American Farm Bureau Federation
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Nepa review requirement
Proposed Grazing Rule - Published 5 12 26
BLM-2026-0001-0001NPRM
Comments
6,442
Last activity Jul 13, 2026
Deadline
Closed on Jul 14, 2026
Closed Jul 14, 2026
Net supportiSupport minus oppose · campaigns included
-67%
-67% excluding campaigns
Document
Details
The document's own metadata, straight from the source system.
- Title
- Proposed Grazing Rule - Published 5 12 26
- Posted
- May 13, 2026
- Comment period
- May 13, 2026 – Jul 14, 2026
- FR Doc
- 2026-09387
- CFR
- 43 CFR Part 4
Analysis
Overview
What the public is saying — stance, who's commenting, and the issues they raise.
Include campaigns
Stance breakdown
-67%
Net support
Support986Oppose5,300Other156
Aggregates include form-letter campaigns. Excluding them, net support is -67% across organic comments.
Who commented
Breakdown by commenter type.
Union
1
Individual
5,955
Government
44
Trade association
43
Advocacy
85
Academic
21
Business
210
Other
83
Comments over time
Weekly arrivals, stacked by stance.
Posted May 13, 2026Deadline Jul 14, 2026
May 11May 25Jun 8Jun 22Jul 6Jul 13
Support986Oppose5,300Other156
Support × commenter type
How each type splits across stance.
Support
Oppose
Other
Individual
11%
87%
2%
Business
99%
1%
0%
Advocacy
42%
55%
2%
Other
40%
53%
7%
Government
82%
11%
7%
Trade association
91%
9%
0%
Academic
29%
67%
5%
Union
100%
0%
0%
Issues raised
The docket's canonical issues. Select one to browse its comments.
Bison grazing permits3,611
Bison grazing rights3,535
Indigenous livestock grazing rights3,376
Public land management2,430
Land health and wildlife habitat protection1,337
Livestock grazing impacts799
Economic impact of grazing rules600
Grazing regulatory streamlining412
Bison reintroduction and conservation348
Opposition to rule change342
Position map
Who stands where on each issue?
Every non-silent position is backed by an excerpt from the comment.
Issues shown
Uncheck an issue to choose another.
| Organization | Grazing regulatory streamlining | Public land management | Rangeland health and grazing fees | Livestock grazing impacts | Nepa review requirement |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
American Farm Bureau Federation Trade associationSupport The American Farm Bureau Federation supports the BLM's proposed updates to grazing administration and land health standa | · | · | |||
Arizona Wildlife Federation AdvocacyOppose The Arizona Wildlife Federation opposes the proposed grazing regulations because they believe the rule reduces public pa | · | · | · | · | |
Border Soil and Water Conservation District AdvocacySupport The Border Soil and Water Conservation District supports the proposed grazing rule, praising its modernization of land-h | · | · | · | · | |
California Farm Bureau Trade associationSupport The California Farm Bureau supports the BLM's proposed grazing rule updates, noting they will modernize regulations, pro | · | · | |||
California Four Wheel Drive Association AdvocacyOppose The California Four Wheel Drive Association (Cal4Wheel) opposes the proposed rule because it creates a framework that co | · | · | · | ||
Coalition of Large Tribes (COLT) AdvocacyOppose The Coalition of Large Tribes (COLT) opposes the proposed grazing rule because it privileges commercial cattle productio | · | · | · | · | |
Colorado Cattlemen's Association Trade associationSupport The Colorado Cattlemen's Association (CCA) supports the Bureau of Land Management's proposed revisions to grazing regula | · | · | |||
Colorado Parks and Wildlife GovernmentOppose Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) expresses concern that the proposed grazing rule's push to increase livestock grazing | · | · | · | ||
Converse County Board of Commissioners GovernmentSupport The Converse County Board of Commissioners supports the BLM's Proposed Grazing Rule, provided it includes greater manage | · | · | · | · | |
Defenders of Wildlife et al. AdvocacyOppose Defenders of Wildlife, representing fourteen conservation organizations, opposes the proposed grazing rule because it fa | · | · | · | · | |
Desert Tortoise Council AdvocacyOppose The Desert Tortoise Council, a non-profit conservation organization, opposes the proposed revisions to OMB Guidance for | · | · | · | · | |
Elko County GovernmentSupport Curtis F. | · | · | · | · | |
Greater Yellowstone Coalition AdvocacySupport The Greater Yellowstone Coalition supports the BLM's proposed grazing rule but urges the agency to include specific prot | · | · | · | · | · |
Humboldt County, Nevada GovernmentSupport Humboldt County, Nevada, submitted comments in support of the BLM's proposed grazing regulations, praising the moderniza | · | · | · | · | |
Idaho State Department of Agriculture GovernmentSupport The Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA) supports the BLM's proposed rule to streamline grazing administration a | · | · | |||
J P Cauhape, Inc. BusinessSupport The commenter supports the proposed grazing rule revisions, specifically agreeing with the removal of "conservation use" | · | · | |||
JRB LLC BusinessSupport JRB, LLC, a multi-generational ranching entity, supports the BLM's proposed rule to revise grazing regulations, citing t | · | · | · | ||
MIC/SVIA/ROHVA Trade associationSupport The Motorcycle Industry Council (MIC), Specialty Vehicle Institute of America (SVIA), and Recreational Off-Highway Vehic | · | · | · | · | |
Montana Association of State Grazing Districts Trade associationSupport The Montana Association of State Grazing Districts (MASGD) supports the proposed grazing regulations, praising the remov | · | · | |||
Montana Farm Bureau Federation Trade associationSupport The Montana Farm Bureau Federation supports the proposed updates to the BLM's Grazing Administration Rules, praising the | · | · | · | ||
Montana Public Lands Council Trade associationSupport The Montana Public Lands Council (MPLC) supports the proposed revisions to the Grazing Administration Regulations, prais | · | · | |||
Montana Stockgrowers Association Trade associationSupport The Montana Stockgrowers Association (MSGA) supports the proposed grazing administration regulations, praising the moder | · | · | |||
Montezuma County Board of County Commissioners GovernmentSupport The Montezuma County Board of County Commissioners supports the BLM's proposed Revision of Regulations for Grazing Admin | · | · | |||
MT Wild Bison.org, Gallatin Wildlife Association, and Gallatin Yellowstone Wilderness Alliance AdvocacySupport Nancy Schultz, representing MT Wild Bison.org and other conservation groups, supports the proposed grazing rule provided | · | · | · | ||
N-2 State Grazing Board (Nevada) GovernmentSupport The N-2 State Grazing Board, a political sub-division of the State of Nevada comprised of ranchers, expresses general su | · | · | · | · | |
Nevada Association of Counties Trade associationSupport The Nevada Association of Counties (NACO) supports the proposed grazing regulations aimed at increasing flexibility and | · | · | · | ||
New Mexico Cattle Growers Association Trade associationSupport The New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association (NMCGA) supports the proposed grazing rule revisions but requests specific mo | · | · | |||
Oregon Farm Bureau Trade associationSupport The Oregon Farm Bureau supports the BLM's proposed grazing regulations, noting that they provide ranchers with necessary | · | · | · | ||
Park County Environmental Council AdvocacyOther The Park County Environmental Council, an advocacy group representing over 1,000 members, provides a mixed response to t | · | · | · | ||
Property and Environment Research Center (PERC) AdvocacySupport The Property and Environment Research Center (PERC) supports the BLM's proposed revisions to grazing regulations that im | · | · | |||
Redd Summit Ranches LLC BusinessSupport Redd Summit Ranches, LLC, a livestock operation with grazing permits in Utah, Nevada, and Colorado, submits comments in | · | · | |||
Rocky Mountain Farmers Union UnionSupport The Rocky Mountain Farmers Union (RMFU) supports the proposed grazing rule provided it maintains a collaborative approac | · | · | · | ||
San Miguel County Board of County Commissioners GovernmentOppose The San Miguel County Board of Commissioners opposes several aspects of the proposed grazing rule, arguing that it weake | · | · | · | ||
Southwest Montana Conservation Coalition AdvocacySupport The Southwest Montana Conservation Coalition supports the BLM's efforts to revise grazing regulations, emphasizing the i | · | · | · | · | |
Stone Cabin Ranch, LLC BusinessSupport Stone Cabin Ranch, LLC, a livestock operation in Nevada, submits comments in support of the proposed grazing rule while | · | · | · | · | |
The Nature Conservancy AdvocacySupport The Nature Conservancy (TNC) supports the BLM's proposed revisions to grazing regulations, emphasizing the need for a cl | · | · | · | ||
Three Creeks Grazing, LLC BusinessSupport Dale Lamborn, representing Three Creeks Grazing, LLC and 38 individual ranchers, supports the proposed rule while reques | · | · | · | · | |
TREE TOP RANCHES L.P. BusinessSupport Tree Top Ranches L.P., a livestock operation, submits comments in support of the proposed grazing rule while requesting | · | · | · | · | |
Umpqua Watersheds AdvocacySupport A coalition of three Oregon-based conservation and watershed organizations (Umpqua Watersheds, Umpqua Natural Leadership | · | · | · | ||
United Property Owners of Montana AdvocacySupport Chuck Denowh, Policy Director for the United Property Owners of Montana, supports the proposed revisions to the BLM's gr | · | · | |||
Utah Cattlemen's Association Trade associationSupport The Utah Cattlemen’s Association supports the BLM's proposed revisions to grazing regulations, praising the modernizatio | · | · | · | ||
Vermillion Ranch LP BusinessSupport Jean M. | · | · | · | · | · |
Wyoming County Commissioners Association Trade associationSupport The Wyoming County Commissioners Association (WCCA) supports the Proposed Grazing Rule, noting it incorporates several o | · | · | · | ||
Wyoming Department of Agriculture GovernmentSupport The Wyoming Department of Agriculture (WDA) supports the BLM's proposed rule to modernize the grazing program, specifica | · | · | · | · | · |
Wyoming Stock Growers Association Trade associationSupport The Wyoming Stock Growers Association (WSGA) supports the proposed revisions to the grazing regulations, commending the | · | · | · | · |
Arizona Wildlife Federation
AdvocacyOppose
Public land management
Border Soil and Water Conservation District
AdvocacySupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
California Farm Bureau
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Rangeland health and grazing fees
California Four Wheel Drive Association
AdvocacyOppose
Public land management
Nepa review requirement
Coalition of Large Tribes (COLT)
AdvocacyOppose
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Colorado Cattlemen's Association
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Livestock grazing impacts
Colorado Parks and Wildlife
GovernmentOppose
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Livestock grazing impacts
Converse County Board of Commissioners
GovernmentSupport
Public land management
Defenders of Wildlife et al.
AdvocacyOppose
Public land management
Desert Tortoise Council
AdvocacyOppose
Public land management
Elko County
GovernmentSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Greater Yellowstone Coalition
AdvocacySupport
Humboldt County, Nevada
GovernmentSupport
Public land management
Idaho State Department of Agriculture
GovernmentSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Rangeland health and grazing fees
J P Cauhape, Inc.
BusinessSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Rangeland health and grazing fees
JRB LLC
BusinessSupport
Public land management
Rangeland health and grazing fees
MIC/SVIA/ROHVA
Trade associationSupport
Public land management
Montana Association of State Grazing Districts
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Nepa review requirement
Montana Farm Bureau Federation
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Nepa review requirement
Montana Public Lands Council
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Rangeland health and grazing fees
Montana Stockgrowers Association
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Rangeland health and grazing fees
Montezuma County Board of County Commissioners
GovernmentSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Livestock grazing impacts
MT Wild Bison.org, Gallatin Wildlife Association, and Gallatin Yellowstone Wilderness Alliance
AdvocacySupport
Public land management
Livestock grazing impacts
N-2 State Grazing Board (Nevada)
GovernmentSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Nevada Association of Counties
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Rangeland health and grazing fees
New Mexico Cattle Growers Association
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Rangeland health and grazing fees
Oregon Farm Bureau
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Rangeland health and grazing fees
Park County Environmental Council
AdvocacyOther
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Property and Environment Research Center (PERC)
AdvocacySupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Rangeland health and grazing fees
Redd Summit Ranches LLC
BusinessSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Rangeland health and grazing fees
Rocky Mountain Farmers Union
UnionSupport
Public land management
Rangeland health and grazing fees
San Miguel County Board of County Commissioners
GovernmentOppose
Public land management
Livestock grazing impacts
Southwest Montana Conservation Coalition
AdvocacySupport
Livestock grazing impacts
Stone Cabin Ranch, LLC
BusinessSupport
Rangeland health and grazing fees
The Nature Conservancy
AdvocacySupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Nepa review requirement
Three Creeks Grazing, LLC
BusinessSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
TREE TOP RANCHES L.P.
BusinessSupport
Rangeland health and grazing fees
Umpqua Watersheds
AdvocacySupport
Public land management
Livestock grazing impacts
United Property Owners of Montana
AdvocacySupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Public land management
Rangeland health and grazing fees
Utah Cattlemen's Association
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Nepa review requirement
Vermillion Ranch LP
BusinessSupport
Wyoming County Commissioners Association
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
Rangeland health and grazing fees
Wyoming Department of Agriculture
GovernmentSupport
Wyoming Stock Growers Association
Trade associationSupport
Grazing regulatory streamlining
2 organization-typed comments could not be identified.
Comments
Explorer
Every mirrored comment — filter by stance, campaign, or issue.
Filter:
- Jul 13, 2026National Mining AssociationOpposeTrade association📎 Attachment
The National Mining Association opposes the proposed rule because it expands rangeland health standards beyond livestock grazing to all BLM programs, which they argue could unlawfully impede mining activities and violate the multiple-use mandate of the FLPMA. They request that the final rule clarify that these standards have no application beyond grazing and do not alter existing rights or authorizations.
Read comment → - Jul 8, 2026The Cloud FoundationOpposeAdvocacy
Jesse Daly of The Cloud Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to protecting wild horses and burros, opposes the proposed Grazing Rule. The organization urges the Bureau to withdraw the rule and instead prepare a full Environmental Impact Statement.
Read comment → - Jul 13, 2026Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09387OpposeIndividualRead comment →
- Jul 13, 2026Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09387OpposeIndividualRead comment →
- Jul 13, 2026Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09387OpposeIndividualRead comment →
- Jul 13, 2026Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09387OpposeIndividual
The commenter, who holds a Master's degree in environmental policy and management, opposes the proposed grazing rule. They argue that the rule favors a few monetary interests at the expense of wildlife and the environment, and they urge the BLM to protect the land instead.
Read comment → - Jul 13, 2026Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09387OpposeIndividualRead comment →
- Jul 13, 2026Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09387OpposeIndividualRead comment →
- Jul 13, 2026Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09387OpposeIndividualRead comment →
- Jul 13, 2026Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09387OpposeIndividualRead comment →