Idaho Wilderness Hearings

Statement:

ROCKIES RESOURCE GROUP Mr. Kimmel. Yes. Sorry for the little mix up here. I'll be brief. Only in the United States are we fortunate enough to have the opportunity to decide the fate of the last remaining roadless areas in the west. It is indeed an honor and privilege to be here today. I come not only as a concerned citizen, but as someone who works on the public lands on a daily basis. I am a private consulting mineral landman based out of Moscow. Most of my work centers on mining operations on Federal lands. I am also a board of director of the Idaho Conservation League. Why wilderness? Aldo Leopold offers us some of his insights * * *. Wilderness was significant to Leopold as the essential source, the departure point for man and his civilization. Shallow-minded modern man * * * who prates of empires, political and economic lacked the humility to perceive this truth. And I quote: 'It is only the scholar,' Leopold explained, 'who appreciates that all history 708 consists of successive excursions from a single starting point, to which man returns again and again to organize yet another search for a durable scale of values.' The problem, as Leopold writes, was to convince Americans that the development of their vast wilderness would entail more sacrifice that gain. Commenting in the 1920's on the tendency of Americans to take wilderness for granted, Leopold pointed out that only when the end of the supply is in sight do we discover that the thing is valuable. Leopold felt that what was at stake in keeping some wild land was the quality of American life—the welfare of the Nation beyond its material needs. Few of you here today question the principle of wilderness preservation. Yet many of you have testified against additional wilderness in Idaho. It is possible to conclude from such testimony that a person is for wilderness as long as it doesn't affect him economically. I believe the proper solution lay in balance. True multiple use will accommodate both civilization and wilderness. Roderick Nash writes: 'The problem with this mutual affirmation of civilization and wilderness is that it works only so long as roads and dams can be built in other than wild places.' Now a decision has to be made between preservation and development. It involves the sacrifice of one good to another. We must find a way of resolving the ambivalence between wilderness and civilization by regarding both as essential to man. I believe we can have both. We already do have both. The benefits of additional wilderness in Idaho are directly related to our growing tourism industry. We do generate revenue off wilderness, an increasing amount annually. I urge you to include as a minimum, the ICL-sponsored endangered Idaho wilderness core, for wilderness designation. I also would like to see more soft release language, as opposed to your hard release language in your bill. Thank you.