Washington, DC — National Wildlife Refuges suffer from a
vast disparity in federal resources available for their operations,
according to a fiscal analysis released today by Public Employees for
Environmental Responsibility (PEER). Acre-for acre, national parks
receive nearly six times the tax support that wildlife refuges obtain
while national forests receive more than twice the appropriations level
for refuges.
“President Bush has admitted that our national parks are
under-funded and is now proposing a financial infusion but has yet to
acknowledge that refuges are subsisting on an anorexic diet of federal
rations,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch. “If our national
parks could be analogized to the middle class, our national forests are
living on food stamps and our refuges have been reduced to dumpster
diving.”
Based upon a review of the current (FY 06-7) and proposed (FY 08) federal budgets and programs –
- Acre-for-acre, national wildlife refuges receive 17 cents
for every dollar spent for support of national parks. Similarly,
national forests see 37 cents for every park dollar;
- The
trend in recent years has aggravated the gaps in funding levels among
the three national recreational lands systems. President Bush’s
proposed FY 08 budget would worsen the disparity for national forests
while negligibly narrowing the gulf for national refuges; and
- While
the national park system has substantially more visitors than the
refuge total, refuge visitation tends to be more intensive with hunting
and fishing (outlawed in most parks), activities that require more
ranger supervision and enforcement than hiking or bird watching.
Compared to the National Park Service (NPS), the National Wildlife
Refuge System is bigger (96 million acres vs. 84 million acres for NPS)
with more units (545 individual refuges and 37 wetlands management
areas vs. 390 NPS units).
This year, fiscal constraints will lead to the elimination of more
than one in ten refuge staff slots, leaving nearly one third of all
refuges without staff, a condition called “Preservation Status.” At the
same time, the U.S. Forest Service is preparing to close hundreds of
campgrounds due to funding shortfalls. By contrast, the NPS is
preparing to invest an additional billion dollars into its parks over
the coming decade.
“We need a national recreational lands policy that does not have its
components competing against each other for fiscal crumbs,” added Ruch,
noting that the refuges, parks and forests are often part of the same
ecosystem and depend upon each other for resource values, such as
habitat protection. “Righting this imbalance is a matter of priorities.
For example, the estimated total current shortfall in both refuge and
forest funding is less than the $200 million that we are spending each
and every day in Iraq.”
###
See the fiscal comparison of national refuges, parks and forests
View the results of the PEER survey of national wildlife refuge managers
Look at the crippling cuts that will leave one-third of our refuges vacant
###