INTERIOR: Utah takeover talk a 'waste of time' -- Jewell
Phil Taylor, E&E reporter
Greenwire: Tuesday, December 9, 2014
LAS VEGAS -- Debate over whether and how Utah should take over federal public lands is a "waste of time" and hinders constructive dialogue between Utah and land management agencies, said Interior Secretary Sally Jewell.
Jewell spoke to Greenwire on the sidelines of the Western Governors' Association winter meeting here last Saturday on the Las Vegas Strip, where she delivered a keynote speech about sage grouse, rangeland fire and landscape conservation.
Her comments came less than a week after a study by Utah universities found that the state "likely" could afford to take over and steward roughly 31 million acres of Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service lands within its borders, and could make a profit under certain energy revenue assumptions (Greenwire, Dec. 2).
The 18-month study by economists at the University of Utah, Utah State University and Weber State University was one of the most comprehensive of its kind to examine the fiscal pros and cons of states' claiming federal lands. It was ordered by the Utah Legislature to inform the state's bid to claim federal lands that conservative lawmakers believe Utah was promised under its 1894 founding act.
Utah's takeover bid is a legal long shot and likely unconstitutional, legal scholars argue.
But the economic study galvanized both supporters and opponents of the takeover plan.
Jewell said the debate is irrelevant and counterproductive.
"A relevant discussion is, 'How can we work collectively with the states on the thoughtful management of public lands?'" she said. "I think it is a waste of time and resources to say we want to have a state takeover of public lands."
Jewell said states enjoy great benefits from federal lands in their states, such as mineral royalties, recreation, hunting and fishing, and quality of life. Land management is also paid for by the U.S. taxpayer.
Conservationists have opposed the transfer in principal, saying it would fleece Americans who own those lands.
Takeover proponents argue states would manage the lands more efficiently, allowing greater economic development and forest health while maintaining public access.
