active in this matter and in giving unstintingly of himself and in dealing with the individuals who are concerned and is as responsible as anybody for the fact that we are having these hearings today. Mr. Conowal?

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH C. CONOWAL, PRESIDENT, BRISTOL CLIFFS LANDOWNERS ASSN., BRISTOL (NOTCH), VT.

Mr. CONOWAL. My name is Joseph Conowal, President of the Bristol Cliffs Landowners' Association, and on behalf of the Bristol Cliffs Wilderness Area Association (sic) we want to thank you for taking time out to come here to hear our people. In layman's language I need not say anymore as the landowners before me stated our case and our sentiments. I would like to comment, though, pertaining to Seward Weber of the Vermont Natural Resources Council and Tom Harroun of the Vermont Sierra Club and Mr. Ernest Dickerman of the Wilderness Society. They say we should negotiate only by redrawing the western boundaries. I will tell you this, we have no intention of negotiating for only part of our lands back but for all.

We maintain our stand and demand that the lines that have taken private property be redrawn back to that of the Green Mountain National Forest. Then if the Government wishes to purchase more land let them approach us in a democratic manner. To do this we must start at ground zero. And another answer to the same gentleman and whomever; I was informed many times as were other landowners by the Forestry Department officials that the Government would never let us win. We have been told that we would set a precedent that would affect other wilderness areas throughout the United States. We have been told from the beginning that we have no say as to the destiny of our property. When this word "precedent" is being used we are not concerned with setting a precedent. We could care less in this respect. We are concerned simply with justice. The fact or fear of setting a damn precedent in this instance should not be the principal concern but rather, if justice is best served. For the day we can arbitrarily confiscate a citizen's property without due process of the law that also sets an example, and I might add, an unAmerican one. When we let anything stand in the way of righting an injustice we have lost some of the principles for which America stands. Let justice set the precedent so then shall we find America. This act of confiscation is a violation of the fifth amendment which states, "Nor can a man be deprived of life, liberty and property without due process of law." I have put my tax monies in escrow out of protest to this unconstitutional act. I would like a moment to read some letters of people that could not be here.

Senator LEAHY. The committee will accept, of course. all letters as we have from any people either for or against the pending legislation. We will accept all such letters and will make them part of our permanent record.

Mr. CONOWAL. Well, now in one week's time just people totally unrelated to the wilderness area heard about our Senate hearing. These are people that do not own land. There is about 125 names of people signed here that say they would agree with the principle and sup

port of the landowners and they would want to remove all private lands from the wilderness areas and these were turned in to me this morning.

Senator LEAHY. Those will be accepted for the committee.

Mr. CONOWAL. This letter is for Harly Odett who is sick and cannot be here. The reason I am reading them I promised the people that I would.

I am a landowner in the Town of Bistol, owning approximately 12.5 acres that are included in the Bristol Cliffs Wilderness Area. I would not be opposed to selling my land to the United States Government, but in the present way the land was confiscated, I would not do so until such a time when the lines are removed, and I am approached democratically. I could not appear in person as I am ill but I want my views known. Thank you.

HARLY ODETT.

Mr. CONOWAL. Here's one from Alfred Browning Parker.

Dear Senator. Although I have lived in Miami for over half a century I was born in New England. I have a small place in Vermont and I spend as much time there as my work permits.

Recently, part of my land was incorporated into the Bristol Cliffs Wilderness Area. At the time this did not bother me, since I am firmly dedicated to principles of conservation and planning for the future. I have learned that the lands of many of my neighbors fall completely into the Wilderness Area, yet these people had no voice in the bill creating the area.

Our only recourse is to stick together and to make our voices heard in Washington.

I join with them in asking that the legislation be revised to remove all private property from the Wilderness Area. I am confident that your reasoned analysis of the situation will confirm the need for revising the legislation. With kindest personal regards, I remain- Alfred Browning Parker.

Mr. CONOWAL. And here is a letter of support from Mr. Cheek.

Our organization does no direct lobbying, so we can't be of any specific help to you or your legislative project.

However, the legislative principle that has been applied to you-partial taking is one of the major complaints of most landowners in regard to proposed land use legislation.

This is the second flagrant example of this kind of thing that we have encountered in the last few weeks and, personally, my reaction is exactly the same as yours.

From a practical standpoint you need to ally yourselves with larger groups with the same interests. I will forward your letter to John Hall of National Forest Products Association, which is an organization that involves itself with government at all levels and does it very effectively.

Mr. CONOWAL. This is from the Lathrops.

At one time I owned several lots along the highway leading through Bristol and in the Notch Area. After I went out of the lumber and wood business I sold these lots, all but one, and this lot joins the main highway leading through Bristol Notch. I kept this lot thinking there would always be a right-of-way to it and it would be a handy place to cut firewood if I needed it. Now I find this lot included in the Bristol Cliffs survey which I object to. Clarence G. Lathrop and his wife, Elizabeth M. Lathrop, and thank you very much.

Senator LEAHY. Thank you, Mr. Conowal, and I appreciate your bringing those letters and I would emphasize again what I stated before, that the record of this hearing will stay open for a period of time after the hearing. So if other people have other letters either from friends or otherwise they can send them to the National Agricultural Committee and they will be included in the record.

I believe Mr. and Mrs. Cousino have come in and if they would come forward we'd be glad to hear their testimony also. Who would like to go first?

STATEMENT OF MR. AND MRS. WILLIAM COUSINO, BRISTOL, VT.

Mr. COUSINO. She is going to do the talking.

Mrs. COUSINO. I'm Janice Cousino, and I want to give my little speech. Our No. 1 opposition is the method

Senator LEAHY. Would you also give your address and whether you are owners within the property area affected just so we know. Mr. COUSINO. We are owners in the property.

Mrs. COUSINO. And our address is box 54-B, Bristol Notch, Bristol, Vt. Our No. 1 objection is to the method of how this became a wilderness. This was not an American way of doing things, and we feel we should have been given some consideration since we are the ones involved. Our No. 2 objection is the way the boundaries were drawn up is another sour note. Why this zigzag in and around certain properties? The Forest Service should have started out with the road. Why didn't they follow through? No. 3, the restrictions. We do not intend to be told what we can or can't do with our property as long as we still hold the deed and pay the taxes. We are not going to put up with any restrictions and don't intend to notify the Forest Department 60 days before we make any changes, and we don't want the Forest Department on our land anymore telling us what we can and what we can't do. We think this Wilderness Act is a great thing if they have it on the property the Government now owns, but as far as our own private land, no way. Let's get back to the American way of doing things and correct this big "boo-boo." Thank you.

Senator LEAHY. Albert Coleman here? Is there anybody who has been invited to testify who has not had a chance to testify yet. Anyone who has been invited to testify who has not testified? Is there anybody else who would like to testify?

Mr. CONOWAL. We have Greg Pahl, president of the chamber of commerce who is to be here at quarter of 2.

Senator LEAHY. Fine, we will wait for him. Let me state, and I would like this statement to come in following Mr. Pahl's testimony. I will recess this hearing now for about 10 minutes and then take our last witness after which we will leave the hearing record open for 2 weeks for anybody who wants to submit further testimony.

[Recess, 1:40 p.m.-resume, 1:45 p.m.]

Senator LEAHY. Chair would call as our next witness Greg Pahl. If you would state your name and your connection with the hearing for the record and feel free to give your testimony.

STATEMENT OF GREGORY B. PAHL, PRESIDENT, BRISTOL AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, BRISTOL, VT.

Mr. PAHL. My name is Greg Pahl. I'm the president of the Bristol Area Chamber of Commerce. Earlier this year the directors from the chamber of commerce had a meeting at which time we decided to give our support to the landowners in the Bristol Cliffs Wilderness Area.

When I'm not working for the chamber of commerce I am employed in the store on the corner here, and I have had an opportunity over the past few months to talk with a lot of people from this area on this particular issue, and I don't think I have ever run into something that has had quite so many people upset as this particular Wilderness Cliffs area issue. So it's, I know, from my own personal experience with talking with many of the people from the community that it's something which they feel has been very unfair and which they want to see righted as soon as possible.

Senator LEAHY. You get the impression, Mr. Pahl, in speaking with the people that they are concerned with not only the wilderness area as such but rather with the way in which this was created, that is, notified them after the fact?

Mr. PAHL, Yes, very much so. Actually, I think probably most of these people are generally in favor of the wilderness area concept, but it would be fair to say it was the manner in which this was done which has probably provoked most of the displeasure.

Senator LEAHY. Thank you very much.

Mr. PAHL. That is really all I have to say.

Senator LEAHY. Thank you, Mr. Pahl, and I appreciate your taking the time to come over. Albert Coleman?

STATEMENT OF ALBERT J. COLEMAN, BRISTOL, VT.

Mr. COLEMAN. Senator, of course, my name is Albert J. Coleman and I live in West Lincoln. Sixteen, 17 years ago I bought a property up in Vermont for retirement and my wife and I retired 2 years ago and, of course, we moved up here and were very happy until we took a trip down south. When we came back from there the mailman had a nice little sealed envelope for me and, of course, it scared me to death because the way the letter was written I thought I lost the whole thing, and I was just disgusted and, of course, I have had high blood pressure and I ended up with the doctor. And, of course, my blood pressure has been up ever since because I'm still very much aggravated about it.

I think if the Government had come to me a couple of years ago and wanted to buy the 20 acres that I think are involved in the wilderness I probably would have talked business with them, but right now, of course, the land is not for sale. And we'd, naturally, like to get it back. Now, when we first got the letter, of course, we thought the whole thing was in it. We thought we couldn't do anything. We couldn't garden, we couldn's build on the land, build on the house or anything like that. Of course, after a while, and after my blood pressure came down a bit, we did find out that we were in just a little better shape. I bought the land, of course, for retirement and I bought it so that my children, my grandchildren would have something later on in life. which I still would like to retain the so-called 20 acres that are involved. Now, the only thing I can add to it are, the two things I might add to it, one is that I think the Forest Service along with the Federal Government handled this absolutely wrong, that they should have called everybody involved in this land deal together and see if we wanted to sell it, not try to take it from us and take over our land. Now, of course, you know and I know we are still paying taxes on this prop

erty. How long we don't know. I'm very much perturbed about the business that I have to get a permit to go on my own land to hunt. I have a permit for myself. My wife doesn't have one. My boys don't have one and, of course, they are servicemen and they like to come up here and they like to hunt on the land.

Now, it means I have to go down there and try to get a permit for them to come up and hunt on my own property, and I think it's absolutely wrong and I think we should get our property back. When we get it back, if the Government wants to buy a little of it let them come and make deal with us, if we want to sell it. This is not the United States, honestly. It's terrible. That is all I have to say. Senator LEAHY. Thank you very much.

STATEMENT OF JANE ARBUCKLE, BRISTOL, VT.

Miss JANE ARBUCKLE. I'm here on my sister's behalf. She owns land up on the Notch and can't be here today. I'm living there this year and so I can only say, Mary says this and Mary says that. Mary is very much in favor of the wilderness area, of the idea of the wilderness area, but like most people was upset at the way this was planned and also at the fact that legally she will get just compensation for her land, but realistically she won't. She will never be able to buy that amount of land, that type of land for the money she would get. And realistically, although legally she lives on her land, realistically she can't. She has to make additions as her cabin is very small if she ever wants to make a family. She has no running water or electricity now. It would be impossible. Also, of course, she can never be compensated for her home which is what it is. And that is all I have to say. I just wanted to put her name down as being against the wilderness as it's been conceived in favor of the idea. But this area isn't even wilderness down to Notch Rock. There is plenty of houses. There is industrial. It's not wilderness. I think it's a farce to call it a wilderness area. I don't know if the boundaries are repealed if it could legally be a wilderness area, because I don't think there is enough land involved in the national park, but something needs to be done.

Senator LEAHY. Thank you very much. Would you fill out one of those and perhaps you may want to fill out one of them for your sister, too.

I think throughout all of this it is extremely clear to me that there is one theme that runs through the whole debate that we have heard in the last 2 days. While nobody objects to the wilderness system as such I think everybody who has testified is extremely concerned of a situation with the Government coming in and making a particular move, making a determination which affects people and for the most basic ways it can affect them on the property they own, on the property in which they live and then tell them about it afterwards. And that concerns me as a U.S. Senator and as a Vermonter very, very much, because I feel that government becomes too unresponsive and is becoming too unresponsive, perhaps, because of its size, certainly not out of any sense of malice. But the fact remains that it has become unresponsive but we must be sure whether it's in Bristol Cliff's or any other area of the government, the U.S. Government get back and talks to the people it serves because your Government exists for you and not the other