The federal government is considering several land-use plans in Utah. One of these, which comes out of the Price field office of the Bureau of Land Management, would put nearly a million acres off-limits to most energy development.

Depending on your point of view, this plan would preserve pristine wilderness areas in all its glory, or prevent the nation from getting badly needed oil and natural gas at a time when fuel and heating prices are going through the roof. This and five other plans -- from six BLM field offices altogether -- are being presented for public comment.

All the documents propose rules to govern what uses are allowed in wide swaths of federal land within Utah. Some would open up more areas for gas and oil drilling, for off-road driving or for other activities. Alternative proposals, which are still on the table, would prohibit or restrict such uses. Still other plans would try to protect some lands while opening up others within a given jurisdiction.

In addition to all the proposals is another possibility: Leave current regulations unchanged.

All this thinking and studying has been in the works for years, and each of the management proposals weighs about the same as a Volkswagen. Few people are willing to take the time to go through the detail, although several interest groups are doing so.

Some environmentalists want more restrictions on uses of public land. The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, for example, calls for stricter oversight of energy leases.

"After the leases are sold, they are issued to the buyer, and a contractual obligation exists to develop the land," the group says. "Therefore, if the BLM sells these leases and then later realizes it erred because of important wildlife or recreational values, few options exist for the agency to correct its mistake."

Other interested parties decry what they see as excessive regulation of the land. Wyoming Sen. Bill Vasey heads up Americans for American Energy. He says, "We have enough natural gas both onshore and in America's deep ocean areas to last us for many generations -- if government regulators allow us to access and utilize it." He says the same about oil.

Utahns can help decide which course to take. If you want federal lands to be more open to energy development, say so. If you want more vehicle access, say so. If you want the land preserved in its virgin condition, say so. Your opinions will help guide officials, even if you don't understand all the details.

Comments are being sought on management plans at the Price, Moab, Monticello, Richfield, Kanab, and Vernal field offices. Go to utahlands.notlong.com to view the plans.

The Price field office's preferred approach of mixed use may represent the best way forward. We believe our society can strike the right balance between development and conservation.

With oil prices poised to reach $100 a barrel (perhaps higher), energy development has gained urgency, and some development may be proper. In light of that, we believe that environmentalists, energy companies and government agencies can work together to protect lands from undue damage. For example, if companies partner to share pipelines and roads rather than each building their own, they can greatly reduce the impact on the landscape.

A few people have recently gotten into a tizzy about overlapping comment periods -- Nov. 30 to Feb. 8 for six plans -- and have called for a 30-day extension to study matters. We think such panic is unwarranted. Even if it were, the addition of a mere 30 days wouldn't do much good. These proposals are the products of years of bureaucratic toil and will not be deciphered in a few days.

Fortunately, no final decisions are pending. The BLM has its preferred plans at this point, but alternatives are still on the table.

For the short term, we would hope that solutions can be found that preserve natural beauty, yet allow for recreational use and a reasonable amount of energy exploration.

We hasten to add, however, that mining the nation's natural energy resources is, at best, a stop-gap measure, not a long-term, sustainable energy solution. This country needs to get to alternative energy sources, including nuclear power, as quickly as possible.

It would be a shame to trash Utah's pristine wilderness areas in any degree for the sake of a few drops of fuel when the wilderness fields will dry up in a hundred years anyway.

Do you agree?