I am stressing that in the formulation of our $6 billion budget, we are putting money into the lands. Much of the criticism that you have read this last 2 years about Jim Watt has been that he has taken money from park land acquisitions.

Let's look at facts. I have not been successful in getting facts in the media. The facts are that, in every single year of the Carter administration funds were cut for acquiring park lands.

Now, I am not critical of the congressional decision. I am critical of the fact that we have not been able to get the facts into the media and that the special interest groups abuse truth.

Never did I hear any criticism that these funds were cut in each year. I guess I am blessed with fortune; you men have been so willing to look at truth and facts, but my congressional critics all voted to cut acquisition for the parks in the 4 preceding years.

They don't admit it to the TV cameras, but the facts are right here, and the facts have been on the record since 1977, when the revised fiscal year began and every subsequent year. But we have not had a press that would look at the facts on that.

ADMINISTRATION'S SUPPORT OF PARKS

We have done differently in the Reagan administration. For the audience's benefit, we are talking about the restoration of the parks. We found that during the Carter administration, every single year funds were reduced for restoring the national parks. In fact, they cut funds 50 percent as they doubled the size of the parks.

Senator Johnston, you will recall the work that you and I did on the land and water conservation fund. It was great working with you, because you understand the need of stewardship, of taking care of our

resources.

Here you will see that every year my predecessors cut funding for the parks. Never did you hear of any criticism from these special interest groups when this was going on. Interesting what facts we can get into the media.

The special interest groups never highlighted the fact that these were votes against the National Park System. The first year I came in I asked for doubling of the funds needed to restore the national parks. The Congress did not give me everything I asked for. This isn't from this committee, by the way, for the audience and the record. This goes to the other Interior Appropriations Subcommittee.

Congress didn't give us all that we asked for. The blue is what Congress appropriated. The gold is what we have asked for. The second year Congress gave us more than we asked for. So, on the average, we came out just about perfect.

NEED FOR FUNDING FOR RESTORING PARKS

This year, the third year, we have asked for even more money to restore the parks. Now, I do not expect that I will ever get fairness in the special interest groups or the media, but let's look at reality.

On the acquisition side, the Carter administration had six times more money for acquiring park lands in their first year than they did in their last year. In taking care of the parks with stewardship, they cut in half

the moneys available while they doubled the size of the national park system. That is not good stewardship.

I belabor these two charts and the third one because they show a philosophy that is applicable to water projects and everything else, and it deals with endangered species. We have introduced-and let me emphasize this-we have brought massive change to the Department of the Interior, I mean massive, wonderful change, because every type of land in the federal system is better managed today than it was 2 to 3 years ago. We believe in investing in the land.

ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY

Now, this subject of endangered species isn't the most important thing, although it is important, but it is indicative of the philosophy that I stand for as contrasted to the 4 years before and to all the critics who refuse to talk about the truth.

The truth is that the previous administration did list many more endangered species than I have listed. They did not look to the recovery side of the statute which says, "If you are going to list an endangered species, you must then plan for its recovery.'

You see, stewards believe in taking care of that which is given to their charge, whether it is parks or endangered species or water reclamation projects.

In 2 years, we have done 60 percent more in the way of recovery plans than the Carter administration did in 4 years.

I emphasize these things because we feel that working with Appropriation Committee members is the key to the change. You have been marvelous.

CONGRESSIONAL SUPPORT

The Congress has been supportive in all of these issues. We have not sought new legislation. Senator Johnston serves on the authorizing committee, and, as he knows, we have not had a legislative program. We have sought to bring these massive changes through the budget process, and in every instance, Congress has been able to address these issues and has supported us in the changes that we have brought.

I am pleased to report for the record that all of my congressional critics voted to cut funding for the national parks, all of my congressional critics voted to cut moneys to take care of the parks, and all my congressional critics have voted with the recommendations I have given here.

I think that is indicative when you see these kinds of changes.

INCOME GENERATED BY INTERIOR

Not only am I to be one of the chief environmental developers, but I also have lots of other responsibilities, and one of them is money. You will see here by this chart that IRS is the only Federal entity that generates more income than does the Department of the Interior. We bring in about $15 billion, and most of it comes from offshore activities.

This is where we work with Senator Johnston so much, and the State of Louisiana has been extremely helpful to us on these issues.

This chart talks about some of the massive changes we have brought for better environmental protection of onshore and offshore lands. The insert here, with a scale of 8 million acres, gives a 30-year history and shows how the offshore leasing program has been manipulated in prior

years to benefit Federal budget objectives-not for managing the resource; not for meeting consumers' needs; not for military purposes, but for manipulating the budget.

In 1981, we set the all-time record for offering leases and for leasing 2.2 million acres. Some of us will remember that when President Nixon was here, he called for Project Independence to lease 10 million acres a year.

We have changed the philosophy so that in the next 5 years we will make available for lease almost the entire Outer Continental Shelf, 200 million acres a year. There will be more environmental protection and enhancement than in prior years.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

As the Senator from Louisiana knows, there is nothing more fragile than our wetlands and the bayous. We have compatible drilling activities with environmental enhancement and protection. If you have a legitimate, sincere concern about the environment and the ecology of wetlands, coastal barriers and the sandy beaches, you will be an enthusiastic supporter of this program. It is much more environmentally sound than bringing foreign crude on foreign tankers, and that is why we have had such a rousing support for this OCS program.

I am pleased to note, on this program, while there has been a good bit of criticism from the special interest groups, not one Member of Congress, House or Senate, has cast one single vote in opposition to our 5-year program, because it is sound environmentally, it creates jobs, it enhances our military security, and it is good.