Urgent: Call Congress and tell them to vote no on H.J.R. 106

by | Jul 21, 2025

A cloudy and foggy mountain scene appears ominous and gloomy. There are tall skinny spruce trees in the foreground and a sliver of blue sky poking through the gray clouds.

View of the Central Brooks Range by Sean Busby

What’s happening?

Alaska Representative Nick Begich wants to take away environmental and subsistence use protections for 13.3 million acres of Interior and Arctic Alaska. This includes 3.6 million acres of designated Areas of Critical Environmental Concern—land that protects subsistence areas, critical salmon spawning habitat, sensitive Dall sheep habitat, and nearly 750,000 acres of caribou habitat. On July 14, Rep. Begich introduced House Joint Resolution 106, asking Congress to use the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to toss out last year’s Record of Decision for the Central Yukon Resource Management Plan. Using the CRA is a backhanded way to make sure a different presidential administration can’t put new protections in place down the road.

This comes as the Bureau of Land Management issued a plan to turn federally managed lands over to the state of Alaska. Under two federal Public Land Orders (PLO), 5150 and 5180, rural subsistence use is currently protected as a priority through the Federal Subsistence Board (FSB). That means that when caribou herds and salmon populations are in crisis, as they are now, rural communities’ needs come first. FSB oversight manages shifts in harvest limits, harvest seasons, and mitigates user conflicts to best protect the needs of rural and Indigenous communities who depend on these resources. The state will not offer these same protections, and will potentially open these lands to extraction that will further harm fish and wildlife.

 

What does it mean?

The 2024 Central Yukon Resource Management Plan (CYRMP) was a robust public process that set up protections for the area, including maintaining federal protections for lands managed under PLO 5150. That 2024 Record of Decision prioritized protecting the region’s ecosystems and maintaining subsistence priority for these lands, all of which would no longer be upheld if the lands were turned over to the state. BLM already determined that revoking PLO 5150 and 5180 protections and transferring these lands to the state would adversely affect historic properties on these lands, yet this is moving forward anyways.

The entire Central Yukon region could be opened to resource extraction.

 

To recap just how bad this is:

  • Using the Congressional Review Act, Congress could potentially revoke the previous Record of Decision for the Central Yukon region and prevent federal agencies from being able to instate similar management plans in the future.

  • By dismantling this resource management plan and turning over lands to the state, subsistence priority would be lost. The Federal Subsistence Advisory Board would no longer be able to oversee subsistence harvest by managing hunting seasons, harvest limits, protecting vulnerable populations, or enforcing restrictions in response to wildlife management emergencies or conflicts between users.

  • The lands could be opened to mining and other extractive practices, and recreational and hunting access would change.

  • Cultural and historical sites that are currently protected by federal management practices would likely be harmed due to lack of adequate protections.

Further, opening these lands impacts multiple other regional issues, such as the fight against the proposed Ambler Industrial Access Road, maintenance of special areas for subsistence and rural hunters, and D1 lands protections. Last year, we achieved hard-fought victories throughout this region—revoking permits for the Ambler Road and preventing its construction, and securing continued protections for D1 lands.

Overturning PLO 5150 lands to the state and rescinding the CYRMP are likely attempts by the state and federal government to disregard sound environmental reviews, override public will, and eliminate protections and barriers to development. Piece by piece they are paving the way for extractive projects that have been determined to be incredibly damaging, both environmentally and culturally. Using the Congressional Review Act for part of this process sets a terrible precedent for all other resource management planning processes across the nation, making them vulnerable for reversal or removal without any scientific review or public oversight.

 

Here’s how can you help

Call Congress and tell them to vote no on Rep. Begich’s H.J.R. 106. The House of Representatives is voting on this resolution TOMORROW (Tuesday, July 22, 2025). It is critically important that we let House members know that we do not support the revocation of federal protections on these lands.

Please call the following members of the House Natural Resources Committee:

  • Rep. Nick Begich (AK): (907) 251-4560 (Fairbanks), (202) 225-5765 (Washington, D.C.)
  • Rep. Bruce Westerman (AR), Chairman: (202) 225-3772
  • Rep. Rob Wittman (VA), Vice Chairman: (202) 225-4261
  • Rep. Jared Huffman (CA), Ranking Member: (202)-225-5161

If you have time, call these additional Representatives and urge them to vote no on this resolution:

  • Rep. Jim Costa (CA): (202) 225-3341
  • Rep. Henry Cuellar (TX): (202) 225-1640
  • Rep. Don Davis (NC): (202) 225-3101
  • Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (TX): (202) 225-2531
  • Rep. Jared Golden (ME) (202) 225-6306
  • Rep. Adam Gray (CA): (202) 225-1947
  • Rep. Julie Johnson (TX): (202) 225-2231
  • Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet (MI): (202) 225-3611
  • Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA): (202) 225-3536
  • Rep. Marc Veasey (TX): (202) 225-9897

 

Go further

BLM will not provide any public comment opportunities for their decision on rescinding Public Land Orders 5150 and 5180. Instead, they are relying on what’s known as a Determination of NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) Adequacy (DNA)—allowing them to claim that the public comment periods previously held during the review process for the CYRMP are sufficient to inform this next process.

This is unacceptable. It is important that we send questions, concerns, and objections to BLM with the hope that BLM will be required to answer them in the public record. We encourage folks to send questions and comments to: