Celeste Maloy: “I agree with everything my colleagues have said about this rule violating the intent of the Federal Land Policy and…”

“I agree with everything my colleagues have said about this rule violating the intent of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, FLPMA, of 1976. I intended to spend most of my time talking about that, but it was pretty well covered. This is an inappropriate use of an administrative action to change the intent of a legislative action. As a Member of Congress, I rise to support everything they have said about why that is wrong. I also want to talk about what role BLM lands play in Utah. I represent Utah, and so does John Curtis, my colleague, who introduced this bill. The reason this is so important for those of us in Utah is that the Federal Government manages most of the land in our State. There are counties in my district that are more than 90 percent managed by the Federal Government. A lot of that is BLM land. We have a lot of experience with multiple use, with grazing, logging, ranching, recreation, fishing, all the things we just talked about, coexisting in the same BLM tracts in Utah. The reason this rule is deeply unpopular in my State is that it comes in and makes one use trump all of the other uses on what should be multiple-use land managed for sustained yield. The role that BLM lands play in our economy and our culture cannot be overstated. In some of the counties I represent, the majority of families get at least part of their livelihood from grazing on public land. If those livelihoods go away, it will have a big impact on our economy.…”