88 NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION ACT One of the major determinations made in the ORRRC Study Report 3 (Wilderness and Recreation-a Report on Resources, Values, and Problems) was that 75 percent of those persons penetrating the boundaries of wilderness areas planned fishing as one of their major activities. Those fishermen desiring to exert themselves can have as a goal practically "virgin" waters in which to fish; an incomparable fishing experience that could become entirely impossible to attain unless such areas are protected from possible future administrative changes that could eliminate management under wilderness concepts. The Sport Fishing Institute generally concurs in the principles to which S. 4 addresses itself, to protect by statute-subject to change only through deliberative processes-those areas now designated administratively, or regarded generally, as wilderness or related purpose areas. With statutory protection, there would be a National Wilderness Preservation System "for the permanent good of the whole people." We feel that this approach provides for public uses and benefits that are of overriding value to America. For these reasons, the Sport Fishing Institute urges approval of S. 4 by your committee as a means to that end, and respectfully requests that this letter be made a part of the official record of hearings. Sincerely, Senator HENRY M. JACKSON, PHILIP A. DOUGLAS, NORTH COUNTRY BIRD CLUB, Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR SENATOR: As president of the North Country Bird Club, whose membership encompasses a large area of northern New York, may I act as the representative of our organization in expressing their views in regards to the wilderness bill. It is with hopeful expectations and relief that our organization welcomes the time when we hope that favorable action will be taken on this most important bill. Unlike the many whose only thoughts are to exploit every commercial possibility, we say let there be some regions of natural beauty left, which can be seen by the generations of the future, unscathed and free from man's defacement. It is with the foregoing sentiment that the members of the North Country Bird Club wish to express their favor of the wilderness bill, S. 4, and hopes for its passage by Congress soon. Thank you for your attention. Hon. MILWARD SIMPSON, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: KENNETH MELLON, President. CHEYENNE, Wyo., February 27, 1963. Please be advised that the 37th session of the Wyoming State Legislature passed a joint memorial at their recent session memorializing the Congress of the United States concerning wilderness legislation and opposing the creation or extension of wilderness areas within the State of Wyoming. I signed the memorial because I firmly believe it is the right approach and is in the best interests of all Wyomingites. The joint memorial included these sections: "Whereas bills have been introduced in the U.S. Congress to establish a national wilderness preservation system; and whereas, these bills would create wilderness areas in Wyoming; and whereas, the creation of wilderness areas would interfere with the development of Wyoming's water resources, and would jeopardize the multiple-use concept of the areas for the projection of water, forage, timber, minerals, and recreational opportunities, which multiple-use concept policy has been in effect for over 50 years, and has shaped the economy of the West; now, therefore, be it Resolved, by the House of the 37th Legislature of the State of Wyoming, the Senate of such Legislature concurring, That the President and Congress of the United States of America be and they are hereby memorialized to consider fairly and diligently the welfare and interest of the people of the State of Wyoming, who oppose the creation of extension of wilderness areas in Wyoming; That, furthermore, if such wilderness areas are necessary and desired in other States,. NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION ACT 89 that areas adjacent to centers of population be purchased and returned to the wilderness state, believing that such a program would make wilderness areas available to more people of the country than the creation of such areas in the West. This action by the State legislature reflects, I firmly believe, the feeling of a great many Wyoming people. It is my hope that no wilderness legislation will be approved by the committee. Senator HENRY M. JACKSON, CLIFFORD P. HANSEN, Governor of Wyoming. ARROWHEAD AREA COUNCIL, INC., BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA, San Bernardino, Calif., February 22, 1963. Chairman, Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: We are informed that your committee is to consider the wilderness bill February 28, 1963. We enclose copy of a resolution unanimously passed by our executive board February 20, 1963. We respectfully request that this resolution be considered by your committee. Our council strongly favors the wilderness bill as is, without exclusion of special areas such as the San Gorgonio Wild Area for purpose of admitting mechanized skiing development. We feel we must take a strong stand on this matter, as it is obvious ski developments would spoil the wilderness for youth training and enjoyment. When you can ride a ski lift up the highest mountain in southern California, the challenge to hike it is lost. Our youth must learn selfreliance and other values to be gained from the wilderness. This is necessary to counteract the softening influences of modern civilization. We trust your committee will agree with our thinking. Cordially yours, EDWARD H. SAXTON, Scout Executive. RESOLUTION REGARDING MAINTAINING THE SAN GORGONIO WILD AREA Whereas the San Gorgonio Wild Area is an important part of our vanishing wilderness area and is the only such undeveloped area of its kind in southern California, and Whereas it is important to retain this primitive wilderness area to provide suitable camping experiences readily accessible to southern California and such camping experiences as are available in the wilderness area are essential to scouting's program of character building, citizenship training, and physical fitness and to the teaching of self-reliance and the ability to take care of themselves and others on the part of Scouts, and Whereas it is obvious that the proposed development of mechanized skiing facilities would permanently damage the wilderness aspect of the area and Whereas it is essential that such wilderness area be retained for future generations. Therefore, be it resolved that the San Gorgonio Wild Area be maintained as it is currently being managed by the U.S. Forest Service. STATEMENT OF J. A. CROWDER, COUNSEL FOR THE NATIONAL WOOL GROWERS ASSOCIATION Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, This statement regarding proposed wilderness legislation is the official position of the National Wool Growers Association. Our association is composed of 19 State organizations and represents an area where over 70 percent of the Nation's sheep, lambs, and wool are produced. The National Wool Growers Association has been the recognized spokesman for the Nation's sheep producers for the past 98 years. The following resolution was unanimously adopted at the 98th annual convention of our association, January 20-23, 1963: "The National Wool Growers Association goes on record as opposing any wilderness legislation. We submit there is sufficient legislation regarding wilderness areas; that the proposed legislation is a duplication of effort; and if carried to its conclusion, would be detrimental to the interest of the people of the United States and especially the livestock industry. "We request that Congress reassert its legislative authority as to the withdrawal of public lands. We are opposed to the executive branch taking over the duties of the legislative branch of Government." The above stand of our organization is not new. This has been our position throughout the long and tiresome battle before Congress to set up this "special interest" legislation. It is our firm conviction that wilderness legislation is not necessary. Wilderareas have been created under existing authority and further wilderness areas, if and when needed, can be created under that same authority. It is true that our national forests, where a number of wilderness areas have been created, are managed under the multiple-use principle, with wilderness as one of the specific uses. However, this is not sufficient for the wilderness enthusiasts who apparently put emotion before sanity and whose aim is wilderness alone through roadlessness and nonuse of resources, however badly needed. In view of the fact that this is a "special interest" bill and, further, that there is sufficient authority for creation of needed wilderness areas, we would strongly urge the Senate Interior Committee to reject this bill. If, however, after consideration of S. 4 the committee deems it advisable to report the bill favorably, then we would strongly urge: (1) That Senator Allott's amendment be added to S. 4, requiring positive congressional action for additional areas to become a part of the wilderness preservation system. National parks are created only through positive action of Congress and certainly it is logical for Congress to act in the same positive manner in the creation of additional wilderness areas. We believe strongly that in the interests of all people of the United States, determination of the status of the land is a function which should only be exercised by Congress. In fact, present laws permitting establishment of wilderness areas through action of Government bureaus should be amended to require that such actions be subject to positive approval by Congress. (2) Furthermore, if favorable action on this bill should be deemed advisable, we urgently request the Senate Interior Committee to amend that section of the bill under "Special Provisions" having to do with grazing of livestock on areas made a part of the wilderness system. Under the present wording of the bill stability of tenure on grazing use is not clearly defined or assured. We would urge the committee to amend section 6(c) (2) (B) of S. 4 through deletion of the words shown in parentheses below: "the grazing of livestock where (well) established prior to the effective date of this Act with respect to areas established as part of the wilderness system by this Act, or prior to the date of public notice thereof with respect to any area to be recommended for incorporation in the wilderness system, shall be permitted to continue (subject to such restrictions and regulations as are deemed necessary by the Secretary having jurisdiction over such area)." The word "well" is vague and subject to many different interpretations depending upon the individual making the interpretation. "Well established" could mean anything from 6 months to 6 years or longer. Grazing permits are not granted indiscriminately by either the Secretary of Agriculture or Secretary of the Interior. A stockman receives a grazing permit only if he meets rigid qualifications set up by either the Secretary of Agriculture or Interior, depending on the land involved. Removal of the word "well" would clarify continuance of established grazing of livestock as one of the compatible and necessary uses of areas placed in wilderness status and would assure continuance of essential grazing operations in areas of the West where communities are dependent on sheep and cattle production to provide taxes for roads, schools, and other necessities. Also, the words "subject to such restrictions and regulations as are deemed necessary by the Secretary having jurisdiction over such area" should be removed since grazing is already subject to many restrictions and regulations established over the years by the Departments of Agriculture and Interior. Since any wilderness areas would be administered by these two agencies, it is certainly logical to continue grazing operations under these applicable restrictions and regulations rather than saddling the livestock industry with a myriad of new regulations. We appreciate this opportunity to present the official position of our organization on wilderness legislation. We will also appreciate favorable considera tion by the Senate Interior Committee of the views and proposals we have set forth in this statement. STATEMENT OF MILES P. ROMNEY, MANAGER, UTAH MINING ASSOCIATION The Utah Mining Association endorses the testimony and the proposals with respect to S. 4, to be presented at these hearings by the American Mining Congress. The Western States, in which the major portion of the public lands are located, are becoming increasingly aware of the extraordinary powers over disposition and use of those lands which have been granted to the executive branch of the Government. There seems to be no firm statutory guidelines governing disposition and use of those lands, but the administering agencies have acquired very broad regulatory powers which have permitted those agencies to encroach upon the legislative field in many of the actions taken. The Utah Mining Association strongly urges that the entire field of disposition and use of the public lands be critically reviewed with respect to the legislative responsibilities and prerogatives of the Congress and the appropriate regulatory powers of the administering agencies. Practically all the lands proposed in S. 4 for inclusion in a wilderness system, other than the land in national parks and monuments, were segregated by Executive order from lands classified by the Congress for much greater general use than the uses stipulated by the agencies in the segregations. We consider the selective classifications by the administering agencies of great acreages of lands for uses much more restrictive than was originally established by the Congress, for those lands, to have violated the intent of the Congress and to have assumed legislative authority. We urge that no lands be included within the wilderness system, unless they have been heretofore classified by Congress for single-purpose uses, or until Congress has made an independent review thereof through normal legislative processes and has made a determination that such classification should be made. We further urge that the Congress act favorably on legislation requiring congressional review of all proposals to make withdrawals in excess of 5,000 acres from the public lands. STATEMENT OF HAROLD E. WALLACE, CHAIRMAN, LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, NATIONAL RECLAMATION ASSOCIATION My name is Harold E. Wallace. My home is Salt Lake City, Utah, and I am chairman of the Legislative Committee of the National Reclamation Association. This statement is presented on behalf of the National Reclamation Association, an organization which was formed in Salt Lake City in 1932. Throughout all the years since that time the association has maintained an active membership from among the irrigation farmers from each of the 17 Western States. Approximately two-thirds of the members of the association at the present time are Western water users or irrigation farmers. The irrigation farmers of the West have perhaps a greater reason for being interested in watershed protection and the proper management of the watersheds upon which they are dependent than any other group of citizens in America. The very existence of the entire irrigated West depends upon an adequate supply of irrigation water throughout the entire growing season. That means that there must be a well-sustained streamflow runoff. In most of the watersheds of the West, reservoirs have been constructed to store the early season runoff and hold it over for late season use, but reservoirs are costly and it is, therefore, vitally important that every effort be made to maintain a well-sustained late season runoff of the natural flow of all the rivers of the West. I am attaching to my statement a copy of Resolution No. 1, wilderness areas, which was unanimously adopted at the last meeting of the National Reclamation Association in Portland, Oreg., in October 1962. I respectfully request that this resolution be included in the record along with and as a part of this statement. From this resolution it is clearly evident that the members of the National Reclamation Association endorse the principle of multiple use rather than single use with reference to the resources of the watersheds of the West. For instance, the resolution states: "(a) In every case where the public domain is capable of a variety of consistent uses, it should be made available for all such uses." 95399-63-7 And again the resolution states: Those uses "most essential should have preference over those less essential." Then I also wish to call attention to the order of preference recommended in this resolution. I think this is especially significant. Following is the order recommended: "(1) National defense and uses in support thereof. "(2) Production of the necessities of life, especially water, food, fiber, timber, minerals, power and the means of transportation and communication. "(3) Recreation for all. "(4) Specialized recreation for the few." The conservation movement as we know it today was given its greatest momentum under the leadership of former President Theodore Roosevelt and our first Chief Forester, Gifford Pinchot. These two great conservationists gave to the word "conservation" its true meaning. Their definition was: "Conservation-the use of the natural resources for the greatest good of the greatest number for the longest time." Gifford Pinchot in his book, "Breaking New Ground," made the following comment: "Launching the conservation movement was the most significant achievement of the T. R. administration, as he himself believed. It seems altogether probable that it will also be the achievement for which he will be longest and most gratefully remembered." Former President Theodore Roosevelt, in his message of December 2, 1901, stated, "The fundamental idea of forestry is the perpetuation of forests by use. Forest protection is not an end in itself; It is a means to use and sustain the resources of our country and the industries which depend upon them." We believe that the fundamental principle of single use underlying wilderness legislation is diametrically opposed to the philosophy of true conservation as established by Theodore Roosevelt and Gifford Pinchot. We recognize that there may be certain areas which are peculiarly adapted to wilderness, and that a wilderness system would be appropriate for such areas. We believe, however, that because of the extreme difference in the philosophy of conservation in its broad multiple-use sense on the one hand, and the narrower version of single use as exemplified by the wilderness legislation on the other hand, that there should be restrictions imposed upon the creation or addition of a wilderness area, whereby not only those who have a vital interest in that particular area, but everyone concerned could be sure that that area is better suited for wilderness than any other purpose. For the foregoing reasons, if this committee feels that it is desirable to enact wilderness legislation, then we would like to suggest that consideration be given to the following amendments to pending legislation S. 4. Amendment No. 1.-To provide for affirmative congressional approval before inclusion of areas in the wilderness system. Amend Section 3(f), page 10, line 5, beginning after the word "adjournment," by striking the remainder of line 5, all of line 6, and line 7 through the word "recommendation," and inserting in lieu thereof the following, "The Congress shall have approved a concurrent resolution declaring itself in favor of such recommendation." Comment.-"Wilderness areas should be created only by affirmative approval of the Congress." This has been the opinion of the members of the National Reclamation Association over a period of years. In my opinion, this is the most important amendment that has yet been proposed to the wilderness legislation. Amendment No. 2.-Amend Section 3 (b) (1) as follows: Page 4, line 1, after the word "wild" strike the word "primitive," and after the word "canoe" strike the colon and insert a period. Page 4, between lines 1 and 2, insert a subheading as follows: "National Forest Primitive Areas." Page 4, line 2, strike the words "provided that the" and insert "(2)" and the word "The." Comment. The purpose of this amendment is to provide that primitive areas shall not be added to the wilderness system except by affirmative action by the Congress. The effect of the proposed legislation now before the committee would be to add the vast and extended primitive areas to the wilderness system with one stroke of the pen. The report by the Department of Agriculture on this bill |