Right-to-Ride Livestock on Federal Land Act of 2005
Key claim: Federal land managers would have to keep national parks, BLM land, wildlife refuges, and national forests open to horses and pack animals where that use is historically traditional, and complete a full NEPA review before cutting that access.
Abstract
(S781 · 109th Congress) Right-to-Ride Livestock on Federal Land Act of 2005 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to manage National Park System land in a manner that preserves and facilitates the continued use and access of pack and saddle stock animals on land where there is a historical tradition of using such animals. Requires such National Park System land to remain open and accessible to the use of such animals. Allows the Secretary of the Interior to implement a proposed reduction in the use and access of such animals on such land after complying with the full review process required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Makes the same amendments to other laws regarding other public land as follows: (1) the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, with respect to Bureau of Land Management land; (2) the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, with respect to National Wildlife Refuge System land and (3) the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, with respect to National Forest System land (with the Secretary directed to act in this case being the Secretary of Agriculture). Directs the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to issue final rules to define the term “historical tradition of use of pack and saddle stock animals” for purposes of this Act. Latest action (2005-04-14): Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Why this matters
Pack and saddle stock access is a recurring flashpoint between recreational users, outfitters, and federal land managers who close trails for resource protection or safety. The 2005 Right-to-Ride bill is an early example of Congress trying to lock in a default of continued access and to raise the procedural bar (full NEPA) before managers can close traditional routes, framing the question as a land-use rights issue rather than a discretionary agency call.