This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2015, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Rep. Rob Bishop thinks the national Land and Water Conservation Fund has to be destroyed in order to save it.

As chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, the congressman from Utah's 1st District has managed the first part of that. But, as it is always easier to destroy than to create, the second part will be a lot more difficult. And, judging by Bishop's own description of how the fund should be repurposed, not altogether such a good idea.

The LWCF is a pot of money fed by royalties received from the oil and gas producers who draw their wealth from our public lands. It has been used over the past half century to buy land that becomes parks, historical monuments, wildlife habitats, hiking trails and other things that boost the common good without taking money from the common folk.

The money has gone to some 40,000 projects, providing a total of $17 billion, $171 million of it in Utah.

But what should have been a routine bipartisan reauthorization of the fund was blocked by Bishop, and it officially died at the end of September. The program isn't well known beyond the offices of conservation and historic preservation groups, so there was not much of an outcry.

Bishop's reasons for letting the LWCF go, and his plans for some other use for the $2.5 million a day it was receiving, range from rational to absurd. Among the former is his point that a fund primarily used to buy land isn't doing the American taxpayer all that much of a favor when the money isn't also used to maintain what we already have. When the National Park Service alone is looking at an $11.5 billion maintenance backlog, the suggestion that some of the LWCF money go to upkeep is quite reasonable.

Bishop goes awry when he worries that too much federal money is being allocated by the federal government, and not enough just given to local governments, even though that would harm the Interior Department's ability to take a broad view of the nation's many needs and opportunities.

The congressman also suggests that some of the money raised from the oil and gas industry go to train oil and gas workers. As if those multi-national corporations weren't capable of training their own workforces.

Congress was wrong to let Bishop kick the LWCF to the curb while he was still formulating some good and not-so-good ideas for what to do instead.

The program should be reauthorized. If Bishop can sell some specific reforms to his colleagues, without the threat of making the whole program go away if the anti-preservation congressman doesn't get his way, then let him try that.