WeVote

Bill

Bill

SF 16

Subleasing of state lands-exemptions.

2026 Regular Session

The bill allows lessees to graze non-owned livestock with a per-head monthly fee instead of traditional subleaseing, under notified and defined rules.

Bill Number Assigned
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 16

Summary — SF 16 (2025): Subleasing of State Lands — Exemptions

Status: Bill Number Assigned (Introduced Jan 14, 2025)
Primary sponsor: Sinclair
Companion: HF 1149

This bill amends W.S. 36‑5‑105 to change how subleasing and grazing by non‑owned livestock on state grazing leases are handled, creates a new non‑owned livestock fee option, and repeals certain older subleasing provisions. The bill text includes an effective date (see Procedural/TIMELINE).

Key purpose and intent
- Provide lessees of state grazing lands an alternative to traditional subleasing by allowing the grazing of non‑owned livestock under specified notification and fee rules.
- Clarify/limit when sublease approval is required and create an administratively set non‑owned livestock fee as an option in lieu of sharing excess rental income.

Major provisions and changes
- Sublease revenue share: Retains the rule that when lands are subleased, one‑half of the “excess rental” (the money received for use of the leased lands minus the annual lease rental) must be paid to the state.
- Non‑owned livestock option: A lessee who allows livestock they do not own to graze can avoid traditional sublease approval by:
- Providing documentation of non‑owned livestock grazing to the Office of State Lands and Investments, and
- Filing notice of the presence of non‑owned livestock on a form supplied by the Office within 30 days after the livestock arrive on the leased land.
- Paying a monthly fee per head of non‑owned livestock, established by the Board of Land Commissioners, not to exceed 50% of the annual animal‑unit‑month (AUM) rental rate. Payment is due within 30 days after removal of the animals.
- Ownership‑commonality exemption: If the lessee notifies the Office that the entities holding the lease and owning the livestock have common ownership of at least 80%, the lessee will not be required to obtain sublease approval or pay the non‑owned livestock fee (i.e., an exemption from those requirements).
- Repeals: The bill repeals W.S. 36‑5‑105(d)(iv)(A)–(C), (v) and (vi) (older subleasing provisions).
- Definitions: The bill references the statutory definition of “animal unit month” (W.S. 41‑3‑116(a)(ii)) and defines “excess rental” for purposes of calculating sublease shares.

Who is affected
- Primary: Lessees of state grazing lands, ranchers who graze livestock on state leases, and livestock owners who are not the leaseholder.
- State agencies: Office of State Lands and Investments (administration/recording and fee collection) and the Board of Land Commissioners (authority to set the non‑owned livestock fee).
- Fiscal impact: Potentially affects non‑administrative revenue to the state (rental/fee receipts).

Fiscal note
- The Legislative Service Office reports the fiscal impact is indeterminable. Uncertainty stems from:
- Lessees’ choice between submitting a sublease (paying half the excess rental) or using the non‑owned livestock fee option, and
- The Board’s yet‑to‑be‑set fee amount (fee may be up to 50% of annual AUM rental). LSO cannot predict net revenue increase or decrease.

Procedural / timeline notes
- Introduced Jan 14, 2025; referred to Education (committee activity recorded Jan 16–30, 2025). Subcommittee recommended passage. Bill was renumbered in committee actions (referenced as SF 171 in one report).
- The bill text includes a Section stating it is effective July 1, 2026.
- Documents provided contain an inconsistent retroactivity statement (retroactive to Jan 1, 2025) that appears to belong to another measure; the bill’s own Section 3 sets July 1, 2026 as the effective date. Users should confirm the final enrolled version for any retroactivity or effective‑date language.

Note: This summary focuses on the state lands/grazing provisions contained in SF 16. The provided packet includes some inconsistent/likely unrelated text (school district reorganization language); that text does not appear to be part of the grazing/subleasing changes described above.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.