pressed into progressively smaller adventures because we have by design and inadvertance denied ourselves the space and solitude in which to flex our muscles of flesh and spirit. Only a chauvinist denies the virtues of modern civilization and its handmaiden of technology. But only the very reckless and insensate would claim that there is no place left in the scheme of things for areas, large areas, where nature alone holds dominion. Like all imperialisms technological imperialism is to be distrusted. If we are not fully alert today to the need for wilderness preservation as part of a national effort to reconcile conflicting aspects of our civilization, we surely will be tomorrow. But tomorrow will be too late because as wilderness languishes in relative disuse its detractors proliferate, because the preservation of it will be an act of national restraint that has, as a category, an infrequent history and may not be possible again as circumstances change, and because the defense of the wilderness must lie ultimately in the hands of the many Americans who have been given the chance to see it, use it, and judge for themselves. Those Americans are not fictions. They are among the tens of thousands who use the summer campgrounds of forests and parks, State and national, a minority perhaps but a multitude nonetheless. They are waiting only for a word of encouragement and the knowledge of a tradition before heading out on the trails that lead away from pavement and crowds. These are the people who have the right to decide on the merit of wilderness and we cheat them if we fail to make their testimony possible. Let us take them to the wilderness and let them evaluate its significance. Of their decision I have no doubt. Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, SALT LAKE CITY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, Salt Lake City, Utah, February 26, 1963. Chairman, Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: The Salt Lake City Chamber of Commerce has a strong interest in wilderness legislation and would appreciate having this letter, expressing some of our views, included in the record of the hearings to be conducted on S. 4 on February 28, 1963. We are sure that you appreciate the fact that the economic well-being and progress of the Western States are dependent in large measure upon the successful development and utilization of their natural resources. These resources in major proportion are found in the public lands within those States. To assure the States and the Nation of the maximum benefits from the resources on those lands, the public land laws and administrative practices implementing them must assure reasonable access and development opportunity. We have noted with growing concern the exercise of regulatory power by the agencies which administer the public lands to a degree which in many cases has assumed legislative authority. It is pertinent in our opinion that, while considering wilderness legislation, the Congress should examine the extent to which the executive department and the administering agencies are assuming legislative authority through Executive orders and regulatory actions. All the lands proposed for inclusion in a wilderness system, excepting national parks and certain national monuments, have been upgraded in classification by the agencies from lands previously classified by the Congress for much broader access and use. The access and use now permitted in such lands are much more restrictive than the Congress stipulated. These actions have, in many cases, adversely affected the economic health of western public land States. With respect to wilderness legislation, we urge the committee to adopt the principle that any and all proposals for withdrawals of 5,000 acres or more be subject to the review of the Congress in normal legislative process, and to provide that all such tracts not previously examined and specifically classified for exclusive wilderness use by the Congress be subject to such review and approval. This would apply to all lands proposed for inclusion in a wilderness system other than those lands which are situated in a national park or a national monument established by direct congressional action. Under such provisions, the affected States, communities, and citizens could have reasonable opportunity to express their views regarding the disposition and use of public lands situated in their respective areas-lands which are vital to their economic life. Yours very truly, GUS P. BACKMAN, Secretary. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Senate Interior Committee, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, February 28, 1963. Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: The 35th Utah Legislature has this day passed and Governor George D. Clyde has signed Senate Concurrent Resolution 2, relating to the designation of wilderness areas. Full text of this resolution follows and we respectfully request that it be made a part of the record of the hearing on S. 4, which we are informed is scheduled for February 28, 1963. Text of the Senate Concurrent Resolution 2 of the 35th Utah Legislature follows: "Be it resolved by the Legislature of the State of Utah, the Governor concurring therein: "Whereas not more than 5 percent of Utah's land surface area is arable, the remaining 95 percent comprising mountains and deserts; and "Whereas, Utah cannot support its present population, much less support the steadily growing population which is reflected in recent census counts and which the most responsible analysts expect to continue at the present or even at an accelerating rate, on an agricultural economy, but must develop to the fullest possible extent its natural resources, including mineral and grazing resources, in order to maintain a healthy and growing economy; and "Whereas, the State of Utah must develop, husband, conserve, and put to the fullest and most efficient use its limited supply of usable water 80 percent of which falls as snow on the 20 percent of our land area which lies 7,000 feet and higher above sea level, giving the management of this remote, high-mountain area special importance to this State : and "Whereas almost three-fourths of the land area of the State of Utah is in Federal ownership and management, thus severely limiting revenues available for support of public schools and other operations of State government; and "Whereas lands in the public domain and in the national forests do produce at least some revenue to the State and its schools, while lands withdrawn for the purposes of wilderness areas, national parks and monuments, military and Indian reservations and other similarly restrictive purposes produce no revenue whatever to the State; and "Whereas Utah recognizes the esthetic and recreational values inherent in its high mountain fastnesses and its many spectacularly scenic semidesert and desert areas; and "Whereas, most of these areas can best be developed on established principles of multiple use, providing for maximum development of both tangible and intangible resources which they may contain: Now, therefore, be it "Resolved by the 35th Legislature of the State of Utah, the Governor concurring therein, That we respectfully urge the Congress of the United States in its consideration of legislation to establish a wilderness system, to limit the total area to be encompassed in such system to the minimum necessary to achieve the legitimate objectives of the program, and leaving the maximum area open to multiple-use development of both tangible and intangible resources for the suppport of the basic economy of this and our sister States; and be it further "Resolved, That we respectfully urge the Congress and the executive departments of the Federal Government to give all possible consideration to the principles outlined above in the creation and administration of all national parks and monuments, military reservations, Indian reservations, and other Federal withdrawals of lands within the respective States which remove such lands from development of whatever resources they may contain by the States and/or by private enterprise; and be it further "Resolved, That copies of this concurrent resolution be forwarded to the Congress of the United States; to the executive departments of the Federal Government, to the Members, individually, of the congressional delegations of Utah and of all the western public lands States; to the Governors of the Western States and to the legislatures of such Western States as may now be in session; and to the council of State governments, as an official expression of the sentiment of the State of Utah on these vital issues." GEORGE D. CLYDE, Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, WASHINGTON, D.C., February 28, 1963. Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: The American Recreation Society wishes to be on your official committee records as favorable to the enactment of S. 4 which would establish a natural wilderness preservation system. We strongly supported this measure when it was introduced in past in the Senate with 78-to-8 vote in the 87th Congress. We continue to emphasize the immediate need for a system which can clearly plan for and strongly control encroachment and impairments of wilderness areas in the Federal land holdings. We further would highlight the need for a program of gathering and disseminating information that would help the user enjoy this wilderness resource in our Nation. This message is amplified through official resolution by our 4,000 members who are professionally engaged in serving the recreation needs of people on many fronts in local, county, State, and National levels and in public community, private voluntary, hospital, military, park, church, and school settings. We all have a strong common interest in conserving outdoor recreation resources in order to condition a more enjoyable future for our growing American populace. Respectfully submitted. RAY R. BUTLER, American Recreation Society. WEST COAST MINERAL ASSOCIATION, Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: The West Coast Mineral Association at its February 11 meeting, unanimously passed the enclosed resolution concerning proposed legislation on wilderness areas. The members of the association urge you to give this careful consideration since it is a matter of vital importance to the mineral industry and economy of the country. As portrayed in the popular press, the wilderness bill has brought out two violently opposed groups. Ardent supporters of the bill are shown as a group that would entirely close the wilderness to any activity. Opponents are shown to be individuals and companies that are bent on the destruction of our beautiful national forests. As in most cases with two extremes, it is apparent that there is a middle-of-the-road policy that more clearly represents a true picture. The mining industry has no quarrel with the establishment of wilderness areas, provided prospecting and mining may be carried out in a law-abiding manner and under adequate restrictions as they now exist. Although this may seem like a protection of wasted interests, it is only meant as a statement of the maintenance -of historical rights; rights that have enabled industry to produce raw materials on a scale that has fostered an accelerated national growth. For those who are unfamiliar and antagonistic toward the mining industry, a picture is shown of hydraulic mining in the early placer days in California. Such -operations indeed left scars on the face of the earth and these practices are neither endorsed nor used today by legitimate mining operators in the Western United States. Another complaint frequently voiced is that waste products from a concentrator will pollute streams. With such a complaint we have no objection and any proposed mining in a wilderness area should be made to conform to existing laws and provide adequate waste storage and filtration systems. Under existing laws no one has the right to pollute a stream. The Holden Mine near Lake Chelan operated for many years and returned a wealth of revenue to workers, company, county, State, and Federal governments. This mine left a waste dump that will soon be overgrown with Cascade foliage. The workings are underground and leave very little evidence of their existence. In short, the mine has returned to nature after yielding a treasure to many citizens. We believe that this is an example of an intelligent controlled use of a vital natural resource. We urge you to support the proposed amendment to Wilderness Act S. 4 which will keep available vital mineral resources while still maintaining true wilder ness areas. Very truly yours, DONALD ANDERSON, President. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR AMENDMENT OF WILDERNESS ACT, S. 4 The members of the West Coast Mineral Association of Seattle, Wash., have had access to the careful and comprehensive study which was made by the Mining and Metallurgical Society of America on the Wilderness Act, S. 4. This study was presented to the House of Representatives, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, at hearings in Washington on May 7, 8, 9, 1962, and the following pertinent facts were brought out: The prohibitions of S. 4 deny the right of mineral production from lands that may be included in the National Wilderness Preservation System, and thereby, some 66 million acres having a high potential for mineral deposits would be sterilized as far as mineral production is concerned. Such impairment to productivity has foreboding implications, reaching deep into our economic structure that are contradictory to the demands on this Nation, as the bulwark of Western civilization, to maintain maximum economic strength and maximum military might. This undesirable circumstance is proposed by S. 4 in spite of the insignificant interference mineral production would have with the objetcive of wilderness preservation. Actual experience records show that the acreage required for mineral production would be less than 1 percent of the wilderness area. Therefore, a conflict of interests does not exist between the mineral industry and the proponents of wilderness preservation, in fact they should be completely agreeable to stand side by side in the belief that this Nation can retain its full capacity for mineral production and still preserve more than 99 percent of its wilderness. After due consideration the West Coast Mineral Association now unanimously endorses the resolution of the Mining and Metallurgical Society of America which reads as follows: 666 "Now, therefore, be it resolved, That the following amendment to Senate bill 4 (Wilderness Act) be added as subparagraph (8) to section C, subsection (c); (8) Anything in this act to the contrary notwithstanding lands within the wilderness system shall continue to be open to prospecting and subject to location and entry in the same manner and to the same extent as under existing mineral laws of the United States and the rules and regulations applying thereto.'' WYOMING FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, Hon. MILWARD SIMPSON, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MILWARD: It is my understanding that the wilderness legislation is once again being jostled about. I would like to take this opportunity to review briefly the stand of our organization regarding this bill. We have, in the past, and shall continue to favor multiple use of Federal lands. We feel that the designation of areas which would restrict multiple use would not be in the best interests of Wyoming and the Nation. We do, however, feel that the designation of approximately 6 million acres which is now classified as wilderness, wild, or roadless areas might well be placed in a wilderness system. Any additions to this system would be made by positive action of Congress and not by the recommendations of administrators subject to the veto of Congress. We would certainly appreciate any efforts that you could make to cause these feelings to be incorporated into a wilderness bill. Thanks very much for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely yours, CRAIG L. THOMAS, Executive Secretary Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, U.S. Senator, Senate Office Building, SPORTSMEN'S LEGISLATIVE ACTION COMMITTEE, MY DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: The Sportsmen's Legislative Action Committee and 25 affiliated sportsmens organizations of New Mexico feel that the wilderness bill as originally proposed is probably as important a piece of legislation as Congress will consider this session. It goes to the heart of the sort of national heritage we are going to pass on to our children and grandchildren. In 1948, after Congress had ordered a study on the feasibility of wilderness legislation, the Director of the Legislative Reference Service warned "with the growing population and the resulting utilization of more and more previously unutilized land, it is becoming evident that before many years have passed there is a danger that the original wilderness which was met and conquered by our forefathers in building our country will have disappeared entirely. It will exist only in the history books. If, then, there is reason for preserving substantial portions of the remaining wilderness, it must be decided before it is too late." Fifteen years later the rape and exploitation of North American resources continues, and at the present time out of 181 million acres of national forests, all that remains that can be preserved as wilderness is an area about as large as New York and Vermont. If this relatively small area is to serve the needs of our growing population with its growing leisure time, it will require all the wisdom that we are capable of exercising. We believe that the wilderness bill is a welcome step in the right direction, provided it is not allowed to become a measure to protect mining, lumbering, any other commercial interest group, but provides to insure conservation of scenic, natural, and historic objects and the wildlife of this Nation. We wish to thank you for the effort which you have put into this bill and offer our individual and collective support on the measure, which we believe serves best the interests of the citizens of our State and of the United States. It is requested that this be made a part of the Senate record. Respectfully yours, ED YOUNG, President, Sportsmen's Legislative Action Committee. NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY, Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: Since time did not permit our appearance at the committee hearing yesterday on the wilderness bill, S. 4, and since other commitments made it impossible for either Mr. Buchheister or me to stay over in Washington another day, I am enclosing for the record a brief statement by Mr. Buchheister for the National Audubon Society in support of the wilderness bill. We sincerely hope this important measure may soon be reported favorably by the committee without weakening amendments. We oppose the amendment proposed by Senator Allott. In addition to the brief statement by Mr. Buchheister, president of the National Audubon Society, we submit for the record of the hearings a copy of an analysis of the wilderness bill as published by the society in the January 1, 1963, issue of Audubon Leader's Conservation Guide. Sincerely yours, CHARLES H. CALLISON, STATEMENT OF CARL W. BUCHHEISTER, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY My name is Carl W. Buchheister. I am president of the National Audubon Society, one of America's oldest and largest organizations of citizens interested in the conservation of wildlife, wilderness, and related natural resources. 95399-63-18 We |