Full Breakdown
Trump Administration Repeals BLM Conservation Rule and Eases Grazing Regulations
5/12/2026, 12:40:13 AM
Repeal of the Conservation and Landscape Health Rule
On May 11 2026 the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) issued a final notice rescinding the Conservation and Landscape Health Rule, a Biden-era regulation that had placed conservation on equal footing with mining, drilling, grazing, and recreation on BLM lands. The repeal becomes effective 30 days after publication.
Background: The 2024 Conservation Rule
Finalized in June 2024, the rule required the BLM to conduct periodic watershed and land-health assessments, share data publicly, consult with Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations, and develop restoration plans for identified priority landscapes. It also created two new lease categories for ecosystem restoration and for offsetting environmental damage.
Key Figures and Stakeholders
Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum led the repeal effort. President Donald Trump has promoted increased resource extraction on federal lands. Principal actors include the BLM, the Interior Department, the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA), the American Exploration and Production Council (AEPC), Defenders of Wildlife, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the Wilderness Society, the Western Watersheds Project, and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER).
Timeline of Policy Changes
- June 2024: Conservation and Landscape Health Rule finalized.
- September 2025: DOI proposes repeal, citing statutory overreach.
- May 11 2026: BLM publishes final repeal notice.
- June 2026: Repeal scheduled to become effective.
- May 2026 onward: Draft grazing rule released, initiating a 60-day comment period.
Data and Scope of the Rule
The BLM manages roughly 245 million acres of public land, about one-tenth of U.S. territory. The repealed rule covered all BLM lands, while the new grazing proposal would affect approximately 155 million acres. The rule contained ten major requirements, and the public comment period on its repeal received 138,161 submissions.
Official Statements and Administration Rationale
The Interior Department’s Federal Register notice said the action “restores balance to federal land management under the principles of multiple use and sustained yield by prioritizing access, empowering local decision-making, and aligning the BLM’s regulations with statutory requirements and national energy policy.” Burgum argued the rule “had the potential to block access to hundreds of thousands of acres… preventing energy and mineral production, timber management, grazing and recreation.”
Industry Support
IPAA’s Dan Naatz said the repeal “restores clarity to the Mineral Leasing Act’s longstanding multiple-use framework” and will support domestic oil and gas development. AEPC CEO Anne Bradbury described the rule as “reckless agency overreach” and praised the administration for securing “energy affordability.”
Criticism and Opposition
Defenders of Wildlife’s Maddy Munson warned that the repeal “abandons progress at the same moment climate change, chronic drought and accelerating habitat loss demand better stewardship.” NRDC director Bobby McEnaney called the move a “lawless green-lighting of extraction.” The Wilderness Society’s Alison Flint said the proposal “flouts both the agency’s legal mandate and the overwhelming wishes of the American people.” Western Watersheds Project’s Josh Osher described the grazing changes as a “blatantly illegal effort to redefine livestock grazing.” PEER’s Chandra Rosenthal labeled the grazing revisions a “war on science and evidence-based decision making.”
Conflicting Views and Gaps
Sources agree on the procedural timeline but differ on the rule’s environmental impact; no independent impact assessment for the grazing proposal is cited, leaving the magnitude of potential habitat degradation unquantified.
Verbatim Quotes
- “The most effective caretakers of our federal lands are those whose livelihoods rely on its well-being. Overturning this rule protects our American way of life and gives our communities a voice in the land that they depend on.” — Doug Burgum, Secretary of the Interior
- “Today’s repeal of the Public Lands Rule abandons progress at the same moment climate change, chronic drought and accelerating habitat loss demand better stewardship from BLM,” — Maddy Munson, Defenders of Wildlife
- “Congress directed the BLM to manage public lands in a way that balances uses like outdoor recreation with needs as varied as grazing, energy development and conservation of wildlife habitat.” — Alison Flint, Wilderness Society
- “AXPC applauds Secretary Burgum for taking a crucial step to secure energy affordability by restoring balanced management of federal lands, including for responsible oil and natural gas development as Congress intended,” — Anne Bradbury, AEPC
- “The federal grazing program is in crisis, and today’s proposed rule changes will make ecologically-appropriate land management even harder,” — Josh Osher, Western Watersheds Project
- “The gutting of the grazing regulations reflects the Trump Administration’s war on science and evidence based decision making,” — Chandra Rosenthal, PEER
Implications for Public Lands
The repeal removes statutory requirements for systematic conservation planning, potentially accelerating leasing and permitting for oil, gas, mining, and timber on BLM lands. The concurrent easing of grazing regulations could increase livestock pressure on 155 million acres, raising concerns about water quality, vegetation loss, and wildfire risk.
What’s Next
The BLM’s grazing rule will remain open for public comment for 60 days, after which the agency may finalize the regulations. Environmental groups have indicated intent to pursue legal challenges, while industry groups plan to monitor implementation for compliance with the revised multiple-use framework.
