On the recordFebruary 7, 2017
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution which would do away with the new procedures established under BLM Planning 2.0. Planning 2.0 encourages, at its foundation, early and frequent public input. By rolling back this planning effort, public input--in particular, tribal input--will be removed. Federally recognized tribes have the right to engage in government- to-government consultation, and, under Planning 2.0, tribal rights to participate in the planning process are clearly enumerated and protected. By introducing the resolution we are considering today, the majority is making clear it doesn't value tribal input in the development of BLM's resource management plans. In this updated planning process, the BLM worked hard to ensure government-to-government consultation was accomplished. Tribes were encouraged to submit comments through the formal comment period and through government-to-government consultation. But BLM recognizes the hard work of tribes and has been inclusive of tribal concerns. In fact, BLM has recognized the quality and value that tribes' traditional ecological knowledge brings to planning efforts. It is important to incorporate this information to avoid resource conflicts and to protect hunting and fishing grounds. In many areas, the BLM and tribes actually have to manage resources together. How can they do this when tribes are not invited to be a part of the consultation process?…





