Federal agencies may have to consider climate before they act
The Obama administration may issue an order that would expand the National Environmental Policy Act’s scope to prevent global warming. The move could open up new avenues to challenge projects.
I review grazing allotment renewal documents and rarely, if ever, have I seen climate change discussed. When it is discussed, and only in response to comments by WWP, the agencies claim that issues related to global warming and livestock grazing are beyond the scope of the project. Unfortunately, grazing compounds the effects of global warming by creating warmer and drier landscapes which, in turn, impacts wildlife.
There is a very good case to be made that eliminating grazing from public lands would also reduce the effects of global warming by 1) reducing desertification and 2) increasing carbon sequestration in soils. As Brian Ertz has illustrated in his post from last year, public lands can be very effective carbon sinks if allowed rest from livestock grazing. This is an important idea that needs to be kept in mind when discussing public lands ranching.
Federal agencies may have to consider climate before they act
By Jim Tankersley – L.A. Times

Ken Cole
Ken Cole is a 5th generation Idahoan, an avid fly fisherman, wildlife enthusiast, and photographer. He is the interim Idaho Director for Western Watersheds Project. We do not accept unsolicited “guest” authors or advertising.
3 Responses to Federal agencies may have to consider climate before they act
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Recent Posts
- Western Rewilding Network Proposal August 9, 2022
- Holiday Farm Fire And Industrial Logging August 8, 2022
- Another Misleading New York Times Fire Article August 4, 2022
- San Pedro Grazing Challenged August 3, 2022
- M-44 Ban On Public Lands Near Enactment August 1, 2022
Recent Comments
- Robert Goldman on Michael Garrity–Working to Protect the Northern Rockies Ecosystem
- Robert Goldman on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
- Robert Goldman on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
- Robert Goldman on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
- Ida Lupine on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
- Nancy on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
- Dave Stricklan on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
- GreenThumb on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
- Beeline on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
- Ed Loosli on A Greater Yellowstone National Park Proposal
- Hiker on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
- Mark L on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
- rastadoggie on Holiday Farm Fire And Industrial Logging
- Rosemary Lowe on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
- Ida Lupine on Western Rewilding Network Proposal
So the message is that if you are commenting on an EA (environmental analysis), or an EIS, raise the issue. Especially regarding a land management proposal’s effects on “carbon sinks.”
If a huge solar farm ruins a large area that sequesters carbon dioxide into the soil, is it a net plus regarding CO2 levels in the atmosphere?
Ralph, if we know the rate at which a large desert area sequesters carbon, it would seem to be a pretty easy calculation to find the net CO2 balance of such a farm. Have there been any studies that how the rate at which various desert landscapes sequester CO2?
A few years ago I (and I believe Maska as well) were checking the grazing allotment renewals in the Apache – Sitgreaves. I wish I had thought of using climate change effects of public lands grazing.