With Californians protesting across the state on behalf of our public lands and the agencies that manage them, officials trying to sell off our public lands for a quick buck have come up with a new deceptive spin: pretend a huge public land grab will fix California’s affordable housing crisis.
Jon Raby, the acting BLM Director, recently said in an interview that Department of the Interior (DOI) is studying the selloff of about 400,000 acres (625 square miles) of BLM-managed lands across the West. That’s an area larger than the size of the City of Los Angeles! Raby said that DOI and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) are looking at all federal lands within a radius of up to 10 miles of all cities and towns with a population greater than 5,000 people.
What this means for beloved public lands in California: Places at risk of being developed for “affordable housing” span from Southern California’s Sawtooth Canyon campground, through Mammoth Lakes to Northern California’s South Fork American River Trail. (See more below.) The following is NOT an exhaustive list but it’s a starting point that does not include places protected by Acts of Congress such as Wilderness areas and some Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) areas (e.g., Cow Mountain Recreation Area and Stoddard Valley OHV area):
- Ma-le’l Dunes Conservation Management Area; Samoa Dunes Off-Highway Vehicle Area
(Arcata) - Rainbow Basin area, including Owl Canyon CG (Barstow)
- Middle Knob (including Barren Ridge); Jawbone Butterbredt area; Desert Tortoise
Research Natural Area (California City) - Kreyenhagen Peak; Joaquin Rocks (Coalinga)
- ButteCreek area (Chico)
- South Fork American River Trail (El Dorado Hills)
- Bear Mountain Wilderness Study Area (Greenfield)
- Sawtooth Canyon Campground (Lucerne Valley)
- Mammoth Lakes – Long Valley/Benton Crossing (Mammoth Lakes)
- North Fork Cosumnes River Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC)
(Placerville) - Sacramento River Bend (Sacramento)
- El Paso Mountains east of El Paso Mountains Wilderness (Ridgecrest)
- Cosumnes River Preserve (Sacramento)
- Fort Ord Public Lands ACEC (Salinas)
- Susanville – Susan River ACEC, Antelope Pit (Susanville)
- Temblor Range (Taft)
- Pinto Mountains aka Joshua Tree National Park “saddle” (Twentynine Palms)
A few reasons Californians and visitors love some of the places at risk:
The Sacramento River Bend Area: From the lush riparian areas surrounding the Sacramento River and its tributaries to the rolling hills of blue oak savannah, the Sacramento River Bend Area offers diverse habitat for bald eagles, osprey, migratory and songbirds, deer, and salmon. Can you imagine the Sacramento River Bend area filled with housing units rather than places to go paddling, birdwatching, camping and hunting? Development could hamper or even end your access to the existing public boat ramps in this area.
The Susan River Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), which includes the Bizz Johnson Trail and the Susan River Homestead, is extremely popular with mountain bikers, hikers, and equestrians. The Susan River attracts a significant number of beavers and muskrats. Patient observers may see bats, raccoons, porcupines, coyotes – even black bears.
The Sawtooth Canyon Campground draws thousands of climbers every year to challenge themselves on the jagged rock faces and enjoy the comradery of fellow climbers around a campfire in the evening. Spring wildflower blooms appear even more spectacular when viewed against the dark brown jagged rocks.
The Pinto Mountains area is an incredibly important stronghold for the imperiled desert tortoise and is enjoyed by many who enjoy exploring 1800s-era mine sites to learn more about the mining history of the
region.
Countless Californians love every single one of the places listed above.
The reality is that most public lands that meet DOI’s criteria would not be suitable for low-income housing due to factors such as remote locations, lack of access (i.e., lack of roads that can be driven without a high clearance 4×4 vehicle), and the absence of necessary infrastructure. By the time developers include the cost of building infrastructure such as roads, utility lines, gas lines, and telephone lines (because cell service is almost always spotty or non-existent in more remote places) into their cost of building housing units on public lands, the only units which could ostensibly be built would be large, multi-million dollar mansions.
Even if developers were willing to absorb these costs and provide affordable housing, purchasers of these housing units would experience many challenges to get to places of employment. Most jobs are found in larger cities and towns, which would likely be located many miles from houses built on public lands. The same holds true for grocery stores, hardware stores, and all other necessities. The cost of vehicle wear and tear and fuel would very likely outweigh any savings that a benevolent developer could provide with building low-cost housing.
This ill-conceived proposal is not about providing affordable housing. It’s about selling off our public lands to private interests. Don’t be fooled.
