Measuring the Scope of Federal Land Ownership

Similar documents
. Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act: Operation and Issues for Congress Carol Hardy Vincent Specialist in Natural Resources Policy June 13, 201

CONSERVATION EASEMENTS. Public Policy Considerations for PRIVATE Land Management Harriet M. Hageman Hageman & Brighton, P.C.

How Could Your Recreational Access Change if Federal Lands were Controlled by the States?

CHALLENGES IN MANAGING MULTIPLE USE LANDS & TOOLS TO ENABLE SUCCESS

25 Annual Water Law Conference Coronado, CA February 22-23, Fundamentals of Prior Appropriation Systems

PROJECT SCORING GUIDANCE. Introduction: National Proiect Selection:

ESP 172: Public Land Management. Professor Mark Lubell TA Rodd Kelsey

MAY 1982 LAW REVIEW SURPLUS FEDERAL PROPERTY FOR PARKS PROGRAM IN REVIEW

AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION EASEMENT PROGRAM AGRICULTURAL LAND EASEMENTS

Exploring Ecosystem Services on State Trust Lands in the West

Business Creation Index

Texas Parks and Wildlife Foundation Buffer Lands Program Program Description and Application

3.23 LANDS AND SPECIAL USES

Nevada Public Land Management Task Force Final Report, SJR 1 of the 78 th Nevada Legislature and Implementation through Federal Legislation

43 USC NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 4, 2012 (see

The Bureau of Land Management and Mineral Development

APPROPRIATIONS Congress should prohibit agencies from expending any funds for:

US Code (Unofficial compilation from the Legal Information Institute) TITLE 43 - PUBLIC LANDS CHAPTER 37 PUBLIC RANGELANDS IMPROVEMENT

Federal Mandates and Willing Sellers: Real Estate Acquisition for the Missouri River Recovery Program

Lessard Sams Outdoor Heritage Council

Public Law th Congress An Act

MARK TWAIN LAKE MASTER PLAN CLARENCE CANNON DAM AND MARK TWAIN LAKE MONROE CITY, MISSOURI

AN ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL ARRANGEMENTS THAT CREATE OPEN SPACE. Lisa Blake Ava Goodale Caroline Krassen Johnathan Licitra Elizabeth Ochoa

Forest Service Role CHAPTER 2

REGENTS POLICY PART V FINANCE AND BUSINESS MANAGEMENT Chapter Real Property

DRAFT Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact

Forest Legacy Program Implementation Guidelines

Basic Facts Claim-Patent System Leasing System General Patterns

Tejon Ranch Conservation and Land Use Agreement Executive Summary

STATUS OF STATE PACE PROGRAMS

State Tax Credits for Historic Preservation A State-by-State Summary. States with income tax incentives States that do not tax income

Title 5: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND SERVICES

Status of State PACE Programs

PUBLIC GRAZING IN THE WEST: THE IMPACT OF RANGELAND REFORM 94

I N T R O D U C T I O N

2016 Highlands Region Land Preservation Status Report

RESEARCH BRIEF. Oct. 31, 2012 Volume 2, Issue 3

Decades of dysfunctional federal bureaucracy is literally dismantling the environmental well being of Nevada and the West.

Wood River Land Trust Staff Report

Using Easements to Conserve Biodiversity. Jeff Lerner Defenders of Wildlife

Commercial Visitor Services. Doing Business In The National Parks

2009 Project Abstract For the Period Ending June 30, 2011

Land Use Planning to Protect Open Space :

Review of Idaho s Forest Legacy Program

Nez Perce (Nee-Me-Poo) National Historic Trail. Land and Water Conservation Fund FY2015 Request

Water Rights Related to Oil Shale Development in the Upper Colorado River Basin

AN INVENTORY OF CONSERVATION EASEMENT ACTIVITY IN MINNESOTA PREPARED BY THE MINNESOTA LAND TRUST

DESCRIPTION OF A LAND TRUST

Kent Land Trust Strategic Reassessment Project Final Report

Summary of the Tejon Ranch Conservation and Land Use Agreement

A Presentation to the. Wyoming Solid Waste and Recycling Association (WSWRA) 2016 Annual Conference Agenda

REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REPORT

Chapter VIII. Conservation Easements: Valuing Property Subject to a Qualified Conservation Contribution

What is a land trust? Their mission is to preserve land via conservation easements and/or acquisition.

Georgia Conservation Tax Credit Program Frequently Asked Questions

Paper for presentation at the 2005 AAEA annual meeting Providence, RI July 24-27, 2005

Justification Review. State Lands Program. Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability

PROPERTY TAX IS A PRINCIPAL REVENUE SOURCE

FGDC Cadastral Data Subcommittee. December 2008

Can Government Open More Doors for Borrowers?

Remains eligible for state or federal farm programs. Can use land as collateral for loans. Can reserve home lots for children

An Accounting Tradeoff Between WRP and Government Payments. Authors Gregory Ibendahl Mississippi State University

Fee-to-Trust: What To Expect in the Current Administration

2018 Highlands Region Land Preservation Status Report

Environmental Assessment South Administrative Site Proposed Property Sale

Conservation Easement Stewardship

Solutions to the Rising Costs of Fighting Fires in the Wildland Urban Interface 10 Ideas

Comprehensive Plan 2030

FARMLAND AMENITY PROTECTION. A Brief Guide To Conservation Easements

insights from new york's premier broker for townhouses and small buildings TOWNHOUSE end of year review MARKET SNAPSHOT JAN-DEC 2017

MITIGATION POLICY FOR DISTRICT-PROTECTED LANDS

CHAPTER Committee Substitute for Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 2188

Transfer and Transition: Interagency Coordination for Managing Public Lands at UMTRCA Title II Sites in Wyoming 16614

Preserving Forested Lands

AVAILABLE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES

Bureau of Land Management MAPPS Federal Update Donald Buhler Cadastral, Lands, and Realty Management April 14, 2015

Protecting Farmland in Maryland: A Review of the Agricultural Land Preservation Program

Establishment of Swan Valley Conservation Area, Montana. SUMMARY: This notice advises the public that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Nonresidential construction activity in the Twin Cities region was robust in 2013

B. UNDERSTANDING BASIC CONCEPTS & PROCEDURES OF ALASKA STATE APPROPRIATIVE WATER SYSTEM Introduction to Alaska Water Rights Presentation

Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) in Practice

PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE OF LAND CONSERVATION IN THE WEST: HOW LAND CONSERVATION IS CHANGING THE LANDSCAPE IN THE WEST. March 4, :00 5:15

Montana Trust Land Grazing Lease Rate Valuation Analysis

Implementing Small Area Fair Market Rents (SAFMRs) in the HCV Program. Plano Housing Authority Case Study

Housing for the Region s Future

Documentary Stamp Tax Executive Summary December 12, 2016

Interpretation of Conservation Purpose INTERNAL REVENUE GUIDANCE AS TO WHAT CONSTITUES A CONSERVATION PURPOSE

January Prepared by: Wisconsin Economic Development Institute, Inc.

Non-Profit Co-operative Housing: Working to Safeguard Canada s Affordable Housing Stock for Present and Future Generations

2014 Plan of Conservation and Development

Implementation of Permanent Easements and Associated Nutrient Load Reductions

Ontario Rental Market Study:

AGENDA ITEM 6. R Meeting No November 13, 2013 AGENDA ITEM. Grazing Tenant Selection for Driscoll and McDonald Ranches

PROVO CITY MUNICIPAL ANNEXATION GUIDE

Introduction to INRMP Implementation Options

Cadastral Data Content Standard - Rights and Interests

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND NEBRASKA NATIONAL FOREST REVISED LAND AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN

Appendix J Agricultural Land Preservation in Other States

Claudia Stuart, Williamson Act Program Manager and Nick Hernandez, Planning Intern

Appendix A Major Federal, State, and Local Permits or Approvals

Transcription:

Measuring the Scope of Federal Land Ownership Angela Logomasini During much of American history, landuse regulation was not a federal issue. The American system was biased against an active federal role in land ownership and long-term management. It focused instead on limiting federal powers to those specifically enumerated in the U.S. Constitution, such as individual rights and protection of private property. Accordingly, newly acquired federal lands were to be dispensed to the public, eventually becoming private lands that would be put to productive use. However, in modern times, these trends have been signficantly reversed. Federal controls on public and private lands have grown and continue to expand, affecting private property, recreation, and small businesses involved in resource industries putting many of them out of business. Background After the Louisiana Purchase and acquisition of the western lands of the United States, the federal government owned about 80 percent of the total U.S. territory. Given the constitutional bias for private property, the government eventually transferred 1.1 billion acres to states and private parties under various federal programs. 1 In particular, the Homestead Act of 1862 granted freehold property to anyone who assumed control of 160 acres of government land, which they were to improve by growing crops or at least keeping a home on the property. An indi- 1. Betsy A. Cody, Major Federal Land Management Agencies: Management of Our Nation s Lands and Resources (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 1995), http://cnie.org/nle/crsreports/natural/nrgen-3.cfm.

The Environmental Source vidual who worked or lived on such a plot for five years would then gain full ownership. Stewardship of these lands would result from private effort or state-level regulation at the most. During the first half of the 20th century, the limited government philosophy gave way to progressivism in many areas, including environmental policy. Progressives ensured that their views were articulated in numerous public policies, shifting the federal focus from divestiture toward acquisition and management. At the same time, land management policy moved away from resource use toward conservation and preservation goals, eventually limiting access for ranchers, foresters, recreationists, and those seeking access to energy resources. Such trends continue even though the federal government could facilitate resource use in a manner consistent with environmental goals. As an example, resource extraction can prove beneficial, particularly when it eliminates diseased trees and reduces fire risk. Scope of Federal Land Ownership and Control One of the most comprehensive reviews of land management and ownership policy was produced by the General Accounting Office (now the Government Accountability Office GAO) in 1996. It reported on ownership and use of federal lands managed by four agencies: the Department of Agriculture s U.S. Forest Service and the Department of the Interior s Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Park Service. According to GAO, these four agencies have jurisdiction over and and regulate 95 percent of federal lands. The Department of Defense controls the rest. Total federal land ownership is substantial, amounting to about 30 percent of the U.S. landmass or about 650 million acres. 2 Most federal ownership is concentrated in the Western United States, exceeding 50 percent in 5 western states and 20 percent in 12. Hence, the impact of land-use regulations is very substantial in some markets. 3 GAO reported that overall federal landownership between 1964 and 1994 for the four environmental agencies declined from 700.8 million acres to 622.8 million. 4 One might conclude that such a reduction indicates that federal land-use regulation has declined in at least one area. However, closer inspection reveals a different story. Federal land ownership increased for three out of the four environmental agencies involved: U.S. Forest Service territory expanded by about 5 million acres, Fish and Wildlife Service territory expanded by about 65 million acres, and National Park Service territory expanded by about 49 million acres. 5 The agencies that gained greater control over lands are those whose missions are more consistent with the progressive environmental movement s emphasis on preservation than with a conservation emphasis that allows resource use and recreation. Based on these missions, a logical ranking of the agencies from most resource-use intensive to most focused on conservation seems as follows: Bureau of Land Management: It is the mission of the Bureau of Land Management to sustain the health, diversity, and productiv- 2. U.S. General Accounting Office, Land Ownership: Information on the Acreage, Management, and Use of Federal and Other Lands, GAO/RCED-96-40: (U.S. General Accounting Office,Washington, DC, 1996), 14. 3. Ibid., 23 24. 4. Ibid., 2. 5. Ibid., 19. Competitive Enterprise Institue www.cei.org 202-331-1010

Lands and Wildlife ity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. 6 U.S. Forest Service: The mission of the USDA Forest Service is to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service describes its mission as working with others, to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. 7 National Park Service: The National Park Service preserves unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education, and inspiration of this and future generations. The Park Service cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor recreation throughout this country. 8 GAO confirms this ranking by assessing the amount of land that each agency has available 6. Bureau of Land Management, Office of Public Affairs, BLM Facts, Bureau of Land Management, Washington, DC, June 7, 2006, http://www.blm.gov/nhp/facts/ index.htm. 7. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Who We Are, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, June 7, 2006, http://www.fws.gov/who. 8. National Park Service, The National Park Service: Caring for the American Legacy, November 25, 2007, http://www.nps.gov/legacy/mission.html. Percent Figure 1. Federal Land Managed for Conservation 100 80 60 40 20 0 USFWS 1964 NPS Agency USFS Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office. 1994 BLM for conservation and preservation. The Bureau of Land Management is the least conservation focused, followed by the U.S. Forest Service. The National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, according to GAO, have always dedicated 100 percent of their property to conservation and preservation goals. Also of note, GAO shows a considerable shift from resource use to conservation between 1964 and 1994 (see figure 1). Not surprisingly, the Bureau of Land Management whose mission is the most focused on resource use is the only agency that saw a decline in landholdings. It relinquished control of 197 million acres between 1964 and 1994. However, its reduced landholding is not indicative of reduced federal controls overall, nor does it indicate increased development of public lands. In fact, not much of this land was privatized or turned over for resource use. More than 113 million acres were simply transferred

The Environmental Source to the state of Alaska and Native Alaskans. And even with that shift, GAO reports that in 1994, the federal government still owned 63 percent of the state of Alaska. 9 Agencies with greater focus on preservation reflecting progressive environmental ideals gained the most. The more conservationfocused Fish and Wildlife Service received 49 million acres of Bureau of Land Management land; the National Park Service received 41 million acres. 10 Such shifts represent movement away from resource use policies toward more preservationist ones. The growth of federal land control and ownership is apparent in most states. The number of acres managed by land agencies increased in 46 states and decreased in only 4. In some states Arizona, California, Florida, Nevada, and Wyoming the shift toward federal ownership was substantial, with more than 1 million acres becoming federal property. Federal ownership declined in Alaska, Idaho, New Mexico, and Utah. 11 These findings indicate that the federal government is in general accruing land in states that have higher-valued real estate, such as California and Florida, while dispensing with lands in lower-valued areas such as Utah and Alaska. The amount of federal land managed for conservation purposes that is national parks, national wildlife refuges, wilderness and wilderness study areas, wild and scenic rivers, and areas of critical environmental concern 12 has grown by 66 million acres. 13 In total, more than 9. U.S. General Accounting Office, Land Ownership, 24. 10. Ibid., 20. 11. Ibid. 12. Ibid. 13. Ibid., 6. 272 million acres out of 622.8 acres or about 44 percent were managed for conservation rather than resource use by 1994, according to GAO. 14 Again, this trend lends support to the contention that federal land policy has shifted in favor of environmental interests. In addition to expanding conservation- and preservation-related territories, the federal government also increased its rights of use on 3 million acres of nonfederal land. 15 These rights include rights for the public or government agencies to cross lands owned by private parties, nonprofit organizations, or nonfederal government entities. Also of note, GAO reports that between July 1964 and September 1994, environmental organizations transferred 3.2 million acres of land to the federal government. 16 Such transfers are indicative of environmentalist support for federal land management policies, because few such organizations would transfer lands unless they had some assurance that the federal government would promote the environmentalist agenda of preservation of such lands shifting them away from resource use activities and public access. Since 1994, total land ownership by the four environmental agencies has grown from 622.7 million acres to 629.3 million acres. The U.S. Forest Service grew from 191.6 million acres in 1994 to 193 million acres by 2006. 17 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service land management portfolio grew from 87.5 million acres in 14. Ibid., 24. 15. Ibid., 6. 16. Ibid., 7. 17. For the 1994 figures, see U.S. General Accounting Office, Land Ownership, 6; for the 2006 figure, see U.S. Forest Service, About Us, U.S. Forest Service, Washington, DC, January 30, 2007, http://www.fs.fed.us/aboutus. Competitive Enterprise Institue www.cei.org 202-331-1010

Lands and Wildlife 1996 to 96 million acres of wildlife refuges in 2006. 18 The National Park Service land ownership grew from 76.6 million acres in 1994 to 79.3 million acres in 2006. 19 As occurred in the prior two decades, the Bureau of Land Management continued to lose property, while more conservation-focused agencies gained. Land managed by the Bureau of Land Management declined from 267.1 million acres in 1994 to 261 million acres by 2006. 20 Growth of Wilderness Regulation Another way to demonstrate the trend toward preservation on public lands involves assessing the amount of land designated as wilderness in the past several decades. The National Wilderness Act of 1964 created the National Wilderness Preservation System, a network of public lands that receive special protections from development and other uses. 18. For the 1994 figures, see U.S. General Accounting Office, Land Ownership, 6; for the 2006 figure, see U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, President Seeks More than $2 Billion for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2007 Budget, press release, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC, February 6, 2006, http://www.fws.gov/budget/2007/ FY07%20press%20release.htm. 19. For the 1994 figures, see U.S. General Accounting Office, Land Ownership, 6; for the 2006 figure, see National Park Service, The National Park System Acreage, National Park Service, Washington, DC, June 8, 2006, http://www.nps.gov/legacy/acreage.html. The National Park Service states that it was responsible for managing 83.6 million acres [in 2006], of which more than 4.3 million acres remain in private ownership, meaning 79.3 million acres were government owned. 20. For the 1994 figures, see General Accounting Office, Land Ownership, 6; for the 2006 figure see Bureau of Land Management, Homepage, Bureau of Land Management, Washington, DC, June 8, 2006, http://www. blm.gov/nhp/index.htm. Under the act, Congress periodically designates land as wilderness. The act declared that, once designated by Congress, wilderness areas shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness. 21 The intent of such designations was to reduce their use for resource industries and focus on recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use. 22 Although all resource use was not eliminated, wilderness designations can limit such use considerably; the growing number of wilderness areas reflects the emphasis on preservation over resource use. Figure 2 shows a considerable and steady expansion of the amount of federal land designated as wilderness. In 1980, Congress added more than 56 million acres to the system with the passage of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. Since then, Congress has continued to add land, but at a slower pace. The federal government also implements a similar law for wild and scenic rivers. Congress can designate rivers for protection under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, which states that these rivers shall be preserved in free-flowing condition, and that they and their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. 21. National Wilderness Act, Public Law 88-577, section 2(b). 22. Ibid., section 4(b).

The Environmental Source Figure 2. Wilderness Acreage by Year 100 80 Millions of Acres 60 40 20 0 1972 1974 1975 1976 1978 1980 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1996 1997 1999 2000 2002 2004 2005 2006 Source: Wilderness.net, a partnership of the University of Montana, the Wilderness Research Institute, and the National Wilderness Training Center. Year Figure 3. Miles of River Designated as Wild and Scenic 12,000 10,000 8,000 Miles 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1996 1998 1999 2000 2002 2004 Year Source: National Park Service. Competitive Enterprise Institue www.cei.org 202-331-1010

Lands and Wildlife The Congress declares that the established national policy of dam and other construction at appropriate sections of the rivers of the United States needs to be complemented by a policy that would preserve other selected rivers or sections thereof in their freeflowing condition to protect the water quality of such rivers and to fulfill other vital national conservation purposes. 23 As with the wilderness designations, nearly every year since the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was passed Congress has added more miles of river to the list, expanding regulation and protection along them (see figure 3). The data show that federal land-use controls are growing in terms of both ownership and management. Subsequent policy briefs will show that such politically driven preservationist management over an increasing amount of land has actually undermined environmental goals substantially. In addition, other policy briefs document how privately managed lands suffer far less from serious environmental problems and are managed to allow long-term resource renewal. 23. Public Law 90-542, section 1(b). Updated 2008.