Tim Petersen had grand plans to restore Palmerita Ranch, a 55,000-acre mix of private, state and federal land near Alamo Lake that began growing alfalfa and grazing cattle long before statehood.

The ranch fell into disrepair in the 1990s and is better known today for the many off-highway vehicles that tear through its publicly owned wilderness area. 

The Yavapai County Farm Bureau vice president applied in 2017 to restore a lapsed federal grazing permit, the lynchpin to making Palmerita a working ranch again. 

But wildlife groups balked. And 6½ years later, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) issued a permit to only graze portions of the land for a few weeks after a major rain.

Now, Petersen is ready to walk away.

“I’m just worn out,” he said. 

Revisions could offer more flexibility

Petersen is not alone. 

For years, ranchers across Arizona and the West have shared similar stories about long waits and inflexible, sometimes unworkable decisions.

Even the BLM acknowledges that its grazing regulations “have not kept pace with current needs.”

The last time those rules saw a comprehensive update was in 1995. Grazing practices have changed markedly since then.

The agency began collecting input several years ago in hopes of streamlining reviews and offering more flexibility to adapt to changing forage conditions.

Comments on the proposed revisions must be submitted by July 13.

Environmental reviews can take years

Ranchers depend heavily on sprawling public parcels to feed and care for their herds, particularly when less than 20% of land in the state is privately owned. 

BLM oversees the largest chunk of Arizona’s public land, issuing grazing permits to ranchers for 10 years at a time.

Those permits detail how much livestock can graze and for how long, on which allotments, using how much of its available forage, among other stipulations.

The agency must conduct a formal environmental impact review, complete with public comment, before permits can be issued or renewed. 

It also must complete environmental assessments on applications to install water lines, upgrade fences or make other improvements.

These reviews rarely move quickly, making it difficult for ranchers to rebuild herds, control erosion and regenerate pasturelands.

“One rancher I know wanted to drill a well when a spring went dry,” said Anita Waite, who co-manages a 70,000-acre ranch near Kingman. “That was 21 years ago, and they’ve still not been given a permit.”

Waite herself has waited 5 years for permission to build a check dam in a canyon, so she can study how slowing storm drainage restores soil in riparian areas and percolates extra water into the aquifer.

Land health assessments would change

BLM must assess land health before issuing permits. 

But it is not authorized under the current rules to consider the impact of other uses, such as wildlife or off-road vehicles. 

As a result, allotments or carrying capacity — a key metric that determines how many cattle can graze the land — can be scaled back to compensate for damage that cattle didn’t cause.

Petersen has experienced this firsthand.

He and other ranchers near the Big Sandy River contend that wild burros, elk and off-road vehicles are destroying habitat for endangered birds and snakes. 

An expert concluded that grazing was unlikely to adversely affect their habitat.

But BLM still would not allow cattle in some areas.   

“Side-by-sides can run up and down the river unchecked, but not cattle,” Petersen said. 

“The irony is I can run cattle year-round on the state land that is mixed in with BLM land. Same forage, same terrain and everything.”

BLM needs staff to make this happen

The proposed revisions would require evaluations for all authorized uses, not just grazing.

If an allotment doesn’t meet its goals, BLM would have to determine what specifically caused the degradation before taking corrective action. Officials would have 6 months to identify the cause and 2 years to act on it.

To further speed reviews, the agency would no longer evaluate allotments one by one, but rather on a broader “landscape scale.”

While many ranchers like the revisions, there is one key aspect that regulations alone cannot address.

Arizona’s BLM field offices are notoriously short-staffed, they say. Few are willing to work in rural areas, particularly for the pay.

Those who fill jobs often don’t stay long, compounding backlogs and leaving some ranchers’ calls unreturned for months.

“BLM doesn’t have the manpower now to do reviews,” said Dan Rodriguez, who has grazed a 6,300-acre allotment northeast of Kingman for nearly three decades. 

“That worries me, especially if we’re putting in time constraints for answers. You still need people to get the work done.”

Make your voice heard

How would the BLM’s proposed grazing rule impact your operation? Submit what you like — or would improve — by July 13 using the American Farm Bureau Federation’s call to action tool.


Joanna Allhands writes about water, land use and other issues important to the Arizona Farm Bureau. Reach her at joannaallhands@azfb.org.