In case you didn’t see this

[Firedad]

Rosen introduces Washoe County lands bill

U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen has introduced a Washoe County lands bill, a piece of legislation she hopes will increase housing opportunities and protect public lands.

www.kolotv.com

 

[Moe]

I thought only the evil Republicans wanted to auction our public lands to the highest bidders? Guess not.

 

[buckskol14]

I don't see much about an auction... looks pretty positive to me.

 

[eshunt]

I don't see much about an auction... looks pretty positive to me.

That one pager says that 15,860 acres of public land to be sold at fair market value.

Of those acres being sold, many of them are in mule deer winter range and antelope range. Look at the areas to the East of the Pah Rah's along the north boundary of I-80 corridor. Lots of deer and antelope habitat will be lost to development. The antelope herd in the Pah Rah range is already hurting due to the overpopulation of feral horses. I had a tag there last year and saw 20-30 times as many horses as antelope. Last thing they need is more development into homes.

There are some good things about this proposal, but the bad outweighs the good in my opinion. There is a lot more in-depth information here: https://landsbill.org/ Take a look at the maps that show the public lands slated for "disposal".

 

[buckskol14]

That one pager says that 15,860 acres of public land to be sold at fair market value.

Of those acres being sold, many of them are in mule deer winter range and antelope range. Look at the areas to the East of the Pah Rah's along the north boundary of I-80 corridor. Lots of deer and antelope habitat will be lost to development. The antelope herd in the Pah Rah range is already hurting due to the overpopulation of feral horses. I had a tag there last year and saw 20-30 times as many horses as antelope. Last thing they need is more development into homes.

There are some good things about this proposal, but the bad outweighs the good in my opinion. There is a lot more in-depth information here: https://landsbill.org/ Take a look at the maps that show the public lands slated for "disposal".

I hear you on the range in question, but unfortunately, with the Eastern sprawl out of Reno happening like it is, it'll always have a target on its back. However, the trade-off of ~15,000 acres to protect ~900,000 of arguably very similar habitat and winter range utilization is something to really think about. My question is, when comparing the NCAs they propose to "replace" or encompass the WSAs, it looks like they are getting downsized in some areas.

"Wilderness Study Areas (commonly known as WSAs) are places that have wilderness characteristics; that is a minimum size, naturalness, and outstanding opportunities for recreation which make them eligible for designation as wilderness... The establishment of a WSA served to identify areas for Congress to consider for addition to the National Wilderness Preservation System." - BLM.gov

So it's as if they have finalized their determination of what study areas should be protected, and in this case, as NCAs. Which is still great, but they should dive into the details of this conversion a little further.

 

[eshunt]

I hear you on the range in question, but unfortunately, with the Eastern sprawl out of Reno happening like it is, it'll always have a target on its back. However, the trade-off of ~15,000 acres to protect ~900,000 of arguably very similar habitat and winter range utilization is something to really think about. My question is, when comparing the NCAs they propose to "replace" or encompass the WSAs, it looks like they are getting downsized in some areas.

"Wilderness Study Areas (commonly known as WSAs) are places that have wilderness characteristics; that is a minimum size, naturalness, and outstanding opportunities for recreation which make them eligible for designation as wilderness... The establishment of a WSA served to identify areas for Congress to consider for addition to the National Wilderness Preservation System." - BLM.gov

So it's as if they have finalized their determination of what study areas should be protected, and in this case, as NCAs. Which is still great, but they should dive into the details of this conversion a little further.

There are some good things about the bill, but why do we have to have almost 16,000 acres of public land get sold off? There is already plenty of private land to the south of I-80 in that area. Why not let those private lands get developed before we sell off the public lands?

 

[Hackleback]

I'm not a fan.

 

[HntHrdr]

900,000 in question is already public land, therefore protected from building housing on it… why sell off almost 16,000 to be developed as “ low income housing” ? News flash, not everyone gets to live everywhere they want. Look at lots of states right now, CA, CO, UT not everyone gets to live on the beach in San Diego or summit county, we should not be chopping up our public land to build subsidized housing

 

[buckskol14]

Unfortunately, these public lands, specifically the BLM portions, are not protected from a change in status, or we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place. It is a question of indefinite protection, not just today's current status. This is why we have firm designations for NCAs, wilderness, national parks, etc. All of the BLM land in question, including the WSAs to the North, are in danger if not given clear and defined protections. WSAs are simply regulatory placeholders for a place that "looks, acts, feels" like wilderness, but it isn't until congressional approval. Without this Bill, these lands continue to be in limbo and still up for debate until their protections are no longer temporary.

"This legislation creates both Wilderness Areas and National Conservation Areas to permanently protect some of the existing public lands within Washoe County. Land that is currently managed as a Wilderness Study Area that is not designated by this legislation as Wilderness or as part of a National Conservation Area will go back to being managed as multiple use." - Landsbill.org

A potential result could be that in 10, 20, 50, and 100 years, Congress could determine them not eligible for Wilderness designation (for whatever reason), strip them of their semi-protected status, and then put them on the chopping block for additional disposal. Then we've lost everything we are talking about today.

You can shut the borders of every state in the US tomorrow, but that won't come close to fixing the problem of folks in need of low-income housing... but that's another story entirely and a conversation that should live elsewhere on the internet.

I would be interested in hearing BHA's stance on this bill.

 

[buckskol14]

BHA's statement from July of 2023

Found the official statement here, some great points for sure.

 

[HntHrdr]

Since you seem to well versed buckshot… seems like really awful precedent to start selling off public land. I understand this happened in the past. I also understand sometimes there are land swaps, but just about every politician on either side of the aisle would like to get to chop up blm and NF and sell it to the highest bidder or “subsidize housing” on it to buy votes on their side of the perspective aisle. Which all of this just appears to be opening up giant cans of worms…

 

[buckskol14]

I agree that our public lands have been and always will be at risk. But utilizing this opportunity to actually protect some of these lands should be considered carefully. It's nice knowing folks like BHA and others like them have their eyes on this and can bring in experts to vet the situation.