Threats and Challenges

Failure to recognize the conservation mandate

Despite the clear priorities established through legislative authorities including the Antiquities Act of 1906 (16 U.S.C. §§ 431 – 433), the Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S. C. §§ 1131-1136), Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1271-1278), and National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 1241 – 1251), the BLM is not consistently managing the units of the Conservation System to protect the values that led to their creation.

In land-use planning efforts and management decisions, the BLM repeatedly emphasizes its obligations to manage for multiple uses under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), but neglects not only portions of FLPMA that acknowledge that multiple use does not necessarily mean that all uses should be permitted in all places, but also the priority of the Antiquities Act and other legislative authorities. The result has been a refusal to consider significantly curtailing other uses, even when there is demonstrated damage to monument objects. To date, there has not been any clear direction from the BLM or the Department of the Interior regarding how to balance the different legislative direction, leaving the staff to rely on their “business as usual” approach.

Challenges in planning and management

The Conservation System is facing many challenges: it is understaffed, underfunded and vulnerable to shifting political priorities; its lands and waters are threatened by development, vandalism and neglect. While many enabling acts and proclamations creating the Conservation System units prohibit use of motorized or mechanized travel “off road” in order to protect resources, there are still several land-use plans that leave routes open to off-road use through ambiguous and illegal definitions of “road,” as well as routes that harm conservation values.

Conservation System units contain many cultural sites that have yet to be inventoried by a professional archaeologist. The BLM’s inadequate budget keeps it from effectively monitoring and protecting its historic and archaeological sites: The agency has inventoried cultural resources in just 6 to 7 percent of the total area encompassed by monuments and conservation areas, while resources remain at risk from looting, vandalism, or vehicle damage.

In most units, livestock grazing is to continue under current laws and regulations that govern this use. Certain units mandate closures or require a specific reassessment of how grazing is or is not consistent with protecting conservation values. However, very few analyses have been conducted; and, even where those show that current levels and management are inconsistent with protection of key resources, the agency has not taken action to reassess management.

Also, BLM has stated its intent to minimize facilities and infrastructure in units, a decision that benefits the fragile resources and also provides an economic boon to nearby communities.

Challenges with the NLCS budget

The Conservation System has historically suffered from underfunding, consistently receiving less than $2.50 per acre, or less than 4 percent of BLM’s budget, although constituting 10 percent of the agency’s lands and accommodating a third of its recreation visitation. As a result, the agency spends more to repair damage than it would to provide the necessary staff and other resources to protect and restore its culturally and naturally significant places. The system’s budget has also been the victim of a lack of transparency, although recent improvements will ensure better accountability.

photos:
Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument, Montana. Courtesy BLM.
Grand Canyon Parashant National Monument, Arizona. Courtesy BLM.
Canyons of the Ancients, Colorado. Courtesy BLM.