ST. PAUL, Minn. -- This fall, University of Minnesota researchers will study how regional lakes are being affected by large waves from recreational boating.

Groups like Minnesota Lakes & Rivers Advocates have voiced concerns about eroding shorelines and damaged vegetation, and they believe it's connected to larger boats operating in sections of waterways that aren't suited for them.

Jeff Marr, associate director of engineering and facilities at the university's St. Anthony Falls Laboratory, said there is no comprehensive research in this area, and his team wants to produce unbiased data.

Marr explained they'll measure the size and force of the waves, using sensors and cameras, "Not really focusing on a watercraft specifically, but looking at how waves, and waves of different magnitude, what their impacts are."

Some of the concern stems from the boats used for wakesurfing, although a variety of wave sources will be studied.

The Water Sports Industry Association supports more research, but has voiced concern that this study won't include its direct input. However, Marr said initial outreach was made to the water sports industry and other stakeholders, but the work will be independent.

He added that the lab hopes the findings will provide reliable information to inform policy decisions.

The water sports industry has been lukewarm about enhancing regulations on lakes, but it does promote educating boaters about responsible behavior.

To Jeff Forester, director of Minnesota Lakes & Rivers Advocates, that's one area the groups can find common ground -- teaching all boat operators to be mindful of their surroundings.

"If I take a 16-foot Alumacraft with a 25-horsepower motor, and run it full tilt through two-and-a-half-feet of water or through a wild rice bed, I'm going to cause damage," Forester noted.

Forester's group opposed an industry-supported bill in the Minnesota Legislature that called for a 200-foot buffer from the shore, saying there wasn't enough evidence it would be sufficient.

The initial study results are expected next year. The research is being funded through a crowdsourcing campaign after attempts to secure grants fell short.

The White House announced two new national monuments in California on Tuesday, one just east of Palm Springs and the other near Shasta Lake.

A signing ceremony will take place next week, as the unveiling event was postponed due to high winds.

Rep. Raul Ruiz, D-Calif., whose district includes parts of the new 624,000 acre Chuckwalla National Monument, said the lands will now be protected from mining, drilling and development.

"This is one of these unique examples where you have both the conservation and tribal leaders, as well as the renewable energy and utility companies all endorsing this enormous monument," Ruiz explained.

The area south of Joshua Tree National Park is crucial habitat for the Chuckwalla lizard, bighorn sheep and the endangered desert tortoise.

Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said although President-elect Trump rescinded protections for some monument lands during his first administration, he hopes the two new monuments will endure.

"If the President-elect talks to the parties who really span the spectrum of interests, he will learn how this was a really well-thought-out effort to conserve this land but also make it possible to generate energy," Schiff asserted. "It's a win-win."

Thomas Tortez, former chairman of the Torres Martinez Tribe, noted his ancestral lands will now gain protections.

"The next step is to strategically develop a co-stewardship plan, put all those resources together and then, start to protect the land," Tortez added.

The White House also intends to designate the new Sátíttla Highlands National Monument, which covers 224,000 acres near Shasta Lake in northern California and contains the headwaters for California's entire watershed.

Brandy McDaniels, a member of the Pit River Tribe, said they have been fighting development in the area for decades.

"As social, economically suppressed communities, having to fight against people with deep pockets and have all the money in the world to come in and destroy our lands," McDaniels observed. "That's what we've been fighting to protect for a very long time."


get more stories like this via email

The 640-acre Kelly parcel has been in limbo for decades. It sits within the bounds of Grand Teton National Park but has long been owned by the state of Wyoming.

Now, $100 million and years of work later, the parcel now belongs to the park. The sale, which closed Dec. 27, was a slow process because the parcel was part of state-owned school trust lands which, according to the state Constitution, must benefit Wyoming students.

A 2003 law made it possible for the sale of such lands to count. Monies came from the Land and Water Conservation Fund and the Grand Teton National Park Foundation.

Leslie Mattson, president of the foundation, said the deal has huge benefits.

"It's kind of a 'twofer' property," Mattson explained. "Not only are we benefiting future students here in Wyoming but this property is a very, very important wildlife habitat and has migration corridors for a number of species on it."

The parcel nearly went to auction in 2023, she said, when it could have gone to private developers. Its protection also conserves critical wildlife habitat and migration corridors for elk, pronghorn and mule deer, including the longest land migration corridor in the lower 48, according to the National Park Service.

Mattson pointed out donations came from people across 46 states, and more 10,000 Wyomingites wrote letters or attended public meetings to prevent the parcel from being sold to developers.

"There was a period of time we were getting dozens of gifts a day with emails saying, 'the wildlife need to be preserved,'" Mattson recounted. "It was amazing to see just the interest across the country in this project."

The parcel was the final state-owned school trust inholding in the park, following the purchase of Antelope Flats for $46 million in 2016.


get more stories like this via email

The Biden-Harris administration is taking another step to protect northeast Nevada's Ruby Mountains - by putting them temporarily off-limits to oil, gas and geothermal development.

The U.S. Forest Service submitted the petition and application to Interior Secretary Deb Haaland.

If approved, it would initiate a two-year halt on new oil, gas and geothermal development on about 264,000 acres. Mining and commercial operations would continue.

Russell Kuhlman, executive director of the Nevada Wildlife Federation, said this mandatory pause would help researchers determine why wildlife populations - like mule deer, bighorn sheep, and sage grouse - have been declining in the region.

"That is what, in my opinion, is textbook sound scientific wildlife management," said Kuhlman. "The first step you need to do is limit variables - and one of those variables, over the last five or 10 years, has been the threat of oil and gas companies wanting to do exploratory drilling."

When the petition is approved and published in the Federal Register, it will initiate the two-year moratorium in what's called Nevada's Swiss Alps.

A 90 day public comment period will then follow on a proposed longer withdrawal.

Federal agencies will consult with Tribes on an environmental analysis to decide if the moratorium should be extended up to 20 years.

Kuhlman said the state does a good job of not only hearing everyone's concerns, but building coalitions and rallying behind solutions to protect public lands for future generations.

But he said those who may not know much about the state's oil and gas history could hold misconceptions.

"When I talk to people not engaged in this space, they believe that just because oil and gas is banned somewhere that there is a motherlode of oil and gas ready to be tapped, and then someone is not allowing that to happen," said Kuhlman. "That is not the case for the Ruby Mountains. It's really trying to find water in sand."

Kuhlman added that putting a stop to oil and gas development in the Rubies can help determine how it's affecting the ecosystem, and whether it should be part of the "multiple use" doctrine for public lands.



get more stories like this via email