monumental step, the wilderness bill, is recognition of the need for retaining additional wilderness values. With our population now doubling every 40 years, it must be obvious that that deed will become critically urgent in the foreseeable future. Many national recreation areas are already beginning to suffer from overuse. The only opponents to this bill are commercial interests who make extravagant claims, such as "locking up," which connotes no mining, no lumbering, no grazing in perpetuity. But the bill only specifies that certain national forest areas, not now mined or lumbered, shall continue to be used as now, with possible mining, lumbering, and grazing permitted, with the added provision that they be administered in such manner that wilderness be preserved. And of course Congress can modify that policy at any time the national interest requires. Ramblers, a nonprofit conservation and recreation organization, with no political axes to grind or commercial interests whatever, strongly urge prompt passage of the wilderness preservation system bill, hoping that the House will remove the Senate's crippling amendments and add none of their own. We request that this letter be made part of the record. ERNEST C. BOWER, Executive Secretary. Representative WAYNE ASPINALL, ROAMER HIKING CLUB, INC., Chairman, House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Room 4023, State Capitol Building, Sacramento, Calif.: The Roamer Hiking Club urgently requests passage without further undue delay (S. 174) the Wilderness Act to insure that wilderness areas are not exploited for any commercial or special interest groups. The above will serve to introduce our representative, Mr. Arthur B. Johnson at the hearing to be held at 10 a.m. Monday, November 6, 1961. Yours truly, BLYTHE O. EDWARDS, Federation and Conservation, Roamer Hiking Club. WEST COVINA, CALIF. Re statement favoring passage of the wilderness bill, S. 174, Sacramento, Calif., November 6, 1961. Representative GRACIE PFOST, Chairman, Public Lands Subcommittee of the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Nampa, Idaho. The undersigned citizens with no commercial axes to grind request your committee to support the passage of wilderness legislation as embodied in S. 174, as so overwhelmingly passed by the Senate of the United States. The United States was carved out of a wilderness. It was founded upon wilderness. Wilderness is America's heritage. It is our country's duty to enshrine as temples of its glory prime examples of that heritage. To enshrine the 14 or more million acres of prime examples of our remaining wilderness areas held by the U.S. Forest Service may appear to be enormous. However, when considered as part of the whole, it comprises less than 1 percent of the area of the United States. We firmly believe that our country owes it to itself to set aside less than 1 percent of its area to enshrine the glory of America's forest wilderness heritage. Opponents of this necessary and worthwhile legislation oppose it on the basis that we cannot afford to reduce our resources of timber and minerals by the great amount that are contained in the wilderness areas anticipated to be included in the wilderness system. Attention of the commitee is called to the fact that if these wilderness areas did contain resources as extensive and as valuable as the opponents of the wilderness bill maintain, American ingenuity would have long ago extracted these resources. The fact that these areas remain wilderness today is unrefutable testimony to the fact that they contain little of resources beyond the resource of wilderness itself. If these areas actually did contain the resources of the valuables attributed to them by the opponents of this legislation, it would be wise and frugal for the Congress of the United STATEMENT OF MRS. LA VERNE N. COHEN, SACRAMENTO, VALIF. Mrs. COHEN. Thank you very much for the opportunity of coming here and being able to express our views. I am La Verne Cohen, board of directors member of the Sacramento Council of the Girl Scouts of America. The Sacramento Council of the Girl Scouts of the United States of America provides an active program for over 10,000 young ladies. The Girl Scouts programs give the opportunity for outdoor activities which affords the members camping experience, giving them knowledge of how to take care of themselves, allowing them to learn conservation measures and to study all phases of plant and animal life. The council recommends that action be taken to preserve and conserve all the precious wilderness areas possible. If this generation will only recognize their responsibility and maintain our wilderness areas in accordance with the provisions of S. 174, the wilderness bill, the future conservationists will have the opportunity to contribute constructive work toward making our land more productive. Thank you. Mrs. PrOST. Thank you, Mrs. Cohen. Are there questions of the witness? Again thank you. Our next witness is Mrs. Effie C. Yeaw, for the Save the American River Association, of Sacramento, Calif. You may proceed. STATEMENT OF MRS. EFFIE C. YEAW, SAVE THE AMERICAN RIVER ASSOCIATION, SACRAMENTO, CALIF. Mrs. YEAW. Madam Chairman and members of the House committee, this is a statement on the wilderness bill presented for the Save the American River Association, Sacramento, Calif. The Save the American River Association, organized in March 1961 is a nonprofit organization composed of about 800 paid up life meinbers and 30 civic organizations. We are pressed for time to save a piece of local wilderness for our rapidly expanding population. We believe this a must provision for the physical, mental, and spiritual well-being of human beings. We also believe this local enthusiasm for saving some wilderness is a cross section of the evidence of overwhelming hope on the part of people over our broad land that passage of S. 174 may insure preserving of a little wilderness for future generations. We are asking for less than 2 percent of the total area in our Nation. With only one exception those gentlemen appearing in opposition this morning represented commercial interests of mining, lumbering, or livestock. They plead for multiple use. Surely S. 174 provides adequately for what they ask, but it does provide also for prevention of grabs by those who, for private gain, may be more unscrupulous than other commercial interests who are willing to abide by an equitable divisions of wilderness lands. Lack of roads in these wilderness areas has been cited as reason for alarm in fighting fire and bugs. Surely roads have proved no deterrent to these maladies in the past. 7735062pt. 3- 7 ual refreshment. We are pleased that the Senate has passed a Wilderness Preservation Act, S. 174, and we urge the House of Representatives to pass this measure also. The federation consists of 36 member clubs. Their headquarters are in California, Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. The members reside in these and other Western States including Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, and New Mexico. They represent a wide cross section of the population. Many are of modest means. They have learned that the wilderness areas offer rich resources for physical and spiritual recreation at low cost. They are people from many communities, with widely varying backgrounds and interests, yet with a common understanding and appreciation of what our parks and wildlands can provide for the camper, the hiker, the fisherman, the hunter, the naturalist, the mountaineer, the photographer, the skier, the trail rider, or anyone else who seeks outdoor activities in a natural setting. The members of the federation are representative of many other people who are not affiliated with such organizations; their numbers demonstrate that wilderness is for the many-not, as some would have us believe, "for the few, the wealthy, and the hardy." The federation strongly supports the principle of this wilderness legislation for the following reasons: We all recognize that wilderness demand is increasing; population is increasing; the wilderness share for each of us is decreasing: The truth of the self-evident proposition is emphasized by the increasing visitation to our national parks, national forest wilderness areas, State parks, and other recreation areas. The wilderness share for each is decreasing not only because there are more people living in our country but also because more of these people are seeking the benefits of these natural resources in their natural state. The currently available wilderness lands are threatened by impairment or gradual nibbling away: Evidence presented before your subcommittee shows that there are strong pressures to void the very endorsement of the principle of wilderness preservation; to delay its establishment until the commodity interests can "get theirs," to hamper and hinder the expression of the will of the majority of the people who, we believe, want this type of wilderness protection. Present protection procedures are inadequate: It is true that the Congress has established numerous national parks whose wilderness sections would be included in the areas covered by the proposed law. It is true that the U.S. Forest Service has established various primitive, wild, and wilderness areas within the national forests, much of which would be covered by the proposed law. These forest areas comprise now a splendid body of reserves, and the Forest Service officials are to be highly commended for the establishment and protection of these areas. But this is not enough. The protection of these areas and their very existence are subject to the whim of administrators. They could be disestablished, as they were established, by administrative order. The time has come when protection of these areas in their natural state is so much in the public interest that Congress should formally recognize their worth and provide means for their preservation without impairment. The Wilderness Act protects mining interests: Mindful of the importance of the mining industry and of the Nation's developing needs In order to reach and work our mine, located on Mount Parker (so named for the late Abraham Lincoln Parker) between Reid and Lampough Glaciers in Glacier Bay National Monument, it is necessary for us to go by motorized marine transport; namely, our tug and barge. We have accomplished all assessment work in the past 6 years by towing heavy equipment and supplies, i.e., bulldozer, loader, backhoe, trucks, etc., by barge to and from Glacier Bay, a distance of approximately 70 miles from the mouth of Glacier Bay to the location of the mine. Since it is our right and intention of maintaining our mine we wish to go on record as opposing any restrictions by the so-called wilderness bill should it at any time in the future affect Glacier Bay National Monument. Respectfully yours, JENNIE M. PARKER, Coowner, Mount Parker Nine. Mrs. Prost. Our next witness is Mr. Henry M. Weber, conservation chairman, California Garden Clubs, Inc., 82259 Miles Avenue, Indio, Calif. Will Mr. and Mrs. Elmer A. Daniels of Sacramento please come forward. You may proceed, Mr. Weber. STATEMENT OF HENRY M. WEBER, M.D., CONSERVATION CHAIRMAN, CALIFORNIA GARDEN CLUBS, INC., INDIO, CALIF. Dr. WEBER. Madam Chairman, members of the committee, I am Dr. Henry M. Weber, of Indio, Calif. I am State chairman for the California Garden Clubs, Inc., with 18,000 members distributed among 400 clubs in the State. I also would like today to speak as the vice president of the Desert Protective Council, Inc., an organization in California with more than 800 members which cooperates with organizations with over 10,000 members. We have voiced our support of S. 174; I would like to briefly elaborate upon the statements which these two organizations have already presented. In the first place, S. 174 could justifiably and very properly be called the wilderness and water preservation bill. Those of us in California have been very happy to note that the committee has been extremely responsive to any mention of preservation of water here. We all know lumbering, or grazing, or mining, or recreation, or road building are not substitutes for water. In fact, all of these resources are fundamentally based upon water. Now the question of forestry in general. I would like to have you refer to those little statements which I passed out to you written by Frank B. Steiner as a civil engineer who has studied very carefully the causes of erratic water and wind behavior, and he calls that "What Makes a Drought?" I believe there are many most important points brought out here that are definitely connected with these new facts. Since the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock 500 millions of acres of our country have been denuded of their forest cover. I would like to have you get an idea of what that extent of acreage amounts to by telling you it is five times the area of the entire State of California. We in the United States have now covered 100 million acres of land with asphalt and concrete. In addition, we have cleared 1,109 million acres of land for crops. Governor Brown himself just last week set the tone for this support of the principles of the Wilderness Act which we are expressing, in a letter to a newspaperman, Dick Hyland. I wish to quote a portion of that letter as it appears in the November 3 issue of the newspaper Western Outdoor News. Governor Brown stated: As Governor of California, I am deeply aware of the interests of our multitude of citizens who look upon the beauties of our mountains and streams as resources worthy of our best attention today and preservation for our children and our children's children. I hope I have been useful in promoting programs in my administration that will safeguard and preserve these things for all time Governor Brown concluded. Recognition by the wilderness bill of the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness for the American people of present and future generations is of particular significance in California. As the subcommittee is well aware, California possesses some of the finest wilderness country in the Nation and also sustains some of the heaviest public outdoor recreational activity. While the wilderness bill will provide reasonable protection for wilderness lands where continued recreational opportunities will be assured, it is most significant to those of us charged with developing and utilizing natural resources of high economic and social value, such as water, minerals, and timber that much of the planning that led to the wording of the bill as it was passed by the Senate, was directed toward protecting and stabilizing the vital industries that depend upon utilization of these resources. This is as it should be. To give the committee some perspective as to the effects of the wilderness bill upon California, I would like to put a few figures in the record. There are approximately 100 million acres of land in California. Adoption of the bill before you would mean that within the next 14 years, 5,778,434 acres, or less than 6 percent of California, might be designated as within the wilderness system. Of this acreage, it is significant that at the present time, between 75 and 80 percent of this land is already permanently withdrawn from resources exploitation with 463,658 acres presently designated as national forest wilderness areas and 4,026,457 acres contained in existing national parks. The additional lands which would be affected specifically under the wilderness bill would be 1,094,164 acres of national forest primitive areas and 194,155 acres of national wildlife refuge and game areas which are not now permanently withdrawn from resources exploitation. From these figures then we see that approximately 1.2 percent of California's land areas would be given new status under the wilderness bill for the benefit of all the people. We believe that there is adequate provision within the bill for congressional review and specific affirmative action necessary before additional lands could be included in the wilderness system. We are not interested in "locking up" forever water, minerals or timber which someday may be needed in the national interest. We believe, however, that the bill provides suitable means and authority for the various secretaries to employ such actions as land exchanges, or |