Posted on 05/21/2023 4:29:17 AM PDT by george76
The new BLM rule introducing so-called conservation leasing will likely become the administration’s vehicle for locking up federal property.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is preparing to fundamentally reshape how public lands are managed without congressional approval.
In March, the agency unveiled a sweeping proposal to establish a framework for “conservation leases” that places a newfound priority on preservation. The new Public Lands Rule presents a radical departure from the “multiple use mandate” Congress outlined for the agency in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA).
New Rules Are a ‘Game Changer’..
FLPMA requires federal lands to be used in ways that “best meet the present and future needs of the people.” The proposed rules from the federal bureau, which has 245 million acres under its jurisdiction, jeopardize access to public lands for grazing and development. Under the new framework for conservation leasing, parcels of federal property could be leased out by third-party NGOs that cut off any other uses for decades.
David McDonald, an attorney with the Mountain States Legal Foundation, called BLM’s new rules a “game changer” for how public lands are managed.
“Under this regulation, ‘conservation’ would be a ‘use’ just like mining or timber,” McDonald told The Federalist, adding that “the devil is in the details.”
While the BLM summary of the proposed rules repeatedly claims that conservation is merely being elevated to be “on par” with and not above activities such as grazing, mining, and logging, the text includes definitions that reveal ulterior motives. The rules outline new protections with vague terms such as “landscapes” and require officials to “prioritize protection of such landscapes” in leasing decisions. The text in the federal register also makes repeated references to analyzing “cumulative impacts” in decision-making, a phrase often embedded in climate regulation only to be weaponized by radical green NGOs to shut down projects the environmental lobby opposes.
“This is an attempt by the Biden administration to end multiple use on public lands,” William Perry Pendley, who led the BLM during the Trump administration, told The Federalist. “It’s all part of their 30 for 30 program.”
In 2021, President Joe Biden announced efforts to lock up 30 percent of American lands and waterways by 2030. The new BLM rule to introduce conservation leasing will likely become the administration’s primary vehicle for the initiative.
Other problematic areas of the proposal include vague references to prioritizing “ecosystem resilience” and the implementation of “indigenous knowledge” into analyses that can’t be tested.
“Consistent with applicable law and the management of the area, authorized officers would also be required to avoid authorizing any use of the public lands that permanently impairs ecosystem resilience,” the agency rules state. “Permanent impairment of ecosystem resilience would be difficult or impossible to avoid, for example, on lands on which the BLM has authorized intensive uses, including infrastructure and energy projects or mining, or where BLM has limited discretion to condition or deny the use.”
“This wording to me seems like it could be used to essentially ban any mining or ‘intensive use’ on any BLM land,” McDonald said. “There are a lot of different areas where they could be chipping away at people’s rights.”
“Whether or not it ends up being as bad as it looks could be a very open question,” McDonald added, depending “on how these provisions are integrated as a final rule.”
The Mountain States Legal Foundation, which has been at the forefront of western property issues since the 1970s, has just hired a new head of environmental resources who is looking into the BLM proposal.
Asked whether western ranchers should be concerned, McDonald said he “would be pretty worried.” More than 90 percent of the land owned by the federal government is out West. Although proposed guidelines offer protections for those with valid existing rights, ranchers might lose their chance to renew their claims thanks to competition from deep-pocketed environmental groups that can now claim priority.
“Ranchers should definitely be concerned enough to be paying attention,” McDonald said, adding the proposal has created “storm clouds on the horizon.”
Pendley was more fatalistic. “It’ll drive them out of business,” the former BLM director said. “We have ranches in the West that exist because they have a grazing allotment.”
“Livestock people settled the West, so when you take away the ability of a ranch to graze on an allotment associated with the ranch, then that’s the end of the ranch,” Pendley added. “They’re able to graze their livestock on BLM or Forest Service lands and it makes that ranch economical.”
The new rules appear to come straight from BLM Director Tracy Stone-Manning’s 1992 graduate thesis. While her 2021 nomination was controversial primarily over her history as an ecoterrorist, Biden’s BLM chief also condemned public grazing and promoted a Chinese-style child cap. Stone-Manning now oversees 155 million acres of grazing land, about the size of Arizona and New Mexico.
Grazing Is Good for Our Diet..
BLM’s new rules thus threaten to take out ranchers, the original conservationists. A major blow to regenerative ranching, which incorporates animals as critical to the natural biological cycle, could actually be detrimental to the nation’s health.
In his book, “Food Fix: How to Save Our Health, Our Economy, Our Communities, and Our Planet — One Bite at a Time,” Dr. Mark Hyman writes about the important benefits of regenerative farm practices on both our health and our planet.
“Regenerative grass-fed meat can restore ecosystems, improving soils while sucking carbon from the atmosphere and increasing water storage in soils,” Hyman wrote, urging readers to “choose regeneratively raised animal products whenever possible.”
“They are better for you and better for the animals and help draw down carbon and reverse climate change,” Hyman added.
Even The New York Times has admitted grazing is an important tool to manage land. “A Different Kind of Land Management: Let the Cows Stomp,” said a headline from the paper two years ago.
Grass-fed cattle that graze on public land boost the supply of a healthier alternative, with two to six times more omega-3 fatty acids than factory-farmed meat, which is laced with antibiotics and pesticides. Omega-3 fatty acids enhance immune systems and prevent chronic disease.
BLM Ignores Red-State Needs..
The BLM announced a tour of western states earlier this month to present its new rules on “Conservation and Landscape Health.” Of the five two-hour meetings revealed on the agency calendar, two are virtual, and three are held in urban centers: Denver, Reno, and Albuquerque. Not one is held in a state with a Republican senator or majority-GOP House delegation.
...
The four Republican members of the Idaho congressional delegation promptly sent a letter to the agency demanding senior leaders reassess their public hearing schedule.
“We were disappointed to see not only was Idaho not included, but the in-person locations are geographically concentrated away from many of BLM’s constituents,” lawmakers wrote.
The letter was followed by similar letters to BLM and the Department of the Interior by a coalition of 16 GOP senators representing western states, the Wyoming congressional delegation, and Republicans on the House Natural Resources Committee.
“The administration’s proposal will have considerable implications, fundamentally changing the way the BLM carries out its multiple use and sustained yield mandate under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976,” House lawmakers wrote Wednesday. Republicans demanded the BLM double its public comment period, which is scheduled to end in June. The letter included signatures from 14 lawmakers, including Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert, whose district is home to the BLM’s headquarters on the western slope.
“Their objective is to end all economic use of public lands,” Pendley told The Federalist of the Biden BLM proposal. “Does that mean recreation? I don’t know. It depends on what kind of recreation. I don’t think they like ski resorts.”
Here is the reason the ranches need to graze cattle on the BLM land. First, grass grows there. Ranchers have the right to go to the green high country. They pay a fee per cow. They are in a cattle pool from other ranchers. They maintain fences and keep cowboys up there for the summer. But the main point: The ranchers need to grow hay for the winter feed. Ranches are in deep snow during the winter. The cattle come off the BLM and USFS land in October. The ranch bottomland has to be irrigated during the summer to grow the hay. The amount of hayland is small...it has to be flat river bottom. If the cattle were on the ranch in the summer... then two things happen: They eat the winter feed. And they trample the wet soil and destroy the grass and soil grading.
End the BLM Allotments, no ranch. Ranches would be sold for millionaire housing sites.
dat BLM rules sounds just like the other BLM rules.
“Cumulative impact” + bureaucrats + NGOs = Let Them Eat Bugs!
https://www.outdoorlife.com/federal-land-transfer-beware-politicians-bearing-maps/
Have you ever seen the map I liked above? Nearly the entire western half of the US is federally owned land.
I live in the west, I grew up in the west, I cherish the fact that most of the land is public, and I can go almost anywhere. Almost everyone that lives out here that uses the outdoors will agree that it is a good thing they are public lands. By comparison, go to Northern New York, I lived there a few years ago, almost everything is fenced off, there is no where you can go.
Let me guess. Politically connected organizations that get tax dollars will “lease” the land indefinitely.
Ranchers and logging won’t be the only impacted groups. They will also go after hunting and fishing access to those areas to lock out everyone except for the elites. I guess this will be America’s version of the King’s/Queen’s forests.
well the environmental nuts will soon enough start preventing anyone from stepping on that public land, to save an endangered weed or lizard or something, mark my words
It is critically important to do this. Lands that are not exploited by commercial interests and are left in their pristine state are a preserve for endangered species to thrive! Well, until a fire comes through the rather overgrown area and cooks everything alive leaving no ground cover to prevent erosion. But, hey, you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.
Klaus Slob is evil but there are also other players and groups involved which is scary. Like the head of a hydra. But no matter what head you look at, Soros, Klaus, Bill Gates, etc the beast at the heart of this is the United States. And at the heart of the United States is a demonic presence with a deep hatred for the average God fearing American.
Anyone glance at the headline and get another idea like me? LOL had to read it twice.
Yes, can’t argue that. Madalyn Murray O’Hare came to mind as I read your post. Seems like, in my lifetime anyway, this was near the beginning of the anti-God movement or at least where it picked up steam. She earned her reward, IMHO.
There is definitely an effort to drive the ranchers off BLM and FS lands. I have friends who have Mexican Gray Wolves driving them out. And now that the radial, unqualified Deb Haaland is in charge they will succeed.
Yep, stack us up in urban sardine Apts.
EVs with no where to plug them in.
China owns much of our electric grid.
They will put the squeeze on.
We can only hope their economy collapses partially soon
Their housing market is collapsing.
Shh, they don’t want us to know...
They are overextended in a lot of areas.
Careful what you wish for. We heard predictions that big business would save us, and then we got woke Disney, Google, FB, Bud Light, Blackrock...
Good point!
Adam Smith would say that rational self interest in a free market economy leads to economic well being for both society and the individual. That seems to work unless those who benefit from capitalism, to achieve their goals for society, take away freedom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.