In an administered wilderness area the complex relations which have attained stability through evolutionary processes are allowed to continue their age-old course. Man, by carefully watching, may profit in his considered attempts in land management and economic natural science. Wilderness is not only a yardstick but also a classroom. One of the unwitting effects that man has upon the land is the raid on the genetic pool. By "genetic pool" we mean a reservoir of inheritable possibilities for continued life. Extinction is not new; it certainly is a natural process, part of evolutionary change. Yet the very existence of modern man as well as his future position depends on what has been termed "directional natural selection." The future of the human race depends largely upon careful utilization of genetic material upon which man may draw. A simple example is the guayule rubber plant found in our desert wasteland from which latex was extracted, a scientific discovery exploited during World War II when our supply of natural rubber became scarce. This plant, previously ignored, suddenly became a valuable resource. We are profoundly ignorant of many of our future resources. Wilderness here is a reservoir as well as a yardstick and a classroom. One of the current techniques of reconstructing the past with an eye on the future is through the study of pollen preserved in peat bogs. Peat bogs in midlatitudes are frequently fragile areas and thrive best under undisturbed conditions. Logging, water diversion, or intensive land use can each quickly destroy these bogs. It is important that wilderness in its ability to preserve specialized vegetational communities serves as a museum; as, for example, in the special case of peat bogs it serves as an historical museum. There are other cogent reasons for conserving the relatively small amount of wilderness yet left in our country. Increasing urbanization, symptomizing our burgeoning population, is placing greater and greater pressure on our wild lands to provide a refuge from the bustle of city life. As an indication of this pressure, the wilderness traveler has actually seen in as short a timespan as 10 years the unmistakable signs of human erosion in these wild lands. this tells us the urgency for not only protecting but expanding as well our present wilderness system. All We must also consider the needs of the individual man. Wilderness provides many visitors with a deep esthetic satisfaction, some with spiritual comfort and others claim practical psychological benefits from wilderness trips. Not all these needs are answered by actual trips. There is a place in some men's imagination which is filled by the knowledge that wilderness does exist. These same men may never visit the wilderness or even desire to do so, but the thrilling knowledge that wild land is there fills a need for them. Certainly the wilderness bill provides a critically needed insurance policy for an extremely perishable and fragile resource. The premium is low. We feel that it must be paid; and, therefore, urge the House to amplify the power of the people by making the unamended wilderness bill law. Robert E. Frenkel, 1217 Virginia Street, Berkeley, Calif.; Clinton R. Mrs. Prost. Are there questions of Mr. Frenkel? If not, the next witness is Mrs. La Verne N. Cohen, of 5615 Camellia Avenue, Sacramento, Calif. You may proceed. 2 Theodosius Dobzhansky, "Man and Natural Selection," American Scientist, vol. 49, No. 3, 1961, pp. 285-299. 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 members 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. 77350-62-pt. 3-7 We fear these commercial interests so earnestly proclaiming their regrets that they are not informed or are purposely misinterpreting the provisions of S. 174 as we read it. (1) It does not damage any lumber enterprise. No area now subject to timber cutting is included. (2) It does not interfere with livestock grazing. A special provision provides for continuation of grazing wherever it is now established. (3) It does not close areas to miners. The national forests now open to mining that are included will still be subject to prospecting and may be opened to mining if the President determines that this is in the public interests. (4) It does not "lock up" without making sure that for every lock there is also a key, as provided in section 6c, 1 through 8. As for preserving natural resources aside from the human resources, wilderness areas will be invaluable for wildlife refuges, and water conservation. We respectfully urge your prompt and favorable action on S. 174. Thank you. Mrs. Prost. Thank you, Mrs. Yeaw. Are there questions? If not, the next witness is Mrs. A. F. Parker of Alaska. Mr. RIVERS. Madam Chairman, Mrs. Parker was in touch with me just recently before I left Alaska, and instead of coming down to testify, she has entrusted me with a letter addressed to me from Juneau, Alaska, October 27, 1961, signed by Jennie M. Parker, coowner, Mount Parker Mine, Jennie M. Parker being the Mrs. A. F. Parker who applied for the privilege of testifying here. Accordingly, I will submit this letter for inclusion in the record as the testimony of Mrs. Parker. Mrs. PrOST. You have heard the request of the gentleman from Alaska. Is there objection? Hearing none, it is so ordered. (The letter follows:) U.S. Representative RALPH J. RIVERS, Juneau, Alaska. JUNEAU, ALASKA, October 27, 1961. DEAR MR. RIVERS: As coowner of the Mount Parker Mine (formerly Leroy Mine) I should like to call your attention to the article in the October 1961, issue of the Mine and Petroleum Bulletin, page 5, which reference is made to the possible inclusion of Glacier Bay National Monument in the wilderness system: "One concern that Senator Gruening brought out is that Alaska's national parks and monuments may be prevented from getting the transportation facilities that they so badly need. The wilderness bill provides that the Secretary may set aside any continuous park area of 5,000 acres or more without roads. They are no roads whatever in Katmai National Monument, and only one road along half of the northern boundary of Mount McKinley, which road was originally a mining trial into the Kantishna mining district. The Senator sees that if these areas were added to the system, it would prevent any possible additional roads, and that further, no motorized marine transport would be allowed in Glacier Bay National Monument." We have for the past 10 years applied for and received from the National Park Service a certain permit for access road to our camp and mill building site, which permit has been exercised by keeping the road in repair each year, for the view in mind or reopening the mine when and if we can profitably operate. Certain exploratory work has been done each year since the closure of milling operations in 1950. 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. Now there is no question but what this terrific and extensive removal of the vegetative cover of the land has produced definitely erratic winds and weather and rain, and it certainly does produce erosion. I would like to call attention to one other thing, the result that Mr. Steiner in his article points out. His recommendations might be grouped in three points. That we need to plant more trees; that we need to plant more trees; and third, that we need to plant more trees. All of which, of course, bears upon the approval of the wilderness bill. Finally, I would like to say that, in our consideration of a threatened atomic catastrophy, we will indeed hear voices calling in the wil derness, as one of the opposition referred to dramatically in opposition to the wilderness, and we will hear voices calling in the wilderness, and they will be asking for water, and the wilderness may be the principal source for the preservation of uncontaminated water in such a misfortune. I prevail upon you, this committee, to recommend favorably on S. 174. Thank you very much. (The statement submitted by Mr. Weber follows:) CALIFORNIA GARDEN CLUBS, INC., Subject: Support for S. 174, the wilderness bill. Chairman, Subcommittee on Public Lands, House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Washington, D.C. DEAR MRS. PFOST: We ask that the support of this organization of 18,000 members in the State of California be stated in the record of the hearing relating to S. 174, known as the wilderness bill. The United States of America may even sooner than the year 1975 find that lumbering, grazing, mining, roadbuilding, etc., are not substitutes for water. Observation of the great expanse of America from the air reveals rivers that run yellow with the golden soil of the country to the sea. Over square miles in every direction is visible the "scorched earth fencerow" type of agriculture and the absence of the forest cover that at one time made clear streams, productive springs and an adequate water table. So long as the U.S. Forest Service is dominated by an increasing pressure from commercial forestry interests, the wilderness and wild areas that have been designated by this agency mean exactly nothing, insofar as preservation of wilderness is concerned. We prevail upon your committee to recommend passage of this greatly needed legislation. Sincerely, Mrs. PrOST. Thank you, Mr. Weber. HENRY M. WEBER, M.D., Let me assure you that those of us on the committee do realize the importance of planting more trees. We realize it from a conservation standpoint of retaining the soil, for conserving water as well as for the wildlife in the area, whether they be in a wilderness area or in naional forest lands. Mr. WEBER. Thank you. Mrs. Prost. The next witnesses are Mr. and Mrs. Elmer A, Daniels of Sacramento, Calif. Will Mr. Smith of Madera County please come forward to the front row. |