A decision by the state to lease 23,088 acres of sovereign land near the Great Salt Lake for mineral extraction is facing an appeal by 14 environmental organizations.

Beginning Aug. 1, the Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands agreed to lease the land for $23,088 a year for 10 years to Great Salt Lake Minerals Inc., the largest producer of sulfate of potash, a fertilizer, in North America.

The company, which has been operating at the lake since 1970, also extracts other mineral salts from the lake.

Great Salt Lake Minerals currently operates a series of dikes and evaporation ponds on 21,000 acres on the west side of the Great Salt Lake and on 22,000 acres on the east side.

The environmental groups, which fall under the umbrella organization of FRIENDS of the Great Salt Lake, include the Audubon Council of Utah, Utah Chapter of the Sierra Club, League of Women Voters of Salt Lake, League of Women Voters of Utah, National Audubon Society, The Nature Conservancy of Utah, Utah Airboat Association, Utah Rivers Council and the Utah Waterfowl Association.

They say the state hasn't done enough to ensure that the ecosystem on the west side of the lake will be protected if Great Salt Lake Minerals gets a permit to operate.

If the environmental groups' appeal to stop the expansion is overturned, Great Salt Lake Minerals would next apply for a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which would conduct an environmental impact study.

David Becker, an attorney representing the groups, says there are very strong reasons to believe the leases shouldn't be granted.

"Our position is that not nearly enough analysis and care was taken before the state made the decision to issue these leases," Becker said Friday.

According to the appeal, the Utah Supreme Court has found that navigable waters should not be given without restriction to private parties and should be preserved for the general public for uses such as commerce, navigation and fishing.

That's the concept of a "public trust," the appeal states and argues that the economic benefit the state may receive from expanded operations of the mineral extraction doesn't fit with what are normally thought of as "public trust" values: navigation, fish and wildlife habitat, aquatic beauty, public recreation and water quality.

Dave Grierson, sovereign lands coordinator for the Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands, said his job is to balance "public trust" impacts with economic impact.

"The public is not that impacted out there," he said, adding that the area is very seldom used by the public because of its remoteness.

"There's a substantial economic gain to the public as a whole by leasing that land," he said.