Commission conditions support for Division of Wildlife purchase near Parowan Valley, demands stronger mitigation and fencing

The Iron County Commission on Monday reviewed a Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) proposal to acquire a 20‑acre parcel northwest of Parowan that contains a substantial Utah prairie dog colony.

The DWR lands representative, Kate, said the parcel is adjacent to the Parowan Valley Wildlife Management Area and would improve habitat connectivity for the federally threatened Utah prairie dog and other species that depend on prairie‑dog colonies. "This property has a very large colony and buying it increases colony numbers and connectivity," Kate said.

Commissioners and members of the public raised concerns about how the existing wildlife management boundary has been enforced on neighboring county and private lands. Reid Erickson, a member of the audience, asked that the baseline survey used to define acceptable prairie‑dog presence be extended to the new boundary so private property owners retain the previously established protections. "Now the baseline survey needs to be extended to this property on the border," Erickson said.

Commissioners said the county will not simply sign a routine letter of support. They asked DWR to include explicit, enforceable conditions: permanent, maintenance‑grade prairie‑dog fencing (buried to prevent burrowing), clear language that extends the prior 0‑count baseline survey to the new boundary, and a state commitment to fund mitigation and removal on adjacent agricultural land if prairie dogs invade crops. One commissioner summarized the request: the county wants "true prairie‑dog fencing," state‑funded mitigation, and a dated‑free authorization so producers can protect their crops if necessary.

Kate said she would raise the concerns with regional DWR staff and recommended the agency return to the commission with a revised draft and, if appropriate, regional staff on the record. DWR representatives said they hope to close on the parcel in December and welcomed further county input.

The commission directed staff to draft a stronger letter for the board's review and asked DWR to return with regional staff and specific management commitments before the county provides a final endorsement.

Ending: The commission did not vote to approve or reject the acquisition; instead it asked DWR to revise the letter of support to include the requested fencing, baseline‑survey and mitigation commitments and to appear at a future meeting before the property's expected December closing.