HARRISBURG, Pa. – Environmental advocates are calling a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court a landmark decision for public natural resources.

The ruling came in a case challenging the use of proceeds from oil and gas leases on public lands for anything other than environmental preservation.

The 4-to-2 ruling, issued Tuesday, broadens the interpretation of the Environmental Rights Amendment to the state constitution.

John Childe, an attorney with the Pennsylvania Environmental Defense Foundation, maintains the ruling should stand as a model for other states and nations.

"It makes it an inalienable right of the people to have their public natural resources protected, for both the people now and for all future generations," he states.

The court ruled that the governor and the General Assembly are trustees, not proprietors of public land. The state argued that would hinder economic development.

For years, state leaders have acted as if they were the owners of the state's natural resources, which Childe says allowed them to make changes to public lands, or even sell them.

"As the trustees, you do not have that authority,” he explains. “You can only do what the trust duty imposes on you, which in this case is to conserve and maintain the public natural resource."

In 2009, former Gov. Tom Corbett allowed some of the royalties from oil and gas leases on public lands to be used as part of the state's general fund.

According to Childe, Tuesday's ruling means those funds now must remain within the trust and only be used to protect the state's natural resources under the trust. That could have immediate fiscal and policy implications for the state.

"Because the existing royalty, as the court suggests in its opinion, will be in the amount of hundreds of millions of dollars," he points out.

The Environmental Rights Amendment, Article 1, Section 27 of the state constitution, was passed by referendum in 1971.





get more stories like this via email

Like Nevada, New Mexico has rejected a proposed interim storage facility for spent nuclear fuel.

Responding to the Federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission's plan to issue a license for a Holtec International facility in southeast New Mexico, the legislature passed Senate Bill 53 mostly along party lines, with Democrats in support and Republicans opposed.

The bill said no nuclear storage permits will be issued without support from state officials and not before the federal government has identified a permanent disposal site.

John Buchser, nuclear waste issues chair for the Rio Grande chapter of the Sierra Club, said a plan to safely transport nuclear waste via railroad from the east to a Western state has not been adequately studied.

"It's probably 10 years of research and then further decisions on, 'is that actually going to proceed?' And then dealing with the resistance of 'nobody really wants it,' " Buchser explained.

Nevada's Yucca Mountain was originally designated for the temporary nuclear waste repository, but strong state and regional opposition eventually killed the proposal. In New Mexico, city and county leaders from Carlsbad and Hobbs recruited Holtec to propose the nuclear-waste storage facility, and believe in its safety and promise to provide local jobs. The bill was signed by the governor hours after it passed.

Buchser hopes New Mexico's decision will put more pressure on Congress to create a permanent disposal site. He pointed out the problem of storing spent nuclear fuel is not unique to the United States, but some countries approach the problem differently.

"Finland is probably the best case, where they actually started with the premise, 'Let's talk to the people and ask them what they want to do with this?' " Buchser observed. "Instead of starting from the premise of the United States which seems to be, 'Let's define a site, and then we'll see what the public thinks about it.' "

A recent poll found 60% of New Mexico voters opposed the Holtec site, including 56% of those in southeast New Mexico. Those opposed to the "interim" storage site could become a substitute for permanent storage, with the radioactive waste possibly abandoned in New Mexico for a million years.

A package of bills in Helena is aimed at improving elk management in Montana. The six bills are bipartisan efforts from lawmakers, hunters and outfitters, and all have survived the Legislature's transmittal deadline outside their house of origin.

One is House Bill 635, which would set aside up to 15% of non-resident big game licenses for non-resident landowners so they can hunt on their own property.

Jim Vashro, president of Flathead Wildlife and a board member of the Montana Wildlife Federation, explained how usage is evolving and driving change.

"Montana has seen a real increase in hunting pressure by non-residents on publicly available land," Vashro pointed out. "This would move some segment of that hunting pressure onto private land, and ease up the competition on public land."

The measure had its first hearing in the Senate Thursday. The bill could remove more than 2,500 non-resident hunters from competing with Montanans on public lands. Some hunters and outfitters oppose it, saying it could reduce the number of big-game licenses available.

Mac Minard, executive director of the Montana Outfitters and Guides Association, said the bill is meant to entice owners of private land to open them to the public.

"Incentivizing landowners to participate in this can, in fact, open quite a bit of public access going forward," Minard contended.

Also in the package, House Bill 596 had its first Senate hearing Thursday. It provides some fixes to a popular incentive-based program passed in 2021, which also opens up private property to public hunting.

Minard noted the legislative package creates incremental benefits for elk management and lays the foundation for a good relationship between hunters and outfitters.

"It has been an absolute pleasure to be able to stand side-by-side with dedicated sportsmen from all aspects of the Montana sporting community, and move forward in a collaborative effort on things that we can agree on," Minard remarked.

The Montana Citizens Elk Management Coalition and Montana Outfitters and Guides Association developed the bills in early January during the "Elk Camp at the Capitol" event. It is the first legislative collaboration between hunters and outfitters in 15 years.

A decadelong effort to secure protections for New Mexico's last remaining free-flowing rivers and tributary systems has been introduced in Congress for the third time.

A diverse coalition of residents traveled to Washington, D.C., to support reintroduction of the M.H. Dutch Salmon Greater Gila Wild and Scenic River Act by the state's Congressional delegation.

John Harned, a wilderness guide from Grant County, lent his support, hoping to prevent future dams from being built on the Gila and San Francisco rivers. He believes New Mexico can sustain both free-flowing rivers and a vital economy.

"How many rivers do we have left that are flowing that have the kind of diversity -- the kind of resources -- that we see along the Gila River? There are not many of them," Harned pointed out

The bill was first introduced in May 2020 but stalled in the last Congress. It proposes to designate nearly 450 miles of the Gila and San Francisco as Wild and Scenic under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The Heritage Waters Coalition opposes the designation, arguing it would hurt the area's industry.

Lori Gooday Ware, chairwoman of the Fort Sill Apache Tribe, said the legislation is needed to ensure traditional and current use of the waterways, and protect critical wildlife habitat. She wants her grandchildren to experience the rivers the way their Indigenous ancestors did.

"People tend to go there and do their vacations and take their kids there, but it needs to be conserved the way it is, that way it will be the same way 150 years from now," Gooday Ware contended.

Outdoor recreation along pristine waterways is an economic driver for communities in southwestern New Mexico and Harned worries without protections, development will spoil the rivers.

"Is that really what we want for the Gila River? Do we want it to be developed?" Harned asked. "It's such an amazingly special place. I think it has more value as it is."

The Gila was inaugurated as America's first wilderness in 1924. Outdoor recreation employs nearly 100,000 people in New Mexico and generates nearly $10 billion in annual consumer spending.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Pew Charitable Trusts.