Summary

Portrait of Earl Warren Earl Warren Udall v. Tallman — Opinion of the Court

When bills were introduced in Congress early in 1956 to restrict oil and gas leasing in wildlife refuges, the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries and the Subcommittee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries of the Senate Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce held extensive hearings thereon. The bills as introduced only forbade the Secretary to 'dispose of' lands in wildlife refuges, and the question arose during the hearings whether that language would apply to the issuance of oil and gas leases.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Earl Warren Earl Warren Udall v. Tallman — Opinion of the Court

An oil and gas lease does not vest title to the lands in the lessee. See Boesche v. Udall, 373 U.S. 472, 477-478, 83 S.Ct. 1373, 1376, 10 L.Ed.2d 491. Moreover, the term 'public-land laws' is ordinarily used to refer to statutes governing the alienation of public land, and generally is distinguished from both 'mining laws,' referring to statutes governing the mining of hard minerals on public lands, and 'mineral leasing laws,' a term used to designate that group of statutes governing the leasing of public lands for gas and oil.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Earl Warren Earl Warren Udall v. Tallman — Opinion of the Court

We think, however, that if the Secretary had been of the opinion that he was changing to status of that part of the Moose Range not covered by Appendix B, rather than merely imposing additional restrictions on leasing therein, he would have done so in terms more express than those used in the 1955 regulation. He did not refer to the Range as a whole; the only reference by name was to those parts of the Range which were specified in order to except them from the general provision that ' (o) il and gas leases may be issued' in wildlife refuges.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature