Attorney General Adam Laxalt this morning filed suit against the federal government's sage grouse land-use plan, going against the wishes of Gov. Brian Sandoval, who has been negotiating to prevent a listing of the bird.
"By pursuing litigation now, the Attorney General is acting in his personal capacity and does not represent the State of Nevada, the Governor, or any state agencies," Sandoval said in an unusally sharp rebuke to the AG. (Full statement below)
The lawsuit, which you can see below, was filed in federal court. The AG, knowing of the governor's opposition, gathered statements from the entire GOP federal delegation, rural lawmakers and others, indicating he knows the political fight with the governor is relevant. (I have posted those below, too.)
No statement yet from the governor, but sources tell me he is not happy, raising (as it he did with Laxalt suing the feds over an immigration executive order) the issue of who the AG represents. Each side focuses on different statutes, with both believing they are on solid legal ground.
The governor cites NRS 228.180 ("consent of the governor") and the AG invokes the subsequently enacted NRS 228.190. The issue does differ from immigration in that the sage grouse is clearly a state issue and does affect public lands.
But would the governor push this into court to, once and for all, get a resolution of what the AG can do? That might be too much to ask for fans of political theater.
“If the Greater Sage-grouse had been listed as an endangered species, the consequences of that listing would have been permanent and inflexible. It would have given exclusive control of the management of the bird as well as the habitat to the federal government.
The "unwarranted" decision keeps management of the Greater Sage-grouse with the Nevada Department of Wildlife and protects Nevadans from having to engage in formal consultation with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) on how to manage private land as well as public.
The Governor has been proactively engaged on this issue from the beginning of his administration, and he has worked with all stakeholders to achieve a mutual goal: preventing the listing of the Greater Sage-grouse as an endangered species.
The federal government’s decision not to list the Greater Sage-grouse is a direct result of the State of Nevada's strategic collaboration with other western states through the Western Governors Association, as well as the Department of the Interior. Many Nevadans, including local industry stakeholders, sportsmen, conservationists and the general public, participated in this engagement strategy and they will continue to be involved moving forward.
Prematurely embroiling the State in costly litigation at this juncture threatens to compromise future collaborative efforts to implement the Nevada plan developed over the last four years by the Sagebrush Ecosystem Council. The Council is comprised of state and local leaders, alongside industry and conservation stakeholders, who have been working on this issue for years and will continue to be engaged in the Governor's response to the USFWS decision.
The Governor continues to have significant concerns about the 10 million acres -- 3 million of which are in Nevada -- that were immediately withdrawn from future mineral entry and multiple use by the Bureau of Land Management and will continue to engage Secretary Sally Jewell on this issue.
The Governor’s course of action is informed by more than a decade of experience on this issue and he believes it is premature to pursue litigation. The Governor believes that joining a lawsuit now will chill ongoing discussions between the state and Department of Interior, divert resources from the current strategy of engagement and could actually undermine the "not warranted” decision nearly every stakeholder has been working toward for over a decade. Once this collaborative phase of engagement is complete, further action will be considered.
By pursuing litigation now, the Attorney General is acting in his personal capacity and does not represent the State of Nevada, the Governor, or any state agencies.”----
----
Senator Dean Heller added, “As I said before, the final greater sage-grouse land-use
plans are not a win for Nevada—new restrictions on over sixteen million acres in our
state alone pose a threat to our western way of life. I support efforts to stop these
unnecessary regulations in their tracks and allow rural Nevada to thrive economically.”
Congressman Mark Amodei stated, “For 150 years, Nevadans have lived with decisions
made from thousands of miles away in Washington, D.C. Nobody else does it this way–
not at the local and state levels and not at the federal level for much of the nation. The
sage hen resource management plans are based on political maneuvers where the last
consideration seems to be multiple use in the West. The result is a nearly three million
acre exclusion zone because the Interior officials in D.C. do not have to live with their
rulings the way Northern Nevadans do. When the Department of the Interior completely
ignores input from Nevada’s Environmental Impact Statement, I believe no tool should
be left in the shed, and one of those tools is litigation.”
Before the federal government adopted its final plan last month, Nevada developed a
State Plan that focuses on the specific needs of the sage-grouse population within the
state while balancing relevant economic and rural concerns, and ensuring that federal
land remains available for multiple uses. The plan was developed through the Sagebrush
Ecosystem Council, and received input from all stakeholders including representatives
from local government, the general public, wildlife, mining, ranching, tribal nations,
energy, agriculture and conservation organizations.
The federal government is required by law to adopt a plan that allows for multiple uses
that is consistent with the State Plan where possible. Despite repeated efforts by state
and local officials, the federal government rejected major portions of the State Plan and
withdrew millions of acres from other uses.
“Those who live closest to the land are the best stewards of it,” said Congressman
Cresent Hardy. “This has been proven particularly true in Nevada, where locally driven
conservation efforts helped keep the sage-grouse off of the endangered species list. But
the federal government is actively choosing to ignore that reality. Washington should
leave land management to those who need it most and who know it best.”
Congressman Joe Heck added, “On the surface, the Obama Administration’s decision
not to list the sage-grouse as a threatened or endangered species may seem like a win
for Nevada. However, the land use plans BLM and the Forest Service intend to
implement have created a de facto listed designation by locking up millions of acres of
land in our state and across the West, greatly restricting our future economic
development. This is consistent with the Obama administration’s habit of disregarding
solutions to local challenges developed at the state level, and instead choosing to enact
its agenda through executive actions like these land-use plans. Nevadans came together
and developed a plan to protect the sage-grouse and its habitat while still allowing lands
to be used for economic development opportunities and recreation. Unfortunately that
plan was rejected by bureaucrats at the Department of the Interior who have no
connection to the land and won't have to deal with the consequences of their land-use
plan. Nevada should pursue this litigation to protect our state from the negative impacts
of yet another example of federal overreach.”
Statement by Senator Pete Goicoechea:
“Attorney General Adam Laxalt’s move to join Eureka and many other Northern Nevada
counties in challenging the BLM and U.S. Forest Service Sage-grouse Management
Plan sends a strong signal that this massive, federal land grab has devastating
implications for Nevada. Governor Sandoval’s Consistency Review letter and formal
appeal provide a strong platform for the attorney general to fight against the land use
prohibitions and restrictions in the federal plan which substantially interfere with the
state’s and Nevada counties’ Sage-grouse Conservation Plans. The state and county
plans focus on habitat conservation, ensure long-term socioeconomic stability to
preserve our way of life, and achieve the proper balance between the national interest
and state and local interests. The federal plan upsets this balance, does not provide
optimal sage-grouse conservation, and will cause widespread economic harm.”
Statement by Senator James Settelmeyer:
“The sage grouse issue has the potential to decimate the way of life in rural
communities by restricting access to the public’s lands for recreation or businesses like
mining, agriculture and hunting. The current trend by federal regulators needs to be
checked by sound scientific data. I support the attorney general in doing just that.”
Statement by Senator Don Gustavson:
“The Western states support land management that is not at the expense of Nevada’s
economic development or culture. The federal plan does not take our state’s
socioeconomic needs into account, and will be detrimental to Nevada’s development. I
applaud the attorney general’s understanding of our rural culture, and support his efforts
in this lawsuit.”
Statement by Assemblyman John Ellison:
“I appreciate the attorney general’s challenge to the federal conservation plan, which
will have a tremendous effect on Nevada’s cultural landscape and economy. Nevada’s
plan strikes a balance between conservation efforts and economic considerations, and
would offer this state much-needed stability.”
Statement by Assemblyman Jim Wheeler:
“The federal government’s top-down land management plan will have a significant
impact on the western states, especially Nevada. I am grateful to the attorney general
and his office for acting in the best interest of this state and its rural culture.”
Statement by Assemblyman Ira Hansen:
“The federal government’s disregard for Nevada’s proposed state conservation plan will
devastate our state’s economy. Nevada’s plan was carefully considered and backed by
scientific data, and should have been taken seriously by the federal government. I
commend the attorney general for taking a stand and protecting this state’s rights and
best interests.”
Statement by Washoe County Commissioner Jeanne Herman:
“I want to thank Attorney General Laxalt for joining this litigation challenging the BLM
and U.S. Forest Service Sage-grouse Land Management Plan. This Plan has already
interfered with Washoe County’s ability to acquire an 80-acre parcel in the North Valleys
needed for a new middle school, as well as a 40-acre parcel in Sparks identified for a
veterans’ cemetery. BLM’s maps incorrectly show these parcels as sage-grouse habitat
even though county maps clearly indicate they are not habitat and are suitable for
acquisition and development. Future conflicts are inevitable because public lands
surround Reno-Sparks suburban areas. The county must be able to acquire public
lands to support future community development objectives.”
Statement by Elko County Commissioner Demar Dahl:
“Attorney General Laxalt’s involvement with this litigation makes a bold statement that
the BLM and U.S. Forest Service Sage-grouse Management Plan is wrong for Nevada.
As ground zero for the Plan’s draconian land use restrictions and withdrawals, Elko
County applauds Attorney General Laxalt’s decision to join this litigation and help us
stop the agencies from placing over two million acres in Elko County off-limits to mining
and other uses. The Plan has already cost Elko County $500 million from a wind energy
project prohibited from being developed, and will cost at least $31 million annually in
lost agricultural productivity.”
Statement by Nevada Petroleum Marketers Association Executive Director Peter
Krueger:
“We are in full support of Attorney General Adam Laxalt's lawsuit in opposition to the
federal government's latest overreach into state affairs. The BLM's new land use plans
will close down all mining activity in Nevada, hurting not only the residents but all of the
mining companies. Our industry is important to Nevada's economic well-being and
employment.”
Statement by the Nevada Association of Counties (NACO):
“The Nevada Association of Counties appreciates Attorney General Adam Laxalt’s
decision to join the Counties’ lawsuit to challenge the BLM and U.S. Forest Service
Sage-grouse Land Management Plan. This Plan is unprecedented in its scope and is
impactful, as it is the first Land Management Plan to use multiple-use statutes to protect
a single species to the exclusion of other land uses. The Plan imposes unworkable
travel restrictions and buffer zones that interfere with Counties’ police powers and their
abilities to provide for public health and safety, as well as recreation, ranching,
renewable energy and mining on which these counties rely for funding and employment.
Further, the Plan withdraws 2.8 million acres from mining and other uses upon which
many county economies depend. We applaud the attorney general for his leadership in
helping us protest the federal government’s approach to managing sage grouse habitat-
-an approach that is not based on best available science, ignores local habitat
conservation and land use plans, and fails to include effective measures to reduce the
primary threats to sage-grouse habitat.”
Statement by Western Exploration, LLC Project Manager John Cleary:
“Western Exploration, LLC is very pleased that Attorney General Adam Laxalt is helping
us challenge the BLM and U.S. Forest Service Sage-grouse Land Management Plan.
This Plan threatens to destroy our Gravel Creek Project in Elko County, and the future
of our company because our mining claims are in a withdrawal area. Western
Exploration’s Gravel Creek Project is an exciting new discovery of a gold deposit that
shows real promise to become a viable mining project. The Plan puts at risk our $32
million investment in this project and the many jobs and state and local economic
benefits that would result from future development of a mine. We already have many
sage-grouse habitat protection measures in place that make development of this project
and sage-grouse conservation mutually compatible objectives, proving that the federal
land withdrawal is an extreme measure that is not necessary to protect sage-grouse.”
Statement by the Nevada Farm Bureau Federation:
The Nevada Farm Bureau Federation applauds Attorney General Adam Laxalt’s
decision to join the counties’ lawsuit challenging the BLM and US Forest Service Sage
Grouse Land Management Plan. The plan fails to adequately address the biggest
threats to the sage grouse population: wildfire, invasive species and conifer invasion,
and it unfairly regulates industries like ranching without sound science or reasonable
procedures. Restrictions on the ranching industry will affect timing of range
improvements, reduce livestock numbers on federal lands, eliminate or reduce actively
permitted grazing allotments, and impact the ability to renew future livestock permits.
The restrictions will also be counter-productive for the bird and its habitat. By eliminating
a multi-use concept, the focal areas and priority habitat will become exclusion areas,
which will decrease habitat restoration abilities by all industries and will increase the fuel
load and intensity of wildfires in those habitats. This heavily restrictive, hands-off plan
will result in the death of industry in Nevada and a steep decline in sage grouse
numbers. We applaud Attorney General Laxalt and the others on the lawsuit and call for
a local and state approach to ensure that the sage grouse population and Nevada
ranching can thrive.
Statement by Ninety-Six Ranch Manager Fred Stewart:
“We thank Attorney General Laxalt for joining the lawsuit to help us oppose the BLM
and U.S. Forest Service Sage-Grouse Land Management Plan. This Plan will effectively
put us, and others like us, out of business. It is truly unfortunate that the agencies chose
to ignore the strengths of the Nevada Sage-grouse Conservation Plan and Governor
Sandoval’s enormous efforts to work with them. As Nevada’s only sesquicentennial
ranch owned and operated by one family, we know best how to care for our land and
have a demonstrated track record of successfully protecting the sage-grouse habitat.
However, we must challenge the federal Plan, which is effectively a massive federal
land grab that substantially interferes with our ranching operation, will increase the
buildup of rangeland fuels and result in habitat destruction due to wildfires, and
Attorney General Adam Laxalt this morning filed suit against the federal government's sage grouse land-use plan, going against the wishes of Gov. Brian Sandoval, who has been negotiating to prevent a listing of the bird.
"By pursuing litigation now, the Attorney General is acting in his personal capacity and does not represent the State of Nevada, the Governor, or any state agencies," Sandoval said in an unusally sharp rebuke to the AG. (Full statement below)
The lawsuit, which you can see below, was filed in federal court. The AG, knowing of the governor's opposition, gathered statements from the entire GOP federal delegation, rural lawmakers and others, indicating he knows the political fight with the governor is relevant. (I have posted those below, too.)
No statement yet from the governor, but sources tell me he is not happy, raising (as it he did with Laxalt suing the feds over an immigration executive order) the issue of who the AG represents. Each side focuses on different statutes, with both believing they are on solid legal ground.
The governor cites NRS 228.180 ("consent of the governor") and the AG invokes the subsequently enacted NRS 228.190. The issue does differ from immigration in that the sage grouse is clearly a state issue and does affect public lands.
But would the governor push this into court to, once and for all, get a resolution of what the AG can do? That might be too much to ask for fans of political theater.
Here is the suit and the statements:
Nevada v Dept of Interior Am Complaint by Jon Ralston
Sandoval statement:
“If the Greater Sage-grouse had been listed as an endangered species, the consequences of that listing would have been permanent and inflexible. It would have given exclusive control of the management of the bird as well as the habitat to the federal government.
The "unwarranted" decision keeps management of the Greater Sage-grouse with the Nevada Department of Wildlife and protects Nevadans from having to engage in formal consultation with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) on how to manage private land as well as public.
The Governor has been proactively engaged on this issue from the beginning of his administration, and he has worked with all stakeholders to achieve a mutual goal: preventing the listing of the Greater Sage-grouse as an endangered species.
The federal government’s decision not to list the Greater Sage-grouse is a direct result of the State of Nevada's strategic collaboration with other western states through the Western Governors Association, as well as the Department of the Interior. Many Nevadans, including local industry stakeholders, sportsmen, conservationists and the general public, participated in this engagement strategy and they will continue to be involved moving forward.
Prematurely embroiling the State in costly litigation at this juncture threatens to compromise future collaborative efforts to implement the Nevada plan developed over the last four years by the Sagebrush Ecosystem Council. The Council is comprised of state and local leaders, alongside industry and conservation stakeholders, who have been working on this issue for years and will continue to be engaged in the Governor's response to the USFWS decision.
The Governor continues to have significant concerns about the 10 million acres -- 3 million of which are in Nevada -- that were immediately withdrawn from future mineral entry and multiple use by the Bureau of Land Management and will continue to engage Secretary Sally Jewell on this issue.
The Governor’s course of action is informed by more than a decade of experience on this issue and he believes it is premature to pursue litigation. The Governor believes that joining a lawsuit now will chill ongoing discussions between the state and Department of Interior, divert resources from the current strategy of engagement and could actually undermine the "not warranted” decision nearly every stakeholder has been working toward for over a decade. Once this collaborative phase of engagement is complete, further action will be considered.
By pursuing litigation now, the Attorney General is acting in his personal capacity and does not represent the State of Nevada, the Governor, or any state agencies.”----
----
Senator Dean Heller added, “As I said before, the final greater sage-grouse land-use
plans are not a win for Nevada—new restrictions on over sixteen million acres in our
state alone pose a threat to our western way of life. I support efforts to stop these
unnecessary regulations in their tracks and allow rural Nevada to thrive economically.”
Congressman Mark Amodei stated, “For 150 years, Nevadans have lived with decisions
made from thousands of miles away in Washington, D.C. Nobody else does it this way–
not at the local and state levels and not at the federal level for much of the nation. The
sage hen resource management plans are based on political maneuvers where the last
consideration seems to be multiple use in the West. The result is a nearly three million
acre exclusion zone because the Interior officials in D.C. do not have to live with their
rulings the way Northern Nevadans do. When the Department of the Interior completely
ignores input from Nevada’s Environmental Impact Statement, I believe no tool should
be left in the shed, and one of those tools is litigation.”
Before the federal government adopted its final plan last month, Nevada developed a
State Plan that focuses on the specific needs of the sage-grouse population within the
state while balancing relevant economic and rural concerns, and ensuring that federal
land remains available for multiple uses. The plan was developed through the Sagebrush
Ecosystem Council, and received input from all stakeholders including representatives
from local government, the general public, wildlife, mining, ranching, tribal nations,
energy, agriculture and conservation organizations.
The federal government is required by law to adopt a plan that allows for multiple uses
that is consistent with the State Plan where possible. Despite repeated efforts by state
and local officials, the federal government rejected major portions of the State Plan and
withdrew millions of acres from other uses.
“Those who live closest to the land are the best stewards of it,” said Congressman
Cresent Hardy. “This has been proven particularly true in Nevada, where locally driven
conservation efforts helped keep the sage-grouse off of the endangered species list. But
the federal government is actively choosing to ignore that reality. Washington should
leave land management to those who need it most and who know it best.”
Congressman Joe Heck added, “On the surface, the Obama Administration’s decision
not to list the sage-grouse as a threatened or endangered species may seem like a win
for Nevada. However, the land use plans BLM and the Forest Service intend to
implement have created a de facto listed designation by locking up millions of acres of
land in our state and across the West, greatly restricting our future economic
development. This is consistent with the Obama administration’s habit of disregarding
solutions to local challenges developed at the state level, and instead choosing to enact
its agenda through executive actions like these land-use plans. Nevadans came together
and developed a plan to protect the sage-grouse and its habitat while still allowing lands
to be used for economic development opportunities and recreation. Unfortunately that
plan was rejected by bureaucrats at the Department of the Interior who have no
connection to the land and won't have to deal with the consequences of their land-use
plan. Nevada should pursue this litigation to protect our state from the negative impacts
of yet another example of federal overreach.”
Statement by Senator Pete Goicoechea:
“Attorney General Adam Laxalt’s move to join Eureka and many other Northern Nevada
counties in challenging the BLM and U.S. Forest Service Sage-grouse Management
Plan sends a strong signal that this massive, federal land grab has devastating
implications for Nevada. Governor Sandoval’s Consistency Review letter and formal
appeal provide a strong platform for the attorney general to fight against the land use
prohibitions and restrictions in the federal plan which substantially interfere with the
state’s and Nevada counties’ Sage-grouse Conservation Plans. The state and county
plans focus on habitat conservation, ensure long-term socioeconomic stability to
preserve our way of life, and achieve the proper balance between the national interest
and state and local interests. The federal plan upsets this balance, does not provide
optimal sage-grouse conservation, and will cause widespread economic harm.”
Statement by Senator James Settelmeyer:
“The sage grouse issue has the potential to decimate the way of life in rural
communities by restricting access to the public’s lands for recreation or businesses like
mining, agriculture and hunting. The current trend by federal regulators needs to be
checked by sound scientific data. I support the attorney general in doing just that.”
Statement by Senator Don Gustavson:
“The Western states support land management that is not at the expense of Nevada’s
economic development or culture. The federal plan does not take our state’s
socioeconomic needs into account, and will be detrimental to Nevada’s development. I
applaud the attorney general’s understanding of our rural culture, and support his efforts
in this lawsuit.”
Statement by Assemblyman John Ellison:
“I appreciate the attorney general’s challenge to the federal conservation plan, which
will have a tremendous effect on Nevada’s cultural landscape and economy. Nevada’s
plan strikes a balance between conservation efforts and economic considerations, and
would offer this state much-needed stability.”
Statement by Assemblyman Jim Wheeler:
“The federal government’s top-down land management plan will have a significant
impact on the western states, especially Nevada. I am grateful to the attorney general
and his office for acting in the best interest of this state and its rural culture.”
Statement by Assemblyman Ira Hansen:
“The federal government’s disregard for Nevada’s proposed state conservation plan will
devastate our state’s economy. Nevada’s plan was carefully considered and backed by
scientific data, and should have been taken seriously by the federal government. I
commend the attorney general for taking a stand and protecting this state’s rights and
best interests.”
Statement by Washoe County Commissioner Jeanne Herman:
“I want to thank Attorney General Laxalt for joining this litigation challenging the BLM
and U.S. Forest Service Sage-grouse Land Management Plan. This Plan has already
interfered with Washoe County’s ability to acquire an 80-acre parcel in the North Valleys
needed for a new middle school, as well as a 40-acre parcel in Sparks identified for a
veterans’ cemetery. BLM’s maps incorrectly show these parcels as sage-grouse habitat
even though county maps clearly indicate they are not habitat and are suitable for
acquisition and development. Future conflicts are inevitable because public lands
surround Reno-Sparks suburban areas. The county must be able to acquire public
lands to support future community development objectives.”
Statement by Elko County Commissioner Demar Dahl:
“Attorney General Laxalt’s involvement with this litigation makes a bold statement that
the BLM and U.S. Forest Service Sage-grouse Management Plan is wrong for Nevada.
As ground zero for the Plan’s draconian land use restrictions and withdrawals, Elko
County applauds Attorney General Laxalt’s decision to join this litigation and help us
stop the agencies from placing over two million acres in Elko County off-limits to mining
and other uses. The Plan has already cost Elko County $500 million from a wind energy
project prohibited from being developed, and will cost at least $31 million annually in
lost agricultural productivity.”
Statement by Nevada Petroleum Marketers Association Executive Director Peter
Krueger:
“We are in full support of Attorney General Adam Laxalt's lawsuit in opposition to the
federal government's latest overreach into state affairs. The BLM's new land use plans
will close down all mining activity in Nevada, hurting not only the residents but all of the
mining companies. Our industry is important to Nevada's economic well-being and
employment.”
Statement by the Nevada Association of Counties (NACO):
“The Nevada Association of Counties appreciates Attorney General Adam Laxalt’s
decision to join the Counties’ lawsuit to challenge the BLM and U.S. Forest Service
Sage-grouse Land Management Plan. This Plan is unprecedented in its scope and is
impactful, as it is the first Land Management Plan to use multiple-use statutes to protect
a single species to the exclusion of other land uses. The Plan imposes unworkable
travel restrictions and buffer zones that interfere with Counties’ police powers and their
abilities to provide for public health and safety, as well as recreation, ranching,
renewable energy and mining on which these counties rely for funding and employment.
Further, the Plan withdraws 2.8 million acres from mining and other uses upon which
many county economies depend. We applaud the attorney general for his leadership in
helping us protest the federal government’s approach to managing sage grouse habitat-
-an approach that is not based on best available science, ignores local habitat
conservation and land use plans, and fails to include effective measures to reduce the
primary threats to sage-grouse habitat.”
Statement by Western Exploration, LLC Project Manager John Cleary:
“Western Exploration, LLC is very pleased that Attorney General Adam Laxalt is helping
us challenge the BLM and U.S. Forest Service Sage-grouse Land Management Plan.
This Plan threatens to destroy our Gravel Creek Project in Elko County, and the future
of our company because our mining claims are in a withdrawal area. Western
Exploration’s Gravel Creek Project is an exciting new discovery of a gold deposit that
shows real promise to become a viable mining project. The Plan puts at risk our $32
million investment in this project and the many jobs and state and local economic
benefits that would result from future development of a mine. We already have many
sage-grouse habitat protection measures in place that make development of this project
and sage-grouse conservation mutually compatible objectives, proving that the federal
land withdrawal is an extreme measure that is not necessary to protect sage-grouse.”
Statement by the Nevada Farm Bureau Federation:
The Nevada Farm Bureau Federation applauds Attorney General Adam Laxalt’s
decision to join the counties’ lawsuit challenging the BLM and US Forest Service Sage
Grouse Land Management Plan. The plan fails to adequately address the biggest
threats to the sage grouse population: wildfire, invasive species and conifer invasion,
and it unfairly regulates industries like ranching without sound science or reasonable
procedures. Restrictions on the ranching industry will affect timing of range
improvements, reduce livestock numbers on federal lands, eliminate or reduce actively
permitted grazing allotments, and impact the ability to renew future livestock permits.
The restrictions will also be counter-productive for the bird and its habitat. By eliminating
a multi-use concept, the focal areas and priority habitat will become exclusion areas,
which will decrease habitat restoration abilities by all industries and will increase the fuel
load and intensity of wildfires in those habitats. This heavily restrictive, hands-off plan
will result in the death of industry in Nevada and a steep decline in sage grouse
numbers. We applaud Attorney General Laxalt and the others on the lawsuit and call for
a local and state approach to ensure that the sage grouse population and Nevada
ranching can thrive.
Statement by Ninety-Six Ranch Manager Fred Stewart:
“We thank Attorney General Laxalt for joining the lawsuit to help us oppose the BLM
and U.S. Forest Service Sage-Grouse Land Management Plan. This Plan will effectively
put us, and others like us, out of business. It is truly unfortunate that the agencies chose
to ignore the strengths of the Nevada Sage-grouse Conservation Plan and Governor
Sandoval’s enormous efforts to work with them. As Nevada’s only sesquicentennial
ranch owned and operated by one family, we know best how to care for our land and
have a demonstrated track record of successfully protecting the sage-grouse habitat.
However, we must challenge the federal Plan, which is effectively a massive federal
land grab that substantially interferes with our ranching operation, will increase the
buildup of rangeland fuels and result in habitat destruction due to wildfires, and
threatens our family’s way of life.”
Comments: