IDAHO FALLS, Idaho - Idaho's demand that the federal government turn over public lands to the state is up for debate in a series of hearings Thursday and Friday in Idaho Falls, Soda Springs, Twin Falls, and Hailey. Courtney Washburn, community conservation director with the Idaho Conservation League, which is against the transfer, says it's a complicated issue that involves a lot of emotions and what could be a long-running court action with no guarantee of success. But she also thinks those testifying will have valid points about how public lands affect communities.

"The conversation that would be more productive would be, what can we do to improve the management of federal lands, both from the environmental side and from the local economic side," Washburn says.

Idaho is one of eight states that have proposed attempting to take over public lands. Montana recently dropped its push because of public input and an assessment that the legal strategy would be costly and would likely fail. Idahoans can testify in person, or submit written testimony to the Federal Lands Interim Committee. Hearings have been held around the state.

Washburn says there are projects underway to form partnerships between local residents, businesses and agencies to design land management that carries a wide range of benefits.

"We have at least seven efforts underway to create jobs, restore watersheds and habitat," says Washburn. "But it doesn't help when an effort to take over federal lands is happening at the same time."

One of the big concerns is the cost to the state for assuming ownership of the land, a total of around 28 million acres. Washburn says her group's assessment shows a $240 million loss for the state in the first year. Another assessment from Idaho Department of Lands predicted profits of up to $75 million a year, mainly through timber sales.

Hearing schedule: Idaho Falls, Oct. 9, 9 a.m. at the Center for Advanced Energy Studies, 995 University Blvd.; Soda Springs, Oct. 9, 6:30 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, 9 West 2nd South; Twin Falls, Oct. 10, 9 a.m., at the College of Southern Idaho Herrett Center, 315 Falls Ave; Hailey, Oct. 10, 6:30 p.m., at Wood River High School, 1050 Fox Acres Rd.


get more stories like this via email

Conservation groups are rejoicing over the decision Friday by the Biden administration to reject a proposed mining road in Alaska.

The 211-mile Ambler Road would have sliced through the Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve, severing the migration route for a Western Arctic Caribou herd.

Alex Johnson, interior Alaska director for the National Parks Conservation Association, said it was important for the feds to take a stand in Alaska so mining interests do not start eyeing other national parks.

"This is a very expensive, destructive and just highly speculative project that does not in any way support our clean energy goals as a country," Johnson contended. "And ultimately would permanently threaten the health and well-being of local communities and the tribes."

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski slammed the decision, warning it could limit jobs and tax revenues for Alaska by preventing exploration for minerals she said are important to national security, like copper, cobalt, gallium and germanium.

Jayme Dittmar, a photographer and filmmaker from Fairbanks, said the road would have been very disruptive to the 66 Native American villages along the proposed route.

"That'd be 168 trucks passing through close vicinity to the villages," Dittmar pointed out. "There would be hundreds of bridges built. It would dismantle a subsistence livelihood that's been in place for thousands and thousands of years."

The road was seen as a negative for tourism to the Brooks Range area. According to the Alaska Travel Industry Association, Californians make up 9% of visitors to Alaska.

Arizona conservation groups and sportsmen alike say they're pleased the Bureau of Land Management will now recognize conservation as an integral part of public lands management.

The agency's new rule puts protecting the environment on par with other land-use priorities.

Scott Garlid, executive director of the Arizona Wildlife Federation, said historically the BLM has done what he termed a "pretty good job," not only managing about 12 million acres of public lands in Arizona, but also protecting natural resources.

"They've got a tough job," Garlid acknowledged. "I think this rule helps make their job a little bit easier because it gives them some tools to balance those different demands on the 12 million acres that they manage."

Garlid predicted the rule will raise what he terms "harder-to-quantify conservation values" to the same level of importance as more extractive land uses like oil and gas exploration and mining. He thinks most Arizonans will recognize the new rule as a positive. A solid majority of Arizona voters across party lines say they are conservationists and use public lands for recreation.

To Garlid, the rule makes it clear the BLM is recognizing certain parts of federal lands, in Arizona and around the West, have been degraded. He contended restoration leases will be a good tool, allowing the BLM to lease acres to groups specifically to improve the conditions on a given landscape. He noted opponents of the new rule might see the leases as a way to "lock up" land but he argued it is not true.

"One example could be a nonprofit, like the Arizona Wildlife Federation," Garlid pointed out. "We could get a conservation lease from the Bureau of Land Management to do riparian restoration work, or work to remove invasive species along a creek bank."

According to the BLM, while a restoration or mitigation lease is in place, casual uses of the leased lands like recreation, hunting, fishing and research activities would generally continue.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Pew Charitable Trusts.

State and federal agencies are collaborating to increase the use of prescribed fires in the Northwest.

Prescribed fire is the controlled use of burns to minimize the larger risks of wildfires and smoke. It is seen as an increasingly important strategy as wildfire seasons pose greater threats to the Northwest.

Casey Sixkiller, Northwest regional administrator for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, said authorities want to work together to maintain forest habitats.

"Prescribed burn is one of the best tools we have for making our forests more resilient against catastrophic wildfires and they help to manage and target hazardous fuels and make for healthier forests," Sixkiller explained.

Sixkiller pointed out the EPA is involved because wildfire smoke poses risks to people's health. The collaboration is between federal agencies, departments in Oregon and Washington, and tribal governments.

Sixkiller noted the collaboration needed a formal agreement to move forward.

"That is what we've been able to do here with this agreement," Sixkiller emphasized. "To get federal land managers and states and us all in the same room, making sure that we're all on the same page about what success looks like."

Sixkiller added the collaboration has another advantage: It helps drive engagement with communities potentially in the path of prescribed burns.

"They have the confidence that the effort that's gone into planning that activity has been thought out from soup to nuts," Sixkiller acknowledged. "And that they have a seat at the table and are being engaged and their concerns are being addressed as we go forward with that activity."


get more stories like this via email