Repealing the Bureau of Land Management’s Public Lands Rule could leave Wyoming’s wildlife at risk, conservation advocates said.
The U.S. Department of the Interior announced its intent to repeal the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 2024 Conservation and Landscape Health Rule, better known as the Public Lands Rule, last week.
Wyoming’s congressional delegation praised the move, saying it would ease unnecessary restrictions on energy exploration, grazing and other extractive uses on hundreds of thousands of acres of federal land in Wyoming and across the West.
The Public Lands Rule favors conservation, which the delegation criticized as essentially cutting those lands off from uses that are vital to local economies in Wyoming.
However, wildlife advocates told Cowboy State Daily they’re worried about the possible effects on wildlife habitat, migration routes and similar concerns.
Avid outdoorswoman Amber Travsky of Laramie likened it to a similar effort to eliminate the U.S. Forest Service’s Roadless Rule, insofar as it could put wildlife conservation in last place, behind extractive uses.
“Conservation takes a very back seat” under the proposed federal land rule rollbacks, she said.
Travsky isn’t unsympathetic to industry. She works as a private consultant, advising energy companies on how to factor conservation into their projects.
She thinks the regulation rollbacks might be happening too fast, and without enough ground-level consultation between various stakeholders, such as energy companies, hunters, recreationists and ranchers.
Wyoming Wildlife Federation policy coordinator Nat Paterson said that land use decisions are often best made by bringing together interest groups at the local level, rather than sweeping top-down decisions.
The Department of the Interior’s announcement Wednesday kicked off a 60-day public comment period for people to weigh in on the proposed repeal of the Public Lands Rule.
Changing The Experience
A broad approach of making extractive uses the top priority would hamper the ability of many people to enjoy Wyoming’s wide-open, remote spaces, Travsky said.
“That would greatly change what people like me experience,” said Travsky, who enjoys mountain biking, hiking and other such outdoor activities.
Wildlife habitat and migration routes need long-term protection; sometimes people must give up short-term gains, she said.
“There needs to be an understanding that some areas are really important for wildlife. If I can’t go out and mountain bike in a certain area, that’s OK with me. I don’t need trails everywhere,” she said.
Greater Little Mountain Sets Example
Paterson said he’s concerned about the “wholesale rollback” of federal land use rules.
However, it’s too early to tell exactly how eliminating the BLM Public Lands Rule might affect Wyoming, he added.
He pointed to the protection of the Greater Little Mountain area in the BLM’s Rock Springs region as an example of doing things the right way.
The BLM’s Rock Springs Resource Management Plan (RMP) has been a source of controversy. Many Wyomingites argued that the BLM’s preferred alternative was far too restrictive toward motorized public access, cattle grazing, mining and other uses.
However there was agreement that within that broad plan, one remote segment, the Greater Little Mountain Area, would remain essentially untouched.
Greater Little Mountain is noted for, among other things, being prime mule deer habitat.
An agreement over the Greater Little Mountain area was accomplished by bringing all the interest groups together at the state and local level, and finding a reasonable compromise, Paterson said.
He added that to his knowledge, eliminating the BLM’s Public Lands Rule probably wouldn’t threaten Greater Little Mountain.
“I think that because of the work that was done. We’re probably not too concerned about that area. Because it has a lot of local buy-in and a lot of state-level buy-in,” he said.
Mark Heinz can be reached at mark@cowboystatedaily.com.
