Back to Home Page

Local Links
Sun Valley Guide
Hemingway in Sun Valley
Real Estate

Sports
For the week of March 21 through 27, 2001

Low bidders awarded grazing leases

Environmental group appeals


By GREG STAHL
Express Staff Writer

In a turn of events that seemingly goes against a 1999 Idaho Supreme Court Ruling, the Idaho Land Board has awarded grazing leases to the low bidders on separate grazing allotments.

The Land Board on Tuesday of last week awarded the 5,500-acre Robinson Hole school endowment land grazing lease to the low bidder, Pickett Ranch and Sheep Co., which bid $13,000 to Western Watersheds Project’s $14,000 bid. The lease land is located near the City of Rocks National Preserve, south of Oakley.

Western Watersheds Project (WWP), formerly Idaho Watersheds Project, is headed by Hailey architect Jon Marvel. The group’s mission is to end what it deems "incompatible uses of public lands," and that includes livestock grazing.

In December, the Land Board awarded the 16,300-acre Lacey Meadows school endowment land grazing lease, near Orofino, to a low bidder, Lacey Meadows Grazing Association. WWP bid $8,000 to the association’s $7,500.

According to Department of Lands interoffice memos, WWP’s proposals not to graze the two allotments for 10 years would result in the probability of catastrophic wildfire, loss of plant vigor and extra management costs to the state.

WWP, said Marvel, is pursuing court actions to overturn the decisions.

In April 1999, the Idaho Supreme Court handed the Land Board a significant defeat when it overturned its practice of giving ranchers preference in granting School Endowment Fund grazing leases.

The decision was a victory for WWP, which seeks to obtain leases for environmental protection purposes. Marvel then called the victory "another nail in the coffin of the good-old-boy policy of the West."

The Land Board manages 2.5 million acres of Idaho School Endowment Fund land, and in selling or leasing the holdings, earns money that goes to the state’s schools.

Under a so-called "Anti-Marvel" law of 1995, the state Legislature directed the Land Board to give ranchers and the cattle industry preference in lease auctions, on the grounds that they add to the state’s economy and therefore help schools in the long run.

From 1993 to 1995, WWP repeatedly outbid ranchers in the auctions, but was never awarded a lease.

The legislature’s 1995 "Anti-Marvel" law eliminated WWP from participating in the lease-bidding process.

However, the state Supreme Court ruled in 1999 that the 1995 law was unconstitutional on the grounds that the state constitution directs School Endowment Fund lands to be managed solely for the benefit of Idaho’s schools, rather than for Idaho’s economy as a whole.

Since the Supreme Court ruling, WWP has been awarded three grazing leases, one in the East Fork of the Salmon River drainage, one along Cottonwood Creek, just north of Boise, and one near Lime Creek, northwest of Fairfield. WWP is not grazing livestock on the allotments but is resting them.

Now it appears the Land Board’s stance on issuing grazing leases will be put to the test again. WWP already filed a lawsuit in Fourth District Court in Boise on the Lacy Meadows lease, and Marvel said the organization will soon file a motion to consolidate that lawsuit with one protesting the recent decision on the Robinson Hole lease.

"In our opinion, [the Land Board’s] just looking for excuses here," he said. "When you go to an auction and you’re the high bidder, you expect to get what you’re bidding for.

"There’s no evidence presented that the level of grazing they’re talking about ever reduces fire risk. I think the fire argument is a crazy one."

Further, Marvel argued, if the Land Board was truly interested in the cost to the state, it wouldn’t graze livestock on any of its lands. It costs more to implement and regulate grazing leases than to rest the range, Marvel said.

Idaho law states nothing specifically about awarding leases and the relationship of land management to potential wildfires or costs associated with various management practices.

It does, however, state that the Land Board has the power to reject "any and all bids" for any reason it believes justified.

 

Back to Front Page
Copyright © 2001 Express Publishing Inc. All Rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Express Publishing Inc. is prohibited.