The Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) has released a proposal to update regulations implementing livestock grazing on public lands under both the Taylor Grazing Act (“TGA”) and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (“FLPMA”). This marks the first time that BLM has sought to meaningfully revise its grazing regulations since comprehensive revisions were made in 1995 and 2006, although courts later permanently blocked the 2006 rules. BLM states that its latest proposal is intended to “modernize” the agency’s grazing program and bring its regulations “in line with current best practices.” While many of the proposed changes are primarily ministerial in nature, others are more substantial, including an overhaul of the regulations addressing the standards BLM uses to assess the “health” of public lands. Comments on the proposal are due July 11, 2026.
Background: BLM’s Grazing Program
BLM manages around 244 million acres of public land. Of that, approximately 155 million acres are available for livestock grazing. Both the TGA and FLPMA govern how BLM manages livestock grazing operations.
FLPMA was passed in 1976 and instructs BLM to manage public lands according to the principles of “multiple use and sustained yield.” 43 U.S.C. § 1701(a)(7). According to FLPMA, “multiple use” means managing public lands and their resources to meet “the present and future needs of the American people” without permanently impairing “the productivity of the land and the quality of the environment[.]” 43 U.S.C. § 1702(c). In turn, “sustained yield” is defined as achieving and maintaining a regular output of “the various renewable resources of the public lands consistent with multiple use.” 43 U.S.C. § 1702(h). Under FLPMA, BLM is directed to develop resource management plans (“RMPs”) for each tract or area of public land. 43 U.S.C. § 1712(a). These plans typically cover a large area, such as the land governed by a BLM field office, and provide the framework for how the area will be managed. 43 C.F.R. § 1601.0-5(n). In general, each RMP will include a description of the resource uses authorized in the area, resource condition goals and objectives to be attained, and management practices needed to achieve both the allowable resource uses and condition goals. Grazing may only occur on lands managed by BLM if the relevant RMP identifies grazing as an allowable resource use.
If an RMP indicates that grazing is allowed in a particular section of public land, BLM will divide the land into grazing allotments. Allotments vary in size and may be adjacent to or even intermingled with private and state lands. BLM issues permits to graze livestock on these grazing allotments according to its authority under the TGA. 43 U.S.C. § 315b. There, Congress directs BLM to “issue or cause to be issued permits to graze livestock[.]” 43 U.S.C. § 315b. However, although both FLPMA and the TGA authorize BLM to plan for and issue permits to allow livestock grazing on public lands, neither go into detail on how a grazing program should be managed. Instead, both statutes instruct BLM to adopt the regulations necessary to implement such a program. 43 U.S.C. § 315d; 43 U.S.C. § 1701(a)(5).
The regulations implementing BLM’s grazing program are detailed and comprehensive. They detail not only the process for applying and receiving a permit but inform how BLM assesses which lands are suitable for grazing. Under the regulatory framework, BLM uses criteria known as Fundamentals of Land Health to set standards for land health and determine whether a particular area is achieving or maintaining those standards. 43 C.F.R. §§ 1480-1480.2. BLM uses that information to inform the terms and conditions of grazing permits which are based on either meeting land health standards or on improving rangeland to mee those standards. 43 C.F.R. § 4130.3. Typically, grazing permits are granted for a ten-year period to applicants who own or control “base property” that can be used for livestock. 43 C.F.R. §§ 4110.1(a); 4130.2(d). The permits themselves detail the kind and number of livestock authorized for grazing, the period of use, which grazing allotments the permittee may use, the amount of forage that may be used, and any terms and conditions necessary to “achieve management and resource condition objectives[.]” 43 C.F.R. §§ 4130.3; 4130.3-1. Additionally, BLM may grant temporary permits such as nonrenewable grazing permits on an annual that allow permittees to graze their livestock on temporarily available forage or crossing permit which authorize grazing for livestock crossing public land.
BLM’s grazing regulations were last overhauled in 1995 and 2006. However, both the 1995 regulations and 2006 regulations were challenged in court. Ultimately, the 2006 regulations were permanently enjoined, meaning that the current grazing regulations largely reflect the 1995 rule. According to BLM, the new proposal is aimed at modernizing the regulations to reflect current grazing practices.
Overview of Proposed Rule
BLM has proposed a comprehensive revision of regulations administering grazing on BLM-managed public lands. While some of the proposed changes are purely ministerial in nature, such as changing the word “cancelled” to “canceled” throughout the regulations to reflect modern spelling, other aspects of the proposal are more substantive. The following is an overview of some of the most substantive parts of the proposal, including an overhaul of the Fundamentals of Land Health, the redefinition of key terms, a limitation on opportunities for public comment, a focus on “production-oriented livestock,” the removal of references to “conservation use,” and the inclusion of targeted grazing as a wildfire fuel reduction tool.
Fundamentals of Land Health
The Fundamentals of Land Health are guidelines BLM uses to achieve and maintain health standards on public rangeland. Currently, the regulations include four fundamentals that BLM uses to assess the health of a landscape: (1) properly functioning watersheds; (2) ecological processes, including the hydrologic cycle, nutrient cycle and energy flow; (3) water quality; and (4) habitats for federally listed threatened and endangered species. The current proposal would remove water quality as a fundamental. According to BLM, state agencies are responsible for ensuring that water quality standards are met because states are responsible for setting water quality standards.
The proposal would also revise how standards used to determine achievement of the fundamentals are developed and amended. Under the current regulations, BLM must coordinate with resource advisory councils prior to developing new standards or amending existing ones. The proposed rule removes that requirement. Additionally, the proposal removes the requirement that the Secretary of Interior must approve any new or amended land health standards. Instead, under the proposed rule, new and amended standards must be approved by the BLM Director.
Additionally, the proposal would expand the scope of land health assessments. Under the proposal, such assessments would be done at the landscape scale, with the term landscape referring to areas of interacting ecosystems characterized by a set of common management conditions. This would be a change from the allotment-by-allotment assessments that BLM currently engages in. Along with expanding the scope of land health assessments, the proposal would also require BLM to apply the Fundamentals of Land Health to activities it authorizes on public land beyond just grazing. Currently, the regulations only require FLM to apply the Fundamentals to grazing permits. By expanding the scope of the Fundamentals and land health assessments to other BLM programs, it will allow BLM to better address failures to achieve land health that are caused by factors other than grazing.
Finally, the proposed rule would relocate regulatory provisions regarding the Fundamentals from 43 C.F.R. Subpart 4180 to a new part of the C.F.R., part 1700.
Definitions
The proposed rule would make a variety of changes to definitions provided in the grazing regulations. While some of the changes are described by BLM as “non-substantive” for the purpose of updating language or improving clarity, many of the proposed changes would have broader impacts. For example, the proposed rule would expand the definition of “base property” to include land that contains livestock operation facilities “capable of serving as a base of livestock operations[.]” Currently, base property includes only land that is capable of producing enough forage to graze authorized livestock for a year or water that is suitable for livestock consumption. Because base property is a necessary requirement for obtaining a grazing permit from BLM, broadening the definition could expand who qualifies for a permit.
BLM is also proposing to revise the definition of “beginning rancher (mentee)” to include not just sons and daughters of permittees, but to include the grandchildren of permittees and anyone who has not owned or controlled a ranch for more than ten years or previously held a grazing permit. According to BLM, this change would remove barriers for young ranchers to participate in public land grazing.
Limits on Public Comment
Throughout the current regulations, there are various opportunities for the public to comment on BLM actions taken under the agency’s grazing program. The regulations instruct BLM to provide notice to and take input from the “interested public” on proposed decisions. 43 C.F.R. § 4160.1. The regulations define “interested public” as individuals, groups, or organizations who have either submitted a written request to BLM to participate in decisionmaking for a specific grazing allotment or submitted a written request regarding the management on livestock grazing on a specific allotment. The proposed rules would revise the definition of “interested public” to include those who have an “interest in the management of livestock grazing on a particular allotment” and have submitted a either a written request to participate in the decisionmaking processes for that allotment or written comments regarding livestock managing on that allotment. The requirement that “interested public” have an “interest” in managing livestock on a particular allotment is likely to limit the scope of who can comment on BLM’s proposed decisions under the grazing program.
“Production-Oriented Livestock”
In an effort to clarify the scope and purpose of the grazing permitting program, the proposed regulations include a new term, “production-oriented livestock.” Under the proposal, the term is defined as “animals when they are being used as part of an operation to provide output for various purposes, such as meat, milk, fiber, or other products and any animals when they are used to assist with management of other animals in connection with such operation[.]” The term would replace the definition of “livestock or kind of livestock” which is defined under the current regulations as “species of domestic livestock[.]” The proposal uses the term “production-oriented livestock” throughout the proposed regulations to clarify that grazing permits can only be issued for livestock that meet that definition.
“Conservation Use”
When BLM amended its grazing regulations in 1995, it added language to the rule that would allow BLM to issue permits for “conservation use.” However, in a 1999 decision from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, the court determined that the TGA does grant BLM the statutory authority to issue conservation use permits. In light of that ruling, BLM is proposing to remove all references to “conservation use” from its grazing regulations.
The move is in line with a decision BLM made in 2025 to rescind the 2024 Conservation and Landscape Health Rule which made conservation an official use of public land on par with any other resource use authorized on BLM-managed lands.
Targeted Grazing
The proposed regulations would strengthen BLM’s ability to approve grazing as a method to address wildfire risk. A newly proposed term, “targeted grazing,” would be defined as “using livestock as a tool to create strategic linear fuel breaks, to reduce fine fuel height and fuel loading, and to maintain fine fuels reduction for a specified period[.]” The proposal would then amend the provisions of the regulation addressing wildfire management to include targeted grazing as a tool that could be used to manage wildfire risk.
Going Forward
The proposed overhaul of BLM’s grazing regulations is likely to have impacts for ranchers, policy makers, and those who interact with BLM-managed public lands. Comments on the proposal are due July 11, 2026, and it is unclear when a final rule could be expected. Like the 1995 and 2006 regulations, it is likely that these rules will face legal challenges once they are finalized. The proposal is comprehensive and the above discussion should not be considered a complete overview of the proposed regulations. NALC will continue to provide resources and information as this rulemaking process unfolds.
To read the proposed rule and learn how to submit a comment, click here.
To view the current grazing regulations, click here.
To view the text of FLPMA, click here.
To view the text of the TGA, click here.