U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

44–367 PDF 2008

S. HRG. 110–493 

MISCELLANEOUS PUBLIC LANDS BILLS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS AND FORESTS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON

S. 934 S. 2834 

S. 2833 H.R. 1374 

APRIL 22, 2008 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

KEN SALAZAR, Colorado 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

JON TESTER, Montana 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

MEL MARTINEZ, Florida 

ROBERT M. SIMON, Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel 

FRANK MACCHIAROLA, Republican Staff Director 

JUDITH K. PENSABENE, Republican Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS AND FORESTS

RON WYDEN, Oregon, Chairman 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

KEN SALAZAR, Colorado 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

JEFF BINGAMAN and PETE V. DOMENICI are Ex Officio Members of the Subcommittee 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page 

Barrasso, Hon. John, U.S. Senator From Wyoming ............................................. 12 

Bennett, Hon. Robert F., U.S. Senator From Utah .............................................. 5 

Craig, Hon. Larry E., U.S. Senator From Idaho ................................................... 3 

Crapo, Hon. Mike, U.S. Senator From Idaho ........................................................ 9 

Eardley, James J., Chairman, Washington County Board of Commissioners, 

St. George, UT ...................................................................................................... 26 

Gehrke, Craig, Regional Director, The Wilderness Society, Boise, ID ................ 38 

Gibson, Chad C., Owyhee Range Service, Wilder, ID ........................................... 34 

Holtrop, Joel, Deputy Chief, National Forest System, Forest Service ................ 20 

Jacobson, Julie, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals Management, Department of the Interior ....................................................................... 13 

Martinez, Hon. Mel, U.S. Senator From Florida .................................................. 2 

Meadows, William H., President, The Wilderness Society ................................... 29 

Wyden, Hon. Ron, U.S. Senator From Oregon ...................................................... 1 

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to additional questions .......................................................................... 49 

APPENDIX II 

Additional material submitted for the record ........................................................ 51 

(1) 

MISCELLANEOUS PUBLIC LANDS BILLS 

TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS AND FORESTS, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 p.m. in room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Wyden presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM OREGON 

Senator WYDEN. The subcommittee will come to order. Today it 

is Earth Day. All over the country in communities small and large, 

many Americans are gathering to talk about how to protect our 

treasured land, air and water. So I think it is very fitting that 

today the subcommittee is looking at wilderness legislation. 

I’m especially pleased to have two colleagues, Senator Bennett 

and Senator Crapo, who are as hard working and as thoughtful as 

any people I know. They are very much aware of what a challenge 

it is to pull together all of the various diverse groups that have 

strong feelings about wilderness legislation. Having talked with 

both of them recently about their legislation, I’m very much aware 

that both of our colleagues have put in scores and scores of hours 

with all of the people that have an interest in this issue. So I very 

much thank them both for coming and just have a couple of remarks to make before we go to Senator Craig and our colleagues. 

S. 934 and H.R. 1374 are going to amend the Florida National 

Forest Land Management Act of 2003 to authorize the conveyance 

an additional tract of National Forest System Land. S. 2833, the 

Owyhee Public Land Management Act of 2008, Senator Crapo’s legislation, will be considered. S. 2834, the Washington County 

Growth and Conservation Act of 2008, Senator Bennett’s legislation 

will be considered as well. 

The Wilderness Act, of course, was passed by the predecessor to 

this committee, the Interior and Insular Affairs Committee. One of 

that committee’s long time members, former Senator Gaylord Nelson, not only was a co-sponsor of the Wilderness Act, but was also 

the founder of the day that is celebrated across the land, Earth 

Day. So it is, as I stated, fitting that on Earth Day we hold this 

hearing to consider important additions to the National Wilderness 

Preservation System. 

In my view both of the Wilderness bills that are before us today 

have come a long, long way since they were first introduced in the 
2 

last Congress. The bills reflect the hard work of their sponsors and 

the dedication of their constituents. We’re going to hear from the 

Department of the Interior and the Forest Service in a few minutes 

on specific concerns of the Administration has indicated they have 

with the legislation. It is our intent after this hearing to continue 

to work with both of our Senators and the Administration to address the various issues that have come up. 

One last thought as it relates to Earth Day and the beautiful 

state of Oregon. Many who are here today know that Senator 

Smith and I have worked together to put together important wilderness legislation for our home state, the Lewis and Clark Mount 

Hood Wilderness Act and the Copper Salmon Wilderness Act. Both 

bills have had broad support and passed this committee on a unanimous basis. 

If I had my way we would be celebrating Earth Day by passing 

those bills on the floor of the Senate. But I am hopeful that they 

will pass in the near future. That the people of Oregon and our 

various supporters and friends from around the country can celebrate Earth Day next year with new wilderness legislation in our 

wonderful state. 

So at this point I want to recognize our colleague Senator Craig 

from Idaho who has a great interest in these issues. Senator 

Barrasso I think will be joining us at some point. We’ll recognize 

him for his opening statement, but when Senator Craig has completed his statement we’ll go right to our witnesses. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Martinez follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MEL MARTINEZ, U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA, ON S. 934 

Mr. Chairman: Thank you for holding this important hearing today on S.934, 

which will authorize a land conveyance in the Apalachicola National Forest outside 

of Tallahassee, Florida to purchase more in-holdings with the Forest. I have joined 

my colleague Senator Bill Nelson in cosponsoring this legislation, and I commend 

Congressman Allen Boyd and Congressman Ander Crenshaw for introducing the bipartisan House companion bill HR 1374. 

The legislation modifies the Florida National Forest Land Management Act to 

allow the Forest Service to sell 114 acres of land that has become completely surrounded by development and the expansion and widening of Capitol Circle/US 319, 

which is a major transportation and hurricane evacuation route. According to the 

Forest Service, this tract of land has become increasingly expensive and difficult to 

manage because of real estate and commercial development. As a result, the land 

has lost its National Forest character and has become a burdensome expense on 

management efforts for the Apalachicola National Forest. The proceeds of selling 

this tract, called W-1979, will allow the Forest Service to purchase 2,000 acres of 

sensitive land that will consolidate holdings within the National Forest. 

In addition to providing a large environmental benefit to the Apalachicola Forest, 

the legislation will provide the Forest Service with the authority and flexibility to 

improve and maintain administrative facilities essential to the management of Florida’s forest land. By granting the Forest Service the ability to use the proceeds of 

land sales from ‘‘non-green’’ parcels to be directed towards basic operations and 

maintenance work makes common sense. Considering the continuing funding difficulties we face in addressing the basic up-keep of our vast public land, we should 

encourage some creative thinking to meet these challenges. 

It is my hope that we can quickly move this legislation through the Committee. 

It is supported by the Forest Service, the City of Tallahassee, Leon County government officials, as well as environmental advocacy groups. This bill is a win-win for 

the Apalachicola National Forest and the future economic development of Leon 

County, and I look forward to working with the Committee to bring this legislation 

into fruition. 

Senator Craig. 
3 

STATEMENT OF HON. LARRY E. CRAIG, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM IDAHO 

Senator CRAIG. Ron, thank you for holding this hearing, especially on the Owyhee initiative in a very timely way because Senator Crapo has just introduced a re-draft of the language that he 

put before the Senate last year. I think we all appreciate that. 

What you’re going to hear today, and as you view the picture, 

Ron, as you’re going to see some of the most marvelous high desert 

canyon lands in the Great Basin West. It is a treasure of our State. 

We find it not only a phenomenal resource for how we think of it 

in a traditional way, as it may result to wilderness, but it has also 

been a resource in which human kind has lived now for well over 

a century. 

Some of the largest public land ranches in Idaho reside in and 

around this territory. The air space has produced one of the most 

effective training ranges for the U.S. Air Force in the world which 

gives us the kind of efficiencies today we see over Iraq and Afghanistan. So it is without question, a very unique property, something 

that Idahoans and now, nationally, the citizens of our country are 

obviously very excited and pleased about. 

As you know when it comes to wilderness designation and because it may in one way or another prevent the kinds of access that 

citizens and Idahoans have traditionally approached their public 

lands with, I approach these designations with a good deal of caution as I know my colleague, Senator Crapo has. As for the last 

good number of years now he has worked in a phenomenally diligent way with all of the stakeholders involved to produce the legislation, S. 2833, that we have before us. I can only give my colleague high praise because of his phenomenal dedication to the 

issue of trying to get the differences between all of the stakeholders 

resolved in a compatible way to assure and sustain the long term, 

long time use of our public lands as we have historically known 

them in Idaho. That is public land grazing, large open western 

range kind of States, not unlike your Eastern Oregon in the Steens 

Mountain country and all of that country that you know so well. 

This land is comparable and yet different in many ways. 

So let’s record the hours, but let’s also recognize the collaborative 

effort that has been underway here because that’s something that 

you and I are very proud of. The Craig-Wyden bill over the years 

have produced literally thousands of agreements between what 

once were warring or I should say disagreeing parties on how we 

approach our resources and manage them. You and I were able to 

resolve that by putting the right incentives in place. Certainly the 

right incentive here is to find common ground, as much common 

ground as you can for all of the stakeholders. 

Yet we know, I know, personally. Mike Crapo knows because he’s 

been involved in it from day one, sitting long hours at a table in 

discussions where there has been a lot of compromises. That all 

parties have given a little and given back a little more than they 

might have otherwise wanted on the issue. So, clearly those are 

concerns that I think he deserves, I mean that Senator Crapo deserves an A for in his effort. 

As I have approached this issue and stepped back, having my 

staff engaged at all times with the Crapo staff and with all the 
4 

stakeholders, I’ve expressed very limited concerns. Ron, you will 

not remember, but Idaho long remembers and a good many out 

there remember that a few years ago I, along with Mike and others, and Governor Andress at the time, created what is now known 

as a world class training range for our airmen and women. I, in 

no way, want to see that impaired, nor do I want its activities to 

impair the natural resource base. It is unique. 

When you fly this country, you fly Afghanistan. When you fly 

this country, you fly Northern Iraq. If you don’t believe me, come 

to Mountain Home Air Force Base and visit with our airmen who 

fly this country in their training and preparation. As a result have 

achieved some of the highest delivery rates of arsenal on the 

ground, on target, of any air force in the history of our country. For 

that, we have another national asset that adjoins this by property 

and boundary that I have made sure and worked very closely to be 

quite confident we did not impair now and into the future. 

Second, there was an issue of land exchanges and buyouts. 

That’s key. That’s very important in this legislation. I wanted to 

make sure that all parties crossed the finish line at the same time 

as you know, certainly, chairing this committee. 

Oftentimes, when we pass re-designation of public lands, those 

who are for the designation immediately win when the bill is 

signed. Those who are by action of agreement termed to be those 

compensated in the future, sometimes that compensation never results. Why? Because they stand in line and compete with other 

money needs that are critical to our Nation. While they at the time 

may have thought of immediate compensation in many instances, 

true in your State, and true in my State, in a few instances that 

money never came. 

A good number of years ago I approached the Appropriations 

Committee to resolve an issue that is not unlike the Owyhee initiative. The great Treasure Valley of Idaho, the Owyhee on the southern, western border and just to the north up against the foothills 

of Boise, other public lands now by the urban growth in Idaho and 

in that area are getting, are running the risk of being overused. We 

wanted to protect the foothills of Boise for their scenic value and 

we did. 

The parties came together. I got the money. I want to make sure 

that project is completed before we launch a new project. I’ve 

worked with Mike on that. I’m reasonably comfortable that the language in this bill resolves that issue. 

Clarification of land exchanges is a concern. I think that we can 

resolve that as we work through the fine points of this. Once this 

greets the public eye and once Mike has brought, as he has, legislation before the committee. I will see if there are fine tunings that 

need to be done. I would trust they can be done in a way that 

keeps all stakeholders at the table. 

I think that is phenomenally important because Mike, Senator 

Crapo, and his and his staff’s effort have struck a very important 

agreement here that in the end, one Senator, this Senator especially, but I know Senator Crapo more than that would like to see 

become public policy. We think it would be good for that corner of 

our State, which is bigger than about half of the Eastern part of 
5 

the United States. It would be good for national policy, public land 

use policy also. 

So, I’m pleased it’s before the committee. I look forward to the 

testimony. Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Senator Craig. What we’ll do at this 

point we’ll hear from Senator Bennett. We’ll hear from Senator 

Crapo. 

My understanding is our two colleagues would like to sit with the 

committee after their testimony and the bipartisan leadership of 

this committee is pleased to have both of you participate. We know 

that you’ve put in a lot of time working with folks at home on this. 

Please proceed as you wish. Why don’t we start with you Senator 

Bennett? 

STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT F. BENNETT, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM UTAH 

Senator BENNETT. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. We appreciate your taking time out of your busy schedule to hold this 

hearing. A lot of work has gone into S. 2834, the Washington County Growth and Conservation Act. 

I’m pleased to share with you the significant progress that’s been 

made since the last time I appeared before this subcommittee when 

Senator Craig was chairing it. I think in the intervening time period we have successfully struck a balance between conservation 

and growth in Washington County. I’m grateful for the opportunity 

to discuss this with you here today. I will point out once again this 

has been a bipartisan effort to a companion bill that has been introduced in the House by the Congressman from Washington County, Congressman Jim Matheson, a member of the democratic majority. 

Wilderness in Utah is the subject that has been discussed with 

a great deal of energy, shall we say, for over 30 years. There’s probably not much more to be said about it because in that 30-year period everyone has made his or her views pretty firmly known. It’s 

time now to act rather than have a rehearsal of these positions 

that have been taken. 

I’ve been concerned with this for the 15 plus years I’ve been here 

in the Senate. This particular process, begun by Governor Arlene 

Walker that produces today’s bill has been going on for 5 years. So 

it’s time to get it done. 

This bill is the product of good faith collaboration. I say that, I 

underscore that, good faith collaboration, with a diverse group of 

interests. It has local support as well as support from a number of 

national environmental groups. 

I could not in all honesty refer to good faith negotiation through 

the entire 30-year period I’ve discussed. There have been times 

where people have come to the table and said why we’re here to 

negotiate in good faith then simply stated their demands, stated 

the table, raised the decibel count of the stating of their demands. 

Then stalked away saying well, we were not dealt with in good 

faith. 

In the experience that I have had working on this bill that phenomenon has disappeared. I’m very grateful to the various groups 

that have been willing to recognize that there has to be some give 
6 

and take. That has been true in this process. It has been done in 

good faith. 

Now no one is completely happy with this legislation. Around 

here that may be a sign of a good bill. It provides us with a comprehensive planning tool for public land in Washington County. It’s 

the Federal counterpart to a local driven effort called Vision Dixie. 

I have to explain that Washington County is in the south of the 

State of Utah. Somewhere along its line in its history it was known 

as Utah’s Dixie. So Vision Dixie is the locally driven planning effort 

that we will be hearing more about from Commissioner Eardley 

from Washington County. But because of the amount of public land 

in Washington County, local and Federal efforts have to go hand 

in hand if it’s going to work. That’s been the case here. 

So as the bill’s title indicates we address both growth and conservation aspects of the land in Washington County. Let me start 

with the conservation side. This bill will provide permanent protection for hundreds of thousands of acres of some of the Nation’s 

most sensitive landscapes. As part of this process I have flown over 

it in helicopter with the representatives of both sides and it is absolutely spectacular. 

We designate more than 264,000 acres of wilderness in Washington County including more than 94 percent of all of the existing 

BLM wilderness study areas. When this bill is enacted more than 

1 out of every 5 acres, or 20.5 percent of the land in Washington 

County will be federally designated wilderness. That compares to 

3.5 percent now. So we have increased the amount of wilderness 

by something between 6 and 7 times. 

We established two national conservation areas in addition that 

will permanently protect the desert tortoise and other at risk and 

endangered species in the county. I want to stress that no cross 

country travel is allowed in these areas. OHVs cannot drive off 

road and will be allowed only on the roads that the BLM identifies 

in the management plans that they will prepare for the national 

conservation areas. 

Utah has never had a wild and scenic river designated. In this 

bill we designate more than 165 miles of wild and scenic rivers. I 

think those things represent significant conservation gains. 

From the growth side, switching now from conservation to 

growth, we’ve taken a small amount of the land in the county representing only three-tenths of 1 percent of the total area that existing land managers, that is people who are currently involved in 

managing the land right now, have identified as suitable for disposal. We have created a framework under which this low priority 

and non-environmentally sensitive land will be sold. Then use the 

vast majority of the proceeds to acquire high priority biologically 

significant lands in the county. Thus reconfiguring land ownership 

in a way that makes sense for conservation values and I believe 

that enhances the Federal estate. 

Now, we do adopt the Nevada precedent in these land sales of 

creating a system whereby the local government can benefit from 

the land sales. I understand that there are some who are not as 

enthusiastic about this portion of the bill as they might be about 

others. We authorize the BLM to identify, in addition to the acres 
7 

they have already picked, up to an additional 5,000 acres for disposal under the same framework. 

I want to make it very clear. This does not mean the BLM can’t 

use other means to dispose of other lands in following proper administrative procedures. It simply says that no more than 5,000 

acres can be disposed of under the framework that we set up for 

the existing lands. The BLM will have to follow both their planning 

process and conform with Vision Dixie principles. So this is the 

way we have the Federal and the local planning go hand in hand. 

I want to make it clear once again. The 5,000 acre figure is a cap 

and not a target. I do that because in the previous bill we had 

20,000 acres as a cap and some of the newspaper stories said that 

this bill was disposing of 20,000 acres. That bill was not, and to 

make it clear, that we do not intend to go to that level. We put in 

the limit of 5,000. 

There are a number of other provisions in the bill that are important. But I see I am over my time. I would ask the chairman to 

include my written remarks in the hearing record. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Bennett follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT F. BENNETT, U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH, 

ON S. 2834 

CHAIRMAN WYDEN, and members of the subcommittee: I appreciate you taking 

the time out of your busy schedules to hold this hearing on S. 2834, the Washington 

County Growth & Conservation Act of 2008. A lot of work has gone into this bill, 

and I am pleased to share with you the significant progress that we have made 

since the last time we met before this subcommittee. I believe that we have successfully struck a balance between conservation and growth in Washington County, and 

I am thankful for the opportunity to discuss this today. 

Mr. Chairman, this is the most important natural resources bill I have introduced 

in my Senate career, and I am very proud of it. I have worked for more than 15 

years to try to bring all sides to the table to finally resolve the wilderness question 

in my home state, and I believe that this bill will provide the foundation to do that. 

This bill is the product of good faith collaboration with a diverse group of interests, 

and has local support as well as support within the national environmental community. We have worked hard to get to this point. These kinds of comprehensive bills 

do not work unless the people who are affected the most—the people who live 

there—buy into the concept. 

This has certainly not been an easy process. We have dealt with people who threw 

out their list of demands and then walked away from the table, only to complain 

later that they were left out of the process. We have poured through thousands of 

public comments and sat in countless meetings with stakeholders to get additional 

information. We have spent hundreds of hours on the ground with local land managers, city and county leaders, conservation groups, and many others who believe 

that the lands in Washington County are special and want to work toward a resolution. There has been a lot of give-and-take, and no one is completely happy with 

everything in this legislation. Around here, that is often the sign of a good bill. I 

want to commend the people who have worked with me throughout this process in 

good faith, actually seeking a resolution on this issue rather than a perpetuation 

of the problem, and I am confident we can continue these efforts throughout the 

state of Utah. 

This legislation is necessary to help preserve the unique nature of Washington 

County for generations to come. It is the federal counterpart to Vision Dixie—the 

locally-driven planning effort that I am sure Commissioner Eardley will discuss further in his testimony. Because of the overwhelming amount of public land in Washington County, local and federal planning must go hand-in-hand. These issues are 

so important to Washington County residents that several thousand participated in 

developing the Vision Dixie principles. These principles helped us to set priorities 

in this legislation that will guide future growth in Washington County. Vision Dixie 

never would have happened without this land bill to begin the discussion. 

Congressman Matheson and I have made significant changes to the previous proposal. We have permanently protected large amounts of biologically significant pub-
8 

lic land in Washington County, including additional wilderness and a new national 

conservation area. We have removed the corridor designations for the Lake Powell 

Pipeline Corridor and the Northern Corridor that bisected the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve. We have removed right-of-way authorizations in areas that are environmentally sensitive, and have significantly limited the amount of public land that is 

authorized for disposal. We have also required a comprehensive, county-wide transportation plan to help reduce conflicts among competing interests, and include provisions to manage priority biological areas. I have included a summary at the end of 

this testimony to further elaborate on each section of this legislation. 

Before I conclude my remarks, I want to clear up any confusion about certain 

parts of the bill, especially as it relates to land disposal. I want the legislative record 

to show my intent in drafting these sections. 

Unlike the previous proposal, every parcel of land that will be sold under this legislation must be included in the Bureau of Land Management’s St. George Field Office Resource Management Plan (St. George RMP) prior to sale. This means that 

the BLM must give the public an opportunity to participate and comment on each 

additional acre that is identified for disposal. The legislation requires the BLM to 

only identify land for sale that meets the stringent qualifications of the Vision Dixie 

Principles, which significantly limits the acres eligible for disposal under this legislation. 

We have also lowered the cap on land sale acreage from 20,000 acres to 5,000 

acres. I want this to be very clear: we are not ordering the BLM to identify an additional 5,000 acres for sale. The 5,000 acres is not a target. We are simply capping 

the amount of acreage BLM is authorized to sell under this legislation’s framework. 

I want to point out that with or without the bill, BLM still has statutory authority 

to dispose of public land in Washington County, and could identify and dispose of 

significantly more acreage than what we authorize in the legislation. For example, 

the 1999 St. George RMP identified around 18,000 acres in Washington County for 

disposal. 

Another substantive change is the revenue sharing from the land disposal proceeds. We have directed all but $15 million dollars of the federal share of the revenue to acquire lands in Washington County. This will allow the BLM to dispose 

of low-priority, non-environmentally sensitive public lands and acquire high-priority, 

biologically significant lands, thereby enhancing the federal estate. Additionally, we 

have given the local share to the county commission—an elected body responsible 

to the people—rather than the Washington County Water Conservancy District. We 

have also included a detailed reporting requirement on any expenditure the BLM 

makes from the land sale proceeds. 

I also want to clarify our treatment of off-highway vehicles (OHVs) in Washington 

County, particularly in the biologically-sensitive southwest corner. We designate the 

Beaver Dam Wash National Conservation Area (NCA), comprising nearly 80,000 

acres, to permanently protect this region. This legislation prohibits cross-country 

and off-road travel in the NCA by restricting the use of motorized vehicles to roads 

designated in the travel management plan that we direct the BLM to develop. This 

legislation also authorizes the BLM to use a portion of the land sale proceeds for 

enforcement purposes. 

We also deal with OHV travel on public lands throughout the rest of the county 

by requiring the BLM to prepare a comprehensive travel management plan which 

will identify areas where OHVs are allowed and not allowed. This plan will help 

protect sensitive areas that are now at risk, while providing additional opportunities 

for the OHV community by designating a system of trails where riding is permitted. 

Although BLM has attempted in the past to develop such a plan, the agency has 

never had sufficient funds to complete it. To cure this problem, this legislation will 

direct a portion of the land sale proceeds to complete the comprehensive travel management plan. 

In conclusion, I again thank the chairman for his courtesy, and hope that this 

hearing will be instructive. We have made significant changes to this legislation and 

I hope the committee will act favorably and quickly to ensure its passage. I appreciate this opportunity to testify and welcome any questions. 

Senator BENNETT. I want to close by acknowledging that while 

this has been a difficult process. It’s been a very rewarding one for 

me. I think we can create significant conservation while balancing 

growth in the county. I have made some good friends and had some 

good experiences as we have gone through this journey. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 
9 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Senator Bennett. Without objection 

we will put your full remarks into the record. I would just say at 

this point that you are well known here in the Senate as somebody 

who consistently tries to bring people together to try to find common ground, that try to address concerns that come up in debates 

where people have passionate feelings. It is evident that you’re trying hard to do that here again. I commend you for it and will welcome your participation. 

Senator BENNETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WYDEN. Let me welcome my western partner, Senator 

Crapo, my neighbor from the Dirksen Building as well. Senator 

Crapo, please go ahead with your remarks. Let me also commend 

you for, I know, the extraordinary amount of time you’ve put in 

trying to bring all of the stakeholders and the parties together. 

Please go ahead as you wish. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE CRAPO, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM IDAHO 

Senator CRAPO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to 

thank you. It’s been several years now since I first sat down and 

walked you through the process we’ve been going through for years 

longer than that out in Idaho. You committed then to work with 

me to try to help make this a reality. You have stayed true to your 

word. I appreciate that. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you. 

Senator CRAPO. I also want to thank Senator Craig. Not only for 

his kind comments here today at the hearing, but for himself working with me consistently to make sure that we can put together the 

kind of land management legislation that will work for Idaho and 

for our country. I truly appreciate Senator Craig’s efforts as my colleague from Idaho. 

Obviously I want to give my thanks as well to Chairman Bingaman and Senator Domenici who also have worked very closely with 

me as I’ve tried to navigate the paths of the legislative process that 

we need to go through here. 

I want to also stop for a moment and thank, in particular, the 

staff who have worked so hard on this as well. David Brooks, who 

has, I think, given up a significant part of his life to work with us 

here to help make this a reality. Frank Gladdox and Darren Parker 

and others, many others, who have put in so much time and effort 

to help us in Idaho as we’ve tried to work to a successful conclusion 

to this important project. 

Additionally the BLM has been very helpful to us in working 

through legislative language and creating maps and literally helping to iron out issues as they come up. For that I want to thank 

Julie Jacobson and Laurie Sedlemeyer. I truly appreciate their efforts. You know, now that I’ve started naming names, I’m going to 

be remiss because there are so many, particularly those in our 

work group in Idaho, some of whom are here today and others who 

have put in so much time to make this a reality. 

Frankly there are a number of Idahoans here in the audience 

today. I won’t try to get them to all stand up or get recognized, but 

this is a truly significant step for us in Idaho. We appreciate the 
10 

support of the committee members and the staff in helping to make 

this happen. 

There are a couple of Idahoans who will testify today who I want 

to recognize. That is Craig Gehrke of The Wilderness Society and 

Dr. Chad Gibson of the Owyhee Range Service. You’ll hear from 

them later. But these two gentlemen have also given a significant 

part of their life to this effort over the last years. They are to be 

thanked for that. 

The Owyhee Public Land Management Act of 2008 is the result, 

as Senator Craig has indicated, of almost a decade of collaborative 

effort between all levels of government, the tribes, ranchers, users 

of the public lands and conservationists to resolve decades of heated land use conflict in the Owyhee Canyon lands in the southwestern part of my home State, Idaho. Owyhee County contains 

some of the most unique and beautiful canyon lands in the world, 

a place that offers the grandeur of untouched western trails, rivers 

and open sky. It’s imperative that its natural beauty and its traditional uses are preserved for future generations. 

The County is a traditional ranching country with 73 percent of 

the land base owned by the Federal Government and located within an hour’s drive of one of the fastest growing areas in the Nation, 

Boise, Idaho. Community expansion, development and ever increasing demands on public land are having a profound effect on 

Owyhee County. Given this confluence of circumstances, the County has been at the center of political and regulatory battles for 

years. 

Diverse land uses coexist in an area of intense beauty and 

unique character. The conflict over land management is both inevitable and understandable. How do we manage for this diversity 

and do so in a way that protects and restores the quality of that 

fragile environment? 

In this context the Owyhee County commissioners and several 

others said enough is enough. They decided to focus efforts on solving these problems rather than wasting resources on an endless 

fight. In 2001, the Owyhee County commissioners met with me and 

asked for my help. 

They asked whether I would support them if they could put together at one table, the interested parties involved in the future of 

the county to try to reach some solutions. I told them that if they 

could get together a broad base of interest who would agree to collaborate in a process committed to problem solving, that I would 

dedicate myself to working with them. If they were successful, I 

would introduce the resulting legislation. 

They agreed. Together we set out on a journey, really on a road, 

that is as challenging as any of the Owyhee Canyon land roads and 

some of them are very challenging. David is shaking his head. He 

knows. He’s been there. 

Make no mistake. This has been very difficult work. But the fruit 

of that labor, the Owyhee Public Land Management Act of 2008 

has made it time well spent. 

The commissioners formed the work group which includes, well, 

at its first formation, included The Wilderness Society, the Idaho 

Conservation League, the Nature Conservancy, Idaho Outfitters 

and Guides, the United States Air Force, the Sierra Club, the 
11 

County Soil Conservation Districts, Owyhee Cattleman’s Association, the Owyhee Borderland’s Trust, the People for the Owyhee’s 

and the Shoshone Paiute Tribes to join in their efforts. All accepted 

and all began work on this bill. As the collaborative process gained 

momentum, the County Commissioners expanded the work group 

to include the South Idaho Desert Racing Association, the Idaho 

Rivers United and the Owyhee County Farm Bureau, as well as 

the foundation for North American Wild Sheep and the Idaho 

Backcountry Horsemen, with the help from the Idaho State Department of Lands and the Bureau of Land Management. 

You can see from that group that we’ve had the diverse interest 

at the table working to make sure that we get the right solutions. 

For me one of the most gratifying outcomes has been to see this 

group transform itself from polarized camps into an extraordinary 

force known for its intense effort, calmity, trust and willingness to 

work toward a solution. They operated on a true consensus basis, 

spent thousands of hours, drove thousands of miles inspecting 

roads and trails, listening to and soliciting ideas from people from 

all walks of life who have in common deep roots and a deep interest in the Owyhee Canyon lands. 

While this whole process and its outcomes are indeed remarkable. One of the more notable developments is the memorandum of 

agreement between the Shoshone Paiute Tribes and the County 

that establishes government to government cooperation in several 

areas of mutual interest. I congratulate Nancy Eagan, the newly 

elected chair of the Shoshone Paiute Tribes on her election and 

today her swearing in. 

The Owyhee Initiative transforms conflict and uncertainty into 

conflict resolution and assurance of future activity. Ranchers can 

plan for subsequent generations. Off road vehicle users have access 

assured. Wilderness is established. 

The Shoshone Paiute Tribes know their cultural resources will be 

protected. The Air Force will continue to train its pilots. Local, 

State and Federal Government agencies will have a structure to assist their joint management of the region. All of this will happen 

within the context of the preservation of environmental and ecological health. 

This is indeed a revolutionary land management structure that 

looks ahead to the future. The status quo is unacceptable. The 

Owyhee Canyon lands, their inhabitants and cultures are truly a 

treasure of Idaho and of the United States. They deserve to have 

a process of conflict management and a path toward sustainability. 

I hope you’ll join with me in ensuring their future. 

Now I want to speak just briefly to the folks back home, very directly, the folks in Idaho who are rightly concerns about a few provisions in this bill that are of great importance. I will continue to 

work with Senators Bingaman and Domenici and Wyden and Craig 

and their staff and others to make the policies and the funding 

that were so carefully negotiated in the Owyhee Initiative Agreement to become a reality. As promised 8 years ago, I regard the 

support of the Owyhee Initiative Workgroup and diverse interest 

that you represent as mandatory for my continued advocacy for 

this bill. 
12 

Our hard work will continue after today’s hearing. I’m committed 

to achieving the objectives that brought us together many years 

ago and that keep us together today. Thank you very much, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Senator Crapo. Listening to you my 

sense is that it is hard to imagine there’s an Idahoan out there who 

hasn’t been given the opportunity to participate. I commend you for 

reaching out in that way. You’ve obviously made a great deal of 

progress. 

You don’t make all this progress by osmosis. You do it by working with people. Having worked with you in the past, I know that’s 

your trademark. I commend you for all your efforts. 

I’m not going to have any questions of either Senator Bennett or 

Senator Crapo. We do look forward to you all sitting in, as you’ve 

indicated you’d like to do. But let me recognize Senator Barrasso 

for his opening statement and then Senator Craig may have comments or further questions he’d like to make. 

Senator Barrasso. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM WYOMING 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I don’t 

have any questions for our witnesses either, but I do want to welcome both Senator Crapo and Senator Bennett. I know that each 

of you has a bill that is very important to you. These two bills have 

been in Congress a long time and I’m sure that each of you would 

be pleased to have them move forward in a timely manner. 

I understand and appreciate the painstaking work that goes into 

meeting with stakeholder groups in your home State to prepare 

these bills. It’s important for me as a Senator to, when I look at 

this kind of legislation, that it be tailored to the specific, local 

needs. Mr. Chairman, I just show great deference to the home 

State Senators who work through those local issues. 

So I welcome both of you here. Also folks who are going to be visiting with us from the Department of Interior and the U.S. Forest 

Service and others from Idaho and Utah who are going to testify 

today. So with that, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Senator Barrasso. 

Senator Craig. 

Senator CRAIG. A clarification for Senator Bennett. You are talking about Washington County, Utah and not Washington County, 

Idaho. 

Senator BENNETT. That is correct. 

Senator CRAIG. Thank you because Dr. Gibson and I grew up in 

Washington County, Idaho and we want to make sure that’s clear. 

Senator WYDEN. There’s Washington County, Oregon. It’s almost 

obligatory for a western State to have Washington County. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator CRAIG. Absolutely. 

Senator BENNETT. Washington County, Utah is the fastest growing county in the State, has been for a half dozen years or more. 

For a good portion of that of that half dozen years, the fastest 

growing county in the country. That’s why it’s essential that we get 

this thing done before it completely gets out of control. 
13 

Senator CRAIG. Thank you. I want to thank my colleague, Mike 

Crapo for recognizing the Shoshone Paiute Valley Reservation. I 

did not in my opening comments. They played a very valuable role 

as you’ve mentioned. 

Mr. Chairman, they still—this is an unbelievable big chunk of 

property if you look at the big map and that it borders the State 

of Nevada and Oregon. So it’s one of those that has multiple interests across State lines as a region and an ecosystem that I think 

is important. Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you both. We’ll excuse you. Please come 

on up and sit with us. 

Our next panel, the Administration panel, Julie Jacobson, Deputy Assistant Secretary with the Department of the Interior. Joel 

Holtrop, Deputy Chief, National Forest System. 

I’m going to repeat the request I made last week. It has varying 

degrees of success. We will put your prepared remarks into the 

hearing record. Every word of your prepared remarks will go into 

the hearing record and if you could perhaps just summarize some 

of your key concerns that would be very helpful. 

Ms. Jacobson, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF JULIE JACOBSON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, LAND AND MINERALS MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Ms. JACOBSON. Thank you for inviting me to testify on S. 2833, 

the Owyhee Public Lands Management Act and S. 2834, the Washington County Growth and Conservation Act. These bills seek to resolve a wide range of public land management issues and opportunities on lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management in 

Owyhee County, Idaho and Washington County, Utah. Both bills 

are the results of years of intense effort by Utah’s and Colorado’s— 

and Idaho’s Congressional delegation, local governments and public 

lands to reach consensus on difficult issues. 

The Administration respects these efforts and supports both bills 

with modifications to the formula for distributing the proceeds from 

any land sale to ensure an appropriate share is returned to Federal 

taxpayers. We recommend some other specific modifications to both 

bills in our full testimony and look forward to working with the 

sponsors and the committee. I’ll briefly summarize the major provisions of both bills. 

S. 2833, the Owyhee Public Land Management Act is the product 

of nearly a decade of work to find solutions to resolve Owyhee 

County public land issues. Senator Crapo deserves recognition for 

his commitment to this effort. S. 2833 designates over a half million acres of wilderness and releases nearly 200,000 acres of wilderness study. It also designates more than 315 miles of wild and scenic river segments. 

S. 2833 provides for the voluntary relinquishment of grazing permits to the Secretary for authorized grazing on lands with any 

areas designated as wilderness. Under the bill the Secretary is required to accept the donation of those permits and is required to 

permanently retire the allotments. Grazing is a compatible use 

within wilderness and there is a long history of legislation accommodating grazing within wilderness designation. To address these 
14 

issues the BLM is committed to working with the committee and 

the sponsors within our existing authority. 

Section Six provides for the sale of lands identified for the disposal within the Boise District and the use of those proceeds for 

the acquisition of private lands from willing sellers within or adjacent to the wilderness designated by this bill. We note that all such 

sales and acquisitions will be undertaken consistent with applicable laws including FLTFA and will be subject to standard appraisals. We support S. 2833 and would like the opportunity to work 

with the sponsors and the committee to address some specific 

issues raised in our full testimony. 

S. 2834, the Washington County Growth and Conservation Act is 

a result of years of work by the Utah Congressional delegation, in 

particular, Senator Bennett. Working with local governments and 

the public they have reached consensus on public land management in Washington County, Utah. The bill would designate a 

number of wilderness areas including nearly 124,000 acres of wilderness within Zion National Park and approximately 138,000 

acres to be managed by the BLM. 

In addition the bill would release 5,000 acres of BLM managed 

lands from wilderness study status and return them to the full 

range multiple uses. Titles III and IV establish the Red Cliff National Conservation Area and the Beaver Dam Wash National Conservation Area. The first NCA’s for the State of Utah. 

Title V designates nearly 170 miles of the Virgin River and its 

tributaries within and adjacent to Zion National Park to the wild 

and scenic river system. Title VII provides for the disposal of up 

to 9,000 acres of public lands through sale at auction. The Department supports making public lands available for community 

growth where it is necessary and appropriate. The land disposal 

process in 2834 is consistent with this objective and we support its 

inclusion. The majority of these proceeds from these sales are to be 

used to acquire lands within Washington County from willing sellers within the special areas designated by the bill. 

We support S. 2834 and the efforts of Senator Bennett and so 

many others in Utah. As with S. 2833 we would like the opportunity to work with the committee and the sponsors to address specific concerns. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 

[The prepared statements of Ms. Jacobson follow:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JULIE JACOBSON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, LAND

AND MINERALS MANAGEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

S. 2833

Thank you for inviting me to testify on S. 2833, the Owyhee Public Lands Management Act of 2008. This bill seeks to resolve a wide range of public land management issues and opportunities on lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in Owyhee County, Idaho. It is the result of years of intensive efforts 

by the Idaho delegation, and particularly Senator Crapo, working with local governments and the public to reach consensus on difficult issues in the spirit of cooperative conservation. We respect the resolution of local land use conflicts in this matter, 

and support the bill with modification of the formula for distributing the proceeds 

from any land sales to ensure that an appropriate share of the proceeds is returned 

to the Federal taxpayers. We would like to work to address this, and other areas 

of concern, with the sponsor and the Committee. 
15 

Background 

Owyhee County encompasses over 7,600 square miles of the southwestern corner 

of Idaho. It is the homeland of the Shoshone-Paiute people and encompasses the 

Duck Valley Reservation. With a population of just over 11,000, it is a sparsely-peopled land where magnificent canyons, rushing rivers, and wide-open skies dominate 

the landscape. Ranching is the traditional and predominant economic activity 

throughout Owyhee County. 

In 2000, the Owyhee County Commissioners invited a number of interested parties to begin discussions with an eye toward resolving a wide range of natural resource issues in the County. Innumerable meetings, conversations, and dialogues 

ensued. Over time, this effort included representatives from many interests within 

the County, including local government officials, tribal representatives, ranchers, 

conservationists, recreationists, and others. 

The legislation before this Committee, S. 2833, is an effort to realize those efforts. 

Senator Crapo deserves recognition for his commitment to working toward collaborative solutions in the spirit of cooperative conservation and proposing this legislation to help resolve Owyhee County’s public land issues. 

Owyhee Science Review and Conservation Center 

Section 3 of this bill requires the Secretary of the Interior to establish the Owyhee 

Science Review and Conservation Center in Owyhee County, Idaho. The stated intention of the Center is to conduct research projects to address natural resources 

management issues as they affect public and private rangelands in Owyhee County 

with a goal of providing information for improved rangeland management. 

We do not oppose the establishment of this Center; however we are concerned 

about the ongoing costs of establishing and operating such a Center. We urge the 

Committee and the sponsor to consider making section 3 subject to adequate appropriations. 

Wilderness and Wild & Scenic Rivers Designations 

The Department of the Interior supports the Wilderness and Wild and Scenic 

River designations in the bill, subject to adjustments in boundaries and management language as is routine in such proposed designations. In general, the Department supports the efforts of Congressional delegations to resolve wilderness issues 

in their states. Congress has the sole authority to designate lands to be managed 

as wilderness and we have repeatedly urged that these issues be addressed legislatively. 

Section 4 of S. 2833 designates as wilderness 517,128 acres in six separate areas 

and releases approximately 198,073 acres from WSA status and will return these 

lands to the full range of multiple public uses authorized by the Federal Land Policy 

and Management Act (FLPMA). The Department generally supports the designations and releases proposed by the legislation and would like the opportunity to 

work with the sponsor and the Committee on possible minor boundary adjustments 

to ensure efficient manageability. 

The areas identified to be designated as wilderness include: Big Jacks Creek Wilderness, Bruneau-Jarbidge Rivers Wilderness, Little Jacks Creek Wilderness, North 

Fork Owyhee Wilderness, Owyhee River Wilderness and Pole Creek Wilderness. 

These proposed wilderness areas contain beautiful and remote desert landscapes. 

The terrain within the proposed wilderness is diverse, ranging from deep river canyons to vast sagebrush and grassland plateaus that provide habitat for sage-grouse, 

pronghorn antelope, bighorn sheep, songbirds, raptors, and numerous rare plant 

species. The river canyons are spectacular. Many are more than 1,000 feet deep, 

nearly twice as deep as the Washington Monument is tall. Rivers meander for hundreds of miles through southwestern Idaho and form what may be the largest, most 

unaltered, desert region remaining in the continental United States. 

Section 5 would designate more than 315 miles of waterways as segments of the 

Wild and Scenic Rivers System. These river segments, ranging from 3/10 of a mile 

to over 67 miles, would be established on 16 different rivers and creeks including 

the Owyhee, Bruneau, and Jarbidge Rivers. As with wilderness, it is the prerogative 

of the Congress to make determinations for additions to the Wild and Scenic River 

System and we generally defer to the consensus of individual congressional delegations while providing input on manageability and potential conflicts. 

The proposed additions to the Wild and Scenic River System are rugged, isolated, 

and unique. This region, the Owyhee Uplands, is unlike any other desert region in 

the United States because it is dissected by hundreds of miles of free-flowing rivers. 

The rivers begin in the mountains of northern Nevada and, flowing north, radiate 

like spokes across southwestern Idaho. Each river has cut a deep, magnificent canyon through alternating layers of black and red volcanic rock. Each river is also an 
16 

oasis for wildlife, including bighorn sheep and large flocks of waterfowl. There are 

no paved roads along any of these rivers and only a few dirt roads provide limited 

access to these remote streams. The larger rivers, like the Owyhee and Bruneau, 

contain some of the most challenging whitewater in the United States. River enthusiasts come from around the country to float these rivers and experience some of 

the ultimate river adventures in the United States. 

Relinquishment and Retirement of Grazing Permits 

Section 4(b)(3)(D) of S. 2833 provides for the voluntary relinquishment of grazing 

permits or leases by permittees to the Secretary of the Interior for authorized grazing on BLM-managed lands within areas designated as wilderness by S. 2833. 

Under the bill, the Secretary is required to accept the donation of those permits or 

leases and is required to permanently retire the allotments covered by the permits 

or leases from grazing. Partial relinquishment and congruent retirement of allotments is also provided for under this subsection. 

The BLM believes that grazing is a compatible use within wilderness and there 

is a long history of legislation accommodating grazing within wilderness designations. The BLM is also concerned about retiring grazing permits. Were it not for the 

Congressional acknowledgement of the choice of individual permittees, and the rigor 

of the collaborative process underlying these designations, BLM could only retire 

grazing permits through land use planning processes. However, the BLM also recognizes the value of working cooperatively and collaboratively with local stakeholders 

to fulfill its multiple-use mission on BLM lands. The BLM is committed to working 

with the Committee, the sponsor, and stakeholders in the spirit of cooperative conservation within our existing authority. 

Disposal and Acquisition of Land 

Section 6 of S. 2833 provides for the sale of lands identified for disposal within 

the Boise District of the BLM and the subsequent use of those proceeds for the acquisition of private lands from willing sellers, within or adjacent to the wilderness 

areas designated by this bill. Specifically, section 6(a) authorizes the sale of lands 

identified for disposal prior to the date of enactment of the legislation. The proceeds 

from any such sales taking place after January 1, 2008, would be deposited in a special account and would be available for the acquisition of private lands identified 

on the maps referenced by the legislation or any other private lands within or adjacent to the wilderness designated by S. 2833. This authority expires at the end of 

10 years or on the date when $8 million has been expended from the account, 

whichever happens first. Amounts remaining in the account upon termination would 

be transferred to the Federal Land Deposit Account authorized by the Federal Land 

Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA) and expended in accordance with FLTFA. 

The Department notes that all such sales and acquisitions would be undertaken 

consistent with applicable laws, including FLPMA, and would be subject to appraisals completed in accordance with the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land 

Acquisition and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. 

In addition, the manner in which the proceeds from land sales are distributed requires significant modifications. As noted above, we will work with the sponsors to 

ensure that this bill returns an appropriate share of these proceeds to the Federal 

taxpayer, consistent with the Administration’s proposed changes to the FLTFA. Our 

proposal would provide for a consistent approach to the distribution of land sales 

proceeds at the National level. 

Additional Provisions 

Section 7 requires the Secretary to coordinate with the Shoshone Paiute Tribes 

in implementation of the Shoshone Paiute Cultural Resource Protection Plan and 

seek agreements with the Tribes to implement the plan in order to protect cultural 

sites and resources important to the Tribes. One provision of that plan includes a 

federally reimbursable law enforcement agreement with Owyhee County for services 

from the Tribes. The BLM and the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes have an excellent cooperative relationship and work together effectively on a wide range of public land management issues in southwest Idaho. The Administration supports and endorses 

BLM’s continuing and expanding this cooperative relationship. 

Finally, section 8 requires the BLM to prepare travel management plans for public lands within Owyhee County. Providing for the wise management and balance 

of all modes of travel and user needs continues to be a priority for the BLM. The 

BLM is currently in the process of developing travel management plans throughout 

the West. We are committed to completing those plans with full public participation 

in Owyhee County and on all BLM-managed public lands. We would like the opportunity to work with the sponsor and the Committee to ensure this section provides 

for comprehensive travel and transportation management planning. 
17 

We are concerned about the long-term costs of the bill not only to the Department 

of the Interior and the BLM but also to the Federal Treasury. Public expectations 

for large infusions of Federal funds to accomplish this bill’s authorizations without 

a clear source of dollars could result in disappointment and frustrate local working 

relationships. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this legislation. S. 2833 is the result 

of years of intensive efforts by Senator Crapo and many interested parties. We applaud these efforts and look forward to working with the Committee and Sponsor 

to address the issues addressed above, as well as technical and conforming amendments. I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have. 

S. 2834

Thank you for inviting me to testify on S. 2834, the Washington County Growth 

and Conservation Act of 2008. This legislation is the result of years of exhaustive 

efforts by the Utah Congressional delegation, in particular Senator Bennett. Working with local governments and the public in the spirit of cooperative conservation 

they have reached consensus on difficult issues on a wide range of public land management issues in Washington County, Utah. The Administration commends the 

resolution of land use conflicts in this manner, and supports the bill with modifications to the formula for distributing the proceeds from any land sales to ensure that 

an appropriate share of the proceeds is returned to the Federal taxpayers. While 

we note several areas of concern below, we are pleased with a number of significant 

improvements in this bill relative to the measure considered last Congress. 

Background 

Washington County, Utah, located in the southwest corner of the State bordering 

Nevada and Arizona, covers nearly 2,500 square miles, and has been one of the fastest-growing counties in the United States. With a population of only about 10,000 

in the mid-1960s, today Washington County has over 130,000 residents. At the same 

time, more than 75 percent of the County is Federal land, managed by the Bureau 

of Land Management (BLM), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and the National Park 

Service (NPS). In addition, the County includes lands held in trust by the Federal 

government for the Shivwits Indian Tribe and lands owned by the State of Utah. 

How those lands are managed is a critical issue for the people of Washington County. 

The Administration recognizes that the Sponsor has included a number of improvements from the earlier bill in the 109th Congress. In particular, we appreciate 

that the bill no longer directs BLM to dispose of lands, regardless of whether or not 

they had been identified for disposal. 

Wilderness Designations 

The bill would designate a number of wilderness areas within Washington County, including approximately 123,743 acres of wilderness to be managed by the NPS 

within Zion National Park, approximately 138,008 acres of wilderness to be managed by the BLM in 16 individual areas, and 2,643 acres of USFS wilderness. In 

addition, the bill would release 5,074 acres of BLM-managed lands from wilderness 

study area (WSA) status and would return them to the full range of multiple public 

uses authorized by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA.) 

The BLM-managed lands that would be designated wilderness by S. 2834 include 

areas of rugged beauty, solitude, and important wildlife habitat. In the northeastern 

part of the County, the proposed Deep Creek and Deep Creek North wilderness 

areas consist of sheer canyon walls dropping to dramatic year-round rivers. Hanging 

gardens with wildflowers compete with a variety of raptors, including bald eagles 

and giant California condors, for the hiker’s attention. The steep and rugged Hurricane Cliffs, which soar 2,000 vertical feet in under a mile, form the most outstanding feature of the proposed Blackridge Wilderness. The area is a magnet for 

hikers, hunters and photographers. 

In the southeast, Canaan Mountain’s rugged topography includes peaks and colorful vermilion cliffs that form the southern gateway to Zion National Park. The scenic vistas available from these peaks increasingly attract recreationists. 

Within the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area (NCA) proposed by Title III of 

the bill lie the proposed Cottonwood Wilderness on the east and Red Mountain Wilderness on the west. The Cottonwood Wilderness and the adjoining Forest Servicemanaged Cottonwood Forest Wilderness form the spectacular ‘‘front range’’ between 

the City of St. George to the south and the Pine Valley Mountains to the north. 

Within minutes of downtown St. George, this area is prized for its primitive recreational opportunities. It lies within the Red Cliffs Desert Reserve, which has been 

Federally-designated as habitat to protect the threatened desert tortoise. It is also 
18 

home to peregrine falcons and State-listed species such as the Gila Monster. The 

aptly named Red Mountain Wilderness provides a scenic backdrop to the communities of Ivins and Santa Clara and is a popular destination for local citizens. 

The bill also designates the Cougar Canyon and Slaughter Creek wildernesses located in the northwest corner of Washington County. Abutting the Nevada State 

line, these wilderness areas connect with the Tunnel Spring Wilderness in Lincoln 

County, Nevada, designated by Public Law 108-424. The area is dominated by rough 

terrain of wooded canyons and low mountain peaks. Just to the south of Cougar 

Canyon and Slaughter Creek the bill also designates Docs Pass Wilderness, which 

includes five miles of a perennial, free flowing stream within Beaver Dam Wash providing habitat to a wide range of native fish and large mammals. The Bull Valley 

Mountains within the proposed Docs Pass Wilderness are rugged pinyon-juniper 

woodlands. 

Wilderness resolution has been particularly challenging in the State of Utah, and 

we applaud the hard work of the sponsor and other members of the Utah delegation 

in reaching consensus on BLM wilderness designation and WSA release. Congress 

has the sole authority to designate lands to be managed permanently as wilderness, 

and we believe these areas are manageable as such. We would like the opportunity 

to work with the sponsor and the Committee on possible minor boundary adjustments to ensure efficient manageability. 

S. 2834 would also designate 123,743 acres of Zion National Park as wilderness. 

The lands proposed for wilderness designation are similar to those that were included in a proposal to recommend wilderness for the park that was originally 

transmitted to the President on June 5, 1974, by then Secretary of the Interior Morton, and in the 2001 General Management Plan (GMP) for the park. The 1974 proposal recommended designation of 120,620 acres of the park as wilderness. 

Differences in the acreage figures between the 1974 transmittal and S. 2834 are 

the result of land acquisition in the park that has taken place since 1974, acquisition of water and grazing rights, and termination of non-conforming uses. Additional 

lands within the park consisting of approximately 9,000 acres, but located in Kane 

County, have also been recommended for wilderness designation and were included 

in the 1974 transmittal and the 2001 GMP. Although the Department supports the 

wilderness designation for the park included in S. 2834, we suggest that the bill be 

amended to include this additional, previously recommended wilderness so that all 

the lands proposed for wilderness designation within the park are designated. 

The bill designates as wilderness five small units of BLM-managed lands surrounding Zion National Park that vary in size from 32 to 663 acres. These are logical extensions of the proposed wilderness areas within Zion National Park and are 

appropriate for wilderness designation. We recommend transferring all five of these 

small parcels—Beartrap Canyon Wilderness (40 acres), Goose Creek Wilderness (98 

acres), Laverkin Creek (445 acres), Taylor Creek Wilderness (32 acres) and Watchman Wilderness (663 acres)—to the National Park Service. Transfer of these lands 

to the park will improve management, reduce confusion for the public, and enhance 

the opportunities for visitor enjoyment. 

National Conservation Areas 

Titles III and IV of S. 2834 establish the 44,695 acre Red Cliffs National Conservation Area (NCA) and the 68,083 acre Beaver Dam Wash NCA respectively. 

These would be the first NCAs in the State of Utah. Each of the NCAs designated 

by Congress and managed by the BLM is unique. For the most part, however, they 

have certain critical elements, which include withdrawal from the public land, mining and mineral leasing laws; OHV-use limitations; and language that charges the 

Secretary to allow only those uses that further the purposes for which the NCA is 

established. Furthermore, NCA proposals do not diminish the protections that currently apply to the lands. The Red Cliffs NCA and Beaver Dam Wash NCA proposals honor this spirit and the Department supports their designation. 

The proposed Red Cliffs NCA would overlay the existing Red Cliffs Desert Reserve 

which was designed as a part of the Washington County Desert Tortoise Habitat 

Conservation Plan (HCP) adopted in 1996. The HCP protects important desert tortoise habitat while also allowing continued development in St. George and nearby 

communities. As directed, the BLM has acquired nearly 8,000 acres of State and private inholdings within the Reserve from willing sellers. 

In addition to providing important habitat for the recovery of the desert tortoise 

and other listed species such as the Shivwits milkvetch and the Woundfin Minnow 

and Virgin River Chub, the proposed NCA is a popular area for recreationists. Over 

130 miles of trails provide excellent opportunities for hikers, mountain bikers and 

equestrians while ensuring compatibility with the species’ recovery. The boundaries 

of the proposed NCA include over 44,000 acres of BLM-managed land. 
19 

The proposed Beaver Dam Wash NCA is nestled in the southwestern corner of 

Washington County which is a transition zone between three major ecosystems: the 

Colorado Plateau, the Great Basin, and the Mojave Desert. Such zones are characterized by diverse vegetative communities supporting a rich array of wildlife. Riparian species are found along the deeply incised channel of Beaver Dam Wash, which 

traverses the length of the proposed NCA to its confluence with the Virgin River. 

At higher elevations in the Beaver Dam Mountains, pinyon-juniper woodlands cover 

the slopes of steep-sided canyons. A forest of Joshua trees, the signature species of 

the Mojave Desert, dots the bajadas and valley floors. The lower elevations provide 

designated critical habitat for the threatened Mojave Desert Tortoise and other native species, such as Desert Bighorn Sheep, Gila Monsters, and Mojave Rattlesnakes. Current recreational uses within the area include technical rock climbing, 

hiking, horseback riding, wildlife viewing, and nature study, all of which are compatible with the designation. 

Wild and Scenic River Designation 

The legislation amends the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act by adding approximately 

165 miles of segments of the Virgin River and its tributaries within and adjacent 

to Zion National Park to the Wild and Scenic Rivers system. Seven of the segments 

are partially or wholly on BLM-managed lands while the remaining 32 segments are 

wholly within Zion National Park. All of the segments of the rivers that are recommended for designation as wild, scenic, or recreational rivers were found eligible 

and suitable for inclusion within the Wild and Scenic River System through the Zion 

National Park 2001 GMP and through the BLM St. George Field Office Resource 

Management Plan (SGRMP) completed in March 1999. The Department supports 

the designation of these segments. 

Washington County Travel Management Plan 

Title VI directs the Secretary to develop a comprehensive travel management plan 

within three years of enactment of this legislation to include the designation of an 

OHV trail (the High Desert Off-Highway Vehicle Trail) in Washington County. The 

trail is to be established on existing roads and trails. This trail has the potential 

to be a significant draw for tourism and will allow visitors and residents to experience and enjoy their public lands while minimizing OHV use outside of designated 

trail networks. We support the development of both the trail and a comprehensive 

travel and transportation management plan for the County. 

Land Disposal 

Title VII of S. 2834 provides for the disposal through sale at auction of up to 9,052 

acres of public lands out of BLM management and into private ownership. The Department supports the general proposition of making some public lands available for 

community growth where it is necessary and appropriate. The land disposal process 

in S. 2834 is consistent with this objective and we support its inclusion. 

Under section 702 of S. 2834 the disposal of land would take place in three tiers. 

In the first tier, lands are to be disposed of within the first eighteen months after 

enactment of the bill, and include 906 acres of BLM-managed land specifically identified on the map in 14 separate, primarily small, parcels. These lands have been 

preliminarily identified by the BLM for disposal through the SGRMP. The local 

BLM had previously reviewed these lands for cultural and historic issues, threatened or endangered (T&E) species conflicts and other potential values that could 

preclude a conveyance out of Federal ownership, and believes that sale of these 

lands can be accomplished. 

In the second tier, the lands are to be sold at auction within a year of the completion of the sale of the tier one lands and completed by January 1, 2013. The tier 

two lands include approximately 3,146 acres specifically identified in one small and 

two larger parcels. These lands have been preliminarily identified for disposal 

through the SGRMP. However, that identification was only preliminary. The local 

BLM has been made aware of conflicts on these lands, which include cultural resources as well as the presence of T&E species. Section 702(h) of the legislation anticipates these problems by allowing the Secretary of the Interior to place restrictive 

covenants on lands sold in order to protect the interests of the United States, including cultural or T&E species. It is unclear how this provision would be implemented, 

and it has the potential to be an administrative burden requiring the United States 

to enforce land restrictions in perpetuity. 

Finally, the bill provides for not more than an additional 5,000 acres of BLM-managed land in the county to be sold. These lands must be identified for disposal by 

the BLM through its land use planning process and be in accordance with the Vision Dixie Land and Transportation plan. The Secretary and the County are to 
20 

jointly select lands to be offered for sale and there is no specific timetable for their 

sale. 

Section 703 directs that 15 percent of the proceeds from the sales directed in section 702 be distributed to State and County entities, while 85 percent would be retained by the Federal government and deposited in a special account. Up to 9 percent of that account (or $15 million whichever is less) is to be used for implementing 

the many provisions of the bill including planning and implementation of special 

designations as well as costs associated with the directed sales of lands. The remainder of the account is to be used to acquire from willing sellers non-Federal 

lands within Washington County that are within one of the special areas designated 

by the bill, or other environmentally sensitive land within the county. 

The manner in which the proceeds from land sales are distributed requires significant modifications. As noted above, we will work with the sponsors to ensure that 

this bill returns an appropriate share of these proceeds to the Federal taxpayer, consistent with the Administration’s proposed changes to the Federal Land Transaction 

Facilitation Act (FLTFA). Our proposal would provide for a consistent approach to 

the distribution of land sales proceeds, at the National level. 

The Administration also does not support section 703(b), which allows the land 

sales account to earn interest. The Department of the Treasury strongly opposes 

such provisions, which effectively require the Treasury to borrow more funds to pay 

this interest. 

Additional Provisions 

Title VIII establishes two parcels totaling 932 acres as aerial rights-of-way for reservoirs. Both of these parcels have been identified as potential reservoir sites 

through the BLM’s land use planning process. Under Title V of FLPMA the BLM 

has the authority to grant rights-of-way for a wide variety of uses, including roads, 

powerlines, pipelines, communications sites and reservoirs. The applicants for these 

rights-of-way pay both administrative cost recovery fees as well as rentals. In the 

case of linear rights-of-way, rent is determined by a published schedule. Rent for 

aerial rights-of-way is based on appraised value. Municipal utilities are charged rent 

if their principal source of revenue is customer charges. 

In general, the legislation appears to allow the BLM to charge administrative cost 

recovery for these grants; however it does not allow the BLM to charge rent. We 

believe it is appropriate that the legislation either allow for the payment of rent or 

provide for the outright purchase at appraised fair market value of these lands by 

the water district. In addition, the grants for use are made in perpetuity. If the 

rights-of-way are not provided for outright purchase, we believe it would be more 

appropriate to make these easements dependent on their actual use and approval 

by any State or Federal agencies and for the life of the facility so as to not permanently encumber the public lands for projects in the event they are never developed. 

Finally, Title IX of the bill requires the Secretary to carry out the management 

of plant and animal species so as to restore native rangelands within the County 

in each ‘‘priority biological area.’’ The bill further provides the Secretary with authority to make grants or enter into cooperative agreements to carry out and develop research relating to the restoration of these areas. The full intent of this Title 

is unclear, as is the definition of ‘‘priority biological areas.’’ We would like the opportunity to work with the sponsor and the Committee to further define this Title. We 

also have concerns that this new grant authority for one county could duplicate or 

conflict with existing DOI nationwide programs or activities. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on the Washington County Growth and 

Conservation Act. While there are a few provisions that cause us concern and that 

we believe should be modified (as well as some technical amendments), we support 

the cooperative conservation efforts of Senator Bennett and so many others in Utah 

to arrive at this point. I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Holtrop. 

STATEMENT OF JOEL HOLTROP, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL 

FOREST SYSTEM, FOREST SERVICE 

Mr. HOLTROP. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, 

thank you for the opportunity to provide the Department’s views on 

two bills today. My short comments this afternoon are a summary 

of my testimony. Just a few of the key points that I want to highlight. 
21 

The Department supports S. 934 which would amend the Florida 

National Forest Land Management Act of 2003 to authorize the 

conveyance of 114 acres of land in Leon County, Florida, known as 

the Flea Market Tract. The bill also provides that proceeds from 

the sale of certain lands in the 2003 act may be used for Administrative improvements for units of the National Forest System within the State. The Flea Market Tract has been on the National Forest and Florida’s potential exchange list for more than 10 years. It 

is a developed parcel of land in an urban area that lacks national 

forest character. 

Conveyance of this tract will reduce boundary management costs 

and allow for the purchase of high priority endangered species 

habitat, critical wetlands and potential recreation areas for the 

public. Both Leon County and the local environmental groups have 

offered support for the bill. Additionally the bill has bipartisan 

Congressional support and we view it as a win-win for all. 

S. 2834, Washington County Growth and Conservation Act of 

2008 pertains to various National Forest System, Bureau of Land 

Management and National Park Service lands in Washington 

County, Utah. My remarks focus on the provisions of the bill related to the National Forest System lands. The Department appreciates the Utah Congressional delegations efforts to resolve a wide 

range of long standing public land issues in Washington County. 

Enactment of this legislation would be a significant achievement 

that the people of Utah, their delegation and Congress could be 

proud of. We would like to continue to work with the committee on 

some of our concerns with the bill. 

S. 2834 would designate new wilderness areas including 2,643 

acres of National Forest System land on the Dixie National Forest 

as the Cottonwood Forest Wilderness prescribes certain management objectives in wilderness areas designated in the bill and 

would establish the High Desert Off-Highway Vehicle Trail. It 

would also direct the conveyance of 112 acres of land on the Dixie 

National Forest. The proposed wilderness area is scenic, rugged 

and has a rich diversity of narrow canyons providing excellent opportunity for solitude and primitive recreational experiences. 

It also possesses a special feature by virtue of its location adjacent to a desert tortoise reserve. The Dixie National Forest has determined that the area is suitable for wilderness. The bill includes 

some provisions regarding management of the areas designated as 

wilderness that are either unnecessary or would change the direction that would otherwise apply under the Wilderness Act of 1964. 

The Department prefers to follow the provisions of the Wilderness Act which allows for review of proposed uses of wilderness on 

a case by case basis. The Department’s specific concerns about the 

wilderness sections of the bill are described in detail in my written 

testimony which I have submitted for the record. The Department 

likes the idea of working cooperatively to carry out wildlife management activities in wilderness areas. 

In fact we already have an agreement with the Association of 

Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the BLM that guides us in working 

cooperatively at the national, regional and local level to manage 

wilderness areas on national forest system and public lands. The 

Department does not oppose designation of the High Desert Off- 
22 

Highway Vehicle Trail. We are concerned however, about the cost 

of repair and the reconstruction of existing trails that the designation could require. 

Title Ten of the bill would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to 

convey for fair market value 112 acres of land to a private land 

owner. While we support selling approximately 21 acres, we do not 

support conveyance of any additional acres. We would like to continue to work with the sponsor and the committee, however, to resolve this concern. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the opportunity to discuss 

both bills. I’m happy to answer any questions that you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Holtrop follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOEL HOLTROP, DEPUTY CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM, 

FOREST SERVICE

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity 

to provide the Department’s views on two bills on the agenda today. My testimony 

will be regarding S. 934 and S. 2834. 

S. 934/H.R. 1374

S. 934/H.R. 1374 would amend the Florida National Forest Land Management Act 

of 2003 to authorize the conveyance, for fair market value, of 114 acres (Tract W1979; Flea Market Tract) in Leon County, Florida. Proceeds from the sale of Tract 

W-1979 are to be used exclusively for the purchase of inholdings located within the 

Apalachicola National Forest. The bill also provides that proceeds from the sale of 

any of the other parcels listed in the 2003 Act may be used for the acquisition, construction, or maintenance of administrative improvements for units of the National 

Forest System (NFS) within the State, except that the bill further directs that only 

proceeds from the sale of lands with improved infrastructure may be used for administrative improvements. 

The Department supports this bill but would like to work with the Committee and 

the bill’s sponsors on amendments that focus the use of funds derived from sales 

in a manner that comports with the original Act. Tract W-1979 (Flea Market Tract) 

has been on the National Forests in Florida’s potential exchange list for more than 

10 years. It is a developed parcel of land in an urban area which lacks National 

Forest character. The conveyance of this tract will reduce boundary management 

costs and allow for the purchase of high priority endangered species habitat, critical 

wetlands, and potential recreation areas for the public. 

S. 2834

S. 2834 pertains to various NFS, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and National Park Service (NPS) lands in Washington County, Utah. I will limit my remarks to the provisions of the bill related to the NFS lands and will defer to the 

Department of the Interior on provisions relating to the lands managed by the BLM 

and the NPS. 

S. 2834 would designate new wilderness areas, including 2,643 acres of NFS land 

on the Dixie National Forest as the ‘‘Cottonwood Forest Wilderness,’’ provide for 

trail maintenance, travel management planning, conservation projects, establish the 

High Desert Off-Highway Vehicle Trail, and prescribe certain management objectives in wilderness areas designated in this bill. It would also direct the conveyance 

of 112 acres of land on the Dixie National Forest to Mr. Kirk R. Harrison. The Department does not oppose S. 2834, although we have concerns regarding some of the 

bill’s provisions. 

The proposed wilderness area is scenic, rugged, and has a rich diversity of narrow 

canyons providing excellent opportunity for solitude and primitive recreational experiences. It also possesses a special feature by virtue of its location adjacent to a 

desert tortoise reserve. In addition, the area is contiguous to BLM land that would 

be designated by the bill as the ‘‘Cottonwood Canyon Wilderness.’’ The Dixie National Forest has determined that the area is suitable for wilderness. However, in 

the revision of its forest plan, the Forest expects to propose that the area be managed as a ‘‘Backcountry Area.’’ This classification is similar to wilderness, but differs 

because it would allow a mix of motorized and non-motorized recreation to take advantage of the unique recreation opportunities that exist in the area. 
23 

The Department requests a technical amendment to the bill in Title I—Wilderness Areas which is needed for clarification. The bill defines the term ‘‘Secretary’’ 

as the Secretary of the Interior. Accordingly, Section 102(a)(2) could be interpreted 

to mean the Secretary of the Interior would manage the area of NFS lands designated as the ‘‘Cottonwood Forest Wilderness’’ by Section 101(a)(5). We suggest 

adding ‘‘Agriculture’’ to the language ‘‘shall be considered to be a reference to the 

Secretary’’ to clarify that NFS lands under the jurisdiction of Agriculture would continue to be managed by the Secretary of Agriculture. 

Section 102 of the bill includes some provisions regarding the management of the 

areas designated as wilderness that are either unnecessary or would change the direction that would otherwise apply under the Wilderness Act of 1964. The Department prefers to follow the provisions of the Act. The Department objects to the provisions in Section 102(l), which would permanently authorize the State’s use of aircraft in wilderness for wildlife management purposes, and Section 102(m), which 

would authorize wildlife water development projects. The Forest Service currently 

subjects proposed uses of wilderness to review on a case-by-case basis, allowing for 

cooperatively working with partners to balance use in compliance with the Wilderness Act. 

Section 102(n) would direct the Secretaries to enter into a cooperative agreement 

under which the State or designee of the State would carry out wildlife management 

activities in wilderness areas designated by this title. The Department does not oppose this provision. The Forest Service has signed a cooperative agreement with the 

Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the BLM that outlines policies and 

guidelines for fish and wildlife management in wilderness areas, including protocols 

for managing nonconforming uses (titled ‘‘Policies and Guidelines for Fish and Wildlife Management in National Forest and Bureau of Land Management Wilderness’’ 

and dated June 2006). It demonstrates a common understanding between the States 

and Federal agencies. The agreement also allows for similar State-specific agreements if needed. The Department believes that this national agreement provides a 

mutually agreed upon method to address management issues, and it would be our 

preference to develop any State agreement in accordance with it to maintain a consistent approach. 

Section 603 of the bill would direct the Secretary of the Interior, in coordination 

with the Secretary of Agriculture, to designate the High Desert Off-Highway Vehicle 

Trail based on existing roads and trails. The Department does not oppose the trail 

designation. However, the Department is concerned about the cost of repair and the 

reconstruction of existing trails that the designation could require. This work has 

not been a priority trail reconstruction project for the Forest. 

Section 1002 of the bill would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to convey, for 

fair market value, 112 acres of land to Mr. Kirk R. Harrison, a private landowner. 

The Department is concerned with this section of the bill. The lands in question are 

currently the subject of Small Tracts Act applications by Mr. Harrison. While we 

support selling Mr. Harrison approximately 21 acres, which would include his entire 

original applications for the Spring Field, Platt Field, and Reservoir Field land 

areas, we do not support conveyance of any additional acres. However, we would 

like to continue to work with the sponsor and the Committee to resolve this concern. 

In addition, we would like to suggest a technical correction for this section. 

Mr. Chairman, again thank you for the opportunity to discuss both S. 934 and 

S. 2834. I am happy to answer any questions you may have. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you. Thank you both. I just have a couple 

of areas I wanted to explore because I know colleagues wanted to 

get into these in greater depth. 

Ms. Jacobson, as I understand it on the Owyhee legislation revenues from the sale of lands the BLM has previously identified for 

disposal would be used to buy other lands in and around the wilderness areas. Now according to your testimony the Administration 

has an objection to this because you want and I quote, ‘‘ensure that 

the bill returns an appropriate share of the proceeds to the Federal 

taxpayer.’’ My question is if all of the proceeds from the sale of the 

BLM lands are being used to acquire other public lands wouldn’t 

that be an appropriate return to the American people? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Senator, I think that’s a very good question. As 

you pointed out land sales and land acquisitions are a valid land 

management tool just as exchanges are. In this case the bill is a 
24 

land sale and land purchase, not an exchange and we just would 

like to work with the committee, with your staff and with Senator 

Crapo’s office to explore the issues surrounding the land sales and 

the finances from them. 

Senator WYDEN. So if the same lands were conveyed as part of 

a land exchange would the Department be recommending that a 

portion of the value of the land involved be deposited in the treasury in effect be consistent with the position you lay out today? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Senator, I don’t know what the Administration 

would say on that specific point although your question is a very 

valid question. 

Senator WYDEN. Ok. I’m going to have some questions that we’ll 

need to have addressed from the Administration on the Washington County legislation when we have a chance to look at that 

further. But my only other one at this time, Mr. Holtrop, is I understand that the Forest Service proposed to exchange the tract of 

Forest Service land that would be sold under S. 934, but that exchange recently was put on hold. Can you tell me what the challenge is there and why that exchange wouldn’t adequately address 

the needs of the Forest Service in the county? 

Mr. HOLTROP. Yes, that’s the Florida National Forest piece of legislation. 

Senator WYDEN. Right. 

Mr. HOLTROP. There never has been an agreement to initiate a 

land exchange in that case. This tract of land has been identified 

as not having national forest character. It’s surrounded on three 

sides by the city of Tallahassee and on the other side by a power 

line corridor and has difficulty in management for our purposes. 

Because of its location and the cost of managing it and property 

boundary management and those types of things, we did enter into 

some discussions as to whether an exchange was feasible given the 

likely high value of that parcel for urban purposes and the difficulty of identifying the number of parcels of land in a short period 

of time to arrive at an exchange this was the option that was preferred. 

Senator WYDEN. Senator Barrasso? 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. To Ms. 

Jacobson, if I could, the Owyhee Wilderness bill has reference to 

fencing off areas of the wilderness. Could you talk a little bit about 

that in terms of the cost, how that’s going to born, if there’s going 

to be appropriations for it in addition to appropriations currently 

out there? 

Ms. JACOBSON. At this time, Senator, we’re unable to anticipate 

how much fencing would be required. So it’s difficult for us to put 

a price tag on that. 

Senator BARRASSO. Can you talk a little bit more about that just 

in terms of as you envision this whole project, what’s involved in 

the process, the amount of time it would take, how many miles of 

fencing are you talking about? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Again, it would depend on the actual acreage and 

livestock on or not on. So again it would be very difficult for us to 

determine at this time. 
25 

Senator BARRASSO. Would you expect regardless of the amount 

that there would be some cost incurred. How would you view that 

being dealt with? 

Ms. JACOBSON. Yes, sir. Yes, Senator. The bill says the Secretary 

may require and what I would anticipate our local land managers 

doing is determining what—where a fence would be appropriate, 

what the cost were and then we have to make, as everybody does, 

decisions on where we allocate funds on the grounds and where we 

don’t. So priorities would be set. But the bill says the Secretary 

may. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WYDEN. I thank my friend. 

Senator Craig. 

Senator CRAIG. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Julie, you 

mentioned some concern about land sales and dollars and sense. 

One of my concerns about the language we are reviewing today lies 

in Section Six, land identified for disposal. It states proceeds from 

the sale of public lands under Section A, shall be deposited in a 

separate account in the treasury of the United States to be known 

as the Owyhee Lands Acquisition Account. 

Should I be concerned and should other Idahoans be concerned 

that such language could redirect Federal dollars away from the 

Boise Foothills Project? 

Ms. JACOBSON. My understanding, sir, is that that wouldn’t 

occur, that the land sales that are authorized in this bill that are 

consistent with our land use plans are in the Boise District and so 

they would not interfere with the bill—the Act that you referenced, 

Senator. 

Senator CRAIG. Trying to look at the location of the Foothills, but 

Boise, I guess they’re not in that BLM District? 

Ms. JACOBSON. That’s my understanding, Senator. 

Senator CRAIG. I think that’s right, ok. We’ll look at that again 

with you, but thank you. I appreciate that offer. 

Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WYDEN. Yes. 

Senator CRAIG. I concluded. Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. I thank my friend. My apologies to colleagues 

with the schedule now it’s a juggle now and I appreciate my colleagues’ indulgence. 

Senator Crapo. 

Senator CRAPO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have no 

questions at this point. I just want to again thank Julie Jacobson 

for the time she’s put into helping us work through the issues on 

this legislation. Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you. 

Senator Bennett. 

Senator BENNETT. Thank you. I alike have no questions for the 

Administration. 

Senator WYDEN. You’re home free, folks. Thank you. Thank you 

for working with us. 

Our next panel. The Honorable James J Eardley, Chairman of 

the Washington County Commission, St. George, Utah. Bill Meadows, President of The Wilderness Society, Washington, DC, Dr. 
26 

Chad Gibson, Owyhee Range Service, Wilder, Idaho, and Craig 

Gehrke, Regional Director of the Wilderness Society, Boise, Idaho. 

Gentlemen, welcome and thank you for coming, in some instances, long, long distances to be with the subcommittee. We’ll 

make your prepared remarks a part of the hearing record in their 

entirety. Why don’t we begin with you, Mr. Eardley? Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF JAMES J. EARDLEY, CHAIRMAN, WASHINGTON 

COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, ST. GEORGE, UT 

Mr. EARDLEY. Ok. Thank you for that. Anyway, I’m grateful for 

the opportunity to be able to address this committee. Mr. Chairman, my name is Jim Eardley. I’m Chairman of the Washington 

County Commission. I’m here to express full support that our commission has for Senate bill 2834, the Washington County Growth 

and Conservation Act of 2008. 

We are able to be here today because we have engaged in an extensive planning effort that has involved productive discussions for 

a broad base of stakeholders. Compromise has been necessary because of either ailments of this legislation that gives us discomfort. 

But the overall importance of Senate bill 2834 overrides the firstly 

important items that many of us had to give up to create this final 

bill. 

I’d like to thank those stakeholders that have been involved for 

their willingness to collaborate. I certainly want to take a few minutes and thank Senator Bennett and Congressman Matheson for 

their help and support through this whole process over these past 

few years. It is important that you understand that Senate bill 

2834 is about getting something done. 

For the first time in Utah we have managed to get the right people to the table who possess a significant amount of courage to address and a grasp of the big picture to finally be successful. I believe we have finally reached a point we are making progress. It’s 

far more important for us to move forward on this than it is to 

maintain unyielding positions. 

As has been stated by Senator Bennett, we are experiencing tremendous growth in Washington County. It is currently the fifth 

fastest growing county in the United States, up from the year 2006, 

it was the No. 1 fastest growing county in the United States. We 

currently are the fastest growing metropolitan area in the United 

States. 

Our county is about 1.5 million acres. Eighty-four percent of that 

acreage is under either State or Federal ownership with 15 to 16 

percent being owned privately. There’s really no practical way for 

us to separate public land use issues from private land use issues. 

One certainly impacts the other and the effect can be rather dramatic. 

This legislation is part of a larger effort to address these issues. 

Washington County began several years ago with a comprehensive 

land use planning project that involved many stakeholders in a 

working group setting, State, Federal, land managers sat at the 

table in advisory roles offering valuable insight and technical advice regarding management challenges and potential solutions. The 

county then engaged in a county wide growth planning process 

called Vision Dixie. 
27 

This project involved over 3,000 of our citizens at a variety of 

meetings held throughout the community. Those findings have 

been validated through polling activity as well as online input. We 

have formed what we refer to as guiding principles. 

Vision Dixie Guiding Principles include maintaining the quality 

of air and water, conserving our precious water, protecting our 

unique signature landscape, preserving our agriculture ranching 

heritage, preserving open space, creating connectability through 

systems of roads and trails, creating improving our transportation 

infrastructure, focusing on growth of our first and contiguous next. 

The objectives of Vision Dixie, overall objectives of this legislation 

are very similar to our land bill. To protect special place, enhance 

open space, develop trails, parks and accommodate accelerated 

growth. 

In fact except for legislative effort, Vision Dixie would never have 

taken place. The land sales element of S. 2834 not only provides 

tools to finally deal with the private in holdings within the Red 

Hills Tortoise Preserve. But 10 percent earmarked for the county 

allows us to accomplish the very thing described of to implement 

Vision Dixie in a very real way. 

It is not difficult to conclude that Vision Dixie process and legislation are separately connected. One cannot work the full benefit 

without the other. S. 2834 is an excellent balance between conservation, growth planning and administrative views to create an 

extraordinary blend of stakeholders, citizens, State and Federal 

managers, local leaders and Congressional delegation representatives. As I said we have other concerns which are outlined in written testimony that we’ll continue to work on with Congress and in 

our delegation to resolve. 

Of utmost importance county wide access for public land users in 

the county a large number of RS 2477 assertions which make up 

the core of our county, public land transportation system. We have 

worked very hard to get to this point. There is much good that can 

be accomplished from the passage of S. 2834, not only for the citizens of Washington County, but for all the people to enjoy the 

beauty and diversity of our county. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Eardley follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAMES J. EARDLEY, CHAIRMAN, WASHINGTON COUNTY

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, ST. GEORGE, UT, ON S. 2834 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, my name is Jim Eardley, Chairman of the Washington County Board of Commissioners. I am here in full support 

of S. 2834, The Washington County Growth and Conservation Act of 2008. We are 

able to be here today because we have been engaged in an extensive planning effort 

which has involved productive discussions with a broad base of stakeholders. Compromise has been necessary. Because of that, there are elements of this legislation 

which give us discomfort. But the overall importance of S. 2834 overrides those personally important items that many of us have given up in order to create a final 

bill, and I would like to thank all the stakeholders involved for their willingness to 

collaborate. 

I also wish to thank the entire Utah Congressional delegation for their support. 

I particularly want to thank Senator Bennett and Congressman Matheson for sharing our vision and then working to advance it here in the Congress. With their support, it has turned into the bipartisan effort you see today. 

It is very important for you to understand that S. 2834 is all about getting something done. For the first time in Utah, we have managed to get the right people 

at the table who possess a sufficient amount of courage and a grasp of the bigger 

picture to finally be successful. I’m sure you know something of the volatile nature 
28 

of public land issues in our state, much of which has played out here in the halls 

of Congress like scenes from a Greek tragedy, with few positive results. But I believe we have finally reached a point where making progress is more important than 

holding to some rigid, unyielding position. 

I’m grateful for that. Utah land management issues have too long been twisting 

on the winds of rhetoric, contention, senseless positioning, and fruitless debate. This 

legislation represents a new day in Utah public land deliberations. The success of 

S. 2834 will usher in a new era of problem solving and resolution—something which 

is especially important to those of us who are closest to the public lands and most 

impacted by management decisions. 

Washington County is experiencing tremendous growth. The U.S. Census listed 

us as the fifth fastest growing county, and the fastest growing metropolitan planning organization, in the country. Each month, around a thousand new residents 

arrive in Washington County, along with tens of thousands of visitors from all over 

the world, drawn by the wonderful natural beauty of the land, the warm climate, 

and the diverse recreational opportunities. 

Washington County is just over 1.5 million acres, more than 29% of which is currently under some form of special, restrictive management, including protective 

habitat for twelve different threatened or endangered species. Our legislation would 

add to that number of specially-designated lands. Over 84% of our land is in Federal 

or State ownership, leaving just over 15% of the total land area to accommodate the 

heavy demands of growth and expansion. 

It is important to note that there is no way to separate public land issues from 

private land issues in a county like ours. Decisions we make in our city and county 

meetings can seriously increase the burden carried by federal land managers. And, 

conversely, decisions made by you here, and by state and federal land managers can 

greatly impact our lives as local citizens and leaders. 

If we plan poorly or fail to address growth responsibly, the impacts on adjacent 

public lands can be dramatic. On the other hand, we cannot plan properly without 

taking into account the continual impacts created by having large tracts of public 

lands next to us. 

For example, in 2005 and again in 2006, wildfires burned out of control, eventually covering nearly one-fourth of the County, with resulting impacts on grazing, 

watershed damage, erosion, and so forth. We also experienced devastating floods 

which left many stranded, some homeless, and property damage in the tens of millions of dollars. The origin of all these events was on our public lands. 

The citizens of Washington County continue to be affected by these and other 

events, and, combined with ever-changing management strategies and ever-growing 

proposals for special forms of management, the impacts on local officials, planners, 

and land-users can be terrific. 

This legislation is part of a large effort to address these issues in Washington 

County. I would like to make you aware of the extensive planning, collaboration, 

and citizen involvement that has brought us to this point. We began several years 

ago with a Comprehensive Land Use Planning Project which involved many stakeholders in a working group setting, examining and discussing the many public land 

challenges in Washington County. State and federal land managers sat at the table 

in advisory roles, offering invaluable insight and technical advice regarding management challenges and potential solutions. 

As an extension of that first effort, the County then engaged in a county-wide 

growth planning process, which we called ‘‘Vision Dixie’’. Vision Dixie is a comprehensive growth planning effort modeled after the Envision Utah process used in 

some of the major communities on the Wasatch Front and in other areas of the of 

the country with great success. 

This project involved over 3000 of our citizens, as well as representatives from 

many stakeholder groups, in creating a county-wide footprint for growth. Some of 

the results of this process were quite predictable, some were a little surprising, but 

all were guided and developed by the many citizens and stakeholders who participated. In the end, a set of visionary ‘‘Guiding Principles’’ were created, which will 

guide the County and all the municipalities in directing and controlling the manner 

in which we grow in the future. I have included a copy of our ‘‘Dixie Principles’’ with 

my written testimony. 

Some of the elements of Vision Dixie include: 

• Maintaining the quality of our air and water 

• Conserving our precious water 

• Protecting our unique ‘‘signature’’ landscapes 

• Preserving our agricultural and ranching heritage 

• Preserving our open spaces 
29 

• Creating ‘‘connectability’’ through a system of trails • Greatly improving our transportation infrastructure • Focusing growth inward first, contiguous next 

The objectives of Vision Dixie and the overall objectives of this legislation are very 

similar—to protect our special places, enhance open space, develop trails and parks, 

and accommodate accelerated growth. In fact, except for this legislative effort, Vision Dixie would never have taken place. The land sales element of S.2834 not only 

provides the tools to finally deal with the private in-holdings within the Red Hills 

Desert Tortoise preserve, but the 10% earmarked for the County allows us to accomplish the very things described above, and to implement the Vision Dixie vision in 

a very real way. 

It is not difficult to conclude, then, that the Vision Dixie process and this legislation are inseparably connected. The legislation empowers, the growth planning process directs, and one cannot work to its fullest benefit without the other. S.2834 is 

an excellent balance between conservation and growth planning, and the methods 

we have used to create it have been an extraordinary blend of stakeholders, citizens, 

state and federal managers, local leaders, and congressional delegation representatives. 

I’m not sure I can adequately define the importance of these two efforts to the 

future of Washington County in the five minutes I have been given. I also believe 

that I cannot emphasize enough the possibilities this legislation creates in finally 

resolving public land management issues across the state. Clearly, it is very important that we pass S. 2834. 

As I mentioned before, there has been a great deal of compromise on many levels 

to reach this point, and Washington County has some concerns about several elements of the legislation to which I would like make reference. 

First, county-wide access for all public land users is of critical importance, and 

the County has a large number of RS 2477 assertions which make up the core of 

our county public land transportation system. Some of these roads may be impacted 

by this legislation, and the County would like the opportunity to work with Senator 

Bennett and Congressman Matheson to continue to clarify and protect these important transportation issues and to assure that the County’s interests are protected. 

Also, we have concerns regarding the land sales portion of the bill. There are a 

large number of private in-holdings, particularly in the Tortoise reserve, which have 

not been appropriately dealt with by the federal government. The proceeds from the 

land sales are intended to address this important issue. It is also the County’s desire to do some of the critical conservation projects which have not had adequate 

funding. However, the limited number of acres remaining in this legislation after 

our negotiations is hardly enough to successfully resolve all the in-holding problems 

and accomplish the many conservation projects which demand attention. The County would like the opportunity to continue to work with the Delegation members on 

this matter as well. 

The County is also concerned about some of the language regarding the establishment of the National Conservation Areas, and would like to continue to work with 

the Delegation members to resolve these concerns. We would like to be sure the 

NCAs accomplish the purposes for which they are being created, while protecting 

historic uses. 

Summarily, we have worked very hard to get to this point, and there is much good 

to be accomplished with the passage of S. 2834, not only for the citizens of Washington County, but for all people who enjoy the beauty and diversity of our public 

lands. But, just as important, it establishes a format for resolving these contentious 

issues on a much broader scale, and could lead to similar collaborative efforts across 

the West. We strongly urge you to support this legislation. Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. Mr. Eardley, thank you and thank you for your 

presentation. 

Mr. Meadows. 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. MEADOWS, PRESIDENT, THE 

WILDERNESS SOCIETY 

Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, 

my name is Bill Meadows and I’m President of The Wilderness Society. I thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the 

Washington County Growth and Conservation Act of 2008. I first 

want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership on wilder-
30 

ness in the Mount Hood Wilderness and Copper Salmon Wilderness, really great efforts. You know The Wilderness Society fully 

supports that work and applaud you for that leadership. 

Senator WYDEN. We thank you for your support of Mount Hood 

and Copper Salmon and by God, by next wilderness day we’re 

going to have those law. 

Mr. MEADOWS. We’ll celebrate with you. Senator Crapo, it’s a 

pleasure to be here at a time when we’re talking about Owyhee 

Canyon legislation, too. So thank you for that. 

It’s particularly auspicious, as Senator Wyden noted, that we’re 

together on the anniversary of Earth Day. I was privileged during 

most of my working life at The Wilderness Society to work a few 

doors down from Senator Gaylord Nelson, the founder of Earth 

Day, who spent his last 25 years working as an esteemed counselor 

for The Wilderness Society. Senator Nelson used to say that our 

public lands in this country are the greatest gift that every American receives at birth. That gift to all of us is no where greater seen 

and envisioned than the beautiful Red Rock Country in Utah that 

we discuss today. 

I’ve submitted a written statement for the record that addresses 

this legislation in more detail. But I would like to summarize the 

views of my organization and then will be happy to take questions 

from the committee. As many on this committee know wilderness 

protection in Utah has a long and contiguous history. 

Although not the bill The Wilderness Society would write, this 

bill is a product of good faith efforts by many diverse interests. We 

have some concerns as outlined in our testimony. But we believe 

that the legislation represents an opportunity to finally achieve 

lasting protection for some spectacular lands in Utah. 

First, I thank Senator Bennett for his diligent efforts on this bill. 

He has demonstrated real leadership keeping these diverse interests focused on what is possible. Many thanks also to Senators 

Bingaman and Wyden who have already devoted personal time and 

attention to the cause of protecting these wonderful landscapes. 

Also my thanks to Representative Matheson and staff, David 

Brooks, and Tyler Owens with whom we’ve worked closely for their 

leadership in developing this legislation as well. 

This legislation would designate as wilderness or national conservation areas about 380,000 acres of public land. This is a substantial amount of protection for a county that has been locked in 

stalemate over wilderness protection for decades. As part of the 

protection, 94 percent of the Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas in Washington County would become permanent 

wilderness. 

Included in these designations would be 190,000 acres of the 

300,000 acres contained in inventory of BLM Wilderness quality 

lands prepared by the Utah Wilderness Coalition. About 140,000 

acres of these lands would be designated wilderness and 50,000 

acres of National Conservation Area. Much of this area has no effective protection to date. So this would be a significant gain in 

protecting the county’s Federal lands. 

Among the outstanding areas that would gain wilderness protection are Cougar Canyon, Doc’s Pass, Canaan Mountain and the 

Kolob Unit of Zion National Park. Protection for these areas would 
31 

truly be cause for celebration. The National Conservation Areas 

would also provide protection for sensitive tortoise habitat. We 

know that it is the intent of Senator Bennett to protect these areas 

against inappropriate motorized vehicle use. We believe additional 

language needs to be inserted to accomplish that intent. 

Our most serious concern is with Title IX—Title VII of the bill 

regarding land disposal. We are much appreciative of the bill’s recognition that identification of Federal land for disposal should only 

take place in the context of agency management planning and in 

accordance with current law. We also are appreciative that a large 

percentage of the proceeds from such sales would be dedicated to 

acquiring ecologically important lands within the county. This is a 

notable improvement over previous legislation because it would add 

high value conservation lands to the Federal estate. 

Our concern is with a portion of the proceeds from such sales 

that divert 10 percent of the revenues to the county’s local government. Use of these funds is not limited to conservation purposes. 

It could be used for a variety of local projects including transportation infrastructure and water development. We believe strongly 

that our Federal public lands for the property of all taxpayers and 

are the birthright that ensures preservation and conservation of 

our most special places for generations to come. 

In the interest of time I will not detail the other suggestions we 

have included in our written testimony, but we believe that there 

are some changes in drafting that would better effectuate the intent of the drafters. I would like to close by reiterating what may 

be the most important point of all that the work that has already 

occurred on this bill represents a breakthrough in long polarized 

debate in Utah over land protection. While not perfect, I think this 

bill offers real and lasting protection for an important part of 

Southern Utah’s public lands. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I’m happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Meadows follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. MEADOWS, PRESIDENT, THE WILDERNESS

SOCIETY, ON S. 2834 

INTRODUCTION

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I am Bill Meadows, President of The Wilderness Society, a non-profit conservation organization dedicated to preserving our 

nation’s public land legacy, and with this bill I believe we have a real opportunity 

to do exactly that for the unique wild lands of southwestern Utah. 

Let me start by thanking Senator Bennett and his staff for the hard work that 

has gone into this legislation. They have spent countless hours listening to the concerns and recommendations from all interested parties, including significant time 

spent on the ground in Washington County examining a great many of the proposed 

wilderness areas. 

Let me also thank the members of the Subcommittee and Committee, and particularly Senators Bingaman and Wyden and their talented staff. Although the bill has 

only recently been introduced, the Committee has already shown a willingness to 

devote resources, including the time of the Senators themselves, to work on this important legislation in a productive way, recognizing the importance of America’s 

public lands legacy to all Americans. 

As you know, S. 2834 is a complex public lands bill built upon years of effort that 

addresses a variety of issues in Washington County, Utah. Although not the bill The 

Wilderness Society would write, this legislation addresses a number of competing 

uses on public lands and is product of an effort carried out in good faith. Although 
32 

we have some concerns as outlined in our testimony, we believe this legislation represents significant gains for America’s public lands. 

While I will briefly address several titles of the bill, our most extensive expertise 

is on the Wilderness titles of the legislation; therefore, I will focus the majority of 

my testimony on that title. 

WILDERNESS AND OTHER PROTECTIVE DESIGNATIONS

The legislation would designate as Wilderness or as National Conservation Areas 

about 380,000 acres of Bureau of Land Management (BLM), national forest, or national park lands. This is a substantial amount of protection for a county that has 

been locked in a stalemate over wilderness protection for decades. As part of this 

protection, 94% of the BLM Wilderness Study Areas (WSA) in Washington County 

would become permanent Wilderness; the areas that are released from WSA status 

are boundary adjustments in the Canaan Mountain and Red Mountain areas and 

one small study area in the Beaver Dam Wash. We believe this level of protection 

for WSA’s should set a minimum standard for future wilderness bills in Utah. 

As part of this designation, 190,000 of the 300,000 acres contained in the inventory of BLM wilderness quality lands prepared by the Utah Wilderness Coalition 

and the citizens of Utah would receive an enhanced level of protection. Although 

this does not protect as much of this these lands as we would like, it includes about 

140,000 acres that would be designated wilderness and about 52,000 acres that 

would be National Conservation Areas as discussed below. Much of this land currently has little effective protection, so this is a significant gain in protecting the 

federal land of Washington County. With this, a stalemate could finally be broken, 

bringing lasting protection to some of America’s most wild and spectacular federal 

public lands. 

Some highlights of the areas and resources that would receive Wilderness protection: 

• Cougar Canyon and Doc’s Pass: Situated in the very northwest corner of Washington County, this remote and rugged area offers outstanding opportunities for 

hiking, rock climbing, deer hunting, and trout fishing. As its name suggests, the 

area is prime habitat for mountain lions. The Wilderness designation would ensure that a proposed reservoir and dam for the heart of the area would not be 

developed. 

• Kolob Units: The six units that comprise the Kolob area are logical extensions 

of the Kolob Terrace section of Zion National Park. They are part of the integrated watershed, wildlife habitat, and scenic terrain of the park, and are 

among some of the most pristine, spectacular, and ecologically significant lands 

in Utah. 

• Canaan Mountain: Peregrines, desert bighorn sheep, mountain lion, coyote, bobcat are among the animals found in this spectacular mountain unit. Though 

often overlooked by visitors to Zion National Park, Canaan Mountain offers superb opportunities for day hikes and backpack trips through its sandstone plateau. 

As noted, in addition to the Wilderness designations the bill also would protect 

a total of about 113,000 acres of sensitive tortoise habitat as National Conservation 

Areas (NCAs), 52,000 acres of which are in the citizens’ inventory of BLM wilderness quality lands. Of these two NCAs, the 68,000-acre Beaver Dam Wash National 

Conservation Area would protect the dazzling Joshua Tree forests of the southwest 

corner of the county. 

In order to realize true protection from inappropriate motorized use in this area, 

we understand that Senator Bennett and the County have agreed and intend that 

the citizens’ inventoried wilderness areas in the NCA should be closed to motorized 

public use except for three roads totaling about three miles. However, there is no 

statutory language affording protection against motorized use in the current version 

of the bill. We understand that committee staff is exploring ways in which such protection could be written into the legislation ensuring that appropriate protection is 

made permanent. We believe this protection is important and should be made a part 

of the legislation. 

Finally, the bill would also protect 165 miles of rivers in the County as Wild and 

Scenic Rivers. We are most appreciative of the protections provided for these areas. 

FEDERAL LAND DISPOSAL

Title VII of the bill requires the sale of about 4,000 acres of public land that has 

been identified by the Bureau of Land Management as appropriate for disposal in 

the course of its management planning. It also provides for the sale of up to 5,000 
33 

additional acres of public land should such land be identified for disposal in accordance with current law at a later date. We are appreciative of the bill’s recognition 

that identification of public lands for disposal should not be made outside of the 

management planning by the relevant agency and must be done in accordance with 

current law. 

Of most serious concern are the provisions of S. 2834 that earmark the disposition 

of the proceeds from these land sales in a manner inconsistent with current law. 

Proceeds from Federal land sales covered by the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA) currently remain as federal funds and generally go toward buying 

other land from willing sellers and making it part of the portfolio of federal land. 

Proceeds from the sale of the 4,000 acres that have been identified by BLM for disposal would be covered by FLTFA. 

The Washington County Growth and Conservation Act would depart from this 

equation by diverting 10% of sale revenues to the local government of Washington 

County. It further provides that 5% would be available to the state for the support 

of schools, in accordance with current law. The remaining 85% of the proceeds 

would go toward acquiring high priority ecological and wilderness lands within 

Washington County, less an amount earmarked for the administrative costs to BLM 

to implement the legislation (9% or up to $15 million). 

It is the 10% earmarked for the county that is of concern. Use of these funds is 

not limited to conservation purposes and could be used for a variety of local projects, 

including transportation infrastructure and water development. We understand and 

are sympathetic to the fact that Washington County, like virtually every county and 

state government, has spending needs that may not be fully funded. However, we 

believe strongly that our federal public lands are the property of all taxpayers and 

are a birthright that ensures the preservation and conservation of our most special 

places for generations to come. When disposal of those lands are appropriate, the 

resulting funds should remain the property of all Americans. 

At the same time, we are supportive of the provision that would commit 85% of 

the proceeds (less the 9% of primarily administrative costs) to acquiring ecologically 

important lands within the county. This is a significant improvement over previous 

legislation that did not dedicate this percentage to land acquisition. Adding high 

value conservation lands to the Federal estate is a significant benefit. 

OTHER PROVISIONS ON FEDERAL LAND MANAGEMENT

We appreciate that this bill no longer mandates that a right-of-way be granted 

for a water pipeline from Lake Powell. We do have some concern about its provision 

of other rights-of-way because, although we understand they are unrelated to the 

pipeline, they are given away in perpetuity without any compensation to the taxpayers. 

S. 2834 requires the BLM to identify one or more options for the placement of 

a ‘‘northern transportation’’ corridor in the County. We understand that Senator 

Bennett has agreed not to require any study of a transportation route through sensitive desert tortoise habitat. The current language needs work in order to more 

clearly effectuate this intent. 

S. 2834 generally would require the BLM to designate areas, roads, and trails 

where off-road vehicle use is permitted. We support the need for the development 

of a timely county-wide travel management plan conducted in accordance with all 

existing laws, including those that are intended to protect natural and cultural resources and the interests of all users of the area. We believe the intent of the drafters is consistent with our view, but that some refinement in the drafting may be 

required to effectuate this purpose. We also have questions about the intent of the 

provisions in Titles VII and IX that provide for funds to private entities for stated 

purposes. We would like to work with the interested parties to better understand 

this intent and ensure that if appropriate, it is carefully drafted. 

Additionally, we have suggestions that we believe would improve the drafting in 

a few other areas. We will be providing those suggestions to the sponsors and the 

Committee, and would appreciate the opportunity to continue to work together with 

the Committee as the bill is further refined. 

CONCLUSION

The Wilderness Society believes S. 2834 represents a breakthrough in what has 

been a long-polarized debate in Utah over land protection. While not perfect as currently drafted, it presents a real opportunity to afford real and lasting protection 

for an important part of southwestern Utah’s public land legacy. We appreciate the 

opportunity to testify and look forward to working with the Committee and the 

sponsors to fully achieve the promise inherent in this bill. 
34 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Mr. Meadows. Thank you for the advocacy you bring to this cause and on this day especially. We thank 

you. 

Dr. Gibson of the Owyhee Range Service, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF CHAD C. GIBSON, OWYHEE RANGE SERVICE, 

WILDER, ID 

Mr. GIBSON. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to be 

here, committee members. We appreciate the opportunity to have 

this legislation heard and for me to provide some information in regard to that. 

I’ve been a member of the Owyhee Initiative Work Group since 

its beginning in 2001 as a representative of the Owyhee Cattlemen’s Association. So I bring this information from that perspective. This initiative process provides an opportunity to deal with 

land use conflicts that have been around forever in regard to wilderness and wild and scenic rivers. But at the same time it addresses the issue of trying to maintain economically viable ranching, initiate preservation of tribal and cultural resources and maintain a significant opportunity for recreational use of this very 

sought after recreational area. 

The Association is supportive of the legislation as is indicated 

and have some issues with it, but the Association does support the 

legislation. The Association was initiated in 1878 and this is probably one of the largest tasks that they faced in all of those years. 

The legislation and this effort is clearly not going to get rid of all 

of the issues, but it certainly provides a path forward that maybe 

gets them down to a manageable level. 

One of the issues is the establishment of the Owyhee Science Review that the Association believes is extremely important. It’s intended as a means of assuring that scientific information is appropriately obtained, properly considered and applied. That’s often an 

issue with scientific information getting into disputes. We recently 

spent 18 days in court over one of these. 

The process imposes no burden on the Department that’s not already required. That is to provide information that’s needed to conduct the review. It ensures that the review is conducted by independent scientists with specific knowledge of the issues in question. 

The intent is to provide sound science for everyone that’s involved 

in and has an interest in resource management. 

While the scientific questions may be generated by issues that 

arise from Owyhee County, they certainly will have broad application in other areas. The Association believes that the wilderness 

areas that have been identified are the very best of the best and 

that they represent a very viable compromise in acres that are 

going to be preserved as wilderness and acres that are going to be 

released to other management, particularly areas that have special 

management needs. 

The same is true in regard to the wild and scenic rivers. They’re 

issues there that have been on the books since the mid 1970s and 

haven’t been resolved. This is an opportunity to be able to do that. 

I think also of importance is the provision in the legislation to 

implement the Shoshone Paiute Cultural Resection Resource Protection Plan. It’s been on the books for a number of years and has 
35 

just not been implemented because the attention has not been 

given to it. The ever increasing visitor participation in the area either from folks that just don’t know or from sometimes in the case 

of vandals the desecration of some of those sites has been well documented. I think recognition of that proposal or that plan and putting it into effect will be a great help to these special values and 

particularly to the tribe. 

I think in the interest of time perhaps I could be, better serve 

the committee by answering questions later on. So I’ll conclude my 

statement now. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gibson follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAD C. GIBSON, OWYHEE RANGE SERVICE, WILDER, ID, 

ON S. 2833 

First I would like to thank the Committee for allowing this legislation to be considered and for allowing me to provide information at this hearing. I have been a 

member of the Owyhee Initiative work group since its beginning in 2001 as a representative of the Owyhee Cattlemen’s Association and I offer the following comment from that perspective. 

The unique process known as the Owyhee Initiative was sponsored by the Owyhee 

County Commissioners, the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes and Senator Mike Crapo. The 

County and Tribes set forth the goal and issues they wished to have addressed, 

sought interested and willing participants and appointed diverse group of representatives from an equally diverse group of conservation, ranching / landowner and recreational interest groups (Owyhee Initiative work group). On paper it may have 

looked like an impossible task; however, a condition for appointment was a strong 

commitment to the assigned task. The resulting Owyhee Initiative Agreement resulted from a willingness of the participants to recognize and respect the views and 

beliefs of others and to seek common ground from where the assigned goal and issue 

could be addressed. The Owyhee Initiative Agreement resulted from a high level of 

commitment and trust among all participants and the patient unwavering support 

of the sponsors. Efforts such as the Owyhee Initiative provide a unique path for the 

replacement of conflict and gridlock with cooperative effort to achieve common interests. 

Owyhee County is sprawled over nearly 5 million acres and possesses a diverse 

landscape from small communities surrounded by intensive irrigated agriculture to 

extremely rugged and remote back country. The ranching community is dispersed 

throughout the County. Like many areas in the west the private land that support 

ranching operations occupy the most productive areas with water and other high resource values. Historically, ranching on these lands has maintained an open space 

landscape prized by residents and visitors alike for its benefit to wildlife as well as 

human use. The best hope for avoiding fragmentation through special use ownership 

is to maintain the opportunity for viable ranching use. While viable ranch operations cannot be guaranteed, land management that, at least, preserves the opportunity for success is essential for maintenance of a viable open space landscape. 

The Owyhee Initiative provides an opportunity to resolves land use conflict 

through the identification and designation of Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers 

while preserving the opportunity for continued economically viable ranching, initiating active preservation of Tribal cultural resources and maintaining significant 

opportunity for diverse recreational use. 

Senate 2833 is the culmination of nearly 7 years of cooperative collaborative effort 

to resolve conflict and move past management gridlock in order to foster and allow 

progressive management of natural resources in Owyhee County. 

While the Owyhee Initiative Agreement imposes various commitments on the participants, some elements cannot become reality without Congressional Action. The 

Owyhee Public Land Management Act of 2008, S-2833 contains the Congressional 

directives necessary to realize many of the most important elements of the agreement. 

I believe it is important to recognize the commitment and extensive effort of the 

Committee staff in the effort to develop this legislation. David Brooks has been especially helpful by committing the time needed to understand the issues and provide 

positive legislative solution. Frank Gladics has also been especially helpful with the 

process. 
36 

I am here to express the Owyhee Cattlemen’s Association support for the components and concepts addressed in this legislation. The OCA was first established in 

1878 and perhaps has never engaged in an effort more important to the future of 

Ranching in Owyhee County. This legislation clearly will not resolve all conflict but 

does offer a positive path forward. 

The provision for establishment of the Owyhee Science Review and Conservation 

and Research Center represents a unique approach to combining the discovery of 

new information and application of new and known science. 

The Science Review is intended as a means of assuring that scientific information 

is appropriately obtained considered and applied. Independent peer review offers a 

unique opportunity to avoid disputes over the proper application of science that lead 

to management delay, gridlock and lengthy legal disputes. This process imposes no 

burden on the Department that is not already required. It assures that any review 

will be conducted by independent scientists with specific knowledge of the issues in 

question. The intent is to provide sound science based management guidance for all 

entities that have an interest in resource management. While the scientific questions proposed for review would originate in Owyhee County, the information gained 

from peer review would in many cases have much broader application. 

Where scientific information is lacking the Conservation and Research Center will 

provide an opportunity to coordinate and direct research activity to meet the most 

pressing scientific information needs. In addition the Center will provide a means 

to leverage and coordinate conservation programs to achieve much broader scale objectives than is now the case. The Center would also be in a position to seek private 

grants and matching funds to provide increased research and conservation program 

opportunity. 

I believe that the designation of wilderness includes the lands with the highest 

wilderness resource values within the county. The areas identified for wilderness 

and the areas identified for release from interim management were thoroughly investigated and evaluated and represent a very positive resolution of this issue. 

The application of wilderness management as well as the use of wilderness by 

users requires that boundaries be readily identifiable on the ground. A great deal 

of time was devoted to the identification of wilderness boundaries in a manner that 

allows them to be clearly and easily distinguished on the ground. 

The identification of additions to the Wild and Scenic Rivers System was a thorough process intended to assure that the additions fully represented the unique rivers and canyonlands in the area. At the same time the selection of proposed additions considered the avoidance of future use conflicts. 

The provision in the legislation to implement the Shoshone-Paiute Cultural Resources Protection Plan will allow the Tribes and the Department to go forward 

with a plan that has been on the shelf for a number of years. Increasing visitor use 

over ever wider areas of the County poses a growing threat to cultural sites and 

resources from vandals or simply uninformed users. Significant depletion of the 

more accessible cultural sites has already been documented. Official recognition and 

implementation of the Shoshone-Paiute Cultural Resources Protection Plan will assure much needed management of these special value resources. 

The legislation directs the Department to complete Recreational Travel Management plans for the Owyhee Front and for the remainder of the County within one 

year and three years respectively. The absence of such plans is detrimental to both 

the affected resources (soils and vegetation) and users who are unaware of the roads 

and trails that would most satisfy their expectations. Without appropriate plans the 

Department must fall back on generic ‘‘existing road and trail’’ designations. In such 

cases enforcement is not practical because neither the user nor enforcer knows 

which trails were in existence at the time of designation. Currently, new routes that 

are created almost daily become ‘‘existing’’ routes to the next user. Thus, many 

users who would not intentionally damage resource values if they were properly informed are a significant problem in the absence of proper travel management planning. 

In addition to proper travel management planning and public information, there 

is a need for adequate enforcement. While most users would, out of respect for the 

land, observe posted rules for travel use, some users need a more direct incentive. 

Unless adequate enforcement can be applied, travel management planning and public information will not solve the problem. 

Having stated the above, there remains some concern relative to the wording of 

the Act. Those concerns and recommendations for resolution are discussed below. 

RE: page 8, lines 10-14 

SEC 4, (b) (3) (C) leaves an impression that it is necessary to fence livestock out of wilderness areas to ‘‘protect’’ wilderness values. However, the 
37 

areas in question have been grazed for well over 100 years and wilderness 

values remain in tact. Thus, exclusion of livestock does not equate to protection of wilderness values. The intent was that exclusion of livestock from 

areas of certain wilderness designation could ‘‘enhance’’ a wilderness experience simply by avoidance of visitor encounters with livestock. It is my opinion and that of the Owyhee Cattlemen’s Association that the terminology 

should be changed as indicated below. 

(C) FENCING.—The Secretary may construct and maintain fencing 

around wilderness areas designated by this Act as the Secretary determines 

to be appropriate to (strike) protect (insert) enhance wilderness values. 

RE: Page 8, lines 23-24 and Page 9, lines 1 & 2. 

The provision for the Donation of grazing permits or leases contains an inadvertent contradiction as to the treatment of the lands covered by a permit or lease. 

The termination language indicates that the donation of a permit of lease in its entirety would result in permanent closure of the land covered by the permit or lease. 

This language does not recognize that the land covered by the donated permit or 

lease may also be covered by another permit or lease that will remain in use (Common use Allotment). The language needed to rectify this issue is presented below. 

(ii) TERMINATION.—The Secretary shall terminate any grazing permit 

or lease acquired under clause (i) to ensure a permanent end to (strike) 

grazing on (insert) grazing use authorized by the permit or lease on the land 

covered by the permit or lease. ** 

RE: Page 9, lines 15-22. 

The following recommendation is to assure consistent terminology and avoid potential issues in regard to interpretation of inconsistent terminology. 

(II) AUTHORIZED LEVEL.—To ensure that there is a permanent reduction in the (insert) authorized level of grazing on the land covered by a permit or lease donated under subclause (I), the Secretary shall not allow grazing use to exceed the authorized level established under that subclause. 

RE: Page 9, lines 23-24 and Page 10, lines 1-5. 

This section of the legislation provides for the acquisition of private land within 

the boundary of the wilderness areas designated by the Act. However, some of the 

private land offered for acquisition or exchange is not within the wilderness boundaries. In addition the language needs to provide a higher level of certainty that the 

Secretary will, at the least, offer to acquire land or interests in land (offered lands 

are depicted on appropriate maps) by purchase, exchange or donation. The certainty 

is needed in order for ranchers to adequately plan for reorganization of their ranch 

operations relative to expected changes in resource inputs. Ranch management decisions often have implication for future demands on capitol, labor and resources over 

the next 18 months or more. Uncertainty as to the availability of future capitol, 

labor and resources significantly disrupts if not precludes effective ranch planning 

and management. 

The Owyhee Cattlemen’s Association believes that there are three elements needed in language in order to adequately address the issue of land acquisition. First, 

the legislation needs to recognize all of the land that has been offered for potential 

acquisition both within and outside of proposed wilderness. Second, the legislation 

needs to provide a greater level of certainty that Secretary will, at the least, offer 

to proceed with acquisition of the identified private lands. Third, there needs to be 

and increased level of certainty that the offer and completion of land acquisition will 

occur in a timely manner. To this end, the following language is offered as a guide 

to arriving at a workable and effective solution. 

Strike the language at page 10, lines 1-5 and insert the following: 

(A) IN GENERAL.—Consistent with applicable law, the Secretary is authorized and directed to offer to acquire land or interests in land as depicted on the map (insert appropriate reference) by purchase, donation, or 

exchange. 

Insert the following at page 10 after subparagraph (B). 

(C) TIMING OF ACQUISITIONS—It is the intent of Congress that the 

land purchase or exchange directed by this section be completed not later 

than one year after the date of enactment of this Act. 
38 

RE: page 22, line 2. 

This line refers to maps in section 4(a)(2) that show land identified as ‘‘proposed 

for acquisition’’. However, it appears that the cited section only refers to maps showing the boundaries of wilderness areas established under this act. This line needs 

to be amended with the appropriate map reference. Based on the recommendation 

above the reference should be (Section 4 (b) (4) (A). 

The Owyhee Cattlemen’s Association again thanks the Committee for this opportunity and would like to express their great appreciation and sincere thanks for the 

enormous support of this effort by Senator Mike Crapo and his staff. The OCA is 

also greatly appreciative of the willingness of the Committee staff to work toward 

a positive outcome of this effort. 

Senator WYDEN. We thank you and thank you for your good 

work. 

Mr. Gehrke, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF CRAIG GEHRKE, REGIONAL DIRECTOR, THE 

WILDERNESS SOCIETY, BOISE, ID 

Mr. GEHRKE. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, 

thank you. My name is Craig Gehrke. I’m the Regional Director of 

the Idaho Office of The Wilderness Society. 

The Wilderness Society appreciates this opportunity to testify in 

support of passage of S. 2833, the Owyhee Public Lands Management Act of 2008. We are committed to working with Congress to 

ensure that the legislation is true to the intent of the Owyhee Initiative Agreement, an agreement to which The Wilderness Society 

was a participant and was developed in Idaho between conservationists, ranchers, Owyhee County elected officials, the Shoshone 

Paiute tribe and others. The Wilderness Society deeply appreciates 

the work done over the last several months by the majority and the 

minority staff of the subcommittee, Senator Crapo’s staff and Senator Craig’s staff on S. 2833. That work has produced legislation 

that reflects very important goals and objectives of the Owyhee Initiative Work Group. 

S. 2833 reflects the attempt by the Owyhee Initiative Work 

Group to provide protection for outstanding wild areas in Owyhee 

County while considering the lives with those who live and work 

there. Through wilderness and wild and scenic river designation, S. 

2833 provides permanent protection for some of the wildest, most 

diverse landscapes in Southwest Idaho ranging from river canyons 

that are over 1,000 feet deep to vast expanses of sage brush and 

grassland plateaus that provide habitat for the sage grouse, 

pronghorn antelope, big horn sheep, song birds, raptors and numerous rare plant species. The river canyons in Owyhee County have 

been called the largest concentration of sheer-walled volcanic rhyolite and basalt canyons in the Western United States. 

White water river enthusiasts come from around the country to 

challenge these rapids on these rivers. This high desert sage brush 

and canyon country not included in existing wilderness areas in 

Idaho and is generally under represented in the National Wilderness Preservation System. All the areas proposed for wilderness in 

S. 2833 represent valuable additions to the National Wilderness 

Preservation System. It’s great to see this picture up here. We look 

forward to see that it will be a great benefit in the State of Idaho 

when the Owyhee Canyon lands joins the ranks of Saw tooth and 

Hell’s Canyon and other special areas in Idaho that receive permanent protection. 
39 

The wilderness designation closes over 200 miles of vehicle 

carved routes through these wild areas and that represents one of 

the biggest threats to the wild places in Owyhee County. It allows 

for the permanent retirement of voluntary livestock grazing upon 

voluntary donation of the permits and acquisition of private lands 

within and adjacent to the wilderness areas. 

S. 2833 directs the BLM to develop and implement transportation plans for the public lands outside the proposed wilderness 

areas. Completion of these plans will lead to better resource protection from damage resulting from cross country motorized recreation 

in Owyhee County. 

S. 2833 establishes the Owyhee Science Review and Conservation 

Center in Owyhee County to conduct research projects to address 

natural resource management issues that effect public and private 

range lands in the county. The Wilderness Society supports the establishment of the Owyhee Science Review and the Conservation 

Center. We support the collection and analysis of the most up to 

date information and research regarding resource management and 

the sharing and distribution of that information among all the interested parties. 

S. 2833 gives greater protection of the Shoshone Paiute Cultural 

sites and resources in what’s been called one of Idaho’s richest archeological areas. The legislation directs the BLM to coordinate 

with the Shoshone Paiute tribe implementation of the Shoshone 

Paiute Cultural Resource Protection Plan. Implementation of this 

plan is needed to help protect the cultural resources of Owyhee 

County from chronic theft and vandalism. 

In summary, The Wilderness Society has been proud to participate in the Owyhee Initiative and is pleased to be here today to 

urge the passage of S. 2833. We want to reaffirm The Wilderness 

Society’s commitment to the Owyhee Initiative and is seeing 

through implementation of the entire agreement including the provisions that are outside the scope of this legislation. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gehrke follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CRAIG GEHRKE, REGIONAL DIRECTOR, THE WILDERNESS

SOCIETY, BOISE, ID, ON S. 2833 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify and state The Wilderness Society’s (TWS) 

support for passage of S. 2833, the Owyhee Public Lands Management Act of 2008. 

We are committed to working with Congress to ensure that the legislation is true 

to the intent of the Owyhee Initiative Agreement, a unique agreement developed in 

Idaho between conservationists, ranchers, Owyhee County elected officials, members 

of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribe, and others. TWS is also committed to working with 

Congress to ensure that the legislation is in the best interest of our public lands. 

S. 2833 provides lasting protection for critical ecological, scenic, recreation and wild 

areas that are threatened from development and degradation. 

TWS deeply appreciates the work done over the past several months by majority 

and minority subcommittee staff, Senator Crapo’s staff, and Senator Craig’s staff on 

S. 2833. That work has produced legislation that reflects important goals and objectives of the Owyhee Initiative Work Group. The Owyhee Initiative Work Group was 

initially comprised of the Owyhee Cattle Association, Owyhee County, Bruneau Soil 

Conservation District, Idaho Outfitters and Guides Association, the Owyhee Borderlands Trust, The Nature Conservancy, The Wilderness Society, People for the 

Owyhees, and the Idaho Conservation League. The Sierra Club was later added to 

the Work Group. The BLM, Idaho Department of Lands, and the U.S. Air Force participated as ex officio members of the Owyhee Initiative. After public hearings in 

Owyhee County urged expansion of the Work Group, it was expanded to include 

Idaho Rivers United, the Owyhee County Farm Bureau, Foundation for North 

American Wild Sheep, and the South Idaho Desert Racing Association. 
40 

There are genuine and significant conservation gains achieved through S. 2833. 

Wilderness and Wild and Scenic River designation, preparation of travel management plans that will lead to better resource protection from damage resulting from 

cross-country motorized recreation in Owyhee County, closure of 200 miles of motorized routes through proposed wilderness, establishment of a conservation research 

center, increased protections of Shoshone-Paiute cultural sites and resources, and 

acquisition of private land inholdings in candidate wilderness areas and public 

rights of way across private land all create a total package that TWS supports. 

WILDERNESS

The bill designates 517,000 acres of BLM wilderness. The landscape within the 

wilderness proposal is diverse, ranging from river canyons over a thousand feet deep 

to vast expanses of sagebrush and grassland plateaus that provide habitat for sage 

grouse, pronghorn antelope, bighorn sheep, songbirds, raptors, and numerous rare 

plant species. More than 230,000 acres of lands proposed for wilderness are upland 

plateaus and 224,000 acres are classified as low or moderate hills. This high desert, 

sagebrush steppe habitat is not included in existing designated wilderness in Idaho 

and is generally underrepresented in the National Wilderness Preservation System. 

All of the areas proposed for wilderness in S. 2833 represent valuable additions to 

the National Wilderness Preservation System. 

The river canyons in Owyhee County have been called the largest concentration 

of sheer-walled volcanic rhyolite and basalt canyons in the western United States. 

Many of the canyons are more than 1,000 feet deep, nearly twice as deep as the 

Washington Monument is tall. River enthusiasts come from around the country to 

challenge the famous white water rapids of these rivers. 

The greatest threat to wildlands in Owyhee County is escalating motorized recreation. While WSAs are intended to be managed to protect their wilderness character, WSA status has done little to limit motorized use as the BLM has not regulated or closed WSAs to motorized recreation. Consequently, WSAs in the OwyheeBruneau Canyonland region have hundreds of miles of illegal motorized routes 

carved within their boundaries. Wilderness designation will close these areas to motorized abuse. 

Lands not designated as wilderness will be released and no longer managed to 

protect their wilderness characteristics, but may be eligible for future wilderness 

consideration at a later date. 

There are specific WSAs that TWS regrets will not be designated as wilderness, 

specifically West Fork Red Canyon and Sheep Creek West. West Fork Red Canyon 

is a rugged river canyon that supports redband trout populations and would be a 

logical expansion of the Owyhee River proposed wilderness. Sheep Creek West WSA 

was recommended for wilderness by the BLM. Conservationists and ranchers could 

not reach agreement on these two areas. While these two areas would have made 

fine additions to the National Wilderness Preservation System, we acknowledge that 

very nature of collaboration is compromise. 

ADMINISTRATION OF WILDERNESS

The legislation directs the BLM to conduct an inventory of existing grazing management facilities and activities in wilderness. Grazing will be allowed to continue 

subject to the congressional grazing guidelines and wilderness wildlife management 

will be subject to congressional wildlife management guidelines. 

The bill contains standard language for wildlife management and helicopter use 

and military overflights. In Owyhee County, Idaho Fish and Game have used helicopters to transplant and re-establish populations of California bighorn sheep, and 

subsequently used helicopters to monitor population trends of bighorn sheep. We expect this kind of helicopter use will be allowed to continue so long as BLM determines, via required analysis, that such use meets the ‘‘minimum management tool’’ 

concept of wilderness management. 

The Act provides for the continuation of outfitting and guiding in wilderness consistent with section 4(d)(5) of the Wilderness Act to the extent necessary for realizing the recreational or other wilderness purposes of the areas. 

OWYHEE SCIENCE REVIEW AND CONSERVATION CENTER

S. 2833 directs that the BLM coordinate with the State of Idaho, Owyhee County, 

and the Shoshone-Paiute Tribe and consult with the University of Idaho, federal 

grazing permittees, the public and federal and state agencies to establish the 

Owyhee Science Review and Conservation Center in Owyhee County to conduct research projects to address natural resources management issues affecting public and 

private rangelands in Owyhee County. The legislation states that the purpose of the 
41 

Center is to facilitate the collection and analysis of information to provide federal 

and state agencies, private landowners and the public with information to allow for 

improved rangeland management. 

TWS supports the establishment of the Owyhee Science Review and Conservation 

Center. TWS supports the collection and analysis of the most up to date information 

and research regarding resource management, and the sharing and distribution of 

that information among all interested parties. 

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS

S. 2833 designates 316 miles of Wild and Scenic Rivers in Owyhee County. These 

rivers are some of the most spectacular whitewater rivers in the lower 48 states. 

The boundaries for these rivers shall be 1⁄4 mile from the high water mark on both 

sides of the river or the nearest confined canyon rim, whichever is shorter. 

WATER RIGHTS

In 2000 the Idaho Supreme Court ruled that wilderness areas do not carry a federal reserved water right, thus S. 2833 expressly denies a federal reserved water 

right for wilderness areas designated by this act. However, each candidate wilderness area contains a proposed Wild and Scenic River through which, under terms 

of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and Idaho law, will carry with it a federal reserved water right. Those Wild and Scenic River water rights will be quantified and 

adjudicated after designation in compliance with state and federal laws and with 

input from federal agencies, the state and other interested parties through Idaho’s 

Snake River Basin Adjudication Court. 

LAND EXCHANGES AND ACQUISITIONS AND GRAZING PREFERENCES

The legislation authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to permanently retire voluntarily relinquished grazing permits. Grazing permittees have indicated their interest in permanently retiring 18,000 animal unit months (AUMS) from public grazing in wilderness, resulting in 55,000 acres of cattle free wilderness and 260,000 

acres of reduced grazing. 

The bill authorizes the sale of public lands within the Boise District of the BLM 

that have been identified for disposal through resource management plans, with 

proceeds from the sale of such lands deposited in a special ‘‘Owyhee Land Exchange 

Acquisition Account.’’ Funds from this account can be used to purchase lands or interests therein within or adjacent to the wilderness areas designated by this Act and 

identified in a map dated March 25, 2008 prepared by BLM for Senator Crapo. The 

account will terminate after 10 years or upon the expenditure of $8 million, whichever comes first. TWS supports the creation of this account as a unique way to acquire the private lands scattered within or near the wilderness areas in Owyhee 

County. 

Landowners with wilderness-quality inholdings within the proposed wilderness 

areas would have the opportunity to sell or exchange their land for equal value federal lands. All land exchanges will be conducted in accordance with standard federal 

procedures. TWS believes the exchanges will likely result in a positive gain for the 

public. The lands that we understand would move into the federal estate have extremely high ecological and wilderness values whereas the lands that would move 

out of the federal estate and into private hands have significantly lower ecological 

value and no wilderness value. 

The public will benefit from anticipated exchanges because inholdings in proposed 

wilderness would be removed. Acquisition of the proposed private inholdings will 

prevent future conflicts regarding landowner access and development issues, as well 

as acquire for public ownership lands that are of key ecological importance, like riparian areas and bighorn sheep habitat. Additionally, some of the private inholdings 

that we understand would be acquired are in excellent vegetative condition, and the 

acquisition of such lands into public ownership is a positive step forward. We are 

also strongly supportive of the acquisition of public rights-of-way across private 

lands, facilitating public access to thousands of acres of public land where access 

has been blocked by ‘‘no trespassing’’ signs and locked gates. The proposed permanent retirement of livestock grazing within some specific wilderness areas broadens 

the diversity of ecologically significant areas in Owyhee County that are livestock 

free. These are all positive actions that will benefit the public and our public lands. 

TRANSPORTATION AND RECREATION MANAGEMENT

The primary threat to Owyhee wildlands is the dramatic increase in illegal and 

inappropriate off-road vehicle use. To date, BLM has not completed a comprehensive 
42 

travel plan for the Owyhee area and conservationists, ranchers and responsible 

ORV-users support the need for a timely plan. The Act directs BLM to develop and 

implement transportation plans for public lands outside the proposed wilderness 

areas. The plans are to establish a system of designated roads and trails and limit 

motorized and mechanized vehicles to designated routes. Until the date that the 

BLM completes the transportation plans, all recreational motorized and mechanized 

vehicle use shall be limited to roads and trails lawfully in existence before the date 

of enactment of the Act, i.e. cross-country travel is prohibited. The BLM is to complete a travel plan for the Owyhee Front not later than one year after passage of 

the act and not later than 3 years for the rest of Owyhee County. 

It is important that the BLM make real progress towards completing these travel 

plans, as the past several years have demonstrated that cross-country off-road vehicle use continues to grow every year in Owyhee County. Delay of this legislation 

means that the unauthorized network of user-created off-road vehicle trails will continue to grow resulting in escalating user conflicts and extensive resource damage. 

CULTURAL RESOURCES

The canyonlands and sagebrush plateaus of Owyhee County contain the richest 

concentration of archaeological sites in Idaho. The ancestors of the Shoshone and 

Northern Paiute have lived, hunted, and worshipped throughout Owyhee County 

and the Snake River Plain for thousands of years. The Camas and Pole Creek Archaeological District alone incorporates over 500 sites of archaeological significance. 

The legislation directs the BLM to coordinate with the Shoshone-Paiute Tribe in the 

implementation of the Shoshone Paiute Cultural Resource Protection Plan and to 

enter into agreements with the Tribe to implement the Plan. Implementation of this 

plan is needed to help protect the cultural resources of Owyhee County from theft 

and vandalism. 

CONCLUSION

The Owyhee Public Lands Management Act will achieve the following: 

• Designation of 517,000 acres of wilderness; 

• Designation of 315 miles of Wild and Scenic Rivers; 

• Closure of 200 miles of motorized routes in candidate wilderness areas and completion of a travel planning process to establish a designated system of motorized routes for all public lands in Owyhee County; 

• Increased protections for Shoshone-Paiute cultural sites and resources. 

These are all tremendous and much needed conservation gains. We look forward 

to continuing to work with you in furtherance of a successful outcome. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Gehrke. I’m going to 

let most of the time go to my colleagues here because of the interest in their home States. Just one question for you, Dr. Gibson because the Oregon cattlemen work so closely with the cattlemen in 

Idaho, Bob Skinner probably wouldn’t let me get away without asking this. 

But what is your sense from a cattlemen’s perspective? What’s 

the key issue in the Owyhee legislation? 

Mr. GIBSON. The key issue on a broad scale is the implementation of the Science Review Program that deals with basically the 

four aspects is the information that’s being used correct, was it collected correctly, was it interpreted correctly and is its application 

reasonable and that really affects virtually every cattleman in the 

county and that would be a major issue with the entire county. 

Senator WYDEN. I know you have been reaching out across the 

spectrum to various organizations and I think that’s why Mr. 

Gehrke gives a lot of bouquets to all concerned for their work and 

I commend you for it. Let’s go to my colleagues now for their questions. 

Senator Craig. 

Senator CRAIG. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. First of all 

my fond regard and respect for Dr. Gibson, but he is operated in 
43 

a state of not full disclosure. He forgot for the record to tell you, 

Mr. Chairman, that he and I were once in 4–H together and that 

his mother was our 4–H leader. For Bob Bennett we showed calves 

at the Washington County Fair. Now that’s full disclosure. 

Anyway, it’s been my privilege to work with Chad and the 

Owyhee County Cattlemen over the years and his representation 

of them has been a great asset to them. Dr. Gibson with no guarantee that the private sector can provide the money to carry out 

this bill, does the Working Group still support the Owyhee Initiative without total funding? 

Mr. GIBSON. I can’t speak for the total Working Group because 

we’ve done everything by consensus from day one. We’d have to address that the same way. In the absence of a guarantee it would 

deal with, probably the, some of the members of the Working 

Group more so then the Working Group as a whole. 

I don’t know what, you know, without a guarantee but a promise 

of some sort it would be a matter of each of those members of the 

Work Group making up their own mind as to how they want to go 

forward. 

Senator CRAIG. I don’t question the good faith that any one 

stakeholder group or individual has brought to the table, but I 

have continually expressed this concern that everybody crosses the 

line at nearly the same time, or there’s a clear ability that all parties remain as whole after the fact as they have come to agree before the fact. I still struggle with that some and that’s probably a 

question that in many respects legislatively cannot be asked or answered. But I don’t question the commitment that has been verbally expressed by all parties. So thank you for that. 

Craig, let me ask you a couple of questions that I think are extremely important to me and I think to the State of Idaho and certainly to Owyhee County. You’re sitting where Secretary Bruce 

Babbitt sat a good many years ago in the later days of the Clinton 

Administration. He was alluding to a series of executive orders that 

was going to permeate the Administration in its latter days that 

many of us were very frustrated by because while we were working 

the process of trying to gain some recognition and designation of 

certain public resources, the Congress was working its will. 

As a result of that, an executive order was produced that included Escalante Grand Staircase National Monument. I’m sure 

you remember that. Craters of the Moon in Idaho. There was parcels of land in Arizona and in Southwest Oregon and in California. 

All of them, in that instance, designated as monuments. 

Other Presidents, both democrat and republican in the moment 

of full disclosure, have used the executive order as a tool, some in 

much larger ways. A former Secretary Andress under the Carter 

Administration designated millions of acres of park land in Alaska 

and was hung in effigy in the streets of Anchorage, but to no avail. 

The land was secured. The land was designated and many of the 

citizens of Alaska were very frustrated. 

We’re in the midst of a Presidential campaign, so I want to fast 

forward a bit. I’m assuming, and it certainly will, be my effort to 

make this bill, and Mike Crapo’s effort, as successful as possible. 

But I’m not at all confident based on the effort of this Congress 

that we’ll get much done this year. 
44 

If we were not able to pass and bring into law an amended or 

at least a final version of the Owyhee Initiative and if Hillary Clinton or a Barack Obama became President of the United States, policy attitudes would change. Players would change. Approaches toward public land resource allocation and management would 

change with that. 

If that were to happen, and this is a hypothetical question and 

they are always the most difficult to answer, but you’ve been at the 

table. You’ve been a very good, oftentimes challenging, necessarily 

so, demanding stakeholder. If that were to change and you had access to a democrat administration, would you go to them, look them 

squarely in the eye and say, it’s a done deal? All of the stakeholders are at the table. We’ve struck an agreement and if you’re 

going to do this by executive order, I recommend you encourage 

passage of the legislation or you, by order, create the Owyhee Initiative as it has been written. 

Could you respond to that? 

Mr. GEHRKE. I think responding to that, Senator Craig, I’d be 

glad to because from my standpoint I think wilderness and wild 

and scenic designation by Congress is the best protection for this 

country that we’re talking about. I think that the group behind 

this, the Owyhee Initiative Work Group, the local buy in, is something like I’ve never seen before in all the years I’ve been doing 

this. I don’t want to jeopardize that. I don’t want to walk away 

from that. 

We’ve been kidding ourselves for a long time that the Owyhee 

Initiative just doesn’t die regardless of how many times it’s been 

hit between the eyes by something. We’re sticking with it as long 

as Senator Crapo will stick with it, as long the Work Group sticks 

together, we’re committed to wilderness designation, to this package that we’ve put together all these years. So I have no intention 

of going to a different Administration and saying ok, the rules have 

changed now. We’re sticking to this as long as it has traction in the 

Congress, as long as there’s traction with Senator Crapo and the 

Work Group stays together and works with The Wilderness Society 

to get this through. 

Senator CRAIG. Thank you. Dutifully recorded in the committee 

record. Thank you. 

Bill, you ask an interesting question, or you drew some frustration over receipts from public lands and how they were used in the 

case of the Washington County effort. Let me just philosophize for 

a moment with you because I know you don’t totally disagree, but 

you’ve been flexible over time in the Owyhee Initiative shows that 

with Craig’s effort and other’s effort. The low hanging fruit of wilderness from its inception in ’63 forward is in large part been accomplished. 

We have marvelous tracts of land designated as wilderness. 

Those that are most difficult to designate today are in large part 

associated near and or around metro areas. They are sometimes 

tied into unique and important economic entities, like the ranching 

in Owyhee County. It is not breaking with historic tradition to take 

public resource that can ultimately benefit local economy. 

I believe that concept started with Gifford Pinchot in the early 

1900s when he counseled Teddy Roosevelt and they created the 
45 

Forest Preserves. His term went something like this, we cannot 

separate the communities of interest from its land. Now the communities of interest at that time were not The Wilderness Society, 

they were communities of people that lived adjoining the public 

lands. They weren’t eastern groups reflecting on western land. 

They were western enclaves of citizens who were deriving their economic interest from the public land. 

Today where that happens, and in some instance where the public interest and the economic interest come together, but one is 

clearly reshaped by the other. I don’t believe, and I would hope, I 

or others could convince the Congress that the sale of public resource in a changed environment can benefit the local economy, not 

just by the change of use in the public lands. But oftentimes, by 

the very economic entities that it is changing by its designation in 

this case in Owyhee County, cattlemen in traditional ranching. 

What it will do in Washington County in Southern Utah is 

change and allow the County Commissioners and citizens there to 

recognize maybe slightly different economic viabilities or assets 

that they can employ in the affected utilization of this new designation. So it is not precedenting, precedent. It has been historically 

true. It should remain that in these unique interests. 

I think just the raw sell off of land for the good of the treasury 

is a different story. So that’s my two bits today. I think it’s historically accurate. I would hope that in these instances, where all parties have come to the table and values can be adjusted and both 

parties can benefit, there is a clear recognition of transferring public values to private and economic values when both sides agree. 

Do you wish to respond to that? 

Mr. MEADOWS. I have probably three responses. First of all I 

would challenge that the work we’re doing in Washington County 

is designed to get the low hanging wilderness fruit. We’ve been recognizing Utah for a long time. 

Senator CRAIG. I don’t think it exists anymore. 

Mr. MEADOWS. It’s, you know, BLM wilderness quality lands 

have been hard to designate in the State of Utah. I think this is 

a real breakthrough on that point. The larger question. There is existing law that allows for the sale of public land. In many cases the 

Bureau of Land Management lands are the lands that are sort of 

left over. 

I mean there are lots of high quality economic and land conservation lands included there but it’s almost by accident of history rather than by design. We think for a variety of reasons, conservation 

interests, economic interests, management interests, there is a 

need to be flexible in the disposal of land and in the sale and purchase of land. We fully support that. 

But there is law that allows that to occur to the benefit of local 

communities, we think, and to the benefit of the Federal estate. 

When one changes the law to allow for 10 percent of the sale value 

to actually go back into the county for operational purposes, we 

think that it is outside the norm. We believe strongly in asset value 

should be transferred to asset value and so rather than asset value 

to operational value. 

The County will benefit greatly from the disposal of up to 9,000 

acres of BLM lands that are adjacent to the communities. This is 
46 

going to add dollars to the tax rolls. It allows for a planned growth 

strategy. We think that is a benefit, a great benefit to the community and one that we fully support, but when you add to that the 

actual distribution of cash to a local county government or to a 

water district or some other non-Federal asset base, we think that’s 

a wrong approach to take. 

Senator CRAIG. Mr. Chairman, I’ve taken too much time. Thank 

you. I appreciate that observation. I think there is a strong argument and you helped shape it a bit. Capital to capital asset verses 

capital to O and M. I think that becomes a reasonable question 

that has to be asked and should be asked. But if it makes the deal 

then maybe it’s worth looking at. Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. Ok. Thank you, Senator Craig. 

Senator Crapo. 

Senator CRAPO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I know 

that we’re pushed for time here and I’ve been so involved with this 

that all my questions have been answered. I know enough. 

But I would like to just make one other quick statement. As we 

see two strong representatives of the Work Group for the Owyhee 

Initiative here in front of us, as I look out over the audience I see 

many other members of the Work Group who’ve been working with 

us this last 6 or 7 years. It’s just rewarding to me to see that kind 

of commitment for them to come here even though they were not 

witnesses to be a part of this. 

Also to have the President of The Wilderness Society here, we’ve 

got to take this opportunity and thank him for letting us have 

Craig Gehrke and all the time that’s Craig’s put into this and the 

commitment of The Wilderness Society to work with us on this. I 

just want to, as I look out over the audience I just did not want 

to let my opportunity slide by before to commend all those who 

were not able to get to the witness table but who came all the way 

out here from Idaho to support this. Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. Well said. 

Senator Bennett. 

Senator BENNETT. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I too, 

think most of my questions have been answered. I want to publicly 

thank Bill Meadows for his leadership and his cooperation as we 

work through this. I understand that it’s perhaps been difficult for 

him as it has been difficult for Commissioner Eardley to come to 

this. They’ve both been stretched about as tautly as they possibly 

can be to come to something they can both endorse and I appreciate that. 

Just to be sure I don’t misunderstand, Bill, recognize that you 

have concerns about the allocation of the funds. You do support the 

Wilderness and National Conservation Area designations that are 

in the bill today? 

Mr. MEADOWS. Senator, as we have discussed, I believe The Wilderness Society believes that we’re going to have significant, lasting protection in the designation of these wilderness areas and national conservation areas. I have to add that I have many colleagues with whom I work on a daily basis and you have colleagues 

in the Senate who I know are going to continue a conversation 

about boundaries and cherry stems and perhaps other units that 

want to be added. I think The Wilderness Society looks at this in 
47 

much the same way we were talking about with Senator Craig just 

a minute ago. 

There are conservation values that we believe are important to 

protect. We recognize and honor the economic, cultural and social 

values that are also needed to be protected. Working in communities is really important to us and our ability to be a strong voice. 

We think The Wilderness Society’s role here is to be a strong voice 

for conservation, acknowledging that there are lots of other voices, 

we’re going to proclaim our support for wilderness and national 

conservation here. 

I think what you have done in bringing those social, cultural, 

economic and conservation values together to be applauded and 

The Wilderness Society is pleased to support the wilderness and 

national conservation areas that you’ve recommended. We think 

that’s good work. 

Senator BENNETT. Thank you. Commissioner Eardley, you’ve 

been stretched as well. You’ve stated your support for this bill with 

that stretching occurring. Can you explain perhaps some of the 

compromises you feel that you’ve had to make here? 

Mr. EARDLEY. Thank you, Senator. We feel that, you know, we 

feel that we’ve done most of the compromising. We look out to the 

west of us in Nevada. We look at Clark County and we look at Lincoln County and we see that, you know, 70,000 acres in Clark 

County was privatized or designated to be privatized. 90,000 acres 

in Lincoln County. We wonder why frankly, we wonder why that 

didn’t work in Washington County where we’re going to end up 

after three tiers of sales about 9,000 acres. 

However, that’s, you know, that’s definitely progress and we’re 

very supportive of that process and it will benefit, I think, Washington County. So therein has been a lot of compromise. We’ve gone 

from our expectation and maybe somewhere between 90 and 70,000 

acres down to 20,000 acres that we were approximately a year ago 

and now at 9,000 acres, 5,000 acres to become in the third tier. 

Just a comment, if I might, make one about Mr. Meadows assuming that there’s going to be a lot of prosperity as the result of 

the sales of land that will be on our tax rolls, property tax. Obviously he’s never tried to manage anything on revenues from property tax. No one’s ever got wealthy doing that. That’s a very difficult thing to do. 

Again, we want to apply these revenues to where it is to the land 

that’s been affected by the change. We think they’re noble and worthy causes that we would direct those funds to. 

Senator BENNETT. Would one of those causes be a law enforcement dealing with off-highway vehicles? 

Mr. EARDLEY. Yes, that’s part of our conservation perspective as 

well, Senator. You know, agriculture, ranching, reserving open 

spaces, those kinds of things that we simply would not have the 

funds to accomplish without a source of revenue. It certainly would 

not come from property tax. 

Senator BENNETT. I see. Thank you. Just picking up on what 

Commissioner Eardley commented, Mr. Chairman, I would point 

out that the process of land sales and the allocation of money has 

been taken absolutely from the Nevada bills. That is, we have seen 

what the Congress has done in Nevada, in four different counties 
48 

in every instance providing for money to be allocated in this same 

formula. We did not want to go beyond the Nevada precedent. 

We did not want to create something new, recognizing as Bill 

Meadows has made clear that even the Nevada precedent remains 

controversial. Some people oppose it, but as Commissioner Eardley 

said we look over the boundary at our neighboring State and see 

that it has been done there and it has been done successfully there. 

So that is the genesis of the procedure that we have written into 

this bill. 

Now I have no further questions. Again, I thank both the County 

Commission as represented by Mr. Eardley and The Wilderness Society as represented by Mr. Meadows for the constructive cooperation, occasionally with a few raised voices and a tight lips as we’ve 

talked through some of these things. But it has been a gratifying 

experience to see everybody work together to say let’s do the best 

thing for the land and let’s do the best thing for the community. 

That’s reflected in the title of the legislation as it is for both conservation and growth. I thank you for holding the hearing, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Senator Bennett and commend you 

for all of your good work. 

I think I’ll wrap up very briefly by saying that if you really think 

about the best of Earth Day and what it was supposed to always 

be about and what Gaylord Nelson envisioned. It’s about what 

we’re trying to do today. 

It’s about trying to bring people together, environmental folks, 

ranchers, cattlemen, business people, local government and trying 

to find common ground. I want to commend all of you for the way 

that you’re approaching this. I think Senator Bennett said something early on that all of us would identify with that when you go 

into these discussions about public lands it’s ultimately about good 

faith. It’s about actually being at the table and trying to get it done 

and trying to come up with a result that satisfies all concerned. I 

can tell you in this room I see an awful lot of good faith and a desire to come together and get these matters resolved. 

Toward that end, what we’re going to do and I spoke with Chairman Bingaman about this and I know Senator Domenici, our ranking minority member, feels this way as well. We’re going to direct 

our bipartisan staff to work very closely with all of you, to work 

with the Administration to see if we can get these matters resolved. We will have to tackle a number of additional issues and 

we’re going to do it with the kind of good faith that Senator Bennett has talked about. 

So thank you for coming and approaching, particularly Earth 

Day, with exactly the kind of spirit that I think the founders had 

in mind. With that the subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:09 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.] 
(49) 

APPENDIXES 

APPENDIX I 

Responses to Additional Questions 

RESPONSES OF JOEL HOLTROP TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR BARRASSO

S. 934/H.R. 1374

Question 1. Mr. Holtrop, could you elaborate on this parcel of land and what exactly warrants this exchange? 

Answer. Tract W-1979 in Leon County, Florida is a tract that has evolved into 

an unmanageable, problem area for the Apalachicola National Forest. It is fragmented from the Forest with a major highway (Capital Circle) to the north and private large-scale developments to the east and west, which include a grocery store, 

strip mall, and a 300+ unit apartment complex. The southern boundary is a 100- 

foot wide power line easement. Due to the property’s configuration, along with the 

surrounding developments and highway, there are public health and safety risks associated with management of this area through prescribed fire and other activities. 

Unmanaged recreation and illegal activity have become prevalent on this tract as 

well. These issues will compound over the next 3 years as Capital Circle is widened 

to a 6-lane highway and the adjoining developments continue to expand. For these 

reasons, the Forest Service supports disposition of this property to acquire private 

tracts within the Apalachicola National Forest better suited for public use and management. The disposition of Tract W-1979 through S. 934 would reduce boundary 

management costs and would allow for the purchase of priority endangered species 

habitat, critical wetlands, and potential recreation areas for the public. 

Question 2. If this land has been on the Forest’s surplus list for 10 years why 

hasn’t the forest carried out an administrative exchange? 

Answer. Leon County has expressed strong interest in Tract W-1979. An administrative exchange was discussed several years ago with the County. The County, 

however, does not presently own any land suitable for exchange. As a result, the 

County would be required to purchase and hold title to private land of equal value 

in advance of consummating an exchange with the Forest Service. Referred to as 

an Assembled Land Exchange, these often take many years to complete and there 

is a risk the proponent may end up owning unwanted property if the exchange is 

never finalized. For this reason, an administrative exchange with the County has 

not been pursued. 

Question 3. If the agency is unwilling to complete these exchanges administratively, why should Congress give the agency the proceeds when these lands are sold 

or exchanged? 

Answer. As mentioned in response to Question 2, Leon County does not presently 

own any land that would be suitable for administrative exchange. Under the Florida 

National Forest Land Management Act of 2003, the Forest Service is authorized to 

sell seventeen isolated tracts of land in Florida and can use the proceeds from land 

sales to purchase inholdings around the National Forest or cover administrative expenses. The proposed legislation would expand that authority by adding Tract W1979 and would also allow the Forest Service to use the proceeds from the sale of 

improved, non-greenland tracts in the 2003 Act for the acquisition, construction, and 

maintenance of a new District Office to serve the public on the Osceola National 

Forest and the Apalachicola National Forest. The Forest would subsequently realize 

a substantial deferred maintenance savings associated with the existing 50-year old 

Osceola Ranger District Office and would be relieved from an estimated $1,000,000 

future expense associated with modifications to resolve accessibility, health and 

safety, and general maintenance issues. 
50 

RESPONSES OF JULIE JACOBSON TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR BARRASSO

S. 2833

Ms. Jacobson, this bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to fence off these 

wilderness areas as ‘‘appropriate to protect wilderness values.’’ 

Question 1. How many miles of wilderness boundary will result on BLM lands if 

the Owyhee Wilderness Bill is passed? 

Answer. We estimate roughly 630 miles of the exterior wilderness boundary 

crosses BLM-managed public lands. 

Question 2. What is the current cost of building a mile of remote fencing in each 

of these following BLM Districts: Owyhee, Bruneau, and Jarbidge? 

Answer. The cost of new fence construction is dependent upon several factors, including the remoteness of the project and the type of terrain. In general, new fencing in Owyhee County would likely be in the range of $5,500 to $7,000 per mile. 

Question 3. If the BLM is not appropriated any additional funds to build these 

fences, what other areas of the BLM’s budget would have to be borrowed from to 

pay for the fencing? 

Question 1. Section 4(h)(3)(C) of S. 2833 states: 

The Secretary may construct and maintain fencing around wilderness 

areas designated by this Act as the Secretary determines to be appropriate 

to protect wilderness values. 

The legislation makes clear that the fencing is not mandatory. It is not possible 

at this time to determine how many miles of fence might be constructed or what 

source of funds might he used. 

RESPONSES OF JULIE JACOBSON TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR CRAIG

Question 4. Ms. Jacobson: One of my concerns about the language we are reviewing today lies in Section 6—Lands Identified for Disposal. It states, ‘‘proceeds from 

the sale of public land under subsection (a) SHALL he deposited in a separate account in the Treasury of the United States to be known as the ‘‘Owyhee Land Acquisition Account’’.’’ Should I be concerned that such language could redirect federal 

dollars away from the Boise Foothills project? Could you provide more clarity on this 

situation? What parcels are involved and where? What phase is this project in? 

Answer. It is my understanding that under Public Law 109-372, the Idaho Land 

Enhancement Act (commonly referred to as the Boise Foothills Act) the BLM lands 

identified for exchange are in the northern part of the state and that none of them 

are within BLM’s Boise District. Under section 6(a) of S. 2833 only lands within the 

BLM’s Boise District would be affected. Therefore there should be no conflict with 

Public Law 109-372. Furthermore, I am informed by the BLM in Idaho that the 

Boise Foothills project is slated to be completed within the next month. 
(51) 

APPENDIX II 

Additional Material Submitted for the Record 

STATEMENT OF JANINE BLAELOCH, DIRECTOR, WESTERN LANDS PROJECT, ON S. 2834 

Founded in 1997, the Western Lands Project is a non-profit, membership organization conducting research, outreach, and advocacy for reform in federal land exchange policy. We also scrutinize a broad range of projects that propose to sell, give 

away, or relinquish public control of public lands. 

We request that this testimony be made part of the record for S. 2834. 

FEDERAL LAND DISPOSAL AND COUNTY SUBSIDIES

We opposed the original version of this bill as part of a coalition of more than 

forty organizations, and we urge you not to pass the current bill. We object to the 

‘‘disposal’’ of public land by fiat, particularly where such privatization will facilitate 

the development of more subdivisions, golf courses, and water pipelines in an arid 

region. 

In Section 702, the legislation directs the sale of public lands in two ‘‘tiers.’’ While 

it is not clear in the bill, according to the bill summary on Senator Bennett’s web 

page, these lands were identified for disposal by the Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM) in its current Resource Management Plan (RMP). 

It is important to note that under the normal administrative process, lands identified as suitable for disposal in an RMP will not necessarily or inevitably be sold or 

exchanged—and even after being identified as such are subject to environmental 

analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) prior to sale. This 

legislation mandates the sale of certain lands, and it is not clear whether NEPA 

compliance would be required before the sales. But the RMP process alone cannot 

ensure that environmentally sensitive lands or lands that should be retained in public ownership are protected from ‘‘disposal’’—the more specific and detailed analysis 

for each individual sale must be conducted. 

Senator Bennett repeatedly stresses that his legislation is modeled on public land 

bills sponsored by Majority Leader Harry Reid, and some outcomes of Mr. Reid’s legislation are instructive. A case in point is an area north of Las Vegas that was identified for disposal by the BLM and mandated to be sold in Senator Reid’s Clark 

County land bill of 2002. After their sale was directed by Senator Reid, several 

thousand acres were found to host a rare plant species and important paleontological features, and their sale is now in dispute. 

Like Clark County, Nevada, Washington County, Utah is rich in cultural resources and is home to many sensitive, threatened, and endangered species—not appropriate territory for bypassing or fast-tracking environmental analysis. Land disposal should not be mandated in legislation in a wholesale manner, but left discretionary to the agency and based on the deliberative process provided in existing law. 

We also oppose the use of proceeds from the sale of public land to subsidize local 

government administration, infrastructure, and a grab-bag of uses the County may 

choose. Public lands are not a liquidity fund for local politicians and developers to 

dip into for basic services and pet projects. 

Washington County would receive 10 percent of proceeds from the sale of federal 

lands and would be authorized to use the funds for a list of purposes so broad and 

open to interpretation as to be meaningless. Again, implementation of Senator 

Reid’s Clark County bill provides a good example of how the leeway provided in categories such as ‘‘conservation purposes’’ and ‘‘public safety’’ plays out. Clark County 

projects funded by American taxpayers through federal land sales have included 

such things as a $42 million shooting range and an ‘‘urban trail’’ system that consists of city sidewalks. 

It should be noted that non-federal parties that own land in either of the proposed 

National Conservation Areas or in any other part of the county that lies within 
52 

desert tortoise critical habitat stand to receive a premium from American taxpayers 

if the government acquires their land. Former Utah Representative Jim Hansen 

slipped a special provision into a 1996 omnibus parks and public lands bill, PL 104- 

333, that effectively inflates the value of any non-federal land in the entire county 

acquired by the federal government through purchase or exchange. In language enacting the Sand Hollow Land Exchange between the BLM and the Washington 

County Water Conservancy District, Hansen inserted the following provision: 

In acquiring any lands and any interests in lands in Washington County, 

Utah, by purchase, exchange, donation or other transfers of interest, the 

Secretary of the Interior shall appraise, value, and offer to acquire such 

lands and interests without regard to the presence of a species listed as 

threatened or endangered or any proposed or actual designation of such 

property as critical habitat for a species listed as threatened or endangered 

pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973. 

Restrictions on development that result from the presence of an endangered species generally reduce the fair market value of a piece of land, so this provision gives 

an inflated value to non-federal tortoise habitat anywhere in the county. 

Some of the more extreme provisions of the original Washington County bill have 

been removed or reduced in scope, but that does not make this a reasonable bill. 

The former version contained a massive giveaway of public land to the local water 

conservancy district, while this one includes a merely large, free right-of-way on 

public land. Presuming the county and the city of St. George continue to sprawl 

across the desert, federally-subsidized pipeline projects and the like will be back in 

future legislation. 

DIXIE NATIONAL FOREST CONVEYANCE

The land sale directed in Title X does not belong in this legislation, nor any bill, 

for that matter. The landowner who would benefit by this special sale of public land 

has a trespassing use on 25 acres of national forest land next to his private holding. 

He does not qualify to purchase the land under existing laws such as the Small 

Tracts Act and thus has sought special legislation to enable him to purchase the 

land. The sale of the 25 acres—let alone the 112 acres he would be allowed to purchase through this bill—is not in the public interest. 

Our organization submitted testimony against a version of this conveyance introduced in the 107th Congress (HR 5180). At that time, the landowner wanted 560 

acres, and the site contained wet meadows and riparian habitat along a major creek. 

It’s not known whether those features are still encompassed in the proposed land 

sale, but by setting a short deadline for the sale, the legislation precludes environmental analysis and disclosure under NEPA. The proposal is an egregious example 

of doling out a public asset for the benefit of one person and should be abandoned 

once and for all. 

CONCLUSION

We urge the committee to reject S. 2834, along with any future proposals (from 

either party) that privatize federal land, subsidize irresponsible development, and 

bilk taxpayers for the benefit of a select few. 

Thank you for your consideration of this testimony. 

STATEMENT OF MARCIA ARGUST, LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, CAMPAIGN FOR

AMERICA’S WILDERNESS, ON S. 2833 

The Campaign for America’s Wilderness applauds the work of the Owyhee Initiative Work Group, Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID), and Chairman Jeff Bingaman (DNM), which led to the April 22, 2008 hearing before the Senate Energy and Natural 

Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests on the Owyhee Public Land 

Management Act of 2008 (S. 2833), sponsored by Senator Crapo. In a time of polarized congressional politics and frequent disputes over public lands in the West, this 

hearing is a positive sign of what can be done when bipartisanship, dialogue, and 

hard work are chosen over distrust, lawsuits, and stalemate. 

Senator Crapo and Senator Bingaman, Chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, worked together to shape a new bill that avoids some of the divisive policy issues and legislative pitfalls that might have thwarted Senator 

Crapo’s original bill (S.802) from moving forward. The new bill remains true to the 

needs and intentions of Sen. Crapo’s constituency: sustaining existing ranching op-
53 

erations, assisting the livelihood of the local community, and preserving quality wilderness. 

The Campaign for America’s Wilderness strongly supports this legislation, which 

will protect as wilderness more than a half million acres of stunningly beautiful 

canyonlands and ecologically rich high desert in southwestern Idaho. This area 

boasts the last vestiges of intact sagebrush ecosystems, lush riparian pockets, juniper stands, and oases that provide for diverse populations of wildlife and plant species. The bill would also designate over 300 miles of rivers as Wild and Scenic, binding together wilderness units and creating unspoiled wildlife and rafting corridors. 

Because the Owyhee-Bruneau Canyonlands are only an hour and a half drive to 

Boise and the Treasure Valley area?one of the fastest growing regions in the nation?the Owyhee landscape is faced with encroaching development and is frequently 

overrun by skyrocketing numbers of motorized recreationists. The latter has taken 

a toll on both the landscape—illegal trails are created every week, adding to the already 10,000 miles of trails and roads that criss-cross the land and fragment ecosystems—and the Owyhee County budget. The County is forced to spend funds to 

monitor and conduct search and rescues on millions of acres of federal land. For 

these reasons, it’s imperative that S. 2833 be enacted this Congress. 

While S. 2833 may not be a perfect bill from our perspective, the dynamics of this 

area make a ‘‘perfect’’ bill nearly impossible. Owyhee County is not an area where 

the wilderness would be designated on a mountainside, thousands of feet above 

where people live and work. Rather, the Owyhee Public Land Management Act protects lands closer to communities and residents. 

By the very nature and diversity of the groups engaged in shaping S. 2833, it was 

clear from the start that the Owyhee legislation would not reflect every provision 

that every stakeholder wanted, but it would seek to include the critical provisions 

each group needed to stay at the negotiating table. Against all odds, the legislation 

has succeeded in this goal. To drive home this point, a list of the broad groups endorsing S.2833 follows this statement for inclusion in the hearing record. 

Senator Crapo deserves high praise for his commitment to bringing together myriad and diverse interests to find common ground on a comprehensive plan for the 

future of public lands in Owyhee County. His years of work will pay off for ranching 

families who will be able to continue operating, sportsmen who will continue to hunt 

in some of the best game territory in the West, as well as have access to new areas 

that will be open to the public under this legislation, communities that will have 

more law enforcement resources, Tribes which will receive more protection for cultural resources, and outdoor enthusiasts who will be able to enjoy this unspoiled, 

vast landscape for years into the future. 

We’re pleased that Senator Bingaman worked with Senator Crapo on this measure and is committed to moving it through the Senate. We look forward to quick 

passage of the Owyhees legislation and to working with Senator Crapo and the 

Owyhee Initiative stakeholders to ensure full implementation of the bill and the 

Owyhee Initiative Agreement. 

STATEMENT OF KATIE FITE, BIODIVERSITY DIRECTOR, WESTERN WATERSHEDS

PROJECT, BOISE, ID 

From the beginning, this was not a ‘‘collaborative’’ process. Western Watersheds 

Project was purposefully excluded from the process, since we had been involved in 

trying to change abusive livestock grazing practices. Livestock grazing is currently 

destroying—through cattle causing irreversible weed spread and other adverse ecological effects—much of the area this Bill affects. Thus, the process purposefully cut 

out parties that would advocate for more integrated and ecosystem—based management in the grazing-imperiled and nationally significant Owyhee Uplands. 

This Bill will only result in the landscape becoming more fragmented by extensive 

new livestock facility development, and intensified grazing use as a result of facilities, and/or cattle forage ‘‘treatments through burning, spraying and herbiciding, 

and other development in across the 200,000 acres of hard-released WSAs. This Bill 

will be a tremendous loss for biodiversity, public lands, wildlife, and waters in the 

Owyhee region. The primary beneficiary of released WSA lands in the BruneauSheep Creek region west of the Bruneau River is the ag-conglomerate of billionaire 

public lands rancher Simplot, whose grazing use occurs across nearly all that area. 

The portions of the sagebrush WSAs to be released are nearly always biologically 

critical plateau areas, which provide critical sagebrush habitats for rare and declining wildlife. The stringer Wilderness of the OI in many area focuses on the canyons—which in many cases are not being grazed due to their rugged nature, and 

which are not used by imperiled species like sage-grouse. However, the WSA por-
54 

tions to be released are the plateau lands where ranchers seek to increase grazing 

use—to the detriment of public wild lands and wildlife. 

CARVING OR SHAVING OFF PORTIONS OF WSAS WILL PROMOTE CATTLE AND FACILITY

DEGRADATION OF CRITICAL SAGEBRUSH HABITATS

From the maps we have reviewed, it appears that the deleterious ‘‘shaving’’ or 

carving off parts—or entire regions—of WSAs remains a central part of this Bill. 

This is particularly alarming in the Bruneau-Sheep Creek area, in the heart of Little Jacks Creek where Simplot and Davis grazers covet a destructive new livestock 

water pipeline in released WSA lands, and in portions of the Jarbidge region where 

industrialization of the landscape for livestock, and the accompanying livestock-promoted weds and cheatgrass-fueled fires, are wreaking havoc on the landscape. The 

ONLY thing that has kept politically powerful ranchers from intensifying grazing 

use near the canyons has been WSA status of lands. Thus, lands in WSAs to be 

shaved for release here are remnant better condition lands including critical big 

game and sage-grouse nesting and winter range. 

The Owyhee Bill Releases and shavings of WSA areas in the Jarbidge-Bruneau 

and Sheep Creek regions will be a large net loss for wild lands and wildlife. The 

Release of these lower elevation sagebrush habitats that are currently in better ecological condition primarily because of the limited grazing use they currently receive 

is an ecological travesty. It is being done for the sole benefit of billionaire public 

lands rancher Simplot (who grazes close to a million acres in the Owyhee region), 

a Brackett permittee, and one or two others. 

PERMIT RETIREMENT QUESTIONS

While WWP strongly supports grazing permit retirement, the acreage to be retired here consists largely of lands ranchers have difficulty grazing due to spring 

mud conditions (lower Battle Creek near Owyhee River), or lands where their cattle 

grazing has so beat out the understory over the years that little forage remains 

(some portions of Jacks Creek), as well as areas where they have been able to graze 

few very AUMs due to limited water (plateau portions of Jacks Creek). Recent BLM 

documents (the Bruneau BLM Battle Creek allotment EA) show ranchers have been 

grazing far below levels shown on grazing permits in the Little Jacks Creek area. 

Much more detail on the grazing permit purchase must be provided to enable full 

understanding of how few AUMs are actually being grazed, compared to AUM numbers to be purchased. 

PUBLIC LAND SHOULD NOT BE SOLD TO ACQUIRE PERMITS

While we have been assured that the intent of the Bill is not to sell public lands 

to purchase grazing permits, we request that language be changed to make it crystal clear that is not the intent. 

‘‘INTERESTS’’ MUST BE DEFINED

The Owyhee Bill refers to the purchase of ‘‘interests’. The scope of any interests 

here must be clearly defined, as ranchersmay consider all manner of things from 

fences to grazing permits as ‘‘interests’’. 

ANY PRIVATE LAND, CONSERVATION EASEMENT, OR OTHER ACQUISITIONS SHOULD NOT

BE THE FUNDED BY SALES OF PUBLIC LANDS

We are opposed to the sale of public lands associated with the Owyhee Bill. Purchase of lands and/or ‘‘easements’’ should be done with Land and Water Conservation Funds, or through other mechanisms. While FLPMA allows sales of public 

lands, retaining intact blocks public lands in the Owyhee region is critical to protection of sage-grouse, a landscape species, other wildlife, and public recreational use. 

Plus, Land Use Plans like the Bruneau MFP are a quarter century old, and lands 

targeted for disposal a quarter century ago may have much higher values to the 

public now. The Owyhee RMP is now nearly 10 years old, and allows disposal of 

lands now realized to be especially critical to sage-grouse and other native wildlife. 

VALUE OF APPRAISALS

We are very concerned that Appraisals may over-value private lands, and undervalue BLM lands. As the four maps prepared for Congress show, very little land is 

to be acquired, but many millions of dollars would be spent—and an unrevealed 

acreage of public land would be sold to do this. 
55 

A review of the maps shows that some of the areas for acquisition may not even 

be located next to Wilderness. Portions of this Bill seem primarily designed to be 

a way to transfer funds to some select ranchers. 

VITAL INFORMATION TO UNDERSTAND WHAT BILL ACTUALLY WILL DO IS LACKING

Information essential to provide adequate Testimony on this current Owyhee Bill 

has not been provided to us by Bill proponents. WWP has requested copies of any 

Agreements that may have been signed with ranchers, and other information and 

we have not received it. It is impossible to understand from the Bill what AUMs 

would be retired where. For example, in the 2006 version, a Buyout would have occurred in the Little Jacks area that only removed one permittee, while still leaving 

the other (Simplot) to graze in the same area. Is that still the case? 

Are there still detailed Rancher Agreements, and if so what do they say? 

It is likely BLM and ranchers will rely on those Agreements—and haggling over 

Agreement intent management, and whittling away at wilderness values, will occur 

This is happening in the Steens. 

It is exceedingly difficult to comment adequately without much more information. 

This Bill appears to be on a fast-track so as to prevent public understanding of 

many important details. 

No public hearings have been held in Idaho on this latest version, either. 

WSA RELEASE

This Bill releases several WSAs in their entirety. 

Released WSAs include magnificent old growth western juniper and labyrinthine 

rhyolite canyons on the Oregon border adjacent to lands proposed for Wilderness 

status by the Oregon Natural Desert Association in Oregon. In the three WSAs to 

be released here, ranchers have long sought to burn, spray and destroy mature and 

old growth forested vegetation to eke out more AUMs on grazing-depleted lands in 

the vicinity of Juniper Mountain. 

Released WSAs also include the sagebrush country of Sheep Creek East and West 

WSAs. At a time when sage-grouse, pygmy rabbits and other rare and declining 

sagebrush-dependent species are hurtling toward ESA listing, the is the last thing 

in the world Congress should be doing. Keeping these lands free of new roading and 

intensified livestock facilities and disturbance, which will result from release under 

this Bill, is in the public interest. Their release to placate a billionaire rancher, is 

not. The sagebrush WSAs and portions of WSAs targeted for hard release include 

critical sage-grouse lek, nesting, brood rearing, wintering and other habitats. 

MAPPING POORLY PORTRAYS MAGNITUDE OF WSA RELEASE

A series of 4 Maps (Little Jacks Creek, Pole Creek, North Fork, Owyhee River,) 

labeled as having been prepared for this Senate Committee very poorly depicts the 

200,000 acres (over 300 square miles) of WSAs to be released. The lands targeted 

for release are colored almost indistinguishably from the lands that would become 

Wilderness in this mapping, which gives the illusion of larger blocks of Wilderness. 

Of particular interest is the fact that the coloring of the map of Pole Creek may 

mask the release of WSA lands near a private parcel to be acquired. 

PARTIAL DONATION MUST BE CLARIFIED

The section on partial donation of permits is troubling. This may result in cuts 

in only ‘‘paper cows’’—unless reduction tied to capability of the land is specified. 

Could the wording of the Bill mean that in areas where ‘‘paper cows’’ or permitted 

AUMs may greatly exceed the number being grazed under actual use and/or under 

active use (which is the case in many Owyhee allotments) grazing use may be intensified in non-Wilderness lands? Greater clarity of language must tie reductions to 

the capability of the land area, and not ‘‘paper’’ cows. 

REFERENCE TO FENCING WILDERNESS SHOULD BE DROPPED

Fences in sagebrush landscapes are particular hazards to sage-grouse, as well as 

antelope and wintering big game, including mule deer, antelope, bighorn sheep, and 

elk. Winter snow conditions and windblown weeds may make fences even with supposed ‘‘friendly’’ wire spacing be barriers and deadly to wildlife. 

Now increasingly research shows that sage-grouse frequently die from collisions 

with fences too. 

By including reference to fencing, the Bill sets the stage for ranchers proposing 

as much as several hundred miles of new fencing right along the Wilderness boundary, with devastating effects to wildlife. Since much of the Bill’s Wilderness is 
56 

stringers along canyons, the total acreage of potential Wilderness lands to be fenced 

is immense. 

This reference to fencing would also promote the building of new fences into 

ACECs in areas where ACEC boundaries differ from Wilderness—as in the 

Jarbidge—allowing potentially intensified grazing use in sections of WSAs outside 

Wilderness. 

WILD AND SCENIC RIVER

The Bill fails to designate large segments of the West Fork Bruneau and other 

worthy areas as WSRs. The Bill’s very bad water language threatens the integrity 

of any WSR that may be designated. 

WATER LANGUAGE

The Bill’s language related to water rights is unacceptable. 

NUMEROUS PROVISIONS WEAKEN WILDERNESS

The Bill should simply state that the areas are managed according to the Wilderness Act. 

TRAIL PLAN

This is not needed, and could be harmful. It can be interpreted as mandating 

more trails than currently exist. The purpose of Wilderness is not to have trails or 

a trail plan. There are no established equestrian trails, and only a few informal 

trails into canyons in the WSAs. This does seem to allow establishment of a greatly 

expanded trail footprint in Wilderness here. 

OUTFITTING

This language authorizes (and perhaps mandates) outfitting and guiding. The Wilderness Act says outfitting ‘‘may’’ occur, but does not mandate it. It omits key words 

found in the Wilderness Act. The Owyhee wording does not have a standard whether outfitting and guiding is proper. This may guarantee outfitting that is currently 

occurring to continue even if it may conflict with non-outfitted members of the public. 

WILDLIFE

This Owyhee bill is not exactly consistent with the Wilderness Act and should be 

changed. I can certainly envision ranchers promoting extensive mechanized vegetation killing of trees or shrubs as ‘‘treatments’’ for wildlife in wilderness. This is particularly troubling since a recent ‘‘mule deer initiative’’ promotes extensive vegetation manipulation in Idaho. Under the broad wildlife management section, none of 

the provisions are consistent with the Wilderness Act. Motorized use and habitat 

manipulation should not be allowed for routine wildlife management, even if ‘‘occasional’’. The existing uses section is a perversion of the Wilderness Act. 

Under this provision, motorized tree chopping equipment could conceivably be proposed to travel crosscountry to ‘‘treat’’ lands to try to produce more deer to bolster 

Game Department tag sales—at the expense of migratory birds and other native 

wildlife that ma rely on forested vegetation. Or this could be used to drill seed pseudo-native cultivars in burned sagebrush lands—if agencies claimed this promoted 

certain wildlife values. 

INSECTS, FIRE AND DISEASE

This section is not exactly consistent with the Wilderness Act. Especially when 

viewed together with the Wildlife Section. I can readily envision proposals for mowing sagebrush vegetation to create ‘‘fuelbreaks’’ inside wilderness, or chain saw felling of trees as a ‘‘hazardous fuels project’’. 

It also includes local agencies, and is a subtle devolution of federal authority over 

public land and should not be allowed. 

MILITARY OVERFLIGHTS

This section allows the military to greatly mar Wilderness values. It should be 

deleted. Military activity and plane noise may increase even more—as now Singapore Air Force planes are bedded down at Mountain Home and sonic booming and 

flying low level over the Owyhee Canyonlands. Israeli, German and other planes 

may soon follow. Noise pollution over America’s airspace is being promoted to keep 
57 

funding flowing to the Mountain Home Airbase. So this language, in the context of 

the Owyhee Bill particularly, should be removed. 

These comments are prepared without full information on many components of the 

Bill, due to the sudden scheduling of a Hearing, and incomplete information that 

is available. 

STATEMENT OF JACK TRUEBLOOD, BOISE, ID, ON S. 2833 

Thank you for accepting this letter of comment on pending legislation. Please 

enter it into the record of comment on S. 2833, the Owyhee Public Land Management Act of 2008. 

I am opposed to this legislation for a variety of reasons but most specifically because of the inclusion of the area north of the east fork of the Owyhee River known 

as Dickshooter Ridge. This area from the Dickshooter Ranch to the river, roughly 

bounded by Deep Creek on the west and Battle Creek on the east, was studied by 

the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) as a candidate for the wilderness system. 

It was not recommended for inclusion because it contains a network of primitive 

roads used by ranchers and big game and bird hunters. Some proponents of this legislation will tell you that these are new roads, ‘‘pioneered’’ by guys like me. This 

is not true. I have hunted there for upland birds and big game since the late 1960s 

and my father did before me. The roads were already there and date to around the 

early 20th century when the country was homesteaded. 

If this area is suddenly designated ‘‘wilderness’’ (in spite of the roads) it represents lost opportunity for any hunter who either does not own livestock or hire 

an outfitter. It is not practical to suppose that a bird hunter and his dog would walk 

the eight or nine miles from the wilderness boundary to the river canyon (where 

the chukar hunting is best), hunt birds in the heat of September, and then walk 

back. Nor is it practical to assume he could carry a camp on his back. He is going 

to have a gun, ammunition and water to carry on the way in and, with a little luck, 

a heavy bird vest on the way out with birds that need to get in a cooler as quickly 

as possible. 

The possibility of hunting a bighorn sheep, deer or antelope is greatly restricted 

with the lack of access. Those of us who want to continue to hunt this area would 

need to hire the services of an outfitter or purchase saddle and pack horses plus 

all the gear that goes with pack animals. Both these options are very expensive and 

not practical for the average hunter. 

As I mentioned above, Dickshooter Ridge was not recommended for wilderness 

designation by BLM. If it is now included in the new Owyhee River Wilderness, 

then I hope Congress will designate the roads that traverse Dickshooter Ridge as 

‘‘cherry-stem roads’’ which can be used to access recreation deep within the wilderness. There is plenty of precedent for designating ‘‘cherry stem roads’’ or access corridors, based on previous wilderness legislation and even within this bill. 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. 

AMERICAN RIVERS, 

Washington, DC, April 22, 2008. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, 304 Dirksen 

Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

Hon. PETE V. DOMENICI, 

Ranking Member, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, 304 

Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN BINGAMAN AND RANKING MEMBER DOMENICI: On behalf of our 

65,000 members and supporters, I write in strong support of the Wild. and Scenic 

River provisions of S. 2833, the Owyhee Public Lands .Management Act. S. 2833 

would preserve and protect over 300 miles of some of the most spectacular unprotected river canyons in the United States under the Wild and. Scenic Rivers Act. 

We applaud Senator Crapo and the group of stakeholders, including ranchers, river 

conservationists, outfitters, anglers, hunters and local county commissioners, that 

helped develop this legislation that protects some of our nation’s most outstanding 

rivers while providing greater certainty in public lands management in Idaho. 

As you know, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act protects the nation’s best free-flowing rivers from activities that would destroy their wild character. Originally passed 

in 1968, a Wild and Scenic designation is currently the strongest tool available to 

protect rivers from future pollution, inappropriate development, and impoundment. 
58 

A Wild and Scenic designation does not prevent development and use of a river; instead, the goal is to preserve the existing character of a river. Uses and development 

compatible with the management goals of a particular river are allowed. 

American Rivers thanks the Committee for holding a hearing on. S. 2833 and 

urges the enactment of this legislation this Congress. We look forward to working 

with you and your staff on technical amendments to the bill to ensure the integrity 

of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act is maintained. 

Sincerely, 

REBECCA R. WODDER, 

President. 

Æ