ROCKY MOUNTAIN LAND USE GROK
Idaho to Sell Lands to Protect Others
By David Frey, 6-21-07
 | |
|
Idaho is aiming to protect ranchland and wild lands with a new land trust, but to fund it, the state wants to auction off more than 30 pieces of land, including some historic ranches within wilderness. State officials say the sales would probably go to federal land agencies, not wealthy landowners looking for a trophy ranch. Still, environmentalists are skeptical.
“The last things we want to see is more no trespassing signs on our favorite fishing holes,” John Robison, of the Idaho Conservation League, told the Associated Press.
The Department of Fish and Game drafted a list of over 30 “surplus properties” to sell off to build an endowment for the trust, including several in the Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness. Ranches range from a fraction of an acre to 20,000 acres in the Panhandle National Forest. In return, the state hopes to protect key ranches and forest land. It’s planning a round of workshops starting in July for residents to identify spots they’d like to see protected.
Conservation easements are also making headlines in Missoula, Mont., where Missoula County commissioners approved their first open space project funded with a new tax. They’ll spend $304,500 to buy the development rights on properties in the Potomac and Greenough areas, writes the Missoulian. One is part of a bigger effort by the Nature Conservancy to acquire Plum Creek Timber Co. land. The other is aimed at protecting a rare wetland, habitat for native fish and part of the recently-restored Ashby Creek.
Boulder County, Colo., doesn’t exactly have a reputation for being a friend to developers. As more and more homeowners in the pricey county are building more and more monster homes, the county is looking at cracking down. The county isn’t looking at size caps, per se. Instead, it’s looking at making homeowners buy transferable development rights to build over a certain size: 2,600 square feet in the mountains, 4,000 square feet on the plains. Another idea would be to require more environmentally-sensitive materials for big homes.
Not surprisingly, real estate agents and builders aren’t thrilled about the ideas.
“We support using less energy and being more sustainable, but this is not the right way to address those concerns,” Diane B. Zile, vice president of ecology at McStain Neighborhood, tells the Rocky Mountain News.
Elsewhere in Colorado, it’s design that’s creating controversy. Architect Daniel Libeskind is famous for designing the master plan for the World Trade Center site in New York. He created the new eye-catching addition to the Denver Art Museum. But his latest project is in the small town of Edwards, just down the road from Vail, and his urban eye is less than beloved in this mountain burg. It’s part of a $125 million condo tower project, his first mountain project in the U.S. Some residents of Edwards may hope it’s his last. The project, the Rocky writes, “has drawn criticism from residents who say it doesn’t blend in with the environment, or it is simply another tribute to Libeskind’s ego.”
In a Q&A, Libeskind shrugs off the criticism.
“Why copy the model of a chalet from Bavaria? Create your own market,” he says.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
ICL does not have any qualms about disposing of public lands in the Owyhee Initiative through sale with the ranchers setting the price.
Idaho fish and game license holders will be carefully watching how this proposal develops.
Cheers,
J. Kent Marlor, President, Idaho Wildlife Federation.
The pieces of legislation known as the Owyhee Initiative and the Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act are being touted as great, but little is said about the public land giveaways.
An ICL spokesman says in this story that he worries about “no trespassing” signs going up on land that Fish and Game sells, but most sales are proposed to the Forest Service or other land management agencies, meaning they would still be public land. I worked for F&G;for 18 years and am aware of what a management burden some of these places are. The discussions of what to do with surplus properties have been going on within the agency for years. The constitutional charge of Fish and Game is to manage the fish and wildlife of the state. When a piece of property no longer serves that end, or would do so just as well in federal ownership, the department is ahead to sell it, apply the funds to other projects, and save the ongoing upkeep and management costs.
Please turn your attention to the Owyhee Initiative and the Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act. Forty-two conservation groups oppose them. There must be a reason.