A paradigm shift in use and management of United States public lands for livestock grazing

Lands with Wilderness Characteristics, Resource Management Plan Contraints and Land Exchanges: Cross-Jurisdictional Management and Impacts on Unconventional Fuel Development in Utah's Uinta Basin

Lands with Wilderness Characteristics, Resource Management Plan Constraints, and Land Exchanges: Cross-Jurisdictional Management and Impacts on Unconventional Fuel Development in Utah's Uinta Basin

In the Amazon, the regularization of public and private lands is under discussion to reduce deforestation. However, this scenario is difficult due to land disorganization and divergent federal and state policies. The objective of this study was to analyze the importance of land data in federal and state public lands and private lands for the municipality of Paragominas, Eastern Amazon. In this study, we try to propose a diagnosis of land tenure structure, quantifying the Value of the Bare Land of the overlapping lands, state public lands on federal lands, as well as deforestation and forest conversion. The results showed that the area of federal publicly listed lands has drastically reduced. The reduced area is equivalent to the territory of Palestine, in the same database managed by the federal management agency. State public lands overlapped 16,153.32 ha on federal public lands, with a loss of US$5,529,927.57 for the federal government. Deforestation has increased on state public lands, driven by conversion to soy cultivation areas, and there is a trend towards stabilization of deforestation and agriculture on federal public lands

Nowhere else in the United States are tribal connections and reliance on federal public lands as deep and geographically broad-based as in what is now Alaska. The number of Tribes—229 federally recognized tribes—and the scope of the public land resource—nearly 223 million acres—are simply unparalleled. Across that massive landscape, federal public lands and the subsistence uses they provide remain, as they have been since time immemorial, “essential to Native physical, economic, traditional, and cultural existence.”[1] Alas, the institutions, systems, and processes responsible for managing those lands, protecting those uses, and honoring those connections are failing Alaska Native Tribes. 
 The cases referenced in this article share a common theme: federal land officials underutilize their existing legal authorities to engage tribes in the management of federal public lands, or treat them like pro-forma “check-the-box” exercises that must be done but have no real substantive impact on decisions that are likely already made. In case after case, Alaska Native Tribes are forced to defensively react to federal land use programs, plans, and projects they had no role in substantively shaping. Though traditional methods of tribal consultation and engagement are used by federal land agencies, they are viewed for the most part as procedural hurdles that are divorced from their core missions and mandates.

Expanding vulnerability assessment for public lands: The social complement to ecological approaches

Hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” continues to grow rapidly as an oil and gas extraction method in the United States, and its growth has recently led to the emergence of natural gas as the nation’s new leading energy source for power generation. However, the hydraulic fracturing process carries innumerable environmental and health-related concerns, and federal regulations to address these concerns have struggled to keep up with the blistering pace of fracking’s growth and development within the United States.In 2015, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), under the Obama administration, promulgated a rule to ‘complement’ its regulations with respect to hydraulic fracturing on federal and Indian lands, citing the Mineral Leasing Act (MLA) and Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) as sources of statutory authority. This 2015 Fracking Rule faced intense opposition, first from industry and state parties within the federal court system, and later from the BLM itself under a newly-elected President Trump. This Note argues that the Bureau of Land Management has the statutory authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing on federal public lands under the MLA and FLPMA, by cause of the plain language, general history, and reasonable agency interpretation of these statutes. This Note further supports BLM’s authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing with justifications related to both natural resource protection and the effectiveness of federal-level regulation. Legal battles over BLM’s authority are ongoing, and the question of whether or not BLM has statutory authority to regulate fracking on federal public lands remains critical as the nation continues to struggle in deciding how to best utilize our commonly-shared lands and resources. Additionally, it will be increasingly important to continue developing and updating federal hydraulic fracturing regulations in order to increase our understanding of this extraction method, while hopefully mitigating its associated environmental and health risks.

In addition to impacts on human health and the economy, COVID-19 is changing the way humans interact with open space. Across urban to rural settings, public lands–including forests and parks – experienced increases and shifts in recreational use. At the same time, certain public lands have become protest spaces as part of the public uprisings around racial injustice throughout the country. Land managers are adapting in real-time to compound disturbances. In this study, we explore the role of the public land manager during this time across municipal and federal lands and an urban-rural gradient. We ask: How adaptable are public land managers and agencies in their recreation management, collaborative partnerships, and public engagement to social disturbances such as COVID-19 and the co-occurring crisis of systemic racial injustice brought to light by the BLM uprisings and protests? This paper applies qualitative data drawn from a sample of land managers across the northeastern United States. We explore management in terms of partnership arrangements, recreational and educational programs, and stakeholder engagement practices and refine an existing model of organizational resilience. The study finds abiding: reports of increased public lands usership; calls for investment in maintenance; and need for diversity, equity, and inclusion in both organizational settings and landscapes themselves; and the need for workforce capacity. We discover effective ways to respond to compound disturbances that include open and reflective communication, transforming organizational cultures, and transboundary partnerships that are valued as critical assets.

It is always enjoyable to attend any meeting of the Society of Petroleum Engineers. I am happy to have this opportunity to speak to you because I believe that petroleum engineers can benefit from a better understanding of the Mineral Leasing Act and the regulations that implement the act insofar as these affect or influence your work. The regulations that implement the leasing act are commonly known as the Oil and Gas Operating Regulations. These regulations are officially described as Part 221 of Title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations. They are printed in a small green booklet which most printed in a small green booklet which most of you have probably seen at one time or other. The requirements of the operating regulations, as specifically set forth in the booklet, or as determined by policy judgments in our various offices, can affect some aspects of your work. I think it would be appropriate first to discuss the two types of lands, Federal lands and Indian lands, which are subject to the Oil and Gas Operating Regulations. Federal lands generally are classified in two categories, acquired land and public domain lands. Acquired lands are lands to which the Federal Government obtained title by purchase, exchange, condemnation, or private gift. These lands are scattered private gift. These lands are scattered throughout the United States and total about 54 million acres, or about 7.5 percent of the area classified as public percent of the area classified as public lands. The public domain lands are lands to which the United States has held title since their original acquisition. There are public lands in 30 states, but the large bulk of the lands are located in Alaska and the Western States. You may recall from your history courses some of the purchases and treaties by which the United States obtained most of the lands now described as public domain lands. The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 included among the Western States most of Montana, eastern and central Wyoming, northeast Colorado, and the northern part of Texas. This treaty also included a large part of the area now generally referred to as The "Midwest". The annexation of Texas occurred in 1845 and it is somewhat surprising to realize that this included, among other lands, a strip of land through western Colorado and a rectangular shaped piece of land in Wyoming, south of Rawlins piece of land in Wyoming, south of Rawlins The acquisition of the Oregon Territory in 1846 brought into the Union parts of western Wyoming and Montana as well as what is now Idahos Oregon, and Washington.

Utah's Women Homesteaders

Today, the United States Department of the Interior manages 500 million acres of surface land, about one-fifth of the land in the United States. Since enactment of the Antiquities Act in 1906, historic and scientific resources collected on public land have remained government property, held in trust for the people of the United States. As a result, the Department of the Interior manages nearly 204 million museum objects. Some of these objects are in federally managed repositories; others are in the repositories of partner institutions. The establishment of the United States as a nation corresponded with the development of paleontology as a science. For example, mastodon fossils discovered at or near present-day Big Bone Lick State Historic Site, Kentucky, found their way to notable scientists both in the United States and in Europe by the mid-eighteenth century and were instrumental in establishing the reality of extinction. Public land policies were often contentious, but generally they encouraged settlement and use, which resulted in the modern pattern of federal public lands. Continued investigation for fossils from public land filled the nation’s early museums, and those fossils became the centerpieces of many museum exhibitions. Case studies of the management of fossils found in Fossil Cycad National Monument, the John Day fossil beds, the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge and surrounding areas of public land, the American Falls Reservoir, and Grand Staircase–Escalante National Monument are outlined. These examples provide a sense of the scope of fossils on federal public land, highlight how their management can be a challenge, and show that public land is vital for continued scientific collection and research.

The Latinx population in the United States, estimated to compose 28% of the country’s population by 2050, has a long history of public land use. Yet while research on Latinx outdoor recreation in urban green spaces has increased over the past 20 years, research on Latinx outdoor recreation on federal and state public lands has waned. This study synthesizes the literature on public land use and outdoor recreation on federal and state public lands by the Latinx population in the United States to assess the state of knowledge and to strategically identify research needs in Latinx public land use and outdoor recreation. Our analysis reveals that while institutional barriers such as policies, practices, and procedures that favor some ethnic groups over others continue to exist, barriers to access, such as distance to sites, available free time, and knowledge about how to use public lands may be shifting, offering clues that may help guide informed approaches to outdoor recreation management.

Balancing economic, ecological, and social values has long been a challenge in the forests of the Pacific Northwest, where conflict over timber harvest and old-growth habitat on public lands has been contentious for the past several decades. The Northwest Forest Plan, adopted two decades ago to guide management on federal lands, is currently being revised as the region searches for a balance between sustainable timber yields and habitat for sensitive species. In addition, climate change imposes a high degree of uncertainty on future forest productivity, sustainability of timber harvest, wildfire risk, and species habitat. We evaluated the long-term, landscape-scale trade-offs among carbon (C) storage, timber yield, and old forest habitat given projected climate change and shifts in forest management policy across 2.1 million hectares of forests in the Oregon Coast Range. Projections highlight the divergence between private and public lands under business-as-usual forest management, where private industrial forests are heavily harvested and many public (especially federal) lands increase C and old forest over time but provide little timber. Three alternative management scenarios altering the amount and type of timber harvest show widely varying levels of ecosystem C and old-forest habitat. On federal lands, ecological forestry practices also allowed a simultaneous increase in old forest and natural early-seral habitat. The ecosystem C implications of shifts away from current practices were large, with current practices retaining up to 105Tg more C than the alternative scenarios by the end of the century. Our results suggest climate change is likely to increase forest productivity by 30-41% and total ecosystem C storage by 11-15% over the next century as warmer winter temperatures allow greater forest productivity in cooler months. These gains in C storage are unlikely to be offset by wildfire under climate change, due to the legacy of management and effective fire suppression. Our scenarios of future conditions can inform policy makers, land managers, and the public about the potential effects of land management alternatives, climate change, and the trade-offs that are inherent to management and policy in the region.

Many veterans returning from military deployment experience stress- or trauma-related symptoms that make reintegration with civilian society difficult. Nature exposure and outdoor recreation can be important parts of alternative and complementary approaches to reduce symptoms and build on veterans’ pre-existing strengths. Multiple outdoor programs now exist for veterans; many of these occur on federal public lands and present a variety of needs, opportunities, and challenges. This paper relies on interviews (n = 36) with public land managers, program providers and participants, health professionals, and veterans to enhance understanding about outdoor programs for veterans (OPVs). We develop a typology of OPVs to help land managers understand current and potential programs, and then describe programs’ varying dimensions. We examine opportunities and challenges for land managers in their interactions with OPVs. Results inform policymakers and public officials interested in developing more effective institutional partnerships and programs that engage and serve veterans and their communities. Study Implications: With growing scientific evidence of the benefits of nature-based therapy, nature exposure, and outdoor recreation for veterans, programming for veterans on public lands has proliferated. Public land-management agencies vary in the extent to which they have systematically organized to provide opportunities for veterans, developed partnerships to support veterans’ health, and explicitly acknowledged agency roles in serving veterans. We describe seven types of outdoor programs for veterans (OPVs) that currently serve this population: supported outdoor activity; guided outdoor activity; retreat; outdoor job training; stewardship or service; horticulture, farming or gardening; and animal-assisted therapy. Each OPV type has different needs for infrastructure, outdoor spaces, and administrative or programmatic engagement. OPVs occurring on public lands typically involve one or more partner organizations, such as commercial outfitters and guides, health providers, veterans’ associations, foundations, corporations, and research institutions. There is potential for public land-management agencies to expand their role as institutional leaders in support of veterans’ health by facilitating the use of public lands as therapeutic landscapes. By enhancing new and existing relations with OPV providers, health providers, and other government agencies, public land agencies could expand benefits to veterans and spur broader societal benefits.

The concept of ecological integrity has been applied widely to management of aquatic systems, but still is considered by many to be too vague and difficult to quantify to be useful for managing terrestrial systems, particularly across broad areas. Extensive public lands in the western United States are managed for diverse uses such as timber harvest, livestock grazing, energy development, and wildlife conservation, some of which may degrade ecological integrity. We propose a method for assessing ecological integrity on multiple-use lands that identifies the components of integrity and levels in the ecological hierarchy where the assessment will focus, and considers existing policies and management objectives. Both natural reference and societally desired environmental conditions are relevant comparison points. We applied the method to evaluate the ecological integrity of shrublands in Nevada, yielding an assessment based on six indicators of ecosystem structure, function, and composition, including resource- and stressor-based indicators measured at multiple scales. Results varied spatially and among indicators. Invasive plant cover and surface development were highest in shrublands in northwest and southeast Nevada. Departure from reference conditions of shrubland area, composition, patch size, and connectivity was highest in central and northern Nevada. Results may inform efforts to control invasive species and restore shrublands on federal lands in Nevada. We suggest that ecological integrity assessments for multiple-use lands be grounded in existing policies and monitoring programs, incorporate resource- and stressor-based metrics, rely on publicly available data collected at multiple spatial scales, and quantify both natural reference and societally desired resource conditions.

Utah’s legal claims to federal land grow out of its statehood enabling act. Since similar statutory language is found throughout the Western states, a successful claim by Utah could fuel more claims and potentially end the public land system as we know it. Utah’s claims, like those of its neighbors, are doomed to failure, however. The federal government has absolute control over federal public lands, including the constitutional authority to retain lands in federal ownership. Statutes authorizing Western states to join the Union required those same states to disclaim the right to additional lands and that disclaimer cannot be spun into a federal duty to dispose. Statehood enabling acts’ guarantee of equal political rights also cannot be spun into a promise of equal land ownership. Furthermore, though statehood enabling acts guarantee states a share of the proceeds resulting from federal land sales, that guarantee is not an obligation to sell. As a BLM spokeswoman recently said with respect to confrontations over public land management and Utah’s antagonistic tone towards the federal government: “It is frustrating as we work to identify the best possible path forward for everyone when some of the entities we are trying to work with consistently feel the need to poke us in the eye and then complain we are not working with them.”99 This may be the larger lesson — that the Transfer Movement does more harm than good to the federal-state relationship needed for effective public land management.