Laserfiche WebLink
<br />000821 <br /> <br />FCOINoms <br /> <br />11 The pr~,ious six versions of the Su~a~~ittee bill h~d b~en <br />amended, revised and incorporated into the scvcn;h version of the <br />draft Subco"-ffiittee bill. <br /> <br />]V The draft bill continues: "Once an area has been designat~ <br />for preservation as wilderness, the ;::>rovisions of the \'lilderness <br />Act shall 2?;>ly with res?=ct to the administration <lnd use of such <br />designated area, including mineral develo~cnt, in the ~anner as . <br />they apply to national forest wilderness areas." <br /> <br />]I The language ~a~ expanded to read "existing mining and grazing <br />uses and mineral leasing in the manner and oe9ree in which the sa~e <br />was being CO:1ducted on the date e,l the a;>;>roval of this Act . . .01 <br />(emphasis added) on Se?terrter 22, 1975 by an ~end~e:1t to section. <br />312 of the draft Su!:x:o:;L-:1ittee pei"t No.2. There was no discussion <br />concerning the addition of the term "mineral leasing." Transcri?t <br />of.Hearings. held before Subco~ittee on Public Lands of the Co~~ittee <br />on Interior a:1d Insular Affair s on Land policy r'lanage;;]ent Act of 1975. <br />Print No.2, p. 319 to 33a (9~th Cong., 1st Session.) It should be <br />noted that \4hen n:nineral leasing" was added the remainder of that <br />phrase w.Js changed fro;n the plural "had been conducted" to the singu- <br />lar "was being conducted". This change could give rise to an infer- <br />ence tllat Congress meant the "m:mner and de<Jrce" exerr;otion to be only <br />for mineral leasing, and not for existing nining and grazing uses. <br />This inference is, ho;;ever, not consistent y:ith the legislative <br />history of section 603(c). iie thin" the better reading is to attri- <br />bute it to inadvertent gra~~atical error. <br /> <br />The House Report on a later and identical version of this section <br />reflects an interest to regulate mineral uses \.;hich a{fect Ylilder- <br />ness values and not mineral leasing P'2r S'2. It states: "\\'hile <br />tracts are under review, they are to be Qanaged in a manner to pre- <br />serve their wilderness character, subject to continuation of existing <br />grazing and mineral uses and appropriation ui1der the mining la'"s." <br />fl. Rep. 94-1163, 94th Congress, 2d Session at 16. . <br /> <br />Y See the el-;planation of this provision in the House Committee <br />Report quoted in footnote 3 above. <br /> <br />~ for a discussion in the Conference Co~~ittee on what became se~tion <br />603(c), see pages 48 thru 71 of the Transcript of proceedings, Unit~ <br />States Senate Confcr~nce Co~ittee on S. 507 (Septel~r 20, 1976). <br /> <br />~ It should be noted that under existing law no new mining claim <br />may be filed or mineral lease issued in IJilderness are.Js after <br />Dece~r 31, 1983. Because the section 603 review may extend to 1991, <br />we must be careful in co~paring the effect or the two ^cts. Also, it <br /> <br />1 <br />