A federal lands package tucked into Congress’ annual defense policy bill has sparked a larger debate over the government’s role as a landlord.
The package, which was approved with broad bipartisan support Friday as part of the 2015 Defense Authorization Bill, designates 250,000 acres of new federal wilderness, in addition to 15 new national park units or expansions and three new wild and scenic river designations.
The provisions also include transferring management of a 140-square-mile national preserve in northern New Mexico to the National Park Service and making a land swap in Arizona that would clear the way for a disputed copper mine.
The provisions were pushed through by senators from Western states, where the federal government owns huge swaths of land, saying the package will help protect more than 1 million acres of landscapes, watersheds and historic sites.
“Our public lands are part of who we are in Nevada, and the diversity of our lands reflects the diversity of our identities,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. “This legislation respects that diversity and provides for balanced development and job creation throughout Nevada while protecting vital natural and scientific resources.”
But Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., led a failed charge against the dozens of public lands provisions in the bill, saying it was wrong to create new parks when the National Park Service doesn’t have the resources to properly care for the ones already under its care.
“Why in the world does the federal government own 640 million acres of our land?” the conservative Republican said on the Senate floor. “Expanding the National Park Service is a disastrous idea, and the reason it’s a disastrous idea is our parks are falling apart.”
“This bill represents the worst of Washington,” he added.
Coburn, who is retiring when the new Congress convenes in early January, complained that if the federal government’s land portfolio is expanded, the park service’s $12 billion maintenance backlog only will get worse as already slim resources are stretched thinner.
“We should preserve what we’ve already invested in,” he said. “I love our wonderful [parks] programs. But the vast majority of the parks we’ve created in the last 20 years are nothing but drains on the National Park Service.”
“We don’t have the money for it.”
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said it was wrong to characterize the land provisions as congressional pork that was snuck into a “must pass” defense bill for the benefit of a few lawmakers.
Ninety-three percent of federal lands are clustered in 12 Western states, including Murkowski’s Alaska. And without the provisions in the bill, those states would have a more difficult time protecting and maintain their vast wildernesses, she said.
“This is a balanced, revenue-neutral package,” Murkowski said. “We have taken great care to make sure it is not simply a conglomeration of new wilderness and new parks. In Western states, in particular, virtually none of us would support that type of package.”
But Coburn said the best way to protect those lands is to let the states — not the federal government — administer them.
“The real problem is restoring the rights of the states to the lands that are there and taking it out of the hands of the federal government and letting the states make the decisions about what happens to the land within their confines,” he said.
Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., sponsored a provision in the lands package to create the Manhattan Project National Historical Park Act, which calls for preserving sites in her home state and elsewhere related to the World War II-era atomic bomb project.
Cantwell said the provision, which will help preserve an atomic reactor in Washington state, “will open the doors for millions of Americans to learn about the scientific achievements made” at the site.
But Coburn said the preservation of the nation’s “most fantastic” national parks are being “highjacked” in order to serve the “parochial benefit[s]” of some politicians.
“We’re taking care of the politicians, but are we taking care of the parks?” Coburn said. “Are we doing what is in the best long-term interest of preserving the pristine, unique aspects of our country?”
