Time for some fun....The Grazing fees announced

mtmiller

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 7, 2001
Messages
12,161
Location
Montana
BLM and Forest Service Announce
2007 Federal Grazing Fee

The Federal grazing fee for Western public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service will be $1.35 per animal unit month (AUM) in 2007, down from $1.56 in 2006. The newly adjusted fee, determined by a congressional formula and effective on March 1, applies to nearly 18,000 grazing permits and leases administered by the BLM and more than 8,000 permits administered by the Forest Service.

The formula used for calculating the grazing fee, established by Congress in the 1978 Public Rangelands Improvement Act, has continued under a presidential Executive Order issued in 1986. Under that order, the grazing fee cannot fall below $1.35 per AUM, and any increase or decrease cannot exceed 25 percent of the previous year's level. An Animal Unit Month is the amount of forage needed to sustain one cow and her calf, one horse, or five sheep or goats for a month.

The annually adjusted grazing fee is computed by using a 1966 base value of $1.23 per AUM for livestock grazing on public lands in Western states. The figure is then adjusted according to three factors - current private grazing land lease rates, beef cattle prices, and the cost of livestock production. Based on this formula, the 2007 fee declined primarily because of an increase in production prices.

The $1.35 per AUM grazing fee applies to 16 Western states on public lands administered by the BLM and the Forest Service. The states are Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. The Forest Service applies different grazing fees to national grasslands and to lands under its management in the Eastern and Midwestern states and parts of Texas. The national grassland fee will be $1.37 per AUM, down from $1.73 in 2006, and will also take effect March 1. The fee for the Eastern and Midwestern states and parts of Texas will be out later this month.

The BLM manages more land - 258 million surface acres - than any other Federal agency. Most of this public land is located in 12 Western States, including Alaska. The Bureau, with a budget of about $1.8 billion, also administers 700 million acres of sub-surface mineral estate throughout the nation. The BLM's multiple-use mission is to sustain the health and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. The Bureau accomplishes this by managing such activities as outdoor recreation, livestock grazing, mineral development, and energy production, and by conserving natural, historical, and cultural resources on the public lands.

The Forest Service, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, manages 193 million acres of Federal lands in 44 states, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.
 
Good information. Obviously the government has come up with a fair and balanced formula for calculating AUM fees on public land. The BLM has a muliple-use mission, and shouldn't be putting ranchers out of business by raising fees unreasonably high. Production costs have risen in the last year, so it's only right that they lowered the AUM fees.








:rolleyes:
 
If I'm reading this right, it is about 15x more expensive to graze cattle on private land. That's ridiculous! The Gov't is way under priced!
 
Thanks for the link Miller. Man, I'm going to have to get me some public land cows, what a bargin !
The number that baffels me is what precentage of cattel are grazed on public land ? I seem to remember in another thread someone said it was only 2% ? Is that right ?
 
Just to save everybody the trouble of checking mtmiller's link:

Grazing fees paid by Montana producers for grazing livestock on privately owned, non-irrigated grazing land was higher for all methods in 2005. The average amount paid for grazing livestock on an AUM (animal unit month) basis was $16.20 per month, up $0.30 from last year. Cattle producers paid $18.70 per cow-calf pair in 2005, up $1.30 per pair from the previous year. The average per head rate was $17.30 per month, up $1.10 from last year.

In the 17 states that estimate grazing fees in the United States, the average charge on an AUM basis was $13.20 per month in 2005, up $0.10 from the previous year. Cow-calf rates were $15.20 per month, down $0.10 and per head rates at $14.00 per month, were up $0.30 from 2004

All grazing fees are for privately-owned, non-irrigated grazing land. Rates charged for public land, irrigated land, and harvested cropland were excluded. The AUM rate includes reported AUM rates plus reported cow-calf rates that were converted to an AUM basis. The cow-calf rate was converted to AUM basis using the following formula (1 AUM=cow-calf *0.833).
 
A-con,
The number that baffels me is what precentage of cattel are grazed on public land

It fluctuates a little, but is always less than 5%. BTW, that's about the annual fluctuation in US beef consumption. If you want to educate yourself about this taxpayer rip-off that directly destroys our public land hunting and fishing, check these sites. Remember, it's OUR land :

http://www.wasteofthewest.com/

http://www.publiclandsranching.org/ Go to the menu on the left of the page and click on "Welfare Ranching"

This is a touchy subject around here. Bambistew gets angry if I call it "welfare ranching". What would you call it?:D (I can't feed my parakeet for $1.35 a month!)
 
Careful what you wish for. The valley where I grew up was once full of hay pastures surrounded by BLM and Forest where there was heavy grazing. Sure there was plenty of cow burnt meadows and nasty looking water holes.

The cows are gone now, and the hay meadows are now 36 holes of golf and million dollar 2nd homes. The grass and wildflowers are amazing now up in the national forest now, but is certainly doesn't feel as wild anymore. I would take the cow burnt meadows over the night time glow of light pollution.
 
The price of a federal land AUM is not going to make one bit of difference in the decision of a rancher to sell out. If they're going to do it, they're going to do it. I don't care if an AUM costs $35 or $0.35. It's a good excuse to use to try to keep the subsidy, though.
 
I am not saying the AUM is not to low. I am just saying there is a BIG cost and another side to NOT having grazing on Federal lands

Oak, just look south of Eagle next time you are on I-70:( I ma sure you can remember the difference.
 
Seems a bit low, my cat eats more than that in a month and he weighs what percentage of a cow and calf?|oo Then again he is on private land.
 
Dinkshooter,
I know what you're talking about, but AUM cost has nothing to do with the development of the river valleys in western Colorado. The Nottingham family (sheep ranchers) used to own a lot of that valley near Eagle, but they sold the valuable stuff when the price got right. They still own land and still run sheep. The fact is, they saw dollar signs and made a decision. The only way to keep that from happening is for agencies or land conservation/sportsmen's groups to buy it up when it goes on the market.

Remember, all that development happened when the price of an AUM was low. The cost of public land grazing played no part in it.
 
Most of the ranchers around here are more worried about what a 14 station sporting clay course will do tothe "value of their land when the develpers start calling. I worked for a rancher years ago and we worked alot of cows on BLM or National forst he always told us he did it to save a buck. His family still runs cows but they sold mst of the ranches in this area.
 
Back
Top