Idaho Wilderness Hearings

Statement:

Mr. Chew. Senator McClure, ladies and gentleman, my name is Eddie Chew. My interest in wilderness is as the past president of the Snake River Audubon Society, someone who enjoys wildlife, and in recent years a has-been wilderness hiker, having done so with a boy scout troop elsewhere. First I would like to set the record straight on one point. I understand that an earlier witness said that the National Audubon Society encourages the leasing of our sanctuaries. National Audubon doesn't encourage such leasing; it is occasionally considered. National Audubon sanctuaries are not managed as wilderness, so that this question of roading roadless areas is not an issue there. Our one sizable lease on the Paul J. Rainey sanctuary predates Audubon ownership of that land. I would like to thank you very much for holding these hearings in Idaho, Senator, and first I would like to make a few general comments on wilderness statewide. I submit that we should be focusing not on how much more land is designated as wilderness, but on how much of our valuable for ests, now unroaded, are allowed to slip away from the wilderness character they now possess. Let me emphasize that these lands are now wilderness but not yet so designated. Our choice is whether to protect them for the use and enjoyment of future generations or to allow them to be degraded to satisfy the short-term desires of some of our people. I say that if the decision is close, we should opt for protection. Congress can reverse itself if a clear national need for a particular wilderness area is shown. Congress cannot make a roaded, clearcut, or a surface-mined area wilderness again. I would, therefore, urge Congress to allow not more than half of the remain ing 6.5 million acres of roadless forest areas in Idaho to be degrad ed to nonwilderness status. Specific areas will be discussed later. 32-426 0— 84 47 730 I would like to see a strong wilderness system to retain most of the multiple uses of our forests. Of the six major forest uses — min erals, timber, grazing, recreation, wildlife, and watershed — four would continue in wilderness areas. On the other hand, I can imag ine very few multiple uses on a clearcut or in an open-pit mine. As a member of an Idaho fish and game advisory committee, I would especially urge that the 559 thousand acres identified as crit ical to wildlife be included as wilderness. The Borah Peak area of 120 thousand acres is so designated. As you state, Senator McClure, much time and effort has been spent studying roadless areas. But the Forest Service recommenda tions have been shortchanged in your recent questionnaire. In addi tion to the 1 million acres proposed as wilderness by the Forest Service, 641,000 acres, most of it in this area, were designated for further planning. I believe most of that designation hinged on oil and gas potential. After 4 more years, I think I'm correct that we still have no producing wells in eastern Idaho.