Capitalism v. Conservation

Since 1792 when the U.S. Government began buying land in earnest, federal holdings have grown enormously, and so have the headaches. Today the Government owns 755 million acres of land, one-third of the nation. The result is a poorly managed tangle of jurisdictions, contradictions and bureaucracies; a 100-by-50-mi. area of southeast Idaho, for example, is administered by more than 100 federal, state, county and local agencies.

Last week the Public Land Law Review Commission, a supercommittee established by an act of Congress in 1964, issued a 342-page report aimed at clearing away the confusion. Unfortunately, the 19-member commission, which spent $7,000,000, labored five years and waded through 3,700 federal land enactments, has delivered a report that is at best a mixed blessing. Some of its ideas, such as the creation of a new Department of Natural Resources to consolidate the administration of all public lands, are excellent. But the main thrust of the report is a compromise between two conflicting policies. The commission urges greater exploitation of federal lands for commercial use, while simultaneously paying homage to environmental preservation.

Scandalous Act. The commission is sure that capitalism can coexist with conservation. To crusaders like Mike McCloskey, executive director of the Sierra Club, that idea is elusive and unrealistic. As he sees it, more logging, grazing and mining on public lands can only benefit the few at the expense of the many. Says former Interior Secretary Stewart Udall: "The report is a long labor that leaves you right back where you started from." Executive Director Thomas L. Kimball of the National Wildlife Federation is even blunter. "In 1930," he says, "such recommendations would have been unacceptable. In 1970, they are incredible."

A major rationale for more logging in national forests is that the bulk of the Government's high-yield timber areas are located in sections of Alaska, California, the Northwest and parts of the South "not uniquely valuable for other uses." The commission would also amend the General Mining Law of 1872 galled "scandalous" by some conservationists), which allows prospectors to mine whatever minerals they find on public lands, but the change would merely shift claim filing from local to federal officials. No tough conservation controls are contemplated.

The overwhelmingly commercial tone of the report should come as no surprise. Most of the commission's members are Congressmen from Western states that depend heavily on mining, grazing and timbering. In spite of this, the report does have the positive aspect of focusing public attention on the nation's land needs. The issue is crucial in a day when 80% of Americans live on 10% of the land--much of it urban, congested and polluted. An increasingly environment-conscious Congress may act only on those parts of it that reflect the current congressional mood. Last week President Nixon approved an increase in the cutting of timber in national forests, a move that Congress spurned when it was proposed by the timber lobby last winter.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.