OCR Text |
Show less than fee interests like leases or scenic and flow-age easements, giving rise to questions as to whether the general grants may be more limited than they appear on their face. Similarly, the acquisition techniques available to particular agencies appear to vary. Although possible acquisition techniques available to the respective agencies encompass acceptance of donations, direct purchase, exchange, or condemnation, the statutes do not consistently enumerate all these techniques. For example, some statutes expressly confer the power of eminent domain, while others omit it or contain limitations on its use. Although the courts have ruled that condemnation is an implied adjunct to any general acquisition authority, even where it is not expressly mentioned, Congress should speak with clarity on such matters. In order to provide the agencies with the full array of techniques necessary to carry out best their programs and to avoid confusion and uncertainty, Congress should provide a general authority for each agency which includes all available acquisition techniques. In those cases where Congress desires to make a particular technique unavailable to any agency, or limit its use (as in recent National Park System authorizations which prohibit condemnation of state lands without state consent), express provision for such exceptions should be made. However, we see no reason why, generally, any public land management agency should be denied the use of particular acquisition techniques if they are to be used for purposes specified by statute as the interests in land the agency is authorized to acquire. The most notable gap is Bureau of Land Management's lack of a general direct purchase authority, except for purposes of access and certain development roads and trails. It should be given such authority. The study prepared for the Commission 8 indicates that there are significant savings that can be achieved by purchasing less than fee interests. For example, the National Park Service reports that costs of scenic easements are running about 22 percent of the appraised value of the fee interest. Savings on flowage easements purchased by water development agencies are not as great, but are still substantial. However, even where direct savings are not great, the Federal Government is saved the costs of administering the area, which would be incurred with full ownership. Moreover, the lands remain on the local tax rolls, albeit at a reduced valuation, and where easements or agreements are obtained prohibiting conforming uses from being changed to degrade the recreation 8 Charles F. Wheatley, Jr., Land Acquisitions and Exchanges Related to Retention and Management or Disposition of the Federal Public Lands, Ch. IV. PLLRC Study Report, 1970. 268 area atmosphere, residential and agricultural uses may be continued without detriment to the Federal program. Consequently, we recommend that the agencies be encouraged to acquire less than fee interests wherever possible. However, this practice should not be used oppressively to force an unwilling landowner to retain a limited interest in the land. Similarly, the agencies should be encouraged to sell lands with appropriate restrictions where full ownership is not essential. Escalating Land Costs Recommendation 121: The public land management agencies should be authorized to employ a broad array of acquisition techniques on an experimental basis in order to determine which appear best adapted to meeting the problem of price escalation of lands required for Federal programs. The problem of escalating land costs has posed a serious obstacle to the implementation of authorized Federal programs involving land acquisition, particularly land for recreation uses. Its many ramifications and possible solutions are detailed in the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation's 1967 report, "Recreation Land Price Escalation." Several of the principal recommendations of that study were implemented by the 1968 amendments to the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act.9 These amendments supplemented the Land and Water Conservation Fund with up to $200 million per year from Outer Continental Shelf leasing revenues for a limited period and authorized the use of several new acquisition techniques to help meet the problem: options, purchase and sale- or leaseback arrangements, and long-term deferred payment contractual commitments. That same year Congress employed the legislative taking technique recommended by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation for portions of the Redwood National Park.10 It is too soon to evaluate the efficacy of these steps to meet the price escalation problem. But we believe the departments should be armed with every tool that offers some hope of amelioration of the problem, so that they may be employed on an experimental basis and a report may be made to Congress in a specified period on the results. For example, the National Park Service has encountered some problems under the Redwood Park legislative taking provisions, indicating that this acquisition approach should be refined and generally reserved for special situations. Moreover, there appears to be no reason why the techniques made available to the Secretary of the Interior in 1968 for National Park System 9 See note 6 supra and 16 U.S.C. § 4601-5(c) (Supp. V, 1970). i° 16 U.S.C. § 79c (Supp. V, 1970). |