Steve Pearce Inches Closer to Becoming BLM Director on the Same Day the Agency Finalizes "Public Lands Rule" Rescission

Things are both accelerating and escalating at the Bureau of Land Management

Today, May 11, the U.S. Senate voted on S. Res. 690, an arcane procedure that considered the en bloc consideration of 49 presidential nominees. That includes Steve Pearce’s nomination for Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Director.

The Senate passed the resolution along party lines with a 46-45 majority.

Senators Bennet (D-CO), Curtis (R-UT), Hagerty (R-TN), Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Moody (R-FL), Murkowski (R-AK), Murray (D-WA), Ricketts (R-NE), and Risch (R-ID) did not vote.

With the resolution now passed, the Senate will proceed with the final confirmation vote, which is still to be scheduled, but will most likely occur within the next few days.

Pearce has a ridiculously long track record advocating for the sale and privatization of public lands and waters. His many previous statements and actions, many while serving in Congress himself as a representative from New Mexico, include the following:

• In 2005, while serving in Congress, he voted for a budget bill provision that would have facilitated the sale of millions of acres of federal lands at below-market prices. Fortunately, that provision ultimately failed.

• In 2012, Pearce criticized Theodore Roosevelt’s “big ideas of big forests and big national parks” and indicated his desire to “reverse this trend of public ownership of lands.”

• In 2013, he helped pass a bill that required federal land managers to prioritize oil and gas drilling over all other uses on public lands.

• Also in 2013, he introduced a bill that would prohibit any future president from establishing national monuments in New Mexico, a bill that eventually went nowhere. Pearce, however, continued to vote for several other bills that, at the very least, would have made it harder to designate national monuments.

• In 2016, Pearce co-sponsored a bill that would have resulted in the sale of huge tracts of public lands and waters in the American West.

Pearce has been waiting to be confirmed for months.

On February 25, Pearce testified—under oath—at a confirmation hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which is chaired by Senator Mike Lee (R-UT).

During that hearing, Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR)—referring to Pearce’s previous statement that “most of that [public land in Western states] we do not even need”—asked him “is there too much public land in the West now in your view? Do you continue to hold that view or have you changed your mind?”

“I’m not so sure that I’ve changed,” Pearce answered.

On March 4, despite those grave concerns about Pearce’s true intentions regarding public lands and waters, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee still voted 11-9, also along party lines, to advance his nomination to the full Senate.

The Senate proceeded with an initial vote on the en bloc nominations on April 28, which was also along party lines, with 52 Republicans voting in favor and 47 Democrats voting against.

And now today, Steve Pearce inched ever so close to actually getting confirmed. After all these months, the final confirmation vote is expected any day now.

As a staunch opponent of the very concept of federal public lands and waters, and with a track record of promoting fossil fuels, grazing, and logging, Steve Pearce is an objectively unfit person to lead America’s largest land management agency from a conservation standpoint. But now, he does.

Along with his previous concerning statements about “too much public land in the West,” Steve Pearce is also drowning in conflicts of interest. And he’s not exactly stepping away from those either.

In fact, as reported in January by Public Domain, rather than showing integrity and respect for the position he’s now confirmed for, Pearce planned to transfer his oilfield services business Trinity Industries to his own wife.

With Steve Pearce’s BLM Director confirmation now pretty much a certainty, it’s not unlikely that we’ll see new attempts to dispose of tracts of public BLM lands like they just did in Alaska after having used to Congressional Review Act; hear new rhetoric about “affordable housing;” see an even more intense focus on mining, drilling, logging, and grazing; and hear more talk about reducing national monuments.

In fact, this Senate resolution vote—which approved Pearce’s inclusion in a group of 48 other nominees whom are all but guaranteed to get collectively confirmed—comes on the very same day news broke about the Bureau of Land Management’s finalized rescission of the Biden-era Conservation and Landscape Health Rule, better known as as the Public Lands Rule.

That rule placed conservation on equal footing as extractive activities like mining, grazing, and drilling on BLM-managed public lands. Conservation is now, once again, an afterthought by the BLM, which manages more public land than any other federal agency.

“The rule required science-based decision-making, conservation considerations within multiple land uses and a focus on sustaining public lands for the long-term benefit of wildlife and the American people,” National Parks Traveler wrote.

Today’s Public Lands Rule rescission drew immediately condemnation from all kinds of environmental organizations.

“Public lands provide us the freedom to explore the great outdoors. Congress directed the BLM to manage public lands in a way that balances uses like outdoor recreation with needs as varied as grazing, energy development and conservation of wildlife habitat,” said Alison Flint, acting Vice President for Federal Policy at The Wilderness Society. “The administration’s rescission of the BLM Public Lands Rule flouts both the agency’s legal mandate and the overwhelming wishes of the American people for public lands to be managed in a balanced and sustainable way that conserves special places for future generations.”

“The Public Lands Rule was a long-overdue effort to modernize how the Bureau of Land Management approaches conservation, recreation, and development on public lands,” said Adam Cramer, CEO of Outdoor Alliance. “Rescinding it is a missed opportunity to manage public lands with the precision and balance these landscapes deserve. Instead of recognizing that we can have thriving recreation, healthy landscapes, and responsible development together, the administration decided to take a time machine back to the late 1800s—putting extraction first at the expense of the wealth of input, expertise, and experience of local communities and recreationists.”

“This administration chose to eliminate the Public Lands Rule, despite its overwhelming public support, at the very moment where extreme drought and a changing climate are pushing our public lands to the brink. This is a major loss for the long-term stewardship of millions of acres of public land that belong to all of us, many surrounding our prized national parks,” said Beau Kiklis, Associate Director of Energy and Landscape Conservation at the National Parks Conservation Association. “This fits a pattern of brazen attempts to sell off and sell out our shared public lands at the expense of public access and conservation. From gutting agency staff to shutting the public out of the process to sidelining years of sound science, rushed industrial development and private interests are being given a free pass no matter the cost. This rollback is the latest attempt by the administration to chip away at America’s conservation legacy while ignoring the will of the people.”

Additionally, as reported by E&E News, the Bureau of Land Management also proposed revisions to its cattle and sheep grazing policies today—the same day the vehemently anti-conservation Steve Pearce got closer than ever to getting confirmed.

“The federal grazing program is in crisis, and today’s proposed rule changes will make ecologically-appropriate land management even harder. These regulations are a handout to a special interest industry seeking control over vast stretches of public land at taxpayer expense, while wildlife, watersheds, and the public bear the costs,” said Josh Osher, Public Policy Director for Western Watersheds Project. “This proposed rule is a slap in the face to the public that invested countless hours in helping to thoughtfully reform the public lands grazing program under the first Trump Administration. Instead, the new rules are being rubber-stamped for the benefit of the livestock industry without even analyzing its consequences.”

All these new developments follow a week in which the American bison played a central role in public lands news. The main story last week, which went absolutely viral after The New York Times covered it last Monday, was that the Interior Department is kicking bison off federal public lands to appease cattle ranchers.

All of this is extremely politically motivated. And all of this is related. All of this is turning into a perfect storm of accelerated resource development on Bureau of Land Management lands.

In summary, today’s vote to proceed with the final confirmation of Steve Pearce as BLM Director later this week, combined with the finalized rescission of the Public Lands Rule and new increased grazing policies proposed by the BLM, is yet another alarming step that puts our public lands and waters on an even more pro-exploitation path.

To be continued very soon…

---

Thanks for reading!

See you on our public lands and waters,

Bram