The BLM’s New Land Rule Proposal: What You Need to Know

Last month the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) proposed a new rule that seeks to add conservation as a “use” within FLPMA’s multi-use framework. According to the 22-page document that outlines the proposal in full, the new rule would allow conservation to take precedence above some public land uses, and be on equal footing with others such as livestock grazing.

Because this rule is just in the proposal stage and is not yet approved or in effect, the BLM is accepting public comments until July 5, 2023.

How to Submit Your Comments

Whatever your feelings are towards this proposed rule, you can make your thoughts known to the BLM through any of the avenues listed below. However, keep in mind that the BLM has requested that comments “[be] as specific as possible, limited to issues pertinent to the new rule, explain the reason for any changes you recommend, and include any supporting documentation.” They’ve also suggested that “where possible, your comments should reference the specific section or paragraph of the rule that you are addressing.”

Online

Comments can be submitted online via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. Enter “1004-AE-92” into the search box. You’ll then be taken to a search results page that shows the proposed rule labeled “Conservation and Landscape Health”. Click on the button that says “comment”, and follow the site’s instructions to submit your thoughts.

E-mail

You can provide a copy of your comments directly to the BLM’s Information Collection Clearance Officer via email to BLM_HQ_PRA_Comments@blm.gov . Be sure to reference the OMB Control Number 1004-0NEW and RIN 1004-AE92 in the subject line.

Mail

You can mail your comments on the BLM’s new proposed land rule to the following address:

U.S Department of the Interior, Director (630), Bureau of Land Management

1849 C St. NW

Room 5646

Washinton, DC 20240

Attn: 1004-AE92

What Can You Comment On?

While the subjects to address in your comments are entirely dependent on your personal viewpoint of the BLM’s proposed rule, they have asked for comments specifically pertaining to the following issues, listed in Section 6102.4 - Conservation Leasing.

Is the term ‘‘conservation lease’’ the best term for this tool?
What is the appropriate default duration for conservation leases?
Should the rule constrain which lands are available for conservation leasing? For example, should conservation leases be issued only in areas identified as eligible for conservation leasing in an RMP or areas the BLM has identified (either in an RMP or otherwise) as priority areas for ecosystem restoration or wildlife habitat?
Should the rule clarify what actions conservation leases may allow?
Should the rule expressly authorize the use of conservation leases to generate carbon offset credits?
Should conservation leases be limited to protecting or restoring specific resources, such as wildlife habitat, public water supply watersheds, or cultural resources?
The BLM seeks comment on how fair market value would be determined in the context of restoration or preservation. Would existing methods for land valuation provide valid results?
Would lands with valuable alternative land uses be prohibitively expensive for conservation use?
Should the BLM incorporate a public benefit component into the rent calculation to account for the benefits of ecosystem services?

Summary

In summary, the goal of the BLM’s new proposed land rule is to add conservation as a “use” within the framework of FLPMA’s multi-use framework. They are accepting public comments on the rule until July 5, 2023, which you can submit via their online messenger system at www.regulations.gov, email at BLM_HQ_PRA_Comments@blm.gov, or direct mail to the address below.

‍