Monthly Archives: February 2017

“Keep Public Land in Public Hands.”
Like all other rights, it’s only a “right” if you fight for it.

The land hustlers are attempting to take our fundamental rights away and turn our public lands into commodity they can profit from. Greed never sleeps and is often disguised as good intentions. America is known for its wide-open spaces, endless mountain ranges, famous rivers and abundant fish and wildlife. SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 7—Urging Congress to enact legislation transferring title to certain public lands to the State of Nevada in accordance with the report prepared by the Nevada Land Management Task Force.

This Resolution sponsored by; Senator Michael Roberson, Senator Pete Goicoechea, Senator James Settelmeyer, Senator Ben Kieckhefer, Senator Donald Gustavson, Assemblyman Jim Wheeler, Assemblyman James Oscarson, Assemblyman Ira Hansen, Assemblywoman Robin Titus, Assemblyman John Ellison, and Co-Sponsored by, Senator Heidi Gansert, Senator Scott Hammond, Senator Joseph Hardy, Senator Becky Harris, Assemblyman Paul Anderson, Assemblyman Chris Edwards, Assemblyman John Hambrick, Assemblywoman Lisa Krasner, Assemblyman Jim Marchant, Assemblyman Keith Pickard.

Proponents of the “transfer” of Federal land would have you believe that they are righting an historic wrong, which long ago the feds grabbed land that did not belong to them, and that it should be “returned” to state ownership. That’s a very convenient, an incorrect, reading of Western history. The fact is that almost all Western states were once federal territories, land purchased by the U.S. Treasury. Where did the U.S. Treasury acquire the funds to buy the land? From all tax payers, not just those from Nevada or Utah or Montana or any other state. The land was purchased by all Americans, for all Americans, from France, Great Britain and Russia or it was seized from Spain, Mexico or Indian nations and governed per fee title by the federal government until statehood.

The goal of Dr. Baughman, the principal officer of the Nevada Land Management Task Force, was made clear at the 2015 Summit on Public Lands held in Las Vegas in September. In the words of Dr. Baughman, the state of Nevada “would not have a mandate like Federal agencies, we would have a mandate for net revenue generation.” When asked how, Dr. Baughman replied, “the most significant revenue source is the sale of disposable lands.” The Doctor advocates for a state land grab of American’s public lands.

One might ask, “what are disposable lands?” Basically, they are any public lands that are not state or Federal monuments or wilderness areas. Such “land grabs” of our public lands would quickly lead to “for sale signs” and those signs will eventually lead to privatization.

Consider the mission statement of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) over that of Dr. Baughman’s. “It is the mission of the BLM to sustain the health, diversity and productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations.” While no westerner thinks, the BLM has done an impressive job, the thought of the American tradition of hiking, bird watching or hunting, trappings or fishing and the many other activities we all enjoy on our public lands would be lost forever. It would be replaced by a model that resembles the old-world style system where only the elite or the wealthy can pay to use the land to pursue the “kings” fish and game.

Mary Jane Williamson, Communications Director
703-519-9691, x227
www.asafishing.org
Industry Releases Updated Economic Contributions of Recreational Fishing by U.S. Congressional Districts
Drilling down to each congressional district illustrates recreational fishing’s impact
Alexandria, VA – February 20, 2016 – Recreational fishing brings a myriad of economic benefits to communities throughout the U.S. The American Sportfishing Association (ASA) and Southwick Associates have released the 2017 update of Economic Contributions of Recreational Fishing: U.S. Congressional Districts, along with a new series of one-page infographics, which depict recreational fishing’s economic impact on all 435 Congressional districts and the 50 states.

The information in the report and infographics use data from the most recent U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services’ National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, conducted in conjunction with the U.S. Census Bureau, as presented in ASA’s Sportfishing in America report. The study used mapping and population software to hone in on smaller geographic areas in a way that is particularly relevant to members of the U.S. House of Representatives.

The results in Economic Contributions of Recreational Fishing: U.S. Congressional Districts report describe the economic contributions for the respective state economies from anglers who live within each congressional district.

America’s 46 million anglers generate more than $48 billion in retail sales with a $115 billion impact on the nation’s economy creating employment for more than 800,000 people. Recreational fishing is the foundation of an industry that involves not just the manufacturing, sale or provision of tackle and other fishing gear, but also includes services such as boat builders, hotels, restaurants and much more.

“A top priority for Members of Congress is the ability to identify jobs and economic opportunity in their districts,” said ASA Conservation Director Mike Leonard. “By identifying recreational fishing’s economic impact at the Congressional district level, we can clearly show Members of Congress that recreational fishing in their district or state is a tremendous economic driver and job creator.”

Leonard further said, “Given the new Administration’s and Congress’ focus on job creation, it’s critically important that we provide accurate, detailed information to decision-makers on the tremendous value that recreational fishing provides to the nation.”

The report and Congressional district infographics are available at www.ASAfishing.org under Facts & Figures.

Op-ed; Dave Chadwick is executive director of the Montana Wildlife Federation
Even before Ryan Zinke starts his first day as Interior secretary, some members of Congress are pushing to throw out an important and broadly-backed rule that gives Americans a bigger voice in how public lands are managed. That’s unfair to Zinke, unfair to Montanans, and unfair to millions of public land users across the West.
Last year, the Bureau of Land Management issued new rules for decision-making on the lands that the agency manages. The new rules, called Planning 2.0, provide additional opportunities, earlier in the process, for the public to provide input on how our public lands are used. This means that hunters, anglers, ranchers, hikers, boaters, coal miners, energy companies, tribes, counties, and everyone else with a stake in public land management will have more information and will be able to express their opinions how our lands should be managed.
For the Montana Wildlife Federation, the rule means new opportunities to protect important fish and wildlife habitat, such as migration corridors and other large habitat areas. By identifying these lands earlier in the planning process, we can find ways to conserve them alongside energy development and other public land uses.
Planning 2.0 also benefits other public land users. Early involvement means more opportunity for public land ranchers to weigh in. Loggers, miners and energy companies will have an easier time if we can get out of the react-and-regulate mode of the past and start strategically identifying areas where development should take place.
Early reports show that Planning 2.0 is working. One of the early tests of the new rule is taking place right here in Western Montana. Sportsmen, conservationists, business owners, tribes, local governments, and ranchers have been showing up and participating.
But now Congress is considering a resolution to throw out the new rules, cosponsored by our own Sen. Steve Daines. If the resolution passes, the BLM will be forced to go back to the old planning rule, which is more than 30 years old and well-known for keeping all public land users in the dark.
Even worse, the law that Congress is using to throw out the rule – the “Congressional Review Act – specifically prohibits any future attempt to recreate any of the good parts of Planning 2.0. We’ll be permanently locked into an old rule that didn’t work for anybody.
Congress should leave the new planning rules in place and allow the new secretary the opportunity to decide for himself how to move forward. I think he will agree with hunters and anglers, snowmobilers and skiers, ranchers, loggers, and other stakeholders who have already been working with Planning 2.0 here in Montana. Having BLM listen to the local community early in the process just makes sense.

The House yesterday voted to kill a controversial rule finalized in the closing weeks of the Obama administration that congressional Republicans say leaves state and local input out of important federal land management decisions. Wyoming Republican Rep. Liz Cheney’s resolution of disapproval, H.J. Res. 44, passed by a 234-186 vote, mostly along party lines. Four Democrats voted for it and four Republicans against. The so-called Planning 2.0 rule, finalized by the Bureau of Land Management in December, established what the agency calls a more efficient process to update and revise the roughly 160 resource management plans for millions of acres of federal lands.

The planning rule, which has not been updated since 1983, was sharply criticized during floor debate by congressional Republicans, who said it allows BLM to bypass coordinating with local and state officials.
“BLM Planning 2.0 is yet one more example of Obama-era federal government overreach,” Cheney said during a one-hour floor debate. “It takes authority away from people and local communities in my home state of Wyoming and all across the West, and it puts Washington bureaucrats in charge of decisions that directly influence and impact our lives,” she said.

“It significantly dilutes cooperating agency status, and it discounts input from those who are closest to our lands and our resources.” The Senate has been bogged down dealing with Trump administration nominations. But next week, it may take up several House-passed rule-killing resolutions. The Senate version of Cheney’s legislation is S.J. Res. 15 from Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). The White House yesterday issued a brief policy statement in support of the House resolution — a clear signal that President Trump intends to sign it once Congress is done.

Resolutions piling up
Yesterday’s vote marks at least the third time in the past week the full House has used a Congressional Review Act resolution to repeal a major Obama administration land-use or environmental protection measure.
Congress last week approved a resolution nixing the Stream Protection Rule (E&E News PM, Feb. 2). And the full House last week also approved H.J. Res. 36 to kill BLM’s rule to limit methane emissions from oil and gas operations on federal lands (Greenwire, Feb. 3). “I am disturbed by that pattern [and] I am disturbed by the haste with which we’ve moved, especially since all these rules took years to create and craft,” Rep. Donald McEachin (D-Va.) said during floor debate.

On Monday, top officials from several states, including California and New York, sent Senate leaders a letter warning against scrapping the methane guidelines. Natural Resources Committee ranking member Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) said the move to scrap the Planning 2.0 rule is part of a Republican “assault on the environment and our public lands.” He noted that once a CRA resolution is approved, federal agencies are prohibited from reissuing the rule or anything similar, locking BLM into current planning guidelines that are more than three decades old.

Republicans painted the rule as a “midnight” regulation, hastily finalized by the Obama administration shortly after Trump’s election. Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) said Planning 2.0 is a prime example of the kind of rule “that needs to be rolled back because it goes too far, it was done at the last minute, and it undermines the kind of input we need to make proper decisions. This is one that’s got to go.” Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Mass.) disagreed, noting that BLM spent more than two years developing the measure and gathering public input. “Two years and 3,000 public comments, this was no midnight regulation,” she said.

Cheers and jeers
The House vote drew strong reactions from those supporting and opposed to repealing the planning rule. The cattle industry hailed House passage of the resolution. “This is a huge victory for America’s cattle producers and a sign that some common sense is finally being restored in Washington,” said Ethan Lane, executive director of the Public Lands Council, who also leads the federal lands program at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. “Planning processes are critical to the ability of grazing permittees to operate in the West,” Lane added. “The final rule’s shift away from multiple use, as well as its disregard for both local input and economic analysis, make it unworkable for the more than 18,000 ranchers operating on BLM-managed lands.”

Conservation and sporting groups blasted the decision, saying it could have far-reaching negative impacts.
Steven Williams, a former Fish and Wildlife Service director during the George W. Bush administration and now president of the Wildlife Management Institute, said the new rule was already working to improve “the way we conserve once-overlooked habitat that elk, mule deer and other big-game animals rely on.” BLM was applying the rule’s principles to develop an oil and gas management plan in Colorado’s South Park region, said Suzanne O’Neill, executive director of the Colorado Wildlife Federation. “Hunters, anglers, landowners, elected officials and others have had more upfront involvement than in the past, and cutting off the process before it barely has a chance to get going is the very example of a top-down edict from Washington that lawmakers are always criticizing,” O’Neill said. Using the CRA to dismiss the rule is an “aggressive” approach that “benefits no one,” said Joel Webster, director of Western lands for the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership.
Scott Streater, E&E News reporter

Nevada Wildlife Federation (NvWF) is Nevada’s oldest non-profit conservation education group in the state. NvWF depends on the engagement of the board of directors to help set of our agenda and manage our organization. Serving on the board is a great way to share your talents and experience while also getting an insider’s view on important wildlife issues. Board members are expected to participate in monthly meetings either in person or by teleconference.

Several board of director seats are open for nomination and election now. If you are interested in joining NvWF’s board of directors contact Robert act (702)-271-5573 or Tammi at (702)-438-2485. You may also consider attending a meet and greet at 4747 Vegas Drive, Las Vegas, (the Nevada Department of Wildlife office) on Saturday February 18 from 10:00 AM to 2:00 PM.

On behalf of over 1000 members and supporters in Nevada, and the over six million members and supporters of the National Wildlife Federation we adamantly oppose efforts to sell or transfer ownership or management of national public lands to state or local governments, or private interests.

Our organizations’ members are hunters, anglers, outdoor enthusiasts, gardeners, educators, and many more. As you know, national public lands are vital to their way of life and to the way of life of people throughout Nevada and across America. We depend on our national forests, parks, wildlife refuges and other federal lands to provide fish and wildlife habitat and access to places to hunt, fish, and enjoy the outdoors.

The iconic landscapes of America’s public lands also sustain our national economy by supporting an outdoor recreation industry that generates $646 billion in economic benefit annually and supports 6.1 million jobs — and attracting tourists from across our nation and around the world. Support of our national public lands is broad, deep and bipartisan. Republican leaders like President Teddy Roosevelt pioneered the creation of national parks, refuges and forests lands for public use, public access, and public ownership.

Democratic leaders like President Franklin D. Roosevelt expanded the national estate on behalf of the public. Republic and Democratic leaders since then have followed in their footsteps. Some of our most treasured big game animals depend on the secure habitat and migration corridors that are provided by public land. Many sportfish species depend on cool, clean waters that originate on public lands. Federal public lands also provide free access for Nevadans to hunt and fish every year. These lands sustain our hunting and fishing heritage and fill our freezers. While all of America owns these lands, their wise stewardship is of particularly vital concern to us.

Monumental landscapes that Americans play in, explore, and cherishes –are under attack. A vocal minority of legislators and private interests are pushing to take our public lands from us by transferring our national public lands to state and private ownership. This would devastate public access. It would cripple an outdoor recreation industry that relies heavily on public lands, in Nevada, outdoor recreation generates $14.9 billion in spending and supports 147,600 jobs. Parceling out these national treasures would undercut the very meaning of public lands. We must protect our public lands. National Wildlife Federation and its 50 state and territorial affiliates, are diverse organizations representing Americans of many backgrounds and interests. We declare our support for keeping public lands in public hands, and states our opposition to any large-scale efforts to sell or transfer ownership or management of national public lands to state or local governments, or private interests. The economic consequences of the loss of our public lands are enormous; the impacts on this fundamental part of our American identity and landscape are incalculable.

President, Nevada Wildlife Federation