Laserfiche WebLink
<br />000816, <br /> <br />Also, the .Secretary under section 603 is directed to regu13te only those <br />uses taking place on the wilderness area review lands that ~ay im?air <br />their wilr.erness chZlracteristics. In this regard, the ",'xisting uses" <br />qualificatio:l OIl t:.e Secretary's authori':.y does nut, for eY3I11?l.:?, neces- <br />sarily fix as an u?9<?r limit the exact r.u::-b.?r of cattle ,-,.Hently grazing <br />in an area. If w~rc cattle could gr3ze there wit~out having any more <br />impact on an area's wilderness suitability, then section 603 would permit <br />the Se-=retary to allo\-I t:.e additional cattle to graze. If the p'lysical <br />or aesthetic im~ct is altered, however, the activity.~us':. be regulated <br />to the extent necessary to prevent Lcpair~ent of the area'~ wilderness <br />suitability. <br /> <br />The Secretary under . section 603 is not prevented from acting pursuant to <br />other parts of FLp:.;A and other statutory authority in order to regulate <br />existing mining and grazing activities so that a land use ~ana9~~ent <br />objective other than the preservation of an area's wilderness character- <br />istics can be met. For exam?le, under the Taylor Grazing Act, ~3 D.S.C.. <br />. S315(b), the Secretarv of the Interior may revoke a grazing permit if he. <br />determines that due to drought a particular range can no lenger support <br />a certain n~er of a~imals. Section 603 should not be read to prohibit <br />such a revocation in a Hilderness study area if justified for reasons <br />other than ~ilderness orotection. Section 603 does not, in other words, <br />freeze uses at their existing levels, if, for reasons unrelated to Hil- <br />derness protection, the.Secretary ceter~ines they must be curtailed in <br />brdet to carry out his other statutory responsibilities. <br /> <br />,. <br />I <br />I' <br />I <br />II <br /> <br />Several other issues need to be e~1'lorej to round out my answer to your <br />question. First,.I eu-U of the opinbn the word "US2S" as found i:1 section <br />603(c) should be construed to iC.2an only z.ctivities actually ta~ing place <br />as of the date of the passage of FLF:':';. A rore general meaning of the <br />word which ~~uld s~cifically authorize new uses of the land to take place <br />so long as they occurred in the sa-ne rr.~cr.er and degree as an existing use <br />took place on the date of the passage of FLJ';.:';, is inco:1sistent \o,'ith the <br />modifier "existing," and the verb n\o,'as bcl:1g conducted," and is inconsis- <br />tent with the legislative history of the section. Congress' intent was <br />to protect actunl uses of a particular area as they 1.lere being conducted <br />on the dnte of passage of the A~t, rather than to protect uses initiated <br />or eXp3:1:Jed after the Act passed without regard to their if:",?act on vilder- <br />lless. The objective Ivas to protect ongoing activities fro;:! curtnilment <br />for wilderness protection purposes, ra~~er than grant a blanket exemption <br />from allY form of regulation. <br /> <br />1his means specifically that if a mlnlng claim had previously been loca- <br />ted in a 1.lilderness study area, but \-.'as not bdn] acti'lely \o,Qrked, it <br />could not be reactivated after passage of FLP;.t; \>'i theut being subject <br />to such regulations as L~C Secretary dee"\ed necessary to protect the <br />area's I-lildernoss c113racter istics fro:;] i:n?airment. I t is, in other words, <br />the actual use of the area, and not the existence of some entitlc.nent for. <br />use, which is controlling. <br /> <br />8 <br />