The Bob Marshall Wilderness Area in Montana, relatively uncelebrated until 1981, recently became the focus of a legal and political controversy raising crucial environmental as well as constitutional issues. Though the specific controversy has now subsided for the most part, it set in motion a heated debate over the basics of federal wilderness law and policy. One act in the drama was a district court decision¹ addressing for the first time the constitutionality of §204(e) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), which authorizes certain congressional committees to compel the Secretary of the Interior to make withdrawals of designated tracts of public lands. The case was decided against the backdrop of a tug-of-war between Interior Secretary Watt and the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs that, when pressed to reveal its views, demonstrated its willingness to limit energy production in order to preserve wilderness. The latest development is Secretary Watt's issuance of proposed legislation that would restructure the existing regime governing the preservation and development of wilderness and potential wilderness lands.