Regulatory Reform

The Council of South Carolina Professional Archaeologists (COSCAPA) opposes the modification or repeal of existing regulations that protect federal land and historic and cultural resources. They argue that regulations implementing NHPA, NEPA, ARPA, and NAGPRA are necessary, effective, and should remain in place to uphold the Department of the Interior's trust obligations to Native Nations and the public.

The Blaine County Board of Commissioners is requesting that the Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Land Management open the 2015 HiLine Resource Management Plan to public review and prepare a new Draft Environmental Impact Statement. They argue that current regulations inhibit access to oil, gas, and mineral deposits and request a "Chiefly Valuable for Grazing Determination" to investigate the impact of the Woody Island ACEC designation on grazing lands.

The Arizona Farm Bureau Federation supports the Department of the Interior's regulatory reform initiative, providing specific recommendations to streamline BLM grazing permits and notice-to-proceed timelines. They also advocate for the rescission of the Conservation and Landscape Health Rule, the reduction of the Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni Grand Canyon National Monument, and the delisting of the Mexican gray wolf.

The National Mining Association (NMA), a trade organization representing the U.S. mining industry, supports the Department of the Interior's "Regulatory Reform" initiative to reduce regulatory burdens. They provide specific recommendations to rescind or modify various regulations related to NEPA, the Endangered Species Act, and land management plans to streamline permitting and promote domestic mineral production.

The Coalition of Arizona/New Mexico Counties, representing multiple counties and various industries, opposes the proposed National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) policy changes. They argue that the new policies overstep statutory authority, prioritize landscape conservation and climate change over the original purposes of individual refuges, and unfairly favor non-governmental partners and tribal knowledge over local government and private landowner interests.

The Boundary Line Foundation supports the proposed regulatory reform and the rescission of the BLM Conservation and Landscape Health Rule. They argue that these regulations conflict with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and request the restoration of historic policies to protect access to public energy and mineral resources.

The Boundary Line Foundation is requesting the rescission of DOI Public Land Order 7917 to restore access to critical mineral deposits in the Superior National Forest of Minnesota. They argue that the current order violates federal land management statutes and propose a framework to align the area with the administration's domestic critical minerals agenda.

SalmonState, an Alaska-based conservation organization, opposes the Department of the Interior's proposal to streamline and deregulate permitting processes for extractive industries on federal public lands. They argue that such actions would harm Alaska's tourism and commercial fishing industries, compromise wildlife and salmon habitats, and lead to costly legal challenges by removing established environmental review safeguards.

Wild Cumberland, a nonprofit grassroots organization, opposes the proposed regulatory reform because it could weaken protections for national parks and public lands. They argue that existing laws like NEPA and the ESA should be maintained or expanded to ensure conservation and that any regulatory changes should prioritize scientific-informed decision-making over industrial interests.

The Coalition to Protect America’s National Parks opposes the Department of the Interior's current approach to regulatory reform, arguing that the Request for Information (RFI) is biased toward weakening protections rather than conducting a balanced review. They argue that the RFI focuses too heavily on the complaints of regulated industries and call for a process that includes identifying where regulations need to be strengthened to protect natural and cultural resources.