'You're Disenfranchising Them': John Hoeven Slams BLM Director Over Mineral Rights Policy

3 months ago

During a Senate Energy Committee hearing earlier this month, Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) spoke about mineral rights.

Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:

https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript

Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com

Transcript

00:00Mr. Hovind. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

00:07Director, right now you're working on a draft resource management plan, RMP, for

00:14BLM lands in North Dakota. On that, you put out a preferred alternative that

00:22we have serious concerns about. Myself, Senator Kramer, Representative Armstrong

00:27sent a letter to you expressing those concerns, and I'd like Mr. Chairman to

00:32ask unanimous consent to make that letter a part of the record. Mr. Chairman?

00:38Without objection. Thank you. Essentially, this preferred alternative would close

00:44off new leasing to 45% of potential federal oil and gas acreage, and it would

00:52close off new leasing to 95% of federal coal acreage. Now, it's important to

01:00understand that in the grasslands, the BLM lands in North Dakota, you

01:06have a checkerboard issue, so it's a split estate ownership. So in a lot of

01:11cases where the federal government may own the surface acreage, they don't own

01:18the minerals. Those are privately owned by private individuals. So the net

01:24result is because of the checkerboard on the surface, and then the split estate

01:28ownership where the federal government may own the land but not the minerals

01:32underneath, by restricting this access, you are restricting private owners from

01:39accessing their property. You're disenfranchising them. In essence, a

01:45taking with no compensation. And so in this draft management plan, that's

01:49exactly what you're doing. You are stranding private owners' mineral rights

01:57and denying them their ability to receive very significant revenue for

02:03their minerals. So please explain to me how that is in any way reasonable or

02:09fair to do that under this type, I mean, how can you do that in a resource

02:15management plan and in any way shape or form believe that that is fair and

02:21equitable? Senator, thanks for the question. A resource management plan, of

02:26course, is about land and mineral allocation. We've issued the draft. We are

02:32we are hearing the comments and I look forward to reading your letter. I don't

02:38think I've seen it yet, but I will find it and read it. Would you agree though,

02:42for example, if you were the owner of whatever property rights and the federal

02:47government was preventing you from utilizing those in full compliance with

02:52the law, that that would be an unfair taking? Senator, I'm not an attorney, but

02:59what I do know is... But then just on the common sense and just common sense

03:02fairness. So, I mean, it's your neighbor, you restrict your neighbor from the

03:08use of his property arbitrarily. Is that a fair or reasonable thing to do? Just in

03:13general. Senator, I hear your frustration. What we try to do is balance the laws

03:19and and the objectives of the administration. But the laws require

03:24multiple use on these federal lands. So whether it's this resource management

03:30plan or your recent April 18th rule regarding public lands where you are now

03:35putting in place restoration or mitigation leases, okay, which lock away

03:42the ability for multiple use. Once you've put these mitigation leases in place, and

03:48we don't even know for how long, now that's limited to one use. That violates

03:54the law of multiple use. So on the one hand, you've got an unreasonable taking

03:58and second, you're in violation of the law that requires multiple use. How can

04:03you go down that track and say that you're either being fair to people or

04:07complying with the law? You're doing this through executive fiat. You're not

04:14you're not adhering to some new law. There was no law passed that suddenly

04:18said you can abrogate all fairness and former laws or laws in the books. There's

04:24nothing that says that. You just through through executive fiat are blowing right

04:29by the absolute requirements of the law. Senator, with respect, mitigation leases

04:36won't be single-use. Oh really? Yeah. Tell me about that. So you're gonna allow

04:41you're gonna allow farming, you're gonna allow energy development, all those

04:44things on these mitigation leases? So. Because I'd like to see that in writing

04:49because you know, you know, that'll be great. I want to see that in writing for

04:52you. It is in the rule that that there are often overlapping uses in in in what

05:00we do. So for example, there could be a grazing permittee who's got a grazing

05:05lease on a piece of ground. Mitigation company wants to come in and say, hey I'd

05:10like to improve your grass. Can I work with you? Can we put a mitigation lease

05:15on on this? They come to the BLM and say, we'd like to do a mitigation lease. And

05:20so those uses then become compatible. Transmission line across across the

05:25section, for example, can be compatible with the increased production we're

05:29trying to get to through the mitigation. We'll want those assurances from you in

05:34writing. And so we'll want you to come out and explain that to our ranchers and

05:39to our energy industry, to our tourism industry. We we truly do have multiple

05:44use in compliance with the law, which benefits everybody. And we're gonna want

05:48your commitment that that can continue. It is exactly what the rule envisions.

05:53Senator Hawley.

'You're Disenfranchising Them': John Hoeven Slams BLM Director Over Mineral Rights Policy

Category

Transcript

Recommended