LETTER OF ADELSA DOPH, EVERETT, WASH. EVERETT, WASH., March 20, 1959. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: I am for wilderness bill, S. 1123. I think we need an overall national policy for the protection and preservation of wilderness areas and a program that will insure this preservation. It is my opinion that if the people were better informed as to what this bill means to them and succeeding generations, the response in favor of it would be overwhelming. Sincerely, ADELSA DOPH. LETTER OF MRS. LENORE FREDSALL, SELAH, WASH. Senator HENRY M. JACKSON. SELAH, WASH., March 20, 1959. DEAR SIR: I am a schoolteacher and in my vacation time spend a large part of the summer camping and hiking. My son is a forester and we all ski so we have seen a large part of the areas under consideration in S. 1123, the wilderness bill. My son has done bug survey work on State forest land and worked as a fire warden also. We are in favor of the wilderness bill because it will protect the existing wilderness which is in the precarious state now of having no all-time guarantee against being cut down in size or invaded by roads. I only wish that the wilderness bill went farther than it does to protect our wilderness against human wear and tear. It is all too easy for persons to get land for a cabin by a phony mineral claim-to let their grazing animals ruin public lands—and to drive into beauty spots and leave them littered with beer cans. I visited Yellowstone Park, for example in 1929 and again in 1950. I would never want to go there again. The damage done by overcrowding has wiped out the beauty. We have so little time left to conserve what is left-Congress should have acted for the good of future generations long ago instead of stalling, facing the issue by having public hearings at which the loudest voices will be those of persons who are hoping to make a profit for themselves from public land. Let these people go buy their own land and let Congressmen think of the future with some of the idealistic vision that a representative of our beautiful Nation should have. Sincerely, Mrs. LENORE FREDSALL. LETTER OF DALE E. VICKLAND, SEATTLE, WASH. Senator HENRY M. JACKSON, SEATTLE, WASH., March 20, 1959. Wilderness Hearing, Federal Courthouse, Seattle, Wash. DEAR SIR: This is to inform you of my stand on the National Wilderness Preservation Act now before Congress. It is my opinion that the wilderness bill will provide the protection by law necessary to insure the future existence of these beautiful unspoiled areas which are now protected by administrative sufferance. I am very much in favor of this bill and wish to go on record at the hearing as an advocate for this worthwhile measure. Yours sincerely, DALE E. VICKLAND. STATEMENT OF THE WANDERERS, OLYMPIA, WASH., MARY E. CLINTON, SECRETARY The Wanderers (an Olympia hiking club) asks support of the wilderness bill. We feel that Washington's wilderness areas are among our most valuable resources-that they are priceless assets of whatever State possesses them. The bill creates a clear public policy to keep some public land forever wild, preserved in perpetuity as unscarred wilderness for recreation, for "room and board" for wildlife, for conservation of timber and water power. It gives legal status to our public land policy, gives firm legal protection to our existing national parks, dedicated wild and wilderness recreation areas of our national forests and our wildlife refuges. We strongly urge support of the wilderness bill. LETTER OF LLOYD E. TURNER, SEATTLE, WASH. Senator HENRY M. JACKSON, Wilderness Hearing, Federal Court House, Seattle, Wash. SEATTLE, WASH., March 22, 1959. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: My letter is in behalf of the wilderness bill, S. 1123,.. and I request that it be made a part of the record. I came into the State of Washington from Illinois as a high school boy and lived in Yakima. Other than service in the U.S. Navy and postgraduate study at Yale and Harvard, I have lived in this wonderful State nearly 50 years. Therefore, I have seen vast changes here. Changes from primitive, open, and "free to all areas," to ever more restricted and despoiled regions. I have walked, driven, climbed, and explored every corner of this State. And I know from direct observation over many years of the gradual encroachment, of those who value just dollar profits, on our unexcelled natural beauties. This commercial expansion and ever-increasing population are gradually wiping out every spot which is native. Plenty of dollars can always be obtained from areas already in production. Please fight for this bill for the public interest. DEAR SIR: I am for the enacting of this bill for the preservation of wilderness areas for the appreciation of and enjoyment of by present and future generations. Truly yours, GRANT R. MONTAGUE. LETTER OF RICHARD M. SALO, SEATTLE, WASH. Senator HENRY M. JACKSON. SEATTLE, WASH., March 20, 1959. DEAR SIR: I am writting to let you know I am in favor of the wilderness bill S. 1123. It would be a shame if this already comparatively small area couldn't be kept as a wilderness area for the future. The breathtaking beauty and aweness of these areas certainly makes it a natural for a wilderness area and its worth as such is worth for more than its timber. Most of this area is a high alpine area with very little commercial timber, its value as timber land is not great. I use our national parks, monuments, and forests quite a lot and am aware of the already crowded conditions in many of these places. We must have places to expand into and protect what we have. Yours truly, RICHARD M. SALO. LETTER OF WENDAL MORGAN, SPOKANE, WASH. Senator HENRY M. JACKSON, Federal Courthouse, Seattle, Wash. SPOKANE, WASH., March 22, 1959. Hon. SENATOR JACKSON: First of all, I want you to know how glad I am that you are sponsoring the wilderness bill. Future generations will be thankful to you. I hope you will continue to work in its behalf. I trust you will make this written statement a part of the testimony received at the hearing March 30, 1959. I have been in three of the wilderness areas in the Northwest, and I personally know how important this bill is. I have seen how parts of the Selkirk Mountains in northern Idaho have been unwisely logged off so as to encourage the ravages of erosion. I have visited the Cabinet Mountains wild area in Montana, the Eagle Cap wilderness area in the Wallowa Mountains in Oregon, and the Glacier Peak limited area in the North Cascades in Washington. Certainly it is important that all of these areas should be protected at least as they are for future generations, by assuring their permanency by giving them the status of a national park type of congressional act. I would like to suggest that the Glacier Peak wilderness area be enlarged (over that proposed by the Forest Service) to include the watershed of the Stehekin River and its tributaries in the upper Lake Chelan region. The mountains here excel the Swiss Alps in beauty, and the beautiful forests are of virgin timber. Certainly we would not want to spoil this unparalleled scenic mountain area by logging off the approaches to it. The Stehekin River is visited by hundreds of people that travel to Stehekin by excursion boat daily during the summer and who are glad that roads have not been built into Stehekin. Very truly yours, WENDAL MORGAN. LETTER OF CLAYTON W. RENNIE, PORT ANGELES, WASH. Senator HENRY M. JACKSON, Federal Courthouse, Seattle, Wash. PORT ANGELES, WASH., March 20, 1959. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: Will you please enter this letter into the hearing record? I am a resident of Port Angeles, Wash. Each year I have witnessed greater and greater numbers of visitors who have journeyed great distances so that they might see Olympic National Park, one of the remnants of our original America. Can we afford to leave such a vital resource in the hands of the various land management bureaus? For the most part they have done a commendable job. However, their efforts will not be sufficient to stem the tide of exploitation that is already being felt on all fronts. The surest way to safeguard these few remaining areas of wilderness is by specific congressional legislation for their protection. These priceless areas will then become a permanent part of our civilization instead of being eliminated because of it. As a teacher I know the need for our youth to escape from the mediocrity of a mechanical environment. In these wilderness areas they can develop physical stamina and mental stability. Surely we can afford to give specific protection to keep some of our American wilderness wild and unspoiled. Yours truly, CLAYTON W. RENNIE. LETTER OF ARTHUR D. FEIRO, PORT ANGELES, WASH. PORT ANGELES, WASH., March 22, 1959. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: I should like to add this one small voice in support of the wilderness bill. As a biology teacher I find it necessary to refer to the parks as the only readily accessible wilderness area in my examples of natural succession, etc. Without this one last outpost of nature as a "reference book" much of our work would be pointless. The real value of the national parks in their wilderness state is illustrated perfectly during our student field trips to this unspoiled area. The look of awe that appears when the true story is told about nature's wonders and the perfect examples available is one of the true joys of teaching (and also of a taxpayer who feels, and sees, his tax dollar well spent). The purpose of the wilderness area is of course much bigger than what I've outlined for educational purposes, It is but if for no other reason than that of education I think it worth while. our last really authentic picture of our American heritage. I should like very much to see it remain that way. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, ARTHUR D. FEIRO. LETTER OF MARK D. HAUN, TACOMA, WASH. Senator HENRY M. JACKSON, TACOMA, WASH., March 21, 1959. Wilderness Hearing, Federal Courthouse, Seattle, Wash. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: As a member of the Mountaineers of Tacoma, and the North Cascades Conservation Council of Seattle, I would like to give my full support to bill No. S. 1123, which would protect the existing wilderness of our present national parks and forests. I feel the remaining wilderness areas of Washington are a precious heritage which must be safeguarded. The North Cascades primitive area, including Glacier Peak and environs, is especially important to conserve. I would like to see the Glacier Peak area made into a national park for all to enjoy. Sincerely yours, MARK D. HAUN. LETTER OF ERIC A. STEIN, PROFESSOR OF BIOCHEMISTRY, UNIVERSITY OF SEATTLE, March 21, 1959. Senator HENRY M. JACKSON, DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: I am extreme distressed by the opposition to the wilderness bill, stirred up by short-range commercial interests. As an immigrant from overcrowded Europe, I am fully aware of the importance of setting aside areas where nature can be kept unsoiled. I urge you to support this bill so that generations to come may have this Godsent heritage to inspire them. Sincerely yours, ERIC A. STEIN, Research Assistant Professor of Biochemistry, University of Washington. LETTER OF DONALD D. SNOW, SEATTLE, WASH. Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON, SEATTLE, WASH., March 20, 1959. Wilderness Hearing, Federal Courthouse, Seattle, Wash. DEAR SENATOR JACKSON: I am writing again to encourage you to support the wilderness bill now before the Congress. It will be a tragic loss to the people of our State as well as visitors if we should lose what remaining wilderness we have, commercial interests notwithstanding. Ours and other wilderness areas in the United States are not going to benefit mankind in the long run if they are exploited for the short-term gain. We stand to lose in many more respects than we will gain if these lands are allowed commercial development of any type, including an incipient plan for a cross-State highway through the northern Cascade area. I urge you to work effortlessly for the passage of the wilderness bill. DONALD D. SNOW. LETTER OF HANS W. AND CAROLINE SMITH, MAPLE VALLEY, WASH. In re Wilderness bill, S. 1123. Wilderness Hearing, Federal Courthouse, Seattle, Wash. DEAR SIR: We believe that the wilderness bill is of the greatest importance to the health of the Nation. In a time of increasing industrialization more areas are constantly being swallowed up by the growth of the cities. At the same time the need for more recreational areas for the growing population becomes steadily greater. The wilderness bill meets these needs in a manner fair to all interests affected. Any statement by the opposition to the contrary should be considered untrue and dictated by selfishness and disregard of the common good. Very truly yours, HANS W. SMITH, STATEMENT OF RICHLAND (WASH.) ROD & GUN CLUB, INC., W. O. SWITZER, PAST PRESIDENT AND LEGISLATIVE CHAIRMAN Although we are unable to attend the hearings in person, we would like to have our opinion on the wilderness bill considered in the committee's review. We might preface our remarks by emphasizing that we try earnestly to evaluate all possible viewpoints on an issue to insure that our position is sound. We feel that the best interests of the country are served only when conservation interests are practical rather than emotional. In this present consideration, it is obvious to us that it should be our national policy to preserve as much of our remaining wilderness type areas as possible. Certainly any further subtractions should only be made after due process of careful appraisal and review. Such care should always be exercised in the disposition and management of all our public domain. Even considering temporary local cessations of progress and the values of the timber and minerals, we are confident that under careful review, reductions of wilderness areas would be unlikely. Further, we feel that the opposition of some of the pulp, lumber, mining, and grazing interests must stem from their realization that their case is weak if brought under close scrutiny-else why would they so actively resist the principle of the wilderness bill? In summary, we support the wilderness bill wholeheartedly and urge its prompt passage. LETTER OF MARGARET BATTLES, SEATTLE, WASH. Senator HENRY M. JACKSON, Federal Courthouse, Seattle, Wash. SEATTLE, WASH., March 30, 1959. DEAR SIR: Please submit my letter to the hearing record of the wilderness bill. I hope that I am not too late to urge you to support the bill (S. 1123). It is appalling to even think of the consequences of not protecting our wilderness areas. This protection does not only affect us today but many generations to come. Where else can we escape to from this mechanized world of man to find peace and quiet that the refuge of the wilderness areas offer. To those of us who love the mountains and forests it is like having someone deface our church to have these areas invaded. It fills one with sadness to see the destruction and rubble left behind by industry and grazing whose only concern is what they can get out of it today. To say that these areas are only used by a privileged few is a grave error. Those that use these areas know that the number of people to be seen here is increasing every year and some areas are already becoming crowded. What is to happen if these areas are reduced and the outdoors men and tourists increase? To permit grazing of these areas would mean that many wild flowers and plants would be killed and the area spoiled for hiking and camping. To say that logging and mining does not leave scars to mar the beauty of an area is a fallacy. I was raised in a logging community. I know the desire is not to conserve but to take all that is valuable. What is not taken is killed in the process of logging or by burning the brush. Surely it is not wrong to try to save what we have left that others may enjoy some of the primitive beauty this State once had. Yours truly, MARGARET BATTLES. 39871-59- -21 |