Laura Lundquist

(Missoula Current) A coalition of environmental groups have asked to intervene in a lawsuit brought by three western states to stop the Bureau of Land Management from setting aside federal land for conservation.

On Thursday, eight environmental groups asked a North Dakota federal judge to let them intervene on behalf of the BLM in a case brought by the states of Montana, Idaho and North Dakota to stop the Conservation and Landscape Health Rule, more commonly known as the Public Lands rule.

In April, the BLM finalized the Public Lands rule to restore its multiple-use mandate by allowing federal parcels to be set aside for conservation the same way they are set aside for industrial uses, such as oil and gas drilling or grazing. The 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act - which guides federal land management and BLM actions in particular - includes conservation as a component of “balanced multiple use.” But over time, the BLM’s multiple-use mission eroded, particularly during the Reagan administration, to prioritize mostly resource extraction.

On June 21, the three states sued, alleging that the Public Lands rule was “a policy of obstructing and preventing the development of (public) resources for climate change reasons.”

Other lawsuits have been filed by various western states and industry groups that favor development. Utah and Wyoming sued in June under more narrow claims that the BLM hadn’t followed the National Environmental Policy Act because it didn’t conduct an environmental impact statement. In July, 12 groups representing various industries - including the Farm Bureau Federation, American Petroleum Institute and National Mining Association - sued in Wyoming federal court, alleging that conservation leases violate FLPMA. That case has been transferred to Utah. Finally, the state of Alaska filed a similar complaint in July claiming that conservation doesn’t qualify as a “use.”

Barbara Chillcott, Western Environmental Law Center senior attorney, said the eight organizations are asking to intervene now in the Montana-Idaho-North Dakota case because it is starting to move along, and one of the groups, the Badlands Conservation Alliance, is based in North Dakota.

“The government had filed a motion to transfer the case to Utah, but the (North Dakota) judge denied that motion recently. Once we realized the case would stay in North Dakota, we wanted to see if we could intervene,” Chillcott said. “We are, of course, keeping an eye on those other cases. Our clients are involved in conservation in the West and want to see this rule upheld.”

The other intervenor organizations are Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club, WildEarth Guardians, Diné C.A.R.E., San Juan Citizens Alliance, and Citizens for a Healthy Community.

On Sept. 6, the U.S. Department of Justice asked the North Dakota federal judge to dismiss the Montana-Idaho-North Dakota case, saying the three states had failed to show that they suffered harm under the rule. The DOJ made the same argument in July against the Utah-Wyoming complaint.

In the meantime, Congressmen from western states are trying to pass legislation to block the Public Lands rule. In July, by a vote of 212-202, the House of Representatives passed the Western Economic Security Today or WEST Act, which would repeal the rule.

Tracy Stone-Manning, BLM director and Missoula resident, has tried to ease livestock producers’ worries about losing grazing opportunities.

“I hope you’ll see (the conservation lease) as a pressure relief valve, not an additional pressure. One way is to ensure that it makes sense for that piece of ground,” Stone-Manning said at a Missoula meeting in November 2023. “(Grazing for wildlife and cattle) are compatible. More importantly, if done right, they’re not only compatible, but they can be a restoration tool.”

While all this is playing out in Congress and the courts, a majority of Americans consistently tell pollsters that they support conservation. In the 2023 Colorado College Conservation in the West poll, two-thirds of respondents preferred conserving public land instead of more drilling and mining development.

In a July 2023 analysis conducted by the nonprofit Center for Western Priorities of more than 150,000 public comments on the Public Land rule, 92% encouraged the Department of the Interior to adopt the rule as written or to go even further with certain changes to strengthen the conservation measures.

“Public lands are ingrained in the lives of so many people that live in these states,” said Chris Krupp, WildEarth Guardians public lands attorney, in a statement. “They want more wildlife, not less. They want favorite landscapes that aren’t threatened with industrial extraction. They want public lands conservation. We’re seeking to intervene in these lawsuits to defend the rule from state leaders whose overriding concern is corporate profits rather than their residents’ values.”
In July 2023, Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen joined attorneys general from Idaho, Arkansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah in submitting comments claiming the BLM doesn’t have the authority to adopt or implement the proposed rule.

Contact reporter Laura Lundquist at lundquist@missoulacurrent.com.