Challenges Facing Wyoming's Farmers and Ranchers

Floor Speech

CHALLENGES FACING WYOMING'S FARMERS AND RANCHERS -- (Senate - June 03, 2008)

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I believe our Nation's farmers and ranchers--free of government interference and redtape--are the best stewards of the land.

Unfortunately in Washington, there are people who don't understand Wyoming. We do not need the Federal Government to regulate mud puddles and wetlands. We know how to manage our lands. We do not take kindly to the ``Washington knows best'' philosophy. We are westerners. We have been living out here for a long time without the helpful hand of the Federal Government.

A recent editorial printed in the Wyoming Livestock Roundup on April 5 really hit home. I recommend to my colleagues the editorial by Jim Magagna as reflecting the feelings of Wyoming farmers and ranchers. I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

The Society We Live In

I am admittedly old-fashioned. I still relish the 60's when resource conflicts were most often resolved by just getting out and kicking a little dirt. I had my share of ``cussin' and discussin''' with BLM, USFS and WG&F personnel. I respected their professional expertise and they respected my practical experience. Most often this combination produced a result that was a little uncomfortable for both of us, but right for the resource. Neither of us was particularly concerned that our decisions would be challenged by anyone else.

Fast-forward to the 21st century: Resource managers are no longer respected for their professional judgment, which they can exercise only at peril of the agency being sued. The demands placed upon them to create paper trails leave little time for kicking the dirt. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), has been added to the list of federal agencies known to strike fear into the hearts of ranchers. Resource decisions are driven primarily by often uninformed public opinion and agency efforts to avoid litigation. Many of the threats which once plagued only public land ranchers have migrated to private lands, infringing on our property rights. Many of today's decisions are simply not ``right for the resource''.

These 21st century resource management challenges have also forced ranchers and the organizations that represent them into the litigation arena to an unprecedented extent. Certain environmental organizations have perfected the litigation process as a tool to make government dysfunctional. Their formula is simple: Challenge every unfavorable decision on simple procedural grounds, utilizing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the Endangered Species Act (ESA), as a tool. Make massive, costly and time-consuming demands on the agencies for documents under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), thereby preventing agency personnel from performing normal duties. Identify ``friendly'' courts that will assure a favorable decision on the weakest of evidence. Assure that the environmental organization's legal fees are paid by the taxpayer and that the FOIA fees are waived ``in the public interest''. This is the shameful but successful strategy of Western Watersheds Project, Center for Biological Diversity, Forest Guardians and a host of similarly aligned conspirators.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, individual families are forced to scrape together thousands of dollars of their own funds to defend property rights and federal grazing permits. Financial and human resources that would otherwise be directed toward resource management and improvements are diverted to legal fees and endless meeting participation, thereby strengthening the claims of the environmental plaintiffs that the resource is not being properly managed. The rancher is placed in a vicious circle from which there is no ready escape.

Agricultural organizations at the state, national and local levels have stepped up to the plate in recent years in order to address these threats in a collective manner and relieve some of the burden placed on individual ranchers. In Wyoming, state government has been a partner in this effort, in particular regarding endangered species.

In 1999 the Wyoming Stock Growers Association (WSGA), for the first time in its then over 125 year history, deemed it necessary to establish a permanent Litigation Fund to support challenges by the radical environmental community. Since that time the generosity of our members and supporters has allowed us to participate in or financially support over ten (10) defenses of the property rights and interests of the ranching community. In addition to these direct expenditures, an increasing portion of staff time is dedicated to reviewing litigation and determining the appropriate level of involvement for the organization.

Currently, WSGA is involved as an intervenor in litigation seeking the listing of the sage grouse and in challenges to the state's elk feedgrounds. We have filed a motion to intervene in recent litigation seeking to force listing of the mountain plover. WSGA, joined by WWGA, has recently moved to file an amicus brief in litigation challenging the delisting of the grizzly bear. We were in the process of filing in the black-tailed prairie dog litigation when a settlement was reached. In addition, WSGA is a leader in an effort by the National Public Lands Council challenging the overturning of the revised BLM grazing regulations. The announcement last week by WildEarth Guardians of a lawsuit challenging the Secretary of Interior for failure to act on listing petitions for 681 species will undoubtedly present new ``opportunities'' for our involvement.

The ESA and NEPA are laws whose original intent remains valid. However, they have been co-opted by environmental litigants as procedural hurdles to serve their ultimate goal of land use control. Congress has demonstrated its inability to act in restoring integrity to these laws. There will continue to be a handful of federal judges who are willing to aid and abet in their abuse.

WSGA and others will continue to defend the property rights and grazing permits of ranchers in environmental litigation. This alone will not be enough. The time has arrived when we must develop a multi-faceted strategy to end this abuse of our rights and our legal system. We have begun the proactive step of building public support for our stewardship and forming alliances with other groups who support our role in resource management. Future steps should include an expose of the motives and tactics of select radical environmental groups and direct legal challenges to certain of their practices. This strategy will demand even greater short-term sacrifices by ranchers and a strong coordinated commitment by those who represent them. Success will assure a sustainable resource and a more secure future for our industry.

Source