CHEYENNE, Wyo. - Just two weeks after armed militants were ousted from the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon, the U.S. House of Representatives is considering legislation to allow states to seize national lands for drilling and logging without federal environmental oversight.
Earlier this month, the Wyoming Sportsmen's Alliance and conservation groups convinced state lawmakers to shelve similar proposals. Chamois Andersen, executive director of the Wyoming National Wildlife Federation, said western states are on the front lines of a national struggle.
"In Wyoming, we're seeing what's actually happening across the American West," she said, "which is a political movement, an attempt to transfer public lands to state ownership or management."
The U.S. House Natural Resources Committee will hear the new bills on Thursday. HR 3650 would allow any state to claim ownership of up to 2 million acres of national forests, roughly the size of Yellowstone National Park. A second bill, HR 2316, would allow states to seize 4 million acres of national forests for clear-cut logging.
The National Wildlife Federation has promised to continue its work to defeat public-land grabs by Congress. When hunters and anglers learned about two Wyoming bills that would allow the state to take over national lands, Andersen said, calls in opposition flooded the lines at the Capitol. She said the actions of anti-government extremist groups and out-of-touch lawmakers have made outdoor enthusiasts and wildlife advocates even more determined to keep public lands in public hands.
"All of these lands are for all Americans, and they include a variety of uses. You can fish, you can hunt, you can ride horses," she said. "But if they go away - if they're converted to state management, potentially sold to the highest bidder - they can be developed."
Andersen said the idea of turning over land that can be enjoyed by everyone to private buyers or for natural-resource extraction isn't popular. She cited a recent survey by Colorado College that found nearly six in 10 western voters oppose removing federal oversight of public lands.
Information about HR 3650 is online here and HR 2316 is here. Details of the Colorado College survey are at coloradocollege.edu.
get more stories like this via email
The remote landscape of southeastern Oregon is receiving additional protections.
The Bureau of Land Management has finalized its resource management plan for the southeast corner of the state and it includes protections for parts of the Owyhee and Malheur Rivers and canyon lands in the region.
Michael O'Casey, deputy director of forest policy and Northwest programs for the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, said it's an exciting announcement, which will protect sensitive landscape from activities like surface development and road building.
"When that landscape is impacted, it's really hard to bring it back and restore it," O'Casey pointed out. "And so, it's really important to protect the places out there that are healthy and intact and resistant. And resilience is a term that we use, to stresses from climate change or whatever else."
O'Casey noted the plan still allows for traditional uses of the land like hunting and fishing. The BLM's final resource management plan for the district covers four-point-six million acres of public land.
O'Casey stressed the agency deliberated for years on this decision.
"This planning process was initiated in 2010 and so it's been 14 years in the making," O'Casey emphasized. "The good news is that, even though it's been a really long time, was that there was a really robust public comment process throughout this."
O'Casey added appointing the Southeast Oregon Resource Advisory Council in 2014 was an important part of public involvement. The council was made up of a wide variety of area people including grazing, energy and conservation interests, who made recommendations for management in the region.
Support for this reporting was provided by The Pew Charitable Trusts.
get more stories like this via email
Tribes in far northeastern California are pressing President Joe Biden to create a new national monument about 30 miles from Mount Shasta.
The Pit River Tribe is asking the president to use his powers under the Antiquities Act to create the new Sáttítla National Monument on just over 205,000 acres in the Medicine Lake Highlands.
Radley Davis, an advocate for the Sáttítla National Monument and a citizen of the Illmawi Band of the Pit River Tribe, said the area is a very important watershed.
"The headwaters of Northern California goes all the way down into the San Francisco Bay Area, gets collected and goes to the aqueduct," Davis pointed out. "That gets further transmitted down in Southern California for agriculture, so we feel protecting this area is very, very key."
Hydrologists said the volcanically formed aquifers below the surface capture snowmelt and store as much water as California's 200 largest surface reservoirs. The Pit River Tribe and the Modoc Nation continuously use the Sáttítla area for ceremonies and gathering medicines. It is also sacred to the Shasta, Karuk and Wintu tribes.
Davis acknowledged there has been some confusion with some local residents mistakenly thinking the area would become a national park with entry fees, rather than a national monument.
"It would not take away any of the rights that people would have to go up and enjoy the land," Davis emphasized. "The cabin owners would still be able to enjoy the winter and the spring and the summer up there. People would still be able to enjoy horseback riding."
The Pit River Tribe has been in litigation with the Bureau of Land Management and CalPine Energy Corporation for 25 years, trying to block consideration of any geothermal projects.
get more stories like this via email
A new poll showed New Mexico voters expressed a deep affection for lands, water and wildlife and want policies offering greater protections.
The 14th annual Colorado College "State of the Rockies" survey of 3,400 voters in eight Western states found increasing support for conservation even as political affiliation fades.
Dave Metz, principal and president of the polling firm Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz and Associates, said they are in favor of requiring oil and gas companies to pay for clean up and restoration on lands where they have drilled and favor limiting where the companies are allowed to drill.
"This year we saw the widest margin in favor of conservation that we have seen in this poll," Metz reported. "For the first time seven in 10 voters told us they would prioritize protecting sources of clean water, air quality and wildlife habitat over producing more domestic energy."
Majorities of New Mexico voters cited loss of habitats and declining fish and wildlife populations, uncontrollable wildfires, and inadequate and polluted water supplies including microplastics as extremely or very serious problems. By a four-to-one margin, they also said they want more emphasis on conserving wildlife migration routes rather than new development, ranching and oil and gas production.
Among respondents, 91% said they regularly participate in outdoor activities on national public lands.
Lori Weigel, principal of the research firm New Bridge Strategy, said many poll respondents expressed concern about children's mental health problems continuing to worsen if they are unable to access public lands where they can spend time outdoors.
"We asked them to tell us, 'Did they think that spending more time in the outdoors and nature; how much would that help?'" Weigel explained. "Virtually everyone said they thought it would help at least somewhat, and we outright had two-thirds telling us, 'Yeah, that would help a lot.'"
Among New Mexico voters, 69% said they think the effects of climate change on the Land of Enchantment over the past 10 years have been significant. Younger, "Gen Z" voters, born between 1996 and 2010 expressed far more concern about the issue than the older "Baby Boom" generation.
get more stories like this via email