Wilderness rules restored for public lands

DENVER – The Obama administration plans to reverse a Bush-era policy and make millions of undeveloped acres of land once again eligible for federal wilderness protection, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said Thursday.

The agency will replace the 2003 policy adopted under former Interior Secretary Gale Norton. That policy — derided by some as the "No More Wilderness" policy — stated that new areas could not be recommended for wilderness protection by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and it opened millions of acres to potential commercial development.

That policy "frankly never should have happened and was wrong in the first place," Salazar said Thursday.

Environmental activists have been pushing for the Obama administration to restore protections for potential wilderness areas.

Salazar said the agency will review some 220 million acres of BLM land that's not currently under wilderness protection to see which should be given a new "Wild Lands" designation — a new first step for land awaiting a wilderness decision. Congress would decide whether those lands should be permanently protected, Salazar said.

Congressional Republicans pounced on the "Wild Lands" announcement as an attempt by the Obama administration to close land to development without congressional approval.

"This backdoor approach is intended to circumvent both the people who will be directly affected and Congress," said Washington Rep. Doc Hastings, a Republican tapped to lead the House Natural Resources Committee when the GOP takes control of the House in January.

The Congressional Western Caucus, an all-Republican group, also blasted the decision. "This is little more than an early Christmas present to the far left extremists who oppose the multiple use of our nation's public lands," Utah Rep. Rob Bishop said in a statement.

BLM Director Bob Abbey said it hasn't been decided how many acres are expected to be designated as "Wild Lands" and whether those acres will be off-limits to motorized recreation or commercial development while under congressional review. It's also unclear whether there will be a time limit on how long acres can be managed as "Wild Lands" before a decision is made on their future.

The BLM has six months to submit a plan for those new wilderness evaluations.

These "Wild Lands" would be separate from Wilderness Study Areas that must be authorized by Congress. Wild Lands can be designated by the BLM after a public planning process and would be managed with protective measures detailed in a land use plan.

Ranchers, oil men and others have been suspicious of federal plans to lock up land in the West, worrying that taking the BLM land out of production would kill rural economies that rely on ranchers and the oil and gas business.

Their suspicions have been heightened since memos leaked in February revealed the Obama administration was considering 14 sites in nine states for possible presidential monument declarations.

That included 2.5 million acres of northeastern Montana prairie land proposed as a possible bison range, along with sites in Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, California, Nevada, Arizona, Oregon and Washington.

The 2003 policy was an out-of-court deal struck between Norton and then-Utah Gov. Michael Leavitt to remove protections for some 2.6 million acres of public land in that state.

The policy allowed drilling, mining and other commercial uses on land under consideration as wilderness areas.

Salazar's reversal doesn't affect about 8.7 million acres already designated as wilderness areas.

Conservationists praised the reversal, though there has been grumbling that it took the Obama administration nearly two years to overturn the Bush-era policy.

"Washington D.C. always takes longer than you want, but we're glad we've gotten here," said Suzanne Jones, regional director for The Wilderness Society.

___

Associated Press Writer Matt Volz in Helena, Mont., contributed to this report.

___

Online:

Interior Department Q&A on the new policy: http://tinyurl.com/24lfw58

Follow Yahoo! News on , become a fan on

89 Comments

  • 0 users liked this comment
    Vote for this comment
    Vote for this comment
    0 users disliked this comment
    Grey 24 minutes ago Report Abuse
    Hooray for the wilderness. "They just ain't making no more these days."
  • 0 users liked this comment
    Vote for this comment
    Vote for this comment
    0 users disliked this comment
    chevy 26 minutes ago Report Abuse
    These people will not stop until they control all the land everywhere. Look up agenda 21 the new world order. unless the land is owned by the people so everyone benefits from it, it will be considered illegal.No one shall own land and make a profit,for someone who doe's not land might be offended by someone owning land and making a profit/ supporting themselves. we have got to stop the commies.
  • 0 users liked this comment
    Vote for this comment
    Vote for this comment
    0 users disliked this comment
    suzanne 28 minutes ago Report Abuse
    Oh! I see Obama is paving the way for more government paid land that the Mexican drug cartels can grow their pot on and make more meth. They are already in Yosemite and Sequoia and parts of Arizona and other Federal lands in America. No doubt they needed more land to polute and take control over. The birds and wildlife in Yosemite are suffering because of the Mexican drug trade and the poisons they use. Do some googleling people.
    Signed, A Nature Lover
  • 0 users liked this comment
    Vote for this comment
    Vote for this comment
    0 users disliked this comment
    hiplainsdrifter 1 hour ago Report Abuse
    Katherine Lee Bates saw the wonder of Colorado and wrote America The Beautiful. The nation must preserve and protect these lands into the future.
  • 1 users liked this comment
    Vote for this comment
    Vote for this comment
    3 users disliked this comment
    Kwitchurbellieakin 1 hour ago Report Abuse
    More liberal Odumbo "Nanny State Policy" run AMUCK!!
  • 1 users liked this comment
    Vote for this comment
    Vote for this comment
    3 users disliked this comment
    rsg 1 hour ago Report Abuse
    i say snipe the envirowakos with a shinny new bullet .
  • 5 users liked this comment
    Vote for this comment
    Vote for this comment
    1 users disliked this comment
    M 2 hours ago Report Abuse
    In my 44 years of living in the woods, working in the woods, playing in the woods, hunting in the woods, and being a custodian of the woods I have never met an "environmental activist" who actually understands let alone cares about "wild areas". It is always about exclusion of user groups of one nature or another, never about actual management of the land. I have never met an "activist" actually doing something for nature such as cleaning up our lands. I always seem to meet them "complaining about another user group or working to exclude one group or another for a myriad of reasons, none of which make any sense to someone who actually lives in the woods. It is truly a shame too me that those that know little too nothing of the wilderness are making decisions for those that actually live, work, play, love, and care for the wilderness. Food for thought...
  • 4 users liked this comment
    Vote for this comment
    Vote for this comment
    3 users disliked this comment
    james 2 hours ago Report Abuse
    another land grab from the true owners----the public!!!!
  • 3 users liked this comment
    Vote for this comment
    Vote for this comment
    0 users disliked this comment
    Lalo 2 hours ago Report Abuse
    United Nations Agenda 21 USA sold to China & UN
  • 7 users liked this comment
    Vote for this comment
    Vote for this comment
    5 users disliked this comment
    granny 2 hours ago Report Abuse
    Yes, let's lock everything up, do not use it, save it for future generations.

    This is the same administration that keeps saying we need to reduce our need for foreign oil and then tells us we cannot drill in or around the US. I only have a high school education but it really seems to me that no increasing our own production in relation to the increased demand does not reduce our use of foreign oil but increases it. Please, some of you brains for the administration explain it to me.

Post a Comment

Comment Guidelines
  1. 4000 characters remaining
  2. You will be seen as:

    your avatar

    Global Warming Is A Fraud