This is excellent news.
Interior Says No to New Wilderness Areas
By ROBERT GEHRKE
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Interior Department intends to halt all reviews
of its Western land holdings for new wilderness protection and to
withdraw that protected status from some 3 million acres in Utah, it
informed Congress on Friday.
By suspending wilderness reviews, the department would limit the
amount of land held by its Bureau of Land Management eligible for
wilderness protection at 22.8 million acres nationwide - a figure
that environmental groups say leaves millions of pristine acres
vulnerable to oil and gas development and off-road vehicle use.
Congress, however, could order additional areas protected.
"The Department stands firmly committed to the idea that we can and
should manage our public lands to provide for multiple use, including
protection of those areas that have wilderness characteristics,"
Interior Secretary Gale Norton said in a letter sent late Friday to
members of Congress.
The wilderness decisions Norton advised Congress about are contained
in a legal settlement of a lawsuit brought by Utah. The settlement
must be approved by federal judge in Utah, who also has yet to rule
on efforts by environmentalists to intervene in the case.
Norton said in 1976 Congress gave the Interior Department 15 years to
inventory wilderness areas, and only those areas identified by 1991
as having wilderness characteristics qualified for protection.
But environmental groups objected when they learned of the decisions.
"This administration's assault on America's wilderness continues,"
said Jim Angell of EarthJustice. "What they're saying is these
wilderness-quality lands throughout the West will continue to be
degraded and continue to lose their eligibility for wilderness. ...
It's just appalling."
Norton also said she was setting aside the 2001 Wilderness Handbook -
a land management policy implemented in the waning days of the
Clinton administration - which required the BLM to protect the
wilderness qualities of lands that could qualify as wilderness areas.
The requirement created millions of acres of de facto wilderness,
even though only Congress can make such designations.
Wilderness areas, as defined by the 1964 Wilderness Act, are those
areas "untrammeled by man," and are protected from oil and gas
development, off-road use, and various types of construction.
The policy changes come as part of a settlement that was to be filed
Friday in federal court in Salt Lake City. Utah had sued the Interior
Department in 1996 over a reinventory of 3 million acres conducted by
then-Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt.
Most of the lawsuit was dismissed, and it sat dormant for years until
the state amended its complaint last month.
In Utah, specifically, the announcement means that the department
will disregard the results of Babbitt's 1996 reinventory. That
inventory identified 5.9 million acres of Utah land that qualified
for wilderness protection, 3 million acres more than found in the
original inventory during the Reagan administration.
The BLM had been managing the land to preserve its wilderness
characteristics. Now it can be used according to the land-use plans
that had been prepared previously by the BLM, which could include
mining and recreation. Norton noted that wildness quality areas also
could be protected in land use plans without ever being designed as
wildness areas.
"It looks like Interior agrees with me and my Western colleagues that
the BLM does not have the authority to designate new wilderness study
areas, ... doesn't have authority beyond what Congress gave it," said
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. "Secretary Norton's actions will bring
resolution to the illegal activities of the past administration."
This was the second time this week that the department has made a
major policy announcement resulting from secret settlement
negotiations with the state. On Wednesday, Norton and Utah Gov. Mike
Leavitt agreed to a process for transferring disputed roads across
federal lands to state ownership.
Full Version: MORE good news!
Nice to see the bad guys scrambling.
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,4800...0035083,00.html
Environmentalists scrambling to counter Utah wilds lawsuit
State wants to kill efforts to identify new sites in West
By Jerry Spangler
Deseret News staff writer
Western environmental groups are scrambling to fight a lawsuit filed quietly by the state of Utah that threatens to kill efforts to identify new wilderness areas throughout Utah and the rest of the West.
On Thursday, a coalition of conservation groups filed a motion in U.S. District Court to intervene in the lawsuit, fearing the Bush administration will acquiesce to Utah's demands.
"If the government is not going to defend the ability of the Bureau of Land Management to identify wilderness, then we want the opportunity to try to do it for them," said Jim Angell, an attorney with Earth Justice in Denver, which filed the motion on behalf of the Wilderness Society and five other groups from Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada and Arizona.
"This just isn't about Utah, but about every Western state with BLM lands. The effects are far, far reaching," he added, "and it strikes at everything wilderness advocates have been fighting for for years."
State attorneys were not available for comment, nor were BLM officials. Gov. Mike Leavitt is aware of ongoing negotiations to settle the lawsuit but refused additional comment, said his spokeswoman, Natalie Gochnour.
The state's lawsuit, Angell said, attacks the BLM's ability to identify new wilderness areas by challenging the legality of all inventories done after 1991. It also wants the BLM to prohibit citizen efforts to identify potential wilderness areas and to prevent the BLM from considering citizen input on areas citizen groups believe have wilderness qualities.
And it would prevent the BLM from considering the wilderness potential of any area identified after 1991 whenever the agency considers whether to allow activities like road building, mining, and oil and gas drilling — activities that are prohibited in areas designated as wilderness.
"In effect, we would be stuck in 1991 forever," Angell said. "If an area has wilderness qualities, but those qualities were not identified until later, then the BLM would have to turn a blind eye."
The lawsuit is actually a new version of an old lawsuit first filed in 1996 against then-Secretary of Interior Bruce Babbitt, who ordered a new inventory of Utah lands with wilderness potential. Much to the chagrin of state officials, that inventory, completed in 1999, identified millions of acres above and beyond the 3.2 million acres identified in an earlier BLM inventory in the 1970s and 1980s.
Several years ago, Utah conservationists conducted their own inventory and identified nine million acres with wilderness qualities. Under existing BLM policy, the agency considers the data collected by the conservationists whenever it makes decisions on what development activities to allow on public lands.
In 1998, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver gutted the state's lawsuit challenging Babbitt's authority, dismissing seven of eight issues before the court. The remaining issue was sent back to U.S. District Judge Dee Benson for further consideration, meaning the lawsuit was still before the court.
That remaining issue has languished in Benson's court for the past five years, although the state's court filings show there were unsuccessful attempts to negotiate a settlement.
On March 28, the state quietly "amended" its earlier lawsuit to bring forward an entirely new lawsuit.
Angell said there has been plenty of talk about the lawsuit by Bush administration officials and there are "strong rumors . . . the administration is going to roll over."
Under the Wilderness Act of 1964, only Congress can designate wilderness. But Congress also set up a process through which federal land management agencies could conduct "inventories" of potential wilderness areas and submit their recommendations to Congress. Those areas would be protected as wilderness until Congress acted.
But wilderness issues have stalemated in Congress for three decades. In rural regions, where the study areas are located, some contend that bureaucrats have locked up millions of acres of de facto wilderness.
The lawsuit seeks to declare illegal any interim protection.
Efforts by Leavitt and Utah's congressional delegation to end the three-decade stalemate have proved fruitless.
Now, the state is asking the court to order the BLM to throw out its existing wilderness policy, articulated in the "Wilderness Inventory Handbook." That handbook has come under fire by Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, and other GOP congressmen, who petitioned Secretary of Interior Gale Norton to rescind it.
A coalition of 15 national environmental groups responded with a letter of their own, calling on Norton to halt any attempts to "extinguish the department's existing policies and requirements with respect to wilderness studies."
And they defended the handbook as "critical for truly comprehensive land-use planning as it provides criteria and protocols for the collection of information vital to determining areas" suitable for wilderness protection.
But the state's lawsuit contends the handbook was adopted with no public input and that federal wilderness policies violate federal law. The suit asks Benson to order the BLM to ignore any wilderness "re-inventory" conducted up to this time, and to "cease and desist from all further wilderness re-inventory, review and associated wilderness management activities."
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,4800...0035083,00.html
Environmentalists scrambling to counter Utah wilds lawsuit
State wants to kill efforts to identify new sites in West
By Jerry Spangler
Deseret News staff writer
Western environmental groups are scrambling to fight a lawsuit filed quietly by the state of Utah that threatens to kill efforts to identify new wilderness areas throughout Utah and the rest of the West.
On Thursday, a coalition of conservation groups filed a motion in U.S. District Court to intervene in the lawsuit, fearing the Bush administration will acquiesce to Utah's demands.
"If the government is not going to defend the ability of the Bureau of Land Management to identify wilderness, then we want the opportunity to try to do it for them," said Jim Angell, an attorney with Earth Justice in Denver, which filed the motion on behalf of the Wilderness Society and five other groups from Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada and Arizona.
"This just isn't about Utah, but about every Western state with BLM lands. The effects are far, far reaching," he added, "and it strikes at everything wilderness advocates have been fighting for for years."
State attorneys were not available for comment, nor were BLM officials. Gov. Mike Leavitt is aware of ongoing negotiations to settle the lawsuit but refused additional comment, said his spokeswoman, Natalie Gochnour.
The state's lawsuit, Angell said, attacks the BLM's ability to identify new wilderness areas by challenging the legality of all inventories done after 1991. It also wants the BLM to prohibit citizen efforts to identify potential wilderness areas and to prevent the BLM from considering citizen input on areas citizen groups believe have wilderness qualities.
And it would prevent the BLM from considering the wilderness potential of any area identified after 1991 whenever the agency considers whether to allow activities like road building, mining, and oil and gas drilling — activities that are prohibited in areas designated as wilderness.
"In effect, we would be stuck in 1991 forever," Angell said. "If an area has wilderness qualities, but those qualities were not identified until later, then the BLM would have to turn a blind eye."
The lawsuit is actually a new version of an old lawsuit first filed in 1996 against then-Secretary of Interior Bruce Babbitt, who ordered a new inventory of Utah lands with wilderness potential. Much to the chagrin of state officials, that inventory, completed in 1999, identified millions of acres above and beyond the 3.2 million acres identified in an earlier BLM inventory in the 1970s and 1980s.
Several years ago, Utah conservationists conducted their own inventory and identified nine million acres with wilderness qualities. Under existing BLM policy, the agency considers the data collected by the conservationists whenever it makes decisions on what development activities to allow on public lands.
In 1998, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver gutted the state's lawsuit challenging Babbitt's authority, dismissing seven of eight issues before the court. The remaining issue was sent back to U.S. District Judge Dee Benson for further consideration, meaning the lawsuit was still before the court.
That remaining issue has languished in Benson's court for the past five years, although the state's court filings show there were unsuccessful attempts to negotiate a settlement.
On March 28, the state quietly "amended" its earlier lawsuit to bring forward an entirely new lawsuit.
Angell said there has been plenty of talk about the lawsuit by Bush administration officials and there are "strong rumors . . . the administration is going to roll over."
Under the Wilderness Act of 1964, only Congress can designate wilderness. But Congress also set up a process through which federal land management agencies could conduct "inventories" of potential wilderness areas and submit their recommendations to Congress. Those areas would be protected as wilderness until Congress acted.
But wilderness issues have stalemated in Congress for three decades. In rural regions, where the study areas are located, some contend that bureaucrats have locked up millions of acres of de facto wilderness.
The lawsuit seeks to declare illegal any interim protection.
Efforts by Leavitt and Utah's congressional delegation to end the three-decade stalemate have proved fruitless.
Now, the state is asking the court to order the BLM to throw out its existing wilderness policy, articulated in the "Wilderness Inventory Handbook." That handbook has come under fire by Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, and other GOP congressmen, who petitioned Secretary of Interior Gale Norton to rescind it.
A coalition of 15 national environmental groups responded with a letter of their own, calling on Norton to halt any attempts to "extinguish the department's existing policies and requirements with respect to wilderness studies."
And they defended the handbook as "critical for truly comprehensive land-use planning as it provides criteria and protocols for the collection of information vital to determining areas" suitable for wilderness protection.
But the state's lawsuit contends the handbook was adopted with no public input and that federal wilderness policies violate federal law. The suit asks Benson to order the BLM to ignore any wilderness "re-inventory" conducted up to this time, and to "cease and desist from all further wilderness re-inventory, review and associated wilderness management activities."
That is awesome news! It's nice to see people that aren't laying over for enviro groups also. It used to go: 1, shake down our supporters for cash. 2, file a law suit against whatever governing body we think isn't doing what we want it to. 3, celebrate by drinking latte's when that governing body lays over and plays dead instead of spending the money to counter our suit. Now, things won't be so easy for them.
Here is Gale Norton's e-mail address for anyone who wants to send their thanks for this decision:
gale_norton@ios.doi.gov
Vicki
gale_norton@ios.doi.gov
Vicki
QUOTE
\"In effect, we would be stuck in 1991 forever,\" Angell said. \"If an area has wilderness qualities, but those qualities were not identified until later, then the BLM would have to turn a blind eye.\"
In other words in was just enviro bullsh!t used to keep us from accessing our public lands forever thru abuse of the legal system! Good to see some common sense being used for a change!
LIVE FREE OR DIE!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.