New West Op-Ed and Series

A New Congress, a New Chance to Be Heard on Wildlands

By Bruce Smithhammer, 3-08-11

	A cutthroat caught in Utah's Srawberry Reservoir, where anglers contribute about $20 million to the state's economy each year. It's part of what's at stake if habitat is sacrificed for development in the Intermountain West. Photo by Flickr user Curtis Fry.

The mule deer population, in their crucial winter habitat on the Pinedale Anticline and Jonah Fields of central Wyoming, has dropped by 60 percent in the last decade. Trophy trout streams, such as the headwaters of the San Juan in Colorado, have experienced increased siltation, which affects trout reproduction, among creating other impacts.

Sharp declines in sage grouse populations in the Powder River Basin of Montana and Wyoming, and elsewhere across the birds’ native habitat, have brought this symbolic Western species close to being put on the Endangered Species list. The Colorado cutthroat trout, which currently occupies an estimated 5 percent of its historic range, is experiencing intense competing pressures in its remaining strongholds in the upper Green River watershed.

All of these areas have also seen rampant, large-scale oil and gas development, and it is becoming increasingly undeniable that this rapidly expanding industry is having a significant impact on wild habitat and species in large parts of the Intermountain West.

Given the nature of this type of extraction, direct causation linked to the changes cited above has often been difficult to definitively prove, and studies of impacts have had a challenging time merely keeping up with the rapid pace of expansion.

Yet at a certain point, abundant correlation should be sufficient enough to cause justifiable concern, especially when remarkably similar impacts are being simultaneously encountered in different parts of the country. Between 2000 and 2008, oil and gas permits tripled nationwide, and approximately 126,000 wells are currently planned for the next 20 years. In the West alone, over the past 15 years, more than 40 million acres have been leased for development.

The impacts of these degraded habitats go far beyond declining wilderness quality and native species, though these are certainly significant enough.

Many of the local communities in these rural areas depend on a crucial influx of dollars from anglers and hunters traveling from elsewhere.

Utah’s Strawberry Reservoir, for example, where anglers convene every year for shots at massive, native Bonneville cutthroat trout, generates $20 million annually to contribute to the state’s economy. The surrounding Uinta National Forest is also a mecca for big game hunters, as well as providing crucial winter habitat for deer, elk and other species; much of it is currently leased for future development.

The headwaters of the San Juan River, considered a Blue Ribbon trout fishery, has been estimated to bring in as much as $40 million a year.

It is estimated that across the West, hunting, fishing and associated spending contribute $7 billion dollars annually – much of it to local economies and to management of lands and wildlife.

There is a reason that hunters, anglers and other backcountry users travel from all over the country, and abroad, to the Intermountain West. For those who seek to connect with wild trout, deer, elk, grouse and other intact species in their native habitat, this is the best place to do so outside of Alaska.

No other region of the country has such vast tracts of wild, public land, and there is no better way to continue to sustain such species at healthy population levels than by keeping their habitat protected and intact. Oil and gas development is certainly bringing welcome jobs and injecting significant amounts of money into many rural economies.

Yet while it may seem that this is a growth industry with no foreseeable end in sight, it is essential to remember that, in the big picture, it is, by its very nature, a finite resource. By contrast, with intelligent, long-term oriented, wildlands management, hunting, fishing and high-quality wilderness can continue to offer these same communities sources of revenue which are sustainable indefinitely.

Yet it is also important to keep in mind that many of our public lands, including those administrated by the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, are in large part designated as “multiple use” – not necessarily managed, nor intended, to be kept entirely pristine. As long as this continues to be the operating definition for these lands, it would be just as extreme to take a position of “no development” as it would be to advocate for developing all of it.

Further development of domestic oil and gas is going to happen, and arguably needs to happen, while we continue to refine and implement more sustainable sources of energy as well. But we must also be judicious, and balance the need for development with the need for keeping important habitat intact.

The realistic goal, then, is not to oppose all oil and gas development, but to instead work with private companies and public agencies to help them decide where it is appropriate and can be done with minimal impact and, conversely, where the loss would be too great or irreplaceable and should be off limits. Finding a sustainable balance requires input from many different, but equally valid, perspectives, and a willingness to work toward a collaborative approach with the most benefit for all concerned.

We can draw a line in the sand and continue to butt heads, or we can figure out how to work together – for industry, for habitat protection, and for sustainable, diverse, local economies.

Legislators also need this variety of input, and with a new Congress in place and many seats having turned over in the last election cycle, the need is even greater. Living in the Intermountain West, it can be easy to feel that decisions regarding our public lands are made a world away. It’s also easy to become cynical about the current state of politics – the real challenge lies in maintaining faith in the democratic process.

And there is arguably no greater way to partake in this dynamic process than by personally making the effort to travel across the country to talk directly with Congresspeople about these concerns. This is where a group called Sportsmen for Responsible Energy Development has entered the picture.

An avid hunter, angler and communications consultant from Idaho, an English professor and bowhunter from Washington state, a retired 30-year career Forest Service employee and angler from Montana, a marketing consultant and sportsman from Oregon: individuals from across the spectrum of occupations and political beliefs. While these people may not conform to the typical stereotype of those who get active in advocating for limits to development, they, too, are sufficiently concerned about making sure that the industry—and the politicians who set policy—understand that it must be done in a responsible way that doesn’t impact the lives and livelihoods of others who share these lands.

When do you decide, despite how easy it may be to feel that your voice is insignificant, that it’s time to leap across the chasm that can sometimes seem to separate individuals from the decision-making process? When is it time to remind yourself, and others, that our elected representatives are public servants who work for us, and that it’s time to go talk to them?

Over the next few days, I’ll be traveling to Washington, D.C., with a group of dedicated hunters and anglers, including the individuals described above, and members of Sportsmen For Responsible Energy Development, to find out.

Stay tuned.

Bruce Smithhammer is a freelance writer and editor, a columnist for the Teton Valley News and a contributing editor for The Drake magazine. He is also among a group of hunting writers who contribute to the blog Mouthful of Feathers. He’ll be blogging about his D.C. trip for New West in the coming days.

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.