Thank you for signing!

Restore Conservation to America's Public Lands Before It's Too Late

120 signatures toward our 30,000 goal

0.4% Complete

Sponsor: The Rainforest Site

Your public lands just lost their last conservation protection — sign now.

An aerial view of a large open-pit quarry carved into a forested mountainside, with snow-capped peaks visible in the distance.

For generations, the Bureau of Land Management operated under a clear, unspoken priority: extractive industries first, conservation second. The 2024 Conservation and Landscape Health Rule changed that, formally placing ecological stewardship alongside mining, drilling, and grazing as a recognized use of the 245 million acres the BLM manages for all Americans. On May 12, 2026, the Trump administration published a formal rescission of that rule in the Federal Register — and the framework was gone.7

What the Rule Actually Did

The rule was not a moratorium on extraction. It created a structure for restoration leasing — agreements allowing conservation organizations to hold leases for habitat recovery and landscape health, mirroring the lease structures long available to energy companies. It also required land managers to incorporate ecological health into planning in a systematic, accountable way. As Inside Climate News reported, it was the first formal effort to put conservation on equal administrative footing with industries that have long dominated BLM decision-making.1 The Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University noted that the rescission removed protections built to address habitat fragmentation, drought resilience, and the long-term health of Western ecosystems.4

The Rescission Did Not Come Alone

The elimination of the rule arrived alongside a broader dismantling of public lands protections. Mondaq documented how the administration simultaneously moved to expand oil and gas leasing across the West, removing buffer zones and environmental review requirements near sensitive habitats.5 Montana Free Press reported deep concern in Western communities about the pace of these changes and the absence of any replacement framework for managing landscape health.6

The Gap Left Behind

FLPMA, the federal law that has governed BLM lands since 1976, mandates multiple-use management — but it does not explicitly name conservation as one of those uses. The 2024 rule was an attempt to fill that gap administratively. Now that it's gone, there is no mechanism within the BLM framework to counterbalance accelerating development pressure. The Sierra Club has warned that millions of acres face accelerated degradation with no administrative check in place.2 Conservation organizations have already filed suit over BLM oil and gas lease approvals in Colorado and Wyoming, arguing the agency is moving without adequate environmental review.3

What Needs to Happen Now

Advocates and legal experts are calling for two actions: an interim administrative order from the Secretary of the Interior reinstating core landscape-health and restoration-leasing provisions while litigation proceeds, and congressional action to amend FLPMA to explicitly name conservation as a mandated use — closing a statutory gap that has left land managers without the legal grounding to prioritize ecosystem health when conditions demand it.

These lands belong to every American. Clean water, wildlife habitat, and climate resilience across the West depend on what happens to them next.

Sign the petition now to urge the Secretary of the Interior to issue an interim order restoring conservation protections — and to call on Congress to make those protections permanent.

More on this issue:

  1. Wyatt Myskow, Inside Climate News (12 May 2026), "Trump Administration Kills Rule Putting Conservation of Public Lands on Equal Footing With Resource Extraction."
  2. Sierra Club, Sierra Club (11 May 2026), "Trump Administration Moves to Strip Conservation from America's Public Lands."
  3. Ali Longwell, Summit Daily News (9 September 2026), "2 conservation groups sue Bureau of Land Management over Colorado, Wyoming oil and gas leases."
  4. Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Columbia University (12 May 2026), "BLM Rescinds Land Conservation Rule."
  5. Brent McManigal, Mondaq (1 September 2026), "Trump Administration Rescinds Biden-Era Public Lands Protections Across The West."
  6. Robert Chaney, Montana Free Press (14 May 2026), "Trump, Burgum Rescind Public Lands Rule."
  7. Bureau of Land Management, Federal Register (12 May 2026), "Rescission of Conservation and Landscape Health Rule."

The Petition

To the Secretary of the Interior, United States Department of the Interior,

On May 12, 2026, the Trump administration published the formal rescission of the Bureau of Land Management's Conservation and Landscape Health Rule — eliminating, in a single administrative action, a framework years in the making. We are writing to urge you to act now to repair the damage.

The 2024 rule did something straightforward and long overdue: it placed ecological stewardship on the same administrative footing as mining, drilling, and grazing on the 245 million acres the BLM manages for all Americans. It established restoration leases that allowed conservation organizations to hold agreements aimed at habitat recovery, mirroring the lease structures long available to extractive industries. It required land managers to incorporate landscape health into planning in a systematic, accountable way. None of that was radical. All of it was necessary.

Its removal was not made in isolation. The rescission came alongside expanded oil and gas leasing across the West, the elimination of buffer zones, and the removal of environmental review requirements near sensitive habitats. There is now no administrative mechanism within the BLM framework to counterbalance accelerating development pressure — no restoration leasing authority, no landscape health assessment requirement, and no formal recognition of conservation as a legitimate use under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act.

This matters for reasons that go beyond policy. Healthy public lands are the foundation of clean water for downstream communities, habitat for species already under pressure from drought and fragmentation, and climate resilience for a region facing hotter, drier conditions decade after decade. These are not abstract concerns. They are the lived reality for millions of people and countless ecosystems across the American West.

We urge you to issue an interim administrative order reinstating the core landscape-health and restoration-leasing provisions of the 2024 rule while legal challenges move through the courts. The absence of any framework in the interim is itself a decision — one that favors extraction over stewardship by default. That default should not stand.

We also call on Congress to act with urgency: FLPMA must be amended to explicitly name conservation as a mandated use, closing a statutory gap that has left BLM land managers without the legal grounding to prioritize ecosystem health when conditions demand it.

Protecting these lands for the generations who will depend on them is an act of humanity — and taking these actions now will ensure a better future for all.

Sincerely,