Utah BLM boss aims to keep plans on fast pace She sticks to self- imposed deadline for environmental studies on land use amid calls for more comment time By Patty Henetz The Salt Lake Tribune
The BLM manages 22.9 million acres of public lands in Utah, representing about 42 percent of the state. Located mostly in western and southeastern Utah, these lands are varied, ranging from rolling uplands to sprawling desert lowlands. Utah’s public lands feature some of the most spectacular scenery in the world, from the snow-capped peaks of remote mountain ranges to colorful redrock canyons. The BLM’s first national monument is also located on public lands in Utah. Situated in beautiful redrock country, the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument encompasses nearly 1.9 million acres in the south-central part of the state. The area offers a unique combination of archaeological, historical, paleontological, geological and biological resources. BLM Utah manages public lands for a variety of uses. These lands not only provide minerals, energy and livestock forage, but also natural, historical and cultural resources that the agency is charged with protecting. In addition, Utah’s public lands offer incomparable opportunities to experience solitude and enjoy outdoor recreation. Source: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, www.blm.gov/ut/st/en.html Long-term plans for the future of some of the most breathtaking geography in the world are on track for completion in the coming year. It’s time for residents to weigh in on such treasures as Labyrinth Canyon, the San Rafael Swell, Dark Canyon, Cedar Mesa, the Paria River and the Wave. The first 90-day comment period deadline arrives Friday; the last is Jan. 24. But any individuals or groups who want more time than officially allotted to wade through 4,000 pages of six U.S. Bureau of Land Management environmental studies of southern Utah desert lands apparently are out of luck. Selma Sierra, BLM’s state director, says the public already has had significant influence during the land-use plans’ 2001 scoping sessions on how to balance multiple – and conflicting – demands for using federal lands in Utah.
Staying the course
During a recent interview in her Salt Lake City office, Sierra, who has held her post for just over a year, said the agency has spent $25 million so far on crafting the crucial environmental studies. Getting them finalized will take even more money. “I think we need to stay on track,” Sierra said. By that, she means hitting a deadline she imposed when she assumed her Utah post just over a year ago, telling her Washington, D.C., bosses she would make sure the Price, Richfield, Moab, Kanab, Monticello and Vernal field offices had their environmental draft studies ready no later than this month. That doesn’t sit well with some experts who represent large segments of the public. They now face the huge task of analyzing a knee-high stack of documents that will determine the fate of scenic lands, energy development, wildlife, livestock and rivers for at least the next 10 to 15 years. Even if they aren’t agitating for extensions, county commissioners are worried that too much space will be given over to wilderness-style protection. Oil and gas developers aren’t satisfied with proposed BLM restrictions on their activities, even though two-thirds of the 11 million acres under study would be open to drilling. Off-highway vehicle groups are upset at the loss of open-country travel, even though the plans would lay out more than 15,000 miles of roads and trails. And conservationists are livid that their concerns seem to be the least important to the BLM, even though half of the acreage is proposed for roadless wilderness designation under the Red Rock Wilderness Act now before Congress. It’s up to the BLM – not-so-affectionately known to some staffers as the Bureau of Lawsuit Management – to sort out how to serve their warring masters. “Any time we make a decision, everybody is mad at us,” Sierra said.
Taking a new look – fast
Congress in 2001 decided the plan overhauls were overdue. That’s when the nation’s leaders handed BLM its marching orders to re-craft its missions to reflect new realities, including increased demand from oil and gas developers and explosive growth in OHV recreation. And not just in Utah. According to Utah BLM spokeswoman Mary Wilson, at least 50 of the agency’s 143 planning districts are now conducting such environmental studies. When Sierra arrived in Utah fresh off a yearlong assignment as BLM chief of staff in Washington, D.C., two BLM field offices – Price and Moab – had completed drafts. But a federal court ruling last year required a new look at lands the agency had earlier determined possessed wilderness qualities that hadn’t been properly studied. Price and Moab would have to write supplements. The other four field offices would have to incorporate the court order into their plans – and fast, Sierra said. The state BLM director was irked to be “spammed” by those seeking a comment period extension the day before the Aug. 27 release of the Moab supplemental study of wilderness-quality lands not already within federally designated wilderness study areas. In a subsequent meeting, she challenged critics to express a “substantive” comment on the spot. They couldn’t, she said. Part of the need for speed was the Bush administration’s Energy Policy Act of 2005, which ordered the federal agency to issue drilling permits as quickly as possible. Elected officials in Utah have embraced the initiative. Sierra said she took pride in respecting their opinions. But Sierra – who worked for the Republican-dominated House Ways & Means Committee during the Clinton administration and conservative New Mexico Republican Rep. Joe Skeen from 1995 to 2001 – refused to connect her push to complete the BLM plans with the Bush administration’s approaching sunset. “I would hope that people would not get into the politics of these plans,” Sierra said. “That would be grossly unfair to the taxpayers.”
Getting emotional
Nada Culver, senior counsel with the Wilderness Society in Denver – and a taxpayer – represents one of many conservation organizations seeking more time for comment. She, too, hopes the BLM “can make decisions as free of politics as possible.” But Culver also worries that what she calls a hurried process devalues people’s emotional response to the landscape. For proof, Culver referred to BLM’s own guidance document, which explains that nonsubstantive comments are those that include opinions, assertions, and unsubstantiated claims. Substantive comments are those that reveal new information, missing information, or flawed analysis that would substantially change conclusions. But people respond to the outdoors from the heart, not necessarily from scientific analysis. The Utah Shared Access Alliance’s organized campaign on its Web site to get its members to write pro-OHV comments recommends offering opinions outlined in a sample letter on how special wilderness-style management is unlawful. However, the illegality isn’t substantiated. Opinions, assertions and unsubstantiated claims, such as ” ‘I like to go here,’ or ‘I want to enjoy the beautiful scenery of Moab and not see an oil rig or an OHV,’ ” are the kinds of comments most people would submit, Culver said. phenetz@sltrib.com