Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The AFL-CIO continues its longstanding support for effective legislation to protect the primitive wilderness areas of national forest, parks, and wildlife preserves. Therefore we endorse and support S. 4, a bill to establish a National Wilderness Preservation System. As you know, in the 87th Congress the AFL-CIO supported S. 174, a bill which was passed by the Senate in a form almost identical to S. 4 as introduced in the 88th Congress. We hope S. 4 will receive the same bipartisan support in the Senate in 1963 that S. 174 received in 1961. I would appreciate your including this letter in the record of hearings by your committee on S. 4. Sincerely, ANDREW J. BIEMILLER, Director, Department of Legislation. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES, Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: The Chamber of Commerce of the United States supports the principle of designating outstanding areas of Federal lands within existing reservations, still in their primitive state, for wilderness recreation purposes. Prior to Senate passage of S. 174 in the 87th Congress, the national chamber urged withholding of action until the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission's report on outdoor recreation needs, including wilderness, had become available. This report was released in January 1962. It recommended, in part, that: "Congress should enact legislation providing for the establishment and management of certain primitive areas as 'wilderness areas.'' In spite of the still unsettled issue in Congress as to the acceptable procedures for segregating wilderness lands, the U.S. Forest Service of the Department of Agriculture, through administrative action, has continued to make substantial boundary changes and has reclassified as "wilderness" two large "primitive" areas-Selway-Bitterroot and Anaconda-Pintlar in Idaho and Montana-totaling nearly 12 million acres. A third new Forest Service action has now been proposed-reclassification of the 192,000-acre Sawtooth Primitive Area in Idaho to wilderness status. In view of these new developments since the passage of S. 174, we support enactment of wilderness legislation at this time. However, a bill such as S. 4, would not be in the public interest without the inclusion of certain basic principles now lacking. We do not believe a wilderness bill warrants support unless it incorporates certain specific principles. These principles are: 1. Congress should assume the responsibility and authority for the specific approval of the designation of each wilderness area. This is in accordance with the constitutional requirement that authority over disposal of all public property is specifically vested in the Congress. 2. The proposed law should require before congressional action: (1) That a thorough inventory be made of the natural resources; and (2) that on the basis of such inventory, the Congress be furnished an evaluation of the proposed area's resources as to their contribution to present and future needs, including wilderness uses. 3. The proposed law should require that prior to congressional action the views of local, county and State governments be ascertained and supplied to the Congress together with a report of the probable impact of proposed designation at National, State, and local levels. 4. The legislation should provide administrative flexibility for the protection and management of wilderness. This is necessary to perpetuate de sirable wilderness characteristics, to permit salvage of resources following catastrophe or to prevent such natural or manmade catastrophe, and to continue resource uses, presently permitted on eligible areas, under controlled conditions not impairing the overall wilderness characteristics. The national chamber therefore recommends that S. 4 be revised to include these basic principles in order to meet the broad national needs, including recreational uses. Sincerely, THERON J. RICE, Legislative Action, General Manager. THE CANOE CRUISERS' ASSOCIATION OF GREATER WASHINGTON, HOWARD ZAHNISER, Executive Director, the Wilderness Society, Dear Howard: This statement authorizes you or your duly appointed deputy to represent the Canoe Cruisers' Association of Greater Washington at the hearing on S. 4, the wilderness bill, at the New Senate Office Building by expressing our support of the detailed recommendations for improvements to this bill which you propose to make. We hope that the work of readying and passing this bill will proceed expeditiously in view of the great amount of thought and work which has been expended prior to the current session of the Congress. The efforts of the Wilderness Society in behalf of the wilderness bill over the years deserve a success this year. With best wishes, I am, JAMES W. JOHNSTON, Jr., Chairman, Committee for the Conservation of Natural Resources. THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY, Washington, D.C., March 11, 1963. Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: I have been requested by Mrs. Emily Haig, president of the Federation of Western Outdoor Clubs, 2216 Federal Avenue East, Seattle 2, Wash., to register the opposition of that organization to the proposed San Gorgonio ski development. May I ask that the opposition of the Federation of Western Outdoor Clubs to the proposed San Gorgonio ski development be made a part of the record of the hearing on the wilderness bill, S. 4, which were held on February 28, 1963. Thank you. Sincerely, HOWARD ZAHNISER, Executive Director and Editor. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION, Re S. 4, 88th Congress, 1st session, to establish a National Wilderness Preservation System. Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR CHAIRMAN: Reference is made to the Commission's report on the subject bill, submitted to you by our letter dated February 26, 1963. The table on page 2 of the report indicates that an estimated 3,006,300 kilowatts of "other potential capacity" exists on lands classified by the Secretary of Agriculture as primitive areas. This figure was based on information with respect to lands within those areas made available by the Forest Service last year, and is reflected in the tabulation which appears on page 1242 of the hearings on S. 174, 87th Congress, held before the Public Lands Subcommittee of the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee in May 1962. A copy of the tabulation is attached. In the course of the testimony on behalf of the Department of Agriculture at the February 28, 1963, hearing on S. 4 it was brought out that the Secretary of Agriculture, by a decision dated January 11, 1963, had reclassified certain lands. By this decision the Secretary established the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness Area largely from lands which were formerly within the Selway-Bitterroot Primitive Area. This decision transforms the Wolf Creek, Moose Creek, and Running Creek sites, totaling 393,000 kilowatts of potential capacity on the Selway River, from the primitive area to the new wilderness area. In addition, the upper part of the reservoir of the 292,000 kilowatts Penny Cliffs site would affect the new wilderness area, and the 46,000 kilowatts Jerry Johnson and the 105,000 kilowatts Wendover sites on the Lochsa River would affect the "Lochsa River face" which the decision states has wilderness value. As a result of the Secretary's decision, 836,000 kilowatts of potential hydroelectric capacity previously affecting primitive areas now affect areas classified as wilderness. In addition, the Secretary's decision would eliminate from the primitive area and return to national forest status the White Cap site on the Selway River, having a potential capacity of 68,000 kilowatts. Because of the reclassification of this site, this 68,000 kilowatts of capacity should no longer be included in our tabulation, the total capacity shown in such tabulation should be 3,974,100 kilowatts instead of 4,042,100 as shown in our February 26 report. In order to adjust the Commission's report to reflect the above-described reclassification of these lands by the Secretary of Agriculture, we request that the following paragraph be substituted for the last paragraph on page 2 of the Commission's report on S. 4: Based upon available information concerning the areas classified as primitive and wilderness, the hyproelectric generating capacities of the sites, licensed and potential, which would be affected in those areas are as follows: Capacity under license: Existing (primitive). Under Construction (primitive) –– Other potential capacity: Primitive_ Wilderness__ Total____ Kilowatts 878, 300 157, 500 2, 102, 300 836,000 3, 974, 100 These recent land reclassifications by the Secretary of Agriculture, considered in the light of recommendations by the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture that the savings clause in section 11 preserving the licensing jurisdiction of the Federal Power Commission be modified or deleted, serve to emphasize the difficulties inherent in making the licensing provisions of the Federal Power Act dependent upon whether potential powersites are located in areas which have a particular classification assigned at a particular point in time by the Secretary of Agriculture. S. 4 contains a satisfactory savings clause and for that reason our report did not go beyond a statement emphasizing the importance of such a clause. For a detailed description of the reasons in support of a savings clause we suggest that the committee refer to and incorporate by reference our testimony at the hearings on S. 174 on this subject during the 87th Congress (see hearings on February 27, 1961, before Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs on S. 174, 87th Congress, pp. 68-76; also hearings on May 8, 1962, before Subcommittee on Public Lands of the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs on S. 174, 87th Cong., pp. 1229–1242). Sincerely, JOSEPH C. SWIDLER, Chairman. |