The principal statutes governing the administration of the federal lands¹ contain a mandate for multiple purpose management that conflicts with efforts by the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), operating under a variety of statutory directives, to identify and protect lands under review for wilderness classification. The Forest Service, pursuant to the Wilderness Act,² and BLM, pursuant to the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA),³ are directed to review wilderness-potential lands under their jurisdiction for possible inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System and, during those reviews, to protect the lands against environmental degradation. Simultaneously, however, both agencies are requiredto continue managing these lands according to multiple-use principles, cognizant of oft-repeated congressional statements of policy encouraging the development of energy resources.

In order to carry out the wilderness reviews the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior have developed management policies that, since they are designed to preserve wilderness values, have placed constraints on oil and gas leasing activities. As a result, several hundred oil and gas lease applications remain pending on nearly one million acres of national forest lands in the Idaho-Wyoming-Montana portions of the Western Overthrust Belt,⁴ and oil and gas leases covering close to one-fifth of the 23 million acres of BLM-managed wilderness study areas (WSAs)⁵ are encumbered by environmental restrictions. Mounting pressure to tap the potentially huge energy deposits in this region has been on a collision course with the Carter Administration's strong support for protecting the lands' wilderness potential, and the conflict predictably has spilled over into the courts.