Phil Taylor, E&E News

January 31, 2011

Nearly 60 Republican lawmakers, mostly from the West, on Friday asked Interior Secretary Ken Salazar to rescind a new policy that directs field managers to inventory and protect wilderness-quality lands, arguing that it would significantly affect rural economies.

In a letter from the Western caucuses of both chambers, the members of Congress warned that Interior's decision to announce the policy after last month's recess and without congressional input threatens future wilderness cooperation and sows public distrust.

"As best we can tell, Congress was left in the dark regarding any process the DOI may have undertaken in the preparation of this decision," said the letter authored by Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) and co-signed by 55 others.

They argued that Interior's new "wild lands" policy flouts the intent of the Wilderness Act -- which gives Congress authority to designate wilderness -- and "appears to be an underhanded attempt by DOI to circumvent Congress and the federal rulemaking process by designating millions of acres of publicly owned lands in Western states as de facto wilderness."

The lawmakers urged Salazar to withdraw the order and asked the agency to consult with Congress if it discovers lands worthy of wilderness protections.

The letter comes amid a hail of criticism from Western governors, counties, oil and gas companies and ranching groups that fear the Bureau of Land Management policy will lock up Western lands from development.

Salazar, backed by environmental groups and dozens of Democrats in the House, last week said the policy is needed so that BLM can fulfill its obligations to manage lands for multiple uses, including oil and gas development, motorized recreation, archaeological resources and wilderness (E&E Daily, Jan. 27).

"We're on very solid grounds," Salazar said following an Interior employee town hall last week. "I feel very comfortable with the fact that we've put wilderness back at the table where it had been taken away from the table for so many years."

A BLM source Friday said the agency's state offices had been requesting clarity on how to manage roadless lands ever since the agency's wilderness guidance was thrown out as part of a 2003 settlement between then-Interior Secretary Gale Norton and former Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt (R).

BLM, in fact, has always maintained the authority to identify lands that are unsuitable for certain activities as part of the planning process. The new policy asks field managers to give wilderness equal weight to uses such as oil and gas development and off-highway vehicle use.

“I am increasingly concerned by Secretary Salazar’s and the current Administration’s ongoing efforts to circumvent Congress when it comes to creating new public lands policies.  The DOI’s unilateral decisions regarding the management of our public lands and resources are detrimental to communities and businesses throughout the West.  Their lack of regard for the impact this will have on local economies is unacceptable.  It is time that they start taking into consideration the people that will be hurt by their decisions to operate in a vacuum, starting with the withdrawal of Secretarial Order 3310,” said Congressman Bishop.  ““Why would anyone who wears a cowboy hat and boots in public work in private to hurt ranchers, outdoorsman and other western industries that depend upon access to our public lands.  It makes no sense.”

Excerpts of the letter:

This directive will significantly impact western economies and rural communities, which depend on multiple-use access to federal lands.

We are also concerned that because this action was taken without input from Members of Congress and local officials, who would be affected by the order, the prospects of a cooperative working relationship about wilderness have been damaged.

We believe this order represents a considerable departure from the method for designating lands as "Wilderness Areas" specified in the Wilderness Act of 1964. 

As you know, the Wilderness Act gives the U.S. Congress -- and only the U.S. Congress -- the power to designate public lands as protected "Wilderness Areas."  Secretarial Order 3310 appears to be an underhanded attempt by DOI to circumvent Congress and the federal rulemaking process…

We believe public lands should be managed in a way that provides the greatest benefit to the public. 

Multiple-use has been the bedrock for many rural western economies for decades.

This new “wild lands” policy introduces more uncertainty and will arbitrarily delay the reasonable use and development of our public lands.  In order to prevent a collapse of several rural economies in the West and forestall continued uncertainty and job loss in western public land states, we urge you to withdraw Secretarial Order 3310 and work with Congress to devise balanced policies for our public lands.

View the full list of Representatives and Senators who supported the letter here

Today, a bipartisan coalition of House Members joined together to introduce legislation [H.R. 509] that will remove the Gray Wolf from consideration under the Endangered Special Act (ESA).  The following four lead members Denny Rehberg (R-MT), Jim Matheson (D-UT), Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), and Mike Ross (D-AR) are calling for new management regime for the gray wolf that will empower state and local officials to create and implement recovery plans on a state by state basis.

“The gray wolf isn’t endangered, which is why Republicans and Democrats alike are joining forces to end the misuse of the Endangered Species Act to advance extremist policy agendas,” said Rehberg, a rancher from Billings.  “I heard from thousands of Montanans, and folks get it.  They know that states are better at managing our own local wildlife than the federal government thousands of miles away.  Unless there’s a darn good reason – and there’s not – the federal government has no business getting involved.  Years of research, dedicated efforts by land owners and local officials, and the expert opinions of on-the-ground wildlife managers have been given a back seat to profit-motivated environmental groups.  We need to end this abuse and solve an issue that should have been put to rest years ago.”

“Scientists and wolf recovery advocates agree – the gray wolf is back. Since it is no longer endangered, it should be de-listed as a species, managed as others species are--by state wildlife agencies-- and time, money and effort can be focused where it’s needed,” said Matheson.

“The ESA should be based on sound science, not a political agenda; but it is clear that Washington has caved to environmentalists determined to prevent the gray wolf’s delisting. We need a balanced and reasonable approach to wolf management that is carried out by the proper officials: Wyoming’s on the ground experts.  As long as wolves continue to hurt Wyoming’s livestock owners and attack large game herds, I will continue to fight for this predator’s delisting,” said Lummis.

“Wildlife recovery is a very important and very sensitive issue and I believe the federal government should listen to state and local wildlife officials in these matters,” said Ross, who is also Co-Chair of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus.  “Excessive wolf populations are having a devastating impact on elk, moose, deer and other species and each state has its own unique set of challenges.  Both the Obama and Bush Administrations have already recommended the de-listing of wolves in many states and turning their management over to state wildlife agencies because it is the right thing to do to keep our nation’s sensitive ecosystem in balance.”

The following 12 Members are also original sponsors of the legislation:

1)                 Rob Bishop (R-UT)

2)                 Leonard Boswell (D-IA)

3)                 Paul Broun (R-GA)

4)                 Dennis Cardoza (D-CA)

5)                 Jason Chaffetz (R-UT)

6)                 Dean Heller (R-NV)

7)                  John Kline (R-MN)

8)                  Mike Simpson (R-ID)

9)                  Greg Walden (R-OR)

10)             Don Young (R-AK)

11)             Dan Boren (D-OK)

12)             Raul Labrador (R-ID)

-30-

“I thank my colleagues for the honor of leading this caucus,” Congressman Pearce stated. “For too long, many Members of Congress, the Executive Branch, and other groups and organizations have chosen to ignore the fundamental principles that are so important to our constitutional liberties. Nothing is more western than private property rights and the ability to work for a living, and these very freedoms have come under fierce attack. As chairman, I will defend the values that are the building blocks of the Republic.  In my frequent travels around New Mexico, I am always reminded of the suffering faced by New Mexicans as jobs are taxed out of existence. I am absolutely convinced that now is time to take back our economic and constitutional rights. The time has come to lead the charge, rebuilding the industries and economies obliterated by overregulation, and speaking out for hard-working Americans. As Chairman, I will work diligently to unite Members who will focus the policy debate on common-sense environmental and natural resource policy.”

Congressman Heller stated that, “With nearly 85% of Nevada federally controlled, federal public land policies and management have a direct impact on my constituents.  There will be many issues impacting western states over the next two years.  Whether we are fighting for public land access or responsible resource development for job creation, it is essential that western Members of Congress stand together and work for our common interests.”

“For nearly two decades, the Congressional Western Caucus has provided advocacy and leadership in Congress on issues that impact western and rural communities and industries.  My decision to step down as Chairman comes as I take on new responsibilities with the House Rules Committee and as Chairman of the House Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.  I am grateful to have had the opportunity to serve as Chairman and am proud of our ongoing and collective efforts to protect the livelihoods of all westerners.  While I will no longer serve as Chairman, I will continue to be actively involved in the Western Caucus as we continue to fight for improved access to our public lands, increased research and development of our abundant energy resources and job creation for all.  As both Chairman of the Subcommittee and a Member of the Western Caucus, I will continue to advocate that economic growth and responsible stewardship of our natural resources are not mutually exclusive and can be accomplished through balanced reforms.  I am confident that both Rep. Pearce and Rep. Heller will provide exceptional leadership,” said Congressman Bishop.

The Congressional Western Caucus was established in 1993 during the 103^rd Congress to enhance, sustain, and preserve the West’s dynamic and unique culture, and to find innovative solutions that address the distinctive concerns facing western and rural communities.

Wilderness Policy Sparks Western Ire

An Initiative to Expand Protection of Unspoiled Lands Has Drawn Opposition From Energy Companies and Ranchers

By Stephanie Simon, Wall Street Journal

The Organ Mountains in Las Cruces, N.M., left, is one of the sites the Bureau of Land Management may seek to preserve under a new federal government initiative aiming to protect more public lands

An Obama administration directive designed to preserve more public lands as wilderness is stirring anger in the West, where ranchers, sportsmen and energy companies say they could lose access to acreage they count on for their recreation and livelihood.

The regulatory change, initiated this month, directs the Bureau of Land Management to survey its vast holdings stretching between Alaska, Arizona, California and Colorado, in search of unspoiled back country. The agency can then designate these tracts—potentially millions of acres—as "wild lands."

Protections will vary from site to site, but in general such lands will be shielded from activities that disrupt habitat or destroy the solitude of the wild, according to the Interior Department. That might mean banning oil drilling, uranium mining or cattle grazing in some areas. It also could mean restrictions on recreational activities, such as snowmobiling or biking.

Stephanie Simon explains why the Obama Administration's surprise move last week to give the Bureau of Land Management the power to designate millions of acres as "wild lands" has sparked an uproar among Republicans and would-be developers.

"Americans love the wild places where they hunt, fish, hike and get away from it all, and they expect these lands to be protected wisely on their behalf," Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said in announcing the policy shift late last week.

But the move, which did not require legislative approval, has drawn a hostile response from many in the West. "This harms economic growth," said Rep. Rob Bishop, a Utah Republican who takes over next month as chair of the House subcommittee on public lands. "The West is being abused."

House Republicans, who will hold the majority in the new Congress that arrives next week, say they plan hearings on the new policy and perhaps seek to cut funding to the BLM for identifying and managing wild lands.

The administration's initiative reasserts a power the BLM used extensively in the 1970s and 1980s to designate stretches of prairie, desert, mountain range or river basin as wild and to limit human intrusion on those landscapes. The agency largely relinquished this practice in 2003 to settle a lawsuit by the governor of Utah, who was seeking to block the BLM from setting aside 2.6 million acres in his state as wilderness.

The administration's move overrides the 2003 agreement and asserts that preserving the wild qualities of remote lands is a "high priority."

Mr. Salazar and BLM officials have tried to counter criticism with a pledge to hold public hearings before designating areas as wild lands. They also say they won't necessarily bar all intrusive activities; they may, for instance, allow vehicular travel on existing roads. The plans developed to protect each region will be revisited every 10 to 20 years, said Jeff Jarvis, a BLM division chief.

None of that reassures Jim Hagenbarth, a Montana rancher who leases BLM land to graze cattle. He fears he might lose some of his leases to wild lands designations, or be barred from such practices as burning off sagebrush to clear room for the grasses that cattle prefer. He also frets that more protected wilderness will mean more habitat for wolves, grizzlies and other predators who occasionally raid his herds.

"We're extremely worried," Mr. Hagenbarth says.

The initiative also has drawn opposition from the energy industry. Kathleen Sgamma, a director of the Western Energy Alliance, which represents 400 oil and natural-gas companies, said the new policy could block promising lands from drilling. The Obama administration has opened several million acres to leases by energy companies but has revoked or restricted other plans to drill on public lands. Ms. Sgamma said that had forced the industry to cancel nearly $4 billion in investment this year alone.

Such fears are heightened by a draft BLM memo that became public earlier this year outlining strategies for protecting up to 140 million acres of BLM land—an area the size of Colorado and Wyoming combined. Not all this land was deemed sufficiently untouched to qualify as wild, but the memo listed sites in New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Colorado, California and Utah as likely candidates.

The BLM says the memo was just an exercise in brainstorming, but critics see the outlines of a bid to put more land off-limits.

"The message of the [midterm] election is we want less regulation, less government intrusion. We want to keep these lands open," said Rep. Dean Heller, a Nevada Republican.

The BLM manages more than 250 million acres across the western U.S. and Alaska. The agency now protects about 22 million acres as wilderness. The National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service also administer wilderness areas. In total, wilderness protections extend across about 5% of the U.S. About half the total wilderness acreage is in Alaska.

Environmentalists say protecting wild lands is crucial—for flora and fauna, for humans craving solitude and even for economic growth, as tourists may be drawn to the hiking, hunting and rock-climbing often allowed in wilderness areas."The economy is often tied to the health of the landscape," said Josh Pollock, a director at the Center for Native Ecosystems in Denver."Some of these places," he added, "are absolutely stunning."

Rep. Bishop Targets Restrictions on Use of Federal Lands

By Patrick O'Connor, Wall Street Journal Washington Wire

Rep. Rob Bishop (R., Utah), who was just announced as the incoming chairman of a subcommittee that oversees federal lands, issued a call-to-arms on behalf of farmers, ranchers and miners that have tussled with the federal government in recent years over the use of public land.

In a press release announcing his chairmanship of the Natural Resources Committee’s panel on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands, Mr. Bishop said the federal government has placed “inequitable burdens” on “communities that rely on access to our nation’s natural resources and lands.”

Out West, many farmers, ranchers and miners rely on the use of federal lands, and newly empowered Republicans like Mr. Bishop are eager to reassert themselves on behalf of these users in this often-overlooked arena. The Utah Republican complained that the Obama administration has made “unilateral decisions that circumvent congressional process and local input.”

“Over the past two years, our nation’s public land users, industries and many local rural economies essential to the future vitality of our country have been unduly targeted by an administration working in concert with radical special interests,” Mr. Bishop said.

He said that people can use federal land for commercial purposes without harming the environment.

“Multiple use and the responsible stewardship of our federally managed lands are not mutually exclusive,” he said. “The interests of all parties and stakeholders can and should be recognized in the development of our natural resource policies.”

Mr. Bishop went on to say, “Unfortunately, this has not occurred in recent years and is one change that I will champion under the new majority.”

“Secretary Salazar’s decision to change the existing policy is a blatant attempt to usurp Congress’ role over public land management.   The Constitution gives exclusive control of the public lands to Congress, and the only authority that the Executive branch agencies exercise over the federal lands is that which is delegated by Congress,” said Western Caucus Chairman Rob Bishop.  “Make no mistake about it, this decision will seriously hinder domestic energy development and further contributes to the uncertainty and economic distress that continues to prevent the creation of new jobs in a region that has unduly suffered from this Administration’s radical policies.   This is little more than an early Christmas present to the far left extremists who oppose the multiple use of our nation’s public lands.”

Today’s announcement directly contradicts previous assurances Secretary Salazar gave to Congress that the Utah Wilderness Settlement Agreement is consistent with federal law, thus validating that agencies do not have the authority to create de facto wilderness. 

“It was only yesterday that President Obama spoke about the importance of cooperation.  Yet today his administration has turned around and deliberately slapped western communities in the face. It has become commonplace that this Administration attempts to arbitrarily regulate that which they cannot successfully legislate.  Unfortunately, this is the kind of doublespeak we have come to expect from this administration,” Bishop added. 

“In order to work cooperatively, we need to trust one another.  The announcement today calls into question whether Secretary Salazar’s word can be trusted,” Bishop concluded. “I am concerned that today’s decision puts the prospects of future congressional designation of wilderness at serious risk.” 

-30-

Last week the Congressional Western Caucus introduced the State Sovereignty Wildlife Management Act [H.R. 6485], which addresses the very concerns outlined by the Arizona Game and Fish Commission.   H.R. 6485 would return oversight and management of the gray wolf populations back to the states and local governments.  

Arizona Game and Fish reaffirms commitment to Mexican wolf conservation

Dec. 7, 2010

PHOENIX – On Dec. 4, the Arizona Game and Fish Commission voted to support Congressional actions to delist the gray wolf from protection under the Endangered Species Act.

The commission reaffirmed its strong commitment to Mexican wolf conservation, but recognized that progress on the program had been stalled since 2001 due to the current federal process that guides Mexican wolf conservation and the impact of unceasing environmental litigation.

“The current Mexican wolf conservation program is in gridlock, and while we support the Endangered Species Act, we recognize that in the case of the wolf, it has helped create an impasse that could lead to the demise of the species in the wild,” says Terry Johnson, Ph.D., endangered species coordinator of the Game and Fish Department. “The discussion that led to the Game and Fish Commission’s decision recognizes that it is both unfortunate, and ironic that successful Mexican wolf conservation may hinge on removing it from the Congressional act intended to help restore it.”

Through the commission’s action, they anticipate that the Game and Fish Department will become even more heavily involved in planning the future of the species and the day-to-day activities in a more affordable, efficient and effective manner

“Continuous litigation on wildlife conservation efforts, including wolves, has left wildlife management decisions to the judiciary instead of with the experts – the natural resources agencies. This litigation-driven bureaucratic process also drives up the cost of conservation, making Mexican wolf conservation unaffordable for anyone,” added Johnson.

The commission discussed that Congressional involvement is necessary to break the regulatory and litigious gridlock that Mexican wolf conservation has endured for many years before the demise of the species in the wild.

Federal partnerships have been, and will continue to be, essential to continuing Mexican wolf conservation, and the commission invites all stakeholders to the table who are willing to participate in seeking solutions that will lead to effective, productive Mexican wolf conservation.

Wolves in Arizona will continue to be protected wildlife through state statutes.

Arizona’s involvement in Mexican wolf conservation began in the mid-1980s, with exploration of the feasibility of reintroducing wolves in Arizona and New Mexico. In 1996, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service selected the Blue Range area in east-central Arizona as the reintroduction site, and the first 11 captive-reared wolves were released there in 1998. The Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area encompasses east-central Arizona and west-central New Mexico. The Fort Apache Indian Reservation also plays an integral part in the reintroduction effort.

To learn more, visit www.azgfd.gov/wolf.

“Wolf depredation of livestock is becoming increasingly prevalent in areas where wolves have been introduced under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). We lost a couple of calves and a cow this summer,” said NCBA President-elect and Montana rancher Bill Donald. “When the pack on our ranch grows to more than eight,! wolf depredation of livestock starts. If the pack remains small it doesn’t bother cattle. This is evidence that wolves no longer need to be listed under the ESA. However, instead of delisting wolves, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) continuously increases ESA Recovery Plan goals, making delisting impossible.”

According to PLC President and federal lands rancher John Falen, unlike many species listed under the ESA, wolves pose a serious threat to wildlife, humans and private property, especially livestock. Falen said the FWS does not have resources to manage continued listing of the gray wolf under the ESA. More specifically, he noted that studies have shown for every confirmed kill of livestock there are seven to eight that go unconfirmed.

“Rather than continuing to allow the distant federal government to dictate how ranchers manage and care for their herds, the State Sovereignty Wildlife Management Act would r! eturn authority to the states where it rightly belongs,” Falen said. “Wolf depredation threatens ranchers’ livelihoods and rural communities and economies relying on a profitable agricultural industry. It is time to end the unwarranted listing of the gray wolf. We urge more members of Congress to support this legislation.”

###