member this area was taken by the white settlers from the Indians over 100 years ago, and it has been operated and managed by the U.S. Forest Service and the private landowners jointly. I think it is ridiculous to suggest that the management techniques of either the Forest Service or private operators is going to change any way that would adversely affect this area. Senator Packwood said over the radio station in Enterprise not too long ago, regarding the condemnation feature of this bill, that, after all, various arms of government can condemn land for various purposes such as highways or building courthouses, or what have you, and he saw no difference. I say there is no comparison at all. The mere suggestion of condemning 27,000 acres of land for this purpose is repugnant to the American way of life. Second, proponents of the bill want to have this land for recreation. I would suggest to you that this bill would hurt recreation rather than help it. Recreation and public enjoyment are the primary goals set out as guides to administer the area. To set this area aside as a semiwilderness and roadless area for the public enjoyment would not appear to be the proper usage if for no other reason than the fact that the normal person would not be attracted to the area. There is no water other than the main river channels, Snake, Grande Ronde, and Salmon Rivers. But the entire area between the Imnaha and Snake Rivers is without water. Experience shows that the public seeking enjoyment will naturally go to an area with either running streams or lakes. The Imnaha unit would contain some 350,000 acres with the Snake River as the only usable water for tourist enjoyment. Statistical data compiled by public and private agencies prove conclusively that the touring public seeking recreational enjoyment will naturally be drawn to an area with water-either running streams or lakes. The vast majority of people in our area firmly believe in the multiple-use concept as is currently provided by law. What can be wrong with proper harvesting and management of our timber resources, our grazing resources, and our recreational resources for the maximum usage by all people? S. 717 defies this concept and should not pass out of your committee. Senator BIBLE. Thank you very much. I appreciate your appearance here. I am sorry you were detained yesterday and delighted that you did get here today. You obviously know what you are talking about. You grew up in this area. Senator JORDAN. I have no questions. Senator BIBLE. Do we have any other witnesses in the room from outside Washington? (No response.) Senator BIBLE. I am told that this completes our list of witnesses. I think the record will show we have had 65 or 70 or thereabouts. If my listing is correct, we have six witnesses to go. Just to wrap them up there is Mr. Brandborg, executive director, the Wilderness Society, Washington, D.C.; Mr. Lewis Clapper, conservation director, National Wildlife Federation: Alex Radin, general manager, American Public Power Association; Mr. Williamson, editor, Outdoor News Bulletin, Wildlife Management Institute: Mrs. Eleanor Robbins, of Laurel, Md.: Mr. Carl Bronn, executive director, National Water Resources Association, Washington, D.C. This has been an informative hearing. There are a tremendous number of unanswered questions so we will go into it very carefully before we make a final decision. The first thing we have to do is get the record printed. Mrs. ROBBINS. I am Eleanor Robbins. Will you take me now? It will just take me a minute. Senator BIBLE. You may proceed. STATEMENT OF ELEANOR C. ROBBINS, LAUREL, MD. Mrs. ROBBINS. So much of our natural heritage has already been changed by man that it seems to me imperative to save for the future as many samples as possible of this natural heritage. Surely the Hells Canyon stretch of the Snake River merits saving as a national river. The giant white sturgeon can only live in its swift water, not in a reservoir. Other valuable fish such as salmon and steelhead trout also need the swift cool water. Since filling this last free-flowing stretch of the Snake River with additional dams will not provide much electric power, I believe it should be saved as a national river, and other means be used to produce power. Not only Washington, Oregon, and Idaho can be proud of this national treasure, but the whole Nation can. Let people continue to enjoy hiking, horse riding, camping, study of the remains left by an ancient people, enjoyment of the varied plants and animals of the different climates in the deep canyon. Let them continue to hike, camp on the sand bars, and be inspired by the scenery. It is too late for areas we intend to save to be left to chance. The forces of destruction are too swift and relentless. I believe S. 717 should be passed now. Thank you. Senator BIBLE. I appreciate your statement and I am happy I was able to accommodate vou and not bring you back sometime next week. Senator JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, before we adjourn I want to express appreciation to all of you for your patience and good nature in conducting these hearings. Before we close, Mr. Chairman, could I ask unanimous consent for insertion in the record of a statement by Congressman Orval Hansen of Idaho. He opposes S. 717. He endorses the moratorium. Also a statement from Hon. James McClure, who opposes S. 717 and endorses the moratorium. Also a wire from the Caldwell Chamber of Commerce, which voted to oppose S. 717: a letter from the Idaho State Grange, opposing S. 717; and from the Idaho Mining Association, also opposing, Senator BIBLE. Each of those will be incorporated in the record. (The material referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF HON. ORVAL HANSEN, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IDAHO Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for the opportunity to present my views on S. 717 and other proposals relating to the future of the Snake River. I am opposed to the passage of S. 717 which would establish the Hells CanyonSnake National River. On the other hand. I strongly support the so-called Middle Snake Moratorium bill sponsored by Senators Jordan and Church which was approved by the Senate earlier this year. I have introduced an identical bill in the House of Representatives. Senator Jordan is one of the nation's recognized authorities on water. He has correctly described the Snake River as the "life-blood of Idaho" and as the State's "greatest resource." He has warned of the possible consequences on future development in Idaho from the passage of S. 717. Having grown up on a farm in the Upper Snake River Valley, I have seen the application of water from that river to arid lands literally make the desert bloom. The Snake River has contributed enormously to the building of Idaho. It has helped to build farms and cities and to create jobs and opportunity for thousands of Idahoans. The Snake River can make an equally important contribution to the future development of the State. The Snake River is also a great national asset. Hells Canyon is a place of high scenic beauty. The canyon and adjacent area includes a diversity of values that should be protected. It would be a serious mistake, however, to commit the Middle Snake to a single purpose as the pending bill proposes to do without first examing carefully all of the potential consequences of such action. I firmly believe that passage of the Jordan-Church moratorium bill will assure the time necessary to undertake and complete essential studies and to examine all alternatives. It can provide the information that will be the basis of decisions on the long range management plan that will best serve the public interest, giving consideration to all the potential uses and all of the values that are involved. For these reasons, I strongly urge that S. 717 not be reported favorably by this Subcommittee. STATEMENT OF HON, JAMES A. McCLURE, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IDAHO Mr. Chairman, appreciate the opportunity of appearing and testifying on the proposal by Senator Packwood to create a Hells Canyon-Snake National River as set forth in S. 717. While I disagree with the direction that this bill takes. I welcome the opportunity to focus the spotlight on a unique resource. That it has national values is without question. Those values have been widely discussed across the nation. That it has very particular and unique values to the people of my State and to our future has not received the same national recognition. I am therefore persuaded to thank Senator Packwood for his role in getting hearings before this Committee so that we may tell our story. I have discussed the various Middle Snake proposals in some detail in a series of four (4) articles released to newspapers in Idaho and attach copies of those articles to this statement and ask that they be made part of my statement. Since those speak for themselves, I shall not repeat the arguments set forth there. I do, however, wish to underscore my conclusions. The Snake River is a nearly completely controlled river above the mouth of the Salmon River. The entire past development of all of southern Idaho has been dependent upon the waters of the Snake River and its tributaries in the Upper Basin. Its major future economic progress will be determined by the wise utilization of the waters of the Snake River. It is absolutely vital that all possible information be examined carefully before final decisions are made which will dedicate the waters of the Snake to any single use. Because the bill now before this subcommittee does make such single purpose dedication and the author of the bill has publicly stated that it would limit future up stream development, I must oppose this legislation. There is no more eminent authority nor more persuasive voice in the western United States in the field of our water resources than Senator Len Jordan. I have, therefore, listened with particular attention as he had argued in favor of legislation sponsored by himself and co-sponsored by Senators Church and Hatfield, urging a moratorium on dam building. After long study, I have concluded that they are right in urging a delay in the decision concerning this water resource and am supporting their moratorium proposal. However, I believe it should be modified to make clear that it is intended to be a delay in all final decisions concerning this water resource and suggest that it should be amended to cover not just dam building. In this way, and only in this way, can we complete studies which are now under way, gather facts which are not now fully de veloped and arguments not fully understood before we are asked to embark upon some irrevokable course of action. I most respectifully urge that this Committee refuse to endorse S. 717. [Telegram] CALDWELL, IDAHO. Senator LEN B. JORDAN, Washington, D.C.: The Caldwell Chamber of Commerce unanimously voted to oppose S. 717 sponsored by Senator Packwood. Resolution to follow by U.S. mail. CALDWELL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. IDAHO STATE GRANGE, Sagle, Idaho, Scptember 14, 1971. Senator LEN B. JORDAN, Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: We wish to urge you to continue to promote the Multiple-Use concept in dealing with proposals regarding the Snake River and any Hells Canyon legislation. We, in the Idaho State Grange, feel you have most ably represented all of the people of Idaho and we have confidence you will do so in regard to the Snake River. Sincerely yours, DAN ROBINSON, MASTER. STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY A. J. TESKE, SECRETARY, IDAHO MINING ASSOCIATION The Idaho Mining Association, representing virtually all of the producing mining companies and most of the exploration firms currently active in the State. wishes to register for the record its firm protest and resolute opposition to the enactment of proposed legislation (S. 717) to create a Hells Canyon-Snake National River encompassing some 714,000 acres along a 120-mile segment of the Snake River between Idaho, Oregon and Washington. Our reasons for this strong position are many and cogent. Approximately 64 per cent of Idaho's land area is in federal ownership. The economy of our stateits ability to provide full employment, adequate education and other public services for its citizens-is in very large measure dependent upon its right and its capability to develop and use these lands and the natural resources within them-minerals, timber, forage, water, wildlife and recreation potential. Under the multiple-use concept, these lands and resources can be utilized for the maximum benefit and enjoyment of the general public, with due consideration for the needs and welfare of the citizens who reside near and depend for their livelihood on these public lands and resources. It is our considered view that Idaho cannot sustain a viable economy if vast areas of federal lands are set aside and segregated for preservation in their existing (not natural) state, with only such resource use as is compatible with public recreation and the conservation of such intangibles as scenic, cultural and historic values. Idaho already has several million acres more than any other state- either in wilderness classification or under consideration for wilderness or recreation area classification. It has more linear mileage of classified Wild and Scenic rivers than any other state. The proposed legislation would dedicate for public recreation management and use an additional 352.000 acres of Idaho lands, most of which are public lands but which include a considerable acreage of private lands, some held as patented mineral claims. Although the area would be classified as a "National River" it would extend as much as 19 miles easterly from the river bank on the Idaho side and as much as 16 miles westerly on the Oregon side. Only a small proportion of this land would be visible to river users. By public admission of its sponsor, Senator Packwood, this legislation would reduce the options for future upstream irrigation in both southern Idaho and eastern Oregon. It would reduce these options at a time when other options, such as recharging the Snake River plain aquifer, are still under study in the pilot project stage. It would forbid any future dam construction or water impoundments on more than 270 miles of Idaho and Oregon rivers. It would permanently preclude the harvesting of approximately 2 billion board feet of commercial timber, except for recreational roads and other recreational developments. Grazing would be an allowable use, but only if, in the sole judgment of the administrative authority, it does not significantly impair public recreation and the intangible conservation values. Furthermore, and most important to the mining industry, this bill would withdraw the entire area from mineral entry. It gives no recognition to "existing valid rights" held under unpatented mining claims and it poses a serious threat of infringement upon the rights of the owners of patented claims because it permits condemnation of private property if the acquisition of a scenic or conservation easement is found, in the administrator's judgment, to be economically infeasible and requires that cooperative agreements with property owners include a provision that the owner must have written consent of the administrator for any alterations in the type of use, including buildings and grounds. In the adsence of procedures for appeal from the administrator's judgment, these combined provisiins confer upon the administrator virtually complete control of the owner's activities on his private property, including patented mining claims. Most of the area within the proposed National River has never been given more than a cursory geologic and mineral reconnaissance because of the very difficult terrain and limited access. Consequently there is little known about its potential as a mineral-producing area. However, in the southern part and along the southern boundary, there are several mineralized areas that have been recognized since the 1880's. A number of these properties have yielded substantial but sporadic production of high-grade copper, with significant gold and silver by-products. More recently, in the 1950's, some commercial production of tungsten has been mined from the area and for the past several years there have been extensive and intensive exploration projects carried on over a large area in an effort to determine the extent of mineralization and to develop plans for its economic recovery. The major obstacle to sustained production over the years has always been the lack of convenient access and the prohibitive cost of moving the ore production to available markets. We believe the enactment of this bill would severely impede-and, in fact, could effectively prevent-the further development of this very promising mineral province. It would also prevent effective exploration of the vast unexplored areas and, through the river bank buffer zone, would severely handicap the utilization of more than a half billion tons of carbonate rock in the Lime Point vicinity which, according to a recent economic evaluation by the Idaho Bureau of Mines and Geology, is of commercial grade suitable for the manufacture of cement and other lime commodities. It is quite obvious that this legislation is directed solely to the problem of providing recreational opportunities for our expanding population. It completely ignores the more urgent problems of providing a means of livelihood (additional jobs) for this increased number of people, satisfying their requirements for additional energy, minerals, food and fiber at reasonable prices and generating the tax revenues necessary for adequate funding of the mounting costs of public education and other essential public services. The mining industry does not oppose a temporary moratorium on water impoundments in this stretch of the Snake River while studies of Idaho's future water requirements are being completed and plans for meeting these needs are being perfected. However, because of its many other objectionable provisions, we carnestly urge that your subcommittee reject this legislation in its entirety and we request that this statement be incorporated in the record of the hearings which have been scheduled before the subcommittee on September 16 and 17, 1971. Senator BIBLE. If there is nothing further to come before this committee at this time, we will stand in recess subject to the call of the Chair. Thank you. (Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned, to reconvene subject to the call of the Chair.) |