Secretary of the Interior to review portions of the national park system and the national wildlife refuges and game ranges under his jurisdiction, with respect to their suitability for preservation as wilderness. The appropriate Secretary is then required to submit recommendations to the President who, in turn, is required to submit his recommendations to the Congress. Each recommendation of the President to designate an area as wilderness becomes effective only by a subsequent act of Congress. These subsequent acts will need to contain any provisions that are deemed appropriate with respect to nonwilderness uses of the areas, the acquisition of State and privately owned lands within the areas, and the acceptance of gifts or bequests of land or private contributions for wilderness purposes.

The Department of Agriculture suggests the deletion of the sentence on page 5 of the bill, beginning on line 8 and ending on line 13. We concur in this recommendation and believe the deletion of this sentence is essential to an effective bill. The purpose of the amendment is to make it clear that the Department of Agriculture may continue to administer these areas as primitive unless Congress affirmatively passes legislation providing otherwise.

In addition to this amendment, we are enclosing several technical and perfecting amendments, which we believe are desirable to remove ambiguities.

The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the administration's program. Sincerely yours,

JOHN A. CARVER, Jr., Assistant Secretary of the Interior.

TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO H.R. 9162

1. Page 10, lines 15 and 16, delete "laws of the United States pertaining to mineral leasing and mining" and insert "the United States mining laws and all Jaws pertaining to mineral leasing."

The reference to laws of the United States "pertaining to" mining has no precise meaning. For example, it might be construed to include the Materials Act of July 31, 1947 (61 Stat. 681; 30 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended. We assume that such construction was not intended. The amendment will clarify the subject because the term "United States mining laws" has a well established meaning and has been given congressional recognition in many statutes.

2. Page 12, lines 6 and 7, delete the words "issued under the Mineral Leasing Act" and insert ", permits, and licenses."

This deletion is made because there are several mineral leasing acts which apply to the national forest areas designated by this act as wilderness. They are the Mineral Leasing Act of February 25, 1920 (30 U.S.C. 181), as amended; the Acquired Lands Mineral Leasing Act of August 7, 1947 (30 U.S.C. 351–359) ; and the mineral leasing authority granted to the Secretary of Agriculture under a number of statutes with respect to certain acquired lands. This authority of the Secretary of Agriculture was transferred to the Secretary of the Interior by Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1946 (60 Stat. 1099). See title 43, Code of Federal Regulations, sec. 200.31 et seq.

This amendment contains a reference to permits and licenses because the Secretary of the Interior also has authority under the above laws to issue these instruments with respect to certain minerals.

3. Page 12, line 12, change the period in this line to a comma, and insert "permitted, or licensed."

The reason for this amendment is the same as given for the insertion under amendment No. 2.

4. Page 12, lines 16 and 17, delete the words "leasing under the Mineral Leasing Act" and insert "disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral leasing."

The reasons for this amendment are the same as those given for amendment No. 2.

5. Page 12, line 5, delete the word "filed" and insert the word "existing." The use of the word "filed" is ambiguous. In the context of the bill an argument might be made that the word refers to a claim for which an application for patent has been filed. We believe this meaning was not intended and that the proper reference is to valid claims existing on the 1973 date. It should be noted that the mere filing, of a notice of location under State law does not necessarily indicate that the claim is valid.

6. Page 11, line 8, delete the words "and patents to mining claims".

The deletion of these words in this provision of the bill will leave no doubt that the bill does not purport to constrict the rights of any prior patentees under the mining laws with respect to the use of the surface of the patented lands. It could not do so in any event, without provision for just compensation. A similar provision with respect to subsequent patentees is contained in other provisions of this subsection, so these words serve no useful purpose.

7. Page 11, line 11, insert the words ", subject to valid existing rights," between the words "hereafter" and "all".

The requirement of the bill that all patents issued after the effective date of this act shall convey title to mineral deposits with a reservation to the United States of all title to the surface of the lands must be subject to "valid existing rights". The owner of a valid mining claim perfected under the mining laws prior to the effective date of this act has already acquired a possessory title to the surface of the land and any patent issued on such a claim after the effective date of this act must convey title to both the land and mineral deposits therein, unless provision is made for just compensation. See Solicitor's Opinion, M-36467 (August 28, 1957).

8. Page 12, line 6, insert the following after "1973":

"Mining claims located after the effective date of this Act within the boundaries of wilderness areas designated by this Act shall create no rights in excess of those rights which may be patented under the provisions of this subsection."

In order for the bill to constrict the rights acquired by a mineral patentee of a mining claim located subsequent to the effective date of this Act, it must likewise constrict the rights acquired under such locations, which this amendment will do.

9. Page 14, line 14, delete "either (1)"; and on lines 17 through 19 delete "(2) vacant, unreserved, and unappropriated mineral or nonmineral lands in the same State, not exceeding the value of the surrounded land, in exchange for the surrounded land", and insert the following: "the State-owned land shall be exchanged for federally owned land in the same State of approximately equal value under authorities available to the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture".

In the case of State-owned land completely surrounded by land within a national forest wilderness area, the bill provides two alternatives: (1) The State may be given reasonable access rights, or (2) the State land may be exchanged for "vacant, unreserved, and unappropriated mineral or nonmineral lands in the same State".

The Department of the Interior now has authority to make such exchanges under the Taylor Grazing Act. The Department of Agriculture also has authority to acquire inholdings in exchange for national forest lands (act of March 20, 1922, 42 Stat. 465, as amended, 43 Stat. 1090; act of March 1, 1911, 36 Stat. 961, as amended, and other acts applicable to specific areas).

We believe that the language of the bill under consideration should refer to both of these existing authorities. The present law would not be changed.

Hon. WAYNE N. ASPIN ALL,

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Washington, D.C., December 9, 1963.

Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,

House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request of November 22, 1963, for a report on 19 listed bills, all of which are to establish a National Wilderness Preservation System for the permanent good of the whole people, and for other purposes.

This Department has consistently recommended the enactment of wilderness legislation insofar as it would affect the national forests, beginning with such legislative proposals in the 85th Congress and furthered by our strong support of legislation introduced in the 88th Congress with a few suggested amendments. We strongly support the objective of providing statutory status for wilderness-type areas.

We recognize that H.R. 9162, H.R. 9163, H.R. 9164, and H.R. 9165, which are identical, represent the combined result of intensive efforts for a solution to provision of statutory protection for wilderness areas and provision for orderly expansion of the system.

We believe that H.R. 9162, H.R. 9163, H.R. 9164, and H.R. 9165 would be progressive legislation for goals long sought. Therefore, insofar as they would affect this Department, we recommend favorable action on them by your committee provided they are amended as hereinafter recommended.

The sentence starting in line 8 on page 5 would deal with the status of primitive areas as they exist on the date of the act or as modified "during the 10 years after the enactment of this Act or until such time as an Act of Congress with respect thereto has become effective." This language could be construed as meaning that after 10 years following the date of the act primitive areas could no longer be administered as such by the Secretary of Agriculture unless an act of Congress with respect thereto had become effective before the expiration of the 10 years.

We have previously expressed our support for provisions which would have made the primitive areas a part of the wilderness system, and which would have provided for their review and action, or opportunity for action, both by the executive branch and the Congress as to their continued administration as a part of the system. The treatment of primitive areas has been one of the major issues with respect to wilderness legislation. We now agree with the provisions of these bills that would provide for the review of the primitive areas and for their designation as wilderness areas and their administration as a part of the wilderness system only if so provided by an act of Congress. These provisions would provide an orderly arrangement.

The national forest lands which are now classified as primitive areas have been so classified and have been administered as primitive areas since 1939 or earlier. We do not believe it should be required that these areas would cease to be administered as primitive areas without consideration of the facts relating to the particular areas that would be so affected. These facts would be ascertained in the review provided for such areas and could be considered in connection with the recommendations which would be required to be submitted as to each such area. We, therefore, recommend that the sentence beginning in line 8 on page 5 be deleted.

Another provision on which we wish to comment for purposes of clarification is that in section 5(b) concerning ingress or egress to privately owned lands and property rights. We understand that the reference in lines 4 and 5 on page 15 to "other such areas similarly situated" refers to other surrounded areas of private holdings within wilderness areas, and that this reference does not compare the surrounded areas of private holdings within wilderness areas to private holdings surrounded by Federal lands which are not in wilderness

areas.

The Bureau of the Budge advises that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the administration's program.

Sincerely yours,

Hon. WAYNE N. ASPINALL,

CHARLES MURPHY.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Washington, D.C., January 9, 1964.

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

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Reference is made to your request to the Secretary of Defense for the views of the Department of Defense with respect to H.R. 295, H.R. 930, H.R. 991, H.R. 1023, H.R. 1114, H.R. 2001, H.R. 2530, H.R. 2880, H.R. 2894, H.R. 3878, H.R. 5246, H.R. 5808, H.R. 7877, H.R. 9070, H.R. 9101, H.R. 9162, H.R. 9163, H.R. 9164, and H.R. 9165, 88th-Congress, bills to establish a National Wilderness Preservation System for the permanent good of the whole people, and for other purposes. The Department of the Army has been assigned responsibility for expressing the views of the Department of Defense on these bills.

These bills would establish a National Wilderness Preservation System to be composed of certain areas within the national forests, the national park system, the national wildlife refuges, and game ranges, and such additional public lands as may be included under procedures set forth in the bills, in order to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness. The wilderness system would be devoted to the public purposes of recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use and, in order to attain these objectives, the bills would impose certain restrictions on use and developments within the system.

Section 3 of the various bills sets out the areas of Federal lands in the national forests, park system and wildlife refuges and game ranges which are to be designated as part of the wilderness preservation system, or considered for such designation. In each bill a procedure is established that will assure review of every area by the Congress prior to its final inclusion in the wilderness system. Section 3(d) (1) (C) of H.R. 9070, H.R. 9101, H.R. 9162, H.R. 9163, H.R. 9164, and H.R. 9165 would also assure pertinent Federal agencies, including the Department of Defense, the opportunity to participate in such review. The Department of the Army, on behalf of the Department of Defense, favors such a provision. With respect to the other differing procedures established in the various bills, the Department of the Army defers to the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior, as the Departments having the primary interest in this matter, for expression of views as to the merits of the proposed procedures.

The Department of the Army, on behalf of the Department of Defense, is in favor of the National Wilderness Preservation System designed, as it is, for the permanent good of the whole people. Insofar as defense interests are concerned, the President's authority, as stated in the special provisions of the bills, to establish and maintain facilities needed in the public interest is sufficient to insure that any specific areas within the wilderness system which might become necessary for the national defense would be readily available.

This report has been coordinated within the Department of Defense in accordance with procedures prescribed by the Secretary of Defense.

The Bureau of the Budget advises that, from the standpoint of the administration's program, there is no objection to the presentation of this report for the consideration of the committee.

Sincerely yours,

CYRUS R. VANCE, Secretary of the Army.

FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION-REPORT ON H.R. 295, H.R. 930, H.R. 991, H.R. 1023, H.R. 1114, H.R. 2001, H.R. 2530, H.R. 2880, H.R. 2894, H.R. 3878, H.R. 5246, H.R. 5808, H.R. 7877, H.R. 9070, H.R. 9101, H.R. 9162, H.R. 9163, H.R. 9164, and H.R. 9165, 88TH CONGRESS

Bills to establish a National Wilderness Preservation System for the permanent good of the whole people and for other purposes

1

The bills included in this report have been divided into five separate groups, those in each being identical. All are known as the Wilderness Act and would establish, in accordance with certain prescribed procedures, a National Wilderness Preservation System of federally owned areas for the purpose of securing "for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness." Representative bills from each groups will be discussed in the following order: H.R. 5808, H.R. 9162, and H.R. 295, H.R. 930, and H.R. 9070 considered as a unit.

H.R. 5808 (group 1)

H.R. 5808, introduced in the House on April 23, 1963, by Representative Wydler, is identical with S. 4 as passed by the Senate on April 9, 1963. The committee is referred to the Commission report on S. 4 which is printed in Senate Report No. 109, 88th Congress, 1st session, April 3, 1963, at page 31. This report was supplemented by a letter from the Chairman of the Commission to Senator Clinton P. Anderson, dated March 8, 1963, which is printed in hearings on S. 4 before the Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, 88th Congress, 1st session, February 28 and March 1, 1963, at page 274. There has been no appreciable change in the figures contained in the March 8, 1963, report with respect to the amount of licensed and potential kilowatts of capacity of hydroelectric sites located in primitive areas.

1 Group 1: H.R. 5808.

2

Group 2: H.R. 9162, H.R. 9163, H.R. 9164, and H.R. 9165.

Group 3: H.R. 295 and H.R. 5246.

Group 4: H.R. 930, H.R. 991, H.R. 1023, H.R. 1114, H.R. 2001, H.R. 2530, H.R. 2880, H.R. 2894, H.R. 3878, and H.R. 7877.

Group 5: H.R. 9070 and H.R. 9101.

2 Under the provisions of H.R. 9162 and H.R. 9070 an act of Congress is required to incorporate primitive areas within the wilderness system.

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 shall contain such conditions as are deemed necessary for the adequate protection and utilization of the reserved lands involved.

Section 6(c) (2) of H.R. 5808 authorizes the President to permit the establishment and maintenance of reservoirs, water conservation works, transmission lines, and other facilities needed in the public interest within specific national forest and public domain areas in the wilderness system "upon his determination that such use or uses *** will better serve the interests of the United States and the people thereof than will its denial." 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. 792–825r)." Read together we interpret the bill as providing that 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 that the above-noted finding of consistency and noninterference with the purposes of the wilderness reservation can be made under section 4 (e) of the Federal Power Act.

3

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.

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.

As interpreted above, the Commission favors the purpose of H.R. 5808 to create a wilderness system and offers no objection to its enactment.

H.R. 9162 (group 2)

H.R. 9162, together with identical companion bills H.R. 9163, 9164, and 9165, was introduced in the House on November 19, 1963. The Commission's interest in this bill is the same as its interest in H.R. 5808 discussed above.

The bill would not incorporate in the wilderness system as of its effective date any lands presently within wildlife refuges, game ranges or primitive areas of national forests, but sets up procedures under which portions of such refuges, ranges, and primitive areas 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.

None of the bill's provisions would vacate or rescind any power withdrawal or power reservation creater prior to its enactment. Section 4 (c) of the bill which specifically preserves 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. H.R. 9162 contains no provision comparable to section 11 of H.R. 5808.* The

3 This provision was originally proposed by the Federal Power Commission as an amendment to the predecessors of this bill.

For a detailed description of the reasons in support of a savings clause, we suggest that the committee refer to and incorporate by reference our testimony at the hearings on S. 174 on this subject during the 87th Cong. (See hearings on Feb. 27, 1961, before Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs on S. 174, 87th Cong., pp. 68-76; also hearings on May 8, 1962. before Subcommittee on Public Lands of the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs on S. 174, 87th Cong., pp. 1229–1242.)