House Republicans yesterday assailed the Obama administration's 2012 Fish and Wildlife Service budget request as out of touch with America's fiscal reality and a prime example of federal government overreach.

"You're here today asking for a 300 percent increase in budget when, of course, we're doing nothing if we're not cutting the budget," said Rep. John Fleming (R-La.), chairman of the House Natural Resources subcommittee that grilled acting FWS Director Rowan Gould about his agency's $1.7 billion fiscal 2012 proposal.

"I'm not sure how any agency can propose such a budget increase in light of our nation's huge deficits," Fleming added.

Republican members of the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs were especially critical of the administration's request for an additional $53.7 million for land acquisition, which would bring that pot of money to $140 million. Fleming called it "an example of big government exploiting the private sector once again," since land prices have deflated in recent years.

But Gould said adding land to the refuge system is actually a boost for local economies.

"The refuge system is an incredible economic generator," he told the subcommittee. "The amount of money resulting from their operations dwarfs the amount of money going into operating them."

Gould said the agency's acquisition plans are targeted at land already within the existing refuge system, which he says would save money on maintenance and enforcement.

That rationale did not convince GOP members of the subcommittee.

"There is a movement to turn the Gulf of Mexico into an aquarium," said Rep. Steve Southerland (R-Fla.). "If you want me to thank you for the economic benefit, OK, of running our family business and working 70, 80 hours a week and having that one Saturday a month that I can go offshore, paying $600 to put gas in my boat, to pay the fees to go offshore, only to catch the two fish the people in labcoats say that I can catch -- I'm not going to thank you for that."

Republican committee members also were dubious about FWS's plan to use much of the land acquisition money for conservation easements, under which a landowner volunteers to legally agree to preserve the land from certain forms of development.

"That sounds a little ludicrous," Southerland said, "for someone to pay me to do what they want me to do on property that I paid for, property taxes that I pay for. I think it's sad that we've gotten to the point that the government feels it's its responsibility to interject its opinion on what I should do with the property that I paid for that I want to use not just in my lifetime, but if I want to perpetuate that for my children."

Gould also was put on the hot seat about how his agency spent the $280 million in stimulus funds it received.

The FWS director said that money was divided between construction projects, such as new visitor centers and administration buildings, and resource management projects. He said the money helped the agency catch up on much-needed maintenance projects and that it both prepared the agency to educate future generations of Americans and saved or created 4,020 jobs.

Republicans remained skeptical that was the best use of taxpayer dollars, though.

"Fish and Wildlife Service has built 15 new headquarters and visitor centers with the stimulus money," said Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.). "It's hard for me to justify that. You indicate in your statement that you guys had to make tough choices. That doesn't look like tough choices to me, that looks like wishlist desires."