|
Above is an image, courtesy of Rocky Mountain Wild, that overlays the proposed oil and gas leasing sites with designated Colorado Roadless Areas (dark green) and elk production (calving) areas (pink). The entire area is in CPW-indicated elk summer range. We reported earlier that the Forest Service is considering leasing “10 parcels of Routt National Forest to the BLM for a potential future oil and gas lease sale and subsequent exploration and development.” The parcels total 13,850 acres, and the project details and public comment can be found here. We noted that there were 355 comments in the Reading Room at the time, with a vast majority being opposed to the project. While leasing to the BLM may seem circuitous, this is an artifact that the BLM owns the subsurface mineral rights, including oil and gas. There’s a myriad of complications to this proposal, including whether, once leased to the BLM, the Forest Service could even enforce any of its protective surface land stipulations on the BLM, who is given freer reign under HR-1 and new BLM rules. The parcels are in some of the most beautiful and biodiverse areas of Routt National Forest. They are home to sage grouse, sharp-tailed grouse, sandhill cranes, and the birthing areas for the second largest elk herd in the world- the Bears Ears Elk Herd. As we reported in our July newsletter, we decided to show off what special locations these are by partnering with EcoFlight to deliver narrated tours of the area for the media and our federal delegation. Three days later U.S. Representative Neguse and U.S. Senators Bennet and Hickenlooper wrote a joint letter to the Forest Service opposing the lease. We have no doubt the BLM will proceed with the leases if the Forest Service approves. Therefore, the gating function of whether the oil and gas leases go forward rests entirely at the doorstep of the Forest Service. The decision maker is identified as District Ranger Michael Woodbridge. We respectfully ask that he deny the proposed leases. We are very concerned that instead of denying or pausing the proposed leases, the Forest Service will fast track them. District Ranger Woodbridge stated recently at the Routt Recreation and Conservation Roundtable that he is treating this as an “administrative item” instead of an environmental evaluation measuring the impact of his decision to consent to leasing on habitat, recreation, and other forest values. When asked if recently-announced BLM policies that enable the BLM to ignore stipulations included ignoring the Colorado Roadless Rule, Woodbridge replied that he didn’t know. The Colorado Roadless Rule is a bedrock of protection for 4.2 million acres of Forest Service land in Colorado. Eight of the 10 parcels include Colorado Roadless Areas. It seems astonishing that the Forest Service would consider leasing to another entity without knowing whether they will comply with this federal rule. Furthermore, treating this as merely an administrative decision is an attempt to skirt important forest management issues at the doorstep of the Forest Service, as the custodian of these sensitive public lands. The Forest Service’s environmental analysis avoids confrontation of the impacts of leasing by labeling them as either (1) not caused by the Forest Service’s consent; (2) previously considered via analyses conducted in the 1990s; or (3) presenting resource concerns that should be deferred to the project-specific stage as the land is leased. Really? The Forest Service is chartered with the protection of these resources and the District Ranger, as the decision maker, can approve or withhold its consent to surface leasing on all or any parts of this area. At the bare minimum, the Forest Service should withhold consent to leasing on the eight parcels that include Colorado Roadless Areas. While the project page states that the estimated decision date is next June, Mr. Woodbridge stated he expects to issue the decision this month, September, fast-tracking the project. He also stated that he expects an expedited objection process. Once more, we respectfully ask that Mr. Woodbridge do the right thing for our public lands, and the wildlife and community members who use them, by withholding Forest Service consent to these leases.
|