'HE student body at a well-known college contained three young men for each young lady. A certain coed at this school, with physical qualifications necessary to compete successfully even if the odds had been reversed, had a pleasant problem. To whom would she grant the pleasure of her company at each social event?

The young lady worked out a highly satisfactory solution-for her at any rate. She accepted all requests for dates, and then, shortly before the anticipated event, she selected the suitor of her choice and notified the other exasperated young men of her decision. This coed must have used some sort of classification system in her selection process, but the criteria were never determined by her anxious applicants.

What does this have to do with land classification and the Bureau of Land Management? What is classification? Webster says "It is the placing of subject matter into classes which have systematic relationships."

The classification process requires the use of standards, or guides, to tell the classifier how to treat each of the items being considered. All of us, like the young lady previously mentioned, classify things every day. When we go into a store to buy a hat, we classify the hats offered into those which are suitable and those which are not. Then purchase the one desired from the suitable group.

Land classification is a specialized form of this process. BLM is not the only organization engaged in land classification. Many communities have zoning ordinances which set aside areas for commercial, industrial, and residential use. This is a form of land classification.

What is Land Classification in BLM?

The Bureau of Land Management uses the land classification process to determine what should be done with the vacant unappropriated public domain. Many complex questions are involved. Should specific areas be retained in Federal ownership or should they be transferred to non-Federal ownership? If retained under Federal administration, what should they be used for, and by what agency should they be managed? If transferred to non-Federal ownership, should they go to State or local governments, private organizations, or individuals?

These questions are answered by classifying land for its "highest and best use, consistent with the public interest."

Highest and Best Use

This is the use for which the land appears best suited, after careful evaluation of all the physical and economic factors affecting the land. These physical characteristics include topography, vegetation, drainage, water supply, mineral character, climate, elevation, access, and so forth. Other less tangible factors, such as recreation potential, wildlife requirements, alternative sites available, and general public needs must also be considered.

The land classifier may conclude that a tract of land is equally well suited for two or more related uses. For instance, a tract may be equally suitable as a site for a roadside park, gas station, or motel. At this point, the public interest must be measured to determine which use should be recognized in the classification.

PUBLIC RECREATION. Proper land classification preserves areas having recreation potential for public use.

Bureau employees would be poor public servants if they made decisions which were not in the public interest. What, then, is "public interest?" It has been defined as that which will benefit the most people for the longest period of time, or that which will do the greatest good for the greatest number of people over the long haul. These are good general explanations, but what should be done in specific situations?

Perhaps an examination of the elements of public interest, one at a time, will help answer this question. Consider the following as possible guidelines:

• Government decisions must benefit the largest possible number of people.

• The Government must receive a fair return for its property in terms of money or other values.

• Benefits must be weighed against monetary and social costs.

• Executive actions must carry out the intent of the law and not merely its letter.

• With respect to individuals, the Government must act as a prudent landowner. With respect to the public as a whole, the Government must act as a representative of all the people.

• Bureau actions must be based on priorities. First things must be done first.

Where the individual has rights, the Government must protect them by all means. Where the individual seeks privileges, he must prove to the Government that he is entitled to them.

These are but a few of the many facets of public interest that a land classifier must consider. When he makes his decision, he balances the possible uses of the land against the various elements of public interest, and decides how the land should be classified.

While no two classifications involve exactly the same factors, they do tend to group in recognizable types. The systematically related classes used by BLM include:

Under What Authority Does BLM Classify Land?

Prior to the passage of the Taylor Grazing Act in 1934, the Bureau had no general land classification authority. A wide variety of activities were being pursued on public lands, many of which were in direct conflict with each other. The uses being made of the land were often not those for which the lands were best suited. Some of the lands were being abused in this first come, first served situation. Lands were being patented which were needed for public purposes. Users of the land had little security of tenure.

To solve this situation, the Taylor Grazing Act provided that lands should not be transferred out of Federal ownership unless they were classified

n.

At present all of the vacant unappropriated lands are not classified, and it will be many years before a complete classification is needed or acBLM complished. Since classifications are based on

Tavior

general variety

blic las ct wit

land

3 went be

gabesed

Lands

for pa

ecurity of

Tarlor

they wer

だ

social and economic factors, as well as the physical characteristics of land, they will change as social and economic factors change. Therefore, in many cases it would be a waste of time and money to make detailed classifications before these factors have reached "maturity" and can be evaluated on a relatively stable basis.

Over 180 million acres of vacant public domain are subject to Taylor Grazing Act classification. This is a vast source of natural resources-land, minerals, forage and timber. The goods in this reservoir are available for present and future use

t be tra by the citizens of the United States. They are

partially used now, on a lease or harvest basis,

by means of grazing permits, timber sales, and mineral leases. However, as our population increases and expands some of the lands may be needed for other public or private uses, such as recreational areas, school sites, industrial locations, or residential subdivisions.

Land classification is essential to this process since it provides the basis for deciding under what circumstances each parcel of land should be used. This requires foresight and planning. Areas which will ultimately be needed for some form of public use should not be transferred to other forms of ownership before the public need becomes established. By the same token, lands required for private use must be placed on the market in a manner designed to help, rather than hinder, private development in the area. Thus, land classification becomes the key to proper use and equitable distribution of these public lands.

The actual classification of a tract of land is prompted in two ways. Applications for land may be filed by individual citizens. Upon receipt of the application, the land included is investigated to see if it can be classified as suitable for the use and title transfer proposed. If it cannot be so classified, the application must be rejected.

Classifications are also made through a Bureau planned program of evaluating the public lands in a specific area and classifying those lands on which effective decisions can be made. In such cases some of the lands may be classified as available for transfer to non-Federal ownership under an appropriate land law.

(Continued on page 12)

5