Public Lands
• Historic View of U.S. Land Disposal
• Development of Agencies managing
Federal Lands
• Development of Policies Governing Key
Federal Agencies
• Alpine Lakes as a case Study
• Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Forest Plan as a
case study
Key Questions to Consider Regarding
Management of Public Lands
1. Whose interests should be considered?
How? Local residents versus distant
interested parties?
2. How to consider present values versus
those of future generations?
3. Should “people” be polled? Or just
volunteer their input?
4. Should planning be bottoms up or tops
down?
Key Questions to Consider Regarding
Management of Public Lands, continued
5. Should Congress step in even more, or has
it gone too far in prescribing management?
6. Should lands be managed for costeffectiveness or should non-economic values
be the primary basis for management (e.g. an
ecosystem perspective)?
7. How should irreversabilties be
considered?
8? What other values should be considered?
Public Domain Relative to U.S.
Land Area Historically
Millions of Acres
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
U.S.
Public Domain
Current Public
Lands
Division of the Public Domain
Idaho
Appropriated by
1923
Reserved by
1923
"Vacant" Area in
1923
Oregon
Washington
0
20000
40000
60000
Thousands of Acres
80000
o
Division of the Public Domain,
Percentage by State
W
as
hi
ng
to
n
O
re
go
n
Id
ah
Appropriated by
1923
Reserved by 1923
"Vacant" Area in
1923
“Vacant” today is mostly
managed by BLM
0%
50%
100%
Appropriation of the Public Domain, to 1923
Thousands of Acres
0
2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Private Claims Prior to U.S. Dominion
Donation Land Act of 1850
Grants to States
Grants to Railroad Corporations
Homestead Act
Timber Culture Act
Desert Land Act
Timber and Stone Act
Other
Cash Sales
Washington
Oregon
Idaho
U.S. Public Land Withdrawls
Land Under Federal Management –p. 54
Non-federal
Lands
An Historic Perspective
• Closing of the Frontier
• The Teddy Roosevelt Era of Conservation
• Creation of the “National Systems:” USFS
and NPS
• More modern concepts:
–Wilderness
– National Recreation Areas
– National Scenic Areas
– National Wild and Scenic Rivers
U.S. Forest Service: Key
Management Directives
• Organic Act of 1897
• Multiple Use and Sustained Yield
Act of 1960
• Resources Planning Act of 1974
• National Forest Timber
Management Act of 1976
• Wilderness Act of 1964
• Clinton’s “Rule Making “ for
Roadless Areas
Revising The Forest Planning
Process
The Current Process to Revise
Forest Planning
National Parks
• Separate mandate for each Park
• General concept: Visitor use AND
preserve the values related to classification.
• Conflicts in management concept
• Current attempts by NPS to balance
management goals w/visitor use
BLM Lands - Largely Idaho and
Oregon
• Grazing by cattle & sheep a
common use
• Timber found on some of these
lands (Mostly O&C lands)
• Strong recreational values
• An agency reluctant to embrace
Wilderness, ecosystem
approaches.
The Wilderness Act of 1964
• The result of pressures from environmentalists from
the 1930’s.
• Fought bitterly by agencies and industries
• Ordered reviews by federal agencies of lands
suitable for Wilderness
• RARE I and RARE II
• Failure of Executive Branch Agencies to Propose
Wilderness
• Omnibus Wilderness Bills for WA & OR; not yet
for ID or MT
Old Growth Forest
In Olympic National
Forest
1940
1988
Source: Wilderness Society
Road Network Olympic National Forest 1988
Source: Wilderness Society
The Fight Over Old Growth
Timberlands (Outside Wilderness)
• Environmental Group Anger over failure of
USFS (primarily) to classify lands leads to
suits resulting in the Dwyer decision
• The Clinton Forest Summit
• The Clinton Forest Plan
• And Clinton’s “rule” for National Forest roadless
land…lands not classified but still in the “roadless”
inventory - Bush & other attempts to undo this
“rule.” Reaffirmed by Obama Administration
Senator Dan Evans
sponsored additions
to the Wilderness
system in Washington
and Oregon in 1984
The Alpine Lakes
was the subject
of separate
legislation in
1976
Tan – roadless
areas where roads
can be constructed
Brown – roadless
areas where roads
cannot be built
Black – areas
recommended
for Wilderness
in Forest Plans
2014
Proposal
by Rep.
Kilmer
&
Senator
Murray
Note Small Share of BLM Wilderness
vs. the size of its land-base
BLM’s December 2010 Announcement
to inventory BLM Wildlands
An Example of
The
Political
Tussle in
The Congress
And Public
Land
Management
The Clinton
administration’s
attempt to
resolve
management
conflicts in
Northwest
National Forests
-Partially implemented
-Still controversial
Public Lands: Generalized
Allowable Uses
Dispersed Recreation
Developed Recreation
Timber Harvest
Mining
Grazing
Wildlife Management
Hunting
Watershed Management
Dams
Road Construction
Trail Construction
National
National Forests National
BLM
Parks Parks
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Wilderness
x
x
x
x
x
x
Special Cases: Where Congressional
Mandates Break Down
• Two Directions: Judicial and Legislative
• Examples: (Results of Congressional Action)
– Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area
– Hells Canyon National Recreation Area with a
Wilderness Core
– Alpine Lakes Management Act
– North Cascades Complex: Ross Lake and Lake
Chelan National Recreation Areas
– Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area
Court Actions have usually led to Executive Actions or Legislation
Symbols of Changing Values
towards Timber
• Federal Lands Programs
• State Lands Programs
• Regulations on Private Timberland
Management & Purchases of Private
Timberlands
• Ecosystem Concerns (Salmon; Interior
Ecosystem Programs)
Conflicts over logging by
USFS led to this study.
Study Team appointed
by President Kennedy
In 1963.
Composed of:
Secretary of Interior,
Secretary of Agriculture,
Their Representatives,
And a Fifth Member,
Who Essentially
Arbitrated the Study.
It can be a symbol of
changes in values towards
timber.
From April 2010 DNR Strategic Plan
Changing Values
Toward State
Trust Lands
Jointly funded
by State Legislature
and
Northwest Ecosystem
Alliance
Efforts to Acquire and Manage
Private and Public Timberlands
February 2004 proposal
By Cascade
Land Conservancy
To protect 600,000
Acres of Cascade
Foothills Timberland
Endorsed by County
Executives in early
March 2004
The Shift from Extraction to Consumption
With spending
on goods and
services in
rural
communities
to support
consumption
of timbered
landscapes,
especially
on public
lands.
Following
slides are from
this recent USFS
document
Recreation Trends
Source: USFS RPA Assessment
Timber Production Trends
Capability to process trees by d.b.h.
(diameter breast height)
Dramatic Change in growth vs.
removals
Alaska: The Division of the
Public Domain
• Statehood is recent: 1959
• History is very different in division of the
public domain. Very little passed into private
ownership prior (or after statehood)
• 375 million acres of land (only 150 thousand
intensively settled); only 7 million considered
good land for settlement by SCS
• Federal dominion over this land challenged
at statehood
Alaska: History Left the North
More or Less Alone
• Only 20 years separate 1846 boundary settlement in
the NW w/ “Sewards folly.”
• Same laws were applicable to Alaska in the 19th
century for appropriation of Public Domain
• Gold Rush of 1897
• Fisheries development
• World War II strategic development
• Federal stewardship of Native groups
• Statehood in 1959
• Oil discoveries in the North
Congress Provides a Framework
to Carve Up Alaska
• Statehood Act of 1959: Grants 104 million of 375 million
acres to the state
• Constraints on state selection:
– “national interest” lands (80 million acres)
– native corporations (44 million acres)
• Massive opposition from Alaskan Congressmen to
Constraints
• A ten-year timetable for classification
• Election of Ronald Reagan (opposed to classifications)
pushes President Carter to create by presidential
proclamation federal national interest lands.
• New Congress ratifies (mostly) Carter designations.
Alpine Lakes Case Study
• Our backyard Wilderness and Recreational Area
• Illustrates in ’s the complexities and
contested nature of public lands.
• The bottom line from this case study:
The Fight Is Never Over
• This case study paints a picture that is created,
and recreated all over the Northwest, and the
Nation.
Multiple Interests in Shaping
Public Land Management
• Environmental organizations
• Industry groups
–
–
–
–
Timber
Grazing
Mining
Other types of extractive uses
• Native Americans
• State and local governments
“Environmental” Organizations
• They range from national groups (like the
Sierra Club) to those focused on a specific
area (like Midfork)
• They span a wide variety of interests,
ranging from motorized recreation to
wildlife protection (Audubon) to skiers to
fishermen to hikers to …. You name it!
Examples of locally focused
environmental organizations
•
•
•
•
•
•
Alpine Lakes Protection Society
North Cascades Conservation Council
Olympic Park Associates
Midfork
Mountains to Sound Greenway
Friends of Lincoln Park
The Key Role of the North
Cascades Study Report of 1965
•
Appointed by President Kennedy in 1963
• Assessed federal lands from Mt. Rainier to Canada, and
made 20 recommendations for management change.
• Key were: establishment of North Cascades National
Park, the Pasayten Wilderness, expanding Glacier Peak
Wilderness, Wilderness in the Alpine Lakes, Mt. Aix
Wilderness, and Wild and Scenic River Status for the
Skagit River.
• In 1967 Congress passed legislation creating North
Cascades National Park, expanding some Wilderness Areas
(Glacier Peak), adding land to Olympic National Park, but
omitted the Alpine Lakes in this legislation.
National Park
Service:
Two National Parks,
National Recreation
Area, and Expansion
Of Mt. Rainier N.P.
Wilderness in
Alpine Lakes
And Pasayten
U.S. Forest
Service:
No transfer of
Jurisdiction to
National Park
Service
Wilderness in
North Cascades,
Alpine Lakes,
Mt. Aix, and
Recreation Areas
Study Team
Recommendations:
North Cascades
National Park
Wilderness in
Pasayten,
Alpine Lakes,
Mt. Aix.
Mt. Baker
Recreation
Area
(Most passed by
Congress in 1967)
Alpine Lakes Chronology
1946 USFS Designates Alpine Lakes Limited Area
1963-65 North Cascades Study Team
1967 Alpine Lakes Protection Society Established
1968 Central Washington Cascades Study Team Established
1971-1973 USFS Alpine Lakes Land Use Study
1975-1976 Congressional Hearings on Legislation:
HR 3977 Environmental Group Proposal
HR 3978 Industry Proposal
HR 7792 USFS Proposal
July 12, 1976: President Ford Signs Legislation
1977-1981: USFS Prepares Management Plan
Timber Industry &
Motorized Recreation
Environmental
Groups
Parcels Disputed Between USFS & Environmental
Organizations – 1976 Alpine Lakes Wilderness Battle
Red- High Timber Productivity
Orange – Medium Timber Productivity
Yellow – Low Timber Productivity
Green – Below threshold for timberland
as commercial (20 cubic feet
per year per acre biomass
accumulation)
Blue: Lands outside USFS
Alpine Lakes Chronology, cont.
1981-today: dealing with the checkerboard land
ownership pattern
- The Cascade Checkerboard project
1991 - Wilderness overuse
1980’s to present: funding of recreation in the wake
of timber sale revenue declines
1980’s to now: how to acquire inholdings
? Sustenance of interest by groups with an ax to grind
re: these lands - timber, recreation, now residential
development, relation to growth management, other
environmental issues?
Recent Issues
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Middle Fork Road Reconstruction
Kittitas County subdivisions & forest land rezoning
Pratt Trail
Wilderness Additions (Reichert & Murray)
ORV programs
New Forest Plans
Road and trail damage due to storms
Funding problems for USFS
Acquisition of Teanaway lands by the Trust for
Public Lands
• Yakima Basin & Icicle Creek Water Development
Proposals
Cascade
Checkerboard
Project:
Purchasing the
Northern Pacific
Railroad Land
Grant
At a price infinitely
above what they
paid for it!
Representative Reichert & Delbene’s 2013
Wilderness Proposal – Passed in 2014
Alpine Lakes Chronology, Cont.
The Fight is Never Over
The fight from the perspectives of all the multiple users
of public lands.
The fight from the agency perspective
The fight from the perspectives of elected representatives.
The fight from new and unpredictable interests.
Coping in the new millennium?
Next slides
• Old slides left in for reference purposes
DNR’s Current Reassessment of Timber Harvest Levels
396
536
662
411
817
781
Harvest volume by
alternative
DNR’s Current Reassessment of Timber Harvest Levels