....So, ranchers are the “surface owner” of their split estate “grazing allotment”, meaning they own the grass, the right to cut or use trees, the right to build improvements, the stock-water rights, the right to cultivate forage, and all rights of ownership necessary to utilize and protect those rights.
The United States retained ownership of the mineral deposits in the land for separate disposal, and certain designated reservoir sites used for irrigation (and hydro-power sites) and rights of way for irrigation works. Forest and grazing districts were NOT reserved for environmental, aesthetics, recreation, or wildlife and fish preservation (United States v New Mexico, 1978).
1976 Grazing Permits subject to valid existing rights
April 9, 2020
The National Forests Management Act says "All present and future permits contracts and other instruments shall be subject to valid existing rights." The Federal Land Policy Management Act says "all actions by the Secretary concerned under this Act shall be subject to valid existing rights." Allotment Owners do NOT have to do everything that the Forest service or Bureau of Land Management employees tell you. Congress granted ownership rights to western ranchers for a number of specific rights beginning in 1853. Those Acts are called "legislative grants" .....
On another thread I mentioned that the only place Congress ever authorized “leasing” of grazing land was in the 1927 Alaska Grazing Act and Section 15 of the Taylor Grazing Act (which authorizes leasing of small isolated tracts outside of Grazing Districts of less than 720 acres). However, in order to give Alaskans (both native and settlers) the same rights as Allotment Owner ranchers in the “lower 48” Congress passed the Alaska Grazing Allotment Act of 1956 shortly before it became a State. This Act demonstrates continued Congressional policy to dispose of national forests as “grazing allotments” even as late as 1956....
1920s era "grazing permit" from USFS. They didn't tell you how many cows or sheep you could have, YOU told the FS how many cows you were going to have, when you were going to put them on, when you would take them off, what brand you were going to use, etc. One page front and back. On the back was 3 standard agreements, if you started a branding fire you'd put it out, if a wildfire broke out you'd help put it out and they would pay you, and if you accidentally started a fire you'd help put it out (but they wouldn't pay you), Their "permit" has been morphed into a 20 page, fine print "cooperative agreement". The only thing they can "permit" is the use of "timber and stone". You don't have to sign their permit (Curtin v Benson, 1911). They NEED you to sign their "cooperative agreement" so they have something to enforce against you in court. NFMA 6(i) says "all permits, contracts and other instruments" shall be subject to valid existing rights. You can see on this one they decided to add-on some extra BS. They've been adding on illegal crap for 100 years. They get away with it because you don't know your rights and so don't stand up for yourself. They are bullies and extortionists.
1916 Act authorized the Secretary of Interior to “grant the grazing privilege”
January 5, 2020
...The bureaucrats have ever since said grazing is not a right it’s a privilege. Most dictionaries define a privilege as “an exclusive right”. For example the right to keep and bear arms is a “right” because everyone can do it. However, everyone cannot graze livestock on your grazing allotment. Only an Allotment Owner can graze livestock on their allotment, therefore it is a “privilege” an “exclusive right”. Any doubt as to congressional intent is removed by use of the preceding word “grant”. A grant is an irrevocable gift...
….. When the bureaucrats later tried to sneak in a law that would take away Western Grazing rights in 1888, Western congressman repealed that law and passed a "Validation Act" of 1890 that perfected ranchers property rights. The General Land Law Revision Act (aka Forest Reserve act) of 1891 cut through all the bureaucrat BS to present a compilation and reinforcement of the key laws from the previous 100 years that created the split-estate system that resulted in ranchers ownership of the "surface" while retaining the minerals and timber for separate disposal.
.....The Grazing Rights Act of 1875 made “grazing” a cultural practice equivalent to farming or mining and applicable to the Homestead, Preemption and Mineral Land Act of 1872. A settler could only claim 320 acres under the “agricultural” land laws (640 if husband and wife) but there was no acreage limitation for “surface claims” under the “mineral” land laws (General Revision Forests Act 1891 Section 17)
.... The 1872 Mineral Land Act together with the 1875 Grazing Rights Act construed together gave stockraising settlers only a “surface claim” or surface title as an “adverse claimant” under the 1872 Act. No “permit” was mentioned or required as the intent of Congress was land “disposal”. The first Act to mention “grazing permits” was the Act forDisposal of Military Resevations of 1884. Grazing permits were only required for grazing stock on active military forts......
Numerous places in the Mineral Land Acts Congress refers to A Sutro and specifically says nothing in the mining laws can affect any provisions of the Act granting rights to him or his successors. When the Mineral Land Acts talk about the “surface owner” it’s not talking about the placer claimant or lode claimant, it’s talking about the rancher. Congress passed the A.Sutro Act the day before the Act of 1866 describing exactly who the “surface” owner would be where a settler was already occupying the land. Split-estate clear and unmistakable if you know your rights. That’s the secret, most ranchers don’t know their rights. They think they’re grazing on “public land”
1840-1850 Comprehensive Range Laws 184o-1850
April 26, 2020
One of the first Acts of California after Statehood in 1850, was to re-enact as State Law the previous “Rodeo,” “Judge of the Plains,” water-right and “Grazing Farm” laws which covered thousands of acres and allowed individual stockraisers to claim a range that would support 1,200 (or more) cattle