A Chronicle of
Oxymoronic Reality
Development Paves the Way for Wilderness
in Central Idaho
"Since 1972, approximately 65 million taxpayer dollars
($7.5 million in 2005 alone) have been wisely spent to purchase
land or acquire scenic easements on private land parcels within
the SNRA to prevent subdivisions and commercial developments. … Privatization
of prime SNRA lands is a totally inappropriate means to an
end to achieve wilderness designation,"
—Scott Phillips on behalf of more than a
dozen retired Forest Service employees in an op-ed.
in the Idaho Statesman, June 25, 2005 on threats to
the Sawtooth National Recreation Area.
Written and Photographed by Eric Segalstad
for Headwaters News
May 18, 2006
Trotting up the steep ridge, each step takes me farther away
from parking tickets, computer crashes, annoying ring tones
and the after-work crowd at the grocery store.
I'm scouring the mountaintops, hoping to get a glimpse of
Jerry Peak. All I see are rolling knolls covered with mountain
brome grass, sagebrush and the occasional patch of old growth
whitebark pine. Established trails are nonexistent in this
magnificent sanctuary, and the least taxing route is only obvious
to those able to read the contours and vegetation.
This breathtaking country, not far from
Ketchum, Idaho, could be close to federal protection as a
301,500-acre wilderness area known as the Boulder-White Cloud
Mountains. After six years on the drafting table, Congressman
Mike Simpson's (R-ID), Central Idaho Economic Development
and Recreation Act (CIEDRA) is written, fine-tuned and ready
to meet the scrutinizing eyes of Richard Pombo (R-CA), leader
of the House Resources Committee. The Committee heard CIEDRA
October 27, 2005, but the bill must pass through both the
House and the Senate before the President can make it law—time
the bill's opponents, who find the cost of designation excessive,
intend to spend well.
From the inception of the Wilderness Act in 1964 to 1980,
Congress passed Idaho wilderness and scenic river bills every
four years or so. In the 26 years since then, wilderness bills
in Idaho haven't come very far.
Nationally, recent additions to the wilderness preservation
system are scant compared to the past: 2.5 million acres included
since 1995, increasing the 106 million-acre system by 2.4 percent.
The last major addition was California's 7.9 million-acre statewide
wilderness bill that established 70 new areas in 1994.
Given this meager legislative activity, CIEDRA is a major
opportunity for many wilderness advocates, especially in Idaho.
But despite the possible establishments of new wilderness,
far from all wilderness advocates support it. The bill sports
several contested components, such as motorized corridors and
an economic development package for the surrounding areas.
Perhaps the most contentious component of CIEDRA concerns federal
land transfers to Custer County and its four sparsely populated
communities: Stanley, Clayton, Challis and Mackay. The 4,925-acre
county is slightly smaller than Connecticut, and the 2000 census
counted only 4,342 residents.
It's a beautiful country: rolling hills of windswept sagebrush
broken by pastures, framed by verdant moraines that lead up
to glacial lakes and glittering peaks. This palace of unspoiled
beauty is the largest swatch of unprotected federal land left
in the Lower 48.
The Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service
manage 93 percent of the county. Large-scale exploitation of
natural resources is quickly becoming a memory of the past
and local governments are struggling to maintain the necessary
tax base to pay for basic municipal services.
Simpson hopes CIEDRA will alleviate some of that pressure,
and he consciously plays land transfers as attractive bargaining
chips for wilderness. If CIEDRA passes, Custer County and its
incorporated cities plan on auctioning off plots to developers.
Therein lies the controversy. What the bill call transfers,
a substantial group of agitated residents and various non-profits
label giveaways. Three plots totaling 162 acres in and adjacent
to Stanley have stirred up the most furor.
Local government, hungry for a cash influx and an expanded
tax base, is in favor of the transfer, while opposing organizations
and residents fall back on two arguments.
One line claims developing the plots will threaten crucial
elk habitat and prevent migrating steelhead trout that come
900 miles away from the Pacific from spawning in the Salmon.
The other asserts that giving away plots,
some bought and protected under the Sawtooth National Recreation
Area, and therefore owned by all Americans, is indisputably
wrong. Ironically, factions involved in negotiations say
the battle is over, while those not willing to budge an acre,
like Janine Blaeloch of Western Lands Project, flatly states "Oh,
it hasn't even begun."
But Blaeloch and others already have
their hands full battling Pombo's recent initiatives. The
chairman of the House Resources Committee proposed last Fall
to close and sell 15 National Parks — approximately 23 percent of the total park system
acreage — to drillers and private developers. Another
initiative from Pombo's desk, an energy bill, could open production
of 10.4 billion barrels of oil in the northern coastal plain
of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. The money
raised from disposing federal land, he suggests, is for relief
work and costs of rebuilding in wake of natural disasters such
as Hurricane Katrina.
The land transfers in CIEDRA, although microscopic in comparison,
are meant to nurture the economic well being of Custer County.
Unlike Blaine County, its wealthy neighbor to the south and
home to Sun Valley, Custer's economy is a stew of ranching,
retirement, government jobs and tourism. The old pillars of
resource extraction continue to lose significance, according
to a 2003 study by the Sonoran Institute. But there are hopes
for a brighter future. Research indicates that communities
surrounded by areas of immense natural beauty can gain from
them. Blaine County was much like Custer until 1936 when Sun
Valley fired up its lifts and became the country's first all-inclusive
ski resort.
Stanley and Challis have benefited somewhat from being gateways
to Sawtooth National Recreation Area (established in 1972)
and the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness (created
1980). But even with 1.7 million visitors per year and a 2.5
percent citywide sales tax, Stanley finds itself without the
means to have its own high school.
Visitors bring with them a substantial influx of cash to the
area, but it's not enough to pay for adequate municipal services
in a large and sparsely populated county.
Gynii Gilliam, the economic development
director for north Custer and Lemhi counties, is excited
about the transfers, but she also has reservations. The problem,
as she sees it, is the lag time between enactment, when land
is transferred and visitors presumably come in larger numbers,
and sale. "We're
fighting for direct appropriations upfront, because emergency
needs will grow." Her logic is simple: as more visitors
come to the wilderness, demand for public services such as
police, upkeep of roads, fire crews and emergency care will
increase rapidly — services the community is responsible
to fund.
The appropriations are commonly known
as PILT, an acronym for Payment In Lieu of Taxes — the
federal ointment preferred by groups who oppose the giveaways
on principle. PILT is handed out to help local governments
offset lack of property taxes due to nontaxable federal lands
within county lines. In fiscal 2005, Custer County received
$390,504 according to data from the U.S. Department of the
Interior.
"This is a way to buy local support for wilderness," says
Janine Blaeloch, director of Western Lands Project, a Seattle-based
nonprofit that monitors federal land use.
A recent paper titled "Quid Pro Quo Wilderness," co-authored
by Blaeloch and Katie Fite of the Western Watersheds Project,
argues that we're witnessing a new and dangerous trend of trading
or giving away public lands for a pittance in return for wilderness
legislation.
Oregon's Steens Mountains bill from 1999 was perhaps the first
of these deals. Ranchers traded 18,000 acres for inclusion
in the wilderness in exchange for 104,000 acres of public lands.
In addition, the bill guaranteed them $5 million in cash and
made the BLM financially responsible for all fencing and water
development projects the ranchers deemed necessary on their
new ranges.
One of the key players in the Steens Mountain legislation
was Lindsay Slater, legislative director for Rep. Greg Walden,
(R-Ore.). Slater is today Simpson's chief of staff.
In Clark County, Nev., a 450,000-acre wilderness bill included
auctioning 22,000 acres of federal land near Las Vegas to real
estate developers. The 2002 bill also included a controversial
land exchange, granting the construction of a new road to cut
travel time for commuters.
George Nickas, executive director for
the nonprofit Wilderness Watch, is saddened by that fact
that environmentalists help make these bills reality through
negotiations with other interest groups. "These are diminished visions of what these places
could be," he says. Wilderness Watch is a national organization
based out of Missoula, Mont., that focuses on the preservation
and stewardship of areas within the wilderness and scenic river
systems.
Nickas characterizes negotiations surrounding
the bills as "backdoor
political games" focused on "what can I [as a user
group] get out of it?"
View south from Jerry Peak on a frosty September morning toward
the Pioneer Mountains. The haze is from a 40,000-acre forest
fire raging 35 miles to the west.
Two years ago Slater told the Salt Lake
Tribune "stand
alone wilderness is done. The trend seems to be toward legislation
based on compromise among various interests."
The Boulder-White Clouds bill is the latest quid pro quo wilderness
according to Blaeloch, but she suggests an alternative to handing
out free federal land.
"I'd rather see the government give them money," she
says. "The very Congress that's screaming about the economic
slump these communities are in is not giving them [enough]
PILT."
Gilliam sees it differently. "Stanley needs employee
housing. We're like Jackson [Wyoming] and Ketchum — surrounded
by so much federal land that the people who work here can't
afford to live here. The land exchange will hopefully change
that, but I have some concerns about it, too. Conservationists
buy up land for conservation easements, which I think is great,
but as an economic development advisor, I see it reducing our
tax base even further."
Idaho offers conditional tax credits to land owners who enter
into conservation agreements or donate conservation easements
to non-profit organizations. Income tax credits are awarded
in exchange for improving habitat for wildlife and endangered
plants. Half of eligible expenditures, such as removing barriers
to fish passage or construction of ponds for waterfowl, are
reimbursed. The limit is currently $2,000 per landowner for
the tax year, although a case review can net the owner additional
credits.
In 1999, the Forest Service paid $2.3 million for a 160-acre
conservation easement from WOMAC Land and Cattle Company in
the Sawtooth National Recreation Area. The easement reduced
a 20-unit subdivision to three units, but without a plan for
wildlife improvement, this particular easement wasn't awarded
tax credits.
The deal was one of the first brokered by the Sawtooth Society,
a nonprofit created in 1997 to oversee policies in the Sawtooth
National Recreational Area.
"Our aim and mission is to protect the SNRA and particularly
open space," says Bob Hayes, the organization's executive
director. On the phone he has the weathered voice of an old
rancher. Hayes has spent his entire life living in the Stanley
Basin and trudging around the towering Sawtooths. He understands
the complexities of the issue: SNRA must remain more or less
intact, Stanley lacks affordable housing, and wilderness protection
of the Boulder-White Clouds is on the agenda.
In the first draft of CIEDRA — Simpson called it a
framework — land transfers numbered some 16,000 acres,
an undisclosed amount of which came from the SNRA. It seemed
Simpson's office spelled out the number without considering
from where the acres came. The high acreage was unacceptable
to most except city and county officials who dreamed of a healthy
tax base supported by an avalanche of new residents.
"Simpson tested the public mind-set with the framework," Hayes
says. The Sawtooth Society and others told Simpson they couldn't
give him their support for CIEDRA, and the acreages evaporated
in the subsequent drafts like morning dew on the basin's alfalfa. "It's
been a give-and-take process and Congressman Simpson has responded
accordingly," Hayes says.
A majority of the Society's members now
accept the 162 acres slated for transfers. "The impacts on the SNRA are minimal.
Our view is give them what they [City of Stanley and Custer
County] need, but with deed restrictions," Hayes says. "We
are very sympathetic to the people who get heartburn over this,
and at one point we did, too, but given the political realities,
we believe this is the best way to save the SNRA." Far
from everyone concurs.
"These guys are smoking some funny stuff," says
Scott Phillips, facilitator for a group of 13 SNRA retirees
who like himself are ardently opposed to any transfers. "Simpson,
ICL [Idaho Conservation League], Hayes and a few others have
been sitting in backdoor meetings and invented their own little
reality world. Taxpayers have already spent nearly 60 million
dollars over a 35 year-period by purchasing tracts to protect
additional SNRA land. Amazing progress has been made. CIEDRA
intends to do the diametrically opposite [by transferring three
tracts for development] and ignores public law 92-400 [the
law that established the SNRA in 1972]. It's arrogance on the
part of Simpson to even propose such a thing [land transfers]."
The group Phillips represents has so far published two op-eds
in five local and statewide newspapers, and plans to publish
a third.
"The Forest Service has spent nearly $58 million [figure
from 2004] since the SNRA was established to protect the valley
floors — and scenic vistas considered to be among the
most beautiful in the mountain West," read the group's
op-ed from August. "CIEDRA would reverse one of the very
purposes for creating the Sawtooth NRA—protecting the
Sawtooth Valley and Stanley Basin from development."
A plan for the plots
Negotiations among Stanley, Custer, the Forest Service and
the Sawtooth Society resulted in a solution acceptable to
those involved. The current, and presumably final, version
of CIEDRA places deed restrictions on the plots. "They're
modeled after the Forest Service restrictions set forth in
the SNRA. They are very tight, very strict, prescriptive
and designed to make sure the use of that land is consistent
with the use in the area," Hayes says. The restrictions
control height, setbacks, maximum square-footage, types of
houses and more. In addition, a special committee made up
of three Stanley-area residents and a representative each
from Stanley and Custer, must agree on proposed developments
before bulldozers can start gnawing the sagebrush and alfalfa.
It's a convoluted conflict, but a closer look at the individual
plots in question removes some of the haze.
The first parcel is 8.3 acres and sits second-to-last on Benner
Street in Stanley, a small town made up of log cabins and western
ranch-style houses. During the 1970s the owner envisioned a
sprawling trailer park on the green alfalfa, but SNRA management
wasn't thrilled with the prospect of a trailer park with an
unobstructed view of the magnificent Sawtooths. Consequently,
the SNRA bought the plot with taxpayer money and preserved
it as open space.
"We intend to sell the land for residential development," says
retiring mayor Paul Frantellizzi. CIEDRA allows four single-story
homes no larger than 3,000 square-feet on the parcel. The mayor
thinks the city can sell the plots for $200,000-$250,000 each.
Assuming he is right, the in-town plot could raise $1 million—five
times Stanley's annual budget. "I suggested we take all
or a significant portion of that and create an endowment for
the community to use as a rainy-day fund or use the interest
for the arts, educations or other causes," Frantellizzi
says.
The second plot is Valley Creek (also
known as Old Sewer Ponds from the creek's past use), a 68-acre
chunk that's currently open space, but contiguous to the
city. Frantellizzi says the city requested Valley Creek to
be deeded for municipal purposes. Suggested uses include
municipal housing for fire fighters, emergency personnel
and teachers, develop the natural hot springs on the property
for the benefit of the community, or a tent city for summer
employees. The warm months are especially busy for the community
and a large contingent of mostly young people work nearby
at the popular Red Fish Lake, or down in the valley as guides,
cooks or ranch hands. Stanley is too small for a rental market
and land too scarce for affordable housing. But Frantellizzi
affirms that the city will maintain a view corridor and push
developments up toward the hill—restrictions
carefully laid out in CIEDRA.
The third parcel is on a bench overlooking
Stanley Basin, 80-some acres deeded to the county. CIEDRA
allows for up to ten parcels with single-story houses no
larger than 3,500 square-feet. The deed restrictions require
that the houses are western style and not visible from the
nearby highways. Given the estimated value of the land, there's
a good chance most of the lots will be mostly-empty second
homes. "I'd rather see families
move in and their kids go to our schools, but it's market-driven," Frantellizzi
says.
Idaho Conservation League's central Idaho
director Linn Kincannon says the group can accept the SNRA
land transfers because they are a necessary part of the political
effort to designate wilderness in Idaho. ICL is the leading
conservation group in Idaho, a position it enjoys due to
political savvy, strong leadership, healthy funding and a
willingness to meet halfway, according to a Blue Ribbon Coalition
staffer. "We can't throw everything
we don't like out of the wilderness bill," Kincannon
says. "It just won't happen, because without compromise
there will be no wilderness."
David Kimpton, a retired SNRA ranger, hunter and angler, is
concerned about the loss of what he calls irreplaceable wildlife
habitat. That elk enjoy Valley Creek in the winter is undisputed.
However, some dispute labeling the wintering grounds crucial
for elk habitat.
"It's certainly true that it's elk habitat," Hayes
says. "But they [Kimpton and others] haven't made a credible
case that they are crucial. The reality is that at that elevation
[6,400-7,000 feet] elk are all over. They do use the Valley
Creek area, and I suspect that they like them because of the
hot springs."
Frantellizzi says he opposes the use
of the word critical since it's subjective. "We live
in hundreds of thousands of acres of wilderness so that those
[few] acres are critical is a little skewed. Are we going
to be considerate and think about the elk? Sure, but how
much damage does a house on one-eighth of an acre pressed
up against the hill do?"
Not much, according to Tracey Trent,
chief of the natural resource policy bureau with Idaho Fish
and Game. "It's
true elk winter there," he says echoing Frantellizzi. "That
doesn't make them winter range." Recent mild winters and
locals feeding the elk have encouraged the large mammals to
stick around the area. The area's average winters of sub-zero
temperatures and five feet of snow, elk seek refuge in mild
drainages such as the middle fork of the Salmon and the north
fork of the Payette, Trent says.
With so many user groups demanding continued, exclusive or
expanded access to public lands, heated debates and direct
conflicts are an unavoidable part of the legislative process.
At this point in CIEDRA's legislative process, user groups
who have been consulted by Simpson's staff support the bill
(with a couple of for-the-record reservations), while those
not consulted are against.
Perceptions change depending on the perspective.
From the top of Jerry Peak one can see for miles in every direction:
great rocky slabs that make up the Pioneers and the Boulders
to the south and the spiny White Clouds to the west. Giant fields
of talus roll perpendicular to drainages and elusive springs
dotted on mountain meadows reflect the sky. Herd Creek appears
navy blue five miles away and a few thousand feet below, but
the perspective deceives—up close the little lake is muddy
with silt |