A coalition of groups representing public lands grazing, mining, energy and timber harvest is suing the U.S. Department of Interior and Bureau of Land Management over a controversial rule that would allow federal land to be leased solely for conservation.

BLM’s Conservation and Land Health rule would undermine the agency’s mandate to manage public land for multiple use under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. The rule threatens grazing, mineral and energy development, timber harvest and recreation, the groups contend.

The rule went into effect June 10. The lawsuit — asking the rule be set aside — was filed July 12 in U.S. District Court for Wyoming.

The rule establishes two new categories of leases for what BLM misleadingly called land “use” — mitigation leases and restoration leases, the groups said in the legal complaint.

Prioritizing conservation

“With the rule, BLM has converted a statute for managing the productive use of lands into one of non-use, prioritizing conservation above, and to the exclusion of, the exclusively productive activities that FLPMA has governed for nearly half a century,” the complaint states.

The groups contend among other things, the rule:

• Interprets the word “use” in FLPMA to include “non-use.”

• Provides to BLM the power to set aside land for conservation, which Congress has reserved for itself or has granted in tightly limited circumstances.

• Authorizes overarching land-use planning determinations that prioritize conservation through mitigation and restoration leases and areas of critical environmental concern without public involvement that federal law expressly requires.

Multiple use

“The rule is also arbitrary and capricious, in part because it offers virtually no guidance as to when land can or can’t be set aside for mitigation or restoration and (areas of critical environmental concern). To top it off, the rule is barred by the Congressional Review Act and was promulgated without complying with the National Environmental Policy Act,” the complaint states.

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act embodies a national policy that “the public lands be managed in a manner which recognizes the nation’s need for domestic sources of minerals, food, timber and fiber from the public lands,” it states.

“It requires BLM to strike a balance among many competing uses to which land can be put, including, but not limited to, recreation, range, timber, minerals, watersheds, wildlife and fish, and natural scenic, scientific and historical values,” the complaint states.

At its core, the rule creates a new “use” for federal lands — conservation, which is to say non-use — “on par” with the productive uses subject to FLPMA’s multiple use and sustained yield mandate.

Public excluded

Individuals, businesses, nongovernmental organizations, Tribal governments, conservation districts and state and fish and wildlife agencies can apply for leases.

Once BLM issues a conservation lease, it “shall not” issue new authorizations to use the leased lands if the use would be incompatible with the authorized conservation. But the rule doesn’t define “compatible” or “incompatible,” which would be determined by a BLM authorized officer.

The complaint also states the rule:

• Lacks any requirement for public involvement in the application process.

• Does not require BLM to publish preliminary conservation leasing decisions in the Federal Register, hold hearings or allow for or consider comments.

• Doesn’t limit conservation leases to lands where the resource management plan includes conservation.

• Prioritizes “intact landscapes” and consideration of “land health” standards across all ecosystems.

• Expands the use of areas of critical environmental concern without public notice and comment.

Plaintiffs

The lawsuit was filed by American Farm Bureau Federation, American Exploration & Mining Association, American Forest Resource Council, American Petroleum Institute, American Sheep Industry Association, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Mining Association, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, National County Farm & Ranch Bureau, Public Lands Council, Western Energy Alliance and Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation.