This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with red strikethrough and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.
Federal Land Designations: A Brief Guide
May 19, 2023
This report provides a brief guide to selected titles—such as national park, national wildlife refuge, national monument, national conservation area, national recreation area,
Laura B. Comay,
and others—that Congress and the executive branch have used to designate certain U.S. lands. These designations primarily
Coordinator
lands. These titles may be considered federal land designations, in the sense that they
Specialist in Natural
are land designations conferred by federal entities (Congress, the President, and
Resources Policy
executive branch officials). Also, most (but not all) of the designations apply to federal
land—that is, land owned by the federal government. The Bureau of Land Management
Carol Hardy Vincent
federal lands administered by land management agencies, including the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and National Park Service (NPS) in the
Specialist in Natural
Department of the Interior and the U.S. Forest Service (FS) in the Department of Agriculture. The report also discusses certain designations that Congress and executive branch entities have bestowed on nonfederally managed lands to recognize their national significance. It addresses questions about what the different land titles signify, which entity confers each designation, who manages the land under each designation, which statutes govern management decisions, and what types of uses may be allowed or prohibited on the land. Depending on the authorities governing each land designation, congressional and executive designations may bring few management
Resources Policy
Agriculture administer most federally owned land. Congress and executive branch
entities also have recognized the national significance of some nonfederally owned lands Katie Hoover by giving them federal designations, such as national heritage area or national historic
Specialist in Natural
landmark.
Resources Policy
Depending on multiple factors, federal designations may bring few management
Christopher R. Field
changes to a site or may involve significant management changes. The designations may
Analyst in Natural
authorize new federal funding for an area, but they do not always do so.
The report begins by briefly discussing some generalManagement
Resources Policy
provisions may vary, even among sites with the same designation, based on the individual designating law for a particular site.
Mark K. DeSantis Analyst in Natural
The report discusses some factors that Congress may consider when contemplating
Resources Policy
which, if any, federal designation might be suitable for a given area. It then compares selected designations across multiple attributes.
Congress regularly considers legislative proposals to designate lands using a variety of titlesFor instance, legislators may consider which entity would own and manage the land under various
Anne A. Riddle
designations, what resource values the designation might highlight or protect, and what
Analyst in Natural
types of land uses would be allowed, as well as whether a chosen designation would
Resources Policy
need to be conferred through legislation or could be applied administratively under existing statutory authorities. A table compares selected land designations across
multiple attributes.
Congressional Research Service
link to page 4 link to page 4 link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 8 link to page 19 link to page 9 link to page 20 Federal Land Designations: A Brief Guide
Contents
Selected Factors in Determining Land Designations ...................................................................... 1
Designating Authority ............................................................................................................... 1 Federal vs. Nonfederal Ownership and Management ............................................................... 2 Managing Agency ..................................................................................................................... 2 Physical Characteristics of the Area .......................................................................................... 3 Values to Be Emphasized .......................................................................................................... 3 Statutory Requirements in Land System Laws ......................................................................... 4 Land Uses .................................................................................................................................. 4
Examples of Federal Land Designations ......................................................................................... 5 For Additional Reading ................................................................................................................. 16
Tables Table 1. Comparison of Selected Federal Land Designations ......................................................... 6
Contacts Author Information ........................................................................................................................ 17
Congressional Research Service
Federal Land Designations: A Brief Guide
ongress often considers legislative proposals to designate lands for a variety of purposes. Congress selects various titles for these designated lands, such as national park, national
C , such as national park, national wildlife refuge, national monument, national conservation area, national recreation area, and many others. Additionally, Congress provides oversight of land designations made by executive branch entities. These congressional and executive land designations may bring few management changes to a site or may involve significant management changes, based on individual designating laws and/or general authorities governing a land system. Often, the designations are applied to federally owned lands (including lands already under federal administration and those that the designating law may authorize for federal acquisition), but some federal designations are conferred on lands that remain nonfederally owned and managed.1 area, national recreation area,
national scenic trail, and others. Additionally, Congress has provided the President and other executive branch officials with authority to make certain land designations, and may consider the sufficiency of these authorities and oversee their use by the President and executive branch. Land designations conferred by Congress, the President, and other executive branch officials are referred to in this report as federal land designations, meaning they are land designations made by federal entities. Most of the designations also are applied to federal land—that is, land in federal ownership—or to land that the designating law authorizes for federal acquisition. However, Congress and executive branch officials also have conferred some designations on sites that remain nonfederally owned and managed.1
Federal land designations may bring few management changes to a site or may involve significant management changes, based on individual designating laws and broader authorities governing particular land systems (e.g., the National Park System, National Wildlife Refuge System, National Trails System, or others). The designations may authorize federal funding for an area, but they do not always do so.
This report addresses questions about which federal title or designationdesignations might be appropriate for particular areas. What do the different land titlesvarious designations signify, and how does each type of unitdo they differ? Who has authority to confer each designation? Which federal agency or nonfederal entity typically is is responsible for managing the land under each designation, and which statutes would govern management decisions? What types of uses wouldmight be allowed on the land under each designation, and what uses wouldmight be prohibited? The report compares a variety of federal land designations with respect to these factors.2and other factors. It is beyond the scope of this reportreport’s scope to assess the benefits or drawbacks of conferring federal designations on landsapplying a federal designation to an area, although such questions often arise when federal designations are contemplated. For any given area, some stakeholders might favor a federal designation (for example, to bring federal funding to anthe area, to publicize a site and promote visitation, or to bring new resource protections) andwhile others might oppose one (for example, to forestall the federal government's becoming a stakeholder in regional land use decisions or to preserve federal funds that might be spent on area management for allocation to other priorities). preserve federal funds for allocation to other priorities or to forestall potential management changes or land-use restrictions). Additional CRS products, cited at the end of this report, explore such questions in greater detail for specific land designations.
Selected Factors in Determining Land Designations
Designating Authority Initial considerations in making land designations might include who could designate the land. Some designations can be made only by an act of Congress; in other cases, Congress has authorized executive branch officials to confer specific designations. For example, under the Antiquities Act of 1906, the President may proclaim national monuments on federally owned land.2 Congress also has authorized the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to make some types of designations on both federal and nonfederal lands. For example, both Secretaries have
1 In addition, state and local governments make designations on nonfederal lands. Examples of such designations include state park, state historic site, and city park. Designations by state and local governments are not discussed in this report.
2 54 U.S.C. §§320301-320303. For more information on presidentially proclaimed monuments, see CRS Report R41330, National Monuments and the Antiquities Act, by Carol Hardy Vincent. Congress also has established national monuments outside of the Antiquities Act authority.
Congressional Research Service
1
link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 Federal Land Designations: A Brief Guide
authority to add certain types of rivers and trails to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System and the National Trails System.3
Members may choose to work with executive branch entities to pursue an administrative designation for a site, in addition to or instead of introducing legislation to designate the site. Among other reasons, an administrative designation may be seen as a faster route to achieve the designation, as compared to moving a bill through the legislative process. (Typical timelines for executive designations vary widely, however, and can extend to several years or more.) Alternatively, limitations on administrative authorities might make them less attractive in some cases. For instance, some administrative designations are not accompanied by federal funding for a site.4 Some executive authorities—including the President’s authority to proclaim national monuments under the Antiquities Act—have been controversial at times, because the designations may restrict land uses.5
Federal vs. Nonfederal Ownership and Management For land not already in federal management, Members may consider whether the federal government should acquire the land. Many designations involve federal land acquisition, but under certain designations nonfederal entities may continue to own and manage the land, in some cases with technical and/or financial assistance from the federal government (see Table 1 for more information). Also, for any specific site, Congress may include individual provisions regarding federal land acquisition. Members may weigh, among other issues, the cost and effort to the federal government of acquiring and managing the land; the resources available to state, local, or private owners to maintain and protect the land; potential benefits of federal management (such as ongoing federal funding); potential drawbacks of federal management (such as a loss of local control over management decisions or a reduction to the state and local tax base); and stakeholder positions on the size of the federal estate generally.6
Managing Agency Another consideration might be which agency (or agencies) would be best suited to manage land in federal ownership, based on the agencies’ missions, among other factors. This could influence which designation to use, because some commonly used designations are associated with a specific managing agency (Table 1). Four agencies manage almost all U.S. federal land: the for specific land designations.
This report begins by briefly discussing some general factors that Congress may consider when determining which, if any, federal land designations might be suitable for a given area. It then compares selected designations across multiple attributes (Table 1).
A primary question for stakeholders often is which federal agency would manage the land under a given designation. Table 1 indicates the federal agency or agencies that have responsibilities for area management under selected designations. It also lists some designations in which lands typically remain in nonfederal management (while receiving technical and/or financial assistance from a federal agency).
Four agencies manage almost all federal land in the United States: the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of the Interior (DOI), and the U.S. Forest Service (FS) in the Department of Agriculture.3
3 National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. §§1271 et seq.); National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. §§1241-1251). Also, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (NHPA; 54 U.S.C. §§300101 et seq.), and the Historic Sites Act of 1935 (54 U.S.C. §§320101-320106) authorize the Secretary of the Interior to make certain historic designations, such as listing properties on the National Register of Historic Places, establishing national historic landmarks, and others. For other examples, see Table 1. 4 For example, the Secretary of the Interior may make certain administrative designations—such as establishing National Park Service (NPS) “affiliated areas”—under authority of the Historic Sites Act of 1935 (54 U.S.C. §§320101 et seq.) but may not provide federal funding for such designated sites without congressional authorization. For more information, see CRS In Focus IF11281, National Park Service Affiliated Areas: An Overview, by Mark K. DeSantis.
5 For more information, see CRS Report R41330, National Monuments and the Antiquities Act, by Carol Hardy Vincent.
6 For discussion of the size of the federal estate and stakeholder views, see CRS Report R42346, Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data, by Carol Hardy Vincent and Laura A. Hanson.
Congressional Research Service
2
link to page 9 Federal Land Designations: A Brief Guide
Department of Agriculture.7 These agencies administer their lands under different statutorily defined missions.4 Both8 BLM and FS manage most of their lands for sustained yields of multiple uses, including recreation, grazing, timber, mineral production, watershed, wildlife and fish habitat, and conservation.5 FWS, by contrast,9 FWS has a dominant-use mission for most of its lands—to conserve plants and animals for the benefit of present and future generations—although other priority uses are provided for if compatible.610 NPS administers its lands with the dual purpose of preserving valued resources and providing for their enjoyment by the public.711 Within these broad missions, each agency manages sites with a variety of titles, management provisions, and allowed uses. In some cases, the management framework for an individual site may differ from the overall framework for the agency, depending on the statutorybased on individual authorities pertaining to the specific site. Table 1 indicates the agency or agencies that generally have responsibility for area management under various designations.
Physical Characteristics of the Area The physical characteristics of an area could influence the choice of a land designation. Some designations—such as national seashore, national forest, or wild and scenic river—denote a certain type of natural feature. If a
An area's physical characteristics may suggest certain types of designations over others. For example, specific natural features may suit themselves to some designations, such as national seashore or wild and scenic river. Some features may suggest management by a particular agency—for example, FS in the case of a forest—although in practice Congress has assigned a range of sites to each agency (e.g., agencies other than FS manage many forested areas). If the site consists primarily of built structures with historical, cultural, or commemorative significance, designationsa federal designation such as national historic site or national memorial might be considered. EachSome managing agencies, too, are associated with certain types of areas; for instance, FS primarily manages forests, although the other land management agencies also manage some forested areas. Similarly, each agency manages some historic and cultural assets, but many federally designated sites with a primarily historical andor cultural features eitherfocus are managed by NPS (or are federally designated but nonfederally owned and managed.
A closely related question concerns the values for which designation is sought. Stakeholders may seek to protect a site's scenic qualities, its flora and fauna, its historical and cultural significance, its recreational opportunities, or combinations of these or other values. Some land designations may indicate the importance Congress places on a particular resource value—for instance, public recreation in the case of a national recreation area, or historic valueor history in the case of a national historic site. Additionally, certain valuesCertain goals (such as wildlife conservation) may be particularly aligned with the mission of a certain agency (such as FWS). Although the agency missions may provide a broad guide, each agency also manages sites whose congressionally established values differ from the overall mission or focus on particular aspects of the mission. . For example, in national monuments or wilderness areas on BLM or FS lands, certainsome uses typically associated with these agencies'’ multiple-use, sustained-yield missions often aremay be restricted or prohibited.
7 Collectively, these four agencies manage about 95% of the roughly 640 million acres of federal land in the United States. A variety of other agencies manage the remainder of the lands, which may have specific designations that are not covered in this report. For more information on federal land ownership, see CRS Report R42346, Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data, by Carol Hardy Vincent and Laura A. Hanson.
8 For further discussion of the missions of each federal land management agency, see CRS In Focus IF10585, The Federal Land Management Agencies, coordinated by Katie Hoover; and CRS Video WVB00399, Introduction to Federal Lands, by Mark K. DeSantis and Katie Hoover.
9 The Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM’s) mission is defined in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. §§1701 et seq.), and the Forest Service’s (FS’s) mission is defined in the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act of 1960 (16 U.S.C. §§528-531). 10 National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. §§668dd et seq.); Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. §§742 et seq.). 11 NPS Organic Act (54 U.S.C. §§100101 et seq.).
Congressional Research Service
3
link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 Federal Land Designations: A Brief Guide
Statutory Requirements in Land System Laws Some designations pertain to statutorily defined land systems, whose laws may specify requirements for areas to qualify for the system designation.12 For example, under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act,13 a water body designated as a wild river must be free from any impoundments (e.g., dams), among other attributes. Congress could choose to ignore or modify system requirements when designating a new site in the system, but the criteria typically have been given weight when Members contemplate applying a designation.
Other designations are not associated with statutorily defined land systems. For example, prior to the establishment of the National Heritage Area System in January 2023, Congress had established more than 50 individual national heritage areas (primarily on nonfederal lands) without formal statutory criteria for this designation.14 Where no systemic law defines qualifying criteria for a particular designation, Congress has often, but not always, followed past precedents when conferring the same designation on a new site.
Land Uses The chosen designation may influence what uses are permitted or prohibited at a site, based on statutory and regulatory requirements associated with the designation itself or with the agency managing the designated land (Table 1)or prohibited.
Some designations pertain to statutorily defined land systems,8 whose laws may specify requirements for areas to qualify for the system designation. For example, under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act,9 a water body designated as a wild river is to be free from any impoundments (e.g., dams), among other attributes. Congress could choose to ignore or modify system requirements when designating a new site in the system, but the criteria typically have been given weight when Members contemplate applying a designation.
Other designations are not associated with statutorily defined land systems. For example, Congress has established 49 individual national heritage areas (primarily on nonfederal lands) but has not enacted a law defining a system of heritage areas with parameters for area inclusion.10 Where no law defines qualifying criteria for a particular designation, Congress has often, but not always, followed past precedents when conferring the same designation on a new site.
Most federal land designations are made by an act of Congress, but in some cases Congress has authorized executive branch officials, such as the President and the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior, to confer specific land designations. For example, under the Antiquities Act of 1906, the President may proclaim national monuments on federally owned land.11 Individual agencies may establish some protective designations on lands they manage (such as BLM's Areas of Critical Environmental Concern), and the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture may make certain designations on nonfederal lands.12
Members sometimes choose to work with executive entities to pursue a federal designation for a site rather than introducing legislation to designate the site. Among other reasons, an executive designation may be seen as a faster route to achieve the designation than moving a bill through the legislative process. (Typical timelines for executive designations vary widely, however, and can extend to several years or more.) Alternatively, limitations on executive authorities, such as a lack of federal funding associated with the designation, might make executive designations less attractive in some cases. Some executive designations—especially the President's authority to proclaim national monuments under the Antiquities Act—have been controversial at times, because the designations may restrict previously available uses of public land.13
Table 1 discusses some of the uses typically permitted or prohibited in different types of designated areas, based on authorities pertaining to the administering agency and/or land system. In general, National Park System lands are among those most strictly protected from uses that may consume or damage resources (sometimes called consumptive usesor extractive uses), given NPS'’s mandate to preserve park resources "unimpaired" “unimpaired” while providing for their enjoyment by the public.1415 On FWS lands in the National Wildlife Refuge System, wildlife-related activities such as hunting, fishing, and bird-watching are considered priority uses; other uses (e,g., motorized recreation, timber cutting, grazing, mineral development) may be allowed to the extent that they are compatible with the mission of the system and the purposes of a specific unit. BLM and FS lands, as discussed, generally allow consumptive uses such as timber production, grazing, and mineral development. Also, Designations for some cross-cutting land systems affect certain lands across all four land management agencies. Of these, the Wilderness Actland use regardless of the managing agency; of these, the National Wilderness Preservation System provides the highest level of protection.1516 On designated wilderness lands, commercial activities, motorized uses, roads, structures, and facilities generally are prohibited, and resources are to be preserved "untrammeled"“untrammeled” by human presence.17
Notwithstandingpresence.16
Regardless of such general authorities, Congress may decide to allow, limit, or prohibit particular uses in an individual area through site-specific laws. Within all four agencies'’ lands are units with varying restrictions or allowances of land usesuse. For example, although hunting typically is prohibited in the National Park System, some individual units, such as many national preserves,
12 Such systems may cut across lands of multiple agencies, as is the case for the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, the National Trails System, and the National Wilderness Preservation System. For more information, see Table 1; and see CRS Report R45890, Wild and Scenic Rivers: Designation, Management, and Funding, by Anne A. Riddle; CRS Report R43868, The National Trails System: A Brief Overview, by Mark K. DeSantis; and CRS Report RL31447, Wilderness: Overview, Management, and Statistics, by Anne A. Riddle and Katie Hoover.
13 16 U.S.C. §§1271 et seq. 14 P.L. 117-339. For more information, see Table 1 and CRS Report RL33462, National Heritage Areas: Background and Issues for Congress, by Mark K. DeSantis.
15 54 U.S.C. §100101. 16 16 U.S.C. §§1131-1136. 17 Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. §1131(c)). For more information, see CRS Report RL31447, Wilderness: Overview, Management, and Statistics, by Anne A. Riddle and Katie Hoover.
Congressional Research Service
4
link to page 9 Federal Land Designations: A Brief Guide
allow hunting as authorized or mandated in the unit’s establishing law. Mineral development is allowed on most BLM lands, but new development is prohibited by law or executive action in some BLM areas, such as many national monuments.
In contrast to federal lands, Congress has limited authority to control uses of nonfederal land. Accordingly, designations for nonfederal lands typically do not prohibit the nonfederal landowner from engaging in particular land uses, even where the use might adversely affect some of the values for which the area was designated. However, activities incompatible with the values of a designation—such as modernizing a designated national historic landmark—may lead to a withdrawal of the federal designation; also, federal funds or permits to carry out projects that compromise these values may be restricted.18
is prohibited in the National Park System, some individual units, such as many national preserves, allow hunting as authorized or mandated by site-specific laws. Mineral development is allowed on most BLM lands, but new development is prohibited by law or executive action in some BLM areas, such as many national monuments.
In contrast to federal lands, Congress has limited authority to control uses of nonfederal land. Accordingly, congressional designations for nonfederal lands typically do not prohibit the nonfederal landowner from engaging in particular land uses, even where the use might adversely affect the values for which the area was designated. However, activities incompatible with the values of a designation—such as modernizing a designated national historic landmark—may lead to a withdrawal of the federal designation; also, federal funds or permits to carry out projects that compromise these values may be restricted.17
When a federal designation is contemplated for land not already in federal management, Members may consider whether or not the federal government should acquire the land. Many designations involve federal land acquisition, but as shown in Table 1, under certain designations nonfederal entities typically continue to own and manage the land. Also, for any specific site, Congress may make individual provisions regarding federal land acquisition. Members may weigh, among other issues, the cost and effort to the federal government of acquiring and managing the land; the resources available to state, local, or private owners to maintain and protect the land; potential benefits of federal management (such as ongoing federal funding or a potentially higher public profile for the land if managed as part of a federal system); potential drawbacks of federal management (such as a loss of local control over management decisions or a reduction to the state and local tax base); and stakeholder positions on the size of the federal estate generally.18
Table 1, below,Examples of Federal Land Designations Table 1, below, describes and compares selected designations usedmade by Congress and the executive branch for federal lands and other areas. The table begins with designations that are common to multiple agencies and then lists designations exclusively or primarily related to an individual agency. The four agencies appear in order of the overall amount of land each agency manages (BLM, then FS, FWS, and NPS).1919 The table provides information on the entity that confers each designation (e.g., Congress, the President, the Interior or Agriculture Secretary); statutory authorities for the designation; the agency or agencies that administer each type of area (also noting designations for which the area typically remains in nonfederal management); selected characteristics of the areas; and examples of each type of area. Designations for nonfederally owned and managed sites are listed according to the agency with overall administrative responsibility for the designation (e.g., responsibility for evaluating site qualifications and providing technical and/or financial assistance to designated sites).
The table reflects a selection of titles that have been used repeatedly for multiple areas. It is not comprehensive. For example, Congress has designated many sites with unique titles (such as "“national park for the performing arts"” or "“national tallgrass prairie"”) that are not reflected in the table, and Congress also may develop new designations.
18 For example, §106 and §110(f) of the NHPA impose conditions on federal funding or permitting of projects that may impact federally qualified historic properties.
19 This does not include offshore submerged lands. For information on total acreage managed by each agency, see CRS In Focus IF10585, The Federal Land Management Agencies; and CRS Report R42346, Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data, by Carol Hardy Vincent and Laura A. Hanson.
Congressional Research Service
5
link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 17
Table 1. Comparison of Selected Federal Land Designations
Authorizing
Authority for
Administering
Designation
Entity
Designationa
Agencyb
Selected Characteristics
Examplesc
Designations Common to Multiple Agencies
National
Congress,
Congressional
NPS, BLM, FS,
•
Sites include both natural areas and areas of cultural,
Grand Canyon-Parashant National
Monument
President
designations: Individual
FWS, other
historical, and archaeological significance.
Monument (AZ), Presidential Proclamation
statutesd
agencies
•
no. 7265
) that are not reflected in the table.
|
Designation |
Authorizing Entity |
|
|
Selected Characteristics |
|
|
Designations Common to Multiple Agencies |
|||||
|
National Monument |
Congress, President |
Congressional designations: Individual statutes Presidential proclamations: Antiquities Act of 1906 (54 U.S.C. §§320301-320303) |
NPS, BLM, FS, FWS, other agencies |
|
Petroglyph National Monument (NM), P.L. 101-313 Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument (AZ), Presidential Proclamation no. 7265 Pullman National Monument (IL), Presidential Proclamation no. 9233 |
|
National Recreation Area |
|
Individual statutes |
NPS, FS, BLM |
|
Lake Mead National Recreation Area (NV, AZ), P.L. 88-639 Allegheny National Recreation Area (PA), P.L. 98-585 White Mountains National Recreation Area (AK), P.L. 96-487, §403 |
|
Wilderness |
Congress |
|
NPS, FS, FWS, BLM |
|
Wheeler Peak Wilderness (NM), P.L. 113-291, §3061 Lee Metcalf Wilderness (MT), P.L. 98-140 |
|
Wilderness Study Area (WSA) |
|
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA; 43 U.S.C. §1782), plus individual statutes |
BLM, FS, FWS |
|
Dry Valley Rim WSA (NV) Burnt Creek WSA (ID) High Lakes WSA (Shoshone National Forest, WY), P.L. 98-550 |
|
Wild and Scenic River |
Congress, Secretary of the Interior |
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, as amended (16 U.S.C. §§1271 et seq.), plus individual statutes |
|
|
Eightmile Scenic River (CT), Black Butte Wild and Scenic River (CA), P.L. 109-362, §7
|
|
National Scenic Trail, National Historic Trail, National Recreation Trail |
|
National Trails System Act of 1968, as amended (16 U.S.C. §§1241-1251), plus individual statutes |
|
|
New England National Scenic Trail (MA/CT), P.L. 111-11, §5202 Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail (AL), P.L. 104-333, §501 |
| |||||
|
Public Lands (general nomenclature for BLM lands) |
Congress |
FLPMA (43 U.S.C. §§1701 et seq.) |
BLM |
|
Not individually designated |
|
National Conservation Area |
Congress |
Individual statutes |
BLM |
|
|
|
BLM |
FLPMA (43 U.S.C. §1702(a), §1712(c)(3)) |
BLM |
| Fairview Area of Critical Environmental Concern (CO) Little Creek Mountain Area of Critical Environmental Concern (UT) Simon Canyon Area of Critical Environmental Concern (NM) |
| |||||
|
National Forest System (NFS) designations |
Congress. President, Secretary of Agriculture |
Organic Administration Act of 1897 (16 U.S.C. §§473 et seq.) and others |
FS |
|
Willamette National Forest (OR) George Washington-Jefferson National Forest (VA, WV) Black Kettle National Grassland (OK, TX) |
|
National Scenic Area, National Scenic Research Area, National Scenic Recreation Area, National Scenic and Wildlife Area |
Congress |
Individual statutes |
FS |
|
Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area (OR, WA), P.L. 99-663 |
|
National Volcanic Monument |
Congress |
Individual statutes |
FS |
|
Monument
Newberry National Volcanic Monument (OR), |
|
Special Management Area, National Protection Area, Others |
Congress |
Individual statutes |
FS |
|
James Peak Protection Area (CO), P.L. 107-216
|
|
Inventoried Roadless Area |
FS |
National Forest Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. §1604) |
FS |
|
Mount Bailey Roadless Area (Umpqua National Forest, OR) Boulder-White Clouds Roadless Area (Sawtooth National Forest, ID) |
| |||||
|
National Wildlife Refuge |
Congress, President, Secretary of the Interior |
|
|
|
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (AK), Public Land Order 2214 Quivira National Wildlife Refuge (KS) Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge (FL) Protection Island National Wildlife Refuge (WA), P.L. 97-333 |
|
Waterfowl Production Area |
Secretary of the Interior, Migratory Bird Conservation Commission |
Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. §§715 et seq.) Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. §§718 et seq.) |
FWS |
| Dickinson Waterfowl Production Area (IA) Detroit Lakes Wetland Management District (MN) |
|
Wildlife Coordination Area |
Secretary of the Interior |
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. §§661-667e)
|
FWS, with states |
|
Beltrami Wildlife Coordination Area (MN) Gila River Wildlife Coordination Area (AZ) |
|
National Fish Hatchery |
Congress |
Fish and Wildlife Act (16 U.S.C. §§742a-742j) Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. §§661-667e), and individual statutes |
|
|
Wolf Creek National Fish Hatchery (KY), 16 U.S.C. §760 (with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) Hotchkiss National Fish Hatchery (CO), 43 U.S.C. §§620-620o |
| |||||
Primarily Natural | |||||
|
National Park |
Congress |
Individual statutes |
NPS |
|
Arches National Park (UT), P.L. 92-155 Glacier Bay National Park (AK), P.L. 96-487, §202 |
|
National Preserve |
Congress |
Individual statutes |
NPS |
|
|
|
National Seashore, National Lakeshore |
Congress |
Individual statutes |
NPS |
|
Cumberland Island National Seashore (GA), P.L. 92-536 Apostle Islands National Lakeshore (WI), P.L. 91-424 |
|
Primarily Historical/Cultural NPS Areas and Related Areas |
|||||
|
National Historic Site |
|
Congressional designations: Individual statutes Secretarial designations: Historic Sites Act of 1935 (54 U.S.C. §§320101 et seq.) |
|
| Little Rock Central High School National
Secretary of
Secretarial designations:
•
The designation has been applied to both federally and Historic Site (AR),
Grey Towers National Historic Site (PA), P.L. 108-447, §348 |
|
National Memorial |
Congress |
Memorials in Washington, DC: Commemorative Works Act of 1986 (40 U.S.C. §§8901-8909) Other memorials: Individual statutes |
|
|
P.L. 105-378
§§320101 et seq.)
National
Congress
Individual statutes
NPS
•
National historical parks preserve sites related to
Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National
Historical Park
events or people of national historical significance.
Historical Park (VA), P.L. 107-373
•
They generally extend beyond a single building or
Blackstone River Valley National Historical
property.
Park (RI), P.L. 113-291, §3031
National
Congress
Memorials in
NPS,
•
Most national memorials are structures erected to
Distinguished Flying Cross National
Memorial
Washington, DC:
nonfederal
commemorate people or events of national
Memorial (CA), P.L. 113-132
Commemorative
entitiesu
importance. They need not be located at historically
Flight 93 National Memorial (PA), Oklahoma City National Memorial (OK), P.L. 108-199, §544 Distinguished Flying Cross National Memorial (CA), P.L. 113-132 |
|
National Battlefield, National Battlefield Park, National Battlefield Site, National Military Park |
Congress |
Individual statutes |
NPS |
|
Wilson's Creek National Battlefield (MO), P.L. 91-554
Horseshoe Bend National Military Park (AL), P.L. 84-800 |
|
National Historical Park |
Congress |
Individual statutes |
NPS |
|
Blackstone River Valley National Historical Park (RI), P.L. 113-291, §3031 Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park (VA), P.L. 107-373 |
|
National Heritage Area |
Congress |
Individual statutes |
Nonfederal entities |
|
Mississippi Delta National Heritage Area (MS), P.L. 111-11, §8008 Freedom's Frontier National Heritage Area (KS, MO), P.L. 109-338, Subtitle E |
|
NPS Affiliated Area |
Congress, Secretary of the Interior |
Congressional designations: Individual statutes Secretarial designations: Historic Sites Act of 1935 (54 U.S.C. §§320101 et seq.) |
|
|
Aleutian World War II National Historic Area (AK), P.L. 104-333, §513 Roosevelt-Campobello International Park (ME), P.L. 88-363
|
|
National Historic Landmark |
Secretary of the Interior |
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (NHPA; 54 U.S.C. §§300101 et seq.) |
|
| Medgar and Myrlie Evers House National Historic Landmark (MS) (designated 2017) Chicano Park National Historic Landmark (CA) (designated 2017) Deer Medicine Rocks National Historic Landmark (designated 2011) Juliette Gordon Low Historic District (GA) (designated 1965) |
Source: CRS.
a. In addition to these statutory authorities for designation, the agencies more broadly administer lands under their "organic acts" and other statutory authorities. These include, among others, for NPS, the National Park for NPS, the National Park
Service Organic Act of 1916, as amended (54 U.S.C. §100101 et seq.); for BLM, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. §§1701 et seq.); for FWS, the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended (16 U.S.C. §§742a-m), and the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act (16 U.S.C. §668dd); and, for FS, the Forest Service Organic Administration Act of 1897, as amended (16 U.S.C. §§473 et seq.), and the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act of 1960 (16 U.S.C. §§528-531). Multiple other statutory authorities also may govern various aspects of land management.
b. For designations common to multiple agencies, the agencies are listed in order of most to least responsibility, either in terms of the number of designated sites the
agencies manage (national monuments, national recreation areas, national trails) or the acreage or mileage they manage (wilderness, wild and scenic rivers). As shown in the table, in some cases, nonfederal entities rather than a federal agency primarily administer the designation. Also, although the listed agency would typically serve as the primary administrator for a given designation, within any individual site, some parcels of land may be owned Act of 1960 (16 U.S.C. §§528-531).
b. BLM = Bureau of Land Management; FS = U.S. Forest Service; FWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; NPS = National Park System. The column lists the agency or agencies that typically serve as primary administrators for each type of area. Although an agency serves as the overall administrator for a given area, some parcels of land within the area's boundaries may be owned and/or managed by another federal agency; by states, tribes, or localities; or by private owners. For example, the area may contain inholdings within its boundaries that are under private ownership, or part of the land may be set aside for military activities and managed by the Department of Defense, or a marine national monument may be cooperatively managed by FWS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
c. For areas that were individually designated by statute (see note “d”), this column shows the applicable statute. In cases where a law authorized the executive branch
to make designations, this column provides examples, while the authorizing law is shown in the “Authority for Designation” column.
d. “Individual statutes” refers to provisions of law conferring a designation on a specific individual site (as opposed to broad general authorities establishing a type of
designation or land system, or setting out an agency’s general administrative authorities). “Individual statutes” could be enacted as stand-alone legislation or could be part of a broader law, such as an omnibus public lands act or an appropriations act. Such broader legislative vehicles could potentially establish multiple individual sites with a given designation, which would stil be referred to in this table as “individual statutes.”
e. by FWS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. For designations common to multiple federal land management agencies, the agencies are listed in order of most to least responsibility, either in terms of the number of designated units the agencies manage (national monuments, national recreation areas, national trails) or the acreage or mileage they manage (wilderness, wild and scenic rivers).
c. For areas that were designated by individual statutes, this column shows the public law number and, where applicable, the relevant title or section of the law. In cases where a systemic law authorized the executive branch to make individual designations, the governing law is shown in the "Authority for Designation" column.
d. Some early national recreation areas were established by interagency agreements between the Department of the Interior'DOI’s Bureau of Reclamation and NPS.
e. f.
There are more than 130 individual wilderness designation statutes. These statutes are not amendments to the Wilderness Act, but they typically refer to the act for management guidance.
f.
g. FLPMA §603(a) required the Secretary of the Interior to identify wilderness study areas (WSAs) by 1991 and to submit wilderness recommendations to Congress
by 1993. These WSAs may be modified only by an act of Congress. FLPMA §202 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to identify WSAs through its land and resource the land management planning process. The Secretary may release those areas from further study area status if determined to be unsuitable for a wilderness recommendation.
g.
h. Wild and scenic rivers generally are managed by the federal land management agencies (BLM, FS, NPS, or FWS), but certain rivers nominated for inclusion by thethat were included pursuant to
nomination by states are managed by state agencies. Also, for federally managed rivers that cross state, county, or other public or private land, the federal agencies are directed to cooperate with state and local governments in developing corridor management plans.
h.
i.
National scenic trails and national historic trails are designated by acts of Congress. National recreation trails may be designated by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture with the consent of the federal agency, state, or political subdivision with jurisdiction over the lands involved.
i. For
j.
For individual national scenic and national historic trails, a single federal agency typically serves as the overall administrator, but lands along the trail may be owned and managed by multiple federal agencies, state and local governments, private groups, and individuals. National recreation trails are mainly on nonfederal lands and typically are administered by states, localities, and private organizations.
j.
CRS-14
k. For more information on BLM areas, please contact Carol Hardy Vincent, CRS Specialist in Natural Resources Policy.
k. l.
BLM also has created subsets of ACECs, including Research Natural Areas and Outstanding Natural Areas.
l. .
m. For more information on FS areas, please contact Katie Hoover, CRS Specialist in Natural Resources Policy.
m. For more information on FWS areas, please contact R. Eliot Crafton, CRS Analyst in Natural Resources Policy.
n. Sometimes jurisdiction is secondary to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, Department of Defense, Department of Energy, and others.
o. ; and Anne Riddle, CRS Analyst in Natural Resources
Policy.
n. FS, “Special Areas; Roadless Area Conservation,” 66 Federal Register 3244, January 12, 2001, 36 C.F.R. §§294.20-49, and FS, “Special Areas: Roadless Area
Conservation; National Forest System Lands in Alaska,” 88 Federal Register 5252, January 27, 2023.
o. For more information on FWS areas, please contact Christopher Field, CRS Analyst in Natural Resources Policy. p. Often jurisdiction is secondary to a water management agency. q. Often jurisdiction is secondary to a water management agency.
p. For more information on NPS areas, please contact Laura Comay, CRS Specialist in Natural Resources Policy.
q. ; and Mark DeSantis, CRS Analyst in Natural Resources
Policy.
r. Some national natural landmarks and national historic landmarks are on federal lands and are managed by the federal agency that controls the land, but most are on
nonfederal lands.
s. The Secretary of the Interior has the authority to designate national historic sites under the Historic Sites Act of 1935 (54 U.S.C. §§320101 et seq.). However, this
authority was limited in 1992 by an amendment to the Historic Sites Act stipulating that Congress must authorize the appropriation of any funds used to carry out secretarial designations. Since then, only Congress has established national historic sites.
r.
t.
NPS administers 78 national historic sites and one international historic site (St. Croix Island on the Canadian border). FS manages one national historic site (Grey Towers National Historic Site in Pennsylvania). An additional 10 national historic sites are nonfederally owned and administered, but are NPS "“affiliated areas," ” receiving technical and/or financial assistance from NPS.
s.
u. NPS administers 30 national memorials as part of the National Park System. Another 5five are nonfederally owned and administered, but are NPS "“affiliated areas," ”
receiving technical and/or financial assistance from NPS. Other congressionally designated national memorials are managed by other agencies or are nonfederal and not associated with NPS.
t. One
v. In addition, one NPS affiliated area, American Memorial Park in the Northern Mariana Islands, is administered by NPS under P.L. 95-348.
u. Some national historic and natural landmarks are on federal lands and are managed by the federal agency that controls the land.
CRS Report R41658, Commemorative Works in the District of Columbia: Background and Practice, by Jacob R. Straus.
CRS Report R41285, Congressionally Designated Special Management Areas in the National Forest System, by Katie Hoover.
CRS In Focus IF10585, The Federal Land Management Agencies, by Katie Hoover.
CRS Report R43429, Federal Lands and Related Resources: Overview and Selected Issues for the 118ththe 115th Congress, coordinated by Katie Hoover.
CRS Report RL33462, Heritage Areas: Background, Proposals, and Current Issues, by Laura B. Comay and Carol Hardy Vincent.
CRS Report R45800, The Federal Role in Historic Preservation: An Overview, by Mark K. DeSantis. CRS Report R43872, National Forest System Management: Overview and Issues for Congress, by Katie Hoover and Anne A. Riddle. CRS Report RL33462, National Heritage Areas: Background and Issues for Congress, by Mark K. DeSantis. CRS Report R45741, Memorials and Commemorative Works Outside Washington, DC: Background, Federal Role, and Options for Congress, by Jacob R. Straus and Laura B. Comay. CRS Report R41330, National Monuments and the Antiquities Act, by Carol Hardy Vincent.
CRS In Focus IF11281, National Park Service Affiliated Areas: An Overview, by Mark K. DeSantis. CRS Report R41816, National Park System: What Do the Different Park Titles Signify?, by Laura B. Comay.
CRS Report R43868, The National Trails System: A Brief Overview, by Sandra L. Johnson and Laura B. Comay.
CRS Report RL31447, Wilderness: Overview, Management, and Statistics, by Katie Hoover.
Author Contact Information
Acknowledgments
Former CRS Research Assistant Marnie Kremer made important contributions to this report.
Key Policy Staff
Area of Expertise
Name
Bureau of Land Management
Carol Hardy-Vincent
Forest Service
Katie Hoover, Anne Riddle
Fish and Wildlife Service
Christopher Field
National Park Service
Laura Comay, Mark DeSantis
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
Congressional Research Service
R45340 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED
17 Key Policy Staff
|
Area of Expertise |
Name |
|
Bureau of Land Management |
Carol Hardy-Vincent |
|
Forest Service |
Katie Hoover |
|
Fish and Wildlife Service |
R. Eliot Crafton |
|
National Park Service |
Laura Comay |
| 1. |
State and local governments also confer designations on nonfederal lands, such as state parks, state historic sites, or city parks. State and local designations are not discussed in this report. |
| 2. |
In this report, the term federal land designation means a federal designation for lands (rather than a designation for federal lands). In other words, the designations are not confined solely to federal lands. |
| 3. |
Collectively, these four agencies manage about 95% of the roughly 640 million acres of federal land in the United States. A variety of other agencies manage the remainder of the lands, which may have specific designations that are not covered in this report. For more information on federal land ownership, see CRS Report R42346, Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data, by Carol Hardy Vincent, Laura A. Hanson, and Carla N. Argueta. |
| 4. |
For further discussion of the missions of each federal land management agency, see CRS Report R43429, Federal Lands and Related Resources: Overview and Selected Issues for the 115th Congress, coordinated by Katie Hoover. |
| 5. |
BLM's mission is defined in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. §§1701 et seq.), and FS's is defined in the Multiple Use-Sustained Yield Act of 1960 (16 U.S.C. §§528-531). |
| 6. |
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. §668dd et seq.); Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. §§742 et seq.). |
| 7. |
NPS Organic Act (54 U.S.C. §§100101 et seq.). |
| 8. |
|
| 9. |
16 U.S.C. §§1271 et seq. |
| 10. |
For more information, see CRS Report RL33462, Heritage Areas: Background, Proposals, and Current Issues, by Laura B. Comay and Carol Hardy Vincent. |
| 11. |
54 U.S.C. §§320301-320303. For more information on presidentially proclaimed monuments, see CRS Report R41330, National Monuments and the Antiquities Act, by Carol Hardy Vincent. Congress also has established national monuments outside of the Antiquities Act authority. |
| 12. |
|
| 13. |
For more information, see CRS Report R41330, National Monuments and the Antiquities Act, by Carol Hardy Vincent. |
| 14. |
54 U.S.C. §100101. |
| 15. |
16 U.S.C. §§1131-1136. |
| 16. |
Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. §1131(c)). For more information, see CRS Report RL31447, Wilderness: Overview, Management, and Statistics, by Katie Hoover. |
| 17. |
In particular, §§106 and 110(f) of the NHPA impose conditions on federal funding or permitting of projects that may impact federally qualified historic properties. |
| 18. |
For discussion of the size of the federal estate and stakeholder views, see CRS Report R42346, Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data, by Carol Hardy Vincent, Laura A. Hanson, and Carla N. Argueta. |
| 19. |
This does not include offshore submerged lands. For information on total acreage managed by each agency, see CRS In Focus IF10585, The Federal Land Management Agencies; and CRS Report R42346, Federal Land Ownership: Overview and Data, by Carol Hardy Vincent, Laura A. Hanson, and Carla N. Argueta. |