Study, Share, Act Today!

 

The federal government promised all new states that it would dispose of the public lands upon each being admitted as a state. It failed to honor this promise to the western states, but unilaterally promised them it would retain and manage these lands in partnership with state and local governments for their economic benefit.

 

It failed to honor this promise, and has unilaterally embarked upon a host of environmentally focused policies that are "loving" our lands, forests, wildlife, watersheds, and resources to death. These policies are also denying western states and their local communities the use of their abundant resources to adequately fund education and secure their economic self-reliance.

 

Just like the 1828 "western states," if we (1) understand the history and facts about our public lands, (2) know our rights, (3) band together, and (4) refuse to take "NO" for an answer, we too can secure the transfer of our public lands to provide for the health, safety and welfare in our states and communities through the wise, local management of these lands.

Liberating our Lands

 

Quick Fact #4

Owner-Occupied vs. Absentee Public Land Management?

By Rep. Roger Barrus,

Utah House of Representatives,

Chair of the Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Standing Committee

 

Western states were admitted into the Union at a time when the federal government still honored the law, the history, and its own longtime policy of disposing of the federal public lands to private owners and the states, with the expectation of equal sovereignty with the other states and the opportunity to chart their own future. However, early in the twentieth century, the federal government unilaterally began to move away from the policy of federal land disposal to a policy of "retention and conservation." Initially, "conservation," as used by federal land managers, meant sustainable resource development. For many decades the resources developed on land managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) generated substantial net revenue to the federal treasury, second only to the IRS. In response to environmental interests, however, Washington, again unilaterally, turned "conservation" into near-absolute "preservation."

 

In 1976, Congress passed the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), unilaterally ending the centuries-old law, policy and practice of disposing federal lands to private owners or directly to the states. FLPMA was based on the promise of (1) local land management planning (2) for multiple uses and (3) sustainable development of the natural resources (4) for the benefit of the states and local governments in which the public lands were located. However, over not many years, the federal government laid waste the federal/state partnership of public lands management through an oppressive and over-reaching federal management agenda. This abrogation of FLPMA, which signaled the move from "economic" to purely "ecological" goals, has adversely impacted the ability and jurisdiction of the western states and local governments to provide for the health, safety and welfare of their states, communities and citizens.

 

Just one example of the impact to Utah of this evolution of federal land management policies is the deterioration of national forests. Utah initially supported placing into reserve the six national forests in Utah -- Ashley, Fish Lake, Manti La-Sal, Dixie, Uintah, and Wasatch-Cache -- because the federal government promised Utah that this action would preserve the forest lands for watersheds, grazing and for agricultural use, namely the harvesting of timber and other wood products.

 

This vision and promise of agricultural production on the forest lands is why the Forest Service was made part of the Department of Agriculture rather than part of the Department of the Interior. But the promise of agricultural use has long since been broken. Logging, timber and wood-products operations in Utah's national forests have come to a virtual standstill.  The results: forests choked with old growth, loss of aspen diversity, loss of habitat and a threat to community watersheds due to insect infestation and catastrophic fire -- all resulting from federal failure to properly manage the forest lands for their intended use.  (Read here and here.)

 

In 2002, the Forest Service lamented its own fate in an internal study, The Process Predicament, noting that it was beset by a "costly procedural quagmire of planning and assessment." It characterized its own circumstances as operating "within a statutory, regulatory, and administrative framework that has kept the agency from effectively addressing rapid declines in forest health," including the development of explosive wood fuel buildups for fire on many western national forests resulting in the loss of habitat, animals, watershed and the resource itself. (Emphasis added.)

 

Time and again, the federal government has breached its promises with respect to the public lands. Utah and other western states are moving to compel the federal government to honor the same promise it made and kept with all states east of Colorado: to timely dispose of the public lands so they can be managed by those whose lives and livelihoods depend upon the wise management of these lands.

 

In 2002, the Forest Service lamented its own fate in an internal study, The Process Predicament, noting that it was beset by a "costly procedural quagmire of planning and assessment." It characterized its own circumstances as operating "within a statutory, regulatory, and administrative framework that has kept the agency from effectively addressing rapid declines in forest health," including the development of explosive wood fuel buildups for fire on many western national forests resulting in the loss of habitat, animals, watershed and the resource itself. (Emphasis added.)

 

Time and again, the federal government has breached its promises with respect to the public lands. Utah and other western states are moving to compel the federal government to honor the same promise it made and kept with all states east of Colorado: to timely dispose of the public lands so they can be managed by those whose lives and livelihoods depend upon the wise management of these lands.

 

 

HOW TO TAKE ACTION TODAY

 

First, please forward this information to everyone you know, post it on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, LinkedIn, etc., and encourage your friends to do the same.

 

Second, as a result of Utah and others in the west beginning to go on the offensive in securing local control of land access, land use, and land ownership, several counties, municipalities, organizations, businesses and individuals have recently come together to form the American Lands Council (ALC), www.americanlandscouncil.org. Click here to get involved in advancing the mission of ALC.

 

Third, money and manpower will make the difference! Please click the donate button (at the top of  this page) to support this critical initiative as we build "The 1828 Resolve" throughout the western states.