Environmentalists are applauding a Bureau of Land Management decision to allow the sale of a small national public land parcel for an affordable housing development.

The sale of public lands is controversial, with Republicans and conservative groups seeing states as preferable stewards. Conversely, Democrats and conservation groups argued states cannot afford to protect public lands and would sell them to private companies.

Aaron Weiss, deputy director of the Center for Western Priorities, said there are public lands adjacent to metro areas in some Western states well-suited to development, which could help solve the nation's housing shortage.

"But that's the kind of stuff that happens five, 10, 20 acres at a time," Weiss explained. "Not the wholesale transfer of tens of thousands or even millions of acres to states and private parties."

For the first time ever, the BLM this week approved the sale of 20 acres of national public land near Las Vegas to the Clark County Department of Social Services for an affordable housing development. Weiss pointed out the federal "memorandum of understanding" is specific to the Nevada parcel but he believes there are others near Phoenix or Tucson that would make sense for consideration.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Gov. Joe Lombardo, R-Nev., are the most recent politicians citing the housing shortage as a need to sell off public lands to developers. In a letter to President Joe Biden, Lombardo urged approval for the transfer of 50,000 acres of public land around Las Vegas with few restrictions, which Weiss believes would create urban chaos. He contends mixing in housing is a new approach to how conservatives now talk about public lands.

"Much of the Republican Party finally recognized that calling for wholesale transfer was a political third rail in the West," Weiss observed. "No matter how conservative the state, voters everywhere across the political spectrum do not want to dispose of national public lands on that scale."

Weiss added any sale of public lands for housing should require it be affordable and not end up providing "McMansions" or "trophy homes" for billionaires.


get more stories like this via email

A sanctuary for stargazing in Oregon is the largest in the world and is set to get even bigger.

In eastern Oregon, the organization DarkSky International declared 2.5 million acres of the Oregon Outback International Dark Sky Sanctuary in the first phase of its process in March. It plans to increase the sanctuary to more than 11 million acres in the next few years.

Damon Motz-Storey, director of the Oregon chapter of the Sierra Club, recently visited the area.

"Anybody who's visited it on a clear summer night or otherwise will agree that it is very spectacular," Motz-Storey observed. "It's a very unique and amazing place to stargaze and get into astronomy."

Motz-Storey pointed out the area is far from urban centers like Portland and Boise, and is sparsely populated. It is estimated more than 2.5 times as many stars are visible than in urban areas. DarkSky International has designated sanctuaries since 2007 and the Oregon Outback is the first in the state.

Motz-Storey emphasized protecting dark areas is good for wildlife and humans alike because both are affected by artificial lighting.

"These kinds of designations help to spread awareness around people preserving the dark sky for both wildlife and human enjoyment," Motz-Storey stressed. "And also to serve as a little bit of a warning signal to future development to say, hey, this is really worth preserving."

Within the Oregon Outback is an area known as the Owyhee Canyonlands. However, Motz-Storey noted Congress has been unable to pass protections for the unique landscape. A coalition of organizations, including Motz-Storey's, are pushing the Biden administration to declare it a national monument.

"That would pair very nicely with this dark sky designation and help to protect everything that's on the ground around the Owyhee Canyonlands, which is just as special as the sky you look up at," Motz-Storey contended.

A new poll indicates strong support for protections of the West's greater sage-grouse. The results come as the U.S. Bureau of Land Management considers a plan for improving conservation of the bird. BLM is reviewing public comments on its draft environmental impact statement for amending and strengthening sage grouse protections. The agency has plenty of public support for this: a poll commissioned by The Pew Charitable Trusts found 93% of people surveyed back the BLM's efforts to protect the bird and its habitat.

Tyler Dungannon, conservation coordinator with Oregon Hunters Association, said many support even greater protections.

"In the Western U.S., roughly 70% favored restricting some development of specific public lands to ensure long term habitat protections for sage grouse," he explained.

The poll also found that nearly 60% of respondents say sage grouse conservation efforts boost economic development. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife data from 2019 says hunting, fishing and wildlife viewing fueled $1.2 billion in spending in the state.

Josh Collins, a retired landscape ecologist in Bend, said there are positives to BLM's plans for conserving sage grouse, including the expansion of Areas of Critical Environmental Concern for the bird and the agency elevating conservation as one of is priorities on public lands. But he added that there's also room for improvement, such as a focus on ensuring sage grouse chicks have wildflowers to feed on in their first few weeks of life.

"One of the things missing in the BLM report and almost every other state or federal report concerning the sage grouse is a focus on the dietary needs of the chicks and the brood hens," he continued.

Collins adds that bringing back the sage grouse means bringing back wildflowers in the region, which will benefit other species.

"Young pronghorn benefit from that, they eat wildflowers. And, of course, the pygmy rabbit does. Many birds are feeding on the insects that are attracted by the wildflowers. So, the wildflower is kind of a missing piece of the foundation of the ecological health for the whole system," he said.


get more stories like this via email

The U.S. Forest Service is considering changes to modernize the Northwest Forest Plan.

While it was hailed as a success when it was created 30 years ago, the Forest Service wants to update the plan to address new challenges to the region. To help with the process, the agency convened an advisory committee, which unanimously approved 192 recommendations for the plan.

Susan Jane Brown, chief legal counsel for Silvix Resources, a nonprofit environmental law firm based in Oregon, co-chaired the committee and said tribal inclusion and rights were among the most critical issues to address because they weren't included in the original plan.

"That was a pretty substantial oversight and something that the federal advisory committee wanted to correct this time around," Brown explained. "We really wanted to center indigenous perspectives and indigenous knowledge in the management of these forests."

The plan guides management of more than 19 million acres of land across Washington, Oregon and northern California. The Forest Service is moving forward with the amendment process for the plan. Brown pointed out a draft environmental impact statement was expected in August but it has been pushed back. The agency is incorporating the committee's recommendations for a draft analysis, as well as other alternatives.

The Forest Service is looking to address three threats: invasive species, particularly large and severe wildfires and climate change. Brown argued the issues need to be addressed quickly.

"Our forests and communities are in desperate need of clear management direction given the wildfire crisis, given the climate crisis that we're also experiencing right now," Brown emphasized. "We really need an updated management plan that is equipped to deal with those new challenges."

Travis Joseph, president and CEO of the American Forest Resource Council, co-chaired the federal advisory committee. He said the committee gathered diverse interests and did the hard work to collaborate on their recommendations to the Forest Service.

"There is a path forward, and we can move beyond the hyperbole and the 'forest wars' of the past," Joseph contended. "If we focus on what we have in common and the outcomes that we want to achieve, we can move beyond the past and frankly build a brighter future."

Support for this reporting was provided by The Pew Charitable Trusts.


get more stories like this via email