As a percentage of the total land area, the federal government owns more land in Nevada than anywhere else. Government agencies own about 81% of the state’s 70 million acres. Soon, however, that may begin to change.
Senator Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) recently introduced a bill that would transfer over 10,000 acres of land from federal to local control. The measure has received criticism from some outdoor recreationists and support from public lands groups.
The Bill: Douglas County Economic Development and Conservation Act
Cortez Masto introduced the Douglas County Economic Development and Conservation Act to the Senate in March. The legislation concerns land in Douglas County, Nev. The area is a popular destination for outdoor tourism, thanks to ski resorts and its close proximity to Lake Tahoe and several national forests.
In 2017, 20,000 acres in the area experienced extreme flooding. Statewide, estimates of flood damage totaled $40 million. Cortez Masto wants to transfer federal land to local control to better manage flood risk and prevention. The Board of County Commissioners would manage this land as one unified authority to streamline planning.
“Northern Nevada continues to experience severe weather events that highlight Douglas County’s need for the authority to mitigate flooding, especially on nearby federal lands that directly impact residential areas. This legislation would also convey federal land to Douglas County. That way can manage these flood-prone areas,” a press release from Cortez Masto stated.
Land Transfers
The bill would transfer multiple parcels of land from different government agencies to various local authorities. The breakdown is as follows:
- 1,084 acres of U.S. Forest Service (USFS) land to Douglas County for a recreation area.
- 7,777 acres of USFS and BLM land to Douglas County for management.
- 67 acres to the State of Nevada as part of Lake Tahoe–Nevada State Park.
- 3,393 acres to the Washoe Tribe of California and Nevada for cultural and ceremonial purposes.
- 31.5 acres of BLM land to be sold for economic development. Funds from land sales will be used for flood mitigation projects.
Additionally, the legislation would demarcate 12,400 acres of existing federal land as the Burbank Canyons Wilderness to help protect the sage grouse, a threatened bird.
Cortez Masto presented the bill as a win-win for all parties involved.
“I worked closely with my partners in Douglas County and the Washoe Tribe to create a bill that would prioritize responsible land management, economic development, outdoor recreation, and preservation of cultural sites,” she said. “Together, we can pass a bill that will give Douglas County the tools it needs to keep its residents safe and conserve its iconic scenery.”
Supporters of the Bill
Many local and statewide groups have endorsed the bill, including the Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California. “The lands designated to the Washoe Tribe come from many years of work and negotiations from prior Washoe Elders and Tribal Council members, most of whom have passed on,” Tribe Chairman Serrell Smokey said. “This meaningful action supports tribal sovereignty, restores Washoe connections to the lands, and will provide new opportunities.”
Other supporters include the Friends of Nevada Wilderness, a conservation nonprofit, and local fire district staff.
“By enabling the County to proactively manage stormwater generated on federal lands, this legislation will help the County protect the residents of neighborhoods like Johnson Lane and Ruthenstroth that have experienced significant impacts from multiple flash flooding events over the last decade and will ultimately save the District and the County hundreds of thousands of dollars in flood response over time,” East Fork Fire Protection District Fire Chief Alan Ernst said. “This is a practical investment in preparedness, safety, and long-term community resilience.”
Opposition to the Bill
Opposition comes from outdoor recreation access groups like the Blue Ribbon Coalition (BRC). The nonprofit’s main objection lies with the bill’s potential impact on off-highway vehicle (OHV) use. The 31.5 acres of BLM land that will go toward commercial development include parts of Mount Seigel OHV Area and Johnson Lane OHV Area.
“Although the exact number isn’t documented or disclosed, this bill, if passed, could close hundreds of miles of OHV routes,” BRC said in a press release.
The wilderness designation would also affect OHV use. Currently, these 12,400 acres are a wilderness study area (WSA). WSAs are natural areas managed by the BLM that Congress may someday designate as wilderness areas. Basically, the WSA designation is a placeholder status until Congress makes a decision.
Wilderness areas ban motorized vehicles, bikes, and road construction. Thus, the BRC sees the potential creation of the Burbanks Canyon Wilderness as a major threat to OHV use. It argues that the change would “ensure this land is locked up forever.”
Why Does it Matter?
The question of who should own and manage public lands is one of the most contentious and consequential issues in public land policy. Advocates of land transfers believe that state and local authorities are better attuned to the on-the-ground conditions in these areas. That allows them to manage the land more effectively to meet local needs.
Opponents of the practice cite concerns that states won’t be able to afford to maintain and manage large swaths of land, so they’ll be forced to sell them off or raise taxes. Unlike the federal government, almost all states have constitutions that prohibit them from going into debt.
Recent attempts to transfer federal land to states include places like Alaska. There, the BLM plans to transfer 5.2 million acres of land to facilitate economic development, including oil drilling and mining. Since the issue in Nevada requires congressional approval, this bill will be a litmus test for each party’s broader approach to public land management.
GearJunkie reached out to the BLM for comment, but the agency does not comment on pending legislation.
Read the full article here
