Farm Bureau Policies 2022 CountyBoardsof Supervisors shouldprotect theenvironmental and socio-economic well-being of their local communities and citizens. This can be accomplished by engaging in joint coordi- nated resource planning with federal landmanagement agencies as allowed by agency regulations, an executive order established in 2004 and by federal environmental statutes.
property develops an equity for which compensation should be made, if encumbered. Grazing Grazing rights should be protected for present and future gen- erations. Individuals chargedwithadministeringgrazingonpublic lands should be adequately trained in rangelandmanagement. All agencies charged with managing grazing on public lands shoulddevelopaprocess to trainandeventually certify employees as “rangelandprofessionals.”Over a reasonableperiodof time, the acquisition and maintenance of this certificate would become a condition of employment. We urge a strategy be developedby the agencies in cooperation with permittees to allow grazing to continue on expiring permits until the necessary documentation required by the agencies can be completed. We support the continued authorizationof off-highway vehicle travel by federal landgrazers asnecessary tocomplywith the terms and conditions of their permits. The public has the right to expect that ranchers will demon- strate stewardshipon federal lands entrusted to them. Public ben- efits provided by science-based management include: thriving, sustainable rangelands; quality watersheds; productive wildlife habitat; viable rural economies; and tax-base support for critical public services. To ensure the continuation of these public benefits, ranchers require opportunity for profit, growth, security of tenure, and the ability tomarket and apply their resourcemanagement expertise. They also require incentives for additional investment in improve- ments and protection of their private property rights. The California Department of Parks and Recreation has for many years evidenced an extreme bias against livestock grazing in state park units. A similar bias has also long been evident in the management of our national parks. While we understand and agree that livestock grazing is not compatible with certain uses, the systematic elimination of grazing throughout the pub- lic park system is unjustified and in some cases is unnecessarily jeopardizing park resources and adjacent private properties. We therefore support legislative or other actions to promote grazing as a landmanagement tool when appropriate in public land systems. We support a grazing fee for federal lands that is based on an economic formula. This formula should: (1) Be based on good scientific data; (2) Provide for the economic and social stability for the industry andWestern rural communities; (3) Recognize permit value; (4)Recognizegoodstewardshipandresourceenhancement; and (5) Recover the direct and reasonable costs of managing the grazing program. Wild Horse and Burro Program The taxpayer has the right to expect the Wild Free Roaming Horse andBurroAct to be fully implemented. This includesman- aging population numbers of wild horses and burros to protect rangeland health and the other authorized multiple uses that share the same ecosystem. The Act requires the establishment of herd population ranges within each herd management area. We support an aggressive schedule of gathers that reduces herd numbers towithin these established ranges.We believe that time- ly gathers by helicopter are the only cost-effective and humane way to finally achieve andmaintain the numbers at or below the required levels. Wemaintain that theonlyway tobring theWildHorseandBurro Programcosts under control in the short-termanddecrease them over time, is to gather and remove horses to the minimum allow- ablenumbersasquicklyaspossibleand thenmaintain thosepopu- lation levels with tools such as fertility control, sex ratio adjust- ments and occasional removals. We encourage the agencies to explore ways to reduce the cost of long-termholding through improved pasture contract solicita- tion and utilization of currently existing land set aside programs. We support the inclusion of both the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service when developing policies, legislation and funding proposals affecting the management of wild horses and burros. Water Rights We believe publicly held land should be treated exactly as pri- vate land in the establishment of water rights and that the same state laws and judicial history should govern the establishment of quantity, quality, and priority of rights. EcosystemManagement So far it appears that the only purpose of ecosystemmanage- ment asusedbygovernment agencies is toremoveappropriateand beneficial multiple uses. We believe that timber harvest, mining and grazing activities are a valuable component of the ecosystem management and that recreational activities, the impactsofwildlife and feral horses and natural events like fires and floods must be
considered. We further believe that these activities should beman- agedwiththesamescrutinyasgrazing, timberandminingactivities. Endangered Species Act / Section 7 Consultation There shouldbeno interruptionof existing grazing rights under grazing permits and leases on federal lands during a consulta- tion between the federal land management agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act. Grazing permits that expire during con- sultationshouldbe renewedunder the same terms andconditions until consultation is complete, unless there is clear andconvincing evidence that such terms and conditions present an imminent threat of direct injury to individuals of the species which is the subject of the consultation, which jeopardizes the continued exis- tence of the species on lands coveredby the permit or lease before the consultation can be completed. If such evidence is produced, only the least burdensomeadditional interimtermsandconditions should be imposed which are required by the need to protect the continued existence of the species until consultation is complete.
Lands acquiredby government or utilities for particular purpos- es andareno longer essential, shouldbe returnedexpeditiously to private ownershipwithpreference toprevious ownerswhere pos- sible, and without reservation of water andmineral rights. Where countyor public roads formerly servedsuchareas, thepublic inter- est in and public access rights of such roads should be restored by the government or utility before disposition. We believe federal, state and county land disposals to private operators should be in sufficiently large units to be economic, but small enough to be of interest to the average size operators. Small, isolatedunits of publiclyheldproperty shouldbe offered for sale to private operators, with preference to adjacent owners. Acquisition of Land State, local and federal agencies should not acquire agricul- tural land for thepurposeof fish, wildlife, andhabitat protectionor public recreation. Agencies proposing such acquisitions must be required todemonstrate that nogovernment-ownedor controlled land is available for the above purposes. The government should completeaNational Environmental PolicyAct (NEPA)orCalifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review on any land proposed for acquisition to determine if acquiring such land is in the public interest. In addition, to acquire or to have land conveyed to the government, the agency should also be required to demonstrate conclusivelyan integratedprogramof landuseand theneed for the acquisitionbefore being permitted topurchase, further expandor to transfer land fromone governmental agency to another. Management plans and budgetary information should be re- quired on all lands proposed for acquisitionby government agen- cies, prior to such acquisition, so that they can be made a part of any public hearing process. Preparation of management plans prior to acquisition would give a number of assurances: (1) That management of the lands would comply with local jurisdictions’ general plans; (2) That the landswould remain inagricultural production; and (3)That the landswouldbemanagedsoas tominimizedamages to adjacent private ownerships. We oppose the practice of government funding through grants or other means to organizations and foundations in order to pur- chase private landwith the intent, purpose or understanding that such land will be resold or donated to some governmental entity. Such practice frequently diminishes the tax base of local units of government andultimately increases governmental costs, agency staffing and appropriations. Compensation Landowners should be entitled to the fair market value when land is acquired by government agencies for the creation or ex- pansion of park lands, the acquisition of right-of-way easements or other uses. We believe that counties and the state should be fully reim- bursed for any lands transferred to another level of government, and counties should be fully reimbursed for any private lands transferred from the county tax rolls to the government. If cash reimbursement is impossiblewe recommend transfers of govern- ment land of equal value. Multiple Use We continue to support the multiple use of federal, state or county lands. We are opposed to government and public agencies changing multi-use policies on government-owned land that will have a negative economic effect on local governments and surrounding communities. We believe that when considering competing uses on these lands, that the responsible agencies should consider the impacts of losing base industry and funding for affected counties when determining the priority of uses. Any proposal to restrict multiple-use activities ongovernment-owned lands shouldbeoff- set by the transfer of productivepublic lands toprivate ownership. Uses of these lands include apiaryplacements, grazing,mining, timber management, wildlife, feral horses and burros and recre- ation.Whenconsidering the impacts to resources,management of all of these uses is necessary in order to protect the environment. Activities like livestock grazing shouldnot be singled-out for regu- lationwhenother activities inmany instancesmay prove farmore detrimental to the resources. Landsunder government control shouldbeadministered toen- courage the greatest use and improvement. Where such lands are available for privateuse, there shouldbeasmuchsecurity in tenure for the user as is compatible with the public interest together with encouragement in the adoption of land improvement programs in cooperationwith government. We also believe that prior use of
Rights of theGrazing Permittee or Lessee and Duties of the Federal LandManagement Agency Under Section 7 Consultation
Grazingpermittees and lessees shouldhave full rights of partici- pationas applicants inany Section7 consultationdirectly affecting their permits or leases, including notice of and full rights of par- ticipation in all meetings, and copies of all data, reports, analyses, opinions and other documentation related to the consultation. All scientific data, reports, analyses, opinions, and management expertise presented by applicants should be given equal status to such information from any other source and should be received into the record and given full consideration by the landmanage- ment agencyandU.S. FishandWildlifeService.Decisions resulting fromtheconsultationshouldbebasedonsoundscience regardless of the source. In consultations under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, the federal land management agency should be required to protect andmaintain all uses on its lands as delineated in its Land Management Plan and provided for under other federal laws gov- erning its jurisdiction over the federal lands, to the fullest extent such uses can bemaintained without jeopardizing the continued existenceof the subject species. It shouldbe the landmanagement agency which makes the final decision regarding restrictions on suchuses for thepurposeof protecting species, and suchdecisions shouldbeupheldso longas they arebasedonsubstantial evidence produced during consultation. The landmanagement agency should be required to prepare a written analysis of all management alternatives, including those presented by the applicant, and justify its preferred alternative basedonsubstantial evidence in the record. Thepreferredalterna- tive should be the alternative which imposes the least restrictions on theapplicant consistentwithprotecting thecontinuedexistence of the species. The applicant should be allowed to respond to the draft analysis of alternatives and to present additional evidence before the final preferred alternative is adopted. The applicant should have standing to challenge any interim or permanent terms and conditions imposed for the protection of the subject species, on the ground that they are not supported by substantial evidence, or that there are equally effective but less restrictivealternative terms andconditionspresented to the federal landmanagement agency during consultation and supported by substantial evidence in the record. Post-FireManagement For the long-term forest health and productivity, post-fire sal- vage, reforestation and weed and brush control should be among thehighest priorities onall government owned lands. Timelypost- fire timber salvage canprovide funding for these rehabilitationac- tivities aswell as substantially reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Proper timing of restoration activities, such as seeding and brush control, is important forpreventing invasive species, treeencroach- ment, and erosion, and to protect water quality. It is important to have clear national directiononpost-fire salvage and reforestation to encourage these activities. We support the development of an improved communication strategy betweenwildfire incident command teammanagers and grazing permittees. (Rev. 2020) No. 410 Benefits of Livestock Grazing Livestock grazing provides many benefits to the environment, wildlife, ranchers, andcommunities.Grazing is an importantman- agement tool on private and public lands. The continued benefits derived fromgrazing California’s private rangelands are often de- pendent uponmanaged grazing on public lands. Grazing animals have been a natural, vital part of grassland ecology for thousands of years. California’s rangelands include rich and varied habitats. The species that rely on these range- land habitats largely exist today due to the positivemanagement
30 Ag Alert January 26, 2022
Powered by FlippingBook