Uncategorized

By Sophie Osborn







IN EARLY MARCH, WYOMING BRACED FOR A DECISION by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on whether to list the greater sage-grouse as a threatened or endangered species under the Endangered Species Act. (The bird was not listed.)

Now south-central Wyoming is facing another listing decision that could influence energy development and other land uses:

The federal government will decide tomorrow, April 9, whether the diminutive Wyoming pocket gopher warrants protections under the Endangered Species Act.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is slated to make a public announcement about its decision early next week.

The pocket gopher is Wyoming’s only endemic mammal. Its entire known range lies within the state’s boundaries in Carbon and Sweetwater counties.

Because of its limited range, restricted habitat, and small population size, we are concerned that the breadth and pace of energy development in south-central Wyoming threatens this species.

We’re also concerned by the inadequate regulatory mechanisms currently in place to protect the Wyoming pocket gopher in the face of widespread energy development.

This is a distinct species that occurs nowhere else in the world, and the Wyoming Outdoor Council wants to be sure that the Wyoming pocket gopher is adequately protected. There are very few species that are so uniquely Wyoming’s.

The Council will continue to work to maintain healthy populations of this species, no matter what the federal government decides tomorrow.

ECOSYSTEM ENGINEERS

The Wyoming pocket gopher, or Thomomys clusius, is a sandy-colored, underground-dwelling mammal that feeds primarily on roots, tubers, and surface vegetation near its burrow entrances. Despite their small size and elusive habits, pocket gophers benefit their ecosystem by aerating the soil with their digging and tunneling, enriching it with organic matter, and improving its water retention capacity during spring runoff.

Thomomys talpoides = Northern pocket gopher; Thomomys idahoensis = Idaho pocket gopher; Thomomys clusius = Wyoming pocket gopher.

Pocket gophers are important to native ecosystems because their activities influence the distribution of plants, which in turn affects the herbivores that feed on these plants.

Recent research on Wyoming pocket gophers has confirmed that the species is genetically distinct from other pocket gopher species in southern Wyoming and has refined existing knowledge about its range and its choice of habitats.

Contact: Sophie Osborn, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-742-6138; sophie@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

Sophie Osborn is a wildlife biologist and the Wyoming Outdoor Council’s wildlife program manager. She is the author of the award-winning book Condors in Canyon Country.


Wyoming pocket gopher photo and range map courtesy of the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database.

HOW DO WE ENSURE GOOD STEWARDSHIP OF THE BIGHORN BASIN?

Wyoming’s Bighorn Basin is almost completely surrounded by mountains. The jagged Absaroka and Beartooth ranges are to the west, the tall, rounded Bighorns are to the east and northeast, the Pryor Mountains to the north, and the Owl Creek and Bridger ranges form its southern border.

 

Click here or click on the image of the newsletter to read more…

The basin is celebrated for its world-class wildlife, rich history and geology, undulating plains, clean rivers and streams, colorful badlands, and stark, Western beauty.

The basin’s western edge is home to some of the most vital and thriving wildlife habitats in the world, and is part of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.

The federal government owns and manages more than half of its surface land, and nearly three-quarters of its mineral estate.

The Bureau of Land Management is currently in the process of developing a new resource management plan for the Bighorn Basin, the overarching document that will guide land use decision-making for the agency for at least 15 to 20 years.

The updated plan will govern the management of about 3.2 million acres of BLM land and approximately 4.2 million acres of federal mineral estate.

This will be the first time a single plan will be written for the entire basin. In the past land management in the area has been guided by smaller plans, each covering just a section of the landscape.

Because of the magnitude and importance of this updated, single plan, the Outdoor Council has created a team to engage in the revision process as government officials move from the drafting stage to the final document.

The Council is currently engaging with locals and decision-makers in an effort to ensure that the new plan for the Bighorn Basin values cultural and historical resources, big game winter ranges, wide-open spaces, hiking, fishing, hunting and camping opportunities, at least as much as it does energy development and other industrial activities.

We believe a balanced approach to land management requires as much.

Download a PDF of our latest newsletter here, or click on the image of the newsletter above.

A MESSAGE TO WYOMING OUTDOOR COUNCIL MEMBERS AND FRIENDS:

WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO HELP the Shoshone National Forest buy a piece of land near the Sunlight Basin from a private landowner who wants to sell it to the agency.

Please contact Senator John Barrasso and ask him to support a $2.5 million appropriation from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to protect this land by including it in the Shoshone National Forest.

The land contains important wildlife and recreational values, and it is likely it could be subdivided and developed if sold to a private interest.

The 118-acre tract is in the Russell Creek area between Cody and Cooke City, bounded on three sides by U.S. Forest Service lands, and it contains great riparian habitat, important wetlands, breeding grounds for elk, and crucial winter range for elk, mule deer, and bighorn sheep.

An appropriation for this purchase was included in President Barack Obama’s budget recommendation to Congress.

The property is near Windy Mountain, adjacent to Dead Indian Pass, where Route 296 drops dramatically into the valley of the Clarks Fork of the Yellowstone River, a national wild and scenic river. It is accessible via road and would offer significant opportunities and access for the public to hunt, hike, and camp.

If the land is not acquired, we believe it would be a prime location for a second-home subdivision, because of its scenic values and proximity to Yellowstone National Park. Subdivision into several smaller parcels is fully authorized under existing county land-use regulations.

In addition to precluding this threat, acquisition by the Forest Service would also allow the agency to improve fire management, control invasive plant species, and resolve obstacles to the free movement of large game and non-game wildlife.

Please ask Senator Barrasso to support this appropriation!

SAMPLE LETTER

(We recommend getting letters to Sen. John Barrasso no later than Friday, March 26, when the decision is expected.)

U.S. Senator John Barrasso
Fax: 202-224-1724
Email: Senator_JBarrasso@barrasso.senate.gov

Dear Senator Barrasso,

Please support the proposed $2.5 million budget appropriation from the Land and Water Conservation Fund for fiscal year 2011 to acquire 118 acres in the Russell Creek Winter Range property. The current owner of this property would like to sell it to the Forest Service, and an appropriation for this purchase was included in the president’s budget recommendation to Congress.

With your support, this appropriation can stay in the budget and be used to protect land on the Shoshone National Forest, just outside Yellowstone National Park.

The property contains prime riparian habitat and important wetlands along Russell Creek. The area is important habitat for many big game species including elk and bighorn sheep. In addition, this purchase would offer significant opportunities and access for the public to hunt, hike, and camp. The acquisition will also allow the Forest Service to improve fire management and control invasive plant species.

If this parcel remains in private hands it is at serious risk for subdivision and development.

If the Forest Service is appropriated the funds for this acquisition the purchase will increase public access for recreation, protect critical wildlife habitat, and improve forest and fire management. Please support this appropriation!

Contact: Lisa McGee, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x20, lisa@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

 

THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY PROPOSED NEW SMOG STANDARDS in January with the aim of bringing health benefits to millions of Americans.

The deadline to submit comments to the EPA on its proposed rule changes for ground-level ozone is March 22. Please see below for where and how to make sure your voice is heard.

The new standards would replace Bush-era rules that medical experts agree are inadequate to protect people from potentially dangerous air pollution.

The standards would be the strictest to date, and would be in line with the unanimous recommendation put forth in 2008 by the agency’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, which was composed of preeminent medical doctors, air quality experts, and public health professionals.

“EPA is stepping up to protect Americans from one of the most persistent and widespread pollutants we face,” EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said in January. “Smog in the air we breathe poses a very serious health threat, especially to children and individuals suffering from asthma and lung disease. It dirties our air, clouds our cities, and drives up our health care costs across the country.”

Using the best science to strengthen these standards is a long overdue action, Jackson said, and will help millions of Americans “breathe easier and live healthier.”

MAKE SURE YOUR VOICE IS HEARD: HOW TO COMMENT

• The EPA is accepting comments on the proposed regulatory revision until March 22. Thank you for letting the EPA know how you feel!
• Subject line of emails, letters and faxes: Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2005–0172
• If you would like to read the full text of EPA’s proposed rule, it is available here: http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/fr/20100119.pdf.
• You can send comments by email by clicking here, or copying and pasting the following email address into the “To” field in your email client: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov
• You can send comments by fax at this number: 202–566–9744.
• You can send comments by regular mail to this address: Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2005–0172, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail code 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two copies.

Sample Letter:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0172
Mail Code 6102T
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20460

To whom it may concern:

I write to express support for the EPA’s proposal to make the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone more stringent. This effort is long overdue and in line with the best available science, as indicated by the unanimous recommendations of the EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. I urge you to set the primary standard at a level of 0.060 ppm, as recommended by many expert groups such as the American Lung Association and the American Medical Association. I also urge you to set the secondary standard within the proposed range of 7-15 ppm-hours. This range is also supported by the recommendations of the EPA’s CASAC. I urge you move toward finalization of this rule change by August 31, as required, so that the public receives these benefits promptly.

Setting the primary standard at 0.060 ppm will help ensure that all of us enjoy better health, especially vulnerable populations such as the very young, old, those with respiratory conditions, and those who work or recreate outdoors. Setting the secondary standard in the proposed range will help ensure vegetation in our wilderness areas and National Parks is adequately protected.

Thank you for moving forward with this rulemaking as expeditiously as possible.

Sincerely,

Signatory

BACKGROUND

In 2008, the Bush administration rejected the unanimous recommendations of the EPA’s expert advisory panel, and chose instead to set a weaker standard that would allow for more pollution.

Many medical professionals and public health officials protested that decision, and in 2009, in Pinedale, Wyoming, a grassroots organization called Citizens United for Responsible Energy Development—along with other local individuals—petitioned the Cowboy State to set its own smog standard that would be in line with what the scientists and medical professionals had recommended to the EPA.

That request was ultimately dropped by Wyoming’s Environmental Quality Council, but the EPA’s newly proposed standard for smog would be roughly the same level of pollution control that the Wyoming petitioners had asked for.

THE PROBLEM WITH OZONE

Smog, also known as ground-level ozone, is especially dangerous to children and the elderly, and can cause a number of serious health problems, including aggravation of asthma and increased risk of premature death in people with heart or lung disease, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the EPA.

Ozone can also harm healthy people who work and play outdoors. The damage caused to people’s lungs by ozone is thought to be immediate and irreversible.

The EPA on Thursday proposed to set the “primary” standard, which protects public health, at a level between 0.060 and 0.070 parts per million measured over eight hours. The current national primary standard is 0.075 ppm. Children are at the greatest risk from ozone because their lungs are still developing and they are most likely to be active outdoors, and they are more likely than adults to have asthma, according to the agency.

The EPA is also proposing to set a separate “secondary” standard to protect the environment, especially plants and trees. Secondary standards are set with the intention of protecting the “public welfare.” The seasonal standard the EPA is recommending is designed to protect plants and trees from damage caused by repeated ozone exposure, which can reduce tree growth, damage leaves, and increase susceptibility to disease, the agency explained in a media release.

OLD STANDARD WAS INADEQUATE

Administrator Jackson announced in September of 2009 that the Obama administration would reconsider the existing ozone standards, which the Bush administration set at 0.075 ppm. Since September, the EPA conducted a review of the science that guided the 2008 decision, including more than 1,700 scientific studies and public comments from the 2008 rulemaking process, according to the agency.

The EPA also reviewed the findings of the independent Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, which unanimously recommended that standards be set in the ranges ultimately proposed on Thursday by the agency.

Depending on the level of the final standard, the proposal will yield health benefits between $13 billion and $100 billion, according to the EPA.

“This proposal would help reduce premature deaths, aggravated asthma, bronchitis cases, hospital and emergency room visits and days when people miss work or school because of ozone-related symptoms,” the agency wrote in a January media release. “Estimated costs of implementing this proposal range from $19 billion to $90 billion.”

This rulemaking is important for Wyoming, especially western Wyoming in the Pinedale area where ozone levels in excess of even the current, weaker, national standard have been recorded in recent years.

Ozone levels have gotten so high in the Pinedale area in recent winters that they have rivaled the worst bad-ozone days in major metropolitan areas, such as Los Angeles. As a result, the state, with the support of Gov. Dave Freudenthal, has recommended that the EPA designate the Pinedale area in nonattainment with the national ambient air quality standard for ozone.

Ground-level ozone forms when emissions from industrial facilities, power plants, landfills, and motor vehicles react with sunlight.

The EPA will take public comment for 60 days after the proposed rule is published in the Federal Register.

 

 

The photo above of natural gas flaring was taken by Linda Baker in the Upper Green River Valley, a rural area in western Wyoming that has experienced big-city like ozone pollution spikes in recent years as a result of a natural gas drilling boom.

Media Contact: Bruce Pendery, program manager, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 435-752-2111, bruce@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

IF YOU HAVEN’T DONE SO ALREADY, now is your chance to support a new proposal by the U.S. Forest Service not to lease 44,700 acres in the Wyoming Range for oil and gas development.

The deadline to comment on the agency’s preferred alternative is March 22. See details below for where and how to comment.

The Bridger-Teton National Forest in January released a long-awaited updated analysis of contested oil and gas leases on the eastern front of the Wyoming Range.

The agency had previously decided to lease 44,700 acres in the Wyoming Range for oil and gas development, but because of legal challenges and strong public outcry from hunters, anglers, hikers, Republican and Democratic elected officials, ranchers, conservationists, labor unions, and many others, the agency decided to do an updated analysis of the proposed development.

The draft of this new analysis states the agency’s preferred course of action now is for no leasing, which would in effect cancel all of the contested leases. This decision that would be in line with the wishes of the broad coalition that has worked for four years to protect the Wyoming Range from development.

HOW TO COMMENT

• You can send your comments via email by clicking here, or by copying and pasting this email address into the “To” field of your email client: comments-intermtn-bridger-teton@fs.fed.us
• You can mail comments to Kniffy Hamilton, Bridger-Teton National Forest, 340 N. Cache, P.O. Box 1888, Jackson, WY 83001

The Wyoming Outdoor Council is grateful to Bridger-Teton Forest Supervisor Kniffy Hamilton for stepping up and doing what needed to be done about these 44,700 acres.

The Forest Service’s preferred alternative recognizes that the Wyoming Range is a special part of Wyoming, and that the people who live here want to make sure it stays that way for our children and grandchildren. This decision is about preserving a little piece of Wyoming’s heritage, and making sure we can keep our hunting, fishing and outdoors way of life.

The Forest Service’s preferred alternative is in line with the wishes of a broad coalition of Wyoming’s hunters, anglers, elected officials, and everyone else who loves the Wyoming Range and what it means to this state.

This ensures that all of the things that make the Wyoming Range such an important resource for Wyoming—its scenic beauty, its hunting and fishing, its clean rivers and streams—will be around for generations to come.

LEASES CONTROVERSIAL FROM THE START

The Forest Service leased the acres in question for oil and gas development in four sales in 2005 and 2006. The leases faced numerous protests from conservation groups, labor unions, hunters and fishermen, concerned citizens, and the governor’s office, among others—who came together to stop the industrialization of the Wyoming Range, and conserve its recreational values.

The Wyoming Range Legacy Act—introduced by Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso in October 2007 in response to the development threats—was signed into law in March 2009. The act removed 1.2 million acres of the Wyoming Range from future oil and gas leasing, and had widespread public support.

The legislation left the fate of the 44,720 acres of contested leases to the agencies. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management decided in August to rescind about half of the contested leases, and refund the high bidders.

This latest draft analysis by the Forest Service addresses the entire 44,720 acres—not simply the remaining 21,000 acres—because industry is currently challenging the BLM’s decision to rescind the other half of the leases.

This updated analysis shows that the Forest Service’s preferred alternative is to cancel all of the leases from the first two sales.

Media Contact: Lisa McGee, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x20; lisa@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

By Richard Garrett, Jr.

GOV. DAVE FREUDENTHAL HAS VETOED two bills: Senate File 13, called “Economic Analysis” and House Bill 97, the nuclear energy production study.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council was happy to hear of these two decisions, and is grateful to the governor for his careful stewardship.

While we did ask the governor to consider vetoing “Economic Analysis,” and sought several improvements for the nuclear energy bill, we believe that some ideas as presented in these bills are worthy of broad public discussion and we look forward to engaging in that process during interim committee meetings and at the next legislative session.

While citing specific reasons for each veto, the governor articulated his underlying concern about growth in state government and the use of taxpayer resources to investigate topics about which we, as a state, are already quite familiar.

The Outdoor Council followed both bills closely throughout this legislative session. As did so many others, we offered comments on each bill and are grateful that our concerns were listened to carefully by many legislators and that some of those concerns were shared by the governor.

A DESCRIPTION OF EACH BILL

SF 13, Economic Analysis. This bill was perhaps at the top of our list of concerns during this legislative session. Its intent was to task the state with compiling and recording economic information on behalf of counties, which could then use that data in closed co-operator meetings with federal agencies, including the BLM, in its planning processes. Supporters of the bill portrayed it as a benefit to every Wyoming county, but we believe it would probably have proved useful, at best, to a very limited number of counties.

As I wrote in a previous post, the original bill would have tasked the State Division of Economic Analysis with determining the “optimum use” for all land in the state (private, state and federal). The proposed modeling process would have created a bias towards finding so-called optimum uses for Wyoming lands that would almost always have involved resource development and extraction.

In other words, the determined “optimum use” would likely never be open space, important wildlife habitat, historical preservation, ecotourism, iconic view-sheds or conservation.

In the bill’s final form, the data compiled would not match up well with the National Environmental Policy Act, which calls for a socioeconomic analysis that is much more detailed — and costly — than a simple economic analysis. Thus, the bill, in practice, would have been underfunded and would not have given counties the kind of data they would need to be effective participants in federal land use planning.

HB 97, Nuclear Energy Production Study. As the governor said on Wednesday, at best this bill would only produce information on topics about which the state is already familiar. Wyoming has a long track record on uranium production and a history that can’t be ignored related to counties vying to store nuclear waste as an income source. The study would have been an attempt to begin finding ways that nuclear power could be generated in the state.

While many would argue that nuclear power is an inevitable component of the national energy portfolio, we agree with the governor that spending $18,000 on a task force study does not represent the best use of taxpayer’s dollars.

We were also very concerned that the task force study might prove a springboard to renewing the notion that Wyoming should become a dumping ground for radioactive waste.

Contact: Richard Garrett, Jr., energy and legislative advocate, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x18; 307-438-9516; richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

THE GREATER SAGE-GROUSE will not be protected as an endangered species, at least not this year.

In a much-anticipated decision—with big implications for Wyoming and other western states—Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced Friday that the iconic western bird is indeed in dire straits. But it will not be afforded protections under the Endangered Species Act.

“We have seen a 90 percent decline in the sage-grouse population from a century ago,” Salazar said. “A 50 percent decline in historic habitat, also accompanied by a fragmentation of habitat, has put sage-grouse in peril.”

And scientists are predicting continuing population declines in the years to come, he said.

But instead of a listing under the Endangered Species Act, the Obama administration has decided to designate the bird as a “candidate” species, “warranted but precluded” from a listing.

This means, essentially, that while the bird objectively deserves Endangered Species Act protections, the federal government has decided that with limited resources other species must take priority at this time.

ONUS ON THE STATES, WYOMING PRAISED

During a press conference announcing the decision Friday afternoon, Salazar and Tom Strickland, the assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks, repeatedly praised Wyoming and Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal for the state’s efforts to stabilize the bird’s population in recent years.

They specifically cited Freudenthal’s strategy to preserve core sage-grouse habitat areas, calling it “real important work,” and they implied that Wyoming’s strategy could be a template for saving the bird in the long term.

“This ‘warranted but precluded’ decision may seem convoluted at first, but I think it makes a certain amount of sense,” said Laurie Milford, executive director of the Wyoming Outdoor Council. “Basically they’re saying, ‘Yes, this bird is in big trouble.’ But at the same time they’re acknowledging that the states, especially Wyoming, have been working quite hard to start to turn things around and protect this species.”

The Obama administration is saying it’s not going to butt in as long as the states continue to embrace good ideas like Wyoming’s “core area” strategy, and as long as they continue to make progress toward ensuring the long-term viability of the greater sage-grouse, Milford said.

“I think they’re acknowledging that states like Wyoming have laid out some sound conservation plans for sage-grouse,” she said. “Now the onus is on the states to follow through and get the job done.”

One upshot of a “candidate species” designation is that the sage-grouse’s status will be reviewed annually, with the option of affording the bird Endangered Species Act protections subsequent to any yearly review.

During Friday’s press conference the director of the federal Bureau of Land Management, Bob Abbey, said his agency will review drilling applications “with a lot more scrutiny” in sage-grouse areas, and might attach extra stipulations.

He also indicated the BLM will likely embrace Freudenthal’s call to protect core habitat areas, where 80 percent of the bird’s population resides.

“We think these are good signs,” Milford said. “The federal and state agencies will have to work hard to keep the sage-grouse off the endangered species list, but we believe with the right protections in place the states can and should do it on their own.”

Media Contact: Laurie Milford, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-721-7610; laurie@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

WYOMING GOV. DAVE FREUDENTHAL HAS ANNOUNCED he will not run for re-election in 2010.

“We are here today, in part, to confirm that I will not be a candidate for Governor in 2010,” Freudenthal said. “This decision is not made lightly but enjoys strong support from my family. I suspect this statement comes as no surprise to most observers of the Wyoming political scene.”

The Wyoming Outdoor Council would like to express its sincere gratitude for the governor’s service to this great state, and his work to find balance between energy production and the conservation of Wyoming’s outdoor heritage.

“We are disappointed that we won’t have the opportunity to work with the governor for an additional four years,” said Laurie Milford, the Council’s executive director. “While it’s true that our relationship has had its difficult turns from time to time, it’s also true that the governor has been a strong supporter of many of the values that we see as core to the Council’s interests.”

Freudenthal was a staunch supporter of the Wyoming Range Legacy Act, which removed 1.2 million acres of Wyoming’s namesake mountains from future oil and gas drilling. His support was crucial to that bill’s passage.

He also advocated and helped ensure the protection of critical big game migration corridors in the Upper Green River valley when the Bureau of Land Management recently revamped its management plan for public lands in the Pinedale region.

He has consistently told the BLM it must do a better job protecting open spaces.

The governor staffed the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality with many people who have a genuine commitment to protecting Wyoming’s environment.

PARALLEL PRIORITIES

DURING THE PRESS CONFERENCE this morning in which he made his announcement, the governor was asked about some of his priorities for the balance of his term. Most that he listed are also priorities for the Wyoming Outdoor Council including wind energy, pipelines and electricity transmission, hydraulic fracturing, carbon sequestration, and advanced coal technologies.

“Most of these are topics that we discussed with the governor last week,” Milford said. “It’s gratifying to know that he places an emphasis on addressing many of the same things that we believe can have a direct affect the future of Wyoming’s open spaces, its rivers and streams, recreational opportunities, air and wildlife.”

While the governor did not specifically mention the ongoing BLM management plan revisions throughout the state, the Council is confident that he will continue to exert a strong influence on these processes, she said. The governor’s office is a powerful voice and one that the BLM pays attention to, particularly since Governor Freudenthal enjoys a longtime friendship with Department of Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.

The Council will work hard to encourage the governor to leverage that relationship in ways that will best protect areas that are under BLM review.

Freudenthal acknowledged during the press conference that he waited to make this plans known until after the Legislature had largely finished its biennium budget, in order to avoid a lame-duck status and, he joked, to “give legislators something to worry about.”

Media Contact: Laurie Milford, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-721-7610; laurie@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

By Richard Garrett, Jr.

TEASING OUT THE BIAS IN THE ‘ECONOMIC ANALYSIS’ BILL…

Going into this legislative session the Wyoming Outdoor Council had several priorities.

Perhaps at the top of our list of concerns was Wyoming Senate File 13, called Economic Analysis — a bill sponsored by the Joint Interim Agriculture Committee and Sen. Eli Bebout.

The original version of the bill can be seen here.

As originally worded, the bill would have tasked the State Division of Economic Analysis with determining the “optimum use” for all land in the state (private, state and federal).

The proposed modeling process would have created a bias towards finding so-called optimum uses for Wyoming lands that would almost always have involved resource development and extraction. In other words, the determined “optimum use” would likely never be open space, important wildlife habitat, historical preservation, ecotourism, iconic view-sheds or conservation.

The bill also had the potential to morph into last year’s ill-conceived landfill “risk management” bill — or set the stage for that bill to be reintroduced next year.

We worked with other concerned legislators and citizens to nearly defeat “Economic Analysis” on the first day of this year’s session, and came close again on its second and third readings in the Senate — forcing some amendments.

Since then we have worked to reign in its scope, eliminate references to private land and ensure that the economic model used would be a nationally recognized tool without a predetermined bias towards mineral extraction and development.

We and our partners have, thus far, been successful on all counts.

FINISHING THE JOB

During this, the last week of the 2010 session we are going to continue to work hard to make sure the bill is not amended beyond the version that is now on the House floor.

We are also working to include language in the bill that will require governmental agencies (primarily county commissions) who use the economic data to insist that if they use it in meetings with the federal Bureau of Land Management and/or U.S. Forest Service that those meetings be open to the public and not considered “closed cooperator” meetings.

We have the support of Gov. Dave Freudenthal on this key amendment, but its success in the legislative body is far from certain.

The bill will also be subject to a legislative budget reconciliation process since the versions coming out of the Senate and House have different funding levels.

If this bill is amended in ways that would put Wyoming’s environment and quality of life at risk, we will work to kill it during that reconciliation process.

Contact: Richard Garrett, Jr., energy and legislative advocate, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x18; 307-438-9516; richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

By Richard Garrett, Jr.

THE MIDWAY POINT — THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS

This week marks the beginning of the second half of the month-long legislative session. In many ways the next two weeks will be the mirror image of the first two.

Bills that managed their way through one side of the capitol will now try to repeat that feat on the opposite side of the building — in a sense, they’re going through the looking glass.

Thus the “big four” wind-energy-related bills will be tested again, but this time by a new group of legislators.

APPROPRIATIONS

Meanwhile, both the Senate and the House will be taking up the appropriations process in earnest, and both bodies will be starting at opposite ends of the capitol with the same bill, Senate File 1. This is the bill that Gov. Dave Freudenthal, in his State of the State address on the first day of the session, suggested (tongue-in-cheek) that the Legislature could pass within a day or so, he could sign and everyone could then go home.

Of course if that had happened we would have missed the debates on concealed weapons, non-native aquatic species and distracted driving that have taken up so much time.

We also wouldn’t have seen the discussion over the resolution that would have urged the repeal of the 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which if passed would have signaled the Wyoming Legislature’s desire to resume electing our two U.S. senators rather than allowing voters to decide who those officeholders would be. The 17th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified by the states in 1913.

Here are some of the bills that we continue to follow and are working to influence. I’ve included a link, as well as a prediction for each:

HB 17, Carbon Sequestration — likely to pass
HB 47, National Environmental Policy Act and Endangered Species Act review — likely to pass (we are working to amend)
HB 72, Regulation of Wind Facilities — likely to pass with amendments
HB 97, Nuclear Energy Study — likely to pass, but we are working to make sure people understand that this bill is more about uranium processing and waste storage than it is about energy development
HB 101, Wind Excise Tax — amended, but its fate is still in doubt
SF 13, Economic Analysis — heavily amended, and we are proposing additional amendments in the house
SF 66, Industrial Siting of Wind Energy Developments — likely to pass
HB 79, Collector Lines and Eminent Domain — no prediction

ON A PERSONAL NOTE

A bill that I’ve been interested in as a private citizen is HB 54, the Food Freedom initiative.

This bill would allow an unregulated one-to-one relationship between a producer (seller) and a consumer for meat, poultry and raw milk products.

While there is much to be said for the safety net that the regulated inspection of these commodities has achieved historically, that process has also set up barriers between consumers and their local food producers and local food sources.

A lot of people in Lander have been eager to learn about this bill and I have been glad to have the chance to keep them updated.

It might interest readers to learn that people were able to testify on this bill during its hearing in committee by going to any of several video conferencing sites around the state, one of which is in Riverton. While not many committee bills are seen in this way, you can go to the legislative web site (http://legisweb.state.wy.us/) and learn more about this important innovation by clicking on the link “How to Participate During the Legislative Session.”

If you want to listen to floor debates, there is a link on the website for that too; it’s labeled “Audio Broadcasts of the 2010 Session.”

As always, if you have any questions or comments on these or any other bills, please let me know. And if you’re in Cheyenne, stop by and say hello!

Contact: Richard Garrett, Jr., energy and legislative advocate, Wyoming Outdoor Council, 307-332-7031 x18; 307-438-9516; richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.