Idaho Wilderness Hearings

Statement:

Dr. Smith. Thank you Senator McClure, for the opportunity to testify here today. My name is Richard Smith and I am a dentist and businessman from Salmon, and I've been there for a number of years. I would like to state that I support the multiple-use concept for our national forests; however, living on Salmon, why, it's very evi dent that the Forest Service manages our lands to favor one use at the expense of others much, if not most, of the time. Usually that use is timber. Now, that's not necessarily bad, I'm not saying that, but there are times when different uses should predominate. Some areas have unique and valuable natural qualities that are different from others, some are wildlife habitat, others are timber-growing areas, and some have both, a mix of each. Timber values are some times low and should at times help to tip the balance toward em phasis of other uses. An instance such as I am describing is found in the North Lemhi Range of mountains, an area recommended through the RARE II process for wilderness designation by the U.S. Forest Service. I would like to join others here today in supporting the creation of a Lemhi wilderness area. I have brought a map, and you have it there before you, sir, of some of the proposed boundaries that quite a number of us support, and would mention that generally the boundaries are drawn to exclude commercial timber producing lands. One exception to this is a small intrustion into portions of the controversial Eight Mile and Mill Creek timber sales, which have been opposed by a majority of the Upper Lemhi River resi dents. And Senator McClure, I believe some of them have been speak ing to you about this, and I know that there are not very many ways in which a Senator can address this problem. And it's a Forest Service problem, but here is one that they were talking about today. The Lemhis are primarily used for grazing and provide a valua ble watershed for ranches in the desert valley below. They are rela tively little used by out of State recreationists but much prized and appreciated by the local and regional Idaho citizens for the moun tain grandure, sparkling lakes, and unchanged vastness contained there. We would like to keep it that way. Rapid proliferation of the roads and use of motorized transportation has quickly changed the majority of our area and will continue to do so. We ask that a pres 687 ervation of the current conditions and commercial use of this area be prescribed by Congress. The Wilderness Act allows for continued use of grazing; but to further protect and qualify the rights of range permittees, I would suggest that wording be added to the enabling legislation, so that nothing shall be implied by the wilderness designation of this area which shall cause a reduction of livestock numbers, and that graz ing systems shall be no different from what would be allowed under current management criteria for nonwilderness land. I feel this is compatible with the wilderness values to be found there be cause what we have there is what has resulted from current man agement. Also, I believe that language should be included so that existing livestock management improvements shall be maintained, recon structed, or relocated as necessary, and that any change in materi als to be more compatible with a natural appearance not be done at the expense of the permittee or to the detriment of his livestock operation. Now, here is an interesting proposal that some of the local people are interested in, and let's see how this lies with Congress. I would also propose that a wood-management zone be included along and within the wilderness boundary toward the Lemhi River where nonmechanized historic methods of selective cutting of trees for firewood, posts, and poles be allowed.