Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Norton Notifies Congress That New Wilderness Areas Will Not Be Considered
TBO via AP ^ | 4-11-03 | Robert Gehrke

Posted on 04/11/2003 8:33:56 PM PDT by paul in cape

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Interior Department intends to halt all reviews of its Western land holdings for new wilderness protection and to withdraw that protected status from some 3 million acres in Utah, it informed Congress on Friday.

By suspending wilderness reviews, the department would limit the amount of land held by its Bureau of Land Management eligible for wilderness protection at 22.8 million acres nationwide - a figure that environmental groups say leaves millions of pristine acres vulnerable to oil and gas development and off-road vehicle use. Congress, however, could order additional areas protected.

"The Department stands firmly committed to the idea that we can and should manage our public lands to provide for multiple use, including protection of those areas that have wilderness characteristics," Interior Secretary Gale Norton said in a letter sent late Friday to members of Congress.

The wilderness decisions Norton advised Congress about are contained in a legal settlement of a lawsuit brought by Utah. The settlement must be approved by federal judge in Utah, who also has yet to rule on efforts by environmentalists to intervene in the case.

Norton said in 1976 Congress gave the Interior Department 15 years to inventory wilderness areas, and only those areas identified by 1991 as having wilderness characteristics qualified for protection.


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: blm; enviralists; galenorton; interior; utahland; wilderness
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
This is great news. I remember when Clinton and BBBBBruce BBBBBBBabbit stole this land so that Clinton's Indonesia buddies wouldn't have to worry about the natural coal deposits there.

Complete article HERE

1 posted on 04/11/2003 8:33:57 PM PDT by paul in cape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: paul in cape
Geat news. The federal government really has no business owning land except for military reservations. The rest should belong to the people or the states themselves.
2 posted on 04/11/2003 8:35:14 PM PDT by flashbunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Donating to the FreeRepublic will keep the bright beacon
of Freedom shining so that our Troops
and the world will know we stand with them.


Please join us.

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD-
It is in the breaking news sidebar!

3 posted on 04/11/2003 8:36:21 PM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paul in cape
I remember when Clinton and BBBBBruce BBBBBBBabbit stole this land so that Clinton's Indonesia buddies wouldn't have to worry about the natural coal deposits there.

So few do remember unfortunately.
4 posted on 04/11/2003 8:36:28 PM PDT by Arkinsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paul in cape
I remember when

As a matter of fact, the Native Americans don't even seem to remember who stole the billions out of their trust fund. Funny ain't it.
5 posted on 04/11/2003 8:37:26 PM PDT by Arkinsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paul in cape; farmfriend; madfly; editor-surveyor; Movemout; backhoe; Carry_Okie; AuntB; AAABEST; ..
Good, good, good, good!!!
6 posted on 04/11/2003 8:47:47 PM PDT by sauropod (I'm a man... But I can change... If I have to.... I guess...................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny
Federal Lands belong to THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES.

State Lands belong TO THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF_____________.

7 posted on 04/11/2003 9:04:08 PM PDT by Sacajaweau (God Bless Our Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: *Enviralists
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list
8 posted on 04/11/2003 9:04:42 PM PDT by Libertarianize the GOP (Ideas have consequences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau; flashbunny
"Federal Lands belong to...

Nobody! There are no "federal" lands; the constitution prohibits federal ownership of land.

9 posted on 04/11/2003 9:12:06 PM PDT by editor-surveyor ( . Best policy RE: Environmentalists, - ZERO TOLERANCE !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
??????? There are many sites giving the stats of Federal Lands within the United States. They are held in the name of the People of the United States as I said.
10 posted on 04/11/2003 9:31:17 PM PDT by Sacajaweau (God Bless Our Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: paul in cape
Stroke of the pen
Law of the land

Kind of cool eh?

What's good for the goose.
11 posted on 04/11/2003 9:35:14 PM PDT by Rippin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: paul in cape; marsh2; dixiechick2000; Helen; Mama_Bear; poet; doug from upland; WolfsView; ...
pinging the crowd.
12 posted on 04/11/2003 11:10:24 PM PDT by farmfriend ( Isaiah 55:10,11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend
Thanks.

How do I get my piece of Forest Land?
13 posted on 04/11/2003 11:13:27 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Where is Saddam? and where is Tom Daschle?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
"Federal Lands belong to THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES."

If you believe that, try doing some of the same things you can do on your private land on federal land. Then come and tell me how it belongs to you.

Tip: Don't use your one phone call to tell me about it - call your lawyer first.
14 posted on 04/11/2003 11:19:48 PM PDT by flashbunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend; SierraWasp; marsh2; sasquatch; Carry_Okie
By suspending wilderness reviews, the department would limit the amount of land held by its Bureau of Land Management eligible for wilderness protection at 22.8 million acres nationwide - a figure that environmental groups say leaves millions of pristine acres vulnerable to oil and gas development and off-road vehicle use. Congress, however, could order additional areas protected.

So, one down (BLM), one to go (USFS). Hopefully, the Department of Agriculture secretary has a similiar pronouncement for the U.S. Forest Service. Given election year politics (next year), does anyone think that Barbra Boxer's California Wilderness Bill (USFS) will get passed as a token jesture to the greens?

15 posted on 04/11/2003 11:38:07 PM PDT by forester (Save the woods; put foresters back in the forest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: forester
I would love to get rid of Boxer. Her and State Sen. Sher. Sher has some real scary bills moving through the senate. Many dealing with logging.
16 posted on 04/11/2003 11:43:34 PM PDT by farmfriend ( Isaiah 55:10,11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend
Sher has some real scary bills moving through the senate. Many dealing with logging.

The bastard smells blood in the water. Over regulation has damn near destroyed the timber industry here in California. Looks like this guy wants to finish it off. Kinda like what they (legislature) did to the gold miners yesterday....just regulated them right out of business.

17 posted on 04/11/2003 11:53:31 PM PDT by forester (Save the woods; put foresters back in the forest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sauropod
So far I haven't been to impressed with Norton, but I'll give her this one.

Too bad every other western state hadn't signed on in the lawsuit with Utah. From the article it appears blm will stop with the inventories but continue to manage any illegally designated "potential" wilderness as such - everywhere but Utah.

18 posted on 04/12/2003 12:06:18 AM PDT by kitchen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: paul in cape; sauropod; farmfriend
(Paul Harvey voice)     And now ... ... for the rest of the story ...

But environmental groups objected when they learned of the decisions.

"This administration's assault on America's wilderness continues," said Jim Angell of EarthJustice. "What they're saying is these wilderness-quality lands throughout the West will continue to be degraded and continue to lose their eligibility for wilderness. ... It's just appalling."

Norton also said she was setting aside the 2001 Wilderness Handbook - a land management policy implemented in the waning days of the Clinton administration - which required the BLM to protect the wilderness qualities of lands that could qualify as wilderness areas.

The requirement created millions of acres of de facto wilderness, even though only Congress can make such designations.

Wilderness areas, as defined by the 1964 Wilderness Act, are those areas "untrammeled by man," and are protected from oil and gas development, off-road use, and various types of construction.

The policy changes come as part of a settlement that was to be filed Friday in federal court in Salt Lake City. Utah had sued the Interior Department in 1996 over a reinventory of 3 million acres conducted by then-Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt.

Most of the lawsuit was dismissed, and it sat dormant for years until the state amended its complaint last month.

In Utah, specifically, the announcement means that the department will disregard the results of Babbitt's 1996 reinventory. That inventory identified 5.9 million acres of Utah land that qualified for wilderness protection, 3 million acres more than found in the original inventory during the Reagan administration.

The BLM had been managing the land to preserve its wilderness characteristics. Now it can be used according to the land-use plans that had been prepared previously by the BLM, which could include mining and recreation. Norton noted that wildness quality areas also could be protected in land use plans without ever being designed as wildness areas.

"It looks like Interior agrees with me and my Western colleagues that the BLM does not have the authority to designate new wilderness study areas, ... doesn't have authority beyond what Congress gave it," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. "Secretary Norton's actions will bring resolution to the illegal activities of the past administration."

This was the second time this week that the department has made a major policy announcement resulting from secret settlement negotiations with the state. On Wednesday, Norton and Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt agreed to a process for transferring disputed roads across federal lands to state ownership.

[Just in case AP pulls a clinton ...]

Do I dare to think that we may also get back the lands in the CA desert that have our only source of Lanthanoid ('Rare Earth') metals we now have to import from China?

19 posted on 04/12/2003 12:33:22 AM PDT by brityank (The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: farmfriend
BTTT!!!!!
20 posted on 04/12/2003 3:06:53 AM PDT by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson