Our public lands have become a focal point for confusion, controversy, ignorance and hysterical behavior. Why? We need to look at our history to begin to understand.
Going back to our Declaration of Independence, the framers of our country clearly stated, We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, and further stated, That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Note that Governments is plural, not a singular overall Government.
Next, the ratified Constitution provided under Article 1, section 8, for the federal government to purchase lands for very specifically identified and limited purposes, and only by the approval of the state legislature involved.
Jumping forward to establishing statehood for western states, a problem began with California, where the Civil War and slavery issues played a major political role. The only way the eastern-controlled Congress would authorize the California to be a state was if, among other terms, the territory ceded all unappropriated land to the federal government, while it also agreed that the state was being recognized as entering in on equal footing with all other previous states, a direct violation of the constitutional provision and the Equal Footing Doctrine.
Blackmail was the tool of the eastern Congress. All western states coming into the union later were held to the same blackmail tactic, including Colorado. The Colorado Enabling Act states in Paragraph 1, which stat, when formed shall be admitted into the Union upon an equal footing with the original states in all respects whatsoever. (They lied!) Paragraph 4: ...disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory .... This was clearly unconstitutional bribery.
Further, it was also with the understanding that the federal government was to dispose of the lands it received, which it did not do! The lands were retained because of their potential economic values. Those lands became the basis for several large federal bureaus that have no constitutional authority to exist.
Next, the Forest Service Organic Act of 1897 stated, No national forest may be established except to improve and protect the forest, or to secure favorable conditions of water flows, and to furnish a continuous supply of timber. The Act is not intended to authorize the inclusion within national forests of lands that are more valuable for mining or agricultural purposes.
Later the Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 and the Forest Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 further identified the management and use of all resources within their boundaries, and that their actions be coordinated with the local governments.
All these preceding Acts, even though they may have had good intentions, were enacted upon an unconstitutional foundation.
The Forest Service was originally directed by professional foresters for many years and did a rather admirable job, which benefited the forest resources and local community and state economies.
In the recent past, President Clinton changed the chief of the forest service position into a political position. Since that day, the management has become politicized, giving preference to single-interest groups with political power on the east and west coasts, and even international influence, via the UNs sustainable development, which was formalized as Agenda 21 in 1992. The president committed the United States to it at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.
The push has been to eliminate management and use of resources for economic benefits of the local communities and states. the ill-conceived idea is that forest lands are to be left alone for nature to manage, which is a chaotic and wasteful system.
The economic mess our country is in today is a direct result of our Congress and White House acquiescing to single interest lobbies pushing the philosophy that man is evil and the natural environment holy. Therefore, man should not be permitted to develop, manage and use the resources of the earth. They dont realize that the economy of the entire world is based upon the use and conversion of earth resources land, timber, forage, minerals, oil, gas, water into a product needed, desired and usable by man.
We have been locking up these valuable resources from beneficial use and are now reaping the negative results in our economy. We have now locked up 251 million acres in designated wilderness, roadless areas and the National Park system. How much is that? It would comprise the combined acreages of Washington D.C., Rhode Island, Delaware, Connecticut, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Maryland, West Virginia, South Carolina, Maine, Indiana and Kentucky.
That is federal land only; there is also another 14 million acres in state parks under the limited- or no-use rules, for a grand total of 265 million acres. We are only using 309 million acres of harvested cropland to feed our 308.7 million men, women and children.
Montezuma County residents have, within a maximum of two hours driving time, access to nearly 1 million acres of locked up wilderness and parks, to hike without any intrusion of other public users on motorized equipment.
The locking up of the current lands and restricting the use of the other lands and resources has directly contributed to the fall of our economy and the deterioration and destruction of much of the resources thereon. Promoters of locking up and no use of our resources use nebulous terms such as sustainable use, environmental protection, protect from damage and similar terms, all of which portray varying visual images that no two people see the same way, but it sounds good, not realizing it is not true.
Locking up, or further restriction of access, use and development of our lands and resources is unconscionable and would be blatant mismanagement and total lack of stewardship of the resources our Creator entrusted us with. We will be depriving our neighbors of their right to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness, all for the desires of the few.
Is there a possible resolution? If our state and county and country is to survive, the various western states that have been deprived of their right of Equal Footing Doctrine and lands have to demand the federal government return the ownership of all the public lands and resources to the states for full control and management.
Anything less will continue the lock-out controls by outside entities, and the demise of our resources and economies.
Dexter Gill, of Lewis, is a retired state and tribal forester.