With Liberty and Land for All:
What a Good Public Lands Bill in Utah Looks Like
The haunting cry of the great horned owl breaks the silence of dawn. The red rock stands tall at the river’s edge. The blue sky expands in all directions. Southern Utah — a place that embodies the boundless beauty and timeless tranquility that shape our vision of the American West.
Away from the river, controversy brews. Back in their Washington DC offices, Representatives Rob Bishop (UT) and Jason Chaffetz (UT) work on their bill to carve up the public’s lands in southern Utah. They promised a bill that would resolve the wilderness fights that have scarred this part of the country for decades. They promised greater certainty. Yet, the only certainty the draft bill provides is for drilling, road building and grazing.
Having met widespread opposition when they released their initial proposal in January, Bishop and Chaffetz have promised a new draft soon. Here’s how to tell whether it is good for the public’s lands or not.
Does the bill protect more wilderness than is protected now?
Bishop touted his draft Public Lands Initiative as a conservation bill that would protect millions of acres of wilderness. In fact, the bill ignores more than 60 percent of the wilderness quality land that we still have. Although the Wilderness Act of 1964 was designed to protect this land, Congress has acted to protect only a small amount. In the interim, our public servants — the dedicated employees of the Bureau of Land Management — oversee much of the rest in a way designed to maintain the land’s wilderness quality. Bishop’s initial draft, however, reduces the 1.8 million acres of land currently protected as wilderness by over 100,000 acres.
Does the bill protect Bears Ears?
Several Native American tribes have formed a coalition to protect 1.9 million acres of important tribal lands in southeastern Utah. Known as Bears Ears, this land holds cultural and natural value beyond measure to all Americans. It needs to be designated a National Monument to protect it from a growing rabble of grave robbers, vandals, off-road vehicles and other threats. Bishop’s bill, as drafted, rejects those needed protections and would instead leave this special place exposed to the damage and risk of drilling and mining that would crisscross the land with roads and traffic.
Does the bill honor the Antiquities Act?
Since 1906, Republican and Democratic presidents alike have used the Antiquities Act to provide National Monument protections to special places of natural, historic or cultural significance, from the Statute of Liberty to the Grand Canyon. Bishop has proposed turning our backs on this tool of bipartisan progress and all it’s achieved.
Does the bill give away federal land?
Bishop’s initial draft gave away priceless assets that belong to us all. It offered the state of Utah more than 12,000 miles of dirt roads and cow trails as designated “highways.” including up to 1,673 miles of “routes” in wilderness lands. Such gift of thousands of rights-of-way to the state would scar the area’s priceless remaining wilderness. In addition, the draft would shortchange American taxpayers, by swapping federal lands for state parcels without ensuring a fair trade of equal value.
Does the bill favor drilling and mining?
Bishop’s draft created energy zones that encourage industrial drilling for oil, gas and coal. In fact, the bill exposed more land — nearly 2.6 million acres — to the hazard and harm of fossil fuel extraction than it would protect as wilderness.
