The administration\u2019s attacks on public lands now target the Conservation and Landscape Health Rule, also known as the Public Lands Rule \u2013 a 2024 policy giving conservation equal priority with extraction and recreation on Bureau of Land Management lands. The rule protects ecosystems, restores damaged areas and relies on science to guide long-term land management.<\/p>\n
For those whose livelihoods depend on public lands, the rule is common sense. At 4Corners Riversports, our business and culture rely on balanced land management. Most people understand that temporary closures \u2013 for campsites or grazing \u2013 lead to healthier lands in the long run.<\/p>\n The Public Lands Rule is the BLM responding to the clear increase in threats to public lands that require thoughtful, science-driven management. Fragmented wildlife habitat, invasive species like cheatgrass and tamarisk, increasing wildfires and frequent droughts impact the health and resilience of landscapes and undermine their ability to support multiple uses. To address these threats and to advance existing policies, the BLM must focus on resilient ecosystems\u2019 ability to recover from disturbances and environmental change.<\/p>\n The rule has broad public support \u2013 92% of comments submitted during its adoption favored giving conservation and restoration equal footing with other land uses. The rule does not prioritize conservation over other uses; instead, it provides a clearer framework for managing public lands amid growing pressures. Importantly, the rule aligns with the BLM\u2019s legal mandate to manage public lands for \u201cmultiple use and sustained yield\u201d \u2013 a goal that isn\u2019t possible without a strong foundation in conservation.<\/p>\n The BLM is clear: Conservation under the rule does not mean closing access and is not a permanent designation. Conservation is both a land use and an investment in the landscape intended to increase the yield of other benefits elsewhere or later in time. It is short-sighted \u2013 and to our long-term detriment \u2013 to treat public lands as a resource to exploit just because current political conditions allow it.<\/p>\n Resource extraction does not struggle to move forward on public lands. Thirty-seven million acres of federal land have been leased for oil and gas production, while less than half are currently in production. Furthermore, only 15% of BLM lands are managed for conservation. Given this, it is unreasonable to claim current policies hinder extraction. In fact, it is wise to be critical of corporations with nearly unfettered access to our shared resources.<\/p>\n Imagine oil and gas wells developed in riparian areas along the San Juan River \u2013 not only would it block public access, but a single flood could contaminate the water and pose risks to human health for years. Or consider permitting a hard rock mine in the middle of an elk winter range \u2013 such a decision could harm wildlife populations for generations.<\/p>\n Instead, we must take a balanced approach \u2013 considering the condition of land and waterways, the long-term needs of both people and ecosystems, and the future we want for our children and grandchildren.<\/p>\n As residents of Southwest Colorado, we understand the economic value of public lands and their intrinsic worth. Managing these lands requires balancing multiple uses over time. If we treat public lands solely as a resource to extract quickly, without investing in conservation and restoration, we risk degrading soil, water and biodiversity \u2013 ultimately threatening the land\u2019s ability to support life and livelihoods in the long run.<\/p>\n