A grazing ‘win-win’

Allowing cattle to graze on publicly owned land could be a win-win situation for ranchers and the Department of Natural Resources looking for ways to maintain its thousands of acres. But before it happens, there may need to be some legal protections in place for owners and the public.

Rep. Paul Anderson (R-Starbuck) has an “idea in progress” that would ensure that a private owner grazing livestock, under an agreement with the DNR, would not be liable for a death or injury to a person that occurs as a result of the livestock being in the field.

While there was general agreement March 7 in the House Civil Law Committee that Anderson’s bill, HF625, is a good idea, its unintended consequences was cause to lay it over, at least until some issues could be worked through. The bill has no Senate companion.

Anderson said that pastureland is expensive and in short supply, and the cost for some is hard to cash-flow. This could be a win-win situation, he said, because cattle ranchers would have more land to graze their livestock and the DNR “would have another tool to maintain the land — trim the grass, keep the weeds down — have the cattle do it.”

Joel Carlson, representing the Minnesota Association for Justice, said the bill may not accomplish the sponsor’s goals, and could leave open some liability questions.

“The issue is many or most state lands are open for public recreational use, and there is an interplay here about where the liability falls,” he said.

He cited language in the bill where the exception to the immunity addresses willful and reckless disregard for the safety as it relates to a condition of a lease agreement and not as it relates the public welfare.

Rep. Bill Hilty (DFL-Finlayson) suggested review of other public land-grazing agreements from states where it is allowed would be beneficial.