Wyoming lawmakers demand BLM hear from public land users facing ban.

Wyoming Lawmakers Demand BLM Hear from Public on Proposed Conservation Leasing

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is facing criticism from Wyoming lawmakers over a proposed framework for “conservation leasing” that threatens to undermine the agency’s “multiple use mandate” by elevating conservation above grazing, recreation, and development. The lawmakers argue that the BLM is locking up public land without hearing from those who rely on it, including ranchers, farmers, and tribes.

BLM’s Proposed Framework

The BLM’s new Public Lands Rule would strip access to public lands locked off from multiple uses, which goes against the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA). The law stipulates public lands must be available to “best meet the present and future needs of the people,” which means allowing lands to be used for a variety of purposes, from livestock grazing to resource development.

Wyoming Lawmakers’ Criticism

Republican representatives from Wyoming, including Harriet Hageman and Sens. Cynthia Lummis and John Barrasso, condemned the BLM effort to “side-step Congress to re-define BLM’s multiple-use mandate.” They argue that the proposed rule would empower radical environmentalist groups to restrict public access to the opportunities and resources Congress has ensured these public lands provide.

Wyoming lawmakers also took issue with the BLM’s public meeting schedule, with a mere five two-hour hearings on the calendar, two of which are virtual. The other three are planned to be held in urban city centers such as Denver, Reno, and Albuquerque. No state with a single Republican senator is slotted to host BLM officials over the proposed framework.

Criticism from Other Western States

The letter from Wyoming lawmakers comes a week after the four-member Idaho congressional delegation sent a letter to the BLM with similar criticism. On Wednesday, a coalition of 16 Republican senators representing western states sent their own letter to the bureau demanding the agency withdraw the new rules altogether.

Court Challenge Likely

The BLM’s proposed framework appears to come straight from BLM Director Tracy Stone-Manning’s graduate playbook. While the controversy surrounding the BLM director’s nomination proceedings two years ago primarily focused on her past history as an ecoterrorist, her 1992 graduate thesis included proposals for population control and criticism of public grazing. The framework is also likely to face a court challenge if successfully implemented. The Supreme Court narrowed the scope of authority for federal agencies to circumvent Congress with broad-range proposals in West Virginia v. EPA last summer.

About the Author

Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist and the author of Social Justice Redux, a conservative newsletter on culture, health, and wellness. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at [email protected].