(Editor’s note: This story was updated at 10 a.m. MT to include additional information from Hammond Ranches Inc.)
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has issued a Proposed Decision advancing a plan to reauthorize grazing on the Hammond, Hammond FFR, Mud Creek and Hardie Summer allotments near Steens Mountain in southeastern Oregon, amid protests from environmentalists.
The agency concluded that Alternative 2 in its Bridge Creek Area Allotment Management Plan’s final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), “meets the purpose and need and best balances the BLM’s obligation to manage the public lands under principles of multiple use and sustained yield” while supporting the secretary of the Department of the Interior’s orders.
Under the proposal, BLM would issue new 10-year grazing permits, implement updated Allotment Management Plans (AMPs), and authorize range improvements, including the Bridge Creek water gap extension, fence construction and removal, and maintenance of spring and pipeline developments.
The decision also establishes adaptive grazing rotations, utilization thresholds of 50% on native grasses and 60% on crested wheatgrass, and a phased increase in permitted animal unit months (AUMs) within the Hammond Allotment tied to land health standards. The decision increases AUMs in the Hammond Allotment incrementally over five years, contingent on continued compliance with the standards and guidelines.
In the Mud Creek Allotment’s Lower Field pasture—containing a greater sage-grouse lek—grazing would begin at a 35% utilization threshold, adjustable upward to 50% only if monitoring shows that vertical cover objectives for nesting habitat are maintained. Visual obstruction readings would ensure residual grass heights meet sage grouse habitat recommendations, and if cover drops below target levels, utilization would be permanently capped at the last acceptable level.
BLM said the plan further reduces infrastructure impacts on designated lands. Removal of 0.14 miles of fence from the Steens Mountain Wilderness would improve wilderness character, and no increase in AUMs would occur within the Bridge Creek Wilderness Study Area.
Riparian protections are equally central. The Bridge Creek water gap modification would restrict livestock access to perennial riparian corridors, preventing animals from traveling along the drainage. In Krumbo Creek Pasture, grazing would not resume until riparian conditions demonstrate significant progress toward the standards and guidelines, with a graze-and-rest rotation thereafter to reduce the risk of trampling Redband Trout redds.
Environmental opposition
The proposal is drawing renewed opposition from conservation groups. Western Watersheds Project (WWP) submitted a formal protest, arguing the plan would increase grazing by 96% across the four allotments and allow temporary grazing permits to capitalize on high-forage years, potentially compounding ecological harm.
“The agency’s environmental analysis for this project is written to paper-over the harmful and deleterious effects from livestock grazing in one of the most biologically rich and beloved areas of Oregon’s high desert,” said Adam Bronstein, Oregon director with WWP. “It is clear that ecological recovery and species’ protection of the last 12 years of limited livestock use is taking a back seat to special interests.”
WWP maintains that the allotments have been recovering since 2014, when grazing was halted after the former permittees, Hammond Ranches Inc., lost their permits after being convicted of arson on public lands. According to BLM, the Bridge Creek Area has remained largely ungrazed since 2014, with only limited grazing occurring in 2019.
Hammond Ranches partial protest
On Feb. 20, W. Alan Schroeder, on behalf of Hammond Ranches Inc., submitted a partial protest to the BLM’s Proposed Decision and accompanying Final EIS for the Bridge Creek Area Allotment Management Plans.
In the filing, Hammond Ranches said that it does not protest the overall forage determination under Alternative 2, but objects to specific boundary adjustments, range improvement responsibilities, and the agency’s failure to allocate forage to Hammond Ranches in a manner consistent with its 2020 permit application. The protest also challenges aspects of the agency’s procedural history since the 2014 permit denial.
A full story on the partial protest will appear in the March 9 issue of Western Livestock Journal.
Background
The permitting history has been contentious. In 2014, BLM declined to renew the Hammond Ranches’ permits and removed grazing preference from the base property. The Hammonds appealed. In 2018, President Donald Trump pardoned Dwight and Steven Hammond for their arson convictions. On his last day in office in January 2019, then-Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke directed BLM to reissue the grazing permit under a categorical exclusion. Later that year, the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon vacated the reissued permits and remanded them to the agency for further review.
In 2020, BLM initiated a new environmental assessment process. After protests, the Interior secretary issued a Notice of Final Decision on Jan. 19, 2021, apportioning forage and authorizing range improvements. That decision was appealed by environmental groups in February 2021. In December 2022, U.S. Magistrate Judge Andrew Hallman allowed most claims in the lawsuit to proceed.
In 2023, an interdisciplinary team conducted updated rangeland health assessments. While earlier 2020 findings identified unmet standards, the 2023 review determined that livestock grazing under the pre-2014 permit was not a causal factor in most instances where standards were not achieved. In January 2025, BLM released a draft EIS evaluating five alternatives for the allotments.
BLM argues the approach balances ecological safeguards with economic stability for ranching families, emphasizing wildfire risk reduction through biological thinning of fine fuels and adaptive management flexibility. However, critics contend that expanded grazing and non-renewable AUMs during high-production years could reverse ecological gains made during the past decade of limited use.
At present, the proposed decision does not identify who would receive the new permits. — Charles Wallace, WLJ contributing editor
