Opinion: Public lands should not be sold. Open lands are our shared 'inheritance. . . and space of democracy'

Humpback whale joyfully feeding in the Kenai Fjords, Alaska. (NPS Photo by K. Thoresen)

Even though lawmakers ultimately rejected the sale of public lands as part of the federal budget bill called the Big Beautiful Bill, that doesn’t mean the idea won't come around again. In her opinion for The New York Times, Terry Tempest Williams explains what motivated Sen. Mike Lee of Utah and other like-minded Republicans to push for the provision and why so many Americans opposed it.

Had it passed, the provision would have facilitated the sale of more than one million acres of public lands; however, the loss of public property wouldn't be the only consequence. "Lee claimed in each of his many revisions of the proposal that disposing of our public lands was a way to address the housing crisis," Williams writes. "But that was a ruse; housing experts have said it wouldn’t have made a dent in the problem. What the senator wanted was to establish a precedent — to normalize selling off our public lands to generate cash to pay for tax cuts. Open that door, and the open space of democracy closes."

Porcupine caribou mothers go to Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in 
Alaska for calving season. (Photo by P. Maher, CPAWS) 

As lawmakers wrangled over the provision, a dramatic rejection of the idea came from "over 100 conservation groups and public lands advocates, as well as hunters, anglers, ranchers, recreationists and right-wing influencers," Williams explains. The sale legislation failed because "in addition to Democrats, four Republican senators from Montana and Idaho refused to vote for it. . . five Republican House representatives from Western states said it was a 'poison pill.' . . . America’s public lands are safe — for now."

Americans made it known to Congress that their lands were not for sale. "Members of Congress learned once again that if they don’t support public lands, they risk being voted out of office, especially in the American West," Williams writes. "What we saw was collective outrage fueled by love — energy we must nurture and draw on in the months and years to come."

Lee isn't the first politician to look at federal lands and see the money privatization could bring. According to Williams, Americans must remain stalwart protectors of their public "inheritance" that remains home to vastly different kinds of wildlife and broad expanses of landscapes found nowhere else on the planet. Williams writes, "What I feel more deeply now is that open lands inspire open minds. This is the open space of democracy." 

A huge U.S. lithium mine needed for EV battery production vs. a flower found nowhere else in the world

Rhyolite Ridge lithium mine site (ioneer photo)

Step by step, the Biden administration inches closer to green-lighting ioneer's Rhyolite Ridge lithium mine in Nevada, reports Ernest Scheyder of Reuters. Last week, it "published a key environmental report [which is] the last step needed before approving what would become one of the largest U.S. sources of the electric vehicle battery metal." But some conservationists are adamantly against the mine opening despite its cleaner energy purpose.

Ioneer's path to opening has been ongoing for at least six years while the project was reviewed. "The Bureau of Land Management published a final environmental impact statement, that sets in motion a review period of at least 30 days before a record of decision -- essentially a mine's permit -- can be issued," Scheyder explains. "BLM also published an opinion on how a rare flower at the mine site can best be protected."

The rare Tiehm's buckwheat flower (CBD photo)

The site is home to Tiehm's buckwheat flower, "which is found nowhere else on the planet and was declared an endangered species in 2022," Scheyder reports. "The Center for Biological Diversity and some other conservation groups thus oppose ioneer's project." Patrick Donnelly of CBD called Tiehm's buckwheat flower a "linchpin of the local ecosystem, harboring a highly diverse pollinator community."

It's hoped the mine's lithium production can help the U.S. combat Chinese metal production. Scheyder writes, "The U.S. Geological Survey has labeled lithium a critical mineral vital for the U.S. economy and national security. The proposed mine, roughly 225 miles north of Las Vegas, contains enough lithium to power roughly 370,000 EVs each year."

New rule increases royalties for oil and gas companies that drill on public lands; bond will be at least 15 times more

The Interior Department worked to bring oil and gas management
into the 21st century. Drillers are angry. (Photo by J. Evans, Unsplash)

 

For decades, companies that  drilled on public lands for oil paid the federal government small royalties and spent little on cleanup funding, but that era is about to change. "A suite of regulatory changes from the Bureau of Land Management will increase royalties on oil and stiffen cleanup requirements," reports Heather Richards of E & E News. "The rule caps a multiyear effort by the Interior Department to 'modernize' how the U.S. manages vast resources of oil and natural gas under public lands in states like Wyoming and New Mexico."

Initially, President Joe Biden planned to end drilling on public lands "to shrink the future footprint of the nation’s oil program. . . but he retreated due to legal setbacks early in office," Richards writes. "The rule requires a minimum bond for drilling a federal lease that's 15 times higher than the previous minimum of $10,000. Environmental groups and government watchdogs like the Government Accountability Office have asked BLM for years for stronger bonding requirements to cover decommissioning costs of wells and pipelines when they are abandoned."

The new rule angered drillers who "are already panning the rule as an attack on their industry and threatening to sue," Richards reports. "The final rule suggests the Bureau of Land Management will have a higher responsibility to limit oil and gas in areas that are considered valuable for wildlife or recreation by prioritizing leasing in areas with greater oil potential. Oil companies nominate lands for lease, but BLM decides what acres are ultimately offered for sale."

Environmental advocates praised the action as a good stewardship plan. Emily Olsen, vice president of the Rocky Mountain Region for Trout Unlimited, told Richards, "Energy development and conservation need not be mutually exclusive. The BLM is prioritizing energy development where it will have the fewest resource impacts."

Government officials have 'unqualified access to private land;' hunters sue to change Open Fields doctrine

The Open Fields doctrine has allowed government officials access
to private land. (Photo by Institute for Justice via Farm Journal)

Sometimes private land isn't private, and in states such as Pennsylvania, the question, "How much power does the government claim on private land?" is answered by a court ruling, reports Chris Bennett of Farm Journal. On Sept. 29, a "court ruled against two hunting clubs in their lawsuit accusing the Pennsylvania Game Commission of private property rights violations. . . . In its ruling, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania noted the government's absolute power to 'roam private land without consent, warrants, or probable cause.'"

The hunting clubs, Pitch Pine and Punxsutawney sued PGC "after game wardens consistently entered club lands without permission or warrant, and secretly monitored club members, including photo collection via installation of a hidden game camera," Bennett writes. "The wardens' behavior, the lawsuit asserted, was a direct violation of Pennsylvania's state constitution, which explicitly protects 'persons, houses, papers, and possessions.'"

The Open Fields doctrine allows state and federal officials "unqualified access to private land" without requiring a warrant to "enter or surveil private land," Bennett reports. "The Commonwealth Court detailed the alarming powers and 'unfettered discretion' assumed by the government via Open Fields: To ensure their members' privacy, the Hunting Clubs have posted their properties with no trespassing signs and have installed gates at all entrances to exclude nonmembers and intruders. However, the Entry Statutes empower game wardens with unfettered discretion to enter upon and roam private land without consent, warrants, or probable cause."

"Six states place state constitutional authority above the Open Fields doctrine: Mississippi, Montana, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington," Bennett writes. The Institute for Justice represents Pitch Pine and Punxsutawney is appealing the decision. "Arguments before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court should take place in 2024, with a decision likely in 2025. IJ is litigating similar Open Fields cases in Virginia and Tennessee about warrantless intrusions on private land."

(For more on Open Fields, see How Much Ag Property Is Protected From a Warrantless Search?)

In the shadow of the coal industry, the Mountain Valley Pipeline runs into resistance in Appalachia

The Daily Yonder graphic

The long relationship between Appalachian people and energy industry representatives was barely forged before it started to fracture due to misrepresentation and unscrupulous contracts pushed by coal representatives, reports Hannah Wilson-Black of The Daily Yonder. More recently, Mountain Valley Pipeline representatives have come calling, and wiser Appalachians are not all-in for their contracts or pipeline.

"When speculators and early corporations first came to the hollers of Central Appalachia's coal country in the late 1800s, they wanted to buy landowners' mineral rights — not the rights to their farmland, but to the coal underneath," Wilson-Black writes. "Knowing that these landowners were subsistence farmers who had little money and were not fluent in legal language or the going price of coal, the land agents offered to buy mineral rights for as little as fifty cents an acre. Or, as West Virginian community organizer Maury Johnson put it, for 'a little bit of nothing and a Christmas turkey.'"

MVP representatives first approached West Virginia and southwest Virginia landowners in 2014, "seeking 'right-of-way' easement agreements that would allow the pipeline to go through private property without requiring purchase of the land itself. Johnson, a resident of Monroe County, was one such landowner," Wilson-Black reports. "An analyst sent by the company asked to survey his farm, and Johnson agreed — with the stipulation that he accompany the surveyors. . . . Johnson claimed that when he followed the surveyors around, he watched them omit the existence of springs or dangerous karst formations on his property in their reports, and said the surveyors would only note the geographic obstacles when he drew attention to them."

Sunset in Monroe County, W.Va., one of the counties the MVP
pipeline passes through. (Photo by Hannah Wilson-Black)

Johnson and Arietta DuPre, who also lives in Monroe County, told Wilson-Black that MVP representatives employed some of the same undervalue-offer tactics coal companies used years ago. Johnson told her: "A lot of people, they've never dealt with this. They don't know what they're doing. I didn't know what I was doing. They [MVP representatives] say, 'We'll give you X amount of dollars, this is the best you're going to get."

Johnson found a way to protect his property. Wilson-Black reports, "He retained an eminent domain attorney who negotiated a higher price for his easement based on 'real impacts to the property,' as he put it. This allowed him to avoid a protracted — and expensive — court battle with MVP. He was also able to stipulate, through his final contract, which crops or chemicals MVP must use to restore the land."

As the pipeline build continues, landslides and explosions remain a top concern to residents who fear a repeat of the Leach XPress Pipeline explosion in Marshall County, West Virginia, where "a fireball burned for several hours after an 83-foot section of the pipeline burst into flames, releasing more than $430,000 worth of natural gas," Brittany Patterson reported for West Virginia Public Broadcasting. Land shift was blamed for the explosion, which left a crater in the ground and a stark reality burned into Appalachian communities.

Land collaborations with Native American tribes gain momentum, but some say agreements don't go far enough

The Sanilac Petroglyphs are in
Michigan's thumb. (Wikipedia map)

Land stewardship collaborations have increased between federal and state governments with Native American tribes who were removed from their ancestral lands, but some advocates say the pacts don't go far enough. "Known as co-management or co-stewardship, [the agreements] range from pledges to consult with tribes to full-fledged partnerships that give tribal leaders an equal seat on governing commissions," reports Alex Brown of Stateline. "While praising such efforts generally, Native leaders say the agreements have been a mixed bag in terms of granting real authority to tribes."

In 2019, the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe forged a successful collaboration agreement with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources to co-manage the Sanilac Petroglyphs Historic State Park, which is home to the largest collection of petroglyphs in Michigan, Brown reports. "The partnership has helped state managers better understand the petroglyphs' meanings. . . . They're now collaborating to build a ceremonial teaching lodge." Sandra Clark, director of the Michigan History Center, told Brown: "We basically make all decisions together now. The more we learn about our partners, their culture and beliefs, the more that gets filtered into how we talk about this."

McLoyd Canyon is part of Bears Ears National Monument,
in Utah. (Photo by Rick Bowmer, AP via Stateline)

"The collaboration in Michigan is part of a growing movement to restore tribes' role in managing the lands and waters within their ancestral territories. Proponents note that many of America's most cherished public lands were established only after the displacement of the Indigenous people who called them home," Brown explains. "Last year, federal land managers signed an agreement with five tribes to co-manage Bears Ears National Monument in Utah. Those nations — the Hopi Tribe, Navajo Nation, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, and the Pueblo of Zuni — form a commission that works with the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to oversee the monument. . . . Advocates say the agreement was a landmark win for tribal management. . . . [But] some believe that stolen lands like national parks should be returned outright to their original stewards."

The current administration is pushing for more land managers to build co-management relationships with tribes. "In 2021, Cabinet leaders issued a secretarial order calling for their agencies to '[m]ake agreements with Indian Tribes to collaborate in the co-stewardship of Federal lands and waters.' Since then, officials have inked numerous agreements with tribal nations," Brown reports. "The partnerships include everything from wildfire prevention work such as forest thinning and prescribed fire to protection of burial sites, restoration of stream habitat, ceremonial activities and traditional food gathering." Kristi Tapio-Harper, regional tribal relations specialist in the Forest Service's Pacific Northwest Region, told Brown: "It's unprecedented. It's given the Forest Service something tangible to sit at the table and start learning from the tribes."

A housing-strapped county is creating a first-of-its-kind development on U.S. Forest Service land

Stunning views where new affordable housing units will be built.
(Photo by Hart Van Denburg, CPR News)

In the bustling hilltop town of Dillon in Summit County, Colorado, businesses face a steep labor shortage, but affordable housing must be available for potential hires. The area is about 86% forest, the Forest Service has its own land and an equipped post, but it doesn't have cash or build houses. When the two entities put their heads together, they forged a first-of-its-kind agreement.

"The agency is about to sign a lease to allow a developer to transform the hilltop property. The fire engine bay, the offices and the storage areas will all be rebuilt to modern standards. And just downslope will come the biggest change of all — an entire residential neighborhood of more than 150 units," reports Andrew Kenney of Colorado Public Radio. Anna Bengtson, land conveyance program manager for the national forest, described the plan to Kenney: "Multi-story buildings with housing units of one-, two- and three-bedroom configurations mixed in with some green space and a community center and public transit and a rec path coming through."

How was this made possible? An act of Congress. "The 2018 Farm Bill, to be precise," Kenney explains. "Federal lawmakers included a provision that authorized the Forest Service to lease out a strictly limited selection of its land for housing and other purposes. . . . Five years later, Dillon is set to be the first place it happens. . . . The project has millions of dollars of backing from the state and local governments, and it will be built by the private developer Servitas. Summit County will lease the land from the Forest Service for 50 years but will provide housing for USFS staffers instead of paying rent to the agency."

Garrett Scharton, an executive with Servitas, told Kenney, "Frankly, it's going to be beautiful, because the site is epic. Any other developer would absolutely put $5 million condos on this site. . . . Summit County and the Forest Service and Dillon have decided to give back to the local community for essentially locals-only housing." Kinney adds, "In some ways, the project is simpler than other developments. There's no need for a zoning hearing where local opponents might slow the project, since the U.S. Forest Service controls the land. And the agency does have experience building its own housing.

"The project is drawing national attention, a sign of how many other rural and resort communities are desperate for land for housing," Kinney reports. "So far, the Dillon project has been uncontroversial — perhaps because the site has already been developed to an extent. But some officials would like the Forest Service to open up a broader range of sites for housing. . . . Marcus Selig, chief conservation officer at the National Forest Foundation, said that the Forest Service should be — and will be — careful in choosing future properties."

A solution for increasingly arid lands? Taking advantage of the water cycle process alongside soil regeneration.

Water cycle restoration is key to creating water on parched land. (Photo by Daniel Sinoca, Unsplash)

When scientists talk about solutions for depleted water supplies or drought, they're talking about a lot more than high temperatures or insufficient rainfall. Some scientists are using water cycle actions to reverse desertified land and help communities find water solutions in their dirt.

For decades, journalist Judith D. Schwartz has watched "the climate crisis conversation follow a steady, linear path, the message being that climate change puts added stress on water sources," reports Caroline Tremblay of The Daily Yonder. Schwartz told her: "But if we understand how the earth manages heat, it's mostly through water phase changes. . . . By working with the water cycle, we can enhance climate regulation." Tremblay adds, "That's when she decided her book, Water in Plain Sight: Hope for a Thirsty World, would focus on water as a verb, not a noun."

As Schwartz completed research hours at conferences and listened to expert opinions, "She realized so much information about how we can do better is already on the table," Tremblay writes. "But getting people to act — together — remains the biggest challenge. For instance, we've all heard stories of rural and urban communities within proximity vying for water resources while both (had) different needs and obstacles."

Schwartz highlights a workshop she attended in rural New Mexico led by Jeff Goebel, an expert in community consensus building for sustainable solutions. "In a setting she described as 'really the Wild West,' she observed townspeople, ranchers, and the Bureau of Land Management, who had been in a legal tangle over water access," Trembley explains. Schwartz told her: "[The community] went from suspicion, sabotage, and gunfire to committing to work together to restore long-held community relationships and the land. . . . [In places] where people are saying: 'We have no water; there is no hope.' He helped them see where they have agency."

"Schwartz and many others engaged in the climate conversation have become invested in a global movement being led by Savory, an organization facilitating the regeneration of grasslands that are key to this puzzle," Trembley reports. "Schwartz detailed the astounding outcomes of Savory's approach on the ground in ecologically devastated parts of the world, like Zimbabwe. Over 15 years, land there has been revived, wildlife has returned, and erosion has been halted."

Trembley adds, "Schwartz has found similarly noteworthy examples of environmental wins within the United States, from water cycle restoration training to condensation catchment systems." Schwartz told her: "It's time to get real about appreciating that water is at once a force that drives ecological processes and a product of them."