Complete Transcript below:
00;00;00;00 - 00;00;28;03
Richard Olsenius
Welcome to another podcast from the American Landscape Gallery, where we're dedicated to preserving and celebrating America's great landscapes. Today we're plunging into a huge topic the management and use of our public lands.
I'm Richard Olsenius
00;00;28;06 - 00;00;45;24
Christine Olsenius
And I'm Christine Olsenius
To begin, it's important to note that in just a few years, U.S. public lands have become a high stakes arena where climate goals, energy security, indigenous rights, and outdoor recreation all collide.
00;00;45;26 - 00;01;00;19
Richard Olsenius
The courts, Congress and successive administrations have pulled policy in opposite directions in the outcome of the next election will once again decide which vision prevails. The uncertainty and whiplash of policy changes has been constant.
00;01;00;25 - 00;01;04;03
Christine Olsenius
So public lands issues are a massive topic.
00;01;04;06 - 00;01;15;10
Richard Olsenius
We're talking over 630 million acres, mostly out West. I mean, just to picture it, that's bigger than Texas, California, Florida, in New York all put together.
00;01;15;15 - 00;01;18;21
Christine Olsenius
It's so vast, it's hard to comprehend.
00;01;18;23 - 00;01;35;28
Richard Olsenius
And these aren't just, you know, pretty places. These places are steeped in history, scenic landscapes, abundant wildlife, invaluable resources like oil, gas and timber. And there are the center of some really intense debates, debates that have been going on for years.
00;01;35;29 - 00;01;36;26
Christine Olsenius
Absolutely.
00;01;36;26 - 00;01;46;15
Richard Olsenius
So we'll look at recent headlines, proposed sell offs, but also dig into history, sometimes uncomfortable history of how these lands even became public.
00;01;46;17 - 00;02;15;17
Christine Olsenius
Right. So our mission for this deep dive is really to help you navigate all these competing ideas about what these lands are for. Well, look at the recent fights, the policies behind them, and all the different perspectives from industry, policymakers, conservationists, outdoor enthusiasts and indigenous communities. Basically, what's at stake. Why do these lands matter so much, and what do these battles mean for the future?
00;02;15;24 - 00;02;25;18
Richard Olsenius
Okay, so let's start with the immediate information, the headlines. Senator Mike Lee from Utah. He's been pushing to sell off federal lands. Right.
00;02;25;19 - 00;02;34;11
Christine Olsenius
That's right. The initial idea was pretty ambitious, mandating sales of up to 3.3 million acres in 11 western states.
00;02;34;17 - 00;02;35;15
Richard Olsenius
Really?
00;02;35;17 - 00;02;48;07
Christine Olsenius
That got scaled back later to about 1.2 million acres, mostly BLM land. Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service land, and specifically areas within five miles of towns or cities.
00;02;48;14 - 00;02;50;29
Richard Olsenius
In the argument is housing and money.
00;02;51;01 - 00;03;02;03
Christine Olsenius
Yes, the stated goals are. Number one tackle the housing crisis in the West, which is definitely real. And number two, to generate revenue maybe 5 to 10 billion.
00;03;02;06 - 00;03;07;22
Richard Olsenius
Okay. But how did these proposals actually get into legislation. That seems important.
00;03;07;25 - 00;03;20;15
Christine Olsenius
It is these provisions were inserted into a budget reconciliation bill, which is of a specific process, mainly for budget items, that lets bills pass with just a simple majority in the Senate.
00;03;20;18 - 00;03;22;06
Richard Olsenius
So it avoids the filibuster.
00;03;22;07 - 00;03;31;13
Christine Olsenius
Exactly. And crucially, it often bypasses the kind of extensive public engagement you'd normally expect for major land decisions like this.
00;03;31;19 - 00;03;34;14
Richard Olsenius
Which I imagine set off some alarms.
00;03;34;18 - 00;03;37;11
Christine Olsenius
It definitely raised red flags for a lot of people.
00;03;37;18 - 00;03;42;12
Richard Olsenius
And the pushback was interesting. It wasn't just the usual environmental groups, was it?
00;03;42;15 - 00;03;50;23
Christine Olsenius
No, not at all. It was incredibly broad, bipartisan even. You had hunters, anglers, off road vehicle users.
00;03;50;25 - 00;03;53;06
Richard Olsenius
Like the ATV and dirt bike folks.
00;03;53;11 - 00;04;13;04
Christine Olsenius
And conservative figures too, like Ryan Zinke, who was Trump's interior secretary in his first administration. Even podcasters like Joe Rogan and Steven Ranallo weighed in pretty heavily against it. There was a poll showing something like 71% of Americans are against selling off public lands.
00;04;13;11 - 00;04;17;06
Richard Olsenius
So why such broad opposition? What was the core argument?
00;04;17;13 - 00;04;39;14
Christine Olsenius
Well, these groups basically call them back door deals. They argued it wasn't just about losing public access, which is huge for them, but also about undermining protections for nature and cultural sites. The key point was that these lands are a public trust sort of an investment for everyone, not just an asset to be sold off to plug budget holes.
00;04;39;21 - 00;04;42;28
Richard Olsenius
In the fair was they just get sold to the highest bidder.
00;04;42;28 - 00;05;01;00
Christine Olsenius
Precisely. If they go to counties, the worry is they could be sold off quickly with no public input, no environmental checks ending up, as you know, luxury housing, hotels, data centers or something else entirely. Not necessarily for the public benefit.
00;05;01;02 - 00;05;03;09
Richard Olsenius
Can you give us an example specifically?
00;05;03;16 - 00;05;09;24
Christine Olsenius
Sure. Lee's initial proposal included 311 acres right next to Zion National Park.
00;05;09;25 - 00;05;11;21
Richard Olsenius
Really? Right next to Zion?
00;05;11;21 - 00;05;25;29
Christine Olsenius
Yes. And also land along the scenic highway. People used to get into the park. So you're talking about potential impacts on wildlife habitat. Bighorn sheep live there. And just the whole experience of visiting a place like Zion.
00;05;26;02 - 00;05;32;03
Richard Olsenius
Okay. But let's circle back to that housing argument, because the housing crisis is real in the West.
00;05;32;03 - 00;05;43;08
Christine Olsenius
It absolutely is. In Nevada, for example, they estimate needing something like 118,000 low income rental units. No question. It's a serious problem.
00;05;43;11 - 00;05;46;29
Richard Olsenius
So does selling public land actually help? Has it worked before?
00;05;47;05 - 00;06;21;05
Christine Olsenius
Well, that's the critical question. If you look at past examples like Nevada, Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act, the results are kind of underwhelming on the affordable housing front. Under that program, about 30 acres were specifically set aside for affordable housing, and that produced only about 850 units. Meanwhile, about 17,000 acres were sold at market rates, averaging $200,000 an acre with zero requirements for affordable housing attached.
00;06;21;11 - 00;06;25;18
Richard Olsenius
So very little affordable housing came out of selling. A lot of public land.
00;06;25;19 - 00;06;37;27
Christine Olsenius
Pretty much leads people to ask, you know, are these new proposals really about housing, or are they, as some critics put it, a point to get your toe in the door to start selling off lots of federal land?
00;06;37;29 - 00;06;49;05
Richard Olsenius
Right. It definitely makes you wonder about the underlying motive. Okay, so sell offs are one thing, but even if those fail, you mentioned other big shifts happening under the current administration.
00;06;49;09 - 00;07;04;14
Christine Olsenius
Yes, exactly. Even without outright sales, there are other potential threats, or at least major changes in direction. And here is where it gets really interesting. The administration plans to rescind the Biden era public lands rule.
00;07;04;18 - 00;07;06;18
Richard Olsenius
Okay. What did that rule do?
00;07;06;21 - 00;07;20;18
Christine Olsenius
So the Biden rule was pretty significant. It aimed to put conservation and ecosystem restoration on an equal footing with the traditional uses of BLM land, oil and gas exploration, mining, grazing.
00;07;20;18 - 00;07;22;22
Richard Olsenius
For the first time ever really?
00;07;22;24 - 00;07;29;24
Christine Olsenius
First time? Yes. So getting rid of that rule lines up pretty neatly with the goals of project 2025.
00;07;29;27 - 00;07;36;15
Richard Olsenius
This is the big conservative policy playbook we keep hearing about. The one from the Heritage Foundation, exactly.
00;07;36;19 - 00;07;53;16
Christine Olsenius
Which calls for boosting drilling and mining on public lands significantly. And this move to rescind the Biden rule is happening despite really strong public support for keeping it 92%. And 72% of Western voters want to prioritize conservation.
00;07;53;17 - 00;08;00;02
Richard Olsenius
So it seems like a clear philosophical shift away from conservation back towards resource extraction.
00;08;00;05 - 00;08;08;16
Christine Olsenius
It definitely signals a different set of priorities. And it's not just that one rule. There are other specific things happening too.
00;08;08;21 - 00;08;09;12
Richard Olsenius
Like what?
00;08;09;13 - 00;08;20;12
Christine Olsenius
Well, coal sales for one. They're looking now at reopening over 20,600mi² for coal sales in Wyoming and Montana's Powder River basin.
00;08;20;13 - 00;08;22;21
Richard Olsenius
Wow. That's a huge area.
00;08;22;24 - 00;08;38;07
Christine Olsenius
It is. And it reverses Biden's climate focus policies. The administration has also lowered the royalty payments that companies pay for mining coal on public lands nearly in half, down from 12.5% to 7%.
00;08;38;13 - 00;08;40;16
Richard Olsenius
Okay, well what else?
00;08;40;18 - 00;08;48;10
Christine Olsenius
Logging. There's an order out for extensive logging across 280 million acres of national forest and public lands, two.
00;08;48;10 - 00;08;51;09
Richard Olsenius
Hundred and 80 million acres. That sounds enormous.
00;08;51;11 - 00;09;04;07
Christine Olsenius
It is. And often they're bypassing Endangered Species Act protections using emergency powers. The justification is wildfire risk reduction and relying less on foreign timber.
00;09;04;10 - 00;09;06;07
Richard Olsenius
But critics probably disagree.
00;09;06;14 - 00;09;16;11
Christine Olsenius
Oh, yes. Critics argue this kind of logging can actually increase fire risk in some cases, and obviously harm hundreds of species that rely on these forests.
00;09;16;13 - 00;09;20;02
Richard Olsenius
Okay, so call and logging anything else, major?
00;09;20;05 - 00;09;51;25
Christine Olsenius
Arctic drilling is another one. While Biden did cancel some Trump era oil leases up in Anwar, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the current administration is generally aiming to speed up permits for resource extraction projects across Alaska. Another big change, potentially, is about national monuments. The Justice Department issued a legal opinion saying that the president has the authority to actually revoke national monument designations made under the Antiquities Act.
00;09;51;29 - 00;09;55;20
Richard Olsenius
Wait, I thought that was settled law, that presidents couldn't do that.
00;09;55;23 - 00;10;12;18
Christine Olsenius
Well, a 1938 opinion said they couldn't. This new opinion challenges that directly. And remember, this is the same legal thinking that allowed the Trump administration to shrink Bears Ears and Grand Staircase Escalante National monuments in Utah during his first.
00;10;12;18 - 00;10;14;23
Richard Olsenius
Term, which Biden later restored.
00;10;14;24 - 00;10;27;29
Christine Olsenius
Which Biden restored, exactly. But now the door seems wide open, and they're looking at shrinking their acreage as well as other monuments like Chuck Marla in California and Ironwood Forest in Arizona.
00;10;28;04 - 00;10;34;14
Richard Olsenius
So all of these actions together call logging monuments. It sounds like a really systematic shift.
00;10;34;22 - 00;10;52;05
Christine Olsenius
It certainly looks like a coordinated effort to change how these lands are managed. Leaning much more heavily towards resource extraction and development. And it connects back to that project 2025 playbook, which also talks about things like dismantling Noah and cutting EPA staff.
00;10;52;05 - 00;11;02;08
Richard Olsenius
Right. Shrinking the federal government, which raises questions about how effective land management can even be if the agencies are understaffed and maybe lose expertise.
00;11;02;12 - 00;11;04;11
Christine Olsenius
That's a huge concern. Definitely.
00;11;04;18 - 00;11;13;20
Richard Olsenius
Okay, that leads us to another really uncomfortable part of the public land story, especially concerning our national parks. America's best idea, right?
00;11;13;22 - 00;11;17;12
Christine Olsenius
Yes, but an idea with a very different origin story.
00;11;17;16 - 00;11;24;29
Richard Olsenius
Because many of these iconic parks, places like Yosemite, Yellowstone, they were established on land taken from Native American tribes.
00;11;25;03 - 00;11;34;26
Christine Olsenius
Forcibly taken. Yes. It really shatters that whole illusion of American wilderness. Settlers saw these landscapes as virgin, untouched.
00;11;34;29 - 00;11;35;23
Richard Olsenius
But they weren't.
00;11;35;24 - 00;11;48;07
Christine Olsenius
Not at all. Indigenous peoples have been managing these lands for thousands of years, often very carefully, using techniques like control burns, sophisticated agriculture, sustainable hunting.
00;11;48;13 - 00;11;51;10
Richard Olsenius
So the wilderness was actually a managed landscape.
00;11;51;13 - 00;12;01;12
Christine Olsenius
In many cases, yes. And national parks were often created right after violent conflicts, broken treaties marking the removal of the people who live there.
00;12;01;18 - 00;12;03;14
Richard Olsenius
It's a tough legacy to grapple with.
00;12;03;21 - 00;12;28;19
Christine Olsenius
It really is. And you see the ongoing impact. Look at the Mandan, Hidatsa and Arakawa Nations in western North Dakota. Their original reservation was over 12 million acres. It got shrunk down to less than a million. And then in the mid 20th century, the government built the Garrison Dam, flooding there best fertile river lands. All of this without any real consultation or consent.
00;12;28;26 - 00;12;29;27
Richard Olsenius
That's devastating.
00;12;30;03 - 00;12;41;13
Christine Olsenius
It is. And that kind of history gives context to a really provocative idea that's gaining some traction now. The idea of actually returning the national parks to indigenous control.
00;12;41;16 - 00;12;46;26
Richard Olsenius
Really returning all 85 million acres of national park sites. To whom exactly?
00;12;46;28 - 00;12;53;04
Christine Olsenius
The proposal is generally to return them to open sources of federally recognized tribes.
00;12;53;08 - 00;12;57;12
Richard Olsenius
Okay, that's a huge idea. What are the arguments for doing something like that?
00;12;57;13 - 00;13;10;14
Christine Olsenius
Well, proponents say first it's about restoring dignity and justice, giving back access to ancestral homelands. Second, there's an argument that tribes might actually be better stewards of the land.
00;13;10;18 - 00;13;11;05
Richard Olsenius
Why?
00;13;11;11 - 00;13;27;00
Christine Olsenius
Because many tribes have experience managing complex land holdings already, balancing different uses cultural, economic, environmental and it could insulate the parks from, you know, the political winds shifting back and forth in Washington.
00;13;27;02 - 00;13;35;18
Richard Olsenius
Okay. Let's shift gears again. Another big fight is just about how people use these lands. The culture war is a public land use, you could call it.
00;13;35;24 - 00;13;44;04
Christine Olsenius
Yes, that's a good way to put it. And a prime example is the battle over off road vehicles or RVs, especially in places like Utah.
00;13;44;06 - 00;13;50;29
Richard Olsenius
Right. I heard about a recent controversy in Glen Canyon National Recreation Area in an area called Orange Cliffs.
00;13;50;29 - 00;14;02;03
Christine Olsenius
Exactly. Congress actually stepped in and overturned a Biden administration rule that would have limited ORV access on just an eight mile stretch of road there, with.
00;14;02;04 - 00;14;04;16
Richard Olsenius
Just eight miles in Congress overturned it.
00;14;04;17 - 00;14;20;11
Christine Olsenius
Yes, it really highlights this clash between two basic views. On one side, you have people who see public lands as mostly a playground to be enjoyed, which advocates for motorized recreation. They emphasize freedom and access.
00;14;20;17 - 00;14;21;19
Richard Olsenius
And on the other side.
00;14;21;25 - 00;14;33;25
Christine Olsenius
You have those who see lands primarily as a treasure to be preserved. They value solitude, quiet, natural sounds. Groups like the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance fall more into this camp.
00;14;33;27 - 00;14;37;04
Richard Olsenius
So what are the RV folks arguing specifically?
00;14;37;09 - 00;14;51;13
Christine Olsenius
They stress their right to use RV to get deep into remote areas. They often argue their vehicles don't cause much more damage than regular trucks, and that restrictions are just as one person called it, purity culture. Nonsense.
00;14;51;15 - 00;14;54;13
Richard Olsenius
Okay, and the counter argument from environmental groups.
00;14;54;19 - 00;15;10;12
Christine Olsenius
They point out that RVs are typically much louder. They can go off trail more easily, disrupting habitat, fragile soils and vegetation. They definitely shatter the quiet that other visitors seek, and they contribute to air and noise pollution.
00;15;10;14 - 00;15;20;21
Richard Olsenius
So it's a classic conflict. How do we balance these people wanting noisy fun versus people wanting quiet solitude, both on the same public land and both talking about freedom?
00;15;20;22 - 00;15;36;11
Christine Olsenius
That is the million dollar question, isn't it? How do you manage for such different, often incompatible uses and ideas of what freedom even means on public land, while also trying to protect the resource itself? It's incredibly difficult.
00;15;36;14 - 00;15;52;03
Richard Olsenius
It really seems like there are no easy answers. So wrapping this all up, it feels like these public lands that are much more than just land. They're like a mirror reflecting our biggest national arguments about priorities, history, money, nature and culture.
00;15;52;05 - 00;16;07;16
Christine Olsenius
I think that's exactly right. They are a battleground for these competing visions. And what really stands out from this deep dive is that the future path is unclear. It depends entirely on how we collectively decide to weigh all these different factors.
00;16;07;23 - 00;16;20;09
Richard Olsenius
Resource extraction versus conservation and environmental protection, federal control versus local special interests development today versus preserving public lands for future generations.
00;16;20;14 - 00;16;30;13
Christine Olsenius
Returning land to indigenous stewardship versus maintaining federal control or even just, you know, our viewers versus hikers.
00;16;30;15 - 00;16;37;23
Richard Olsenius
So maybe the provocative thought to leave with is this how do you define the word public when you think about public lands?
00;16;37;26 - 00;17;04;12
Christine Olsenius
What does that word truly mean to you, and what obligations or opportunities does that definition create for the future of these incredible contested spaces?