Op-Eds

Utah’s lawsuit raises critical issues about the West’s future. Federal land management has long shaped the economic, social, and environmental landscape of the region, yet states such as Utah are often left with little say in decisions that profoundly affect our communities. The sovereignty of Western states is continually impeded by federal agencies that ignore the needs and desires of the West through restrictions on grazing, mining access, and energy development. Meanwhile, wildfires in mismanaged federal forests level our landscapes and communities.

The story of public lands in the West is rooted in a unique historical contrast. States east of the Mississippi were largely granted control of their lands. But Western states were not. They remain dominated by federal ownership. In Utah, a majority of our land is federally controlled. This disparity has led to a host of challenges, from restricted access to natural resources to limited input in land-use decisions.

This legacy has real-world consequences. State and local governments struggle to provide adequate funding for schools, housing, and infrastructure, while federal policies governing public lands often fail to reflect the needs and priorities of the people who live here. Utahns and our Western neighbors deserve better.

At its core, this issue is about accountability. Our founders wisely gave Congress jurisdiction over federal lands in the Constitution, not unelected bureaucracy. This way, local voices would be represented in land management decisions at the federal level, and representatives who didn’t heed those voices would risk losing reelection.

Congress directed federal agencies to manage our land for various uses in the Federal Land Management Act of 1976. However, federal agencies repeatedly ignore that directive to restrict access to our public lands in the name of “conservation.” Because these agencies are not accountable to voters, their rulemaking decisions have gone unchecked.

As we wrestle with the future of public lands, we must work to rein in federal overreach by executive agencies and work toward reforms that give Western states a stronger voice in land management while maintaining the broader public interest. Responsible multiple-use requires partnerships that work.

Imagine what Utah could do if it had a greater say in how its lands were used. Revenues generated from responsible land management could be reinvested into education, easing the strain on our already overburdened school funding system. The state could also address rising housing prices by making more land available for responsible development. These are opportunities worth exploring.

When states manage their own lands, decisions are made closer to the people they affect. Local governments are better equipped to balance environmental stewardship with economic development, recreational access, and other priorities. They understand the nuances of local ecosystems and economies in ways distant federal agencies can’t — or simply won’t.

Additionally, we must work to address the funding disparities caused by federal land ownership. Programs such as Payments in Lieu of Taxes help offset the loss of tax revenue in counties with large amounts of federal land, but they are insufficient. Expanding and modernizing these programs would be a meaningful step toward fairness for Western states.

Utah’s recent Supreme Court challenge shines a spotlight on an issue that has too often been overlooked in national policy debates. And while the challenge was denied, we must continue working to address the underlying concerns that fuel this debate. Change will require good-faith partnerships at the local, state, and federal levels.