Idaho Wilderness Hearings

Statement:

Ms. Kelly. Good afternoon, Senator McClure. First off, I want to thank you for conducting these hearings and giving all of us the opportunity to have input into this very important issue. My reason for living here in Idaho is not for a good-paying job. In fact, by moving here, my income was cut by one-half. I live here because of the other types of opportunities available here. Primarily opportunities to see and experience the land, the air, and the water in a reasonably natural state. Obviously, by the testimony of several other people here this afternoon, I am not alone in choosing this area of the country for these reasons. I am personally convinced that Idaho's greatest resource is not her timber but rather the naturalness of the environment within our region. Further, I do not believe that the designation of 'wilderness' is necessarily in conflict with the timber industry. First of all because of the low quality timber in many of the areas under consideration; and, secondly, because of the remoteness of many of these areas. Remoteness which presents extravagent costs not only to taxpayers for roadbuilding but also to the logging industry in transporting the timber over extreme distances. I'd like to finish this by saying that I do support the wilderness proposal of the Idaho Conservation League, et al., especially the Mallard-Larkin and Great Burn Area. And I also support soft release language. I feel that at this time a forest plan under the National Forest Management Act it would be disastrous to remove any of these lands from consideration of wilderness. Thank you very much.