During the 1940s offshore drilling took off in the Gulf of Mexico and in the 1950s the government introduced a regulatory framework to balance competing interests/concerns of environmental impact, safety, and business. Since 1953 the Department of the Interior has overseen the offshore leasing program, and since the 1980s the Minerals Management Service has overseen the collection of revenue generated by leases and royalties.
In a 2009 press release the Minerals Management Service puts it this way:
Of the $10.68 billion, $1.99 billion was disbursed directly to states and eligible political subdivisions such as counties and parishes. Another $5.74 billion was disbursed to the U.S. Treasury; $449 million was disbursed to 34 American Indian Tribes and 30,000 individual American Indian mineral owners; $1.45 billion was contributed to the Reclamation Fund for water projects; and $899 million went to the Land & Water Conservation Fund, along with $150 million to the Historic Preservation Fund.
The Land & Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) enables the development of new parks and recreation facilities, preserving land and conserving natural resources. The Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) is a foundational budget source for State and Tribal Historic Preservation Offices. These Funds, and subsequently every state, count on this grant money every year.
It's no chump change either. Consider New York State. In 2009, New York received $1.19 million in HPF funding, and $1.33 million for LWCF projects. This money goes towards partial payment of staff salaries, toward development of surveys and studies, and National Register nominations. The Historic Preservation Fund also funds the Save America's Treasures grant program. (See the 2009 HPF Annual Report here.)
It is ever-critical to secure non-taxation based methods for financing conservation projects. Even in tough economic times, like 2010, grants based on offshore licenses are increasing. This allows critical conservation work to occur despite diminishing tax revenue for states. That said, this is bogus blood money.
No matter how great projects accomplished using LWCF or HPF funding are, they are hardly anything when compared to the extraordinary cost of the oil disaster in the Gulf. In no way does a new urban park in St. Petersburg, FL or a preserved historic house in the Hudson Valley offset the scale of destruction wrought by this (or any) spill. It's not sufficient to accept the exploitation one type of resource and save another. First of all, they're not comparable. Second, in all future licensing, the federal government should tack on additional fees for an emergency fund to help the recovery efforts after an environmental disaster.
It's no chump change either. Consider New York State. In 2009, New York received $1.19 million in HPF funding, and $1.33 million for LWCF projects. This money goes towards partial payment of staff salaries, toward development of surveys and studies, and National Register nominations. The Historic Preservation Fund also funds the Save America's Treasures grant program. (See the 2009 HPF Annual Report here.)
It is ever-critical to secure non-taxation based methods for financing conservation projects. Even in tough economic times, like 2010, grants based on offshore licenses are increasing. This allows critical conservation work to occur despite diminishing tax revenue for states. That said, this is bogus blood money.
No matter how great projects accomplished using LWCF or HPF funding are, they are hardly anything when compared to the extraordinary cost of the oil disaster in the Gulf. In no way does a new urban park in St. Petersburg, FL or a preserved historic house in the Hudson Valley offset the scale of destruction wrought by this (or any) spill. It's not sufficient to accept the exploitation one type of resource and save another. First of all, they're not comparable. Second, in all future licensing, the federal government should tack on additional fees for an emergency fund to help the recovery efforts after an environmental disaster.
