How
did this happen?
I have previously written about the accomplishments of
the Trump Administration. This time we’ll take a look at some of the things
that didn’t get done.
Fake
Wilderness
Here we find a history of jealousy, chicanery and subterfuge
by a federal agency including a big stiff arm to Congress. A little background
is necessary to fully contemplate this issue.
In 1976 Congress passed the Federal Land Policy &
Management Act (FLPMA).
Section 201 of FLPMA instructs the BLM to inventory
the federal lands, and does not mention Wilderness.
Section 202 of FLPMA instructs BLM to conduct land use
planning on federal lands utilizing the aforementioned inventory, and nowhere
mentions Wilderness.
Section 603 of FLPMA is the part of FLPMA that deals
with Wilderness. This Section instructs the BLM to review roadless areas of
5,000 acres or more for their suitability or nonsuitability as Wilderness, with
the President making his final recommendations to Congress, as only Congress
can designate a Wilderness. FLPMA required this process by the Interior Dept.
to be completed in 15 years.
The administrative process was completed with any
remaining action requiring Congress to act, or so everyone thought. You see BLM
kept right on inventorying and recommending as if the 15-year limit did not
exist. A lawsuit ensued and finally, in an out of court settlement, the George
W. Bush Administration agreed the Dept. of Interior’s authority under Section 603 had expired. So
that’s it. No more inventorying or recommending areas for Wilderness.
Well no, that is when the BLM jealous bone once again
came out of hiding. The
BLM has long been jealous of other land management agency’s budgets and
programs, especially those of the Forest Service. BLM’ers were very resentful
of always being considered a stepchild of natural resource management. Just
watch them play copycat to Smokey. The Forest Service had many restrictive land-use
designations. The BLM finally convinced Congress to create the National
Conservation Lands System, along with the accompanying appropriations. The
Forest Service and the National Park Service had national monuments, now BLM
has them too. The Forest Service had a centralized system of law enforcement.
BLM moved their LEO’s out from under the State Directors and created a national
office. The Forest Service had administratively created roadless areas. In
fact, it had 58.2 million acres of them, constituting about thirty percent of
all Forest Service lands. The poor BLM, however, had…none. Just imagine the terrible ache in that
jealous bone!
Stick with
me now. The best (worst?) is yet to come.
Next appears
President Obama and his shiny new Secretary of Interior, Ken Salazar. In
December of 2010, BLM convinces Salazar to issue Secretarial Order 3310, which
instructs the BLM to use Section 201 of FLPMA to inventory lands with
wilderness characteristics and to use Section 202 of FLPMA to designate them as
“Wild Lands”.
Notice the
cute little sleight of hand here. Salazar doesn’t challenge or disturb the out
of court settlement which dealt with Section 603 of FLPMA, and instead claims
the BLM has the same authority to accomplish the same goals under different
sections of FLPMA. (One has to wonder here: Why would Congress include Section
603 which specifically directs them to inventory and protect these lands, if
BLM already had such authority in Sections 201 and 202?).
In addition
to this sleight of hand change in policy, there was the cute way Salazar
handled the timing of the change. Recall
there was an attempt by Senators Reid and Bingaman to include an Omnibus Public
Lands Bill in the budget during the waning hours of that Congress. Salazar held
back the policy waiting to see if the bill would pass and when it didn't, he
waited till Congress had adjourned and left town to announce his little jewel.
History has demonstrated that tactic was just a little too cute.
The blowback was immediate.
The Governors of Utah, Wyoming and Alaska sued to overturn the Secretarial
Order. Members of Congress decried the policy as undermining their sole
authority to designate Wilderness. Congressional opposition was so bipartisan
that they defunded the program in the next budget cycle.
Finally seeing the light, in
June of 201l Salazar issued a memorandum stating the BLM will no longer
designate “Wild Lands”. The Washington Post article on this was titled Salazar shelves policy to analyze more acres
for wilderness protection and the AP story was Obama abandons wilderness plan. So that should be it. This baby was
finally put to bed.
Well, no. That jealous bone
still must be fed. You see, the BLM is no longer designating “Wilderness Study
Areas” under Section 603 of FLPMA, nor are they designating “Wildlands” under
Section 202 of FLPMA. No, now they are inventorying and designating “Lands With
Wilderness Characteristics” under Sections 201 and 202 of FLPMA.
It does not matter what a
court settlement says, it does not matter what the Secretary of Interior says,
and it does not matter what a majority in Congress said. The BLM insists on
having the ability to administratively designate wilderness-type management on
these areas and nobody has been able to stop them.
If you’ve been able to
follow me through this labyrinthine policy pathway, you have witnessed how one
federal agency can defy Congress, the Courts and their own Cabinet Secretary.
They dodge, they misdirect, they play word games and so far, they win.
The Trump Administration had
the opportunity to right these wrongs, but failed to do so.
Until next time, be a
nuisance to the devil and don’t forget that check that cinch.
Frank DuBois was the NM Secretary of
Agriculture from 1988 to 2003, is the author of a blog: The Westerner (www.thewesterner.blogspot.com) and is the founder of The DuBois Rodeo Scholarship
and The DuBois Western Heritage Foundation
3 comments:
Well said
Agencies are constantly jockeying for position to increase budgets. One clear example is the Clean Water Act budget competition between Corps of Engineers, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and EPA.
Another source of agency confusion is the Forest Service employees believe that the FS "owns" the lands they regulate. All of the Forest Reserves and now Forest Service controlled lands are under the jurisdiction of the Department of Interior but "withdrawn" from DOI programs for the purpose of Forest Service regulation. Forest Reserves being placed under Department of Agriculture is another bazaar example of bureaucratic posturing and was done before Dept of Interior was blessed with the Taylor Grazing Act. When we get a strong President or when the U.S. dollar collapses again it will be a good time (long overdue)to place all the Forest Service withdrawals back under Department of Interior, eliminate the FS as an agency, and then cut the size of DOI by about 80%.
All the interagency jealousy and fussing will end when the agencies can no longer be distinguished.
Sorry Floyd the Forest Service US Department of Agriculture is only steward for those lands under the management direction of the Department of Agriculture. There is no such thing as the US Forest Service. Sorry Smokey Bear!
Anonymous
There is no reason for you to apologize.
I learned an interesting phrase some time ago that is more precise than saying those nice government agencies and departments are stewards of the lands.
It is clear that the status lands controlled by both DOI and DOA agencies is one of proprietorial interest and that does not carry the normally available "bundle of sticks" of property rights.
By the way, I was also taught that those same agencies do not hold jurisdiction over the areas unless it is either conceded by the permitted users or there has been a formal cession of jurisdiction. In Nevada there are counties with over 80% federally controlled lands but the only locations with a cession of jurisdiction to the U.S. is typically the original Post Office location and none of the rangelands.
Post a Comment