If we would examine it carefully, there are likely many acres of federal land in Utah, and throughout the West, that could reasonably be turned over to state or local control or to private developers.
Some of that land, perhaps, is included in a provision that Rep. Celeste Maloy worked into a bill as it was on its way out of a committee. The one to sell about 11,500 acres of Bureau of Land Management land in southwestern Utah.
The problem is that many of the ideas for what land should be sold, and the purposes it should be put to, come from people who seem to be acting out of ignorance, resentment or greed.
There is no reservoir of the kind of trust that is necessary for those who want to sell, or buy, land to come together with those who want to preserve it.
So many Utah politicians at the local, state and national levels spend much of their time making baseless and expensive arguments about how the more than 60% of Utah that belongs to the government of the United States somehow shouldn’t.
To them, the 131-year-old law by which Utah waived all claims to federal land doesn’t count. The idea that all the people of the nation, through their elected representatives, have a say in the future of that territory is denied.
Maloy’s amendment would sell some federal land to the city of St. George so it can expand its airport and improve its water delivery system. This sounds like a reasonable enough move.
Another idea, that some of the land could go to much-needed affordable housing in the fast-growing community, could be a good one. If that is indeed what happens.
Sadly, Maloy is a member of a congressional delegation that is pushing against conservation, against national monument or wilderness status for land that is worthy of it, and for despoiling land by drilling or mining or off-road vehicle use. Any proposal she puts forward deserves careful scrutiny.
Sen. John Curtis, of whom some of us expected more, has joined the chorus of those who reflexively dismiss federal conservation management as schemes “dictated by Washington bureaucrats.” He did so in joining the rest of the delegation in overturning a Biden-era plan to limit off-road vehicle use near Lake Powell and within Glen Canyon National Recreation Area.
Most federal land management plans are drafted and implemented by Utah-based officials — our friends, neighbors and fellow taxpayers — not imposed upon us by people who have never set foot in our state.
And when Utah officials again come down on the side of the overgrown boys who demand the right to play with their oversized toys on sensitive federal lands, well, they do anything but demonstrate that they know better than the feds.
If Utah would put up a new generation of elected officials that demonstrated respect for the land and saw that conservation is, indeed, a proper use of much of that territory, then our representatives would be in a position to negotiate well-thought-out plans that could include turning some federal land over to local governments or even private developers.
So far, Utah has not earned the trust necessary to engage in such planning.
Editorials represent the opinions of The Salt Lake Tribune editorial board, which operates independently from the newsroom.
Donate to the newsroom now. The Salt Lake Tribune, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) public charity and contributions are tax deductible