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.”
“Sort of reminds me of “Oath of Fealty” by Larry Niven.”
I’ve been thinking more along the lines of Chunk Kuo by David Wingrove.
Bingo! And that was / is / will be how it's done. Our dear leaders....
New rules added by one administration can be suspended and reversed by the next administration. I’d like to see the next administration sell off a large amount of BLM land, maybe under the guise of paying down the national debt incurred by the current administration.
Indeed.
I’ve fought them my entire life. I’m tired and too old to take a punch.
There aren’t any Jeff Heads and Mike Pierce’s left to fight them.
Democrats think it’s their land
Sold to who and for what purposes.
Millions of Americans use public lands for various reasons.
Your willing to lock them out.
For a one time gain that will be used up in a year or so.
Saw some “prime rib hamburger” on sale this week for $7.99 /lb. Almost the price of regular hamburger- I might give it a try.
No!!! Keep those land public and accessible by the American people. I cannot imagine a worst decision than to sell those lands and allow people to fence them off
If I did my math right @6000/acre and 245 million acres that would be $1.715 trillion. If I am wrong please correct me if I am right, this doesn’t put a dent in the overspending that our government has done in the last 30 years.
No selling is not the answer but I can think of something that would work
There is no war
I’ve seen no Progressive blood on the streets
I like your thinking.
This is physical proof that preservation is ecologically a catastrophic policy.
30% OF THE US LAND MASS IS OWNED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. WITH NEW MONUMENTS. AND THEY PLAN TO ANNEX EXISTING ONES.
MAKES OIL DRILLING, AND MINERAL MINING OFF LIMITS But he must get moving and designate many more national monuments to save 30 percent of the United States by 2030.
https://gailhonadle.substack.com/p/30-of-the-us-land-mass-is-owned-by
I know I missed some, some I didn’t know of. But it all boils down to linking all the natural resources and selling them to foreign countries, I have limited space, so more links are in the comments. I write FREE, I’m not a professional. And if you are a writer Subtack is where you can go. I joined under the Free subscription.
Check out some of the others on the Biden Depression, spending.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) not interested in constituents who live near public land. The globalists’ war on food
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4152939/posts
Many of the family farmers and ranchers will be soon broke as the arsonists politicians are also introducing exotic, not native Canadian HUGE wolves that are not endangered.
Ted Turner wants to kill 6+ Billion people - to save the planet
Vermejo is a 550,000-acre Ted Turner dude ranch in northeastern New Mexico - west of Raton.. Vermejo Park was originally part of a Spanish - Maxwell Land Grant.. where locals hunted, fished, obtained firewood and logs for their homes.. no longer.
Coal mines closed, natural gas, and oil production ended.
Or Jim Jones?
I cannot imagine the stupidity of grinding prime rib met into hamburger.
To prevent any growth so people will be fully dependent on the government and then they completely control you.
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.