The Bureau of Land Management controls land almost twice the size of Texas. It controls much of the land in Alaska and Nevada. Much of the land it controls is rented to ranchers to graze cattle. The cattle overgraze the land since the tenant ranchers don't care about preservation of the land. The cattle descimate the area and leave it to lie as wasteland. Then the same ranchers rent more land from the government and repeat the process. When they leave the land in ruins from overgrazing, our government then spends millions of dollars reclaiming the land, replanting, and reforesting. This overgrazing does not occur where the land is owned by the ranchers. They are cautious in their use of the land because they have to use it year after year. They own it. The government should sell off the land at fair market prices, deposit the funds into the Treasury, and get out of the land leasing business.

The management of endangered species, general wildlife populations, and endangered lands should fall to private organizations who create vested interests in the lands, accept and expend private contributions for the maintenance of the species and lands, and require no assistance or control from government to do so. The maintenance of endangered species and lands by private organizations and companies has proven to be effective. In fact, some companies have proven that clean industry can co-exist in a wildlife-friendly environment and even generate an income while promoting wildlife. When individuals and organizations own land and wildlife, they take great care. It is time for the Goverment to get out of the wildlife and land management business, sell the assets, return the money to the Treasury, and allow nature to be managed by individuals who can and will care for it.

The Republicans have responded to environmental issues by their usual passage of greater legislation, additional governmental agencies, and, of course, more funding. In fact, during President Bush's short time in office, the Republicans have pushed through three new programs--Pacific Salmon Recovery Act (HR 1157), the Wildfire Management Act (HR 581), and the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (HR 701). The costs of these new programs is almost $2 billion per year!

The Democratic viewpoint differs from the Republicans only in how the money should be spent. They, too, see the government's role in the environment as the "Great Landholder." They boast that under President Clinton's regime, the government protected almost 60 million acres "from the Redwood Forest to the Everglades." What they fail to mention is at what cost this "protection" was provided.

More on the economic costs of Land Management and Wildlife Management