LAS VEGAS, Nev. - Nevadans who care about the future of wild places like Gold Butte are in the nation's capital today for workshops and to urge Congress for bipartisan action. Carrie Sansdstadt, Reno, works as a senior associate with the Campaign for America's Wilderness. She is one of the Nevadans in Washington, D.C., for National Wilderness Week, trying to raise awareness about the need to protect wild places.
Sansdstadt says she hopes Congress will look to Gold Butte when they consider which public lands they will protect by designating them as wilderness.
"The time is now for Gold Butte. It has spectacular biological, cultural and historical treasures, but Gold Butte is being loved to death - right now, it's not being managed for the amount of activity that's going on out there."
In declaring September as National Wilderness Month, President Obama has called on all Americans to help ensure that future generations can experience the tranquility and grandeur of America's natural places.
Some off-road-vehicle enthusiasts have expressed concerns that wilderness designation might mean they would lose access to Gold Butte, but Sandstedt says that is not the case.
"Only the wildest areas – those without roads – will be designated, so no roads will be closed. Right now, 500 miles of roads are open out there in Gold Butte. What needs to happen is better management for motorized and non-motorized recreation."
2010 has proven to be a difficult year to get agreement in Congress on many issues, but Sanstedt says there is widespread support for protecting places like Gold Butte.
"Wilderness is an incredibly bipartisan issue; bills have been sponsored from Republicans and Democrats alike. So we're hoping that Congress will work together and protect these areas before they adjourn this year."
More information is available at www.friendsofgoldbutte.org.
get more stories like this via email
Conservation groups, tribes and community organizers are praising President Joe Biden's decision Thursday to expand two national monuments in California.
Together, the monuments will gain about 120,000 acres. The Berryessa Snow Mountain National Monument is 90 minutes northwest of Sacramento and the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument lies just east of Los Angeles.
Brenda Gallegos, public lands manager for the nonprofit Hispanic Access Foundation, said millions of urban families live close to the San Gabriel Mountains.
"A lot of our Latino communities don't have access to nature, prominently, like 67% of Latino communities don't have access to green spaces or blue spaces," Gallegos pointed out. "Having these expansions designated today brings us closer to closing that nature gap."
The president used his powers under the Antiquities Act to expand the monuments in order to increase public access and protect the watershed and wildlife habitat. The move also makes progress toward Biden's goal of protecting 30% of the country's public lands by 2030.
Gallegos said Berryessa Snow Mountain National Monument in Lake County will include an area previously known as Walker Ridge, now renamed Moluk Loyuk, which means Condor Ridge in the Patwin tribal language.
"This is important because it establishes a co-stewardship with federally recognized tribes and will return the indigenous names of these lands to them," Gallegos explained. "This continues to build that great relationship with tribes."
Land managers will now create a new management plan for the area, which could include new campsites, hiking and mountain biking trails, and even off-highway vehicle-designated routes.
Disclosure: The Hispanic Access Foundation contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Environment, Human Rights/Racial Justice, and Livable Wages/Working Families. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
The Bureau of Land Management recently released its final Public Lands Rule, which is set to put conservation on equal footing with other multiple uses taking place on public lands.
The state of Utah has come out in opposition, pointing to the impact it could have on the almost 23 million acres of BLM land in Utah.
Redge Johnson, director of the Utah Public Lands Policy Coordinating Office, said the state supports conservation efforts but called the rule a "solution looking for a problem."
"What we have already put into conservation designations and then what you have for the acts that promote the conservation of the lands, why do you need to level that playing field?" Johnson questioned. "The playing field has more than leveled over the past 40, 50 years with the passage of all these acts."
Johnson contended Utah's lands and wildlife will suffer as a result of the rule and added it'll make mining critical metals used for batteries even more difficult. He and others, like Gov. Spencer Cox, called on the BLM to immediately withdraw the rule and work with stakeholders on more practical solutions.
Conservationists see the rule as a big win for restoring and sustaining public lands for future generations.
Johnson described Utah's public lands a "fire dependent ecosystem," adding fuel loads have accumulated drastically due to over a century's worth of fire suppression. He argued the rule will make executing and continuing vegetation management projects more difficult, including reducing the threats posed by fuel loads.
"One of the biggest contributors we have to carbon dioxide right now are wildfires, at least in the West," Johnson asserted. "Transportation, all the others, yes absolutely. But wildfires are a huge contributing factor to that. One of the best things we could do is reduce the fuel loads on some of these areas to reduce the fire risk and this rule puts that at risk."
The rule also creates the frameworks for "restoration and mitigation leases," which will allow groups to restore public lands or to offset the effects of a particular use. Johnson argued the leases will leave too many loopholes but the BLM said they will not "disturb existing authorizations."
get more stories like this via email
Conservation groups are rejoicing over the decision Friday by the Biden administration to reject a proposed mining road in Alaska.
The 211-mile Ambler Road would have sliced through the Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve, severing the migration route for a Western Arctic Caribou herd.
Alex Johnson, interior Alaska director for the National Parks Conservation Association, said it was important for the feds to take a stand in Alaska so mining interests do not start eyeing other national parks.
"This is a very expensive, destructive and just highly speculative project that does not in any way support our clean energy goals as a country," Johnson contended. "And ultimately would permanently threaten the health and well-being of local communities and the tribes."
Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski slammed the decision, warning it could limit jobs and tax revenues for Alaska by preventing exploration for minerals she said are important to national security, like copper, cobalt, gallium and germanium.
Jayme Dittmar, a photographer and filmmaker from Fairbanks, said the road would have been very disruptive to the 66 Native American villages along the proposed route.
"That'd be 168 trucks passing through close vicinity to the villages," Dittmar pointed out. "There would be hundreds of bridges built. It would dismantle a subsistence livelihood that's been in place for thousands and thousands of years."
The road was seen as a negative for tourism to the Brooks Range area. According to the Alaska Travel Industry Association, Californians make up 9% of visitors to Alaska.
Disclosure: The National Parks Conservation Association contributes to our fund for reporting on Budget Policy and Priorities, Climate Change/Air Quality, Endangered Species and Wildlife, Environment, Public Lands/Wilderness, and Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email