A Proposal for Federal Forest Trusts

KMorrisD kmorrisd at aol.com
Mon Oct 5 04:48:35 EST 1998


Joseph Zorzin <redoak at forestmeister.com> wrote:

>State land here in Taxachusetts is managed for the benefit of the state
>bureaucracy.

Data from the National Associatin of State Foresters for 1996 show that costs
were 200% of returns from MA state forests.  Many other state forest
bureaucracies have similar performance records.  Most are modelled on the USFS.

The table below shows how self-serving the USFS and BLM are relative to state
trust lands.   The table is from the Souder & Fairfax paper at
http://www.ti.org/statetrusts.html.

Table One 
Federal Lands vs. State Trust Lands 

                                 Annual    Returns to
                            Acres   Revenues  Treasuries
                          (millions) ($millions) ($millions)
Forest Service          192       1,000         465
BLM                           270          187         142
Park Service               80           97              1
Fish & Wildlife Serv  90             8              5
State Trusts                135     4,500        3,500

Note: Annual revenues include all rents, royalties, and other user fees paid 
for use of agency resources. Returns to treasuries deduct any costs 
retained by the agency but not costs paid out of appropriated or general 
funds.

KMD

 





More information about the Ag-forst mailing list