Side-by-side Comparison of Resources 2000 and other Lands Bills

RECENTLY PROPOSED LAND BILLS:

Miller-Boxer Resources 2000 Bill, HR 798

Landrieu-Murkowski CARA Land Bill, S. 25

Young-Dingell CARA Land Bill, HR 701

MILLER-BOXER RESOURCES 2000 BILL, H.R. 798
(Supported by national, regional, and local conservation organizations) LANDRIEU-MURKOWSKI CARA LAND BILL, S. 25
[Funds calculated are based on percentage eg. on 1998 revenues of 4.5B] YOUNG-DINGELL
CARA LAND BILL, H.R. 701
[Funds calculated are based on percentage eg. on 1998 revenues of 4.5B]

Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)
Impact Aid Assistance
0
This bill does not provide incentives for new offshore oil drilling. It does not base State/Local revenues on proximity to drilling. It does not encourage new leasing, exploration or development of offshore areas for oil and gas, including areas currently covered by moratoria.
$1.22B (or equal to 27% of OCS revenues)
Impact Assistance funds CAN be used for infrastructure and public works projects eg. highways, levees, bridges, planning new offshore drilling among other development projects.
THIS TITLE CREATES INCENTIVES FOR FURTHER LEASING AND DRILLING AS A SIZABLE PORTION OF STATE/LOCAL $$ WOULD BE BASED ON THAT STATE-LOCALITY'S PROXIMITY TO LEASING AND DRILLING
States Allocation of Impact Aid Funds:
A) 50% to each coastal State based on proximity to leased tracts, ½ to local political subdivisions (within a 200-mile radius of leased tracts or impacted by OCS activity), ½ to State, unless NO eligible subdivision, then all to State.

B) 25% to each State based on the ratio of the State's coastal shoreline miles to shoreline miles of all coastal States.

C) 25% to each State based on ratio of State's coastal population to coastal population of all coastal States.
$1.22B (Or equal to 27% of OCS revenues)
Impact Assistance funds CAN be used for infrastructure and public works projects eg. highways, levees, bridges, planning new offshore drilling among other development projects.
THIS TITLE CREATES INCENTIVES FOR FURTHER LEASING AND DRILLING AS A SIZABLE PORTION OF STATE/LOCAL $$ WOULD BE BASED ON THAT STATE-LOCALITY'S PROXIMITY TO LEASING AND DRILLING
States Allocation of Impact Aid Funds:
A) 50% to each coastal State based on proximity to leased tracts (excluding moratoria tracts), ½ to local political subdivisions (within a 200-mile radius of leased tracts), ½ to State, unless NO eligible subdivision, then all to State.

B) 25% to each State based on the ratio of the State's coastal shoreline miles to shoreline miles of all coastal States.

C) 25% to each State based on ratio of State's coastal population to coastal population of all coastal States.

LWCF - Federal
(Land and Water Conservation Fund)
$450M - FULL FUNDING LEVEL (50% of LWCF totals of up to 900M total)
Distributed as: Determined by the President's and Congress' consideration of federal priority acquisitions as submitted by Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior.
This amount would establish full dedicated funding without unacceptable restrictions.
$324M (Or equal to 45% of LWCF totals)
(LWCF funds = 16% of OCS total revenue, up to 900M total)

Distributed as: 25% to Ag Dept. 75% to Interior Dept.
Crippling restrictions are placed on federal LWCF funds:
1) requires 2/3 of funds to be spent east of Texas (100th meridian)

2) allow funds to be spent only on current inholdings (unless a new Congressional unit is passed)

3) requires expenditures over $5M to obtain Congressional approval
$378M (Or equal to 42% of LWCF totals)
(LWCF funds =23% of OCS total revenue, up to 900M total)

Distributed as: 25% to Ag Dept. 75% to Interior Dept.

Crippling restrictions are placed on federal LWCF funds:
1) requires 2/3 of funds to be spent east of Texas (100th meridian)

2) allow funds to be spent only on current inholdings (unless a new Congressional unit is passed)

3) requires expenditures over $1M to obtain Congressional approval

LWCF - State $450M - FULL FUNDING LEVEL (50% of LWCF totals)
Distributed as:
2/3 of funds as:30% equally among the States

70% based on population

1/3 of funds as: competitive grants

Since FY1995, this portion of LWCF has received zero funding. Full funding would provide grants to states for land acquisition, planning and development of outdoor recreation facilities and conservation.
$324M (Or equal to 45% of LWCF totals)
Distributed as: 60% equally among the States
20% based on population

20% based on urban population.

Provides 50-50 matching grants to States.
Allows stateside funds to be used for facility rehabilitation.
$378M (Or equal to 42% of LWCF totals)
Distributed as: 60% equally among the States
20% based on population

20% based on State acreage

Provides 50-50 matching grants to States.

UPARR
(Urban Parks & Recreation Recovery program)
$100M (In addition to LWCF totals)
Matching grants to local governments to acquire, develop or rehabilitate current or new recreation areas and facilities.
$ 72M (Or equal to 10% of LWCF totals)
Matching grants to local governments to acquire, develop or rehabilitate current or new recreation areas and facilities.
$144M (Or equal to 16% of LWCF totals)
Matching grants to local governments to acquire, develop or rehabilitate current or new recreation areas and facilities.

Historic Preservation $150M - FULL FUNDING LEVEL
Though created in 1977, less than 29% of funding has been appropriated since then. Grants to States incl. 1/3 of funds to priority historic structures, sites, documents, etc.
0 0

Federal Lands Restoration $250M
Funds to restore degraded Tribal and federal lands, and protect public health and safety.
0 0

Endangered and Threatened Species Recovery $100M
Dedicated funding for implementation of a voluntary private landowners incentive program to recover endangered and threatened species and their habitats.
Funds are not available to carry out activities otherwise required by law, including mitigation required under an Endangered Species Act incidental take permit.
0
No dedicated funding provided to promote the recovery of endangered and threatened species.
0
No dedicated funding provided to promote the recovery of endangered and threatened species.

Living Marine Resources Restoration $300M
For conservation, restoration, management of U.S. ocean fish and wildlife.
Distributed as:
2/3 for coastal states for ocean fish & wildlife conservation plans including inventory and monitoring of species.

1/3 as competitive grants for living marine resource conservation.
0 0

Native Fish and Wildlife Conservation $350M
Funding is distributed via the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act of 1980, focus is on conservation of native fish, wildlife and plants, including non-game species and their habitats.
Ensures federal funds are targeted to achieve greatest conservation benefits by requiring states to develop and implement federally-approved comprehensive conservation plans that emphasize habitat conservation.
Approved plans must provide for inventory of fish and wildlife and their habitats, prioritization of conservation actions, monitoring, meaningful public input, plan review / revision and coordination among appropriate federal and state agencies.
$315M (Or equal to 7% of OCS revenues)
Funding is distributed via Pittman-Robertson Act.
Fails to ensure that funds will be adequately targeted to address the unmet needs of our nation's native fish and wildlife, including non-game species.
Fails to require states to develop/implement comprehensive native fish and wildlife conservation plans that emphasize habitat conservation.
$450M (Or equal to 10% of OCS revenues)
Funding is distributed via Pittman-Robertson Act.
Fails to ensure that funds will be adequately targeted to address the unmet needs of our nation's native fish and wildlife, including non-game species.
Fails to require states to develop/implement comprehensive native fish & wildlife conservation plans that emphasize habitat conservation.

Farm, Forest Rangeland and Open Space Conservation $150M
Grants for State, local and tribal governments for open space planning, acquisition of conservation easements, and protection of threatened farmland and urban forests.
0 0

Revenue Sources for Bills This bill specifically excludes revenues from new leasing or drilling as a source of funding to the bill, thus removing incentives for new leasing or drilling Any OCS revenues from new leasing or drilling including from moratoria areas & sensitive frontier areas (eg. AK), would be used to help und all titles of this bill. Any OCS revenues from new leasing or drilling including from moratoria areas & sensitive frontier areas (eg. AK), would be used to help fund Titles II and III of this bill. Revenues from moratoria areas couldn't be used under Title I of this bill.

TOTALS $2.30 Billion $2.26 Billion $2.57 Billion

	MILLER-BOXER RESOURCES 2000 BILL, H.R. 798 (Supported by national, regional, and local conservation organizations)	LANDRIEU-MURKOWSKI CARA LAND BILL, S. 25 [Funds calculated are based on percentage eg. on 1998 revenues of 4.5B]	YOUNG-DINGELL CARA LAND BILL, H.R. 701 [Funds calculated are based on percentage eg. on 1998 revenues of 4.5B]
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Impact Aid Assistance	0 This bill does not provide incentives for new offshore oil drilling. It does not base State/Local revenues on proximity to drilling. It does not encourage new leasing, exploration or development of offshore areas for oil and gas, including areas currently covered by moratoria.	$1.22B (or equal to 27% of OCS revenues) Impact Assistance funds CAN be used for infrastructure and public works projects eg. highways, levees, bridges, planning new offshore drilling among other development projects. THIS TITLE CREATES INCENTIVES FOR FURTHER LEASING AND DRILLING AS A SIZABLE PORTION OF STATE/LOCAL $$ WOULD BE BASED ON THAT STATE-LOCALITY'S PROXIMITY TO LEASING AND DRILLING States Allocation of Impact Aid Funds: A) 50% to each coastal State based on proximity to leased tracts, ½ to local political subdivisions (within a 200-mile radius of leased tracts or impacted by OCS activity), ½ to State, unless NO eligible subdivision, then all to State. B) 25% to each State based on the ratio of the State's coastal shoreline miles to shoreline miles of all coastal States. C) 25% to each State based on ratio of State's coastal population to coastal population of all coastal States.	$1.22B (Or equal to 27% of OCS revenues) Impact Assistance funds CAN be used for infrastructure and public works projects eg. highways, levees, bridges, planning new offshore drilling among other development projects. THIS TITLE CREATES INCENTIVES FOR FURTHER LEASING AND DRILLING AS A SIZABLE PORTION OF STATE/LOCAL $$ WOULD BE BASED ON THAT STATE-LOCALITY'S PROXIMITY TO LEASING AND DRILLING States Allocation of Impact Aid Funds: A) 50% to each coastal State based on proximity to leased tracts (excluding moratoria tracts), ½ to local political subdivisions (within a 200-mile radius of leased tracts), ½ to State, unless NO eligible subdivision, then all to State. B) 25% to each State based on the ratio of the State's coastal shoreline miles to shoreline miles of all coastal States. C) 25% to each State based on ratio of State's coastal population to coastal population of all coastal States.
LWCF - Federal (Land and Water Conservation Fund)	$450M - FULL FUNDING LEVEL (50% of LWCF totals of up to 900M total) Distributed as: Determined by the President's and Congress' consideration of federal priority acquisitions as submitted by Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior. This amount would establish full dedicated funding without unacceptable restrictions.	$324M (Or equal to 45% of LWCF totals) (LWCF funds = 16% of OCS total revenue, up to 900M total) Distributed as: 25% to Ag Dept. 75% to Interior Dept. Crippling restrictions are placed on federal LWCF funds: 1) requires 2/3 of funds to be spent east of Texas (100th meridian) 2) allow funds to be spent only on current inholdings (unless a new Congressional unit is passed) 3) requires expenditures over $5M to obtain Congressional approval	$378M (Or equal to 42% of LWCF totals) (LWCF funds =23% of OCS total revenue, up to 900M total) Distributed as: 25% to Ag Dept. 75% to Interior Dept. Crippling restrictions are placed on federal LWCF funds: 1) requires 2/3 of funds to be spent east of Texas (100th meridian) 2) allow funds to be spent only on current inholdings (unless a new Congressional unit is passed) 3) requires expenditures over $1M to obtain Congressional approval
LWCF - State	$450M - FULL FUNDING LEVEL (50% of LWCF totals) Distributed as: 2/3 of funds as:30% equally among the States 70% based on population 1/3 of funds as: competitive grants Since FY1995, this portion of LWCF has received zero funding. Full funding would provide grants to states for land acquisition, planning and development of outdoor recreation facilities and conservation.	$324M (Or equal to 45% of LWCF totals) Distributed as: 60% equally among the States 20% based on population 20% based on urban population. Provides 50-50 matching grants to States. Allows stateside funds to be used for facility rehabilitation.	$378M (Or equal to 42% of LWCF totals) Distributed as: 60% equally among the States 20% based on population 20% based on State acreage Provides 50-50 matching grants to States.
UPARR (Urban Parks & Recreation Recovery program)	$100M (In addition to LWCF totals) Matching grants to local governments to acquire, develop or rehabilitate current or new recreation areas and facilities.	$ 72M (Or equal to 10% of LWCF totals) Matching grants to local governments to acquire, develop or rehabilitate current or new recreation areas and facilities.	$144M (Or equal to 16% of LWCF totals) Matching grants to local governments to acquire, develop or rehabilitate current or new recreation areas and facilities.
Historic Preservation	$150M - FULL FUNDING LEVEL Though created in 1977, less than 29% of funding has been appropriated since then. Grants to States incl. 1/3 of funds to priority historic structures, sites, documents, etc.	0	0
Federal Lands Restoration	$250M Funds to restore degraded Tribal and federal lands, and protect public health and safety.	0	0
Endangered and Threatened Species Recovery	$100M Dedicated funding for implementation of a voluntary private landowners incentive program to recover endangered and threatened species and their habitats. Funds are not available to carry out activities otherwise required by law, including mitigation required under an Endangered Species Act incidental take permit.	0 No dedicated funding provided to promote the recovery of endangered and threatened species.	0 No dedicated funding provided to promote the recovery of endangered and threatened species.
Living Marine Resources Restoration	$300M For conservation, restoration, management of U.S. ocean fish and wildlife. Distributed as: 2/3 for coastal states for ocean fish & wildlife conservation plans including inventory and monitoring of species. 1/3 as competitive grants for living marine resource conservation.	0	0
Native Fish and Wildlife Conservation	$350M Funding is distributed via the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act of 1980, focus is on conservation of native fish, wildlife and plants, including non-game species and their habitats. Ensures federal funds are targeted to achieve greatest conservation benefits by requiring states to develop and implement federally-approved comprehensive conservation plans that emphasize habitat conservation. Approved plans must provide for inventory of fish and wildlife and their habitats, prioritization of conservation actions, monitoring, meaningful public input, plan review / revision and coordination among appropriate federal and state agencies.	$315M (Or equal to 7% of OCS revenues) Funding is distributed via Pittman-Robertson Act. Fails to ensure that funds will be adequately targeted to address the unmet needs of our nation's native fish and wildlife, including non-game species. Fails to require states to develop/implement comprehensive native fish and wildlife conservation plans that emphasize habitat conservation.	$450M (Or equal to 10% of OCS revenues) Funding is distributed via Pittman-Robertson Act. Fails to ensure that funds will be adequately targeted to address the unmet needs of our nation's native fish and wildlife, including non-game species. Fails to require states to develop/implement comprehensive native fish & wildlife conservation plans that emphasize habitat conservation.
Farm, Forest Rangeland and Open Space Conservation	$150M Grants for State, local and tribal governments for open space planning, acquisition of conservation easements, and protection of threatened farmland and urban forests.	0	0
Revenue Sources for Bills	This bill specifically excludes revenues from new leasing or drilling as a source of funding to the bill, thus removing incentives for new leasing or drilling	Any OCS revenues from new leasing or drilling including from moratoria areas & sensitive frontier areas (eg. AK), would be used to help und all titles of this bill.	Any OCS revenues from new leasing or drilling including from moratoria areas & sensitive frontier areas (eg. AK), would be used to help fund Titles II and III of this bill. Revenues from moratoria areas couldn't be used under Title I of this bill.
TOTALS	$2.30 Billion	$2.26 Billion	$2.57 Billion

Contact: Mary Beth Beetham, Mike Senatore or Sietske Smith at Defenders of Wildlife, 202-682-9400.

Created with Netscape Composer Webmeister Roger Featherstone