Public Lands: Utah Pursues Balanced, Win-Win Approach
by Utah Lt. Gov. Greg Bell
10/25/2012 | 1212 views | 12 12 comments | 9 9 recommendations | email to a friend | print
The pending ballot proposal in Arizona claiming jurisdiction over the air, wildlife and minerals within the state’s borders is the latest manifestation of a growing frustration many westerners feel at being prevented from governing the places they inhabit.  While Utahns can certainly sympathize and understand the sense of bureaucratic paternalism felt by our Arizona neighbors at having a majority of their state managed by a distant landlord, Utah has undertaken a different path to achieve our shared objectives.  For example, in Utah, we do not claim state control over our National Parks or over congressionally designated wilderness areas.  We believe that Zion, Arches, and other areas of national significance should remain under federal control.

Utah’s participation in the proper management of its lands and resources is very limited today, because nearly two-thirds of our state’s land is controlled by the federal government, which has imposed its agenda on western states and dictates local land management.  Slowly but surely, the national government has lost its ability to effectively manage the West in a way that assures access and balanced management; let alone the sustainability of western communities.  Simply put, as our national government becomes more cumbersome and increasingly gridlocked in bureaucracy, it can no longer properly care for the vast spaces, resources, and unique ecosystems in the West.

Utah has a strong conservation ethic and heritage, and cares deeply about its mountain, forest, and desert landscapes.  Utahns intuitively know the value of these natural lands and resources.  That’s why virtually all Utahns agree that our State’s world-class recreational and scenic attractions, and rich energy, mineral and other natural resources require cooperative, proactive management, for the benefit of all interests.  That’s also why the majority of its citizens recognize that Utah should be the rightful administrator and the political entity best suited to manage its public lands.  A balanced approach to public lands management in Utah, which protects our beautiful lands and encourages vibrant outdoor recreation and responsible energy development, is the best approach for all interests.

Federal control and management of public lands probably worked reasonably well, back when Western areas of our young nation lacked leadership and a sense of community.  More recently in Utah and other Western States, however, growing numbers of residents have come to understand that they can do better by working together in their own communities, economies and ecosystems, than as part of a centralized, national government structure.  Re-thinking public land management in Utah will allow the state to maintain vibrant, healthy landscapes, and find the best management practices to enhance or restore areas that have suffered under a process-heavy federal bureaucracy.  

We believe the effort launched earlier this year in Utah represents a balanced approach.  Our approach is based on the conviction that development and environmental stewardship are synergistic and not mutually exclusive.  Governor Herbert signed HB148, the Public Lands Transfer Act, in an earnest and timely effort to generate cooperative, constructive dialogue with the federal government about gaining more say in how Utah’s public lands are managed.

Utah’s public lands effort is based on a commitment to facilitating a balanced, federal-state win-win situation.  Despite the media myths to the contrary, there is no multi-million-dollar lawsuit to take over all federal lands in Utah.  Rather, Utah is investing the time, resources and effort required by the scope of such a Legislative decision surrounding State control of public lands within its borders.  These lands were originally intended, but never transferred to Utah or any other western state, by founding and subsequent leaders in our federal government.

The emerging efforts by western states for greater self-determination and responsibility for the lands within their borders represent an important paradigm shift in public land management.  As westerners continue to move away from a top-down, Washington-led land management regime, it is important that the new models of public land management are based on a local, collaborative-based approach. I believe Utah is leading the way with a balanced approach that recognizes some key lands should remain under federal control while giving the state authority over lands more suitably managed at the local level.
Comments
(12)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
|
November 01, 2012
Great to see Mr. Bell dispel some of the myths being circulated. The picture portrayed by the media and by ignorant commenters is vastly different from what is really going on.
|
October 30, 2012
Gov. Herbert is a wolf who has just donned sheep's clothing. he has no interest in preserving the pristine character of Utah's great natural resources for current citizens or for the future. Witness the 22 “RS 2477” lawsuits in support of opening op wilderness spaces to noisy, dusty, habitat destroying ATVs, and cutting the funding of state parks by more that half over his term in office. An outrage. Cutting of funds for state parks is the real measure of his idea of state stewardship of public lands.
|
October 27, 2012
Looks like the SUWAcides are out in full force. It's been a while since I've paid attention to them, but I'm heartened to see they're still using the same tired talking points and inaccurate facts.

Utah does not control 43% of the state. If you combine all state and private land, you come out somewhere closer to 30%. There's this thing called Google. Learn it. Live it. Love it.

Peter Cooke supports the effort to realign lands in Utah. If you don't believe me. Ask him. He merely disagrees on tactics. And just because he is misinformed about the 5% argument, doesn't mean he's wrong on the broader point, which is that Utah is at a disadvantage due to the massive amounts of federal land within the state.

And to the ringleader: Lt. Gov. Bell writes that "there is no multi-million-dollar lawsuit to take over all federal lands in Utah" probably because there is no multi-million dollar lawsuit to take over all federal lands. He wrote that because it is true. Yes, there are RS2477 lawsuits, but they are completely separate and distinct from the so-called "Herbert land grab." They are not an attempt to "take over all federal lands in Utah," but rather, a surgical attempt to retain ownership of roads that legally belong to counties. There is a big difference. If you're looking for someone who is trying to blur lines and confuse people, look no further than SUWA.

|
October 30, 2012
Poppycock.
|
October 27, 2012
There is nothing balanced about this approach at all. The extractive industries have enormous sway at the Capitol and would have even more in a Utah state government unfettered by actual experience in land management and demonstrably deaf to the real needs and potential of the state. Lt Gov Bell and his boss play message politics to garner votes while state coffers are drained to support their ludicrous lawsuits. It's time we grow up and realize that our public lands, administered and funded by the federal government and our fellow citizens, for their sake as well as ours, are far more valuable to the state in pristine condition rather than defiled by filthy fossil fuels and the tracks of ORVs. Such things only benefit the few and enrich even fewer.
|
October 27, 2012
There are 37 million acres of federal land in Utah. Meanwhile, there are only about 17 million state or private acres. Just to put this in context, 37 million acres is larger than most eastern states.

Maybe you didn't get the chance to read the essay, but what the state is proposing is to rebalance the amount of federal control and allow for greater state responsibility over some lands within the state's boundaries.

The state, fortunately, recognizes that some lands can and should stay in federal control, but that doesn't mean that all lands should.

If you actually learn about the Governor's proposal instead of attacking strawmen from the late 1970's, you might realize that the state is going about this in a pretty balanced fashion.

|
October 26, 2012
Win-win would be great, except that it is two dimensional. You can't two dimensionalize Nature. Her systems are so very complex that is is impossible to quantify the consequences of the proposed mineral extraction. WHO EXACTLY is on the winning sides? Governor Herbert's parceling of Utah lands to the oil and gas is not a "win" in accordance to my values.
|
October 26, 2012
I am a Westerner and I am not frustrated with the federal government's land management, except when they lease rights to special interests at below market prices. I certainly don't think the states can do a better job of managing land than the federal government and I don't know anyone who believes the states can do better. The states have serious budget problems and the state parks are in trouble with decreasing funding. The Lieutenant Governor does not speak for me and should not claim to. I think he is speaking for mining and drilling companies mainly.
|
October 26, 2012
First off, the lands in question belong to all citizens of the United States. The win-win is already in place; tourists come in large numbers to visit Utah.

Secondly, Utah has 43% of the land inside of its boundaries to do what it wants with. The win-win would be to make these lands world-class properties. Are Utah's state parks models for the rest of the world?

I'm a US taxpayer and I want US taxpayer lands managed for the benefit of all of us, not just for the benefit of those who happen to be fortunate enough to live nearby.
|
October 26, 2012
Oh, and I forgot to add, if Utah citizens have issues with management of federal lands in Utah, or anywhere else for that matter, there are ample opportunities to get involved, volunteer, report any misuse, comment on management plans, etc.

They're our lands and we should all be involved in enjoying them, taking care of them, and participating in management decisions.
|
October 26, 2012
No one is buying the whitewashing of this rediculous land grab. And no one is buying the excuse that it is necessary for the funding of education. Education funding is anemic in this state because of irresponsible tax cuts and allocation of funds elsewhere.

Candidate for Utah Governor Peter Cooke said in a radio interview that Utah would only be able to benefit from 5% of the revenues from the land, and that there would be around $2 billion in costs involved in assuming control. In addition, i am in no way convinced that the Utah legislature has any ability whatsoever to manage these lands in a responsible manner so that they remain pristine for the enjoyment and benefit of future generations. There is not enough long-term thinking involved in Utah politics today.
|
October 26, 2012
Lt. Gov. Bell writes that "there is no multi-million-dollar lawsuit to take over all federal lands in Utah." The fact is, the state of Utah, at Governor Herbert's direction, filed 22 lawsuits this spring against the United States Government seeking to gain control of tens of thousands of RS2477 claims, including those in National Parks, National Monuments, and Wilderness Study Areas. If a court were to accept Utah’s argument that these R.S. 2477 claims --many of which are no more than cow paths, old seismic lines, dry stream beds, ORV tracks and hiking trails – are actually “highways” under this antiquated law, it would nullify or diminish longstanding protection for National Parks, wilderness areas and other scenic landscapes, and seriously disrupt the ability of professional land managers to manage federal lands in Utah.

And the cost of these lawsuits? Surely they will be in the "multi-millions" of dollars, as San Juan County and the state of Utah have already spent more than a million dollars losing their battle to disrupt the ability of the National Park Service to manage off road vehicle use in Salt Creek in Canyonlands National Park. The Herbert administration is willing to argue their intention of opening up these federal lands to off-road vehicle use in front of a judge in federal court; the question is, why do they feel the need to obfuscate that same intention in the court of public opinion?

Mathew Gross

Media Director

Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance

today's headlines
Comments
(0)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet
Comments
(0)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet
Comments
(0)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet
utah tweets
RSS Feeds
Utah policy stories feed
Policy buzz feed
Daily news highlights feed
Washington watch feed

With support from UtahWebStuff.com