fbpx

Legislature

A toxic legacy: When “temporary” becomes permanent

Posted on by Big Wind Carpenter

I grew up hearing stories. Not just bedtime stories, but also stories shared around the dinner table, passed down from my family. These are tales of mutated animals — creatures with extra legs or two heads. They told us about how the land had been taken, the water contaminated, and how a sickness struck the area.

These tales weren’t folklore. This was reality. Growing up in Arapahoe, Wyoming, under the shadow of the uranium industry, I witnessed firsthand the devastating consequences of nuclear waste. My community — those living on Goes in Lodge, Red Crow, and Little Shield — remember the story, one of forced displacement and a long-lasting environmental disaster.

For many, the uranium boom of the 1950s was a sign of progress for the country, but for the people of Arapahoe, it resulted in a toxic legacy. When uranium mining began in the Gas Hills, a local milling site was required to process the uranium ore. The land chosen for the mill site was on the Wind River Reservation and belonged to members of my family. The Bureau of Indian Affairs came to our families to buy the land for the federal-funded project. When they refused, BIA coerced some into signing documents, promising payments that never arrived. Those who resisted were threatened with arrest and forced off their own land. The mill site was then constructed and operational within a year’s time. Although the project was brief, its impact lingers today. The Susquehanna plant operated for only five years before closing, but when it shut down, it left behind a 70-acre unlined impoundment of tailings — approximately 1.8 million cubic yards of low-level radioactive waste.

The Department of Energy removed the tailings in the late 1980s, claiming the danger was eliminated. This was a false promise. Over time, rain and snowmelt washed radioactive materials deep into the ground, polluting the water supply. This created an underground uranium plume — a silent threat that continues to grow, expanding from 20 to 27 acres in recent years and inching closer to the Big Wind River. This experience has left a deep scar on our community. We have seen loved ones suffer and even lose their lives from illnesses linked to radiation exposure from using tainted well water.

Now, Wyoming faces a new threat: HB16, a bill that seeks to redefine “high-level radioactive waste” to exclude “spent nuclear fuel.” In doing so, it opens a dangerous loophole that would allow a “temporary” nuclear waste storage facility to be built in Wyoming.

This “temporary” label is a dangerous illusion. Is it temporary for five years? 50 years? 500 years? We’ve seen “temporary” become “permanent” before. And even if a facility is eventually decommissioned and the federal government finds a safe, permanent storage solution for the country’s nuclear waste, the environmental damage and consequences to Wyoming could be irreversible.

The risks are immense. Nuclear waste remains radioactive for millennia, and there’s no guarantee any storage facility, no matter how secure, can withstand the test of time. Transporting radioactive material across our state and through our communities is hazardous, with the potential for accidents that could devastate our land, water and well-being.

The stories of mutated animals, poisoned water, and sick family members, once shared around our dinner tables, should serve as a stark reminder. We cannot allow these stories to be the reality for another Wyoming neighborhood. In Arapahoe, this toxic legacy continues to haunt our community. We know the true cost of nuclear waste — the environmental devastation, the health risks, and the broken promises.

Wyoming, we must learn from the past. We have a responsibility to ensure that no other community faces the devastating consequences of nuclear waste. We must reject HB16 and protect our state from the dangers and false promises of “temporary” nuclear waste storage.

If you share our concerns about nuclear waste storage in Wyoming, we could use your help. Tell your legislators that you oppose nuclear dumps in Wyoming, and sign up to be notified with alerts as this bill moves through the legislature.

SIGN UP

Legislative Lowdown: Wyoming’s 68th Legislature begins this week!

Posted on by Alec Underwood

And … we’re off! The 2025 Wyoming Legislature kicks off this week, ushering in a jam-packed two months of debate, amendments, and votes on hundreds of bills impacting all aspects of life in Wyoming.

Many of these bills concern our lands, waters, wildlife, and climate. We’ll be following the action closely and keeping you updated every step of the way. Read on for an overview of what to expect from WOC, details about our upcoming Beers & Bills event, and more.

Updates on Important Bills

We’re keeping a close eye on bills related to public lands transfer, nuclear waste storage, limited mining operations, and rooftop solar — and those are just the topics we already know of. In the next several weeks, many more bills in other areas will be introduced.

For the best and most up-to-date information about the bills we’re keeping an eye on, visit the bill tracker on WOC’s legislative webpage. There you’ll also find resources for contacting legislators and much more.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR ACTION

Our staff on the ground in Cheyenne (wildlife program manager Meghan Riley, energy and climate policy director John Burrows, and myself) will share frequent updates and opportunities for you to take action. Keep an eye on our emails, and sign up for text messages from WOC, which we’ll reserve for the most urgent issues.

When you see action alerts from WOC, be ready to add your voice to the conversation — it truly makes a difference!

YOU’RE INVITED: BEERS & BILLS

Join us January 30 at Black Tooth Brewing in Cheyenne (or via a Zoom livestream!) for a lively panel discussion with experts on the session’s most important topics.

If you’re curious about what to expect during the session or want to get more involved, this is an event not to miss. Doors open at 5 p.m., and the panel discussion (and livestream) begins at 5:30. This event is free and open to the public, but your RSVP will help us plan.

Know who your legislators are, and how to contact them?

Sending your legislators a message or calling them ahead of votes on important bills is the best way to participate during the session. Find your legislators’ contact info here. When you do reach out, keep your messages simple, tell the story behind your stance, and personalize the subject line of your message if sending by email.

That’s a wrap for now, but we’ll be in touch with more soon. If you have any questions in the meantime, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Want to stay in the loop on important legislation and opportunities to take action? Sign up for our legislative emails!

SIGN UP

Why we’re concerned about nuclear waste storage in Wyoming: A deeper dive

Posted on by John Burrows

When the 2025 General Session kicks off next week, the debate over nuclear waste storage is set to become a hot (dare we say radioactive?) topic. In preparation, we wanted to share the latest information about the current proposal to store the country’s nuclear waste in Wyoming — and why we plan to oppose it.

Wyoming has stood firm against nuclear waste storage for decades, and for many good reasons. We’re concerned about the current proposal because the consequences of transporting and storing high-level radioactive waste in Wyoming would be significant, multi-generational, and perhaps even permanent.

Concerned about nuclear waste storage in Wyoming? Join our list to stay informed as this bill moves through the legislature.

SIGN UP FOR ALERTS

The draft bill, which has been received for introduction as House Bill 16 – Used nuclear fuel storage-amendments, could move quickly into the house Minerals Committee. If it does, we’ll need your voice to help stop it. So without further ado, let’s dive into the bill and our key reasons for opposing this effort to site nuclear waste in Wyoming.

  • This bill has moved forward with remarkably little opportunity for public engagement for such a significant and consequential issue. Initial public review of the draft bill wasn’t available until less than two weeks before its first and only discussion in the October 2024 Minerals Committee meeting. Opening the door to invite nuclear waste to Wyoming should not be a legislative afterthought and last-minute committee sponsored bill. We believe this is a topic that should require many discussions and seek robust public participation similar to what we saw in the early 1990s.
  • We need to be realistic that once nuclear waste is here temporarily, it will be here to stay. It has become clear to us based on the failings of federal policies, that a “temporary” facility would become a de facto permanent repository, as no legal, political, or financial mechanisms exist to ensure its removal. Despite decades of efforts from the federal government, the fact remains that there is still no permanent disposal solution for this waste. In fact, creating temporary storage for this waste in Wyoming could undermine the political will needed to pursue a safe permanent solution to this issue.
  • The history of nuclear waste storage in our country is fraught with broken promises by our federal government to both states and tribes. When we consider a half-century of missed timelines, changing scientific guidelines, and disregard of state and tribal sovereignty that has plagued the full supply chain of nuclear energy from cradle to grave, we can find very few reasons to trust the federal government that it has the best interest of Wyoming and the Wind River Reservation in mind. In 1992, this was one of Gov. Sullivan’s key points when rejecting further study of a Department of Energy proposed monitored retrievable nuclear storage site in Wyoming. In a letter, he stated,

“I am absolutely unpersuaded that Wyoming can rely on the assurances we receive from the federal government. Even granting the personal integrity and sincerity of the individuals currently speaking for the federal government, there can be no guarantees or even assurances that the federal government’s attitudes or policies will be the same one, five, ten or 50 years from now.”

  • A rush to designate Wyoming as the country’s nuclear waste storage capital could have both real and perceived consequences to other industries and the state’s broader economic diversification efforts. Numerous states have rejected advances by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to store nuclear waste, citing concerns around their reputation and damage to other economic sectors. In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbot raised concerns over a facility because of potential risks it could pose to the state’s oil and gas development in the Permian Basin. (The Nuclear Regulatory Commission permitted this over his objections anyway.) In other states such as Tennessee, New Mexico, and Nevada, studies have confirmed negative impacts to other economic sectors like agriculture, outdoor recreation, tourism, and resident property values. If Wyoming legislators want to take the title of being the country’s nuclear waste dump, we need to be clear-eyed about how this could negatively impact our reputation and other economic sectors.
  • The risks of transporting and storing nuclear waste from around the country amount to an unprecedented, unnecessary national experiment. Nuclear waste is currently stored safely at reactor sites, where it is generated, as required by federal law. This would also be true for any nuclear facility built in Wyoming. This is the right place for this waste to remain until a permanent solution can be found. It does not make sense to transport and move this hazardous material twice across thousands of miles of interstate highways, city and county roads, and railways.

If you share our concerns, we could use your help. Tell your legislators that you oppose nuclear dumps in Wyoming, and sign up here to be notified with alerts as this bill moves through the legislature.

Looking for more information? Check out our nuclear waste storage fact sheet, and don’t hesitate to reach out to us for a conversation.

Image: ShinRyu Forgers | Wikimedia Commons CC

INVITING NUCLEAR WASTE RISKS FEDERAL OVERREACH AND ENVIRONMENTAL HARM

Posted on by John Burrows

Some bad ideas refuse to die — and the recent legislative push to make Wyoming a temporary location for the nation’s high-level radioactive waste is definitely one of them.

Over the last three decades, the Wyoming Legislature has discussed rolling out the red carpet for nuclear waste several times. Now, that discussion promises to rear its head once again when the 2025 General Session begins in January.

Just as we have in the past, WOC opposes this latest proposal, which would make it easier to store high-level radioactive waste in Wyoming. It’s not a position we take lightly: As an independent, statewide organization, we understand the challenges associated with diversifying our economy and the need for solutions that address complex energy and environmental challenges, which are often at odds with one another.

As one of the most regulated materials known to humankind, inviting high-level nuclear waste to Wyoming would also invite an unprecedented level of federal oversight and regulation not seen before in Wyoming. For this reason and others discussed here, we strongly believe that inviting this waste to Wyoming would be a poor decision that could jeopardize our environment, communities, state sovereignty, and future hopes of broader economic diversification.

Concerned about nuclear waste storage in Wyoming? Join our list to stay informed as this bill moves through the legislature.

SIGN UP FOR ALERTS

Wyoming has held the line against nuclear waste storage for decades. Before we get to the current proposal, let’s take a look at some highlights from Wyoming’s long and proud history of rejecting nuclear waste dumps.

  • 1991: The U.S. Department of Energy proposes a “Monitored Retrievable Storage” nuclear waste facility in Wyoming. Gov. Mike Sullivan ended the project a year later, citing numerous concerns around transportation safety, the failures of the federal government as a trusted partner, and potential damage to other industries.
  • 1994: A University of Wyoming poll shows that more than 80 percent of residents opposed nuclear waste storage in Wyoming.
  • 1995: The Wyoming legislature passes laws regulating private and federal nuclear waste storage facilities. Importantly, they include safeguards to ensure Wyoming does not become a de facto permanent repository site.
  • 1998: Gov. Jim Geringer shuts down a proposal for a private nuclear waste storage facility.
  • 2010: The decades-long effort by the federal government to create a permanent nuclear disposal facility for high level nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain Nevada ended, mainly for political reasons.
  • 2019: The Wyoming legislature’s Spent Fuel Rods Subcommittee studies the revenue opportunity for waste storage. Because of restrictions and limited funds provided in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, they abandon the effort.

The current attempt to bring nuclear waste to Wyoming comes from a bill sponsored by the Joint Minerals Committee that changes the definition of “high-level nuclear waste” to exclude “spent nuclear fuel.” This definition change would create a loophole to circumvent our existing laws that require extensive environmental protections and requirements for public comment and legislative approval for the storage of high-level radioactive waste.

Call it what you like — but if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck. Legislators can change the definition of “high level nuclear waste,” but spent nuclear fuel is still high level nuclear waste, and “spent” does not equal safe. The definition change is out of sync with the definition held by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, setting the stage for conflict with the federal agency created to regulate high-level radioactive waste — do we really want to invite more uncertainty in management, jeopardizing land, water, wildlife and communities?

If you share our concerns, we could use your help. Tell your legislators that you oppose nuclear dumps in Wyoming, and sign up here to be notified with alerts as this bill moves through the legislature.

Looking for more information? Check out our nuclear waste storage fact sheet. Finally, don’t hesitate to reach out to us for a conversation.

Q&A: What’s going on with nuclear waste storage and mining permit exemptions?

Posted on by Max Owens

Lawmakers from around the state won’t flock to Cheyenne for the 2025 General Session until January. But many of their priorities are set well in advance, shaped during committee meetings during the months between sessions, or the interim.

It pays to keep a close eye on interim committee meetings. That’s because when the session begins, draft bills approved by interim committees have a much better shot of making it through the legislature and onto the governor’s desk, where they may be signed into law.

Wyoming Outdoor Council staff have been closely following several important pieces of draft legislation discussed in meetings of the Joint Minerals, Business, and Economic Development Committee. One draft bill contains a dangerous proposal to expand the types of minerals allowed to skirt the mining permit process — effectively removing public comment for these operations. The other establishes a process to allow storage of extremely hazardous radioactive waste within the state. If the bills become law, the implications for Wyoming’s lands, waters, and communities would be enormous.

WOC’s Carl Fisher, executive director, and Alec Underwood, program director, were in the room to provide testimony during the Minerals Committee’s early October meeting. Afterwards, we caught up with them to hear what happened with these important bills — and what that means as we race closer to the 2025 session.

At the highest level, what do these draft bills do, and why has WOC been following them?

AU: Let’s start with the nuclear waste storage bill, Used nuclear fuel storage – amendments. This summer, lawmakers proposed expanding Wyoming’s economic portfolio by allowing storage of the nation’s high-level radioactive waste, which is the byproduct of nuclear energy. Longstanding Wyoming policy prohibits storage of radioactive waste — but the draft bill changes this, and establishes a process to allow it to be stored. The bill also redefines “high-level radioactive waste” by excluding “used nuclear fuel” or “spent fuel,” which conflicts with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s definition. This legislation intentionally creates confusion around an issue of significant importance to our environment, wildlife, and public health.

The committee also considered two bills related to Limited Mining Operations, or LMOs. LMOs are small mining operations, covering 15 acres or less. Historically they’ve been used to source materials like sand and gravel for improving roads for local landowners. Unfortunately, through the bill called Limited mining operations – amendments, some legislators and industry representatives want to include other non-coal minerals in the LMO category. This would be a major shift in how those minerals are regulated. Currently, minerals like gold, copper, and rare earth minerals require a permitting process that includes public input and rigorous environmental review. This is due to their potential to harm water and landscapes, as they can produce harmful byproducts like acid-forming substances.

The second LMO-related draft bill would adjust bonding amounts, which are the up-front costs paid by operators for cleanup after mining operations have concluded. Unlike the first LMO bill discussed, we supported this bill — as did industry groups such as the Mining Association.

You were there to testify on these bills. What did you feel was most important for you to communicate to the committee?

AU: When it comes to nuclear waste storage, Wyoming has a long history of defending our state from dangerous materials whose impacts will linger literally for tens of thousands of years. We also felt the process around this bill had been hurried — again, not good when we’re talking about such negative and long-lasting impacts. Finally, we wanted to correct some of the disinformation that has sprouted up around this issue: Not only have legislators downplayed the very real dangers of exposure to high-level waste, they have incorrectly suggested that Wind River Tribes were supportive of storage, and have made misleading statements about how long waste would be stored.

For LMOs, we felt it was important to highlight the many citizens we’ve heard from who are frustrated by the lack of public engagement allowed under the current LMO process. Exempting new mineral types would make a bad problem worse, by effectively removing the public comment opportunities for operations with potentially significant negative impacts to public health and the environment. The bottom line: Landowners adjacent to these operations, and the public, should have a say in matters impacting their communities.

What actually happened with these bills at the meeting, and what does that mean for the future of these issues?

AU: The committee passed all of the bills we’re discussing, which means they will be “committee-sponsored bills” in the 2025 General Session. Traditionally, committee-sponsored bills are well-vetted bills that have been through an exhaustive process, with rigorous debate and public input. Because of this status, they have a much higher likelihood of being adopted as law.

The process around the nuclear waste storage bill was rushed, only coming up at the last committee hearing of the interim. It was not carefully vetted, and conflicts with federal law and the very definition of high-level radioactive waste. This is not good public policy, nor is it a good outcome for Wyoming. The committee also advanced both the LMO bonding bill and the bill to exempt new minerals under the LMO category. Unfortunately, as several committee members pointed out, these bills conflict with each other — because one is really a subset of the other. These bills will likely be combined during the session.

CF: It’s also important to note that this meeting is just one step in the process. While committee members vet bills and make policy recommendations during the interim, it is only during the 2025 General Session that these laws may become law in Wyoming — by passing both the Senate and House of Representatives, then earning the governor’s signature. If we wish to see a change of course from where these proposed policies now stand, it’s going to take the dogged, factual, and respectful engagement of Wyoming citizens. This, after all, is your government, and those at the dais are your representatives.

What was the atmosphere in the room like around these issues?

CF: Legislative hearings, whether during an interim committee meeting or the general session, are interesting. Often, who is saying things — rather than what is being said — carries the most weight. The audience ebbs and flows as the agenda changes, but at any given time, the number of citizens in the room is usually less than you can count on one hand — which is to say the vast majority of people who are there are paid to be there.

At this meeting, there were lobbyists and staffers from industry groups, plus leadership from state agencies and programs. While citizens impacted by nuclear waste and the LMO provisions were there to testify, testimony by industry representatives, Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality staff, and former Wyoming Legislature leadership appeared to carry the most weight. Still, there was good input from other citizens and groups sharing their concerns around these policies — and when citizens do show up to testify, it certainly changes the tone and the consideration of legislators.

This isn’t the first time Wyoming lawmakers have had the discussion around nuclear waste storage. How did this meeting differ from past discussions? 

CF: Wyoming has had legislation on the books for decades blocking the storage of high-level radioactive waste within the state’s boundaries. As for this meeting, within the span of an hour-long discussion and public testimony, decades of policy was turned completely on its head. Which is to say, the conversation to create the policy had a lot more depth to it than the committee deciding to reverse course and invite the nation to regard Wyoming as its nuclear wasteland. The committee also stated they believed Wyomingites were in support of what they were doing, which simply doesn’t track from an historical perspective.

For LMOs, committee members discussed this same bill in July, but voted against moving it forward. Why was the outcome different this time around?

AU: In July, After WOC supporters and other organizations like the Casper Mountain Preservation Alliance turned out to oppose the bill, the committee put the brakes on advancing the bill and resolved to improve it. Though the LMO amendments bill would still effectively remove public comment opportunities by including new minerals to be exempt from permitting, the bill was improved in many ways, including increased bonding rates and requirements for restoration after operations are complete. Perhaps committee members felt that these changes were sufficient to move the bill forward. However, we maintain that mining operations for hardrock minerals, even if they are small, should not be exempt from permitting, environmental review, and public engagement. 

Ahead of this meeting, WOC called on Wyomingites to engage their legislators and speak out against these bills. What’s the potential impact of citizen engagement on these issues — now and in the future?

CF: As we talked about earlier, there is certainly a power imbalance at play. Industry lobbyists’ testimony carries much more weight than members of the public. Even more imbalancing is the fact that the lobbyist is paid to be there, while members of the public must leave work and family to testify. That said, every comment truly makes a difference. While these measures passed this committee, they certainly didn’t pass unanimously.

Much work still needs to be done between now and the 2025 General Session in January. There’s an election between now and then, meaning that the next time these bills come up, the legislature will have a new composition. This comes with its own set of challenges, and opportunities. But at the end of the day, citizen voices will continue to humanize these issues. Members of the public don’t speak up because they’re paid to do so; they speak up because they care — and that represents something truly invaluable.

VOICE YOUR SUPPORT FOR WIND RIVER MULE DEER MIGRATION

Posted on by Meghan Riley

Wyoming is renowned for its wide-ranging ungulates and boasts the most extensive migration corridors left in the Lower 48. However, maintaining connectivity in these corridors requires maps of animals’ seasonal movements — it’s darn near impossible to protect critical habitat if you don’t know where it is!

Thankfully, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department is now making moves to formally recognize and share maps for the Upper Wind River Mule Deer Migration Corridor.

These incredible mule deer migrate through some of our wildest places, including the Wind River Basin, the Gros Ventre, Absarokas, and Grand Teton National Park. But development on private lands is one of the chief threats to this migration, according to WGFD biologists’ threat evaluation.

To ensure Upper Wind River Mule Deer have the connected habitat they need to survive and thrive, we need a map of their corridor to direct conservation efforts where they’ll do the most good. If you’d like to see this and other migration corridors mapped, the agency needs to hear from you!

Write a comment in support of mapping this migration

We know from past experience that public support matters when it comes to migration corridors. It is up to us to show the state that Wyomingites overwhelmingly support the sharing of data and mapping of migration corridors.

Your comments can be brief and speak to your connection to Wyoming’s mule deer — the more personal, the better! You may also want to touch on the suggested points below.

SUPPORT WIND RIVER MULE DEER: COMMENT NOW

Deadline: August 9, 2024 at 5 p.m.

Suggested talking points:

  • Support for habitat mapping and data sharing: We can’t hope to protect habitat for deer that migrate through the Upper Wind River Valley without having a clear picture of where their migration corridor is. I am grateful to our biologists for mapping this migration and fully support this migration corridor being formally recognized and shared with the public.
  • In favor of funding for habitat improvements: Given the pressures these deer face on private land in the Dubois area, I recommend that Wyoming Game and Fish Department ask that this migration corridor be prioritized for funding through the USDA’s Migratory Big Game Initiative. The more we can do to fund habitat improvements in this migration corridor, the better.
  • Enthusiasm for mapping this corridor and others: It is heartening to see new migration corridors being mapped and shared with the public. In addition to formally recognizing the Upper Wind River Mule Deer Migration Corridor, I strongly encourage biologists to do the same for other migrations around the state.*

*Many migrations would benefit from being formally recognized, including Wyoming Range mule deer, Carter Mountain pronghorn, Shirley Basin pronghorn, Clarks Fork mule deer, and Upper Shoshone mule deer. If you have a personal connection to any of these, feel free to include that in your comment!

Thank you once again for voicing your support for the Upper Wind River Mule Deer Migration Corridor — and for your care and stewardship of our phenomenal wildlife!

ROOFTOP SOLAR IS UNDER ATTACK (YET AGAIN)

Posted on by Era Aranow

A bad bill that tried to end net metering in the 2023 legislative session is back — and we need your help to stop it.

Over the years, you’ve told the Senate, the Corporations Committee, and the Travel Committee how important net metering is to Wyomingites. Those efforts paid off, but now we need you to speak up again. This time, it’s the Minerals Committee that needs to be told how strongly Wyoming supports net metering.

Having the freedom to use our roofs, property, businesses, and homes to generate the electricity that helps power our lives is a policy that makes sense for Wyoming.

But the bill “Small customer electricity generation” would end net metering and negatively impact current and future rooftop solar customers, businesses, and employees.

This bill would eliminate jobs, limit the energy choices Wyomingites currently have to produce their own power, and harm long-term investments. Even its discussion (yet again!) creates significant uncertainty for customers and installers in Wyoming.

STOP ANOTHER ATTACK ON NET METERING

Deadline: July 30, 2024

On July 31 in Casper, the representatives and senators of the Joint Minerals Committee will vote on whether or not to end net metering. We need to send the message to the committee that net metering is a policy that works for Wyoming, and that we should not favor utility monopolies and their rising rates over private investment.

Please help us keep net metering alive by telling the Minerals Committee to vote ‘NO’ on “Small customer electricity generation.” If it’s not broken, there’s no need to fix it!

You don’t need to have rooftop solar to make a difference. Some of the most effective testimony and comments we’ve seen on this issue are from folks without rooftop solar but who would like to see more of it.

Thank you for once again taking action and showing your support for net metering. Together, we’ll stop this bad bill, just as we’ve done in years past.

Looking for more information and points to include in your message to the committee? See our fact sheet for net metering.

STOP THE EXPANSION OF LIMITED MINING OPERATIONS TO NEW MINERAL TYPES!

Posted on by Era Aranow

Your voice makes a difference! Will you urge the Joint Minerals Committee to protect public input on mines and ensure industry is not exempted from important health and environmental protections? Find suggested talking points to help you write your message below.

MESSAGE THE COMMITTEE

Imagine this: Your new neighbor is a gaping 15-acre mine, bringing clouds of dust, unrelenting noise, and near-constant truck traffic to your area. Your peace and quiet are disrupted, your property values decrease, and, worst of all, there’s almost nothing you can do about it.

It may be hard to believe, but this nightmare scenario is entirely possible under the current process for Limited Mining Operations. LMOs are operations for mining inert materials like sand and gravel that are 15 acres or less, or approximately the size of 12 football fields.

LMOs are exempt from the mine permit process and do not require public comment, which means that a dusty, noisy mine could become your new neighbor without you having a chance to voice your concerns. While many LMOs help ranchers maintain roads on their own property, over the years we’ve seen more and more commercial operators using this permit exemption close to residential areas.

And here’s where it gets worse: Legislators are now proposing to expand these permit exemptions to include almost all mineral types. This increases the likelihood of a commercial LMO near you, and elevates the risk of water pollution and other hazards.

This proposed legislation takes an existing problem and makes it potentially far more damaging. But you can help today by asking the Joint Minerals Committee to oppose the expansion of LMOs to new mineral types.

ACT NOW – MESSAGE THE COMMITTEE

Deadline: July 29, 2024

You may have heard about the proposed gravel pit in Casper, an example that demonstrates how even existing types of LMOs can significantly impact the quality of life in an area. The last thing we should be doing is expanding these exemptions. But if this bill moves forward, that’s exactly what would happen.

This bill would expand the LMO category from sand and gravel to include gold, lithium, rare earth metals, and others. If these operations are exempted from a full mine permit, there would be less oversight from the Department of Environmental Quality and no public comment requirements for minerals with known risks.

Some even see this expansion as a means to allow large mines to get started on a small scale before their full permitting process is complete.

On July 30 in Casper, the representatives and senators of the Joint Minerals Committee will vote on the expansion of LMOs. We need to send the message to the committee that Wyomingites like you and me value public participation in these processes, and that we should not exempt industry from important health, safety, and environmental protections for these new minerals.

How large is a 15-acre mine?

Looking for more information and points to include in your message to the committee? See our fact sheet for Limited Mining Operations.

Thank you for reaching out to your legislators. Together, we can keep this from getting worse!

The 2024 Conservation Vote Report is here!

Posted on by Era Aranow

It’s here — the 2024 Conservation Vote Report!

Each year, following the state legislative session, the Wyoming Outdoor Council publishes a report describing conservation-related legislation, as well as how state legislators voted on key conservation bills. In this report, we also share broader themes that emerged to provide insight into the general tone of the session from a conservation perspective.

The Outdoor Council supports accountable and transparent governance as an important part of protecting Wyoming’s environment and quality of life. We believe that informed and engaged citizens matter and that conservation is not a partisan issue — it is a unifying Wyoming value. That’s why we’re committed to providing educational materials like this vote report to help you, the citizens of this ecologically and culturally diverse state, engage in the legislative process throughout the year.

GET THE 2024 VOTE REPORT

This past session, we tracked 74 bills related to issues such as wildlife, energy, clean air and water, state revenue, carbon capture and sequestration, state lands, public land access, recreation, and economic diversification. We testified before committees, sent notes to the floor, and worked with diverse partners to support, oppose, or modify these bills.

While the 2024 Budget Session is behind us, legislative committees are already meeting around the state to draft bills for the 2025 General Session. Reflecting on the last session can help us celebrate successes, anticipate what may be coming, and reach out to legislators about important issues outside of session, when they are most available.

Building proactive relationships and having ongoing conversations with those who have been elected to represent you is the best way to realize our shared mission and goals. As such, we encourage you to reach out to your legislators, learn more about the specifics of their votes, and share what is important to you.

Your voice and your vote matter. We hope that you will exercise both of them this year.

Post-session wrap-up and what’s next

Posted on by Era Aranow

When I last wrote to you on March 11, the House and the Senate had just adjourned. As of this past Saturday, all bills that made it to the governor’s desk have been signed or vetoed. We’re now in that brief, beautiful pause between the end of the budget session and the start of interim meetings. Thank you for following along and making your voice heard. We hope you continue to do so!

When we began this frenetic budget session in mid-February, 366 bills and resolutions were numbered for introduction. 125 of these made it through both chambers of the legislature and onto the governor’s desk. Of those, Gov. Mark Gordon vetoed eight, signed 109 into law, and let four become law without his signature. In the coming weeks and months, agencies will create the rules to implement these new laws. Most will go into effect on July 1, 2024, though some will go into effect sooner.

Below you’ll find a bill-to-law infographic that shows where some key conservation bills ended up. We’ve also listed some of the bills that have been signed into law or died since we last wrote. (To find out more about bills we’ve covered previously, read past Legislative Lowdowns at our State Legislature webpage.)

Click to expand.


Themes from this year’s session included pushing back on the feds, concerns about utility rates and reliability, and reducing regulations, among others. Later this year, we’ll share our Conservation Vote Report, which will dive deeper into these themes and others — keep an eye out for it.

KEY BILLS THAT ARE NOW LAW

SF01, HB01 | 2025-2026 Biennial Budget

While passing a budget was the session’s primary goal, this year it was hardly a sure thing. The budget process was contentious, with late nights of discussion and over 300 amendments! Ultimately, a compromise budget (landing nearly halfway between what the House and Senate proposed) was passed by a slim margin in the final hours.

The budget was then sent to Gov. Gordon, who made line-item vetoes before signing it this weekend. The Legislative Service Office reported spending at $11.3 billion, with $3.4 billion coming from the General Fund (tax dollars) and the rest coming from the federal government and various state savings accounts.

Among the provisions that made it through were funding to staff state agencies that influence conservation; money to fight invasive grasses; and money to support both the state and local governments in finding and securing grants. 

The sale of the Kelly Parcel directly to the federal government remains in the budget, but so do stipulations on its sale, the most concerning of which ties the sale to specific actions in the Rock Springs Resource Management Plan. We sincerely hope that the Governor can exercise his authority to ensure the sale goes through unencumbered by these stipulations.

HB36 | Natural Resource Protection Act | Opposed

This “fight the feds” bill attempts to give the governor the power to decide if federal laws or regulations regarding land management do not comply with federal laws — a role that, constitutionally, belongs to the federal courts. If the governor declares a federal action to be unlawful, the bill would prohibit state employees or funds from being used to enforce it.

SF114 | Contractor license-reciprocal recognition requirements | Supported

This bill requires local governments to grant reciprocity to contractor licenses and sets standards for these licenses. There are a number of federal grant programs that could benefit Wyoming’s residents and workforce if we had the contractor capacity. For examples, the Home Energy Rebates programs could bring over $70 million in to support Wyoming residents and businesses with upgrades that lower utility bills and increase efficiency. 

KEY BILLS THAT ARE NOW DEAD

SF13 | Federal land use plans-legal actions authorized | Opposed

This “fight the feds” bill would have provided the state legislature $75 million in funds to sue the federal government in order to “protect the rights, powers and interests of the legislature.” Gov. Gordon vetoed this bill because it “represents a clear attempt to cross, blur, and trample the line of separation between our equal, but separate, branches of government” and because “it is not fiscally conservative.” Read the full veto letter here.

SF44  | Limited Mining Operations-Amendments | Oppose

This bill would have expanded the types of small mines that do not require a full mine permit under section 401 of the Environmental Quality Act. This would mean less oversight from the Department of Environmental Quality and no public comment requirements on new Limited Mining Operations that could now include gold, lithium, and rare earth metals in addition to the already exempted sand and gravel. Gov. Gordon vetoed this bill because its final version limited the state’s ability to generate revenue and gave state decision-making to the counties. You can read the full veto letter here. We anticipate that expanding Limited Mining Operations will be a focus of the Minerals committee during the interim. 

For the final status of bills WOC has been following that are now law, click here. For the final status of bills WOC has been following that died, click here.

WHERE ARE WE HEADED?

On April 1, the Management Council will meet to assign topics to interim committees who will meet several times across the state throughout the year to learn about these topics and consider bills for the 2025 general session. These committee meetings are an excellent time to have your voice heard by testifying in person or via Zoom. You can find meeting times and agendas, sign up to testify, and watch meetings live on YouTube all on the legislative calendar.

Voting is an important conservation tool. Later in the year, we’ll share how legislators voted on conservation-related issues, which may help inform your decisions at the ballot box.

In the meantime, make sure you’re registered to vote. Wyoming law requires County Clerks purge their voter rolls every two years. If you did not vote in the 2022 election, you have been purged from the roles and need to re-register. 

Many Wyoming races will be decided in the primary on August 20. If you are already registered to vote, you have until May 15 to change your party affiliation for the primary election. You can find key election-related dates here and information on how to register or re-register here.

Though we will pause weekly Legislative Lowdowns until next year, we will continue to keep you updates as issues arise. Please don’t hesitate to reach out with questions about this session or how to get involved in the interim. I look forward to meeting as many of you as possible as I am out and about across the state supporting conservation at interim meetings. 

Finally, I just want to say thank you for speaking up for conservation this session. Your calls, emails, and texts to legislators made a difference. Additionally, your responses to my weekly emails buoyed my spirits during a challenging session and helped to keep us all going. Thank you for the support!

P.S. If you’ve appreciated our legislative coverage and would like to keep this vital work going through the interim, consider making a gift to the Outdoor Council. Your contributions enable year-round advocacy for all that we treasure about Wyoming.