MOUs for Traditional Uses

Summary#

This bill would require the federal land agencies to make formal agreements with the New Mexico Land Grant Council to better coordinate historical or traditional uses of federal land by New Mexico land grant‑mercedes (community land grants). It sets out categories of long‑standing noncommercial uses, requires memoranda of understanding (MOUs) to describe permit rules and fee reduction processes, and asks agencies to consider these uses in land use plans. The bill also says MOUs do not themselves authorize uses and does not change tribal or state legal rights.

• Main change: The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture must, within two years, enter into an initial MOU with the New Mexico Land Grant Council and then extend, renew, or replace it as needed.
• Defines what counts as “historical or traditional uses” (examples: small‑scale gathering, grazing where historically done, water use, cemetery maintenance, subsistence hunting/fishing consistent with state law).
• Requires MOUs to spell out permit types, application procedures, fees, fee‑reduction/waiver procedures, vehicle/equipment use rules, and consultation with affected Indian Tribes.
• Allows MOUs to address routine maintenance and to describe processes for major infrastructure improvements (water systems, roads, fences, cemeteries), but MOUs cannot themselves approve uses.
• Requires land use plans for BLM and the Forest Service to consider impacts on these historical or traditional uses.

What it means for you#

• Community users (heirs of a qualified land grant‑merced):

  • Could get clearer rules about which traditional activities on federal land require permits and how to apply for them.
  • May be able to request fee reductions or waivers; the agencies must consider community socioeconomic conditions and the governing body’s budget when doing so.
  • Could have clearer processes for routine maintenance of features they use (trails, wells, cemeteries).

• Governing bodies of land grant‑mercedes (boards of trustees):

  • Can be invited into MOU development and may negotiate subsidiary agreements for specific projects.
  • May see formal processes for approval of routine work and for consideration of major improvements (though actual approvals remain with the federal agency).

• New Mexico Land Grant Council:

  • Will be a required signatory/partner for the MOUs and may represent multiple land grants in developing or implementing the MOU.

• Federal land managers (Interior and Agriculture Departments, including BLM and Forest Service):

  • Must negotiate, document, and implement MOUs with the New Mexico Land Grant Council.
  • Must include consideration of these uses when preparing or revising land use plans.

• Indian Tribes:

  • Agencies must consult with tribes that would be directly affected by proposed historical or traditional uses. The MOU must describe the consultation process.

• General public / other land users:

  • The bill does not create new rights to use federal land. Existing permits, laws, and land use plans still apply. The MOUs must include notice and comment procedures for actions that could affect traditional uses.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

• The bill does not include a fiscal note in the supplied text.
• This could mean additional administrative costs for the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture to develop, negotiate, and implement MOUs, keep lists/public notice systems, and handle fee‑reduction requests.
• If agencies reduce or waive fees, that could reduce fee revenue collected for permits. The bill does not say who would pay for major infrastructure projects or whether federal funds would be provided.
• Community governing bodies might incur costs to prepare proposals, participate in consultations, or carry out approved maintenance or improvements.

Proponents' View#

The bill appears intended to address coordination gaps and make traditional uses by New Mexico land grants easier to carry out in practice. Possible arguments in favor based on the bill text:

• The bill appears intended to create clearer, consistent procedures for traditional noncommercial uses on federal land.
• It could improve communication between federal land managers and land grant communities by requiring formal MOUs and subsidiary agreements.
• It could reduce financial barriers for community users by directing agencies to consider socioeconomic conditions and governing budgets when deciding fee reductions or waivers.
• It could help protect long‑standing cultural practices and infrastructure by including maintenance and improvement processes in the MOUs.
• It requires agencies to consider these uses when updating land use plans, which could make planning outcomes more predictable for land grant communities.

Opponents' View#

The bill’s design raises several practical questions and potential trade‑offs based on the text:

• One concern is that many key terms are left to agency judgment (for example, “small quantities,” “sustainable use,” and uses “as determined by the Secretary concerned”), which could create uncertainty or inconsistent application.
• The MOUs do not themselves authorize uses. This could mean communities still need separate permits and approvals, so coordination may not remove practical barriers.
• The bill does not provide funding for agencies to negotiate and implement MOUs or to pay for major infrastructure projects; this could create unfunded administrative or capital costs.
• It is unclear how agencies will balance these traditional uses with other land uses, conservation goals, and the rights of other stakeholders.
• Consultation procedures with Indian Tribes are required to be described, but the bill does not set clear standards for how tribal concerns will be resolved if they conflict with land grant uses.