Conservation groups voice opposition to unappropriated public lands lawsuit

SALT LAKE CITY — Two conservation groups expressed opposition to the State of Utah’s lawsuit challenging the federal government’s control of unappropriated public lands. 

The Center for Western Priorities called the lawsuit “pointless” and a waste of taxpayer dollars. 

“This lawsuit isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on. 130 years ago, the people of Utah agreed to ‘forever disclaim all right and title’ to national public lands when Utah became a state,” read the statement.

It continued, taking aim at Utah Gov. Spencer Cox. 

“What part of ‘forever’ isn’t clear to you, governor? The property clause of the Constitution gives Congress, and only Congress, authority to transfer or dispose of federal lands. That’s the beginning, middle, and end of this lawsuit.” 

Similarly, the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance criticized the lawsuit. A press release from SUWA called the move an “election-year stunt.” 

“With today’s announcement Utah has firmly established itself as the most anti-public lands state in the country,” wrote Steve Bloch, the organization’s legal director.

Bloch added that Utah’s scenery draws visitors from across the world. Much of the famous scenery lies within the boundaries of public lands. 

“All of that is at risk with Utah’s saber rattling and insistence that many of these remarkable landscapes are instead “state lands” that should be developed and ultimately destroyed by short-sighted state politicians,” his statement continued.

The Associated Press reported that the Utah Enabling Act of 1894 included a promise that the Beehive State wouldn’t try to claim federal land. 

“Nothing in the text of the Constitution authorizes such an inequitable practice…. Current federal land policy violates state sovereignty and offends the original and most fundamental notions of federalism,” wrote Attorney General Sean Reyes in a press release about the lawsuit.

Why does Utah want control of public lands? 

KSL NewsRadio reported that the lawsuit focuses on 18.5 million acres of unappropriated lands. The Bureau of Land Management currently controls the land.

The lawsuit does not include national parks, forests, monuments, or any other appropriated lands. 

A video on the Stand for Our Land website said the BLM has adopted a “museum-type management approach” to conservation efforts. 

“We are committed to ensuring that Utahns of all ages and abilities have access to public lands. The BLM has increasingly failed to keep these lands accessible and appears to be pursuing a course of active closure and restriction. It is time for all Utahns to stand for our land,” wrote Cox in a press release about the lawsuit.

The state said that the BLM’s approach closed leased lands to other uses. It is currently unknown which lands it was referring to. 

The AP reported that the federal government’s current control prevents Utah from making money off land taxes and development projects. 

If the lawsuit is successful, the state said it plans to acquire the BLM-managed lands for “multiple uses.” The list of uses includes recreation, wildlife habitat, and conservation. 

Additionally, the state plans to use the currently unappropriated lands for energy production, livestock grazing, and sustainable resource development. 

The areas the state is seeking control of currently include remote desert regions. It also seeks control of small areas near Utah’s famed Canyonlands and Arches National Parks. They are highlighted in a map on the Stand for Our Land website.