Farm groups: BLM proposal could limit public land uses
“You’re creating a conflict there that doesn’t exist today.” BLM acknowledged that uses deemed incompatible with conservation activities would not be allowed during the term of a conservation lease, though it’s unclear if those lands would then be available for other uses after the lease ends. Under the proposal, conservation leases could be extended after an initial maximum term of 10 years. Opponents of the proposed rule point out that historically, federal lands that have been designated for conservation
protections largely are not managed for other purposes. They say they’re con- cerned that if BLM were to issue conserva- tion leases or expand designation of Areas of Critical Environmental Concern to large swaths of land, that activities such as graz- ing and logging would be prohibited on those lands indefinitely. In a letter to the Department of the Interior, a coalition of agricultural groups, including the California Farm Bureau, said BLM defines conservation so broadly
By Ching Lee Ranchers, foresters and others who use public lands have urged the Bureau of Land Management to withdraw a pro- posed rule they fear would radically re- strict activities such as grazing and timber harvesting in favor of conservation as the predominant land management priority. If the rule is implemented in its current form, agricultural users of public lands say it would have wide-ranging impacts on rural businesses and communities, with unintended consequences on the more than 245 million acres of public lands—lo- cated primarily in 12 western states—that BLM manages. Those who hold permits on federal lands also say they were blindsided by the proposal, which the U.S. Department of the Interior unveiled in late March with no stakeholder discussion or ad- vance notice that it was developing the rule. The public was initially given 75 days to comment on the proposed BLM Conservation and Landscape Health rule, but the department later extended the deadline to July 5. Now that the department is reviewing stakeholder comments, opponents of the proposed rule say they hope their concerns will send BLM back to the drawing board. The department said the proposed plan is meant to address a current gap in BLM regulations that “directly promote conservation efforts for all resources…so that conservation is applied more broadly across the landscape to all program areas.” It characterized the proposal as a tool for BLM to respond to pressures from climate change, including wildfires, droughts and severe storms across the West. The proposed rule includes three major changes to how public lands are currently managed: It would add con- servation as a land-use category and al- low BLM to issue conservation leases for “restoration or land enhancement,” or for mitigation. It would also expand the identification and designation of Areas of Critical Environmental Concern. In addi- tion, it would apply land health standards to all BLM-managed lands; currently, BLM only uses those standards to eval- uate grazing permits. BLM said the proposal does not change its multiple-use mandate, adding that grazing, timber, mining, energy develop- ment, recreation and other uses will con- tinue. The agency also maintains that the proposed rule “does not elevate conser- vation above other uses” but rather puts conservation “on an equal footing with other uses.” Furthermore, it said conservation leas- es would “generally be a compatible use” with grazing allotments that meet land health standards and that the new rule would allow ranchers with grazing permits opportunities to enter into a conservation lease to improve land health. But Modoc County rancher Sean Curtis, who also works as the county’s planning
director, said BLM’s proposal does not address how it would manage conflicting goals. For example, he said he wondered what would happen if an environmental group wanted to fence off a piece of ground for restoration but the same ground al- ready had a grazing permit on it. “How do you facilitate that?” he asked.
See LAND, Page 13
Dial up YOUR DISEASE CONTROL
When quality matters as much as yield, you need a fungicide that performs unlike any other. Powered by ADEPIDYN ® Technology, Miravis ® Prime fungicide takes power, spectrum and stamina to the max — outperforming leading competitors and delivering higher-quality crops at harvest. With the most advanced chemistry in its class, Miravis Prime is the boost of protective power your crops need to succeed.
Talk to your retailer or learn more at MiravisPrimePower.com
All photos are either the property of Syngenta or are used with permission.
Product performance assumes disease presence.
© 2023 Syngenta. Important: Always read and follow label instructions. Some products may not be registered for sale or use in all states or counties. Please check with your local extension service to ensure registration status. ADEPIDYN ® , Miravis ® , the Alliance Frame and the Syngenta logo are trademarks of a Syngenta Group Company.
July 19, 2023 Ag Alert 3
Powered by FlippingBook