For most of American history, the Bureau of Land Management operated under a hierarchy: mining, drilling, grazing, and other extractive uses came first. Conservation was something that happened around the edges, when resources allowed. The 2024 Conservation and Landscape Health Rule changed that, formally placing ecological stewardship alongside resource extraction as a recognized use of the 245 million acres the BLM manages on behalf of the public. In May 2026, that change was erased.

On May 12, 2026, the Trump administration published a formal rescission of the rule in the Federal Register, wiping out provisions that had established restoration leasing, landscape health assessments, and a framework for acknowledging conservation as a legitimate use under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. The Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University noted that the rescission removed protections developed to address habitat fragmentation, drought resilience, and the long-term health of Western ecosystems.

What the Rule Actually Did

The 2024 rule wasn't a sweeping land grab or a moratorium on extraction. It created a structure for the BLM to issue restoration leases — agreements that would allow conservation organizations and others to hold leases specifically aimed at habitat recovery and landscape restoration, much as energy companies hold leases for drilling. It also required the agency to incorporate ecological health into land-use planning in a more systematic way.

As Inside Climate News reported, the rule represented the first formal effort to put conservation on equal administrative footing with the extractive industries that have long dominated BLM decision-making. Supporters argued that without such a framework, land managers lacked the tools to prioritize ecosystem health even when resource conditions demanded it.

What Comes Next Without It

The rescission arrived alongside a broader rollback of Biden-era environmental policies. Mondaq documented how the administration simultaneously moved to expand oil and gas leasing across the West, eliminating buffer zones and review requirements that had slowed development near sensitive habitats. Montana Free Press covered the response from Western communities, where concern ran high about the pace of change and the absence of any replacement framework for managing landscape health.

Legal challenges have already begun. As Summit Daily News reported, conservation organizations have filed suit over BLM oil and gas lease approvals in Colorado and Wyoming, arguing the agency is moving forward without adequate environmental review. The Sierra Club has warned that without the rule's structure, millions of acres of public land face accelerated degradation with no administrative mechanism to counterbalance it.

The Gap the Rescission Left Behind

FLPMA, the law governing 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, advocates and legal experts are pressing for an interim administrative order to restore core provisions while litigation proceeds, and urging Congress to close the gap permanently by codifying conservation as a mandated use in the statute itself.

These lands belong to all Americans. What happens to them is a decision that affects wildlife, water, climate, and communities across the West — and across the country.

Click below to make a difference.