Overview
Title
To amend the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 to improve the management of grazing permits and leases, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
S. 1553 is a plan to change how people use land for cattle and sheep to make it easier when there's a problem like a fire or no rain. It also wants to spend money to make the land better and let people use it for longer, but there need to be clear rules about how this is done to be fair.
Summary AI
S. 1553 seeks to amend the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 to enhance the management of grazing permits and leases on public lands. It proposes allowing temporary use of vacant grazing allotments during extreme natural events, such as wildfires or droughts, to help permit holders maintain their livestock. Additionally, the bill outlines financial provisions for investing in and improving public rangelands and suggests extending the renewal term of grazing permits from 10 to up to 20 years. The bill also addresses procedural guidelines for environmental reviews during permit renewals and responses to unforeseen natural events.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The proposed Resiliency for Ranching and Natural Conservation Health Act (S. 1553) aims to amend existing federal law to address challenges faced by grazing permit holders during extreme natural events and disasters. Introduced in the Senate, this bill specifically seeks to improve the management of grazing permits and leases while also enhancing public land resiliency and conservation efforts. The bill outlines provisions for the temporary use of vacant grazing allotments, creation and use of public rangeland resiliency funds, and extension of the duration of grazing permits or leases.
General Summary of the Bill
The bill includes several key components:
Temporary Use of Vacant Grazing Allotments: Allows permit holders to temporarily use vacant grazing allotments when usual pastures are unusable due to natural events like wildfires or droughts. It demands coordination between agriculture and interior secretaries to set terms based on ecological conditions and to establish implementation guidelines for smooth operation.
Public Rangeland Resiliency Funds: Establishes a fund supporting rangeland improvements and public access initiatives. It sets financial provisions to facilitate maintaining healthy rangelands and enhancing recreational access to public lands, with funds allocated towards specific improvement projects and land access agreements.
Renewal Term of Grazing Permits: Extends the maximum term for grazing permits and leases from 10 years to 20 years, reflecting a shift in the management timeline for these permits and potentially impacting the stability and strategy for ranchers.
Simplified NEPA Review: Introduces a presumption favoring the use of categorical exclusions under environmental law (NEPA) to expedite the renewal of permits and use of grazing allotments during emergencies, given specific conditions meet similarity to existing terms.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several issues have been identified with the bill:
Ambiguity in Definitions: Terms such as “extreme natural events and disasters” and “maximum extent practicable” lack precise definitions, potentially leading to varied interpretations and inconsistent applications.
Coordination Challenges: The requirement for coordination between various government secretaries could introduce bureaucratic inefficiencies without clear procedures, potentially delaying urgent needs for temporary grazing solutions.
Prioritization and Fairness: The absence of explicit prioritization criteria for distributing vacant allotments among multiple permit holders and the vaguely defined term "willing landowner" might lead to disputes and perceived favoritism.
Investment Oversight: Provisions for fund management and investment decisions lack clear oversight parameters, raising concerns about potential mismanagement without adequate financial controls.
Impact on the Public and Stakeholders
Broad Public Impacts:
The bill could lead to more efficient and rapid responses to natural disasters affecting grazing lands, thereby supporting food security and stabilizing ranch economies. However, the ambiguity surrounding its terms might result in inconsistent applications, potentially affecting environmental conservation efforts negatively.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders:
Ranchers and Permit Holders: This group might benefit from increased flexibility and extended permit terms, offering stability and reduced administrative burdens. However, unclear prioritization and guidelines could lead to uncertainties and disputes.
Environmental Groups: Concerns may arise about the relaxed environmental reviews and the potential impact on ecosystems due to extended or expanded grazing periods under temporary measures. There could be pushback against perceived insufficient attention to ecological impacts.
Government Agencies: The requirement for improved inter-agency coordination and fund management could strain capacities and highlight the need for more structured approaches.
Overall, while the bill aims to enhance rangeland management and resiliency, further clarifications and more robust procedural guidelines could lead to more transparent and effective implementation, minimizing potential drawbacks.
Financial Assessment
The bill, S. 1553, primarily addresses modifications to the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, focusing on enhancing the management of grazing permits. The bill includes several financial provisions and references that are particularly noteworthy.
Financial Allocations and Investments
A significant aspect of the bill is the provision for investment of funds by the Secretary of the Treasury. The bill permits the Secretary to invest portions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund to generate up to $15,000,000 annually in investment income. This investment income is intended to support rangeland improvement projects and public access agreements. Such financial strategies are aimed at enhancing the resiliency and health of public rangelands.
Use of Funds for Rangeland Improvements
The bill specifies that $10,000,000 is allocated annually for various rangeland improvement projects. These projects include activities such as seeding, fence construction, and invasive weed control, which are vital for maintaining and improving rangeland conditions. In addition, $5,000,000 each year is reserved to enhance public access to certain lands, which includes creating agreements for access through private lands necessary to reach public or National Forest lands.
Relation to Identified Issues
One of the issues highlighted in the bill is the lack of detailed parameters for oversight on how funds, particularly those generated from investments and allocated for rangeland improvement, will be controlled and used. The bill's broad provisions may lead to discretionary use of funds without sufficient checks and balances. This raises concerns about the fair and effective distribution and application of these financial resources.
Additionally, the ambiguous term "willing landowner" in the context of public access agreements may complicate how agreements are negotiated and executed, potentially affecting the financial fairness and transparency of transactions involving reimbursements or lack thereof to landowners.
Transparency and Accountability
Given the scale of financial allocations involved, the bill would benefit from more specific guidelines on how funds should be managed and tracked to ensure transparency and accountability. This could include clearer criteria for project selection, spending efficiency, and periodic audits to verify that funds are being used as intended to benefit public lands and their ecosystems.
In summary, while the bill provides substantial financial resources for improving public rangelands and expanding access, the absence of detailed oversight mechanisms may lead to challenges in ensuring that these funds are used efficiently and equitably. Addressing these weaknesses could help in achieving the bill's objectives more effectively, aligning financial allocations more closely with intended outcomes.
Issues
The definition of 'extreme natural events and disasters' is broad and might lead to different interpretations, including terms like 'resource conditions from unforeseen natural events' that are not clearly defined, potentially leading to legal ambiguities and inconsistent applications. This is relevant to Sections 2 and 405.
The phrase 'maximum extent practicable' in Sections 2 and 405 is subjective and could lead to inconsistent application or interpretation, affecting how grazing allotments are managed in practice.
There are no clear guidelines on how to prioritize among multiple holders of grazing permits or leases vying for temporary use of the same vacant grazing allotment, potentially leading to disputes and perceived favoritism. Relevant to Sections 2 and 405.
The lack of specific criteria for 'minor adjustments' and 'localized resource conditions' in Section 5 may result in inconsistent application and decision-making, which could have significant environmental impacts.
The proposed changes in Section 4 allowing extensions of grazing permits or leases from up to 10 years to up to 20 years lack specific justification, raising concerns about the potential impacts and reasons for such a change.
The coordination required between Secretaries as outlined in Sections 2 and 405 demands inter-agency operation, which can be challenging and prone to inefficiency without specified procedures, possibly leading to bureaucratic delays and inefficiencies.
The term 'willing landowner' in Section 3 is ambiguous and lacks clarity on how willingness is determined, potentially affecting the fairness and transparency of public access agreements.
The investment provisions and use of funds in Section 3 lack detailed parameters for oversight, leading to potential discretionary use of public rangeland resiliency funds without adequate control.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The “Resiliency for Ranching and Natural Conservation Health Act” is the short title of this legislative bill.
2. Temporary use of vacant grazing allotments for holders of grazing permits or leases during extreme natural events and disasters Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The new bill section added to the Federal Land Policy and Management Act allows the temporary use of vacant grazing allotments for those with grazing permits if their usual land is unusable due to unforeseen natural disasters, such as wildfires or droughts. The bill requires the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior to coordinate these efforts, establish terms based on local ecological conditions, and create guidelines to ensure the process is efficient. The temporary use can't exceed three grazing seasons and won't affect the original grazing terms or future authorization for permit holders.
405. Vacant grazing allotments made available to holders of grazing permits or leases during extreme natural events and disasters Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines rules for allowing temporary use of vacant grazing allotments to those who hold permits or leases for grazing land that has become unusable due to unexpected natural events like wildfires or droughts. It specifies how the responsible Secretaries should set terms for such temporary use, ensuring coordination, considering ecological conditions, and implementing guidelines within a year to address emergency circumstances efficiently.
3. Public rangeland resiliency funds Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines how funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund can be invested to generate income and establish a range betterment account for rangeland improvement projects and public access on public lands. It describes how $15 million yearly is allotted for these purposes, with $10 million dedicated to rangeland improvement and $5 million to enhancing public access for recreation, while providing guidelines for coordination, agreements, and the use of funds.
Money References
- “(1) IN GENERAL.—On request of the Secretary, the Secretary of the Treasury may invest any portion of the Fund (including amounts in the Fund that are appropriated but not disbursed) that is not, as determined by the Secretary, required to meet the current needs of the Fund, but not to exceed such amounts as are necessary to generate $15,000,000 in investment income per year under paragraph (2). “(2) REQUIREMENT.—An investment of amounts made available under paragraph (1) shall be made by the Secretary of the Treasury in a public debt security— “(A) with a maturity suitable for the authorized uses described in subsection (c)(2) of section 401 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1751); and “(B) bearing interest at a rate determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, taking into consideration current market yields on outstanding marketable obligations of the United States of comparable maturity.
- “(2) USE OF FUNDS.—Of the amounts available in the account established under section 200302(c)(3) of title 54, United States Code (referred to in this subsection as the ‘account’)— “(A) $10,000,000 shall be made available for each fiscal year to carry out rangeland improvement projects under subsection (b)(1), including for all forms of rangeland betterment, management, and improvement activities, including seeding and reseeding, fence construction, the use of a temporary structure (such as a corral), an invasive plant or weed control measure or treatment, water development, and any other activity that advances healthy rangeland improvement, habitat, and resiliency; and “(B) $5,000,000 shall be available for each fiscal year to enhance, expand, or improve access opportunities producing co-benefits for hunting and recreation activities on public lands or National Forest System land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary concerned through public access agreements (including cooperative agreements or special use agreements) that improve or provide for permanent, temporary, or seasonal access to private land through which individuals would need to traverse to access the public lands or National Forest System land, subject to paragraph (5)(B).
- “(B) PUBLIC ACCESS AGREEMENTS.— “(i) REQUIREMENTS, PROHIBITIONS, AND AUTHORIZATIONS.—A public access agreement entered into under paragraph (2)(B)— “(I) shall— “(aa) be negotiated by the Secretary concerned with willing landowners; “(bb) establish the terms of the public access or any enhancement project carried out under the public access agreement, including the duration of the public access agreement; and “(cc) be entered into voluntarily by a willing landowner; “(II) shall not convey to the public any right to hunt or otherwise carry out recreational activities on the private land subject to the public access agreement; and “(III) may— “(aa) be entered into without reimbursement to the willing landowner, if the willing landowner volunteers to not receive reimbursement; or “(bb) provide for reimbursement by the Secretary concerned, as applicable, to the willing landowner, with the amount of the reimbursement to be determined by the Secretary concerned— “(AA) using the principles of ‘roughly equivalent value’ or another cost or valuation method; and “(BB) which may not require a formal appraisal, if the Secretary concerned determines that an appraisal is unnecessary because the valuation is uncomplicated and the anticipated value is estimated to be $10,000 or less, based on a review of available data.
4. Renewal term of grazing permits or leases Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The amendment to Section 402 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 extends the maximum term for grazing permits and leases from 10 years to 20 years and updates related provisions to reflect this change, including conditions where the permit term may be less than 20 years.
5. NEPA review in renewal of grazing permits and leases and certain actions during extreme natural events and disasters Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section adds new rules to make it easier for the Department of the Interior or Agriculture to renew grazing permits or leases without a detailed environmental review, as long as the renewal is similar to the previous terms or needed due to emergencies like extreme weather. It allows temporary changes to grazing permits during unforeseen disasters if conditions are met, without changing the original grazing area.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the Act states its official name, which is the “Resiliency for Ranching and Natural Conservation Health Act”.
2. Temporary use of vacant grazing allotments for holders of grazing permits or leases during extreme natural events and disasters Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The proposed amendment to the Federal Land Policy and Management Act allows the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to temporarily allocate vacant grazing allotments to permit holders when their usual allotments are unusable due to natural events like extreme weather or disasters. The terms for using these vacant allotments will consider ecological conditions and previous agreements and can include temporary rangeland improvements, with guidelines to be established to ensure quick and effective implementation.
405. Vacant grazing allotments made available to holders of grazing permits or leases during extreme natural events and disasters Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In situations of extreme natural events or disasters, Section 405 allows for the temporary use of vacant grazing allotments by those holding grazing permits or leases. It outlines the responsibilities of the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to determine suitability, set conditions, and establish guidelines while ensuring that current grazing rights are maintained once conditions improve.