LAS VEGAS – Four decades ago today, in 1976, President Gerald Ford changed the way the government manages much of its land, signing a law that required the Bureau of Land Management to consider conservation and not just development.

Shaaron Netherton, executive director of the group, Friends of Nevada Wilderness, said the Federal Land Policy Management Act, also known as FLPMA, also required that the public have some say in the future of these lands in the form of resource-management plans.

"It's critical that everybody get involved and have a say in how their public lands are managed," she said. "And these plans are a great way to do that."

There are several resource-management plans in process right now, taking public input on lands near Battle Mountain, Las Vegas, Elko and Reno. The BLM controls 48 million acres in the state, making it the largest land manager by far. Nevadans still can enjoy places such as the Black Rock Desert, Red Rock Canyon and Sloan Canyon, as well as the new Basin and Range National Monument.

Ken Rait, the director of U.S. Public Lands with The Pew Charitable Trusts, said the state's wild places not only provide priceless habitat, they are a major economic driver.

"BLM lands are really the goose that lays the golden egg for rural Western economies because recreation on these lands generates a $2.8 billion annual economic output," Rait said.

Bruce Babbitt, the former Secretary of the Interior, said FLPMA sets the right priorities.

"A really important step forward was the creation of conservation lands, which is about 25 million acres within the public lands which are specifically earmarked for conservation purposes," he said.

FLPMA also required the BLM to do an inventory of all its public land, which led to the creation of 46 wilderness areas, and 60 wilderness study areas, for a total of 2-million acres in Nevada that are now protected from development.

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


get more stories like this via email

International tourists visiting U.S. national parks may pay more at the gate starting next year.

Advocates have called it a "common-sense policy" that could raise needed revenue for maintenance. In its 2026 "Budget in Brief," the U.S. Department of the Interior has included a surcharge for the 14 million foreigners who visit America's national parks annually.

A 2023 report from the Property and Environment Research Center found a $25 surcharge would just about double fee revenue to the National Park Service, adding $330 million to its coffers.

Tate Watkins, research fellow at the center, said the revenue could go a long way.

"With a relatively small increase in fees for visitors from abroad, you could raise a really significant amount of revenue that many parks really, really need," Watkins pointed out. "Especially the ones that are bigger, attract more visitors and have seen booms in visitation over recent years."

Watkins noted routine maintenance at Yellowstone, the nation's oldest park, costs about $43 million annually, while the park has a maintenance backlog totaling $1.5 billion. The Interior budget comes as the U.S. Senate's reconciliation bill proposes moves which could hinder park operations, including pulling $267 million in remaining Inflation Reduction Act funding earmarked for the Park Service.

Watkins stressed current park fees make up a small slice of travel budgets for those visiting from outside the country, usually less than 3%.

"When you think of the types of visitors who are able to pay multi-thousands of dollars for a big, often bucket-list trip to some of the incredible sites that we have at our national parks, most wouldn't blink at paying a little bit more, or even potentially a decent amount more," Watkins asserted.

According to the report, it is common practice around the world to charge international visitors more. Torres del Paine National Park in Chilean Patagonia, for example, charges foreigners $55, almost four times the citizens' rate of $14.


get more stories like this via email

California took a big step Tuesday toward the goal of conserving 30% of land and waters by 2030. The Ocean Protection Council adopted a roadmap to decide which protected waters will count toward the goal.

"We're now at 21.9% of coastal waters conserved," said Michael Esgro, the council's senior biodiversity program manager and tribal liaison, "so more than three-quarters of the way to our 30 by 30 goal, here at the halfway point of the initiative. We have another almost 300,000 acres to conserve by 2030."

The Council refined the roadmap over the past year in a series of public workshops and consultations with tribes. The next meeting in September will delve further into the specific criteria for evaluating improvements in biodiversity in protected waters.

Rebecca Schwartz Lesberg, president of a conservation consulting firm, Coastal Policy Solutions, said advocates are pleased that the final draft of the roadmap zeroes in on threats specific to estuaries, where the rivers meet the sea.

"On the open coast, we're worried more about things like fishing and oil and gas extraction and impacts from shipping," she said. "In bays and estuaries, we're more concerned with impairments to water quality from urban runoff and lack of space for marsh migration under sea-level rise."

At Tuesday's hearing, tribal leaders praised the state and tribal cooperation that resulted in the new federal Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary. However, Violet Sage Walker, chair of the Northern Chumash Tribal Council, said the sanctuary needs more state support if it is to be counted in the 30 x 30 initiative, citing cuts at the federal level.

"I am concerned as national leadership has removed so much of the funding," she said, "so much of the staff and potentially co-management directives from marine sanctuaries and all protected areas."

The roadmap allows for some commercial fishing within the marine sanctuary. Council staff will report back on biodiversity in those waters over the next year.

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


get more stories like this via email

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, has announced plans to reintroduce a public lands sell-off amendment to the big budget reconciliation package in Congress, after a similar proposal was rejected in the U.S. House.

The House version would have facilitated the sale of thousands of acres of public land in Utah to local governments or private buyers. Backers of the idea said it could help address the housing shortage, improve public infrastructure and allow industries to expand. Similar arguments are now being made by Senator Lee.

Steve Bloch, legal director for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, said the idea is "wildly out of step" with what Utahns want.

"We're all deeply concerned about the precedent that this could set," Bloch explained. "This would start to sell off the fabric of the American West to pay for tax cuts. And if it starts here in Utah and adjacent western states, it can really spread anywhere across the West and into Alaska."

Bloch pointed out the amendment would be only the beginning of public lands being sold. In recent polling, a majority of Utah voters said they oppose giving control over national public lands to state government.

Lee has been an advocate for selling them, especially in Utah, which is made up of about two-thirds public land. But the amendment could prove to be another hurdle for Republicans who want to pass the bill by July 4.

Bloch would like state leaders to have meaningful conversations with public lands advocates. He noted it is a group that includes people from all sides of the political spectrum.

"This is a far cry from your Schoolhouse Rock 'How a Bill Becomes a Law,'" Bloch asserted. "This is not some stand-alone piece of legislation. This is trying to insert public land sell-off into a budget bill, expressly for the purpose of selling them off to pay for tax cuts."

The budget bill now awaits revisions in the Senate and will then go back to the House. In the meantime, Bloch encouraged Utahns and other westerners to voice their opinions.

"We're encouraging our members and supporters to reach out to Senator Lee and tell him that he is simply out of touch with what Utahns, and other westerners, want," Bloch underscored.


get more stories like this via email