Letter to the Editor: Utah Public Lands Initiative Act

By Michael Ralphs Ferron

Editor:
Congressmen Rob Bishop and Jason Chaffetz should be commended for their tireless efforts to try to bring together many different stakeholders holding conflicting land use values. All stakeholders were invited to come forward with their proposals and participate in the process. Most accepted the invitation with guarded optimism of this grass roots effort. Congressman Bishop stated from the onset that this effort would require compromise; no one would get all of what they want. Following the release of the Draft Initiative on 20 January 2016, the public outcry from all sides, particularly loudest from the Environmental and Tribal groups, signaled they didn’t get what they wanted – they wouldn’t accept the compromise. This response is revealing; a close analysis of the initiative appears that it was a one-sided give away – to the Environmental groups.
In the Initiative’s Conservation Section (Division A), 4.3 million acres would be locked up in land protection and conservation, and 301 miles in Wild and Scenic Rivers. This consists of 41 new Wilderness Areas, 14 National Conservation Areas, 7 Special Management Areas on Forest Service Lands, and an expansion of Arches National Park.
In the Opportunity Section (Division B), 1.05 million acres would be designated for new recreation and economic development. However, most of this land is set aside for recreation, and is withdrawn from multiple use and from mineral exploration, development and grazing. SITLA will transfer 336,441 acres of state lands within the Wilderness Areas for federal land outside that is already designated for multiple use. This is simply a change in land ownership and blocking up these parcels under state control and regulation. There are 23 separate federal land conveyances to state and local entities to facilitate public use of local lands surrounding these communities.
The Energy Industry received only a promise – that lands designated as “open” to energy development would be leased and developed in a streamlined, timely manner, subject to existing environmental review required by law. The grazing industry got less – language stating that where grazing is currently permitted, they can continue to graze subject to federal regulation.
The Native American tribes received and open invitation to participate in the process. They were offered economic development advantages as well as protection of areas they considered sacred. The different factions within the Tribes need to decide what they want as a group.
Overall, the Environmental community received a 4:1 advantage of lands protected for wilderness values. An additional 581,441 acres are withdrawn from multiple use as Recreation Zones and Roadless Areas. Only 80,797 acres are released from Wilderness Study status back into multiple use. These numbers are revealing. The State, Counties, Energy and Livestock industries are willing to accept this “compromise.” The Environmental and Native American groups, who stand to gain the most from the act, apparently don’t seem to think they received enough.