H.R.230 - To prohibit the implementation of the Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment for the Buffalo, Wyoming Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management. (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R. 230 aims to prevent the implementation of the Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment for the Buffalo, Wyoming Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The bill specifically targets the amendment outlined in the 'Notice of Availability of the Record of Decision' published on November 27, 2024. The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives by Ms. Hageman and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources.
The core of the bill is to restrict the Secretary of the Interior from implementing, administering, or enforcing the mentioned resource management plan amendment.
This action effectively freezes the current management plan in place, preventing any changes proposed in the amendment from taking effect.
Expected Effects
If enacted, H.R. 230 would maintain the existing resource management plan for the Buffalo, Wyoming Field Office. This means that any proposed changes or updates outlined in the 2024 amendment would not be implemented.
The practical effect would be a continuation of current land use policies, potentially impacting various stakeholders including ranchers, energy developers, conservation groups, and recreational users.
Ultimately, the bill's impact depends on the specific changes proposed in the amendment and the degree to which those changes would affect the region's resources and economy.
Potential Benefits
- Preservation of Existing Land Uses: Prevents disruption of established practices for ranchers, energy companies, and recreational users if the amendment would negatively impact them.
- Protection of Specific Environmental Values: If the existing plan is more protective of certain environmental values than the proposed amendment, this bill would maintain those protections.
- Maintenance of Economic Stability: Prevents potential economic disruption if the amendment would negatively impact key industries in the region.
- Adherence to Local Preferences: If the existing plan better reflects the preferences of local communities, this bill would ensure those preferences are maintained.
- Certainty and Predictability: Provides certainty for stakeholders by preventing changes to the existing management plan.
Potential Disadvantages
- Stifled Innovation and Adaptation: Prevents the implementation of potentially beneficial changes to resource management practices.
- Missed Opportunities for Environmental Improvement: If the amendment includes measures to improve environmental outcomes, this bill would prevent those measures from being implemented.
- Economic Stagnation: Prevents the implementation of changes that could stimulate economic growth or diversification in the region.
- Disregard for Updated Scientific Information: Prevents the implementation of changes based on new scientific understanding of resource management.
- Conflict with National Policy Goals: If the amendment aligns with broader national policy goals related to resource management or conservation, this bill would create a conflict.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill appears to be constitutionally permissible under Article I, Section 1, which grants all legislative powers to Congress. Congress has the power to enact laws that regulate the management of federal lands. The bill does not appear to infringe on any specific constitutional rights or protections.
However, the bill's impact on executive branch authority to manage federal lands could raise questions about the separation of powers. The extent of this impact would depend on the specific details of the resource management plan amendment and the reasons for Congress's intervention.
Overall, the bill seems to fall within the scope of Congress's legislative authority, but its specific application and potential impact on executive power should be carefully considered.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).