SALT LAKE CITY – Conservation groups say the U.S. Bureau of Land Management broke the law when it approved eight large oil and gas lease sales in Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, Nevada and Utah, and filed suit yesterday in federal court.

The sales came after the agency rolled back protections for greater sage-grouse habitat and cut opportunities for the public to have a say in how public lands are managed.

Laird Lucas, with the group, Advocates for the West and lead attorney on the case, says so far under the Trump administration he's only seen the pendulum swinging toward energy development without regard for wildlife.

"We're trying to get the pendulum to go back because that's what the laws say, that you have to have a balance there," he says. "And this administration is not acting in accordance with the law. We need to have balance in how public lands are managed."

After a decade of work by federal, state and local leaders along with ranchers, energy companies and other stakeholders, a comprehensive land-use plan was put in place to keep sage grouse off the endangered species list. Populations of the iconic birds have declined by as much as 95 percent from historic levels.

Some industry groups argue the plan overestimated the impacts from energy production, and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke has pushed to remove restrictions for development on public lands in order to achieve energy dominance.

Lucas says there are plenty of places on public or private lands to drill for oil and gas without encroaching on habitat that the sage grouse and more than 350 other species depend on.

"There are millions of acres of federal leases that are held by oil and gas companies that are not being developed," he notes. "Awarding more leases now does not make sense, particularly where it threatens really sensitive wildlife habitats."

In the 1970s, Congress adopted laws for how public lands should be managed by the BLM, requiring the agency to use the best available science and allow the public to play a meaningful role in planning and land-use decisions.

Lucas says he hopes the federal judge in the Boise U.S. District Court will agree that the BLM has violated what he calls bedrock environmental laws.


get more stories like this via email

Indiana is considering a limited bobcat trapping season and the Department of Natural Resources is seeking public input on the proposal.

The plan would allow trapping in about 40 southern Indiana counties starting in November 2025, with a statewide quota of 250 bobcats. Trappers would have a one-bobcat bag limit and be required to purchase a special bobcat license.

Geriann Albers, furbearer and turkey program leader for the Indiana Department of Natural Resources, said the proposal includes strict monitoring, and requires trappers to report their catches within 24 hours.

"We do have a population model for bobcats," Albers explained. "We're very confident with that 250 quota that it will not negatively impact bobcat populations. What that 250 was set on was the population model we have that shows that's a sustainable level of harvest."

Opponents argued even a limited season could threaten bobcat populations. Environmental groups, including the Humane Society, said the DNR's population model may not fully account for the bobcat's slow reproductive rate and threats from habitat loss. They contended reintroducing trapping could undermine years of conservation work that helped the species recover in Indiana.

Albers noted the DNR invited public feedback on the proposal.

"On that rule-making docket page the comment button is available for people to submit comments now," Albers pointed out. "That went up pretty quickly after the meeting but the first round of comments, we haven't scheduled yet because that usually coincides with when we do a public hearing."

A public hearing, tentatively set for November, will offer both in-person and virtual participation options. The DNR said updates will be posted on its website.


get more stories like this via email

Environmental groups are slamming a Biden administration effort to remove federal protections for the endangered gray wolf.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service just appealed a 2022 court decision reinstating protections for the gray wolf under the Endangered Species Act; protections lost in the Trump era.

Derek Goldman, Northern Rockies senior field representative for the nonprofit Endangered Species Coalition, said federal officials are making contradictory moves.

"On one hand, they said earlier this summer that they want to write a national recovery plan. But then they appealed to reinstate the Trump wolf delisting rule, which would presumably mean they don't have to do a recovery plan," Goldman pointed out. "This is kind of sending a mixed message here."

In the suit, Justice Department attorneys argued the gray wolf is no longer in danger of extinction. The National Rifle Association and hunting and livestock groups also supported the Trump-era policy, which would send protections back to the states.

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife said seven confirmed packs of gray wolves have made their way down from Oregon. Goldman acknowledged the wolves enjoy state-level protections but have a long way to go.

"They certainly haven't recovered throughout all the suitable habitat that's in California, like the Sierra Nevada mountain range," Goldman noted. "But without the resources provided by the Endangered Species Act, they won't fully recover."

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service set a deadline of December 2025 to produce a new federal gray wolf recovery plan.

Following the torture of a wolf by a Wyoming man, a state panel is seeking a bill to protect the killing of predators with vehicles, but Federal lawmakers are pushing back.

After Cody Roberts in February hit a gray wolf with his snowmobile, taped its mouth shut and brought the injured animal to a bar, he was fined just $250 and an international outcry followed.

The gray wolf was removed from the federal endangered species list in 2021. In Wyoming, it is considered a "predator" and is legal to kill. The state's newly formed Treatment of Predators Working Group approved a bill, which clarified using vehicles to run over "predators," a practice called "whacking," is legal, as long as all "reasonable efforts to kill" the injured animal are then taken.

Elaine Leslie, retired agency chief of biological resources for the National Park Service, said Wyoming "sanctions this kind of behavior."

"The dialogue during that meeting was focused on, 'Oh, we can't identify or articulate the exact meaning of the word humane or ethical. So let's take that out of the bill,'" Leslie recounted.

In an opposing move, Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., last week introduced a bill to prohibit the intentional use of motor vehicles to harm wildlife on federal lands, establish a protocol for enforcement and penalties and maintain exemptions for human safety.

The bill is co-sponsored by legislators in North Carolina, Florida and Louisiana but notably none in the Mountain West, where the practice of "whacking" coyotes and wolves is legal in several states, as a practice distinct from hunting.

Leslie pointed out the behavior is likely happening elsewhere, too.

"We have no idea what the extent of this behavior is nationally," Leslie acknowledged. "I think it does need to have national attention and be a national bill right now."

A Wyoming legislative committee will hear recommendations from the Treatment of Predators Working Group Sept. 30.


get more stories like this via email