The Bureau of Land Management has proposed modifying an existing rule that would elevate conservation activities to the same level as other types of land use. The BLM operates under a multiple use mission, which was laid out by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. According to the BLMs website, the Act "establishes the agency's multiple-use and sustained yield mandate to serve present and future generations". Every agricultural producer that I know is a conservationist at heart. The first question we should ask, however, is not if conservation is itself good; but rather, will this proposal help ensure the framework we need to make conservation practices cash flow? I have said before that sustainable ecosystem management should not deplete soils or people. To qualify as truly sustainable, we need to have a multi-generational view of any fundamental changes being proposed to the legal framework being used to manage our natural resources. If those changes will result in reducing jobs and tax revenue, we need to reconsider.

If the folks interpreting and enforcing this rule believe in the principle of multiple use and sustained yield, there is probably little reason for concern. Given the political influence of environmental extremist groups who actively lobby for an end to all economic activities on public lands, I feel that concern is warranted. This shift in mindset will not have a positive effect on the rural economies of the west. Keeping people on the landscape whose lives and livelihoods are inexorably linked to the health and function of the land itself is a foundational part of the basic concept of Multiple Use.

               The deadline for public comment on the proposal is June 20, 2023

     To submit a comment, go to regulations.gov/commenton/BLM-2023-0001-0001

​