School Trust, St. Louis County and The Conservation Fund Land Acquisition

Full Question

What kind of background information is available on the $51 million in funding from the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) that has been appropriated for the acquisition of School Trust lands inside the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness?

Answer

This project is a federal land acquisition case on the Superior National Forest in northeast Minnesota. The funding for this purchase is provided through congressional appropriations associated with the LWCF. The LWCF is funded by receipts from offshore drilling for oil and gas and made available to federal, state, and local governments for land acquisitions that support recreation, clean water, wildlife habitat, and other public benefits. Each year, Congress passes an appropriation within the U.S. Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Act, identifying projects selected for funding, including multiple years of funding for the Superior National Forest and BWCAW Congress appropriated funds in various amounts for the School Trust project from fiscal years (FY) 2017 until 2022.

Congress strongly encourages agencies to close projects once funds are made available, appraisals are complete, and all parties have entered a purchase option. Appropriations for LWCF projects do not expire but unused funds may be proposed for reprogramming to projects able to be closed.

Full Question

How will public access be affected on the TCF lands when the Forest Service becomes the land manager?

Answer

Upon final realty purchase of the lands, the land would become open to the public as National Forest System lands within Superior National Forest and managed per the Forest Plan.

Full Question

The purchase of up to 6,261 acres of TCF land in this decision is substantially less than the 17,000 acres proposed in August scoping documents. What is happening to the remaining acreage?

Answer

Currently, the remaining acres are under evaluation for purchase by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and St. Louis County

The Decision Memo for the TCF land purchase is one of the first steps in the process. 

The timeline for full implementation is expected to take multiple months due steps needed to fully implement and complete the purchase.  The timeline for full implementation is expected to take multiple months due to required realty actions.  

These required actions relate to valuation of the subject property, inspections and investigations concerning the environmental condition of the property, and title review and approval.  Ultimately, acquisition of any particular parcel (or acreage) is contingent upon acceptable condition of title and acceptable physical/environmental conditions for the tract.  

Completion of the purchase is also contingent upon the availability of appropriated funding. 

The Forest Service received comments that view this project both positively and negatively, with the majority of comments demonstrating support for the proposed land purchases. The principal concern over the TCF Land Purchase pertained to some of the 17,000 acres of TCF lands not abutting existing Forest Service land. See Attachment B for response to these comments (Superior National Forest - Home).

The land within the BWCAW 1-million-acre boundary is of mixed ownership:

• USDA Forest Service – Superior National Forest – 809,000 acres
• State of Minnesota – 107,000 acres
• Private – 549 acres
• There is over 174,000 acres of lakes not included in the above acreage
• Totaling 1,090,000 acres as designated by the BWCAW Act of 1978

The public can submit comments through the official School Trust, St Louis Cty & TCF Purchase NEPA project page see right side navigation for ‘Comment/Object on project’ link. The public comment period closes on September 17, 2024. All comments should go through the NEPA page system to be considered.

Please look over the Scoping Package including proposed action maps, lands lists, etc. are available electronically on the SNF project page and our informational web page. Paper copies of the scoping documents are available upon request. There are 3 different ways to ask questions:

• Open House (in-person) – the public is invited to provide an opportunity to ask questions and learn more about the project. An in-person open house will be on August 28 - from 4:30 – 7 p.m. at the SNF Supervisor’s Office (8901 Grand Ave. Pl, Duluth, MN 55808).
• Open House (Virtual) - A virtual open house will be held on August 29 from 4:00-6:00 p.m.
• For more information you may also contact - Trevor Peck, Special Projects Manager, at trevor.peck@usda.gov, (801) 823-5138, or Barbara Thompson, Lands Program Manager, at barbara.thompson@usda.gov, (218) 365-7618.

Please note the State of Minnesota offers an informational page for this project including contact information.

NEPA is a law that provides this country’s national environmental policy and a process to implement it. NEPA requires the Forest Service and other federal agencies to assess the environmental effects of proposed major Federal actions prior to making land management decisions. The environmental review process under NEPA provides an opportunity for citizens to get involved in the Forest Service’s decision-making process.

NEPA established the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) within the Executive Office of the President to ensure that Federal agencies meet their obligations under NEPA. More information about CEQ and NEPA, can be found at NEPA.Gov. More information on Forest Service NEPA procedures can be found on our national website.

CE is a category of actions that the agency has determined does not normally have a significant effect on the human environment. A CE is based on an agency’s experience with a particular kind of action and its environmental effects. The agency may have studied the action in previous EAs, found no significant impact on the environment based on the analyses, and validated the lack of significant impacts after the implementation. Categorical exclusions are a method of NEPA compliance set forth in CEQ NEPA regulations.

The Forest proposes to pursue a categorical exclusion (CE) under 36 CFR 220.6(d)(6) to purchase the lands within the BWCAW from the State (including St. Louis county state forfeit lands) and the TCF lands outside of the BWCAW. We welcome any comments you may have on the proposed use of this CE for this project. Citizens Guide to NEPA(see pages 8 for a flowchart and following pages for CE definitions)

There is $50 million in Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) funding is currently available for the Forest Service’s purchase of the State lands. The parties will work closely with the State’s congressional delegation and other members of Congress on LWCF funding needs for the Forest Service’s proposed purchase of School Trust and TCF lands under the new proposal. The Forest Service would purchase the state and TCF lands in separate transactions, and due diligence will be initiated separately for both projects.

Even under the previous hybrid model, there was a purchase component. The Forest Service was going to purchase 53,000 acres of School Trust lands within the BWCAW. The purchase will consolidate federal ownership and incorporates tribal consultation.

The new federally owned acres would lead to an increase in various federal payments to counties, such as Secure Rural Schools (SRS), Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) and Thye-Blatnik. School Trust lands acquired by the federal government will be considered in the next Thye-Blatnik appraisal beginning in 2028. Tax revenues outside of the BWCAW would not be affected.

No, the Wilderness Act of 1964 does not provide the authority for the Forest Service to purchase State-owned land completely surrounded by designated wilderness (16 U.S.C. 1131, Sec. 5). However, the Act does not forbid a purchase from taking place using other legal authorities. In this instance, the Forest Service proposes to purchase land within a designated wilderness using the Weeks Act (16 U.S.C. 515). The Weeks Act is the primary land purchase authority used by the Forest Service, authorizing the purchase of land in order to protect the headwaters of rivers and watersheds in the eastern United States. The Weeks Act does not prohibit purchase of lands within wilderness based on the type of seller.

The Forest Service can directly purchase the Minnesota School Trust lands within the wilderness area under the authority of the Weeks Act (16 USC 515). The Weeks Act authorizes purchase of lands, it does not distinguish between wilderness and non-wilderness lands and has been widely used for the purchase of lands throughout the eastern United States.

Reference: 16 USC 577c: From Title 16-CONSERVATION CHAPTER 3-FORESTS; FOREST SERVICE; REFORESTATION; MANAGEMENTSUBCHAPTER I-GENERAL PROVISIONS: §577c. Acquisition of additional lands in northern Minnesota To protect and administer more effectively the publicly owned lands within certain parts of the area described in section 577 of this title, and to accomplish certain public purposes explicit and implicit in sections 577a and 577b of this title, the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized and directed to acquire any lands or interest in lands, and appurtenances thereto, situated within the area described in section 577d of this title, where in his opinion development or exploitation, or the potentialities for development or exploitation, impair or threaten to impair the unique qualities and natural features of the remaining wilderness canoe country.

The Forest Service has broad statutory authority to purchase land, including under the Weeks Act (16 U.S.C. § 515) and the Organic Act (7 U.S.C. § 2268a). Here, the Forest Service will directly purchase Minnesota School Trust lands within the BWCAW under the Weeks Act, its primary land purchase authority in the eastern United States, authorizing the purchase of land to protect the headwaters of rivers and watersheds. The Weeks Act purchase authority does not distinguish between wilderness and non-wilderness lands and has been widely used to acquire lands throughout the eastern United States, including in wilderness. The Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C. § 1134) provides that if adequate access to State- or privately-owned land in wilderness cannot be provided, then federal land shall be offered in exchange for those inholdings; it does not in any way preclude a purchase from taking place using other legal authorities.

No, the lands would remain open to the public as National Forest System lands within the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. The USDA Forest Service currently owns and manages approximately one million acres of BWCAW lands within the BWCAW boundary.

The appraisal of School Trust land has no effect on the appraisal of federal lands for Thye-Blatnik payments.  The School Trust lands acquired by the federal government will be considered in future Thye-Blatnik appraisals and will impact future payments (starting with the 2028 10-year cycle for Thye-Blatnik payments).  

Land Exchanges require two willing parties. Once the Minnesota DNR withdrew their request for exchange, the land exchange proposal was no longer viable and there was no reason to continue the EIS. Accordingly, the EIS was cancelled. The purchases may be proposed and decided on using a Categorical Exclusion under the NEPA process. The public will have a chance to provide input on the purchase proposals before a decision is made.

Full Question

Did the Forest Service consider that lands exchanged to the Minnesota DNR under the School Trust Land Exchange could have been managed to benefit Minnesota Schools, support the local economy and provide other benefits?

Answer

The Forest is aware of this, and also notes that purchase money for school trust lands would be managed to benefit Minnesota Schools. Lands acquired in the proposed purchases would be managed by the Forest Service for multiple uses, values and benefits in accordance with the Superior National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan.

The Forest Service considered a wide range of public comment that raised a variety of viewpoints on the proposed exchange, and tribal consultation, to inform the steps taken and proposed. The Forest did consider that the land exchange would result in loss of federal lands outside the BWCAW where tribal members could practice treaty rights.