Desert Dilemma

The battle over Sen. Alan Cranston’s (D-Calif.) California desert protection bill is like trench warfare. There is nothing new about hardened battle lines over wilderness and national park proposals, but the two sides of the Cranston measure have dug into their positions with extraordinary determination. Thus, there has been no real action on the measure for three years now. Opponents are so certain of keeping the measure bottled up in Congress that they have had no reason to negotiate any compromises.

The opposition has included desert-area House members and has had the outspoken leadership of Ed Hastey, the California director of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, an agency in the Department of the Interior. Proponents, including House co-sponsor Mel Levine (D-Los Angeles) and the Sierra Club, have been so confident of the rightness of their plan to shift millions of acres from the control of the bureau to the National Park Service--also an Interior offshoot--that they have been reluctant to make any concessions.

But now Rep. Richard H. Lehman has entered the fray in a way that might just get the debate off dead center. Lehman, a Democrat from the San Joaquin Valley whose district stretches into desert regions of the eastern Sierra, gave both sides a quick kick during a House Interior subcommittee hearing on the bill recently. Lehman was astonished that the opponents had not come forth with constructive alternatives. He expressed disappointment that Cranston forces had not resolved a single major controversy. Then Lehman offered some constructive middle-ground talking points in the hope of getting the two sides to work toward agreement.

As background, Lehman noted that of the 25.5 million acres of desert in California, 12.1 million acres are managed by the bureau, 3.2 million acres by the Department of Defense, 2.5 million by the National Park Service and about 1 million acres by the state of California. More than 6 million acres are privately owned.

Under Hastey, the bureau runs the desert through a management plan adopted by Congress back in 1980 after years of public hearings, study and debate. Congress should stick with that decision, Hastey contends. And in response to congressional directive, the bureau has recommended that only 1.9 million acres be incorporated into wilderness areas for protection against human development or motorized travel.

Cranston has argued that the bureau cannot protect the desert adequately against the pressures of increased recreation use, and that the bureau is too amenable to private desert users such as miners and ranchers. His bill would convert Death Valley and Joshua Tree national monuments into national parks, create a new national park out of the bureau’s East Mojave National Scenic Area and set aside 4.4 million acres of wilderness.

Lehman agrees with Cranston that the desert needs more protection, with more staff, financial help and strong management direction. For discussion purposes, however, Lehman suggested creation of 3-million to 4-million acres of BLM wilderness, an expanded Joshua Tree monument, and a larger Death Valley National Park or creation of a sister park adjacent to Death Valley. More protection is needed for the East Mojave area, Lehman said, but he questioned whether it should be a national park, a position privately shared by some respected environmentalists. Lehman said wilderness designation might be more appropriate for major segments of the East Mojave, which is crisscrossed by power lines, railroads and highways and has checkerboard squares of private property.

All of Lehman’s ideas are worth discussion. They provide a forum for beginning serious debate. And it is time now to have some specific input from Sen. Pete Wilson (R-Calif.). His aides have said he is considering joining the negotiating discussions. Wilson’s support can be critical to Senate passage.

Lehman is correct in saying that the bureau’s desert plan of 1980 was the beginning, not the end, of an evolving management process. The next step should be a strong desert parks and wilderness bill this year or next.