[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]





















































































          HD
          211
          Ns
          H3
          1992


I


I



                  Atiskeii      0.,17,4LA



                                               Executive Summary

                                               State-Owned Lands:/
                               A Plan for Their" Protection, Manif'gement, and Use

                                                February 3, 1992

             V%<
                        Submitted,by Elizabeth H. Haskell, Secretary of Natural Resources

                    The General Assembly requested that I prepare a plan for the protection,
               management, and use of state-owned lands by state resource agencies. In conducting
               this study, I have analyzed the current state land management system in.relation to
               four general. goals for resource management. I found an information system with
               limited- value for resource management, modest resource protection programs, informal
               cbofdifiatibr@@ and --unstable-- funding. -- Itf general, it- is a system -whi& presents a
               number of opportunities for improvement.
                     Virginia has a long history of resource management on its lands. In the past,
               an informal network of agency land managers has assumed the responsibility for
               coor  ating resource protection efforts and promoting the cooperative use of state
               lands. This -loosely structured proces& has resulted- in a number of examples of state,
               lands being cooperatively used for multiple objectives that clearly demonstrate the
               value of coordinated state land management.
                     However, circumstances are changing for the state's land management system.
               Population growth and development have increased the need for recreation and for
               natural resource management, while reducing the supply of land that is available for
               acquisition for those purposes. At the same time, a slower economy has reduced the
               level of federal and state funding for acquiring and managing public lands. Finally,
               many of the individuals who for years managed state lands have retired or moved on
               to other assignments. The once workable system for promoting cooperative uses is
               less able to respond to the needs of a larger population and increased demand for
               services.
                     Many State-owned lands provide a variety of opportunities for recreation,
               economic return, education and research. Other lands may have limits on their use
               because of the need to preserve significant natural features, or because of hazards
               presented by natural features. The diversity of opportunities and limitations on State-
               lands requires that coordination and cooperation in State land-management should be
               a higher priority. Decisions to acquire, use or sell land parcels should be particularly
               sensitive to opportunities for achieving multiple resource management objectives and
               to the value of the resources present.


                                      vxoperty   Of CS C







                     To improve efficiency in state land management and use, I recommend a plan
              to:
                     1. Provide a high quality information base for making resource management
                     decisions. The Council on the Environment, in cooperation with the
                     Department of General Services, has already taken an important step toward
                     achieving this information base by converting mapped data into computerized
                     form. If sufficient resources can be made available, we will build rapidly on
                     this base by defining data needs and collecting accurate information.
                     2. Protect significant resources or features found on state lands. I have
                     directed that a guide to resource management be prepared for use by agency
                     facility managers.
                     3. Encourage coordination and cooperation in state land resource management.
                     I will work with state agencies to discuss and coordinate land management for
                     multiple objectives, and to explore what additional steps might be necessary to
                     assure effective interagency cooperation.
                     4. Provide a stable source  of funding for resource acquisition and
                     management. The Governor has recommended creation of-a special
                     Conservation and Recreation Fund to be used to acquire and protect important
                     State lands. As well, the Governor has asked for.legislation authorizing a
                     refiie--ndurn on the use of general obligation bonds to acquire new parklands
                     and natural areas and construct critical infrastructure.
                     To fully implement this plan, adequate funding would be necessary,    not only
               for land acquisition and management, but also to create the  information base that is
               necessary before effective and efficient management can become a fact. Meanwhile,
               using existing staff, we will continue to develop the data base. As other funds
               become available we will accelerate this effort. Additional funds will be needed to
               support the actual inventory of State lands. However, that expenditure should be
               delayed in view of the State's current revenue position.












                                                          2












                                                    Final Report

                                                 State-Owned Lands:
                                A Plan for Their Protection, Management, and Use

                                                  February 3, 1992

                        Submitted by Elizabeth H. Haskell, Secretary of Natural Resources



               R-TMODUCTION
                     The 1990 Appropriations Act (item 568.C.) requested that I develop a plan for
               the protection, management and use of state-o,,Amed lands by state resource agencies.
               The legislature requested that the plan identify all state-owned lands appropriate for
                                      means or protecting.t ose                              din
               resource prote--cl-id ---- n_,_ - -d' ---'f  h     lAhds'9 options - for the coor ated
               and cooperative use of state-owned lands by  .state resource agencies, and methods for
               financing new land acquisitions. As well, the legislature requested projections of
               required funding for the first three years of implementation, and an examination of
               program alternatives such as establishing a conservation land bank as well. as
               memoranda-6f-understanding between affected agencies. I submitted a progress report
               to the Chairmen of the House Appropriations and Senate Finance Committees:on
               November 1, 1990.
                      This final report presents the plan that I have developed in response to the
               General Assembly's request. I have provided eight short sections in the report in
               order to clearly define the process used to conduct my analysis, to identify the
               resources in need of protection, and to discuss the major issues that must be resolved.
               The final section summarizes implementation measures.
                      Highway right-of-ways are not covered in this plan because they are excluded
               from the definition of state property. State interests in property that is less than fan
               ownership, such as leases and easements, are also not covered. Leases and easements
               are usually acquired for limited periods or for specific, limited uses. In such cases
               management for multiple objectives may be precluded. Subaqueous lands are also
               excluded due to their specific and limited uses. Further study may be merited in the
               future for both easements and subaqueous lands.


               BACKGROUND
                      The Commonwealth of Virginia owns over 390,000 acres of land, with parcels
               ranging in size from under one acre to over 3000 acres. Parcels are often aggregated
               into tracts greater than 10,000 acres. Recreation, conservation, timber production,

                                                           3







                prisons, education, health care, research, offices and transportation support are the
                principal state land uses. In managing these lands, the Commonwealth and its
                agencies and institutions have obligations based on the state constitution, statutory law
                and state policies to use land resources for the benefit of all Virginians, and to do so
                in an environmentally sound manner.
                       Over 85 percent of state-owned land is held by three resource agencies: the
                Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, the Department of Conservation and
                Recreation, and the Department of Forestry. Of the remaining state land, 5.6 percent
                is held by colleges and universities, and 5.2 percent by the Department of Corrections.
                Ile remaining 4 percent is held by 24 different agencies. Figure 1 shows the
                holdings of the major land managing agencies of the Commonwealth; the geographic
                distribution of larger state land holdings is shown in Figure 2.
                       A number of studies have been undertaken which addressed management of
                state-owned lands, some of which resulted. in changes. in the way state lands are now
                managed. These- include the 1977 Joint, Legislative Audit and Review Commission
                report entitl d@ QperAtional Review@                  of State Owned-Land in VirgLm
                             e                         Management                                       La;
                the- 1988 -study--of-the- Outdoor Recre'atio* ft -Needs- of the Commonwealth- (House
                Document 40); the 1989 Virginia Outdoors, Pla ; the 1990 report to the General
                Assembly on tree planting opportunities "on state lands prepared by the-Department of
                Forestry; the- 1990 survey of historic buildings on state lands conducted by the
                Department of Historic Resources; and, the report to the Southside Economic
                Development Commission on the Outdoor Recreational Potential of Southside
                Virgiw .
                       Project Streamline, an initiative of the Govemors, also      involves several   studies
                that may result in changes in the management of state lands.         They include an
                evaluation of the capital outlay construction requirements; an      evaluation of
                opportunities to consolidate and co-locate state offices; development of a long-term
                state facilities plan; a study and inventory of state property to determine surplus
                potential; and, a prioritization of data collection activities for natural resources
                information management systems. These recommendations may require statutory,
                regulatory or administrative management changes and are currently in various stages
                of development and implementation.


                IMPORTANT ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES:

                       T'he features found on lands owned, or considered for acquisition by the
                Commonwealth present both opportunities and limitations for the use of the land.
                While all land offers some level of opportunity and some limitations, certain features
                of the landscape deserve closer attention. Some features provide opportunities for
                recreation, preservation of significant resources, economic benefit, education or
                research. Other features present limitations on use because of the potential for
                damage to the natural environment or to the use itselL


                                                               4








                                        FIGURE 1
                    Real Estate Holdings
                        Of State Agencies

                             Total Acres 392,303




                                  DGIF 47.8 %
                                   191,173 Acres















                                              .............
                                                                        DOF 13 %
                                                             . ...............
                                               10
                                                 . 1 11 . .........
                                   ---- - ------
                                          .... ..... ...                51,000 Acres
         DCR 23 .5%
         92,416 Acres




                                                                      DOC 5     2 %
                                                                      20,462 Acres


                  OTHERS 4
                  15,692 Acres                  Co I I ege-s &
                                                Universities 5.6 %
                                                21,560 Acres


         Source.- Department of General Services
         Prepared By-. Virginia EcoMAP System, Council on the Environment
                      October 18,1991











                                                                        FIGURE 2
                                                       STATE OWNED LANDS





                                                DCR

                                                DGIF

                                                DOF
                                                                                                  Aq. -
                                                OTHERS
                                                                                           4F
                                                                                  04




















             Source: Department of General Services
             Prepared By i Virginia EcoMAP System, Council on the Environment
                          October 18, 1991







                      Opportunities for recreation are presented by State lands which border bodies
                of water. They may provide opportunities for public access for boating, fishing,
                swimming, beach use, or other water related recreational activities. Other recreational
                opportunities are presented by state holdings with large tracts of undeveloped land
                which have the potential for hiking or bike trails, scenic overlooks, camping, hunting
                or simply observing nature.
                       State-owned lands also contain natural or cultural features that should be
                preserved and protected. The natural features include special habitats supporting
                rare, threatened or endangered species of animals or plants, or ecosystems that are
                considered rare or exemplary for Virginia. Other habitats are important because they
                provide wildlife migration routes or are important to a critical lifestage of a species.
                Cultural resources include historic structures, districts, or routes, archaeological sites,
                or scenic viewscapes. In some cases, these areas can also provide immediate
                educational or research opportunities.
                       Some state lands also have potential for cooperative use for economic. benefit.
                These areas can provide commercially valuable resources such as timber, agricultural
                crops, mine rals, - sand, - gravel, --c6al, oil- 6r-'nat&A1 - gas.
                       Other state-owned lands present limitations for intensive use and development
                because of the potential for damage to the environment, or to the use itself. For
                example, certain areas are particularly important in maintaining water quality. Some
                land features have a close relationship with both surface and*ground water 'quality.
                Areas along water: courses act to slow and filter surface'drainage r and buffer surface
                waterg from contamination from runoff. By allowing more infiltration, these areas
                also help recharge groundwater supplies. Wetlands are especially proficient in this
                respect.
                       Some features limit use because of the hazards they present. For example,
                floodprone areas are subject to periodic inundation from flooding rivers or coastal
                storm surges. Also, steep slopes may not provide stable building surfaces and may be
                subject to landslides.


                GENERAL GOALS FOR MANAGING STATE-OWNED LANDS:

                       I recommend four simple principles to guide state-owned land management.
                These principles describe the components of an efficient land and resource
                management system:
                1. Adequate Resource Information Should be Available. The Commonwealth should
                have adequate information on the resource opportunities and limitations presented by
                state-@owned lands. Sufficient information should be available to make timely, efficient
                land use decisions and make the best use of state lands while protecting natural
                resource values.



                                                              5







               2. Significant Natural Resources Should be Protected. Land use decisions for state-
               owned lands should reflect an exemplary level of sensitivity toward areas with high
               resource values such as areas with recreational potential, economically productive
               areas, natural hazard areas, sensitive groundwater areas, areas important to surface
               water quality, wetlands, special habitats, and cultural resources. Information on the
               opportunities and limitations of these areas should be factored into land use decisions
               at the beginning of the decision process.
               3. Agencies Should Coordinate Activities and Cooperate Whenever Possible. State-
               owned lands should be viewed as a resource for meeting the needs and goals of
               resource agencies. There should be an effective procedure for reviewing opportunities
               for multiple use of existing state lands as well as those lands being considered for
               acquisition.
               4. Adequate Funding Should be Available. State funding, adequate to acquire and
               manage lands to meet open space, recreation and conservation needs, should be
               available.


               ISSUE: INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

               Findings:
                     Although basic information about significant resources on state lands exi9ts, the
               current data. is: neither. comprehensive nor readily-accessible4or land use decisions.
               While individual agencies maintain information about resources found on their lands,
               existing information has not been compiled for all state lands, nor has all needed
               information been identified.

                      Real estate information for the Commonwealth is maintained by the Bureau of
               Real Property Management within the Department of General Services. The basic
               components of the existing state-owned lands inventory include a paper record system
               containing files on each state-owned property, a set of USGS quadrangle maps
               showing state-owned and leased properties, composite plats for selected properties,
               and the Real Property Management System (RPMS) computerized data base. Prior
               to July 1, 1991, the RPMS was a subset of the FAACS information system maintained
               by the Department of Accounts.
                      All state agencies owning or leasing land in the Commonwealth are required to
               submit annual reports concerning their  'individual lands (Vuginia Code ï¿½2.1-505).
               These reports are intended to inform DGS about the conditions of the property,
               current and proposed use, as well as notification of any surplus property. This is
               done through a validation process where DGS generates reports on each agency's land
               holdings and the agency updates the report and returns it. The reports are of limited
               use for natural resource management because complete information is not available
               for each property, definitions of natural resources are not standardized, and regular
               training is not provided for agency field reviewers.

                                                           6








                      In an effort to enhance this data system, the Council on the Environment,
               working in cooperation with the Department of General Services, has digitized the
               Department's hard copy map data, and reformated the RPMS data base so that it can
               be used in the EcoMAPS geographic information system. The resulting data base is
               now accessible, reliable, and easier to analyze. However, the usefulness of the system
               for natural resource management is still limited by the quality of the information
               within the RPMS data base. Many types of data necessary for resource management
               are not kept in the system, and resource data that is kept varies in accuracy and
               reliability.
                      A number of issues remain to be addressed. Resolving these issues will
               require input from the agencies that will use the data system. Specifically, the
               Commonwealth must consider how best to continue development and maintenance of
               a comprehensive, accurate inventory of state lands. and the natural resources present
               on those lands. To achieve this, I recommend a program to:
                      e define the information needs and expectations of the information
                      system,
                        organize these needs into a comprehensive resource classification
                      system;
                        and, develop consistent, well documented methodologies for data
                      acquisition, information reporting, and op erating procedures (including
                      quality assurance/quality control),

               Recommendation:
                      Under the guidance of the Virginia EcoMAPS Program, the Commonwealth
               will continue to develop and maintain a data base describing the location and
               condition of natural resources on state-owned lands. This data base will act as a
               framework within which natural resource information will be collected, assembled,
               organized, extracted, and analyzed. Ile data will be geographically referenced in
               order to be the most useful for resource management. Mapped data will allow for
               analysis of relative location and extent of significant land features. This will
               necessitate that the data base be part of a larger geographic information system
               (GIS). Information assembled by the Department of General Services and digitized
               by the Council on the Environment as part of this study will form the foundation of
               this information base. The speed at which this effort can be undertaken is highly
               dependent on adequate funding.
                      Further development will take place  in four phases:
                      Phase 1. Describe and Prioritize Information Needs. Agencies and
                      institutions that will use the data base will describe their specific
                      information needs such as land cover or presence of wetlands, along with
                      the level of detail required.

                                                          7








                   Phase 2. Develop a Classification System. Definitions of each data type
                   will be developed to determine how all the different data sets will fit
                   together.
                   Phase 3. Develop Methodologies. Methods for collecting and
                   standardizing the various data sets will be determined and documented.
                   Phase 4. Collect Data. Land owning agencies will collect the needed
                   data using agreed upon methodologies and will transmit data to a
                   central repository for use by any interested agency.
                   The entire information system will link the individual data bases of the
             resource agencies to a central repository of information. This arrangement will be
             easily accessible, and provide comprehensive information for state land management.

             ISSUE: PROTECTION OF SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES

             Findings:
                   Resource management efforts on state lands generally meet minimum
             protection standards as prescribed by numerous state laws. Although there may be
             isolated exceptions, agencies comply with the law and violations are rectified in timely
             M anne r.
                   Although agencies may be meeting minimum environmental protection
             standards for lands they manage, there is strong justification for the Commonwealth to
             provide a model for environmentally sound land management. Inasmuch as the State
             uses its police power to require private land owners to meet minimum environmental
             standards, the state should display a higher level of environmental sensitivity on the
             lands it has full control over and demonstrate innovative land management practices.
             This policy with respect to land management was recognized in the 1987 Chesapeake
             Bay Agreement. The Agreement committed the Bay states to designing and carrying
             out each state development project so as to serve as a model for the private sector in
             terms of land use practices.
                   The Department of General Services, Division of Engineering and Buildings's
             Directive 1 provides general natural resource management criteria for agencies to use
             in acquiring, developing and managing lands. More detailed guidance for resource
             management on state lands is offered through the Virginia Environmental Quality Act
             (Virginia Code ï¿½10.1-1200 et. seq.). Included in the Act is a mandate for state
             agencies to submit environmental impact reports to the Council on the Environment
             (Virginia Code ï¿½10.2-1208). The Council staff, in cooperation with the appropriate
             state agencies, reviews the reports for consistency with state environmental laws and
             policies and makes recommendations to the Governor. This process does not,
             however, apply to land acquisition for resource management, nor to state land
             development and acquisition under $100,000. In addition, agencies do not always

                                                   8







               comply with this process at the earliest stage of project development -- during the
               capital outlay planning stage -- when changes can be accommodated more easily and
               with less cost.
                     Some significant resources found on state lands need to be buffered from other
               incompatible uses. At some locations, the Commonwealth does not own enough
               property to provide a sufficient buffer around these resources. For example, a
               recreational lake found on a state property may be adversely affected by encroaching
               urban development in the watershed of the lake, but outside of state control. Local
               land use decisions about properties adjacent to state-owned lands can therefore have
               an impact on the values of state-owned resources. In order to provide effective
               management of these valuable public resources, compatible land uses should be
               encouraged adjacent to state facilities. Facility managers should work with local
               officials to improve the protection of state lands through local zoning and land use
               plans. For instance, cooperative agreements to address local recreational'needs in
               return for compatible zoning should be considered. Although a few examples may
               exist, cooperative agreements such as-these are uncommon.
                     In order- to @ adequately protect significant resources- on, state lands - certain
               important objectives must be achieved;
                       adequate information should be available on the resources to be
                     protected,
                       land managing agencies should be familiar, with all resource protection_
                     policies, laws and programs,
                     * resource management plans should be available for large land
                     holdings,
                     * appropriate buffer areas should be identified and compatible uses
                     encouraged within the buffer areas.
                     As I noted above, comprehensive resource information is not available for
               resource management. At a minimum, this implies that resources are not being
               protected to an exemplary level. It may also mean that protection of some resources
               has not been given the same level of importance as others. For example, inventories
               for natural heritage resources such as rare, threatened and endangered species have
               only been performed for a few state-owned proper-ties.
                     There is also evidence that state resource protection policies and mandates may
               not be receiving equal emphasis on all state lands. While the Department of General
               Services is charged with developing and implementing basic guidelines for acquiring,
               maintaining and surplusing state lands, there is no mechanism intended to establish or
               coordinate priorities for resource management on those lands. Individual agencies
               may apply their own programs to their land holdings. There is, however, no common
               forum or process for sharing resource information and identifying opportunities to

                                                          9







               implement other state resource protection efforts. There is also no single reference
               for information on state resource policies.
                     The environmental impact review process administered by the Council on the
               Environment can consider a wide spectrum of policies and laws, but this process
               covers only construction projects over $100,000. It does not cover acquisition or
               management of lands which do not involve construction, or construction projects     under
               $100,000. This review certainly encourages responsible resource management, but it
               does not cover all state lands, nor does it take place in the earliest stages of project
               development.
                     Master plans may be a way to identify significant natural resources and provide
               for their protection. Master plans for state lands are currently required by the
               Department of General Services in its Directive #1 which sets out requirements and
               procedures for the acquisition of land. However these plans are not required for all
               properties, and are not typically used for resource protection.

               Recommendations:
                      All land managing agencies must have information on resources of importance,
               and be aware of the -existing policies, laws, and mandates related to resource
               management on their lands. The information base described above helps to satisfy
               this requirement. I am directing the Council on the Environment to prepare a
               manual to guide agency facilities managers in appropriate resource management
               techniques.% The Council will. coordinate development of the.manual with all:-.relevant,
               agencies.
                      To assure that policies, laws, and mandates are applied on a case-by-case basis,
               resource management plans would be helpful for all large properties that don!t
               already have a master plan. These resource management plans could then be
               reviewed for consistency with existing objectives.


               ISSUE: INTERAGENCY COORDINATION

               Findings:
                      There is currently no comprehensive, systematic process for reviewing
               opportunities for cooperative use of state lands. There is no central forum for
               sharing information and coordinating use of these lands,.nor is there a standardized
               process for completing master plans or resource management plans for state lands.
               State agencies acquire land based on specific attributes that serve their specific,
               purpose.
                      The Department of General Services, Division of Engineering and Buildings,
               through its Directive 1, provides general guidance for agencies and institutions in the
               acquisition, leasing, disposal, surplusing and management of state lands and facilities.

                                                           10








                These centralized functions are intended to provide consistency for all agencies
                involved in public land management. Detailed planning for and day-to-day
                management of state lands is the responsibility of the individual agencies and
                institutions.
                       An informal network of land managers from these agencies have assumed the
                responsibility for promoting the cooperative use of state lands. This process has
                resulted in a number of examples of state lands being cooperatively used for multiple
                objectives. For example, the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, the
                Department of Transportation and the Department of Conservation and Recreation
                have a cooperative agreement whereby potential bridge replacement and road
                realignment projects are screened by all three agencies to determine the feasibility of
                incorporating river access facilities into the project.
                       In some cases, agencies already manage their lands for multiple objectives.
                The Department of Forestry (DOF), for example, may use land for forest products
                harvesting, passive recreation, wildlife management, resource buffer areas and
                research. Various aspects of DOF land management are carried out cooperatively
                with other agencies- - - For example'- in- cooperation- with-- the-- Department of Game and
                Inland Fisheries, food patches for wildlife are provided in clearings created by timber
                harvesting or powerline -right-of-way clearing.
                       The Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) has initiated a land
                classification system to determine options for additional uses on their lands. A system
                like this can be -helpful in developing multiple objective- master plans. for @state-owned
                lands. DCR has completed such a plan for Seashore State Park which incorporates
                protection of important plant and animal habitats into a popular recreational facility.
                       Another example of a cooperative master plan for multiple use and protection
                is that of the "Elko" Tract, a state-owned parcel of several hundred acres in eastern
                Henrico County. In response to a 1988 proposal for a public safety complex on the
                site., the Council on the Environment and other natural resource agencies through the
                state environmental impact review process, requested an evaluation of resource values
                which might be placed at risk if the complex, or other developments considered in the
                master plan, were constructed as contemplated. A cooperative effort between natural
                resource agencies and agencies with an interest in the parcel resulted in changes to
                the master plan and revisions of plans for the public safety complex. As a result,
                resource identification improved; wetlands and endangered species' habitats were
                effectively protected; and project plans were adapted to terrain features and biological
                resources on the tract. Potential wetlands loss was reduced by over 90 percent, and
                mitigation plans were developed for the losses.
                       There are some impediments to coordination and cooperation within the state
                system. For example, several resources agencies have cited problems with the time it
                takes to complete, review and have approved the required forms for buying lands.
                This time delay can result in lost opportunities to quickly purchase land which will
                assist the agency in carrying out its mission and meeting the needs of the public. On

                                                            11








               the other hand, it is important to thoroughly review any potential land acquisition
               before purchase to assure that the land meets the needs.of the Commonwealth and
               does not present unexpected liabilities.

               Recommendation:
                      State resource agencies should meet regularly to investigate opportunities for
               further coordination and cooperation. In order to assure that the resources on state
               lands are put to their best use, I am beginning to work with agency heads to
               coordinate land management and acquisition efforts. We will look for opportunities
               for additional uses of state lands, such as recreation, preservation or economic benefit,
               and seek cooperative agreements, such as memoranda-of-understanding, for using land.


               ISSUE: FUNDING FOR LAND ACQUISMON AND MANAGEMENT

               Findings:
                      The current system -of fund allocation for land- acquisition; although at times
               resulting in large appropriations, has limited utility over time because it is subject to
               annual fluctuations based on previous funding patterns- and fiscal priorities. Those
               funds which do provide a stable source of fimds are limited in size. These funding
               mechanisms do not promote development of a systematic acquisition and construction
               program which en@ploys long-term planning. Although a number of funds exist, and a
               number of efforts have been madeto more closely. link resource.. fundig, sources to.
               their use, there is currently no adequate, stable, readily available source of revenue
               for new land acquisition for natural resource protection and use.
                      The Commonwealth typically acquires land and finances the construction and
               operation of capital facilities with appropriations from the General Assembly. Those
               state agencies desiring to purchase land submit funding requests for acquisition and
               construction to the Department of Planning and Budget (DPB) and the Department
               of General Services (DGS). DPB and DGS review land acquisition requests and
               submit recommendations on the proposed acquisitions to the Governor. Based on
               these recommendations, the Governor may include an appropriations request in his
               budget bill. The General Assembly then approves, modifies or denies the requests.
               General Assembly members may also directly submit appropriations requests for land
               acquisition on behalf of a state agency.
                      State agencies also obtain land through private gifts, or.by donation of federal
               lands. State universities have received sizable private gifts of land, while the
               Departments of Game and Inland Fisheries, Conservation and Recreation and
               Forestry have benefited from federal land donations.
                      The General Assembly has established long-term fimding options for certain
               resource agencies that may be used for land acquisition purposes. These funding
               mechanisms have included voluntary tax contributions (Open Space Recreation and

                                                            12








               Conservation Fund); general fund appropriations (Virginia Recreation Facilities
               Authority); revolving loan funds (Virginia Historic Preservation Revolving Fund and
               Virginia Recreation Assistance Revolving Loan Fund); revenues derived from the use
               of state-owned lands (Reforestation Operations Fund); licensing fees (Game Protection
               Fund); and general fund appropriations derived from lottery fund proceeds to match
               private donations (Natural Area Preservation Fund). These revenue sources provide
               vital support for resource conservation programs; however, they are very limited in
               terms of the level of income that can be generated relative to acquisition. and
               construction needs.
                     In addition to acquiring land, the state also sells land deemed to be surplus.
               Agencies must notify the Department of General Services (DGS) of lands which are
               considered surplus and report this information in the Annual Land Report. DGS
               does not normally circulate information on surplus lands to.agencies. Agencies must
               notify DGS through the Annual Land Report of land acquisition needs. DGS will
               assess the need in light of the lands available and will notify the agency. The
               Commonwealth currently has 8 parcels of surplus land totaling 678 acres.

               Recommendation:

                      Governor Wilder has called for establishment of a special non-reverting
               conservation trust fund to provide a stable source of funds for acquisition and
               protection of important parklands, valuable wildlife, and historic resources. The fund
               has also been recomrfiended by the Commission on Population Growth and
               Development@and the Southside Economic Development Commission.
                      As well, the Governor has requested legislation to authorize a referendum on
               the use of general obligation bonds for parks and natural areas. Issuance of $90
               million in bonds is proposed. ne revenue would be used to acquire and construct
               facilities identified in VirginWs six-year capital plan for addressing the
               Commonwealth's priority needs.


               IM[PLEMENTATION
                      In order to implement the plan outlined above, the General Assembly should
               approve the establishment of the conservation trust fund and the general obligation
               bond proposals. This will provide the Commonwealth with adequate funding to carry
               on the task of improving cooperative and coordinated management of natural
               resources on state lands.
                      My meetings with agency heads about cooperative use will include any
               interested land management agencies. In addition to the agencies in the Natural
               Resources Secretariat, I will invite the Department of General Services, the
               Department of Planning and Budget, the Department of Forestry and others that
               express an interest in joining. We will focus on:


                                                          13











               1. Continuing the development and maintenance of a comprehensive, accurate
               inventory of state lands and the natural resources present on those lands. We will
               build on the data assembled by the Department of General Services and digitized by
               the Council on the Environment. Information will be collected into a coordinated,
               easily accessible data system. We will set standards and procedures for developing
               and maintaining the inventory.

               2. Coordinating state efforts to protect and use natural resources on state-owned
               lands. We will examine opportunities for additional cooperative use and resource
               protection on existing state lands as well as lands considered for acquisition by the
               Commonwealth.

               3. Recommending stable sources of funding to acquire and maintain state lands used
               for natural resource purposes. We will continuously monitor funding levels and
               develop new strategies for providing steady, sufficient, readily available funding to
               acquire and manage natural resource lands.































                                                          14











             This report was ftinded, in part, by the Virginia Council on the Enviromnent's Coastal
             Resources Management Program through grant #NA90AA-H-CZ796 of the National
             Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under the Coastal Zone Act of 1972 as
             amended.















































                                                     15










                                                                                                                  -i


                                                                                                                       3 6668 14103 5339
































                                                                                                              C,



                                                                                                               C,
                                                                                                             I @,


                                                                                                                11


                                                                                                                L",