'Sweeping Threats' to public lands as GOP bill heads to Senate
Although a large federal lands sell-off was ultimately cut, local environmentalists say remaining measures are devastating
By Sophie Stuber, Telluride Daily Planet
House Republicans passed a tax and spending bill last week that would expand tax cuts alongside cutting Medicaid and eliminating all credits for low emissions energy sources including wind, solar, geothermal and batteries.
The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” also would bring back the federal multi-use mandate, which authorizes logging, recreation and conservation simultaneously on public lands — promoting energy exploration and production. Otherwise, public lands can be exempt from extraction and development when designated as national monuments or critical habitat zones for endangered species, among others.
The vote was essentially along party lines, although Republicans Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Warren Davidson of Ohio joined Democrats in opposition to the bill. Republicans say that adding oil and gas leases, boosting energy development and reducing environmental protections could create about $15 billion in savings, but Democratic lawmakers and environmental advocates state that the negative impacts far outweigh the financial benefits.
“I continue to be deeply concerned for the sweeping threats this bill still poses to critical conservation and public oversight programs,” Colorado Democratic Rep. Joe Neguse said in a statement.
One provision that would have sold off more than 450,000 acres of public lands in Nevada and Utah was ultimately removed from the budget bill before the vote. Although Colorado lands were not part of this initial sale, the measure could have created a framework for future deals to sell federal lands.
“It’s a relief that the public lands sell-off was not included in the reconciliation package — it would have set a really dangerous precedent for future public lands sell-off, which is something that can't really be undone and would have profound lasting effects on our communities, economies and environment,” Sheep Mountain Alliance Program Director Ruthie Boyd told the Daily Planet.
But Boyd joins others in saying that the measures that were approved could have negative environmental consequences.
“The bill remains devastating toward many other aspects of environmental protection, as well as community and social wellbeing, which are inherently tied together. Environmental advocacy doesn't exist in a silo from other problems our country is facing, and I think that is so evident in this bill,” she said.
San Miguel County Natural Resources and Climate Resilience Director Starr Jamison agreed.
“I am having a hard time being positive about the removal of the public lands sell-off when there is so much ‘worse’ in the BBB (Big Beautiful Bill Act),” Jamison told the Daily Planet.
Other measures in the budget bill that will affect public lands include a proposal that would allow private entities to avoid the public review process under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) if they pay a fee and requiring quarterly lease sales for oil and gas on federal land.
A proposal to repeal five resource management plans — two in the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Colorado River Valley and Grand Junction field offices — was also struck from the final version.
“Republicans’ effort to overturn resource management plans for two Bureau of Land Management field offices in Colorado was an attempt to roll back years-long community efforts, backed by public input and on-the-ground expertise,” Neguse said.
Congressman Jeff Hurd — representative from Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District, which includes San Miguel County — voted to pass the spending bill, stating that the idea is to address public lands “pragmatically.”
“In areas, especially in western and southern Colorado, energy production isn’t just an issue, it’s a livelihood,” Hurd told the Vail Daily in an interview. “I think, when it comes to this reconciliation legislation, that we’re reflecting that mentality.”
Although Hurd voted for the budget bill, he opposed an initial amendment supporting public lands sell-off in the House Natural Resources Committee.
The San Miguel Board of County Commissioners sent a letter to Hurd on May 19, thanking him for voting against the amendment, but noting that more action is necessary to protect public lands — including maintaining funding at public land management agencies, opposing efforts to sell, transfer, lease, or dispose of public lands without public process, and opposing legislation that negatively impacts public lands.
The commissioners called on Hurd to “support policies that ensure long-term preservation and sustainable use of these lands for future generations,” and encouraged the representative to join the Public Lands Caucus and consider co-sponsoring H.R. 7430 - Public Lands in Public Hands (PLPH) Act.
“We still have a lot of work to do, hence encouraging Hurd to co-sponsor the PLPH Act and join the Public Lands Caucus,” Jamison said.
The tax and spending bill goes to the Senate next.
Read the article here.