Search

Although federal agencies, such as Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), are the entities formally charged with governing federally-owned lands that are deemed "public lands," there are a number of groups that challenge that jurisdiction and/or aim to participate in land and resource governance. There are a plethora of non-governmental organizations that have developed to further environmentalist and indigenous interests and participation in public lands governance. Such organizations include those that have taken on formal partnerships with the BLM and USFS, such as Grand Staircase Escalante Partners (the official "friends" organization of Grand Staircase Escalanate National Monument that takes care of much of the outreach and public interface work related to the monument) and the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition which is a management partner with USFS and BLM for the Bears Ears National Monument. The latter governance formation is a result of work on the part of a number of organizations focused on protecting indigenous landscapes and pushing for Indian sovereignty and is a rare instance of indigenous representatives having an institutionalized management role on federal public lands.

There are also those who wish to shape public lands governance by pushing for the transfer of federal public lands to state governance or to private landholders. Much of this work is done through lobbying to legislators to create such bills as Utah's Lands Transfer Act, which called for shifting federal lands into state management (although critics argued that such a bill passed by Utah legislative bodies is unconstitutional). Much of the anti-federal sentiment is expressed through highly organized but less institutionalized militia efforts as well as through conservative think tanks such as the American Legislative Exchange Council, the American Lands Council, and the Heritage Foundation.

Additionally, in Utah there are a number of fundamental Latter Day Saints (fLDS) communities that do not recognize the federal government and its agencies, i.e. BLM, as legitimate rule-makers/governers of the spaces surrounding where they live. Although there is some overlap with these communities and the anti-federal groups listed above, further examination of the perspectives on land use and governance from fLDS groups and the mainstream LDS church are needed.

The Weldon Spring Interpretive Center was a discursive jamboree for those of us curious about how anthropocenics are narrated. This particular display at the center stood out to me becuase of its resemblance to other interpretive center or science museum displays representing the "life cycle" of an organism or of cycles of ecosystem conditions (e.g. forest succession). One of the first displays visitors see upon entering the center, the display's format and captions read to me as a clear attempt to control the discourse about nuclear contamination and remediation in the area. The image--or its creator--wants to do the work of suggesting that the clean up process has brought the place "back to how it was," cycling back to a good beginning. The text used in this display is exclusively neutral or positive. The arrows moving from each circle to the next purports to display how "this area has served many purposes over the years." It states "these exhibits are designed to educate you on the history, science, and efforts of many to bring the Weldon Spring site full circle." In this cycle, Weldon Spring is not a hazardouse waste site or contaminated site but rather "a site for remedial action." Thus we are to see the space as a "home to many people," then "a TNT and DNT plant," then "a uranium feed and matierals plant," then "a site for remedial action," "an extensive cleanup effort," "a successful solution," and, finally, "a place to enjoy and learn." In this emphasis on a "return" to good conditions, the displacement of residents, health issues plant workers and others' faced, and the uncertainties or messiness of what adequate clean up is are omitted. In this image, and in much of the interpretive center, the discourse around nuclear materials, its effects and cleanup, is neatened, simplified, into a narrative that de-emphasizes the actual health impacts of these processes and of the political wherewithall that was required to make that remediation happen.

The notion of cycling back to something is a particularly intriguing move