The Wilderness Workshop and The Wilderness Society filed a lawsuit Sept. 9 in U.S. District Court in Denver challenging the Bureau of Land Management’s June approval of oil and gas lease sales that include public lands in Colorado and Wyoming. The groups contend the BLM failed to follow its own regulatory criteria and violated multiple federal laws by offering environmentally sensitive parcels for lease.
Who’s named and what they allege
The complaint names the U.S. Department of the Interior, Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, the Bureau of Land Management and acting BLM directors for Colorado and Wyoming — Thomas Heinlein and Kris Kirby — as defendants. The plaintiffs say the agency’s June lease sales offered “hundreds of thousands of acres” of public lands without withholding parcels that BLM’s regulations and federal law would require be set aside because of conflicts with wildlife habitat and wilderness-quality areas.
The suit alleges violations of several federal statutes and authorities, including the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. It asks the court to vacate the lease sale decisions and return them to the agency for further consideration.
“The Bureau of Land Management’s failure to follow its regulations and consider the impacts of these oil and gas lease sales on pristine public lands and wildlife violates the law,”
said Clay Samford, an attorney at Earthjustice representing the two nonprofits. He added that the agency ignored the importance of “centuries-old big game migration corridors” and neglected impacts on hunters and other public lands users.
Alleged impacts and agency analysis
According to the complaint, BLM’s own analyses indicated multiple conflicts between the parcels offered in June and critical big game habitats, migration corridors and areas described as having wilderness-quality characteristics. The plaintiffs assert the agency nevertheless proceeded to include those parcels in the lease sale rather than withholding them under its preference criteria.
The lawsuit seeks a judicial ruling that the agency’s actions were unlawful and an order sending the decisions back to BLM for further review consistent with applicable statutes and regulations.
What the suit asks the court to do
- Vacate the BLM’s June lease sale decisions affecting lands in Colorado and Wyoming.
- Require the agency to reexamine the parcels under the proper regulatory preference criteria and federal environmental law.
- Prevent new leases from proceeding until the agency complies with legal obligations identified in the complaint.
Legal context and local implications
The case raises familiar but consequential questions about how federal land managers balance energy development with conservation and multiple-use mandates. In Wyoming, where public lands are central to outdoor recreation, hunting and the state’s energy economy, disputes over where to allow oil and gas activity have repeatedly reached federal courts.
For hunters, recreationists and wildlife managers, the central concern outlined in the complaint is that leasing in or near migration corridors and intact landscapes can fragment habitat and disrupt seasonal movement patterns that species have relied on for generations. The plaintiffs argue that the BLM’s decision-making process did not adequately account for those risks before offering parcels for lease.
Parties and statutes at issue
| Plaintiffs | Defendants | Statutes Cited |
|---|---|---|
| The Wilderness Workshop; The Wilderness Society | U.S. Department of the Interior; BLM; Secretary Doug Burgum; Thomas Heinlein; Kris Kirby | FLPMA; NEPA; One Big Beautiful Bill Act; APA |
The plaintiffs are represented by Earthjustice in the case. The BLM and Interior Department have not yet issued a public response in the materials filed with the court as of the filing time.
What to watch next
The court will decide whether to grant the relief sought by the conservation groups, which could delay or undo oil and gas leasing decisions tied to the contested parcels. If the court vacates the lease sales, BLM would be required to revisit its review process and could either withhold certain parcels or supplement its environmental analyses.
For residents and stakeholders across Wyoming, the litigation underscores ongoing tensions between energy development and landscape-scale conservation. The outcome could affect future leasing practices, the pace of permitting on public lands and how the BLM weighs migratory wildlife corridors in its decisions.
WE NEWS will continue to monitor filings in U.S. District Court in Denver and report any formal responses from the BLM or Department of the Interior.
