Recently, the Forest Guardians and another environmental group filed suit in Federal District Court, asking a judge to “overturn all decisions in which the Forest Service allowed livestock grazing on the Gila National Forest without public participation … .” in order to protect the Mexican grey wolf.

Family ranchers who do not hold federal grazing lease permits are not immune to potential attacks by environmental groups such as Forest Guardians. If ranchers hold state grazing leases, particularly leases that involve riparian areas, they may find themselves battling such groups when it is time for lease renewal. Ramifications extend beyond financial difficulties. With the checkerboard pattern of state trust lands and private lands, losing a state grazing lease may mean that a ranch is split up into pieces, sometimes resulting in a loss of dependable water supplies or creating access and range management problems.

Changes in State Grazing Lease Awards in Arizona

The nature of grazing leases has changed over the past few years. They are no longer limited to grazing purposes. This is a result of a Forest Guardians lawsuit that was appealed all the way to the Arizona Supreme Court. The Court ruled in 2001 that the State Land Department could not automatically exclude an environmental or conservation group from applying for a grazing lease simply because they do not intend to graze livestock on the subject property. (Forest Guardians and Jonathan D. Tate v J. Dennis Wells, in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Arizona State Land Department and the Arizona State Land Department, 112101 AZSC, CV-00-0177-PR)

Upon winning the ability to apply for grazing leases, Forest Guardians’ first attack on ranchers in Arizona came when they sought and filed conflicting applications for state grazing leases held by Babbitt Ranches in Coconino County and a small 162-acre state lease on the Babocomari River in Santa Cruz County near Elgin. In filing these conflicting applications, Forest Guardians sought to take a lease from one of the largest ranching outfits in the state - which has won awards for its wildlife management practices -- and one of the smallest. The conflicting application involving Babbitt Ranches was withdrawn. The small ranch near Elgin, Arizona, lost its lease and Forest Guardians possess it to this day.

The Current Conflict Involving the Knights and Their Equities

In 2006, the Knights’ lease which they held for the past 30 years was about to expire. When they applied for another ten-year lease term, they were informed on April 18, 2006, that Forest Guardians was also seeking the lease by filing a conflicting application. This conflicting application set off an array of legal wrangling, which will culminate in a hearing in the Office of Administrative Hearings in February, 2008. The subject of the administrative hearing will be the Knights’ request that the decision by the State Land Commissioner, Mark Winkleman, be overturned.

If a conflicting application is filed for a state grazing lease, the State Land Commissioner requests that both parties file a “statement of equities.” In the rancher’s case, this statement of equities is a written plea explaining why the rancher should be allowed to keep the lease, as opposed to an environmental group or any other party seeking the lease. Conversely, the competing applicant’s statement of equities is a written plea that gives the reasons why the competing party, and not the rancher, would be the better lessee. The State Land Commissioner then weighs the “equities” and determines if either party should be awarded the lease outright or if the matter should proceed to bid. In the Knights’ case, the State Land Commissioner requested that one of his range managers, Steve Williams, study the matter and submit a recommendation.