fbpx

John Rader

Field Notes


Tell the BLM to keep Wyoming wildlife habitat off the auction block

Posted on by John Rader

Tell the BLM to keep Wyoming wildlife habitat off the auction block

At the start of 2022, the federal government plans to lease more than 179,000 acres of public lands in Wyoming for oil and gas development.

While the Wyoming Outdoor Council appreciates that the Bureau of Land Management removed many parcels within “priority” or “core” sage-grouse habitat from this sale, most of the remaining parcels are still well within the imperiled bird’s range. Sage-grouse are in steep decline across the West, and the federal government is currently updating its management plans in an effort to prevent an Endangered Species Act listing. Until we have an updated strategy, based on the best available science, we should not be offering up sage-grouse habitat for industrial development.

The BLM is accepting public comment until Dec. 1. If you have a moment, please to send a brief, personal message to the BLM asking that sensitive wildlife habitat be removed from the sale.

SUBMIT A PUBLIC COMMENT

As you may know, lease sales were paused early this year so the Department of the Interior could conduct a review of the program because of fiscal waste and problems with accountability and transparency that the Government Accountability Office has flagged for decades. That review has still not been completed, but for the time being a federal judge has ordered leasing to resume.

The upcoming sale illustrates some of the faults with the current leasing system. It includes parcels adjacent to wilderness study areas, in some of our best wildlife habitat, and in areas that are highly prized for backcountry recreation and hunting — even though they’ve been shown to have low potential for ever producing oil and gas. The BLM did not meet its obligation to consult meaningfully with Tribes that have ancestral ties to the region. And the environmental review did not consider localized impacts of climate change, such as the effects on wildlife habitat, water resources, or wildfires.

Five million acres of public lands in Wyoming are leased for oil and gas but not yet developed. Clearly the industry has what it needs to continue business-as-usual drilling and production for many years to come, so let’s make sure our irreplaceable wildlife have the space they need to thrive.

Field Notes


Risks must be addressed before “advanced” nuclear reactors come to Wyoming

Posted on by John Rader

Risks must be addressed before “advanced” nuclear reactors come to Wyoming

Wyoming’s energy sector is a critical element of our state’s economy, providing revenue for public services and good-paying jobs that support our communities. Most of the energy we produce is exported and, as such, our energy economy is heavily influenced by the global market, which is rapidly turning towards decarbonization. Nuclear energy is a carbon-neutral power source, one that the federal Department of Energy considers critical for combating climate change. But boondoggles in other states and countries demonstrate that the new, untested technologies supported by the federal government pose economic, environmental, and safety risks that must be thoroughly considered before “advanced” nuclear reactors are constructed in Wyoming. 

Elected officials in Wyoming have voiced support for an experimental nuclear power plant known as the Natrium project, proposed by Rocky Mountain Power and TerraPower, a nuclear design and development firm founded by Bill Gates. 

Gates, Gov. Mark Gordon, and U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm unveiled the proposal to much fanfare this June, touting the potential for diversifying the state’s energy economy and job market while adding zero-emissions power generation to the grid. The reactor is planned to be built on the site of one of several coal-fired power plants that Rocky Mountain Power’s parent company PacifiCorp plans to close in the coming years — in the communities of Kemmerer, Rock Springs, Glenrock, and Gillette. It comes with a $1 billion minimum price tag (capped at a potential $4 billion), half of which will be funded by the federal government, and is a sodium-cooled fast reactor that uses molten metal rather than water as coolant. The developers want to have the plant in service by 2028. 

Some elements of the proposed project are sound. Building the demonstration reactor on the site of an existing coal-fired power plant reduces the need to disturb undeveloped land. Equally important, taking advantage of existing electrical transmission lines will minimize impacts on the surrounding land, simplify the permitting process, and avoid potential conflicts with private landowners. And endeavoring to train and employ local workers could provide a new source of economic stability in coal communities. 

But there are reasons to question the hype around this project. 

Economics

Natrium is not a silver bullet to solve Wyoming’s economic woes. While nuclear plants could fill some gaps in the workforce left by closing coal-fired power plants, they would not replace the mineral royalties that provide the bulk of funding for state services, local governments, and schools. Revenue for the state would come from taxes on the electricity that is generated, and TerraPower and Rocky Mountain Power have already approached the Wyoming Legislature seeking tax cuts. 

Nuclear power is expensive and getting pricier, while other existing, properly-vetted energy technologies are already cheaper than coal and continue to become more affordable. Between 2009 and 2020, the cost of solar power generation went down by 90 percent and the cost of wind energy declined 70 percent. Natural gas also became more affordable. Meanwhile, the cost of electricity from coal stayed largely stable and the cost of nuclear power increased by 33 percent. 

Around the country, other advanced reactor projects have invariably been over budget, years behind schedule, and underperforming — if they work at all.

  • Duke Energy abandoned a recent nuclear energy project with an estimated cost of $5 billion when costs ended up exceeding $22 billion, but not before the Florida Public Service Commission approved passing on $800 million in excess costs to ratepayers for a project that never produced a kilowatt of energy.
  • South Carolina’s Public Service Commission approved a massive nuclear energy project at a cost of $9 billion. The project was ultimately abandoned, never producing energy and leaving ratepayers to pick up the tab.
  • The Vogtle plant in Georgia — currently under construction and six years behind schedule — had an estimated cost of $14 billion but costs have now soared to at least $26 billion. In mid-October that state’s Public Service Commission struck an agreement allowing Vogtle to pass on $2.1 billion in construction costs to ratepayers. 

The seven-year timeline for completing the Natrium project is ambitious in itself. Combined with the many additional hurdles the developers face — scaling up an unproven technology, conducting an environmental review of the yet-unknown location, the potential need for state lawmakers (who have their own concerns) to pass legislation to facilitate the project — delays seem all but inevitable. As we’ve seen, that means higher costs. 

Safety

Sodium-cooled fast reactors are theoretically less prone to meltdown than conventional nuclear reactors because they use liquid metal as coolant, rather than water. Sodium’s boiling point is higher than the reactor temperature, meaning the coolant can never boil or vaporize and the system does not need to be pressurized. But there’s a catch: Liquid sodium catches fire if exposed to air or water. Sodium-cooled reactors in other countries have experienced leaks that have led to fires and shutdowns, including the Monju project in Japan and the Superphénix in France.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is looking to streamline public processes for advanced nuclear projects, including safety and environmental reviews. The agency is considering a “generic” environmental impact statement for all advanced nuclear reactors across the country, rather than reviewing specific sites in detail. We shouldn’t be cutting corners on health and safety to rush through an untested technology, and Wyoming’s harsh climate and seismic activity underscore the need for site-specific reviews. It’s also important to note that the NRC is considering placing advanced reactors in rural areas as an added “safety” measure so fewer people would be harmed in the event of a catastrophe. 

Nuclear power plants must store all their waste on site, encased in concrete casks. Yucca Mountain in Nevada was identified by Congress in 1987 as the nation’s permanent underground nuclear waste repository, but it was never constructed and all progress has been halted for more than a decade. No state in the U.S. is willing to accept long-term or permanent storage of spent nuclear fuel — and the Wyoming Outdoor Council and our members have long opposed legislative proposals that would allow Wyoming to accept and “temporarily” store spent fuel rods. Our advocacy and a multitude of citizen voices resulted in the defeat of the legislature’s most recent storage proposal in 2019. 

Initially, TerraPower suggested that it would implement a “breed and burn” reactor that would effectively recycle its own waste by accepting depleted uranium. The company has since changed plans to a more conventional “once through” approach that would create more waste. And, even if a “breed and burn” reactor was used, it would take hundreds of years to recycle a significant portion of the fuel. 

Questions remain

Generally, the Wyoming Outdoor Council supports diversifying our energy sector and addressing decarbonization, both to combat climate change and shore up our state economy that for too long has been dependent on volatile fossil fuel markets. But we are skeptical of unproven, fast-tracked technologies that rely on taxpayer funding to be economically viable. And we are unwilling to gamble with this level of risk to the environment, public health and safety, and Wyoming’s ratepayers. 

Nuclear power will continue to play a role as U.S. utilities move toward zero-emissions energy, and there is the potential for new, advanced nuclear plants to complement renewables like wind and solar that are rapidly being added to the grid. The Natrium project itself has the potential to help at least one Wyoming community stay strong in the face of a coal plant closure. But there can be no half measures if Natrium is to become a reality. The people of Wyoming must have thorough, site-specific safety and environmental reviews before this experimental project moves forward. Ratepayers need to be protected from runaway construction costs. And all of us, especially our elected officials, need to remember that building a single power plant is not the silver bullet that will diversify Wyoming’s economy and provide a good quality of life for future generations. 

Field Notes


The public lands lease system is broken. Let’s fix it.

Posted on by John Rader

THE PUBLIC LANDS LEASE SYSTEM IS BROKEN. LET’S FIX IT.

The federal oil and gas leasing program is deeply flawed. Outdated laws and policies have led to a wave of speculative leasing on public lands, threatening wildlife habitat, outdoor recreation, and sacred cultural sites important to Indigenous peoples. Millions of acres across the West and in Wyoming are tied up in leases, but over half are sitting idle, without producing a drop of oil and gas. Thousands of leases have sold for rock bottom prices, short changing taxpayers. Sovereign Native American tribes have been routinely ignored, and opportunities for the public to weigh in on leasing have been inconsistent. 

Our May 2020 lease report detailed many of these concerns. Now, with the program under federal review, we consider several solutions in our 2021 report: Public Lands Lease Reform.

It’s time to update our antiquated leasing program, for the benefit of Wyoming and the American public. Check out this new report to find out how modernizing our century old oil and gas leasing program can generate more revenue for taxpayers, protect other important public resources, and ensure transparency and accountability in the leasing process.

See the full report below, or click to open it in a new window

Field Notes


Not worth the gamble: Cutting corners on Moneta Divide project would threaten water source

Posted on by John Rader

Whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting over. In the arid West, there may be no more precious resource. So why would Wyoming risk contaminating a valuable reserve of fresh water for short term economic gain?

On November 10, the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission approved a request by Aethon Energy to dispose of billions of gallons of oil and gas waste fluids from operations in the Moneta Divide into the Madison Aquifer. 

The Madison is one of Wyoming’s most important aquifers, with remarkably high water quality. The Wyoming Water Development Commission considers the aquifer critically important for the water supply of the Wind River and Bighorn basins. It also supplies over a dozen Wyoming municipalities and the Bighorn regional water system, which provides water to 15 public water systems, and many ranching operations in the Bighorn Basin, Powder River Basin, and the Black Hills. 

The Madison Aquifer is a valuable water source for Wyoming, and its value will only grow as our climate continues to change and drought becomes more frequent.

Because the Madison Aquifer serves as a current and potential drinking water supply, it is protected under the Safe Drinking Water Act — which prohibits injection of oil and gas wastewater. However, a company can seek an  “aquifer exemption” if they can demonstrate that the aquifer “cannot now and will not in the future serve as a source of drinking water.” 

Aethon, a Texas-based investment firm, purchased the Moneta Divide oil and gas field from the previous owner, Encana, and has plans to expand the field by an additional 4,250 wells. The Moneta Divide field, east of Shoshoni, is located primarily on federal public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management. At full field development, these wells would produce about 59 million gallons a day of oil and gas wastewater — a mix of formation and flowback water from fracking that contains toxins like benzene and high levels of salts. This produced water is dangerous for aquatic life, public health, and the environment, and must be disposed of responsibly. 

The BLM’s environmental review for the project states that treating and piping the water directly to Boysen Reservoir is the preferred method of disposal. Aethon acknowledges  that treatment is “a viable option for managing the total volume of produced water within the Project Area,” and that “water treatment technology is evolving quickly and will likely become less expensive and more efficient in the future.”

But for now, water treatment is expensive, and Aethon has tried several methods to shift that cost to the Wyoming public. First, Aethon proposed to dispose of vast quantities of wastewater by dumping it into tributaries that flow into Boysen and downstream to the Wind and Bighorn rivers.

Now Aethon is proposing another alternative —  injecting the wastewater into the Madison. This scheme is all too familiar. Aethon’s latest proposal is the fourth attempt by an operator to secure an injection permit for the Madison. The Oil and Gas Commission rejected previous requests after thoughtful deliberation by the commission, because the risk of contaminating the aquifer was too high.

Today, the composition of the commission has changed, and Aethon has renewed its efforts. At the November hearing, the commission heard hours of testimony from Aethon’s experts arguing that the injected wastewater could be contained in one part of the aquifer. The public raised numerous concerns during the scant half hour we had to present testimony. 

More than 100 citizens filed written comments, unanimously opposing an exemption. As residents of Powell stated, “The current water quality is good and could in the future be pumped to the surface for municipal and/or industrial water supplies.” A resident of Pavillion, who has been dealing with drinking water contaminated by oil and gas activity for the past 15 years, wrote, “I am in favor of responsible development of our oil and gas resources, but not at the expense of contaminating our good quality drinking water.”

Despite the public concerns, the commission voted 4–1 to approve the exemption. Wyoming State Geologist Erin Campbell, the one dissenting vote, asked her fellow commissioners before voting, “Do you want to risk contaminating a viable aquifer?” and called Aethon’s venture “a gamble I don’t feel comfortable taking.” 

The Madison Aquifer is a valuable water source for Wyoming, and its value will only grow as our climate continues to change and drought becomes more frequent. The Wyoming public isn’t comfortable rolling the dice with our water supply. Wyoming should take the long view and conserve our drinking water aquifers, not jeopardize an important public resource so that Aethon can avoid the cost of water treatment. 

While Wyoming has primacy over injection wells in the state, new aquifer exemptions require EPA approval. The EPA will review the existing record, including written comments and testimony from the November hearing. We’ll continue advocating the protection of the Madison and will urge the EPA to deny this exemption. We’ll also let you know when there are opportunities for the public to weigh in again. Your voices every step of the way have made a difference.

Field Notes


A federal land use plan may have drastic impacts on southwest Wyoming. Here’s how to prepare.

Posted on by John Rader

For almost 10 years, we’ve been waiting for the release of the Bureau of Land Management’s draft Rock Springs Resource Management Plan. The release is imminent, the field office announced earlier this summer, but we’ve come to expect delays.

So why is this plan so important? Because it will determine how 3.6 million acres of public lands in southwestern Wyoming are managed for decades to come. This includes the Northern Red Desert, Greater Little Mountain, South Pass and parts of the Oregon Trail, Adobe Town, Devil’s Playground, and the Golden Triangle, as well as the southern portion of the Red Desert to Hoback mule deer migration corridor. Based on recent land use decisions from across the West, we anticipate the Rock Springs plan will sacrifice the hunting and fishing, recreation, wildlife, and cultural values of these lands to facilitate more oil and gas leasing. 

The Wyoming Outdoor Council requested the BLM postpone the plan’s release until the COVID-19 pandemic no longer posed a roadblock to public participation. Other groups made similar requests, including the Sweetwater County Board of Commissioners, but the agency appears to be proceeding. 

So what can you do?

  • WATCH FOR UPDATES FROM US. We’ll let you know how and when to take action. If you don’t already receive our email alerts, now is a great time to sign up. We’ll also share information on our social media channels.
  • SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENT WHEN THE TIME COMES. Wyoming citizens who know and love these areas — not just appointed federal officials — should have a say in how they’re managed. The 90-day public comment period is your opportunity. We’ll offer you suggestions on how to craft an informative, personal message.
  • SPREAD THE WORD. Effecting changes to the draft will require the full support of all the people who care for this vast and varied part of Wyoming. Not everyone who hunts, hikes, horse packs, or off-roads in these areas will know what is at stake. Forward our emails to friends and family, encourage others to submit a public comment, write a letter to the editor or to the governor, or talk to your county commissioner.

Field Notes


Public Lands Lease Report: Wild Speculation in Wild Places

Posted on by John Rader

While local governments, businesses, and individuals wrestle with the impacts of coronavirus, public lands leasing to the oil and gas industry continues unabated. But this irresponsible federal leasing in Wyoming started well before the pandemic. In recent years, the Bureau of Land Management has drastically ramped up the amount of acreage available for leasing. Hundreds of thousands of acres of public land in Wyoming — including some of our most cherished landscapes and wildlife habitat — have been auctioned for development, with many parcels going for bargain basement prices.

The BLM is required to manage public lands for “multiple use,” balancing a wide range of activities and uses on our public lands — from outdoor recreation to wildlife habitat, preservation of historic and cultural sites, livestock grazing, industrial uses, and more. But today, over a third of all federal public lands in Wyoming are already leased to oil and gas companies for development. At a national level, 90 percent of BLM lands are available for leasing and new federal resource management plans across the West are opening up even more lands to industry, putting recreation and wildlife at risk. 

At the Wyoming Outdoor Council, we wonder where the balance is — and why our exceptional wildlife, outdoor recreation, and historical and cultural resources are being ignored.

That’s why we’re publishing a two-part report on the management of public lands in Wyoming, which includes infographics, photos, and interactive maps so you can better understand what’s at stake. 

Part I, which we’re releasing today, focuses on speculative oil and gas leasing in Wyoming. Specifically, we touch on the scale of leasing in Wyoming, where leases are located, and what resources they are impacting.

Part II, which we’ll publish along with the release of the long-awaited BLM draft resource management plan for the Rock Springs field office, will focus on this plan.- The RMP will dictate the management of millions of acres of public land in Wyoming for decades to come. The region includes treasured places like the Red Desert and irreplaceable wildlife habitat like the Red Desert to Hoback mule deer migration corridor and the Golden Triangle.

READ THE REPORT HERE

Field Notes


Should Energy Companies be Exempt from Environmental Protections During the Coronavirus Pandemic?

Posted on by John Rader

The global outbreak of Covid-19 has upended our lives. Economic activity around the world has slowed at an alarming rate as many of us stop traveling, shutter our businesses, and stay in our homes. In Wyoming, families are feeling the strain, including our energy workforce. Oil prices continue to tumble as demand slows, companies slash spending, and Saudi Arabia and Russia flood the oversupplied markets with cheap crude, furthering a massive oil glut. Across the nation and in Wyoming, major oil and gas companies are already laying off workers.

In these lean times, it’s important to take stock of and be responsible with our resources, support our communities, and plan for a secure economic future. But while individuals and industries across the country are tightening their belts, energy companies are requesting exceptions from basic environmental protections that protect public health — shifting the burden to the public and future generations in a time of crisis. 

Last week, the National Mining Association, the lead lobbyist for the coal industry, requested a temporary reduction or elimination of royalty payments and fees to the Treasury Department. Shortly thereafter, oil and gas companies asked the Environmental Protection Agency for a pass on regulatory requirements, claiming companies can’t afford to pay the employees who are responsible for ensuring compliance. 

On March 26, the EPA issued a sweeping and unprecedented suspension of its enforcement of environmental protections telling companies they do not need to comply with environmental regulations during the outbreak — including protections for water, air, and land quality that prevent pollution and protect public health.. The EPA has not set an end date for this suspension. The new policy would allow companies to both ignore environmental protections and avoid routine monitoring and reporting obligations with no penalty or repercussions for noncompliance. 

At the same time, the Bureau of Land Management is continuing to lease public land to oil and gas companies at unreasonably low prices, and is threatening to open up new lands to development in Resource Management Plans across the West during the pandemic. These actions raise serious fiscal and resource concerns. Should leasing and permitting be allowed to move forward if the energy industry has conceded it will be unable to meet its most basic environmental and public health obligations? Should it get special accommodations while the public faces additional roadblocks to participation? Should the public shoulder additional cleanup and public health costs to prop up an industry beleaguered by global markets?

In response to the pandemic, governors across the country have requested a halt to leasing, RMP revisions, and other federal actions on public lands. This week, conservative and taxpayer groups asked the federal government to suspend public lands leasing, calling it “fiscally reckless” in the current financial market. The financial return to taxpayers from public lands leasing is already far below the market rate, and the current oil glut is depressing returns even further. In BLM’s last Wyoming lease sale, only 61 percent of the acres that were offered actually sold — and 42 percent went for the minimum bid of $2 an acre for a 10 year right to develop. The parcels that weren’t bid on are now available noncompetitively for just $1.50 an acre. Conservation groups have also asked for a halt to leasing, concerned that the public can’t safely convene at meetings or even access important documents. 

Some federal actions, like RMP revisions, can dictate land management for decades. It is critical that local stakeholders can provide input on these plans, understand them, and ask questions of government officials. Based on our concerns about public participation, the Wyoming Outdoor Council and Powder River Basin Resource Council sent a letter to Gov. Mark Gordon on March 26, requesting a pause on public comment periods for state permits and rule changes. The Outdoor Council, along with other conservation and sportsmen’s groups, has also requested a delay of the Rock Springs RMP draft release until public meetings can safely resume. 

In Wyoming, we look out for one another in times of hardship. Many people’s livelihoods are on the line, and people in all lines of work are struggling. But cutting environmental regulations that protect the public’s health and leasing public land at bottom of the barrel prices is not a smart response to this crisis. It’s fiscally irresponsible, shortsighted, and jeopardizes the quality of life and natural resources Wyoming will need for a stable future.

Now is the time to come together and rally around our shared values, work for the well-being of our state, and protect its resources for future generations. That means not loosening the protections Wyoming people depend on for clean air, clean water, and abundant wildlife. In times of crisis, environmental protections are more important than ever. Public participation in government decision making is critical. And fiscal responsibility is even more essential. We should not rush to give away the resources that secure our state’s future — our public lands, our clean air and water, and our outdoor way of life. 

Field Notes


Local input essential for development on federal public lands

Posted on by John Rader

For the first time in history, the federal government has proposed significant rollbacks to how the National Environmental Policy Act reviews the environmental impacts of development on public lands. The draft regulations would make major cuts to public participation, and in many cases, completely remove the public from the decision making process. The rollbacks would also prevent agencies from considering the broader impacts of projects to the region and the country. 

What’s more, removing the public from the equation won’t speed up the review process — the stated intent of the rollbacks. In cases when the act requires detailed environmental reviews it’s typically federal agencies — not the public — that cause delays. In fact, there are multiple cases in recent years where Wyoming residents made the process more efficient by contributing their local expertise to projects.

The people of Wyoming share a strong connection to our public lands, and should have a seat at the table when decisions are being made. Join us in asking Gov. Mark Gordon to stand up for public participation in the management of our public lands. Read our letter to the governor for just a few examples of how public input has helped safeguard natural resources, outdoor recreation opportunities, and private property rights in Wyoming.

The governor will be submitting comments to the federal government regarding these changes on March 10. We’ll be sure to keep you updated as we hear more.

If you would like to read the proposed rule change in its entirety, or submit comments of your own to the federal Council on Environmental Quality, you can do so by following this link.

Field Notes


Public lands leasing at bargain basement prices

Posted on by John Rader

For the past nine years, the BLM has been revising its long-term “resource management plan” for more than 3.5 million acres of public lands in southwest Wyoming — including the Red Desert. Once finalized, this plan will dictate which lands are available for oil and gas leasing — and which will be protected because of their wildlife, cultural, scientific, recreational, or other values. And for nine years, the Wyoming Outdoor Council has been advocating strong protections that will safeguard invaluable resources like our big game migration corridors, historic trails, archaeological and scientific resources, and Native American sacred sites. But if similar plans around the West released under this administration’s “energy dominance” policy are any indication, we can expect the upcoming Rock Springs plan both to remove current protections and open even more lands to development. 

Where’s the balance?

Wyomingites walk the talk when it comes to strong ties to the land and natural resources. We recreate outdoors at far above the national average — hunting, fishing, camping, climbing, skiing, you name it — and the vast majority of us support conserving the landscapes we love and the wildlife that rely on them. We recognize that responsible industrial development on our public lands can benefit our communities, but only if it is done right, in places that don’t sacrifice Wyoming’s natural beauty, open spaces, and abundant wildlife. We might choose to develop our resources carefully, but we all tend to agree: our outdoor heritage is not for sale.

Today, the federal government is not respecting the balance Wyomingites have long fought for. Most of the 30 million acres of public lands in Wyoming are managed for “multiple use,” a congressional mandate to balance a wide variety of resources and values — from hunting and fishing, outdoor recreation, and conserving wildlife habitat to livestock grazing, and industrial uses like mining and oil and gas development. In the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, Congress instructs the BLM to manage public lands to

protect the quality of the scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and archaeological values … preserve and protect certain public lands in their natural condition … provide food and habitat for fish and wildlife and domestic animals; and … provide for outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use.

This congressional act also directs the agency to prioritize designating and protecting “areas of critical environmental concern” — places with extraordinary historic, scenic, cultural, and wildlife values. In the Rock Springs Field Office, this designation protects some of our most treasured public resources including the Steamboat Mountain desert elk herd, Historic South Pass, the Killpecker Sand Dunes, and the Oregon and Mormon national historic trails.

Today, the federal government is not managing for multiple use or prioritizing our most treasured landscapes. That’s bad for Wyoming. Across the West, the BLM is leasing millions of acres of public lands for oil and gas development in places with low oil and gas potential potential, while risking other values, such as wildlife and recreation. 

Since 2018, the federal government has leased about 2 million acres of public land in Wyoming — an area the size of Yellowstone National Park — to oil and gas. Much of this leasing has occurred in sensitive wildlife habitat. In fact, in the past two years, the BLM has leased about 55,000 acres within Wyoming’s prized mule deer migration corridors, while roughly half of all leases since 2018 have been in core greater sage grouse habitat, undermining the collaborative West-wide effort that has so far prevented an Endangered Species Act listing for the bird.

The BLM’s forthcoming Rock Springs plan will reassess which lands are available for oil and gas development — including those currently designated as “areas of critical environmental concern” due to their outstanding wildlife, historic, or scenic values. Our hope is that these special places will retain these strong protections, but what we’re seeing in other plans across the West doesn’t bode well for Wyoming: the BLM has consistently removed  “areas of critical environmental concern” designations, ignored public demand for conservation and access, and opened up sensitive wildlife habitat to industrial development. 

In Montana’s Lewistown draft RMP, the BLM proposed removing almost 23,000 acres of ACECs. In a draft plan in Alaska last year, the BLM proposed removing almost 2 million acres of protections from the prior plan. We’ve seen the same story play out in Idaho, Colorado, and Oregon. And Wyoming is next in line. 

But here’s the thing. Despite its “multiple use” mandate, 90 percent of BLM lands nationwide are already available for development. These recent land-use plan revisions put even more public lands on the auction block every quarter, in the very places that need the most protection.

Selling our public lands for the price of a cup of coffee

It’s disheartening to see the BLM locking up our public lands for one industry’s use and jeopardizing our wildlife for dirt cheap. Under this administration, we’re seeing rampant speculative leasing in Wyoming, with oil and gas companies leasing many parcels for the minimum bid of $2 an acre. For the price of a cup of coffee, companies have purchased the right to develop within the longest recorded mule deer migration corridor and in the Golden Triangle, some of the world’s best sage grouse habitat. To add insult to injury, many of these parcels aren’t even bid on, and are sold after auction for as little as $1.50 an acre. And almost half of the leases in Wyoming are sitting idle — tying up our public lands without producing a drop of oil and gas. 

This is a serious policy failure. The “energy dominance” mandate coming from today’s White House, which prioritizes a single use of our public lands over all others, is a top-down policy that doesn’t respect local priorities or multiple use. It locks up lands for potential industrial development even when there is low oil and gas potential potential — and risks the very resources that make Wyoming special.

We’ll need your help to Protect the Red Desert

The BLM’s widely anticipated Rock Springs resource management plan, which will direct the management of more than 3.5 million acres in Southwest Wyoming, including the Northern Red Desert, could open up even more public lands to development when it’s released in early 2020. If past is prologue, this new plan will remove key protections that Wyomingites have worked for for generations, and make more land available for oil and gas leasing. That’s shortsighted, and it’s not good for Wyoming’s future.

Please stay tuned in the coming months to learn how you can weigh in and help us advocate for a plan that respects balance and protects our most important resources.