Friends of Idaho Watersheds Project:
Somewhat modified, the Rep. Bob Smith (R-Ore) bill passed the House of Representatives yesterday (10/30). I watched some of the proceedings on C-Span and saw a couple of interesting fabrications: Bob Smith claimed that state school lands in the west were so much better than BLM managed lands for grazing that a higher fee could be justified for them (this was in response to Rep. Klug's (R-Wisconsin) proposed amendment which would have required public lands ranchers to pay the same fee as what individual states charge on their lands (in Idaho that is $4.16 per AUM for 1998 as compared to $1.35 charged by the BLM and Forest Service). And Rep. Stenholm (D-Texas) claimed that there was no subsidy for public lands ranchers (even though they pay 1/6 of market rates for forage), and if there was it would give them an unfair advantage over non-public lands ranchers, and he would have to vote against the Smith bill to protect his constituents. So, even though there are no public lands ranchers in his Congressional District, he voted for the bill anyway!
Here is a summary of the proceedings forwarded from Rose Strickland of the Sierra Club. Thank you, Rose.
The Smith Forage Bill won, 242-182, effectively by 31 votes. Those are the Boehlert troups that we lost when he cut a deal with Smith to drop 3 of the egregious provisions - RACs, access, and grazing right language/definitions. But the votes on Klug's, Vento's and George Miller's amendments were much closer. Vento's amendment for a 2 tier fee, one (state grazing fee) for permittees with under 2000 AUMs and the other (25% higher than that) for permittees with over 2000 AUMs only lost by 3 votes. We need to thank Vento, Klug (GOP fiscal hawk from WI), and George Miller for their leadership. The cowboys took a lot of (deserved) criticism for this "welfare" bill, in Congress and on editorial pages and did risk a great deal by putting the federal grazing fee up for a Congressional vote.
There's no Senate bill now. Maybe the fight in the Senate should focus on raising the grazing fee. (We only lost by one or two votes in the Senate on the Domenici bill in the last Congress). Then the bill's supporters would probably pull the bill, rather than risk a real fee hike???!!!
Congressmen who testified in support of the good amendments included: Dan Miller of FL and Abercrombie of HI. Congressmen testifying against the amendments and for the bill included: Boehlert, Stenholm of TX, Barrett of NE, Bishop of GA, Cooksey of LA, Dooley of CA, Hostettler of IN, Lucas of OK, Lahood of IL, Blunt of MO, Chenoweth, Ewing of ID, Thune of SD, Jerry Lewis of CA, Hill of MT, Hayworth of AZ.
The bill's a long way from becoming law, with an unfought Senate fight and the threat of a presidential veto. Looks like one more in the long line of struggles from defeat to defeat to defeat to ultimate victory, hopefully.