CONCORD, N.H. – Summer vacation adventures on public lands could change dramatically if the push to turn federal lands over to state control succeeds.

Jamie Williams, president of The Wilderness Society, warns allowing state control would lock up lands for private development, and other parcels would be sold by states to pay for managing additional land.

"This is a terrible idea that is totally out of sync with the way Americans value our parks, our forests and wildlife refuges,” Williams states. “They don't want to see their lands turned over to states and sold to the highest bidder."

There have been moves in both the U.S. House and Senate to turn over federal lands to states.

Williams says the push to privatize public lands originates with special interests and their allies in Congress, and could bring the biggest changes to lands in the West.

Backers of the idea maintain the states would be better managers of federal properties, and say there is a legal precedent for state control.

John Leshy, a professor of real property law at University of California Hastings, counters there's a long history of court decisions affirming the federal government's rights to hold land, and that this type of case would probably be laughed out of court.

Leshy is a former chief counsel of the U.S. Interior Department.

"It has nothing to do with the law,” he says. “It's not a legal claim. It's all about politics – I mean, it's all about stirring up the base, tapping into the anxiety or hatred or whatever you want to call it, that some people have about federal ownership of land in the West."

Williams says the move for state seizure of public lands is overshadowing the urgent need to reauthorize the Land and Water Conservation Fund – a program that helps pay for parks, trails, baseball fields and more, in just about every county in the country.

"For 50 years, this program has played an essential role, protecting places people love and getting Americans outdoors," he stresses.

The fund expires at the end of September unless Congress takes action.






get more stories like this via email

This month, the federal government announced funding for next year's wildfire management, totaling $236 million and experts hope threatened communities in Wyoming receive some of the funds.

Money from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will be used to help reduce wildfire risk, improve firefighter training, rehabilitate burned areas and advance research, according to the Interior Department. The focus areas are partly based on a report last year by the Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission, with 148 recommendations on how the U.S. can approach fires more effectively.

Kimiko Barrett, wildfire researcher and policy analyst for the nonprofit research group Headwaters Economics and a member of the commission, said the recommendations build off one another but the federal government has focused on some more than others.

"It's not surprising that some of the policy is cherry-picking those recommendations that seem to be easiest or more reasonable, given the time constraints of the current administration," Barrett asserted.

The U.S. House of Representatives will consider a bipartisan bill this month, called the "Fix Our Forests Act." It could adjust permitting under the National Environmental Protection Act to make wildfire prevention projects happen faster, among other changes.

Most wildfire management is supported at the federal level, through agencies that manage public lands, as well as state foresters and natural resource managers.

Barrett notes communities are often the first line of defense when a fire ignites.

"Communities and counties need to be additionally empowered and provided the funding, the resources, the technical assistance, to be able to have more ownership over becoming more resilient," Barrett contended.

Barrett added the protection of the built environment is especially important to communities, including home and neighborhood infrastructure.


get more stories like this via email

A sanctuary for stargazing in Oregon is the largest in the world and is set to get even bigger.

In eastern Oregon, the organization DarkSky International declared 2.5 million acres of the Oregon Outback International Dark Sky Sanctuary in the first phase of its process in March. It plans to increase the sanctuary to more than 11 million acres in the next few years.

Damon Motz-Storey, director of the Oregon chapter of the Sierra Club, recently visited the area.

"Anybody who's visited it on a clear summer night or otherwise will agree that it is very spectacular," Motz-Storey observed. "It's a very unique and amazing place to stargaze and get into astronomy."

Motz-Storey pointed out the area is far from urban centers like Portland and Boise, and is sparsely populated. It is estimated more than 2.5 times as many stars are visible than in urban areas. DarkSky International has designated sanctuaries since 2007 and the Oregon Outback is the first in the state.

Motz-Storey emphasized protecting dark areas is good for wildlife and humans alike because both are affected by artificial lighting.

"These kinds of designations help to spread awareness around people preserving the dark sky for both wildlife and human enjoyment," Motz-Storey stressed. "And also to serve as a little bit of a warning signal to future development to say, hey, this is really worth preserving."

Within the Oregon Outback is an area known as the Owyhee Canyonlands. However, Motz-Storey noted Congress has been unable to pass protections for the unique landscape. A coalition of organizations, including Motz-Storey's, are pushing the Biden administration to declare it a national monument.

"That would pair very nicely with this dark sky designation and help to protect everything that's on the ground around the Owyhee Canyonlands, which is just as special as the sky you look up at," Motz-Storey contended.

A new poll indicates strong support for protections of the West's greater sage-grouse. The results come as the U.S. Bureau of Land Management considers a plan for improving conservation of the bird. BLM is reviewing public comments on its draft environmental impact statement for amending and strengthening sage grouse protections. The agency has plenty of public support for this: a poll commissioned by The Pew Charitable Trusts found 93% of people surveyed back the BLM's efforts to protect the bird and its habitat.

Tyler Dungannon, conservation coordinator with Oregon Hunters Association, said many support even greater protections.

"In the Western U.S., roughly 70% favored restricting some development of specific public lands to ensure long term habitat protections for sage grouse," he explained.

The poll also found that nearly 60% of respondents say sage grouse conservation efforts boost economic development. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife data from 2019 says hunting, fishing and wildlife viewing fueled $1.2 billion in spending in the state.

Josh Collins, a retired landscape ecologist in Bend, said there are positives to BLM's plans for conserving sage grouse, including the expansion of Areas of Critical Environmental Concern for the bird and the agency elevating conservation as one of is priorities on public lands. But he added that there's also room for improvement, such as a focus on ensuring sage grouse chicks have wildflowers to feed on in their first few weeks of life.

"One of the things missing in the BLM report and almost every other state or federal report concerning the sage grouse is a focus on the dietary needs of the chicks and the brood hens," he continued.

Collins adds that bringing back the sage grouse means bringing back wildflowers in the region, which will benefit other species.

"Young pronghorn benefit from that, they eat wildflowers. And, of course, the pygmy rabbit does. Many birds are feeding on the insects that are attracted by the wildflowers. So, the wildflower is kind of a missing piece of the foundation of the ecological health for the whole system," he said.


get more stories like this via email