OCR Text |
Show favor nonmarket uses, this would not be true in all cases. Within either use class, it would prefer those with the most favorable impact on the environment. We are not able to endorse any of the three approaches, nor do we suggest that others might not be devised to be used individually or in combination. Much more refinement and consideration of such preferences is necessary before Congress can establish, if at all, national guidelines for use in cases of otherwise irreconcilable conflicts in land use planning and decisionmaking. Disposals Recommendation 3: Public lands should be classified for transfer from Federal ownership when net public benefits would be maximized by disposal. We have approached the issue of whether public lands should be retained and managed not as a question of public land policy objectives, but rather as a matter of means to accomplish "the maximum benefit for the general public." Early in our deliberations we reached agreement that we were opposed to wholesale disposal of the unappropriated public domain, as had been recommended by the Garfield Committee in 1930.19 Rather, we determined that our recommendations for disposal would be on a selective basis, keyed to the highest and best use of the lands and the private or state and local governmental need for them. Similarly, we decided that wholesale retention in Federal ownership for its own sake or for historic reasons was not a sound policy. In line with that policy, and while recognizing that the National Forest System is in the forefront of exemplary public land management in many ways, we concluded that limited disposals of national forest lands would be appropriate in certain circumstances. Throughout this report we are recommending that public lands chiefly valuable for specified purposes be made available for disposition on certain conditions and to a limited extent, particularly for grazing domestic livestock, intensive agriculture, mining, some occupancy uses, and the provision of outdoor recreation opportunities by state and local governments. The case by case decisions as to whether particular public lands will be disposed of or retained to meet public land policy objectives will be made 19 The Garfield Committee, a Presidential study commission, recommended that the remaining unappropriated public domain lands be turned over to the states in which they are located, but that the mineral rights on these lands be retained by the Federal Government. 48 under the improved land use planning procedures we recommend in this chapter. Management Recommendation 4: Management of public lands should recognize the highest and best use of particular areas of land as dominant over other authorized uses. Existing law governing the allocation of public lands among their many possible uses is deficient in two principal respects. First, the laws providing for use of lands designated by Congress for primary uses leave the relationship between the primary use and other possible uses uncertain. Second, although the multiple use acts provide clear authority for the Forest Service and BLM to consider and permit any and all of a number of possible uses, they provide little guidance as to how the public lands should be allocated to various uses. As to lands set aside for primary uses, Congress should direct the agencies to manage them for secondary uses that are compatible with the primary purpose. National parks are generally established to provide for the preservation of their natural conditions and to provide for the enjoyment of the people. Wilderness areas are established to preserve the existing wilderness conditions. Other uses of these areas are not specifically provided for by law. Wildlife refuges and national recreation areas are established to provide for a single dominant use, but other uses are permitted where compatible with the dominant use. However, the status of these secondary uses, in the national parks and wilderness areas, is not wholly clear. As a matter of fact, many uses other than the primary uses occur on all of these categories of land. General protection of the land results in the protection of watershed lands and of wildlife habitat, even if the lands are not managed specifically for these uses. Grazing of domestic livestock and mineral operations also occur in some cases on national park and wilderness area lands. And permitted secondary uses of national recreation areas and wildlife refuges are quite common now. Inasmuch as all of these wildlands are potentially capable of providing a variety of goods and services, we believe the agencies should be given clear direction to manage primary use lands for such secondary uses as are compatible. As long as this can be done without impairing the area for its primary purpose, this directive will result in the efficient use of our limited land base. With careful control over land uses we believe that there will be little conflict with the basic concept of establishing primary use areas. |