By Richard Garrett, Jr. story filed Feb 27, 8 a.m.

Your voice for conservation at the Wyoming State Legislature

The external costs of fossil fuels, funding conservation, protecting landowners, and a renewal of the Sagebrush Rebellion?

Even as the 2013 Wyoming legislative session winds down, there are still issues in play and several bills that await Gov. Matt Mead’s signature.

But this seems a good time to look back at the last seven weeks and see what has been accomplished, what issues weren’t resolved, reflect on a couple of bad bills, and take a peek ahead to see what the interim is going to bring.

During this session there were 423 bills introduced (260 House bills, 163 Senate files) and six resolutions.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council closely tracked 17 bills on the House side and 14 on the Senate side. In order to be passed, a bill has to survive 11 different major checkpoints along the way and a few that are hidden between the cracks.

I attended committee meetings every day of the session, listened to floor debates, and spent a lot of time in the lobbies on both sides of the capitol. I had meetings with agency officials as well as folks in Governor Mead’s administration. Add to that the receptions (an average of two per night) and it all makes for a jam-packed couple of months in Cheyenne.

Here are some highlights from 2013.

Senate File 142 (SF 142) – Utility rate making

This bill, despite its sponsorship by one of our favorite legislators, Senator Cale Case, was one that we opposed and for good reason.

It would have put into question the Public Service Commission’s authority to structure electricity rates in ways that encourage the use of renewable energy in Wyoming.

Our argument on behalf of our members was that rates should favorably reflect the further deployment of renewable energy. Federal rules clearly allow utility commissions to use a variety of methodologies to determine what are called “avoided costs” and how those costs are factored into rates. Using these guidelines, the Wyoming PSC has ruled in favor of policies, rules, and rates based on several motivations, including ratepayer neutrality, least cost, and accuracy, or to provide incentives for development of renewables.

In the House Corporations Committee, we argued that the bill would have provided a disincentive for renewable energy and would thus have negative consequences for our efforts to combat climate change.

Others argued that the bill was poorly worded and was intended to solve a unique circumstance on behalf of a select group of landowners (people who don’t want wind turbines in their viewsheds). Senator Case said that the intent of the bill was to make sure that least-cost resources would always be favored by the PSC.

It is worthwhile to note that existing infrastructure and facilities will almost always seem to provide a lower cost of goods and services to the consumer. Our thought is that the challenges imposed on our way of life by the externalities of this older infrastructure are seldom if ever calculated in a way that would make it more obvious to the end user of the risks of low-cost energy.

One of those risks (and hidden costs) became apparent late last year when the people (and especially women and children) of the state of Wyoming were warned against consuming too much fish due to elevated levels of mercury found in many species.

If we take into account this potential challenge to one of our state’s many assets perhaps the cost of traditional energy generation would not be so attractive to consumers or decision-makers.

The bill was defeated in committee.

House Bill (HB 81) – Large project funding

For seven years, each generation of the Legislature has wisely supported the Wyoming Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust and its proposed large projects (projects whose cost exceeds $200,000).

For the last two years, many of those projects have included conservation easements on agricultural land that the Trust board has found to be crucial for habitat, species, and open space.

The Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust—which was created by the Wyoming Legislature in 2005 “to enhance and conserve wildlife habitat and natural resource values throughout the state”—is one of this state’s key institutions as its mission ultimately benefits all residents. Any project designed to improve wildlife habitat or natural resource values is eligible for funding from the Trust.

The Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust is an independent state agency governed by a nine-member citizen board appointed by the Governor.

This year’s Legislature tried in a variety of ways to eliminate, scale-back, or restrict the state’s investment in conservation easements. House Bill 81 was the authorizing bill, but the Trust was attacked in no fewer than three bills by amendments that would have significantly altered its mission and diminished any substantive future contribution by the state for protecting sage-grouse.

Together with a diverse array of conservation groups (and in particular The Nature Conservancy), agricultural groups such as the Wyoming Stockgrowers Association and the Stockgrowers Land Trust, prominent individuals such as Sara Flitner, labor representatives from the AFL-CIO, and many others) we were successful in not only getting House Bill 81 approved but also in defeating the various attempts to alter the future course of the Trust.

House Bill 40 (HB 40) and Senate File 118 (SF 118) – Eminent domain

Infrastructure development in Wyoming (including wind developments, transmission lines, road construction, and pipeline construction) can have significant impacts on wildlife, habitat, viewscapes, and personal property rights.

The state has historically extended the right to condemn property to utilities and more recently has extended that right to some developers. This right is, in the minds of many, inappropriately given and too frequently applied. House Bill 40 extends a moratorium on the wind energy industry’s ability to claim eminent domain for wind energy collector lines. Senate File 118 gives landowners an opportunity to force a developer to more correctly value the land condemned for development.

As of this writing, the bill is headed to a conference committee to reconcile differences between the house and senate versions. Assuming concurrence is reached, it will be up to the governor to sign or veto the bill. House Bill 40 has already been approved and signed into law by the governor.

House Bill 16 (HB 16) and Senate File 136 (SF 136) – Seismic exploration

When House Bill 16 died in committee on the House side, Senator Bruce Burns introduced a similar bill in the Senate (SF 136). That bill is due for a concurrence meeting and the governor’s decision.

Essentially this bill protects landowners from “entrepreneurial” seismic operations, a particularly contentious issue in Laramie and Converse counties with the rush to develop oil and gas on private lands.

Many landowners have had to endure multiple incursions on their property by seismic exploration companies with little or no recourse if damage to buildings, roads, fields, fences, livestock, or infrastructure happens as a consequence of that exploration.

Senate File 136 forces companies to have a contractual relationship with the mineral estate holder and to post a bond at the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. The Powder River Basin Resource Council did a lot of heavy lifting on this issue and deserves much credit for getting it off of life support and (apparently) on it way to the governor. Kudos to Shannon Anderson, Jill Morrison, Kevin Lind, and Bill Bensel of the PRBRC.

House Bill 260 – Game and fish license fees

I’ve written previously about how this bill came to be introduced and its subsequent failure to win approval on the House floor. The bill would have secured the Wyoming Game and Fish Department’s funding resources for an additional two years.

But without this authorization to increase license fees, the Game and Fish Department anticipates significant shortfalls in programs and cutbacks.

This will be an interim topic for the Travel, Wildlife, and Recreation committee. One of their meetings is tentatively scheduled to be in Guernsey, WY and it might coincide with the Wyoming Outdoor Council’s (also tentatively planned) board/staff meeting (to which all members are invited). We will keep readers of this blog informed on the details.

House Bill 228 (HB 228) – Federal land study

This bill, which some have referred to as the Sagebrush Rebellion redux, would use $33,000 of taxpayer money to fund a study to see how Wyoming can take over public lands in the state. Somehow this bill made it through 10 of the 11 checkpoints mentioned above.

The only checkpoint left is its stop at the governor’s desk. The Wyoming attorney general told the Legislature that the effort is unconstitutional. We made the case that the bill is also duplicative of other studies that the state already has underway and has undertaken in years past. We hope this is persuasive to the governor. I am grateful to Barry Bruns for participating as a citizen in our effort to influence this bill.

Senate File 157 – Hydraulic fracturing disclosure requirements

Senator Floyd Esquibel introduced this bill, which failed on a 5-0 vote in the senate minerals committee. The good news is that the governor’s staff has committed to rulemaking at the Wyoming Oil and Gas Commission and/or at the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality to accomplish many of the bill’s provisions—and most particularly baseline testing of groundwater prior to resource development.

This will be one of the most important interim topics on the Wyoming Outdoor Council’s agenda and you can be sure that you will hear more on this in the weeks and months to come. If state agencies fail to act, Senator Esquibel and Senator Chris Rothfuss have strongly indicated that this issue will be a legislative priority in 2014.

Senate File 55 (SF 55) – Energy education initiative

This bill, largely supported by industry, ended up being significantly amended by the Senate, and again in the House. We argued that since industry had characterized itself as a “vested interest” in the state’s public education system that the initiative would be biased.

Thankfully, that argument was heard and the subsequent amendments made the bill much less ominous than when it was introduced. While materials about energy development will be made available to teachers, it will not be required that they use or access those materials. Additionally, a conservation component will be included in the materials.

We are grateful to Edith Cook, a resident of Cheyenne, for pointing the way to the availability of these resources.

House Bill 63 (HB 63) – State primacy on greenhouse gas

As it did in the 2012 session, the Wyoming Legislature is trying to assert its authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

The keys to the bill are two—first, the state can be no more restrictive than the federal government on emissions and, second, the state has indicated to stakeholders that it will issue permits on a timelier basis than the federal government would.

As was the case in 2012, it is somewhat remarkable that the state acknowledges the existence of greenhouse gases. In testimony to the Senate Minerals Committee I maintained that the state should consider with aspiration the economic and competitive advantages that stronger environmental regulations might bring. Here is the Casper Star Tribune article on the bill.

Senate File 162 (SF 162) – Authorized taking of an eagle

This bill, perhaps misunderstood by the media, is one that would bring Wyoming law into conformance with federal law that allows the limited taking of golden eagles in areas where they are depredating sheep.

While some believe it has implications on the Wind River Indian Reservation, the bill was not sponsored as a way to resolve that ongoing issue.

Senate File 66, Senate File 20 – Conservation easements and state acquisition of land

These bills either through their primary purpose or as amended would have unreasonably restricted state investments in conservation easements.

Without repeating what I wrote above (on HB 81), it is imperative that the state put “skin in the game” in the effort to protect habitat, and avoid the consequence of further declines in Wyoming’s sage-grouse population.

Senate File 76 (SF 76) – Bighorn sheep relocation

This bill requires the relocation or removal of the bighorn sheep population in the Medicine Bow National Forest if a lawsuit successfully challenges grazing permits there.

The only amendment to the bill was one we asked for—that the removal not be undertaken until all judicial proceedings have been completed. The law will expire in 2015.

It is definitely bad practice and a bad precedent for the Legislature to micro-manage the Wyoming Game and Fish Department. Gov. Mead has signed this bill.

Senate File 6 and Senate File 7 – Office of consumer advocate

These bills, both sponsored by Senator Case, clarify and strengthen the office of consumer advocacy at the state Public Service Commission.

It will underscore the advocate’s role in rate hearings and require the office to intervene effectively in rate cases. While we supported the bills, I also asked the corporations committees to consider as an interim topic an Office of Environmental Advocacy, which would be engaged in rate cases.

My thought is that utilities, regulators, and consumers are often driven to a least-cost alternative to energy generation (which means fossil fuels) without any regard for the externalities of that generation (human health implications, mercury levels in lakes, etc.). I will continue to advocate this proposal to the joint interim committees.

As noted, a few (actually several) bills have yet to make their final and 11^th step to becoming laws. Clearly we will be asking Gov. Mead to veto House Bill 228—it’s very hard to see from my perspective how he could justify its approval. In addition to wasting taxpayer money, the bill paves the way for the renewal of the Sagebrush Rebellion in Wyoming—is that where the governor wants to go? I hope not.

Any questions or comments?  I am always available via email or phone and welcome your ideas and support.

I am truly grateful that the Wyoming Outdoor Council members and board have given me the opportunity to represent them at the Legislature.

If you would like more information, you can find the specific bills at the legislative website or be in touch with me. Thank you!

Contact: Richard Garrett, richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org

Other posts you might want to see:

Capitol blog: Game and Fish funding bill died, but that’s not the end of the story

Capitol blog: Let’s keep politics out of wildlife management

AP: Wyo’s Gov to Pursue Required Groundwater Testing Prior to Drilling

Column: Intransigence on climate pollution risks much, including Wyoming jobs

The 2013 Wild & Scenic Film Festival, April 25 and 26 in Riverton and Lander

Each night the Wild and Scenic Film Festival will take us to some of the most beautiful places on the planet, introducing us to wildlife, adventurers, and activists from around the world—including Wyoming and the Rocky Mountain Region.

WHEN AND WHERE:

• 6:30–9 p.m., April 25, 2013, The Little Theater at CWC, Riverton, WY.
• 6:30–9 p.m., April 26, 2013, The Monarch Room, Pronghorn Lodge, Lander, WY

Starting April 1: Get your advanced purchased tickets in Lander at Wild Iris Mountain Sports at 166 Main Street or the Wyoming Outdoor Council at 262 Lincoln Street.

TICKETS:
Advanced purchase: Adults $8; 12 yrs and under $4 At the door: Adults $10; 12 yrs and under $5 Students $5 (includes a one-year membership)

FREE ADMISSION with a first time Wyoming Outdoor Council membership, $15

Click here for a printable PDF of the Wild & Scenic Film Festival posters.

The Casper Star-Tribune editorial board has made a strong argument for why Wyoming should require baseline water testing prior to drilling.

Here is an excerpt:

Baseline testing would’ve gone a long way to avoiding the mess still underway in Pavillion, as several federal agencies have struggled to prove or disprove that nearby gas drilling harmed residents’ well water. It would’ve avoided the mess of the resignation of Tom Doll as state oil and gas supervisor, after he said those concerned about water contamination in the area were motivated by greed.

If Mead decides to require baseline tests, he would cement Wyoming’s position as role model for other states considering such regulation. While Colorado beat Wyoming to the punch on baseline testing, Wyoming should reclaim the crown. Wyoming shouldn’t miss a chance to prove other states should look to us for common-sense regulations of the oil and gas industry.

 Click here to read the entire piece.

The case for baseline water testing

For more information on the case for baseline testing, click here or on the image to the right to read the Spring 2012 Frontline.

“We believe that when legislators, regulators, and decision makers have had a chance to consider the facts and to hear the arguments for and against required baseline water testing in Wyoming, they’ll conclude, as we have, that it makes sense,” said Steve Jones, the Council’s watershed protection program attorney. “It’s a matter of public health and public trust and it’s the best path forward.”

Other posts you might want to see:

Wyoming official’s remarks prove baseline testing is needed

Proposed Wyoming gas field would be one of the largest on the planet

Why We’re Seeking Fracking Chemical Information

Groups seek better disclosure of fracking chemicals in Wyoming

The Outdoor Industry Association released figures today quantifying the economic impact of outdoor recreation in all 50 states, with a separate report for each state that tallies direct spending, jobs, salaries and tax revenue.

Among the findings for Wyoming: Outdoor recreation generates $4.5 billion annually in consumer spending, $1.4 billion in wages and salaries and $300 million in state and local tax revenue.

Click here or on the image to the right to see the Wyoming-specific report.

This data reaffirms that outdoor recreation is an important driver of state economies, supporting jobs, businesses and communities.

Click here or on the map below to find all of the state-specific reports.

Other posts you might want to see:

Capitol blog: Game and Fish funding bill died, but that’s not the end of the story

Column: Intransigence on climate pollution risks much, including Wyoming jobs

Proposed Wyoming gas field would be one of the largest on the planet

By Richard Garrett, Jr.

Your voice for conservation at the Wyoming State Legislature

State continues to seek primacy over greenhouse gas regulation, among other things

Here’s the latest rundown of the bills we are working on (often with others) to improve outcomes at the Legislature:

One of the most important bills of the session

House Bill 81 (HB 81), Wyoming Wildlife and
Natural Resource Trust — Large Projects

This is one of the most important bills of the session. If it succeeds, it will reaffirm the Legislature’s seven-year commitment to funding projects that help to protect the Greater sage-grouse and wildlife habitat.

Many legislators have complained that these kinds of projects close land in perpetuity from development, direct state resources to private landowners and conservation groups (land trusts), or are restrictive of mineral development.

The fact is, however, that the 19 large projects in this bill represent the only “skin-in-the-game” that Wyoming can provide to demonstrate to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that it is proactively working to balance conservation and resource development.

The projects in this bill are protective of our state’s wildlife and its habitat, and yet are hardly restrictive of the state’s major economic driver — mineral development.

To date, less than .15 percent of the state’s 63 million acres have been placed in conservation easements under the Wyoming Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust. There is no evidence that suggests that oil and gas development is jeopardized by the trust.

One good bill died, but the idea will be back

House Bill 260 (HB 260), Game &Fish Funding – license increases

When the interim-approved funding bill for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department was defeated early in the session, we worked successfully to have a substitute bill introduced and we were able to get it out of the revenue committee on a 5-4 vote.

Unfortunately, the budget-cutting mood of the State House doomed the bill and it was soundly defeated in that larger body.

Nevertheless, we found that a lot of legislators want to support a reliable funding mechanism for wildlife management in Wyoming. All of them have encouraged us to more fully engage in the upcoming spring/summer/fall interim to accomplish this.

The Game and Fish Department is currently held hostage by its funding model and those that would control it. We have to find a way to break that stranglehold and yet keep politics out of wildlife management.

As for why we succeeded in committee, it was in no small part due to a personal letter that Tom Bell wrote to the committee. Representative Patrick Goggles was particularly mindful of Tom’s message and acknowledged that to the committee.

One bill seems misunderstood

Senate File 162 (SF 162), Authorized taking of an eagle

This bill, perhaps misunderstood by the media, is one that would bring Wyoming law into conformance with federal law, which allows the limited taking of golden eagles in areas where they are depredating sheep.

While some believe it has implications on the Wind River Indian reservation, the bill was not sponsored as a way to resolve that ongoing issue.

 State once again acknowledges the existence
of greenhouse gases

House Bill 63 (HB 63), State primacy on greenhouse gas

As it did in the 2012 session, the Wyoming Legislature is trying to assert its authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

The keys to the bill are two — first the state can be no more restrictive than the federal government on emissions and second, the state has indicated to stakeholders that it will issue permits on a timelier basis than the federal government.

As was the case in 2012, it is somewhat remarkable that the state acknowledges the existence of greenhouse gases.

In testimony to the senate Minerals committee I maintained that the state should consider the economic and competitive advantages that stronger environmental regulations might bring. Here is the Casper Star Tribune article on the bill.

For more on this topic in general, check out Laurie Milford’s column, “Intransigence on climate pollution risks much, including Wyoming jobs.”

Seeking clarification on utilities bill

Senate File 142 (SF 142), Utilities – rate making

This is a seemingly simple bill, but one that might have potentially significant consequences for wind energy in Wyoming. I have written to the governor’s office, the bill’s sponsor, and others as follows seeking clarification on the bill and its intent:

As per our conversation, I would like to direct your attention to SF 142 (link is to the engrossed version which includes an amendment adopted on third reading in the Senate). While I am not an expert on avoided costs, FERC, and PURPA I do feel confident when I advocate on behalf of our members in favor of the deployment of renewable energy particularly if it is sited correctly and that energy is used in Wyoming to robustly supplement outdated generation facilities.

There is a great deal of uncertainty about this bill’s intent and its consequences, both immediate and long-term. From my point of view, if the bill is ultimately contrary to our advocacy objectives and our mission, it is one that our members will oppose.

Attached (and linked here) is what I believe to be an informative and highly detailed white paper regarding PURPA and avoided costs. In conclusion, its author, Carolyn Elefant, says:

“States use a variety of methodologies to determine avoided costs. State policymakers appear to have chosen policies based on several motivations, including ratepayer neutrality, least cost, and accuracy, or to provide incentives for development of certain types of renewables.”

It appears that the bill is intended is to direct regulators (specifically the PSC) toward specific methodologies and away from any that might be motivated to underpin the development of wind energy. Meanwhile, Governor Mead and many legislators have identified a balanced approach to energy development in the state as one objective of the state energy strategy. Inasmuch as that is a goal that we are all committed to achieving, I believe SF 142 might run somewhat contrary to achieving that goal.

I think it is worthwhile to note that existing infrastructure and facilities will almost always seem to provide a lower cost of goods and services to the consumer. My thought is that the challenges imposed on our way of life by the externalities of that use are seldom if ever calculated in a way that would make it more obvious to the end user of the risks of low cost energy. One of those risks (and hidden costs) became apparent late last year when the people (and especially women and children) of the state of Wyoming were warned against consuming too much fish due to elevated levels of mercury found in many species. If we take into account this potential challenge to one of our state’s many assets perhaps the cost of traditional energy generation would not be so attractive to consumers or decision-makers.

As always, I invite our members to share any information — with me or with legislators — that they think useful to this discussion.

Here is a list of some other topics and bills that we are following (more on these in my next report):

Eminent Domain

Energy education initiative

Bighorn sheep relocation

Office of Consumer Advocate (2 bills)

Municipal solid waste landfills

Conservation districts, special expertise

Select natural resource policy committee

Innocent landowner

Transfer of federal lands study

If you would like more information, you can find the specific bills at the legislative website or be in touch with me. Thank you!

Contact: Richard Garrett, richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org

Other posts you might want to see:

Capitol blog: Let’s keep politics out of wildlife management

AP: Wyo’s Gov to Pursue Required Groundwater Testing Prior to Drilling

Column: Intransigence on climate pollution risks much, including Wyoming jobs

Check out Laurie Milford’s column on climate change denial in Wyoming, which was published in the Casper Star-Tribune.

It’s well worth the read.

Here is an excerpt:

Let me also speak plainly about the long-term implications of our state’s leaders’ stubbornness when it comes to admitting our role in climate change. This intransigence will leave the state at a competitive disadvantage and leave our children with even fewer job choices than they now have. I maintain that a steadfast commitment to science and good education is the best way for states and nations to remain competitive in the long run. It’s also the best way for us to give our kids reason to stay and work in Wyoming. Business as usual when it comes to fossil fuels is not acceptable if we care about our state.

 . . . if Wyoming really wants to get serious about protecting good jobs in this state for the long term, our elected officials need to get serious about investing in the research and technology that the human race will need to use in the near future when we agree as an international community to constrain our greenhouse gas emissions.

The fact of the matter is that our coal industry is at a crossroads. We need to either (1) figure out how to use coal for energy that releases no, or significantly less, CO2 into the atmosphere or (2) drop coal combustion altogether and figure out how to produce cleaner energy in other ways. Moreover, the rest of the United States and other countries may well decide to put a price on coal that diminishes its demand, leaving the Wyoming coal industry without buyers.

Click here to read the entire piece.

Other posts you might want to see:

Proposed Wyoming gas field would be one of the largest on the planet

Why We’re Seeking Fracking Chemical Information

Groups seek better disclosure of fracking chemicals in Wyoming

Wyoming Gov. Matt Mead is looking to implement a groundwater testing requirement, prior to drilling, by the end of this year.

Click here to read the story by Mead Gruver of the Associated Press.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council is encouraged by this news. It’s an important step in a long process, and one we’ve advocated for years.

The case for baseline water testing

For more information on the case for baseline testing, click here or on the image to the right to read the Spring 2012 Frontline.

“We believe that when legislators, regulators, and decision makers have had a chance to consider the facts and to hear the arguments for and against required baseline water testing in Wyoming, they’ll conclude, as we have, that it makes sense,” said Steve Jones, the Council’s watershed protection program attorney. “It’s a matter of public health and public trust and it’s the best path forward.”

Other posts you might want to see:

Wyoming official’s remarks prove baseline testing is needed

Proposed Wyoming gas field would be one of the largest on the planet

Why We’re Seeking Fracking Chemical Information

Groups seek better disclosure of fracking chemicals in Wyoming

Let’s speak up before March 6 to help protect residents, workers, and the environment

By Bruce Pendery

The Bureau of Land Management is analyzing a mammoth, 9,000-well natural gas drilling project proposed in south-central Wyoming near Wamsutter.

Called the Continental Divide-Creston project, it would be one of the largest single natural gas field developments in the United States.

We are asking for your help to reduce the environmental impacts of this project as much as possible. Please send your comments to the BLM by March 6! (See below)

Our biggest concern—and what we are focusing on the most—is making sure this project is done right relative to air quality. This development needs to be conducted in such a way that residents and workers are safe and can breathe clean air, and that the air, land, and wildlife, stays healthy in the future.

This Proposed Project Will Be Bigger than Rhode Island

The BLM would allow BP America Production Company and other operators to drill up to 8,950 new wells. The project area would include 1.1 million acres—or more than 1,600 square miles—much of which would be in what’s known as the “railroad checkerboard.” And much of this proposed project would involve “infill” of existing natural gas fields where 4,400 wells have already been drilled.

The Wyoming Outdoor Council does not oppose development in this area outright because it is not located in one our “heritage landscapes” (iconic areas where we believe any energy development is inappropriate) and it is largely an “infill” project where there is already a lot of existing disturbance.

However, although much of this area is far from pristine, we need to do everything we can to ensure that companies “do it right” at every stage of this project’s development. Therefore, we believe the BLM should require careful, effective, environmentally protective measures as conditions to the development in order to protect residents, workers, air quality, and remaining wildlife habitats.

How to Make a Difference

The BLM has prepared a draft environmental analysis, called an “environmental impact statement” for this project. It considers five alternative development options but it does not specify a “preferred alternative.”

The BLM is now accepting comments on this draft analysis. The comment deadline is March 6. It would be very helpful if you could offer your input on the draft. This could help improve the project, and help ensure that we “do it right” in the face of this massive level of development.

Here are some issues you might consider raising in your comments:

• While much of this project is in the “railroad checkerboard”—where the BLM’s ability to protect the environment is reduced because of the intervening privately owned sections of land—the project area extends into large, contiguous blocks of public land roughly 20 miles north and south of Interstate 80. You can ask the BLM to provide enhanced protection for these contiguous areas of public lands.
• The Directional Drilling alternative is the most environmentally protective of the current alternatives, so please ask the BLM to adopt it. This alternative would be even more effective if the BLM were to set a limit on the number of well pads that can be developed.
• Directional Drilling has become increasingly common and popular with industry with the horizontal “reach” of these wells becoming ever greater. Having multiple wells drilled from a single well pad with directional drilling to access gas resources at great distances can greatly reduce environmental impacts. You can ask the BLM to maximize the use of directional drilling, and to require the greatest “reach” possible.

Where to Send Comments:

You can submit your comments to the BLM by March 6 by e-mail: Continental_Divide_Creston_WYMail@blm.gov, or fax: 307-328-4224, or by regular mail: Bureau of Land Management, Rawlins Field Office, P.O. Box 2407, Rawlins, WY 82301.

You can view the draft environmental impact statement here: http://www.blm.gov/wy/st/en/field_offices/Rawlins.html.

For more information contact Bruce Pendery at the Wyoming Outdoor Council, 435-752-2111, or bruce@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org.

By Richard Garrett, Jr.

Your voice for conservation at the Wyoming State Legislature

Wildlife management and habitat protection are hot topics

The 62^nd session of the Wyoming State Legislature just began its (not quite) third week today. And as of the end of last week, there is good news to report.

This year, the Wyoming Outdoor Council is following and engaging in several bills, all of which have implications for our members.

In the course of the last several days, we’ve fought hard on legislation—sometimes for a given bill’s passage and sometimes against—to make sure the state’s lawmakers don’t compromise the Wyoming Outdoor Council’s mission.

With state income flattening, the legislative mood is to reduce costs, cut budgets, restrict programs, and establish legislative oversight in ways not seen in many years.

Should we mix politics with wildlife management?

One example of an attempt at increased legislative oversight is House Bill 78 (HB 78) that, as authored, would have inserted politics into wildlife management by the Game and Fish Department for the first time since 1936.

By working with the sponsor of the bill and others we were successful in amending the proposed legislation to require that the Wyoming Game and Fish Department submit its budget for legislative review—but not approval.

This is an important distinction. The bill, as originally written, would have required legislative approval of not only the Game and Fish Department’s budget but also that of the Department of Transportation and the University of Wyoming.

We still believe the bill reaches too far but absent its outright defeat, this compromise is a step back from the wrong direction.

Important wildlife habitat projects move forward

A bigger victory came on Friday, January 18, in the House Travel, Recreation, and Wildlife committee.

After a full week of intense advocacy and by once again working with a diverse group of other stakeholders, we won a hard-fought 6-3 vote to approve as written House Bill 81 (HB 81), which, if it wins final approval, will endorse 19 large projects, including 14 conservation easements, for the Wyoming Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust.

The conservation easements, all of which are within core sage-grouse habitat, are recognized by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as important indicators that the state is working hard to protect the sage-grouse.

Here are some reasons that we offered to legislators to support the bill:

• Habitat restoration/improvement projects and conservation easements play a key role in protecting Wyoming’s economy and our way of life.
• Seven generations of the Wyoming Legislature have supported the Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust (it was, in fact, the Wyoming Legislature that created the trust).
• The conservation easements and projects included in this year’s bill were fully funded by the 2012 legislature.
• There are 63 million acres in our state (about half of which is publicly owned land); aggregated, the easements included in House Bill 81 represent key habitat but would exist on less than half of one percent of the state’s total land mass.
• By investing in the easements, the federal government has signaled its support for the state’s initiative for protecting habitat, which is critical for a variety of wildlife including mule deer, moose, and sage grouse.
• Others have invested in easements too (most notably industry and land trusts).  This means that the state has leveraged its investment by an average ratio of about 6:1.

It will be important in the days to come to continue to support this bill as it journeys through the legislative process. Its next stop is in the Appropriations Committee, some members of which might try to revoke the funding mechanism that was passed in 2012.

Assuming it clears that hurdle, the bill will be heard by the full House. At that point it will be crucial for Wyoming Outdoor Council members to let their representative know how we feel about this bill.

Here is how you can locate your representative.

Game and Fish Department funding

This week will be a very important one for us, too. There are two bills in particular to which we direct your attention—House Bill 136 (HB 136) and House Bill 137 (HB 137). These bills, if approved, will provide the Wyoming Game and Fish Department with the authority its needs to insure it has the resources necessary to achieve its mission and obligation to effectively manage Wyoming’s wildlife.

Reception on Friday

Lastly,  on Friday, January 25 from 5-7 p.m. the Wyoming Outdoor Council board will host its annual legislative reception at the Plains Hotel in Cheyenne.

Everyone is welcome, so I hope readers will mark the date on their calendars and take advantage of this unique opportunity to meet, mingle, and talk with the Wyoming Outdoor Council board and with state legislators and decision makers.

As always, I want to thank our Outdoor Council members! Its my privilege to advocate on behalf of you and Wyoming’s environment at the State Legislature.

Contact: Richard Garrett, energy and legislative advocate, richard@wyomingoutdoorcouncil.org