Wilderness Management

To help ensure that Forest Service wilderness areas are protected and maintained in their natural state, Congress increased funding for wilderness management by almost 80 percent during fiscal years 1989 through 1991. The Forest Service, however, diverted more than one-third of the $44.7 million designated for wilderness management to other activities. Of the $28.3 million spent on wilderness management, $10.5 million was used for management expenses--mainly salaries and administrative costs--at organizational levels above the district offices, with the remainder spent on wilderness management at the district level. The Forest Service reported that 112 of the 500 district offices managing wilderness areas saw cuts in funding for fiscal year 1990, including some offices that had earlier reported funding and staffing shortfalls. Contrary to congressional directives, the Forest Service reprogrammed these funds without seeking prior approval by the House Committee on Appropriations. The head of the Forest Service recently outlined several steps to ensure that (1) designated funds are spent as Congress intended, (2) the Committee's reprogramming procedures are followed, and (3) there is greater accountability over funds designated for wilderness management. In addition, GAO suggests that the Forest Service refine its accounting for expenditures and establish output targets to improve accountability over expenditures of wilderness management funds and the performance of wilderness managers.

GAO found that: (1) Congress increased Service funding by almost 80 percent from fiscal year (FY) 1988 though FY 1991 to help ensure that national wilderness areas were protected and maintained their natural conditions; (2) of the $44.7 million Congress designated for wilderness management in FY 1988 through FY 1990, the Service reprogrammed $16.4 million to other activities; (3) because of this reprogramming, expenditures for wilderness management that had increased from $8.5 million in FY 1988 to $10.2 million in FY 1989 decreased to $9.6 million in FY 1990; (4) of the $28.3 million the Service spent on wilderness management, it used $10.5 million for wilderness management expenses at the executive levels, and spent the remaining $17.8 million on wilderness management at the district levels; (5) the Service failed to comply with congressional procedures or seek prior congressional approval before reprogramming funds; (6) contrary to congressional reprogramming procedures, the Service's internal guidance handbook did not require that the agency seek congressional approval prior to reprogrammings; (7) the Service has taken steps to ensure that it spends designated funds as Congress intends, follows congressional reprogramming procedures, and improves accountability of wilderness management funds, and it plans to revise its handbook accordingly.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: Team: Phone: