67 



8 

 Admlalstratlon's approach Is appropriate and should be followed. 



S. 59, as drafted, may achieve limited benefits. However, the addition of 

 other states with lands Identified for transfer between the Forest Service and 

 the Bureau of Land Management would Improve public land management patterns 

 and provide an opportunity for achieving some of the efficiencies, cost 

 savings and public service Improvements Identified. 



Under the Nationwide Interchange proposal, minerals authority would be 

 transferred to the Forest Service. S. 59 does not have that provision, nor do 

 we believe that it can be done on a state by state basis. Some of the savings 

 identified in the legislative analysis of the Nationwide Interchange proposal 

 were calculated on the basis of eliminating the need for both the Forest 

 Service and the Bureau of Land Management to visit the same areas when 

 processing a variety of applications. 



S. 59 would result in no significant savings of personnel or administrative 

 costs, and, as I said, only minimal Improvements la public service, since no 

 offices would be affected. Some permittees and other users of the lands would 

 simply deal with a different office and agency than they have la the past. 



As I said earlier, we recommend that Congress enact the nationwide bill - the 

 Administration's Interchange proposal. Instead, as it would lead to more 

 efficient land managemeat. Improved service to the public, and economic 

 benefits in the administration of Federal lands. These goals can be attained 

 and these are the reasons we coatlnue to support the Interchange concept. 



This concludes my statement. I will be pleased to respond to any questions. 



