Act would not be affected in any way and licenses could continue to be issued by the Federal Power Commission in these areas. We will comment on this later. Recreation

Recreation uses of these wilderness-type areas are of the kind, including hunting and fishing, normally associated with wilderness enjoyment. These uses would continue. Commercial services to the extent necessary for the recreational or other purposes of the wilderness system may now be performed, and could continue to be performed, in the areas. Hotels, resorts, summer homes, and other such types of recreational developments are not now, and would not be, permitted.

There are within these areas trails and facilities of a primitive nature for camping. These include primitive-type sanitary facilities. These will continue under our present policy and could continue under the bill. Also, in certain of these areas, as well as in portions of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area, the use of motorboats is presently allowed and could continue under the provisions of the bill. In certain of the wilderness, wild, and primitive areas, the landing of aircraft at established locations is permitted and could continue under the bill. Motorized transportation by the public by ground vehicles is not permitted except on those roads in primitive areas presently open to public use and would not be permitted under the bill.

Roads

Roads opens to public use are not allowed in wilderness and wild areas. There are some such roads in some of the primitive areas. The existence of roads would have material bearing on the reviews and recommendations as to the suitability of primitive areas or portions thereof for continued inclusion in the wilderness system or exclusion therefrom. Under the provisions of S. 4, the existing roads in such areas could continue to be maintained and used pending the review and effectiveness of a recommendation for the area to remain in the wilderness system. Temporary roads which are essential in the control of fire, insects, and diseases or to meet the minimum requirements for the administration of the areas may now be permitted in these areas. The bill would continue to allow these.

We have the following comments and recommendations for amendments to the bill:

1. On page 4, in lines 19 and 20, reference is made to recommendations for the exclusion of portions of primitive areas of the national forests and "return to national forest land status" thereof. Primitive areas now designated in the national forest system have national forest status and exclusion of any portion thereof from the primitive area would not have the effect of returning it to national forest status. Therefore, the words "return to national forest land status" should be deleted and the words "administration as other national forest land" should be inserted in lieu thereof.

2. The provisions in section 3 (b) (1) for the review of primitive areas would allow alterations of the boundaries of primitive areas recommended to be continued in the wilderness system, but the proviso beginning on line 23 on page 4 would not permit any primitive area recommended to be continued in the wilderness system to be larger than that particular area on the date of the act. Net additions to a few of the primitive areas might be desirable and we would prefer not to be so restricted. However, if such a restriction is considered essential we suggest that a leeway of up to 10 percent be allowed. This could be accomplished by adding after the word "act" and before the period in line 2 on page 5 the words "by more than 10 percent."

3. As worded, the provisions of section 9 for a Presidential Land Use Commission would apply only to the State of Alaska. We recognize that Federal ownership of about 99 percent of the land area of the State of Alaska presents a situation peculiar to that State, and have no particular objection to such a Commission in relation to Alaska. However, the scope of the duties of the Commission would go to all federally owned land in the State and not just to lands in wilderness-type areas.

We therefore question whether provision for such a Commission should be included in legislation which otherwise deals only with wilderness-type areas. We therefore suggest that all of section 9 on pages 19 and 20 be deleted and the succeeding sections be renumbered accordingly.

4. Section 11 would provide that nothing in the bill repeal, or otherwise affect the Federal Power Act.

would supersede, modify, With this provision the

Federal Power Commission could issue licenses for power projects on areas in: the wilderness system without a determination by the President that the development of such projects within the particular areas would be more in the public interest than would their denial. Such a determination by the President

would be required for other types of industrial and commercial uses. We recognize that under some circumstances the permitting of power developments in areas of the wilderness system might be more in the public interest than their denial. However, we believe that the same Presidential determination should be required with reference to them as would be required for other types of industrial and commercial developments. We of course believe that upon such Presidential determination the licenses for power projects should be issued by the Federal Power Commission in the same manner as such licenses are issued elsewhere. Therefore we recommend that section 11 on page 20 be deleted or modified by deleting the word "Nothing" in line 12 on page 20 and inserting in lieu thereof "Except as provided in section 6, nothing."

In conclusion, this Department has consistently recommended the enactment of wilderness legislation insofar as it would affect the national forests ever since our first report on such legislative proposals in the 85th Congress. We strongly believe that not only should wilderness areas be established and maintained in the national forests but also that enactment of S. 4 with the amendments recommended above would be desirable and progressive resources legislation and in the national interest.

The Budget Bureau advises that the enactment of legislation along the lines of S. 4 would be in accord with the President's program.

Sincerely yours,

ORVILLE L. FREEMAN.

FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION REPORT ON S. 4-88TH CONGRESS

A BILL To establish a National Wilderness Preservation System for the permanent good of the whole people, and for other purposes

This bill, to be known as the Wilderness Act, for the purpose of securing "for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness," would establish, in accordance with certain procedures prescribed in the bill, a National Wilderness Preservation System comprised of such federally owned areas as are designated (subject to existing private rights) from the following lands:

(1) All areas within national forests classified on the effective date of the bill by the Secretary of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service as "wilderness, wild, primitive, or canoe." However, those areas classified as "primitive" would be reviewed by the Secretary within 10 years following enactment of the bill for the purpose of determining the suitability of each such area for preservation as wilderness. The Secretary would be required to report annually his findings to the President, who in turn is to advise the Congress annually of his recommendations with respect to the continued inclusion within the system, or the exclusion therefrom of each area reviewed during the year.1

(2) Each portion of a national park or monument embracing on the act's effective date "a continuous area of 5,000 acres or more without roads." However, any such wilderness status would be acquired only after a review of each such unit by the Secretary of the Interior within 10 years and a recommendation annually by the President to the Congress that particular areas reviewed during the preceding year should be incorporated into the system.1

(3) Such portions of previously established national wildlife refuges and game ranges as, within a 10-year period, the Secretary of the Interior and the President may recommend annually for incorporation into the system.1 (4) Privately owned lands within any portion of such system under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agriculture or the Secretary of Interior,

1:

1 Under the provisions of sec. 3 (f), each recommendation made by the President would take effect only upon the day after adjournment sine die of the first complete session of the Congress following the date or dates upon which the recommendation was received by the House and Senate, but only if prior to such adjournment neither the Senate nor the House shall have approved a resolution in opposition thereto.

and acquired by either Secretary, subject to the approval of any necessary appropriations by the Congress; and lands acquired for preservation as wilderness through gift or bequest to the respective Secretaries. This Commission's interest in the bill arises from the fact that it would set up a wilderness system embracing lands and powersites having existing and potential power value subject to the Commission's authority under part I of the Federal Power Act. Section 4(e) of the Power Act (16 U.S.C. 797) provides that licenses shall be issued within reserved lands of the United States "only after a finding by the Commission that the license will not interfere or be inconsistent with the purpose for which such reservation was created or acquired * In addition, the licenses contain such conditions as are deemed necessary for the adequate protection and utilization of the reserved lands involved.

*

Under section 24 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 818) any lands of the United States included in a proposed project "shall from the date of filing of the application therefor be reserved from entry, location, or other disposal under the laws of the United States until otherwise directed by the Commission or by Congress." In addition to reservations effected under this provision of the Power Act, other lands of the United States have been reserved or withdrawn from time to time for power purposes under other statutes, and in the future lands may be reserved pursuant to section 24 or under other statutes. Based upon the best available information concerning primitive areas, the hydroelectric generating capacities of the sites, licensed and potential, which would be affected in those areas are as follows:

Capacity under license :
Existing_

Under construction___

Other potential capacity

Total

Kilowatts 878, 300 157,500 3, 006, 300

4,042, 100

The bill would not incorporate in the wilderness system as of its effective date any lands presently within wildlife refuges or game ranges, but sets up procedures under which portions of such refuges and ranges may subsequently be incorporated into the system. It is assumed that when future recommendations are made to the Congress by the President to incorporate additional areas into the system, this Commission will be requested to advise the Congress as to the power potential affected by any such recommendations.

Section 11 of the bill states that nothing therein "shall be construed as superseding, modifying, repealing, or otherwise affecting the provisions of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 192-825r)." Consequently, if this proposed legislation is enacted in its present form the Federal Power Commission's jurisdiction to issue licenses authorizing the use of lands in the wilderness system for power purposes would not be affected, provided the above-discussed finding of consistency and noninterference can be made under section 4 (e) of the Power Act with respect to the use of reserved lands of the United States. In this connection, it should be noted that none of the bill's provisions would vacate or rescind any power withdrawal or power reservation created prior to its enactment. Furthermore, sections 3(a) and 6(b) which specifically preserve existing private rights in lands placed in the wilderness system, clearly would protect a licensee's right to continue the use of any such lands under authority of a license previously issued by the Commission.

The Commission favors the purpose of the bill to create a wilderness system and offers no objection to its enactment.

FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, By JOSEPH C. SWIDLER, Chairman.

Senator ANDERSON. There are 25 witnesses scheduled, and there may be 2 or 3 others. I hope witnesses will take only the time essential to present their position and their material.

Our first witness is Secretary of the Interior Stewart Udall. Mr. Secretary, we are always glad to have you with us.

STATEMENT OF HON. STEWART L. UDALL, SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Secretary UDALL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I am sure this is one of the most important pieces of legislation that this committee will consider during the life of this Congress.

I regret that, because the demands on my time and my own schedule in the last day or so, I do not have a prepared statement this morning, Mr. Chairman, but my statement will be brief and I ask the indulgence of the committee with regard to it.

As you yourself have just commented, Mr. Chairman, this is old wheat that this committee has threshed at great length and, in September 1961, the Senate expressed its will once rather emphatically on both the importance of wilderness legislation and on the general outlines of the type of wilderness legislation that the Senate feels our country needs.

I should like to say that, on behalf of the administration and the President, our strong endorsement of this Congress continues. The last extensive statement of President Kennedy on wilderness was in his conservation message of a year ago in which he called for the enactment of legislation along the lines of the Senate-passed bill, and this has been our position and it still is.

We still feel that this is a very vital and, indeed, a landmark piece of legislation.

I would like to comment generally, because it has been my privilege as Secretary, in looking over our various conservation opportunities and what we have done in the past, to learn a great deal myself in the year or two since I last testified before the committee.

It seems to me that this decision, which would affect the status of lands permanently, and large areas of lands in our country, is truly one of the landmark land conservation decisions that confronts the American people.

I have attempted, Mr. Chairman, on my own, and I thought the committee might be interested in this, to outline what I think have been the six or eight great conservation decisions in the history of this country.

We have made many important decisions where we set up a service and an organization to do work, but there are certain decisions that we have made, as a people, through the Congress, in the main which have fixed the status of land and which have determined our policy with regard to conservation and the use of land.

As I see it, there have been eight, and I think this would be the ninth, of these great landmark conservation decisions.

I think the first was the Homestead Act of 1962, which determined the land pattern in many parts of this country. I think the second was the Forest Reservation Act of 1891, a little act that was actually a rider, a paragraph on a bill, and this enabled President Harrison, President Cleveland, and President Theodore Roosevelt to establish the national forests in the public land areas in the West. I think the fourth

Senator ANDERSON. The third.

Secretary UDALL. Well, let's see, yes, the third, to my way of thinking, Mr. Chairman, would be the Reclamation Act of 1902 and again this was a great land reform piece of legislation with the 160-acre

limitation in it. This also determined what we were going to do in the areas in the West with regard to our water resources.

The fourth, I would say, was the Antiquities Act of 1906, in which the Congress authorized the President to proclaim national monu

ments.

The fifth would be the Leeds Act of 1911, which authorized the establishment of a system of national forests in the States east of the Mississippi and, of course, great work has been done over the years in this area.

I think the sixth would be the National Parks Act of 1916 which fixed the status and determined the use of our national park areas. The seventh would be the Rental-Leasing Act of 1920, which is a very basic act, with regard to our public lands, and set up a public lands system with regard to the development and licensing and use of our wealth of public lands.

The eighth was the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 or was it 1935, which, for all practical purposes, closed the public domain and put our grazing lands under a conservation management regime.

There may be others that one could add. There are several that might be legitimately added to this list, but the point that I wanted to make is that each of these pieces of legislation was far-reaching. Each concerned the use of land. Each was a conservation decision. Each was made by the American people through the participation of Congress.

In other words, we have had a period here of nearly 30 years in which, although we have done some very important conservation work, as far as the Congress is concerned a decision of such major importance as the wilderness bill has not been presented to the Congress.

I think, in another way, maybe the land and water conservation fund bill, which this committee will soon consider as S. 859, might belong in this category of great long-term decisions.

But this country, and this is another thing that I have learned, is looked to all over the world for its pioneering in conservation. We did the wrong kind of pioneering for about a century but, beginning with Teddy Roosevelt, we started down the right road and our national park system, for example, is looked to all over the world, and people come from all over the world to see this pattern of land management and land use, and to find out what our national park system is all about.

Our Forest Service, forest system, is likewise considered pioneering, and we have pioneered in forest wilderness areas. It was foresters themselves, men like Bob Marshall and Aldo Leopold, and others, who saw that there should be wilderness areas as part of our national forest system.

So it seems to me that this decision was worthy of the type of complete and thoroughgoing consideration this committee has given it in the past over the years, with all of these hearings, and that it does truly represent a great conservation decision which we must make.

The truth of the matter is, Mr. Chairman, that only a few countries. in the world have a wilderness option. It is only the nations that are on large continents, only the nations that still have untouched virgin land, that have an option today to have a wilderness system such as we are talking about.