458 CONFERENCE ON NATURAL BEAUTY 



Most urban open space marked for acquisition or protection 

 under comprehensive planning will have outdoor recreation value. 

 But some areas aquifers, wetlands, ridgelines, small natural areas 

 of scientific interest, for example may be of limited utility for 

 active recreation. 



No amount or quality of urban regional planning will lead to a 

 sensible interrelated system of open space and outdoor recreation 

 areas until regional plans are correlated with each other and with 

 those of the State, and ultimately into an interstate and nationwide 

 program. 



3. Both programs are fluid. The Land and Water Conservation 

 Fund program is not yet in operation. Legislation is pending to 

 broaden HHFA's authorization to include grants for acquiring and 

 clearing developed land, for developing acquired lands, and for land- 

 scaping and beautification. 



Any arbitrary distinction in advance of experience either func- 

 tional or geographic is likely to defeat the intent of the Congress 

 in authorizing the two programs. 



The sensible approach is to get the two programs on the same 

 financial footing; to let the relationship between the two programs 

 evolve out of experience. During this shakedown period, HHFA and 

 BOR regional offices should exchange information promptly on 

 project applications for acquisition grants, and should encourage 

 close coordination of comprehensive planning and outdoor recreation 

 planning, State and local. 



The HHFA program should be strengthened. 



1. The Federal contribution should be raised to 50 percent the 

 level Congress has set for Land and Water Fund grants. Identical 

 cost sharing is essential if the two programs are to effectively comple- 

 ment each other. 



2. More much more should be appropriated. With 50 per- 

 cent Federal money, applications will rise. Appropriations should 

 keep pace. Time is critical in terms of lost opportunities and rising 

 prices. We defeat the primary purpose of the program, and waste 

 money, by conservative funding. 



Both programs ought to stimulate new approaches. 



The HHFA program has been used largely for classic fee-simple 

 acquisition of park lands. 



Not much has been done either with less-than-fee ways of preserv- 

 ing open space values, or with preserving open space where recreation 

 is not a primary value. 



