Restore Land/Water Fund

If Republicans and Democrats in Congress meant what they said last month, that the long impeachment drama in Washington has left both parties eager to find common ground, then proposals to restore the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund would be an excellent place to start.

Created by Congress in 1964, the fund was intended to be the largest single financial source for land protection. Revenues from federal offshore oil and gas leases total some $900 million annually, and a portion of that money was ticketed for the purchase of land for federal forests, national parks and wildlife refuges. The rest was designated to help states add to their forest and parkland holdings and to assist cities seeking to improve urban parks and recreational facilities.

But since the 1970s, Congress has not appropriated all of the annual $900 million as intended. In recent years at least half has been diverted to help cover the federal deficit. Now, with the federal deficit gone, Congress should restore revenues from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to their original purposes.

Money from this fund paid for the federal government’s share of California’s Headwaters redwoods grove in a deal finalized in recent weeks. In his current budget, President Clinton has designated $328 million to fund federal land purchases. But none of Clinton’s funding goes to cities and states that need it to extend and improve recreational resources.

A handful of bills now in Congress aim to revive the conservation fund. Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s bill would amend the original Land and Water Conservation Fund Act to ensure that the $900 million collected would be appropriated as the act intended. The bill directs that half the money go to federal agencies for land acquisition, 40% to states for parkland and open space and 10% to cities for urban parks and recreational programs, much of that targeted on low-income neighborhoods.

Proposed legislation from two other California Democrats, Sen. Barbara Boxer and Rep. George Miller, would provide $2.3 billion to fully restore the Land and Water Conservation Fund. Bills by Reps. Don Young (R-Alaska) and John D. Dingell (D-Michigan) and Sens. Frank H. Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Mary Landrieu (D-La.) address the fund but include unwise new restrictions. These dollars were designated for a popular purpose. The money should be used for that.