United States Department of the Interior

BUREAU OF LAND MAN AGEMENT

Washin gto n, D.C. 20240
http ://w ww.b Im .gov

JUN 1 9 20H
The Honorable Greg Abbott
Attorney General of Texas
P.O. Box 12548
Austin, Texas 787 1 1-2548
Dear Attorney General Abbott:
As indicated in a letter to you on May I, 2014, we are prov iding additional information in respon se
to your letter of April 22 , 20 14, concerning the Bureau of Land Management' s (BLM) work a long
the Red River. We have, through the years, had a good relationship w ith Texas, and I would like to
reiterate the BLM ' s commitment to maintaining these relationships with the cit ize ns, industry, and
other interested groups.
Your requests relate to two issues: (I) the Reso urce Management Plan/ Environmental lmpact
Statement process, and (2) ownership interests of the Un ited States and adjacent landowners in the
area . I appreciate the 0ppOttunity to offer clarification .
The Resource Management Planning (RMP) process is set forth at 43 C.F.R. Part 1600. The
Nat ional Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process associated with plans, including development of
Environmental Impact Statements (E IS), is delineated at 40 C.F. R. Parts 1500-1508, with additional
Department of the Interior-spec ific regulations at 43 C.F.R. Part 46. To sum marize, the RM.PIEIS
process is designed to estab li sh general management goa ls, objectives, and directives for public
reso urces, including lands and mineral s, managed by the BLM. The process involves numerou s steps
that allow for public input, ana lysis, and informed decision-making with regard to public reso urces.
In order to ensu re the appropriate consistency with other governmental planning efforts, the BLM
invited local , state, Federal , and triba l representatives to palticipate as cooperating agencies in the
preparation of the BLM ' s RMP/ EIS. It is my understanding that multiple county governments and
agencies of the States of Texas and Oklahoma have agreed to participate as cooperating agencies.
A lthough the RMP does not apply to private lands, the process ensures full consideration of adjacent
uses, includ ing local uses ofresources from public lands.
The initial step in the public RMP/EIS process is the issuance of a Notice of Intent (NOI), in form ing
the public that the BLM intend s to initiate its planning efforts. The NOI for the three-state planning
effort that includes the Red River area was publi shed on July 26, 2013 (78 Fed. Reg. 45266-68). The
publi cation of a NO I in iti ates what is called "scoping," which is a public process that involves
identifying issues - those brought forward by indi viduals, state, and Federa l agenc ies - for analysis
during the RMP/EIS process. The BLM has collected a ll comments received during the scoping
period and incorporated the comments into a publicly ava il able scoping report.
The next phase includes the development of an Analysis of the Management Situation (AMS),
followed by deve lopment of several potential management alternatives for detailed
considerat ion. T he AMS is an assessment of cu rrent manage ment and base line cond itions, which

ass ists the agency and the public in understanding, rev iewing, comparing, and weighi ng the impacts
of any proposed management alternatives. The BLM then deve lops alternatives based on the
comments rece ived during the scoping process and the management issues to be addressed.
Next, the BLM deve lops an ana lysis of the effects of each of the alternatives. A fter ana lyzing,
comparing, and weighing the enviro nmental and other effects of the alternati ves, the BLM identi fies
a preferred alternati ve . The analys is of all alternatives and identifi cati on of a preferred alternati ve
are presented in a " Dra ft RMP/E IS." This document is released to the public fo r rev iew for at least
a 90-day comment peri od. Once the Draft RMP/E IS comment period closes, the BLM reviews,
analyzes, and incorporates, to the extent practicable, the information gathered from the comments
into a Proposed RMP/ Final EIS. The Proposed RMP/Final EIS is released fo r a 30-day publi c protest
peri od and a 60-day Governor's consistency rev iew period.
To fin alize the RMP, the BLM prepares a Record of Decision/Approved RMP and releases it to the
public, a fter which time the RM P will be implemented and monitored. The estimated date for a
signed Record of Dec ision for the three-state RM P revision that includes the Red River area is
January 20 18. The map of the pl anning area is enclosed.
With regard to the issue of ownership interests, the Supreme Court and other judicia l dec isions from
the 1920s up until Congressional consent to the Red River Bo undary Compact establi shed the
boundary between Texas and Oklahoma as the gradient line along the south bank of the Red
River. Congressiona l consent to the Compact in 2000 esta bli shed the boundary between the two
states as the vegetation line on the south bank of the Red Ri ver. The Compact, however, did not
change the United States' ex isti ng interests in any public domain lands along the Red Ri ver ("The
full title and ownership of so much of the bed of the river as lies south of its med ial line are in the
United States." Oklahoma v. Texas, 26 1 U.S. 345, 346 ( 1923)). Accord ing to the pl ain terms of
Arti cle VII , the Compact "does not change: ( I) the title of any person or entity, public o r private, to
any o f the lands adjacent to the Red River; (2) the rights, including riparian ri ghts, of any person or
entity, public or pri vate, that ex ist as a resul t of the person' s or entity' s title to lands adjacent to the
Red Ri ver; or (3) the boundaries of those lands." Therefore, any shi fts in the boundary between
Texas and Oklahoma as a result of the Compact may mean that public lands that are owned by the
United States now are w ithin Texas that were fo rmerly in Oklahoma . The BLM will determine the
uses and extent of these public lands through the current publi c planning process and any necessary
surveys.
The RMP/EIS process encourages substantial parti cipati on by the public and important participation
by cooperatin g agencies, including county governments and State agencies. Any further inquiries
may be addressed to me or to Steve Tryon, who oversees operations in Texas, Oklahoma, and
Kansas. Mr. Tryon can be reached at the BLM' s Okl ahoma Field Offi ce (9 18-62 1-4 100) or by email
at sttyon@blm .gov.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your inquiries.

Neil Kornze
Director

_.. _-

u. _ _ _ _

United States Department of the Interior

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Washington. D.C. 20240
http://www.hlm .gov

MAY 0 1 20n
The Honorable Greg Abbott
Attorney General of Texas
1'.0. Box 12548
Austin, Texas 7871 1-2548
Dear Anorney General Abbott:
Thank you for your letter dated April 22, 20 14, wh ich sets forth your questions and concerns
about the Bureau of Land Management 's work along the Red River.
Th e Bureau of Land Management has a long history and good relationship with Texas, as well as
the many industri es, groups, and citizens that call Texas home. We have a number o f active and
successful efforts ongoing in Texas. For example, we are proud to be working with the oil and
gas industry and surrounding communities in areas where oil and gas development is taking
place on federal propenies throughout the state. The area north of Burkburnett is one of those
areas. We are committed to maintaining these good relationships.
Regarding your concerns, first and foremost, I wanllO emphasize that the Bureau of Land
Management is not expanding federal holdings along the Red River. Work is underway to
review and respond to your specific quest ions about the U.S. Supreme Court decision and the
Red River Boundary Compact.
The work we do at the Bureau of Land Management is guided by long-term p lans that are
refreshed every 10 to 20 years. Rigbt now, the Bureau of Land Management is in tbe initial
stages of develop ing a management plan that will apply to public lands, including minera l
interests, in Texas and Oklahoma, and Kansas, and wi ll include some limjled areas along the Red
River thai the courts have previously determined to be public lands.
During thi s planning process, we rely on the pub lic to hel p us detennine how best to manage the
public lands for the nexi many years. Our goal and commitment is to work closely with yo u,
local and state government officials, congressional delegation members, and the public to
determine the best management options for the public lands in these three states.
We have a great deal of nexibility in deve loping options, and we look forward 10 obtaining input
fTom you and others throughout the process. Members of the public and interestcd parties will
have many opponunities to review the ideas that are considered al various steps along the way.
The planning process is expected to last until 2018 o r beyond.

The public meetings are still being scheduled, but in the meantime, the public can contact us with
their ideas and thoughts at the Bureau of Land Management ' s Oklahoma Field Office, 7906 E.
33" Street, Suite 10 1, Tu lsa, Oklahoma, 74 145, or at BLM NM OKT RMP@blm.gov.
We will be sending you additional, detai led information about the work we are undertaking,
including relevant maps. I hope that information is helpful to you.
If there are further issues of concern or interest, I hope you will reach out to me directly or you
can contact Steve Tryon who oversees our operations in Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas. He can
be reached at the Bureau's Oklahoma Field Office at (918) 621-4100 or by emajl
at stryon@blm.gov.
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to respond to your questions and concerns.

Neil Kornze
Director

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

GREG

ABBOTT

April 22, 2014

The Honorable Neil Kornze

Director
Bureau of Land Management
U.S. Department of the Interior
1849 C Street NW, Rm. 5665
Washington, DC 20240
Dear Director Kornze:
Respect for property rights and the rule of law are fundamental principles in the State of Texas and the
United States. When governments simply ignore those principles, it threatens the foundation of our free
and prosperous society. That is why I am deeply concerned about reports that the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) is considering taking property in the State of Texas and that it now claims belongs to
the federal government. Given the seriousness of this situation, I feel compelled to seek answers
regarding the BLM's intentions and legal authority with respect to Texas territory adjacent to the Red
River.
I understand that your office is in the early stages of developing a plan-known as a Resource
Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (RMP/EIS)-to regulate the use of federal lands
along a 116-mile stretch of the Red River. As Attorney General of Texas, I am deeply troubled by reports
from BLM field hearings that the federal government may claim-for the first time-that 90,000 acres of
territory along the Red River now belong to the federal government.
Private landowners in Texas have owned, maintained, and cultivated this land for generations. Despite
the long-settled expectations of these hard-working Texans along the Red River, the BLM appears to be
threatening their private property rights by claiming ownership over this territory. Yet, the BLM has
failed to disclose either its full intentions or the legal justification for its proposed actions. Decisions of
this magnitude must not be made inside a bureaucratic black box.
Nearly a century ago, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the gradient line of the south bank of the
Red River-subject to the doctrines of accretion and avulsion-was the boundary between Texas and
Oklahoma. Oklahoma v. Texas, 260 U.S. 606 (1923). More recently, in 1994, the BLM stated that the
Red River area was "[a] unique situation" and stated that "[t] he area itself cannot be defined until action
by the U.S. Congress establishes the permanent state boundary between Oklahoma and Texas." Further,
the BLM determined that one possible scenario was legislation that established the "south geologic cut
bank as the boundary," which could have resulted "in up to 90,000 acres" of newly delineated federal
land. But no such legislation was ever enacted.
Instead, in 2000, the U.S. Congress enacted legislation ratifying an interstate boundary compact agreed to
by the State of Texas and the State of Oklahoma. With Congress' ratification of the Red River Boundary
Compact, federal law now provides that the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma is "the vegetation on
the south bank ofthe Red River ... "-not the "south geologic cut bank." Given this significant legal

POST OFFICE Box 12548, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL:(512)463-2100 WWW.OAG.STATE.TX.US

All Equal Employ",r"t Opporwnity Employtr.

Pril1ud

011

Ruyclrd Papa

The Honorable Neil Kornze

April 22, 2014
Page 2
development, it is not at all clear what legal basis supports the BLM's claim of federal ownership over
private property that abuts the Red River in the State of Texas.
This issue is of significant importance to the State of Texas and its private property owners. As Attorney
General of Texas, I am deeply concerned about the notion that the BLM believes the federal government
has the authority to swoop in and take land that has been owned and cultivated by Texas landowners for
generations. Accordingly, I hereby request that you or your staff respond in writing to this letter by
providing the following information as soon as possible:
I.

Please delineate with specificity each of the steps for the RMP/EIS process for property along
the Red River.

2.

Please describe the procedural due process the BLM will afford to Texans whose property
may be claimed by the federal government.

3.

Please confirm whether the BLM agrees that, from 1923 until the ratification of the Red
River Boundary Compact, the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma was the gradient line
of the south bank of the Red River. To the extent the BLM does not agree, please provide
legal analysis supporting the BLM's position.

4.

Please confirm whether the BLM still considers Congress' ratification of the Red River
Boundary Compact as determinative of its interest in land along the Red River? To the extent
the BLM does not agree, please provide legal analysis supporting the BLM's new position.

5.

Please delineate with specificity the amount of Texas territory that would be impacted by the
BLM's decision to claim this private land as the property of the federal government.

In short, the BLM's newly asserted claims to land along the Red River threaten to upset long-settled
private property rights and undermine fundamental principles-including the rule of law-that form the
foundation of our democracy. It is incumbent on BLM to promptly disclose both the process it intends to
follow and the legal justification for its position.

cc:

The Honorable Mac Thornberry

2329 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-4314