Ah, Wilderness! Ah, Development!

The Alaska land battle ends in a compromise

President Carter has called the issue "the conservation decision of the century." At stake were more than 100 million acres of virgin forest, magnificent mountains and prospective oilfields in the country's largest state. The future of Alaskan lands was also one of the most contentious environmental questions of the day. Conservationists maintained that Alaska's timbered coastline and tundra needed strong federal protection. Developers and businessmen, supported by Alaska's top elected officials, argued that the Federal Government should not lock up virgin land before its soil and mineral wealth could be assessed. After almost four years of warfare over how to balance economic and environmental interests, Congress last week finally passed an Alaska land bill.

The measure is a masterpiece of compromise. The House originally approved a bill in 1979, sponsored by Arizona Democrat Morris Udall, chairman of the House Interior Committee, that would have protected 127.5 million acres, about one-third of Alaska's land, an area larger than California and Maine combined. The bill was favored by many environmentalists, but it was blocked by Democratic Senator Mike Gravel, who wanted to ensure future development in his state.

Last summer the Senate offered a compromise bill, sponsored chiefly by Democrats Henry Jackson of Washington and Paul Tsongas of Massachusetts. Jackson declared: "The bill is balanced, the product of bipartisan effort. All the groups are a little bit mad, which proves that we were honest judges." Indeed, Gravel tried to filibuster the bill, but his Senate colleagues passed a cloture vote that shut off debate. When the bill passed, Jackson sent it along to the House with the warning: "It's that or nothing." Angered by what they considered to be strong-arm tactics, Udall and his supporters vowed to hold out for a more protectionist measure. But then Ronald Reagan was elected President. Udall admitted that the Senate bill was the "only legislative option." With that, the House last week passed the bill on a voice vote, reasoning that legislation more acceptable to environmental interests would never make it through a Republican Senate.

The bill as finally approved covers 104.3 million acres. It provides varying degrees of environmental protection to such national treasures as Admiralty Island, the Mount McKinley area, the Gates of the Arctic National Monument, and the William O. Douglas Arctic Wildlife Range, which is a calving ground for one of the largest caribou herds in the U.S. Of this land, 56.7 million acres have been designated as wilderness where logging, mining and motorized vehicles will be outlawed. The rest of the land will be open to some development, but only under stringent environmental safeguards. Out of Alaska's total of 377 million acres only 8% of the land will be completely closed to hunting, 20% to oil and gas exploration, and 34% to mining.

Many Alaskans are relieved that a bill of some sort has passed: they finally will gain full title to 150 million acres of land that they have been waiting to receive under the 1958 Statehood Act and the 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. Says Republican Senator Ted Stevens: "I think there is an insatiable urge throughout Alaska to get our land." But the legislation itself is far from popular. Environmentalists are unhappy with provisions that permit oil and gas exploration on the Arctic Range, limited timber harvesting in southeastern Alaska, and some mining in the southeastern Misty Fjords area. Says Charles Clusen, chairman of the Alaska Coalition: "A lot of great and special places will be damaged or destroyed." On the other hand, entrepreneurs and many state officials object to the lockup of potentially valuable land. Says Gravel, whose inability to stop the Senate bill was a factor in his primary defeat last August: "The legislation denies Alaska its rights as a state, and denies the U.S. crucial strategic resources."

The fight may not be completely over. Udall plans to press for changes to protect such areas as Misty Fjords from mining. Don Young, Alaska's lone U.S. Representative, counters: "I hope we can come back in the next Congress and unlock more of our lands for mineral development." One person, however, is happy: President Carter, who had called the measure his "highest environmental priority." Said the President last week:"The crown jewels of Alaska's natural wonders are afforded protection."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.