Debate over US Badlands site designation

The fate of about 12,000 acres (5,000 hectares) of scenic North Dakota Badlands on the National Register of Historic Places is at the center of a debate over recognizing an area that inspired Theodore Roosevelt. The U.S. Forest Service and National Park Service are pushing for the designation to highlight the significance of the region, where Roosevelt ran his cattle more than a century ago. Ranchers and state officials, though, fear it would hinder development and say local residents were not consulted. "Our view is that it's benign," said Dave Pieper, the Forest Service's Dakota Prairie Grasslands supervisor. "It's just an acknowledgment." The National Register of Historic Places is the federal government's list of properties it considers worthy of preservation and recognition. "It doesn't pose any restrictions," said Valerie Naylor, the superintendent of Theodore Roosevelt National Park in southwestern North Dakota. "It's a nice recognition of its historical significance." "If it's just a title, then why do we need it?" counters Jim Arthaud, a rancher and Billings County commissioner. "This is about locking the land up. So for them to say it will not do anything is completely bogus. The people in this county are nervous." Arthaud said the historic designation could prevent oil and gas development in the area and lessen the amount of land open for grazing. He said it also could hinder plans for a bridge over the Little Missouri River, which local residents say is a key to travel. For the purchase of the private ranch two years ago, the federal government paid $4.8 million and conservation groups contributed $500,000. The Forest Service promised to keep allowing grazing and other activities, including oil and gas development, on the land. A historic designation would restrict land use as outlined in that agreement, said Gov. John Hoeven's staff attorney, Ryan Bernstein. "We believe the status change would add different layers of bureaucracy," Bernstein said. "We feel this is contrary to the original agreement."...AP