Who Controls Public Lands? Mining, Forestry, and Grazing Policies, 1870-1990.

Political scientist Chris Klyza of Middlebury College suggests an intriguing explanation for our inconsistent federal policies on mining, forestry, and grazing on public lands. Tracing their history for clues as to how they developed and why they are so hard to change, he concludes each originated as "an idea reflecting the prevailing views of the appropriate role of government at that moment." These ideas, he argues, became institutionalized and are protected by the agencies and interest groups who benefit. While the notion of interest-group politics is not new, Klyza believes that a lack of understanding of the original "idea" accounts for the failure of several administrations to enact reforms or develop consistent policies for natural resources.

Klyza describes the "main conceptions of the public interest regarding public-land management" as "economic liberalism," the idea behind mining policies from 1848 to 1872; "technical utilitarianism," the foundation for forestry as defined by Fernow and Pinchot; "interest-group liberalism," the basis for later grazing policy; and "preservationism." While much of this will be familiar to resource policy buffs, the emphasis on understanding the original "idea" to explain why these old policies seem impossible to change is refreshingly new. Here Klyza confirms the validity of one of my favorite axioms: the past is always prelude.