Potential for protecting Owyhee Canyonlands takes urgency in final months of Biden administration

A push to preserve more than a million acres of wildlands in Eastern Oregon is taking on new urgency in the final months of the Biden presidency, as environmentalists and political leaders from different parties each seek to shape the future of the Owyhee Canyonlands.

This expanse of sagebrush desert and river gorges spans millions of acres between Oregon, Idaho and Nevada. Hundreds of plant and animal species rely on its sage-steppe landscape, including the increasingly vulnerable greater sage grouse. And ranchers say this land provides crucial sustenance to their livestock.

Environmental groups have long sought to protect the Owyhee’s lands in Oregon with limitations on industrial developments like mining, solar and wind projects. They’ve homed in on two options: a national monument designation from a sitting president, or a wilderness designation from Congress.

These last months of the year are a critical time, as federal lawmakers rush to pass a lands package before the start of a new administration. This “lame duck” period is also high time for an outgoing president to make last-minute proclamations — like, for example, by designating millions of acres of desert as a national monument.

Since 2019, Democratic U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden has advocated for passing a bill he crafted after years of negotiating between conservationists, ranchers, hunters and local leaders in Malheur County. The Oregon senator’s proposal cleared a Senate committee last year, and remains on the table.

Then Republican U.S. Rep. Cliff Bentz introduced his own legislation in October. Contrary to Wyden’s focus on the “long-term ecological health” of the Owyhee, Bentz’s proposal emphasizes ranchers’ grazing rights on public lands. In its first sentence, it declares its purpose is to “provide for the establishment of a grazing management program on Federal land in Malheur County.”

Despite their differences, these two lawmakers say they’re working closely together to get Owyhee wilderness protections through Congress. They see this as an opportunity for bipartisan cooperation, but only if they can rally enough support from both sides of the aisle.

It’s unclear if President Joe Biden plans to make his own sweeping gesture to protect the wildlands, which he could do by designating a national monument, during his final days in office. President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to slash environmental regulations across the board, so this is likely the last opportunity the canyonlands could see additional protections for at least another four years.

Monument versus wilderness

Presidents have broad power to designate national monuments under the 1906 Antiquities Act. Since taking office, Biden has created six new monuments and expanded two others. He hasn’t signaled if he plans to create another monument during his final days in office.

National monuments vary widely by type and location — they range from ancient ruins to historical buildings, to natural areas like mountains and forests. During his first week in office, Biden promised to add protections for 30% of federally owned lands by 2030. His administration has since protected more than 41 million acres of land and water. No other president has protected lands at such a rapid pace, according to his staff.

The country still has a long way to go to meet Biden’s goal. Only 13% of federal lands are protected from industries, like mining and logging. Designating the Owyhee Canyonlands as a national monument could hasten that progress.

The protections that national monuments come with depend on the management objective. In the case of the Owyhee, it could include limitations on mining, or not. It could include limitations on grazing, or not. In the end, it’s in Biden’s hands, at least until Trump is inaugurated.

Bentz and Wyden steadfastly oppose a monument designation, preferring to strike a wilderness compromise between advocates, ranchers and people living in Malheur County. Environmental groups are hoping for wilderness legislation, too, since it would offer the strongest protections from heavy industry. It also would allow grazing, so many ranchers appear to prefer wilderness over the uncertainty of a presidential monument.

Those groups include the Owyhee Basin Stewardship Coalition, which formed in response to the Obama administration’s effort to turn the Owyhee into a monument in 2015.

“There was a major concern that it would change things to where it wouldn’t be feasible to graze,” said the coalition’s chairman, Steve Russell.

Congress now has two wilderness proposals

The Owyhee Canyonlands straddle the Oregon-Idaho border. More than 267,000 acres on the Idaho side are already a designated wilderness area.

On the Oregon side, the Bureau of Land Management is tasked with conserving the “wilderness characteristics” on 1.7 million acres. A congressional wilderness designation would take those protections further. It could prohibit motorized and mechanized equipment — like vehicles, motorcycles and drones — and it could generally prohibit commercial activity, with exceptions for livestock grazing.

The Wilderness Act of 1964 gives Congress the power to designate public lands as wilderness, which is generally considered the highest level of protection for federal lands.

The bills from both Bentz and Wyden would designate part of the Owyhee as wilderness, but Wyden’s designation would amount to about 1.1 million acres, which is about 207,000 acres larger than what Bentz has put forward. Bentz’s bill also would allow some vehicles and equipment in wilderness areas, something critics say flies in the face of the Wilderness Act.

“The Bentz bill uses the term ‘wilderness,’ but then defines it in a way that no wilderness bill has ever defined it, which is to say that you can have roads in it, that you can have heavier machinery in it,” said U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., who co-sponsored Wyden’s proposal. “That’s simply not what wilderness is.”

Both proposals allow grazing, but Wyden’s would collect data to assess the ecological impacts that cattle can leave behind, like soil erosion. Wyden’s bill also would create a group that collects and saves native seeds. Both proposals would create an advisory group made up of stakeholders — like ranchers, members of the local Burns Paiute Tribe, and conservationists — but Bentz’s group would be smaller, and would include fewer spots for environmental advocates.

Despite these disparities, Wyden has commended Bentz’s proposal as a “significant step forward” in getting protections through Congress.

“There’s been a lot of good faith negotiations to get us to this point,” Wyden said. “These differences are real and we’re continuing to work through them.”

Some people who have spent years working with Wyden on his bill say they were blindsided by the recent Bentz proposal.

“We knew that it was being worked on, but we didn’t get a chance to see it until it went public,” said Ryan Houston, executive director of the Oregon Natural Desert Association. “It undermines many of the core principles and many of the key agreements that those stakeholders put together.”

Bentz’s timing also risks muddying up the work that local advocates have dedicated to Wyden so far, says Tim Davis, executive director of the nonprofit Friends of the Owyhee.

“This late in the game, going into the lame duck session, it creates a huge uphill battle to even have a chance to get Wyden’s bill across the line,” Davis said.

But as November comes to an end and with Trump’s Jan. 20 inauguration day inching closer, time is running out for federal lawmakers or Biden to do anything major with the Owyhee.

“We do not want to miss this opportunity,” said Merkley.