DOCUMENT RESUME

02790 - [A2133234]

Land Use Planning, Management, and Control: Issues and Problems. CED-77-101. Jujy 28, 1977. 56 pp. + 4 appendices (21 pp.).

Staff study by Henry Eschwege, Director, Community and Economic Development Div.

Issuf Area: Land Use Plaaning and Control (2300). Contact: Community and Economic Development Div. Budget Function: Natural Raesources, Fntironaent, and Energy (300); Natural Resources, Envirconment, and Enrgy: Other Natural Resources (306); Natural Resources, Environment, and Energy: Conservation and Land Management (302). Organization Concerned: Department of Agriculture; Department of Housing and Urban Development; Department of the Interior; Environmental Protection AgeDcy. Congressional Relevance: House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs; Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and

Forestry.

Authority: Coastal Zone fanagoeent Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-583;

P.L. 94-370). Federal Land Policy and Management Act (P.L. 94-579). Federal Eater Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. Alaska Statehood Act. Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, National Forest Management Act of 1976. Clean Air

Act of 1970, as amended. Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965, as amended. Noise Control Act of 1972. Water Resources Planning Act of 1965.

The land use planning, management, and control area is concerned with planning for the use of lands, regardless of ownership, and fostering better management of the Nation's land and related resources. Planning for the use of lands includes

Federal 

those activities which are directed to: the future use of lands; encouraging and assisting State, regional, and local governmental and special-use jurisdictions in planning for

the use of lands within their jurisdictions; and planning for functional activities which have significant impacts on the future uses of land or related resources and are accomplished with Federal assistance. Issuds meriting priority attention include: (1) Are existing land planning programs adequate or is there a need for a national land use policy and program? (2) Are Federal lands and related resources being effectively managed on

a aultiple-use basis with adequate consideration to competing needs? (3) How effective are Federal programs designed to promote the development, rehabilitation, conservation, and preservation of nonpublic lands and related resources? (4) Are Federal programs and activities effective in meeting shortages of outdoor recreation? (5) Are federally owned and federally supported recreation areas being properly developed, managed, and maintained? and (6) What are the effects of tax policies on land use? (SC)
° is~w>>eSTUDY BY THE STAFF OF THE

ro'- ' UNITED STATES

GENERAL ACCOUNTINGS OFFICE

LAND USE PLANNING,

MANAGEMENT, AND CONTROL

ISSUESC AD PROBLEMS

. CEaD-77-1O1 JULY 28, 1977
FOREWORD

Perhaps no other country on this earth has been, or is,

as fortunate as the United States. Piessed with a large

area, a favorable climate and fertile soil, an abundance of

a variety of natural resources, an industrious people, and

a government olore responsive than most to the wants and needs

of its people, the United States ha:s achieved a position of

a highly developed nation unparralled in history. This has

been achieved for the most part, through private rather than

governmental initiative anJ through a reliance on economic

considerations to allocate resources.

It is difficult to deny, however, that our traditional

approaches to achieving progress and allocating resources

have often resulted in widespread abuse and waste. Air,

water, and noise pollution, massive urban sprawl, the loss

of valuable wetlands and marshes, the destruction of towns

and cities built in floodplains, soil erosion caused by overgrazing and indiscriminate logging, unrestored strip mined areas, and the destruction of historic, culturalaesthetic, and recreational sites are oily a few of the

legacies of our traditional approaches, particularly with

respect to land.

An expanding population and economy demand land and resources. How we use our land and resources, however, will

determine whether our children and grandchildren will continue to enjoy today's economic and social well being. Proper land use planning, management, and control is an area of

great importance, too long deferred as a matter of national

concern.

As part of our continuing reassessment of areas of national concern and interest, and as an aid to focus our own

work efforts, we have attempted to identify problems and

3ssues within the land use planning, management, and control

area meriting attention. This study identifies and describes

what we believe to be the problems and issues in the area

and represents the perspective we use to organize our audit

efforts.

We hope that this study will be of assistance to others

in carrying out their activities and that it will foster a

better understanding of the land use planning, management, and control area.
This study was developed by the Community and Economic

Development Division with the cooperation of and input from

other divisions and offices. Questions regarding the study

should be directed to David L. Jones, Assistant Director,

275-5834.

Director

Community and Economic

Development Division

ii
Contents

Page FOREWORD i

CHAPTER

1 OVERVIEW OF LAND USE PLANNING,

MANAGEMENT, AND CONTROL

MATTERS AREA 1

Definition and scope 1

Perspective on land use 2

The Federal role 7

Major legislation impacting on

the area 11

Congressional Committees and

Subcommittees 16

Other organizations concerned with

the area 16

2 LAND USE PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, AND

CONTROL ISSUES 17

3 ISSUES MERITING PRIORITY ATTENTION 20

Are existing land planning programs

adequate or is there a need for

a national land use policy and

program? 20

Are Federal lands and related resources being effectively managed

on a multiple use basis and giving

adequate consideration to competing

needs? 27

How effective are Federal programs

designed to promote the development, rehabilitation, conservation,

and preservation of non-public lands

and related resources? 35

Are Federal programs and activities

effective in meeting shortages of

outdoor recreation? 41

Are Federally-owned and Federallysupported recreation areas being

properly developed, managed, and

maintained? 44
CHAPTER Page

What are the effects of tax

policies on land use? 48

4 OTHER LAND ISSUES 50

How can land use planning assist in

solving environmental problems? 50

How can the multile land use conflicts associated with energy

development be resolved? 50

How can urban planning be mace more

effective? 51

How can Federal land occupancy, use,

and trespass and disputed title

problems be resolved? 51

How effective are Federal organization,

administration, administrative and

budgeting procedures, including

Federal legislative jurisdictions with

respect to land use matters? 52

What are the effects of the Federal

Government's tax immunity on land

use? 53

How can the problem of land grants to

States be resolved? 54

Are Federal land acquisition, disposal

and exchange laws, policies, and procedures effective in meeting their

established goals? 54

Are the economic returns from the uses

of Federal lands adequate? 55

Are Federal recreation concession

operations being properly managed

for the benefit of the public? 55
APPENDIX 

Pa

I Selected Federal departments and agencies with programs and activities impacting on land use planning, management, and control 57

II Significant legislation impacting on land use planning, management, and control 

63

III Congressional committees and sub- committees with interest in or responsibilities in land use plan- ning, management, and control activities 74

IV Selected organizations concerned with land use planning, management, and control matters 77
CHAPTER 1

OVERVTIEW OF THE LAND USE PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, AND CONTROL

AREA

Man is a land animal. Although about seventy percent of the earth's surface is covered by water, it has been

on the solid footing of land that mail has survived and prospered. For the most part, it has been land which has provided the resources by which man has fed, ulothed, and sheltered himself.

In recent years, an awareness that land and its resources are limited and subject to deterioration or dissipa- tion has led to a growing concern over how land is being used and how it should be used in the future. This concern, in turn, has led to the recognition that there should be orderly planning and some degree of control over land use, to protect ital resources and the well-being cf all who depend on these resources.

DEFINIIION AND SCOPE OF THE ISSUE AREA

The land use planning, management and control area is concerned with planning for the use of lands, regaruless of ownership, and fostering better management of the nation's land and related resources. Because most human activity is land bahed, this issue area is interrelated with other highly important areas.

Planning for the use of lands includes those activities which are directed to (1) the future use of Federal lands, (2) encouraging and assisting state, regional, and local governmental and special use jurisdictions in planning for the use of lands within their jurisdictions, and (3) planning for functional activities, such as housinc trans- portation, recreation, water and se.ver systems, e'c., which have significant impacts on the future use of land or re- lated resources and are accomplished with Federal assistance.

The land management portion of the issue area is con- cerned with the actual policies, practices and procedures used in the management of land and related resources, in- cluding agriculture, forestry, fish and wildlife, recrea- tion, mineral, grazes, and watershed activities. Much of the emphasis in this area is directed to Federal lands, but the Federal programs and activities derigned to aid,

encourage, and promote good land management practices for non-Federal lands are also of importance.

- 1 -
Land use planning, maneaement, and control cannot be

looked upon as an entity unto itself; nor can it be viewed

as an area of only Federal involvement. The entire area

is pervasive and is interrelated with other areas. In

addition, many state and local activities have a definite

impact on the area and must be considered.

PERSPECTIVE ON LAND USE

Land use planning, management, and control is a complex,

highly controversial subject matter. Tt involves population

and economic growth, multiple use of land and resources,

controversies over tradeoffs between competing land uses,

individual aspirations and rights versus the public good,

and Federal, state, and local government rights and

responsibilities.

Population and Economic Growth

In 1790, when the first national census was taken, the

population of the United States was four million. Only five

percent of the 1790 population lived in urban areas. Of the

95 percent living in rural areas, 85 percent lived on farms.

The populated area of the nation generally consisted of a

small band of land, bounded on the east by the Atlantic

Ocean and on the west by the Allegheny Mountains.

Much of the population in 1790 was concerned with eking

out a subsistence living through farming, fishing, hunting,

and trading. The lands between the Allegheny and the

Mississippi were beginning to attract settlers because

of the tales of fabulous riches, but the lands west of the

Mississippi were virtually unknown.

In the intervening years between 1790 and the present,

the United States grew from farm to small town to city to

metropolis. Today the population of the United States exceeds 200 million, of which about 75 percent lives and works

in urban areas. A highly industralized economy has resulted, and the average family income is over $12,000

annually. The nation is settled from coast to coast and

the wilderness has been conquered.

There are many factors which have contributed to the

dramatic growth of the United States, but two of the more

important factors have been an abundance of land and natural

resources and a historical philosophy which held that nature,

- 2 -
particularly land and land based resources, had to be con- quered. Land was viewed as a commodity to be bought, sold, and exploited.

Growth has not, however, been without cost. As popula- tion, employment, and shopping centers move to the suburbs, the cities face the problems of inadequate housing, trans- portation, public facilities, open space, air, water and noise pollution, a declining tax base, and a concentration

of minorities, poor, and the elderly. At the same time the

move to the suburbs has consumed large areas of farms, forests, streams, wetlands,. and open space. In addition, the suburbs face the problems of uncontrolled development patterns, poor transportation to e-mployment areas, and high costs for water, sewer, utilities, schools, and police and fire protection. The pictures on the following page show the results of urban growth.

Rural areas have also paid a price for growth and urban- ization. Farming methods have been highly mechanized and employment opportunities in other industries such as fishing, mining, and forestry have declined. As people migrate from rural areas, and tax bases decrease, public services decline and housing becomes substandard. In 1970, more rural fami- lies (13.5 percent) than urban families (7.9 percent) were below the poverty level.

Despite the problems associated with it, growth and urbanization are not expected to stop in the near future.

By the year 2000, the nation's population is expected to expand by a minimum of 40 million and five-sixths of the people are expected to live in urban areas. The annual

average family income is expected to exceed $21,000 and

per capita consumption expenditures are expected to double.

The impact of this growth on land use will be signifi- cant. The Commission on Population Growth and the American

Future projects that by the year 2000, 20 million more

acres of land will be urbanized and much farm and rural land

near cities will disappear. According to Resources for the

Future, by the year 2000 if present trends continue, demand for lands for all uses -- crop land, forest, grazing, re- creation, and urban uses -- W:ill add up to 50 million more

acres than the country currently has.

An expanding popuiation and economy demand land and re- lated resources and in terms of sheer quantity the United

States possesses a vory comfortable supply. The problems and controversies arise with respect to the quality of the

land and how it is used and controlled.

- 3 -
SOURCE: DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR

-4- fix ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r

rr; 1LL 5*·~~~~
Controversies

In the future difficult decisions will need to be made 

These concerning Lhe balancing of diverse needs and demands. decisions will be very controversial and will to some

extent touch the lives of all Americans.

Multiple and competing land uses

Land is finite, yet the demand for land continues to grow. How will land be allocated to competing uses? For example:

-- If a reliance on frreign energy sources is to be decreased, development of the vast western

energy sources will be necessary. However the lands containing these resources are also valuable for food production, recreation, wildlife, and

watershed purposes. Which lands should be pro- tected or reserved for other purposes and which developed for energy? What should be the re- clamation requirements for those lands mined? How are the social impacts and growth from

energy development to be dealt with?

-- If food production is to be increased to keep pace with our expanding population and provide surpluses

to meet world demands, new agricultural land will be needed. Wh re will this new land be found? Will valuable fish and wildlife producing wetlands be drained; will forests be cleared; or will re- creation lands be plowed under?

Individual aspirations an( rights versus the public good

Many people immigrated to the United States because they were not allowed to own land in the countries of their birth. The 

freedom 

ability to own land in this country offered them not only but also the hope for a better life. Over a period of time, the concept of "my land is mine to do with as I wish" became 

has very much a part of the American ethic. This concept been further reinforced by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution which provides that:

"No person shall***be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use witout just compensation."

- 5 -
Americans have always had some restrictions placed on the manner in which they can use their property, but in re- cent years there has been trend toward even greater public control over land use. Advocates of strong public controls

argue that in some cases the public good transcends the privatce right to buy and sell property and that development of property is as much a privilege as a right.

The "taking" issue thus centers on the extent to which government can limit the use of private property. This issue has 

case 

largely 

basis 

been left to the courts to decide on a case by and the debate continues to invoke emotional

responses.

Federal, state, and local government rights and respo"TnsbitFies

The Federal Government's attitude toward land use plan- ning has traditionally been one of laissez-faire -- leave it to someone else, state, lccal, private -- anybody but the Federal Government. To a large extent, state governments also adopted the laissez-faire attitude and consequently most 

governments. 

planning and control activities were delegated to local

governments 

Under the police powers of the state, local controlled the use of land, primarily through zoning and subdivision regulations.

In recent years, however, all levels of government have become aware that many land use decisions have impacts which are of greater than local concern. The Federal Government's interest in land use has been revived because of problems such as energy development and air and water pollution which transcend state boundaries. State governments argue that Federal involvement in many land use decisions is an infringe- ment on states rights and that land use problems are more easily solved at the state level. At the same time, local governments jealously guard their traditional powers of land

decisions 

use control and argue that the vast majority of land use concern only local affairs and are best handled

at that level.

6 -
THE FEDERAL ROLE

Despite its traditional laissez-faire attitude toward land use planning the Federal government has been involved in land use matters from the very beginning of the nation. This involvement has been both direct and indirect and has been a powerful influence in shaping land use patterns.

At one time or another, over 75 percent of the 2.3 billion acres of land in the United States became the pro- perty of the Federal Government through purchase, annexation,

or seizure. Over the years, however, title to about 1.1 billion acres has been transferred to individuals, businesses, and non-Federal Governments. About 298 million

acres were removed from Federal ownership under the home- stead and desert lands acts and another 328 million acres

were granted to the states for public school, transportation, and general eccnomic development purposes. Millions more

acres were granted to railroads to encourage the development of the frontier. Much of the land tranferred rom Federal ownership WdS granted free of charge or for a mninimal fee, sometimes as low as $ .25 per acre.

Today the Federal Government owns about 760 million

acres of land, or about one-third of the nation's land resources. This land provides many resources essential to the economy and health of the Nation, including energy fuels and other minerals, timber, rangeland, water, fish and wildlife, recreation and areas of scenic beauty.

About 60 percent of the Federal land is administered by the Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior, and about 25 percent by the Forest Service, Department of Agriculture. A summary of the acreage under the jurisdiction of the major Federal land management agencies as of June 30, 1974, is as follows:

- 7 -
Thousands of acres

Bureau of Land Mangement 470,341 Fish and Wildlife Service National 30,812 Park Service 24,819 Other Interior agencies 12,535 Forest Service 

187,247 Department of Defense 

Other 30,736 agencies 4,042

Total 

760,532

Of 

and 

the 

346 

above 

million 

acreage, about 352 million acres are in Alaska

63 million 

in the 11 western states. The remaining

map on the 

acres 

following 

are scattered throughout the country. The

throughout page shows Federal land distribution the United States.

lands, 

In 

Federal 

addition to the Federal responsibility for public

mass transit, 

programs for housing, highways, airports,

grams, open space, 

sewer and water grants, environmental proprojects and 

agricultural subsidies, water resource

governments as 

the 

well 

like 

as 

affect land use by state and local

use activities by private owners and Involve land that must recognize these diverse interests.

- 8 -
LU

0

cI

- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~F

or ... r ~ *.**....o*.

51 551 If

ILa z

L1

us

wi

LA.

W L

C rF~~-9
A 1973 study prepared by the Library of Congress showed

that 23 Federal departments and agencies were administering

programs which impact on land-use policy and/or planning,

including at least 112 Federal land-oriented programs.

The range of activities supported by these programs is very

broad. For example:

-- 53 programs promote housing and community

development activities;

-- 19 progrars support use of land for recreation, agriculture, forestry, wildlife, or

other open space uses through conservation

of soil, water, and plant materials, and

other protective measures;

-- 8 closely related programs are oriented to

prevention of floods and erosion, stabilization of shorelines, and other protective

measures;

-- 5 programs assist the construction or extension

of utility systems and services required to

support intensive land use;

-- 17 programs provide similar support for transpoLtation systems of all types;

-- 9 programs are designed to stimulate economic

development in general;

-- 20 programs support construction or rehabilitation

of community facilities for health, educational,

cultural, and other purposes; and

-- 6 programs facilitate transfer of land from

Federal to non-Federal entities.

With respect to the management of Federal lands, the

principal agencies are the Departments of Agriculture,

Defense, and the Interior. During fiscal year 1977, the

civilian land management agencies -- namely the Forest Service,

Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, and the

Fish and Wildlife Service -- will expend an estimated $1.8 billion for management of tihe lands under their control.

Information on Defense Department expenditures for land management activities, including the civil functions of the Army

Corps of Engineers is not readily available.

- 10 -
For programs which provide assistance in planning for the future use of non-Federal land and related resources

or which have significant land use impacts, the principal agencies include:

-- Department of Agriculture -- Department of Commerce -- Department of Housing and Urban Development -- Department of the Interior -- Department of Transportation -- Environmental Protection Agency

Appendix I contains a nmore detailed listing of the agencies and programs and activities which impact on the land use planning, management, and control issue area.

MAJOR LEGISLATION IMPACTING

ON THE ISSUE AREA

Thousands of individual pieces of legislation impact

on the land use planning, management, and control area. Until recently, the Bureau of Land Management alone operated under 3,500 different and frequently conflicting laws, hundreds of court decisions, and thousands of administrative precedents. Appendix II contains a listing of significant legislation impacting on the area. Major legislative initi- atives are discussed below.

Federal land use_ lannig assistance

This is a matter of great controversy. Proponents of

this legislation argue that comprehensive statewide land

use planning is needed to insure proper uses of land and that a Federal program to provide States with the necessary financial resources to carryout such a program is needed.

Opponents of a Federal program generally agree that land

use is a matter of local concern and they fear that such a

program would be a step in the direction of Federal inter- ferance in State and local matters.

Legislation to establish a Federal land use planning assistance program has been introduced in Congress for

many years. Such legislation was passed by the Senate in 1973 and 1974, but failed to pass the House both years.

Two similar bills (S. 984 and H.R. 3510) were introduced in the 94th Congress to establish a voluntary system of

Federal grants to assist states in developing and implement- ing land resource and planning programs. Although the bills

- 11 -
differed in some matters, both would have required participating states to develop land use programs which included a statement of policies defining the states' role

in land use decisions and procedures for planning or regulating key facilities, large scale subdivisions, developments of regional impact, and areas of critical state concern. The State program vas also to include policies and

procedures to promote continued use and productivity of

prime food and fiber producing lands, and policies and procedures to encourage land use patterns designed to conserve

energy. H.R. 3510 also requires Federal public land agencies to develop and maintain la.,d use plans for areas under

their jurisdiction.

Hearings were held on S. 984 in April and May 1975, but

no further action was taken. Hearings on H.R. 3510 were held

in March and April 1975. On July 15, 1975, the House Interior

Committee voted not to report H.R. 3510 by a vote of 23-19.

The 95th Congress is again expected to take up the question of Federal land use planning assistance. Several bills

dealing with land use or areawide planning have already been

introduced in Congress and additional bills are expected to

be introduced later in the session.

Stripmining

On May 20, 1975, the President vetoed H.R. 25 which

would have regulated surface coal mining on non-Federal

lands and established similar safeguards for surface mining

and reclamation operations on Federal lands. An effort to

override the veto in the House failed on June 10, 1975.

Legislation similar to H.R. 25 (H.R. 9725) was passed by the

House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee on February 24,

r976, but failed to obtain a rule from the Rules Committee

on March 23, 1976. A third attempt to pass stripmining

legislation (H.R. 13950) was reported out by the House

Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs on August 20, 1976.

This bill, also failed to obtain a rule from the rules

Committee on September 15, 1976.

Almost immediately upon the convening of the 95th

Congress, stripmin,.g legislation was again introduced.

H.R. 2 was introduced on January 4, 1977, and S. 7 was introduced on January 7, 1977. Extensive hearings have been

held on these bills and they are expected to easily pass

Congress. The Administration has also strongly endorsed

the proposal before Congress and the President has announced

that he will sign the legislation.

- 12 -
Coastal Zone Management Act

The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-583) provided for development of a national program to manage and protect the land and water resources of the coastal

zones and authorizes Federal grants to the States to help them in managing their coastal zones. P.L. 94-370, approved on 

billion July 26, 1976, amended the 1972 Act to authorize a $1.2 coastal energy impact program ($800 million in loan and bond guarantee authority and $400 million in direct grants) 

ing 

of Federal aid to coastal states to assist in deal- with the effects of offshore gas and oil development. Loans and guarantees are authorized to aid in providing new or improved public facilities or services needed as a re- sult of coastal energy activity.

Although this legislation has been in existence for several years, in many respects it is as controversial as the proposed Federal land use planning program. The Coastal Zone program was enacted in 1972, but it was not funded until fiscal year 1974. To date, progress under the pro- gram has been limited--most states are still developing coastal zone programs. In addition, states have experienced delays and hdve had trouble obtaining funding, developing necessary implementing authority, receiving public and political support, and coordinating program development with relevant Federal agencies.

Agricultural land protection

As demand for food has increased in recent years, questions have arisen as to whether the United States, traditionally 

sufficient 

one of the world's bread baskets, will have agricultural land in the future to save its increasing population, as well as the exploding export market. The diversion of agricultural land to non- agricultural uses and increasing erosion of agriculture lands are among the topics of high importance to the Congress and the public.

During the 94th Congress, legislation was passed which called 

age the 

for a long range mechanism for making policy to encour- wise and orderly development of the Nation's soil and water resources. The legislation called for (i) an appraisal of the Nation's lend, water, and related resources, and (2) the development of a national land and water conservation program by the Soil Conservation Service, Department of Agriculture. This legislation was vetoed by

- 13 -
the President, but similar legislation has again been introduced in the 95th Congress. S. 106 was passed by the

Senate in March. 1977, and by the House in May. Also,

several bills have been introduced to improve soil conservation programs and at least one bill specifically

addressing the question of the diversion of agricultural

lands is before the Cong:ess.

Wetlands protection

In recent years, the value of wetlands as a primary

source of the protection of aquadic life has been recognized and legislation designed to protect such areas has

been enacted. Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, the Army Corps of Engineers

is charged with the protection of wetlands through a permit

program for the disposal of dredge and fill materials.

Much controversy surrounds the Corps interpretation and

implementation of the permit program. Agriculture, forestry,

and other interests believe the Corps interpretation of the

Act interferes with their normal activities and favor limitiiig the Corps control over wetlands. Other interests, however, favor the Corps to retain broad control over practically all wetlands. Several attempts have been made in

Congress to limit the Corps wetland authority, but none have

been successful to date.

This matter is again of interest to the 95th Congress.

Several bills to redefine the Corps 'uthority over wetlands

have been introduced and some type of limiting authority

may be enacted.

Alaska lands

Under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and the

Alaska Statehood Act, significant amounts of currently

Federally-owned land will be transferred from the present

jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management to the U.S.

Forest Service, National Park Service, and Fish and Wildlife Service, and to Alaska Native groups and the State

of Alaska. About 44 million acres will be transferred to

Alaska Native ownership, about 103 million acres will be

selected by the State of Alaska, and over 80 million acres

will be placed in the national forest, park, wildlife refuge, and wild and scenic rivers systems.

- 14 -
Alaska is the last "frontiet" remaining in the United

States and has significant mineral, timber, wildlife, recreation, and scenic resources. Therefore, the selection of

lands for various ownership categories .is somewhat controversial and of extreme importance to many interests. This

matter is expected to receive very close attention by the

Congress in the immediate future.

Federal Land Policy and Management Act (BLM Organic Act)

On October 21, 1976, the President signed the Federal

Land Policy and Management Act (P.L. 94-579), which for the

first time set forth in a single statute the authority for

the management of the more than 450 million acres of public

lands administered by the Department of the Interior through

the Bureau of Land Management. The Act, among other things

-- Authorizes the Secretary of Interior to manage

the public lands in accord with the principles

of multiple use and sustained yield; to allow

their use by persons holding permits, leases

or licenses from the Federal government, and

to regulate that use in a variety of ways including ensuring the observance of environmental

rules;

-- Requires the Secretary to develop comprehensive

land use plans for the public lands, to maintain an up-to-date inventory of the lands and

their resources, and to identify areas with

potential for wilderness status, and to conduct mineral surveys of such areas before recommending that they be included in the wilderness system;

-- Provides Congress with a larger role in public

land management decisions, including allowing

Congressional review and veto of executive

decisions to sell tracts of public land totalling more than 2500 acres or to withdraw from

mining, grazing, or timber production tracts

of public land totalling 5000 acres or more;

and

-- Directs the Secretaries of Agriculture and the

Interior to conduct a study to determine the

value of grazing on public lands.

- 15 -
The Bureau of Land Management is the largest Federal

land management agencies and for many years, the Bureau's

administration of the public lands has been very controversial. Because of the importance of the public lands

for mineral, range, timber, wildlife, and recreation

purposes, the manner in which the Organic Act is implemented will be of great importance to the Congress and

the public.

National forest management

The Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning

Act of 1974 provides for protection and development of

national forest lands through formulation of a long-range

forestry policy and making renewable resource assessments,

expanded resource surveys and annual progress reports.

This Act was amended and strengthened by the National Forest

Management Act of 1976, which eliminates restrictions imposed by the courts in recent rulings on the clearcutting

of timber in the National Forests and sets legislative

prescriptions for forestry management.

As with the Bureau of Land Management's administration

of its lands, the Forest Service's land management activities

have also been somewhat controversial, particularly with

respect to the clzarcutting of timber on the National Forests.

Implementation of the 1974 and 1976 Acts by the Forest Service will be of high interest to the Congress in the future.

CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES AND SUBCOMMITTEES

There are 65 congressional committees and subcommittees

which have responsibilities related to the land use planning management and control issue area. These committees are

listed in appendix III.

OTHER ORGANIZATIONS CONCERNED

WITH THE ISSUE AREA

A variety of private, and public interest organizations

are concerned with land use planning, management, and control matters. Many of these organizations have active programs concerning land use. Appendix IV contains a listing

of such organizations.

- 16 -
CHAPTER 2

LAND USE PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, AND CONTROL ISSUES

The following issues were identified as meriting attention within the next 2 years.

*1. Are existing land planning programs adequate or is

there a need for a national land use policy and

program?

*2. Are Federal lands and related resources being effectively managed on a multiple use basis, and

giving adequate consideration to competing needs?

*3. How effective are Federal programs designed to pro- mote the development, rehabilitation, conservation,

and preservation of non-public lands and related

resources?

*4. Are Federal programs and activities effective in

meeting shortages of outdoor recreation?

*5. Are Federally-owned and Federally-supported recreation areas being properly developed, managed, and

maintained?

*6. What are the effects of tax policies on land use?

7. How can land use planning assist in solving environmental problems?

8. How can the multiple land use conflicts associated

with energy development be resolved?

9. Hot can urban land use planning be made more

effective?

10. How can Federal land occupancy use and trespass and disputed title problems be resolved?

11. How effective are Federal organization, administration, administrative and budgeting procedures, including Federal legislative jurisdictions, with

respect to land use matters?

*Designated for priority attention.

- 17 -
12. What are the effects of the Federal Government's

tax immunity on land use?

13. How can the problems of land grants to states

be resolved?

14. Are Federal land acquisition, disposal, and exchange laws, policies, and procedures effective

in meeting their established goals?

15. Are the economic returns from the uses of Federal

lands and resources adequate?

16. Are Federal recreation concessions operations being properly managed for the benefit of the public?

After thoroughly considering all the issues identified above, the first six issues were designated for priority attention. These issues were selected for priority attention because:

-- Land use planning is highly controversial and offers an excellent opportunity to address

the effectiveness of existing land use plann- ing programs, the problems of coordinating planning programs and programs which impact on the

use of land, the problems associated with land use controls, and whether there is a need for a national land use planning policy and program.

--The manner in which Federal lands are managed may well determine whether the Nation will have suffi- cient timber, range, fuel and non-fuel mineral resources in the future. This issue provides a good basis for addressing the need for changes in legislation, as well as improvements needed in

resource management activities.

-- As the demand for various resources increases, pri- vate land with important agricultural, forestry, wildlife habitat, and historical values are being placed under increased pressure for use for other

purposes. In response to public recognition of the value of such lands, a variety of Federal programs have been enacted to conserve, protect, properly

- 18 -
develop and where necessary, rehabilitate these lands. This issue offers the opportunity to address 

insure that 

the effectiveness of Federal efforts to private lands with important resource

values will continue to be available to meet the Nation's economic and cultural needs.

-- Recreational facilities are important to the physical and emotional well being of a large, expanding and mobile population, but too often in the past the provision of such facilities has been inadequate, they have not been located so as to serve the areas of greatest need, or they have not been properly developed, maintained, and managed. Recreation programs, however, have often been the first ones eliminated during budget crises, resulting in increased overcrowding of

deterioration 

existing facilities, staffing reductions, and of facilities. The need for adequate

a 

recreational opportunities has been recognized by number of Federal commissions, and most recently by the President. The Federal Government is a major factor in the provision of recreation opportunities and the issue provides a good basis to address the effectiveness of the Federal efforts.

--The effect of taxes on land use has been inferred by many sources to hinder good land use planning and management, but it is not clear as to what has been or is being done to minimize such effects. Through an overall study of this matter, the issue offers

various 

the potential taxing to (1) determine approaches used by authorities to minimize or abate

the 

ness 

effects of taxes and comment on the effective- of such approaches, and (2) possibly suggest changes in taxing policies and procedures in order to promote good land use planning and management.

Congressional and public concern expressed toward the areas 

stand 

identified for priority attention indicate that they

of 

out above the other areas identified. The selection these issues for priority attention is further reinforced by the inclusion of several of these matters in the platforms of either both or one of the major National political parties.

- 19 -
CHAPTER 3

ISSUES MERITING PRIORITY ATTENTION

ARE EXISTING LAND PLANNING PROGRAMS

ADEQUATE OR IS THERE A NEED FOR A

NATIONAL LAND USE POLICY AND PROGRAM?

Despite a feeling among many people and groups that a

national land use planning program would be desirable, repeated attempts by the Congress to enact such legislation

have failed and there is no national land use planning program. Land use planning and control has traditionally been

exercised at the local government level, primarily throuah

the exercise of zoning authority, which is fray...t..

a myriad of political and special use jurisdictions. RecenL

attempts by state governments to exert some control over the

use of lands within their boundaries by establishing standards and criteria for local governments, and more recently

regional planning authorities, have met with mixed success.

Although a national land use planning program has not

been enacted, the Federal Government does play a major rcla

in land use planning in three ways -- through the control

of Federal lands; through regulatory and planning aid programs; and through assistance in providing infrastructure

investments.

With respect to Federal lands, the Government has a responsibility to plan for the use of its land and can directly

control the planning and use of about one-third of the Nation's

land resources. The significance of this responsibility is

further increased because the decisions applicable to Federal

lands impact on contiguous non-Federal lands. Under the Forest

and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, the

U.S. Forest Service is required to plan not only for the future

use of Federally-o'--d lands, but also to develop programs

for the advancement of the Nation's 1.6 billion acres of

forest and range lands, regardless of ownership. The planning

programs and activities of other Federal land management

agencies will also have impacts on non-Federal lands. Thus,

as the demands for energy fuels and other minerals, timber,

forage, water, fish and wildlife, and other resources increase,

the Federal responsibility to plan for the proper utilization

of its land resources will take on added significance and

importance. The conceptualized land use plan on the following

page demonstrates how public lands could be used on a multiple

use basis.

- 20 -
CONCEPTUALIZED LAND USE PLAN FOR A SECTION

OF PUBLIC LAND

Watershed g) Wildlife Timber

Recreation Mining Livestock

- 21 -

41C~~~~t~4

~~L~iA

--~~~.~~flp.~u,

i··'. ~ ~ ~ ~ · ~ ~ ~~~______________________________________ I-~· I·~~~~ 21i·· -''
Second, through a variety of regulatory and planning aid

programs, the Federal Government also plays a significant role

in planning for the use of non-Federal lands. Some of these

programs play a very major role because they either dictate

strong land use controls or require permission for certain

land uses. For example:

--the coastal zone management program, administered

by NOAA, requires, as a condition of participation,

that states and/or local governments develop and

implement plans for the use of non-public lands

within the coastal zone;

-- the national flood insurance program, administered

by HUD, requires, as a condition of Federal assist

ance, that local communities develop flood plain

control ordirances;

-- the Corps of Engineers dredge and fill permit program under Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution

Control Act Amendments of 1972, requires a permit from

the Corps for the dredging and fill of wetlands,

regardless of ownership.

Other programs, which on the surface appear to be

concerned with issue areas other than land use, also have

significant impacts on planning and the use of land. These

Federal programs include:

-- Section 208 requirements of the Federal Water

Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 for

the establishment of state and Preawide plans

and programs to control local government and

industrial wastewater storm and sewer runoff,

non-point sources of pollution, and land use

as it relates to water quality;

-- State prepared implementation plans under the

Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended, to control

the use of land for activities ranging from public

transportation modes to siting considerations for

new industrial and public facilities;

- 22 -
-- EPA assistance to local governments in planning for solid waste disposal activities to preserve

and enhance the quality of air, water, and land

resources under the Solid Waste Disposal Act of

1965, as amended;

-- the control of noise, through land use planning as

well as other means, under the Noise Control Act

of 1972;

-- the HUD 701 comprehensive planning assistance

program;

-- comprehensive water and related land resource

planning activities authorized by the Water Resources Planning Act of 1965 and administered by the Water Resources Council;

-- Federal Aviation Administration grants to localities for airport planning (as well as construction)

under the Airport and Airway Development Act, as

amended;

-- Federal Highway Administration financial and

technical assistance to State and local governments for comprehensive transportation planning

under the Federal Aid Highway Act, as amended; and

--Federal Railroad Administration financial and

technical assistance to state governments for

rail transportation planning under the Railroad

Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976.

Assistance in providing for infrastructure investments

is the third way in which the Federal Government plays a sig- nificant role in land use decisions. Federal programs for

housing, highways, airports, mass transit, sewer and water

grants, open space, agricultural subsidies, water resource

projects and the like, as well as the location of Federal

facilities, affect land use by state and local governments

as well as by private owners. The link between these infrastructure investments and land use has been recognized for a long period of time, but little has been done to control the location of new infrastructure, which in itself

can be an effective means of reinforcing land use controls.

- 23 -
Through its many programs and activities, the Federal

Government has the opportunity to aid in the protection of

valuable land resources for the use of future generations

and to demonstrate that "good" land use planning ca:n be

beneficial in terms of avoiding or mitigating incompatible

land uses and saving millions of dollars in rectifying the

results of improper land use decisions. In the absence

of a national land use planning program, existing Federal

programs also offer the opportunity to demonstrate to the

public and Federal, state, and local officials that land

use planning is not the outcast it is often characterized

as being. The success or failure of such programs may well

determine whether a national land use planning program is

needed.

If existing Federal land use programs are to be

successful, however, they must be properly implemented,

coordinated, and managed. Planning cannot take place in a

vacuum. There are many interrelationships between various

land uses and these interrelationships must be recognized

and considered in any type of planning activity. Planners

and public officials must recognize that transportation,

housing, water and sewer, and economic development activities

have both direct and secondary land use impacts which need

to be considered before such activities are undertaken. Also,

once land use plans are developed they must be implemented

and enforced. Without implementation and enforcement of

such plans, the planning phase is only an exercise in

futility.

The following questions are important in addressing

this issue.

1. Have Federal agencies established comprehensive

programs to plan for the future use of Federal

and Indian lands? Are such programs coordinated

and do they consider all potential resource uses

of the lands? Do Federal programs consider state

and local needs and desires as well as national

needs? Are they compatible with well designed

local or state land use programs?

- 24-
2. What efforts have Federal agencies made to develop

coordinating mechanisms for the various planning

assistance programs directed to non-Federal lands?

Are these mechanisms effective? Do planning

activities continue to work at cross purposes

despite the coordinative mechanisms?

3. To what extent have plans developed under existing

Federal assistance programs been implemented? What

are the problems in implementing and enforcing land

use plans and controls? What needs to be done to

overcome such problems?

1. Does Federal infrastructure assistance conform to

state and local land use plans and objectives?

Have the land use impacts of such assistance programs been recognized and brought to the attention

of planners and local officials? How can such

assistance programs be restructured to assist state

and local officials in their planning and development activities?

5. How effective have been Federal and state, interstate, and regional planning organizations? What

are the strengths and weaknesses of such organizations? How can the Federal Government be of assistance in promoting such organizations?

6. Is Federal resource information being made available to non-Federal land use planning organizations?

What problems have states and local governments

encountered in attempting to obtain technical assistance from Federal agencies in planning for the use

of lands and related resources and in attempting

to resolve land use conflicts?

7. Is there a need for a stronger Federal, state,

or regional role in land use planning? Does

the success or failure of existing Federal,

state, and/or local land use planning programs

demonstrate the need for a broad based national

policy and program?

- 25 -
Planning for the use of land, which is a finite resource, is the key to wise use of the resource. It is,

however, the matter which is the most complicated and

controversial.

GAO Reports

National attempts to reduce losses from floods by planning

for and controlling the use of flood-prone lands (RED-75-327,

3/7/75).

Tulsa, Oklahoma's participation in the National Flood

Insurance Program (evaluates effectiveness of Federal,

State, ,4nd local procedures to prevent improper development of flood plans)(RED-76-23, 9/9/75).

Policies and scope of air installation compatible use zone

program (discusses DOD efforts to work with local governments to achieve compatible land uses around its bases)

(LCD-76-329, 5/21/76).

Formidable administrative problems challenge achieving national

flood insurance program objectives (discusses the need to

ensure that participating communities adopt acceptable flood

plain management regulations and enforce compliance with

approved objectives)(RED-76-94, 4/22/76).

The Coastal Zone Management Program: An uncertain Future

(GGD-76-107, 12/10/76).

Studies in Process

Possible impact of locating project Seafarer in Michigan

(includes an assessment of the possible future land

use implications for the area in the vicinity of the

project).

Survey of land use plans, planning, and the classification

of Federal lands by the Federal land management agencies.

Assessment of Forest Service land use planning efforts and

their relationship to the forest and Rangeland Renewable

Resources Planning Act of 1974, as amended.

Survey of the effectiveness of the Alaska Joint Federal-State

Land Use Planning Commission.

- 26 -
ARE FEDERAL LANDS AND RELATED RESOURCES BEING EFFECTIVELY MANAGED ON A MULTIPLE USE BASIS AD-GITVING ADEQUATE CONSIDERATION TO COMPETING NEEDS?

Almost from the beginning of our country, the public lands and the resources on these lands have either been given away or made available at very low prices. In earlier times the various homstead acts and the desert lands act opened 

nitely contributed 

up vast acreages for settlement. Such practices defi- to the conquering of the American wilder- ness and the settlement and development of the frontier,

of 

but 

acres 

they also resulted in essentially giving away million

mineral 

of the best agricultural, forestry, grazing, and lands in the United States. They also resulted in the destruction of prime lands and valuable resources and in scandals such as Teapot Dome.

Of the about 2.3 billion acres of land making up the United States, today about one-third is owned by the Federal Government. 

istered 

About 60 percent of the Federal land is admin- by BLM and about 25 percent by the Forest Service. These lands provide many resources essential to the economy

minerals, 

and health of the nation, including energy fuels and other

recreation 

timber, rangeland, water, fish and wildlife, and areas of scenic beauty. For example:

--Federal lands contain nearly 40 percent of

the nation's supply of merchantable timber and over 60 percent of the supply of saw

timber.

-- Nearly one-third of the nation's total timber production comes from the public lands.

-- Within the boundaries of the 11 western states, about 61 percent of the total natural water runoff occurs on Federal lands and practically the entire hydroelectric capacity of these

states is dependent on water which rises on Federal lands.

---Federal lands account for about 3 percent of all forage consumed by livestock in the nation and

about 12 percent in the 11 western states.

- 27 -
-- Lakes, streams, and rivers on Federal lands

account for about 45 percent of the cold and

warm fish habitat on the West Coast, 71 percent

in the Mountain states, and 15 percent in the

Eastern states.

-- In the 20 states where Federal lands constitute

6 percent or more of the total acreage in the

state, between 40 and 48 percent of the big game

populations rely on habitat on Federal lands

and nearly all elk, big horn sheep, mountain goat,

moose, and wild turkey are dependant on such

habitat.

-- During fiscal year 1975, Federal onshore lands

produced over 174 million barrels of petroleum

and over 50 million tons of coal, potash, and

other minerals.

-- Receip s from Federal lands and resources during

fiscal year 1975 included $3 billion from mineral

leasing (including OCS), about $440 million from

timber, and about $19 million from grazing.

-- Over $250 million was provided to the states as

their share of the royalties and receipts from

the use of Federal lands during fiscal year 1974.

Federal lands are being placed under increased pressures

for use and development. Ranchers are demanding higher grazing authorizations to increase the supply of red meat; additional acreages are being requested for placement into

irrigation units to increase food supplies; the Administration has recommended that the vast coal deposits be exploited to lessen the nation's demand for foreign energy

supplies and that restricted areas be opened up for mineral

exploration; and pressures are being exerted to increase

the timber supply in order to assist the lagging housing

industry. At the same time, environmentalists are

- 28 -
and 

demanding 

wildlife 

that the non-resource values, including fish resources, be adequately considered and prostances 

tected in 

it 

any proposed developments. Under such circum- is extremely important that the various Federal agencies administering these lands adequately consider all of the resource values in their decision making activities.

Government 

Two comprehensive studies sponsored by the Federal in recent years have stressed the need for

The 

improved 

Publi 

manaapment of the Federal lands and their resources. a nd Law Review Commission conducted an extensive

over 

study 

130 

of he Fedeial lands and in the June 1970 report made . ammendations for policy guidelines for the re- tention 

the President's 

and management or disposition of Federal lands. Also, Advisory Panel on Timber and the Environment

management 

in April 1973 made 20 major recommendations relating to the of forests on public and private lands. Legisla- tion and administrative action on the recommendations of

mendations 

these groups has been slow, and although some of the recom- have received attention recently, much additional work needs to be done to carry them out.

In addressing this issue the following questions arise.

1. Can improvements in timber growth and quality be made and at the same time protect and enhance other resource values? Is the greatest pro- ductivity being obtained from Federal timber lands? Are forest lands being managed under the principals of multiple use and sustained yield? Are allowable harvest determinations being made in a proper manner? To what extent is clear cutting (see picture on following page) con- sistent with the protection of other resource values? Are existing clear cutting guidelines

adequate to protect multiple use resource values? Are Federal controls over timber harvesting operations adequate to protect other resource values?

- 29 -
' I`

; '' , A llll l - i

THOUGH AN ACCEPTED FORESTRY PRACTICE, CLEAR CUTTING PRESENTS AN EYESORE TO THE PASSING MOTORISTS AND SOME- IiMES DAMAGES OTHER RESOURCE VALUES.

SOURCE: (PUJBLIC LAND LAW REVIEW COMMISSION)

2. Hlow can better utilization and improvements in

grazing resources be obtained? Is the greatest

productivity possible being obtained from Federal

grazing lands? Do special interest groups have

too great an input into grazing management decisions and thus defeat the concept of multiple

use managemernt? What effect does grazing have

on other land resources? (See picture on

following page.)

3. Is multiple use considered in allowing mining

operations? Is the need for non-mineral, buL

essential lands adjacent to mining operations,

properly justified? Are lands leased for

mining purposes properly protected? How does

mining affect other land uses? (See picture on

page 32 )

- 30 -
OVERGRAZING BENEFITS NEITHER THE LIVESTOCK NOR THE PUBLIC. THE HEALTHY RANGE CO"'TRASTS STARKLY WITH THE OVFiGRAZED RANGE.

SOURCE: (PUBLIC LAND LAGJ REVIEW COMMISSION)

4. Is the need for protection of valuable watershed

and ecologically sensitive (see picture on page 33) areas considered in allowing the use of such lands for other purposes? What uses are

compatible with watershed and ecologically sensi- tive area protection?

5. Are wildlife protection activities compatible with other land uses? Is joint management of

game refuges by BLM and FWS, or the Corps of Engineers and FWS an effective means of pro- tecting wildlife resources? Is the protection and propogatio.i of wildlife adequately being considered in the management plans of BLM, NPS,

the Forest Service, the various military services, etc.?

- 31 -
MINING OPERATIONS ON PUBLIC LANDS MAY HAVE

UNDESIRABLE EFFECTS ON OTHER LAND USES

SOURCE: (PUBLIC LAND LAW REVIEW COMMISSION)

6. Have the oil and gas pipeline rtghts-of-way provisions of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act been properly implemented? Are such

provisions adequate to protect the lands and

resources from abuses?

Federal lands are very important in providing a great

variety of resources for the Nation and proper management of

these lands on a multiple use basis is essential for the

Nation to continue to enjoy the benefits of these resources.

- 32 -
DESTRUCTION OF PERMAFROST IN ALASKA CAUSES SERIOUS EROSION PROBLEMS.

SOURCE: (PUBLIC LAND LAW REVIEW COMMISSION)

- 33 -
GAO Reports

Modernization of 1872 mining law needed to encourage domestic

mineral production, protect the environment and improve

public lands management (RED-74-246, 7/25/74).

Trans Alaska oil pipeline--Progress of construction through

November 1975 (includes evaluation of efforts to control

environmental damage to Federal lands)(RED-76-69, 2/17/76).

Analysis of timber association comments on the proposed

National Forest Management Act of 1976 (S. 3091)(CED-76-123,

6/15/76).

Acreage limitations on mineral leases not effective (CED-76-

117, 6/24/76).

How to improve U.S. Forest Service reports on forest resources

(PAD-77-29, 2/23/77).

Studies in process

Monitoring of the Trans-Alaska pipeline (concerns the use of

Federal lands granted for pipeline construction and environmental controls, as well as the timely completion of the

pipeline).

Survey of Federal management and protection of rangelands.

Review of issues and problems relating to the Forest Service's

allowable harvest.

Data requirements, assumptions, and methodologies for formulating

policies for future timber supplies.

Review of the effectiveness of procedures to review and revoke

obsolete public land withdrawals.

Survey of the effectiveness of forest treatment measures in

improving timber growth and quality in National Forests.

Review of issues and views on Federal policy for harvesting

old growth timber.

- 34 -
HOW EFFECTIVE ARE FEDERAL PROGRAMS DESIGNED TO PROMOTE THE 

MP'SERVATION 

DEVELOPMENT, REHABILITATIO_ ,_ CONSERVTVATiO AND OF NON-PUBLIC LANDS AND RELATED RESOURCES?

As our population expanded and our rate of economic development increased, the demand for land and its resources increased. Much of this increased demand was satisfied through westward expansion and the opening up of the virgin territories with their seemingly unlimited supply of resources. Today our frontiers have been settled and the supply of new lands for further expansion is very limited, but our demand for resources continues to grow.

Land is not homogeneous. Some lands, because of the quality of the soil, climate conditions, and geographical location, are especially suited to the production of spe- cific food crops, timber, or forage for livestock. Other lands, because of their particular characteristics, are valuable as watersheds, aquifer recharge areas, wetlands, and wildlife habitat. Still other lands are valuable because of their scenic characteristics, or the role that they played in the Nation's historic and cultural develop- ment. In addition, some lands which have been used, and often abused, in the past would be valuable if returned to their original state, or at a minimum rehabilitated to a useful state.

Many non-Federal lands and resources with important economic and ecological values have been and are being lost

to the Nation. For example:

-- About 1.4 million net acres of agricultural land are consumed annually by urban sprawl, highways, parks, and reservoirs, thus reducing the base of prime food and fiber producing lands;

-- About 32 million acres of land have been disturbed by surface mining and 1.7 million acres of wildlife habitat have been destroyed;

-- Over 20 percent of the Nation's shoreline is seriously eroding; (see picture on the following page)

- 35 -
I 

EROSION DAMAGE AT KITTY HAWK CAUSED BY STORM

SOURCE: CORPS OF ENGINEERS

--4 billion tons of sediment and topsoil are washed

into streams annually because of poor land use

practices;

--Over 60 percent of the Nation's potentially productive timberland is in private ownership, most

of it in small tracts and presently not veiy

productive of commercial timber; and

-- Approximately one-tenth (nearly 200 species) of

the higher animals (mammals, birds, reptiles,

amphibians, and fish) in the United States are

endangered because their habitat is being destroyed.

- 36 -
National interest in lands with unique characterisitics

and important resource values has greatly increasee as demands

for various resources increased and these lands have come

under increased pressures for other uses. These factors

have in turn imposed additional responsibilities on Federal

agencies to sustain and preserve such lands.

A variety of Federal agencies administer activities and

programs which seek to develop, rehabilitate, conserve, and

preserve land and resources with important values. Examples of the agencies and activities and programs are shown below.

Agency Activity or Program

U.S. Forest Service Agreements with states

for cooperative fire

control programs

Tree seed and seedling

planting on state and

private forest lands

Cooperative forestry

program for technical

assistance for private

forest landowners

Soil Conservation Service: Technical assistance

through 3000 conservation districts cover

almost 2 billion acres

of land

Soil Conservation Service: Great plains conservation

program

Technical assistance for

the development of conservation plans and land

treatment

Survey and investigations

for small private watershed projects

- 37 -
A2eny Activity or Program

Agricultural Stabilization Financial assistance for

and Conservation Service: installing conservation

measures under agriculture conservation program

Farmers Home Administration Soil and water conservation

loans

Resource conservation and

development loans

Army Corps of Engineers: Protection of shorelines

and beaches

Permits for wetland dredge

and fill operations

National Park Service: Historic preservation grant

program

Fish and Wildlife Service: Endangered species protection program on

Federal and private

lands

State fish restoration and

management grants

State wildlife restoration

project grants

National Oceanic and Estuarine sanctuary grants

Atmospheric Administration:

- 38 -
In addressing this issue the following questions

should be considered.

1. Have the state and private forestry programs

of the U.S. Forest Service been effective in

promoting the conservation, preservation, and

reforestation of valuable non-public forest

lands? Do such programs promote good forestry

practices designed to insure a continued supply

of forest products in the future?

2. Are we in danger of depleting our supply of

prime agricultural and wetlands? What is the

Federal government doing to assist in retaining

such lands?

3. Sow effective are the land conservation programs

of the Department of Agriculture and other

agencies in maintaining and preserving food and

fiber producing lands?

4. What is being done to return derelict (i.e. stripmined) lands to productive uses? How can lands

which contain wasting assets (i.e. coal) be used

for those purposes? Which lands are so valuable

for other purposes that they should not be allowed

to be used for development purposes?

5. To what extent have non-Federal lands with historical and cultural significance been identified?

How effective have Federal efforts been to preserve such areas?

6. Have non-Federal land suited for addition to tre

national park, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers,

or wildlife refuges systems been identified? How

effective have the Federal efforts been to place

such areas in the systems?

7. To what extent have the important habitat for

valuable threatened or endangered wildlife species

been identified? Have the Federal efforts to protect such habitat been effective? What more needs

to be done? Are Federal/state wildlife coordination efforts effective?

- 39 -
Proper development, rehabilitation, conservation,

and development of non-public lands is important to the

continued economic and cultural well being of the Nation.

GAO Reports

Need to direct cooperative forestry programs toward

increasing softwood sawtimber supplies (RED-75-258,

10/8/74; RED-75-397, 7/25/75).

National efforts to preserve the Nation's beaches and

shorelines--a continuing problem (RED-75-364, 6/11/75).

Action neeJed to discourage removal of trees that shelter

croplands in the Great Plains (RED-75-375, 6/20/75).

Damage done at Big Thicket National Preserve (CED-76-143,

9/8/76).

To protect tomorrow's food supply, soil conservation

needs priority attention (CED-77-30, 2/14/77).

Effectiveness of land treatment agreements in watershed

areas (CED-77-13, 12/27/76).

Reclamation of lands damaged in the mining of noncoal

minerals (CED-77-63, CED-77-72, 5/17/77)

Studies in Process

Development of information and identification of issues

pertinent to Congressional oversight of soil and water

conservation programs.

Review of maintenance of Federally-assisted conservation

structures and measures.

Review of Corps of Engineers regulatory functions (addresses

wetlands protection).

Survey to determine -hether the use of prime agricultural

lands for non-agricultural purposes is a problem in the

U.S.

Survey of the administration of the National Historic

Preservation Program.

- 4U -
ARE FEDERAL PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES EFFECTIVE

IN MEETING SHORTAGES OF OUTDOOR RECREATION?

A shorter workweek, more flexible employment schedules,

more three day weekends, and year-round school, coupled with

an expanded population and increased family income and mobility, have increased the demand for recreational opportunities.

Consequently, providing adequate outdoor recreation opportunities for the Nation has taken on new dimensions in recent

years, as brought out by numerous studies made. Studies by

the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, Public

Land Law Review Commission, National Recreation and Park

Association, and President's Council on Recreation and Natural

Beauty indicate that more recreation opportunities and open

space are necessary to meet the growing needs of the American

people.

Through its land management agencies, such as the National Park Service, the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Federal Government owns significant land

acreages with recreational potential, paticularly in Alaska

and the 11 western states. Often, however, such lands are

inaccessible for recreational purposes. Also, many Americans,

because of their socioeconomic characteristics, do not have

the opportunity to visit Federally-owned parks, forests,

and recreation areas. For example, in one major city 53 percent of the families do not own cars and with few exceptions,

recreation areas are practically impossible to reach by

public transportation. In addition, many of the Federallyowned recreation areas are not located within relatively

short distances to serve millions of other Americans. The

Bureau of Outdoor Recreation has found that three-fourths

9 f outdoor recreation occurs close to home, after school,

after work, and on short outings of no more than a day.

Metropolitan areas, particularly densely populated, lowincome inner cities have the greatest need for outdoor recreaction facilities and opportunities.. However, these are

the same areas that are usually lacking in the availability

of such resources. According to the Bureau of Outdoor

Recreation, only about 25 percent of all recreational

facilities and only 3 percent of public recreational

lands are readily accessible to 75 percent of the people

in the United States. The "Kerner Commission" report on

civil disturbances stated that one of the major reasons

for urban disturbances and riots was the lack of adequate

recreational opportunities.

- 41 -
In addition to its public land recreation activities,

the Federal government offers a variety of programs designed

to identify recreation needs and assist in meeting recreation

needs. In 1973, the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation identified

319 programs administered by 204 Federal agencies which were

recreation oriented, including 61 grant programs, 54 recreation research programs, 37 recreation information programs,

15 advisory programs, and 18 credit programs.

One of the most important Federal programs in meeting

recreation needs is the Land and Water Conservation Fund

grant program administered by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, Department of the Interior. Since its establishment

in 1965, this program has provided over $2.5 billion for

Federal, State, and local recreation planning and acquisition purposes. On September 28, 1976, the President signed

P.L. 94-422, which significantly increases (from $300

million in fiscal year 1976 to $900 million in fiscal year

1980) the amount of funds authorized for the La:': .-.d Water

Conservation Fund. P.L. 94-422 also changed the fund allocation formula to provide more funds for more populous states

where recreation needs are the greatest and directed a comprehensive review and report on urban recreation needs in

highly populated areas.

The effectiveness of Federal programs in meeting

shortages of outdoor recreation and directing Federal,

state, and local resources to the areas of greatest need is

an important issue. Questions such as the following arise

with respect to the issue.

1. What have Federal, state, and local governments

accomplished with respect to planning for outdoor recreation? Are such planning efforts comprehensive in nature and do they inventory existing recreation facilities and identify areas

of greatest need? Are Federal, state, and

local recreation planning efforts coordinated

and do they utilize common data bases and

assumptions?

2. Do recreation plans detail the actions necessary

to direct resources to areas of greatest need?

Have such plans been implemented? If not, why?

3. Are Federal recreation resources in fact being

directed to shortage areas and areas of greatest

need? What factors cause resources not to be

directed to such areas?

- 42 -
4. Are state and local governments experiencing

difficulty in providing recreation in shortage

or greatest need areas? What can the Federal

government do to assist in solving such problems?

If Federal efforts to provide recreation opportunities

for the American public are to be successful, it is important

that such efforts be properly planned, coordinated, and directed to the areas of greatest need. This issue is therefore very important in meeting the goal of adequate recreational opportunities for the public.

GAO REPORTS

Except for a 1972 report on greater benefits to more

people possible by better uses of Federal outdoor recreation

grants (B-176823, 10/5/72), GAO efforts have not been directed

to this specific issue. Meeting shortages of outdoor recreation will receive greater empahsis in the future.

- 43 -
ARE FEDERALLY-OWNED AND

FEDERALLY-SUPPORTED RECREATION

AREAS BEING PROPERLY DEVELOPED

MANAGED, AND MAINTAINED?

The American public's desire for greater outdoor

recreational opportunities has placed great pressure

on existing Federal, state, and local recreation areas. The demands on Federally-owned recreational resources

have been increasing quite substantially, as can be seen by the following visitation statistics.

Millions of Visitations

Fiscal Year

Agency 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 est.

National Park 206 215 209 229 240 253 Service

Forest Service 184 188 193 199 207 216

Corps of 328 339 352 376 Not Not Engineers Avail- Available able

Long lines at campgrounds, overcrowded facilities, traffic jams at popular areas, and general deterioration

of facilities became common place prior to the 1973 oil embargo (see pictures on the following page) Although overcrowded conditions abated somewhat immediately after the oil embargo, increasing numbers of Americans are again visiting the national forests, parks, and recreation areas.

A recent series of articles in a well known newspaper circulated on a national basis, detailed problems with respect to the lack of development, management, and maintenance funds for the national parks. The articles painted a grim picture of delapidated buildings, inadequate water and sanita- tion facilities, scenic views marred by large volumes of litter, poor camping facilities, and eroding roads and trails. During its fiscal year 1977 appropriations hearing, National Park Service officials acknowledged that conditions in some parks need improvement and cited a need for $40 $50 million

per year to adequately maintain the National Parks.

- 44 -
OVERUSE OF SOME AREAS HAS

REACHED CRISIS PROPORTIONS

BOTH VIEWS ARE OF YOSEMITE

PAR K. 

SOURCE: (PUBLIC LAND 

LAW REVIEW COMMISSION) "f

- 45 -
Officials of other Federal, state, and local recreation agencies have also acknowledged a need for improved develop- ment, operations, and maintenance activities. In 1975, the backlog of requests for funds for the development of Federal, state, and local recreation areas totaled about $2.7 billion.

In August 1976, the resident also expressed his concern over the need for improvem.ents in recreation activities and pro- posed a $1.5 billion program over the next 10 years to ex- pand the Nation's public parklands, develop new and existing park facilities, provide increases in park personnel, and increase the development of parks in urban areas.

Local government officials have also indicated that operating and maintaining recreation facilities is a pro- blem because of the low priority placed on recreation and that park and recreation budgets are usually among the first to be decreased when financial problems occurred. They

generally agree that sufficient funds are not being spent to properly maintain park and recreation areas and that develop- ment funds are often unavailable.

In evaluating this issue, the following questions arise.

1. Are the national parks, forests, and recreation

areas being developed in a manner which meets

the recreational needs of a variety of Americans?

Are recreational developments on Federal lands

in urban areas meeting the particular needs of

those living in such areas? Are the recreational

facilities in Federal parks, forests, and recreation areas compatible with the mission or

purpose of the area and with other uses?

2. What is being done to "cope" with the increasing demands and overcrowding in national parks, forests, and recreation areas? Are people being encouraged to visit less crowded facilities of

equal value? Are officials of such areas actively working with state, local and private groups to

seek solutions to overcrowding? Can alternative

or mass transportation programs assist in easing the problems associated with park overcrowding?

- 46 -
3. Are park facilities being maintained in

a manner which does not detract from the

park environment or recreational experience?

What are Federal recreation managers doing

to obtain the greatest benefit from limited

maintenance funds and personnel?

4. Are local and state recreation areas acquired

with Federal funds being developed in accordance with approved plans? Are they being

developed in a timely manner?

5. What problems are state and local governments

experiencing in managing and maintaining re-

-creation:facilities and areas acquired and

developed with Federal funds? What can the

Federal government do to assist state and

local governments in solving such problems?

If the American people are to obtain the full benefit

of public recreational areas and facilities, it is important

that such areas and facilities be properly developed, managed, and maintained.

GAO REPORTS

Managing recreation facilities at Bureau of Reclamation

reservoirs (RED-74-235, 7/29/74).

Studies in Process

Survey of the administration of the land and water conservation

fund grant program to states for the acquisition and

development of land for outdoor recreation purposes.

Review of problems in developing a National Wild and Scenic

Rivers System.

- 47 -
WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF TAX

POICIES ON LAND USE?

THE PROBLEM

Tax policies of Federal, state, and local governments may have a significant effect on the uses of private lands. For example, lands are often assessed for local tax purposes on the basis of their highest and best use rather than actual

use. This significantly increases the tax burden on the landowner and increases pressures to develop the land in order to

recoup the property taxes. Also, state and Federal tax poli- cies may pressure landowners to sell farm, forestry, and

open space lands for development purposes in order to pay real estate taxes. To protect agricultural, forestry, or

open space land, several states have enacted preferential property tax legislation to lower tax rates on such land and provide penalties for their conversion to other uses.

Property tax policies may also promote urban blight and suburban sprawl. For example, property taxation policies may contribute to the deterioration of housing in urban areas and discourage the rehabilitation of urban properties. Also, high taxation of central city properties may encourage developers to leave the central city and thus contribute to sub- urban sprawl.

In addition to property taxes, sales and income taxes

may have an effect on the uses of land and may be factors to be considered in land use planning. For example, re- visions of Federal estate taxes intended to assist in the preservation of family farm lands are contained in the Tax Reform Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-455).

To explore the effects of Federal, state, and local tax policies on land use, the following questions should be considered.

1. What Federal, state, and local taxes and tax policies have the greatest effect on land uses

or land use planning? Have the adverse land

use effects of such taxes and tax policies been adequately demonstrated to responsible public officials in order to attempt to remedy them?

2. What new or special taxes, policies, or taxing procedures have been enacted by state or local

governments to minimize or mitigate the adverse

effects of taxes or tax policies on land use? Could such policies, procedures, etc. be used by other jurisdictions to promote "better" land use?

- 48 -
3. How effective are preferential taxes in protecting certain categories of land, such as agricultural, forestry, and open space lands? Have recent Federal estate tax reforms been effective in protecting farm lands? What could be done to make preferential taxes and the estate tax reforms more effective?

4. What could the Federal Government do to promote more effective state and local tax policies which impact on land use? What incentives could the Federal Govern- ment offer to encourage needed land use tax reforms?

contribute 

This line-of-effort 

to an 

offers an excellent opportunity to

significance 

area which has been inferred to be of great with respect to the user of land, but which has not 

lic 

been 

sentiment 

fully demonstrated or understood. In light of pubaudit 

for tax reform at all levels of government, efforts in this area would also be very timely.

GAO Reports

of the 

Past GAO efforts have not addressed the specific issue effect of tax policies on land use.

Study in Process

Survey of the effect of tax policy on land use.

- 49 -
CHAPTER 4

OTHER ISSUES

In addition to the six issues designated for priority

attention discussed in Chapter 3, there are several other

issues which need to be considered. Brief descriptions of

these issues are set forth below.

HOW CAN LAND USE PLANNING ASSIST

IN SOLVING ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS?

The control of non-point sources of water pollution,

proper placement of facilities which contribute to air

and noise pollution, and proper land disposal of waste

materials are important if the Nation is to have a clean,

healthy environment. Proper planning for the future use

of land resources can contribute to solutions to these

problems.

The effectiveness of individual environmental planning program is more appropriately addressed by the

environmental protection area, but it should be recognized

that proper land use planning is a potential contributor

to solutions to many pollution problems. Should it be

demonstrated that environmental planning programs offer

the greatest potential to plan for and control land uses,

this issue will take on increased importance.

HOW CAN THE MULTIPLE LAND USE

CONFLICTS ASSOCIATED WITH ENERGY

DEVELOPMENT BE RESOLVED?

The development of energy resources, whether on public

or private lands creates conflicts with other land uses.

Very often lands on which energy resources are located are

also valuable for agricultural, forestry, grazing, or recreational purposes. By planning for the future use of land

and considering all of the resources associated with the

lands, some of these conflicts may be resolved.

The extent to which adequate consideration is given to

resources associated with lands to be developed for energy

purposes, and whether land use planning can contribute to

solutions to conflict situations is important and needs to

be addressed. Conflict situations with respect to energy

development are not, however, unique. Similar conflicts

- 50 -
arise with respect to other land uses, such as the use of lands for timber production versus their use for recreation

or minerals. Conflict situations arise with respect to all

the issues discussed and should be addressed as part of each

individual issue.

HOW CAN URBAN LAND USE PLANNING

BE MADE MORE EFFECTIVE?

As noted in the plan overview, population growth in the United States has placed increased pressure on urban

areas. The result of this pressure has been constantly expanding, relatively low density suburban areas, characterized by large portions of idle land as developers "leap frog" across vacant lots to build on the rural-suburban

fringe and large regional shopping centers and larger distances to work areas, which cause traffic disruptions and air pollution. At the same time, the inner cities are decaying as residents and job opportunities move to the

suburbs, tax bases decrease, and transportation facilities

and housing deteriorate. Many of these problems have

been caused by the lack of foreward looking land use

planning and the inability of fragmen . urban governmental jurisdictions to join together to solve economic, social, and environmental problems on a reg'onal basis.

The need for more effective urban land use planning is

very real and should be recognized. However, there is a

need for more effective land u e planning in general, not only for urban areas. Rural and undeveloped areas are also facing increased pressures as the ,ieed for greater food, timber, energy, and recreations resources mounts. In addi- tion, most of the factors which significantly contribute

to urban land use problems -- inadequate planning, frag- mented political and special use jurisdictions, failure

to implement plans, and ineffective land use control mechanisms -- are also prevalent in non-urban areas. Accordingly, this issue should be addressed as part of an overall

effort to evaluate the general effectiveness of land use planning programs.

HOW CAN FEDERAL LAND OCCUPANCY, USE,

AND TRESPASS AND DISPUTED TITLE

PR BLEMS- F'vEiF T

Unauthorized use and occupancy of Federal lands has

occurred since the beginning of the Nation and continues

today. Such actions have often resulted in denial of land

use to the public for recreational purposes because of

illegal private use, misappropriation of resources, and sometimes damage or destruction of the environment and

- 51 -
unauthorized 

valuable resources. One of the factors contributing to encroachi, nts and trespass action has been

of 

the 

an 

lack 

active 

of adequate boundary definitions in the absence land survey program. Reportedly, boundaries are undefined on 70 million acres of public lands--excluding Alaska--that have not been surveyed. At the current rate of 

exists 

progress it is said that an 800-year backlog of work on boundary definitions.

Federal efforts to properly manage its land resources are seriously hampered by unauthorized use and occupancy, trespass, 

important 

and disputed title situations. Therefore it is

ing 

that this issue be addressed, including address- the difficult task of taking effective enforcement actions because of the lack of legal authority, manpower, and funds.

HOW EFFECTIVE ARE FEDERAL ORGANIZATION, ADMINISTRATION, ADMNISTRATIVE AND BUDGETING PROCEDURES, INCLUDING FEDERAL

LEGISLATIVE JURISDICTIONS, WITH RESPECT TO LAND USE MATTERS?

discussion 

Over the 

of 

past years, there has been a great deal of

programs 

the need to reorganize the national resource

trative 

of the Federal Government, streamline agency adminisof jurisdiction 

procedures, and obtain greater uniformity in the type

lands. 

Federal agencies should exercise over Federal In line with recommendations made by the so-called Ash 

years, 

Commission and legislative proposals introduced in prior

93d Congress 

the Administration proposed in the first session of the

Natural 

legislation to create a Department of Energy and

the present 

Resources. The proposed new department was to include

and 

functions of Interior, the Forest Service, NOAA,

Corps 

some functions of the Soil Conservation Service and the

a limited 

of Engineers. Although this legislation was not enacted,

effected 

reorganization of Federal energy activities was

consolidations 

and the debate over the need for more Federal agency and reorganizations continues.

issue 

As 

will 

specific reorganization proposals are presented this

to be placed 

take 

on 

on 

the 

increased importance. Emphasis will need specific justification for consolidations or reorganizations of Federal activities and functions re- lated 

jurisdictions, 

to land use matters, including legislative committee

advisory agency rule making and appeal procedures and

ardizing 

boards and committees, and the feasibility of stand- the type of jurisdiction Federal agencies exercise over Federal lands, including needed legislative action.

- 52 -
WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF THE

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S TAX

IMMUNITY ON LAND USE?

Federally owned lands cannot be taxed by state and

local governments. Congress, beginning in 1891, from time

to time authorized return to state and local governments

percentages of sale receipts principally from timber lands

and oil and gas leases. Under this system, however, no

payments were made to state and local governments for national parks, military reservations and reclamation reservations. Also, possessory interests of Federal land

users, such as lessees and permittees and the improvments

constructed by them were not always taxed. Payments in

some programs undercompensated and in others overcompensated

the state and local governments. Thus the revenue-sharing

programs did not meet the standard of equity and fairness.

On October 20, 1976, the President signed the Payments

in Lieu of Taxes Act (P.L. 94-565) which reforms the system of making payments to local governments to compensate them

for the tax immunity of Federal lands. Under the Act, local

governments will receive the greater amount of either (1)

$.75 per acre for certain Federal national resource lands

(National forests, parks, and wilderness areas; Bureau of

Land Management administered lands; and water resource lands,

such as Army Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation

projects) less payments from proceeds of timber and mineral

sales and grazing fees; or (2) $.10 per acre in addition to

timber, mineral and grazing receipts. Local governments

will also receive an additional payment of one percent of

the market value of land purchased by the Federal government for parks and wilderness since 1971. These payments

will be made for a period of five years to compensate

local governments for the sudden tax loss when lands are

taken off the tax rolls.

The payments authorized under the Payments in Lieu of

Taxes Act may be used by local governments for any purpose. Previously, timber, mineral, and grazing receipt payments

were allowed to be used only for school and road purposes.

The equity and fairness of Federal programs to compensate states and local governments for Federal land tax

immunity is of high importance to many communities, particularly in the Western States. Of particular interest is the

implementation of the provisions of the Payments in Lieu of

Taxes Act.

- 53 -
HOW CAN THE PROBLEM OF LAND

GRANTS TO STATES BE RESOLVED?

unsatisfied, 

Some of the original land grants to states have remained

Utah. 

principally involving the States of Arizona and

hood Act 

In 

and addition., the Alaska 

with 

Native 

the enactment of the Alaska State- Claims Settlement Act, the

of 

Federal Government has become responsible for the transfer

and 

large areas of land to be selected by the State of Alaska

lands 

the 

will 

Alaska Natives. The unsettled question of which be transferred to the states creates significant problems in planning for and managing Federal lands.

the 

Of particular concern in this issue are the status of

encountered, 

land grant situation and the reasons for the delays

obligations, progress being made in satisfying land grant and actions necessary to complete the selection process.

ARE FEDERAL LANE ACQUISITION DISPOSAL, AND EXCHANGE LAWS, POLICIES, AND PROCEDURES EFFECTIVE IN MEETING THEIR

ESTABLISHED GOALS?

Federal practices in effecting disposals, acquisitions, and exchanges of public lands often have come under criticism as 

and 

being 

clear 

cumbersome, 

interest lacking flexibility, and not in the full of the Government. The lack of flexibiltion 

ity to 

of exchange, 

scattered purchase, 

parcels or sell lands needed for consolida- and to correct situations where Federal 

board pattern 

land is intermingled with private lands in a checker- and the disposal of small tracts of public lands which often have no public access and where it is difficult 

blems 

to arrive at a fair market value have created proAlso, 

with respect to the management of the public lands.

acquisitions 

the Congress has expressed its concern over delays in which it has authorized for national parks, national 

of such land 

forests 

in connection 

or wilderness areas, and the increasing cost with ineffective acquisition programs.

The effectiveness of existing public land acquisition, disposal, and exchange authorities need to be addressed, including adequacy of the appraisal function and changes necessary to improve overall public land management.

- 54 -
ARE THE ECONOMIC RETURNS FROM THE

USES OF FEDERAL LANDS_ ADEQ-UATE?

Millions of acres of Federal lands annually are used for

a variety of purposes which benefit private enterprises or

individuals. Federal lands are leased for grazing purposes, millions of board feet of standing timber are sold, and

rights-of-way are granted for a variety of purposes. These

activities provide millions of dollars to the Federal

Government in permit fees, sales proceeds, rents, and royalty payments and bonus bids.

In recent years, the public has become aware

that the Federal lands contain valuable resources which

belong to all the people. This awareness has led to a

desire to insure the public obtains a fair value for the

use of its resources and does not subsidize special interest groups.

The major concern of this issue should be an assessment

of the effectiveness of the manner in which Federal agencies

grant privileges for the use of Federal lands and the

exploitation of land resources and the adequacy of policies and procedures to insure fair returns from the use of the

lands and resources.

ARE FEDERAL RECREATION CONCESSION

OPERATIONS BEING PROPERLY MANAGED

FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE PUBLIC?

Several Federal agencies witn land management responsi- bilities award contracts or other privileges to concessioners

to provide accomodations and services to the public using

Federal lands. These agencies include the National Park

Service, Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation,

and Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior;

the Forest Service, Department of Agriculture; and the Army

Corps of Engineers. The concession facilities operated and

the services provided on Federal lands under the jurisdiction

of these agencies are similar. They include lodging, restaurants, camping facilities and supplies, boat rentals, ski

facilities, and a variety of other services associated with

outdoor recreation.

- 55 -
In recent years, the Congress and the public have become

concerned about the need for and propriety of certain types of concession operations in parks and recreation areas, the

manner in which concession priviledges are awarded by the

Federal land management agencies, and the influence that con- cessionaires may exert with respect to overall management and operation of Federal recreation areas. During the past Congress, two committees of the House of Representatives, with assistance from GAO, exposed questionable aspects in the Park Service's award of concession priviledges to concessionaires

at Yosemite National Park and on Federal lands in Washington, D.C. The recent publicity given to a proposed Forest Service skiing concession award at Crested Butte, Colorado, also raised questions as to the influence concessionaires have on recreation operations.

Under this issue, the effectiveness of Federal land

management agencies' managemert of concession operations and the protection of the public interest needs to be

addressed. Of particular interest is the adequacy of poli- cies and procedures to insure that (1) concession opera- tions are in fact desired by the public, (2) concession

facilities are adequate to meet normal demands, but are not

overly taxing the park environment or incompatible with the enjoyment of the park itself, and (3) concession priviledges

are awarded in an equitable manner and with a return to the

Federal government commensurate with the priviledges granted. The overall question of the need for a standardized Government-wide concession policy also needs to be

addressed.

- 56 -
APPENDIX I

SELECTED FEDERAL DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES WITH PROGRAMSND ACTIVITIES IMPACTING ON LAND USE PLANNING, MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL

DeartmentorAgency Prgram or Activity

Council on Environmental Quality Analysis of land and

environmental conditions

Department of Agriculture: Agricultural Research Service Soil conservation research and other

agriculture concerns

Farmers Home Administration Rural development in

general; loans for land

acquisition, farm and

ranch improvement and

operation, watershed

development, flood pre- servation, an,' il conservation; loasis and

grants for housing water

and sewer facilities

Forest Service Natural resource activities

in general, including

research and State and

private forestry assist

ance

Soil Conservation Service Land conservation in

general, including research, financial, and

technical assistance on

resource conservation and

development, watershed

planning, and watershed

and flood prevention

operations.

- 57 -
APPENDIX I

Department or Agency Program or Activity

Agricultural Stabilization

and Conservation Service Land conservation through

cost sharing of land

treatment measures with

land owners

Department of Commerce:

Economic Development Loans, grants, guarantees,

Administration technical assistance

and research for planning, construction and

improvement of sanitation, transportation,

industrial, and skill

development facilities

in economically depressed areas.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal zone management;

marine mammal rookeries

and mating grounds preservation and conservation; estuarine grants

JDeFartment of Defense:

Army Corps of Engineers Construction of water related projects, including flood control,

and shore protection;

regulation of wetlands;

recreation.

Military Agencies Land management in general,

including forestry,

grazing, agriculture,

fish and wildlife, and

recreation; siting of

military installations.

- 58 -
APPENDIX I

Department or Agency Program or Activity

Department of Housing and

Urban Development Housing and community

development in general,

including siting, construction and research;

interstate land sales;

comprehensive planning

grants (701); new

communities; block grants

for model cities; neighborhood facilities, open

space lands; urban renewal; water and sewer

activities; flood insurance and flood plain

management.

Department of the Interior

Bureau of Indian Affairs National resources in

general - All aspects

of planning for and

managing Indian lands,

including grazing,

forestry, fish and wildlife, minerals, etc.

Bureau of Land Management All aspect of planning

for and managing the

public lands, including

the outer continental

shelf.

Bureau of Mines Conservation and development of mineral resources.

Bureau of Reclamation Planning, construction, rebabilitation, and management of reclamation and

irrigation projects, including hydrcelectric

siting, flood control,

recreation, and fish and

wildlife facilities.

- 59 -
APPENDIX I

Department or Agency Program or Activity

Bureau of Outdoor Planning, research and

Recreation coordination of Federal,

State, local, and private

outdoor recreation;

grants to states and

localities for recreation purposes.

Fish and Wildlife Fish and wildlife in

Service general, including management and investigations

of fish and wildlife resources, construction of

facilities to conserve

and manage fish and wildlife, endangered species,

and migratory birds;

recreation

Geological Survey Research and investigations

of land and mineral resources; topographic

surveys and mapping;

supervision of prospecting, development, and

production of minerals

and mineral fuels on

Federal lands.

National Park Service Conservation of natural,

historical, and recreational resources in

the park system, including wilderness areas,

parkways, and trails;

historic preservation

planning surveys and

grants; .fish and wildlife.

- 60 -
APPENDIX I

Department or Agency Program or Activity

Department of Justice:

Land and Natural

Resources Division All legal matters relating to title,

possession, and use

of Federal lands and

natural resources.

Department of Transportation: Transportation in general,

including transportation research and planning.

Federal Aviation Adminis- Airport planning, developtration ment, and construction

Federal Highway Adminis- Highway planning and contration struction

Urban Mass Transportation Planning, research,

Administration development, demonstration and construction

of mass transit facilities

Environmental Protection Environmental matters in

Agency general, including air,

noise, water, and solid

waste pollution control

program planning; facilities construction; environmental research

and monitoring.

- 61 -
APPENDIX I

Department or Agency Program or Activity

Energy Research and

Development Administration Energy research in

general, including

extraction and exploration research

and demonstration

for fossil, nuclear,

solar, geothermal, and

other energy resources.

Federal Energy Administration Development of policies

and programs for siting,

leasing, and construction of domestic energy facilities utilizing environmentally

sound practices.

Federal Power Administration Permits and licenses for

siting non-Federal

hydroelectric power projects, including development of recreation facilities at such projects,

and construction and

operation of interstate

pipelines.

General Services Administration Federal property management, including surplus

real property

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Siting of nuclear facilities; disposal of nuclear materials.

Water Resources Council Grants for development

of water and related

land resources plans.

- 62 -
APPENDIX II

SIGNIFICANT LEGISLATION IMPACTING ON

LAND USE PLANNING,-MANAGEMENT, AND CONTROL

Legislation Activity and Programming _Aency

PLANNING FOR AND CONTROLLING THE USE OF LAND RESOURCES

Coastal Zone Management Planr'ng and management grants

Act of 1972, as amended to States for coastal lands

and related resources

(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration);

Flood Disaster Protection Regulation of flood plains

Act of 1973 (HUD)

Federal Water Pollution

Control Act Amendments Section 208: State and areaof 1972 wide plans for wastewater

storm and sewer runoff,

nonpoint sources of pollution, and land use as it

relates to water quality

(EPA)

Section 404: Permit program for disposal of

dredge and fill material

in waterways and wetlands

(Army Corps of Engineers

and EPA)

Clean Air Act of 1970, as

amended in June 1974 State implementation plans

to achieve air quality

standards, including public transportation modes

and the siting of new

industrial and public

facilities (EPA)

- 63 -
APPENDIX II

Water Resources Planning

Act of 1965 Regionally developed

plans for water and related land resources

(Water Resources

Council)

Solid Waste Disposal Act

of 1965, as amended by

the Resources Recovery

Act of 1970 Waste management and resource recovery systems

construction and planning to preserve and

enhance the quality of

air, water, and land

resources (EPA)

Public Works and Economic

Development Act of 1965 Technical and financial

assistance for planning,

construction, and' imprr,vement of sanitation, tra:isportation, industrial, and

skill development facilities in economically depressed areas (Economic

Development Administration)

Federal Power Act of 1920 Authority for permits and

licenses for siting nonFederal hydroelectric power projects, including

development of recreation

facilities at such projects, and construction of

interstate pipelines.

(Federal Power Commission)

- 64 -
APPENDIX II

Housing Act of 1954 Section 701 comprehensive planning

grants with associated land use planning requirement

(HUD)

Noise Control Act of 1972 Coordination of Federal noise research

and control, and

development of noise

emission standards

through land use

as well as other

means (EPA)

Airport and Airway Development

Act, as amended Planning for and expansion of the

Nation's airport

and airway system

(FAA)

National Environmental Policy

Act of 1969 Consideration of

environmental impacts in land use

planning (Council

on Environmental

Quality)

Forest and Rangeland Renewable

Resources Planning Act of

1974 National assessment

and a National program for forest and

range renewable resources (Forest

Service)

- 65 -
APPENDIX II

FORESTRY, GRAZING AND CONSERVATION

Pickett Act of 1910 Authorized temporary withdrawals of public lands

from the operation of

disposal laws, other than

the mining law, for public

purposes (Department of

Interior)

Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 Grazing rights and conditions on public lands

(Bureau of Land Management and the Forest

Service)

Clarke-McNary Act of 1924 Federal-State cooperation

for producing and planting tree seeds and seedlings (Forest Service)

Multiple Use-Sustained Yield

Act of 1960 Recognition that public

lands contain a variety

of resources and activities and should be administered in a multiple use

basis (Forest Service)

Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant

Act of 1937 Provides authority for

the acquisition of lands

for conservation and

utilization; these lands

later became the National

Grasslands (Department

of Agriculture)

- 66 -
APPENDIX II

Soil Con .ervation Act Technical and financial

of 1935 assistance for water

and soil conservation

programs and flood protection (SCS)

National Forest Management

Act of 1976 Amends the Forest and

Rangeland Renewable

Resources Planning Act

of 1974 to provide

additional guidance on

the protection, development, and management of

National Forest lands.

Also removes restrictions on the use of

clear cutting timber

in National Forests and

sets legislative prescriptions for forestry

management.

PARKS AND RECREATION

Bureau of Outdoor Recreation

Act of 1962 National policy and focal

point on outdoor recreation plans and programs

(Bureau of Outdoor Recreation)

National Wilderness Preservation System Act of 1964 Federally owned areas

designated by Congress

as wilderness areas

(Departments of Agriculture

and Interior)

- 67 -
APPENDIX II

Concessions Policies

Act of 1965 Established policies to

guide and control the

establishment of public

accomodations and facilities in national parks

and recreation areas

(National Park Service)

Federal Water Project

Recreation Act of

1965 Planning for any Federal

navigation, flood control,

reclamation, or other

water resource project

must consider outdoor recreation (Bureau of Outdoor

Recreation)

Land and Water Conservation

Fund Act of 1965 Federal assistance to states

in planning, acquisition,

and development of land and

water areas (Bureau of Outdoor Recreation)

Historic Preservation Acts Various acts provide for

the preservation of significant historic places,

structures, and items

(National Park Service)

National Wild and Scenic

Rivers Act of 1968 Provides for Federal and

State government administration of unspoiled essentially primitive river areas

(Departments of Agriculture

and Interior)

- 68 -
APPENDIX II

National Trails System

Act of 1968 Establishment of a

national system of

trails (National

Park Service)

Federal Surplus Lands

for Parks and Recreation Act Authorized the use of

surplus real property

for parks or recreational areas (Department of Interior)

WILDLIFE

Fish and Wildlife

Coordination Act

of 1974 Authorizes Federal water

resource agencies to

acquire lands specifically

for fish and wildlife

purposes (Department of

Inter ior)

Fish and Wildlife Act

of 1956 Provides for acquisition

of refuge lands and

development of facilities

(Fish and Wildlife Service)

Estuarine Areas Act

of 1968 Protection, conservation,

and restoration of many

estuaries through Federal and state programs

(Department of Interior)

- 69 -
APPENDIX II

Endangered Species Act

of 1973 Federal programs relating

to wildlife threatened

with extinction (Departments of Interior and

Commerce)

Marine Mammals Protection

Act of 1972 Protection of marine

mammal rookeries and

mating grounds

Federal-Aid in Wildlife

Restoration Act of 1937 Federal aid and cooperation with states which

pass wildlife conservation laws (Fish and Wildlife Service)

Wild Horses and Burros

Act of 1971 Protection for free-roaming horses and burros

(Departments of Agriculture

and Interior)

ENERGY AND MINERALS

Outer Continental Shelf

Lands Act of 1975 Provides authority for

leasing mineral exploration and development

righits in the Outer Continental Shelf (Bureau of

Land Management)

Mining Law of 1872 Provides basic authorities for location and

sale of mineral deposits on public lands

(Department of Interior)

- 70 -
APPENDIX II

Mineral Land Leasing

Act of 1920 Provides the basic

authority and procedures for management of mineral rights

on public lands (Department of Interior)

Mining and Minerals Policy

Act of 1970 Federal encouragement of

private enterprise to

develop domestic mining,

minerals, metal, and

mineral reclamation industries (Department

of Interior)

Federal Energy Administration

Act of 1974 Policies and programs to

increase production and

utilization of energy

from domes-ic sources

(FEA)

OTHER LAND MATTERS

Federal Property and

Administrative Services

Act of 1949 Authority for Federal

real property utilization and disposal programs (GSA)

Trans Alaska Pipeline Expedited construction of

Authorization Act the Alaska Pipeline, estabof 1973 lished a comprehensive

national policy for the

granting of oil and natural

gas pipeline right-of-way

across public lands, and

spells out environmental

protection measures during

construction and operation

(Department of Interior)

- 71 -
APPENDIX II

The Snyder Act of 1924 and

the Indian Reorganization

Act of 1934 Development of Indian

and Native Alaskan

human and natural resource potentials

(Bureau of Indian Affairs)

Alaska Native Claims

Settlement Act of

1971 Provides for land grants to

natives; classification of lands as a prerequisite for disposal; and possible addi- tions to national forests,

parks, wildlife refuges, and wild and scenic rivers (Department of Interior)

Federal Land Policy and

Management Act (BLM Organic Act) Consolidates into a single

statute the authority for the management of public lands administered by the

Bureau of Land Management,

Department of the Interior

PaymentF in Lieu of

Taxes Act Reforrms the system of

makino payments to state

and lo,-al governments to

compensate them for tax immunity of Federal lands.

- 72 -
APPENDIX II

HOUSING AND TRANSPORTATION

Housing and Community

Development Act of

1974 Omnibus legislation which

outlines Federal involvement in a wide range of

community development activities. Communities

qualifying for block grants

must submit housing and

community development plans

(HUD)

Federal-Aid Highway

Act, as amended Financial and technical

assistance to State and

local governments for constructing and improving

highways, highway related

safety programs and transportation planning.

Urban Mass Transportation

Act of 1964 Research and development

and technical/financial

assistance to commun i es

seeking to meet their mass

transit needs. (DOT)

- 73 -
APPENDIX III

CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES AND SUBCOMMITTEES

WITH INTEREST OR RESPONSIBILITIES FOR

LAND USE PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, AND CONTROL ACTIVITIES

SENATE

Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry

Subcommittee on Environment, Soil Conservation

and Forestry

Committee on Appropriations

Subcommittee on Agriculture and Related Agencies

Subcommittee on Housing and Urban Development and

Independent Agencies

Subcommittee on Interior

Subcommittee on Military Construction

Subcommittee on Public Works

Subcommittee on State, Justice, Commerce,

The Judiciary

Committee on Armed Services

Subcommittee on Military Construction and Stockpiles

Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs

Subcommittee on Housing and Urban Affairs

Subcommittee on Oversight

Committee on Budget

Committee on Government Operations

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

Subcommittee on Parks and Recreation

Subcommittee on Public Lands and Resources

Committee on Environment and Public Works

Subcommittee on Environmental Pollution

Subcommittee on Water Resources

Subcommittee on Regional and Community Development

Subcommittee on Resource Protection

- 74 -
APPENDIX III

HOUSE

Committee on Agriculture

Subcommittee on Forests Subcommittee on Conservation and Credit Subcommittee on Department Operations, Investigation and Oversight Subcommittee on Family Farms, Rural Development, and Special Studies

Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture and Related Agencies Subcommittee on HUD - Independent Agencies Subcommittee on Interior

Subcommittee on Military Construction Subcommittee on Public Works Subcommittee on State, Justice, Commerce, and Judiciary

Committee on Armed Services

Subcommittee on Military Installations and Facilities

Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing Subcommittee on Historic Preservation and Coinage

Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development

Committee on Budget

Subcommittee on Community and Physical Resources

Committee on Government Operations Subcommittee on Environment, Energy, and Natural Resource

Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment Subcommittee on Mines and Mining Subcommitte.. 

Subcommittee on National Parks and Insular Affairs on Indian Affairs arid Public Lands Subcommittee on General Oversight and Alarka Lands

Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries Subcommittee on Fisheries and Wildlife Conservation and the Environment Subcommittee on Oceanography

- 75 -
APPENDIX III

Committee on Public Works and Transportation

Subcommittee on Economic Development

Subcommittee on Investigations and Review

Subcommittee on Water Resources

Committee on Science and Technology

Subcommittee on Environment and the Atmosphere

Ad Hoc Select Committee on Outer Continental Shelf

- 76 -
APPENDIX IV

PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS CONCERNED WITH

LAND USE PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, AND CONTROL MATTERS

American Conservation Association, New York, N.Y.

American Forestry Association, Washington, D.C.

American Institute of Architects, Washington, D.C.

American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, Chicago, Ill.

American Institute of Planners, Washington, D.C.

American Law Institute, Philadelphia, Pa.

American Mining Congress, Washington, D.C.

American Society of Planning Officials, Chicago, Ill.

Appalachian Trail Conference, Harpers Ferry, W. Va.

Chamber of Commerce of the U.ited States, Washington, D.C.

Conference of National Park Concessioners

Coastal Zone Management Institute

Conservation Foundation, Washington, D.C.

Council of State Governments, Lexington, Ky.

Environmental Defense Fund, Inc., Washington, D.C.

Environmental Law Institute, Washington, D.C.

Environmental Policy Center, Washington, D.C.

Friends of the Earth, Washington, D.C.

Izaak Wa.-on League of America, Glenview, Ill.

League of Women Voters, Washington, D.C.

National Association oi Conservation Districts, Washington, D.C.

National Association of Counties, Washington, D.C.

National Association of Home Builders, Washington, D.C.

National Association of Manufacturers, New York, N.Y.

National Association of Regional Councils, Washington, D.C.

National Audubon Society, New York, N.Y.

National Forest Products Association, Washington, D.C.

National Governors Conference, Washington, D.C.

National League of Cities, Washington, D.C.

National Parks and Conservation Association, Washington, D.C.

National Planning Association, Washington, D.C.

National Recreation arnd Parks Association, Arlington, Va.

National Research Council, Washington, D.C.

National Resources Defense Council, Washington, D.C.

National Wildlife Federation, Washington, D.C.

Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Va.

Resources for the Future, Inc., Washington, D.C.

Sierra Club, Washington, D.C.

Society for Range Management, Denver, Co.

Society of American Foresters, Washington, D.C.

Soil ConservaCion Society of America, Ankeny, Iowa

Urban Land Institute, Washington, D.C.

h.lderness Society, Washington, D.C.

Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, D.C.

- 77 -