federal lands

The economic track record of the current administration and Congress is not a good one. Unemployment remains stubbornly high at nearly 10 percent, and many believe federal missteps prolonged the recession and are weakening the recovery. While things like ill-advised spending, Obamacare, and looming tax hikes are doing damage nationwide, a number of other federal measures have particularly burdened the American West, the region suffering with the highest unemployment rate in the country. The Senate and House Western Caucuses’ recent study, “The War on Western Jobs,” documents the host of environmental policies that have targeted the sectors crucial to the economies of Western states — especially energy production but also mining, logging, farming, and ranching.

It is important to note that the federal government controls the economic fate of western states to a greater extent than any other part of the country. The lands comprising 12 western states (Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, California, and Alaska) are nearly half owned by the federal government. More so than other regions, job losses in the West can be traced to federal policies.

The Obama administration’s attack on Western energy jobs began within weeks of taking power when the Department of the Interior revoked 77 oil and gas leases in Utah and halted new oil shale projects in Colorado. By the end of 2009, the administration had issued fewer onshore energy leases than in any year under Bush or Clinton, and the pace thus far in 2010 is no better. Throughout the West, vast energy-containing federal lands are currently off-limits, and the administration and Congress have sought to restrict access to millions of additional acres. Even where energy leasing is not explicitly prohibited, Obama’s regulators have imposed red tape and bureaucratic delays that have substantially limited it.

Beyond oil and gas, the administration has all but declared war on coal mining, which is particularly vital to Wyoming and Montana. The Environmental Protection Agency’s global warming regulations as well as many other anti-coal measures (including Boiler MACT, combustion byproducts, new National Ambient Air Quality Standards, others) bode ill for the future of western coal.

The threat of new energy taxes has only added to the chilling effect on Western investment in energy projects.

In addition to the impact on energy production, the federal government’s excessive ownership of land — as well as intrusive measures like the Endangered Species Act that target private property — is posing growing problems for other industries. Despite the West’s mineral wealth, mining jobs continue to decline. The same is true of logging. Farmers and ranchers also face a host of costly hurdles.

Instead of providing regulatory relief that could turn the region’s economy around, Congress has proposed new constraints like the sweeping Clean Water Restoration Act. This bill would essentially federalize land-use decisions on any property containing wetlands, and compounds the threat by defining wetlands so expansively so as to include almost everywhere. And the Obama Department of the Interior and Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service have issued new agency guidance for federal lands, which under the name of addressing global warming would further restrict access.

Granted, Washington’s control over western lands and the misuse of that control to curtail economic activity is not a new phenomenon, but the current administration and Congress have taken it to a new level.

The West’s economic pain has not been justified by environmental gain. Quite the contrary, Uncle Sam turns out to be a lousy landlord. For example, the forest fires that have become common in Western lands in recent years have mostly originated on federal lands, and not on privately-held forests which tend to be better managed against such risks. A less-intrusive federal approach could deliver both economic and environmental benefits.

The next Congress should have a long list of reforms on its agenda. The Western Caucuses’ report spells out what needs to be addressed to get the American West back on the path to prosperity.

UPDATE 1:15pm ET: Myron reports – “House narrowly defeats omnibus land grab bill under suspension. 282 yes to 144 no. Two thirds needed under suspension. Two votes short.” Huzzah!

The Republican Study Committee sent out this alert about the what I’m call the Federal Land Grab Act of 2009:

This legislation is more than 1,000 pages and would generally designate new wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, codify a National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS), and expand the National Park system. Conservatives may have concerns with many different provisions in the bill.

New Spending: The bill authorizes $5.5 billion of new discretionary spending and $900 million in new entitlement spending.

Blocks Millions of Acres for Energy Development: Some conservatives have expressed concerns that the bill blocks millions of acres from new oil and gas leasing, logging, mining, and all other business activity in designated areas. The bill eliminates 1.2 million acres from mineral leasing in and energy exploration in Wyoming alone—withdrawing 331 million barrels of recoverable oil and 8.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas from domestic energy supply. The bill would also eliminate a proposed terminal site for importing liquefied natural gas (LNG) in Massachusetts by designating a river that runs through an urban city as “wild and scenic.”

Pork Projects: $3.5 million to the city of St. Augustine (FL) for a birthday party, $200,000 for a tropical botanical garden in Hawaii, $250,000 to study the birthplace of Alexander Hamilton in the U.S. Virgin Islands, and $37 million for a park in New Jersey that the National Park Service does not want. The bill also codifies the National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS) within the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which creates a duplicative agency without a clear mission or structure.

Process: The bill is more than 1,000 pages, and contains many controversial provisions. Yet it is reportedly coming to the floor under suspension of the rules, which means that no amendments will be in order. Many conservatives believe that the process of bringing a bill to the floor under suspension of the rules should be reserved for noncontroversial measures.

My colleague R.J. Smith, who holds portfolios with both CEI and NCPPR, also weighed in on the bill on Amy Ridenour’s blog here. The legal threats posed to geologists and paleontologists is described by John Berlau here and Myron Ebell provides more details on the energy development impact here.

UPDATE: Myron reports – “House narrowly defeats omnibus land grab bill under suspension. 282 yes to 144 no. Two thirds needed under suspension. Two votes short.” Huzzah!

In these troubled times, Congress’ plate is piled high with vital legislative priorities. Naturally, upon getting to work this week, the Senate is zeroing in on the most important of all: taking millions of acres of land that may yield a vast amount of natural gas and other mineral resources and locking them away from development forever. Take that, energy crisis!

Our very own Myron Ebell had something to say about this move in a press release today:

The Bingaman-Reid bill is full of bad provisions, but the worst are the ones that would prohibit oil and natural gas production on more than a million acres of federal land. Tens of millions of acres of federal lands in the West have already been withdrawn from mineral and energy production. The new Congress should be opening some of these areas, which would help increase domestic energy production and lower prices. Instead, faced with declining natural gas production and potential shortages in the near future, the first bill that Majority Leader Harry Reid wants the Senate to consider would take 1.2 million acres in Wyoming with high natural gas potential out of production.

I should also point out that property rights advocates like the Competitive Enterprise Institute have long opposed expanding federal land ownership, in part because of the federal government’s poor track record in managing the lands it already controls. Management strategies adopted by the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and National Park Service have led to destructive wildfires, habitat loss, and the spread of pests and disease in large swaths of forest and range land throughout the Western United States. Over one hundred non-profit groups last November sent a letter to the Senate raising concerns about an earlier incarnation of the current legislation.

ADDENDUM: CEI adjunct fellow Bob Nelson has been writing about the deficiencies of federal land management for quite some time – his Forbes column from 2000 is an excellent introduction to the topic. In depth researchers will want to get a hold of a copy of his book, A Burning Issue: A Case for Abolishing the U.S. Forest Service (Rowman & Littlefield).