150 
must define which of the two is the most beneficial source and how the 
necessary lands should be made available and where. 
III. PRICING HISTORY OF FEDERAL LANDS 
A prime policy concern is with the issue of what direct charges should 
be made for the use of public recreation facilities. To set this discussion 
in perspective it is necessary to understand, at least in broad terms, 
the system of user charges that presently exists. Before commencing 
a discussion of this point, however, it seems desirable to first discuss 
the context within which the present system evolved. 
First of all, the sale of Federal lands, resources, and its uses has 
never properly fit the economists’ model of perfect competition. While 
it is true that in the early history of this country competitive sale of 
the original public lands was tried, little was disposed of in this fashion. 
There were several reasons for this. For one, the concept of selling 
land on the frontier at the greatest possible price conflicted with the 
whole prevailing social value system of the era. The idea of competitive 
sale was replaced with a system of fixed low prices, which became 
lower yet since they did not keep pace with the rising price level. Grad- 
ually, through the passage of years and through the homestead and 
other laws, the idea of the public domain as free land came to be ac- 
cepted. Significantly, these along with other factors, gave rise to the 
attitude that public domain was common property, available on a 
first-come-first-served basis with little regard for the interests of the 
public at large. This attitude is part of our heritage and, to this time, 
still has its effects on Federal land policy.® 
For the most part, the idea of free land is no longer valid today, but 
it has had an evolutionary impact on present pricing policies of Federal 
lands. Acts have been passed giving the Federal Government the 
authority to levy charges for the use and sale of Federal lands and 
resources; however, they have frequently been resisted and the 
charges that have been made are in many instances very low. The 
pricing policy of Federal lands has developed along other lines than the 
maximization of revenue. This has been especially true for recreational 
users of the public lands. 
For example, the National Park Service has collected entrance fees 
at some major parks for quite a long time. Yet, prior to 1956 less than 
10 percent of total expenditures on the national park system came from 
this source; receipts per visit averaged about 10 cents, and car en- 
trance fees for the entire system averaged out to less than $1 per car. 
In more recent years, entrance fees to the national park system have 
covered 5 percent or less of total expenditures. The National Forest 
Service, has also made some charges—although rather low ones—for 
some campgrounds and other areas. Receipts from this source were too 
small to be even shown separately until after 1956. Other Federal 
agencies, in general, made no charges for recreational use of land and 
water properties under their management prior to the midsixties.* __ 
A significant development occurred in the area of pricing of Federal 
recreation lands at this point. This was the passage of the Land and 
