Connect with us

Business

Effort to safeguard public lands sparks battle in Wyoming on December 6, 2023 at 11:00 am Business News | The Hill

Published

on

A Biden administration proposal to safeguard swaths of public land from future mineral and fossil fuel extraction has set off a battle in southwestern Wyoming. 

“We’re out there, hiking, running our dogs, working on these lands every day,” Julia Stuble, Wyoming senior manager for The Wilderness Society, told The Hill. 

“But they’re not our lands — they’re our lands that are held in trust for all,” she said. 

Conflict began brewing over those areas in August, however, when the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) proposed revisions to the ways it administers this 3.6-million-acre swath of federal property. 

Advertisement

The BLM offered up a 1,350-page behemoth — a draft “Resource Management Plan” and environmental impact statement — detailing four conservation and development options for the Rock Springs Field Office in southwest Wyoming. 

What surprised activists, politicians and industry executives — in some cases for better, and in some cases for worse — was the “preferred alternative” promoted by the BLM in the two-volume document. 

This pro-conservation choice, known as Alternative B, would preserve the most land relative to the other options, while restraining activities like mining and extraction.

If Alternative B were to move forward as written, it would bar new fossil fuel or mineral extraction leases on nearly half of the land within the Rock Springs Field Office area. 

Advertisement

As Stuble sees it, Wyomingites will face one of two fates as the BLM solidifies its plans: the first, remaining a state in which “public lands continue to produce fossil fuels, and thus contribute to the climate crisis.” 

“Or we can have those lands be solutions to that climate crisis,” she said. 

Opponents decry ‘federal overreach,’ impact on jobs

Wyoming has long been a national bastion of fossil fuel development and resource extraction — providing a hefty supply of coal, oil, gas and the critical mineral trona.  

The biggest coal-generating state since 1986, Wyoming was responsible for about two-fifths of all coal mined in the U.S. in 2022, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reported. With regards to fluid fossil fuels, the state is the eighth-largest crude oil producer nationwide and is the ninth-largest generator of natural gas in the nation. 

Advertisement

Wyoming also boasts the world’s largest deposit of trona — a resource it draws on to supply about 90 percent of the country’s soda ash, which is used to make glass, soap, cattle feed, paper, pool products, textiles, medicines and toothpaste, per the Wyoming Mining Association. 

Beyond the BLM’s preferred alternative, the Rock Springs Resource Management Plan contains three other potential courses of action: one that maintains the status quo, another that favors resource exploitation and a middle-ground compromise on conservation and development. 

But if the BLM does adopt its preferred alternative, the agency would classify 1.6 million acres of land — nearly six times today’s share — as Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, a strict conservation designation that generally includes all-out extraction bans. 

In total, restrictions on new oil and gas projects across Rock Springs would apply to about 2.19 million acres, representing a 305 percent jump from current conditions. The proposal would also prohibit new wind and solar energy projects, as well as “rights-of-way” corridors — for pipes, transmission lines and maintenance roads — on 2.48 million acres, or 481 percent more than those excluded today. Additionally, the preferred alternative would close 433 percent more land to new coal exploration in comparison to the status quo, while increasing the areas barred to hard-rocking mining claims by 258 percent.

Advertisement

Millions of acres would remain available for exploitation, however: 1.42 million would stay open for new oil and gas projects, and nearly 1 million for new wind and solar projects and rights-of-way corridors.

Grazing, meanwhile, would only face minimal effects: a 0.02 percent cut in accessible acreage.

In advocating for its favored option, the BLM touted the benefits to wildlife habitats and cultural resources. The agency also recognized, however, that “socioeconomic impacts would be the largest due to reduced mineral development.” 

Opponents of the BLM proposal, including state lawmakers and development companies, have decried this potential impact on both Wyoming’s economy and the resources it supplies the rest of the country.

Advertisement

“Trona in particular, that’s a fairly limited resource that we have domestically,” state Sen. Brian Boner (R), who opposes the BLM’s preferred alternative, told The Hill. 

“I’d hate to be more dependent on foreign nations for such an important resource, especially ones that may not share our values or security concerns,” Boner added. 

Reflecting on the BLM’s Resource Management Plan, Ryan McConnaughey, vice president of the Petroleum Association of Wyoming, said in an emailed statement that his organization “could live with any of the alternatives other than Alternative B.”

Citing the BLM’s analysis that this option could lead to 52-percent economic declines and a 73-percent reduction in oil and gas-related jobs, McConnaughey stressed that such development “is the backbone of Wyoming’s economy.” 

Advertisement

“Our stance is that the industry is constantly improving technologies and processes that both reduce the costs of production and lessen the impacts on the environment,” he stated.  

“The BLM should take those advancements into account at the application for permit to drill level rather than a carte blanche ban on development,” McConnaughey added.  

Boner echoed these sentiments, estimating about 3,000 jobs could be lost in a region with just more than 100,000 residents.  

The legislator co-chairs the Wyoming state Senate’s Select Federal Natural Resource Management Committee, which is sponsoring legislation that would empower local officials to disregard federal policies they believe don’t comply with federal law. 

Advertisement

The text of the bill, which is still under revision, would involve “directing the governor to cease cooperation with federal land management agencies when agencies pursue policies that harm Wyoming,” according to October committee minutes.

The legislation would also establish a full-time position within the governor’s office “to protect Wyoming’s state interests from federal government overreach,” per the minutes. 

Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon (R), too, is among the proposal’s opponents. At the end of September, he sent a letter to the BLM director, requesting the withdrawal of the draft resource management plan and decrying the agency’s preferred alternative as too restrictive. 

“As this draft stands it will lack Wyoming’s support, local community support, and will surely be challenged on rigor,” Gordon wrote. 

Advertisement

The governor pointed to the efforts that have been underway since 2010 to update the current Rock Springs management plan, noting the 12-year collaborative review process is “either falling on deaf ears or disingenuously being thrown by the wayside.” 

Gordon accused the BLM of pulling “a bait-and-switch” on Wyomingites and warned “existing and future partnerships are in jeopardy.”

The BLM extended the mandatory public comment period for the proposal a few weeks later — a gesture for which Gordon expressed his appreciation and that he cited as an opportunity for public engagement.  

For the BLM’s part, Wyoming state director Andrew Archuleta at the time issued a statement urging members of the public to participate in the process, noting such comment periods “make our work stronger.”

Advertisement

‘Open and free and wild and intact’

The selection of the pro-conservation option as the preferred alternative was shocking to environmental groups as well — although in their cases, it was largely a pleasant surprise. 

In Stuble’s mind, the preferred Alternative B is “remarkably protective of the values that we think that they should be prioritizing.”

She applauded the BLM for proposing “significant conservations” in two key landscapes — the Northern Red Desert and the Big Sandy Foothills — that are rich in habitats for wildlife such as sage grouse, migrating mule deer, migrating pronghorn and both wintering and residential elk. 

“These are places people go to recreate, to hunt and fish and camp, walk around, trail run,” Stuble said. “It’s a remarkable area. It’s open and free and wild and intact.”

Advertisement

As far as the potential economic impacts from slashing resource production are concerned, Stuble said certain areas that would face closures have “low to no potential for oil and gas to be found regardless.” 

She also stressed the plan would not affect existing leases, which include wells that are currently producing and those that have yet to be drilled. 

Stuble further pushed back on criticism regarding the proposal’s potential impact on employment.

The BLM’s analysis for how many jobs would be cut is based on a forecast made in 2011 and was correlated with what officials believed would be the number of wells drilled in the following decade, according to Stuble. 

Advertisement

But that number, she explained, was much higher than the actual quantity of wells that ended up materializing in recent years.

“One of the only benefits of having a plan take 10 years is you can actually check the work,” Stuble said. 

A vital link between conservation and hunting

Joining activist groups like the Wilderness Society in backing the conservation-focused alternative are a spectrum of groups ranging from avid hunters and recreators to members of local tribal communities. 

“I’m not sure why there’s so much opposition to what is being proposed,” Earl DeGroot, a retired management consultant and administrator of the Wyoming Sportsmen for Federal Lands group, told The Hill. 

Advertisement

“A lot of what is being proposed would be good for wildlife, and if it’s good for wildlife, it’s good for sportsmen,” he said. 

DeGroot voiced his support for the portion of the proposal that would grant 1.6 million acres of land the strictest conservation designation. He stressed that these restrictive classifications would enable the BLM to “evolve some wildlife specific management prescriptions,” such as protections for migration corridors and riparian areas. 

DeGroot acknowledged, however, that many people living in the area have dual concerns that revolve around their enjoyment of hunting and their livelihood from resource development.

“It’s kind of a battle between what’s good for me economically and what do I want in terms of hunting opportunities and conservation and aesthetics,” he said. 

Advertisement

Dan Stroud, a hunter and retired state biologist, echoed many of these sentiments, explaining that he is generally in favor of the BLM’s preferred alternative, but with some adjustments. 

“We need protection of some very important areas for wildlife and some of the other resources, whether they’re cultural or historic trails,” said Stroud, who was a wildlife habitat biologist with the Wyoming Game and Fish Department.

In Stroud’s mind, there are five or six areas within Rock Springs that warrant specific attention — particularly the Big Sandy Foothills region, also known as the “Golden Triangle.”

This region, he explained, is home to one of the longest mule deer corridors in the nation and has one of the densest sage grouse populations. 

Advertisement

“It’s really important from the standpoint of wildlife and their future that we pay attention to their needs,” Stroud said. 

For Jason Baldes, an Eastern Shoshone tribal member, the need for conservation protections in Rock Springs extends beyond wildlife to also include centuries of cultural history.

The U.S. government’s original treaty with the Eastern Shoshone tribe, he explained, contained the entirety of this high-desert area and included more than 44 million acres before the overlapping states were even established. 

The tribe’s cultural connections to the region include petroglyphs, pictographs, spiritual spots, burial grounds, campsites and relics of a vast trade network, according to Baldes. 

Advertisement

“We want to protect these places for future generations,” said Baldes, who manages the tribe’s buffalo herd and serves as executive director of the Wind River Tribal Buffalo Initiative.

“The exploitation and extractive industries and the commodification of land and resources is detrimental,” he said. “Preservation, leaving things as they are, is an important endeavor.”

Opportunities for compromise?

While it’s difficult to predict whether the various Rock Springs stakeholders will be able to find an agreeable balance, Stuble said the governor is assembling a task force to figure out if there is some common ground. 

“Time will tell in the next couple of weeks as that task force comes together, but there are shared values among people of different interests here in Wyoming,” she continued. 

Advertisement

As discussions continue to unfold, Boner expressed what he described as “procedural concerns” about the BLM’s surprise decision to back away from a compromise solution. 

“There was a middle-of-the-road option, which I may not agree with, but certainly wouldn’t be strongly opposed to either,” Boner said.  

Regarding the need to balance development and wildlife preservation, Boner stressed his belief that local stakeholders have been doing this successfully for years together. 

“The problem is if the federal government comes in and tries to do it their way, you’re going to lose a lot of the collaboration you need,” he said, noting this “checkerboard” region of Wyoming also includes private landowners. 

Advertisement

“Without their support, there’s nothing stopping them from disrupting those migration corridors, if they feel like the BLM is also threatening their livelihood,” Boner added. 

Micky Fisher, spokesperson for the Wyoming BLM, stressed in an emailed statement that “no decisions have been made at this juncture” as the process has only reached the public comment phase. Until a final environmental impact statement has been approved, he continued, the entire “range of alternatives and each component within remains on the table.” 

“We’ll compile and leverage all the substantive comments to make an informed final decision,” Fisher added.

With the public comment deadline of Jan. 17 rapidly approaching, Stuble expressed some optimism about the potential for compromise — and about the BLM’s openness to making adjustments to the plan. 

Advertisement

“You have folks who work in oil and gas field who are out hunting, or who are out driving around and enjoying wild spaces too,” Stuble said. 

“People who are out there recreating in wild spaces, who see themselves as conservationists, are relying on these fuels and these products for our daily life as well,” she added.

Baldes likewise said that while he is pleased with the BLM’s preferred alternative, he understands there will have to be some compromise. 

But he cautioned against making decisions based on commodifying resources and maximizing extraction.

Advertisement

“What I’ve grown up with is an understanding of finding common ground between Western science, Indigenous science,” Baldes said. 

“That’s often aligned around conservation values of wildlife corridors, migration and biodiversity, and those are more preferable in my perspective,” he added.

​Equilibrium & Sustainability, Business, Energy & Environment, News, Policy, State Watch A Biden administration proposal to safeguard swaths of public land from future mineral and fossil fuel extraction has set off a battle in southwestern Wyoming. “We’re out there, hiking, running our dogs, working on these lands every day,” Julia Stuble, Wyoming senior manager for The Wilderness Society, told The Hill. “But they’re not our lands…  

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

How Trump’s Tariffs Could Hit American Wallets

Published

on

As the debate over tariffs heats up ahead of the 2024 election, new analysis reveals that American consumers could face significant financial consequences if former President Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs are enacted and maintained. According to a recent report highlighted by Forbes, the impact could be felt across households, businesses, and the broader U.S. economy.

The Household Cost: Up to $2,400 More Per Year

Research from Yale University’s Budget Lab, cited by Forbes, estimates that the average U.S. household could pay an additional $2,400 in 2025 if the new tariffs take effect and persist. This projection reflects the cumulative impact of all tariffs announced in Trump’s plan.

Price Hikes Across Everyday Goods

The tariffs are expected to drive up consumer prices by 1.8% in the near term. Some of the hardest-hit categories include:

  • Apparel: Prices could jump 37% in the short term (and 18% long-term).
  • Footwear: Up 39% short-term (18% long-term).
  • Metals: Up 43%.
  • Leather products: Up 39%.
  • Electrical equipment: Up 26%.
  • Motor vehicles, electronics, rubber, and plastic products: Up 11–18%.
  • Groceries: Items like vegetables, fruits, and nuts could rise up to 6%, with additional increases for coffee and orange juice due to specific tariffs on Brazilian imports.

A Historic Tariff Rate and Economic Impact

If fully implemented, the effective tariff rate on U.S. consumers could reach 18%, the highest level since 1934. The broader economic consequences are also notable:

  • GDP Reduction: The tariffs could reduce U.S. GDP by 0.4% annually, equating to about $110 billion per year.
  • Revenue vs. Losses: While tariffs are projected to generate $2.2 trillion in revenue over the next decade, this would be offset by $418 billion in negative economic impacts.

How Businesses Are Responding

A KPMG survey cited in the report found that 83% of business leaders expect to raise prices within six months of tariff implementation. More than half say their profit margins are already under pressure, suggesting that consumers will likely bear the brunt of these increased costs.

What This Means for Americans

The findings underscore the potential for substantial financial strain on American families and businesses if Trump’s proposed tariffs are enacted. With consumer prices set to rise and economic growth projected to slow, the debate over tariffs is likely to remain front and center in the months ahead.

For more in-depth economic analysis and updates, stay tuned to Bolanlemedia.com.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

U.S. Limits Nigerian Non-Immigrant Visas to Three-Month Validity

Published

on

In July 2025, the United States implemented significant changes to its visa policy for Nigerian citizens, restricting most non-immigrant and non-diplomatic visas to a single entry and a maximum validity of three months. This marks a departure from previous policies that allowed for multiple entries and longer stays, and has important implications for travel, business, and diplomatic relations between the two countries.

Key Changes in U.S. Visa Policy for Nigerians

  • Single-Entry, Three-Month Limit: As of July 8, 2025, most non-immigrant visas issued to Nigerians are now valid for only one entry and up to three months.
  • No Retroactive Impact: Visas issued prior to this date remain valid under their original terms.
  • Reciprocity Principle: The U.S. cited alignment with Nigeria’s own visa policies for U.S. citizens as the basis for these changes.
  • Enhanced Security Screening: Applicants are required to make their social media accounts public for vetting, and are subject to increased scrutiny for any signs of hostility toward U.S. institutions.

Rationale Behind the Policy Shift

  • Security and Immigration Integrity: The U.S. government stated the changes are intended to safeguard the immigration system and meet global security standards.
  • Diplomatic Reciprocity: These restrictions mirror the limitations Nigeria imposes on U.S. travelers, emphasizing the principle of fairness in international visa agreements.
  • Potential for Further Action: The U.S. has indicated that additional travel restrictions could be introduced if Nigeria does not address certain diplomatic and security concerns.

Nigeria’s Updated Visa Policy

  • Nigeria Visa Policy 2025 (NVP 2025): Introduced in May 2025, this policy features a new e-Visa system for short visits and reorganizes visa categories:
    • Short Visit Visas (e-Visa): For business or tourism, valid up to three months, non-renewable, processed digitally within 48 hours.
    • Temporary Residence Visas: For employment or study, valid up to two years.
    • Permanent Residence Visas: For investors, retirees, and highly skilled individuals.
  • Visa Exemptions: ECOWAS citizens and certain diplomatic passport holders remain exempt.
  • Reciprocal Restrictions: Most short-stay and business visas for U.S. citizens are single-entry and short-term, reflecting reciprocal treatment.

Impact on Travelers and Bilateral Relations

  • Nigerian Travelers: Face increased administrative requirements, higher costs, and reduced travel flexibility to the U.S.
  • U.S. Travelers to Nigeria: Encounter similar restrictions, with most visas limited to single entry and short duration.
  • Diplomatic Tensions: Nigerian officials have called for reconsideration of the U.S. policy, warning of negative effects on bilateral ties and people-to-people exchanges.

Conclusion

The U.S. decision to limit Nigerian non-immigrant visas to three months highlights the growing complexity and reciprocity in global visa regimes. Both countries are tightening their policies, citing security and fairness, which underscores the need for travelers and businesses to stay informed and adapt to evolving requirements.

Continue Reading

Business

Nicki Minaj Demands $200 Million from Jay-Z in Explosive Twitter Rant

Published

on

Nicki Minaj has once again set social media ablaze, this time targeting Jay-Z with a series of pointed tweets that allege he owes her an eye-popping $200 million. The outburst has reignited debates about artist compensation, industry transparency, and the ongoing power struggles within hip-hop’s elite circles.

Credit: Heute.at

The $200 Million Claim

In a string of tweets, Minaj directly addressed Jay-Z, writing, “Jay-Z, call me to settle the karmic debt. It’s only collecting more interest. You still in my top five though. Let’s get it.” She went further, warning, “Anyone still calling him Hov will answer to God for the blasphemy.” According to Minaj, the alleged debt stems from Jay-Z’s sale of Tidal, the music streaming platform he launched in 2015 with a group of high-profile artists—including Minaj herself, J. Cole, and Rihanna.

When Jay-Z sold Tidal in 2021, Minaj claims she was only offered $1 million, a figure she says falls dramatically short of what she believes she is owed based on her ownership stake and contributions. She has long voiced dissatisfaction with the payout, but this is the most public—and dramatic—demand to date.

Beyond the Money: Broader Grievances

Minaj’s Twitter storm wasn’t limited to financial complaints. She also:

  • Promised to start a college fund for her fans if she receives the money she claims is owed.
  • Accused blogs and online creators of ignoring her side of the story, especially when it involves Jay-Z.
  • Warned content creators about posting “hate or lies,” saying, “They won’t cover your legal fees… I hope it’s worth losing everything including your account.”

She expressed frustration that mainstream blogs and platforms don’t fully cover her statements, especially when they involve Jay-Z, and suggested that much of the coverage she receives is from less reputable sources.

Credit: Heute.at

Satirical Accusations and Industry Critique

Minaj’s tweets took a satirical turn as she jokingly blamed Jay-Z for a laundry list of cultural grievances, including:

  • The state of hip-hop, football, basketball, and touring
  • The decline of Instagram and Twitter
  • Even processed foods and artificial dyes in candy

She repeatedly declared, “The jig is up,” but clarified that her statements were “alleged and for entertainment purposes only.”

Political and Cultural Criticism

Minaj also criticized Jay-Z’s political involvement, questioning why he didn’t campaign more actively for Kamala Harris or respond to President Obama’s comments about Black men. While Jay-Z has a history of supporting Democratic campaigns, Minaj’s critique centered on more recent events and what she perceives as a lack of advocacy for the Black community.

The Super Bowl and Lil Wayne

Adding another layer to her grievances, Minaj voiced disappointment that Lil Wayne was not chosen to perform at the Super Bowl in New Orleans, a decision she attributes to Jay-Z’s influence in the entertainment industry.

Public and Industry Reaction

Despite the seriousness of her financial claim, many observers note that if Minaj truly believed Jay-Z owed her $200 million, legal action—not social media—would likely follow. As of now, there is no public record of a lawsuit or formal complaint.

Advertisement

Some fans and commentators see Minaj’s outburst as part of a larger pattern of airing industry grievances online, while others interpret it as a mix of personal frustration and performance art. Minaj herself emphasized that her tweets were “for entertainment purposes only.”

Credit: Heute.at

Conclusion

Nicki Minaj’s explosive Twitter rant against Jay-Z has once again placed the spotlight on issues of artist compensation and industry dynamics. Whether her claims will lead to further action or remain another dramatic chapter in hip-hop’s ongoing soap opera remains to be seen, but for now, the world is watching—and tweeting.

Continue Reading

Trending