Proposed Energy Bills Would Limit Sportsmen’s Role on Public Lands

[Ben Lamb]

http://www.trcp.org/2018/06/07/proposed-energy-bills-limit-sportsmens-role-public-lands/

Sportsmen for Responsible Energy Development say draft legislation pushes ‘pay to have a say’ approach to permit decisions

A coalition of sportsmen’s groups are questioning draft legislation that would make it more difficult for sportsmen and women to comment on oil and gas lease sales on public land.

Under one of the draft bills discussed at an Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee hearing this week, the Interior Department could impose a “filing fee” for anyone submitting administrative protests of oil and gas lease sales, permit-to-drill applications, and issuance of right-of-way grants.

The “base filing fee” for protests of 10 pages or less would be $150, with “an additional assessment of $5” for each additional page, and “$10 per additional lease parcel,” according to the discussion draft. Lawmakers also considered three other discussion drafts that seek to fast-track permitting and curtail the process used to determine if a project should be “categorically excluded” from further environmental review and public comment.

Representatives of Sportsmen for Responsible Energy Development issued the following statements:

“It is already difficult for the American public to be thoughtfully involved in the decision-making processes that lead to energy development on public lands, even when these decisions put our best hunting and fishing areas at risk,” said Whit Fosburgh, president and CEO of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership. “Instead of further minimizing the input of hunters and anglers, we ask lawmakers to give sportsmen and women a better seat at the table and for more transparency in public land management decisions.”

“Most sportsmen and women believe we can balance responsible energy development with hunting, fishing and other uses of our public lands, but it takes thoughtful planning and consideration of all the resources,” says Aaron Kindle, senior manager of Western sporting campaigns for the National Wildlife Federation. “When it takes decades or longer for habitats to recover from irresponsible development, it’s more than reasonable to ask for prudent deliberation and appropriate safeguards. These bills are the opposite of that and should be rejected.”

“Sportsmen and women who value their public lands want a voice in the permitting process,” said Corey Fisher, senior policy director for the Sportsmen’s Conservation Project at Trout Unlimited.“Limiting public comment and creating a ‘pay to have a say’ system will affect the very people who know these lands best. We can have both responsible energy development and conservation, but this requires that everyone affected—landowners, state and local governments and public lands users—gets a fair shake and a say in the management of our public lands.”

The TRCP is encouraging sportsmen and women to defend our say in public land management by signing the Sportsmen’s Country petition. It’s not enough to keep public lands public. We must demand that they are thoughtfully managed for all the many ways Americans use these incredible resources.

 

[christopherwatkins]

It may sound silly, but I don’t understand the connection between energy bills and athletes ... How is this interconnected? I doubt that athletes will help me pay bills
By the way, I tried to negotiate with a supplier and partially pay bills for energy, but he was against it, and besides, he completely did not understand that now many people lost their jobs, including myself. As a result, I had to borrow money from a friend to pay bills after I found another supplier of this. I found information about several cool companies on usave.co.uk, and compared the prices there. So everyone solves only his own problems!

 

[Trial153]

He who pays the most gets to to say the most. I am against a flat fee for everyone. There should a a limited number of permits for comments allowed to be submitted. We can auction the off to highest bidder. That will add weight to the comments because the committees members will know that the comments coming from seroius stake holders who ponied up the cash to get their say. Democracy for those who can afford it the American way.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Stinking gubment red tape and over regulation....

 

[Deleted member 28227]

@Ben Lamb not sure how I fall on this one. On the one hand I think streamlining development is extremely problematic. On the other hand, I’ve been part of the process on the other side and it’s well... obnoxious. CBD blanket protests everything with nothing more substantive than “the BLM didn’t consider global warming within management plan.” Nothing ever happens with that argument other than an extra month or two on the process.

I’m not sure what the answer is...I don’t think this fixes the problems on either side.