Privatizing Looms as One of Many Dangers to Public Parklands : A growing movement in the 104th Congress threatens recreation areas as close as the Santa Monicas. Such lands need U.S. protection and conservation funds.

Public parks are in trouble, including the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area.

Today’s mood in Washington recalls the anti-park movement of the 1980s when James Watt, interior secretary under Ronald Reagan, tried to place a five-year moratorium on land acquisition.

Today’s threat comes from several sources:

* A bill to create a national parks closure commission, sponsored by Rep. Joel Hefley (R-Colo.).

* Republican opposition to acquisition funds for the recreation area in fiscal 1995, as shown by the failure of Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-Simi Valley) to continue the tradition of local bipartisan cooperation on this issue.

* The proposed transfer of six state-owned beaches to Los Angeles County, which would result in commercial development for RV parks, restaurants and more parking lots in the Santa Monica Mountains Recreation Area from the county line south to Venice.

The Hefley bill, HR 260, would establish a commission to give Congress a list of supposedly undesirable and insignificant national parks which could be privatized or turned over to local governments. The bill’s supporters argue that Congress has created too many national parks and the government cannot maintain them.

Responding to Hefley’s bill, former Rep. John Seiberling of Ohio warned in the Washington Post: “Extremist elements, reminiscent of the days of former interior secretary James Watt, are once more mounting a campaign for wholesale de-authorization and even ‘privatization’ of the national parks, national forests, and other public lands. Such action would be a national tragedy.”

The Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area is already on the hit list of some Republicans. Watt, when he was a park official during the Nixon years, said the mountains were “too fragile for parks” and should be given over to development. Rep. Charles Hansen (R-Utah) has voiced support for de-authorizing the mountain-seashore recreation area on the grounds that it is not “nationally significant.”

Supporting his position is Charles Cushman of the so-called Wise Use Movement, a Western states anti-environmental movement, who opposed the establishment of the recreation area in the first place. The Wise Use Movement, which seeks to privatize most public land, has a wide following in the 104th Congress.

It deems the Santa Monicas “insignificant” because they are near urban populations. They forget that Rock Creek Park in Washington, D.C., is the oldest national park in the nation. Parks near cities are especially significant, because they provide relief from stressful urban life for millions of people.

*

To some critics, “real” national parks are those of the 19th Century that were carved out of the frontier. Usually containing outstanding geological landmarks, these became protected for public enjoyment as recreation destination points for tourists.

Today the frontier is gone. The more recently authorized and proposed national parks such as the Cuyahoga National Historic Park in Ohio, Boston Harbor, the Tallgrass Prairie and the 15-year-old Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area contain important remnants of the historical, cultural and ecological past. They may not have world-class climbing rocks or the most spectacular mountains or the deepest canyons, but they comprise a priceless heritage that needs federal protection and accompanying federal land and water conservation funds.

Unfortunately, the large, well-known parks such as Yosemite and Yellowstone are under pressure from high use. They are being severely degraded by too many cars, visitors, snowmobiles, aircraft and concessions. This will get worse if other parks are closed.

De-authorization is a long-term threat to the Santa Monicas. Budget starvation is an immediate one.

In March, Rep. Anthony C. Beilenson (D-Woodland Hills) requested $4.3 million to $8 million from the House Appropriations subcommittee on the interior and related agencies for the Santa Monicas. The future of the request is not bright because of the way the Republicans have centralized the budget process.

Formerly the subcommittee under Rep. Sid Yates (D-Ill.) made independent decisions and supported funding for the Santa Monicas when the White House would not. The present House leadership controls the money directly, and its budget attitude is well-known.

Moreover, environmental activists say the congressional majority will not hesitate to punish those who do not play along with the new order. Beilenson is famously independent, and Gallegly, in a departure from past years, has refused to support his request.

The national park system represents only a sliver of the national budget. It makes no sense to create a moratorium on enlarging it when public use and the need for preservation and education has been increasing every year.

*

At the state and local level, there is talk of the state’s transferring six state beaches to the county. The two governments are at odds over funding for lifeguards and maintenance. The county has proposed developing revenue for these services by providing restaurants, recreational-vehicle campgrounds and new parking lots at Topanga, Point Dume and Nicholas beaches--uses that the state does not allow.

At the same time, the National Park Service has begun leasing some land to commercial users, and there is a possibility that the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy, short of cash, will sell some public land in the mountains.

Assaulted from all sides, our parkland heritage will demand its supporters’ constant vigilance--and action to defend it--in the months and years ahead.