Congress Overturns BLM Plans—Here’s What It Means For Hunters

The strategic selections single out regions with particularly dense natural resources. In Montana, the primary target is coal deposits in the Powder River Basin; in North Dakota, it’s the oil-rich “Bakken formation;” and in Alaska, the mineral-laden Brooks Range, which would require construction of the 200-mile-long “Ambler Road” to access.

Opening up these areas—and the unique congressional process that was used to do so—could impact hunters and anglers in some surprising ways, both short and long-term.

Immediately, the vote clears red tape for new energy leasing on BLM land—much of which was reopened by Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act in July. In Montana’s Powder River Basin, for instance, 1.1 million acres of mineral estate managed by the Department of Interior were made readily available for leasing in July, along with an additional 5.6 million acres of private, state, and other local land. Repealing the local RMP removes guardrail regulations designed to protect wildlife, water, and other natural resources on those lands.

For instance, the Montana RMP prohibited surface disturbances (coal mining) within a quarter mile of the Missouri and Yellowstone rivers to protect water quality and riparian habitats that elk and deer rely on. Importantly to hunters, it also restricted new mining activity in “developed and undeveloped recreation areas receiving concentrated public use”—essentially a mandate to consider hunters, anglers, hikers, and other users before issuing new leases.

Similarly, the North Dakota plan has special restrictions for critical sage grouse habitat, elk birthing areas, and a half-mile buffer around the Missouri River, Lake Oahe, and Lake Sakakawea to protect drinking water. In addition, there were statues in place to protect other, non-game species like bald and golden eagles and wetland areas—all important parts of the prairie ecosystem.

However, just because more land and more leases are available doesn’t mean they’ll be utilized. That was demonstrated last week, when the BLM held what was expected to be the largest coal sale in nearly a decade in Montana’s Powder River Basin. The sale received one bid from Navajo Transitional Energy for $186,000, or less than one cent per ton of coal. The bid was rejected because it fell below the “fair market value” set by the BLM. After the flop, the agency indefinitely postponed a similar lease sale that was previously scheduled in Wyoming for last week.

In Alaska, though, mining companies are poised to reel in the newfound slack from the overturned Central Yukon RMP. In conjunction, the Trump Administration also announced a partnership last week with Trilogy Metals—a company with plans to develop the Ambler Road and associated mining districts—and ordered that the necessary authorizations and permits be issued by the BLM, National Park Service, and U.S. Army Corps within 30 days. The move also makes the Department of War a 10% shareholder in Trilogy Metals. In short, it’s looking all but certain that the industrial-use road will be built. (For more on the Ambler Road and the impact it could have on wildlife and recreational hunters in this remote region, read this article.)

While the three regions impacted by the repealed RMPs might see varying degrees of new development, there’s another issue at stake: the mechanism by which Congress overturned the plans. Together, senators and representatives invoked the 1996 Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn new rules set by federal bureaus, or rules that were enacted at the end of a previous presidency (all three RMPs fell into the latter category).

The catch, though, is that RMPs have never technically been considered “rules,” according to Department of Interior officials in a letter earlier this year. The thick planning documents (about 300-500 pages) provide guiding regulations, but lack the congressional oversight of official “rules.” Treating the RMPs as such could call into question “the validity of implementation decisions issued in conformance with those plans,” according to the letter. Essentially, any resource plan across the country that has been issued by the BLM since 1996 could be up for debate in court. And along with them, all the associated oil and coal leases, grazing allotments, and access agreements.

To make the waters even murkier, the Congressional Review Act prohibits agencies from re-issuing rules similar to those that have been overturned. The clause is designed to prevent agencies from changing a few words and resubmitting a document, but in the case of RMPs, it could also wipe out thirty years of regulations—collateral damage in the process of clearing the books for energy leasing. Those regulations prohibiting development on the banks of the Missouri River in Montana and North Dakota, for instance, could be wiped clean.

In short, unless Congress chooses to selectively reintroduce regulations, the impacted areas will be, at best, in a realm of regulatory uncertainty. Experts expect the issue will be taken up in court.

Unfortunately, there are no cut-and-dry answers for sportsmen wondering about the future of their hunting spots. Though additional BLM land could be open to leasing, it still takes private companies, backed mostly with private equity, to sign the papers and fire up the equipment. With Trilogy Metals in Alaska being an exception, those companies appear somewhat reluctant to do so as a result of both consumer pressures and a Biden administration that squashed new coal and oil production. However, new government partnerships could be a powerful incentive for companies to pursue new leases.

Political issues aside, though, energy leasing could have some benefits for hunters. On the Montana and North Dakota oil fields, for example, antelope hunters on BLM land can take advantage of thousands of miles of dirt roads to scout and hunt for speedgoats. Mining companies also pay royalties to the states (usually in the range of 7 to 15% of revenue), some of which is used for road improvements and funneled into local conservation districts.

Of course, wildlife tends to pay the price for development of any kind—housing, wind and solar farms, mining, etc. In 2018, wildlife biologists conducted a study in eastern Montana and western North Dakota to assess the impacts of oil and gas development on mule deer. They found that low levels of development didn’t have much of an impact, but areas with high oil-pad and road densities resulted in a change in deer behavior and lower overall survival. In light of the repealed RMPs, considering research like this will be much harder for land managers to justify when considering new leases in the future.

The bottom line is that the next few years could see an uptick in development, especially in Alaska and on the open western prairies. As hunters, we would be wise to keep wildlife and conservation at the forefront of the conversation.