aktango58
FRIEND
9aa9
A recent article:
[COLOR=var(--primary-text)]Alaska joins other states in opposition to proposed BLM land rule
By Jack Barnwell
Alaska, along with 16 other states, are challenging how the Bureau of Land Management might replace multi-use land with conservation purposes, according to an Alaska Department of Law news release.
The Department of the Interior — the BLM’s parent agency — proposed a new rule in March that “would establish a framework to ensure healthy landscapes, abundant wildlife habitat, clean water and balanced decision-making on our nation’s public lands.”
According to the DOI, the Conservation and Landscape Health Rule was drafted in response to better management of public federal lands, waters and wildlife “in the face of devastating wildfires, historic droughts, and severe storms that communities are experiencing across the West.”
But Alaska state officials view it as another example of federal overreach.
“This conservation-or-nothing attitude will significantly reduce the wellbeing of millions of people who derive benefit from the multiple uses that Congress granted. In sum, this proposed action will upend the history and legal framework of BLM-managed lands,” Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor wrote in a statement.
Gov. Mike Dunleavy noted that courts have ruled federal government “out of bounds” in the past. He added Alaska’s public lands represent a broad economic range for the state.
“Alaskans, businesses, and the State all need predictability and assurances about their livelihoods and endeavors— our economy depends on it,” Dunleavy said in a written statement. “Our lands don’t have to be locked up by a distant office in D.C. Balance between uses and protecting our environment can exist— Alaskans have shown that for decades.”
According to the Interior Department, the proposed rule would provide a roadmap for federal land management agencies. The new tools would allow inventory and assessment the health of public lands, identify climate changes, demand for public land use and implement adaptive management strategies.
The new rule would integrated in part into the Federal Land Policy and Management Act.
It would also “increase access to outdoor recreation by putting conservation on equal footing with other uses,” according to the Interior Department.
An additional component — conservation leasing — would be introduced to “facilitate restoration work on public lands in cooperation with community partners.”
Under a conservation lease, interested groups would be able to conduct research or mitigation efforts while “generating revenue for the American taxpayer.” Such activities might include restoration of game migration corridors or creating carbon markets.
State commissioners disagree, noting that Congress did not include conservation when it pushed the Federal Land Policy and Management Act into law. The uses designated by Congress for federal management of lands include “mining operations, motorized recreation, natural gas leases, guide concessions, hunting and fishing, tourism, scientific study,” among others.
“ This ill- conceived nationwide rule would have outsize implications on Alaskans given that the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) has already struck the final balance between conservation and multiple use for federal lands in Alaska,” said Alaska Department of Natural Resources Commissioner John Boyle.
Boyle added that federal lands not specifically classified for conservation “must be available for Alaskans to use and enjoy ... which is why we are objecting to this proposed rule.”
Alaska Fish and Game Commissioner Doug Vincent-Lang said the proposed rule clashes with the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act.
“ The plain language of ANILCA, as written by Congress, is very clear and numerous times states that it has achieved a balance be tween conser v a tion and other uses in Alaska,” Vincent-Lang wrote. “We don’t need the new leadership of BLM rewriting history as is being attempted by this proposed rule-making exercise.”
[/COLOR]
[COLOR=var(--secondary-text)]
' xlink:href='%23b'/%3e%3cuse fill='black' filter='url(%23c)' xlink:href='%23b'/%3e%3cpath fill='white' d='M12.162 7.338c.176.123.338.245.338.674 0 .43-.229.604-.474.725a.73.73 0 01.089.546c-.077.344-.392.611-.672.69.121.194.159.385.015.62-.185.295-.346.407-1.058.407H7.5c-.988 0-1.5-.546-1.5-1V7.665c0-1.23 1.467-2.275 1.467-3.13L7.361 3.47c-.005-.065.008-.224.058-.27.08-.079.301-.2.635-.2.218 0 .363.041.534.123.581.277.732.978.732 1.542 0 .271-.414 1.083-.47 1.364 0 0 .867-.192 1.879-.199 1.061-.006 1.749.19 1.749.842 0 .261-.219.523-.316.666zM3.6 7h.8a.6.6 0 01.6.6v3.8a.6.6 0 01-.6.6h-.8a.6.6 0 01-.6-.6V7.6a.6.6 0 01.6-.6z'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
All reactions:
11
[/COLOR]
[COLOR=var(--primary-text)]Alaska joins other states in opposition to proposed BLM land rule
By Jack Barnwell
Alaska, along with 16 other states, are challenging how the Bureau of Land Management might replace multi-use land with conservation purposes, according to an Alaska Department of Law news release.
The Department of the Interior — the BLM’s parent agency — proposed a new rule in March that “would establish a framework to ensure healthy landscapes, abundant wildlife habitat, clean water and balanced decision-making on our nation’s public lands.”
According to the DOI, the Conservation and Landscape Health Rule was drafted in response to better management of public federal lands, waters and wildlife “in the face of devastating wildfires, historic droughts, and severe storms that communities are experiencing across the West.”
But Alaska state officials view it as another example of federal overreach.
“This conservation-or-nothing attitude will significantly reduce the wellbeing of millions of people who derive benefit from the multiple uses that Congress granted. In sum, this proposed action will upend the history and legal framework of BLM-managed lands,” Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor wrote in a statement.
Gov. Mike Dunleavy noted that courts have ruled federal government “out of bounds” in the past. He added Alaska’s public lands represent a broad economic range for the state.
“Alaskans, businesses, and the State all need predictability and assurances about their livelihoods and endeavors— our economy depends on it,” Dunleavy said in a written statement. “Our lands don’t have to be locked up by a distant office in D.C. Balance between uses and protecting our environment can exist— Alaskans have shown that for decades.”
According to the Interior Department, the proposed rule would provide a roadmap for federal land management agencies. The new tools would allow inventory and assessment the health of public lands, identify climate changes, demand for public land use and implement adaptive management strategies.
The new rule would integrated in part into the Federal Land Policy and Management Act.
It would also “increase access to outdoor recreation by putting conservation on equal footing with other uses,” according to the Interior Department.
An additional component — conservation leasing — would be introduced to “facilitate restoration work on public lands in cooperation with community partners.”
Under a conservation lease, interested groups would be able to conduct research or mitigation efforts while “generating revenue for the American taxpayer.” Such activities might include restoration of game migration corridors or creating carbon markets.
State commissioners disagree, noting that Congress did not include conservation when it pushed the Federal Land Policy and Management Act into law. The uses designated by Congress for federal management of lands include “mining operations, motorized recreation, natural gas leases, guide concessions, hunting and fishing, tourism, scientific study,” among others.
“ This ill- conceived nationwide rule would have outsize implications on Alaskans given that the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) has already struck the final balance between conservation and multiple use for federal lands in Alaska,” said Alaska Department of Natural Resources Commissioner John Boyle.
Boyle added that federal lands not specifically classified for conservation “must be available for Alaskans to use and enjoy ... which is why we are objecting to this proposed rule.”
Alaska Fish and Game Commissioner Doug Vincent-Lang said the proposed rule clashes with the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act.
“ The plain language of ANILCA, as written by Congress, is very clear and numerous times states that it has achieved a balance be tween conser v a tion and other uses in Alaska,” Vincent-Lang wrote. “We don’t need the new leadership of BLM rewriting history as is being attempted by this proposed rule-making exercise.”
[/COLOR]
[COLOR=var(--secondary-text)]
All reactions:
11
[/COLOR]
