Utah is suing the federal government again, this time over land conservation policies

Comb Ridge National Monument in Bears Ears, May 10, 2018 (Kyle Dunphey/Utah News Dispatch)

Utah is suing the federal government again, this time over a new public lands policy that allows land managed by the Bureau of Land Management to be leased for conservation purposes.

This policy, the so-called public lands rules, was finalized without an appropriate environmental assessment by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Department of the Interior, the state alleges in its lawsuit filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Utah. The state of Wyoming is also a plaintiff in the lawsuit.

“The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires agencies to consider a field of study take steps to carefully consider possible environmental consequences before taking further action,” the complaint reads. “This matter stems from the failure of the Bureau of Land Management to comply with its NEPA obligations.”

In the 34-page complaint, lawyers for both states ask the court to strike down the rule and issue an injunction until the trial ends, essentially nullifying it for the time being.

This rule was finalized in April and took effect on June 10. Just as the BLM currently leases its lands for mineral extraction, energy development, recreation or grazing, the new rule creates conservation leases.

Now groups can purchase a regeneration lease, intended to improve habitat and restore or protect land, as well as a mitigation lease, intended to offset existing investments and projects on BLM lands.

In typical fashion, this policy was met with praise from environmental groups and contempt from Utah politicianswho expressed concerns that this provision could result in land closures, impeding traditional uses such as grazing or commercial guidance.

Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes said it was “devastating” for the state.

“This allows the BLM to unnecessarily restrict access to millions of acres of land by adopting an independent, museum-like approach to management,” Reyes said in a statement. “The rule redefines and prioritizes ‘conservation’ or ‘non-use’ over all other legal and productive uses, directly violating existing federal law and undermining the intent of the multiple-use policy as required by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act.”

Meanwhile, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance legal director Steve Bloch reiterated support for the rule on Tuesday, writing in an email that the lawsuit “highlights what a lackadaisical approach (Utah’s) elected leaders are to solving the problems facing public lands.”

“This lawsuit is out of touch with the majority of Utahns who support environmental protection and know that climate change is a serious problem,” Bloch said, calling the lawsuit “disappointing but predictable.”

Bloch said he looks forward to the rule’s “positive impact” on Utah’s public lands, which make up about 70% of the state’s land area.

“The rule will keep environmental concerns in mind as the BLM goes about its day-to-day work of managing some of the most pristine and ecologically significant public lands in the country,” Bloch said.

For months, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox has been hinting at a legal challenge. That took shape this week, with lawyers arguing that the BLM adopted an “unreasonable” interpretation of federal guidelines in applying the categorical exclusion, which allowed the agency to waive the environmental impact statement typically required under NEPA.

“By citing this unjustified interpretation as a reason for failing to conduct an appropriate NEPA review, the BLM acted arbitrarily and capriciously,” the complaint says.

The complaint also accuses the BLM of ignoring the concerns of various groups during the public comment period, including politicians in Utah, Wyoming, mining and solar companies and more.

In Utah, the rule could financially burden the state Division of Wildlife Resources and the Department of Agriculture and Food, the state’s attorneys. This is because the risk of land being leased by “other people or entities” for conservation purposes is so high that the state plans to buy all available plots.

“These agencies intend to pursue every available remediation and mitigation lease,” the complaint states. Court documents say it could cost taxpayers more than $5 million.

Earlier this year, outgoing Republican and current Senate candidate John Curtis introduced legislation to repeal the rule. The bill, called the Western Economy Security Today Act, passed the House after a bipartisan vote in April.

The post Utah sues federal government again, this time over land conservation policy appeared first on Utah News Dispatch.