Get breaking news alerts via email

Click here to manage your alerts
(Al Hartmann | The Salt Lake Tribune) In this file photo, cattle graze on public land in Utah.
Utah lawmakers embrace wilderness? Not so fast

If Utah wrests public land from the feds, bill would allow wilderness areas inside transferred 30M acres.

First Published Mar 04 2014 05:36 pm • Last Updated Mar 04 2014 10:42 pm

A House committee advanced a wilderness bill Tuesday, but it’s not what you think.

The Utah Wilderness Act would not protect any specific pristine landscapes. But for the 30 million acres of public land that Utah is demanding from the federal government, the act would provide a framework for the state to eventually designate and manage sections as wilderness areas.

Join the Discussion
Post a Comment

HB160 is aimed at capturing the messaging high ground over Utah’s public land battles with the feds and environmentalists, according to sponsor Rep. Stephen Handy, R-Layton.

Many conservation-minded people believe that Utah’s real intent behind the land transfer drive is to open these public lands for unfettered resource extraction, he said. This perception, however wrong, is becoming reality, warned Handy, a public relations professional.

"We value these natural wonders and our access to them in every way that we value our families," Handy told the House Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Committee.

"HB160 demonstrates that we are committed to a management plan that codifies the potential designation of wilderness as part of Utah’s public lands portfolio," he said.

The bill mirrors the federal Wilderness Act, but lays out a "Utah way" for managing wilderness that weds a conservation ethic with multiple use.

It would bar most commercial enterprises and permanent roads within wilderness, as well as temporary roads, motorized equipment and mechanical transport, except to meet minimum requirements for administration.

Existing grazing would be protected and allowed to continue. Existing mineral leases would be honored inside newly designated wilderness for up to 20 years, but no new leases would be issued.

Prospecting for water and developing it would be allowed, including building any required power projects or transmission lines.

story continues below
story continues below

If a designated area enclosed private land, the landowner would have the right to reasonable access.

"The bill allows access both to private property and mineral leases," said Assistant Attorney General Tony Rampton, who helped draft the measure.

To make sure the bill wouldn’t lock out people, Republicans struck key language that echoed the famous 1964 federal act, which aims to "recognize and protect in perpetuity areas where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by humans and where humans are visitors that do not remain."

Under Utah’s 2012 Public Lands Transfer Act, under legal attack by conservationists, the state is to assume title to most land administered by the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service by the end of the year. National parks and wilderness areas are not targeted for transfer.

HB160 would require the Public Lands Policy Coordinating Office to survey transferred lands to find potential conservation areas. The office would then have five years to review the candidates to be designated as "protected wilderness" in the Utah Wilderness Preservation System.

"The process of review would require extensive coordination with local government and the public, and the review and correlation of a great deal of data," wrote John Harja, the state’s senior public lands policy analyst, in an explanation of the bill.

Still, a fiscal note indicated the bill would "not materially impact the state budget."

Support for the bill came even from committee chairman Rep. Mike Noel, a Kanab Republican known for opposing impediments to mining, drilling, logging, motorized recreation and grazing on the public domain.

"It’s hard for me to say the ‘w’ word, but I believe the state can do a better job and there are areas that need to be protected," Noel said. "They are special areas for people."


Copyright 2014 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Top Reader Comments Read All Comments Post a Comment
Click here to read all comments   Click here to post a comment

About Reader Comments

Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
Staying Connected
Contests and Promotions
  • Search Obituaries
  • Place an Obituary

  • Search Cars
  • Search Homes
  • Search Jobs
  • Search Marketplace
  • Search Legal Notices

  • Other Services
  • Advertise With Us
  • Subscribe to the Newspaper
  • Access your e-Edition
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact a newsroom staff member
  • Access the Trib Archives
  • Privacy Policy
  • Missing your paper? Need to place your paper on vacation hold? For this and any other subscription related needs, click here or call 801.204.6100.