The Biden administration’s 30x30 conservation initiative seeks to expand the extent of land that is held by the federal government. 

The federal government's ownership of land is estimated to be around 640 million acres, constituting approximately 28% of the total land area in the country. There are a total of 2.27 billion acres of land in the U.S., according to the Congressional Research Service.

During a May 16 hearing, Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) raised questions to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Martha Williams regarding the lack of a clear definition of conservation in relation to the 30% conservation goal. 

Ricketts emphasized the importance of having a defined framework in order to accurately assess whether the goal of conserving 30% of the United States has been achieved. He argued that without a proper definition for conservation, it becomes difficult to ascertain if the goal has ever been reached, as changing definitions could hinder the ability to measure progress accurately.

Jerry Schickedanz is dean emeritus of the Linebery Policy Center and a former dean of the New Mexico State University College of Agriculture, Consumer and Environmental Sciences. He shared some definitions, history and background on the topic with Federal Newswire. Schickedanz noted that this information is coming from him personally and not as a university representative. 

“There’s not an agreed-on definition of the term. With the rollout of the 30x30 conservation executive order, to conserve was to protect the land in a natural state, which really meant full protection from use by mankind,” said Schickedanz. 

“I realized during the development of the America the Beautiful plan there was not enough land to be protected in the natural state and other lands would be needed for designation for conservation." he added. "This led to the term of inclusion of working lands, or those that were to be utilized in some way by humans. So now the term conservation or protection has been watered down."

This raised a question for the former academic.

"Is the Biden administration's 30x30 plan conservation or preservation? I believe the government in environmental goals, in the use of the term conservation is a protected classification and the end result will be preservation,” Schickedanz said. “I believe in wise use. That is probably the connotation you should have with conservation.”

He said this debate can be traced back to the United Nations report on climate change and potential ecological collapse.

“A recommendation resulted in a goal of conserving 30% of the land and water globally by 2030,” he said. “It’s commonly known as 30x30. President Biden issued an executive order to implement a 30x30 plan for the United States and a follow-up task force from the secretaries of interior and agriculture. Neither the executive order nor the task force report did little to define what conservation is.”

It’s a term loaded with meaning, too, Schickedanz said.

“Conservation is a term that has a feel-good connotation to it,” he said. “We all want to save something. Money, time, land, vista, good memories, whatever. But conservation is hard to define because of the casual use of the word and a high degree of variability of the definitions." 

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has released several reports expressing concerns over the lack of information regarding the government’s own property holdings. According to these reports, the government lacks a comprehensive understanding of the full scope of its property ownership, including the locations of properties, the entities responsible for their management, their current conditions and how they are being utilized. 

This lack of knowledge raises significant issues in terms of accountability and effective management of government-owned properties.

Schickedanz said the debate has become more about politics than science. He relies on data, history and established facts.

“Most of these advocates, they cite scientists, but they really don’t have any data that shows 30% is the optimum maximum or minimum land and water required to stop or slow down climate change,” he said. “An important distinction to remember as you look at this data that they put out, or the propaganda I guess I should say they put out, is derived on modeling or suspect data. Modeling is not data and should not be confused with absolutes."

He contends the 30x30 plan is not on track to fulfill environmentalists’ goal of 30% preservation by 2030.

“They’re rolling out a new proposed rule-making, conservation and landscape health, and that’s being lobbied by the environmental community to take a new approach,” Schickedanz said. “Now we have a new definition and meaning for conservation. And this new definition is not something specific toward a certain natural resource, either renewable or nonrenewable or many other things."

Schickedanz said the new meaning makes conservation equal to mandated land use, such as livestock grazing, timber production and fish and wildlife development. The multiple years of management and sustained yield as defined means the public lands on their various resource values are utilized in combination that will best meet the present and future needs of the American people.

“Conservation in the new rule now would be to restore and protect with no output of products if the use would impair or harm with protection or restoration of the project,” he said. “This will drastically change the management direction from wise use to protection, all without direction or approval by Congress or signed by the president. It would require BLM to manage for conservation, not possible use. I think it’s probably been written so it is confusing."

Property rights advocates have put forward a new approach aimed at striking a balance between national conservation interests and the concerns of private landowners. This proposed approach involves placing limits on the duration of federal easements on private properties, capping them at 30 years.

Advocates suggest incorporating a sunset clause into new land easements, enabling states to safeguard the rights of landowners. The inclusion of sunset provisions is intended to prevent federal conservation efforts from becoming permanent fixtures on private properties, ensuring a more flexible and balanced approach.

Schickedanz said he supports the time limit. It makes sense to allow future users of land to make their own choices, he said.

A briefing paper by American Stewards of Liberty (ASL) highlights concerns about the lack of coordination between federal agencies and local governments regarding land use issues, potentially jeopardizing the well-being of communities and local economies. The paper, aimed at informing policymakers, points out that while Congress has mandated federal agencies to collaborate with states and local governments in their planning and management activities, such coordination rarely occurs in practice.

ASL asserts that this lack of coordination leads to the implementation of policies that could negatively impact local economies. One example highlighted is the 30x30 initiative, which aims to prioritize conservation-only land uses but lacks congressional authorization.

Schickedanz urges people to make their voices heard.

“I think they need to certainly get a hold of their legislators and congresspeople and let them know their dislike for this new change of direction," he said.