From High Country News, an excerpt:
Decades of public-lands planning, overturned in a day
On the sagebrush plains of eastern Montana, cattle graze alongside mule deer, and pumpjacks rise from coal seams. For nearly a decade, the future of this landscape was hammered out in the Miles City Resource Management Plan, a compromise shaped by ranchers, tribes, hunters, energy companies and conservationists. Now, with one vote in Washington, Congress has thrown that bargain into doubt, and with it, decades of public-lands decisions across the West.
Finalized in November 2024 after years of debate and litigation, the Miles City plan is one of the nation’s largest, governing 12 million acres of BLM land and 55 million acres of federal mineral estate across eastern Montana.
But on Sept. 3, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to overturn three Bureau of Land Management plans, including Miles City, under the Congressional Review Act, the first time the law has ever been applied to land-use planning. Legal experts and conservation groups warn that the consequences could be far-reaching, enabling Congress to unravel decades of environmental protections and management decisions on public lands.
I would like to read arguments pro and con enumerated during Congressional debate.
I wrote about this last week. https://forestpolicypub.com/2025/09/10/would-use-of-the-cra-on-rmps-destabilize-land-management-open-pandoras-box/ I don’t know about Miles City but Rock Springs was definitely not a compromise, it was against what the public and elected officials and the state commission wanted and seemed to be a unilateral political decision.
I don’t know about Miles City. Maybe that’s why the article is focused on that one, so it wouldn’t be so obviously untrue. It should also tell us something that the decision was post-election. Like Rock Springs..
https://cowboystatedaily.com/2024/12/20/blm-finalizes-controversial-rock-springs-plan-now-only-
congress-can-stop-it/
It doesn’t sound very “compromise shaped by ranchers, tribes, hunters, energy companies and conservationists” when the elected officials in the State are against it. Also it seems dubious that it was much of a compromise if “Under the amendments to the RMP for the Powder River Basin, no coal leasing is available on BLM land within the area. ” https://www.milescitystar.com/news/montanas-congressional-delegation-introduce-resolution-opposing-miles-city-blms-resource-management-plan/article_69a1694a-993b-412e-b098-6b544bb4bca0.html
A common theme seems to be resisting the will of the Governors of the states..
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/31/2024-31413/blm-directors-response-to-the-montana-governors-appeal-of-the-blm-montanadakotas-state-directors
All of that context seems to be missing from the story. I wonder if that is intentional selling of a narrative, or they really haven’t been paying attention?
Oh my, what has become of us? I cannot seem to find the words to express my feelings about what is happening to our country, and indeed, planet Earth. We are better than this, right?
Yesterday I was reading about the decision from USDA and DOI to form a national wildland fire control service, or whatever the name shall be. In my view, it’s a terrible path to take without any logic that I can understand. It’s a tactic that will destroy any hope of needed forest management. On a much larger scale, what is happening now is so much worse. Important choices are being made without any thought. I wanted to say, “rigorous thought”, but in truth, the “without” is what’s happening.
Currently, we have all these piecemeal, haphazard choices being made without learned counsel that, by themselves, go against almost any critical thinking, are terribly disruptive to the workforce, extremely expensive false-starts, and in the end will not be at all effective. Again, if I can see this, you can bet so many others can see this as well, and more precisely. There must be something I am missing that is intuitively obvious to even the most casual observer, right? These are America’s leaders. They would know, right?
When the “USDA Reorganization Plan” came out, I asked numerous people inside and outside of the agencies that I worked with and for, “Were you asked for your opinion”? The answer was “No” with an “R-Factor of 1.00 (that means I did not get even one “Yes”). It seems like those who are not informed, but in powerful positions, have no task-relevant maturity to simply ask, “What do you think?”
If these decisions were about “doughnuts at 3 PM or not”, then the room for error is clearly wide. But what we are talking about in the landscape scale conservation area, for example, has generational impacts, now and ahead. These are America’s leaders. They would know, right?
In my development assignment for the Senior Executive Service, I worked for the US Agency for International Development for almost five months. What a wonderfully caring and productive organization that was. Millions of lives were saved because they intuitively seemed to know what the next right thing was to do. So, in exchange for their good, they are tossed aside without any thought.
My father had three core values in his life: lie, cheat, and steal. The idea of just doing “the next right thing” was never in his playbook. Most of us know without a doubt that nullifying these land management plans, without learned discussion, is not the right thing to do. We know that eliminating science-based choices is not the right thing to do; intuitively, we know this, right? Yet, we don’t seem to care about the impacts on those following us, the next generation.
I just turned 78. For me, this means, “please do the next right thing. you do not have that many start-overs left.” Be kind and respectful to those who follow. My wish to tour leaders: use your position of power to help, not destroy. When I read this latest decision by Congress, I was sad but not surprised. What has become of us?
Recently, I have been re-reading parts and pieces of two books: “Man and Nature” by George Perkins Marsh (1864) and “Make Your Bed” by Admiral William H. McRaven (U.S. Navy Retired) (2017). Both are classics about forging enduring change that help make things better.
Now, I always carry with me a pocket version of the “United States Constitution.” I never did this before, but it feels like the right thing to do, especially now. The Constitution guides me with rules, promises, and faith. I can only imagine the learned debate that took place then, so long ago. Now, McRaven says, “If you want to change the world, don’t back down from the sharks.” I am not going to let these current bullies push me around. I can’t; we cannot.
I spent 50 years of my life with a grand organization, the “United States Forest Service.” Now, I am watching it be dismantled piece by piece by those who don’t know and seem not to care. How can this be? These are America’s leaders. They should know, with the help of all of us, what’s the next right thing to do. Tossing out decades and even centuries of proven work and accomplishments, as if they were garbage, is profoundly rude. We cannot allow this to continue. We must “Never, Ever Quit” (McRaven, 2017), trying to restore a legacy of being respectful, kind, and productive for those who follow.
Very respectfully,
Yes Mr. Rains,
This is not a criticism, just a comment. What has become of us? It is a question I have heard since before the Sage Brush Rebellion days and is as frustrating for the rural families left in limbo and who have gone bankrupt or actually commit suicide during these political roller coaster rides as you might have experienced over 50-years of honest service to our country.
Many folks are absolutely frustrated with the way things are going in America, but as one USFS forester once corrected my overall thoughts about certain aspects of forest management – not enough agree on what constitutes what a healthy forest is. Kind of the same deal here on these RMPs.
The RKS RMP dispute actually dates back to the 1990’s and the Jack Morrow Hills Coordinated Activity Plan SEIS and Green River Basin Advisory Committee arguments and agreements, primarily relative to proposed mapping under then Sec of Interior Bruce Babbitt’s efforts. It was just as hot back then as today. There is more depth in that particular arena of the 3-corners of CO-UT-WY than either side of the road would like to be made public.
Similar to the HCN lead story posted by Sharon, the last ditch effort by the WY Governor’s Task Force appeared to be geared more toward the media and Cheyenne and WDC politics rather that what actually has transpired over the past 32-years (speaking solely for myself having been involved, except with the task force which was politically driven in my estimation).
Many people living in majority federal owned land counties sympathize with your frustrations, including my small circle. But our angle of frustration generally emanates from thinking that, we too, “are tossed aside [and about] without any thought”, and what is to become of our 5th and 6th generation of family.
This website should take anyone interested to the 03SEP2025 House Floor Cast. Under Caption Text, scroll down to around 2:30:18PM for the start of the floor discussion and opposing viewpoints: https://live.house.gov/?date=2025-09-03
In this link, https://www.congress.gov/committee-report/119th-congress/house-report/232/1?outputFormat=pdf , bottom of page 2, under EXPLANATION OF WAIVERS is what helps to inflame the dialogue, and generally is utilized on both sides of the political spectrum depending on who is goring who. Congressional Review Act H.J. Res. 104, 105, and 106 are listed and rules of engagement frustrate everyone when used as tit-for-tat.
This weblink is the Daily Digest for 03SEP: https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record/volume-171/issue-144/daily-digest
Rest assured that their are people who take what you write to heart and that your time in the USFS was not, and likely will not have been wasted in the long run.
Cordially submitted
I hope those links work…
This article is very distorted. First of all, the CRA action is not over ruling the miles city resource plan, it is overruling a Biden driven amendment to the 2015 plan which took 12 years to develop because of intense collaboration. The 2024 amendment sought to undermine this work. The CRA is a check on actions that are a result of over reach. To say that this Act should not apply to land use planning is not accurate. Why should it be excerpt when other government actions are not? Your characterization of the governor’s position and the details of the consistency review are distorted. Some of it is 180 degrees off. Please research more thoroughly in the future. This article is very misleading.
Mitch, was it my characterization or the High Country News article that was distorted. TSW exists for you to tell your side of the story.
It was the HCN article that got it wrong on the miles city RMP, the 2024 amendment to this RMP and the MT governors consistency review. The MT governor appealed the amendment. He disagreed with BLM but the article states that congress is over riding the will of the governor. This is not what is happening. BLM, pressured by the Biden administration, over-rode the will of the governor and the state of MT with the 2024 amendment as documented in the Gov. Consistency review and subsequent appeal. HCN is saying that congress is over riding the governor through the CRA. All of this is a false narrative that is spun into a self righteous rant to get people worked up. Facts matter.