Andy Kerr - BLM National Conservation Areas

By Andy Kerr and Mark Salvo

In the last third of the twentieth century, Congress saw fit to designate ten Bureau of Land Management (BLM) national conservation areas (NCAs) in eight western states. Unlike Wilderness or national parks or national wildlife refuges, Congress has never enacted general, uniform guidance to direct the creation and management of NCAs. There is no "National Conservation Area System." ^[1] Although there are similarities in the legislation establishing NCAs, each is the result of local politics and Congressional compromise.

Congress cites a multitude of reasons for designating NCAs, but two unstated reasons almost always bear on the decision to create a new area. The first has been to elevate the status of environmentally significant BLM lands (and sometimes their protection) to avoid transferring them to another (more conservation-oriented) federal agency. A relatively consistent second reason has been as a political alternative to Wilderness designation. ^[2]

The enabling legislation designating each NCA also establishes the management scheme and lists the permissible uses for that particular area. Table 1 depicts the areas Congress has designated to date. By analyzing the columns from left to right one can see the differences between NCAs. Analysis of the rows yields trends in both the levels and types of protection legislated for each area.

Congress addresses resource protection, or the lack thereof, in the purposes for which each NCA was designated, the values for which the area is intended to conserve, the statutory uses that are allowed in the area, or specific clauses regarding particular uses. Only a few generalities can be made for NCAs. These areas are usually withdrawn from location, leasing and sale under the mining and geothermal laws; ^[3] motorized vehicles are generally limited to designated roads and trails; and as public lands grazing has become more contentious, where it has predated NCA designation Congress has specifically preserved grazing privileges in the enabling legislation. ^[4] In most cases, Congress has authorized acquisition of inheld or adjacent state or private lands through purchase, donation or exchange to consolidate or expand NCAs. Which political party controls what branch of government appears to have little effect on the form or substance of NCA designation. ^[5]

NCAs are potentially helpful in the conservation, protection and restoration of BLM lands. Since there is no underlying statutory basis (including minimum protections) for NCAs, each area Congress creates is essentially concocted to meet the political opportunities or realities of the moment. If conservationists have a strong political hand, they can help craft a good NCA. If they do not, they will not.

The history of NCAs teaches us that they should be considered when it is determined that transfer of the threatened lands to another federal agency is not preferred or politically practical. However, there are standards that conservationists should enforce when Congress seeks to designate a new area. NCAs should not be a substitute for Wilderness designation, rather they should encompass larger landscapes with important natural and other public values and include Wilderness and Wild and Scenic River designations for all qualifying lands within them. Also, conservationists should reject any NCA that, at a minimum: does not declare environmental conservation as its primary purpose, to which all other exploitative or recreational uses are subordinate; fails to withdraw the entire area from all forms of mineral and geothermal development; does not prohibit off-road vehicle use; or “releases” wilderness study areas from further consideration as BLM wilderness. ^[6] Where livestock grazing is an issue, conservationists should also advocate for voluntary or compulsory grazing permit retirement. ^[7] If, as NCA legislation winds its way through the political process, it takes a turn for the worse, then conservationists may need to kill it, fight harder to win the necessary protections, or tactically withdraw and regroup so that better conservation can be obtained for the area in the future.

Andy Kerr of The Larch Company (the Western Larch has a contrary nature as a deciduous conifer) is a writer and freelance agitator for the wild who lives in Oregon's Rogue Valley. He recently represented The Wilderness Society in a successful effort to protect the Steens Mountain in the Oregon High Desert, including the designation of the first legislated livestock-free Wilderness. He may be reached at andykerr@andykerr.net.

Mark Salvo is Grasslands and Deserts Advocate for American Lands in Portland, Oregon. He endeavors in all things BLM, including the conservation and restoration of sage grouse and their habitat across the West. He may be reached at mark@sagegrouse.org.

Footnotes

^[1] In 2000 former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt attempted to draw together the NCAs and other BLM reservations, including Wilderness, Wild and Scenic rivers, national monuments, the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area and the California Desert Conservation Area, into a “National Landscape Conservation System” (NLCS). An associate director was promoted to manage a small NLCS office in Washington, D.C., to develop guidance and policy for the NLCS, but the agency promises that no new legal protections or restrictions will be imposed on BLM reservations in the new system. It remains to be seen whether the new Bush Administration will abolish the NLCS.

^[2] Some NCAs overlap existing Wilderness, while others are designated along with new Wilderness areas. But in every case NCAs are larger than the Wilderness areas within them to allow for otherwise incompatible uses to continue in the non-Wilderness parts of each NCA.

^[3] The California Desert Conservation Area is not listed in Table 1 as an NCA because it is still open to mineral exploitation.

^[4] In three of the last four NCAs established (Snake River Birds of Prey; Colorado Canyons; Black Rock Desert-High Rock Canyon Emigrant Trails), livestock grazing has been listed as a statutory value as well as a statutory use of the area. For two NCAs (Snake River Birds of Prey; Black Rock Desert-High Rock Canyon Emigrant Trails) Congress stated that grazing is important to local communities and that livestock have not been proven to be harmful to the environment. For three NCAs (Colorado Canyons; Black Rock Desert-High Rock Canyon Emigrant Trails; El Malpais) grazing was specifically reserved in Wilderness designated in the NCA.

^[5] Sometimes the politics of what an area will be called result in the most dramatic and contentious discussions regarding the area's designation. For example, although the pride of the Oregon Congressional delegation, the recently established Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area (Pub. L. 106-399) (SMCMPA) is a political bastard. As the delegation deliberated the future for the area managed by the BLM in southeastern Oregon, local resource users warned that they would not tolerate Steens Mountain being legislated as a “national conservation area” due to the land use restrictions that might accompany such a designation. The delegation therefore dutifully avoided any reference to NCAs in naming the area. Nevertheless (despite it's unusual name), the SMCMPA implemented strong protections for the Steens, including our country's first legislated livestock-free wilderness area. See Mark Salvo and Andy Kerr, 2000, Congress Designates First Livestock-free Wilderness Area, Wild Earth 10(4): 55.

^[6] Pursuant to the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. ¤ 1701 et seq..) Congress will eventually “release” all wilderness study areas not designated as Wilderness. 43 U.S.C. ¤ 1782(a), (c). Wilderness study areas were released in the Snake River Birds of Prey and Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Areas.

^[7] For a discussion of federal grazing permit retirement, and how it could rid our national parks and Wilderness of domestic livestock, see Andy Kerr and Mark Salvo, 2000, Livestock Grazing in the National Park and Wilderness Systems, Wild Earth 10(2): 45-52.