When it comes to conservation and land management, there’s a lot that goes on behind the scenes. Congress passes high-level laws, like the Environmental Protection Act or the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, but then leaves it up to experts and policy-makers at the appropriate agencies to construct regulations to implement those laws. Over the years, those regulations can be amended, added to, or scrapped altogether following public comment and review.
With a new executive order on April 9, titled “Zero-Based Regulatory Budgeting to Unleash American Energy,” the Trump administration is seeking to remake that paradigm. The idea is essentially a roundabout flip: instead of a baseline regulation book that is changed carefully as needed, the new baseline is a zero-regulatory state, with regulations set to expire every five years, unless renewed.
Agencies and bureaus listed in the order (including the Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) have until September 30th this year to add a “conditional sunset date” into thousands of regulations on their books, effectively terminating the regs within one year (by September 30, 2026 at the latest).
Any regulation that the agencies wish to keep can receive an extension of up to five years, if found to be “warranted” after reviewing the costs and benefits in coordination with public comment and a Department of Government Efficiency team lead planted in the agency. The extension process must be repeated every five years.
To help make sense of the directive, MeatEater spoke with policy expert and lifelong conservationist Steve Williams, who served as U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service director under George W. Bush. “It just doesn’t make any sense,” Williams said in an interview with Ryan Callaghan for an upcoming episode of “Cal’s Week in Review.” “We’re at the precipice of having a hundred years of experience go out the window because of things like a reduction in people and sun-setting regulations.”
The areas that could be impacted are far-ranging. Specific laws that must have all associated regulations reviewed include, to name a few, the Mining Act of 1872, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act of 1965, the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, and the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Check out the full list here.
The leviathan task this presents is difficult to put into perspective. FLPMA alone, for example, outlines how BLM land is managed, including everything from grazing leases to road maintenance to mineral extraction and right-of-ways, each containing hundreds of associated regulations. With recent staff reductions and federal agencies, it’s unclear if the capacity even remains to carry out the reviews mandated by the order. That might be the point, though, suggests MeatEater’s Ryan Callaghan.
“The good-faith part of my brain says this could be a good way of updating and eliminating redundancies, and the things that don’t need updates will just remain,” Callaghan said. “I would love to see some updates in a lot of regulatory areas, for instance, how much you get fined for driving motorized vehicles into a wilderness area. However, the skeptic in me says this incredible undertaking will cause enough of a cluster fluffle that a bunch of unregulated development in sensitive areas could take place.”
Williams expresses similar concerns. Even businesses don’t function in this way, he says. The process of making changes—whether that be in government or in the private sector—is lengthy and time-consuming, but ultimately results in calculated decisions. “These folks are smart enough to know that businesses don’t operate like this. They collect information, they analyze it, they make changes, they monitor those changes, then they change incrementally,” he said. “That’s a common occurrence and an important occurrence. But to sunset all the regulations, in one year? That’s unprecedented. That’s never happened in the history of this country.”
In terms of the impacts on hunters and anglers, there may be a mixed bag of results. There’s no doubt that there are old, inefficient laws on the books—regulations that “serve as a drag on progress” and create an “energy landscape perpetually trapped in the 1970s,” according to the executive order. But sweeping changes to the overall regulatory structure could have unintended—or intended—consequences, depending on how you look at the issue and what you prioritize.
“I spent my whole career working in fish and wildlife conservation and my heart breaks for what’s happening to conservation programs that are the envy of the world,” Williams concluded. In conjunction with a series of other executive measures targeting agencies responsible for implementing conservation programs, the order could put a damper on things. It will certainly be worth keeping an eye on.
Read the full article here