Two bills that seek the transfer of federal lands to state ownership have gathered criticism and opposition from local officials.
The two bills, House Bill 209 and Senate File 56, both deal with the topic of the state owning federal lands. The senate file, approved by the senate appropriations committee last week, would commission a study and report addressing a transfer in the management of public lands to the state. Senator John Hastert (D-Green River) was the only member of the appropriations committee voting against the senate file.
House Bill 209, which was approved by the house judiciary committee Friday, would demand the U.S. government to transfer ownership of all public lands in Wyoming to the state by Dec. 31, 2017. Any lands granted to the state sold as a result would have the proceeds split between the federal and state governments.
According to the bill, 95 percent of the net proceeds to the federal government, while 5 percent would be retained by the state. It would also create a joint select committee involved with drafting policy regarding the public lands, while also creating a public lands commission. Representative Mark Baker (R-Rock Springs) was one of the house judiciary committee members voting in favor of the bill.
The Sweetwater County commissioners sent a letter opposing the transfer of federal lands to legislators representing Sweetwater County, outlining the county’s reasons for its opposition. The letter, signed by Commission Chairman Wally Johnson, states the county doesn’t believe Wyoming can afford the high cost of administering federal land.
Comparing the Bureau of land management’s 668 employees and $105 million budget to the State Lands and Investment Office’s 101 employees and $18 million budget, Johnson points out that it would cost the state more than five times the current budget to manage the lands. Johnson also questions where the state would allocate the needed $105 million annually to manage public lands, saying state plans to allocate $1 million per county for infrastructure repair and replacement.
“With this insignificant amount being set aside to provide additional infrastructure support, Sweetwater County finds it doubtful that the state can allocate $105 million dollars on an annual basis to properly manage federal lands placed under its control,” Johnson’s letter states.
The county also fears a land transfer would result in the public losing access to those lands because the state would be forced to sell land to private groups. Under private ownership, Johnson believes the land would not be open to public access and would lose its capacity for multiple uses.
Johnson also notes state management of public lands would result in a loss of environmental protections.
According to the letter, the county believes the state should develop an environmental impact study to protect the multiple use charter of federal land. Without an study in place, the county believes the state would not have the tools needed for balancing environmental protections with maintaining multiple uses and preserving the environmental integrity of the land.
Representatives from Green River share the county’s opposition to the bills. John Freeman (D-Green River) said federal lands have benefits to residents that state lands don’t offer.
“In Green River, I can walk a half mile and be on federal land, enjoying it without the fear of trespass,” Freeman said.
Freeman said state lands are managed for profit for the school foundation, with those renting state lands often denying public access. Freeman said camping is prohibited on state lands and the the state parks department is one of the most underfunded divisions within the state, with other legislators offering resistance towards increasing its budget. Freeman also agrees with the county’s assessment in regards to the cost of managing the land, saying it would be the best way to bankrupt the state.
Stan Blake (D-Green River) said his opposition stems from his belief that federal land in Wyoming belongs to everyone, both residents and visitors alike. He believes if the state were to take over federal lands, they would be sold off to the highest bidder and used for mineral development.
“There are areas in our state that are on these lands that should be protected from development,” Blake said. “Areas like Little Mountain, the Wyoming Range and Adobe Town are special areas that need the oversight and protection they deserve.”
Sen. Hastert was also contacted for this story, but did not respond to a request for comment.
Reader Comments(0)