Idaho Wilderness Hearings

Statement:

Mr. Greenfield. I am Tom Greenfield. I moved to this area about 5 years ago from Michigan, which is one of the States that as somebody referred to earlier lost most of its virgin timber. Ajid there's now a small area, perhaps 10 to 15 acres of virgin white pine left there. This made a marked impression on me. And I guess I came to Lewiston primarily—I felt like talking after listening to a number of arguments of people who appear to feel that their livelihood is threatened by the possible inclusion of what to me seems like a relatively small area of wilderness that currently has not been logged and may well not be but would be offered some protection by the wilderness status. My remarks are basically not factual. They are based on feelings. I have the sense that the emotions underlying the threat to livelihood are very compelling. I believe that this should be weighed. But I also believe that we need to examine whether, in fact, taking the State of Idaho as a whole and perhaps the Nation as a whole, whether the current downturn and pessimism and concern about the future of the timber industry here is really linked in any direct way to the rather small additions that we might be contemplating or at least groups such as the Idaho Conservation League might be contemplating. It appears to me that it has to do with other factors. And quite candidly, that some of the timber industry has to some degree found a suitable scapegoat in the wilderness issue for conditions that are much broader than this matter. I think it should be—that the area that would be made available to the timber industry should be safeguarded, also. But I want to make a point that the rather small percentage that—of irreplacable existing wilderness deserves consideration, also. Thank you.