Reid, Ensign say lands bill may pass next year

By PETE FOWLER
Ely Times Reporter

The White Pine County Public Lands Bill may actually pass Congress next year, senators say.

County commissioners participated in the "art of compromise" Wednesday by voting to support senators' efforts on the bill even though specific parts of the bill face some opposition by individuals.

Introduced to the Senate Aug. 1 by Sens. John Ensign and Harry Reid, the bill's most discussed portions would grant four parcels of land totaling around 3,563 acres to the Ely Shoshone Tribe and designate about 545,000 acres of land as wilderness in 13 new wilderness areas. Some of the bill's other main actions would allow 45,000 acres of federal land to be sold, allow for a feasibility study of a trail system for off-road vehicles, expand Cave Lake and Ward Charcoal Oven State parks, expand the airport and industrial park, support efforts of the Eastern Nevada Landscape Coalition with funding, amend the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act, and support efforts to preserve a "Great Basin Heritage Route."

Around 130 people showed up at the David E. Norman Elementary School Wednesday to listen or speak to the senators, who stayed from about 9:30 a.m. until nearly noon.

The Senators said at Wednesday's public hearing that the legislative process was an "art of compromise," where probably no one wholly supported every aspect of the bill.

"You have to have your vegetables before you get your desert," John Ensign's Rural Coordinator Kevin Kirkeby said describing the bill at last Thursday's public hearing and legislative work session. The bill used a collaborative process that worked well -- trying to involve as much input from as many parties as possible, he added.

"We're comfortable that it's a good piece of legislation," and will try to pass it this year, Reid said.

Sen. Dean Rhoads, who spoke at the legislative work session, didn't seem quite as convinced would pass so quickly. He endorsed the bill and efforts to advance it but said it would "blow my mind," since similar bills don't typically move as fast.

Senators and county commissioners plan to continue to "tweak" the bill according to ongoing recommendations and encouraged the public to contact Ensign and Reid's offices. Ensign's office said Wednesday afternoon that no changes have been made to the bill since it was introduced.

Ensign said claims that much of the lands bill could be done administratively rather than legislatively were "absolutely false."

The Shoshone Tribal land expansion is probably the most controversial part of the bill. Some citizens criticized the county commissioners and senators, saying they didn't listen to county recommendations.

The Shoshone Tribe originally asked for around 22,000 acres of land, and the bill as it was introduced proposes around 3,563 acres for expansion. The county had originally recommended around 750 acres.

"That's a pretty good compromise," Reid said, mentioning that refusing even more of the Shoshone Tribe's request could easily kill the bill.

County resident Brenda Alexander read a prepared statement saying local officials agree that two parcels should be removed from the Shoshone land expansion. People living near parcels one and two will be "forced to live next to a government that is not their own," she said. "This will not work for us." She mentioned concerns that some tribal laws are not the same as the county laws and could allow fireworks, gambling or floodlights from a race track next to existing county homes. The bill specifically prohibits gaming, but Alexander and some others have said there is no way to enforce the ban.

Ely Shoshone Tribal Chairwoman Diana Buckner read a statement thanking Ensign and Reid, "The Ely Shoshone Tribe and I would like to thank you personally for being our champion," she said.

"Because these are our traditional lands, we still believe we should receive additional lands but we are willing to compromise and accept this proposal. We tried to negotiate in good faith with the county commission, but they chose to go forward without us. We understand that there is concern to our local community, but we have always been good neighbors."

Some county residents have expressed concern that designating wilderness areas could limit access and traditional uses. Some support the wilderness areas to protect natural habitats.

Section 206 in the wilderness title of the bill makes it clear that low-level military flight operations, designation of new military flight routes, and "flight testing and evaluation" will not be restricted over any wilderness areas, even if jets are seen or heard from the wilderness areas.