WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM WEDNESDAY, APRIL 29, 1964 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 11:20 a.m., in the committee room, 1324 Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Walter S. Baring (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. BARING. The Subcommittee on Public Lands will come to order. I have here a statement by our colleague, the Honorable Emilio Q. Daddario. Without objection, the statement will be printed in the record at this point. (The statement follows:) STATEMENT OF HON. EMILIO Q. DADDARIO, A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT Legislation to establish a national wilderness preservation system is a source of great interest to people of the First Congressional District in Connecticut. I have received and continue to receive a great deal of mail urging that the Congress enact legislation which will contribute to the conservation of these areas. I want to bring this interest to your attention and to stress my own concern. We in the northeastern areas of the country are deeply aware of the way in which our growing population is causing the open spaces to disappear. In an outstanding report which was filed in 1962 and which was written by the distinguished author, William H. Whyte, Jr., Connecticut was forcibly reminded that Connecticut has just so much land and with this land it is going to have to take care of many more people in the decades ahead. Land can be desecrated quickly and irreversibly. The same principles apply on a national scale to the wilderness land which these bills hope to preserve. Our people are acutely aware that the areas in which wilderness is relatively unspoiled by man, and where man himself can only be a visitor who does not remain, are under pressure. They are believers in conservation of these areas so far as possible, hoping to preserve them in the primitive condition, as nearly as possible devoid of the works of man. We all must recognize that the values of unspoiled wilderness in our growing country become more important as time passes. I would urge favorable consideration of this legislation. Mr. BARING. Our first witness this morning in regard to the wilderness legislation will be taken out of turn, because the witness has to return to New York. It will be Curtis M. Hutchins on behalf of the chamber of commerce of the United States. Mr. Hutchins, we welcome you before the committee. 1241 STATEMENT OF CURTIS M. HUTCHINS, REPRESENTING CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES; ACCOMPANIED BY DOUGLAS H. HARNISH, JR., ASSISTANT MANAGER, NATIONAL CHAMBER'S NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT Mr. HUTCHINS. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for the privilege of appearing out of order. We appreciate it. I am Curtis M. Hutchins, chairman of the board, Dead River Co., Bangor, Maine. We are a company engaged in pulpwood and timberland development. I am here to represent the chamber of commerce of the United States of America, of which my company is a member. I am a director of the national chamber and serve on its natural resources committee. With me is Mr. Douglas H. Harnish, Jr., who is assistant manager of the national chamber's natural resources department. I am here to present the national chamber's views on wilderness legislation and my remarks will be directed specifically to H.R. 9162 and identical bills. The purpose of this legislation is to provide for statutory preservation of the wilderness character of certain areas in national forests, national parks and monuments, and wildlife refuges and game ranges by 1. Establishing a National Wilderness Preservation System. 2. Providing statutory limitations for regulation and control by the Departments of Agriculture and Interior. 3. Setting specific restrictions on the use of these areas. 4. Establishing methods for modifying existing wilderness area boundaries and adding new wilderness areas. The national chamber supports the principle that if a limited number of Federal land areas are clearly shown to be more valuable as wilderness than for any other use, they should be retained as wild or wilderness areas subject to such development only as will safeguard resources in and adjacent to such areas. Laws and regulations governing such areas should be sufficiently flexible to permit their reclassification if changing conditions make other uses of equal or greater value. This is in keeping with the multiple-use concept which we support. Of the bills now being considered, H.R. 9162, if amended as described below, will provide the most adaptable bill for management of wilderness areas and resources. Significant features of the bill which the national chamber believes are essential to proper management of wilderness areas are: First, positive congressional action required for the creation of "wilderness" areas. Second, provision for hearings and review, and flexible management to permit additions to and deletions from the system. Third, continuation of present land use practices and procedures now under regulation of the Secretary of Agriculture except for cessation of patent claims and mineral leasing for mineral prospecting and mining after December 31, 1973. Discussing the first, the national chamber believes that all congressional grants of authority to administrative agencies should be strictly limited, clearly defined, and policed by Congress to assure adher ence to congressional intent by the agencies. Sections 3 (b) and (c) of H.R. 9162 clearly state: Each such recommendation of the President shall become effective only if so provided by an Act of Congress. Secondly, the national chamber supports the provision in sections 3 (b), (c), (d), and (e) that within a 10-year period after the effective date of the act the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior shall review each "primitive" or "roadless portion" of the lands under his respective authority as to its suitability for addition to or deletion from the "wilderness system." Further, it is provided that, prior to submitting any recommendations to the President, both Secretaries shall give due and sufficient notice of intent, hold public hearings on the matter of their intent, and include all views expressed at the hearings in their report to the President. Thirdly, for the most part, land use practices and procedures now regulated by the Secretary of Agriculture would not be changed under H.R. 9162 except that he would be responsible for maintaining and preserving the wilderness character of all such multiple-use areas. While no commercial enterprise and no permanent roads would be allowed in wilderness areas, there are special provisions in the bill giving authority for continuation of present uses and initiating new ones. Uses and practices specifically referred to are— 1. Use of aircraft and motorboats. 2. Fire, insect, and disease control projects. 3. Maintaining a status quo on grazing, mineral leasing, and mining patenting activities except that after January 1, 1974, minerals in lands designated as wilderness areas are withdrawn from all forms of appropriation under the mining laws and from leasing under the Mineral Leasing Act. 4. Initiation of certain activities such as water resources development, power projects, transmission lines, and public recreation projects. While the national chamber believes that H.R. 9162 is the most desirable bill now pending before Congress, certain amendments as described below should be incorporated in the bill, we believe. First, section 4(d) (2) should be amended to delete the 10-year time period deadline set for filing patent claims or securing a mineral lease. A fixed period of some 10 years or less is not sufficient time to allow for adequate prospecting, exploration and subsequent development of minerals that may be located on these large land areas. Since the bill recognizes the value of allowing prospecting and exploration for 10 years, it would seem inconsistent to restrict arbitrarily the length of time to such a degree that it would have the effect of granting no further exploration authority at all. Properly supervised and regulated prospecting and mineral exploration can be made compatible with the character of wilderness preservation. If and when minerals are located in a wilderness area, the major part would continue as a wilderness since only very small areas would be involved in actual mineral extraction. Second, H.R. 9162 should be amended to provide for such recurring surveys by private and Government groups as are necessary to determine the kind and extent of mineral resources in wilderness areas. Such a continuing inventory is vital to the national interest in these times of swiftly advancing technology and world unrest. Since taking such an inventory is time consuming, initial surveys should be started immediately. Third, it is recommended that the word "system" be deleted from the bill and that it be titled "National Wilderness Preservation." "System" connotes a new entity which would only serve to encourage those who will want to establish another Government bureau or agency for management of the "system." The national chamber believes that existing agencies of the Federal Government can do this job. In summary, we support an amended H.R. 9162, which would 1. Remove the restrictive date of December 31, 1973, in section 4(d) (2) in favor of unlimited time to explore in order that the total area could be adequately surveyed. 2. Provide for continuing surveys of wilderness areas by appropriate private and governmental groups. 3. Delete the word "system" in order to help dispel any notion that wilderness areas are to be considered as a new domain for bureaucratic empire building. I will be happy to answer your questions. Mr. BARING. I am very happy to receive your report and to note your chamber favors the multiple use concept. Also I note you are not too pleased with the 10-year phaseout period. What would you suggest as a good time to set for the phaseout? Mr. HUTCHINS. I think we feel there should be no limit on it. Mr. BARING. It would be just a matter of exploration? If they find it, let them go ahead and take it out of the wilderness area? Is that your plan? Mr. HUTCHINS. Yes; I think so. I think we feel mineral resources are vital to natural resources in these times, and if valuable minerals are found on wilderness areas, the area which would be used for the mining and extraction of it would be sufficiently small so as not to substantially damage the wilderness concept of the area involved. Mr. BARING. The gentleman from Idaho. Mr. WHITE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to compliment you, Mr. Hutchins, on a very fine presentation. On page 1 of your statement, in the last paragraph, you have: "The national chamber supports the principle that if a limited number of Federal land areas." I want you to explore a little, the word "limited." Are you satisfied with the present designated areas to be included in the wilderness system as it is now named or proposed? Would this be what you consider to be a limited number? Mr. HUTCHINS. Yes. We are happy with the designated areas. Mr. WHITE. In other words, you are happy with the areas as they are categorized? Mr. HUTCHINS. We would be happy to discuss with the Congress Congress about the other areas to be further designated. Mr. WHITE. The last paragraph on page 2, under "uses and prohibitions," the first sentence near the end says "preserving the wilderness character of all such multiple-use areas. I gather from this that you are saying that multiple use, as you see it, to some degree should be continued in some of the wilderness areas. Is that correct? |