FEDERAL LAND 

MANAGEMENT

Availability and Potential 

Reliability of Selected Data 

Elements at Five Agencies

Statement of Anu K. Mittal, Director 

Natural Resources and Environment

Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Energy and 

Mineral Resources, Committee on Natural 

Resources, House of Representatives

For Release on Delivery 

Expected at 9:00 a.m. MDT 

Thursday, May 3, 2012

GAO-12-691T

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-12-691T, a statement 

before the Subcommittee on Energy and 

Mineral Resources, Committee on Natural 

Resources, House of Representatives

May 3, 2012

FEDERAL LAND MANAGEMENT

Availability and Potential Reliability of Selected 

Data Elements at Five Agencies

Why GAO Did This Study

The federal government manages 

about 650 million acres, or 29 percent, 

of the 2.27 billion acres of U.S. land. 

Four land management agencies—the 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 

the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), 

the National Park Service (NPS) in the 

Department of the Interior (Interior), 

and the Forest Service, in the 

Department of Agriculture—manage 

about 95 percent of these federal 

acres. Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation 

(BoR) manages another 1 percent of 

these acres. The five agencies collect 

certain data to help manage federal 

lands under their jurisdiction. 

This testimony summarizes GAO’s 

findings from GAO-11-337, a report 

issued in April 2011. In this report, 

GAO reviewed the extent to which the 

five agencies collect certain federal 

land and resource data (referred to as 

data elements), how these data 

elements are stored, and their potential 

reliability. GAO included over 100 data 

elements at each agency in its 

analysis. These elements can be 

categorized as information on (1) 

federal land and the resources the five 

agencies manage, (2) revenues 

generated from selected activities on 

these lands, and (3) federal land 

subject to selected land use 

designations, such as wilderness 

areas. 

What GAO Recommends

GAO made no recommendation in its 

2011 report and is making no new 

recommendations in this testimony.

What GAO Found

The five agencies varied in the extent to which they collected the over 100 land 

and resources, revenue, and federal land use designation data elements that 

GAO asked them about. Specifically, all five agencies collected data on four 

basic data elements, which related to total surface acres managed, total acres 

managed within each state, the number of special use permits generated for 

filming activities on federal land, and the number of cultural and historic sites

listed on the National Register of Historic Places. In contrast, none of them 

collected information for 33 other data elements, such as the percent of total 

acres under oil, gas, or coal leases that have surface disturbance or where the 

surface disturbance has been reclaimed, or information on the potential 

quantities of oil, gas, and coal resources on federal land. Agency officials cited 

various reasons why the agencies did not collect certain information, such as 

believing another federal agency collected it, it was inconsistent with the 

agency’s mission, or they lacked the authority or resources to do so.

When an agency collected information, it was usually stored in a primary agency 

data system—a centralized electronic data system maintained at an agencywide 

level. For example, GAO queried each agency about 57 federal land and 

resources data elements, and while the number of data elements each agency 

collected varied significantly, ranging from 3 to 22, the majority of the information 

that was collected was stored in a primary agency data system. Similarly, GAO 

asked each agency about 35 specific revenue data elements, and again while 

the number of data elements each agency collected varied significantly, ranging 

from 6 to 22, the majority of the information that was collected was stored in a 

primary agency data system. When the agencies collected information but did 

not store it in a primary agency data system, it was available in other formats 

such as paper files, land use plans, or other agency documents and files that 

may have been located in multiple field locations.

GAO assessed the potential reliability of the data elements that the five agencies 

collected and determined that less than half of the data elements stored in a 

primary agency data system were potentially reliable. Generally, data elements 

were assessed as potentially reliable when information about the completeness 

and accuracy of a specific data element provided high assurance of its reliability. 

It is important to note that GAO assessed the potential reliability of these data 

elements for a given period of time, and additional analysis would be needed to 

determine the reliability of specific data elements for specific purposes. Among 

the reasons some of these data were assessed to be potentially unreliable were 

insufficient information about the accuracy and completeness of data elements 

and lack of internal controls for data quality. 

View GAO-12-691T. For more information, 

contact Anu K. Mittal at (202) 512-3841 or 

mittala@gao.gov.
 

Page 1 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

Chairman Lamborn, Ranking Member Holt, and Members of the 

Subcommittee:

I am pleased to be here today to participate in your field hearing on land 

inventory management. The federal government manages about 650 

million acres, or 29 percent, of the 2.27 billion acres of land in the United 

States. Four land management agencies—the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM), the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the 

National Park Service (NPS) in the Department of the Interior (Interior), 

and the Forest Service in the Department of Agriculture—manage about 

95 percent of the federal land. The Bureau of Reclamation (BoR), also in 

Interior, manages another 1 percent of this land.

The agencies manage their land for various purposes. For example, BLM 

and the Forest Service manage land for a variety of uses—including 

recreation, timber harvesting, livestock grazing, oil and gas production, 

mining, and wilderness protection. In contrast, FWS and NPS primarily 

manage land to conserve fish and wildlife and their habitat and park 

resources, respectively, and resource development is generally not 

allowed on FWS- and NPS-managed land. BoR focuses on managing, 

developing, and protecting water and related resource projects, such as 

dams, irrigation, and hydroelectric plants. Lands managed by these 

federal agencies may also be specially designated, for example, as 

wilderness areas or national trails.

To help manage federal land, the five agencies collect data that track, 

among other things, land use, revenues generated from activities 

occurring on the land, and land that has been designated for a specific 

use, such as wilderness areas. However, in the past, we, the 

departments’ Offices of Inspectors General, and others have raised 

concerns about the accuracy and completeness of the data used to 

manage federal land and resources and revenues collected from activities 

on federal land. As these prior reports have concluded, without accurate 

and complete data, managers cannot make fully informed decisions and 

effectively manage and evaluate agency activities. 

In 2010, at the request of the House Committee on Natural Resources 

and the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, we 

undertook a study to review the extent to which each of the five federal 

land management agencies collect data that were considered by the 

committees as key to managing federal lands and resources. In April 

2011, we issued a report—Federal Land Management: Availability and 

Potential Reliability of Selected Data Elements at Five Agencies

 
 

Page 2 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

(GAO-11-377)—that described which data the agencies collected, where 

the agencies stored these data, and the potential reliability of these data.

My testimony today is based on the findings of this report, which 

contained no recommendations. The 2011 report contains a detailed 

explanation of the methods used to conduct our work, which we 

performed in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards.

The four major federal land management agencies—BLM, the Forest 

Service, FWS, and NPS—manage their land and resources in 

accordance with their respective missions and authorities. BLM and the 

Forest Service are responsible for managing about 69 percent of federal 

land for a variety of uses, including recreation, timber harvesting, 

livestock grazing, oil and gas production, and mining. FWS is responsible 

for managing about 14 percent of federal land, primarily to conserve and 

protect fish and wildlife, and their habitat, although other uses, such as 

hunting and fishing, are allowed when they are compatible with the 

primary purposes for which the lands are managed. NPS manages 

approximately 12 percent of federal land to conserve, preserve, protect, 

and interpret the nation’s natural, cultural, and historic resources.

In comparison, BoR, which manages about 1 percent of federal land, has 

a much narrower primary mission—to manage, develop, and protect 

water and related resources in an environmentally and economically 

sound manner. Accordingly, BoR maintains 348 reservoirs, 476 dams, 

and 58 hydroelectric plants on federal land and is the largest wholesale 

supplier of water in the United States and the second-largest 

hydroelectric power producer in the nation. BoR land is largely managed 

to meet its primary mission, but this land also provides other benefits, 

such as recreation.

These agencies may collect a variety of data to manage and oversee 

their activities. For our 2011 report, we examined over 100 data elements 

that fall into three broad categories: (1) information on federal land and 

the resources the agencies manage, (2) revenues generated from 

selected activities on federal land, and (3) information on federal land

subject to selected land use designations. We developed this list of data 

elements by reviewing, among other things, the request letter for the 

work, past GAO and Congressional Research Service reports, and 

interviewing agency officials. The five agencies may collect other data 

related to land management that were not included in this review. The 

three data element categories are described below.

Background 
 

Page 3 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

• Federal land and resources. We identified 57 data elements in this 

category that relate to (1) information on the total surface and 

subsurface acres of federal land managed by each of the five land 

management agencies and the total acres managed for specific 

purposes, such as hardrock mining or grazing, and (2) the volume of 

various resources, such as oil and gas and timber extracted or 

harvested from federal land.

• Revenues generated from activities on federal land. We identified 35 

data elements in this category that relate to information on revenues 

generated from activities on federal land, which are derived from the 

use or sale of land and resources. Sources of revenue include 

revenues generated from oil and gas activities, hardrock mining, and 

special use or right-of-way permits issued for transmission lines, 

filming activities, and concession activities. We also included cost 

recovery fees—which are intended to recover agency costs for 

processing certain plans, applications, or permits associated with 

various activities on federal land—in this category of data elements.

• Federal land use designations. Data elements in this category relate 

to information on the number of acres each agency manages that are 

associated with various special designations of federal land, such as 

wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, paleontological sites, and 

critical habitat set aside for endangered species. Some of these land 

use designations apply to all five federal land management agencies, 

but some are unique to a specific agency, and the number of land use 

designations applicable to each agency varies.

The five agencies varied in the extent to which they collected the over 

100 land and resources, revenue, and federal land use designation data 

elements that we queried them about. Specifically, all five agencies 

collected only 4 of the same data elements of the over 100 data elements 

that we asked them about. These 4 elements related to total surface 

acres managed, total acres managed within each state, the number of 

special use permits generated for filming activities on federal land, and 

the number of cultural and historic sites listed on the National Register of 

Historic Places. In contrast, none of the agencies collected information for 

33 data elements that we asked them about, such as the percent of total 

acres under oil, gas, or coal leases that have surface disturbance or 

where the surface disturbance has been reclaimed, or information on the 

potential quantities of oil, gas, and coal resources on federal land.

Specifically, of the 57 federal land and resource data elements we asked 

each of the five agencies about, BLM and the Forest Service collected the 

most—22 and 20 data elements respectively—and BoR collected the 

Extent to Which Data 

Elements Are 

Collected by the Five 

Agencies Varied
 

Page 4 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

least—3 data elements. Table 1 lists the 57 federal land and resources 

data elements we asked about and indicates which of the five agencies 

collected them.

Table 1: Federal Land and Resource Data Elements Collected by the Five Federal Agencies

Collected

Data element BLM Forest 

Service

FWS NPS BoR

1. Total surface acres managed ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

2. Total subsurface acres managed ✔ ✔

3. Total acres managed within each state ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

4. Total acres acquired that facilitated the establishment of buffer areas around military 

installations

✔

5. Total acres withdrawn that facilitated the establishment of buffer areas around military 

installations

✔

6. Total acres acquired for national park units ✔

7. Total acres acquired for wilderness areas ✔ ✔

8. Total acres acquired for battlegrounds

9. Total acres acquired for wildlife refuges ✔ ✔

10. Total acres acquired for national recreation areas ✔ ✔ ✔

11. Total acres acquired for other purposes ✔ ✔

12. Total acres that were added to the federal estate through eminent domain powers of 

the federal government

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

13. Total acres disposed of through sale or exchange ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

14. Potential quantity of coal resources on federal lands (tonnage)

15. Potential quantity of coal reserves on federal lands (tonnage) ✔

16. Total acres of federal lands available for coal leasing under existing land management

plans 

17. Total acres of land that have been leased for coal development ✔

18. Total acres of federal lands leased for coal development that are in producing status

19. Extent to which coal has been produced from leased lands (tonnage)

20. Potential quantity of oil and natural gas resources on federal lands (barrels/cubic feet)

21. Potential quantity of oil and natural gas reserves on federal lands (barrels/cubic feet)

22. Total acres of federal lands available for oil and natural gas leasing under existing land 

management plans

23. Total acres of federal lands that have been leased for oil and natural gas development ✔ ✔

24. Total acres of federal lands leased for oil and natural gas development that are in 

producing status

✔ ✔

25. Extent to which oil and natural gas has been produced from leased federal lands 

(barrels/cubic feet)
 

Page 5 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

Collected

Data element BLM Forest 

Service

FWS NPS BoR

26. Value of bonds held by your agency to ensure reclamation of oil and gas operations ✔

27. Potential acres of federal lands available for timber sale

28. Potential quantity of timber on federal lands suitable for commercial harvesting (board 

feet)

29. Total acres of federal lands that have been approved for commercial timber harvesting 

(acres) under existing land management plans

✔ ✔

30. Extent to which timber on federal lands has been commercially harvested (board feet) ✔ ✔

31. Total acres of federal lands from which timber has been commercially harvested ✔ ✔ ✔

32. Potential acreage for livestock grazing on federal lands ✔

33. Total acres of federal lands authorized for livestock grazing use under existing land 

management plans

✔ ✔

34. Total acres of federal lands used for livestock grazing ✔ ✔ ✔

35. Potential quantity of hardrock (locatable) minerals on federal lands

36. Total acres of federal lands available for hardrock (locatable) mineral mining under 

existing land management plans

✔

37. Extent to which hardrock (locatable) minerals have been extracted from federal lands 

(tonnage)

38. Value of bonds held by your agency to ensure reclamation of hardrock (locatable) 

mineral operations

✔

39. Total acres of federal lands that were burned as a result of wildland fires (Forest 

Service and NPS)/wildfires (BLM)

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

40. Costs associated with wildland fires (Forest Service and NPS)/wildfires (BLM) ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

41. Percentage of total acres of federal lands that are under a coal lease that have surface 

disturbance

42. Percentage of total acres of federal lands that are under an oil and natural gas lease 

that have surface disturbance

43. Percentage of total acres of federal lands that are under a notice or plan level hardrock 

(locatable) operation that have surface disturbance

✔

44. Percentage of total acres of federal lands that are under a coal lease where the 

surface disturbance has been reclaimed

45. Percentage of total acres of federal lands that are under an oil and natural gas lease 

where the surface disturbance has been reclaimed

46. Percentage of total acres of federal lands that are under a notice or plan level hardrock 

(locatable) operation where the surface disturbance has been reclaimed

✔

47. Percentage of total acres of federal lands that are under a coal lease where surface is 

undisturbed

48. Percentage of the total acres of federal lands that are under an oil and natural gas 

lease where surface is undisturbed

49. Percentage of the total acres of federal lands that are under a notice or plan level 

hardrock (locatable) operation where surface is undisturbed
 

Page 6 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

Collected

Data element BLM Forest 

Service

FWS NPS BoR

50. Total acres of wildlife refuge with energy development and production currently taking 

place

51. Total acres of wildlife refuge with mineral development and production currently taking 

place

52. Ownership of the fluid mineral estate being developed on wildlife refuge (federal, state, 

private)

53. Ownership of the solid mineral estate being developed on wildlife refuge (federal, 

state, private)

54. Total percentage of federal mineral estate that has been withdrawn from mineral entry 

under the General Mining Act of 1872

✔

55. Total percentage of federal mineral estate that has been withdrawn from mineral entry 

under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920

✔

56. Total percentage of federal mineral estate that has been withdrawn from mineral entry 

under the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands

✔

57. Total percentage of federal mineral estate that has been withdrawn from mineral entry 

under the Mineral Materials Disposal Act of 1947

✔

Source: GAO.

Of the 35 revenue data elements we asked each of the five federal 

agencies about, BLM collected the most and NPS collected the least, 22 

and 6, respectively. Table 2 lists the 35 data elements that relate to 

revenues generated from activities on federal lands and which of the five 

agencies collected them.

Table 2: Revenue Data Elements Collected by the Five Federal Agencies

Collected

Data element BLM Forest 

Service

FWS NPS BoR

1. Oil and gas bonus bids ✔

2. Oil and gas rents ✔

3. Oil & gas royalties

4. Coal bonus bids ✔

5. Coal rents ✔

6. Coal royalties

7. Geothermal bonus bids ✔

8. Geothermal rents ✔

9. Geothermal royalties

10. Other leaseable commodities bonus bids
 

Page 7 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

Collected

Data element BLM Forest 

Service

FWS NPS BoR

11. Other leaseable commodities rents

12. Other leaseable commodities royalties

13. Grazing fees ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

14. Claim maintenance fees for hardrock mining ✔

15. Location fees for hardrock mining ✔

16. Special use permits for transmission lines ✔ ✔

17. Right-of-way permits for transmission lines ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

18. Special use permits for water projects ✔

19. Right-of-way permits for water projects ✔ ✔ ✔

20. Special use permits for solar projects ✔ ✔

21. Right-of-way permits for solar projects ✔

22. Special use permits for wind projects ✔ ✔ ✔

23. Right-of-way permits for wind projects ✔ ✔

24. Special use permits generated from camping activities ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

25. Special use permits generated from day use activities ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

26. Special use permits generated from filming activities ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

27. Special use permits generated from concession activities ✔ ✔

28. Cost recovery fees associated with hardrock mining ✔

29. Cost recovery fees related to Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) preparation ✔

30. Cost recovery fees for processing oil and gas Applications to Drill ✔

31. Cost recovery fees associated with geothermal activities ✔

32. Recreation fees ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

33. Entrance fees ✔ ✔

34. Use fees ✔ ✔

35. Concession receipts ✔ ✔ ✔

Source: GAO.

Some land use designation data elements that we asked the five federal 

land management agencies about applied to all five of them, and some 

were unique to a specific agency. As a result, the number of land use 

designations applicable to each agency varied. Specifically, 26 federal 

land use designation data elements applied to BLM, 21 to the Forest 

Service, 21 to FWS, 30 to NPS, and 17 to BoR. NPS collected the most 

information on federal land use designation data elements and BoR 

collected the least, 25 and 1, respectively. Table 3 lists the data elements 

collected for federal land use designations by those that apply to all 

agencies and those that apply to each of the five agencies.
 

Page 8 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

Table 3: Federal Land Use Designation Data Elements Collected by the Five Federal Agencies

Federal land use designation data elements applicable to all five agencies

Collected

Data element BLM Forest 

Service

FWS NPS BoR

1. Total acres designated as Wilderness Areas under the Wilderness Act of 1964 and 

subsequent associated legislation

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

2. Total river miles designated as Wild and Scenic River under all categories of 

designations under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, as amended

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

3. Number of cultural and historic resource sites listed on the national register of historic 

places under the Historic Sites Act of 1935 or the National Historic Preservation Act 

of 1966

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

4. Number of National Historic and National Scenic Trails designated under the 

National Trails System Act of 1968, as amended

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

5. Number of National Recreational Trails or roads designated under the National Trails 

System Act of 1968, as amended

✔ ✔ ✔

6. Number of paleontological sites ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

7. Total acres designated as Research Natural Areas ✔ ✔

8. Total acres designated as critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act ✔ ✔ ✔

9. Total acres designated under the United Nations Biosphere Reserve Program

10. Total acres designated as World Heritage Sites ✔ ✔

11. Total acres designated as Wetlands of International Importance/Ramsar sites

12. Total acres designated as Globally Important Bird Areas

13. Total acres designated as International Historic Sites ✔

Federal land use designation data elements specific to BLM

1. Total acres designated as National Conservation Areas ✔

2. Total acres designated as National Monuments by public proclamation of the 

President under the Antiquities Act of 1906, or by the Congress

✔

3. Total acres designated as Cooperative Management and Protection Areas ✔

4. Total acres designated as National Recreation Areas ✔

5. Total acres designated as Special Recreation Management Areas ✔

6. Total acres designated as Outstanding Natural Areas ✔

7. Total acres designated as Forest Reserves ✔

8. Total acres inventoried as Wilderness Study Areas through Section 603(a) of the 

Federal Land Policy Management Act

✔

9. Total acres designated as Areas of Critical Environmental Concern ✔

10. Total acres designated as administrative sites

11. Total acres designated as Visual Resource Management Classifications 

12. Total acres designated as Wildland Fire Use Management Areas

13. Total acres designated as Herd Management Areas ✔
 

Page 9 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

Federal land use designation data elements applicable to all five agencies

Collected

Data element BLM Forest 

Service

FWS NPS BoR

Federal land use designation data elements specific to the Forest Service

1. Total acres designated as National Forests ✔

2. Total acres designated as National Grasslands ✔

3. Total acres designated as National Monuments ✔

4. Total areas designated as National Tallgrass Prairie ✔

5. Total acres designated for Land Utilization Projects ✔

6. Total acres designated as administrative sites ✔

7. Total acres within inventoried roadless areas ✔

8. Total acres for other land use designations listed in existing forest plans

Federal land use designation data elements specific to FWS

1. Total acres within the National Wildlife Refuge System ✔

2. Total acres within the National Fish Hatchery System ✔

3. Total acres designated as Waterfowl Production Areas ✔

4. Total acres designated as Coastal Wetlands

5. Total acres designated as Wetlands Conservation

6. Total acres designated as Migratory Bird Habitat Areas

7. Total acres managed as administrative sites ✔

8. Total acres designated as National Monuments ✔

Federal land use designation data elements specific to NPS

1. Total acres designated as National Parks ✔

2. Total acres designated as National Parkways ✔

3. Total acres designated as National Cemeteries

4. Total acres designated as National Monuments ✔

5. Total acres designated as National Battlefields ✔

6. Total acres designated as National Battlefield Parks ✔

7. Total acres designated as National Battlefield Sites ✔

8. Total acres designated as National Military Parks ✔

9. Total acres designated as National Historic Parks ✔

10. Total acres designated as National Historic Sites ✔

11. Total acres designated as National Lakeshores ✔

12. Total acres designated as National Memorials ✔

13. Total acres designated as National Preserves ✔

14. Total acres designated as National Reserves ✔

15. Total acres designated as National Seashores ✔
 

Page 10 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

Federal land use designation data elements applicable to all five agencies

Collected

Data element BLM Forest 

Service

FWS NPS BoR

16. Total acres designated as National Recreation Areas ✔

17. Total acres designated as administrative sites

Federal land use designation data elements specific to BoR

1. Total acres designated as Wetlands

2. Total acres designated as National Monuments

3. Total acres designated as National Natural Landmarks

4. Total acres designated as administrative sites

Source: GAO.

Agency officials cited various reasons why their agencies did not collect 

certain information, such as they believed another federal agency 

collected it, it was inconsistent with the agency’s mission, or they lacked 

the authority or resources to do so. For example, according to BLM 

officials, the agency does not collect information on the total acres of land 

designated as Globally Important Bird Areas. The American Bird 

Conservancy designates these areas and, along with the National 

Audubon Society, collects information about these sites. BLM is informed 

if any designations are on its land but does not track these areas.

Similarly, according to FWS officials, the United Nations World Heritage 

program keeps records for acres designated as World Heritage Sites, and 

FWS relies on this entity for information about these sites.

In addition, some agencies did not collect data because they believe 

collecting it would be inconsistent with the agency’s mission. For 

example, according to NPS officials, with regard to data related to various 

aspects of coal, oil and gas, and hardrock operations on NPS land, these 

activities, if they are allowed at all, are quite limited on NPS land because 

they are inconsistent with the mission of the agency. For this reason, NPS 

does not collect information on the potential amounts of these resources 

on NPS land. These officials also told us that for any quantities of oil and 

gas extracted from NPS land, the Department of the Interior’s Office of 

Natural Resources Revenue would collect this information. In addition, 

BoR did not collect 54 of the 57 federal land and resource data elements 

we examined because, according to agency officials, these data did not 

relate to BoR’s mission. The officials noted that while BoR manages land 

associated with its mission, other activities do occur on its land that are 

incidental to its mission and are generally managed by another agency. 

For example, Lake Mead in Nevada and Arizona is a National Recreation 
 

Page 11 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

Area located on BoR land and managed by NPS. Thus, NPS would 

collect data on the number of acres acquired for national recreation 

areas, such as Lake Mead, and not BoR.

Further, some agencies cited a lack of authority or resources to collect 

certain data elements as their reason for not doing so. For example, 

according to agency officials, the Forest Service does not collect 

information on surface land disturbed by coal mining because it is not 

within Forest Service authority to require collection of this information. 

Forest Service officials said Interior’s Office of Surface Mining, 

Reclamation and Enforcement may collect this information. They added 

that it is not within the scope of the Forest Service’s authority to require 

the collection of information on surfaces disturbed by oil and gas 

activities, but they thought that BLM might collect this information. BLM 

officials stated that they would like to collect this information, but funding 

is not available to do so.

When information was collected by the five agencies, it was more often 

stored in a primary agency data system—a centralized electronic data 

system maintained at an agencywide level—than in other formats.

Specifically, approximately three-quarters of the data elements that the 

agencies collected were stored in a primary agency data system. For 

example, we queried each agency about 57 federal land and resources 

data elements, and while the number of data elements each agency 

collected varied significantly, ranging from 3 to 22, the majority of the 

information that was collected was stored in a primary agency data 

system. BLM collected 22 federal land and resource data elements, and 

15 of these elements were stored in a primary agency data system.

These included data elements related to the total acres that have been 

leased for coal development, total acres that have been leased for oil and 

gas development, and total acres for livestock grazing. However other 

data, such as acres of surface and subsurface land, acres managed 

within each state, and potential quantity of coal reserves on leased land

that the agency manages, were kept in BLM state offices in other formats, 

such as electronic spreadsheets or hard copy. In contrast, all the data 

elements the Forest Service, FWS, and BoR collected were available in a 

primary agency data system.

Similarly, we asked each agency about 35 specific revenue data 

elements, and again while the number of data elements each agency 

collected varied significantly, ranging from 6 to 22, the majority of the 

information that was collected was stored in a primary agency data 

Approximately ThreeQuarters of the Data 

Elements Collected 

Are Stored in a 

Primary Agency Data 

System 
 

Page 12 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

system. For example, BLM stored all 22 of the revenue data elements it 

collected in primary agency data systems, including those related to 

revenues generated from right-of-way permits for transmission lines and 

water and wind projects and special use permits for camping, day use, 

filming, and concession activities. In contrast, of the 6 revenue data 

elements that NPS collected, 3 were stored in a primary agency data 

system—including those related to recreation fees, use fees, and 

concession receipts—and 3 were stored in other formats—including 

special use and right of way permits, which are kept at the park unit level.

With regard to data elements on federal land use designations, the 

number stored in primary agency data systems or in other formats also 

varied significantly by agency. For example, only 1 of the 17 land use 

designation data elements applicable to BLM was stored in a primary 

agency data system. Other data elements, such as those related to the 

number of cultural and historic resource sites, National Monuments, and 

National Historic and National Scenic Trails, were documented in 

spreadsheets at BLM headquarters. Some data elements, such as the 

number of paleontological sites and total acres designated as critical 

habitat under the Endangered Species Act, were maintained at multiple 

field offices in other formats, such as electronic files or hard copy. In 

contrast, 13 of the 15 data elements that the Forest Service collects on 

land use designation are stored in primary agency systems. These 

include information on total acres designated as Wilderness Areas, 

National Forests, National Grasslands, National Monuments, National 

Tallgrass Prairie, Land Utilization Projects, administrative sites, and 

Research Natural Areas; and the total river miles designated as Wild and 

Scenic Rivers. At NPS, the format for data storage was more of a mix, 

with 18 of the 25 data elements stored in primary agency data systems 

and 7 stored in other formats, including electronic spreadsheets, Web 

sites, or paper files at agency headquarters or in park units.

We assessed the potential reliability of the data elements that the five 

agencies collected and determined that less than half of the data 

elements stored in a primary agency data system were potentially 

reliable. Generally, we assessed data elements as potentially reliable 

when information about the completeness and accuracy of a specific data 

element provided high assurance of its reliability. It is important to note 

that we assessed the potential reliability of these data elements for a 

given period of time, and additional analysis would be needed to 

determine the reliability of specific data elements for specific purposes.

Less than Half of the 

Agency Data Stored in 

Primary Agency Data 

Systems Were 

Assessed to Be 

Potentially Reliable
 

Page 13 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

With regard to federal land and resource data elements, we assessed as 

potentially reliable 24 data elements that the five federal agencies stored 

in a primary agency data system:

• At BLM, of the 15 data elements that were stored in a primary agency 

data system, 6 were assessed to be potentially reliable.

• At the Forest Service, of the 20 data elements that were stored in a 

primary agency data system, 4 were assessed to be potentially 

reliable.

• At FWS, of the 10 data elements that were stored in a primary agency 

data system, 6 were assessed to be potentially reliable.

• At NPS, of the 10 data elements that were stored in a primary agency 

data system, 8 were assessed to be potentially reliable.

• At BoR, of the 3 data elements that were stored in a primary agency 

data system, none was assessed to be potentially reliable.

Reasons why these data were found to be potentially unreliable included 

concerns about the accuracy and completeness of the data and internal 

controls for data quality. For example, all of the federal land and resource 

data elements in the Forest Service’s Land Area Report data system and 

the Automated Lands Program data system were assessed as potentially 

unreliable, in part because their associated data systems had weak 

internal controls for data quality.

With regard to the revenue data elements stored in primary agency data 

systems, we assessed 17 as potentially reliable:

• At BLM, of the 22 data elements that were stored in a primary agency 

data system, 13 were assessed to be potentially reliable.

• At the Forest Service, of the 9 data elements that were stored in a 

primary agency data system, 1 was assessed to be potentially 

reliable.

• At FWS, of the 10 data elements that were stored in a primary agency 

data system, none was assessed to be potentially reliable.

• At NPS, of the 3 data elements that were stored in a primary agency 

data system, all 3 were assessed to be potentially reliable.

• At BoR, of the 4 data elements that were stored in a primary agency 

data system, none was assessed to be potentially reliable.

Reasons why these data were found to be unreliable varied. For example, 

at BLM, we assessed two data elements—revenues generated by coal 

bonus bids and coal rents in the Collection and Billing System—as 
 

Page 14 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

potentially unreliable, in part because BLM did not provide sufficient 

information about the accuracy and completeness of these data elements 

in the Collection and Billing System. In addition, at FWS, we assessed the 

revenues generated from the right-of-way permits data element as 

potentially unreliable, in part because the revenues cannot be broken 

down by type of permit, and even if the type of permit were known, the 

frequency of revenues generated from these permits is unknown (e.g., 

annually or one-time).

With regard to the data on land use designations, we assessed as 

potentially reliable 25 land use designation data elements stored in 

primary agency data systems:

• At BLM, the 1 data element that was stored in a primary agency data 

system was not assessed to be potentially reliable.

• At the Forest Service, of the 13 data elements that were stored in a 

primary agency data system, 2 were assessed to be potentially 

reliable.

• At FWS, of the 6 data elements that were stored in a primary agency 

data system, all 6 were assessed to be potentially reliable.

• At NPS, of the 18 data elements that were stored in a primary agency 

data system, 17 were assessed to be potentially reliable.

• At BoR, the 1 data element collected was not stored in a primary 

agency data system.

As with the other two types of data elements, the reasons why these data 

were found to be potentially unreliable varied. For example, we found the 

land use designation data element at BLM potentially unreliable, in part 

because of limitations with the accuracy of historic data. In contrast, we 

found eight data elements stored in the Forest Service’s Land Area 

Report data system potentially unreliable, in part because the data 

system used few internal controls for data quality, and the data in the 

system had not been audited.

Chairman Lamborn, Ranking Member Holt, and Members of the 

Subcommittee, while we recognize that managing the vast federal estate 

is a daunting task, this task becomes even more challenging when federal 

land managers do not have access to complete, accurate, and 

comprehensive land inventory data. This concludes my prepared 

statement. I would be pleased to answer any questions that you may 

have at this time.
 

Page 15 GAO-12-691T Federal Land Management Data

For further information about this testimony, please contact Anu K. Mittal 

at (202) 512-3841 or mittala@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this testimony. Elizabeth Erdmann, Assistant Director; Antoinette 

Capaccio, Carol Kolarik, Rebecca Shea, and Lisa Turner also made key 

contributions to this testimony.

GAO Contacts and 

Acknowledgements 

(361406)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, 

GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, 

go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.