Photo: Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument, Montana. Copyright 2012 Delena Norris-Tull
History of coordination between States and Federal Agencies on issues related to Invasive Species
Summary prepared by Dr. Delena Norris-Tull, Professor Emerita of Science Education, University of Montana Western, June 2022.
The Western Weed Control Conferences, which began in 1938, represented the first attempts at interstate coordination of knowledge and actions related to noxious weed management. The North Central States, following the lead and model of the Western states, formed their first interstate weed control conference in 1945.
It was not until after World War II that Federal agencies took an active role in management of invasive species. At the 1946 Western Weed Control Conference, the following recommendations were presented by the Washington delegation: “It is unanimously agreed among those who have made a study of noxious weeds that there is a critical need for a strong, aggressively administered, and fully financed National Weed Control Program.
”It is further agreed that the United States Department of Agriculture should create within the Bureau of Plant Industry, a Weed Division to deal with the various phases of the nation’s weed problems and extend its research, investigations and experiments with noxious weeds on a national scale to assist in developing the most efficient and economical methods of control and eradication.”
At the North Central States Weed Control Conference of 1946, the following summary was stated: “In the weed control program the National Congress has curiously adopted what seems to be a hands-off policy. Maybe it would be better to say that the Congress seems not to be interested in the national weed control problem. Some of the states, in order to protect themselves against the weed menace, have been forced to initiate and support their own eradication and control program, while the Federal Government has set idly by and has not even done a good job of looking on. The weed problem is so broad in scope so devastating in effect and so complicated when considered from the overall standpoint, that we believe the time is here when Congress should sit up and take notice that there is a weed condition in our country that is of national importance, which if not properly handled will undermine the greatest resource of our nation, which is the soil. There are some aspects of the weed problem that cannot be handled on the state level. These problems cut across state lines and can only be handled by Federal action…”
That same year, at the Western Weed Control Conference, representatives from the State of Idaho presented recommendations for Federal action in support of the States’ efforts at weed control (for details, refer to the archival minutes of 1946).
Relationships between Federal Agencies and State and County Agencies
Several Federal Agencies (e.g., USDA, BOI, DOD) that deal extensively with land management (e.g., Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, US Forest Service, Bureau of Reclamation, Army Corps of Engineers) have representatives stationed in each of the States, and in a variety of locations within each State. Those locally-based representatives are tasked with collaborating, communicating, and coordinating activities with State and County-level agencies, and a wide array of non-profit organizations, and private landowners. These relationships often are very beneficial both to the Federal Agency and to the local entities.
Several of the interviews included in these webpages highlight problems in the past, when representatives of some Federal Agencies came to the table insisting that they were in charge of State-level solutions. Fortunately, changes to Federal laws eventually clarified that the role of Federal Agency representatives is to assist State and County agencies, rather than dictate solutions to them.
However, the following problems still occur, when State Agencies are working with representatives from Federal Agencies:
Then, to add one more layer of complexity, each State has its own agencies to manage. And each time a new Governor is elected within a State, the same problems can arise as are seen at the Federal level, when a new US President is elected.
Next Sections on Federal Agencies:
Related Sections:
History of coordination between States and Federal Agencies on issues related to Invasive Species
Summary prepared by Dr. Delena Norris-Tull, Professor Emerita of Science Education, University of Montana Western, June 2022.
The Western Weed Control Conferences, which began in 1938, represented the first attempts at interstate coordination of knowledge and actions related to noxious weed management. The North Central States, following the lead and model of the Western states, formed their first interstate weed control conference in 1945.
It was not until after World War II that Federal agencies took an active role in management of invasive species. At the 1946 Western Weed Control Conference, the following recommendations were presented by the Washington delegation: “It is unanimously agreed among those who have made a study of noxious weeds that there is a critical need for a strong, aggressively administered, and fully financed National Weed Control Program.
”It is further agreed that the United States Department of Agriculture should create within the Bureau of Plant Industry, a Weed Division to deal with the various phases of the nation’s weed problems and extend its research, investigations and experiments with noxious weeds on a national scale to assist in developing the most efficient and economical methods of control and eradication.”
At the North Central States Weed Control Conference of 1946, the following summary was stated: “In the weed control program the National Congress has curiously adopted what seems to be a hands-off policy. Maybe it would be better to say that the Congress seems not to be interested in the national weed control problem. Some of the states, in order to protect themselves against the weed menace, have been forced to initiate and support their own eradication and control program, while the Federal Government has set idly by and has not even done a good job of looking on. The weed problem is so broad in scope so devastating in effect and so complicated when considered from the overall standpoint, that we believe the time is here when Congress should sit up and take notice that there is a weed condition in our country that is of national importance, which if not properly handled will undermine the greatest resource of our nation, which is the soil. There are some aspects of the weed problem that cannot be handled on the state level. These problems cut across state lines and can only be handled by Federal action…”
That same year, at the Western Weed Control Conference, representatives from the State of Idaho presented recommendations for Federal action in support of the States’ efforts at weed control (for details, refer to the archival minutes of 1946).
Relationships between Federal Agencies and State and County Agencies
Several Federal Agencies (e.g., USDA, BOI, DOD) that deal extensively with land management (e.g., Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, US Forest Service, Bureau of Reclamation, Army Corps of Engineers) have representatives stationed in each of the States, and in a variety of locations within each State. Those locally-based representatives are tasked with collaborating, communicating, and coordinating activities with State and County-level agencies, and a wide array of non-profit organizations, and private landowners. These relationships often are very beneficial both to the Federal Agency and to the local entities.
Several of the interviews included in these webpages highlight problems in the past, when representatives of some Federal Agencies came to the table insisting that they were in charge of State-level solutions. Fortunately, changes to Federal laws eventually clarified that the role of Federal Agency representatives is to assist State and County agencies, rather than dictate solutions to them.
However, the following problems still occur, when State Agencies are working with representatives from Federal Agencies:
- Because Federal Agencies are tasked with enacting Federal laws, and because the Agency representatives are a small part of a very large organization, the representatives often find that their hands are tied, when State Agencies need a more rapid response to changing conditions.
- Federal Agency representatives are often (perhaps always) unable to make decisions related to issues that States are dealing with, as the Federal representatives are limited in the scope of their operations. For example, the mission or policies of the Federal Agency may impede (or prevent all together) the Federal representative making decisions, making resource commitments, or offering feasible solutions to States.
Then, to add one more layer of complexity, each State has its own agencies to manage. And each time a new Governor is elected within a State, the same problems can arise as are seen at the Federal level, when a new US President is elected.
Next Sections on Federal Agencies:
Related Sections: