You are here: home   Blogs   The Range Blog   Natural resources and the fiscal cliff
The Range Blog

Natural resources and the fiscal cliff

Document Actions
Tip Jar Donation

Your donation supports independent non-profit journalism from High Country News.

Red Lodge | Dec 17, 2012 05:00 AM

By Heather Hansen, Red Lodge Clearing House

As even people living in a cave know by now, if Congress doesn’t strike a deal soon, some combination of automatic tax hikes and draconian budget cuts will kick in. As early as January 2, the first round of sequestration cuts will be triggered.

I’ve heard little discussion of how this swan dive off the so-called fiscal cliff will affect our natural resources. Here’s a rundown of what I’ve found:

  • The Office of Management and Budget estimates that sequestration would cut $2.6 billion in fiscal year 2013 from the agencies that manage hundreds of millions of acres of public lands and waters.
  • Like all federal agencies, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) budget would be cut by as much as 8.2 percent. For the National Park Service that means a loss of $218 million. Closures of different degrees will likely be experienced at every park in the system and cuts could mean the downsizing of as many as 9,000 rangers.
    NPS Ranger
  • A number of National Wildlife Refuges also face closures—meaning fewer places to hunt, fish and hike, and less of the $4.2 billion in revenue (and nearly 35,000 jobs) refuges contribute to local economies. In fact, all gateway communities that subsist on pubic land use are at risk.
  • HotshotOne item on the chopping block is a $225 million cut in wildland fire prevention, putting at risk beloved recreation areas and adjacent communities.
  • Some $15 billion will be cut from science funding. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in particular, conducts science-based recovery efforts under the Endangered Species Act, the single most important piece of species protection legislation.
  • The U.S. Forest Service, a unit of the Department of the Agriculture, will likely experience similar cuts (from 7.6 to 8.2 percent) to the DOI, which also administers the Bureau of Land Management. Together, these agencies make major contributions to the economy ($385 billion in 2011) through oil and gas leasing, mining, timber, grazing and recreation.
  • The production tax credit (PTC) for wind energy is set to expire at year's end. The wind sector employs 75,000 Americans and political uncertainty over the PTC extension has already led to significant lay-offs.
  • A reduction of law enforcement on public lands, a foreseen effect of budget slashing, will likely lead to an increase in poaching, vandalism, drug smuggling and other villainy.

Non-defense discretionary funding (i.e. money for public lands management, scientific research and conservation programs) didn’t get us into our debt hole—to the contrary, small investments in these areas are consistently shown to multiply revenue.

Part of any sensible budget negotiations have to prioritize funding for the agencies that grow our economy by managing, harnessing and safeguarding our natural resources.

Essays in the Range blog are not written by High Country News. The authors are solely responsible for their content.

Heather Hansen is an environmental journalist working with the Red Lodge Clearinghouse /Natural Resources Law Center at CU Boulder, to help raise awareness of natural resource issues.

Images courtesy National Park Service and Utah.gov

Lyn McCormick
Lyn McCormick
Dec 18, 2012 04:59 PM
If the BLM charged the going market rate for leasing the Publics' resources; grass, O&G, minerals, timber, etc the contribution would be much larger. Why should these agencies be allowed to broker the Publics' assets at less than market value? Why shouldn't they be managed like any other private or public Corporation's Assets ?
Dennis Willis
Dennis Willis Subscriber
Dec 24, 2012 07:21 AM
Response to Lyn: The BLM does not set most of these rates. The ridiculously low rates were set by Congress years ago and they are now enshrined, kept under glass in the National Archives. $1.35 to graze a cow and calf for a month; no royalty on gold and other hard rock minerals, oil and gas leases for $2.25/acre/year, low royalty rates on energy minerals......Thank a Congress tha will not touch these sacred cows.

Email Newsletter

The West in your Inbox

Follow Us

Follow us on Facebook! Follow us on Twitter! Follow our RSS feeds!
  1. Rancher vs BLM: a 20-year standoff ends with tense roundup |
  2. Photos of a standoff | Armed militia members join a Nevada rancher to pro...
  3. The energy haves and have-nots | Will rooftop solar owners get off the grid — and...
  4. Why homes are lost to wildfire | This Forest Service expert says it's as much a soc...
  5. The future of the Sacramento Delta hangs in the balance | But few Californians seem to grasp what is at stak...
  1. Why homes are lost to wildfire | This Forest Service expert says it's as much a soc...
  2. The energy haves and have-nots | Will rooftop solar owners get off the grid — and...
  3. Photos of a standoff | Armed militia members join a Nevada rancher to pro...
  4. Will the Colorado River reach the Gulf of California once more? | Photographs of last month's historic water pulses....
  5. Locals resist a Bakkenization of the Beartooths | South-central Montanans oppose new drilling, forew...
HCN Classifieds
Subscriber Alert
 
© 2014 High Country News, all rights reserved. | privacy policy | terms of use | powered by Plone