The Bureau of Land Management is currently considering several Resource Management Plan proposals in Montana, with one major objective ostensibly aimed at conserving sage grouse habitat to bolster population growth. However, one look at the management plans clearly shows that the stated intentions are very different from what the plans would actually accomplish. In reality, these RMPs are one of the biggest threats to private property rights and natural resource development that our state has seen in years.
The RMPs would effectively shut down BLM-managed land, as well as some privately held land, to development by eliminating grazing permits, restricting surface occupancy, as well as the use and development of roads and rail lines.
BLM has conducted a preliminary environmental impact statement in order to analyze what new conservation measures should be undertaken in the management plans where they believe sage-grouse is most in need of conservation. The BLM EIS is rife with vague and ambiguous language, resulting in inaccurate conclusions. For instance, the BLM’s economic modeling leads them to the conclusion that the proposed rules would have no impact on “very small towns dependent on agriculture.” There’s simply no credible way to believe that imposing such a dramatic change of use across hundreds of thousands of acres of land could have no impact on local economies.
The EIS completely ignores the negative effects on property rights and local economies which the new RMP guidelines would create. The aggregate effect of these multiple errors and omissions by BLM points to a much more duplicitous agenda than simply protecting sage grouse.
Modeling future outcomes is highly dependent on the accuracy of the input information used in the forecast. BLM simply has not gathered enough data to make reasonable models. In a short, 21-page passage discussing a modeling system, the words “assumptions, estimates, predictions, potentials, could be, may be, expected, approximately, and about” are used 183 times – clearly indicating the EIS does not contain enough hard data to make a justified decision about closing down thousands of acres of Montana land to existing productive uses.
1 comment:
Your Retweet link does not work
Post a Comment