The Army and the Department of Defense (DoD) have a long-term need to access land for training and testing. Both have been criticized for failing to determine their overall land needs, and for pursuing land expansions without a rational strategy. Critics charge that the military is involved in land-grabs driven by the inability to share resources across organizational boundaries within DoD. This report examines the physical and organizational boundaries of the DoD and Army land base,...
More DescriptionThe Army and the Department of Defense (DoD) have a long-term need to access land for training and testing. Both have been criticized for failing to determine their overall land needs, and for pursuing land expansions without a rational strategy. Critics charge that the military is involved in land-grabs driven by the inability to share resources across organizational boundaries within DoD. This report examines the physical and organizational boundaries of the DoD and Army land base, and it uses the Army as a case study of how land requirements are determined. The authors conclude that physical--not organizational--boundaries, along with advances in weapon systems, are the decisive factors in determining land requirements. Physical boundaries turn the issue of overall military land needs into a meaningless concept. In general, each installation must determine individual needs. However, organizational and institutional boundaries prevent DoD and