Utah and Wyoming sue BLM, saying agency skipped NEPA before new conservation rule

Utah and Wyoming have sued the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, alleging the agency issued a conservation-focused rule without the required National Environmental Policy Act review and by doing so exceeded its authority over federal public lands.

"The Utah attorney general's office is on top of this lawsuit," host Richard Pyatt said while introducing Jason DeForest, an assistant attorney general with Utah's office who is working on the case. DeForest said the states argue the BLM "didn't comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, NEPA," a procedural claim central to the complaint.

DeForest said the rule has a potentially broad scope in Utah. "This rule could potentially affect all BLM-managed land within the state of Utah going forward," he said, noting the rule purports to protect intact landscapes and to permit new mitigation or restoration leases that could be issued to nongovernmental organizations, individuals or other entities.

State lawyers contend those mitigation and restoration leases are a material change from the Federal Land Policy and Management Act's multiple-use and sustained-yield mandate. DeForest summarized FLPMA's traditional uses—grazing, mining, timber harvest, fish and wildlife development—and said the new rule effectively elevates conservation into a parity of uses that was not established by Congress.

The complaint also focuses on how leases could affect ongoing state management. DeForest warned that if a mitigation lease limits activities on a parcel, it could preclude state programs such as the Division of Wildlife Resources from conducting habitat management or the Watershed Restoration Initiative from carrying out restoration work. He said it is "completely uncertain" what qualifications nongovernmental lease holders would need and whether they would have the same level of expertise as longstanding state programs.

On the environmental-review claim, DeForest said NEPA requires the agency to take a "hard look" at the environmental effects of major federal actions. He listed possible consequences the state asked the court to consider, including changes to watershed conditions and higher wildfire risk if active state management is curtailed by lease terms or by designations tied to the rule.

DeForest also flagged a separate implementation concern: local BLM managers could identify "intact landscapes" and designate Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) that, in the state's view, might be imposed without appropriate public processes or NEPA analysis and could lock up land needed for state-driven conservation and management programs.

Wyoming joined the suit for related reasons, DeForest said, particularly because of the state's long investments in sage-grouse conservation. "They've spent millions of dollars and decades conserving sage grouse," he said, and the state worries the rule would allow leaseholders who would not be required to coordinate with existing state plans.

On timing, DeForest said the state "just filed the complaint" and that the litigation is at an early stage. "We are at the very beginning stages of this process," he said, and added the case will take time to move through the courts.

The lawsuit seeks to have the rule set aside or otherwise to require the BLM to complete the environmental review the states say NEPA demands. The state stated its objective is to remain an "equal partner" with federal land managers on actions that affect wildlife and other state interests on public lands.

The case is active litigation; no court decision was reported during the interview.