What is grass banking?

Much like the rivalry between Tom and Jerry, ranchers and conservationists often have clashing views. Ranchers are frequently depicted as land-hungry individuals whose activities damage the landscape, while conservationists are seen as elitist environmentalists who prioritize wildflowers over human needs. In reality, these stereotypes are not fully accurate. Thanks to grass banking, both groups are finding common ground, realizing that they can collaborate to meet their respective goals.

Grass banking is an innovative approach where landowners lease their properties to ranchers at a reduced rate in exchange for conservation efforts on the ranches. This arrangement helps ranchers by offering fresh grazing land for their cattle and providing much-needed respite for overgrazed pastures. Simultaneously, it enables landowners, typically conservation-focused organizations, to protect more land than they could through conventional means.

Currently, many grass banks are located in the western United States, particularly in cattle ranching areas. The first such initiative began in 1994, when Drummond Hadley of the Animas Foundation teamed up with the Malpai Borderlands Group to offer local ranchers conservation easements in exchange for affordable grazing rights on a 502-square-mile (1,300-square-kilometer) ranch in New Mexico [source: Herring]. These easements, which reflect the value of the forage consumed by the cattle, are voluntary legal contracts that limit land development both now and in the future. In return, ranchers must engage in restoration activities to maintain the land's health and sustainability.

Since that first grass bank was started more than a decade ago, dozens of others have popped up, effectively saving both the ranchers and the prairies from extinction. On the one hand are the ranchers, whose way of life is slowly disappearing -- either giving way to increased cropland for farming or to neighborhood developments. Many of them struggle just to stay afloat, especially during times of drought, which affects the land that their herds depend on.

To these ranchers, grass banks are a way to stay in business. By providing inexpensive supplemental pastures during downtime, the leased land enables them to continue their way of life. And the grass on their own pastures comes back even greener when they return.

­To the landowners, the deal is just as sweet. Rather than protecting just their own land, they're able to protect other land as well via the conservation agreements -- not to mention the added benefit that limited grazing can bring to the leased land. By many accounts, it's fair to say that those involved find grass banking to be a wise investment. Find out what's involved with grass banking on the next page and what some of the detractors are saying.

Grass Bank Investments Paid Out in Green

A key advocate for grass banking is the Nature Conservancy. This environmental organization has entered into several successful grass banking agreements across the western United States, finding it a powerful tool in its mission to conserve land and protect wildlife. One notable example is a grass bank at the Matador Ranch in Montana, which plays a crucial role in safeguarding habitat for numerous native animal species.

Initiated in 2000, this specific grass bank agreement allows ranchers to graze their herds on the 60,000-acre (24,281-hectare) Matador Ranch at a discounted rate, in exchange for committing to conservation practices like weed control, banning plowing, and protecting habitats. Within just one year, this grass bank helped preserve 24,500 acres (9,915 hectares) of sage grouse habitat, prevent the plowing of 70,000 acres (28,328 hectares) of native range, and restored 50 acres (20 hectares) of cropland to native grasses [source: The Nature Conservancy].

Not all successful grass banks need the support of major organizations like the Nature Conservancy. The Rocky Mountain Front Grass Bank in Montana is an example, where 360 acres (146 hectares) are rented out by private landowners. Ranchers who lease this land agree to undertake fence repairs, control weeds, and monitor the area in exchange for temporary grazing rights. This arrangement allows the land to rest and recover, mirroring the restoration efforts of other similar grass banks found across California, Oregon, New Mexico, and Iowa.

Despite the success of these initiatives, grass banking has its critics. Like major financial institutions such as Lehman Brothers and AIG, grass banks can fail. A primary concern is the cost: operational expenses, including irrigation, can range from $5,000 to $260,000 annually, which is often shared by the partners in the grass bank [source: Reese]. Without grants or government support, many participants find these costs prohibitive.

Acquiring or leasing land for grass banking can also be challenging. While the Bureau of Land Management and other federal land agencies see potential in the concept and occasionally collaborate as partners, they have yet to establish any grass banks of their own due to a shortage of available land [source: Reese].

Apart from the financial concerns, some critics argue that grass banks provide only a temporary fix to a long-term issue. Unless ranchers commit to permanent easements that protect the land, the conservation benefits last only as long as their involvement. What’s to stop them from cashing out eventually, rendering all the invested resources futile?

Another point of contention arises from the ongoing conflict between ranchers and environmentalists. Some argue that ranching is inherently unsustainable and that offering more land to ranchers, a practice known as "welfare ranching," merely perpetuates poor grazing techniques and wastes money [source: Batdorff]. On the other hand, some ranchers remain reluctant to form agreements with conservation groups.

For those who have overcome their biases, however, the gamble has paid off. Not only are both the ranchers and landowners satisfied, but the cows are content as well—and well-fed.