A Biden administration plan to let conservation groups lease public land for preservation is facing backlash.

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) introduced the new rules to allow for conservation leases in March. Since then, more than 170,000 public comments have been submitted about the proposed policy.

Under the draft rule, “conservation” would be recognized as part of the “multiple use” doctrine, with conservation defined as including “both protection and restoration activities.” The draft states that “conservation is a use on par with other uses of the public lands,” in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976.

A group of state attorneys general have registered their opposition to BLM’s proposal in comment letters, reported Fox News. The attorneys general argue that, if enacted, the policy would violate FLPMA, which requires open lands under BLM’s management to be used for purposes such as energy exploration and extraction, grazing for livestock, and recreation.

Leasing land for conservation is not one of the approved uses under FLPMA intended by Congress, the attorneys general claimed.

“Uses are all defined in FLPMA. Nowhere in there does the term conservation — conservation is basically non-use,” Montana’s Attorney General Austin Knudsen told Fox News. “So what this would amount to is locking up swaths of federal land for ‘conservation.’ That’s not an approved use under the law. If you want to do that, fine. Go to Congress, pass the bill, get the president to sign it. But they know they don’t have the juice to do that.”

The Petroleum Association of Wyoming has openly opposed the proposed rule. Pete Obermueller, the organization’s president, claimed that the rule over-emphasizes conservation.

“It doesn’t put conservation on par [with other uses],” Obermueller said, according to the WyoFile. “It elevates it above everything else, to the exclusion of everything else.”

“If conservation leasing doesn’t preclude [oil and gas activity], that’s something we’re absolutely willing to discuss. But that’s not how the rule is written,” Obermueller added.

In addition to energy developers, the rule has also come under scrutiny by cattlemen and farmers. The South Dakota Cattlemen’s Association considers the rule ill-conceived and recommends that BLM engage the potential users in revising the rule, reported Fox News.

Many small business ranchers depend on public lands for grazing their livestock. Grazing is currently permitted on about 242,000 square miles of BLM land, while 33,000 square miles are set off as areas of “critical environmental concern,” according to Fox News.

The Center for American Progress (CAP), a left-wing think tank, applauded the proposed rule and encouraged its adoption.

“With climate change, extractive development, and other threats imperiling America’s most vulnerable public lands, President Biden must act now,” CAP concluded in a report about the proposed rule.