Emery County Public Lands Council opposes Drunkards Wash solar project and asks SITLA to explain process
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
The Emery County Public Lands Council voted to oppose further solar development at the proposed Drunkards Wash site, citing an estimated loss of 4,000 acres of winter habitat, 14 miles of fencing and concerns over grazing and transparency; the council asked SITLA to attend the next meeting and consider relocation or mitigation.
The Emery County Public Lands Council voted to oppose further solar development at the proposed Drunkards Wash site and to send a formal letter to the county commissioners requesting additional explanation and engagement from the State Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA).
Danniel Olsen, who presented the project to the council, said there is formal opposition to a proposed roughly 4,000-acre solar development five miles north of Huntington that has been in development by Nadara since 2021. The presentation referenced estimates from the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) that the site conversion would remove about 4,000 acres of important winter range for mule deer and elk and would introduce approximately 14 miles of fencing across the landscape.
The presentation said the current deer population in the area is about 25% below objective levels and that DWR prefers relocation of the project; DWR recommended a 4:1 compensatory mitigation approach with an estimated mitigation cost of $6.5 million. Council members expressed concern that the project would reduce grazing acreage, increase costs for ranchers and shift local management away from multiple-use public lands to single-use development.
Following the presentation, Pat Sundstrom moved that the council submit a formal letter to the county commissioners opposing further solar development at the Drunkards Wash site. Varian Allen seconded the motion and it passed (motion carried). The council also requested that SITLA attend the next council meeting to explain its environmental impact evaluation process and indicated it would consider a binding county ordinance to prohibit similar projects on county public and state-trust lands.
The action formalizes local opposition and frames two near-term follow-ups: the requested SITLA briefing and the potential drafting of local land-use restrictions. The council did not adopt any ordinance at this meeting; the minutes record the passed motion to send a letter and to pursue additional engagement and potential legislative or ordinance options as next steps.