock across National Forest
System lands and other lands under Forest Service control. This should
not result in a substantial increase in the cost of business since, in
many instances, there may be alternatives to trailing that do not
require the payment of a grazing fee.
Paragraph (b) of this proposed section would allow an authorized
officer the discretion to issue free or paid temporary permits where
the primary documented objective is managing vegetation to meet a
resource objective other than livestock forage utilization. Where the
primary land management objective is to ``manipulate vegetation'' (as
opposed to livestock production), the current regulations at
Sec. 222.3(c)(2)(ii)(I) require that a fee be charged for this use. The
agency believes this fee requirement is an impediment to effective
vegetative management. In some areas, vegetation, such as chaparral, is
best managed by grazing livestock. Permitting free use could be a cost-
effective way to manage fuelbreaks, tree plantations, or other areas
where it is desirable to remove vegetation periodically. In these
situations, grazing can be used instead of more costly methods
involving herbicides, fire, or mowing. The temporary permits for
vegetation management issued under this authority would not replace
existing grazing permits where the primary purpose if livestock
production and the permittee pays a fee.
The current rule at Sec. 222.3(c)(2)(ii)(E) provides for free
permits to campers and travelers for the livestock used during the
period of occupancy. This same provision is carried forth into the
proposed rule at paragraph (c)(1) of proposed Sec. 222.6. Livestock use
under this provision does not included livestock being used by campers
and travelers permitted under the provisions of paragraph (a)(6) of
this section which covers use by transportation livestock for
commercial purposes.
The current rule at Sec. 222.3(c)(2)(ii)(B) allows for free or paid
grazing for research purposes and administrative studies but requires
the issuance of a permit. Under the proposed rule at Sec. 222.6(c)(2),
authorized offices may provide for this type of grazing use free of
charge without a written permit. Experience shows that the amount of
grazing permitted under this authority is insignificant. Most of the
livestock involved in such studies are owned by permitted and are
authorized and paid for under a term grazing permit. Where a university
or other research entity owns or borrows the livestock used in a study,
it is in the interest of the United States to allow such use free of
charge and without a written permit, since the public will benefit from
the information gained from the research.
Paragraph (c)(3) of proposed Sec. 222.6 would allow authorized
officers to grant free grazing with no permit to permittees for horses,
mules, or burros that are used to support the management of permitted
livestock. This type of free grazing use is appropriate when the animal
is not grazed full time on the allotment but is used occasionally as a
work animal during the grazing season. This is a revision of the
provision of the current rule at Sec. 222.3(c)(2)(ii)(F), which allows
for this type of permitted use on either a free or paid basis.
Proposed Section 222.7--Requirements Applicable to Grazing Permits
This section of the proposed rule contains the requirements which
must be met in order to hold a term or temporary grazing permit.
Proposed paragraph (a) lists the requirements for term and temporary
grazing permits while paragraph (b) covers all additional requirements
applicable specifically to term permits. The proposed rule is similar
in content to the current rule at Sec. 222.3(c)(1) and existing agency
direction with two primary differences. First, the proposed
requirements would enable foreign corporations to hold grazing permits,
and second, this proposed rule would establish a satisfactory record of
performance under previous or currently held federal grazing permits as
a requirement for the issuance or renewal of a grazing permit.
Proposed Sec. 222.7(a)(1) would limit issuing term and temporary
grazing permits to private individuals, grazing associations and
districts, business concerns, or tribal governments, making it clear
that government agencies are not eligible to receive term or temporary
grazing permits. This is consistent with Sec. 222.3(c)(1) of the
current rule.
Paragraph (a)(2) of Sec. 222.7 of the proposed rule requires
eligible individuals or entities seeking a grazing permit to make
written application, using one of the forms listed in Sec. 222.12.
Currently this requirement is established in the Forest Service Grazing
Permit Administration Handbook, FSH 2209.13, section 14, which provides
that applicants must submit an application and any other information
requested by the authorized officer in order for the officer to
determine that all permit requirements have been satisfied. This
requirement belongs with other requirements in the rules rather in
agency directives.
Paragraph (a)(3) of Sec. 222.7 of the proposed rule requires that
applicants, permittee(s), and affiliates(s), have a satisfactory record
of performance under previous or currently held federal grazing permits
to be eligible for a permit. An applicant, permittee, or affiliate, if
any, with a history of prior grazing use on federal lands that has had
a Forest Service grazing permit canceled, in whole, pursuant to
Sec. 222.10(b) (2), (3), (4), or (5), or other federal grazing permits
cancelled for similar reasons within 36 months prior to application,
would be presumed to have an unsatisfactory performance record. This
provision is a substantive change from the existing rule and would
conform with the intent of FLPMA which requires that, in order to be
given first priority for receipt of a new grazing permit, existing
permittees must be in compliance with the terms and conditions in the
permit and any applicable rules and regulations. Under the current
rule, permittees who have their permits cancelled because they have
violated their permit terms and conditions may, be reorganizing as a
new entity, remain eligible to hold a permit provided that they are
otherwise qualified. This situation is contrary to the public interest
and to the intent of FLPMA and would be remedied by this proposed
Sec. 222.7(a)(3) which would protect the public interest by allowing
only those who have satisfactory performance records to hold a grazing
permit. In determining eligibility for a new permit or for reissuance
of a permit, under the proposed rule an authorized officer would
consider current performance under federal grazing permits held at the
time of application as well as performance under other federal grazing
permits held within the past 36 months. A 36-month period is believed
to be a reasonable period of time to consider in establishing a record
of performance under grazing permits. This consideration would extend
to any affiliates of the applicant or permittee and would include
review of all federal grazing permits or leases held by those parties.
Section 222.7(b) of the proposed rule establishes additional
requirements that are applicable only to term grazing permits.
Specifically, Sec. 222.7(b)(1) would establish that term permits may
only be issued to the following:
(1) A citizen of the United States.
(2) An alien who has filed a petition for naturalization with the
proper authorities.
(3) A corporation or other business concern that is authorized to
do business in the state where the graving activity is sought or is
otherwise licensed to do business in that state.
(4) Tribal governments.
Currently, the Forest Service Manual (FSM 2231.21) identifies who
is eligible for a grazing permit. These eligibility standards belong
with the other requirements in regulation, not in an internal agency
directive, and, therefore, and being incorporated in the proposed rule
at Sec. 222.7(b). The current Forest Service eligibility requirements
do not allow corporations or other business concerns to hold a grazing
permit unless 80% of the capital stock is held by American citizens
(FSM 2231.21). This policy would be eliminated by adoption of the
proposed rule, which at Sec. 222.7(b)(1)(iii) would allow foreign
corporations or other business concerns to hold a grazing permit if
they are licensed to do business in the state in which the grazing
permit is sought. This change will make eligibility requirements for
graving permits consistent with requirements for all other Forest
Service permits and with those of the Bureau of Land Management.
Section 222.7(b)(2) of the proposed rule would establish that an
applicant or permit holder must own the livestock to be graved under
permit and such base property as required by the Forest Service. This
requirement is the same as that in Sec. 222.3(c)(1)(i) of the current
rule. However, in contrast to the current rule, the proposed rule would
allow for five exceptions to the livestock ownership requirements.
The first exception is at proposed Sec. 222.7(b)(2)(i) and would
allow livestock owned by children of permittees to be run under the
parents' term grazing permit for up to 50 percent of the permitted
numbers. The inclusion of this section makes an existing Forest Service
practice currently authorized in the Forest Service Grazing Permit
Administration Handbook (FSH 2209.13, sec. 12.22) a part of the grazing
regulations. The intent of this exception is to allow children who own
livestock for 4-H, Future Farmers of America, or similar projects, or
those who want to build up their own livestock herd and ultimately take
over the family ranch operation, to run livestock under the parents'
permit and to encourage family operations.
The second exception, Sec. 222.7(b)(2)(ii) of the proposed rule,
recognizes that where the permit or agreement is issued to a grazing
association or district, the members of the association or district
must own the requisite base property and livestock as specified in the
term permit or grazing agreement. This is consistent with the intent of
the current rule (Sec. 222.7) and agency practice as provided in the
Forest Service Grazing Permit Administration Handbook (FSH 2209.13,
Chapter 20). Thus, the agency has concluded this provision belongs in
the rule.
Under the third exception, Sec. 222.7(b)(2)(iii) of the proposed
rule, holders of term private land permits would not be required to own
the livestock or base property under Forest Service permit. This is
current agency practice as provided in the Forest Service Manual (FSM
2231.22c). However, it belongs in the rules and, accordingly, is
incorporated.
The fourth exception, at G222.7(b)(2)(iv) of the proposed rule,
provides that term permit holders for developing ranges on National
Forest System lands in the Eastern States would not be required to own
livestock or base property for the initial permit, but must meet the
livestock and base property ownership requirements for permit renewal.
This provision, which is not in the current rule, would allow new
livestock operators to get into the livestock business incrementally.
This flexibility is desirable in the Eastern States where the Forest
Service administers areas where vegetation can be better and more
economically managed through livestock grazing rather than by spraying,
mowing, or burning.
The fifth exception is found at proposed Sec. 222.7(b)(2)(v) and
would allow a permittee who disposes or loses control of all or part of
the base property but retains the permit up to one year, to meet base
property requirements. The proposed rule is very similar to the current
rule at Sec. 222.3(c)(1)(v) but is reworded to clarify its intent and
to recognize that the loss of control of the base property can result
from actions other than disposal through sale.
Proposed Sec. 222.7(b)(3) would grant authorized officers authority
to impose additional requirements for term permits including, but not
limited to, nonuse of permits and upper limits on the total number of
permitted livestock. This is a continuation of existing authority
currently located in Sec. 222.3(c)(1)(vi).
Proposed Section 222.8--Waivers and Escrow Waivers
This section sets out the circumstances where term grazing permits
may be waived in favor of another entity, where escrow waivers may be
executed, and the Forest Service role in each. Although escrow waivers
have long been allowed through Forest Service Manual direction, they
have not been addressed in the grazing regulations.
Proposed Sec. 222.8(a) would include provisions for the waiver of
term grazing permits to the United States in favor of another entity.
The current rule at Sec. 222.3(c)(1)(vi)(F) provides for the
establishment of conditions where waived grazing privileges may be
confirmed in favor of a new applicant. The proposed rule at
Sec. 222.8(a)(1) would include the current conditions established in
the Forest Service Manual (FSM 2230) for waiver of term grazing permits
for National Forest System lands in the Western States.
In addition, the proposed rule at Sec. 222.8(a)(2) would provide
that an existing term grazing permit for National Forest System lands
in the Eastern States, issued under the noncompetitive procedures of 36
CFR 222.53, may be waived to the United States in favor of the
permittee's spouse or child who acquires title to base property or
permitted livestock. If such a permittee dies and the permit was not
waived in favor of the spouse or child, the permit reverts to the
United States and would be competitively offered to other applicants
pursuant to Sec. 222.5(a)(1). This proposed provision merely placed
into the rule what is the current practice in the Eastern States and
clarifies the status of the permit in event of a permittee's death.
Under proposed Sec. 222.8(a)(3), the holder of a permit for
National Forest System Lands in the Eastern States, issued as a result
of the competitive bidding process authorized in the current rule at 36
CFR 222.54, could not waive a permit. This provision reflects current
Forest Service practice in the Eastern States and is necessary to
ensure continuation of the competitive bidding process at 36 CFR
222.54.
Proposed paragraph (b) addresses escrow waivers. The Forest Service
has been allowing permittees to execute escrow waivers in favor of
lenders since 1938 under a memorandum of understanding between the Farm
Credit Administration and the Department of Agriculture. That agreement
is no longer in effect; however, a new memorandum of understanding was
agreed to by the Forest Service and six western Farm Credit Banks on
December 21, 1990.
The current procedures governing escrow waivers are set forth in
FSM Chapter 2230, section 2231.82. Under these procedures, a permittee
who mortgages base property or permitted livestock waives all grazing
permit privileges (except the privilege of continuing to graze
livestock) to the United States to be held in escrow for a named
lender. If the lender forecloses on the mortgaged property, the lender
or a subsequent purchaser who acquires the foreclosed property has
first priority for receipt of a new term grazing permit. This policy
would be incorporated in the rules at Sec. 222.8(b).
Proposed Section 222.9--Renewal of Term Grazing permits
This section of the proposed rule specifies the qualifications and
priority for reissuance of a term permit. The current rule at
Sec. 222.3(c)(1)(vi) merely authorizes the Chief of the Forest Service
to prescribe the provisions and requirements under which term permits
will be reissued, but does not set out those provisions in the rule. In
the proposed rule, renewal of term permits is addressed in a separate
section to ensure that all provisions related to renewal can be easily
found in one place in the rule.
Paragraph (a) of proposed Sec. 222.9 states that current permit
holders must meet the requirements of Sec. 222.7 to qualify for renewal
of a term permit, and paragraph (b) provides that current permit
holders on National Forest System lands in the Western States have
priority for receiving new term permits when the current permit
expires. Under paragraph (c) of proposed Sec. 222.9, a new permit would
be issued to the current permit holder if the agency must cancel an
exiting permit to respond to changing law, executive order, regulation,
or resource condition. This commitment to issue a new permit is
necessary to protect permittees' interest when events beyond their
control result in the need to establish new terms and conditions of the
grazing permit.
Proposed paragraph (d) provides a needed cross reference that notes
that holders of expired term permits on the National Forest System
lands in the Eastern States, issued under the competitive bidding
process, are subject to the renewal procedures in 36 CFR part Sec. 222,
Subpart C.
Proposed paragraph (e) makes clear that term permits that are
renewed are subject to the same duration provisions as set out in
Sec. 222.5(b).
Proposed Section 222.10--Cancellation Suspension, and Modification of
Grazing Permits
This section of the proposed rule contains the provisions found in
the current rule at Sec. 222.4. In addition to editorial changes and
reorganization of the text for clarity, the proposed rule makes several
changes from the current rule that take into account important
rangeland resource management needs.
Areas of emphasis that were not specifically stated in the current
rule include cancellation, suspension, or modification of a permit to
correct documented resource damage [Sec. 222.10(b)] and for
unauthorized use [Sec. 222.10(b)(3)]. Documented resource damage refers
to damage occurring as a result of the livestock grazing. If permittee-
owned livestock exceed the permitted numbers or are on the allotment at
times or in locations not authorized under the permit, they are
considered unauthorized livestock. This change replaces the current
excess livestock designation and is consistent with the current Bureau
of Land Management regulations.
Proposed Sec. 222.10(b)(1) strengthens direction in the current
rule at Sec. 222.4(a)(3) by explicitly providing for a permit to be
canceled, suspended, or modified, in whole or in part for failure to
pay grazing fees. The proposed rule includes failure to pay
unauthorized use and service charges in the same category.
Cancellation of permits for the purpose of reissuance of a new ten
year term permit is provided for in both the current and proposed
rules. The current rule Sec. 222.3(c)(1)(iii) states that a permit may
be cancelled at the end of the midyear of the decade for reissuance of
a new permit. The term grazing permit also currently contains a clause
which states that an authorized officer may cancel the permit at the
end of the midyear of the decade so that it may be updated. The clause
provides that, in such a case, a new permit will be reissued to the
existing permit holder. This permit clause causes authorized officers
to cancel all the term permits needing updating at the same time and
reissue them. This practice results in inefficiency and delays in
reissuing permits. Therefore, paragraph (a)(4) of this section of the
proposed rule retains the authority to cancel permits to update their
terms and conditions but does not limit the point at which this could
be done. This charge would allow authorized officers to update permits
over a period of time in an efficient and timely manner. Paragraph
(a)(4) also stipulates that when a permit is cancelled under this
provision, issuance of a new permit is preceded by a rangeland project
decision and NEPA documentation.
The current rule at Sec. 222.4(a)(6) authorizes the Forest Service
to cancel or suspend a permit if the permit holder is convicted of
failing to comply with certain Federal laws or regulations or state
laws when exercising the grazing use authorized by the permit. The
proposed rule at Sec. 222.10(b)(5) would change the words ``when
exercising'' to ``related to.'' This proposed change would clarify that
the Forest Service is authorized to cancel or suspend a grazing permit
when a permittee is convicted of violating the listed laws even though
the violation may have taken place outside the grazing season or the
specific allotment, but there is a connection between the violation and
the grazing use authorized by the permit. The current rule focuses on
the permitted grazing allotment and on the permitted season of use.
This clarification is needed so permittees, agency personnel, and the
public understand the agency's intent, to broaden this provision of the
rule beyond the grazing allotment and season of use specified in the
grazing permit.
The proposed rule would incorporate an existing procedure outlined
in the Forest Service Grazing Permit Administration Handbook, FSH
2209.13, section 16.2, that requires an authorized officer to notify a
permittee in writing of an alleged permit violation and that the
officer is considering taking action against the permit. Under
Sec. 222.10(d) of the proposed rule, the permittee would be allowed up
to 30 days to respond to allegations.
Proposed Section 222.11--Grazing Permit Fees and Other Charges
This is a new section of the proposed rule that would direct
authorized officers to establish grazing fees and charges for livestock
grazing use in accordance with this section of the proposed rule and
the rules in subpart C--Grazing fees of part 222. Additionally, this
section would set out the charges to be assessed for unauthorized use
and provide for the assessment of a service charge for recovery of
administrative costs for processing actions related to grazing permits.
Proposed Sec. 222.11(a) would permit recovery of administrative
costs associated with issuance of grazing permits. Under the current
regulations, the Forest Service does not assess a service charge to
recover the costs of processing permit actions initiated by an existing
or prospective permittee or processing of actions related to permit
violations. Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 9701, the Forest Service believes it
should recover the cost of providing services to users who seek a
special privilege or use, especially when costs of responding to
permittees or applicants exceed those normally incurred by the agency.
Paragraph (a) would make clear that the Forest Service is authorized to
assess a service change to recover the administrative and clerical
costs for processing those permit actions initiated by an existing
permittee or applicant. Examples of these types of actions are the
modification of an existing permit solely at the request and benefit of
the permittee and issuance of a new permit to a qualified applicant. It
is estimated that out of the approximately 9,100 permittees on the
National Forest System, 2,000 may initiate a permit action in any one
year. The average service charge is estimated to be about $100 per
action. It is the agency's intent to issue guidelines to its employees
through the agency directive system establishing the service charge,
which would include the processing costs and be adjusted periodically
to reflect any changes in these costs.
Proposed Sec. 222.11(b) makes clear that unauthorized use is a
violation of the terms and conditions of the permit and establishes
that authorized officers shall charge permittees and other livestock
owners for any unauthorized use. Charges for unauthorized use are in
addition to grazing fees assessed for authorized grazing use as
prescribed in subpart C.
Proposed Sec. 222.11(c) provides for determining if unauthorized
use is willful or nonwillful. If unauthorized use is determined to be
willful, the authorized officer is directed to determine if the
offender has been responsible for other incidents of willful
unauthorized use within a period of 36 months preceding the subject
incident, and therefore is subject to the higher rate charge of
paragraph (d)(3) of this section.
Proposed Sec. 222.11(d) establishes that the charge for
unauthorized use will be the average monthly animal unit month (AUM)
grazing fee rate for the 17 Western States published annually by the
National Agricultural Statistical Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture. Direction for determining charges for unauthorized use is
covered in the current rule in subpart C--Sec. 222.50(h). Since charges
for unauthorized use are penalties rather than fees, this direction is
more appropriately covered under Subpart A of the proposed rule rather
than Subpart C where it is currently located.
Proposed Sec. 222.11(d)(1) provides that livestock owners
responsible for nonwillful unauthorized use would be charged the
unauthorized use rate. This section also provides for the charge to be
waived if certain criteria outlined in the proposed rule are met. In
the case of a waiver there would be no unauthorized use or service
charges to the permittee when the situation has been resolved to the
satisfaction of the authorized officer. Paragraphs (2) and (3) of
proposed Sec. 222.11(d) provide for charging two times the unauthorized
use rate for willful unauthorized use and three times the unauthorized
use rate for repeated willful unauthorized use. When unauthorized use
is found to be willful, or repeatedly willful, charges will be assessed
for the full cost of all resource and property damage resulting from
the unauthorized use and all reasonable expenses incurred by the United
States in detecting, investigating, and resolving such unauthorized
use. In recognition that Forest Service financial penalties have not
been effective as a deterrent in preventing unauthorized use in the
past, this section of the proposed rule represents a significant
increase in penalties for unauthorized use. Strong support for this
section of the proposed rule was contained in the public comments on
the ANPR. This support was based on the need for Forest Service
enforcement of the terms and conditions of grazing permits and for
strong penalties for willful unauthorized use; also, for the
recognition that some situations of unauthorized use are unintentional
and the appropriate resolution does not entail a financial penalty.
Proposed Section 222.12--Information Collection Requirements
While this is a new section in the proposed rule describing
information requirements associated with the application and
administration of grazing permits, the type of information requested
has been routinely collected by the agency in its grazing permit
administration activities for many years. For a description of the
information requirements associated with this rule, see the discussion
of ``Information Requirements'' at the end of this ``Supplementary
Information'' section.
Proposed Section 222.13--Improvements
The current regulation at Sec. 222.9 authorizes the Forest Service
to grant permission to individuals, organizations, or other agencies to
perform range improvement work on National Forest System lands and
other lands under Forest Service control. Additionally, the current
rule allows authorized officers to require permittees to maintain range
improvements to specified standards. The proposed rule at Sec. 222.13
includes the provisions of the current rule but would be reorganized
for ease of use. The only substantive changes embodied in this section
is to incorporate provisions related to the Range Betterment Fund into
this section of the proposed rule (currently at Sec. 222.10) and to
conform the rules prohibiting adjustment of fees or charges for range
improvement work to the new rules governing grazing fees in the East
adopted in 1990.
The current rule at Sec. 222.10 details background and direction
for range development through the Range Betterment Fund. Direction
presently contained in the current rule at Sec. 222.10 has now more
appropriately been incorporated into the Forest Service Manual (FSM
2240). Therefore, direction for use of the Range Betterment Fund in the
proposed rule is greatly reduced from that in the current rule and is
incorporated in paragraph (c) of proposed Sec. 222.13.
The current rule at Sec. 222.9(d) prohibits adjusting grazing fees
or charges for number of head months to compensate permittees for range
improvement work performed on National Forest System lands with the
exception of National Grasslands and land utilization projects. On
January 26, 1990, FR 2646, Vol. 55, No. 18, Subpart C of part 222 was
amended to allow grazing fee credits for range improvements on National
Forest System lands in the Eastern States to facilitate the development
of ranges. Therefore, the proposed rule at Sec. 222.13(d) makes clear
where the use of grazing fee credits or adjustments for rangeland
improvement work is authorized within the National Forest System.
Proposed paragraph (d)(1) references the specific sections of Subpart C
of part 222 authorizing grazing fee credits for rangeland improvements
on National Forest System lands in the Eastern States. Proposed
paragraph (d)(2) continues the provision of the current rule at
Sec. 222.9(d) authorizing the adjustment of annual grazing fees on
National Grasslands or Land Utilization Projects to reflect the cost to
a grazing permittee of complying with required conservation practices.
Proposed paragraph (d)(3) then specifically states that adjustment in
grazing fees charged in exchange for rangeland improvement work is not
authorized on all other National Forest System lands except as provided
in proposed paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3).
Proposed Section 222.14--Compensation for Permittees' Interest in Range
Improvements
This section of the proposed rule provides for and sets the
conditions under which permittees may be compensated for investments in
existing rangeland improvements in the event of grazing permit
cancellation.
The proposed rule at Sec. 222.14(a) would incorporate the
provisions of the current rule Sec. 222.6(a) which directs that
whenever a term permit for grazing livestock on National Forest lands
in the 16 contiguous Western States is cancelled, that the current
permittee shall be compensated for the current value of any authorized
permanent range improvements they placed or constructed on the lands.
This situation applies when the permit is cancelled, in whole or in
part, to devote the land to another public purpose, including disposal.
This provision is applicable only when lands are actually permanently
excluded from grazing and does not apply in the situation when a
grazing permit is partially reduced due to resource conditions but
grazing use continues at a reduced level. The value of these range
improvements may not exceed the fair market value of the terminated
portion of the permittee(s) interest in the improvement.
Questions have arisen concerning the status of former permittees
and any interest they might have had in a range improvement. To address
these questions, the proposed rule at Sec. 222.14 (b) and (c) would
state that those permittees who had waived permits or allowed permits
to expire prior to receiving notice of cancellation of grazing in an
area would not be entitled to compensation under this section. This is
intended to clarify the direction in the current rule at Sec. 222.6(b)
concerning permittees who have waived their permit in connection with
the sale of permitted livestock or base property.
Proposed Section 222.15--Recognition and Cooperation With Local
Livestock or Grazing Associations and Districts
This section of the proposed rule deals with the recognition of and
subsequent issuance of term permits to local livestock or grazing
associations and the requirements that must be met and adhered to in
order to maintain that recognition.
Section 222.7(a) of the current rule authorizes and sets out
procedures for Forest Officers to recognize and cooperate with local
livestock associations. Section 222.15 of the proposed rule covers the
same information in the current rule at Sec. 222.7(a); however, the
text has been edited for clarity and contains two modifications of
existing practice.
Historically, a clause has been included in term permits which
specified that grazing association or district members must address
their grievances to the association or district in accordance with the
term permit and the governing constitution and bylaws of the
organization. This requirement should be in the rule. Accordingly, the
proposed rule would include this longstanding grievance process at
Sec. 222.15(a)(2).
The current rule at Sec. 222.7(a)(4) allows an authorized officer
to withdraw recognition of an association if it does not hold an annual
or special meeting during a 24-month period. However, if an association
does not meet at least once a year, the organization cannot effectively
assist in the management of allotment(s), which is the purpose of the
Forest Service cooperating with the association. Therefore, the
proposed rule at Sec. 222.15(c) would require an association or
district to meet at least once every 12 months. Failure to meet at
least annually would be grounds for withdrawal of recognition. The
proposed rule further clarifies that the loss of recognition would
result in cancellation of the grazing permit to the association or
district.
Proposed Section 222.16--Cooperation with National, State, and County
Livestock Organizations and Others
This section of the proposed rule encourages Forest Service
officials to cooperate with national, state, and county livestock
organizations, other agencies, institutions, organizations, and
individuals having an interest in the protection and management of the
rangeland resources on National Forest system and private lands. The
proposed rule is very similar to information in the current rule found
in Sec. 222.7(b), (c), and (d), and Sec. 222.8. The text of these
sections of the current rule has been edited for clarity and
consolidated into a revised section of the proposed rule at
Sec. 222.16. Additionally, Sec. 222.11 of the current regulation,
providing direction for the establishment and operation of grazing
advisory boards would be removed, as the statutory authority mandating
such boards has expired.
In addition to editorial changes for clarity, proposed
Sec. 222.16(b) would make clear that cooperation with other agencies
and units of government is subject to the availability of appropriated
funds. Also, the word ``farm'' would be eliminated from the term
``noxious farm weeds'' in proposed Sec. 222.16(b) (1) and (2) to
broaden the term to include undesirable plant species which may occur
on rangelands or farm (cultivated) lands. Animal damage management is
added to paragraph (b)(3) as a specific activity in addition to
surveillance of pesticide programs for which the Forest Service
cooperates with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
The authority for Grazing Advisory Boards, established under the
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, expired December 31,
1985. Thus, the current regulations at Sec. 222.11 concerning Grazing
Advisory Boards are obsolete and need to be removed. However, the
proposed rule at Sec. 222.16(d) would note that the Secretary has the
authority, under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 1),
and the implementing regulation at 41 CFR part 101-6.10, and the Food
and Agriculture Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2281, et seq.), to establish
advisory boards reflecting a variety of points of view and resource
interests to advise the Forest Service on management of the resources
of the National Forest System including forage production.
Other Considerations
In addition to the changes noted in the preceding section-by-
section discussion of the proposed rule, gender specific references
have been identified throughout the current rule and eliminated. Also,
wherever possible, the language--but not the intended meaning--of the
existing rule has been revised for clarity and ease of reading; for
example, text written in passive voice has been rewritten in active
voice whenever possible. In addition, the organization and arrangement
of the sections of the rule have been revised for easier use by permit
holders, agency personnel, and other readers. Publication of the final
rule will require concurrent modifications in the standard conditions
and clauses of grazing permit forms.
Public comment on this proposed rule, is invited and will be
considered in adoption of the final rule. Due to the great volume of
comments anticipated on this proposed rule the Department requests that
reviewers identify the specific section and paragraph label for the
regulatory text on which they are commenting. Specific statements of
what regulatory text the reviewer feels should be modified, and the
reasons for the recommended changes, are encouraged. By separate
rulemaking, the Department also will propose a revision in the system
used to determine the fees for grazing livestock on National Forest
System lands in the Western States.
Redesignation of Existing Rule
The following redesignation table systematically lists the old CFR
numbers with the new CFR numbers.
Redesignation Table
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Old section New section
------------------------------------------------------------------------
222.1.
222.1.............................. 222.2.
222.2.............................. 222.3.
222.4 (Partial).
222.3.............................. 222.3 (Partial).
222.4.
222.5.
222.6.
222.7.
222.8.
222.9.
222.10 (Partial).
222.4.............................. 222.10.
222.11.
222.12.
(Note: no Sec. 222.5 in the current
rule.).
222.6.............................. 222.14.
222.7.............................. 222.15.
222.16 (Partial).
222.8.............................. 222.16.
222.9.............................. 222.13.
222.10............................. 222.13.
222.11............................. ...................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the current rule is so comprehensively revised and reorganized
in the proposed rule, it is not practical to provide a full derivation
and distribution table for this subchapter. However, as an aid to
readers the agency has prepared a very simplified chart showing where
old sections can be found in the proposed rule and whether that section
has been edited in the proposed rule.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Old section New section
------------------------------------------------------------------------
222.1(a) First half of paragraph... 222.3 Addresses and expands.
222.1(a) Second half of paragraph.. 222.4 Addresses and expands.
222.1(b)........................... 222.2 (Edited).
222.2(a)........................... 222.3(d) Addresses and expands.
222.2(b)........................... 222.3 Addresses and expands.
222.2(c) First half of paragraph... 222.3(b)(1)(iii) Addresses and
expands.
222.2(c) Second half of paragraph.. 222.3(b),(c) and 222.4(b) Addresses
and expands.
222.3(a)........................... 222.4(a) (Edited).
222.3(b)........................... 222.4(b) (Edited).
222.3(c)........................... 222.3 (b) and (c) Addresses and
expands.
222.3(c)(1) ``Grazing permits ... 222.5(b) Addresses and expands.
or less.''
222.3(c)(1) ``Term grazing ... 222.5(a)(4) (Edited).
policies.''
222.3(c)(1) ``Term permits ... 222.5(a) (2) and (3) Addresses and
requires.'' expands.
222.3(c)(1)(i) First half of 222.7(b)(2).
paragraph.
222.3(c)(1)(i) Second half of 222.3(a) and 222.3(b)(1)(iii)
paragraph. Addresses and expands.
222.3(c)(1)(ii).................... 222.9(a), (b), and (d) Addresses
and expands.
222.3(c)(1)(iii)................... 222.10(a)(4) (Edited)
222.3(a)(1)(iv).................... 222.8(a)(1), (2) and (3) (Edited).
222.3(c)(1)(v)..................... 222.7(b)(2)(v) (Edited).
222.3(c)(1)(vi).................... 222.7 (Edited).
222.3(c)(1)(vi)(A)................. 222.7(b)(2) (Edited).
222.3(c)(1)(vi)(B)................. Unnecessary.
222.3(c)(1)(vi)(C)................. 222.8 Addresses and expands.
222.3(c)(1)(vi)(D)................. 222.7(b)(3)(i) (Edited).
222.3(c)(1)(vi)(E)................. 222.7(b)(3)(ii) (Edited).
222.3(c)(1)(vi)(F)................. 222.8(a) (Edited).
222.3(c)(2) Entire section......... 222.6 (Edited).
222.4(a)(1) and (2)(i) through (iv) 222.10(a)(1) and (a)(2) (Edited).
222.4(a)(2)(v) and (3) through (6). 222.10(b) addresses and expands.
222.4(a) (7) and (8)............... 222.10(c) (Edited).
222.4(b)........................... 222.10(a)(3) (Edited).
(There is no 222.5 in the current
rule.)
222.6.............................. 222.14 (Edited).
222.7(a)(1)........................ 222.15(a) (Edited).
222.7(a)(2)........................ 222.15(b) (Edited).
222.7(a)(3)........................ 222.15(a) (1) through (4) (Edited).
222.7(a)(4)........................ 222.15(c) (Edited).
222.7(b)........................... 222.16(a) (Edited).
222.7(c) and (d)................... 222.16(c) (Edited).
222.8(a)........................... 222.16(b) (Edited).
222.8(a) (1) through (3)........... 222.16(b)(1)(3) and (4) (Edited).
222.8(b)........................... 222.16(b)(2) (Edited).
222.9.............................. 222.13 (Edited).
222.10............................. 222.13(c) (edited).
222.10(a).......................... Unnecessary.
222.10(b).......................... Unnecessary.
222.11............................. Obsolete.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Impact
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866 on
Regulatory Planning and Review, The agency has determined that in
combination with a separate proposed rule to revise grazing fees this
proposed rule is a significant regulatory action subject to Office of
Management and Budget review. The proposed increase in grazing fees may
result in increased operational costs for small ranching businesses
that have permits on National Forest System land in Western States.
The Department of Interior has prepared an initial Small Entities
Flexibility Assessment analyzing the economic impact of this rulemaking
on small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605 et
seq). The public may obtain copies of the draft Small Entities
Flexibility Assessment by writing the address listed under ADDRESSES
earlier in the document.
Environmental Impact
The Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service, as a
cooperating agency, are preparing a draft environmental impact
statement (DEIS) on rangeland reform as announced in the Federal
Register on August 13, 1993. Upon completion of the draft EIS, a notice
of availability will be published in the Federal Register with an
opportunity for public comment. Following the comment period on the
draft EIS, a final EIS will be developed.
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights
This rule has been reviewed for its effects on private property
rights (Executive Order 12630 of March 15, 1988, ``Government Actions
and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights'' as
implemented by the U.S. Attorneys General's Guidelines for the
Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings). Under the
Guidelines, benefits and privileges bestowed by the Government are
expressly excluded from the definition of private property rights
protected by the Fifth Amendment.
The Congress established that a grazing permit is a privilege
through the Granger-Thye Act of April 24, 1950 (Section 19) and the
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of October 21, 1976 (Section
402h)). Both of these acts state that the issuance of grazing permits
in no way grants any right, title, interest, or estate in or to lands
or resources held by the United States.
A long line of court cases has established that a grazing permit is
a noncompensable interest since it is a privilege to use federally
owned land for livestock grazing purposes. Accordingly, it is a
privilege--not a right--which can be withdrawn or canceled by the
United States without compensation. Since this rule deals with granting
a privilege, Executive Order 12630, which involves the taking of
private property for public use, does not apply.
Notwithstanding the above, the Office of General Counsel has
prepared a Taking Implication Assessment on grazing activities
undertaken by the Forest Service. It was the conclusion of that
assessment that regulatory activities associated with Forest Service
administration of grazing on National Forest System lands do not
present the risk of a taking of private property.
Information Requirements
This proposed rule governing grazing and livestock use on National
Forest System lands specifies the information that applicants or
permittees must provide in order for an authorized officer to act on a
request. This proposed rule would not require permittees to provide any
additional information from that already required under the existing
rule. As such, this rule contains information requirements as defined
in 5 CFR part 1320.
The following Forest Service grazing-related forms: FS 2200-1,
Refund, Credit, or Transfer Application; FS 2200-2, Application for
Temporary Grazing Permit)--Part 1; FS 2200-12, Waiver of Term Grazing
Permit; FS 2200-13, Escrow Waiver of Term Grazing Permit Privileges; FS
2200-16, Application for Term Grazing Permit; and FS 2200-17,
Application for Term Private Land Grazing Permit are already cleared
for the use that would be required by this proposed rule and have been
assigned OMB control No. 0596-0003, with an expiration date of August
31, 1995.
Public reporting burdens for the collection of information by these
forms is estimated to average from 9 to 18 minutes per response
depending on the form. Extremely complex situations may require up to 2
hours to prepare. The information needed to complete the forms should
be readily available from existing livestock and landownership records.
Reviewers should send comments regarding the burden estimate or any
other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions
for reduction this burden to: Chief (2200) Forest Service, USDA, P.O.
Box 96090, Washington, DC 20090-6090; and Forest Service Desk Officer,
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Washington, DC 20503.
Civil Justice Reform Act
This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12778,
Civil Justice Reform. If this proposed rule were adopted, (1) all state
and local laws and regulations that are in conflict with this proposed
rule or which would impede its full implementation would be preempted;
(2) no retroactive effect would be given to this proposed rule; and (3)
it would not require administrative proceedings before parties may file
suit in court challenging its provisions.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 222
Grazing Lands, Livestock, National forests, National grasslands,
Range Management, Wildlife, and Wild horses and burros.
Therefore, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, it is
proposed to revise subpart A of part 222 of title 36 of the Code of
Federal Regulations to read as follows:
PART 222--RANGE MANAGEMENT
Subpart A--Management of Grazing Use Within Rangeland Ecosystems
Sec.
222.1 Purpose and scope.
222.2 Definitions.
222.3 Framework for rangeland planning and decisions.
Grazing Permits
222.4 General provisions applicable to all grazing permits.
222.5 Term grazing permits; types and duration.
222.6 Authorization of temporary grazing.
222.7 Requirements applicable to grazing permits.
222.8 Waivers and escrow waivers.
222.9 Renewal of term grazing permits.
222.10 Cancellation, suspension, and modification of grazing
permits.
222.11 Grazing permit fees and other charges.
222.12 Information collection requirements.
Rangeland Improvements
222.13 Improvements.
222.14 Compensation for permittees' interest in rangeland
improvements.
Cooperation
222.15 Recognition and cooperation with local livestock or grazing
associations and districts.
222.16 Cooperation with national, state, and county livestock
organizations and others.
Subpart A--Management of Grazing Use Within Rangeland Ecosystems
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1011; 16 U.S.C. 472, 551, 572, 580g, 580h,
580l, 1600 et seq.; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 43 U.S.C. 1901-1903, 1751-1752.
Sec. 222.1 Purpose and scope.
(a) The purpose of this subpart is to set forth the rules by which
domestic livestock operations are managed on National Forest System
lands and other lands under Forest Service control.
(b) This subpart addresses the following:
(1) The points in the planning and decisionmaking process at which
decisions are made on the suitability of rangelands for grazing, on the
authorization of livestock grazing, and when compliance with NEPA
procedures is required;
(2) General provisions applicable to all grazing permits;
(3) Specific requirements related to issuance and administration of
grazing permits;
(4) Standards for the cancellation, suspension, and modification of
grazing permits;
(5) Requirements related to structural and nonstructural range
improvements; and
(6) Standards for cooperative management.
Sec. 222.2 Definitions.
The special terms used in this subpart are defined as follows:
Affiliate(s) means a business concern(s) or individual(s) that is
sufficiently closely related to a permittee through personal,
professional, or other ties that it either controls, has the power to
control, or can influence business decisions made by the permittee
concerning authorized grazing use on National Forest System lands or
other lands under Forest Service control.
Allotment is a delineated area of land available for livestock
grazing.
Allotment management plan is a document that specifies the actions
to be taken to manage and protect the rangeland resources and reach a
given set of objectives.
Authorized officer is a Forest Service line officer who has been
delegated the authority to take certain actions related to rangeland
management on National Forest System lands and other lands under Forest
Service control.
Base property is land and improvements owned and used by a grazing
permittee for a farm or ranch operation and specifically identified by
a permittee, in order to qualify for a term grazing permit.
Escrow waiver is a document by which a permittee, who has mortgaged
permitted livestock or base property, waives all privileges associated
with a grazing permit, except the privilege of continuing to graze
livestock, to the United States to be held in escrow for the lender.
Grazing permit is a document authorizing livestock use of National
Forest System lands or other lands under Forest Service control.
Livestock means foraging animals kept or raised for livestock
production, pleasure, or other use.
National Forest System lands means the National Forests, National
Grasslands, Land Utilization Projects, and other lands, waters, or
interests therein administered by the Forest Service or designated for
administration through the Forest Service as a part of the System (16
U.S.C. 1609).
National Forest System lands in the Eastern States refers to all
National Forest System Lands in the Eastern and Southern administrative
regions of the Forest Service (36 CFR 200.2), except the National
Grasslands in Texas and Oklahoma.
National Forest System lands in the Western States refers to all
National Forest System lands in the states of Arizona, California,
Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota,
Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming but only to the
National Grasslands in the states of Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas. This
term does not include national forests in the states of Oklahoma and
Texas.
NEPA procedures are the requirements of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, (42 U.S.C. 4321 et. seq.) regulations at 40 CFR
parts 1500 through 1508, and Forest Service policies and procedures in
the Forest Service Manual Chapter 1950 and Forest Service Handbook
1909.15.
Other lands under Forest Service control are non-federal lands over
which the Forest Service has been given control through lease,
agreement, or other means.
Permittee is any individual or entity who has been issued a grazing
permit.
Permitted livestock means livestock being grazed under a permit or
those that were grazed under a permit during the preceding season,
including offspring retained for herd replacement.
Range Betterment Fund is the fund established by section 401(b)(1)
of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1751)
which is used for on-the-ground range rehabilitation, protection, and
improvement projects.
Rangeland improvement is any permanent or temporary structure or
any nonstructural land treatment designed to protect, improve or make
use of rangeland ecosystems.
Rangelands are a kind of land on which the native vegetation,
climax or natural potential, is predominantly grasses, grass-like
plants, forbs or shrubs. Rangelands include lands revegetated naturally
or artificially to provide a plant cover which is managed like native
vegetation. Rangelands include natural grasslands, savannas,
shrublands, most deserts, tundra, alpine communities, coastal marshes,
and wet meadows. When used in this rule, the term also includes other
National Forest System lands (including forested lands, woodlands, and
riparian areas) on which grazing by wild and domestic herbivores may
occur.
16 Contiguous Western States refers to the states of Arizona,
California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington,
and Wyoming.
Transportation livestock means livestock used as pack and saddle
stock for travel on National Forest System lands and other lands under
Forest Service control.
Unauthorized use means livestock use on National Forest System
lands or other lands under Forest Service control that is not
authorized by a grazing permit, or an amendment or modification
thereto.
Sec. 222.3 Framework for rangeland planning and decisions.
(a) Forest plan direction. Planning for management of rangelands is
accomplished through the land and resource management planning process
set out in 36 CFR part 219. Forest plans establish programmatic
direction including goals, objectives, standards, and guidelines for
rangeland management and identify National Forest System lands suitable
for livestock grazing. A suitability determination is not a decision to
authorize grazing.
(b) Rangeland project decisions. Except as otherwise provided in
this section, a rangeland project decision is required when site-
specific activities designed to accomplish a specific, on-the-ground
purpose or result are proposed which implements the programmatic
management direction in the forest plan.
(1) Examples of rangeland project decisions include, but are not
limited to, the following:
(i) Maintenance or modification of specific plant communities or
riparian, aquatic, soil, or other resource conditions needed to promote
the achievement of goals and objectives of the forest plan.
(ii) Rangeland improvements needed to promote the achievement of
goals and objectives of the forest plan.
(iii) Authorization of livestock grazing where grazing is suitable
and appropriate. A rangeland project decision authorizing livestock
grazing must specify the maximum permissible amount of grazing use, the
timing and duration of such use, and other appropriate livestock
management requirements or measures needed to promote the achievement
of goals and objectives of the forest plan.
(2) Rangeland project decisions must be consistent with applicable
forest plan standards and guidelines.
(3) Rangeland project decisions are decision points subject to NEPA
procedures. Where a rangeland project decision authorizes livestock
grazing, timely issuance of the grazing permit based on the rangeland
project decision is an administrative act and not a separate decision.
(c) Transitional procedures for authorizing grazing use. In the
absence of a rangeland project decision that addresses livestock
grazing use, the authorized officer may issue a grazing permit in
accordance with the following transitional procedures:
(1) The authorized officer may issue a new term permit for up to
ten years where there is a current allotment management plan adopted
prior to [180 days from date of publication of the final rule] and the
analysis and disclosure of environmental effects are still current.
(2) On those allotments for which there is no current allotment
management plan but which are meeting, or moving toward achievement of,
forest plan goals and objectives, the authorized officer may issue a
new term permit for up to ten years based on the forest plan, provided
that the plan contains applicable standards and guidelines that can be
incorporated as terms and conditions of the permit and that the
environmental effects of applying the standards and guidelines on the
land are analyzed and disclosed pursuant to NEPA procedures.
(3) On those allotments for which there is no allotment management
plan or current NEPA disclosure and the allotments are meeting, or
moving toward achievement of, forest plan goals and objectives, but the
forest plan does not contain applicable standards and guidelines that
can be incorporated into the permit, the authorized officer shall issue
a term permit not exceeding three years in duration to authorize the
continuation of grazing. This interim period will permit the agency to
gather information and conduct necessary analysis to determine if
grazing should be authorized or a different permit term should be
established. In such cases, the environmental effects of continuing
grazing under a 1-3 year term permit must be analyzed and disclosed
pursuant to NEPA procedures prior to issuance of the permit.
(4) On those allotments for which there is no allotment management
plan or current NEPA disclosure, and the allotments are not meeting or
moving toward achievement of forest plan goals and objectives, the
authorized officer may not issue a term permit of more than three years
in duration until a rangeland project decision and disclosure of
environmental effects is accomplished. In the interim, the authorized
officer may issue a term permit of up to three years in duration
provided that the terms and conditions of the permit include existing
or amended forest plan standards and guidelines or other measures
necessary to move management of the allotment toward achievement of
forest plan goals and objectives. In such case, the environmental
effects of continuing grazing under the 1-3 year term permit must be
analyzed and disclosed pursuant to NEPA procedures prior to issuance of
the permit.
(5) Where authorization of livestock grazing is made pursuant to
paragraphs (c) (1), (2), (3), and (4) of this section, the authorized
officer shall develop and maintain a schedule for completing rangeland
project decisions and site specific disclosure of environmental effects
on affected allotments pursuant to NEPA procedures. The authorized
officer shall develop this schedule in consultation with the grazing
permittees and other interested parties. Priority for scheduling the
completion of rangeland project decisions shall be given to those areas
with significant resource concerns such as protection of threatened and
endangered species, riparian and aquatic habitats, and water quality.
(6) Where grazing permits are issued under the transitional
procedures of paragraphs (c) (1), (2), (3), and (4) of this section,
the timely issuance of a grazing permit is an administrative act and
not a separate decision.
(7) This subpart does not compel immediate initiation of rangeland
project decisions to issue or renew grazing permits.
(d) Delineation of allotments. Where lands are suitable for grazing
and livestock grazing is to be authorized, the authorized officer shall
delineate allotments consistent with the forest plan and applicable
rangeland project decisions. When approved by the affected landowner,
lessee, or cooperating agency, allotments may include associated
private and other public lands in order to form logical range
management units for effective coordinated resource management.
(1) Maps delineating allotments shall be on file at the office of
the District Ranger.
(2) The delineation of allotments is an administrative act and not
a decision subject to further NEPA analysis or disclosure of
environmental effects.
Grazing Permits
Sec. 222.4 General provisions applicable to all grazing permits.
(a) Grazing authorization required. All livestock grazing use of
National Forest System lands and other lands under Forest Service
control requires prior written authorization through a grazing permit
issued by an authorized officer, except for certain temporary grazing
as provided for in Sec. 222.6(c).
(b) Nature of grazing permit. A grazing permit is a privilege
authorizing the holder to use National Forest System lands or other
lands under Forest Service control subject to the terms and conditions
contained therein. Grazing permits do not convey any right, title, or
interest in United States lands, resources, or permanent range
improvements to the permittee.
(c) NEPA compliance. Issuance of a permit implements a previous
decision to authorize grazing and is not a decision point subject to
NEPA procedures as provided for in Sec. 222.3(b)(3).
(d) Terms and conditions. The authorized officer shall prescribe
the terms and conditions of each grazing permit in accordance with
applicable statutes, regulations, and direction issued through the
Forest Service Directive System (36 CFR 200.4).
(1) The authorized officer shall include as terms and conditions of
the grazing permit those applicable standards and guidelines in the
forest plan and rangeland project decision.
(2) A permittee may be required, as a condition of permit issuance,
to collect and submit to the Forest Service monitoring, inventory, or
other resource information related to the permitted livestock grazing
activity.
(e) Operating instructions. In addition to the terms and conditions
of a permit, the authorized officer may issue written operating
instructions to the permittee(s) to make annual, seasonal, or other
temporary adjustments in the amount or duration of livestock grazing
use authorized by a grazing permit. The authorized officer may also
issue written instructions that temporarily adjust or tailor terms and
conditions as necessary for proper management of the rangelands. As
long as the operating instructions fall within the scope of the
decision authorizing the grazing use and the NEPA documentation
associated with that decision, this does not require a new decision and
additional environmental analysis.
Sec. 222.5 Term grazing permits; types and duration.
(a) Types of term permits. The following types of grazing permits
may be issued to applicants that meet the relevant requirements of
Sec. 222.7 for a term of up to 10 years with priority for renewal, as
described in Sec. 222.9.
(1) A term grazing permit may be issued to qualified applicants,
including grazing associations and districts, to graze livestock on
National Forest System lands or other lands under Forest Service
control. On all National Forest System lands in the Eastern States,
except the National Grasslands in Texas and Oklahoma, permits for new
allotments or permits that are vacated or terminated are issued under
the competitive provision of Sec. 222.54.
(2) A term private land grazing permit may be issued to a qualified
applicant who owns or controls land in an allotment under Forest
Service control. To receive this permit, the applicant must waive
exclusive grazing use of the private land involved to the United States
for the full period the permit is to be issued. In return, the
applicant is authorized to graze livestock within the allotment
associated with the waived private land.
(3) A term grazing permit with provisions for grazing on and off
National Forest System lands and other lands under Forest Service
control may be issued to a qualified applicant when a logical grazing
area contains both lands under Forest Service administration and lands
controlled by the applicant.
(4) A grazing agreement may be issued to eligible grazing
associations or districts, to graze livestock on National Forest System
lands and other lands under Forest Service control. Under such grazing
agreements, grazing associations or districts may be authorized to
issue and administer grazing permits subject to rules, policies, and
procedures agreed to by the authorized officer.
(b) Duration of term grazing permits. The maximum length of a term
grazing permit is 10 years.
(1) On National Forest lands in the 16 contiguous Western States,
the authorized officer shall issue permits for the full 10-year period,
unless one of the following situations exist:
(i) The land is pending disposal;
(ii) The land will be devoted to non-grazing uses prior to the end
of 10 years; or
(iii) It will be in the best interest of sound land management to
specify a shorter term.
(2) On all other National Forest System lands or other lands under
Forest Service control, the authorized officer may issue permits for up
to a ten year period, as determined to be in the best interest of sound
land management.
Sec. 222.6 Authorization of temporary grazing.
Provided that the necessary forage is available, applicants meeting
the relevant requirements of Sec. 222.7 may receive authorization to
graze livestock for a term of up to three years, with no priority for
renewal. Grazing fees for authorized temporary livestock grazing shall
be assessed in accordance with Sec. 222.11 and Subpart C--Grazing Fees
of this part, unless free permits as expressly provided for in this
section.
(a) Paid temporary permits. Temporary permits for a fee are
appropriate in the following circumstances:
(1) Where a new permittee assumes previously authorized grazing use
which has been suspended or cancelled.
(2) Where there has been unusually favorable climatic conditions.
(3) Where a permittee has exercised the nonuse provision of a term
permit.
(4) Where the base property has been sold; the term permit waived;
a new term permit issued; the new permittee does not want to graze
livestock that season; and the most recent former permittee desires to
graze livestock for the remainder of the permitted grazing season.
(5) Where fire, drought, pestilence or other natural phenomenon has
reduced livestock grazing capacity on other National Forest System
lands or other lands under Forest Service control.
(6) Where transportation livestock are engaged in commercial
packing, dude ranching, or other commercial enterprises, such as
mining, ranching, and logging activities.
(7) Where animals are being used to breed permitted livestock.
(8) Where livestock are trailing across National Forest System
lands and other lands under Forest Service control.
(b) Free or paid temporary permits: The authorized officer has
discretion to issue temporary permits for a fee or free of charge where
the primary objective for grazing use is managing vegetation, rather
than utilizing forage.
(c) Free grazing with no written permit. Grazing may be authorized
free of charge and without a written permit in the following
circumstances:
(1) Where livestock are being used by campers and travelers during
the period of occupancy.
(2) Where horses, mules, or burros are being used in support of
research, administration, or other approved work being conducted on
National Forest System lands and other lands under Forest Service
control.
(3) Where horses, mules, or burros are being used occasionally to
assist a permittee in managing the permitted livestock during the
grazing season.
Sec. 222.7 Requirements applicable to grazing permits.
(a) Requirements applicable to all Forest Service livestock grazing
permits. (1) Grazing permits may be issued only to private individuals,
grazing associations and districts, business concerns, or tribal
governments. Federal, State, and local governments, or units thereof,
are not eligible to receive or hold grazing permits.
(2) Applicants for a grazing permit must file a written application
to the District Ranger responsible for the administration of the lands
to be grazed.
(3) An applicant or permittee(s), and affiliate(s), if any, with a
history of prior grazing use on federal lands, must show a satisfactory
record of performance under previous or currently held federal grazing
permits. Applicants, permittees, or affiliates, who have had Forest
Service grazing permits cancelled, in whole, pursuant to Sec. 222.10(b)
(2), (3), (4), or (5), or other federal grazing permits or leases
cancelled within 36 months prior to application are presumed to have an
unsatisfactory performance record.
(b) Additional requirements applicable to term permits:
(1) Term permits may be issued to the following:
(i) A citizen of the United States;
(ii) An alien who has filed a petition for naturalization;
(iii) A corporation or other business concern, including but not
limited to grazing associations and districts, that is authorized to do
business in the State where the grazing activity is to be conducted
regardless of the ownership of the company or the company's stock; or
(iv) Tribal governments.
(2) An applicant or permittee must own the livestock to be grazed
under permit and such base property as required by the Forest Service,
except that:
(i) Livestock owned by children of permittees may be run under
their parent's term grazing permit for up to 50 percent of the
permitted numbers when the children are establishing a livestock herd
with the intent of acquiring the family ranch operation or when
children own livestock as part of a youth agricultural program or
project.
(ii) Members of a grazing association or a grazing district, as
opposed to the association or district itself, must meet base property
and livestock ownership requirements as specified in the term permit
issued to that association or district.
(iii) Applicants for or holders of term private land grazing
permits are not required to own base property or the livestock
authorized by the grazing permit.
(iv) Applicants for or holders of term permits for developing
ranges on National Forest System lands in the Eastern States are not
required to own livestock or base property to obtain the initial
grazing permit. However, when applying for permit renewal, the
permittee must meet the livestock and base property ownership
requirements.
(v) If a term grazing permittee disposes or loses control of all or
part of the base property but does not waive the permit to the United
States in favor of the new owner, the permittee has one year from the
date of sale or loss of control to meet base property requirements. If
the permittee does not meet base property requirements within that time
period, the permittee is no longer qualified to hold a term grazing
permit, and the authorized officer shall promptly cancel the permit.
(3) An authorized officer may prescribe other requirements for term
grazing permits including, but not limited to, the following:
(i) Conditions for and length of time that non-use may be allowed;
and
(ii) Upper limits on the total number of permitted livestock and
any exceptions to upper limits.
Sec. 222.8 Waivers and escrow waivers.
(a) Waiver of term permits. Holders of term grazing permits may
waive their permits to the United States in favor of another entity and
the waiver may be confirmed by an authorized officer as follows:
(1) A holder of a term grazing permit for National Forest System
lands in the Western States may waive a permit to the United States in
favor of an applicant who has purchased the permitted livestock or base
property if there is no escrow waiver in effect for that portion of the
permit. An authorized officer may confirm the waiver and issue a new
term grazing permit if the purchaser meets the requirements of
Sec. 222.7.
(2) On National Forest System lands in the Eastern States, a holder
of a term grazing permit issued under the noncompetitive procedures of
Sec. 222.53 may waive the permit to the United States in favor of a
spouse or child who acquires title to base property or permitted
livestock. An authorized officer may confirm the waiver and issue a new
term grazing permit if the spouse or child meets the applicable
requirements of Sec. 222.7.
(3) A holder of a term grazing permit issued under the competitive
bidding procedure in Subpart C-Grazing Fees of this part, may not waive
the permit to the United States in favor of another entity.
(b) Escrow waivers. Authorized officers may accept an escrow waiver
executed by the holder of a term grazing permit for National Forest
System lands in the Western States. The lender in whose name the United
States holds the grazing privileges in escrow shall receive copies of
all correspondence by the Forest Service related to actions under
Sec. 222.10 of this subpart to cancel, suspend, or modify the grazing
permit that is the subject of the escrow waiver. The authorized officer
may release an escrow waiver only upon the satisfaction of the mortgage
or upon the lender's written notification to the Forest Service that it
does not require such an arrangement to adequately protect its
interest. Authorized officers may issue term grazing permits to the
lender named on the escrow waiver, if the lender has acquired the
mortgaged base property or livestock and otherwise meets the
requirements of Sec. 222.7.
Sec. 222.9 Renewal of term grazing permits.
(a) To qualify for renewal of a term permit, current permit holders
must meet the requirements of Sec. 222.7.
(b) Current permit holders on National Forest System lands in the
Western States have priority for receiving a new term grazing permit
when the current term grazing permit expires.
(c) If the agency must cancel an existing permit and issue a new
permit to respond to changing law, executive order, regulation, or
resource condition, the new permit shall be issued to the current
permit holder.
(d) Procedures for renewal of term grazing permits for National
Forest System Lands in the Eastern States are set forth in subpart C of
this part.
(e) The duration of a term grazing permit renewed under this
section is determined in accordance with Sec. 222.5(b).
Sec. 222.10 Cancellation, suspension, and modification of grazing
permits.
(a) An authorized officer may cancel grazing permits, in whole or
in part, under the following circumstances:
(1) If the lands grazed under the permit are to be disposed of or
devoted to another public purpose. In these cases, except in an
emergency, the authorized officer must give the permittee two-years
advance notice of the intent to cancel.
(2) If a permittee does one or more of the following:
(i) Fails to meet the requirements in Sec. 222.7.
(ii) Waives the permit to the United States.
(iii) Fails to resume livestock grazing after exhausting the
maximum permitted time for nonuse.
(3) If a grazing association or district fails to comply with Title
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and regulations promulgated
thereunder (7 CFR part 15).
(4) If it is necessary to update the grazing permit terms and
conditions. In this case, issuance of a new permit is preceded by a
rangeland project decision and NEPA disclosure and the duration of the
permit is determined in accordance with Sec. 222.5(b).
(b) An authorized officer may cancel, suspend, or modify a permit,
in whole or in part, to correct documented resource damage, or if a
permittee:
(1) Fails to pay grazing fees, service charges or unauthorized use
charges within the established time limit;
(2) Fails to comply with terms and conditions in the grazing
permit;
(3) Is responsible for unauthorized livestock use;
(4) Intentionally misrepresents a material fact to an authorized
officer on an application for a grazing permit or during the permit
term by making a false statement or by failing to disclose relevant
information; or
(5) Is convicted for violation of Federal laws or regulations or
State laws concerning animal control, protection of air, water, soil,
vegetation, fish, wildlife, or other environmental values related to
the grazing use authorized by the permit.
(c) An authorized officer may suspend or modify a permit, in whole
or in part, for the following purposes:
(1) To conform with changes in statute, court order, regulation,
Executive order, forest plans, rangeland project decisions, or other
management needs.
(2) To respond to a permittee(s) request, provided that the
requested modification is consistent with the forest plan and
applicable rangeland project decisions.
(3) To alter the amount of grazing permitted, the time or duration
of grazing use, or the allotment(s) to be used because of resource
condition(s). The authorized officer shall give a permittee one year's
notice, expect in an emergency or when agreed to by the permittee.
(d) When an authorized officer believes that cancellation,
suspension, or modification of a permit may be warranted, the officer
shall notify the permittee in writing that such action is being
considered. The permittee shall be accorded a reasonable opportunity to
respond, not to exceed 30 days. The officer shall consider any response
submitted by or on behalf of the permittee. If the authorized officer
decides that the permit action is appropriate, the decision becomes
effective on the date the decision is issued, unless specified
otherwise in the written decision.
Sec. 222.11 Grazing permit fees and other charges.
Authorized officers shall establish grazing fees and charges for
livestock grazing use in accordance with this section and the rules in
subpart C--Grazing Fees of this part.
(a) An authorized officer may assess a service charge for
processing the following actions related to a grazing permit:
(1) Actions initiated by a permittee or applicant;
(2) Actions arising under Sec. 222.10; or
(3) Actions related to willful unauthorized use.
(b) Unauthorized use is a violation of the terms and conditions of
the grazing permit. Except as otherwise provided in this section, the
authorized officer shall charge permittees and other livestock owners
for any unauthorized use. Charges for unauthorized use are in addition
to grazing fees assessed for authorized grazing use as prescribed in
subpart C of this part.
(c) The authorized officer shall determine whether unauthorized use
is willful or nonwillful. If willful, the authorized officer shall
check agency records and check with other federal agencies to determine
whether the permittee, applicant, or affiliate (if any) has been
responsible for other incidents of willful unauthorized grazing use in
the 36 months preceding the subject incident and, therefore, is subject
to the higher rate charge of paragraph (d)(3) of this section.
(d) The basic charge for unauthorized use will be the average
monthly animal unit month (AUM) grazing fee rate for the 17 Western
States published annually by the National Agricultural Statistical
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Charges for unauthorized use
are as follows:
(1) Nonwillful unauthorized use. Livestock owners responsible for
nonwillful unauthorized use shall be charged the unauthorized use rate
unless the authorized officer waives the charge. The charge for
nonwillful unauthorized use may be waived if the authorized officer
finds that all of the following apply;
(i) The unauthorized use was not due to the negligence of the
livestock operator;
(ii) Forage consumed by the unauthorized livestock was
insignificant;
(iii) There has been no damage to the land, resources or
improvements resulting from the unauthorized use; and
(iv) The waiver is in the best interest of the United States.
(2) Willful unauthorized use. Except as provided in paragraph
(d)(3) of this section, livestock owners responsible for willful
unauthorized use shall be charged two times the unauthorized use rate,
and they also shall be charged for all resource and property damage
resulting from the unauthorized use and for all reasonable expenses
incurred by the United States in detecting, investigating, and
resolving such unauthorized use.
(3) Repeated willful unauthorized use. Livestock owners responsible
for repeated willful unauthorized use shall be charged three times the
unauthorized use rate, and they also shall be charged for all resource
and property damage resulting from the unauthorized use and all
reasonable expenses incurred by the United States in detecting,
investigating, and resolving such unauthorized use.
Sec. 222.12 Information collection requirements.
(a) This subpart contains information requirements as defined by
the Paperwork Reduction Act and implementing regulations at 5 CFR part
1320, which, along with the forms listed in this section, have been
assigned OMB Control Number 0596-0003.
(b) Applicants or permittees must submit such information as may be
reasonably necessary for the authorized officer to determine whether
all applicable requirements under this subpart are satisfied.
(1) A person or entity desiring a grazing permit must submit an
application (Sec. 222.7), using one of the following forms:
(i) FS-2200-2, Application for Temporary Grazing Permit-Part 1.
(ii) FS-2200-16, Application for Term Grazing Permit.
(iii) FS-2200-17, Application for Term Private Land Grazing Permit.
(2) A permittee desiring a refund, credit, or transfer of grazing
fees (Sec. 222.11) must complete Form FS-2200-1, Refund, Credit, or
Transfer Application.
(3) A permittee desiring to waive a term permit to the Forest
Service (Sec. 222.8) should complete Form FS-2200-12, Waiver of Term
Grazing Permit.
(4) A permittee desiring to have the Forest Service hold a term
grazing permit in escrow in favor of a lender (Sec. 222.8) must
complete Form FS-2200-13, Escrow Waiver of Term Grazing Permit
Privileges.
Rangeland Improvements
Sec. 222.13 Improvements.
(a) An authorized officer may authorize permittees, individuals,
organizations, or other federal, State, and local agencies to perform
rangeland improvement work (Sec. 222.2) consistent with the forest plan
and with applicable rangeland project decisions.
(1) An authorized officer may require as a term or condition of the
permit that the permittee maintain rangeland improvements to specified
standards.
(2) The cost of rangeland improvement work may be borne in whole or
in part by the Forest Service.
(b) The installation, construction, and/or maintenance of rangeland
improvements are subject to the following conditions:
(1) All new or replacement rangeland improvements to be constructed
or accomplished by permittees must be expressly authorized by the
grazing permit.
(2) Subject to valid existing rights, title to permanent structural
rangeland improvements is held by the United States. Title to temporary
structural rangeland improvements may be held by the party which
performs the rangeland improvement work, if no part of the cost of that
work is borne by the United States.
(3) When rangeland improvement work is performed by a party other
than the Forest Service, that party does not obtain an exclusive right
to use the improvement or the land influenced by the improvement.
(c) Rangeland improvements on National Forest land in the 16
contiguous Western States may be funded by the Range Betterment Fund.
(d) Grazing fee credits or adjustments for rangeland improvement
work are subject to the following:
(1) Grazing fee credits for rangeland improvements may be granted
to permittees on National Forest System lands in the Eastern States
pursuant to Secs. 222.53 and 222.54.
(2) The annual grazing fee on National Grasslands or Land
Utilization Projects may be adjusted to reflect the cost to a grazing
permittee of complying with conservation practices required by a term
grazing permit, provided that such cost has not already been used in
establishing the grazing base value.
(3) Except as provided in paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of this
section, authorized officers shall not adjust grazing fees charged in
exchange for rangeland improvement work performed on all other National
Forest System lands.
Sec. 222.14 Compensation for permittees' interest in rangeland
improvements.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whenever a term
grazing permit in the 16 contiguous Western States is cancelled, in
whole or in part, to dispose of the land or to devote it to another
public purpose, the current permittee shall receive reasonable
compensation for investments in authorized permanent structural
rangeland improvements on the land affected by the permit concellation.
Compensation may not exceed the fair market value of the terminated
portion of the permittee's interest in the improvement.
(b) A permittee who waived a grazing permit to the United States
prior to the notice of cancellation, in accordance with
Sec. 222.8(a)(1), shall not receive any compensation under this
section.
(c) If a term grazing permit expires and the permittee fails to
renew it in accordance with Sec. 222.9, no compensation will be granted
for rangeland improvements to the former holder of the expired permit.
Cooperation
Sec. 222.15 Recognition and cooperation with local livestock or
grazing associations and districts.
(a) An authorized officer may recognize a local livestock or
grazing association or district for the purpose of issuing a term
permit if the following requirements are met:
(1) A majority of the grazing permittees on the allotments
designated in the term permit to be issued are members of the
association or district.
(2) The activities of the association or district are governed by a
constitution and bylaws which include a provision for members to
address their grievances to the association or district in accordance
with the term permit and the governing constitution and bylaws of the
organization and which are approved by the authorized officer.
(3) The officers of the association or district are elected by a
majority of the association or district members or by a quorum as
specified in the organization's constitution and bylaws.
(4) The officers, other than secretary and treasurer, are grazing
permittees on the allotments involved.
(b) Once an association or district is recognized and a term permit
issued, the Forest Service may cooperate with the association or
district under the terms and conditions of the permit in the management
of rangeland resources and livestock on the land covered by the term
permit issued to the association, provided that the association
provides the means for their members to:
(1) Manage their permitted livestock and the range resources
cooperatively;
(2) Share costs for handling of livestock, construction, and
maintenance of range improvements or other projects deemed necessary
for proper management of the permitted livestock and range resources;
(3) Meet with Forest officers to discuss and formulate programs for
management of their livestock and the rangeland resources;
(4) Communicate proposals, issues, or concerns to Forest Service
officials; and
(5) Formulate special association rules as needed to ensure proper
resource management.
(c) An authorized officer may withdraw recognition and subsequently
cancel the grazing permit of a grazing association or district at the
request of the majority of the members, when the association or
district is inactive and does not hold an annual or a special meeting
during a 12-month period, or when the association or district fails to
comply with the provisions of paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this
section.
Sec. 222.16 Cooperation with national, state, and county livestock
organizations and others.
(a) Forest Service officials shall endeavor to establish and
maintain cooperative working relationships with national livestock
organizations who have an interest in the administration of National
Forest System lands and other lands under Forest Service control and to
work cooperatively with state and county livestock organizations having
similar interests.
(b) Insofar as the programs and responsibilities of other agencies
and units of government involve grazing upon National Forest System
lands and other lands under Forest Service control or the livestock
which graze thereupon, the Forest Service may, subject to the
availability of appropriated funds, cooperate with:
(1) State, county, and federal agencies in the application and
enforcement of all laws and regulations relating to livestock diseases,
sanitation, and noxious weeds;
(2) County or other local weed control districts in analyzing
noxious weed problems and developing integrated weed management
strategies for areas which may include National Forest System lands and
other lands under Forest Service control;
(3) The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and other
Federal or State agencies and institutions in surveillance of pesticide
application programs and animal damage management; and
(4) State cattle and sheep sanitary or brand boards in control of
estray and unbranded livestock, to the extent such cooperation does not
conflict with the Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act of December 15,
1971.
(c) Forest Service officials also shall endeavor to cooperate with
other agencies, institutions, organizations, and individuals having an
interest in the protection and management of the range resource on
public or private lands.
(d) Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.),
and the implementing regulation at 41 CFR part 101-6, subpart 101-6.10,
and the Food and Agriculture Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2281, et seq.), the
Secretary may establish advisory boards to advise the Forest Service on
range resource management concerns. The membership of such boards shall
be appointed to reflect a variety of points of view about resource
management and a range of resource interests.
Dated: April 20, 1994.
James R. Lyons,
Assistant Secretary, Natural Resources and Environment.
Note: This appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal
Regulations.
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
Appendix to Preamble of Proposed Rule
TP28AP94.001
[FR Doc. 94-10031 Filed 4-26-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-C
