In August of this year, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) released a draft supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) to be appended to both the Colorado River Valley and Grand Junction resource management plans, affecting usage policy for approximately 2 million acres of land for the next two decades. After a two-month period of public comment which closed early this month, there’s been significant support within the Western Slope community to increase the protection of public land and reduce oil and gas leases.
Nearly 6,000 community members, including nearly 85 businesses and over 25 elected officials, responded to BLM indicating their support for an increased conservationist policy. Most of this came with the support of Alternative F, a proposed plan which expands protection and reduces leasing.
Alternative F makes sweeping closures to future gas and oil leasing in the name of environmental protection. While Alternative E — indicated as the BLM’s preferred — would close all areas with unknown to moderate oil or gas development potential, 93% of high development potential areas would remain open to leasing under the jurisdiction of the Colorado River Valley Field Office (CRVFO), as well as 44% of high potential areas in that of the Grand Junction Field Office (GVFO). In comparison, Alternative F would close the same low-potential areas as E, but only keep 16% of high potential areas in the CRVFO area and 14% in the GVFO area open to future leasing.
In Alternative F, areas closed to future oil and gas development include designated habitat for threatened and endangered species and areas of tribal concern. These areas include famous public lands such as Castle Peak and the Book Cliffs — sites not only of ecological but recreational importance.
The draft SEIS — which Alternative F could become a part of — is being written in response to a court opinion and settlement agreement following a lawsuit filed by Wilderness Workshop challenging the BLM on its assessment of climate impacts. Filed in 2016, Wilderness Workshop prevailed two years later and the BLM was ordered to reconsider aspects of its resource plan now to be addressed in the SEIS.
Now that the period for public comment has closed, the BLM will enter the final drafting stage for the SEIS which will be released in spring of 2024. After a formal protest period and governor’s review, a record of decision will be signed by the third quarter of that year.
Wilderness Workshop is encouraged by the vast support for Alternative F. “We urge the BLM to listen to the voices of community members who participated in this process and provide us with a strong final plan,” stated Erin Riccio, Wilderness Workshop’s advocacy director.
In terms of the economic implications of Alternative F, the plan calls for assistance in shifting the Western Slope’s industries from extraction to services, sustainable agriculture and recreation. Regional oil and natural gas production peaked in 2012 and has been steadily decreasing since. In a value assessment by Garfield County, the assessed value of residential properties has exceeded that of oil and gas since 2019. Additionally, the extractive industry makes up 2% of employment in Garfield and Mesa counties, compared to 69% of employment in services.
According to an estimate by the Conservation Economics Institute (CEI), since roughly 40% of oil and gas production takes place on federal land, a total ban of federal oil and gas leases would put approximately 1% of the Garfield and Mesa County workforce at risk of unemployment. However, the CEI also noted consistent growth of amenity-based industries and emphasized the longevity of a diverse local economy instead of a boom-and-bust cycle and the environmental risk common with extractive industries.
“The non-oil-and-gas revenue sources the region will need to rely upon have been consistent and steadily growing,” stated the CEI in a report titled “Economic Transition Away from Federal Oil and Gas in Western Colorado.” It continued, “Our analysis indicates that imposing greater limits on which BLM lands are available for oil & gas leasing, and greater accounting for the social costs of carbon (and methane), would have a minimal fiscal effect for Mesa and Garfield Counties and would create a rising tide for all other economic activities.”