Introduction by Editor
On June 8, a large group of livestock affiliates including the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, Public Lands Council and American Sheep Industry Association, presented a letter to U.S. Senate leaders warning of the consequences to private land owners, ranchers and farmers of provisions in the Great American Outdoors Act (GAO). As Greg Henderson wrote in Drovers, “The GAO Act as written creates more than $14 billion in new, mandatory spending and gives federal agencies free rein to spend $360 million per year solely to acquire new private land without any oversight from Congress, according to a statement from NCBA. This raises concern among the 48 livestock and natural resource groups who signed the joint letter, as the groups point out the blatant conflict by pairing the mounting disrepair of current land under federal control and allowing rampant acquisition without accounting for management of future land acquisitions.” Federal agencies have already proven themselves incapable of managing the land and resource with which they are charged. Yet this act gives LWCF unlimited funding and unchecked power to acquire more property, resources, water rights and grazing lands now privately held.
The full text of the letter and its signatories is below:
Dear Leader McConnell, Leader Schumer, Chairman Murkowski, and Ranking Member Manchin:
As the Senate proceeds with consideration of the Great American Outdoors (GAO) Act (S.3422), we urge you to retain your role in safeguarding public lands for the future of all Americans.
As introduced, the GAO Act, and every other bill that preceded it that contained similar provisions, is an irresponsible way to fix a very real problem. Currently, land management agencies like the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management face a staggering backlog of much-needed maintenance. Without question federally-owned and operated infrastructure needs serious attention, but the GAO Act does not provide a meaningful and lasting solution.
Federal agencies currently have more assets than they can afford to maintain. The GAO Act simultaneously recognizes and attempts to address this while also providing hundreds of millions of dollars each year for the government to buy more land through the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). This approach is counterproductive and will result in a larger federal estate that will require increasing maintenance over time. It’s also worth noting that the bill does nothing to change the way federal agencies prioritize maintenance of assets so that history does not repeat itself. Simply providing funding without action to prevent future maintenance backlogs will only result in compounding maintenance challenges.
Section 2 of the bill provides funding for maintenance on the assets the government already owns and cannot afford to fund, while immediately allowing for hundreds of millions of dollars allotted to new acquisitions in Section 3. When Congress permanently authorized LWCF in
2019, there was the recognition that Congress still had a responsibility to safeguard the American landscape and the American taxpayer against irresponsible spending. This responsibility was to be carried out through the annual appropriations process, during which Congress would evaluate proposed land acquisitions and determine the appropriate level of funding. Now, the Senate is poised to willingly abdicate their oversight of federal land acquisition, while providing the maximum amount of funding allowable into perpetuity.
The GAO Act provides for $900 million in mandatory funding for LWCF as a whole, meaning that at least 40 percent, or $360 million, each year will be eligible to buy land resources across the country. The federal government already owns more than 640 million acres, controlling a vast majority of the American West. More federal ownership is irresponsible, and in some places it will soon be impossible. In Nevada, federal agencies currently own more than 85 percent of the landscape, leaving precious little to support private enterprise.
To be clear, this bill radically increases the burden on the American taxpayer for years to come. Congress will still be required to confront federal maintenance needs, including mounting deferred maintenance costs, through the annual appropriations process. There will be fewer maintenance dollars to go around, meaning fewer dollars will be directed to parks in Maine, refuges in Wisconsin, and forests in Florida. If passed, the GAO Act sentences hundreds of millions of acres of American land and water to a poorly-managed future. We understand some of the historic benefits that have resulted from LWCF funding in local communities through the use of state-side funding. We also acknowledge that sometimes, acquisition can provide continuity for discrete landscape. We do not, however, believe that acquisition on this scale would be anything but an utter failure by Congress to perform its oversight role.
Consideration of this bill comes at a time when Congress has recently provided trillions of dollars in much-needed aid to individuals, businesses, and communities nationwide as a result of COVID-19. To add billions of dollars to mandatory spending for LWCF is both irresponsible for future Americans who will be forced to confront American debt, and irresponsible for the resource.
We stand ready to work with you to find a more responsible way to confront these challenges and urge you and your colleagues to oppose the GAO Act.
Sincerely,
American Sheep Industry Association
Association of National Grasslands
National Cattlemen’s Beef Association Public Lands Council
Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association
Arizona Cattle Feeders Association
California Cattlemen’s Association
California Wool Growers Association
Colorado Cattlemen’s Association
Colorado Public Lands Council
Colorado Wool Growers Association
Florida Cattlemen’s Association
Idaho Cattle Association
Idaho Wool Growers Association
Indiana Beef Cattle Association
Indiana Sheep Association
Iowa Cattlemen’s Association
Kansas Livestock Association Louisiana Cattlemen’s Association
Maryland Cattlemen’s Association
Minnesota State Cattlemen’s Association
Montana Public Lands Council
Montana Wool Growers Association
Nebraska Cattlemen’s Association Nevada Cattlemen’s Association
New Mexico Cattle Growers Association
New Mexico Wool Growers, Inc.
North Carolina Cattlemen’s Association
North Dakota Lamb & Wool Producers Association
North Dakota Stockmen’s Association
Ohio Cattlemen’s Association
Oregon Cattlemen’s Association
Oregon Public Lands Council
South Dakota Cattlemen’s Association
South Dakota Public Lands Council
South Dakota Sheep Growers Association
South Dakota Stock Growers Association
Texas Sheep & Goat Raisers Association
Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association
Utah Cattlemen’s Association
Utah Wool Growers Association
Virginia Cattlemen’s Association
Virginia Sheep Producers Association
Washington Cattlemen’s Association
West Virginia Cattlemen’s Association
Wisconsin Cattlemen’s Association
Wyoming Stock Growers Association
Wyoming Wool Growers Association
What is the point of purchasing more land for the federal government when they can’t even care for the land they already own? This is a waste of taxpayer money, and very poor planning indeed.
And the USA govt should be lottoing land off every week.
Get the land out in private deeded hands.. Where it does economic Good.
The Federal Government has proven it cannot take care of the amount of land it now governs. They should NEVER be given control over more lands.
Anything managed by the federal government is a farce. Wading through red tape of the BLM has been a nightmare to make infrastructure improvements on our range such as water erosion projects and water lines to better utilize the forages. The gov’t. Acquiring more land is part of the lefts desire to control our food supply.
Is this bill part of the Green New Deal ? So they can run roughshod over private landowners by way of eminent domain. In Colorado there was a ballot initiative in 2016 to pay fair market value to landowners but it was voted down. So, now we get huge transmission line projects to carry power from Corporate landholders, ( Phillip Anschutz & Warren Buffet) in partnership with the Federal govt from the WY wind farms to Las Vegas and So CA.
This sounds like a poor management plan for sure.
There is no management plan. Just lots of money