OCR Text |
Show General Land Office continued to have responsibility for the public domain lands, mostly in Alaska, that were not withdrawn from appropriation. Although by this time it was no longer doing "a land office business," the land office continued its responsibilities for surveying and disposing of the public domain lands until 1946,9 when it was merged with the Grazing Service to form the present Bureau of Land Management.10 Some withdrawn public domain lands are, of course, administered by the Department of Defense, the Atomic Energy Commission, the Federal Power Commission, and other Federal agencies in support of their specific programs. The responsibilities of these agencies with respect to lands are relatively limited except as required for their missions. Accordingly major changes in their organizational structures are not warranted for this purpose. Nevertheless, the fact that each of them has a role in the administration of the public lands was a consideration in reviewing the structure and practices of the major public land agencies. The Commission has found that the organization of public land programs is much more complex arid confusing than is suggested by the existence of only four major public land bureaus.11 The policies and practices of these agencies differ significantly in management programs affecting the same resources (e.g., timber, forage, and recreation), requiring continuing efforts to achieve uniformity and promote the coordination of such programs. Their lands are intermingled and arrangements for coordinating their activities on the ground are not well structured. Responsibilities for some programs are divided among several agencies. Geographic boundaries of their regional organizations are different, and provisions for their coordinated administration and for working with states and local governments are piecemeal or nonexistent. Although the public land management agencies may find that they are able to adjust programs to minimize the impact of these problems on themselves, the Commission firmly believes that organization must be viewed in terms of how well it serves the public, rather than how well it serves the agencies. 9 Reorg. Plan No. 3, July 16, 1946, 5 U.S.C.A. app., p. 185 (1967). 10 This consolidation also included responsibilities for the administration of the Oregon and California revested lands and Coos Bay Wagon Road lands, whose administration had been placed in an office of the Director of Forests in the Department of the Interior in 1938. Paul Wallace Gates and Robert W. Swenson, History of Public Land Law Development, Ch. XX. PLLRC Study Report, 1968. 11 The Forest Service; the Bureau of Land Management; the National Park Service; the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. 282 We believe that the following recommendations are essential for the successful implementation of the Commission's other recommendations for major changes in public land laws and policies. A New Department of Natural Resources Recommendation 131: The Forest Service should be merged with the Department of the Interior into a new department of natural resources. The Forest Service is the only major public land agency not now in the Department of the Interior. We believe the fact that the Forest Service is not under the same policy direction as the other public land agencies has led to unnecessary differences in policies between the Forest Service and bureaus within Interior; to conflicts between them, particularly over the use of national forest lands for national parks, that have been a source of embarrassment to national administrations; to confusion on the part of the using public; and to expensive duplication of staff, offices, programs, and facilities. The original reasons for placing the administration of the national forests in the Department of Agriculture may have been sound. But the uses of the national forests have changed in recent years with increasing emphasis being placed on outdoor recreation and environmental quality. We think these changes justify separating the administration of the national forests from the farm enterprise orientation of the Department of Agriculture and placing it in a closer relationship to the public land functions of the Department of the Interior. Since 1934, the programs of the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service have moved almost irresistably toward similar objectives for the management of comparable lands. The Multiple Use Acts of 1960 12 for the Forest Service and 1964 for the Bureau of Land Management13 underscore the reality of this development. Both the national forests and the Bureau of Land Management lands are managed for the same products and under similar multiple-use authorities. Although there are still program differences between the two bureaus, caused in large part because of their historical development, the actual uses of these lands are almost identical. We see no differences in the timber that is harvested or the grass that is grazed on national forests or Bureau of Land Management lands. i2 16 U.S.C. §§ 528-531 (1964). "43 U.S.C. §§1411-1418 (1964), as amended, (Supp. IV, 1969). |