Stop Wyoming BLM oil and gas leasing in early 2027
2027 First Quarter Competitive Oil and Gas Lease Sale
Bureau of Land Management· BLM Wyoming public landsBLM NEPA Register DOI-BLM-WY-0000-2026-0009-EA ↗
BLM ePlanningWe track this on the agency’s own system of record, where most on-the-ground decisions live.
The groups on this fight
4 groups work Wyoming
By footprint, from the same match the STAND matchmaker runs; none is linked to this decision in our record yet. Give straight to them; nothing routes through us.
- Sierra Club
Works Wyoming: its Wyoming Chapter mobilized public comments ahead of the December 18, 2025 deadline against the administration's rollback of Red Desert ACEC protections in the Rock Springs RMP amendment..
- Western Watersheds Project
Works Wyoming: co-plaintiff in the federal appeal challenging BLM's plan to cut the Adobe Town herd management area roughly in half as part of the largest wild horse removal ever attempted in the Wyoming checkerboard..
- Wyoming Outdoor Council
Works Wyoming: leading opposition to BLM's 2025 reopening of the just-finalized Rock Springs RMP, with program director Alec Underwood arguing the Golden Triangle and Big Sandy Foothills are too special to lease and develop..
- Wyoming Wilderness Association
Works Wyoming: organized citizen outings at Skull Rim to build opposition to BLM lease parcels around Adobe Town Rim and has pressed the agency to shrink lease sales touching the WSA and surrounding lands with wilderness characteristics..
Every group above is on STAND for Public Lands, with its court record, its filings and who backs it.
BLM would auction Wyoming public land parcels to oil and gas companies for fossil fuel extraction.
What’s at risk
Wildlife habitat and recreation areas on Wyoming public lands face industrial drilling development. The lease sale would authorize energy companies to extract fossil fuels from parcels currently open to the public.
If this goes through
Once leases are sold, BLM is legally constrained from blocking development on those parcels, locking in drilling rights for the lease term.
Our plain-English read of the official notice ↗. Check it against the agency’s own words below.
6 holes in the agency’s own analysis
What the public could have raised, from the agency’s own document
- I oppose this action as proposed, and I ask the agency to weigh the specific harms below.
- The notice states that 328 parcels covering 427,701.41 acres are posted for scoping, but it provides no parcel-level description of the resources present on those parcels -- no mention of watersheds, wildlife habitat, cultural sites, or surface ownership. Without that information in the scoping notice itself, the public cannot meaningfully identify resources of concern as the agency says it intends. The 'What's New' section acknowledges the scoping period exists to receive comments to assist in identifying resources of concern, yet posts only a shapefile and an overview map, not the resource data needed to evaluate impacts. BLM should post parcel-level resource inventories -- including known cultural, biological, and hydrological values -- alongside the scoping list before the comment period closes.
- The scoping period runs only 30 days, from August 11 to September 10, 2026, for 328 parcels totaling over 427,000 acres. The notice itself flags that acreage is subject to change based on further adjudication, analysis, and/or comments, meaning the public is being asked to comment on a moving target within a narrow window. A 30-day window for a sale of this scale is the regulatory minimum, not a reasoned choice, and the notice offers no justification for not extending it. BLM should extend the scoping period to at least 45 days and commit to re-noticing any parcels added or materially changed after the close of scoping.
- The notice states that preliminary parcel stipulations may change upon further review, but provides no information about what stipulations are currently attached to which parcels, what criteria govern changes, or when final stipulations will be made public before the lease sale. Members of the public commenting on resource conflicts cannot evaluate whether existing stipulations are adequate if BLM does not disclose them during scoping. BLM should post the preliminary stipulation table for every parcel during the scoping period and commit to a public comment opportunity on any material stipulation changes made after scoping closes.
- The notice references 43 CFR section 3120.42(a) as the basis for the 30-day scoping period but provides no analysis of whether that regulatory minimum satisfies NEPA's requirement for meaningful public participation given the scale of this sale. The notice also does not state whether a scoping meeting will be held, whether Spanish-language or other accessibility accommodations will be provided, or how comments must be formatted to be considered. BLM should hold at least one in-person or virtual public scoping meeting and publish clear instructions on how comments will be reviewed and responded to in the EA.
Show all 8 points from the document
- The notice describes the program as 'Fluid Minerals (Oil & Gas, Tar Sands, Oil Shale)' but does not specify which of these mineral types are actually offered in this sale. Tar sands and oil shale extraction have substantially different environmental footprints than conventional oil and gas, yet the notice treats them identically. If any parcels are being offered for tar sands or oil shale, the EA must separately analyze those impacts. BLM should disclose which parcels, if any, are being offered for tar sands or oil shale development and analyze their distinct environmental impacts.
- The notice provides no information about the National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 consultation process for any of the 328 parcels, and no mention of Tribal consultation under NHPA or NEPA for a sale covering more than 427,000 acres in Wyoming, a state with multiple federally recognized Tribes with treaty rights and cultural interests. The absence of any Tribal consultation disclosure in the scoping notice is a significant procedural gap. BLM should disclose what government-to-government consultation has occurred or is planned with affected Tribes before the EA is completed, and should not finalize any parcels with unresolved Tribal cultural resource concerns.
- Say something only you can say. The law requires the agency to consider and respond to substantive comments, and specifics are what make a comment substantive.
Did the agency answer?
6 issues are on this record. The agency has not published its decision document yet, so each one stays pending until the agency answers.
Issues on the record, awaiting the decision
- PendingThe notice provides no information about the National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 consultation process for any of the 328 parcels, and no mention of Tribal consultation under NHPA or NEPA fo
The notice provides no information about the National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 consultation process for any of the 328 parcels, and no mention of Tribal consultation under NHPA or NEPA for a sale covering more than 427,000 acres in Wyoming, a state with multiple federally recognized Tribes with treaty rights and cultural interests. The absence of any Tribal consultation disclosure in the scoping notice is a significant procedural gap. BLM should disclose what government-to-government consultation has occurred or is planned with affected Tribes before the EA is completed, and should not finalize any parcels with unresolved Tribal cultural resource concerns.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe notice states that 328 parcels covering 427,701.41 acres are posted for scoping, but it provides no parcel-level description of the resources present on those parcels -- no mention of watersheds,
The notice states that 328 parcels covering 427,701.41 acres are posted for scoping, but it provides no parcel-level description of the resources present on those parcels -- no mention of watersheds, wildlife habitat, cultural sites, or surface ownership. Without that information in the scoping notice itself, the public cannot meaningfully identify resources of concern as the agency says it intends. The 'What's New' section acknowledges the scoping period exists to receive comments to assist in identifying resources of concern, yet posts only a shapefile and an overview map, not the resource data needed to evaluate impacts. BLM should post parcel-level resource inventories -- including known cultural, biological, and hydrological values -- alongside the scoping list before the comment period closes.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe scoping period runs only 30 days, from August 11 to September 10, 2026, for 328 parcels totaling over 427,000 acres.
The scoping period runs only 30 days, from August 11 to September 10, 2026, for 328 parcels totaling over 427,000 acres. The notice itself flags that acreage is subject to change based on further adjudication, analysis, and/or comments, meaning the public is being asked to comment on a moving target within a narrow window. A 30-day window for a sale of this scale is the regulatory minimum, not a reasoned choice, and the notice offers no justification for not extending it. BLM should extend the scoping period to at least 45 days and commit to re-noticing any parcels added or materially changed after the close of scoping.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe notice states that preliminary parcel stipulations may change upon further review, but provides no information about what stipulations are currently attached to which parcels, what criteria govern
The notice states that preliminary parcel stipulations may change upon further review, but provides no information about what stipulations are currently attached to which parcels, what criteria govern changes, or when final stipulations will be made public before the lease sale. Members of the public commenting on resource conflicts cannot evaluate whether existing stipulations are adequate if BLM does not disclose them during scoping. BLM should post the preliminary stipulation table for every parcel during the scoping period and commit to a public comment opportunity on any material stipulation changes made after scoping closes.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe notice describes the program as 'Fluid Minerals (Oil & Gas, Tar Sands, Oil Shale)' but does not specify which of these mineral types are actually offered in this sale.
The notice describes the program as 'Fluid Minerals (Oil & Gas, Tar Sands, Oil Shale)' but does not specify which of these mineral types are actually offered in this sale. Tar sands and oil shale extraction have substantially different environmental footprints than conventional oil and gas, yet the notice treats them identically. If any parcels are being offered for tar sands or oil shale, the EA must separately analyze those impacts. BLM should disclose which parcels, if any, are being offered for tar sands or oil shale development and analyze their distinct environmental impacts.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
- PendingThe notice references 43 CFR section 3120.42(a) as the basis for the 30-day scoping period but provides no analysis of whether that regulatory minimum satisfies NEPA's requirement for meaningful publi
The notice references 43 CFR section 3120.42(a) as the basis for the 30-day scoping period but provides no analysis of whether that regulatory minimum satisfies NEPA's requirement for meaningful public participation given the scale of this sale. The notice also does not state whether a scoping meeting will be held, whether Spanish-language or other accessibility accommodations will be provided, or how comments must be formatted to be considered. BLM should hold at least one in-person or virtual public scoping meeting and publish clear instructions on how comments will be reviewed and responded to in the EA.
A hole PLAN found in the agency’s own notice, quote verified against the text
The reporting behind this
From More Than Just ParksIt’s referred to as Unit 346 in the Twin Mountain II Timber Sale. On the ground, it’s some of the most spectacular old growth we’ve ever witnessed, and it’s marked for clearcutting.
To document and do our part to save America’s greatest old growth forest
A judge in Anchorage ruled that once the federal government hands public land to a state, no citizen can sue to undo it. Nothing in his reasoning stops at Alaska.
More actions that need you
Go deeper, free
See how your members of Congress vote on public lands
Every representative, graded on the votes that decide the fate of parks, forests, and refuges.
Open ↗The mapSee the places under active threat
A live map of the parks, monuments, and wild country in the crosshairs right now.
Open ↗A wrong fact, a dead link, a form that wouldn’t take your letter: one tap and it comes to the people who build PLAN, with this fight attached.
Know an open comment period we are missing, or spotted a wrong deadline? .