Landmark Case Notes Ranchers’
Rights On Federal Grazing Land

WASHINGTON — A federal court here has ruled that Nevada rancher Wayne Hage has property rights on his federal grazing allotments, a ruling that is being heralded as a major victory for public lands ranchers.

Senior federal Judge Loren A. Smith ruled Jan. 29 that Hage has some vested water rights and irrigation ditch rights-of-way to 10 of 16 irrigation ditches. Those rights include the right to have his livestock consume forage adjacent to the water and ditches and the right of access.

Hage, 66, Tonopah, Nev., filed a $28 million "takings" claim in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims here against the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management in 1991, after he says he was forced out of business because of excessive regulations.

"The court specifically rejected the position of the BLM and Forest Service that ranchers have no property rights on their grazing allotments," says Ladd Bedford, Hage's attorney. "The court further stated that if the government's interference with these rights makes it impossible for the rancher to use them, the government will be required to pay compensation for their loss."

Smith says in the ruling that the government cannot deny citizens access to their vested water rights without providing a way for them to divert that water to another beneficial purpose if one exists. The government cannot cancel a grazing permit and then prohibit the plaintiffs from accessing the water to redirect it to another place of valid beneficial use.

Smith says the plaintiffs have a right to go onto the land and divert the water.

The court ruled against Hage's claim that he owned the surface estate of his allotments.

"It is clear that the key property rights essential to a western livestock grazing operation are recognized," says Hage.

The court also says the grazing permit is a license and the government has the authority to exercise reasonable regulations.

"For the first time in history, a federal court has defined the balance between the western ranchers’ property rights and the government’s ability to regulate," says Bedford. "This decision is a major step forward for the security of federal land ranchers."

This, however, was only the first phase of the case. It determined that Hage had rights to property on the grazing permit. The next phase, scheduled for March, will determine whether the government took those rights and what, if any, compensation is due Hage.