« PreviousContinue »
protected while the recreational resource value of these areas shall increase in use and character in the future.
Unprotected development and indiscriminate use of these areas which may eventually be set aside in wilderness status would not provide these assets of natural resources for the distant future, but perhaps rather than an objective view to future natural resources, they are predominately concerned with natural resources of singular value to themselves.
We indeed wish to congratulate the U.S. Forest Service in its excellent administration of the areas which may possibly be designated as wilderness areas, but recognize the salutary purpose of wilderness legislation as relieving the service from the many pressures for opening these areas for use which could readily damage their water resource, game habitat, recreational or aggregate wilderness value.
With some 29 million farm acres presently retired in the conservation reserve soil bank program and an increase to 60 million acres in retirement desirable to decrease overproduction of farm products, we are not short of land. We are short of intelligent programs directing the intelligent use and management of land.
We can therefore spare the land for wilderness areas and we bid the advocates and opponents of wilderness legislation to give greater attention and consideration to possible programs for the intelligent management and use of our surplus farm land. We cut down the forests and plowed under the wilderness to gain these now surplus acres; let's put them to intelligent conservation use and cease contemplating how to maneuver our way in the new wilderness areas to create more surplus farm acreage. Very truly yours,
LEONARD R. GRAYDON, Chairman.
MENLO PARK, CALIF., February 9, 1961. Hon. CLAIR ENGLE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I hope that you may have opportunity to glance over the February Atlantic, for the articles on our urgent wilderness needs. They express thoroughly my viewpoint on national parks, wilderness, and beaches preservation. Will you please register my, support of the wilderness bill, if at all possible, at the forthcoming hearing before the Senate Interior Committee. The Palo Alto Times reports the hearing to be held on February 27–28.
Let's get going on this wilderness preservation now. Nobody knows what the almighty dollar will be worth in 20 years, but there can be no doubt of the value of our natural heritage. Wilderness first, dollars second, is my motto. Let's not sell it out for the quick buck. Respectfully,
KENNETH R. BROWN.
GEORGE W. NILSSON,
Los Angeles, Calif., February 24, 1961. Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Chairman, Senate Interior and Insular Affairs, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON : According to reports, you are going to have a hearing on next Monday and Tuesday concerning a new bill providing for a national wilderness preservation system.
Under date of November 7, 1958, the Mining Association of Southern California filed with your committee its opposition to such a wilderness bill. Two copies of that protest are enclosed, as it states our position now as it did 2 years ago.
It seems to me that such a wholesale withdrawal is unnecessary. However, from the miners' standpoint, the bill is improper in that it excludes prospecting and mining in such withdrawn areas.
As you know, during recent years the principle of multiple use has been extensively developed, and there is no reason why mining should not be permitted under proper regulations.
For years those interested in proper defense of the United States have tried to have developed a long range minerals policy. I understand this is again before the Congress. As minerals are absolutely essential to national defense, and during a war the shipments of minerals from other countries would be cut off to a very large extent, we all know it is very necessary that new sources of minerals be discovered. Because of this vital need, it is wrong to lock up millions of acres of land just for the benefit of a relatively few sportsmen.
Finally, as will be seen from the pamphlet prepared by the American Mining Congress, the mining industry has, as a byproduct, opened up many outdoor recreation opportunities for a great many people. Very sincerely,
GEORGE W. NILSSON, President.
CORVALLIS, OREG., February 28, 1961. Senator CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON : We urge the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee to approve the wilderness bil (S. 174) and recommend its passage by the Senate as being in the interest of public welfare. Letter follows.
William F. Unsoeld and Jolene Unsoeld, Lewis J. Krakauer, and
Carol Krakauer, Alan Berg and Verna Berg, James L. Over-
WEST COVINA, CALIF., February 25, 1961. Senator CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Chairman, Senate Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON : Our headlong plunging pace of exploitation of our natural resources will soon come to a screeching halt—the screeching halt of their sudden exhaustion.
That dire prediction will come about sooner that most realize unless well thoughtout planning takes place. The scientist and the engineer have long discarded the once prevalent concept that unlimited and inexhaustible resources exist. They both warn that the day has arrived for beginning wise planning of what remains of our natural resources. All such plans must call for the wisest possible utilization of what remains.
Wisdom also dictates that a certain portion must be held in reserve. A reserve that can conceivably spell the existence or collapse of our country or even our civilization. The wilderness bill, S. 174, is gravely needed to assure the reservoir of wilderness against that fateful day. The wilderness reservoir that will contain timber, grass, water resources, wildlife, and most important, areas large enough to protect the ecological balances so necessary for life itself.
The Interior and Insular Affairs Committee is hereby petitioned by an engineer to report favorably on the wilderness bill to allow our country to proceed with the thoughtful planning of the future. Respectfully yours,
ARTHUR B. JOHNSON.
PRESCOTT SPORTSMEN'S CLUB,
Prescott, Ariz. Hon. CLINTON ANDERSON, Chairman, the Interior Committee, Senate Building, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. ANDERSON : The Prescott Sportsmen's Club in meeting of its executive committee heard discussion on the wilderness bill, S. 174, and since we have always worked for the passage of this bill even in its amended forms, wish to reaffirm our support and hope that work on it will expedite its passage in this session of the U.S. Congress. We are informed that in its present form it is more acceptable and urge and request that our letter be placed in the record of the hearing as it takes place. Trusting that you will do all in your power for the passage of this bill we are Very truly,
M. J. McNARIES
IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA, INC.,
BIG HORN CHAPTER,
SHERIDAN, WYO., February 25, 1961. Senator CLINTON ANDERSON, Chairman, Senate Committee Interior and Insular Affairs, Washington, D.C. MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to go on record as favoring the immediate passage of the wilderness preservation bill, S. 174.
There is very little more that could be added to the already voluminous testi. mony and letters of the past 4 years, except to reaffirm the position that it is imperative that the wilderness bill be enacted to strengthen the Multiple Use Act, Public Law 86-517.
A very good example to demonstrate this need is a memorial passed by the 1961 session of Wyoming Legislature which "opposes the creation or extension of wilderness areas within the State of Wyoming” (a copy of this document, H.J.M. No. 7, is included for the record). It is very unfortunate that this memorial was passed by both houses and signed by Governor Gage. It is unfortunate because the document contained some inaccuracies, ignored the Multiple Use Act, and showed a general lack of knowledge of wilderness preservation bills and most important, showed how a single-use minority group can accomplish their aims. Also, lines 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 of page 2 ignored the facts that 11 Southern States are planning 50 wilderness areas, with 17 of these already in effect.
Again, I urge you and the committee to recommend that S. 174 be enacted into law. Wilderness is a natural resource of the United States and the manage ment of it as a resource is well within the philosophy of multiple use. Sincerely,
WILBUR N. JACKSON,
WYOMING HOUSE JOINT MEMORIAL NO. 7
À JOINT MEMORIAL memorializing the Congress of the United States concerning
wilderness legislation and opposing the creation or extension of wilderness areas within the State of Wyoming Be It Resolved by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming:
Whereas, bills have been introduced in the last two sessions of the United States Congress to establish a national wilderness preservation system; and
Whereas, these bills would create wilderness areas in Wyoming; and
Whereas, the creation of such wilderness areas would interfere with the development of the State's water resources, and would jeopardize the multiple-use concept of the areas for the projection of water, forage, timber, minerals and recreational opportunities, which multiple-use concept policy has been in effect for over fifty years, and has shaped the economy of the West; and
Whereas, the welfare and interest of the citizens of Wyoming demand that there shall not be any further extension of wilderness areas in Wyoming ;
Now, therefore, be it resolved, by the House of the Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the State of Wyoming, the Senate of such Legislature concurring, that the President and Congress of the United States of America be and they are hereby memorialized to consider fairly and diligently the welfare and interest of the people of the State of Wyoming, who oppose the creation or extension of wilderness areas in Wyoming; that, furthermore, if such wilderness areas are necessary and desired in other states, that areas adjacent to centers of population be purchased and returned to the wilderness state, believing that such a program would make wilderness areas available to more people of the country than the creation of such areas in the West.
Be it further resolved, that certified copies hereof be promptly transmitted to the President and Vice-President of the United States, the Speaker of the House of Representatives of said Congress, United States Senator Gale McGee, United States Senator J. J. Hickey, and Representative in Congress William Henry Harrison.
NEW YORK, February 26, 1961. Senator CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.
SIR: May I express my strong approval of the wilderness bill, S. 174, as an important step in the fight for conservation of our few remaining natural areas? As the preservation of every acre of wilderness which remains is one of the most urgent and crucial necessities for the future of this Nation and its people, I urge concerted effort by you, your committee, and the cosponsors of the bill to effect passage as speedily as possible. In the past private power, lumber, and other interests have opposed such a bill; if some effective measure is not passed soon, there will be no wilderness left to preserve. Kindly include this message in the record of the hearing on February 27 and 28. Yours very truly,
ELISE S. UNTERMYER.
STANDARD MILLING Co.
Kansas City, Mo., February 24, 1961. Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Senator of New Mexico, Washington, D.O.
DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON : Would you please incorporate this letter in the hearings as being very much in favor of the wilderness bill, which you have so generously offered for adoption.
This is a once in a lifetime chance and once these areas are gone, they will never return.
You have the support of a great many people for this bill and I hope it goes through. Best personal regards from my father and me. Sincerely yours,
R. HUGH UHLMANN, Executive Vice President.
WASHINGTON STATE FORESTRY CONFERENCE,
Seattle, Wash., February 21, 1961. Hon. CLINTON P. ANDERSON, U.S. Senate, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: The Washington State Forestry Conference has provided a forum for discussion of the problems and programs of the forests of our State since 1922. Our members and participants represent all facets of governmental and private forest interests.
We are strongly opposed to the national wilderness system type of legislation because of the restricted use philosophy that it advocates. We no longer have enough forest land for each segment of our population to have private domains for its exclusive use, and this problem becomes more critical each year.
At our 38th annual conference, a publicly employed forester itemized projected withdrawals from the publicly owned segment of our forest land base over the next 15 years that averaged 4842 square miles per year. These forested areas would be diverted to use as reservoirs, powerline rights-of-way, roads, singleuse recreation, and miscellaneous. The privately owned segment of our forest land base would be diminished even more, One private company has lost 2 square miles of forest land to public purposes during each of the last 4 years. This is in addition to all of our urban growth.
At our 39th annual conference in 1960, the following resolution was unanimously adopted: “The Washington State Forestry Conference reaffirms its strong opposition to national wilderness legislation as introduced into the recent sessions of Congress which would place areas that are under the administration of different Federal agencies together in a national wilderness preservation system. Such legislation jeopardizes the forest land base supporting our State economy, and restricts the ability of forest land managers to protect and manage forest resources for the greatest good of all the people. We are opposed to any transfer of responsibility from existing land management agencies presently administering forest land areas. We urge you to oppose S. 174. Yours very truly,
WILLIAM H. LARSON, Secretary-Treasurer.
LORAIN COUNTY ELY WALTONETTES, CHAPTER OF IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE
Sheffield Lake, Ohio, February 25, 1961. Senator CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR ANDERSON: The Ely Waltonettes Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America are pleased to inform you of their memberships support of the Senate wilderness bill 174 which is scheduled for February 27 and 28 before the committee.
If there are any future bills to be presented before the committee meetings in the fields of conservation or natural resources we would like to be notified so that we may present the bills to our membership for their approval and support. Sincerely,
Mrs. ROBERT J. TEAMAN, Secretary.
PICO RIVERA, CALIF., February 25, 1961. Senator CLINTON P. ANDERSON, Chairman, Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.
DEAR SIR: It has just been brought to my attention that the wilderness bill, S. 174, is up for a hearing within the next few days.
The great importance of the wilderness bill inheres, we believe, in that this measure attempts to set aside and protect the last remnants of our great American heritage the vast wilderness of a whole continent. These last remnants, for the most part in high altitudes of the Far West should by all means be set aside and preserved in their native wilderness, untouched by man so far as possible, so that future generations of Americans may have some areas—some parcels as it were—that remain in the wild, primitive condition as left by the hand of Nature.
Much of the sterling character of this America that we all revere-has been forged and molded in the vast wilderness of our continent; and we deem it most important that the present and future generations should have preserved for them these remnants which the wilderness bill, S. 174, seeks to set aside and preserve. Now is the time before it is too late. We speak not only as a patriotic American but as a student of the out of doors who has given much of his life to scientific studies in the field, in professional service in behalf of the wilderness and the wildlife which it contains, both as professor of zoology in some of our well-known institutions of learning, and also in service in wildlife preservation with the former U.S. Biological Survey. We speak also as a longtime member of many organizations supporting the wilderness bill—such as: the A.A.A.S., the National Parks Association, the Wilderness Society, the American Forestry Association, the Museum of Natural History, the California Academy of Sciences, the Federation of Western Outdoor Clubs, the Sierra Club, and others.
May we request that this communication be written into the record.
Now let us all pull together to preserve the wilderness—what remains of it, for today and tomorrow a great American soul-inspiring heritage. Thanking you greatly for your attention. I am, sir, Sincerely yours,
RALPH BENTON, Profesor of Zoology (Emeritus).