Poll: Westerners oppose public-land giveaways to oil and gas
Laura Lundquist
(Missoula Current) As Congress prepares to slide fossil-fuel giveaways into the next budget bill, a new eight-state poll shows Westerners oppose giving oil and gas companies free-rein over public lands.
On Monday, the National Wildlife Federation released a poll showing that Westerners overwhelmingly oppose Congressional and Trump administration proposals that would take away the public’s right to weigh in on federal land uses and would prioritize oil and gas development on public land, locking out other users.
Conducted by New Bridge Strategy, a Republican polling firm, the poll ran between March 27 and April 10 and interviewed 400 voters each in Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and the Dakotas. The margin of error is 4.9%.
David Willms, National Wildlife Federation associate vice president for public lands, said even though the poll was taken more than a month ago, it’s proving to be timely considering the budget reconciliation process taking place in Congress now.
“It shows really broad opposition to many of these proposals and overall broad public support, regardless of political party, for public involvement in oil and gas leasing decisions, for taxpayers receiving their fair share from development on public lands, and the decisions to lease oil and gas development should be done carefully,” Willms said in a press conference. “These results couldn’t be more timely to a lot of the topics that Congress is going to be talking about (Tuesday) in the markup in the House Natural Resources committee and that the administration is moving forward with.”
Yesterday, the House Committee on Natural Resources proposed several public land changes, particularly related to oil and gas federal land leasing, that could be passed as part of the Concurrent Resolution on the Fiscal Year 2025 budget, which is currently going through the reconciliation process. In addition, the Trump administration has made a number of proposals to expedite the leasing process, mainly by significantly reducing public participation.
Among other things, the House committee proposals would reduce royalty payments - royalty payments generate the most revenue related to oil and gas - to 12.5% from 16.67%. The Bureau of Land Management would be required to hold quarterly lease auctions and each lease sale must offer 50% of the leasable land, such that all leasable land would be offered within 18 months. Any leases not purchased during the auctions would be put out for noncompetitive bidding, meaning they could be sold for pennies per acre.
Several conservation groups have protested the proposed changes.
“This bill, if passed by Congress, would endanger public lands throughout the country. It elevates the interests of the oil and gas industry over the interests of the American taxpayer by prioritizing drilling on public lands over the long-term conservation of our shared natural and cultural resource heritage,” said Emily Thompson, Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks executive director. “Selling off our public lands is shameful and wrong. The Committee should reject this bill and work to protect and expand our public lands, not gut them.”
However, it’s not just conservation groups who are opposed. A majority of Westerners wouldn’t be pleased with these policies either, according to the poll, which shows that large majorities oppose stripped-down regulations and reduced fees for oil and gas developers.
“What the poll tells me is that Montanans know their history. They don’t want to go back a century to when robber barons fouled waters, decimated wildlife and put taxpayers on the hook to clean up their mess. Extractive industries, if left unchecked, would do just that,” Frank Szollosi, Montana Wildlife Federation executive director, told the Current. “Commonsense rules and a balanced use of our natural resources really shouldn’t be too much to ask. But special interests are at the trough right now in Washington and at Mar-a-Lago, and they’re just taking it too far.”
When it comes to reducing royalty rates or fees, around 80% of Westerners say the fees for oil and gas development should remain as they are. That includes 83% of Montanans and notably 87% of voters in North Dakota, a state with a lot of oil and gas development. The state with the largest percentage of voters who supported reducing fees - 25% - was Nevada. Earlier polls have also shown that at least 90% of voters support a requirement for oil and gas companies to pay for cleanup and restoration costs after drilling is complete.
Westerners still want to have their say about what happens on public lands, including oil and gas development. About 75% oppose efforts to shorten the review process by limiting public input and about 57% strongly oppose. Wyoming voters were the least interested but still, 67% opposed reducing public input with 51% strongly opposed.
In addition, 85% or more say a broader swath of public interests should be represented in decisions related to public land use because oil and gas leases can limit the access of other users.
Many Westerners know that extractive industries can take a toll on public land and waters. That was demonstrated by a huge majority - more than four in five - agreeing that we need to be cautious about how and where oil and gas is developed on public land. More than 70% said oil and gas drilling should be restricted to areas where oil and gas deposits are more likely or known to be.
Along those lines, more than 80% of Westerners opposed any policy that prevents agencies from taking local concerns into account about wildlife or water on land that oil and gas companies want to develop. Again, Wyoming was the outlier, with 77% opposed to such a policy.
Not surprisingly, with so many private-property-rights advocates in the West, more than 85% of Westerners opposed allowing oil and gas companies to use eminent domain to install pipelines across private property.
New Bridge Strategies pollster Lori Weigel said these high percentages didn’t change that much when she polled people who self-identified as Make America Great Again movement or Trump supporters. For example, 54% or more of MAGA voters opposed policies that reduced public input, and about 67% of MAGA voters opposed policies that prevented agencies from considering local concerns.
“I think what’s significant is there’s a majority in every single state indicating opposition to these particular proposals,” Weigel said.
Weigel also isolated the responses provided by sportsmen and rural voters in each state and found the same results: None support giving oil and gas companies essentially free and unquestioned access to public lands. Regardless of the demographic, Weigel found that majorities support continued public participation and limited oil and gas development where companies pay their fair share for public land use and cleanup.
“(Interest in public lands) cuts across all demographics and the political spectrum. You’re not going to get eight out of 10 Montanans to agree unless it appeals across the spectrum. So the Wildlife Federation calls on our delegation to listen to Montanans and not be swayed by special interests,” Szollosi said. “The sporting community is more than comfortable with self-regulation. A lot of sectors have regulation. We’re not asking oil and gas (companies) for more than any other.”
Neither of Montana’s Congressmen sit on the House Natural Resources committee.
Contact reporter Laura Lundquist at lundquist@missoulacurrent.com.