Utah
Opinion: Utah’s commitment to true conservation
Generations ago, pioneers arrived in the harsh yet beautiful terrain of the Utah desert, determined to make a home. They faced countless challenges, but through collaboration and respect for the land, they cultivated thriving communities. Those who called this place home before us understood the delicate balance between using the land for survival and preserving it for future generations. This principle of stewardship has guided Utahns ever since.
Unfortunately, this code has been eroded by a recent federal rule adopting a “look, but don’t touch” approach that has left outdoor enthusiasts feeling excluded. The federal government’s approach underscores a troubling trend that makes it clear that managing Utah’s public lands from Washington, D.C., is not the solution. That’s why Utah is asserting its right to manage our lands. We believe in local stewardship, proven through our track record of responsibly managing state lands for the benefit of all Utahns and future generations.
The new version of the Public Lands Rule released earlier this year redefines conservation. This fundamental change of course from the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), enacted without congressional approval, now includes “conservation” as a defined “use” and allows special interest groups to close down access to public lands across Utah. The federal government claims the Public Lands Rule will safeguard public lands. In reality, it restricts local Bureau of Land Management (BLM) employees and their partners at the state and local levels from improving and restoring Utah’s landscapes and watersheds effectively. This new rule will shut down access to Utahns’ favorite spots and limit activities we’ve done for generations on public lands like camping, hiking, biking, fishing and driving off-highway vehicles.
Most people know me as a conservative, but I’m also a conservationist — the two are not mutually exclusive. Activist companies and organizations have hijacked the meaning of true conservation, pushing for strong environmental regulations that misuse the terms “preserving” and “protecting” the land, with the real goal being to restrict access from nearly every possible angle. The way I see it, the best kind of environmental conservation stems from being a wise and respectful steward of the land, working to make it better, and not keeping it closed from public access.
The federal government has not always had such a radical approach. Fifty years ago, they took a much more common sense approach with FLPMA, which “required lands to be carefully managed to balance uses such as livestock grazing, thinning woodlands, hiking, camping, horseback riding, and riding recreational vehicles.” We’ve strayed well off of that balance, and it’s time to get back on track.
For as long as I can remember, I’ve spent time working and playing on Utah’s land. I love Utah’s lands. Ranching, hunting, fishing and growing crops are in my blood. This deep-rooted connection has fostered respect and appreciation for our land. I feel the weight of wisely managing our resources, protecting wildlife and proudly preserving our natural heritage for the generations to come, just as well as those who came before me did.
Already, Utah’s state and local governments bear the brunt of the management burden, a nearly impossible task made even more daunting under the new, restrictive regulations. When a crisis strikes, like a raging wildfire or spring flooding, our hands are bound with red tape, forcing us to seek permission before deploying critical resources. The federal government’s failures in wildfire control, flood prevention and water management are both a burden on our state and proof that Utah can do it better.
That’s why Utah has filed a legal suit asking the U.S. Supreme Court to address whether the federal government can simply hold unappropriated lands within a state indefinitely. Federal lands dominate Utah’s landscape, with the federal government controlling two-thirds of the state’s entire land.
From their offices in Washington, D.C., the federal government insists it knows best while forcing policies that leave locals to pay the price. Conservation should involve both protecting the land and allowing for sustainable use. We have proven our public lands can remain accessible and productive for all. The short-term thinking of people who suggest that locking the gate and throwing away the key, restricting access, could only come from people who have never experienced a night under Utah’s stars.
It’s time for a different approach. By fostering collaboration and respecting multiple-use principles, we can conserve and actively manage our lands. The State of Utah can and will apply policies that benefit the environment and support Utahns’ tradition of spending time on our beloved public lands.
Rep. Mike Schultz is the Speaker of the Utah House of Representatives
Utah
A win-win? Utah revisits discussion of public land for housing — with a narrower scope
SALT LAKE CITY — Measures to turn swaths of public land over to local entities were met with widespread opposition last year, but a Utah legislative committee agrees it could yield good things.
Outdoor recreation groups and others say they’re concerned it could be a slippery slope leading to the loss of public land.
Members of the House Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Committee voted unanimously on Monday to favorably recommend HCR14, which urges Congress to allow “limited use of unreserved lands near existing communities and infrastructure for moderate income housing.”
Unlike Utah’s effort to secure 18.5 million acres of Bureau of Land Management land or Utah Sen. Mike Lee’s push to include the sale of 0.5% to 0.75% of public lands in Utah and 10 other Western states in a federal budget bill, each of which failed last year, HCR14 supports a “much smaller ask” and a particular type of federal land, said Rep. Raymond Ward, R-Bountiful, the resolution’s sponsor.
The idea was sparked by a conversation with Santa Clara leaders, who are dealing with southwest Utah’s population growth near federal land, but it’s a challenge that many other Utah communities face, he and members of the committee added. That’s contributed to some of the state’s housing affordability and other challenges.
“At least some portion of this difficulty is that land is a lot more expensive than it used to be,” he said. “You can’t make any more land, but there is some land that is right close by us, but because of the way it is designated federally, it is not available to be used for housing.”
Department of the Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner announced last year that they formed a joint task force to explore using “underutilized federal land” for housing to increase supply and potentially lower costs. Utah’s resolution, if passed, offers federal leaders “one more thing in their hand that they can use as a tool” when they have these types of land policy discussions in Washington, Ward said.
However, efforts to tinker with public land have been unpopular across all spectrums thus far, especially among those who recreate outdoors. Brett Stewart, president of the Utah OHV Advocates, asked if there are ways to trade state and private land in exchange for public land, so that the public doesn’t lose access to the land.
“Once you start doing this, you start handing it off … it’s going to do the domino effect,” he said. “It’s going to get easier and easier and easier, and now we’ve got that reputation that we’re selling off our public lands, which we’ll never, ever be able to touch again once it’s privatized.”
Housing is an important issue, but there’s a “huge lack of trust” following last year’s effort to sell land off land, said Kael Weston, of Salt Lake County.
Members of the committee agreed that it’s a complicated issue, which could require tighter language in the final resolution to avoid confusion, said House Majority Leader Casey Snider, R-Paradise.
“I think the intent is appropriate. I’d like to see it move forward, but I’m wondering if we could just have a conversation,” he said.
Ward acknowledged that it could be nice to clear up any concerns to reassure the public that the resolution isn’t seeking “a lot of other lands” that should remain in the public’s hands.
Others on the committee said land swaps and other types of agreements can be beneficial for both sides of the conversation. They can produce “win-wins” that support conservation and housing development needs, added Rep. Doug Owens, D-Millcreek.
“I think it’s a great resolution. It’s not in the far distant past where this used to happen more,” he said.
The resolution now heads to the House floor for a wider vote.
The Key Takeaways for this article were generated with the assistance of large language models and reviewed by our editorial team. The article, itself, is solely human-written.
Utah
Utah leaders say gas prices will fall thanks to new agreement – KSLTV.com
SALT LAKE CITY — State leaders announced a partnership with the petroleum industry that they said will increase fuel supply, lower gas prices and resolve an ongoing feud with Idaho.
The announcement comes after weeks of tension between Utah and Idaho leaders over a plan floated by Utah lawmakers to tax fuel exports. Officials in Idaho said that could have raised gas prices there.
Instead of taxing exports, the Legislature plans to cut the state gas tax by 15% while working with the oil and gas industry to increase the supply of fuel at Utah’s refineries, House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, announced Monday.
“If you want lower prices, you have to increase supply. It’s that simple,” Schultz said. “This agreement will bring in nearly 800,000 additional gallons of fuel into the market every single day, boosting competition and putting real downward pressure on prices at the pump.”
At the same time, leaders in Idaho have tentatively agreed to work to increase water supply on the Bear River system, which runs through Idaho, Wyoming and Utah. Gov. Spencer Cox signed a memorandum of understanding about that during a press conference at the state Capitol. Idaho Gov. Brad Little was expected to sign it soon, a spokesperson said.
“We are at a critical crossroads in Utah’s energy and water future and we are choosing an abundance mindset over managing scarcity,” the governor said. “This partnership not only benefits Utahns, but it will benefit the entire Intermountain region.”
He said industry leaders have committed to increase refinery production in Utah by 23,500 barrels of oil per day within the next five years. The state is also investing in fuel storage to help meet seasonal demand and infrastructure to aid production and delivery of fuel, Cox added.
The agreement with Idaho won’t secure any new water rights in the Bear River system, but will let both states work together on managing excess flows and water sustainability.
“We have so much in common — probably more in common with Idaho than any other neighbor out there — and so I’m grateful that the relationship is coming out even stronger,” Cox told reporters.
Meanwhile, the proposal to cut the gas tax, HB575, is moving through the Legislature in the final weeks of the session. Besides slashing the tax, the bill also requires refineries to report to the state how many barrels of oil and other petroleum products they produce. It also aims to make it easier to build pipelines in the state that would increase the supply of gasoline.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Cal Roberts, R-Draper, was unanimously approved by a House committee last week and is awaiting a vote in the full House of Representatives.
Rikki Hrenko-Browning, the president of the Utah Petroleum Association, said “tightening supplies” in the fuel market has led to some higher prices.
“We stand together with state leadership to reaffirm our commitment to the state, to our neighbors and to our customers,” she said. “We look forward to working together to grow Utah to become an energy leader across the Intermountain West.”
Utah
Utah Zoom weddings used by thousands of Israelis face new legislative threat
Thousands of Israelis have already used an option offered by the U.S. state of Utah to marry via Zoom and register as legally wed. Israelis who did not want, or were unable, to marry through Israel’s Chief Rabbinate, the only authority through which Jews can marry and be registered as married in Israel, found a solution in the arrangement. Now, an internal legislative move in the U.S. state threatens that possibility.
In recent weeks, a bill introduced in the Utah Senate seeks to bar marriages conducted entirely remotely, without physical presence in the state, unless they were recognized before a certain date. The proposed legislation would require at least one of the spouses to be physically present in Utah during the wedding ceremony.
2 View gallery
Will the option for Jews to marry outside the rabbinate and register as married in Israel be revoked?
(Photo: Alexander Dyachenko / Shutterstock)
According to data from the Hiddush religious freedom advocacy group, about 3,000 couples in 2024, in which at least one spouse is Israeli, were married in “Utah weddings” via Zoom or another video platform. Information from Utah County indicates that roughly 30% of all couples marrying through the remote procedure there are Israelis.
During the COVID pandemic, Utah authorized marriage ceremonies to be conducted via Zoom, enabling couples, including non-U.S. citizens, to marry and have their unions legally registered. After Utah residents, Israelis make up the largest national group to use the option.
In a landmark 2022 ruling, Israel’s Administrative Court instructed the Population and Immigration Authority and the Interior Ministry to recognize all couples married under the “Utah wedding” framework and register them as married. The decision effectively validated the registration of civil marriages conducted in Israel by remote means. Now, that option could be curtailed.
2 View gallery
Zoom app. About 30% of Utah weddings are of Israelis
(Photo: Thaspol Sangsee / Shutterstock)
“‘Utah weddings’ are a very common ‘bandage’ for the distorted reality in which the State of Israel does not allow many citizens to marry at all or to marry in accordance with their worldview,” said Rabbi Dr. Seth Farber, founder and chairman of the ITIM advocacy organization, which helps people navigate Israel’s religious bureaucracy
“Our assistance center at ITIM uses Utah weddings as a solution for many couples who seek to marry according to Jewish law but refuse to do so through the Chief Rabbinate,” he added.
“Israeli lawmakers must advance an arrangement that allows citizens to choose how to conduct their wedding ceremony. More and more couples would then choose a Jewish wedding.”
-
Montana5 days ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Oklahoma7 days agoWildfires rage in Oklahoma as thousands urged to evacuate a small city
-
Technology3 days agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Education1 week agoVideo: Secret New York City Passage Linked to Underground Railroad
-
Louisiana2 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Politics1 week agoChicago-area teacher breaks silence after losing job over 2-word Facebook post supporting ICE: ‘Devastating’
-
Technology3 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Politics3 days agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT