OCR Text |
Show Moss Says Recreational Lands Should Be Transferred Free i velopment of sites within a State which have recreational potentials poten-tials as S rpkaetastaineedrn tials as State parks or State recreational rec-reational areas. Many of these lands are close to cities, and would lend themselves to development de-velopment of recreational sites suitable for a weekend or a Sunday Sun-day outing. "ORRRC especially wants to see them set aside now before they are used for other purposes. The ORRRC report, therefore, recommends: "Surface rights to surplus Federal Fed-eral lands suitable for recreation should be transferred without cost to State or local governments govern-ments with reversion clauses.' He commended Secretary o:' the Interior Udall for takin specific steps to encourage state acquisition of Federal land: j "One of the first bills I introduced intro-duced when I came to the Senate 3 years ago was S. 1032 86th Congress, 1st Session which would have amended the act of June 14, 1926, to provide that the 640-acre provision should not apply ap-ply to the conveyance of lands for State park purposes, and that such land should be conveyed without cost. After considerable discussion, Congress passed legis- Senator Frank E. Moss CD-Utah) CD-Utah) has told the Senate that Federal lands should be transferred trans-ferred to the states for recreation purposes without cost. In his statement, Moss pointed out that this is the policy recommended rec-ommended in the recent report of the Outdoor Recreation Resources Re-sources Review Commission. And the Senator said that, in the first session of the 86th Congress, Con-gress, he introduced a bill which provided that the 640-acre limitation limi-tation then in effect should be removed on conveyances of Federal Fed-eral land for State park purposes, and that such conveyances should be without cost. He commended members ol the Senate who served on the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, and said: "The report dramatizes a situation situ-ation we have known was shaping shap-ing up for some time that we are now a highly urban country with 63 per cent of our people living on 10 per cent of our land. Our big metropolitan centers become be-come more heavily congested each day, increasing the need of the people to escape from the crowded cities to seek fresh air and relaxation in the great outdoors. out-doors. Our parks, our open-air recreational areas and our beaches are no longer a luxury but a necessity. "By the year 2000 the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission has calculated our population will have doubled, and the demand for fresh air recreational rec-reational facilities will have tripled. tri-pled. There is still considerable j land available for recreational pursuits, but the trouble is that much of it is too far for city Hwpllers who have only a few lation of this type, but the bill did only part of what we set out to do. The 640-acre limitation was lifted, and a State or territory terri-tory was empowered to file for 6,400 acres a year for not more than three recreational sites. This was a tenfold increase, and, therefore, progress. But nothing was done to ease the financial problem to the states the state still had to pay 50 per cent of the fair market value of the land. I accepted the bill, and hoped the time would come when we could again consider the matter. "I 1960, only 1,954 acres of Federal land were transferred in the entire nation to states and localities for park and recreational recrea-tional purposes under the provisions provi-sions of the new law. "In the summer of 1961, Secretary Secre-tary of the Interior Udall, who saw that the price of the lands was stopping any real effort on the part of the states and localities locali-ties to acquire Federal lands for park and recreational uses, reduced re-duced the price to $2.50 an acre or to an annual rent of 25 cents an acre. "This action was a definite spur to the acquisition program in 1961 some 4,768 acres of Federal land were transferred. But still is a modest amount in comparison with the mounting demand for outdoor recreational sites." hours for recreation, and that land which is available is being gobbled up for industrial or suburban sub-urban development in some way. The primary need is for more recreational areas near metropolitan metro-politan centers which are suitable suit-able for a Sunday outing." Senator Moss pointed out that the Commission stated the Federal Fed-eral Government should preserve "scenic areas, natural wonders, primitive areas, and historic sites," and added: "I am confident that the Can-yonland Can-yonland National Park which I seek to authorize in the State of Utah would fall into this latter category. The National Park Service says of it: "Canyonlands would undoubtedly undoubt-edly be one of the greatest scenic attractions in the national park system, and furthermore states 'Its rugged landscape contains a profusion of impressive red rock canyons, sandstone spires, arches, and other erosive features that may well be of worldwide significance.' "The ORRRC report also recommends rec-ommends management of Federal Fed-eral lands for the broadest possible pos-sible recreational benefits consistent con-sistent with other essential uses, which I contend my Canyonlands bill would do, and suggests that the Federal Government should cooperate with the states by giving giv-ing financial and technical assistance, assis-tance, promoting interstate arrangements, ar-rangements, and generally assuming as-suming a vigorous and cooperative coopera-tive leadership in a nationwide recreational effort. This is obviously ob-viously a sound approach." And stating that his particular interest is in the role the ORRRC recommends for the States, Moss continued: "The report specifically coun-- coun-- sels acquisition of land and de- |