By now, I am sure that all of you are well aware of the importance of preserving open space, and of its continuing disappearance from America's landscape. As numerous witnesses have already testified, development is eating into our nation's forests, farmlands, and wetlands.
S. 532, the Public Land and Recreation Investment Act, addresses this problem by ensuring permanent funding for two of our nation's pre-eminent conservation and recreation programs: the Land and Water Conservation Fund and the Urban Parks and Recreation Recovery Act. Specifically, the bill provides $900 million annually, without further appropriation, for these critical programs.
Fifty percent of the funding-$450 million per year--will be allocated to the federal government, so that we may continue to acquire prime conservation and recreation land, habitat areas, and open space in and around national parks, refuges, forests, and other public lands.
Forty percent of the funding-$360 million a year-will go to the stateside grants program of the LWCF. The stateside grants program has helped states acquire over 2 million acres of park land and open space over the years, but Congress has not funded it since 1995. Reviving the stateside grants program will give states a critical boost in their efforts to preserve key open space, recreation, and wildlife habitat areas.
In an effort to make the stateside grants program more effective, the Public Land and Recreation Investment Act also institutes a new requirement that states develop a plan for conservation, open space, and conservation; requires states to pass through 50 percent of the grants they receive to local governments; and, for the first time, allows Indian tribes to receive LWCF funding.
Finally, the bill directs 10 percent of LWCF funding, or $90 million per year, to the Urban Parks and Recreation Recovery Act. UPARR targets parks and recreation funds where, arguably, they are needed the most-cities where recreational facilities are deteriorating or nonexistent. Under this bill, for the first time, cities will be able to use UPARR funds to acquire land for conservation and recreation purposes.
I introduced the Public Land and Recreation Investment Act for three key reasons. First, I believe strongly that the LWCF and UPARR should continue to play a central role in preserving sensitive land from development. The LWCF works. Since 1965, it has helped to preserve nearly 7 million acres of America's most special places. Rather than inventing new programs to preserve open space, why not concentrate first on fully funding the programs we already have?
Second, I introduced the Public Land and Recreation Act because I wanted to preserve the LWCF for the purposes for which it was intended-land acquisition at the federal, state, and local level. Some of the LWCF-related proposals that are currently pending in Congress would make dramatic changes in the program that would significantly impair the federal government's ability to acquire land.
I certainly understand the fact that sprawl is a local issue, and this bill gives state and local governments the tools to address it. But the federal government has a role to play here; otherwise, we would not be in this hearing room today. To compromise the federal government's ability to acquire land, particularly at a time when open space issues are absolutely critical, seems at best short-sighted.
Finally, I felt it was important to have a moderate, relatively low-cost alternative on the table should other proposals pending in Congress prove too expensive or too controversial. We have a golden opportunity this year to make an unprecedented commitment to open space and habitat preservation. Senator Landrieu's bill, Senator Boxer's bill, and the President's Lands Legacy Initiative and Better America Bonds proposal all would dramatically increase our investment in public lands. But these proposals, as you know, are expensive, and each has, in its own way, drawn some political heat.
I would hope that if we cannot agree on a new, broad-based conservation initiative, or if we cannot find money in the budget to "do it -all," we can at least make a commitment to fully fund LWCF and UPARR. These are highly successful programs, and they enjoy a broad base of support. It is time that we fulfill the extraordinary promise of the LWCF. I believe that doing so is key in preserving our most special land, at the federal, state, and local level, from development and sprawl.
Again, thank you for this opportunity to testify before the Committee.