Wildfires Rage, Again, and the Constitution is Involved

Unlikely, but true : the Constitution and raging wildfires are connected.

According to the original U.S. Constitution, federally owned lands in a state, to be used for "forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards and other needful buildings", were limited to approximately 1-2% of any state's territory. While this policy was followed for states east of the Mississippi, the government changed tactics for the west, absconding with major portions of land in 10 western states. Imposed as conditions to qualify for statehood, these actions were, and still are, unconstitutional.

Today, for instance, the federal government owns 58% of Utah's land, 45% of California, and 85% of Nevada. According to the Interior Department, 28% of the American land mass, or 2.27 billion acres, is federally owned. Further land grabs, such as the 1996 Escalante Grand Staircase, 1.8 million acres of land in southern Utah, add to federal land inventories.

These confiscated lands are often designated as national parks. This may seem benevolent -- protection the land to preserve its beauty, supposedly making it available for recreation. Few realize the implications of these land seizures. Private property of citizens is confiscated, occupations such as ranching are paralyzed, and families' lives are shattered. The federal government becomes a bully: "I want what you have, and I'm taking it." Imagine the federal government evicting you because it wants your house.

These actions are troubling on several fronts. First, as mentioned, the actions taken are unconstitutional. Second, those from whom property is taken are denied their rights. Third, the states, who previously controlled the land and have proven they can manage it much better than the federal government, lose revenue that would have come from land use. Fourth, natural resources abundant in the land are unavailable and the jobs that would have resulted from their extraction are lost. Fifth, if lands are designated wilderness areas, access is denied to virtually everyone. And finally, we come back to the issue of wildfires.

The federal government manages its land badly. Forests are choked with old growth because those who would clear the land by using it are barred. Logging and timber operations benefit the land, rather than harming it, but they are prohibited. Diversity in tree species is lost. Insect infestation has destroyed natural habitat and threatened watershed areas. Wildlife survival is threatened.

The Forest Service has lamented its own inefficiency, stating that it has not effectively addressed "rapid declines in forest health". It further mentions the development of "explosive wood fuel buildups" that create fires in many western national forests. These lands, left untamed by human hands, have become fire traps. Each summer, western lands blaze as lives are jeopardized and property is destroyed. Trees that could be used by people become fodder for fires, instead. These fires pollute the air and destroy the quality of the water for decades to come.

This is unconscionable. Citizens own the land -- they are the basis of government. We have the inalienable right to the resources of the land, to graze livestock and grow crops on the land, and to use its bounty and beauty for recreation. Addtionally, the land within a state's boundaries belongs to that state, not the federal government.

The Constitution and wildfires are related. If the federal government will abide by its contractual agreement with America and return state lands to their rightful ownership, we would see better managed lands and we could save millions of dollars spent in firefighting. We would have healthier forests, more lumber available, and greater revenue in the states. Jobs would multiply and prosperity would increase ; Americans would profit greatly from the application of constitutional principles and spare her forests at the same time.

For addtional information, see www.americanlandscouncil.com

- Pam