Conservation Groups Seek to Defend Public Lands Rule from Misguided Legal Attack

19th of Sep 2024

Advocates for the West and our partners filed a motion to intervene to defend the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Public Lands Rule against a lawsuit brought this past summer by the States of North Dakota, Idaho, and Montana in North Dakota federal district court. 

The conservation groups—including Conservation Lands Foundation, The Wilderness Society, and the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA), and represented by Advocates for the West and Kaplan Kirsch LLP—argue that the Public Lands Rule will help modernize the management practices of the BLM and ensure that the agency has the tools to meet future challenges, like growing pressure from climate change, and to restore public lands from the impacts of development. These groups celebrated the finalization of the rule, which was overwhelmingly supported during the comment period, and are now engaging to defend it from attacks. 

“By seeking to prevent the Public Lands Rule from being implemented, this suit threatens to keep the Bureau of Land Management chained to its dirty extractive industry past, preventing the agency from implementing a commonsense approach to future land management that includes a greater focus on conservation and meeting the challenges of a rapidly changing climate,” said Todd Tucci, Senior Attorney with Advocates for the West. “The lawsuit should be dismissed, and the Public Lands Rule should be fully implemented to ensure the ecological health and resilience of public lands across the country.”

“This lawsuit shamelessly seeks to let big fossil fuel and development interests keep pulling the strings and set the agenda for how we use our natural resources. The BLM Public Lands Rule, meanwhile, seeks the balanced approach prescribed for the agency by Congress almost a half-century ago,” said Alison Flint, Senior Legal Director at The Wilderness Society. “The Wilderness Society has worked for nearly 90 years to defend public lands. Continuing that work entails vigorously defending the Public Lands Rule so we can meet the challenges of a hotter, drier and more crowded future in the American West.”   

“This lawsuit against the Rule appears to be motivated by a puzzling fear of implementing existing law—the Federal Land Policy and Management Act—and the will of the people,” said Charlotte Overby, Vice President of Conservation Field Programs at the Conservation Lands Foundation. “This new guidance is needed to keep important recreation areas—that are also local economic engines—open and accessible to the public. It will improve ecological and climate resilience, and provide the tools managers need to restore habitat from wildfires, droughts, and other negative impacts. Supporters of the Public Lands Rule include legal experts, western lawmakers, local elected officials, and governors who participated in a robust public process, and more than 90% of public comments were in support of this sensible Rule.”

“Instead of seeing the Public Lands Rule as a way to work with BLM on shared conservation goals, North Dakota, Idaho, and Montana are fighting these efforts at every turn,” said Stephen Bloch, Legal Director at SUWA. “The overwhelming majority of Americans support conservation and know climate change is a serious problem. The American west and Utah in particular are predicted to be hit particularly hard by the impacts of a hotter, drier, and more unpredictable climate. The Public Lands Rule gives BLM and the public a framework and important tools to begin work to stem the tide.” 

Background

The groups’ legal action comes on the heels of a motion to intervene filed by the same conservation groups in July in another lawsuit filed by the states of Utah and Wyoming challenging the Public Lands Rule and seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent the BLM from implementing the rule. The Public Lands Rule went into effect in June after a year-long process to engage the public in its development. 

The Rule establishes a “framework to ensure healthy landscapes, abundant wildlife habitat, clean water, and balanced decision-making on our nation’s public lands.”

Read more about this case.