Updated Congressional Overview of LWCF 2018
The following is a summary of an updated report and a link to it, from the Congressional Research Service on the history, evolution and issues related to LWCF.
The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Act of 1965 was enacted to help preserve,
develop, and ensure access to outdoor recreation facilities to strengthen the health of U.S.
citizens. The law created the Land and Water Conservation Fund in the U.S. Treasury as a
funding source to implement its outdoor recreation goals.
The LWCF has been used for three general purposes. First, it has been the principal source of
monies for land acquisition for outdoor recreation by four federal agencies—the National Park
Service, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Forest Service. Second, the
LWCF also funds a matching grant program to assist states in recreational planning, acquiring
recreational lands and waters, and developing outdoor recreational facilities.
There are two
aspects to this “stateside” program: the traditional state grants and the more recent competitive
state grants. Under the traditional state grant program, a portion of the appropriation is divided
equally among the states, with the remainder apportioned based on need. Each state awards its
grant money based on its own outdoor recreation plan and priorities.
The competitive state grant program, begun in FY2014, funds recreation projects in urbanized areas meeting certain criteria.
Third, beginning in FY1998, LWCF has been used to fund other federal programs with related
purposes, such as the Forest Legacy program of the Forest Service and grants under the
Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Under the LWCF Act, the fund is authorized through September 30, 2018, to accrue $900 million
annually from multiple sources. However, nearly all of the revenue is derived from oil and gas
leasing in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). The LWCF receives additional money under more
recent legislation (P.L. 109-432, “GOMESA”).
Throughout the history of the LWCF, $40.0 billion in revenues have accrued under both the LWCF Act and GOMESA.
Congress determines the level of funding for the three LWCF purposes through the annual
appropriations process. These discretionary appropriations have fluctuated widely since the origin
of the program. In addition, any funds deposited under GOMESA are mandatory appropriations
for the state grant program.
Mandatory appropriations were relatively small from FY2009-FY2017. They increased substantially in FY2018, and are expected to remain relatively high atleast over the next decade, due to additional revenues from leasing in the Gulf of Mexico.
Less than half of the $40.0 billion in total revenues that have accrued in the LWCF have been
appropriated ($18.4 billion). FY2001 marked the highest funding ever, with appropriations
exceeding the authorized level by reaching nearly $1 billion. For FY2018, the most recent fiscal
year, the total appropriation was $487.6 million (with $425.0 million in discretionary funds and
$62.6 million in mandatory funds).
The $18.4 billion appropriated through the history of the program has been allocated unevenly
among federal land acquisition (61%), the state grant program (25%), and other purposes (14%).
Similarly, federal land acquisition funds have been allocated unevenly among the four agencies.
A variety of issues pertaining to the LWCF are the subject of legislation, hearings, and other
debate. Some of them are being considered as part of deliberations over whether to reauthorize
the LWCF beyond September 30, 2018. Issues include the optimal level of funding for LWCF
overall and its individual components, whether to reauthorize provisions of the LWCF, and
whether to retain discretionary appropriations or provide additional mandatory appropriations.
Other issues involve whether LWCF funds should be used for additional purposes, such as
maintenance, or set aside for particular priorities, such as securing additional access to federal
lands for recreation. The priority of the state grant program vis-à-vis federal acquisition is being
