RENAISSANCE MEETS REALITY

Posted on February 2, 2026February 2, 2026 by Max Owens

Will advanced nuclear technology usher in a clean energy utopia — or deepen existing problems?

LATE ON A WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON in a nondescript conference room in Casper, the people filling rows of plastic chairs lean forward in their seats. Reporters lining the back wall raise cameras and audio recorders, straining to catch every word. The air hums with tension as one after another, members of the public speak into a microphone and address the lawmakers seated before them.

The people have traveled here, to the July 2025 meeting of the Wyoming Joint Minerals, Business, and Economic Development Committee, to voice their opinions on a draft bill that would help clear the way for a first-of-its-kind nuclear manufacturing facility near Bar Nunn. The proposed facility would build “microreactors,” which are portable nuclear reactors — sort of like a shipping container-sized diesel generator, except with nuclear fuel — that would aim to provide reliable power for military installations, hospitals, and remote towns.

Murmurs of approval and frustration rise from the crowd as nearly 40 people share everything from heartfelt pleas for caution to hopeful portraits of economic prosperity. At times the tension boils over. “You’re shoving it through!” one commenter shouts, amplifying what several others have declared: that a speedy approval of the measure would disregard the concerns of community members. The chairman’s gavel cracks over the woman’s shouts. The proceedings continue.

Finally, long after afternoon has turned to evening, the last comment has been heard. What happens next is something of an anticlimax: The legislators agree to table the bill — effectively suspending it from consideration, while leaving the door open to discuss the topic at a future meeting.

But they never get the chance. In October, amid the regulatory uncertainty and public outcry, Radiant Nuclear, the company behind the project, pulled the plug on its plans in Wyoming, announcing that it would build its facility in Tennessee instead.

Some people breathed a sigh of relief. Others lamented what they saw as a missed opportunity. But for everyone, this is just the beginning of a much bigger conversation.

The proposed Bar Nunn facility may be off the table, but interest in advanced nuclear technologies is only growing, and industry has its eyes on Wyoming. In 2025 the Trump administration issued four executive orders to expedite licensing and build nuclear power generation capacity. And Wyoming’s favorable tax environment, plentiful open land, and skilled energy workforce make it attractive for nuclear development. Which is why, advocates say, it’s time for Wyoming to make a comprehensive plan governing nuclear energy.

The problem is, there are still a lot of unknowns when it comes to advanced nuclear energy. The technologies on the horizon are largely untested, and important questions remain about their safety and affordability. These unknowns could have serious consequences for Wyoming, for generations to come. And policymakers need to carefully consider the consequences as they weigh how much — and what kind of — nuclear development to allow in the state.

INTEREST IN NUCLEAR ENERGY IS SURGING in part because it’s seen as a way to meet rising energy demands, driven largely by the growth of AI and data centers, without contributing to climate change.

Traditional nuclear energy, with its high price tags, burdensome waste, and painful history of catastrophic meltdowns, has had a rocky past. But the advanced designs coming to the fore these days, proponents say, could power America’s future in an affordable and safe way, while also curbing fossil fuel emissions.

“Advanced nuclear technology” can mean a lot of things. But what’s garnering the most attention from both industry and the public are “small modular reactors,” or SMRs.

Proposed SMR designs vary wildly in their fuel, cooling systems, and power output. The most basic SMRs are scaled-down versions of traditional reactors, of which there are currently 94 in operation across the country, supplying 19 percent of America’s electricity. But their designers say SMRs have important advantages over traditional reactors: They will produce less waste, for one. And because components would be manufactured in a central facility before being assembled at a power plant site — sort of like Lego building blocks for nuclear energy — they could theoretically be deployed much faster. (Microreactors, like the ones Radiant hoped to build, are even smaller than SMRs; while microreactors are designed to be portable, SMRs are not.)

SMRs are also being touted as eminently affordable. Once SMR designs have made it over research and development humps, their size and modularity will lead to great cost efficiencies, Erik Funkhouser, executive director of the nuclear advocacy organization Good Energy Collective, says. That means they are more likely to be built: A large reactor costing $12 billion may be very difficult to fund, for example, but $1–2 billion is comparatively easy. SMRs would be more similar to the energy output and cost of a natural gas plant, Funkhouser says, “and we fund those day in and day out.”

Nuclear proponents hope such advanced designs will usher in a “nuclear renaissance” that will reshape the way we supply electricity to the grid while solving climate change. But other experts caution that nuclear’s economic problems aren’t going away and that commercial deployment of advanced technologies is still a distant dream. Moreover, they worry a “renaissance” could deepen problems around safety and disposal of radioactive waste.

In 1951, Experimental Breeder Reactor 1 near Arco, Idaho successfully powered four light bulbs, becoming the world’s first nuclear reactor to produce electricity. It suffered a partial meltdown in 1955. Later, EBR-1’s reactor design gave way to more reliable alternatives.

DR. ALLISON MACFARLANE speaks with the measured, patient air of someone who has explained nuclear energy policy thousands of times. And she has: From 2012 to 2014, Macfarlane, a geologist by trade, headed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the federal agency that licenses the country’s nuclear energy projects.

Macfarlane sees many problems with a potential nuclear renaissance — starting with economics. The financial promises being made about SMRs simply aren’t realistic, she says. In her tenure as NRC chair, she oversaw licensing for three different SMR projects. Two of these projects failed in early stages because of concerns that they wouldn’t be economically viable. The third, developed by a company called NuScale, made it further along. But in 2023, this project also collapsed for economic reasons.

Traditional reactor projects have long suffered from construction costs that balloon far beyond initial projections, and SMRs are susceptible to these cost overruns, too. But they also have another issue to contend with: what experts call economies of scale. While an individual SMR might be cheaper to build than a large nuclear power plant, Macfarlane explains, you’d need several of them to generate the same amount of power. In the end, it would be cheaper to build one big plant than five small ones.

The bottom line for Macfarlane? Traditional nuclear power plants haven’t been cost-effective, and smaller reactors won’t be either. Other advocates fear that if they are built despite this, electric utility customers — homeowners, renters, and businesses — will be the ones to suffer as utilities look to recover their inevitable losses.

The problem is, there are still a lot of unknowns when it comes to advanced nuclear energy. The technologies on the horizon are largely untested, and important questions remain about their safety and
affordability.

IN 2024, TERRAPOWER, A BILL GATES-FUNDED VENTURE, broke ground on its experimental nuclear power plant near Kemmerer — Wyoming’s first. The theoretical power output of TerraPower’s reactor is just above the threshold for what many consider to be an SMR. But its design, which uses molten sodium as a coolant instead of the water that traditional “light water reactors” use, is a perfect example of the advanced technology that proponents think will power a zero-emissions future.

The problem, Macfarlane says, is that these kinds of advanced nuclear facilities take a very long time to become operational. And we don’t have much time to curb the worst impacts of climate change.

“When you engineer anything — a fighter plane, or bridge, or nuclear reactor — you design it on your computer and then you have to build a scale model,” Macfarlane explains. As a design is scaled up and into three dimensions, aspects will shift and adjustments must be made, and then more adjustments must be made when moving from scale model to commercial scale. “With small modular reactors, we are at the computer model stage.”

There are only two SMRs being demonstrated in the Western world, according to Macfarlane: the Kairos reactor in Tennessee and the GE Hitachi BWRX in Ontario. Neither have completed construction. And the rest, she says, are so far from commercial deployment that they are basically figments of imagination.

Even TerraPower’s project in Kemmerer fits into this category, she says. While the project has cleared important hurdles, it has not yet received its construction permit from the NRC. And the gap between the design phase and large-scale commercial deployment for it and other advanced nuclear technologies could be on the order of three decades.

That’s why Macfarlane loses her patience when proponents laud advanced nuclear technologies as the silver bullet to combat climate change. “I’ll try not to be too colorful in my language…. If we had 20 years to fart around and perfect this technology, great,” she says. “But we don’t have endless time. We have to address this problem now.”

AT THE JULY MINERALS COMMITTEE MEETING IN CASPER, much of the opposition to Radiant’s facility had to do with waste. High-level radioactive waste, an unavoidable byproduct of nuclear power generation, produces fatal doses of radiation and could lead to far-reaching impacts on people and the environment if leaked into ground or surface water. Radiant’s plan involved storing waste from its microreactors onsite in Bar Nunn.

Wyoming law prohibits spent nuclear fuel from being stored within the state. But the company was asking for an exception. (A similar exception was given to TerraPower years earlier.)

In the short term, we actually have pretty foolproof ways to store nuclear waste, Macfarlane says. The current storage standard is within “dry casks,” or large steel canisters surrounded by thick concrete. And these work well: Even dry casks tipped over and inundated during the Fukushima disaster, for example, were undamaged.

But people are correct to worry about the long term. High-level waste remains radioactive for tens of thousands of years. While dry casks will hold waste safely for decades, perhaps even for a century, there’s no way to avoid their eventual degradation, Macfarlane explains. That means someone must always be monitoring them, and someone must foot the bill when it’s time to change them out. “The question of who’s going to pay for this 100 years from now is not answered at all,” Macfarlane says.

Another source of uncertainty is the lack of a federal site for permanent disposal of high-level waste. In TerraPower’s case, the company is allowed to temporarily store waste from their operations onsite, until a national repository is established. But such a site doesn’t yet exist. And the prospect of establishing one in the foreseeable future is bleak, meaning that waste would likely be stored within the state for far longer than “temporary” might suggest.

Wyomingites have good reason to be cautious about radioactive waste. From 1958 to 1963, the Susquehanna-Western uranium mill near Riverton processed uranium ore on land seized from Wind River Tribal members through eminent domain. When it shut down, a 70-acre pile of radioactive tailings was left behind.

Without a lining to keep it contained, waste soon seeped into the groundwater. Local families began experiencing cancer at alarming rates — an apparent impact of the radioactive plume that continues to this day.

When remediation efforts began, tribal members were often excluded from the decision-making process. “We were stymied at every turn,” says Gary Collins, a Northern Arapaho member involved in the discussions. He describes an atmosphere of broken promises and disregard for the people bearing the waste’s cancerous brunt.

Today, decades later, the waste has been removed. But the danger of contamination lingers, unseen by the people who live nearby. Collins rattles off a handful of local families impacted by cancer. “When you drive by here, you don’t see anything different,” he says. “You see a vast open field. You see somebody’s cows out there grazing away.” Collins pauses. “Are you eating those cows?”

Uranium processing is not the same as a nuclear power plant or nuclear manufacturing facility. But the story of the Susquehanna mill tailings offers a troubling lesson: When radioactive waste isn’t given the diligence it deserves, the impacts, which can last for generations, often fall on the most vulnerable communities.

A uranium mill operated by Susquehanna-Western, Inc. in Karnes County, Texas. When another Susquehanna mill near Riverton, Wyoming closed in 1963, it left behind nearly 1.8 million cubic yards of radioactive waste.

How to store radioactive waste safely, in both the short and long term, is an important question. But what about other safety concerns? After all, nuclear energy still carries the stigma from catastrophic meltdowns at Chernobyl and Fukushima. Would advanced nuclear technologies be, as some of their proponents claim, less prone to dangerous accidents?

In the years since those notorious meltdowns, the industry has made important safety advancements. But Dr. Edwin Lyman, a nuclear physicist and director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists, thinks that many of the advanced nuclear technologies in the spotlight today are not likely to be much safer than nuclear power plants from earlier eras.

“We don’t have endless time. We have to address this problem now.“
— Dr. Allison Macfarlane

Part of the problem, according to Lyman, is that many of these technologies aren’t as “advanced” as industry would have you believe. “Most of the so-called advanced reactors are really repackaged designs from decades ago that were attempted but didn’t succeed,” he says. Today’s “innovative” technologies have designs similar to flawed projects from the 1950s and 60s: There was the Experimental Breeder Reactor 1 in Idaho, which in 1951 was the world’s first reactor to produce electricity — before an accidental meltdown damaged half its fuel in 1955. And there was Fermi 1 in Michigan, which suffered a partial meltdown of its reactor core in 1966.

Unlike the well-known meltdowns of history, these accidents didn’t result in any major release of radioactive material. But the technologies were discarded in favor of safer, more reliable reactors — which are what’s operational today.

Now industry is returning to those older, experimental designs, as the basis for some of the “advanced” technologies of today. To Lyman, that’s risky. He’s concerned that when it comes to some advanced designs, there are still questions without answers backed by rigorous data — such as the risk of fire posed by sodium coolants, and how well physical containment structures would work in the event of an accident. Security is another concern, with some designs increasing the risks associated with nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism.

MORE CLEAN ENERGY IS NEEDED TO POWER AMERICA’S FUTURE, and even many critics of advanced nuclear technology, like Macfarlane, aren’t advocating shutting down existing nuclear plants. “We definitely need that carbon-free electricity,” she says.

But nuclear isn’t the only zero-emission energy source on the table. Renewables such as wind and solar are quickly becoming cheaper. And while nuclear industry proponents have long scoffed at the reliability of these sources, this is far from the problem it’s made out to be, Dr. Amory Lovins, a Stanford University energy efficiency researcher, says. Wind and solar may be variable, but “variable does not mean unreliable,” he says — especially as modern wind and solar forecasting, significant improvements in battery technology, and other advancements are shoring up the reliability of renewable-heavy grids.

Unlike advanced nuclear projects that won’t come online commercially for years, renewables are adding valuable capacity to the grid right now. “There’s no way nuclear can address climate change in any timely fashion,” Macfarlane says. But renewables, by being cheaper and quicker to deploy, give us a chance.

In the long term, nuclear may well be part of the puzzle that helps the U.S. meet growing energy demands. It may even make sense for Wyoming to host new nuclear projects. But bringing nuclear energy to Wyoming isn’t something we should rush. Even if we speed ahead with advanced nuclear technologies, it’s not likely to add enough clean energy capacity fast enough to solve the climate crisis — and it is likely to expose Wyoming communities to unnecessary risks.

As Lyman, the nuclear physicist, says, speed isn’t the friend of safe nuclear energy. And asking important questions — about how industry and government plan to build projects responsibly, deal with waste, keep communities safe, and pay for it all — takes time.

It will take even more time, and surely many more public meetings stretching late into the night, to build a comprehensive state policy around nuclear energy.

But slowing down and making well-informed decisions could yield clarity. In a world of unknowns, that clarity may offer the strongest foundation for moving forward, on Wyoming’s terms.

Header image: An artist’s rendering of TerraPower’s planned Natrium nuclear power plant near Kemmerer, Wyoming. (Courtesy TerraPower)

Protect Wyoming’s 3 Million+ Acres of Roadless Areas

Posted on September 3, 2025September 3, 2025 by Alec Underwood

The U.S. Department of Agriculture wants to start allowing road construction and industrial development in parts of our national forests that have thus far been protected.

The agency announced last month that they intend to do away with the 2001 Roadless Rule, which prohibits road building on millions of acres of undeveloped land.

Wyoming has more than 3 million acres of “Roadless Areas,” which account for some of the state’s most remote, ecologically valuable lands. Allowing roads to be built in these landscapes could increase wildfire risk, jeopardize wildlife migrations, and make it harder to get away from the hustle and bustle of civilization. Plus, the Forest Service already has a massive backlog of deferred maintenance on existing roads, which would only be exacerbated by new road construction.

*Map depicting Wyoming’s roadless areas. The brown shading shows areas that could lose protections if the Roadless Rule is rescinded.* *Source: The Wilderness Society.*

SPEAK UP NOW!

The USDA is accepting public comments on the rule change until Sept. 19. Fill out the form below to weigh in.

We’ve provided a template, but please personalize it as much as you want — the important thing is to share why YOU care about roadless areas.

LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP, WYOMING!

Posted on August 26, 2025August 26, 2025 by WOC Staff

The case for caution on a nuclear future

By John Burrows and Big Wind Carpenter

IN THE LAST YEAR, we’ve heard a lot about Wyoming’s “nuclear renaissance.” With industry’s narrative leading the messaging, it’s hard to tell exactly how much is hype versus reality. But something does feel different about the conversations happening today around nuclear energy.

Things are moving rapidly in a new direction, which will likely have significant impacts on Wyoming. Now is a critical time to be paying attention, asking questions, and advocating for the best interest of our communities and state. It’s important that we slow down and look before we leap headlong into a nuclear future we can’t undo.

A confluence of political, economic, and logistical factors are driving the resurgence of nuclear discussions in Wyoming:

The U.S. is experiencing a significant increase in demand for electricity, driven largely by the expansion of data centers and artificial intelligence. Estimates vary, but in general energy demand is predicted to rise 1.5–2% per year over the next 20 years.

Many of the same companies, industries, and investors that are increasing electricity demand are also seeking ways to reduce emissions.

In June, the Trump administration issued four new executive orders to expedite the testing and permitting process for new nuclear technologies (including the TerraPower nuclear reactor in Kemmerer) and reforming the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The recently passed federal budget maintains many important subsidies for nuclear energy development, while repealing subsidies for renewables and other forms of energy generation.

Wyoming has the nation’s largest recoverable uranium ore deposits, along with ample open land, a skilled energy workforce, and a favorable tax environment, making it attractive to industry.

What does this mean for Wyoming, and what do communities need to be thinking about to prepare?

Communities need a clear, accurate understanding of what would happen to radioactive waste generated in Wyoming. If Wyoming develops nuclear energy, Wyoming will have to deal with the by-products — high-level radioactive waste. This is critical to understand because currently the United States has no permanent repository for this waste. Nuclear waste generated in Wyoming will stay here for decades, or longer, as we wait for a federal solution.

New technologies mean new challenges. Demonstration reactors, such as the TerraPower reactor, are first-of-their-kind projects and use different types of fuel and cooling sources than existing commercial nuclear plants. Similarly, small modular reactors pose new and unprecedented transportation, safety, and security risks. These must be thoroughly considered at local and state levels before opening the door to nuclear development.

Decision makers must understand the actual cost of nuclear energy — and not just the financial cost (which is very expensive), but also the environmental and social costs. The implications of introducing this new industry are multi-generational and far-reaching. We must consider long-term impacts and how projects would be decommissioned, bonded, and managed if new start-up companies fail to live up to their hype.

The state, local communities, and tribes should be in the driver’s seat. Wyoming’s decision makers must look beyond the bullish predictions of industry and the federal government, which has sweeping regulatory authority and oversight. New proposals must be evaluated objectively and address the fears and concerns of local communities. Siting should be consent-based, and agreements must prioritize the well-being of the communities that will host these projects for generations.

We must understand and learn from our country’s legacy of nuclear energy. The nuclear industry has made mistakes in the past, and many deep scars remain — not only on our landscapes, but also in the families and communities that have shouldered the burdens and harms of this type of energy production over the years. Humility, thoughtfulness, and trust are needed now. Many Wyomingites are appropriately skeptical of these projects. The burden to prove otherwise should not be on those most vulnerable.

With the pressing need to reduce emissions from electricity production, new nuclear energy projects might very well have a place in our state’s future. But if the terms and conditions of Wyoming communities are not being met, leaders must also have the courage to reject industry’s sales pitch. Now is the time to slow down, ask the right questions, and develop proactive policy to guide development on Wyoming’s terms.

Image: Courtesy of Nuclear Regulatory Commission

THE LAND PAYS THE PRICE

Posted on August 26, 2025August 28, 2025 by Max Owens

Federal employees are the heartbeat of public lands stewardship.
What happens when they’re gone?

A giant downed tree and wreckage of limbs block the trail. Peggie dePasquale considers the obstacle in thoughtful silence, calculating the angles. Finally she nods. “If we cut here, and get a little lucky, we may be able to roll it off the trail — no need for a second cut.” She pauses to wipe the sweat from her forehead. “But we definitely need to get a little lucky.”

My colleague Gabby Yates and I have joined Peggie here in Wyoming’s Gros Ventre Range — an amorphous group of mountains in designated wilderness between the Continental Divide and the Tetons — to see firsthand what’s happening to public lands as the Trump administration culls the federal workforce. For much of the morning we’ve been inching up a forested ridgeline, stopping frequently to clear deadfall.

Gabby lops off limbs with the Pulaski, a modified axe, while Peggie and I sever branches with handsaws. Then it’s time for the giant log, and the crosscut saw. The tinny rasp of the five-foot saw, commonly used in wilderness areas where mechanized equipment isn’t allowed, rings through the forest. Fifteen minutes of steady, sweaty back-and-forth later, the log finally splits and crashes to the ground.

Until recently, Peggie roamed this area as a wilderness ranger for the Bridger-Teton National Forest, where she not only did trail upkeep but also collected vital data and educated visitors. But in February, she was terminated from her position, joining thousands of other federal employees suddenly out of work. Now, months later, the cost of having fewer people to steward public lands — people who maintain campgrounds and trails, protect wildlife habitat and cultural resources, manage wildfire risk, and respond to emergencies — is becoming clearer and clearer.

*Gabby Yates and Peggie dePasquale pause their trail work to enjoy views of the Gros Ventre Range.*

Peggie had worked in and around the Bridger-Teton National Forest for more than a decade, first as a field instructor for the Teton Science School and later as an organizer for the Wyoming Wilderness Association. But she was relatively new to the Forest Service, with just two field seasons as a ranger under her belt.

In late January of this year, while spending the off-season in France for her husband’s job, Peggie received the infamous “Fork in the Road” email pressuring federal employees to resign. She had been looking forward to the upcoming season in the Gros Ventre: Her work plan was finalized, and a promotion to crew lead was on the horizon. Leaving her post was the last thing she wanted. She ignored the email.

But on Valentine’s Day, while skiing with friends, she received a text: The district ranger needed to speak with her immediately.

“I found a way to give them a call and received the news that the leadership at the Jackson district of the Bridger-Teton Forest were instructed as of that morning to terminate all probationary staff based on performance,” Peggie tells us. “Leadership had been given a day to make these calls to people who they wanted, more than anything, to keep on their team. Their hand was forced.” The call was followed up with a letter that said that she had not performed up to par and that’s why they were letting her go, despite her excellent performance reviews.

Peggie was among at least 2,400 Forest Service employees with probationary status (which includes new hires and recently transferred or promoted employees) who were fired that weekend. In the weeks and months that followed, chaos within federal agencies reigned, with further mass layoffs and the shuttering of dozens of federal offices. As of June, in the Forest Service alone, the number of employees fired or who took the government’s “deferred resignation,” a buyout designed to downsize the federal workforce, totaled 7,500 — more than 20 percent of the Forest Service’s workforce.

A month after Peggie was fired, a federal judge ruled some of the layoffs unlawful, and Peggie was told she could return to her post. But by that point, she had already accepted another job offer.

She faced a dilemma: Should she stick with the new position, or return to the job she’d been heartbroken to lose? And if she did return, would she lose the job again just as easily? As one current Bridger-Teton National Forest employee (who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation) described, the atmosphere within the agency for those who remain has been turbulent, in large part due to ever-shifting directives. “Sometimes it seems purposefully chaotic, but I think a fair amount of it is sheer ineptitude,” they said. “In the meantime, agency personnel are getting ping-ponged back and forth with no context, no clarity, and no real actionable direction.”

Ultimately, Peggie decided not to return to the Forest Service, opting instead to stay in the role she’d just accepted: National Forest Wildlands Director for the Wyoming Wilderness Association, her previous employer.

We traverse flower-filled meadows bordered by red rock outcroppings and hike higher into the mountains. Peggie literally wears a different hat now — an orange cap emblazoned with WWA’s logo — and the trail work we’re doing with her today is not part of her typical job duties. But she’s the kind of person who can’t visit the forest without pitching in: When Gabby and I asked her to show us around, there was never any question that we’d load up the saws.

As we hike, Peggie points out examples of the work she and her former colleagues did here in past years. Some, like the sturdy bridges that span creeks and streams, are obvious displays of labor. Others, like the drainage ditches dug to mitigate rutted trails, are less obvious. Peggie shares that because of staffing cuts, it’s unlikely that a Forest Service crew will make it to this trail this year — meaning the hard work that keeps trails accessible and safe just won’t happen.

Because of staffing cuts, it’s unlikely that a Forest Service crew will make it to this trail this year —
meaning the hard work that keeps trails accessible and safe just won’t happen.
— Peggie dePasquale

Rutted trails and deadfall may seem like a minor inconvenience for many visitors. But for others, like horsepacking outfitters, the impacts can be far greater. “There are people that rely on these trails for their livelihood, and who don’t necessarily have the capacity in the pre-season to spend whole days clearing trail,” my colleague Gabby, who has a background leading horsepacking trips, explains. And with fewer Forest Service staff, the backlog of trails that need clearing will continue to grow.

The impacts of staffing cuts don’t stop with unmaintained trails. Fewer backcountry crews means less data on wilderness visitorship, which forest managers use to make sound management decisions. Cuts have also halted studies of invasive weeds, which Peggie says represent one of the most pressing threats to the Gros Ventre. “At the end of last year, we were working with our GIS specialists to create a survey that would allow us to track infestations,” she shares. From there, managers would work with an invasive species specialist to find a solution. “But now, a program that had so much potential and energy and enthusiasm is just no longer.”

Then of course there’s wildfire: Wilderness crews, like the crew Peggie was on, reduce fire risk by educating visitors about campfire safety, ensuring campfires are properly extinguished, and reporting newly started blazes in the backcountry. Other Forest Service employees play vital roles, too. Without adequate staff for fuels mitigation or trail maintenance, catastrophic burns are more likely, and firefighting personnel may struggle to get where they need to go. Without administrative staff, fire crews face travel delays. And with fewer support staff trained to aid in fires — red card carriers — crews on the frontlines carry a heavier burden.

The Bridger-Teton National Forest, though it encompasses an enormous 3.4 million acres, represents only a fraction of the 30 million acres of federally managed public lands in Wyoming — nearly half the state. I ask Gabby, who is in charge of the public lands program at the Wyoming Outdoor Council, how the impacts from layoffs that we’re seeing here fit into the larger picture of public lands across the state and the West.

She says she’s less worried about unmaintained trails or bathrooms and more concerned with, “What’s going to happen to these ecosystems? We’re talking about wildlife resources. We’re talking about watershed resources. If there’s no one there to manage these issues, the problems we have are just going to be exacerbated.”

Indiscriminate firings of land stewards are a devious part of a much larger effort to transfer public lands to state control, Gabby continues. “With these layoffs, there’s a slippery slope: If we’re not properly staffing these places, we’re not properly managing them, and when that occurs, they become more of a liability than an asset, and there’s more of an excuse to sell them off.”

Although the push for public lands transfer has a long history, it was brought into sharp focus this summer, when Congress tried to include the sale of millions of acres in the federal budget reconciliation bill. If there’s anything to learn from the past, it’s that transfer of public lands to states is a direct pathway to sale and privatization, as states eventually realize they have nowhere near the resources needed to manage lands, let alone turn a profit.

If there’s anything else to be learned, it’s how fervently Americans want to see their public lands protected, not sold off. With the recent sell-off attempts in Congress, for example, the backlash was swift and enormous, and showed just how disconnected many politicians are from the lands they seek to sell off. “Decision makers aren’t seeing places that people care about, or rely on for clean water, or cultural values, or recreation,” Gabby says. “They’re seeing something that you can extract value from.”

Places like the Gros Ventre are ground zero for such attempts: It’s Forest Service land that doesn’t have the recognition of, say, a national park, and therefore means little to distant politicians. Yet for those nearby — people like Peggie, Gabby, and countless others — such places are more than just land. They’re cherished parts of their backyards, places whose true value defies measurement.

*Clearing trails is difficult, time-consuming work. With fewer Forest Service employees, the backlog of trails in need of maintenance is growing.*

We clear tree after tree as the heat of the afternoon builds. Peggie patiently explains to Gabby how to avoid getting the crosscut saw stuck; she hands me the axe and tells me to enjoy some “wilderness therapy.” The work feels good, and the results are immediately tangible — one of the things Peggie loved most about this work.

On a small scale, there’s no doubt we’re making a difference. And we’re not the only ones, either: From individuals to organizations, there’s no shortage of people stepping up to fill the gaps left over from staffing cuts. The Friends of the Bridger-Teton, for example, recently launched the FBT Forest Corps, an initiative that lends a hand on vital trail infrastructure projects. WWA, Peggie’s organization, helps fund this new initiative, and also regularly trains volunteers to conduct solitude monitoring surveys that would otherwise go undone.

On the other hand, Peggie is clear that our work today is but a drop in the bucket. Nothing, she says, can replace the work done by a full wilderness crew.

“… Our work today is but a drop in the bucket. Nothing can replace
the work done by a full wilderness crew.“
— Peggie dePasquale

We stay past our agreed-upon turnaround time to clear one last log. Finally, though, we turn our backs on whatever awaits up the trail and begin the hike down.

Our talk turns to what gives us hope, for the Gros Ventre and places like it. “For me, it’s the community of people who care for wild places,” Peggie says. “Which is interesting — this idea that it’s people who are bringing us to this point of conflict, and it’s also people who give us hope that we’re capable of finding a solution.”

As we pass the wooden sign marking the wilderness boundary, Peggie gives it a pat like it’s an old friend. With it, she seems to say goodbye. And — I’ll be back.

Have you noticed impacts on public lands from federal layoffs?
Let us know! Fill out our form at our Federal Layoff Hotline below.

FEDERAL LAYOFF HOTLINE

Inside the new plan for Greater sage-grouse

Posted on November 25, 2024November 26, 2024 by Meghan Riley

This month, the Bureau of Management unveiled its new plan for Greater sage-grouse. With the plan comes a ray of hope — both for the imperiled bird and the ever-diminishing sagebrush steppe ecosystem it depends on. Since the BLM manages more sage-grouse habitat than any other entity, actions taken on these public lands will have massive impacts across the West. The BLM’s final Greater Sage-Grouse Resource Management Plan Amendments serve as a new blueprint for how the agency will manage sagebrush habitat on behalf of sage-grouse, other wildlife, and a slew of other uses. What remains to be seen is if we can muster the political will to make this plan a reality and address the very real challenges facing an ecosystem in distress.

As the process leading up to this final plan has shown, there will always be competing voices saying that the BLM is using too heavy a hand, and those saying that the agency isn’t doing enough for sage-grouse. But what’s needed right now isn’t ongoing disagreement, nor delays. Research shows we’re hemorrhaging more than 1 million acres of functioning sagebrush habitat a year. Sage-grouse numbers are a sliver of what they were sixty years ago. To stem declines and retain this species on Wyoming’s wide-open landscapes, what’s needed right now is action.

With that in mind, let’s take a closer look at the plan — how we got here, what the plan does, and what we can expect looking ahead.

The long path towards a sage-grouse plan

Sage-grouse and the sagebrush steppe that sustains them are in trouble. Both have experienced steep losses, with populations of sage-grouse down 80 percent from 1965. Sage-grouse act as a bellwether for the overall health of the sagebrush ecosystem and their decline sounds the alarm for the future of these lands and the communities that depend on them. Without decisive action from the BLM to address growing threats, the bird’s habitat will be further compromised, resulting in rangewide sage-grouse population losses.

Here in Wyoming, we have been fortunate compared to other range states. Between Wyoming’s executive order that’s helped protect sage-grouse habitat with bipartisan support since 2008, climatic conditions that favor sagebrush, and a small human population, Wyoming’s sage-grouse populations have been more resilient than those in neighboring states. Nevertheless, Wyoming is not immune to the habitat loss and degradation laying siege to the Intermountain West and continued long-term declines in Wyoming are a concern. A comprehensive, West-wide sage-grouse plan from the BLM is wholly necessary and overdue.

The BLM has been trying to tackle this problem for going on 10 years. First petitioned for listing in 1999, the US Fish and Wildlife Service determined that Endangered Species Act protection for the Greater sage-grouse was warranted in 2010. This kicked off a massive effort between states and federal agencies — an effort in which Wyoming played a leading role — to create robust plans for protective management. The BLM’s first range-wide sage-grouse management plans rolled out in 2015 with strong bipartisan support from Western governors. In response to conservation measures in these 2015 plans, the USFWS determined the species no longer needed federal protection under the ESA. Unfortunately, these plans were never fully implemented as intended before the first Trump administration carried out revisions that weakened habitat protections to better favor industry. That revised plan was finalized in 2019, but was quickly blocked following litigation. Now, once again, the BLM is on the cusp of finalizing a plan for managing sage-grouse habitat. By building off the 2015 and 2019 plans, clarifying points of confusion, incorporating the latest science, and weighing input from varied stakeholders, the BLM has put forward a balanced approach to sage-grouse habitat management that honors the agency’s multiple-use mandate.

Greater sage-grouse populations across the bird’s range have declined precipitously since the 1960s.

What the plan means for Wyoming

This sage-grouse plan is truly staggering in its scope and detail, as you would expect for a document that amends land use plans for over 70 BLM field offices across 10 states. For Wyoming specifically, the plan introduces some significant new protections for the bird’s habitat to ensure development and industrial uses don’t come at the expense of sage-grouse. With about 97 percent of BLM lands in Wyoming classified as sage-grouse habitat — and almost half of that considered “priority habitat” — this is a big deal! Below are some of the standout provisions that would apply to sage-grouse habitat in Wyoming under the final sage-grouse plan.

Sage-grouse habitat designations used by BLM in the final Greater Sage-Grouse Resource Management Plan Amendments. These designations are based on maps provided by the state of Wyoming and mirror general habitat and core area classifications recognized by the state.

Priority Habitat Management Areas

This is the best of the best sage-grouse habitat and overlaps what the state of Wyoming has identified as sage-grouse “core area”. Just under half of the land BLM manages in Wyoming is classified as PHMA, at about 8.6 million acres. Under BLM’s latest plan, these are just some of the management guidelines that would apply in priority habitat:

Utility-Scale Solar: excluded; some exceptions
Utility-Scale Wind: excluded; some exceptions
Oil and Gas Leasing: no surface occupancy; some exceptions/modifications/waivers
Major Right of Ways: avoidance area unless specific conditions met

Priority Habitat Management Areas with Limited Exceptions

In reviewing the best available science, along with copious public comment, the BLM determined that select areas of priority habitat are of such exceptional quality and importance to sage-grouse that they warrant the highest level of protection. These are classified as “Priority Habitat Management Areas with Limited Exceptions”. One such area covering roughly 273,000 acres was identified in southwest Wyoming — the so-called “Golden Triangle,” which is home to the densest population of sage-grouse on Earth. This area overlaps the South Wind River Area of Critical Environmental Concern, or ACEC, included in the new Rock Springs Resource Management Plan, underscoring how irreplaceable this region of Wyoming is to a wide range of wildlife. The following noteworthy management guidelines would apply here:

Utility-Scale Solar: excluded; no exceptions
Utility-Scale Wind: excluded; no exceptions
Oil and Gas Leasing – no surface occupancy; no exceptions, modifications, or waivers
Major Right of Ways – excluded; some exceptions

Of note, the BLM considered designating this area and three others in Wyoming as ACECs in light of their significance for sage-grouse. However, partly in response to concerns voiced by Gov. Gordon, the BLM eliminated all ACECs from the latest proposed management approach we have before us.

Adaptive Management

The BLM is taking steps to standardize how it adapts management approaches when habitat and population measures dip too much, too quickly. The monitoring methods identified to inform this adaptive management, such as the Habitat Assessment Framework and Targeted Annual Warning System, are intended to create a consistent, rangewide system that catches problems before they snowball out of control. Engagement by the states in this process — especially through the free sharing of data — is critical. As the wildlife professionals responsible for sage-grouse management, each state game and fish agency oversees lek counts in the spring to gauge population levels. Having Wyoming and other states participate meaningfully is for the collective benefit of understanding how the bird is doing across its range and will allow closer examination of circumstances on the ground when areas of concern are flagged.

Where do we go from here?

Additional review of the plan is required between now and January, when a “Record of Decision” could be issued and the plan can take effect. This includes a 30-day protest period for the public and a 60-day consistency review carried out by Governors in affected range states. The BLM has signaled its commitment to getting this plan finalized expeditiously, but time is in very short supply.

Overview of the NEPA process with star denoting where the BLM’s new sage-grouse plan currently stands.

After years of setbacks, it is tantalizing to see so many positive conservation measures enshrined in BLM’s new proposed sage-grouse plan. As sagebrush country faces growing threats — including a quick-moving onslaught of invasive annual grasses that cause more frequent, larger, and hotter wildfires — the time for inaction is gone. Here in Wyoming, where the health of private and public lands are intertwined and vital to the future of our communities, the benefits of smart, protective management on our public lands are far-reaching.

Unfortunately, as is the case for several actions taken in these final months of the Biden Administration, Trump’s ascendency in Washington threatens to undo a lot of this good work. Whether we see attempts to scrap the plan outright, aggressive lawsuits from multiple corners, or yet another plan rewrite, we can be sure of attacks on what the BLM has put forward. We will do all we can to push for science-based solutions and support sage-grouse conservation in the coming storm and seek allies anywhere we can find them. Neither these birds, nor the hundreds of other species they share the sagebrush biome with, have the luxury or capacity to despair in the face of mounting threats and dwindling habitat. They merely soldier on with an inextinguishable will to survive. It is up to us to do right by them and keep fighting on their behalf.

Banner image: Bob Wick, BLM

Get to know Gabby Yates, WOC’s public lands program manager

Posted on September 25, 2024September 25, 2024 by Max Owens

From sprawling desertscapes to vast, forested ranges, the public lands that cover more than half of Wyoming are incredibly varied — and wildly important. Public lands support thriving wildlife populations, host incredible opportunities for recreation and solitude, and are home to uncountable cultural resources.

Advocating conservation of the extensive and irreplaceable public lands in Wyoming is a core part of what we do here at WOC. That’s why we’re so excited to welcome Gabby Yates, our new public lands program manager, who will be largely focused on protecting Wyoming’s remarkable lands.

We sat down with Gabby to talk about cultivating a love for landscapes, her background, and what she’s most excited about as she moves into her new role.

Can you share a little about your background?

I grew up in central New York, outside of Syracuse. After high school, I attended Colgate University and earned a degree in Geography. I didn’t want to jump straight into a 9–5 job after graduating, so I applied to horsepacking jobs — and soon found myself stepping off a plane in Wyoming. From that first week, I knew I wanted to make the state home.

During that first week, what was it about Wyoming that drew you in?

I started to feel how the openness of the landscapes affects people, even if I couldn’t yet put that into words. By “openness,” I mean both the beauty and vastness of the Wyoming skyline as well as the access folks have to it. I remember leaving the Riverton airport that first day and driving south. My new colleague pointed to the snow-capped Winds River Range and said, “You’ll be living up there.” The more folks I met here, the more I saw how a relationship with the land carries over into all aspects of life, and how it was becoming intrinsic to my own life.

Was there a particular moment or experience that sparked your interest in public lands advocacy?

There wasn’t a specific moment, but rather the realization that public lands are the reason I love Wyoming. I’ve spent the better part of the last six years working on, living in, and exploring Wyoming public lands — from caring for cattle in the Red Desert to leading horsepacking trips in the Absarokas and Wind River Mountains. Public lands management here is a sea change from the way the landscape is managed where I grew up.

That’s interesting — can you elaborate on that? What makes public lands management in Wyoming so unique?

Half of Wyoming is public land. And that’s public land that is fairly well dispersed throughout the state, with large tracts of intact, wild ecosystems, and working landscapes, too. That doesn’t exist in most of the world, and it means that living here, people can and often do have a much closer, albeit nuanced, relationship to so much of their “backyard.” It also means that they have a voice in how that landscape is managed, and a responsibility to use that voice.

As a horsepacking guide, you had the chance to share wild lands with people who aren’t at all familiar with them. What was it like to watch them form their own relationships with the land?

It is easy for people to be awed by the beauty of Wyoming’s mountains and wildlife, and it never gets old to share something you love with other folks. What’s really fun, though, is just what you mentioned — people starting to form relationships with the land. You can see it in the conversations you have while riding, from discussing the nuances of wildlife management, land use, or local history, to simply learning to name wildflowers, to feeling more and more oriented to the landscape. I think having a taste for the complexity of these wild lands helps build a foundation so that when folks go home, they don’t just remember a pretty place, or how cold it was at night, for example.

What excites you most about joining WOC as the public lands program manager?

There are so many opinions out there about what happens on public lands, but that means that so many people care about public lands. I am most excited to have conversations and learn from folks that are passionate about these places, to hopefully inch toward common ground, so that future generations can experience the landscapes and wildlife that we enjoy today.

What are some of the things you’re bringing with you from previous roles, as you begin this one?

The time I’ve spent on the ground in public lands through ranching and outfitting has shaped my understanding of public lands and the relationship that folks have with these landscapes. I think that puts me in a place to better find common ground and solutions. Likewise, my background in human geography has trained me to look for ways to find and address nuance in human-environmental relationships. That’s a necessity in looking toward finding solutions for Wyoming’s public lands.

When you’re not in the office, what do you enjoy doing in your free time?

I enjoy exploring new places on horseback, hiking with my dog, hunting, reading, and trying out New York Times recipes. I am planning on planting a garden next year, and am very excited about that prospect.

Do you have a favorite outdoor activity or place to visit on public lands?

I’d say camping somewhere up high in the Shoshone National Forest, drinking coffee, ideally on a frosty morning in early fall.

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT ON STATE OIL AND GAS LEASING: DIRECTORS’ MESSAGES ON RECENT PRESS, PT. 2 OF 2

Posted on July 10, 2024September 18, 2024 by Alec Underwood

Recent press concerning the Wyoming Outdoor Council’s efforts to protect critical pronghorn migratory habitat has caused a bit of a stir in certain circles — and we’d like to set the record straight with an important message for the WOC community and other Wyomingites.

In this second part of a two-part message, WOC’s program director, Alec Underwood, responds to biased reporting and industry perspectives on WOC’s involvement in the July 2023 oil and gas lease sale, and lays out the need for reforms. If you haven’t already, be sure to read Part 1: On the Media, in which executive director Carl Fisher lays out this recent experience with the media in greater detail.

Setting the Record Straight on State Oil and Gas Leasing

There’s that common saying, that wildlife don’t know political or human-made boundaries. The complicated matrix of Wyoming land ownership can vex people, too — making it all the more important that we work together to build common-sense plans and policies to protect our uniquely Wyoming values.

Wyoming is not immune to major challenges for wildlife and occasionally, we see the threat of short-sighted development that warrants bold action to prevent it. Recent articles penned by Cowboy State Daily reporter Pat Maio paint a misleading picture of WOC’s involvement in state oil and gas lease sales, while taking as fact the lone perspective of industry. In an effort to provide transparency and factual information to the public, we at the Wyoming Outdoor Council would like to set the record straight.

Though we are not against oil and gas leasing or other forms of industrial development, most people can agree that some places are just too special to develop. That was the case with ‘parcel 194’ in the Office of State Lands and Investments’ July 2023 oil and gas lease sale. The 640-acre tract of land is located squarely in a bottleneck portion of the Sublette Pronghorn migration corridor, a pinch-point that is vital to the herd’s seasonal movements.

Many Wyomingites know the story of how nearly 50 percent of the Sublette herd perished during the winter of 2023 — dropping from an estimated 43,000 animals to 24,000. That’s why we were alarmed when the state offered a development lease directly in this incredibly sensitive habitat for pronghorn. After raising our concerns with state leadership, the auction went forward with parcel 194 included, and without any stipulations in place to protect migratory big game. Left with no other options and the threat of future development in this sensitive habitat, we decided to participate in the oil and gas lease auction.

Parcels offered in OSLI’s July 2023 oil and gas lease sale, overlaid with migratory data for the Sublette Pronghorn herd. Each yellow line represents a single radio-collared animal’s journey between summer and winter range. Parcels offered are bordered in blue; parcel 194 is visible at the bottom of the image. *(Image: The Wilderness Society)*

We did not take this action lightly nor is it a standard practice for WOC. In our eyes, our bid was an effort to demonstrate that we could still produce revenue for our state while also preserving important wildlife habitat. It was not an effort to “drive up prices” or start a “bidding war,” as falsely mischaracterized in Cowboy State Daily’s articles. Regardless, we were not the high bidder for the parcel, and we turned our efforts toward the State Board of Land Commissioners, urging them not to issue the lease.

Despite having the support of both OSLI and the Wyoming Game and Fish Department for a new protective stipulation for the parcel, and hearing from hundreds of Wyomingites who wrote in opposition to leasing the ground in the first place, the Board issued the lease as-is — without any considerations for migratory pronghorn.

The story of parcel 194 represents a larger issue within the system of state trust lands: There is no clear alternative to protect key habitat or other values from development, while also respecting the mandate to provide revenue for state trust beneficiaries. Given there is great interest from the public in how state lands are used (think Casper Mountain or Munger Mountain), we hope our state leaders are listening and will commit to solving this very real problem.

The recent changes to defining “qualified bidders” in state oil and gas lease sales brings into question how the Board of Land Commissioners makes decisions on state lands leases. Take for example that according to testimony from OSLI in a February 2024 legislative committee hearing, only 27 percent of state land oil and gas leases ever make it to production. Does that sound like a system that is fulfilling the Board’s constitutional charge of optimizing revenue?

Also important to note, the Board has full discretion in their duty to protect and care for all state lands This includes the ability to withdraw lands to protect economic or environmental interests. In addition to what conservation groups may be willing to pay for protecting a parcel, what is the long-term value of protecting the most sensitive habitat for thousands of migrating pronghorn?

The Wyoming Outdoor Council has always been committed to finding common-sense solutions to any issue that we work on. That’s why we’ve been calling for increased screening for conservation conflicts before sensitive habitat is leased, as well as urging state leaders and OSLI to develop a formal conservation leasing program. We believe the state can, and should, do better to address these known conflicts with other values.

Oil and gas production on state lands is undoubtedly a primary driver of revenue for our schools and other public institutions, and we respect that. But that shouldn’t preclude us from discovering new avenues to conserve important habitat on state lands and monetize them for the beneficiaries in a sustainable manner.

Using a word recently penned to describe our advocacy, the real “shenanigans” being played are by those who, on occasion, would rather sell out our wildlife for short-term gains. Rest assured, we’ll keep seeking solutions and advocating for conservation of the things that make Wyoming such a special place. We invite anyone who cares about healthy landscapes, clean air, clean water, and wildlife to join us in those efforts.

Alec Underwood is the program director for the Wyoming Outdoor Council. He resides in Lander.

YOU REALLY CAN’T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ: DIRECTORS’ MESSAGES ON RECENT PRESS, PT. 1 OF 2

Posted on July 10, 2024September 18, 2024 by Carl Fisher

In this first part of a two-part message, WOC’s executive director, Carl Fisher, lays out a recent experience we had with the media. Be sure to also read Part 2: On the Ground, in which program director Alec Underwood responds substantively on issues concerning parcel 194 and needed reforms for leasing of state lands.

You really can’t believe everything you read

For one Wyoming media outlet, the state’s Fourth of July celebrations must have fallen short, because it decided to set off some fireworks of its own. Unfortunately, their bombastic display was itself pretty short on substance — being composed instead of the sorts of fictions that only exist in the imagination. As such, the Wyoming Outdoor Council was the undeserving recipient of what you might describe as an industry hit job. The result? WOC will no longer respond to media inquiries from Cowboy State Daily, until trust can be restored and these issues resolved.

The issue erupted around a well-known news story from last year, about WOC going to great lengths to protect a state parcel within the Sublette Pronghorn migration corridor — including bidding on parcel 194. Subsequently, in this past Legislative Budget Session, an industry-initiated bill, HB141, directed modification of administrative rules defining what constitutes a “qualified bidder” in state oil and gas lease sales, and directed the Office of State Land and Investments to develop criteria for qualified bidders. The bill was passed and signed by the governor on March 8, 2024. From what we can tell, Governor Gordon recently put through an emergency order in an effort to enact the legislated policy (which had yet to take effect), due to pressure from industry and fear-mongering that “billionaires” and “activists” would wreak havoc on the auction. WOC, for one, had no intentions of this, and the media firestorm created by the Petroleum Association and Kirkwood Cos. could have been resolved with a simple phone call, as we frequently do for them.

For years, WOC and other wildlife and conservation organizations have had concerns about development of land, which lies directly in the path of migrating Sublette Pronghorn. These concerns became urgent in July 2023, when parcel 194 was put on the auction block for leasing. WOC did, in fact, legally bid on parcel 194 in last year’s July auction. WOC is not fundamentally against leasing for oil and gas, or the auction process for that matter. Just as oil and gas wishes there was better guidance around what constitutes a qualified bidder, we believe the state has an obligation to develop better guidance around which state parcels should be leased for development, and which should be protected for their importance for wildlife and other irreplaceable environmental attributes.

According to Cowboy State Daily, WOC “duped” oil and gas companies during this auction and our sole intent was to drive up costs, play shenanigans, and start a bidding war. The titles and subtitles of the articles were bad, really bad, and the accusations of the reporter about WOCs intentions were malicious. Here are the reporter’s own words: “There’s a lot of disdain, I’m finding out, for the Wyoming Outdoor Council because they’ve gotten to the point now where, I mean, theoretically, you know, if you’re taking leases out of the hands of oil and gas companies, that hurts education in Wyoming, right? Because a lot of that money, that royalty money goes directly to education.” We think Cowboy State Daily was duped into carrying water for industry in penning these biased and one-sided articles. The reporter’s own bias clearly comes through in his words.

Over the course of several days (July 4–8), four articles (three written and one video) were published. As the situation developed, I had a very pleasant call with the editor of Cowboy State Daily, who ultimately agreed to modify the headlines, bylines, and add an accompanying editor’s note, and I look forward to working with them over the coming weeks and months to build trust. On one hand, I sympathize: The issues we and media outlets work on are complex and require a level of policy wonkiness I wouldn’t wish upon most people. Expeditiously translating these into the public vernacular is more an art than a science. On the other, it is the job of the media to report the facts, and Cowboy State Daily is, as its name implies, a daily — meaning the damaging and false narrative that was perpetuated is impossible to unsee. I remind my staff that you can’t un-ring a bell, and that it’s virtually impossible to put a bullet back into the barrel. Honesty and integrity are vital to our kindling of the public trust and our way of accomplishing our mission.

The irony is that Cowboy State Daily’s accusations lack basic understanding of the system that is set up to fund schools and a dozen or so other entities that benefit Wyoming citizens. And to put a bid in during an auction naturally increases the cost for the next person. We’d welcome Pat Maio, Pete Obermueller, and Steve Degenfelder to any livestock auction in the state to show that this is common practice — it’s how auctions work. Further, if another energy company offered up $5 when the last bid was $3, you’d say they were “outbid.” Cowboy State Daily stated that WOC “duped” them. Even the Office of State Land and Investment acknowledged we did nothing wrong. So, it appears the energy industry concocted a media strategy to drag WOC publicly, and Cowboy State Daily took the bait — hook, line and sinker.

Pronghorn and natural gas infrastructure *(Image: Theo Stein / USFWS / FlickrCC)*

Our intentions in bidding on parcel 194 were two-fold. First, we wanted to protect critical habitat in a migration bottleneck. Second, we sought to demonstrate that conservation interests and values could monetize state lands for beneficiaries. WOC showed up with real money over three times the prior bid. We were proud to try, and sad we failed — not for ourselves, but for the Sublette Pronghorn herd. And at the end of the day, the beneficiaries of state land leases won the day, as they do at any competitive auction that generates revenue for critical programs. Let’s talk about what royalties could and should emerge from a conservation lease.

So, there is no mechanism for conservation leasing and a rule was just passed that clarifies who can bid on oil and gas lease sales. The amount of bellyaching and press that accompanies state protection of the oil and gas honeyhole — which is now less competitive — is pretty extraordinary. If you want to really generate some revenue for Wyoming’s beneficiaries, it’s time to make lease sales competitive again, and allow a diversity of monied interests to vie for these parcels, be it for energy, conservation, recreation, or one of Wyoming’s many other values in the land. The proof is right there in the pudding: They wanted to get it for $3/acre, we went to $18. Are we promoting auctions for the beneficiaries, or fire sales on Wyoming’s landscapes? We believe we can lease, monetize and protect.

Here’s my promise to the state and energy developers like Kirkwood Cos.: If they’re willing to give up the lease and protect the bottleneck, we’ll cut ’em a check, because we don’t believe you can put a price on the viability of this herd. We get it, energy development is critical to Wyoming, but so too are our wildlife, our water and air, how we manage and lease our land, and for whom. Human and natural systems are complex. Our solutions should not oversimplify the challenges, or else we’re shifting burdens to something else, sometimes unknowingly, but the worst of us do it knowingly and for our own benefit.

At the Wyoming Outdoor Council, we welcome your questions and opinions. As executive director, I encourage them. Your inquiries and ideas (whether from members, partners or media) improve our work. We work to answer them expeditiously, but if you don’t get an answer immediately, we respectfully request that you not fabricate an answer for us. Instead, politely try again, we’ll in turn, reciprocate. We will work to be solutions-oriented, innovative, not positional, pragmatic members of the communities to which we belong and call home.

We felt compelled to share this story because we don’t believe it to be a one-off. It was for me here at WOC, but I’ve heard a number of stories from within and beyond our organization. I look forward to straightening things out with Cowboy State Daily, and frankly with Steve Degenfelder and Pete Obermueller. For more information on what WOC did at the July 2023 lease sale on parcel 194 and what our motivations were, it’s important to read program director Alec Underwood’s piece On the Ground: Setting the Record Straight on State Oil and Gas Leasing.

Carl Fisher is the executive director for the Wyoming Outdoor Council, a statewide organization committed to protecting Wyoming’s environment and quality of life now, and for future generations. Our environment includes land, water, air, wildlife, vegetation, cultural resources, and people — past, present and future.

STAFF FAVORITES: CELEBRATING SUMMER ON WYOMING’S PUBLIC LANDS

Posted on June 26, 2024September 18, 2024 by Max Owens

Summer is here — and if you’re like us, the shift in seasons means it’s time for blissful days on the water, solitude in the high country, hikes through wildflower-blanketed meadows, and otherwise enjoying all that Wyoming’s public lands have to offer this time of year.

Fortunately, with public lands encompassing over half of Wyoming, you don’t have to look far to find your new favorite summertime spot. From way-out-there wilderness to easily accessible trails, crags, and waterways, the possibilities are endless. We asked our staff to share some of their favorite summer destinations across the state, to inspire you to get out there and celebrate Wyoming’s legacy of protected wildlands. Whether your adventures take you to old favorites or new ones, to the public lands in your backyard or further afield, happy summertime exploring!

EXPLORING THE WIND RIVER RANGE

Era Aranow, government affairs manager

Rugged cirques, rolling meadows, and stunning alpine lakes: the Winds have it all. (Including notorious mosquitoes … If you plan an early-season trip, come prepared!) For Era, choosing a single “favorite” destination does a disservice to this vast and diverse range — it’s the exploration that’s meaningful.

Fortunately, explorers have plenty of options to choose from. The range falls within two national forests (Bridger-Teton on the west side and Shoshone National Forest on the east) which encompass three wilderness areas. “It’s always a special feeling to pass that wooden sign and cross into the wilderness,” Era says.

In addition to the Bridger, Popo Agie, and Fitzpatrick Wildernesses, a part of the range’s eastern slope is protected by the Wind River Indian Reservation. In fact, the Eastern Shoshone and Northern Arapaho Tribes designated the Wind River Roadless Area to prohibit development on 188,000 acres of the Wind River Range in the late 1930s — nearly 30 years before the passage of the 1964 Wilderness Act.

Casting a line in the Wiggins Fork

John Burrows, climate and energy policy director

When the temperatures start to climb, it’s time to escape the lowlands and head to the mountains. “I’ll head up to Double Cabin Campground on the Wiggins Fork in Shoshone National Forest to cool off in the July heat,” John says. “It’s a great place to cast a line and a good starting point to explore the Absarokas.”

Just north of Dubois, this section of Shoshone National Forest holds plenty of opportunities, whether you’re looking to fish, boat, day hike, or backpack deep into the Washakie Wilderness.

Did you know? The Shoshone National Forest has roots as the oldest federally protected forest in the country. Its precursor was the nation’s first “forest reserve,” the 1.2 million-acre Yellowstone Park Timberland Reserve, which was designated in 1891 — part of a much-needed effort to prevent the destruction of the West’s remaining forests.

Family adventures in Dubois Badlands WSA, Dunoir SMU, and the Snowy Range

Meghan Riley, wildlife program manager

For Meghan and her family, the central perk of living in Dubois is an abundance of options for adventures close to home. For late spring and early summer hikes and wildflowers, you can’t beat the Dubois Badlands WSA. Highlights, she says, include spotting mule deer and bighorn sheep and visiting cottonwood and juniper oases set against a backdrop of beautiful red cliffs. But what the heck is a WSA, anyway? “They’re areas that Congress decided might warrant wilderness protection, but they weren’t quite sure yet,” Meghan explains. “The idea is to gather more data and information before either designating it as wilderness, or releasing it.” Because WSA’s are managed as wilderness, they often have qualities similar to those of designated wilderness, such as non-motorized recreation and opportunities for solitude.

For another backyard destination in mid or late summer, Meghan takes her kids hiking and backpacking in the Dunoir Special Management Unit of Shoshone National Forest. This 28,000-acre wildland northwest of Dubois features accessible front country terrain, but still has some wilderness qualities. “We can hike just three miles up the trail and find ourselves in the most beautiful wildflower-filled meadows,” Meghans says.

Finally, if she wants to travel further afield, the Snowy Range is a favorite spot. As a graduate student in Laramie, the Snowies, located in Medicine Bow National Forest, provided a welcome respite from the summer’s heat: “With its easy access and abundant wildflowers, it’s a beautiful place to replenish your spirit when everything dries out down low.”

A marmot in the Snowy Range, Medicine Bow National Forest

cool-water reprieves in Fremont Canyon and tongue river canyon

Carl Fisher, executive director

Carl’s first year on the job has seen him traveling to all corners of the state to meet with members and partners — and occasionally, he’s been able to sneak off with his fly rod to wet a line. The North Platte River’s Fremont Canyon, southwest of Casper, has been a frequent rest stop: With its spectacular granite walls, juniper-spotted hills, and, of course, clear, cold, trout-filled waters, the canyon offers excellent fishing with easy access.

Rather spend the day boating? The canyon is also popular with kayakers and canoers — and Alcova Reservoir is just downstream, too. Or, if you’re a rock climber, the canyon’s walls are dotted with hundreds of established climbing routes.

Another favorite of Carl’s is Tongue River Canyon in Bighorn National Forest, where the Tongue cascades through mountainous terrain dotted with pines and limestone spires. It’s a river he’s had the chance to fish with frequent travel partner Tyler Cessor, WOC’s development director — and the two are itching to get back!

Scaling Tensleep Canyon’s walls

Max Owens, communications manager

The pocketed limestone walls of Tensleep Canyon hold a special place in Max’s heart. And it’s not just because of the world-class rock climbing: “The expansive views of the plains at the foot of the Bighorns feel classically Wyoming,” he says. “And hiking down from the cliff through fields of lupine and balsamroot, and knowing that I get to do it all again tomorrow, always feels perfect.”

Bighorn National Forest is full of nearby hiking and backpacking options, too — including the spectacular trail to the summit of Cloud Peak, the highest point in the Bighorns. Did you know? This year marks the 40th anniversary of the passage of the Wyoming Wilderness Act, which designated the Cloud Peak Wilderness along with several other Wyoming wildernesses.

Scenic view of Tensleep Canyon in Wyoming with lush sagebrush in foreground and steep canyon walls in middle and background — Tensleep Canyon, Bighorn National Forest

Where are you headed to enjoy Wyoming’s public lands this summer? What are some of your favorite Wyoming destinations and activities? Let us know in the comments!

The 2024 Conservation Vote Report is here!

Posted on June 4, 2024September 18, 2024 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.