Congress Must Look for Ways to Improve Our Federal Land Policies

I devoted all of my November column to this hearing. Katie Tubb was a presenter at that hearing and I see we both had the same observation.

I wrote: 

On the very day I am writing this column, a subcommittee of the House Committee on Natural Resources is scheduled to hold a hearing, the title of which is No More Standoffs: Protecting Federal Employees And Ending The Culture Of Anti-Government Attacks And Abuse.

...There are three non-agency witnesses scheduled to testify, and their written testimony does not reflect the hyperbole used by the Committee majority.

Katie writes: 

The hearing—before the National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Subcommittee—was unremarkable except for one observation; namely, the witnesses largely all disagreed with the clear partisan purposes of the hearing.

Here are some excerpts from her column 

The hearing sought to revivify the 2016 occupation of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon by followers of Ammon Bundy, who sought to overtake federal lands by force and made national headlines.
The claim—encapsulated by the hearing’s title—was that all conflict over federal land management by local communities, landowners, and states is anti-government, and dangerously so.
What unfolded from the witness panel was far more nuanced, however, both in describing conflict on federal lands and in seeking solutions.
The importance of protection of federal employees as they do their job was something no one disagreed with. But that doesn’t look at the causes of problems and, as in the Bundy case, why protection was needed in the first place.
...It’s not surprising that there’s such potential for conflict concerning federal lands. While not exclusively a Western issue, federal land covers vast tracts of the West—covering more than half of Oregon, Alaska, Idaho, Utah, and Nevada.
That has major implications for states and individuals, and for their ability to foster a promising place to live with economic diversity, generate tax revenue for services such as education and public safety, and provide access to land for a variety of cultural, recreational, and economic activities.
Further, management of these massive and diverse lands is spread across multiple federal departments and bureaus governed by a maze of overlapping and often conflicting laws, missions, and regulations.
Presidents have implemented these laws in drastically different ways, creating tension and uncertainty.

In addition, you can read Tubb's testimony here. My column was written 10 days ago but I will wait for it to be officially published before I post it here.

I might add that this hearing was chaired by Rep. Deb Haaland (D-NM) who, in her opening remarks, very rudely proclaimed Tubb as "unqualified" to testify on this issue.