 |
FEDS PRIVATE LAND PURCHASE TRUST: A BAD IDEA
by RICK KENYON
Reprinted in the Voice of the Times, Anchorage Daily News, March 12, 1999
An ancient by the name of Agur said there were four things that were never satisfied -- Hell, the barren womb, a barren desert and fire. Today we have to add a fifth -- the bureaucrat. Over 66 percent of the state of Alaska (more than 230 million acres) is already in Federal ownership. 103 million is in state ownership. Private non-Native corporation land is less than three-tenths of one percent. Yet some are not satisfied.
According to the National Parks and Conservation Association, there are more than 1 million acres of private lands within the boundaries of the national park system that should be acquired for public use. Representative Don Young and Senator Frank Murkowski are making plans to give the federal land managers all the money they need to buy up that million acres and more, and with few strings attached.
Rep. Young, chairman of the House Resources Committee, introduced his version of what some call the "Billion Dollar Trust Fund" -- HR701. If passed, many fear this off-budget land acquisition entitlement will ultimately grow to become a $1 billion per year slush fund for federal, state and local land agencies. It supports the concept President Clinton and VP Gore are proposing with their "lands legacy initiative." Sen. Frank Murkowski along with Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-LA., and others, have introduced a companion bill, S25.
"Once the Trust Fund is signed into law, no landowner will be safe," said Chuck Cushman, executive director of the American Land Rights Association. "Park Service, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service and BLM land agents will become tyrants far exceeding even the aggressive Carter Administration."
Murkowski and Young have a long record of being the friends of landowners and users of the Federal lands. They helped draft the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) which, along with setting up the massive new federal parks and preserves, incorporated many "protections" for the Alaskan way of life. Then, the delegation held hearings when the federal land managers twisted and sometimes just plain ignored the protection provisions.
Witness the most recent Park Service action at Denali. Superintendent Steve Martin arbitrarily closed 2 million acres of the "old park" to access by snow machines -- an area where, by his own admission, "snowmachines have rarely been used..." Sen. Murkowski immediately responded: "ANILCA guarantees Alaskans the right of reasonable access. I am distressed by the continuing efforts of this Administration to erode that right. We've seen it in Glacier Bay, and now we are seeing it in Denali. The Park Service's action establishes a dangerous precedent -- an erosion of the rights guaranteed under ANILCA. The issue will now move to the courts and I'm hopeful that the court will overturn the Park Service."
An obvious question for the senator: Do you think these types of actions that you rightfully call an erosion of the rights will become less frequent when the federal land managers are handed a bag of money marked, "This money is for purchasing inholdings in federal units"?
I think not.
"This money," the senator tells us, "is not earmarked for a federal land grab. I believe the federal government already owns too much land."
I respectfully submit this is double-speak.
Murkowski said many inholders "have been waiting for decades to receive compensation from the federal government for their property. In many instances those landowners must suffer restrictions on access to and use of their lands while they wait endlessly for the funds to compensate them for their lands."
And that's just the point. These landowners have become "willing sellers" because of restrictions on access to and use of their lands. Some say the willing seller provisions will not survive the legislative process, and that a final bill will include condemnation. Are we to be heartened to know we won't have to wait long to be compensated for the land we are no longer permitted to own?
During the early years of the Wrangell-St. Elias Park (and other Alaskan park units), the Park Service was busy running the miners out. During the debate of the Alaska lands act, Alaskans were told that mining was a "protected" activity. Only a few years after the compromise passage of ANILCA, federal managers started to undermine this compromise by maneuvering to end mining in the parks. The rules started changing. Even folks with small recreational claims suddenly found they had not met the requirement of burdensome new rules. Of course not, they had never been told about the rule changes.
Finally, in frustration, they gave up. They relinquished their claims to the federal government. Although park managers will tell you there is still mining in the parks, everyone knows it's a joke. The miners are no longer mining -- they are running parking lots for tourists.
Now it's the inholders' turn. Groups like the National Parks and Conservation Association and the huge environmentalist land trusts are drooling at the thought of a permanent pipeline of money earmarked for private land acquisition. Just as the land managers in their hearts disagreed with Congress that mining be allowed to remain in Alaska parks, now those behind this latest move apparently think that private property owners themselves are something that is unacceptable.
My wife and I have lived here in the Alaska bush for over twenty years now.
When we built our log home this was not a national park. If any of these massive land acquisition trust funds becomes law, the best we can hope for is increased harassment and burdensome new rules. If, as some believe, the final legislation contains language that allows condemnation, then our lifestyle is over.
Sen. Murkowski, Rep. Young, I don't know what to say. You have been our friends and allies, and without your support many of us would have been forced off our land long ago. Some say the siren song of distributing vast sums of money has caused you to cast aside your principles. They say you are willing to sacrifice inholders, our communities, lifestyles and culture. I don't know. I can only wonder, as the Apostle Paul did about the church at Corinth when the believers wandered from the faith: Who has bewitched you?
Rick Kenyon is the editor of the Wrangell-St. Elias News. This column is adapted from the March/April 1999 issue.
