CHEYENNE, Wyo. – A group of lawmakers meets tomorrow in Cheyenne to advance a state constitutional amendment to manage federal lands if they're transferred to states. The measure would govern lands currently managed by the U.S. Forest Service and BLM, not national parks or monuments. Critics are concerned lands could be sold off to the highest bidder, limiting access to outdoor recreation.

Chamois Andersen, executive director of the Wyoming Wildlife Federation, said protecting lands owned by all Americans is an issue that cuts across partisan divides.

"And it has nothing to do with whether you're a Republican or a Democrat, whether you like the federal government or not," she said. "We all recognize the risk is too great. And we all want to work toward solutions when it comes to federal-lands management."

Proponents of the amendment claim the feds are bad managers, and are slow to grant oil, gas and mining permits. In November, a Wyoming legislative committee charged with natural resources heard more than two hours of comments from hunters, anglers and conservation groups opposed to the move. Only two people spoke in favor of the proposal.

A recent study commissioned by the Wyoming Legislature found state management would be too costly, and adhering to federal multiple-use and environmental standards would present significant challenges. Anderson said lawmakers also should consider the potential loss of money from tourism and outdoor recreation, a sustainable and ongoing source of revenue.

"More than a billion dollars per year is provided by hunters and anglers and watchable wildlife enthusiasts," she added. "This is just going to continue, the use of these lands, and the important dollars that hunters and anglers and other outdoor enthusiasts bring to the counties, and thus to Wyoming state coffers."

A Western Attorney Generals' report, chaired by Wyoming AG Peter Michael, found no legal merit for a constitutional amendment to transfer public lands. Governor Matt Mead told the Casper Star-Tribune the move also would be financially impractical.


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

The U.S. Forest Service is considering changes to modernize the Northwest Forest Plan.

While it was hailed as a success when it was created 30 years ago, the Forest Service wants to update the plan to address new challenges to the region. To help with the process, the agency convened an advisory committee, which unanimously approved 192 recommendations for the plan.

Susan Jane Brown, chief legal counsel for Silvix Resources, a nonprofit environmental law firm based in Oregon, co-chaired the committee and said tribal inclusion and rights were among the most critical issues to address because they weren't included in the original plan.

"That was a pretty substantial oversight and something that the federal advisory committee wanted to correct this time around," Brown explained. "We really wanted to center indigenous perspectives and indigenous knowledge in the management of these forests."

The plan guides management of more than 19 million acres of land across Washington, Oregon and northern California. The Forest Service is moving forward with the amendment process for the plan. Brown pointed out a draft environmental impact statement was expected in August but it has been pushed back. The agency is incorporating the committee's recommendations for a draft analysis, as well as other alternatives.

The Forest Service is looking to address three threats: invasive species, particularly large and severe wildfires and climate change. Brown argued the issues need to be addressed quickly.

"Our forests and communities are in desperate need of clear management direction given the wildfire crisis, given the climate crisis that we're also experiencing right now," Brown emphasized. "We really need an updated management plan that is equipped to deal with those new challenges."

Travis Joseph, president and CEO of the American Forest Resource Council, co-chaired the federal advisory committee. He said the committee gathered diverse interests and did the hard work to collaborate on their recommendations to the Forest Service.

"There is a path forward, and we can move beyond the hyperbole and the 'forest wars' of the past," Joseph contended. "If we focus on what we have in common and the outcomes that we want to achieve, we can move beyond the past and frankly build a brighter future."

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


get more stories like this via email