the refuges and ranges under his jurisdiction and designate additions to the system which he thinks appropriate; and (4) other units as may be designated within any federally owned areas by officials authorized to do so under the act, including any area or areas acquired by those officials through gift or bequest. H.R. 299 and H.R. 496 also provide that the Secretary of the Interior may designate areas within Indian reservations.

Section 2(e) of H.R. 766 provides that any proposed modification, elimination, or addition to the wilderness system, after notice and opportunity for hearing, shall be reported to the President, who shall then recommend to the Congress those changes which he deems appropriate. Such recommendations shall take effect upon the expiration of the first full and continuous session of Congress after the recommendations are received by Congress unless a concurrent resolution is passed in opposition.

Section 2(e) of H.R. 293 and H.R. 1925 contains essentially the same provisions as section 2(e) of H.R. 776 except that any alterations to the system made through this procedure must be carried out during the 15-year period following the effective date of this act. H.R. 293 and H.R. 1925 go on to provide that later additions to the system or areas shall be made only by Congress.

Section 2(f) of H.R. 299 and H.R. 496 provides that the Secretaries of Agriculture or Interior shall recommend to the Congress, modifications, eliminations, or additions to the system, which will become effective after the expiration of the first 120 days of continuous session following the date such recommendations are received, provided, however, Congress does not adopt a concurrent resolution in opposition thereto during the 120-day period.

The Commission's interest in these bills arises from the fact that they would set up a wilderness system embracing lands having existing and potential power value subject to the Commission's licensing jurisdiction under part I of the Federal Power Act. A license for project works on reserved lands of the United States may be issued by this Commission under section 4(e) of the Power Act "only after a finding *** that the license will not interfere or be inconsistent with the purpose for which such reservation was created or required." In addition, such licenses contain conditions deemed necessary for the adequate protection and utilization of any reservation involved.

Under the provisions of section 24 of the Federal Power Act 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.

We interpret section 4(e) of the Power Act as authorizing this Commission to issue license for construction of power facilities in presently designated “primitive," "wilderness," "wild," "canoe," or "roadless" areas, except in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area of Minnesota, and in national parks and monuments.

We believe that these bills would not preclude the continued exercise of that jurisdiction within the proposed wilderness system. However, in view of the possibility that these bills could be interpreted as precluding any licensing authority under the Federal Power Act, we could, therefore, foresee serious administrative difficulties in attempting to license hydroelectric facilities in those areas if they are enacted in their present form.

Furthermore, it will be noted that the provisions of section 2(a) of each bill would provide for the inclusion into the proposed wilderness system additional areas within national forests as may be designated by the Secretary of Agriculture after notice and opportunity for hearing. Because this section covers such a vast land area, it is difficult to adequately determine future power potential within these forests. Therefore, we believe that the Federal Power Commission should retain jurisdiction over all portions of national forests incorporated into the wilderness system subsequent to enactment of any one of these bills.

This Commission has under license 10 powerplants now in operation (813,500 kilowatts) and 4 under construction pursuant to a license (222,000 kilowatts), all of which are affected by licensed reservoirs located in primitive areas only. A potential project (150,000 kilowatts) covered by a license application now pending would affect the Flat Top Primitive Area in Colorado. The Senate passed version of the Wilderness Act (S. 174, 87th Cong.) which was referred to the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee on September 7, 1961, carries an amendment (bill, sec. 11) adopted on the floor of the Senate on September 6, 1961 (Congressional Record, pp. 17229-17231), providing that

nothing in the proposed Wilderness Act "shall be construed as superseding, modifying, repealing, or otherwise affecting" the Federal Power Act. This mendment was recommended in the Commission's original report on S. 174, but the Commission in a later report on March 3, 1961, indicated that a more limited amendment saving the Commission's licensing jurisdiction with respect to primitive areas only would be adequate. (See Congressional Record, Sept. 6, 1961, p. 17229.)

Although we do not oppose the broader amendment carried in S. 174 as passed by the Senate, we still believe that in view of the very limited hydroelectric potential in existing wild, wilderness, or canoe areas (in contrast to the substantial potential in primitive areas and national forests lands which may be added to the system), the public interest in the development of waterpower resources through licenses issued under the Federal Power Act will be adequately protected, and at the same time be consistent with the objectives of these bills, if the jurisdiction of the Commission is preserved expressly with respect to primitive areas and national forest lands later added to the wilderness system. This would be accomplished by adding a new subsection 3(c) (7) to H.R. 293 and H.R. 776 and a new subsection 3(c) (6) to H.R. 299, H.R. 496, and H.R. 1925, each such new subsection to read as follows:

"To the contrary notwithstanding, no provisions of this Act shall be construed as superseding, modifying, repealing, or otherwise affecting the provisions of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 792-825r) with respect to primitive areas as referred to in section 2(a) of this Act or with respect to additional areas of national forest land which may later be added to the wilderness system pursuant to that subsection."

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

FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION,
Washington, D.C., May 4, 1962.

Hon. WAYNE N. ASPIN ALL,

Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Enclosed are three copies of the revised report of the Federal Power Commission on the subject bills. It is requested that this report be substituted for the Commission's previous report on these bills which was submitted to your committee by our letter dated April 27, 1961.

It is contemplated that this report may be released to the public within 3 working days from the date of this letter unless there is a request that its release be withheld.

Sincerely yours,

JOSEPH C. SWIDLER, Chairman.

FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION REPORT ON H.R. 1762, H.R. 2008, AND H.R. 8237, 87TH CONGRESS

(Bills to establish a national wilderness preservation system for the permanent good of the whole people, and for other purposes)

These bills, to be known respectively as "Wilderness Acts," propose to secure for the American people the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness by establishing a national wilderness preservation system comprised of federally owned lands taken from the following: (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," the primitive areas only being subject to review by the Secretary within 15 years from the effective date of this act as to their suitability for inclusion into the wilderness system, the results of which are recommended to the President; (2) national parks or monuments embracing "a continuous area of 5,000 acres or more without roads," subject to review by the Secretary within 10 years from the effective date of this act as to their inclusion into the wilderness system, the results of which are then recommended to the President; (3) such wildlife refuges and game ranges, or portions thereof, as may be recommended subsequent to enactment of the bill by the Secretary of the Interior to the President within 10 years following the effective date of this act; and (4) acquisitions of privately owned land within any portion of such system under either Secretary's jurisdiction and, in addition, acquisitions by gift or bequest to the respective Secretaries.

Sections 3(b) (1), 3(c) (1), and 3(d) (1) of the respective bills provide, among other things, that the President shall advise the House and the Senate, before the convening of Congress each year, of the areas he recommends for incorporation into the system. Thereupon, under the provisions of section 3 (f) of each bill any recommendations so made 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 they were received by the House and Senate, provided however, the Congress did not approve a concurrent resolution in opposition thereto.

The Commission's interest in these bills arises from the fact that they would set up a wilderness system embracing lands having existing and potential power value subject to the Commission's authority under part I of the Federal Power Act. A license for project works on reserved lands of the United States may be issued by this Commission under section 4 (e) of the Power Act, "only after a finding *** that the license will not interfere or be inconsistent with the purpose for which such reservation was created or required." In addition, such licenses contain conditions deemed necessary for the adequate protection and utilization of any reservation involved.

Under the provisions of section 24 of the Federal Power Act 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.

We interpret section 4 (e) of the Power Act as authorizing this Commission to issue licenses for construction of power facilities in presently designated primitive, wilderness, wild, or canoe areas, except in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area of Minnesota, and in national parks and monuments.

We believe that enactment of any one of these bills would not preclude the continued exercise of that jurisdiction within the proposed wilderness system. However, in view of the possibility that these bills could be interpreted as precluding any licensing authority under the Federal Power Act, we could, therefore, foresee serious administrative difficulties in attempting to license hydroelectric facilities in those areas if any one of such bills should be enacted in its present form.

This Commission has under license 10 powerplants now in operation (813,500 kilowatts) and 4 under construction pursuant to a license (222,000 kilowatts), all of which are affected by licensed reservoirs located in primitive areas only. A potential project (150,000 kilowatts) covered by a license application now pending would affect the Flat Top Primitive Area in Colorado.

The Senate passed version of the Wilderness Act (S. 174, 87th Cong.) which was referred to the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee on September 7, 1961, carries an amendment (bill, sec. 11) adopted on the floor of the Senate on September 6, 1961 (Congressional Record, pp. 17229-17231), providing that nothing in the proposed Wilderness Act "shall be construed as superseding, modifying, repealing, or otherwise affecting" the Federal Power Act. This amendment was recommended in the Commission's original report on S. 174, but the Commission in a later report on March 3, 1961, indicated that a more limited amendment saving the Commission's licensing jurisdiction with respect to primitive areas only would be adequate. (See Congressional Record, Sept. 6, 1961, p. 17229.)

Although we do not oppose the broader amendment carried in S. 174 as passed by the Senate, we still believe that in view of the very limited hydroelectric potential in existing wild, wilderness, or canoe areas (in contrast to the substantial potential in primitive areas), the public interest in the development of waterpower resources through licenses issued under the Federal Power Act will be adequately protected, and at the same time be consistent with the objectives of these bills, if the jurisdiction of the Commission is preserved expressly with respect to primitive areas only. This would be accomplished by adding to H.R. 1762 and H.R. 2008 a new subsection 4 (c) (8), and to H.R. 8237 a new subsection 6(c) (8), each such new subsection to read as follows:

"To the contrary notwithstanding, no provisions of this Act shall be construed as superseding, modifying, repealing, or otherwise affecting the provisions of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 792-825r) with respect to primitive areas as referred to in section 3(b) (1) of this Act."

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

Mrs. Prost. Our first witness this morning is the Honorable John P. Saylor, the ranking minority member of the committee, a member of the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, and the author of H.R. 776.

Mr. SAYLOR. I am pleased to present this statement to the committee.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN P. SAYLOR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA

Mr. SAYLOR. The people in western Pennsylvania whom I have the privilege of representing in Congress, like those in all other regions of our country, are deeply interested in our American wilderness. They know that it was out of the wilderness that our pioneers developed this country.

My people are proud of this Nation, proud of its great cities, its magnificent stretches of well-traveled highways, the railroads that link us together as a nation, the marvelous airplanes that span the whole continental sweep of our skies in only a few hours, and proud of the industry and labor that in our American way have made it possible for us to inhabit this continent so comfortably and with such excellent opportunities for enjoying the cultural advantages of modern American civilization.

And the people of western Pennsylvania, the people of all America, love the land which gave us these advantages and made it possible for us to realize our great freedoms not only our freedom from fear and want but also those other great freedoms of religion, of the press, of speech that have come to a people so righly endowed with naturaĺ resources and thereby blessed with independence.

So wherever there still remain unspoiled areas of our original wilderness we look on the land with special pride, and we are glad that not all of America has been used up. Some of it is still as God made it, although many of us may have to go a long way to find the unspoiled back country.

We want to know that there will always be these areas of wilderness remaining unspoiled, not only for ourselves but for our children, and their children, on and on into the future.

That is the explanation of the great protest which arose against the Echo Park Dam when there was an attempt to build it in one of these areas of scenic wild beauty.

In both the 83d and the 84th Congress, I represented the people of the 22d District of Pennsylvania, and indeed the people of all America, in a strong determination that no such structure should needlessly be placed in any of our sanctuaries of wilderness. Few at first were the voices that I heard in support of this determination, but when the American people understood the issues at stake in the Echo Park controversy, I began to receive letters of encouragement from citizens in all parts of our land.

Near the close of the 83d Congress the Speaker of the House told reporters that Congressmen had received more protests against the Echo Park Dam than letters on any other subject. When the 84th Congress finally passed the Colorado bill, it was without the Echo Park Dam, and it did include a declaration that no dam or reservoir

under the act should be constructed within any national park or monument.

It had been demonstrated that the American people favor the protection of such areas.

Of course, we want these areas. We want them not only as examples of our once unbroken wilderness; we want them because we are an outdoor people. We want to know that there always will be parks and forests and fishing streams and hunting grounds for Americans to enjoy.

We know that such places throughout most of the country are getting fewer and fewer. Places where you can camp beyond the roar of traffic, hike without dodging automobiles, fish without hooking a buddy, or hunt without being afraid of being shot are getting harder and harder to find. And as these privileges become less plentiful, we suddenly realize that we want them very much.

We want the wilderness, for we deeply need it in many ways. We need the physical strength and the stamina that men and women know when they face the wilderness on their own. The frontier-the wilderness was one of the things which encouraged immigrants to become good Americans and inspired Katherine Lee Bates to call America herself beautiful for those pioneer

* pilgrim feet,

Whose stern impassioned stress

A thoroughfare for freedom beat
Across the wilderness!

In a century and a half this Nation was established the whole continental frontier had been mastered. The United States was established from Atlantic to Pacific, and the sons of these hardy pioneers with their inherited strength were transforming America's natural resources into the greatest national prosperity the world has ever known.

This is a century of great prowess for us. It is likewise a century of decision. Shall we, exploiting all our resources, reduce also every last bit of our wilderness to roadsides of easy access and areas of convenience, and ourselves soften into an easygoing people, deteriorating in luxury and ripening for the hardy conquerors of another century?

I hope not, and in our preservation of wilderness and our encouragement of the hardy recreation that puts a man or a woman or a redblooded child on his own in the face of primitive hardships we can help meet this need for maintaining a nation of strong, healthy

citizens.

As the magazine Newsweek reported on September 26, 1955, in an article entitled "Are We Becoming Soft?" many of us, including President Dwight D. Eisenhower, are concerned with this question. As Maj. Gen. Lewis B. Hershey, the Director of Selective Service, is there quoted, I too believe that "we are not inherently a nation of softies, but it's a harder fight for us to stay fit than for a lot of less privileged people."

As General Hershey observes, "Our kids are all right, but autos, innerspring mattresses, and regulated heating makes it tougher for us to stay fit."

I agree with General Hershey when he says, "We've got to stay vigorous and still enjoy our luxury," and I suggest that our wilderness areas give us our best chance to do this.