Concerns persist about the RPM

Government agencies have lost trust from the people they serve. The Bureau of Land Management has been conducting town hall meetings to discuss its Resource Management Plan, which according to the agency, “provides the framework to guide decisions for every action and approved use on the National System of Public Lands.”

Currently, the BLM, through its RMP meetings in Nevada, is taking a collaborative approach when dealing with state and local governments and tribal entities. The BLM plan covers 11 counties including most of Churchill and Lyon.

The BLM faced the public in Fallon on Thursday, not to tell the people what the agency plans to do in the future but to gain input from the residents for the new RMP.

One three-hour session in Fallon was not enough to listen to residents’ concerns regarding the multiple uses for public lands. While residents expressed their frustrations with the agency, the BLM has proposed to designate more land for alternative energy development and to protect sensitive wildlife habitat, cultural and archaeological resources.

Churchill County residents are joined by others across the state who have serious reservations about various BLM plans. According to news reports out of southern Nevada, for example, the Nye County Commission passed a resolution that said no to the BLM and called its RPM “repugnant” and it threatens “further economic and environment damage” to Nye County.

Currently, too many questions linger without too many answers. Once the BLM sifts through all the questions and concerns, the agency will then incorporate — or so they say — some suggestions in their plan.

We don’t have a warm feeling about the RPM and any proposal to shut off more public land, an observation shared by those in attendance. Attendees were interested in what others had to say, but Thursday’s venue was too small to accommodatethe large crowd

Too many times, government agencies give lip service during hearings, and we hope that is not the case.

We felt too many BLM responses to the residents were perhaps too short and arrogant in nature, and some presenters did not appear to respect the people’s concerns.

On Tuesday, BLM extended the response time for the RPM for 30 more days, which is a wise move.

The BLM — which is definitely not alone as an agency — should be more transparent in how it will assess the input. That seems to be another gripe from the general public.

Furthermore, we like to see the BLM make better use of its advisory council in Nevada, but according to the Carson City District, a county official from both Churchill and Lyon counties will be part of the meetings when the BLM puts together its RPM. If the BLM is inviting our officials to these meetings, we hope the feds will listen from those at the grassroots level and respect what the public has to offer. They don’t have the time to play games that will affect their lives or livelihood.

LVN editorials written by the Editorial Board appear on Wednesdays.