National-monument decrees are way to control public lands

We should all respect and treasure history. We must preserve our past and the artifacts from historic times. The Antiquities Act established by President Theodore Roosevelt simply requires presidential signature to declare national monuments as opposed to congressional action required for a national park. In more recent years such locations as historic buildings or battlefields have expanded to protections of entire scenic landscapes of federally held lands. There is now question of original intent.

The Bears Ears region of Bureau of Land Management land in Utah was declared a national monument by President Obama prior to leaving office in December 2016. It properly protects ancient Indian cliff dwellings but also includes 1.35 million acres of landscape which compares to that of Glacier Park or about half of Yellowstone Park. Starting with George W. Bush, monument designations have dramatically increased in expanse. Clinton’s Grand Staircase Escalante declared soon after he assumed office covers 1.9 million acres.

Western states with a high percentage of federal lands are becoming understandably sensitive to increasing over-reach with lock-up of lands and natural resources. We even hear of tribes laying claim to sites where their sacred stories originated and artifacts are found. The federally enforced Endangered Species Protection Act ,with the goal of protecting species close to extinction, has expanded to encompass not only the habitats where species currently exist, but even where they may have existed in an earlier time. In the case of the lynx, wolf, and now the prairie chicken these habitat claims extend over several large Western states. Various agency control policies take on aspects of federal land grabs and restrictions on human access and use.

Now in question is the Bears Ears Monument of Utah. With the 1996 establishment of the Staircase Escalante monument, Utah suddenly lost use of their high-grade coal which would have provided centuries of funding for education. Suddenly without advance notice that state was stripped of income for their schools. Many more similar problems have evolved out of federal policies, including the current BLM abusive attacks on hundreds of ranchers holding grazing leases, including the Bundys and Hammonds, with several of them now wrongfully in jail and one murdered. Unfortunately since the late 1980s our federal forests have been federally mismanaged, with restrictions that closed down the timber industry. This led to over-grown and dying, fuels-loaded forests subject to catastrophic fires which have destroyed not only valuable timber, but also thousands of wild animals, many on the endangered list.

As time goes on, we will likely be hearing many similar stories about federal agency over-reach causing loss of custom, culture, security and way of life for citizens. We have already basically lost the production from 193 million acres of U.S. Forest Service lands nationwide, as well as extensive wildlands, wildlife preserves, wetlands, etc., established largely through environmentalist initiatives and funded by the Equal Access to Justice initiative. Even access for recreation, hunting and fishing has been severely restricted on public lands. The economy declines with close-down of natural resources and related industries. Our mountain regions contain valuable uranium, minerals, oil and gas essential to energy production and manufacturing, providing jobs as promised by the present administration. Eighty percent of water for farming and food production throughout the Middle-west and Columbia River Basin comes from Rocky Mountain watersheds.

We must not allow our natural resources to be locked up by various federal agencies. Through proper management, multiple use of federal lands can be accomplished while also accomplishing protection of wildlife and the environment. States have generally performed better management in this regard than the federal government. We should consider transfer of management and control of federally held lands to the states, which can be accompanied by proper legal contracts eliminating acquisition of these lands by the private sector. County commissions should then apply federally enforced coordination process in performing policy development to assure access and productive use of these lands. Property rights of current title-holding landowners must also be protected.

The question has always been, “Where do rights to the land and its ownership lie? And upon whose terms?” Surprisingly there are 567 tribal governments nationwide, many of which fervently seek to reclaim what they consider their “aboriginal” lands to become independent sovereign nations recognized by the U.S and U.N. Current reservation lands are basically held in trust for people of “Indian descent.” But according to tribal constitutions, many now consider the right to re-establish “Indian country” with undefined borders. Similarly, are there limits to environmental aspirations for expansive grasslands, wildlands and “open spaces”? We cannot afford the nation’s lands, both governmental and private, to fall under the euphoric dream and newly created philosophies of extreme protectionism in its various forms.

Meanwhile, Ryan Zinke, secretary of the U.S. Department of Interior, is now reviewing those national monuments with 100,000 acres of land. He currently welcomes public comment. Website: www.regulations.gov. Emails: exsec@ios.doi.gov. Phone: 202-708-7351

Ryan is a resident of Bigfork.