The Stealth Plan to Erode Public Control of Public Lands

This is an opinion piece in POLITICO by two former national BLM Directors, Bob Abbey and Jim Caswell. It begins with the usual pablum about BLM land:

About 10 percent of all the land in the country — 245 million acres — are public lands cared for by the Bureau of Land Management. These public lands range from national monuments and conservation areas to recreation lands; from wild, open spaces to forests and mountains; from rangelands to Arctic tundra. They include wetlands, lush river valleys, austere desert landscapes, and a vast wealth of mineral resources vital to our country.

And then they write:

This land is owned by all Americans. It is your land.

I am really tired of hearing this. If you own land, you have the right to possess, to control, to exclude others. to transfer the property to someone else by selling, gifting or inheritance, and to use the property as collateral through a mortgage.

Do you, or I or any member of the public have these rights of ownership to these lands? No, and it is a terrible distortion to say this is "your land". The feds, not you, control these lands, can exclude us from these lands and can sell or exchange these lands.

This is often used, as it is here, to claim your ownership is threatened or is being eroded. How can something be eroded that doesn't exist in the first place?

Then we get to the main purpose of the opinion piece:

So why is Bernhardt relocating much of the remaining 3 percent of BLM? Our view is that the plan is a poorly disguised attempt to destroy the agency from the inside. BLM state directors and field managers in the West already have the authority to make land-use, leasing and permitting decisions and facilitate coordination with state, tribal and local governments. The 3 percent in Washington focuses on policy, oversight and coordination at the national level with other federal agencies, Congress and national public interest groups. This is work that must be done in Washington to be effective.

I've already written about this here:

Former BLM Director Robert V. Abbey, who served in the Obama administration says, “It’s just another step that they are taking that will add credence to those advocates that say these lands should be managed by the states.” 

“They want to dissolve gradually the federal BLM agency and transfer the responsibility and, more importantly, the assets to states, which robs the rest of the country of an asset they’ve been paying for,” says Patrick Shea, a former BLM Director who served during the Clinton administration.

I wish this were true, but it is not. It is just another arrow pulled from their quiver in a transparent effort to stymie reform. They conveniently forget that then candidate Donald Trump was the only Republican in the presidential primaries to oppose the transfer of certain federal lands to the states. 

Interior Spokesman Molly Block says, “We are not doing anything to change the legal basis of BLM’s role in land management, or the continued federal ownership of public lands administered out West by BLM.” 

Interior says their plan places emphasis on the need to align its personnel footprint with their resources footprint, which is primarily located in the West.

 The author's write as if the entire "three percent in Washington" is being moved West. However, the plan would leave sixty positions remaining in D.C., including the Deputy Director of Policy and Programs, and those involved in legislative affairs, public affairs and other functions best suited to a D.C. presence.  

And one more thing about Bob Abbey. Let's not forget he attempted to confiscate Wayne Hage's cattle while the issues surrounding the Hage case were being litigated and the feds were losing. Read about it here.