Public Lands Clips: August 21, 2024

 

 

Harris-Walz

 

Video: Harris May Want A 'Complete And Utter Ban' Of Oil, Gas Development: Mike Sommers — “American Petroleum Institute CEO Mike Sommers argues against banning fracking and details what oil producers want to hear from Kamala Harris’ energy platform.” [Fox Business, 8/20/24 (-)]

 

 

 

Judge Orders Feds To Protect Endangered Whale From Oil Drilling — “Marine species advocates scored a long-awaited legal victory this week, after a judge found the federal government had underestimated the risks of offshore oil and gas development to the critically endangered Rice’s whale and other wildlife. On Monday, a federal district court in Maryland tossed out NOAA Fisheries’ Trump-era assessment — known as a biological opinion, or BiOp — effective Dec. 20, forcing the federal government to develop a new plan for protecting marine life like Gulf sturgeon and sea turtles. ‘The court’s ruling affirms that the government cannot continue to turn a blind eye to the widespread, persistent harms that offshore oil and gas development inflicts on wildlife,’ said Chris Eaton, a senior Earthjustice attorney representing environmental challengers in the case. He continued: ‘This decision means the Fisheries Service must comply with the law to put in place meaningful safeguards for the Gulf’s rarest marine species.’ Judge Deborah Boardman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland said delaying the effective date of her decision ‘strikes the appropriate balance’ between discarding an unlawful agency action and allowing time to transition to a new approach.” [Politico, 8/21/24 (=)]

 

Safeguards For Whales, Other Species From Gulf Of Mexico Oil Drilling Must Improve, Judge Rules — “A federal agency’s recommendations on how to protect endangered and threatened marine species, including the Rice’s whale, Gulf sturgeon, and loggerhead sea turtles, from the effects of oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico violate federal law, in part because they discount the potential for a repeat of the 2010 BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, a federal judge ruled Monday. U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman of Maryland, appointed to the bench by President Joseph Biden, found that the National Marine Fisheries Service biological opinion for Gulf drilling violated both the federal Endangered Species Act and Administrative Procedures Act, and that its failure to recognize the potential for damage caused by major oil spills was ‘arbitrary and capricious’. Her 84-page ruling also said the related analysis for the Rice’s whale and Gulf sturgeon ‘assumed these species’ populations remained as large as they were before the catastrophic Deepwater Horizon oil spill, even though the record evidence and NMFS’s own findings indicated that (the spill) significantly diminished their populations.’” [NOLA.com, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

More Must Be Done To Protect Of Species From GOM Drilling, Says Judge — “At the urging of environmental groups, a U.S. judge threew out an assessment by a federal agency governing how endangered and threatened marine species should be protected from oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman in Greenbelt, Maryland, ruled the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Services’ so-called ‘biological opinion’ was flawed and did not adequately address risks species face from oil spills and vessel strikes. The assessment was issued in 2020 during Republican former President Donald Trump’s administration and was legally necessary for oil and gas exploration and drilling to be conducted. The judge, appointed by President Joe Biden, said the assessment violated the Endangered Species Act. She faulted it for assuming an oil spill like the catastrophic Deepwater Horizon one in 2010 would not occur. … The decision drew praise from environmental groups including the Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity, who in a lawsuit filed in 2020 argued more safeguards were needed for imperiled whales, sea turtles, and other species.” [Offshore Engineer, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Gulf Spill Review 'Underestimated' Enviro Risks, Court Says — “A National Marine Fisheries Service review of the effects of oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico violates federal law, a Maryland federal judge ruled, agreeing with the Sierra Club and other environmental groups that the agency underestimated the risks to endangered and threatened marine species. U.S. District Judge Deborah L. Boardman, in a lengthy order Monday, granted summary judgment in favor of the Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth and Turtle Island Restoration Network, saying the NMFS’ biological opinion concerning offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico ‘underestimated the risk and harms of oil spills to protected species,’ in violation of the Endangered Species Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. For one thing, the NMFS unlawfully deferred to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s conclusion that ‘an oil spill larger than one million barrels was unlikely to occur,’ instead of making its own determination, the order states. What’s more, the NMFS’ past findings held that such an oil spill could be expected, according to the order. The agency also didn’t explain its decision to defer to the BOEM’s conclusion, the judge said.” [Law360, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE)

 

Report: Red Tape Leaves Most Of $1B To Reclaim Mine Land Unspent — “A federal oversight report found much to critique about the Department of Interior’s approach to cleaning up abandoned mine sites. After eight years and $1 billion to get it moving, barely 30% of the clean-up funds for the Abandoned Mine Land Economic Revitalization program, or AMLER, have been spent, and the process has pushed some groups to give up on reclamation projects altogether. The report from the Government Accountability Office warned of management problems in the department’s Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, or OSMRE, including the lack of systematic tracking for project reviews and approvals. Regional office staff do some tracking, according to the report, but in an inconsistent manner, making the information ‘incomplete and unreliable.’” [The Center Square, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

 

AP | Utah Lawsuit Seeks State Control Over Vast Areas Of Federal Land — “Utah’s attorney general said Tuesday he’s asked to file a lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court challenging a federal agency’s control over vast tracts of public land covering about one-third of the state. The legal action — considered a longshot attempt to assert state powers over U.S. Bureau of Land Management property — marks the latest jab in a long-running feud between states and the U.S. government over who should control huge swaths of the West and the enormous oil and gas, timber, and other resources they contain. Federal agencies combined have jurisdiction over almost 70 percent of Utah. The lawsuit seeks to assert state control over about half of that federal land — some 29,000 square miles (75,000 square kilometers), or an area nearly as large as South Carolina. Those parcels are under land bureau management and used for energy production, grazing, mining, recreation and other purposes. Utah’s world-famous national parks — and also the national monuments managed by the land bureau — would remain in federal hands under the lawsuit.” [ABC News, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Utah Asks Supreme Court To Let State Manage 18.5M Acres Of BLM Lands — “The state of Utah wants the nation’s highest court to order the federal government to give it control over the management of millions of acres of public lands within its boundaries. Gov. Spencer Cox announced Tuesday the state has filed a legal complaint directly to the Supreme Court asking the justices to determine whether the Bureau of Land Management is legally authorized to indefinitely control 18.5 million acres in the state that have not been authorized for a specific use. The 18.5 million acres of BLM lands at issue — more than one-third of the state’s territory — do not include lands in national monuments, national conservation areas or congressionally designated wilderness. But they do include lands with livestock grazing allotments, as well as oil and natural gas leases. Cox said during the press conference that Utah ‘deserves priority when it comes to managing its land,’ and that the U.S. Constitution did not grant the federal government the right to hold these lands indefinitely.” [E&E News, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

NOAA Ignored Trawling Impacts On Alaskan Seafloor, Lawsuit Says — “NOAA Fisheries violated federal law by allowing corals, sponges and other seafloor habitats in the Gulf of Alaska to be damaged by unchecked bottom trawling, a lawsuit filed Monday by environmental groups says. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska by the nonprofit group Oceana, says the agency and its primary advisory board, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council, failed to consider scientific evidence about trawling impacts on fragile sea-bottom habitats when it adopted five amendments to its North Pacific essential fish habitat (EFH) program last month. Oceana is seeking to block the amendments from being implemented, arguing the Commerce Department agency, also called the National Marine Fisheries Service, ‘failed to develop or consider any habitat conservation actions’ for the Gulf of Alaska, one of the most important ground fisheries in North America, producing several million tons of seafood annually. ‘Instead of using the amendments to advance protection of corals, sponges, and seafloor habitat from the destructive effects of trawling, defendants ignored and underrepresented fishing effects and declined to consider alternatives that would have protected benthic species and habitat with minimal displacement of fishing effort,’ states the complaint, filed by the nonprofit Earthjustice on Oceana’s behalf.” [E&E News, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

 

Alaska

 

Army Corps Suspends Permit For Alaska Mining Road — “The Biden administration has suspended a water and wetlands permit for the proposed Ambler mining road in Alaska, a month and a half after the Bureau of Land Management rejected the contentious project. In a letter sent this month, the Army Corps of Engineers informed the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority that a previously issued permit to fill in approximately 1,400 acres of wetlands was suspended, ‘effective immediately.’ The authority is a state-owned development bank pursuing the project. A 211-mile industrial access road, the Ambler Road Project is intended to support the development of new mines for minerals like zinc and copper in northwestern Alaska and benefit the area’s economy. Conservation groups and some tribes in the region have sought to stop the proposal, which they say would irreparably harm the sensitive Arctic landscape. The road would cross part of Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve and could also speed up the thawing of permafrost and harm wildlife like caribou, the Bureau of Land Management concluded this year.” [E&E News, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Arizona

 

US Forest Service Sued Over Ariz. Canyon Road Approval — “Environmental groups have slapped the U.S. Forest Service with a complaint in Arizona federal court, accusing the agency of violating the National Environmental Policy Act by allowing the construction of three roads into remote canyons in the Coronado National Forest that could destroy one of the last natural jaguar habitats in the United States. Despite the project’s aniticipated effect, the groups, which include the Center for Biological Diversity, Chiricahua Regional Council, Natural Allies, Wild Arizona and Conservation CATalyst, said the Forest Service’s environmental review under NEPA failed to address many substantial impacts of the project and erroneously concluded that it would result in no significant impacts. ‘Accordingly, the Forest Service failed to take the requisite ‘hard look’ at the direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the project required by NEPA before it was approved, and short-circuited public involvement and the consideration of mitigations for endangered, threatened and sensitive species,’ the groups said, in their complaint filed on Monday.” [Law360, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Greens Challenge Forest Roads Planned For Jaguar And Owl Habitat — “Environmentalists sued two federal agencies Monday over road plans in Arizona they fear could imperil vulnerable jaguars and spotted owls but that planners say will boost recreation opportunities. The Center for Biological Diversity and four allied organizations contend in the new lawsuit that the Forest Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service put the protected species at undue risk by approving new roads in the rugged Coronado National Forest. In particular, the lawsuit challenges plans for nearly 3 miles of roads through the canyons of the Chiricahua Mountains. These roads would reopen access to other forest roads that are currently closed, according to the lawsuit. ‘These fragile canyons in the Chiricahua Mountains are a sanctuary for wildlife and they’re key to the recovery of endangered jaguars and Mexican spotted owls,’ Laiken Jordahl, Southwest conservation advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement.” [E&E News, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Ariz. Tribe Wins Pause Of Lithium Project Construction — “An Arizona federal judge has granted the Hualapai Indian Tribe’s bid for a temporary restraining order in its lawsuit seeking to halt U.S. government approval of a lithium exploration project that it says threatens the life of a sacred medical spring used for cultural and religious purposes. U.S. District Judge Diane J. Humetewa’s docketed text-only order on Monday granted a temporary pause of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management’s approval of Arizona Lithium Ltd.’s exploratory drilling program for lithium deposits, known as the Big Sandy Valley Lithium Exploration Project. Judge Humetewa issued her order following a Monday hearing at which she heard the parties’ arguments over the restraining order bid. Also Monday, she set a preliminary injunction hearing for Sept. 17 and granted Arizona Lithium’s Friday motion to intervene in the suit. The judge found that the company, also known as AZL, filed a timely motion, had a significant protectable interest and an impaired ability to protect that interest, and adequate representation. ‘AZL’s point is well taken that defendant BLM may not adequately represent its interests due to its responsibilities as a government agency to represent the public interest,’ Judge Humetewa wrote in her order allowing the company to intervene.” [Law360, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Maine

 

DOI Issues 1st Floating Offshore Wind Energy Lease — “The U.S. Department of the Interior on Monday announced its first-ever floating offshore wind energy research lease, which will allow for up to 12 floating wind turbines off the coast of Maine. The department said the aim of the lease is to evaluate the feasibility of offshore wind energy in the region. ‘As a research lease, Maine or its designated operator will propose and conduct research regarding environmental and engineering aspects of the proposed project,’ the Interior Department said in a statement Monday. ‘This information will be made public and used to inform future planning, permitting, and construction of commercial scale floating offshore wind projects in the region.’ The department said construction on the research array is not likely to occur for several years, until after an environmental analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act.” [Law360, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Maine Gets Floating Offshore Wind Research Lease From BOEM — “The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management announced Monday that it has executed the first floating offshore wind energy research lease in the U.S., awarding an area of around 15,000 acres to the state of Maine. The lease, located 28 nautical miles offshore Maine, allows the deployment of up to 12 floating offshore wind turbines totaling 144 MW of generation, BOEM said. Maine has designated Pine Tree Offshore Wind as the operator of the research lease. The Gulf of Maine is already home to the 11-MW New England Aqua Ventus floating offshore wind pilot project in state-owned waters. The new lease ‘is needed to conduct important technological, operational, and scientific research to inform future floating offshore wind projects in the Gulf of Maine,’ according to the Maine Offshore Wind Initiative, which is overseen by the energy office of Gov. Janet Mills, D.” [Utility Dive, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Nevada

 

On Bahsahwahbee, Nevada Voters Want Action By The Biden-Harris Administration, Not Promises — “The Biden-Harris Administration committed to standing up for tribal sovereignty, preserving our public lands and cultural sites, and ensuring our national parks tell America’s complete story. The Administration even asked for Tribal-led conservation campaigns. Our tribes have delivered for them just that with Bahsahwahbee, a place in eastern Nevada where our people – our families – were murdered during religious gatherings. For years, we’ve been calling on the Administration to establish the Bahsahwahbee National Monument within the National Park System. But with the clock winding down, we find ourselves asking, ‘Is the Biden-Harris Administration committed to delivering this monument for the benefit of our tribes and Nevadans, or will this be the latest case of government talk but no action?’ Honoring a place of religious gathering comparable to the Vatican and a mass graveyard not unlike Arlington National Cemetery shouldn’t be political, but tribes are not naive to the fact that we are in the middle of a high-stakes election year. Every vote matters in purple states like Nevada, and decision-making by the Biden-Harris Administration will naturally run through the political lens. According to the Center for Western Priorities, voters in Nevada want their elected officials to take more conservation actions.” [Nevada Current, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Oregon

 

Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek Throws Support Behind Owyhee Canyonlands National Monument — “Gov. Tina Kotek threw her support behind the latest movement to establish a national monument in southeast Oregon’s Owyhee Canyonlands. Kotek’s support is the latest in a chorus of voices from conservation groups and local tribes asking President Joe Biden to use the Antiquities Act to protect around 2.5 million acres of rugged canyons and rivers near the Idaho border. ‘Permanent safeguards will protect the Owyhee Canyonlands against the growing threats of development, extraction, and other detrimental activities and, most importantly, will pay endless dividends for generations to come,’ Kotek said in a letter to Biden. It’s not the first time conservation groups have made the monument pitch to an outgoing Democratic president. In 2016 and early 2017, groups pressured then-President Barack Obama to establish the moment. Some reporting at the time indicated he was close to doing so, but ultimately didn’t due to opposition from Malheur County residents.” [Idaho Statesman Journal, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Utah

 

Utah Lawsuit Seeks State Control Over Vast Areas Of Federal Land — “Utah’s Republican leaders made good Tuesday on a decade-old vow to launch a legal challenge aimed at wresting control from the U.S. government over much of the federal lands that dominate the state. The state’s attorney general said he asked to file a lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court in what is considered a long-shot attempt to assert state powers on U.S. Bureau of Land Management property across about one-third of Utah. It marks the latest jab in a running feud between states and the U.S. government over who should control huge swaths of the West and the enormous oil and gas, timber, and other resources they contain. Federal agencies combined have jurisdiction over almost 70% of Utah. The lawsuit targets about half of that federal land — some 29,000 square miles (75,000 square kilometers), or an area nearly as large as South Carolina. Those parcels are under land bureau management and used for energy production, grazing, mining, recreation and other purposes.” [Associated Press, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Utah Sues Federal Government Over Public Lands Control — “Utah filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday against the U.S. government over the control of millions of acres of public land in the state. The big picture: The lawsuit focuses on the 18.5 million acres of unappropriated public land controlled by the Bureau of Land Management. Utah Republicans want the U.S. Supreme Court to decide if the federal government can indefinitely hold unappropriated public land. ‘It’s a simple question … and we’re hoping the Supreme Court will give us an answer,’ Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes said during a news conference Tuesday at the state Capitol. Zoom out: The federal government owns nearly half of the land in the West, per the New York Times, which, for decades, has fueled debates around how that territory should be handled. Tuesday’s filing is the latest legal action Utah has taken against that control. Nearly 70% of the state’s lands are managed federally.” [Axios, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Utah Asks Supreme Court To Make US Give Back Some Federal Lands — “Half of all federal land in Utah is being illegally held by the federal government, which should dispose of it, the state argued in a Supreme Court original jurisdiction complaint filed Tuesday. If the court takes the case and Utah wins, the legal action has the potential to completely upend the US’s system of public lands, jeopardizing the 245 million acres of land under the control of the Interior Department’s Bureau of Land Management. Each of the 11 Western states and Alaska have vast amounts of federal land within their borders. Nevada has the most, with 80% of its land under federal ownership. Utah, which is 69% federally-owned, is the only state to ask the Supreme Court to force that land out of federal hands.” [Bloomberg Law, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

The Utah Lawsuit That Could Change The Face Of The West — “After decades of preparation, Utah leaders declared that the Beehive State is ready to transform public lands in the West. Utah filed a ‘historic’ lawsuit on Tuesday, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether the federal government has constitutional authority to maintain unappropriated public lands in the state against the state’s wishes. The country’s highest court has yet to take up the case. But if it were to rule in Utah’s favor, the control of a significant portion of public lands would shift to state capitals like Phoenix, Boise and Salt Lake City, instead of the nation’s Capitol more than a thousand miles away. … Environmental activist groups in the state quickly voiced their disapproval of the lawsuit. The Center for Western Priorities, a conservation advocacy organization, said the lawsuit complicated an already decided issue because public lands are under the exclusive purview of Congress. ‘Gov. Cox and the state legislature need to make a U-turn before they waste millions of taxpayer dollars enriching out-of-state lawyers on this pointless lawsuit,’ said the organization’s deputy director, Aaron Weiss. The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance took a similar tone, with legal director Steve Bloch saying the lawsuit establishes Utah ‘as the most anti-public lands state in the country.’ The Wilderness Society called it ‘a brazen and undemocratic attempt to force the handover of millions of acres of American’s public lands to the state — and ultimately to private companies planning to develop them.’” [The Deseret News, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Rift Reopens Over Power Plant Pollution Near National Park — “EPA is again clashing with Utah regulators over the scope of haze reduction requirements for two high-polluting coal-fired power plants. In a draft rule published Monday, EPA tentatively rejected part of a Utah plan for making continued headway toward clearing the air in Canyonlands National Park and other large federal recreation areas inside and outside the state. Among other factors, EPA cited Utah’s failure ‘to reasonably evaluate’ measures for cutting emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) at the Hunter and Huntington plants, both owned by PacifiCorp and located in central Utah. Those releases are a major source of haze-forming pollution. But rather than require both plants to adopt a pollution control technology known as selective catalytic reduction that would slash NOx emissions by thousands of tons annually, Utah opted for tonnage limits so high that they will yield no reductions from current levels, the draft rule indicates. The proposed disapproval marks a resumption of a seesaw regulatory fight that dates back to the final year of the Obama administration and provisionally ended last year with a ruling by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that effectively gave both plants a reprieve.” [E&E News, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Utah Sues Federal Government For Control Of Public Lands — “The state of Utah sued the federal government Tuesday in an attempt to gain control of millions of acres of public lands. … Aaron Weiss, deputy director of the Center for Western Priorities, which advocates for conservation, argued that the suit would not hold up in court. ‘Congress decides how public lands are managed. Congress decides when public lands are disposed of,’ he said. ‘The Enabling Act that brought Utah in as a state did not leave any wiggle room.’ The state’s suit argues that under this law, the federal government’s authority was ‘limited to the power to dispose of those lands.’ While Cox said that the goal of the suit was to bring lands under state management — not privatization — Weiss expressed concern that if the state were to succeed, land sell-offs would be the ultimate outcome. ‘The costs of fighting one wildfire on this theoretically new state land that they want could wipe out a state budget,’ Weiss said. ‘We’ve seen Oregon have to sell off state forests because they couldn’t afford to maintain them and manage them.’ ‘What, what this would lead to … is trophy homes all up and down Moab, trophy homes on the edge of Bears Ears,’ he added.” [The Hill, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

KSJD Local Newscast - August 20, 2024 — “In an effort to gain control of Bureau of Land Management lands within its borders, the State of Utah has filed a lawsuit directly with the U.S. Supreme Court. The suit asks the court to weigh in on whether the federal government can legally maintain control of what Utah officials call ‘unappropriated lands.’ At a press conference Tuesday that was aired live, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox and Attorney General Sean Reyes voiced concerns about how road closures and resource management on BLM lands, which make up about 34 percent of Utah. Reyes and Cox noted that many states back East have very little federal public land. Cox said Utah officials don’t want to privatize the land, just to manage it differently. The deputy director of one conservation advocacy group scoffed at their statements. Aaron Weiss of the Center for Western Priorities told KSJD by phone that he is skeptical about the lawsuit’s chances. He said if it should succeed, Utah could not afford to keep the land, as management costs would bankrupt it. Weiss said, ‘The notion that you could dispose of national public lands, make them state land, and then keep them open to the public is a fever dream. The ultimate outcome would be to sell off the land for trophy homes on the edge of Zion and Moab.’” [KSJD-Radio, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

'The Right Time' — Cox, Reyes File Supreme Court Lawsuit Claiming 18.5M Acres Of Federal Land — “Utah has filed a lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court challenging the federal government’s claim to roughly 18.5 million acres of ‘unappropriated’ land and calling for its ‘disposal’ into state hands. ‘Utah is absolutely committed to keeping public lands in public hands and locally controlled,’ said Gov. Spencer Cox during a news conference Tuesday with Attorney General Sean Reyes at the state Capitol in Salt Lake City. ‘Utah deserves priority when it comes to managing its land. Utah is in the best position to understand and respond to unique needs of our environment and communities,’ Cox said. … Aaron Weiss, deputy director of the Center for Western Priorities, said in a statement that ‘130 years ago, the people of Utah agreed to ‘forever disclaim all right and title’ to national public lands when Utah became a state. ... The property clause of the Constitution gives Congress, and only Congress, authority to transfer or dispose of federal lands. That’s the beginning, middle, and end of this lawsuit.’ ‘Gov. Cox and the state Legislature need to make a U-turn before they waste millions of taxpayer dollars enriching out-of-state lawyers on this pointless lawsuit,’ Weiss said.” [KSL-TV, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Utah Suing Federal Government To Gain Control Of Millions Of Acres Of Public Lands — “Utah is suing the federal government in the U.S. Supreme Court, hoping to force the divestment of nearly 20 million acres of public lands owned by the federal government back to the state. The state is asking for the nation’s highest court to rule on whether 34%, or 18.5 million acres of unappropriated land can come back to be managed by Utah. Utah’s top political leaders held a press event Tuesday, arguing the feds are not using that land and they are better managed when in state hands. The leaders were clear that the state isn’t suing over national parks, monuments, or forests. … ‘Governor Cox and the state legislature need to make a U-turn before they waste millions of taxpayer dollars enriching out-of-state lawyers on this pointless lawsuit,’ the Center for Western Priorities said in a statement.” [KSL-TV, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Utah Sues Federal Government For Control Of 18.5 Million Acres Of Land — “The state of Utah is suing the federal government, seeking control of approximately 18.5 million acres of land. The lawsuit, filed directly with the U.S. Supreme Court, seeks control of land overseen by the Bureau of Land Management that covers roughly 34% of the entire state. Governor Spencer Cox, Attorney General Sean Reyes, House Speaker Mike Schultz and Senate President J. Stuart Adams announced the lawsuit at a news conference on Utah’s Capitol Hill on Tuesday morning. … Environmental groups blasted the litigation. ‘This lawsuit isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. 130 years ago, the people of Utah agreed to ‘forever disclaim all right and title’ to national public lands when Utah became a state. What part of ‘forever’ isn’t clear to you, governor? The property clause of the Constitution gives Congress, and only Congress, authority to transfer or dispose of federal lands. That’s the beginning, middle, and end of this lawsuit,’ said Aaron Weiss, the deputy director of the Center for Western Priorities in a statement.” [KSTU-TV, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Utah Sues The Feds For Control Over Millions Of Acres Of Public Land — “Utah has escalated its ongoing fight over the control of public lands. This time they’re petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court directly to weigh in. The Utah Attorney General’s Office has filed a landmark lawsuit against the federal government over ‘unappropriated land’ in the state. The lawsuit, Gov. Spencer Cox said, asks whether it is constitutional for the federal government to ‘simply hold unappropriated lands within a state indefinitely.’ ‘Utah deserves priority when it comes to managing its land,’ he said at an Aug. 20 press conference. While federal land makes up roughly 70% of Utah, half of that land, Cox said, is ‘unappropriated’ — which in this case is land administered by the Bureau of Land Management. … Kate Groetzinger of the Center for Western Priorities, a public lands advocacy group, called the lawsuit ‘a threat to federal public lands’ in Utah. If the state were to assume control, Groetzinger said, ‘it will manage these lands for extraction and for profit, because it will have to.’ ‘The state cannot afford to manage these lands the way that the federal government does, which is a more balanced approach. They’ll manage them for profit, by leasing them out for oil and gas, for mining and by selling them off for private development.’” [KSUT-Radio, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Utah Files Lawsuit Against Federal Government Over Control Of 34% Of State — “Utah leaders filed a lawsuit against the federal government over control of public lands on Tuesday, placing the long-standing issue before the U.S. Supreme Court. Gov. Cox announced the lawsuit in a press conference on Tuesday, Aug. 20, saying Utahns should be in control of the state’s public lands. Cox said the federal government controls nearly 70% of Utah’s lands, comparing that number to several other states with only one to three percent of their lands controlled by the federal government. … Attorney General Sean Reyes said the question is: ‘Whether the federal government can simply hold unappropriated lands within a state indefinitely over the objection of that state.’ …. ‘Nothing in the text of the Constitution authorizes such an inequitable practice,’ Reyes said. ‘Current federal land policy violates state sovereignty and offends the original and most fundamental notions of federalism.’ However, the conservation organization Center for Western Priorities called the lawsuit a ‘land grab’ saying the ‘property clause of the Constitution gives Congress, and only Congress, authority to transfer or dispose of federal lands.’ ‘That’s the beginning, middle, and end of this lawsuit,’ said Center for Western Priorities Deputy Director Aaron Weiss.” [KTVX-TV, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Utah Sues The Feds For Control Over Millions Of Acres Of Public Land — “Utah has escalated its ongoing fight over the control of public lands. This time they’re petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court directly to weigh in. The Utah Attorney General’s Office has filed a landmark lawsuit against the federal government over ‘unappropriated land’ in the state. The lawsuit, Gov. Spencer Cox said, asks whether it is constitutional for the federal government to ‘simply hold unappropriated lands within a state indefinitely.’ ‘Utah deserves priority when it comes to managing its land,’ he said at an Aug. 20 press conference. While federal land makes up roughly 70% of Utah, half of that land, Cox said, is ‘unappropriated’ — which in this case is land administered by the Bureau of Land Management. … Kate Groetzinger of the Center for Western Priorities, a public lands advocacy group, called the lawsuit ‘a threat to federal public lands’ in Utah. If the state were to assume control, Groetzinger said, ‘it will manage these lands for extraction and for profit, because it will have to.’ ‘The state cannot afford to manage these lands the way that the federal government does, which is a more balanced approach. They’ll manage them for profit, by leasing them out for oil and gas, for mining and by selling them off for private development.’” [KUER-Radio, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Utah Tells Justices Feds Must Relinquish Land In State — “The federal government is unconstitutionally hoarding and profiting from public lands in Utah, and the state is missing out on economic and development opportunities that are rightfully its own, it told the U.S. Supreme Court in a proposed lawsuit filed Tuesday. According to Utah’s proposed complaint, the federal government owns about 69% of the state’s land, or roughly 37 million out of 54 million acres. But about half of that U.S. land is ‘unappropriated’ for any specific purpose and is instead leased out for fossil fuel projects, livestock grazing or other things, the state said. Utah said its elected leaders ‘have repeatedly urged the United States to relinquish ownership of its unappropriated lands,’ to no avail. The justices must decide whether to grant the Beehive State’s motion to file its complaint, but if it goes ahead, it raises serious constitutional questions. Utah alleges that because the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management continues to control and manage the land independently, the state can’t tax the federal government’s land holdings, exercise eminent domain there for projects like public roads and transportation and communications systems, or pass laws about how the land may be used.” [Law360, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Utah Sues Feds Over Control Of Public Lands — “The state of Utah on Tuesday filed a lawsuit against the federal government in an effort to seize control of some 18.5 million acres of land — almost one-third of the state’s total area. The federal government controls about 70% of the land in Utah. Only Nevada, at 80%, has more federally controlled land. Utah gave up the land under the Utah Enabling Act, an 1894 law that laid out provisions for Utah to become a state. The lawsuit contends that the federal government’s indefinite control of the unappropriated public lands is unconstitutional. In a statement, Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes says, ‘Nothing in the text of the Constitution authorizes such an inequitable practice. In fact, the Framers of the Constitution carefully limited federal power to hold land within states.’ He adds, ‘Current federal land policy violates state sovereignty and offends the original and most fundamental notions of federalism.’ But others disagree. Aaron Weiss, deputy director of conservation group the Center for Western Priorities, writes in a press release, ‘This lawsuit isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. 130 years ago, the people of Utah agreed to ‘forever disclaim all right and title’ to national public lands when Utah became a state. What part of ‘forever’ isn’t clear to you, governor? The property clause of the Constitution gives Congress, and only Congress, authority to transfer or dispose of federal lands. That’s the beginning, middle, and end of this lawsuit.’” [Newsmax, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Utah Lawsuit Challenges Federal Control Of A Third Of Its Land — “The state of Utah filed a lawsuit on Tuesday in the U.S. Supreme Court challenging federal control over more than a third of the land within its borders, saying U.S. government policies are restricting access to those lands for recreation and energy and infrastructure development. The move is the latest by a Republican-led state to push back against federal land management policies put in place by the administration of Democratic President Joe Biden. Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes asked the Supreme Court to address whether the federal government can hold lands within a state indefinitely if they are not designated as national parks, monuments, wilderness areas, tribal lands or for military use. About 70% of the land in Utah is owned by the federal government. The unappropriated lands the state is seeking to manage are 18.5 million acres (7.5 million hectares) controlled by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, or 34% of the land in Utah, the state said in a statement. … ‘Governor Cox and the state legislature need to make a U-turn before they waste millions of taxpayer dollars enriching out-of-state lawyers on this pointless lawsuit,’ Center for Western Priorities deputy director Aaron Weiss said in a statement.” [Reuters, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

The Feds Own Millions Of Acres Of Public Land In Utah. Now The State Is Suing For Control Of Over Half Of It. — “Utah officials filed a lawsuit Tuesday asking the U.S. Supreme Court to answer a question: Can the federal government control public lands within the state indefinitely? ‘It is obvious to all of us that the federal government has increasingly failed to keep our lands accessible and properly managed,’ Gov. Spencer Cox said at a Tuesday morning news conference. ‘Utah deserves priority when it comes to managing this land,’ he continued. ‘Utah is in the best position to understand and respond to the unique needs of our environment and communities.’ The lawsuit is an effort that comes after ‘decades of legal analysis,’ according to the Utah attorney general’s office. ‘It is time that we stand for our land,’ Cox said, which is the title of a state campaign launched Tuesday alongside the lawsuit. … Aaron Weiss, deputy director for the nonprofit Center for Western Priorities, said that the ‘lawsuit isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.’ ‘The property clause of the Constitution gives Congress, and only Congress, authority to transfer or dispose of federal lands,’ he continued. ‘That’s the beginning, middle, and end of this lawsuit.’” [The Salt Lake Tribune, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Utah Sues Federal Government For Control Of Public Lands — “Gov. Spencer Cox, Attorney General Sean Reyes and other state officials announced the lawsuit during a press conference Tuesday morning in Salt Lake City that was accompanied by a news release to the media. Nearly 70% of Utah is comprised of land managed by federal agencies like the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service and others. Around half of that land is appropriated via congressional designation for a specific use, such as being a national monument or park, protected wilderness area, national forest, tribal land or military property, according to the news release. … ‘This lawsuit isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on,’ Aaron Wells, the deputy director for the Denver-based Center for Western Priorities, said. ‘130 years ago, the people of Utah agreed to ‘forever disclaim all right and title’ to national public lands when Utah became a state. What part of ‘forever’ isn’t clear to you, governor? The property clause of the Constitution gives Congress, and only Congress, authority to transfer or dispose of federal lands. That’s the beginning, middle and end of this lawsuit.” [St George News, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Utah Challenges Federal Land Control: State Files Supreme Court Lawsuit Over 18.5 Million Acres — “Utah has launched a significant legal challenge against the U.S. government, questioning the indefinite federal retention of 18.5 million acres of ‘unappropriated’ land managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). This groundbreaking lawsuit, presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeks to address the constitutionality of such federal land policies under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA). While this legal action does not affect lands designated as national parks, monuments, wilderness areas, national forests, tribal lands, or military properties, it targets the expansive territories not allocated for any specific federal purpose. Currently, the federal government possesses nearly 70% of Utah’s land, a stark contrast to states like Connecticut, New York, and Rhode Island, where federal ownership is less than one percent. Governor Spencer Cox expressed concerns about the restrictive federal control over Utah’s lands, emphasizing the state’s inability to manage and utilize its natural resources effectively. … Attorney General Sean D. Reyes argued that the federal policy of retaining land indefinitely is unconstitutional, lacking textual support from the Constitution and undermining the principles of state sovereignty and federalism established by the Framers.” [Tampa Free Press, 8/20/24 (-)]

 

KLAS-TV | Utah Goes To Supreme Court To Challenge BLM’s Claim To ‘Unappropriated’ Public Lands — “Utah filed a complaint on Tuesday asking the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on who really owns public lands, challenging federal ownership of 18.5 million acres of ‘unappropriated’ land in the state. … Most federal control of land is through the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Forest Service and the National Parks Service. Utah is challenging the BLM’s claim to millions of acres under the Federal Land Policy Management Act (FLPMA). Utah argues there’s nothing in the U.S. Constitution that gives the government the right to reserve that land. But the Denver-based Center for Western Priorities (CWP) quickly labeled Utah’s argument as a waste of time and money. ‘Governor (Spencer) Cox and the state legislature need to make a U-turn before they waste millions of taxpayer dollars enriching out-of-state lawyers on this pointless lawsuit,’ Aaron Weiss, CWP deputy director, said in a news release. ‘This lawsuit isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on,’ Weiss said. ‘130 years ago, the people of Utah agreed to ‘forever disclaim all right and title’ to national public lands when Utah became a state. What part of ‘forever’ isn’t clear to you, governor? The property clause of the Constitution gives Congress, and only Congress, authority to transfer or dispose of federal lands. That’s the beginning, middle, and end of this lawsuit.’” [Yahoo! News, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Utah News Dispatch | Utah Files Ambitious Lawsuit To Take Control Of 18.5 Million Acres Of Federal Public Land — “Utah is suing the federal government over how it manages public land in the state, again. But unlike past legal challenges, which target specific national monuments or policies, the scope of the lawsuit filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday is massive, questioning whether the Bureau of Land Management’s claim to 18.5 million acres of land — about 34% of the entire state — is legitimate. … The Center For Western Priorities, a public lands advocacy group, said Utah’s legal argument was likely to fail, telling Utah News Dispatch it ‘isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.’ ‘One hundred and thirty years ago, the people of Utah agreed to ‘forever disclaim all right and title’ to national public lands when Utah became a state. What part of ‘forever’ isn’t clear to you, governor? The property clause of the Constitution gives Congress, and only Congress, authority to transfer or dispose of federal lands. That’s the beginning, middle, and end of this lawsuit,’ said the group’s deputy director, Aaron Weiss, who urged the governor and other state leaders to abandon the suit before they ‘waste millions of taxpayer dollars enriching out-of-state lawyers on this pointless lawsuit.’” [Yahoo! News, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Utah Sues Biden Administration For Control Of Federal Lands — “Utah questioned whether it is constitutional for the federal government to hold unappropriated land indefinitely as nearly three-quarters of the state’s land lies under bureaucratic control. Gov. Spencer Cox (R-UT) announced the lawsuit, which goes directly to the Supreme Court, during a press conference Tuesday. ‘The Federal Government controls 70% of the land in Utah,’ Cox wrote in a post to X explaining why he’s suing the Biden administration. ‘The U.S. Constitution never intended a federal agency to hold onto so much land in any state – that’s why the state of Utah is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on this constitutional question we, and many western states, have had for years.’” [Washington Examiner, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

Utah Sues Feds Over Control Of Public Lands — “The state of Utah on Tuesday filed a lawsuit against the federal government in an effort to seize control of some 18.5 million acres of land — almost one-third of the state’s total area.The federal government controls about 70% of the land in Utah. Only Nevada, at 80%, has more federally controlled land. Utah gave up the land under the Utah Enabling Act, an 1894 law that laid out provisions for Utah to become a state. The lawsuit contends that the federal government’s indefinite control of the unappropriated public lands is unconstitutional. In a statement, Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes says, ‘Nothing in the text of the Constitution authorizes such an inequitable practice. In fact, the Framers of the Constitution carefully limited federal power to hold land within states.’ He adds, ‘Current federal land policy violates state sovereignty and offends the original and most fundamental notions of federalism.’ But others disagree. Aaron Weiss, deputy director of conservation group the Center for Western Priorities, writes in a press release, ‘This lawsuit isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. 130 years ago, the people of Utah agreed to ‘forever disclaim all right and title’ to national public lands when Utah became a state. What part of ‘forever’ isn’t clear to you, governor? The property clause of the Constitution gives Congress, and only Congress, authority to transfer or dispose of federal lands. That’s the beginning, middle, and end of this lawsuit.’” [WCBM-TV, 8/20/24 (+)]

 

Virginia

 

Croatan Residents Complain Of Loud Noises From Dominion Energy Wind Turbine Project — “Dominion Energy continues to work on its $9 billion wind turbine project that it says will bring more reliable, sustainable energy for more than 600,000 households. In all, 176 wind turbines are being built off the coast of Virginia Beach to provide more reliable energy. But residents of the adjacent Croatan neighborhood are unhappy with the noise and vibrations it’s causing, voicing their concerns at a Virginia Beach City Council meeting Tuesday. ‘It’s a peaceful neighborhood. Since November when they started construction, it’s been a nightmare. They’re noise that wakes us up at night shaking our beds,’ John Knight, a Croatan resident said. Knight has lived in Croatan for 6 years.” [WTKR-TV, 8/20/24 (=)]

 

 

 

RESPONSES TO THIS EMAIL ARE NOT MONITORED

 

 

To be added to the People over Polluters (POP) listserv to receive clips and other postings, please contact:

 

LAUREN LANTRY – Senior Director, Arc Initiatives (She/Her)

(laurenlantry@team-arc.com)

 

 

For any other questions or comments, please contact:

 

MITCH DUNN – Director of Media Monitoring and Analysis, Beehive Research (He/Him)

(mitch@beehivedc.com)

 

 

***