Utah BLM is no fan of Rockhounds

The continued reductions in federal lands open to rock collecting (and federal land is the bulk of land potentially open to Rockhounds in the western states) is not the result of statutes (legislation passed by our elected representatives). It is the result of the actions and rule-making of bureaucrats at agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management. Their actions are sometimes contrary to the intent of statutes, even on occasion in conflict with the letter of law (i.e., the APA), and thus arbitrary.

Many BLM employees seem to consider rock collecting a harmful activity. This attitude, combined with the agency's authority to write rules, has resulted in more and more restrictions placed on non-commercial collecting of modest amounts of rocks, minerals, and common fossils, including petrified wood. However, rules written under applicable laws, including the Paleontological Resources Act of 2009 (PRPA) and the Petrified Wood Act of 1962, are not unfriendly to hobby collecting. In fact, the sponsors of the PRPA stated that it was not intended to interfere with rock collecting, and the study prepared for Congress mentions the positive effects of amateur fossil collecting. The Petrified Wood Act protects the public's right to collect petrified wood on public land. Unfortunately, the attitude of many BLM employees might be summed up by what one high-ranking official told me: "If the management report mentions any geological or paleontological resources, then collecting will be banned."

BLM's Catch-22

Any large piece of land has rocks and fossils. Reports prepared by BLM will always mention these resources, so, don't be surprised if hobby collecting is banned on any and all land with a management plan administered by the BLM.* Paradoxically, the only land that would be open for collectors is land lacking any geological or paleontological resources, i.e. you can only collect where there is nothing to collect.

Rockhounds who supported the President's executive order to shrink Utah's National Monuments with the expectation that accommodation of hobby collecting would be restored now have good reason to feel betrayed. Commercial interests are being accommodated, but not those of Rockhounds. BLM has made arbitrary decisions that conflict with the Rulemaking process stipulated under the APA (see below). If the agency is going to be persuaded to revise its customary ad hoc management practices, it's going to take a sustained campaign of outreach and pressure, bringing to bear the voices of the Rockhound community represented by societies and regional federations of the AFMS. In other words, the community will need to assert itself as a Stakeholder that has special interests, particular expertise and authority on the subject of amateur collecting of geological and mineral resources.

* Southern California's BLM has a more tolerant view of hobby collecting; the agency regards it as a low-impact recreational activity.

How it's supposed to work

After a Statute is passed into law by Congress, the specific rules and regulations for implementing it are then drafted by the agency responsible for administering it. The Administrative Procedures Act of 1946 (APA) requires the agency to "give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking through submission of written data, views, or arguments" (5 U.S.C. § 553(c) (2006)), especially, when a person's own interests might be affected or when a person might have special expertise whereby constructive input could improve the Final Proposed Rule.

Under § 551. Definitions, (2), " 'person' includes an individual, partnership, corporation, association, or public or private organization other than an agency.") Federal agencies recognize a "Stakeholder" as a special category or group of "interested persons" who represent special interests or have authority or particular expertise on a subject. Are 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations such as gem-minerals societies "interested persons" aka "Stakeholder"? Yes.

The comment period under the Rulemaking process of the APA is federally mandated to provide opportunity for "interested persons" to submit input on a proposed rule or plan. The Federal Register is the vehicle for administering the Rulemaking process and publishing relevant documents, procedures and timelines. The Federal Register reiterates the APA: "The proposed rule and the public comments received on it form the basis of the final rule." (emphasis added)

According to the Rulemaking process posted in the Federal Register:

The notice‐and‐comment process enables anyone to submit a comment on any part of the proposed rule. This process is not like a ballot initiative or an up‐or‐down vote in a legislature. An agency is not permitted to base its final rule on the number of comments in support of the rule over those in opposition to it. At the end of the process, the agency must base its reasoning and conclusions on the rulemaking record, consisting of the comments, scientific data, expert opinions, and facts accumulated during the pre‐rule and proposed rule stages."