The U.S. House of Representatives recently used a rarely invoked law to overturn three public land management plans, marking a significant departure from traditional practices. These plans, created by the Bureau of Land Management for Montana, Alaska, and North Dakota, direct decisions over 166 million acres, affecting oil and gas leasing, renewable energy, grazing, and habitat protections.
The House’s Congressional Review Act resolutions require Senate approval. While the act typically targets recent federal regulations, reversing resource management plans could alter how public lands are managed, according to legal experts and conservationists.
Historically, such plans are crafted with public comment, tribal and stakeholder input, and environmental review to balance uses like grazing, energy development, and conservation. This move would give Congress final authority, potentially disrupting these processes.
“This creates a political pendulum, which is not ideal for managing federal public lands,” said Susan Jane Brown, an attorney with Silvix Resources. Brown and 31 other experts signed an open letter opposing the resolutions, highlighting that nature doesn’t operate on political timescales.
Impact of Reversing Resource Management Plans
A key issue is the CRA’s “substantially similar” clause, which restricts agencies from issuing new rules similar to those Congress has already overturned. This vague definition could hinder new plan development, as fear of similarity may prevent the Bureau of Land Management from drafting new plans.
Supporters, including Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, argue for a more balanced resource extraction process. Murkowski, co-sponsoring the Senate resolution introduced by Sen. Dan Sullivan, criticized the Central Yukon Resource Management Plan for excessive restrictions and not lifting certain federal orders, such as bans on new mining claims.
Critics warn this Congressional action could nullify years of public engagement and research. Without stable “rules of the road,” management decisions may swing based on short-term political influences.
“Undoing plans developed over a decade for wildlife preservation creates chaos,” said Cooper Freeman from the Center for Biological Diversity. Alaska Native tribes, involved in shaping the Central Yukon plan, see it safeguarding crucial habitats. Overturning it could undermine tribal sovereignty and Indigenous land stewardship.
Resource management plans are vital for limiting development that harms ecosystems. Without them, local communities might lose their ability to reject environmentally damaging projects.
Rollbacks and Industry Uncertainty
Susan Jane Brown, from the Western Environmental Law Center, noted the timing and state involvement aren’t coincidental. Montana, Alaska, and North Dakota are key fossil fuel producers, and while the plans didn’t prohibit energy production, they imposed limits.
Resource management plans also aid industries reliant on these lands by providing long-term planning frameworks. Their rescission through the CRA adds uncertainty to clean-energy projects already underway.
Clean energy investors are wary of partisan changes affecting development rules, further destabilized by previous administration actions against renewable energy projects.
“This CRA action introduces chaos and uncertainty, affecting all industries reliant on public lands,” said Justin Meuse from The Wilderness Society. The CRA maneuver could impact geothermal development despite administrative support.
Federal lands hold significant clean-energy potential, including millions of acres viable for solar, wind, and geothermal energy, primarily managed by BLM. The CRA’s influence could shift these opportunities dramatically.
The GAO, in opinions since 2017, treats land-use plans as CRA-subject rules, but legal experts cite Supreme Court precedent indicating these aren’t binding regulations, setting up a potential legal clash.
“This CRA action introduces chaos and uncertainty for all industries reliant on public lands.”
— Justin Meuse, The Wilderness Society
If the GAO’s interpretation holds, over 100 RMPs finalized since 1996 could face scrutiny, impacting leases, permits, and rights-of-way.
Experts warn this could lead to public lands being dictated by political whims, allowing future Congresses to discard plans without achieving a balanced use.
The CRA resolutions, having passed the House, now await Senate action within 60 session days under expedited procedures.
“We are supporting jobs, state revenue, and energy dominance,” stated U.S. Rep Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.), chair of the House Committee on Natural Resources, following the resolution’s passage.
Critics argue this threatens stability for jobs, revenues, and environmental resources, undermining rational planning for public lands.
Correction: Susan Jane Brown is employed at Silvix Resources, not the Western Environmental Law Center.
Original Story at insideclimatenews.org