Labrador Grazing, Gun Range Bills Head to President

Press Release

Two bills introduced by Rep. Raúl Labrador, R-Idaho, offering regulatory relief in federal land management are expected to become law after final passage in the Senate Friday.

The Grazing Improvement Act, which Labrador has been working on since he came to Congress in 2011, will provide stability for about 20,000 ranchers who lease grazing rights on more than 250 million acres of federal land.

Introduced as H.R. 657, the grazing reform bill would temporarily extend permits while the Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service process a backlog of environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act. It also allows the agencies to issue permits and leases under categorical exclusions from NEPA if they continue current management and grazing is not adversely affecting land health. Finally, the bill permanently exempts livestock trailing from full NEPA review.

Ranchers with grazing permits own nearly 120 million acres of nearby lands, making the collaborative management critical to rural economies. More stable business conditions will prompt investment in improvements such as stock ponds that benefit livestock and wildlife.

The Idaho County Shooting Range Land Conveyance Act would establish the first public shooting range in the state's largest county by conveying 31 acres of BLM land to Idaho County. Introduced as H.R. 5040, Labrador's bill was necessary because federal regulations blocked the transfer of the parcel used informally as a gun range by sportsmen and women. The bill has the BLM's support and the County Commission has agreed to manage the site as a shooting range and work closely with law enforcement on maintenance.

"The Idaho County gun range bill resolves a local issue that has been pending for close to six years," Labrador said. "I am just as gratified to see it pass as I am the grazing reform that will boost economic certainty for ranchers across the West. Both measures are examples of how Congress can act to better manage public resources."

Unfortunately, the measures were attached in the House to the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, in the closing days of the 113th Congress. The NDAA was totally unrelated to the substance of Labrador's bills, which had previously passed with bipartisan support. Labrador voted against the defense bill because he continues to object to the NDAA on both foreign policy and civil liberties grounds. He opposes the NDAA's authorization of $1.6 billion to arm and train Syrian rebels and continues to have concerns about the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism.

Source