WASHINGTON — During a U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing to consider pending Trump administration nominees, U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), the Committee’s Ranking Member, and Committee Democrats secured key commitments from former Congressman Steve Pearce, President Trump’s pick to lead the Bureau of Land Management. In his answers to the Democratic Senators’ questions, Pearce acknowledged he could not sell a large amount of public lands under existing law and said he would not recommend rolling back national monument designations across the West, including the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument, Chuckwalla National Monument, and the Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni-Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument.
Additionally, Pearce pledged to enforce public land grazing laws and engage with communities with respect to the management of public lands.
If former Congressman Pearce is confirmed by the Senate as Director of the Bureau of Land Management, Ranking Member Heinrich and Committee Democrats will hold Mr. Pearce to these commitments.
On Mass Public Land Sell Offs
Heinrich began his questioning of Pearce, asking whether he would support broad-scale public land sell-offs, “The first is just the issue of the potential broad-scale divestment of public lands. And this is something that came up with Secretary Burgum and his nomination as well. And I think he did a good job of talking about how, while it may be completely appropriate to divest of certain isolated parcels of public land for affordable housing and other public purposes, that there wouldn't be a broad scale selling off of the public lands, and because of some of your previous writings and statements there is a concern in the public, among New Mexicans, that a sale of public lands on a broader scale might be part of the new BLM agenda. Can you speak to that and maybe allay some of those concerns?”
Pearce answered, “Thanks, Senator, I appreciate the chance to talk about this. The [Interior] Secretary has been very straightforward that he does not visualize any large-scale sales of land. FLPMA does not allow BLM to go in and the director of BLM to have these large-scale sales, that's something that, frankly, the isolated parcels, I would look to the members of this Committee to identify those. I think that from my time in office, I know that I would have understood better than any director of BLM, the sensitive sensitivity of this piece of land or that piece of land, and so that's the reason, when I say, I'll look to you all on that. There is a monumental amount of work to be done. And again, I would say, gladly, I would use the help you all could provide in identifying those parcels.”
U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) criticized Pearce for his previous position on selling off public lands, “It's pretty hard for us to be able, in the West, to trust someone who fundamentally doesn't believe that these public lands are important. I know you answered my colleague to the effect, well, we may not be able to do all the things that some people care about, but you're going to be in a position of great influence.”
Pearce responded, “So I recognize the importance of the federal lands and support the missions completely. I do not believe that we have too much federal land sitting in public hands.”
U.S. Senator John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) pushed Pearce on his past comments supporting public land sales, “I think oftentimes someone in your position influences Congress. And I guess the question is, are you free of those past comments? I could read back several where you supported the widespread sale of public lands, either to pay down the deficit or to get money for education or whichever reason. Is that something you really can renounce and feel that — if you were being asked by Congress to provide input, what would you say?”
Pearce answered, “I think the [Interior] Secretary has been very clear FLPMA prohibits any large sale —scale sale by the director, and so it would be at the secretary level. And he said — I would intend to follow his lead on that, there won't be any large-scale sale of land.”
On Protecting Monuments
Heinrich asked about the future of the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument, given that then-Congressman Pearce opposed the monument’s designation, “The other issue, and I've got correspondence from a number of Las Cruces City Councilors, the Mayor of Mesilla, Doña Ana County Commissioners, and State Representatives and Senators in Southern New Mexico, as well as Soil and Water Conservation District Members, is the issue of the future of the Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks National Monument. I know there's a lot of water under the bridge on that issue between both of us, but what would you say to those elected officials in Doña Ana County about your approach with respect to the monument?”
Pearce responded, stating that the monument was settled and he has no plans to recommend any changes to the monument, “Senator, again, thanks for the opportunity to clarify that because that issue was very hotly contested in the county for about 15 years, and eventually it was designated by executive order [sic]. I very rarely look in the rear-view mirror, and especially looking at this job in the, in the amount of work ahead of us, I don't anticipate going back and reviewing that at the end of the day. It's a presidential decision anyway [sic]. But I don't, I don't view myself as going and making a recommendation. There is too much ahead of us to get done to focus on things that have happened in the past. It's been recognized and operating. I appreciate that very much.”
U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) asked Pearce whether he would respect Chuckwalla’s monument designation, “From a California perspective, the Bureau of Land Management manages nearly 15% of California's land mass, so it's critical for us that BLM and the BLM Director maintain these lands for future generations to enjoy and not just need to sell them to the highest bidder. These BLM lands in California include Chuckwalla National Monument. For years, I worked with numerous Tribal leaders who led the effort to protect the natural resources in that area and to promote access to what is now Chuckwalla. It was a thoughtfully crafted proposal, as you and I discussed in my office, that took into account the input from stakeholders, conservationists, of course, energy developers, utilities, Tribal leaders, hunters, recreation groups and others, and we ended up with universal local support from the state and bipartisan support here in the Senate and in Congress. As a result, as one of the outcomes of that, five Tribes have even formed an intertribal commission to solidify their enduring commitment to protecting sacred lands in Chuckwalla. My question is clear and simple: Mr. Pearce, if confirmed, are you committed to honoring these monument designations? Yes or no?”
Pearce responded simply, “Yes.”
U.S. Senator Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) began his questioning of Pearce, asking if he would support the Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni-Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument, “But you know, you've heard it from some of our western states all today. And I'll give you the stat that everyone else has. You know, we have 12.1 million acres of BLM land. We're very, very, very lucky to have such a beautiful state, the most beautiful state in the country. And within this land, we have national monuments to highlight, you know, the beauty, the culture of the state, too. Of course, one of the ones that we always talk about is the Grand Canyon and ancestral footprints and such. And so because it's already been asked, but I have to do it as a home stater, because this has been somewhat controversial, which, when it comes to the Grand Canyon Monument that has been ping-ponging back and forth. Love to make sure that you know there is still going to be support for that, and would like to know if you have any plans to roll back protections for the Grand Canyon?”
Pearce answered, “So the monuments are something I do support deeply and understand. The Grand Canyon is one of the most magnificent things, frankly, in the world. So we'll do whatever we can to work with you any way that's necessary on that.”
On Community Engagement with BLM
U.S. Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Public Lands, Mining, and Forests, asked Pearce about whether he supports community partnership with BLM, “Based on your experience... it is important that locals are part of this conversation and that the federal government pays attention to it, locally and to stakeholders?”
Pearce responded, “That is correct... I've said multiple times that I'll work with every member of the Committee and their state to figure out what makes sense in their state. I don't visualize the federal government having the best insight on that.”
Cortez Masto continued, “And I know I'm running out of time, but let me just do one final thing here: resource management plan statewide. I've been asking the department for this, for this very reason, because the federal government owns so much land, there has to be a partnership and a resource management plan taking into consideration our state, our local stakeholders, our Tribes, and working together. I would hope that when you get in this position, you are willing to work with us on updating our Resource Management Plan statewide for the state of Nevada. That is in the best interest of both people in the state of Nevada, but also the federal government.”
Pearce responded, “I think it was Senator Heinrich that mentioned that we had tremendous outreach into every community in the second district of New Mexico. And I would visualize the same effort going into the states. So you'd find me a willing partner on looking at that and working with local communities, because that's the voice that we've got to protect. It's their economy, it's their life, it's their homes, it's their culture, it's their customs. And those are things that I'm deeply sensitive to, whether Native American land or just your average mountain community or whatever. Yes, I would commit strongly to them.”
On Illegal Grazing
Cortez Masto asked Pearce how he’d approach illegal grazing on public lands, “We’ve seen this issue in the state of Nevada, but if a rancher is grazing cattle illegally on federal land, how would you handle that?”
Pearce answered, “If they're grazing illegally? Oh, I think that the laws will be upheld, and we should dig into that. And again, there are pieces of the agency which deal with that. But, absolutely believe that permission has to be given when a land holder, be it personal or federal, the permission has to be sacred.”
###