▶ 0:16:44>> good morning and welcome to all of you. We are holding a hearing on how exactly the bureau of land management plans land-use under the federal land management policy act, flpma. We will study flpma's impact on how the bureau, the blm, issues land permit uses for energy, mining, infrastructure projects and other uses.
▶ 0:17:17We will hear from five witnesses today to consider how blm's permanent process has become rigid, slow and often detached from the intent of congress expressed in passing flpma. Multiple use and sustained yield. As those concepts are articulated in flpma itself. When this include the honorable derek brown, attorney general of the state of utah.
▶ 0:17:46Jim kenna, retired california blm state director. Micah christensen, a natural resources council for wyoming county commissioners association. Adam cramer, ceo of the outdoor alliance. Finally, greg sheehan, former utah blm state director and chief executive officer of mule deer foundation.
▶ 0:18:16We will recognized senator barrasso for a moment to talk about one of these witnesses.
▶ 0:18:25Sen. Barrasso: I appreciate what you said. Rigid, slow and often detached. That has been the experience we have seen wyoming. I'm delighted that micah christensen is here today and I'm honored to introduce him to the committee. He's a natural resource council for the wyoming county commissioners association. He works with wyoming's commissioners on federal natural resource issues. He is a seventh generation member from wyoming. Group and the bighorn basin and graduated from the university of wyoming college of law.
▶ 0:18:58Sen. Barrasso: Prior to joining the county commissioners association, he served as assistant attorney general for the state of wyoming. He represented the wyoming oil and gas conservation commission. He lives in casper with his wife and four children. Over the past few years he has worked to defend and represent wyoming when it comes to federal land management. He's a pivotal voice for wyoming and seeing firsthand the federal overreach from the previous administration.
▶ 0:19:25Sen. Barrasso: I'm grateful he's here today to be with us to discuss the federal land management and policy act. I'm thankful for all he does on behalf of wyoming's county commissioners and the people of our great state. Thank you for joining us. Thank you for allowing me this opportunity.
▶ 0:19:41Chair Lee: Thank you very much. When congress enacted flpma in 1976, the idea was straightforward. Federal agencies would manage public lands for the clear eye towards multiple use and sustained yield. States and counties would be partners in this in the planning process would be predictable and responsive to conditions on the ground as expressed by those involved in the process.
▶ 0:20:10Chair Lee: It's not how the system functions today. Congress intended the resource management plan to be flexible and these processes to involve flexible instruments that could adapt. That could adapt with changing circumstances according to local needs.
▶ 0:20:35Chair Lee: They have often become these large and enormous static documents that take many years to write and even longer to revise. By the time an rfp is finalized, local conditions have often shifted. New technology may have emerged in project needs may have changed substantially.
▶ 0:21:00Chair Lee: The rigidity we see in the process can end up affecting everything from energy development to recreational access. A project can -- if the plan that covers a landscape is outdated, the project may be stalled anyway. Applicants are left waiting for permits that should be routine. Proponents faced uncertainty.
▶ 0:21:30Chair Lee: Counties are forced to operate under assumptions that may not match reality. The expanded use of restricted designations like areas of critical environmental concern and study areas demonstrates how far the process has deviated. Congress intended these tools to protect resources. Over time however blm has applied these concepts to enormous tracts of land, often layered with other restrictions.
▶ 0:22:00Chair Lee: These things are rarely reviewed. Even before the biden administration's abuse of the ac ec designations, over 20 million acres were designated as areas of critical environmental concern. It limits active management and access for uses that congress specifically drafted flpma to support. The rock springs rfp provides a clear case study of this phenomena.
▶ 0:22:31Chair Lee: The biden administration tagged more than one million acres with restricted designations which had sweeping implications for communities that rely on public land. Wyoming counties raised concerns. The state raised concerns. The proposed plan move forward anyway. In response to public outcry the trump administration reopened the plan.
▶ 0:22:56Chair Lee: That sequence of events reveals a process in which coordination with state and local governments is a courtesy, not a an obligation. Flpma requires the secretary coordinate with state and local governments, yet the statute gives that requirement no legal teeth. As a result federal planners can move forward without the most current information available.
▶ 0:23:22Chair Lee: States and counties have up-to-date data on wildlife migration, water availability, infrastructure and emergency needs. That should strengthen federal planning. Instead it is often incorporated late in the process or incorporated not at all. Coordination when done correctly results in locally supported plans that are durable and lead to more certainty for projects. We have an opportunity to explore ways we can improve the planning process.
▶ 0:23:53Chair Lee: A functional system should allow for adaptive management. It should allow for timely adjustments and stable expectations for project sponsors. It should respect the knowledge of state and local governments that live with the practical consequences of these decisions. Flpma rests on the idea decisions made in washington, D.C.
▶ 0:24:20Chair Lee: Gain legitimacy when they reflect the judgment of the people who have to live with the outcome. That assumption is true today as it was in 1976. It remains embedded within flpma today as it was in 1976. The question before us is whether the government is meeting the obligation.
▶ 0:24:40Chair Lee: If what we want as a planning process worthy of the land in the process -- that the process governments, it must be real, early and it must include the state and local governments that know these landscapes the very best. With that we will turn the time over to our making never, senator heinrich.
▶ 0:25:04Sen. Heinrich: Thank you Mr. chairman. I want to add my welcome to the witnesses as we talk about what to do with our public lands. Talking about resource management plans might not be everyone's idea of a great way to spend their wednesday morning. Personally I'm very glad this committee is looking at this important element of public land management. The federal land policy and management act, flpma, says something pretty simple.
▶ 0:25:36Sen. Heinrich: The bureau of land management should look at the lands it manages and decide how to manage those lands for multiple uses. The blm has a complicate a job. It has to figure out how to fit energy development and wilderness and grazing and wildlife habitat and mining and fishing and forestry and recreation and cultural research preservation on the lands it manages. One approach could be a free-for-all.
▶ 0:26:07Sen. Heinrich: Whoever puts the land to use first gets to decide what happens going forward. Our nation did that for a long time, giving away public land via homesteading, mining claims, granting lands to railroads to facilitate western expansion. Conservationists began to recognize if we kept going down that path we would have no public lands left, which would mean most americans would be locked out of nations open spaces.
▶ 0:26:37Sen. Heinrich: A few decades later, congress passed flpma and directed the blm to keep public lands public into manage the lands under the principle of multiple use and sustained yield. It requires the blm to periodically produce land use plans to guide its management decisions. Recognizing multiple use does not and can't mean every use on every acre. These plans ensure all uses have some of those acres.
▶ 0:27:08Sen. Heinrich: Land-use planning is a robustly public process. Integrating information and priorities from local residents, businesses, tribes and local governments and public land users from across the nation. Finding ways to accommodate the broad range of everything from wilderness to mining is not easy. The planning process makes sure all uses are considered and everyone's voices are heard.
▶ 0:27:36Sen. Heinrich: Unfortunately these plans are updated far too frequently. That is something we all agree on. Are intended to be in place for about 20 years. The blm has not kept up with revisions to keep these plans aligned with today's priorities and technologies.
▶ 0:27:55Sen. Heinrich: Some plans in place now we are well before utility scale solar was common in a few -- if you are ready to facilitate geothermal energy on the horizon. Many plans don't accommodate the explosion in outdoor recreation are public lands now host.
▶ 0:28:17Sen. Heinrich: Recreation is now an economic powerhouse, generating $128 billion in economic activity every year and driving $6 billion to federal tax revenue. On blm land alone recreation supports 76,000 jobs and contributes to more than $12 billion in economic output. Those numbers are very different than they were 30 or 40 years ago when many blm land use plans were actually written.
▶ 0:28:48Sen. Heinrich: We were not even keeping track of recreation statistics when many of the plans were written. I look forward to hearing from witnesses about how we can make the planning process more efficient come more responsive to changes in how we use our public lands while making sure our public lands continue to serve the public for generations to come. Thank you, chairman.
▶ 0:29:09Chair Lee: We begin hearing from each of our witnesses. We will start with attorney general brown, and then move over from there. You will have five minutes. I want to briefly introduce attorney general brown. Derek and I have known each other most of our lives going back 30 plus years, ever since college. We have worked together on four or five separate occasions at the same location.
▶ 0:29:40Chair Lee: He's been a member of my team in the past. We practiced at the same law firm. He and his wife emily are good friends of ours. I welcome our state's esteemed attorney general, the honorable derek brown.
▶ 0:29:53Mr. Brown: Thank you. Good morning, Mr. chairman. On the utah attorney general derek brown and I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you about an issue that is critical not just to my home state but to the entire american west, effective public land management. In utah, the government controls the overwhelming majority of our state. Roughly 68% of our landmass.
▶ 0:30:25Mr. Brown: Because the federal government controls virtually two out of every three acres of the state it is critical for environmental, economic and social well-being to have a functional system of cooperative federalism where we work together and the nature -- the three c's of public land management. Coronation, cooperation and consistency in mandating the multiple use and sustained yield that is part of flpma.
▶ 0:30:50Mr. Brown: Flpma mandates meaningful public involvement of state and local government officials in land-use decisions. For that reason in 2015 the state did what I think is the first of its kind. The legislature asked all 29 counties to create a comprehensive county resource management plan which was then used to create a state resource management plan to manage our state's precious natural resources.
▶ 0:31:20Mr. Brown: That plan is largely useless if the regulatory space does not have predictability or consistency. While cooperation and collaboration are critical to the process, the language of flpma stopped short of giving states any real meaningful say in the process itself. So often the level of cooperation depends on the political context.
▶ 0:31:46Mr. Brown: In my state we have unfortunately seen federal agencies ignore state specific input and state specific science. One example is in 2015 when the administration at that time ignored the state specific information and ended up adopting sage grouse plans that were inapplicable to utah's unique environment. Another example included infrastructure, the northern corridor.
▶ 0:32:15Mr. Brown: This is a highway project in washington county, utah. It is designed to alleviate traffic concerns and has been planned for over a decade now. State, county and local stakeholders have largely been shut out of the process entirely. State specific science involving the mojave desert was ignored.
▶ 0:32:38Mr. Brown: Another example is state and county officials were largely denied any meaningful role in the development of the final rmp for the bears oce national monument. Officials of the benefit of countless coordination meetings where they were provided meaningful opportunities to be involved in the planning process. One of the most well-known is the trans west express transmission line.
▶ 0:33:07Mr. Brown: This was a renewable energy product that was a priority for multiple administrations. It has taken over 18 years to go simply from the application to the construction phase. This creates a lack of predictability which hurts everyone. The question is what can be done? I believe there are bipartisan solutions that can be had to change flpma.
▶ 0:33:33Mr. Brown: One of the things I do is I look to work with other attorneys general in other states, both red and blue states, to identify long-term solutions to critical problems and I start by finding issues on which we can agree. One of the issues I see there is a lot of agreement in this area is the fact that there's a regulatory whiplash every time and administration changes, throwing in rmp back into question.
▶ 0:34:01Mr. Brown: That not only does not achieve flpma's goals but it is bad for the land. All the land regardless of where it is located. Ultimately as a state we want to be a partner. That is what was contemplated by flpma. We want to create an environment where there is more collaboration, more cooperation, more consistency, more predictability.
▶ 0:34:26Mr. Brown: I believe that result will create less friction with the individuals who are closest to the land. He will empower states to make better long-term decisions, preserving the land for future generations. Thank you and I look forward to any questions.
▶ 0:34:42Chair Lee: Thank you. Mr. kenna.
▶ 0:34:47Mr. Kenna: Chairman lee, ranking member heinrich, I appreciate the opportunity to talk about an important subject. I'm a retired blm state director with 40 years of public service plus. My background includes experience in planning and permitting and project proposals and policy.
▶ 0:35:16Mr. Kenna: It crosses all the levels of the bureau of land management from the field office to the washington office. Land-use planning is one of the most fundamental processes to management. It really does three things I think are really important and critical. One, it integrates land-use decision-making across a broad landscape.
▶ 0:35:44Mr. Kenna: Two, it does that by including public participation. Three, it applies the best available information about the planning area itself. By congressional design, federal land use planning, is a systematic interdisciplinary approach -- planning is a systematic, interdisciplinary approach.
▶ 0:36:12Mr. Kenna: Is required to integrate conservation values with all the detailed expectations around coordination with all of the various uses that apply in that planning area. The land management is the basis basically for all of blm's work. It affects all the multiple uses. I appreciate the ranking member's comment on that.
▶ 0:36:38Mr. Kenna: It is just as much about oil and gas as it is about hunting and fishing. Those are the inside the definition of multiple use. If there is one thing that congress could do to really have an impact on land-use planning, it would be to pay more attention to funding and staffing for that function. That is where the on the ground work happens.
▶ 0:37:11Mr. Kenna: There is no substitute for the on the ground work. It is the meat and potatoes of the process. Every planning area is different, with different issues and different alternatives to be considered. A solid resource management plan addresses those differences. It does not start from a perceived starting point.
▶ 0:37:41Mr. Kenna: There also no substitute for involving the people with the knowledge of the area. That is the local folks. You need to get there early and often. I appreciate there have been planning processes -- chairman lee, thank you for mentioning this -- that sometimes you have a dual problem of outdated plans and an attempt to sort of fix the process late.
▶ 0:38:11Mr. Kenna: Those don't work very well. It is really important when you initiate a process to pay close attention to not only the formal level, the state and local and tribal officials, but also to all the relevant community interests from the very beginning. How you launch becomes really important. The public participation out there right now is really very sophisticated and well-informed.
▶ 0:38:40Mr. Kenna: They won't take anything but addressing the things that they raise forthrightly and honestly. That is frankly the best approach. Public dialogue is your best anchor point for the balancing discussion that flpma requires. The most valuable lesson I learned in my 40 years is to invest in that on the ground work.
▶ 0:39:07Mr. Kenna: The local knowledge, the expertise and planning team, and the participation and interfaces. If you look to some of the examples I cited in my written testimony, arizona's design energy plan and the california desert renewable energy and conservation plan. Those are very complex settings. One was statewide and the other in an area with a whole slew of very complicated issues.
▶ 0:39:40Mr. Kenna: How you launch is really important. The california planning process launched an agreement between the secretary and the governor. That was the beginning. That framed how the dialogue went back and forth. If I were to talk about a well-managed process, what I would always look for is that very characteristic. How did you launch?
▶ 0:40:10Mr. Kenna: How did you structure the public participation? How did you make sure the dialogue was about the best information? Thank you for the opportunity to give my perspective on this. I look forward to the conversation.
▶ 0:40:22Chair Lee: Thank you, Mr. kenna. Mr. christiansen.
▶ 0:40:27Mr. Christensen: Thank you for holding this hearing to discuss land management planning under flpma in my experience under the acec's. I serve as a natural resource council for the wyoming county commissioners association, a statewide association that represents all 23 counties and their 93 elected commissioners. Five counties are fortunate to call the land home.
▶ 0:40:56Mr. Christensen: It generated substantial fervor not only in southwest wyoming but in many states. It was designed december 20, 2024. It was by the principal deputy of the blm. It designated 935,000 acres with substantial use restrictions. This represented a 226% increase.
▶ 0:41:27Mr. Christensen: This data is not the easiest to come by. The rock springs no action alternative was over 100,000 acres off from the blm's acec database online. Calling the excel sheet a database is likely inappropriate. The blm system for conveying to the public and itself what, where, how and why acec's exist is largely inadequate for the purpose.
▶ 0:41:56Mr. Christensen: This harms is proper utilization and enables a lack of compliance. Numerous rmp's share deficiencies. Designations offered minimal information on values that acec 's are designed to protect. They include more land than values exist. The restrictions are often general. Instead of being specific to prevent irreparable harm. The south bend acec contains the buckskin crossing cemetery.
▶ 0:42:25Mr. Christensen: The public in the blm may wish to protect this resource and could prescribe a new service occupancy restriction for mineral leasing as a buffer around the area. Closing 439 square miles of all fluid mineral leasing is likely disproportionate, especially noting most of wyoming's oil and gas develop and occurs on two mile horizontal wells that are thousands -- that have thousands of people of the surface.
▶ 0:42:54Mr. Christensen: Congress did not give blm unilateral authority to establish resource areas were national monuments. Congress designed it to protect multiple land values in coordination and cooperation with local governments. The rock springs rmp demonstrate it help vulnerable acec designations are being shaped by broad political objectives such as limiting fossil fuel development rather than carefully targeted measures flpma envisioned.
▶ 0:43:26Mr. Christensen: Wyoming county support acec's, but their effective business and legitimacy -- effectiveness illegitimacy depends on identifying the necessity of special management to protect irreparable harm and that prevent irreparable harm. And working cleverly with local government whose communities live with the consequences.
▶ 0:43:51Mr. Christensen: These are the cultural and social economic lifeblood of the rural communities in our future is inextricably intertwined with their proper conservation. As theodore roosevelt said, "conservation means development as much means production." both sides seem to understand that top-down edicts that we can local engagement, undermine the planning process as goals to balance conservation across all lands.
▶ 0:44:14Mr. Christensen: As energy security, water, catastrophic wildfire and habitat fragmentation continued to be important conservation considerations, treating federal lands as if they exist in a vacuum is not a winning strategy. These landscapes cannot be managed on four or eight year terms from D.C. they must transcend elections are being grounded in the cooperative federalism principles that congress envisioned and flpma demands. There is a better way.
▶ 0:44:43Mr. Christensen: We need the government to empower local land managers on the ground. Leaders who do not chafe under the cooperative you those of nepa, but partner with state, local and tribal governments so collectively we can craft rfps . We need a cultural shift in the nucleus of power, from D.C. back to the people we entrusted to steward these lands.
▶ 0:45:12Mr. Christensen: When local and federal leadership can embrace local governments as partners in the planning process we can achieve mutual benefits to federal agency missions and for our communities. Thank you.
▶ 0:45:22Chair Lee: Thank you. Mr. cramer.
▶ 0:45:28Mr. Cramer: Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is adam cramer, the ceo of outdoor alliance. We ensure sustainable management recreation access for current and future generations.
▶ 0:45:50Mr. Cramer: We represents climbers, surfers, backcountry skiers and anyone who likes to enjoy the country's public lands and waters. Art member organizations include the access fund, american white water and national mountain bicycling association, the wildlife alliance, the mountaineers, and surfrider foundation. Outdoor recreation is the most common way americans come to know the public lands and waters and cultivate a stewardship.
▶ 0:46:22Mr. Cramer: It's also a principal of major use under flpma. The bureau of land management is responsible for the care of some of our country's most spectacular outdoor recreational experiences, like mountain baking -- biking on gooseberry mesa, climbing red rock canyon outside of las vegas. These are just a drop in the bucket.
▶ 0:46:45Mr. Cramer: The 245 million acres contained more than 10,000 miles of mountain bike trails, 2500 miles of whitewater paddling, and 20,000 climbing routes. Cumulatively, these resources are the literal infrastructure of the outdoor recreation economy, which supports nearly $1.2 trillion in gross economic output, 5 million jobs, and 2.3% of the country gdp.
▶ 0:47:16Mr. Cramer: Outdoor recreation helps support a vibrant, diversified local economy and public lands community. It helps workers and businesses because of quality of a businesses because of quality of life benefits. It might be the most economically significant and socially relevant use of public lands, but it is not the only use. The blm has a complicated job.
▶ 0:47:47Mr. Cramer: It is a complex and consequential balancing act. Planning is how blm takes a ton of information from the public to help strike a balance to create harmonious and coordinated management that flpma describes. Successful and planning requires engagement, especially at the local level, officials and tribal governments. Blm also needs reliable and current information.
▶ 0:48:15Mr. Cramer: I commend congress and this committee in particular for the bipartisan work that led to the unanimous passage of the explore act last year which directs blm and other agencies to inventory recreation resources and values to support better agency decision-making. Planning is essential for protecting and enhancing public land.
▶ 0:48:37Mr. Cramer: Plans layout wetlands are open or close for energy, mining, development activities, special designations, and lands eligible for -- plans that are outdated are recipes for conflict. Planning is a huge important investment for the success of the permitted projects.
▶ 0:49:01Mr. Cramer: Clear plans with public support from sound processes give communities and stakeholders the certainty they need to make investments in recreation infrastructure and businesses and public land uses. Most importantly, planning as part of the democratic management of public lands and part of what makes public lands truly public.
▶ 0:49:26Mr. Cramer: Sound planning may not fully satisfy everyone but at its best it reduces conflict and leads to compromise where stakeholders feel heard and communities are reflected in the final plan. In closing, outdoor recreation community strongly supports blm supporting management decisions.
▶ 0:49:57Mr. Cramer: Thank you for the opportunity to be here. I'm truly grateful and look forward to all your questions in the conversation.
▶ 0:50:03Chair Lee: Mr. sheehan.
▶ 0:50:07Mr. Sheehan: Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is greg sheehan, ceo of the mule deer foundation whose mission is to ensure the conservation of mule deer, black tailed deer and their habitats. We engage with more than 420,000 hunters, members, volunteers and supporters. We speak for the millions of sports men and women who depend on healthy public lands.
▶ 0:50:42Mr. Sheehan: My testimony reflects a lifetime and state, federal and nonprofit conservation service. I spent 25 years as the utah department of natural -- with the department of natural resources, including five is a director of the division of wildlife resources. I served as acting director of the U.S. fish and wildlife service and then as the utah state director for the bureau of land management under both the trump and biden administration's. Overseeing 22.8 million acres of federal land.
▶ 0:51:11Mr. Sheehan: That experience from energy and mineral development to wildlife, recreation, fires, fuels, grazing, national monuments gave me a practical understanding about how planning decisions shape day-to-day management and help essential strong partnerships with states, tribes, local governments, industry, permittees and nonprofit partners really are. The federal land policy and management act provides the framework for this stewardship.
▶ 0:51:35Mr. Sheehan: Flpma's principles recognize that conservation, recreation, grazing, energy, mining, and the preservation of landscapes are all legitimate uses of land. As president roosevelt said, conservation means development as it does protection. Multiple use does not mean every use everywhere but it does require planning systems capable of balancing these needs while keeping landscapes healthy for future generations.
▶ 0:52:09Mr. Sheehan: Some are written in the 1980's on typewriters and no longer reflect modern wildlife science, migration data, while the conditions, recreation growth, energy and mineral needs or other demands on the land. Updating the plans is essential for responsible use in revising an rfp today takes two to three years, sometimes up to 10 and costs $2 million to $6 million.
▶ 0:52:34Mr. Sheehan: Blm stated it's plans are outdated. Many landscapes continue to be managed under frameworks that no longer match up the ground realities. Part of the challenge is that flpma provides a direction on how blm is supposed to develop plans that meet the expectations of congress and the public. Let me give an example. When I was a kid would like to play monopoly. We did not have phones back then.
▶ 0:53:04Mr. Sheehan: Imagine if the instructions simply said buy property, build houses and hotels, make more money than the other players, and if those instructions are not sufficient than make up your own rules. You can imagine that result. Every game ends in an argument. Flpma feels a little like that. It is 71 pages but only two pages of section 202 explain how to do land use planning for 245 million acres of public land.
▶ 0:53:34Mr. Sheehan: On the statue provides so little direction, the blm has to fill in the gaps with regulations and policy. States, tribes, counties, industry, conservation groups in the public end of happy with that unhappy with some part of the outcome. If congress has clear expectations, updating those few planning pages would be very helpful, especially for the blm. Another factor is that use of administrative designations.
▶ 0:54:01Mr. Sheehan: Blm has more than two dozen planning and management tools for study areas to lands with wilderness characteristics and visual resource management classes. Each can serve a purpose but when layered together are left in place they can limit flex ability to manage habitat and address wildfire risk, support communities and maintain access. Society increasingly depends on blm lands for energy production, critical minerals, transmission lines, recreation and solitude.
▶ 0:54:32Mr. Sheehan: Planning has to be thoughtful enough to allow for those needs while still protecting wildlife habitat and migration. I want to share that my experience working side-by-side with blm staff as they are dedicated, hard-working and committed to fulfilling all the limits of flpma and other governing acts.
▶ 0:54:51Mr. Sheehan: I want to emphasize land stewardship matters deeply to americans, protecting watersheds and healthy habitats is fundamental to our mission at the foundation, a planning system that is timely, collaborative, science based and flexible to support wildlife and other diversities as congress intended under flpma. Thank you for the opportunity to testify and I would be pleased to answer questions from the committee.
▶ 0:55:16Chair Lee: Thank you so much. We will begin our rounds of questions. I will go for us to member heinrich. We will alternate between republicans and democrats in order of seniority subject to the early roll call. Mr. brown, I would like to start with you. I have a chart here that shows two maps of blm managed land within utah.
▶ 0:55:48Chair Lee: The map on the left shows blm in utah that was open for multiple use in 19 76 upon the enactment of flpma. The map on the right shows the same lands today that are plastered with a lot of restrictive designations pursuant to flpma. What is the increase in restrictive designations over the last 40 nine years since flpma's enactment?
▶ 0:56:19Chair Lee: What does it mean for the rural economies in utah? Rural economies that depend on access to these lands? How does it affect the ability to permit projects like transmission lines, wildfire mitigation, grazing, basic rights of way and so forth?
▶ 0:56:40Mr. Brown: If you look at that map, the purple represents what are effectively single uses. The reality is under flpma the dual mandate is multiple use and sustained yield. You mentioned these communities. I spent a lot of time in garfield county. We love it. I love the mountain biking.
▶ 0:57:07Mr. Brown: It is roughly 93% owned and controlled by the federal government. You literally cannot take any action without implicating the federal government. You mentioned the economic impact. Imagine trying to run and fund the county on what is effectively 3% to 4% of the land being taxed. Hospitals or schools.
▶ 0:57:37Mr. Brown: We talked to commissioners in garfield county. They are passionate about this issue. One of the things we need to do is have what is mentioned by every testimony here today. Meaningful involvement of the people who are local and most directly affected by these designations. I think that will make a huge impact in how we address these issues.
▶ 0:58:02Chair Lee: That makes things difficult. You mentioned the 93% ownership. That is all owned by the federal government. Did make things more difficult, including building their tax base. Can we talk about the trans-transmission line? -- trans west transmission line? It took more than 18 years to move from application to construction of the project. That is a long time.
▶ 0:58:34Chair Lee: It took that long in large part because the project had to navigate multiple outdated or ever shifting federal planning documents. It spanned a creation and revision of two separate sage grouse plans, each with different requirements. The ground was shifted throughout the duration because of these multiple governing documents.
▶ 0:59:01Chair Lee: What does that tell us about how rigid and sometimes outdated rmp's affect transmission permitting? What we need to change in the planning process to ensure the projects like that are not stuck perpetually in limbo?
▶ 0:59:17Mr. Brown: Flpma was passed over 50 years ago and those that voted for it would recognize it at this point in time. We need to rethink the rigidity of the process. It is not good for anyone. It is not good for permitting projects. You mentioned this express. This transmission line was a renewable project that was a priority for multiple administrations. Everyone wanted it to happen.
▶ 0:59:44Mr. Brown: If you have a project everyone wants to happen and it still takes 18 years, clearly the process itself is broken. This was a very complicated project spanning multiple states, starting in wyoming and delivering power to california. We have got to be able to rethink the process if it takes that long.
▶ 1:00:06Chair Lee: Indeed. That's a relatively noncontroversial project. Mr. sheehan, you noted blm uses more than 26 different administrative designations that can be layered on top of the other, compounding the complexity. What happens when these designations are layered on the same landscape? How does that inhibit carry how does that inhibit carr -- inhibit --
▶ 1:00:41Mr. Sheehan: Thank you, chairman lee. When we have this multitude of layers, some are identified on the map you showed a moment ago. It can restrict our ability to help wildlife and those needs. Wildlife do need her help. We have an evolving landscape. We have fire regimes. We have drought situations that occur.
▶ 1:01:08Mr. Sheehan: It is important we can get in for the benefit of wildlife and do water structures and developments, habitat restoration to help reduce the impact of non-native invasive plants that come into our landscapes. We need to get into these areas to address fire rehabilitation after the occur. At times some of the designations will preclude us from being able to get in and adequately help.
▶ 1:01:35Chair Lee: Thank you. Senator heinrich.
▶ 1:01:38Sen. Heinrich: I know both my dais members have a meeting to get to. I will defer to them.
▶ 1:01:45Chair Lee: Great. Who has the more pressing -- roger that. Senator cortez masto. Earlybird rule.
▶ 1:01:58Sen. Cortez Masto: This is a great conversation. I am from nevada. Similar to utah, most of our land is owned by the federal government. 84%. 63% is managed by the blm.
▶ 1:02:15Sen. Cortez Masto: I appreciate the conversation about how to find that balance and manage this public land for use, not only for individuals who live in the state but those that want to engage in tourism and be stewards of federal land as well. Let me start with Mr. kenna. I appreciated your comment about congress paying attention to funding and staffing at the blm level. I could not agree more.
▶ 1:02:44Sen. Cortez Masto: What we have now I'm concerned the current administration is taking actions that will only exacerbate blm's backlog and resource planning. We have identified today there are 164 outdated -- 134 out of the 164 are outdated. If we don't have the staff and we don't have the resources to look at how we need to update, I'm very concerned.
▶ 1:03:11Sen. Cortez Masto: Can you talk a little bit about the importance of the staffing levels? What role they play? Every single one of us have worked with our local blm's. We know who they are. They have worked and lived there and worked with the local jurisdictions. The understand better than anybody in washington. I will call out the folks in washington under both administrations of playing politics. We need people driven from the ground up.
▶ 1:03:40Sen. Cortez Masto: I cannot agree more, that are focused on how people live there and recreate there. How much more is that going to set us back with the issues we're talking about today?
▶ 1:03:57Mr. Kenna: Let me start by taking the perspective of a field manager. The manager of an office at the ground level. One of the things it calls for an unplanned or project is you have to have access to an interdisciplinary staff. You need a wildlife biologist. You need an archaeologist. You need the specialist to have expertise that are unique.
▶ 1:04:27Mr. Kenna: That is a lot of the processes that are underneath that. The historic preservation process. They help manage that. They bird-dog the details of what goes on. I share your concerns as I see the field office is losing key bits of expertise. We have had times in my career when there was a shortage of wildlife biologists.
▶ 1:04:56Mr. Kenna: If you have got to do section seven consultation under the endangered species act, you have to have one. If you don't have one in the office, you have to find one. It is not really a discretionary thing. You have to have the expertise. If I were to try to put a fine point on it, imagine that happening in every single field office.
▶ 1:05:23Mr. Kenna: As you lose people and you have a vacancy in a key position, what are you left to do? You are trying to cast around with your offices to see if you can find the right expertise in order to assemble what you need to be done -- what needs to be done. I think that is essentially the crux of it. You have got to have that interdisciplinary mix. There are very specific pieces of expertise that are essential.
▶ 1:05:51Sen. Cortez Masto: My time is running out. Let me touch on one other thing. Congress took the unprecedented step in using the congressional review act to reverse three separate resource management plans approved under the previous administration. That's the first time. There is an argument to be made if they are rule-making or not.
▶ 1:06:17Sen. Cortez Masto: I'm concerned if a land-use plan is now considered to be a regulation that congress can overturn, how does this bode for other existing or future land-use plans? The concern we are talking about is top down. Driven from washington, dictating what happens and we are still doing that. How will that impact resource planning you plan in the future and all of a sudden congress uses the cra still return it?
▶ 1:06:47Sen. Cortez Masto: Wouldn't that frustrate the process moving forward? I will open it up to anyone.
▶ 1:06:51Mr. Kenna: I don't see how it can help and undermine it. I think it has created a mess.
▶ 1:06:58Sen. Cortez Masto: Thank you.
▶ 1:07:01Chair Lee: Senator barrasso has differed to senator king.
▶ 1:07:06Sen. King: Thank you very much. One specific question is timing. Are there limits on this process? Is that something we should be discussing here? You talk about the 18 year transmission line. That is unacceptable in this day and age. Should we be talking about putting limits on times and steps so there is a foreseeable end to the process?
▶ 1:07:36Mr. Brown: When you look at flpma's section 202, everything is very -- when it comes to land swaps -- it is very prescriptive. 202 is not. It's a very impactful section of code. Those kind of limits might make sense but it also makes since to figure out how we can get meaningful involvement with those on the ground and maybe that is the answer.
▶ 1:08:07Mr. Brown: If there is a lack of staffing, maybe we can look at those folks with a local interest.
▶ 1:08:11Sen. King: Work tends to expand the fill the time available. I hope you would provide suggestions of where we might be able to look for some time limitations. That would improve the uncertainty surrounding the process. Mr. sheehan, used an important term as an undercurrent of the hearing. Regulatory whiplash.
▶ 1:08:38Sen. King: Part of the problem is that the congress is not being specific about what it once. It leaves tremendous discretion to whatever administration it is. You go from one to the other in the whole world turns upside down. Is one way to address this by being more specific in terms of flpma and what the criteria are so congress is not advocating its responsibility in this area to the executive?
▶ 1:09:10Sen. King: -- abdicating. >> it is worth considering. That is why chairman lee after this hearing today. Do we need to do more? Attorney general brown mentioned it a moment ago but when we look at section 202, I mentioned in my remarks it's only about two pages of guidance for 240 5 million acres of land.
▶ 1:09:36Sen. King: It talks about a congressional process and how they can look at amending these actions. 202 says three things. Coordinate with the state, local and tribal governments. Try to use their planning efforts where you can. Prioritize critical environmental concerns. That is the guidance from congress in a nutshell in section two of two of the 71 page law.
▶ 1:10:05Sen. King: Everything beyond that has been crafted through rules. Everything has been crafted through the handbooks by the blm.
▶ 1:10:13Sen. King: That leads to the problem of executive overreach. There are no boundaries. I would ask all of you for some suggestions how to a two can be amended to narrow with the criteria are and what the specifics are so we can get policy on a more timely basis that is more predictable and more resilient. One of the problems you have identified is uncertainty.
▶ 1:10:46Sen. King: It takes so long and you don't know what the result is going to be. I would ask you to provide some suggestions. That is the business we are in, lawmaking. How the law could be more definitive to provide better guidance to the process which will hopefully produce better and more resilient results so we don't have what you
▶ 1:11:16Sen. King: Characterized accurately as regulatory whiplash. My final comment is I was concerned whitetail deer don't seem to be your constituents. The species you mentioned.
▶ 1:11:29Mr. Sheehan: We will take the mule deer in the west and see how it works out.
▶ 1:11:35Sen. King: I come at this as someone who has no blm land in their state. I'm looking from the point of view of good policy going forward and hope you can help us with that. Thank you for your testimony.
▶ 1:11:51Chair Lee: Senator barrasso.
▶ 1:11:55Sen. Barrasso: I want to talk about what we have seen under the federal land policy management act. There are many6 c1 there are many tools we have. One tool is a special designation known as the areas of environmental concern. Those designations have been used in processes past 50 years ago.
▶ 1:12:23Sen. Barrasso: The original intent was to provide flexibility and locally led protections for what we have seen in the last decade is substantial use of this designation that seemed to limit use, to use these in ways to make nonuse a use. I was wondering if you can explain the increase of this definition being used in a way that we never anticipated it being used.
▶ 1:12:50Sen. Barrasso: >> we have seen a substantial increase in acreage since our most recent planning efforts. It is good to know that took place after the blm's public conservation land health rule.
▶ 1:13:11Sen. Barrasso: We did not see that rule fix our problem which is that the blm is utilizing the acec as a tool for large swaths of land, not identifying protection with hundreds of thousands of acres and combining them with all sorts of things that we care about like wildlife habitat and historic places but doing so in a way that is hard to untangle and understand what we are trying to protect. It is unclear because we have numerous uses.
▶ 1:13:41Sen. Barrasso: It is acec a huge increase of acec. A large increase.
▶ 1:13:56Sen. Barrasso: Are these designations being driven by local folks or is the federal government getting involved?
▶ 1:14:04Mr. Christensen: Interesting question. It is hard to tell. We don't actually know who is nominating these. There are two ways that the public I nominate. They can be interminably -- internally nominated. We have seen certain nominations like the sagebrush nomination. 48 million acres.
▶ 1:14:30Mr. Christensen: We know those who supported it but it is really hard to tell where those nominations came from. >> the biden administration finalize the plan in december Sen. . I'm grateful that president trump and the secretary are announcing an amendment process.
▶ 1:14:59Mr. Christensen: Can you talk about the socioeconomic impacts of communities in the west especially wyoming who are impacted by some of these federal land management programs?
▶ 1:15:08Mr. Christensen: It is easy to think of public lands is being isolated in the middle of nowhere. As you know, our lands are often intertwined. We have different surface ownership. We also have an holdings in these areas.
▶ 1:15:25Mr. Christensen: Any the federal government through some rule restricts use on federal land, there is often a restriction that occurs on state and private land is, further limiting our ability to develop resources, access certain lands. Rock springs was estimated $40 million per year in losses to county government including the school districts.
▶ 1:15:55Mr. Christensen: We are not talking inconsequential numbers. A fairly significant impact.
▶ 1:15:59Sen. Barrasso: In terms of the land management, what I see is federal overreach. Ultimately so many of the final decisions are not made locally but they are made in washington, D.C. how can we improve upon the land management process?
▶ 1:16:17Mr. Christensen: One of the first things I would start with is we have this idea of consistency and coordination and cooperation but we do things out of order. Blm can propose a plan management plan with multiple alternatives but maybe one or maybe none of those alternatives are consistent with state and local plans.
▶ 1:16:41Mr. Christensen: We can really prioritize plants that have consistency done upfront, allow for that building so you are not checking the box at the very end.
▶ 1:16:51Sen. Barrasso: Thank you for coming back to testify.
▶ 1:16:55Sen. Hagerty: How quickly is it for the public to guide a land-use plan for that plan to be effective and successful. >> I would highlight the fact that planning processes create a record and it is a public record and that public record underpins all of the decision-making that happens in the plan.
▶ 1:17:27Sen. Hagerty: It essentially is balancing dialogue around the questions. You cannot sidestep that. You need to make sure that local acknowledge is integrated and not just the social preferences, those are very important.
▶ 1:17:51Sen. Hagerty: But also, where are the cultural resources and properties? Where are the things that we care about? Where are the trails that get a lot of recreation? All of those things are local and specific. >> how does the congressional review act incorporate that?
▶ 1:18:13Mr. Kenna: My concern is that it is the exact opposite. You think about the perspective of the person who participated in a plan they just invested years to get to that endpoint where everybody got together and whatever the deal was, the deal was the deal. Now the congressional review act has taken the political process and put it over top of that and vacated that.
▶ 1:18:38Mr. Kenna: >> there is no mechanism for republican viewed in the congressional -- there is no mechanism for the public review act. With congress overturning a number of our mps through the congressional review act, one of the limitations under the's e.r.a. Is it means that the blm under the statute could never issue a substantially similar plan for that, is that correct?
▶ 1:19:08Mr. Kenna: >> I believe that is accurate. >> I am wondering if an plan allowed for development of oil and gas, mining and grazing, hunts and the hunts and t the plan is overturned by the cra.
▶ 1:19:36Mr. Kenna: >> I am not a lawyer here and there are lots of lawyers in the room. >> I am not either.
▶ 1:19:43Mr. Sheehan: If we work under that premise that a cra pulls the plan back and a new plan cannot be substantially similar, that would certainly lean into a set of facts around you cannot go back and do the same thing again until congress says you can go do it again. What it does do is it reverts back to the prior plan that is sitting there.
▶ 1:20:13Mr. Sheehan: If that allowed for some of those uses -- >> it could be 40 years old and that plan may not actually address the uses that are most pressing today.
▶ 1:20:27Mr. Sheehan: Absolutely. When we talk about planning, I wrote down a comment that chairman lee said, adapting changes and circumstances. What happens with some of these plans that have sat there, with the new technologies, what do we know differently about wildlife management and movements and how we can restore habitats. We have wild horses in some of these areas that we have plans for.
▶ 1:20:56Mr. Sheehan: We don't necessarily want to manage the wild horses. >> we also know where the corridors are. Where the corridors were. That does not get managed to clear in with a 40-year-old plan . >> exactly.
▶ 1:21:24Mr. Sheehan: My hope as a formalin manager is if the cra's get used, let's try to avoid that. >> why not just redo the plan? And avoid all of those unintended consequences?
▶ 1:21:38Mr. Sheehan: Absolutely. If the plans can be done initially, do all of that first so that we get a better higher level and I would hope congress does not need to step in on these because to your earlier point, I don't know what kind of certainty is there is for future plans in this area.
▶ 1:22:00Mr. Sheehan: >> one of the things I am concerned about is the opening for litigation because the statute is so vague about what a substantially similar plan will look like. You can see every permit whether it is for outdoor recreation, whether it is for oil and gas. Whether it is for grazing, called into question because of some of these cra activities.
▶ 1:22:31Mr. Sheehan: That is something that everyone ought to be considering. Thank you, Mr. tear.
▶ 1:22:35Chair Lee: Thank you.
▶ 1:22:38Sen. Daines: Thank you. Last month congress acted to right a wrong and repeal the violation of the multiple use and public engagement enshrined in flip model.
▶ 1:23:00Sen. Daines: Biden's blm was weaponize to pull despite significant opposition from the state. Thankfully, congress acted and they passed my bill to repeal the anti-coal while city plan amendment. I look forward to president trump signing the law very soon. I want to focus my question on a specific violation of flpm.
▶ 1:23:41Sen. Daines: The miles city was strongly opposed by those living, working, representing the lands affected and despite this opposition, biden's blm ignored local feedback and they pushed forward with this harmful effort. It was frustrating to see the disconnect between federal bureaucrats here in washington who had a very strong agenda and local elected officials on the ground in montana.
▶ 1:24:12Sen. Daines: During the officials governors consistency review, after multiple official protests and an appeal from governor gm forte, the blm decided to reject the governor's recommendations. This is shameful and we need to ensure voices of those closest to the land are not ignored or just rejected. My question for attorney general brown and Mr.
▶ 1:24:39Sen. Daines: Christensen, what actions should congress take to ensure that local state and local statewide elected officials and those most affected by blm's actions do not have their voices literally shut out of the planning process. >> I appreciate that. We have seen that in our state where we have that governors consistency review and it is effectively overruled.
▶ 1:25:07Sen. Daines: One of the things that I think this body can do is look at meaningful changes to flpma such that there is meaningful involvement that is more than just a pat on the head to the states because as we mentioned, we need consistency, coordination and collaboration but we also need the states to have some sort of meaningful input so that they can be co-sovereigns over these lands where they have jurisdiction.
▶ 1:25:36Sen. Daines: The consistency review is one specific example where I think if there were maybe more teeth to that, where they could be meaningful partners rather than just pro forma partners, that would solve a lot of the issues we have in the local areas in utah and places like montana.
▶ 1:25:51Sen. Daines: Thank you.
▶ 1:25:53Mr. Christensen: It is a great question. I agree with the idea of increasing the teeth of consistency review. I speak more to culture. We heard about the impact of not enough planning employees. This is a real concern. One way to fix that lack of employment for planning is to utilize state and county resources.
▶ 1:26:19Mr. Christensen: Utilize state wildlife agencies to help you with developing your plan instead of working against those plans. Incorporating state and local knowledge meaningfully in the planning process by authorizing those individuals on the planning teams and utilize the science and data they provide. As far as the rejection of this letter, I think our governor got the same letters. We have some government efficiency there. But it is a problem.
▶ 1:26:48Mr. Christensen: A 13 year planning process ends with a whimper. Your recommendations are rejected. It certainly is not the way you would like to see a planning process be working to unite horses, states, local governors -- working to unite forces, states, local governors.
▶ 1:27:09Sen. Daines: Thank you. In order for elected kennedys -- electric utilities in montana to be able to provide energy efficiently, we have to get the transmission line someplace, crossing a patchwork of private, state and federal lands. To protect these power lines and communities from devastating wildfires, utilities obtain management to cut dangerous trees on public lands.
▶ 1:27:39Sen. Daines: However, they cannot protect communities if land management agencies are not cooperative when utilities are managing their rights away. Recently the vigilante electric co-op from montana was slapped with a $5 million fines from the forest service because a tree outside of their right caught on fire -- outside of their right-of-way caught on fire. Any attempt to remove the tree would have been illegal but they were held liable for the fire.
▶ 1:28:09Sen. Daines: 2018 flpma was amended to include a strict liability cap. The $5 million vigilante fire was far beyond the limit. It is near impossible for a small co-op to pay. An entity should not be fined without proving negligence or noncompliance. Last quick question, Mr. brown's.
▶ 1:28:37Sen. Daines: Utah and montana passed legislation to address these liability problems and the unique burden placed on electricity providers. What still needs to be changed at the federal level to replicate the success we are seeing?
▶ 1:28:49Mr. Brown: This is something this body should look at in terms of caps and liabilities. A lot of what you are talking about, you mentioned the catch 22. They need to do something but they are disempowered from doing it in the first place. Having more meaningful involvement with the folks on the ground who recognized the problems involving the rights of lands, something that should be addressed and I think changing that, as Mr.
▶ 1:29:12Mr. Brown: Christensen said, that cultural shift as well would be helpful but this body should look at things such as those caps and how that can be addressed.
▶ 1:29:21Sen. Daines: Thank you.
▶ 1:29:23Chair Lee: Senator padilla.
▶ 1:29:27Sen. Padilla: Thank you. Good morning to all of you. I want to begin by noting Mr. kenna's long and distinguished career in public service which includes more than 40 years in his role as blm director for the state of california. I want to thank you for your service, for your dedication to protecting our cherished public lands, not just in california but especially in california.
▶ 1:29:57Sen. Padilla: There are a number of great examples from your time they are as successful research -- resource management plan development. We have stakeholders together to establish the desert renewable energy conservation plans. I know you are familiar with this. It focuses on 10.8 million acres of public land across seven counties in california.
▶ 1:30:24Sen. Padilla: It is a landscape level plan that streamlines renewable energy development while conserving uniquely valuable desert ecosystems. The drecp is a success story incorporating robust and tribal participation in land planning and it is a great example of working collaboratively to ensure that all stakeholders benefit from blm's multiple use mandate.
▶ 1:30:52Sen. Padilla: I share all that to say thank you and to point out a success story but to ask you, can you discuss how the energy permitting landscape looked in the california desert before successful implementation of the drecp and how the plan actually helps provide the certainty, the transparency and the efficiency for the energy industry after it was adopted? >> thank you for your comments.
▶ 1:31:21Sen. Padilla: This is a really important thing to be clear. One of the characterizations we have heard so far is that the land-use planning is in a combative relationship with the state and the federal government. That was certainly not my experience in california. We started with a republican governor and secretary of interior and democratic administration setting up an agreement that was the umbrella to the entire process.
▶ 1:31:50Sen. Padilla: In terms of what things were like when we started, nobody really anticipated the flood of applications that happened with renewable energy. We had 15 to 20 coming in the door at the time. There were six to 10 that were active. They are all in different stages and frankly with very different applicants.
▶ 1:32:11Sen. Padilla: We had everything from florida power and light, a very sophisticated operator that operates globally, to startups that had ideas about where they wanted to put a wind farm. That is a variable that is really important and has a lot of impact and control on timeline, is the applicant itself. There are also things we talked about my capacity to do the work.
▶ 1:32:37Sen. Padilla: Then you have to go to the issues and let that steer the process because the content of what is going on in the case of the drecp that you mentioned, you are in a national conservation area that was congressionally designated in 1976. As a starting point, you have to have a robust, reliable conservation design. The governor and the secretary agreed on that. Then you also have a very complex system that you are working with.
▶ 1:33:08Sen. Padilla: You have interstate transmission of power. How california fits to the grid. How things move across and how that all fits together with transmission and generation. It is a complex process and there are a lot of people with unique information that you need to get from point a to point b. Hopefully that is responsive to your question.
▶ 1:33:36Sen. Padilla: I appreciate if you can end this response by saying the process is not meant to be a barrier to the country. This committee in other hearings observes the carpenter's rule. We measure twice, you cut once.
▶ 1:33:53Sen. Padilla: If you do the appropriate engagement and put an emphasis on tribal consultation, you get the information you need to be fought full -- thoughtful on the front end where they do need a plan or in the context of the designation of the exact parameters.
▶ 1:34:16Sen. Padilla: You can better protect ecosystems that are worth protecting and establishing clear energy development opportunities because you are informed on the front end. Whether it is through litigation or revisiting plans or boundaries, it takes thoughtfulness, open-mindedness and due diligence. That is the point we are trying to make. Thank you for your response.
▶ 1:34:45Sen. Padilla: Thank you all for your testimony.
▶ 1:34:48Chair Lee: Senator gallego.
▶ 1:34:59Sen. Gallego: Glad to have you all back. We have a very long and rich career. I am glad you started in california and graduated to arizona. Your insight will be low key as we talk about local issues. Arizona has 12 point one million acres of land and over 70 million surface acres.
▶ 1:35:25Sen. Gallego: These lands are home to some of the most important resources including sacred travel sites, 45 miles of the arizona scenic trail and over 55,000 mining claims. We will get to the questions about arizona specifically. I want to point out the underlying challenge that impacts every potential use such as staffing. We talked about that earlier. What you would like to see to use, you need the staff to get it approved.
▶ 1:35:53Sen. Gallego: 50% to 20% of staff have been fired or forced to retire since the beginning of this year not including lay off plans that are currently on hold. That does not make sense and I urge their administration to reverse course. Mr. kenna, when you were arizona state director you worked on the restoration design energy project. That plan created opportunities while taking advantage of hard rock sites.
▶ 1:36:21Sen. Gallego: Can you talk about how you approached the development of the plan and how you balance multiple use requirements including clean energy deployment?
▶ 1:36:27Mr. Kenna: I mentioned earlier, none of the states or the land-use plans that were in place at the time were prepared for renewable energy when it hit. There was a lot of figuring it out on the fly that had to happen. That was also true in arizona.
▶ 1:36:48Mr. Kenna: One of the goals is to get to something that is practical and transmission-aligned for the basically public-interest reasons that make sense with the grid. There are some technical issues that overlay everything you have to do. Doing a statewide plan requires a unique mindset and one is that you have to be willing to go where the people are and figure out what the issues are.
▶ 1:37:20Mr. Kenna: The point I would emphasize again is one I made earlier. There is no substitute for the on the ground knowledge and the on the ground information when you are doing land-use planning. Each plan and each area is going to be different and unique. That was true in the restoration design energy project. The reason I mentioned the mining situation is that a fair amount of hard rock mining in arizona as you know.
▶ 1:37:50Mr. Kenna: When a mine is decommissioned, they are generally big consumers of power. The decommissioning historically, reclaimed the site and take out the power line. But if you have already disturbed the site and it is flattened and it has power access into the grid, why not take advantage of that? So that was the concept behind it.
▶ 1:38:20Sen. Gallego: You talked about this. We have 22 federally recognized tribes. Can you elaborate on your experience with tribal consultation and why it is important and how it improves the projects stability?
▶ 1:38:40Mr. Kenna: It is easy to talk about it in an oversimplified way but it is a process. There is a lot that has to happen in a very personal and face to face kind of relationship. Getting with tribal council's and tribal preservation officers that really individual conversation. Then there is a second tier that has to happen.
▶ 1:39:09Mr. Kenna: You would not expect the perspective to be exactly the same. So you have to have some way to assemble those points of view. In arizona the magic of that was the tribal council.
▶ 1:39:27Sen. Gallego: Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 1:39:31Chair Lee: Hoeven senator.
▶ 1:39:46Sen. Hoeven: Thank you, Mr. chair. We have split states where you have federal state and privately owned minerals. In some instances the federal minerals have no surface acreage. I have legislation in that I called the blm mineral spacing act where you avoid duplicate permitting when you are trying to drill for oil and gas.
▶ 1:40:16Sen. Hoeven: Does that make some sense to you to protect property rights? >> that is certainly a great idea.
▶ 1:40:24Sen. Hoeven: Would you encourage the chair and ranking member to events that legislation so that we can pass it on the floor?
▶ 1:40:31Mr. Christensen: If senator barrasso is for it, then we are for it too.
▶ 1:40:38Sen. Hoeven: He is for it. He is probably on it. Did you want to add anything?
▶ 1:40:44Mr. Christensen: On the split of state issue it is unique that you have federal regulations that can control surface use pipelines, right-of-way, roads. When you are dealing with something that is owned underneath the ground so there is a complicated maze. I stated earlier, our states do not just have giant blocks of blm land. We have a checkerboard. We have state lands all between. It is not a one-size-fits-all.
▶ 1:41:15Mr. Christensen: A lot of places could see development that cannot because federal lands might restrict right-of-way access so they have no take away on things like that so it is a complex issue that should be looked into.
▶ 1:41:25Sen. Hoeven: As for Mr. brown, Mr. christensen and Mr. sheehan. The blm resource management plan put forth by the biden administration for our state would have closed off 45% of our oil and gas to development and 99% of the federal coal acreage. I am not sure why they left 1% available. But they closed off 99%.
▶ 1:41:53Sen. Hoeven: Do each of you agree that an expanded federal regulatory approach like that is absolutely a problem if we are going to follow the law, which is multiple use on federal lands? Meaning energy, farming and ranching, tourism and something that senator heinrich and I enjoy very much which is hunting. Starting with Mr. brown.
▶ 1:42:16Mr. Brown: I would agree. If you look at the map that chairman lee put up, it shows the transition from multiple lucian students -- notably use lands to the single use lands. It is important so you do not see those kinds of overreaches.
▶ 1:42:41Sen. Hoeven: I guess the 1% was to maintain. Right? Come on. Who's next? By the way, do not take anymore more of our football coaches.
▶ 1:43:02Mr. Christensen: We miss them already. Just because an area is open for coal, does not mean it is going to be released -- leased. It means we have the opportunity to look into it or invest if we need. Reopening plans does not change the landscape. There is still a permitting process and infrastructure that needs to be built. It is closing lands that seems so simple.
▶ 1:43:32Mr. Christensen: Opening them should be the same way. There is really a lot more to it than just opening and closing. There is an industry component.
▶ 1:43:39Sen. Hoeven: Mr. sheehan?
▶ 1:43:41Mr. Sheehan: I think what Mr. christensen said is accurate. Having lands open for any of these extractive uses still requires mining plans and evaluation of multiple use, multiple resource uses as well as endangered species act as well and the national historic preservation act. When you have these open, there is still a lot of work ahead.
▶ 1:44:12Mr. Sheehan: I don't know the exact specific details in the north dakota plan but certainly I am a proponent of multiple use.
▶ 1:44:20Sen. Hoeven: I have to get one hunting question in. I'm sure the ranking members worked you with hunting issues. Any thoughts you have on what congress can do to streamline the blm planning and process and improve coordination within the state and federal government as far as hunting issues? Any big recommendations?
▶ 1:44:43Mr. Sheehan: Obviously, we recognize the states have the authority of wildlife management. It is very important to a lot of these species. Senator heinrich mentioned migratory corridors. We have learned a lot even in the last 10 years. Wildlife are struggling. Deer populations are down 60% since the 1960's and they continue to decline. We care about that.
▶ 1:45:12Mr. Sheehan: As we undergo planning and work together with states and coordinate with fishing and game agencies and do our planning work, that we take those factors into consideration and try to keep those species around.
▶ 1:45:22Sen. Hoeven: The hunters do a lot for livestock as far as disease and all those kinds of things.
▶ 1:45:31Mr. Sheehan: There are lots of challenges but we appreciate all your support and all of the hunters on this committee and in the room.
▶ 1:45:37Sen. Hoeven: Thank you.
▶ 1:45:40Chair Lee: Senator king took issue with Mr. sheehan because he does not represent white tales but as you know, the best states have proven states have pr why states have pr white tails.
▶ 1:46:02Mr. Sheehan: It might be the only state. >> I think it might be two states.
▶ 1:46:11Mr. Sheehan: Maybe texas and may arizona.
▶ 1:46:16Chair Lee: Senator hickenlooper.
▶ 1:46:19Sen. Hickenlooper: Thank you. Thank you all for your work. I was in colorado. Coloradans cherish their public lands. There were threats to sell public lands. There was an outrage to create a giant push back on that. We have seen a lot of energy around how do we increase protections of public land as well as seeking opportunities to enhance conservation through things like the public lands rule which we are still working on.
▶ 1:46:54Sen. Hickenlooper: Mr. cramer, how does the health of our public lands impact recreation?
▶ 1:47:01Mr. Cramer: Thanks for the question, senator hickenlooper. They are connected. You cannot have outdoor recreation without a setting. It is not mean anything. We need a place to paddle or ride your bike or go skiing so the setting is crucial for these things to take place and how these places are meaningful to individuals, how they contribute to local economies and the broader recreation industry.
▶ 1:47:33Mr. Cramer: Space is essential.
▶ 1:47:35Sen. Hickenlooper: We have seen the value of outdoor recreation across the west. It is $17 billion in colorado just alone. These are annualized numbers. Mr. sheehan, I wanted to ask your take on flpma and how it provides a framework for conservation. Are there some commonsense ways we can make that better?
▶ 1:48:05Mr. Sheehan: Thank you, senator hickenlooper for that question. Wildlife don't have much of a voice for themselves so we have to look out for them. I think what is critical is let's identify the areas that are most important and protect those. We may not need to protect at a high level every inch of publicly managed lands to protect the wildlife that rely on those landscapes.
▶ 1:48:38Mr. Sheehan: Through any of these planning processes or any other work that happens within the planning process when it is implemented, we need to use the best current knowledge, the best information to make sure that we give this wildlife an opportunity to persist in the efforts that we undertake.
▶ 1:48:56Sen. Hickenlooper: I did seven m hunts when I was governor in the land of wyoming. It is always a struggle because you only get one shot. The governor was sadly disappointed when our team won the whole thing. Let me go back, Mr.
▶ 1:49:24Sen. Hickenlooper: Kenna, amended flpma in 2018 to allow it to issue regulations for transmission rights. The final rule directs blm to enhance the reliability of the grid and reduce the threat of wild fire to transmission lines which has become a huge issue across the west.
▶ 1:49:49Sen. Hickenlooper: The cost of insurance right now, the rising cost of utilities from having to rebuild that infrastructure from these fires is enormous. As wildfires get such a major priority, and we have to fix our forest act which will help reduce fire risk in transmission corridors and other high-risk areas more broadly.
▶ 1:50:14Sen. Hickenlooper: How can we use the planning process to both not just prevent the wildfires but enhance grid reliability?
▶ 1:50:21Mr. Sheehan: Interesting question, senator. Thank you for that. One of the things that I found in my career with planning is that there are two things to pay attention to in any given planning area. What you've got when you talk about the grid in the west is a whole bunch of regional issues overlaid. It is different in the bonneville power region than it is in california, than it is in arizona and so forth.
▶ 1:50:51Mr. Sheehan: The complexity is very real. The things that I concentrate on is what do you need to do in terms of the speed of trust. If you set the process upfront, you've got to make sure that you don't try to go so fast that you do not keep everybody with you.
▶ 1:51:14Mr. Sheehan: And in each of those different regions, and this is probably not good wording, but I have traditionally called it the honesty habit. Different areas have different capacity to tackle things like the wildlife trends that we heard discussed earlier, where you see wildlife is declining. So what is our issue? Or the fire with transmission issue, same thing.
▶ 1:51:45Mr. Sheehan: You have to be able to directly address the issue forthrightly and honestly with a whole range of constituencies when we are talking about a west wide grid. That is a very complex undertaking.
▶ 1:51:57Sen. Hickenlooper: I appreciate that. I yield back.
▶ 1:52:00Chair Lee: Thank you very much, senator hickenlooper. Before we adjourn, senator heinrich and I have a couple of follow-up questions. A lot of the blm plans still in effect in utah were written in the early 1980's so we are talking 45 years ago.
▶ 1:52:23Chair Lee: How realistic is it for blm to manage fire, habitat and so forth under plans that were written before modeling data, modeling techniques or current demands even existed? Can you help us understand that why it is some of these plans have not been updated in that time period.
▶ 1:52:53Mr. Sheehan: First of all, it is vital. The changing circumstances, what do we know that is different? A lot of people in this room were not born in 1983. I was, unfortunately. We have to look at how has the world changed? What do we know now? What do we know about rare earth minerals that we did not know? What do we know about some of these habitats that are shared by wildlife and wild horses and livestock communities? Do we need to revisit that?
▶ 1:53:25Mr. Sheehan: What do we know that is different now about uses that many have interest in? Putting renewable energy on public lands. How does recreation change? In 1983 you did not have side by sides and maybe not even four wheelers and now they are quite prevalent. If we cannot address updating these plans on some regular basis, it is going to be very difficult to move forward. It just makes sense.
▶ 1:53:54Mr. Sheehan: We have all tried to reevaluate our life from time to time with what is happening that is different. As far as what it is going to take to get us there, some of these plans, I look at cedar city, utah, that started one dozen years ago. That really has not gone anywhere. Initially in the early part of planning, it is scoping. What are the situations out here? What do we need to know?
▶ 1:54:24Mr. Sheehan: We do an analysis of the situation and we say, how has the world changed. Maybe we just need to make sure that we continue to evaluate those parties. When I served in blm, we have lists and I'm sure they would be happy to give you that. Cedar city is one of the top lists but as the priorities change, some of these plans continue to be redone and that leaves a lot of these things on the sidelines.
▶ 1:54:54Mr. Sheehan: But if we are going to manage public lines, it is vital to point out that we have to get this planning work done or we are not in a good place.
▶ 1:55:01Chair Lee: That is a good point. Someone mentioned earlier today that typewriters were still in use.
▶ 1:55:08Mr. Sheehan: I have one.
▶ 1:55:10Chair Lee: In many cases, they are still in emerging technology. Some good gaming opportunities when I was in grade school. Shifting gears for a moment, under section six all three -- under section 603 c of flpma, the secretary of the interior
▶ 1:55:40Chair Lee: Was given the task of designating studying areas. When the wilderness studying area has been designated, only congress can release the wsa, and until congress releases it, it has to be managed as if it were designated by congress.
▶ 1:56:05Chair Lee: History has shown that these releases rarely occur so this allows many millions of acres to be managed as de facto wilderness without specifically being designated as such by congress. How workable of a system is that where when one agency can unilaterally designate a wsa. It cannot be unlocked except by an act of congress.
▶ 1:56:30Chair Lee: I have been racking my brain over the last couple of days trying to find any parallel to this. The U.S. code is replete with instances in which we delegate significant authority to an agency but not aware of a circumstance like this one where the authorization of a foreign agency to exercise administrative authority becomes a complete one-way ratchet and takes on some of the traffic of a statute and cannot be
▶ 1:57:00Chair Lee: Revisited later in light of a subsequent fact, either the original decision was wrong or it has become outdated or otherwise. Tell us about how workable that sort of thing is and how that may make things difficult for land managers.
▶ 1:57:20Mr. Sheehan: Certainly. In these planning processes the blm can take an area of land and say in their planning opinion that that should be a wilderness study area. Further to your point, you acknowledge that only congress can undo that. A future executive administration cannot undo what is done in that plan.
▶ 1:57:50Mr. Sheehan: I cannot say there are no other instances in the federal government that allow an agency or bureau to create an action that really elevates itself instantly to a congressional action. That cannot be undone even in the future by the executive side.
▶ 1:58:07Mr. Sheehan: Whether it is a major problem or not, I am not certain how much of those wsa's are being designated now but it is certainly curious that we have an ability to designate something that has a de facto effect of permanency behind it.
▶ 1:58:27Chair Lee: Thank you. Senator heinrich.
▶ 1:58:31Sen. Heinrich: Mr. cramer, there was a new report that looked at outdoor recreation on public lands and the scale of the economic impact of that was estimated at over $350 million per day. That is at a scale bigger than logging and mining together.
▶ 1:58:59Sen. Heinrich: It has certainly had a huge impact in my state on a lot of gateway communities to these public lands. But many of the plans on the books right now were written at a time where that scale was much smaller and when it was sometimes not even considered. Do you think in your experience, do land managers actually know all the places and mechanisms that people use to recreate on the public lands that they manage?
▶ 1:59:30Sen. Heinrich: For your typical blm district manager, do they know all the places that people climb and hunt or do they need a public process to understand where those things occur and where conflicts might occur?
▶ 1:59:46Mr. Cramer: Great question. I think they know a lot because they are there. In some cases, they might know almost all of them. But why not check? Why not double check? As you point out, there is so much desire to be outside. The economic activity from that desire is substantial. If we do not inventory where these places are, we are leaving a ton on the table in terms of economic activity.
▶ 2:00:18Mr. Cramer: In some cases you might want to develop recreation infrastructure where there is not recreation infrastructure to make sure there is more equitable access for more people that is closer to where more people live. Data about this stuff is very liberating. It is available and accessible through my organization outdoor alliance.
▶ 2:00:41Mr. Cramer: There are a lot of companies that have gotten a tremendous amount of data and they are generous about it so we get to a better place with this information is for sure.
▶ 2:00:51Sen. Heinrich: New mexico purchases a lot of oil and gas but we have a lot of public lands. We value those public lands and we also rely on outdoor recreation, hunting and fishing, other things to generate economic activity in our state's. . So the balance of those things is really important to us.
▶ 2:01:13Sen. Heinrich: The budget bill this summer elevated oil and gas leasing above other uses on public lands by literally requiring the blm to offer any parcel for leasing if it is open. Before that change, the blm would first consider oil and gas development and whether it was the best use for a parcel before offering the lease and now oil and gas gets preferential treatment over those other uses.
▶ 2:01:43Sen. Heinrich: Mr. cramer, for people who like to recreate on public lands, what are the consequences of saying things are multiple use but in elevating certain uses above others?
▶ 2:01:53Mr. Cramer: Just setting things up for more conflict and slowing things down. As a lot of the witnesses have shared, it is a composition of all of these elements. We need to allow that composition to be composed in a way that is in everybody's best interest.
▶ 2:02:10Sen. Heinrich: Mr. chairman, I think I'm done.
▶ 2:02:14Chair Lee: Thank you so much. I want to thank each of you for being here today. You've all brought unique expertise to the table and we have learned a lot from this. This will conclude today's hearing. I want to thank my colleagues for participating and the witnesses for being here. Any member of that committee who wishes to submit questions for the record that have not been asked today may do so. The deadline will be 6:00 p.m. Tomorrow. Senators have until 6:00 p.m.
▶ 2:02:46Chair Lee: This coming wednesday, november 26 to add statements for the record of today's hearing. We received one of those from senator risch already today. He had to run to a foreign relations hearing that he was chairing, but that will be added without objection. Thanks again for being here and for your testimony and for answering our questions. This committee stands adjourned. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap.org]