May I speak, therefore, to one thing that has not been mentioned this morning, that is, something other than food for the gut, or food for the hurt. There are other kinds of food in this world that is food for other men.

I join them in believing that America is great and America is beautiful and America is wonderful, and we have used these gifts. We have also misused these gifts. Ninety-eight percent has been used for the boys who have been in the predominance and they have had fun. We have let the pigs run. It is time to say stop before the pigs get it all. The right time is now when there is something left.

Multiple use is not endorsed at all by scientists as a way to preserve the history of our past. It is not endorsed by historians who would like to have the unborn America see what made it great, see a little bit of untouched prairie. It has taken years to define a piece of untouched prairie. To find a piece of virgin timber has taken research.

We do have declared on paper some wilderness areas. Many have been already violated or, let us say, property utilized in the terms of our friends here who have no other language but that which is profit. Man after man has spoken here to his own gain. These men have interests. These men are Americans and they are good Americans, and they have engaged in our so-called development. There is a point at which to draw the line, and this is the stopping point. There is a line that must be drawn, that must be adhered to in their further use. Less than 2 percent is left that we can show my child and yours and the unborn America what made us great.

I want to speak to the summary statement the club has presented. The first thought is that mankind today is at its highest, we feel. We can also say the wilderness is at its lowest in America and total destruction for mankind and the wilderness is imminent, and right now in view. These are two possible destructions, and we are trying to solve one of them here and now by men of action and women of courage. It is not tomorrow that America the beautiful is to be preserved, it is today.

We have monuments to extinct forms of life, we have a national monument to show us what a Yosemite once looked like. We have preserves, we have so-called wilderness and wild areas, and we had reserves recently violated by oil exploring to the complete destruction of the refuge and preservative act.

We need to rescue now the real and the primitive and the unspoiled while we have it, for we will not have it any longer. You have seen them. They are here-cattlemen, mineral men, all honorable, all normal Americans. We are simply saying there is another kind of American; furthermore, there is an unborn American and we speak in behalf of him.

We speak in behalf of these points:

First, if we save the wilderness now, we have some immediate use permitted under this marvelous and orderly act. We will have practical as well as cultural uses. We will have earthy uses permitted under this and we will have spiritual-they laugh, and it is here on record--we will have spiritual uses as real values.

I have seven points which I can cover in 1 minute.

We say: (1) Check areas for science to understand how America ever grew, naturally, physically, and economically.

The TCC is one of 35 member clubs of the Federation of Western Outdoor Clubs whose policies and resolutions it supports. The FWOC represents more than 30,000 persons. In September of this year, the FWOC with the TCC delegate assenting, went on record for passage of the wilderness bill, S. 174, as reported out of the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee. The resolution further urged passage by the House of Representatives and eventual signing into law by the President of the United States.

At this same convention in September, Secretary of the Interior Stewart L. Udall, sent a written message. Because he was unable to appear in person, Mr. Udall sent Special Assistant Joseph F. Carithers to read his talk for him. In it, the Secretary said that—

Passage of such legislation (the wilderness bill) will be a milestone in the evolution of sound natural resource management policy in this country. True worth of wilderness is difficult to put into words; its intangible values can be measured only in terms of individual personal experience.

No real wilderness per se exists today in the congested bay area. True, open spaces remain, some of which we hope to have for a national seashore recreational area-the Point Reyes plan--or for addition to already existing State parks including Mt. Diablo in the East Bay. Those seeking real wilderness must travel 200 miles eastward to the craggy peaks of the Sierra Nevada Range or north a longer distance to the Trinity Alps.

In the Pacific Northwest, in other Western and Middle Western States, there remain a vestige of wilderness country in mountains, forests, deserts and canyon lands which through legislation can be saved for the future. These are already in Federal hands. They are areas which have been set aside within the national park system, the national forests or the national wildlife refuges and ranges.

Under the wilderness bill these lands would continue to be handled as they are now and with preservation of their wilderness character included. No new agency would be created to administer these acres. They would not be "locked up" as opponents so vociferously publicize. No lumber enterprises are damaged. No area now subject to timber cutting is included. Established areas of livestock grazing can continue under the terms of the wilderness bill. Changes in the wilderness bill have been made to serve the interests of both the National Park Service and the U.S. Forest Service.

Stalling tactics of the opposition-persons and business interests with unlimited funds at their disposal to carry out hoped-for scuttling of the bill through having the measure killed in committee-continue.

What small amount of wilderness remains would eventually not be enough to suit the purposes and demands of the growing population. Prof. James Bonner of the California Institute of Technology, writing in Western Outdoor Quarterly for the 1961 spring issue, noted

The pressure today for the despoilation and utilization of our natural areas in order to obtain from them material resources such as ores, trees or fuel is immense. As high-grade resources become ever more scarce *** let us maintain in a portion of the surface of our earth in its original state. By doing so we do not cheat mankind of anything which is essential to his well-being, we merely hasten very slightly the day which must inevitably come anyway, the day when industrial civilization must live upon rock, sea water and air.

(2) Basic reserve of untouched resource for the new techniques, new minerals of the future.

(3) Recreation of wilderness type-riding, hiking, climbing, exploring, camping.

(4) Re-creation of urban man-by spacious solitude, unspoiled view, music of nature, natural providences of life.

(5) Historic evidences of America's struggle, growth, success.

(6) Teaching and laboratory par excellence.

(7) Living monuments, mementoes, samples of wild, original America.

Millions of years in the making, wilderness will perpetuate itself.

Costs, operations, administration are minimal, or nonexistent.

Preservation is leaving alone, eliminating multiuse, stopping development, holding back progress.

Use is: (a) Future: Reserve resource; (b) Future: Relict, historic; (c) Current: Recreation, re-creation.

ROLAND CASE ROSS, Professor of Nature Study, Los Angeles State College.

Mrs. Prost. The next witness is Mr. Joe Hughes, Hughes Bros., Foresthill, Calif.

And will Mrs. J. B. Atkisson, State chairman of conservation, California Federation of Women's Clubs, please come to the front and be ready to testify?

You may proceed, Mr. Hughes.

STATEMENT OF JOE HUGHES, HUGHES BROS., FORESTHILL, CALIF.

Mr. HUGHES. Madam Chairman and members of the committee, I am Joe Hughes of Hughes Bros., Foresthill, Calif. Our organization, a family partnership, is a second generation, owner-operated sawmill and logging enterprise.

The wilderness bill is of particular interest to us who have lived all our lives within the national forest boundaries. Our father started cutting timber in the mountains of New Mexico at the turn of the century. At that time there were no restrictions or regulations on timber cutting, as the Forest Service had not yet come into being.

We have progressed from the horsepower sweep first used by our father through steam diesel to electric power, and we have grown from a concern hiring a few employees and cutting a few thousand feet to one employing 140 people and producing in excess of 10 million feet of lumber annually. Preservation of the wild land is as dear to us as to any, but we oppose S. 174 for the following reasons:

(1) Because we consider it a gross injustice to existing agencies, who we feel are doing an overzealous job, to take the responsibility from them.

(2) Because the bill in its full import would handicap the economy of the Western States and bring about great unemployment and displacement of people.

(3) Because timber is an agricultural crop and as such cannot be preserved in the field-it must be harvested to be kept growing.

(4) Because it will withdraw from development many other natural resources such as minerals, water, and recreation, to name a few.

(5) Because by its very stipulated exclusion of roads, airfields, and supply centers, it will allow egress to the few most apt to set fires and will at the same time deny the means of suppressing forest fires.

We do wish to thank the Public Lands Committee for allowing us time to express our views.

Park, more land is being developed for those who "want to get away from it all" and have the money required for building sites on the spectacular headlands. South of me, beyond the Golden Gate, the hills, fields of green and gold outside the city limits of San Francisco as recently as 15 years ago, are now smothered in concrete; row upon row of homes march over the contoured land in cookielike precision. There are shopping centers and supermarkets to service and serve the occupants. East of here is a large open space with thousands of occupants who dwell side by side in very small spaces. They are the dead and these are cemeteries. South again and down the coast are the San Mateo County parks. They are also crowded with visitors.

It

East of me, but 6 or 7 hours' driving time, are the Sierra Nevada peaks. just happens that much of the area there is familiar to me. I know many of the high passes, the satisfaction of standing atop a 13,000- or 14,000-foot mountain reached after hours of hiking, not driving. I know the desert at sunrise with a coyote disappearing into the brush * * *the desert in its heat of the day and again at night with the dry, intense cold. The stars of Death Valley, crystal clear, far from city lights, the depths of the Grand Canyon to which I have walked, not ridden on the trail, all these are quite familiar to me. I prowled the cliffs of Mesa Verde, walked the sands of the Great Sand Dunes, have run the rapids in Dinosaur where the Green and Yampa Rivers join and go on to become part of the Colorado. In the North Cascades are glaciers on which I walked (albeit cautiously), dark wooded forest trails from which the sun was barely discernible through the trees. High places in the back country of Glacier National Park and the wildlife there have been part of my life because I walked these trails. Looking into the rain mists of the Olympics, watching a sun sink westward over Puget Sound are happy memories. Sitting out a mountain storm in the Selway-Bitterroot country of Idaho or on a peak in the Wind River Mountains of Wyoming have been my good fortune. And there was wilderness, miles of it, in all directions.

So much for what has been mine. But what of those who come after? What will there be for them?

Subdivisions are crawling up toward the western slopes of the Sierra Nevada from the wide San Joaquin and Sacramento Valleys. The deserts are filling with jackrabbit homesteads, subdivisions, or used as targets for military tests. Underwater wilderness is violated by enthusiastic bands of Scuba clubs (selfcontained underwater breathing apparatus).

Under the guise of multiple use, lumbermen and miners have disregarded all ethics of decency in cleanup in their haste to down trees and draw ore. Denuded hillsides subject to erosion and tons of rusted machinery are left with no thought of appearances. The picture on the front cover of the attached Western Outdoor Quarterly, fall issue for 1961, is a minor example of such practices. An assistant superintendent in a national park in relating cleanup efforts on land for a park addition cited another example. He said that tons of ancient steel, rusted and no longer useful, left on this park addition, was thrown down the mine shafts. These were once working mines on this same land. There was no other way of disposal.

These same groups, lumber, mineral, and grazing interests, want to hold and use more land. At the same time they thunder out against conservationists whom they term "the lockup group serving the interests of a few bird watchers." In the name of progress, such commercial organizations, private and public, have used up in the past two decades much of our wilderness country.

The wilderness bill can save land still open which are areas already in Federal hands, preserving both its use and its wilderness look. These are in park, forest, or wildlife refuges and ranges. No "grabbing" of more open space as has been charged, is made and further misrepresentations that the wilderness bill is not necessary because the outdoor recreation resources review serves the same purpose is also wrong. ORRRC is merely a reviewing committee. While engaged in their work, that of a survey of open spaces now available, such land can go by the simple stroke of a bureaucratic pen.

The wilderness bill does not close areas to miners. National forest areas now open to mining that are included in wild lands will still be subject to prospecting and may be opened to mine if the President determines that this is in the public interest. The bill designates areas suitable for inclusion in the wilderness system but requires a review of these before they are withdrawn. Certain already established practices such as motorboating or aircraft use are permitted. The bill, in its writing also recognizes that an increasing popula

tion, accompanied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, is destined to modify and occupy all areas except those set aside for preservation so it establishes a congressional policy for protecting certain federally owned areas in a National Wilderness System. It would insure for everyone the perpetuation of places where human enjoyment, the freedom of choosing to know the primeval for themselves.

When the wilderness bill becomes law through the efforts of this committee, you may know you acted wisely and in good faith.

Thank you for your consideration.

Mrs. PrOST. Our next witness is Jerry Lausmann.

And will Mr. Ross please come forward.

You may proceed, Mr. Lausmann.

Mr. LAUSMANN. Before I get into my presentation, Madam Chairman, may I present the statement of L. A. Nelson of Portland, Oreg., for the record?

Mrs. ProST. Yes. Without objection it will be accepted for the record.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF L. A. NELSON ON AMENDMENTS FOR SENATE BILL 174, REVISED

INTRODUCTION

My name is L. A. Nelson, of 7665 Southwest Copel Street, Portland, Oreg.

For a period of years I have camped and explored in the mountains of Oregon and Washington, and am therefore familiar with the wilderness areas and speak with knowledge based on use and appropriation of wilderness.

Need for revision of wilderness bill S. 174, revised

An analysis of revised S. 174 developed the need for further revision in subject matter and titles to realize the objective in and understanding of preservation of wilderness and wilderness legislation.

The objective of bill S. 174 as contained in the first paragraph is to establish a "National Wilderness Preservation System" for the permanent good of the whole people, and for other reasons.

This indicates that the objective is to establish a "system," as the emphasis is on "system" and not on the actual objective, "wilderness."

Amendment suggested:

A bill to establish national wilderness for the preservation of wilderness for the permanent good of the whole people and for other purposes.

The title "National Wilderness" coincides with the titles of the various Federal areas in the bill:

National wilderness.
National forests.

National parks.

National wildlife refuges and game ranges.

Section 1: Amended to read: "National wilderness established."

Section 2(a): Amend "National Wilderness Preservation System" in the third sentence to read "National Wilderness."

Instead of citing each place in the bill for amendment, the following should apply:

Where "National Wilderness Preservation System" appears, change to "National Wilderness."

Where "system" occurs, eliminate the word.

Section 2(b)-Definition of wilderness: This definition is a high-sounding dissertation, difficult to follow as to objective. The following is offered as an amendment to section 2(b):

Definition of wilderness

Section 2(b): Wilderness is primeval and essentially scenic, an area of solitude, serenity, and inspiration, a contrast of natural features and phenomena typical of their environment. Physiographically, wilderness is an area of mountains and valleys, streams and lakes, alpine forests, meadows and vegetative cover, desert or seashore.