The Bureau of Land Management’s Public Lands Rule, which was announced in late March, would allow the agency to lease federal lands for conservation purposes under its existing “multiple-use” framework, essentially giving conservationists and other environmental groups who are opposed to new fossil fuel development the same right to bid on federal leases as oil companies, miners, and cattle ranchers.
In writing the 1976 law governing BLM’s public land management, Congress specified that the agency should make lands available for mining operations, motorized recreation, natural gas leases, guide concessions, hunting and fishing, scientific study, and more. By allowing conservation to be considered on an equal playing field, the many people, businesses, and industries that depend on public lands for their livelihood would suffer, the states argued.
Importantly, the states argue that the rule would also stifle domestic mineral production at a time when the United States has sought to incentivize EV battery production and manufacturing, most recently through the Inflation Reduction Act and “Made in America” tax incentives aimed at battery manufacturing and critical minerals mining.
In addition, states have argued that the administration has no authority to adopt or implement the proposed rule, which they said violates the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. The administration, for its part, has argued conservation leasing is a critical tool that will help balance the impacts of development and facilitate the restoration of public lands, which have seen new strain from drought, wildfires, and extreme heat conditions in recent years.
Since Congress did not authorize the Interior Department or BLM to act as a de facto conservation lessor in FLPMA, opponents say the administration would be violating its authority by trying to push the conservation policy through via a proposed rule.