::A.
October 4, 1972
MEMORANDUM
TO: Senator Jordan
FROM: Gwenn
Logan Lanham, Idaho Power, called to advise you that
everybody opposes the wilderness area for the Snake
River islands: the irrigators are against it; the fish and
game people in both Oregon and Idaho are against it.
He would like to make sure he gets copies of the Hearings
and the Report on it.
Mill Patay Hevatad
WS laat Aah Street
Caldwell, Idaho 83605
DMr Miaa Hevatadl
Thank you for your letter of Auvuat 21.
September 6, 1172
I am glad you uaed the word "balaaoe" because that il one of my favorite
expreaaiona when dealing with problema of environmental management.
Idaho'• problem appears to be how to aChleve a belanoe between the need
to PN•erve an adequate amount of our u.mendoua land reaouroea in a
natural atate whlle being able to develop the reaOUJOea of the remeining
landl to aaaure Joba and future economic stability for you and other young
people who grow to maturity in Idaho. I think we can aChleve that goal and
live qualltyWvea at the aame time, 1f our cultural atandardl can match the
grandeur of our land and water reaouroea.
Actually, Idaho ia doing very well in PN•ervln9 Wlldemeaa. We have 2 1/2
m1Uion acrea of land managed aa wilderness or in finalatagea of atudy.
Idaho alao haa more then 50 I*' cent of the wild river mlleage in the
National WUd and Scenic Rivera ayatem. Alao we adJoin on our eastern
boundary, the 2 mUllan acre Yellowstone Natlonel Park, which 11 largely
wild, and the North Caaoadea and Glacier Park wtldemeaa can be reached
in an eaay drive from north Idaho. Farther north, in Alaska, 140 mlUion acrea
have been aet aaide for National Parka , National Foresta , and Wildlife
Refuges , all PNdomlnantly wild in character.
I aPPNClate your int ... at in thla important subject and thank you for Writing
me.
With all good wiabea, I am
Sincerely,
Len 1. Jordan
United State• Senator
LJ:rmm
The Honorable Len Jordan
The United States Senate
WasAington, D.C.
Dear Senator Jordan:
1115 East Ash Street
Caldwell, Idaao 83605
21 August 1972
1
/ / 'VV"'-
I am enclosing a copy of an advertisement which recently appeared in
a local paper. I would like you to know how very heartily I disagree
with it, even though I do not Aike and pack.
We certainly do need to maintain wilderness areas to keep our environment
in some sort ef balance and to preserve nature's creatures, Lot
us not sell eur natural resources for the sake of more and more gadgets,
which man basically does not need and which causes harm to our fragile
environment, Let us concern ourselves with the ~uality of our lives
rather than with tile traditional noticm of "standard of living,"
Sincerely yours, 'iiiJ? i!-t . -ki ({
Pats;/Hegstad ~
< I
•• a voice, crying in the w.!lderness.
It could well be yours.
•oic~. It woula be • ~norus
·r_,_ ,·;.~,: ·3 aw&rc of a SllJd)' now going en out it can
·.: •uc:.:. A-.... ~.,-the c:Conom\' ot the en•ire am a.
he t=o . .-c. ,-:. vice ~,3s t>P.S•i -,1struc1ed tor .cw _.ertain
.:..·v8Jc, · .:.:·ona, ->:rr.:s~- arl?s.r ..:..:; ootenh& , .... ,::!itions
!r..:E.;,- .i:.r::-a Vv )c.·r,,;s~ Sy5:·e:m:
, lar~;_: uni:·;:.:iii;T . .-· : .... -~ / r::an-a-1 ilrea :;•
No· ;('ads. it'~,~ ---~.usJve,, mr tno"e
•. , ,.o in q rll· ·seoa.:;.
dt:.:.UI•
And we neec: .. Jme ~·: 'dt:>1ness.
But\- t thk ~nal r -;;-1urce, less than .5% of our
COc ntrvrner- .• ,-. '"to ~t .... use it.
Sc wna: ao the remainmg 99.5% of the people do for
recreaLo.J~'•? Many of them choose to go to 11 in
automobiles. campers. bikes. snowmobiles or other such
vehicles nat permitted in the Wilderness.
It's their land too . . . and yours.
You and your community gain fr·· M ind·.;stry uses of th~
forest lands. A minijnum ci .11ne pec.nle nave jobs in
the' forest industrf for e;ory million ooard feet of lumber from tr~esthe
renewable :tsourc -· S-.J: wt,er. moP.r is taken out of production,
jobs go too Soil'. mill . ,, "''<;. oy
closed. ~: ;: .. ,;;c ·.,::nt; ... ,J.ou~"' :1peo area~ tn laano s National
Forests·were ~~e nat€':· 'J_ ... :derness", the e::~tlmated annual t_.ss
of potent1a ·o~:~ har .,_,,,. ;l!1 be 400 miUKn boar.:. fee· •. Thts
translates h> · ; ... ·har •t·S IO'->t for~ .~.·
One-to ·t"' .! !r-.e d(,; .. : ... ~~at ~='ore~• tirntP.r
sales,;:- ~· i.:. ,: .; roads ana s.::.nools -~f tr·.:· .. vunty 1n'V'O\'!
Who,. ·. ¥·' t,.,at up .n taxes?
·T,-, r: ·-.:..udt: ··.c..;ldreds of tnousands of av. rs
patd r ~-· .·1du~ · •ts employees tn local sta.c:.
and · -.r.cs-(
H teas a·· '•"· ; .. ·uvtde .r,os thn.
;P, ,·r~"· ·,- · 1,::.rr1es~, :Joes · ..
. mean when wf: :;;a·' :t. . .. -" .:.-y,ng :r. the
wilder:·'d'~;, .na} =~e yours.
Just as much as ours
li~e Cascade Corporation
L.._. ...... ... .,..
t (i, tv '·"
...._L ___ ,.
~
~,,
-·
·.;..·
You bet we have sn economic interest.
You do too.
So dot!ls your whole town.
·. ce '"'' ".:JUA G•'MMENTS. WRITE YOUR 0 '· FORtST SUPE RVlSOA
..
• ,,
Idaho Environmental Council
Senator Franlc Church
Senate Office Building
HHshlneton, D. c. 20510
Dear Senator Church:
P. 0. Box 3371 • University Stotion
Moscow1 ldilho 83043
April 4, 1971
w7t-
!!t""''~ ~"'"~~p
'l'he Idaho Primitive Area and the Salmon Hi ver Breaks Priml. ti vc
Areas are currently being reviewed by the Forest Service in
accordance with the Hilderness Act of 1964 (P.L. HB-577). In
addition to the primltl.ve areas tltb Forest Service is also
studying several areas contiguous to the primitive areas to determine
the sui tablli ty of these areaG for ~inclusion in the National
Hilderness Preservation f>ystem, For example, one area being
studied is the upper portion of the Clear Creek-Garden Creek area.
This region is approximately 1700 acres in size. In addition, the
Hor['e Creek area, l~hich J.s adjacent to the Salmon River Breaks
Primitive Area, is being studied but as a seperate area. However,
there are a number of additional contiguous areas both large and
small that should be studied con~1rrently with the primitive areas:
in particular the Clear Creek-Garden Creek area should be studied
along with the Idaho Primitive Area, In the Clear Creek-Garden
Crc"ek si tuatl.on the Forest Service has designated thl.s area as a
"new study area", that is, l.t will be studied after e.ll the
primitive areas have been considered,
The Forest Service's position of not studying all suitable contiguous
areas along with the primitive areas is not in keeping with the
intent of the Hilderness Act and the Forest Service regulations
~1hieh state that sui table contiguous areas will be studied for
possible inclusion in the Wilderness System, Section 3(b) of the
Wilderness Act says ''Nothing herein contained shall limit tho
President in proposing, as part of his recommendations to Con3ress,
the alteration of existing boundaries of primitive areas or recommending
the addition of any contiguous area of national forest
lands predominantly of wilderness value''· Forest Service regulation
2321(1) which applies to the implementation of the section of the
Vlilderness Act concerning contiguous areas states that "Each
Primitive Area (so classified as of September 3• 1964) and contl.guous
lands which seem to have significant wilderness resources will be
studied to determine tiliether to recommend that all or part should
be included in the National Vli.ldenJess Preservation System".
The Forest Service maintains that it cannot complete the revier
of any contiguous areas until a mineral survey has been made by
the Geological Survey and the Bureau of Mines, The Wilderness
Act, Sectl.on IJ.(d)(2) states 11 such areas shnll be surveyed on a
planned, recurri ne; basis consi·stent 1·11 th the concept of Hilderness
preservation by the Geological Survey and the Bureau of Mines to
determine the mineral values, if any, that may be present••. This
provision of the Wilderness Act does not require that mineral
surveys be made before an area may be studied for wilderness
classification. HoHever, it has been Forest Service policy to
Senator Church Page 2 April 4, 1971
include the mineral survey as part of Hilderness propoBals
submitted to the President and to Congress.
Accepting the present policy of the Forest Service concerning
minerul surveys, it is imperati vc that the mineral surveys be
performed on all contiguous areas which are suitable for study
as wilderness areas at the same time that they are made on the
primi ti vc areas. In this ;my ~ll Hilderncss quality regions in
one locality can be studied as11 s1nt~le unit and Pcted upon as a
whole. Also accepting the Forest Service contention that the
mineral surveys cannot be performed due to a lack of funds, it
is essential thnt Congress appropriate sufficient funds so that
the Geoloc:i cal Sul'vey and the BureRu of MJ.ncs can perform the
required nt.ndics, On behalf of the Idaho Environmental Council
I urge you to request funds for the Geolor;l c.al Survey and the
Bureau of Mines so t!1ey may carry out the required mineral
surveyiJ on any contiguous oreas Hhich seem to be p:redowinantly
of a Hildcrness nature.
Mr. Richard Smith of Salmon Hrote to Senator Jordan on March 25, 1971
(cc to Senntor Church and Representative Hansen) inquiring into
the status of funding for the Geological survey and the Bureau
of Mines. In his letter Mr. Smith made a very good point, that
the cost of u number of individual mine:ral surveys on lnrlividual
aren.s 11ill undoubtedly cost more than one nnifl.cd comprehensl.ve
survey of all areas within a given locality, This is a valid
argument for walti.ng all mineral surveys at one time,
cc: Senator Jordan
Representative Hansen
Representative McClure
Si.ncerely yo/"' d/(/ :&~/ri<~
Carl I 'l;occvar, Chai:rman
Wilderness Committee
Idaho Environmental Council
2J40 Richards Avenue
Idaho Falls, Idaho 8JII01
St •. \nthony, Idaho
;\.pril 4, 1.072
·\':'\ -:·nR
Tile f!o~wt·ablc Senator Len D. JorlLJ.n '!I
' ,....., ,__,
Dear Sir;
Follow.in;; is o. st:ctcuent ./c wish to ioclutle
i·,_1 the o~CicL:tl rc.corll rccCtnlin:.:; tile, .1\1rk 1•lastcr
.t • .llat and .iilLlcrncss Study.
ti:-.,le use pl<J.n. >le believe the trees sh:'L~lll be cut,
before they arc Lnfcstcl1 :lml rti:1ed. The cattle to
cont_Lnue to J;L.!.ZC, lhc st rC::t'lS to be fis!-.ecl, the
g~vtc to l.::c hunt ~xl J.~lJ. •:ihcn t !12rc is snO\'i, the use
s11- uld ~Jc used v.nd •wt :J.LluscJ. ,Jhicll is \·::1crc tile
in •. 1::. )003i'uly JL' not ::;ct to usc thc:;c facil-i.tics
tilC)' are tl:c;:c, free £or everyone.
YollrS truly,
...- -
. . .
. --
i
'
Mr. Jaok M. Gruber
904 18th Avenue
Lewiston, Idaho 83501
Dter Mr. Gruber:
May 12, 1972
Thank you for sending me copies of your letters to the Foreat
Supervi&OC'B.
The Multiple Use Act, under which the F~t Service ta mak•
lng lta study of roadless areas, was enacted more than a
decade ago and it directed the agency to consider wlldeme ..
values along with other multiple use features of the National
Forests. Hence the Forest Service has a pent considerable tlJM
in its study of the National Forests and this roadleas arM study
il -..ly the culmination of a special proJect.
In considering th1s matter, one should recognlu that the Forest
Servtce was a plOQHr 1n the dea1gnet1on and management of
Forest prtmJ.Uve and wtl ' aess areas • In ldabo the agency bas
managed for many yean some 2 1/2 mtWon acres of superlative
prtm!Uve and w11demess .,..s 1 and also bas preserved 1n Idaho
mora than balf tba nation's mtleap of wtld riven. The Foreat
Service also bas managed tba Sawtooth MOWltatna .,.. wbioh we
bope to recognize legillaUvely as one of the COWltry's outstand•
tng National a.crestton Areas •
In vtew of thiS background 1 I be1teve we can res pact tba judge•
JUDt of the Forest Servtce 1n the clestgnetton of areas worthy of
wu.c:s.m.s s study.
Stncerely yours 1
Len •• Jorden
United States Senator
Mr. Bob Rehfield, Forest Supervisor
Nez Perce National Forest
Grangeville, Idaho 83530
Dear Mr. Rehfield:
904 18th Avenue
Lewiston, Idaho 83501
May 5, 1972
In response to the solicitation of public input by the United
States Forest Service concerning management direction of public lands
administered by your agency, I wish to offer the following studied opinion.
The State of Idaho already has more than an adequate and
reasonable amount of area classified iLS Wilderness or in the study category
of Primitive area classification. The people in this area, State and
Nation can ill-afford additional restrictions on permitted uses of remaining
unrestricted lands.
The more than 5 million acres presently classified for limited
or restricted use or proposed for such classification should be more
than adequate to satisfy the needs of reasonable people for the very selective
uses permitted by law.
Those specific areas uniquely suited for limited uses should
be carefully considered by responsible resource managers. However, the
Forest Service does have the option of administrative procedures to designate
such areas for limited use without the congressional action required
in the establishment of Wilderness areas. In all cases, however, the overriding
consideration must be that provided for in the Multiple Use and
Sustained Yield Act of 1960. In my judge,ment, responsible action by the
Forest Service within the guide lines established by that Act will provide
the most benefits for the most people in the long run.
I am well aware of the fact that this Act does include the
provision for Wilderness areas but it is my serious contention that Idaho
already has more than a reasonable amount of such classified lands within
her boundaries.
Therefore, I wish to be recorded as opposing the establishment
of any additional Wilderness within this State.
cc: Sen. Len Jordan ---
Sen. Frank Church
Rep. Jim McClure
Sincerely yours,
Jack M. Gruber
:Jo_n;,tor• J.!Jn d •. Jorc:··n
1:e:1r1 .JU::.1ato O:i.''i.'il:O u: .1. l_c)j_(~fZ:
'l._(j , onlo /~VC'-lUG
-~~o:~.~l~.:.oJ_1o, I;!, :)o
Juc•il (,, i'J72
111Joro ~![.:!..:~ bee:n oa'tr:Jd <1:_··-:.:.tl~e ~'ocnnt~y t;i~'ou-e:hout It~-~l!-.o
-.~oncr;;-lnin,r:r, pro--:-o2:-ocL -, ... _i ld~-:rnc:Js o.~·ons • ..:\~:j :'::.1 r~d-·Joc~·to of
1,:1_~_1Ucl':_lO:JS aro:.'t~l, I :fr;t':r thn.t the n.n'Lu:::•r_;_li.'1t 18 ·:·ersuani,.ro
'::_rr::-;txL.:<;-l; G:'; r.~:-(:/ ·;"·1ot ·,o t."J.~l: -ugi-~ to o·,n_:r:.:or".ie t: ·e st:_,, __ Tl.fi fi~n:~:.neia1
.Co:rcns o.i.' t~:~o ui'l~:in:·: ~1nd J.u~:Jhn::."inr:~ int-;rosts. 1.Ph-:: .''•ll"r.lJ ox"~tc::jr;:-;
of uilcL r _o~.; ·_rr:·,_·,.s ~ ~nst re·l.:;·.c o:rr 'i.\,\VOPa~;lc 1u:-risl8."Cion to
pro:-::.(_n. ....... rc he lV1.tur:.l :J-.Jauty ~hJd .J.t~i~·!iti"101Jonn of natuPc.
:~nJ · c;tion i21 -~_;;_;c· ll.:). ')(3n:1to -~Jbi:::h i'a'IOr:':i the for·-:·;~,'ltion of'
GllC~:l :":.rCCl3 r~honJ.c'l l_~r; ::>U,) ·ortr;d b7{ -:~be f,JQjOl'ity CJf Iri :.lJO cf
Ici __ L.io .i'C:~:i..<.-t,_-;n_:ci; .d it'~-; ·)ctlator;~. ·_e,:a:,_·tk--;}'ou.
Sinueroly yo11rs, .... x:·qW~£;--
:~. 1\. l-fw·n,.~l1rey
P.O.BOX12CB PH.12DBI476·4597
KONKOLVILL~ LUMB~R CO., INC..
Pg. 1
Richard J. Pfilf
Forest Supervisor
Clearwater National Forest
Orofino, IdQho 83544
Dear Sir:
Konkolville Lumber Company, Inc, opposses nny further additions
to the Wilderness system of timbered ground from the Clearwater and
Northern Idaho for the following reasons:
1. Our State needs timber to earn a living. Taking l~rge
areas out of forest production would put a lot of honest
hard working people out of work. This has already happened
here in our county.
2. Idaho already has nearly 2,700,000 acres of forest land
in the Wilderness System and :1t least one milUon more being
managed as Wilderness.
3. ll'ilderness regions benefit only a few rople at the expense
of many. It is estimated that only . of 1% of the
people in the U.S.A. even use those areas, Yet the forest
industry puts meat on the table for millions of people,
being the 4th largest industry in the nation.
4. The timber in roadless and hard to reach areas will be
subject to rot and bug infestation and forest fires will be
harder to control.
5. Timber is one of the only resources that can be used
and reproduced. Others such as coal, oil, metals, etc. cannot
be replaced once they are used up. Using non-renewable
wood substitutes in housing will not be the ans~ter to the
drain on our natural resources.
We feel that good management of our forests is the only logical
answer to the problem. If industry and ~overnment have made mistakes
in harvesting timber it. is time to admit to it and throw out old mbthods
that harm timber growth. The ideal would be to grow as niuch as we cut.
In Finland, for example, tree harvesting has been practiced so religiously
that all the timber removed in the last 22 years has been reproduced.
Private lumber operations in our own country have made good progress
in improving growth but the biggest timberland owner, the U.S. Governrrent,
lags behind. Forest service officials complain that our Congress has
not given them nearly enough money to grow trees, only encugh to ~
them.
Our Pacific Northwest has only 7% of the Nations area yet we produce
1/3 the timber. Locking up millions of acres of good producing ground
into Wilderness will only throw a lot of people out of work, cause
a serious lumber shortage, and hurt these areas we are trying to "~o-nserve".
. · .. ,.'\
/•-; ,,,~·-·£: :I'' .o... ., '~~~': -' ~\,
' il .--~"-'~ '0 ' -· ' ' ,,:'\d-' .)... \() ~,,o ~
'Z__t, I~!'~
F.D.BCX12CB FIH, 12DSI 476•4597
KONKOL VILLE LUMBER CO., INC.
Pg, 2 OROFINO, IOAHO 8!3544
Vice Presjdent
1?0 Hichigan
Orofino, Idaho
Honorable Governor Cecil
State House
Boise, Idaho 83701
Andrus
· Honorable James A. McClure
1034 Longworth Bldg.
House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Honorable Frank Church
U.S. Senate
~iashington, D,C, 20510
Honorable Len Jordon
·, U.S . Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Honprabh- Orval Hansen
1 U..J4 Longworth Bidg.
House of Representatives
J,r~ ~·\-..: .--• -- r. ,.., '""~•·~ •,..
I '
/
(
(J_)_Q_ a& -LunQil\
~~
i
I
• •
•
'.
•
ARNOLD MACHINERY CO., INC.
P. 0. IIOX 7425 ·:· 111 EAST 39th ST.
PHONE 342-46~6
BOISE, IDAHO 83707
Bo1n, Ideho
Aprll 7, 1972 ')
/<vv\_-~
Hr. Jeck Anderton, Supt.
Yellowatone Netion.l Perk
Ydl-*- "-U•nel Perk, illya.ing
82109
Deer Hr. Anderaonl
I heve juet recaived e lattar fro~ Outdoor• UnliMited, diecueeing
the propoeRd]iilrt•rne MGveaent of 1,963,000 ecrea in the Yellowetoae
Natlonel Park area.
Needle•• to eey I think thie 11 being proaoted by reletively few
people in our country and certeinly in ay opinion it ie not in
the beat interllt of the MUltitude• who probebly vieit theea ereee
beceuu of ~he lack of roede end other fec111t11a.
I certeinly agree with Hr. George Hartzog, Director or the Netionel
Parka Servicea, who aeye that the need ie to develop axieting perks,
build c .. p eltea, scanic ovarlooke, toilet fecilitlee end of couree,
roade to help people get to end fro• theea ereaa.
I too 1M oppaeed to the repe of our lend end the dlatruction that
le brought about by it, but I .. More violently oppoaed to the
concept of tying up good acreea•• for the enjoyaent of very few
people.
Thenk you.
R£N1te
cc1 Outdoore Unliaited
cc: Senetor rrenk Church
cc1 Senetor Len B. Jorden
Very trulyvyours,
~e~~-?
Vice Prel1dent
cc1 Congreeeaen J.-ee L. McClure
cc1 Congreeeaen Orville Henean
9 ~hdr~ Jd_ Dr.
/llf,·sso""lo-)41. S9?cJI
f1tJ. re£ :1. 7; I 9 7;;..
Ag-~-ffi -~
;:r:-w.,. .. Jd. //ke /;! "to b-e ktfow"' Th"'t T "'~""' O..J<~.il1ri -the.
es/«-bf,-.s~•neut of! ct"':J mo1·e i<n·/Jerhes.s ttrea.s. C9..,<?. /t-<. ra rt, CL<. /&;1" /.> ·tf,e -~ 1/ej--~-e~J o..,d F;..s-4 Chi! .. J a "ye.A. c:>"t_
t~~-~-~~~--- !_d ... L,o h"ilr.:Le~,
C)v..r- t2coYrO"'"J C',..,d h->.J f,·,;e~h~~vd d-epe..,d.; ot-r i-l.e '-'<- .. N'
p.p Ot.<l" Fore.si t'~-t. A. rela.l-ed WA.J' ./?<Zslde.s I a .... 0-
f"'".sfe<--for whc teft';)es 't:l.e heed of s-fra.feJ,·c.
1'>1/J.-tey-tA/s o.Lt d ~weit:>../s t:t.~t <=tr-e rej- ... ,-l"eJ 1<> k-e~l'
cl,i.J' h"-1:,-a;., ff~""•'-"j' 7he o..re.."- I ~->-tf!...,t.-."'eJ t'i... i"he
fY'oc..ee.dt'hJ ra.rc...Ji'''-d'" J.,,jjJ t/.,e r·fez,.f,·<>-1 01-f o>te
o-f. c"'-~" sce~.rce. h-tiheY-"-/s.
Al.s-11 h-tvre.. w,· /J eY'~-tt!S.> <>->"€'<-..$ "'-'"''~ /J 1/H-t,-t the ''P'<«.
"""""'·J f£.'lle. Q ..... /<1 J~ . .e C<."f.J. 't'l-re. t:thl.> t.v/ZL.. t.·""e
Q ... J_. h-tOI<<'} to j'") Pot f ... Jr,-... J /J..r "'""' ld b~ the.. "'''I:;
C)lte,f Tl...r..t C?..n ..... IJ. $~e. ihe , ... ,·fdeu,e,s.J, Alft> o/d-el"
re "''/e. t:t.. .... { c ...... 'i. f&-.ck ,-~.,. 'or 1,,-),e_ /.,v.J J,-siC< .. c..i.S
'·1/<"'-/d. b~. de--.;ed th~ tA$-e o.f ~.v,/del"l1€>5 /:Y'e>i,
TJ,,-.$ d ... e.s "'"{ .f',·i the C'i>'-1ceft {-t,.._t Ct.e f.:.rf~",J
,P.d roi- /J fo..,. IA../J.
7hMtk )ltJt-<- ~r CCJtts/d~Y.ihj 1--K/ sfa...,J &<.jv../"sf.
fh e e5i "'-b/,·.s It ;"e.,t .,f' 1?1&,-,--e w:i:/u ... ~.s.$ 11)"-e ..... ..c •
'
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FOREST SERVICE
324 25th Street
Ogden, Utah 84401
1510 (1600)
111nr: · ' "h.\ . :
Mr. Ray McGuire
Special Assistant to
Senator Len B. Jordan
U. s. State Senate
Washington, D. C. 20510
L
Dear Ray:
In response to your request, we are enclosing an assortment of
statements and news releases pertaining to the Idaho Falls
hearing on the.Yell.alols.tone and Grand Teton National Park Master
Plans ~ Wilder.':ess p:'":OP<>~
Let us know if we can be of further help to you on this
matter.
~~.,,.... ...'..\ . ..' """'"". ..., . .._. .. ., ..... ... ....,, ._.. _ .,...d
----
Vern 0. Hamre
Regional Forester
U.S. Forest Service
324 - 25th Street
Ogden, Utah 31,401
Dear Mr. Hamre,
March 21, 1972
As president of thE' Caribou County Snowmobile Association, representing
over four hundred regi stcreJ snov.rmobile owners in Caribou County,
I want to express our support for the multiple use management of the
Caribou National Forest lands.
We strongly oppose setting aside any of the Caribou ForPst lands as
wil clerncss as your inventory program proposes. None of the eleven
areas totaling 158,500 acres has any unique quality which supports
their being set nsiJe as wilderness.
As the total National Forest land in the State of Jdaho comprises
thirty-eight percent of the state total area or 20,352,000 acres,
and of this area fifteen percent or 2,932,000 acres is already wilder·
ness or primitive area and as the National Forests belong to us (the
people) and thP managers of this ground (Forest supervisors) haw· askol
for our opinions, we would suggest tl1at Idnho has contributed enot1gh ~
the wildernesB system and should usc all available land for nntltiple
use. As the govP-rnment kf~eps gl'tling fargf~r and tnxes are ahn.tys going
up, don't we ttc-ed all the resources available to pay the hills?
A wilderness area obviousl_y docs not need as n1uch manaflement as does
multiple nse arcA.s. If these eleven areas, all in Caribou National
Forest are withdrawn from multiple use~ doc:s the Fon-'st Service Hanagement
plan to T£!duce their ~wrk force and budget hy the co::rrP~~pouding
percentage'?
The "'1ilderness Act of 1961_.. would place unnecessary restrictlons on
snowmobiling which would he totally off limits in these arvat-;. What
rt>8Hon does the forest service have for Pliminating snowmohilinr, in
these el<..~ven areas and how do they propose to enforce these unnecpssary
res triclions '!
CC: Heed Budge'
LPn Jordon
Frnnl< Cln1rcll
Sincerely~
;) '.c/ )\;' ( ,.
Ray Nt•l:.;on, PrPsid£'nt
CARIBOU COUNTY SNOWNOUJLING ASS.
!lox 31,1,
Soda Sprjngs, 'Jdalw
Mr. Rays. Lowe
524 West Ptfte
Pocatello, 1:1aho 83201
Deer Mr, Lowe:
MaR:h 27, 1972
Thank you for sending me a copy of your letter of Maroh 23
to Forest Supervisor Schultz,
If the Forest Servloe recommends wlldemeaa atudy of specific
areas, the recommendation wlll have to be affirmed by legislative
aotlon, I em pleased to have your views on flle ahould
such a legislative recommendation come before the Senate
lrterlor Committee on which laerve,
With all good w Ishee.
Stncerely yoW'I,
Len B. Jordan
United Stet•• Senator
IJ:rmo
, _, '. • "I -~ r• -- ... --- - '
March 23, 1~72
I an: ·,!riti: .:: ~o ,you. Lo or:er r:;y vi_e~JJ:-:; cor:ce uinl~ the addition of undero.evelo:s:-,ec.l
area:.., into the Uilderne..-5;:_:; SJstem.
I GJl1 3? yer:..rs old, have lived and. vwrks-d j n Idaho i.:·ost of that time because I feel
that there i!3 r:o better place to live o.nd raise o fo.miJ.y. For the pa:Jt 15 years, I
have \·;url-~ed for 2.n Id.:.Lo bac;eU. tr:::mspcrtntion company thnt provide:::; jobs for 6';0
people wit!lin the sta-re awl ties in directly wi'Sh our agriculture, ranching, mininG
and timber interests tho..t support our st.:tte.
My family, friencis and I ;;pend as much tir.:e as possible in our !lational Forests,
partie ul=ly, Gccribou, Targhee, Challis ancl Sillman National Forests. I feel that
the present multipls use concert ur~der }"'crest .Service !~anaGmcnt is uorkinr; very \'}ell,
considerinG the many different groups and uses to \·Jhich this land is subject.
I beleive that certain problem areas should be op<en or closed as needed to prevent
over exposure or damage by any one groupo
Our .present va.st wilderness are:;. shoud be protected as such at all co.sts, butc sometir..es,
I also feel that it is primarily visited by peo!Jle ~<ith incomes hir_;her than that of
the ave:v.age citizen.
I believe thC<t 1'lith the continued proper hundlinc of our ilationo.l Forec;t System
under the LIUltiple usc concept, we deiini ely do not need more <~ilderncss area in
the Stote of ~detho.
cc: Richo.rd 0. Benjamin
Challis National Forest
P. 0. Box 247
Ch:>llis, lcbho 83226
John L. Emerson Jr.
Salmon I~atj anal For2.jt
Forest Service Bld~-~·
Salmon, Ictetho 8364'1
Vern 0. Hrunrc
Rer;ional Forec,tor
324 2'->th Street
Or;den, Utah 8141+01
Senntor Frank Church
Sen;rte Office Blclr;.
Washinr;ton, D. c. 20036
Senator Len Jordan
Senate Office Bldc;.
\v:>shint;ton, D. c. 20036
Mr, Ec:lwerd Hook
14!1 North Third
Rexburg, ldeho 83440
Dear Mr. Hoole
March 23, 1972
Thank you tor wr1t1nt.l to qive me your views on the For.at Service' 1
Cendidete Wilderness .eddy,
I sppreoiete your OODCenl a!)out efforts being made within lclaho and
naUonelly to lock up extensive acreages of our Forest resources In
very restricted withdrawals. My polloy h81 been to favor balanced
use, aince I believe that we can have development of our nadllal
reiOUI'Cel and protect the env1ronmanteet the aeme Ume.
I also agree that the local eraa residents end the stites should have
a vo.toe in deoiaion•maldng on such w1thdrawels or major lend•uae
changes to Congressional action.
In me lUng 1ts study of roedless araas in the forests, the Forest Service
baa been seeking widespreed d1acusa1on and publlo part1cipat1on, end
I hope you have participated 1ft the public meetings or have submitted
statements. In edd1t1on, the Forest Service has been reviewing these
roedlesa areas end making specific recommendations only on selected
acreage. Preservat1on1stl organizations, on the other hand, have been
tna1st1ng that aU roadie .. area 1 ll the national forest lar.Jer than 5, 000
acres be gt .. n wtldernasa tatetu., and Jn a 1t1te like Idaho th11 could
llwrally mean withdrawal of 1everal m1111on acres beyond the 2 V2
m1Won eore1 alraady managed a1 prtnutive end wilderne11 araa1. Propoaels
for w1ldeme11 1twty mu1t be legi1lated by the Congre••· 10 we
will have an opport\ln1ty *> conl1der the 1peo1f1o proposals that emef',Je
from the Forest Service review. The YeUow1tone W1ldemea~ prcpo1al
also will come before the Congrell eventually, but I hope that you have
expre&led your views to the National Park Service at Yellow1tona.
SiDcerely yours,
Len B. Jordan, U.s. s. LJ:rmj
. • • ·-- . -
. ~-. ·l
~~~g_W~
~ -. ~~ r.
c:97-~S/ 2>
~~~~t,;;
-d"~~ ~~-.J ~~
--?: 4 ~'~ ~ ~&ev) ---
c:4-'~~-~ ~ c; \ ~.
March 23, 1172
Mr. and Mra • Jack lucy
Bcac 76
McCall, Idaho 83638
Dear Mr. and Mra. Buoy:
Thank you far your lettiii'IJ relative to wUdem .. a
JII'Opo&ala.
I ho" that y011 have ppreaaed your view• to the
Forest Service, whiCh 11 1nvit1ng pubUc parttctpaUon.
1n itl atudy of aueh JII'Opo&&la •
If the agency recoiiiiQitnda area• far WUderne•• atudy,
legtalaUon will be required and the pubUc will have
another opponun1ty to ltXPIUI ita views.
Sincerely youra ,
Len 8. Jordan
United Statal Senatat
u,
f r-· ,\ .
'I I'
I
U I
',< I:
:'
! I ' I l! II]
' '-/
I; I
I
)
u
:~! J'·.
i L !
r '' I : . ''
' . .
'
M•. lrucene Hill
Route 1, Box 179
St. Anthony, Idaho
Dear Mn. Hilll
March 20, 1972
Thenk you for your letter glv.l.ng me your v1ewa on wllciemesa
propoaala.
The propond wllciemeu pleD for Yellowatcme and Teton
Parka will not affect the vavailobUity of oommerc1e1 Umber
lands, becellaa the Park landa -n not available for Umber
herveat.
The Forest Serv1oe hea been cooduot.l.ng public hearin<JI
111leUve to a atudy of I'OIIdleu areaa which may be aonatdered
for w1ldemeaa atatua. You may want to expresa your
view a directly to the Superintendent of the Targhee NaUona1
Foreat.
I appreciate your .l.ntareat and your expreaaed v1ewa.
With all good wilhea, J am
S1nceNly,
Len a. Jordan
United Stat .. Senator
LJ:rmJ
Senator Len B. Jordan
437 Old Senate Office Bldg,
\vashington,D,C. 20510
De'lr Sir,
March 4,1972
Rt.l Boxl79
St. Anthony,
u::~1
; '1'1 I I
I i '' i' I! ' '
~_;!JL~~~t
I , :i
Idaho
I am writing in the hopes th1t you m"-Y be able to help me
and so many of us average citizens.
I strongly feel th·~t if the Wilderness Plans on the YellmJstone
and Teton P1rk and 5,000acres in the Tarr,hee are
accerted it ':ill deprive most of us of many enjoyments
and also our ONLY replaceabile N1tural Resource -our timber,
I have re;,d and studied the various 1dilderness proposals
and realize there is :1 real need for chanzes in our forests
and National P 'rks, but I feel there are other 8.lternatives
open to us other than locking up our forests and National
P:1rks. I am convinced this \-Jould be :w injustic~ to me and
to the American People,
Any help you can give us in preventin~ the Targhee Forest
being placed in 'dilderness ~nd also preventing the proposed
'·:ilderness pl:ms on YelloHstone ·:nd Teton being accepted
Hill truly be appreciat~.
l!incerely,
The Honorable Len
437 Senate Office
Washington, D.C.
B. Jordan
Building
20510
Dear Senator Jordan:
October 21, 1971
It has been a pleasure to read your recent letter and
review your support in some matters pertaining to a quality
future for America. Idahoans and other Americans have been
grateful for your initial support of the wilderness and
wild rivers acts. In your letter to me you have indeed hit
upon a crucial question. I shall briefly discuss this question
and its importance in this necessarily curtailed reply.
I hope I am not misstating when I write your question as
follows: How much candidate and de facto wilderness land
would I (and environmentalists in general) propose in light
of need for.'employment for our young graduates?
This is a "gutsy" question, of a type that politicans
and probably all Americans should use as a basis or take-off
point for the many other questions they also should be asking.
If the question is intended to be asked by itself in the
vacuum that pertains at present and is not intended as greater
or more profound than stated, then I am more than a little
appalled. I am sure that you, Senator Jordan, as a senior
Senatorial statesman must see the deep cloud of implications
that surround such a question. Any move by America to find
a simple answer to this question without the deep look --
and several changes -- that is really required will simply
mean that we will probably be "damned if we do and damned if
we don't."
I have said that the question is a crucial one. This
is so for many reasons, many of which I will not have time or
space to take up. The question points out the tendency to
expect simple answers to socially and ecologically difficult
problems. It invites answers that do not consider the enormity
Page 2 - Senator Jordan
of our population and the growing resource demand. It suggests
quick answers not related to the fact of our nonecological
fitness on our tiny earth and its diminishing space. The
question invites answers that would ask us to live for the
day and to consign to the devil the outdoor quality that the
children of my students will eagerly seek ten or twenty
years hence. For some the question would suggest that somehow
a generation of jobs hangs on the answer. This is not true
at all. A better management of our total American real estate
and of the ecology of its people (which implies several basic
changes) may bring jobs aplenty.
If the question must be considered without its many larger,
crucial future resource and society consideration it would go
far towards proving what some of us have said for a generation -that
we have carried on some very thoughtless practices in
that generation. The question considered alone would infer th~
we must continue such short-sighted practices into the future.
Many of us in Idaho feel that it is time indeed to take stock
in many directions. Where do we want to go in Idaho? Are we
constrained to a traditional direction of constant gnawing
away of values (as we see in California and in many eastern
states)? Perhaps we are closer to this brink than we would
like to think but mortgaging our wilderness and other excellent
outdoor values without much thought and attempt at action
does not seem to be as good an answer as placing Idaho and
America in an intensive self-examination for better answers;
perhaps putting America in an emergency situation of seeking a
new direction basis.
The question of wilderness and jobs is out of context so
far as it is only one question rut of a number that public
servants, professors, and the public should be asking all
at the same time and for which these people should be actively
seeking answers. The background of statements in your letter
which leads up to the question that you have given me are
not altogether factual in what they say or in what they imply.
Please bear with me while I discuss these and remold them
just a bit. First, the forests of the United States belong
to the American people; a fact, that I pretty well know, the
public would not likely let us lose sight of. Second,
realistically the additional wilderness to be won for our
region of the United States will be at most a considerably
smaller percent than the amount you mentioned. But I would
not at present prejudice the case of the People of the United
States by listing any particular percent. Third, in your letter
you "added" (among some other additions) to our "Idaho" wilderness
the national monuments and the proposed Sawtooth National
Recreation Area. By monuments you must principally mean the
Page 3 - Senator Jordan
Craters of the Moon. I can not believe that you would
seriously consider any other status than wilderness for these
acres of Crater's land. Does someone want the land for housing
(?), lumbering (?), for development of other kinds (?), for
a resort, perhaps (?), for mining(?). I do not believe that
the public would condone any other status than a type of
wilderness in this case.
Then you mentioned the Sawtooth Recreation Area~ Can you
really mean that the present plan (other than the Sawtooth
Mountains themselves which are outside the plad is to be in any
real way equated with wilderness protection? If so, I can
only imagine that we are dealing with some form of wry humor.
Since the only part of the area planned for wilderness standing
is the relatively small Sawtooth Mountain region itself
(incidentally with no additional national park protection)
and the wild areas of the remainder of the national recreation
park proper are only tiny, fragile, and often frayed nuclei,
it is more than a little unrealistic to state that we are
adding much to the wilderness system in this case. My
reading of the recreation park act has made me very pessimistic
about any real protection that such small "wild'' areas (like
the White Clouds) will receive. Certainly these areas will
not be wilderness if the present invasion by jeeps, cycles, and
mining operations is allowed to continue without zoning and
control.
The old cliche, of your letter, of wilderness being withdrawn
from multiple use recalls the many weary sessions where
special interests always defined a use as multiple use only
if their use was included. Any carefu~ understanding of
multiple use of the national forests would certainly recognize
that there are areas where the number of uses can not include
all uses. To forbid lumbering and reduce mining in wilderness
probably comes no closer to non~multiple use of forests and
mountains than does the intensive lumbering and mining and
heavy resort recreation use in other areas. The multiple use
idea was not intended to destroy the principle of best use.
Just as we have allowed timber producers and miners to
continually reevaluate the forests and mountains relative to
their uses so the door of new wilderness and wild area
possibilities should be continually open. Any 5000 acre or
larger area that might have wilderness possibilities should
still be looked at on its merits. I understand the Forest
Service will examine some new areas. Unfortunately, probably
not enough such examination and reexamination will be done.
Earlier I made a point that the question about the
consideration of wildernesses and jobs was an important one
Page 4 - Senator Jordan
largely because it was a part of several important problems
to be answered. Some of these questions are (keeping strongly
in mind that we have generations of children that are growing
up who I believe should have the right to demand that there
is the resource of the forests and all of its multiple uses
there, when they grow up and when they in turn have children
who will grow up): What do our present forest policies promise
for the future? How much human ecological unrealism and
ecological dishonesty is there in our whole forest situation?
This same type of "multiple question" pertains of course to
other public land use. I have some reason to believe that there
is much that is not scientifically, technologically good, nor
even in some cases sociologically honest in some of the so-called
values and reasons placed upon the entrance into our desert
lands. Would it not be money well spent to have a new all-out
Human Ecology Study set up to make the most careful study ever
made along the lines of the use of our land? In consideration
for balanced use, population needs, future generations this
study should go much beyond that done recently by the Land Law
Review Commission with its minimum of human-ecology findings.
Increasingly the idea of the necessity for population limit
has been coming out in the open. To look to our next generation
without intensive consideration of population problems is wasted
effort. The population question is closely tied to your
question, Senator Jordan. If we insist that forests and other
public lands' land use keep pace with people explosions then there
is no other possibility except that we will surely witness a
steady and accelerating loss of Eorests and public land values
of many kinds. If this hypothesis is to be shown true or false
will require the demands of new statesmanship and a new look at
ourselves which the new ballgame of high population and resource
demand indicates are essential. Incidental to this type of
question, for instance, is this basic idea: If farmlike monoculture
processes must increasingly prevail in our forests then
of course there will be the same pressures and ecological
substitutions and the deterioration of important parts of our
multiple use of these forests. Most of our commercial timberlands
are in private hands where a great claim is made that
good restocking and replenishing practices are maintained.
Although some of use have grave doubts that such private
practices pertain to the extent that they should, a larger
question is whether the public will condone the intensive kinds
of lumbering practices on our public forests that will surely
bring about the deterioration of many other uses. Is it
not wise that we take a clear, calm, impartial look at the
forests and other p,Jblic land use even if that look costs us
some money and considerable amount of time; even if that look
is apt to suggest some basic changes away from intensive use
of public forests?
Page 5 - Senator Jordan
America, especially its politicans and its great interests
have had considerable opportunity to examine our situation
but always the emphasis has been on the problem of the moment
removed from the context of the basic, irger questions. Is it
not wise that our answer be based on much more information, a
much more realistic look at what America seems to be headed for?
Is it not also wise that this study I am suggesting be put in
the hands of a committee representing a much wider spectrum of
the American public than most committees have had in the past?
Would it not be wise that many more persons representing the
general public be brought into the study in one capacity or another?
What possibilities (under guidance of perhaps senior senators)
do we have for a reappraisal and new stewardship examination in
our state? Man surely can have better goals than a constant
march towards the deterioration of the quality of his environment.
If we are faced with the fact that a decision about relatively
little of our land (as in the case of the wilderness) stands in
the way of successful living for some then W'' are indeed already
in a condition of poverty of ideas and resources. In that
case we have surely been "living beyong our means." I don't
believe that this is necessarily so. Perhaps we just need
a greater vision.
Senator Jordan, you have been in the public eye during a
good many years. You have, in the eyes of America, grown a
great deal and you are respected both by a la~ge segment of
the public and bv your own contemporaries in Congress. It
seems to me that you as an elder statesman in the last year of
his service might well call upon America to look upon its past
with pride and upon its future with active hope to base that hope
upon an honest appraisal of our situation. Man will have to
exist with some form of good ecolog which means that he will
have to fit his world, his natural boundaries, as well as his
state and society. I believe that a call from you for a
profoundly encompassing kind of new appraisal giving much
attention to population, resource demand; and the quality of
living projected a generation hence, would be a statesman-like
move in its best sense. ouch a reappraisal would have as its
main questions: Can we so use our National Forests and other
public lands that these will yet remain for the people of the
year 2000 and beyond? America has achieved a large part of
its greatness by utilizing its vast possibilities for growth.
Our new direction can well be, instead of a growth that leaves
in its wake an enormous amount of destruction and dubious promise
for the future, a new kind of growth that sees in stewardship
and in human ecology a much more promising direction for the
energies and hopes of the people of the United States.
No, Senator Jordan, I do not find it wise to pull a
number out of my hat and say "here is the acreage we should
reserve as wilderness." But I do believe there are two lines
Page 6 - Senator Jordan
of essential action that we the people can be following towards
answers of this kind. First we should not allow foreclosure of
our options to have, as nearly as possible, the amount of
wilderness that our future will demand. Then we should insist
on the broadest and deepest study in our history to see where
our present directions are taking us.
LMS:ph
cc: Jerry Jayne
Frank Church
James McClure
Statesman
CecTfD-. Andrus
Orval Hansen
Sincerely,
/~l( /l) ~1-}f>"
r#ie M. Stanford
1916 Fillmore Street
Caldwell, Idaho 83605
Professor Lyle M. Stanford
1918 FiUmcn Stntet
CalclwtaU, Idaho 83805
Dear Professor Btanfcrcll
~~-~- re: ~etc wilderness
September 24, 1971
Thank you for aencUng me a copy of your letter Ill President Nixon
relative to de facto wildeme ...
In view of your background and your letter, I would appreciate
your optnion on how much acnage In Idaho should be reserved as
wUdem .. a.
I have seen eattmate• that placing essentially rcadleaa areas of
5,000 acre• or mere Into a wUdernua study status would remove
30 to 40 peraent of Idaho'• National Fcnata from our commrclal
tlmberlenda , and eventually from utWaation for mlnel'al development.
Additional mUllona of acres also would be remcwed from resource
uttUaatton lf asmUar proposals were followed fer the publlo domain.
These proposals for large-aoala wtthdlawala from a multtple-ue
status are ever and above the snaent 2•1/2 mWton acres of Fcnat
land managed aa wUderne.. or prtmtttve areas , and an additional
mtWon acre• er men Included In wtlcl rtvera , natural areas , National
Monuments, and the proposed Sawtooth National lecreatton Area.
I supported the Wtlclerneaa Act and the WUd liver Act, and I have
worked wtth Senator Church fer the peat atx years to help sn•erve
the Sawtooth area, ao I beUeve that I share your concern for snaervlng
some of our heritage In Ita natural a tate. However, I am aura that
you aa an educator are not bUnd to the problem of finding employJHnt
for our young graduates, and fer obtaining ftnanolal support for
improved schools and aoo&al aervtcea, pnottoal ~ems Involved
Profel8or I.y&. M. Sta~ fF\\ [C5) ~ :::e!-r 24, 1171 ~ g u u
with accel8 to and prudent development of natural ruourcea. My
feelint 11 that we ahould atrtve for a balance in the preaervatlon of
and utlllut&on of our natural reaouroea. Your vtew. are aoUcited.
Inclosed 11 a copy of a atatement 1 ••ued at a recent hMrinO' on
the Middle Snake, where thla problem OOJMI into acute fooua for
Idaho.
With all 9ood wtahea.
Sincerely youn ,
Len 8. JOidan
United State• Senator
Inclosure
IDAHO WILDLIFE FED.RATION
101_,. e.. .JI.IO..M.A I, ,,...._..,., JAMII D. '"tON, Vke heeide11t
)'101 ''" ..
IOIIIT J, IMIIH, S~rotory T'""''"
lo"' 149
•
c.... ........... 111111 .. Ul14
, ........... 7-7471
l.ewou- tduho 1~1
TeL-.flotl• 741• "1011
PreBldent. Richard 11. Nixon
'l'he White House
Waahington, D. c. 20500
Dear President Nixon:
Co.vr d' AI•"•· tctaho lll14
Tel..,hone 664-65:1C
in Executive Order to prevent further erosion of de facto wilderness
areas will be appreciated and supported by the Idaho Wildlirii-Federation,
Such an order will give us the necessary time to provide for public
hearings and consideration to.place these areas in the wilderness system.
Yours 'l'ruly,
Robert G. Thomas, Pres,
copies a
Senators Church & Jordan
Representatives llcClure & Hansen
National Wildlife Federation
Wilderness Society
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FOREST SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20250 .£; AY
Honorable Len B. Jordan
United States Senate
Dear Senator Jordan:
~-r
f) ~o J4t;j.
IN REF'L Y REFER TO
This is in reply to your June 7 referral of a letter
from Mr. Martin F. Huebner of the Bonneville Sportsmen's
Association at Idaho Falls, Idaho.
Although ~e ?~ aa~ pczi:~for keeping the record open
for t~ta2th Wilder~-~proposal hearing ended on
June 4, ·are forwarding Mr. Huebner's letter to
Regional Forester Vern 0. Hamre at Ogden, Utah, for his
consideration. We conclude from the date on the letter
that it has already been made part of the record.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
. .
STATEMENT OF MARTIN F. HUEBNER
Representing the Bonneville Sportsmen's Association
of Idaho Falls, Idaho
Please include this statement in the record of the
hearing for reclassification of the Sawtooth Primitive
Area as a wilderness conducted at Sun Valley, Idaho
May 3, 1971
IDAHO FAllS, IDAHO
I am Martin F. Huebner of Idaho Falls. I work as a nuclear
engineer for Argonne National Laboratory at the National Reactor
Testing Station in Idaho.
I am the Secretary of the Bonneville County Sportsmen's
Association, one of the largest sportsmen's clubs in America.
This organization of nearly 4,000 outdoorsmen has been doing
outstanding conservation work for nearly 50 years, and have
received state and national recognition for our efforts in wildlife
conservation.
Last August, we went on record, here, with the House Subcommittee
on Parks and Recreation as favoring a Sawtooth National
Park-National Recreation Area complex, and specifically stated our
desire for wilderness status for the proposed Sawtooth Park unit,
with game management by the Idaho Fish & Game Department.
With regards to the proposed reclassification, I have the
following comments about the houndaries. These are compiled from
consultation with a number of the members of the Association who
are intimately familiar with the Sawtooths.
(1) The exclusions cited in the proposal before you are unacceptable
with the exception of that referring to the Alturas Lake area.
We see no justification in the public interest for these other
exclusions.
(2) We strongly recommend that the shore of Redfish Lake that is now
undeveloped (by roads, docks, campgrounds, etc.) be kept in its
present undeveloped state as wilderness.
• 11'-:
Librcli'f of Congrcs,;; •
(? o ~ )) ~---· Re: info on , defacto"
~ ~ U wilderness
'"rr. Lc~tcr S .• !vyG.on
D1.~ctr)f
kly 13, 1971
C011'=l!'2-:it'li~'nnl ~~::.:.:-r..;~r:.::h ~;OJ!1t!OO
IJ.brt:tr:r co£ Cc~r::;;~.-.).:.:s
10 .F.trr.t Street, i>,:C.
V'~shino;:;tcn, :V.G.
Dee~r Mr. Je~yson:
Plense scncl rna J:-,n·~kground :Information on "de hcto"
\vl1":1cmc~~ r..
'l'h!.'.l !'t'qw~st could b!; c:o:r.f.inQd. to significant articlM,
cop!en of honri.n']s and !'•:lP•,rts, if nnv, and ot.hor
C(\::')il1r nvr.ili:!:)lc publ1~h(~d or Cr.J) ~t;:!tnrial. !£ quontio:ts
remain eftor I hnve rcvi0'\~'·.'l:1 th.!s ll'!.'ltcr!nl, l ShL'Ill bs
in ft~rthcr touch with you..
Sincerely yours,
J..en 0. Jordan
United ;S't::lt:!:J Son.J.tor
r
L
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICUL. TURE
FOREST SERVICE
PO Box 3623
Portland, Oregon 97208
Honorable Len B. Jordon
United States Senate
Washington, D. C, 20515
Dear Senator Jordon:
2320(2500)
December 2, 1970
(!)
This is in response to your letter of November 16, 1970, to Chief
Edward Cliff requesting information about reservoirs located within
the Eagle Cap Wilderness in Oregon,
There are, at present, ten reservoirs maintained and operated for
the storage of irrigation water in the wilderness, Use at one
additional reservoir site, Red Mountain Reservoir, was terminated
with the permittee's concurrence in November 1963. This site has
since reverted back to its natural shallow-lake state,
Information you requested about the existing reservoirs has been
compiled on the enclosed data sheets,
Information which is common to all reservoirs in the wilderness
includes:
1. Free use is granted under an annual special use permit
within the authority stated in 36 CFR 251,2,
2, Special use permits are renewable annually and have no
termination date.
3, There are no plans at present to change the status of
these permitted uses,
We hope the enclosed information will meet your needs.
Sincerely,
:£.~(/ c-{ J ~j~~
{{J;o G, GILLMOR
Acting Regional Forester
Enclosure•
·~1 <) I C.J I . <; · ._,, 1 ! r ·, ;
': (
. ~ r : .
' ; c:.J_ .
I I
·- '" ' " I ; I . ; :I j
u ,_:, ~:.)
L ~~-I'J :;, JC):·::.::\.:
tllo.F£fii(..;IJ IU:----··"-··-
'
'
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
FOREST SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20250
IN REPLY REFER TO
2320
MAY 2 7 1(171.
Honorable Len B. Jordan
United States Senate
Dear Senator Jordan:
Thank you for your letter of April 28 requesting information about units
of the National Wilderness Preservation System and of the Natjona! Wj!d
and Scenic Rj¥ftfs System which are located in Idaho and adjoining States.
·- ;:::::::
We are enclosing maps which show the locations of these areas and a
table which shows by State: Wildernesses, Primitive Areas, Areas Recommended
for Wilderness, and Wild and Scenic Rivers established or under
study.
In addition to the enclosed table, the Secretary of the Interior and
the Secretary of Agriculture have jointly determined, as provided by
Section 5(d) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, that segments of the
following rivers shall be evaluated in planning reports by all Federal
Agencies. Wild and Scenic rivers as an alternative use of the water
and land resource will be evaluated when other developments are
proposed:
Sincerely,
Acting Chief
Enclosures ®
Idaho: Henrys Fork
Washington: Columbia, Wenatchee
Oregon: Deschutes, John Day
Utah: Esca 1 ante
Wyoming: Green, Gras Ventre, Snake, Wind River
Montana: Blackfoot, Madison, Yellowstone
Oregon, Washington: Grand Ronde
ldaho,Oregon, Washington: Middle Snake
State Name of Area
Idaho &
Montana Selway- Bitterroot
Idaho Idaho
Salmon River Breaks
Sawtooth
Craters of the Moon
Middle Fork
C 1 earwater
Middle Fork
Salmon
Moyie River
Priest River
St. Joe River
Salmon River
Bruneau River
Status
Wi 1 derness
Primitive
Primitive
Primitive
Wi 1 derness
Wild & Rec.
River
Wi 1d & Seen i c
River
Study - FS
Study - FS
Study - FS
Study - FS
Study - FS
Page 1 of 4
Acres of Land
I ,240,618
1,224,733
216,870
200,942
43,243
56,000
32,000
Location
Bitterroot, Clearwater,
Nezperce & Lola NF's
Boise, Challis, Payette,
& Salmon NF's
Bitterroot & Nezperce NF's
Boise, Challis, & Sawtooth NF's
Craters of the Moon Nat'l
Monument
Clearwater, Nezperce, &
Bitterroot NF's
Boise, Challis, Payette
& Salmon NF's
DAY MINES, INC.
HENRY L. DAY
Honorable Len B. Jordan
Senate Office Building
Washington, D. C. 20510
Dear Len:
WALLACE, IDAHO
83873
May 12, 1971
7158-1181 (Ofi' .. ICII:)
71UII-7st71 (RII:.IDitNC&)
A .. &A CODI: 808
There recently came to my attention a statement made by a resident of
Salmon at the U.S. Forest Service hearing held there just a month ago on
Wilderness Status for a central Idaho Primitive Area. From my point of
view it is excellent. I feel that there are many Idahoans who feel very much
like David Ainsworth. They are not as vociferous as the organized environmentalists,
nor are they as emotional, nor are they inclined to exaggeration.
In my opinion the country has been flooded with an appeal to save it from
destruction and much hasty legislation and poorly considered regulations are
being adopted. Sooner or later they will be rectified but a great deal of
damage is being done meanwhile.
Men like Ainsworth are without the means or the organizations to make
public their views to the extent done by those with contrary views such as
held by the Sierra Club and other environmentalists.
HLD e
Enc.
Yours very truly,
Statement by David G. Ainsworth at Solman, Idaho, April 13, 1971
at U. S. Forest Service Public Hearing regarding
Wilderness Status for lrlaho Primitive Area
Bocnuoo I hll.?~:ln to b:-liovc t!1at tho t:~!Jt 'bo::oficio.l uoo of
T.:.:ul tiplo .._,;:;a, I ~ n r::x.::bor of Ol.ri:cbo!"c Unl ~•·1it~:d, I1..1c., r>~d cl'Soni-
. .
l:u.ltiplo ti::;o Act, dooo l'"''ovido r:xd.::mn boD.;Jfit to tho g:r>o::>.tost nunbc:;;o.
In viocr Clf t:C.o fe>.ot thnt thia ia not "· horo•ing but l'o.thor e. pub~
lie lt::r.Z~~=ziz:hn-x::eotilog called by tho Fo1•ost S;wvio·.:l to tJupply info::::.:-
ntion to i·o.tor,:,s ted ci M.zo::'l, I hc;>0 to ~.dd a 11 ttlo :!.:o.fOl>z:J•'lt:to:l rc.:.•
V'ls t!->.·J into::.,>.t of tho Conz:<'OOS <Ihori 1 t pnosod tho \-Jilcb:o.'nO:JD Act.
noou i.n
Ro...:,».u~..·L- ·-·..·i. J.·,,.~~, ...._,. ....,,. ,.,'.r~. Ji fl.'~'· "• Jt I
. by p:·cpononta of tho l1ildc:rono;)G Bill i:a floor c'.obnto c.nd c.s l'CPOl'tod
... Tho fotmc1ntlcn of .t:C.o ~-JiJ.c::w;;:Joo Aot \10.0 t:1o O:r'c10l'ly tl":J.nofo:r>
of nll tho thou o::dll tins P:r>irli ti vo J..rott::J int.o r. no;;J.y ooto.bJ.iu':.od
Hiltlornoo s P1,onor-:,·nt.im.l e;;r., ·:;o::J. /1..11d ui th that co::wopt of t~'.) tlil"-··
__. _..,.,,..f'.t,• '>.~ q .•a• ..lc -, 'L·_hI'.,·..·J'.V~ o~~~" .. J .l'.i'..~l littlo r.:."0 "tt:'::.mt c:c· oo>•: >t !Hi it l'Olnto::;
--
David G; Aim.morth Stutc;;ont - 4/13/71 -2-
to tho logislntivo loc}:-up rather than expert nanagoraent. But that
is not n nJtter in point heNl.
.. ~ . -.
Tho quos tion hel'O is tho effcc t on adminis trn tion of tho l'lildderno5s
Act of so:1o of the statem:mts n!D.de by proponents of tho bill
in achiev;,ing .its pas sago. The question is not whether tho lru:•gost
portion of tho already eAioting Primitive Arons should bo included
in tho Hildorness Proscrvation System, but ratho1•, t-rhnt "contiguous
areas" should be included. The Sierra Club already has gone into
the courts to halt proposed timber sales in arons contiguous ~o former
primitive~ areas noH included in tbi'lildernoss Sy~tom bringing
thpir action under tho "saving cJroo" of tho Wilderness Act trhich
says (and I quote! "Nothing heroin contained ehnll limit tho President
in proposing as p!n•t of his l'OC01!1Jn<:>ndntions to Congress, tho nltcl'ation
of oxis ting box..dnries of Prirni ti ve Areas or rooo=ending the
addition of any contiguous aron.of National Forest Lands prodorainantly
of lrildcrnoss vnluo. 11 (End of quote)
The question to bo ans>-loi•od before tho final rocormnendation
by tho For~st Service to tho President as it affects tho Idaho Priraitivo
Area, and on t-:hich formal honi•ings Hill bo held later, is not
so much tho question of tho boudarios of tho prosont Idaho Priraitivc
Aroa, . but re.thol', ho.-r Iiluch is to be added to it, and hou r,1uch todr>.y 1 s
I
"Ecology Kick", if I· mn.y be allo~Ted tho use of the vornacular, ul ti-matoly
>-Till c1•ipplo tho futuro woll-boing of this aroa, and concoiv-ably,
tho nn.tion as a t-Tholo.
Remembering, for instance, that timber is a rone\·Tnblo rooourco;
that it is nctually a crop of tho enrth '~>Thich can bo hnrvostod for
tho benefit of r,1ankind; e.nd thc.t tho question involvc:d is tho suitability
of e. specific nroa for either sir..glo Ol' 1>1ultiple uso and thnt
lands suitable for vlildci•noss cle.ssifice.tion actually deolaro themsolves
by their v:::.ry no.tur.::J, lot.s lool' nt somo of tho things ~Thich
David G, Aimn:o1•th Stnto1:ont -4113/71 -3-
said in th:J Congros::l prior to po.ssago of tho Hildorncss J.ot,
PI•osentod on Ap1•il 3, 1963, by Idaho Senator I<'rank Church on
behalf of the Sonata CoilUT!itteo on Interior and InsuJ;;.• Affairs, Committee
Report No, 109 said in part, "As reported at the time, tho
Wilderness Preservation System can be established ·without affecting
tho economic arrangements of co=nitios, counties, states or' business
enterp:•isos since the areas are already wi thdrm·m, or because
existing rights and established uses are permitted to continue, There
will be no wi thdra.,ral of lands from the tax base of counties or communi
ties; no rri thdra;.ral of timberlands on which lumbering operations
depend, nor any withdraHal of present grazing or mining rights,"
Sena~or Church, as floor manager for the bill during the ill-nos
s of tho connni ttoe chail•r,lan, quoted the chairman as saying - and
this appears in the CongressionsJ. Record, (again I quote) "inclusion
of the wild, wilderness, primitive, park and •rildlife areas in the
wilderness prusorvation system will cause no disturbance of :l.ndividual,
communities, or economic patterns, Tho areas have been withdra<m for
years, Thoro have boon no timber sales fro;n forest lands involved
so· th1n•o aro no lumber mills dependent on them which will have to
close dmm. Es tablishod mining operations and grazing will not be
disturbed,
"There is virtually no chango in tho status quo of the areas
to be handled under the presidential recon~ondations procedure of the
bill, The bill simply makes wilderness preservation a statutory directive
and responsibility of tho existing land administering agency
in its handllng of already reserved lands,"
That ls tho end of thRt quote, but we go rigpt on to another
from Idaho's oi-rn Senatol' Church <rho added to the statement by the
cor.nnittee chairman hls own words, as folloHs: "Hr, Presldent, that
-.
explanation by the con;mi ttE>e chairraan is important. It is in:portcnt.
to the Senate to understand that the lands under the jurisdiction of
the department of agriculture - and I speak of it particularly - that
will be affected by this bill are those lands which, in his exocutivt'
discretion, the Secretary of Agriculture h~s already deterrnin9d shall
be set aside as •rilderness, wild, primi. ti ve or cano'> areas. 11 (Unquote)
In the House debate on Senate Bill No. 4, rlhich became the Wilderness
Preservation Act, Representative John P. Saylor of Pennsylvania,
one of the leadinr; proponents of the bill, stressed that' as far as
the national forests were involved, the bill •rould relate only to
area~ (and I quote from the Congressional Record) 11
••• within the
8 percent of the national forests lands comprising tho less than 15
million acres already classified for l·lilderness proteotion." (unquote)
Mr. Saylor said - this,too, quoted from the Congressional Record -
"Bear in mind that this revie•r rela'ues only to the lands that congress
by the act says aro to be considerod, and all these lands arc now in
some kind of ad1nl:r.is trati ve status as 1-lildernoss. 11 (Unquote)
There arc many more similar quotes, such as a Cl'ucial one from
Idaho Senatol' Church who remarked, after stating that tho \-lilderness
System could only contain those areas already desi.gnatod as Hild,
wildo1•nes s, canoe and primi ti. ve areas i.n the r.ational foros t.o, parks
and monuments, that (and at;ain I quote) "That is the n11Ddmum possible
scope of the wiJ.derness system to be established by the bill." (unquote)
These statements do not match •roll with the performance of the
last fovr years in additions made to the 1-liJ.dernass System, nor do
they match toowoll •rith some of tho ideas being pl'oposed for tho
Idaho Primitive Area and tho Sawtooth Primitive Area.
What is happening is slmply that the preservationist eroups, in
many cases entirely unmindful of the inunedis.te· and far futur·e impact
on tho economic •rell-beine; of specifi.c areas and the nati.on e.s a Hhole,
-.
c:'•o u!ling tho "contir;uous c.rca" sewing clauso of tho Wildornoos
Pre5orvo.tion Ac:\1, to greatly expend tho Hildornoso syste~, dospito
the often expres!lod intent of the backers of tho eno.bling legislation.
Sounds from Hashingtcn indicate that those backor'l of tho Wilderness
legislation either spoke tongue in cheek or have succunbed to tho
siren song of tho preservationists.
Th..l secc:--1 point to be considered and to receive somo attention
is the constitutional implications of closure of ~rent arona of patently
multiple uso lands ~~dor wilderness status. Those lands are
the birthright, not of just teo prosorvationlsts, but of all the
people. Yes, all tho people have tho right to rocroationul usc of
these public lr~ds. If they have multiple use capabilities, if they
can be 1•or.dad, harvested, grazed or mined without UlfDUE, and mark
that word, undue, physical or osthotio d~~ago and if that damage is
reparable, thoy should bo made available to all the people, not just
to tho hiker or ho;rscback ridel'.
Eo.ch year, tho p::>rcentago of tho agod - tho over 65's - becor.J·Js
g1•eater. 'I'hoy,ovon mo1•o than tho younger, are socking recreational
opportunities. They have just as much right to enjoy tho scenic
boau'dos, tho outdoor experiences, as do the youngo1• and Illore vigozo ...
ous. But tho r,1un uho has sut fo1• some forty yoars be!d.nd a desk cannot
undcl't<:lco tho x•igors of hiking or riding. But their right to
enjoy tho scenic bonuties, "the solitudes, the outdoor experiences,
must b0 pl'otoctod. Full uso of tho public lands whih lend thor..selvos
to multiple uso, uill malco th0so a1•oas available to all the people.
Propor r.1ano.gomont and planning - NOT wilderness lock-up - CAN
mnko thi~: pos:Jiblo - and ·can contribute groatly to tho futul'O rrollboing
of our nation.'.
L
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUBf:
~1--s&:FivicE:f'
BitterrootNatiOnal Forest
Hamilton, MT 59840
Honorable Len B. Jordan
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Jordan:
! ,.
2150
April 8, 1971 ~ &)/
The 216,870-acre Salmon River Breaks Primitive Area is undergoing a
classification review as required by the 1964 Wilderness Act. The
Primitive Area is located in the Bitterroot and Nezperce National
Forests, A portion of a contiguous study area is within the Salmon
National Forest. The Bitterroot Forest has been designated the
coordinator for the three National Forests involved.
As part of our study process, we wish to advise you on the current
progress of the study and classificat:ion review.
The Salmon River, forming the south boundary of the Primitive Area,
is being studied under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The Intermountain
Region is conducting a Primitive Area review of the Idaho
Ptimi ti ve Ar·ea south of the river. The three studies are being
coordinated to insure that the classification proposals are compatible.
Hearing dates for the three areas are scheduled for the
fall, 1973.
The Salmon River Breaks Primitive Area study began in July 1969.
The first year was utilized in preparing study plans, flow charts,
and other administrative details. Last November, we conducted public
meetings at Grangeville, Lewiston, and Salmon, Idaho; Spokane, Washington;
and Hamilton, Montana to assist us in establishing a study
boundary and to determine how the public feels we can best work with
and keep them informed.
Following intensive review of public comments and suggestions, we
have established a study boundary which includes, in addition to
the 216,870-acre Primitive Area, the contiguous areas in Mallard
Creek (25,700 acres); Bargamin Creek (11,800 acres); and Horse
Creek (50,100 acres). These areas are shown on the enclosed map as
Areas A, B, and C respectively. The study boundary establishes a
2
data collection and analysis perimeter. The boundary does not necessarily
reflect the area that will be proposed for wilderness classification
or for other forms of management. However, management impacts
on the various resources must be considered on lands adjacent to, as
well as within, the Primitive Area,
Considerable public comment was received regarding the inclusion or
exclusion in the study of a portion of the Magruder Corridor. This
area, referred to as the Hells Half Addition, contains about 72,500
acres south and west of the Nez Perce Trail Road. The entire Corridor
was studied in 1963 as part of the Selway-Bitterroot Primitive
Area review. The area has also been under study since 1967 when the
Secretary of Agriculture directed the Forest Service "to prepare a
new integrated management plan" for the Corridor. The Management
Direction framework for this plan has been completed and will be
available to the public this summer, Because of the intensive study
and public participation this area is receiving, we are not recommendin
the Corridor for furt.her study.
Comments and suggestions have been favorable to our proposed formation
of a public advisory group to participate in the development of
alternatives and selection of ~ preliminary proposal. This group will
consist of about 12 persons from various concerned organizations and
resource interests. The advisory group will meet as necessary in 1971
and 1972 to review and analyze data. Close contact is being maintained
with 15 cooperating Federal and Idaho State agencies,
All aspects of the study are proceeding on schedule to conform to the
Wilderness Act's 10-year review period ending September 1974. The
field data collection and inventory will be essentially completed by
e~rly fall, followed by the analysis process and the formulation of
land-use alternatives early in 1972. Public comment and suggestions
will be solicited on the alternatives prior to selection of the single
proposal in the fall of 1972. The proposal will also be submitted for
public review. Formal public hearings are scheduled for September
1973, prior to submitting the proposal to the Secretary of Agriculture,
the President, and the Congress.
We will continue to keep you informed as the study progresses. If
you have questions regarding the study, we would be most pleased to
answer them.
ORVILLE L. DANIELS
Forest Supervisor
Enclosure
~.. ..c...' .!_.:
0
0
0 • • •••• •• ••• ••• ••• •
•• •• 0 00 •• •• ••••••••
• • • • • • •• 0 0
• 0
0 00
0
0 uo•
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF" .A.'3RICUL.. TURE
FOREST SERVICE ;-
r
Honorable Len B •. Jordan
United Sta.ter Senate
WaEhin~ton, D. C. 90510
L
Dear Senator Jordan:
Boise National Forest
1075 Park Boulevard
Boise, Idaho 83706
2320
March 23, 1971
We are inviting you to attend a public meeting in regard to our forthcoming
study of the Idaho Primitive Area for possible reclassification
as _i]WIIde-rne~under the Wilderness Act of September 3, 1964.
The meeting will be held Monday, April 5, 1971, in the Alturas Room
of the Rodeway Inn, commencing at 7:00 p.m. This will be an informal
meeting with a presetttation of the facts about the area by the Forest
Service, and the remainder of the time for open discussion and questions
by the public. This is not a formal hearing but rather an
opportunity for you to let us know how you feel about the area,
proposals for additions or deletions, matters needing study, or any
other input you feel is pertinent to the study to be made.
Enclosed is a map of the Idaho Primitive Area as it now exists, along
with some background material about it. I hope you will be able to
attend the meeting and give usothe benefit of your thoughts on the
matter.
Sincerely,
Enclosures
,\'
15.20~11 (I/G9}
IlJI\H0 PRIMITIVE AI\FA
STU~Y OBJECTIVES
The Boise, Challis, Payette, and Salmon National Forests of the Intermountain
Region are presently engaged in a study of the Idaho Primitive Area, as specified
by the Wilderness Act (P. L. 88··577) of September 3, 1961+.
The study objectives are:
l. Comply with provisions of the Wilderness Act (P.L. 88-577), which provides
that all Primitive Areas existing on the date of che Act be studied and:
a. Reviewed as to their suitability or nonsuitability for preservation
as Wilderness.
b. Reported to Congress not later than September 3, 1974, as to the
findings of such review.
2. Study areas of land contiguous to the Primitive Area boundary that have
been or may reasonably be cons ide red by the Forest Service or others to have
Wilderness qualities.
3. Collect, compile, and evaluate the basic information necessary for the
development of the suitability report to Congress in conformity with the Act.
4. Provide for appropriate public, State, and Federal agency involvement in
the study. Involve th!O! foregoing in basic study and provide opportunities to
receive inputs from them during the course of the study.
5. Hold public hearings as required by the Hilderness Act and prepare final
reports and recommendations for submission to the President. These are tentatively
set for the fall of 1973.
PUBLIC RESPONSE
Public participation in this study is encouraged. If you have questions or
comments concerning the study, please write to:
Regional Forester
Federal Office Building
324 25th Street
Ogden, Utah 84401
Forest Supel~isor
Boise National Forest
1075 Park Boulevard
Boise, Idaho 83706
Forest Supervisor
Challis National Forest
Forest Service Building
Challis, Idaho 83226
Forest Pupervisor
Payette National Forest
Forest Service Building
Post Office Box 1026
McCall, Idaho 83638
Forest Supervisor
Salmon National Forest
Forest Service Building
Post Office Box 1729
Salmon, Idaho 83467
Individuals are invited to examine the Idaho Primitive Area and send their
recommendations or suggestions to the Regional Forester, Forest Supervisors,
or District Rangers.
GENERAL DESCRIFriON
The Idaho Primitive Area was established in 1931, then enlarged to 1,232,744
acres in 1937. It includes parts of four National Forests--Boise, Challis,
Payette, and Salmon.
Most of the area is within the drainage of the Middle Fork of the Salmon River.
The remainder drains directly into the Salmon River.
The Idaho Primitive Area is largely "back country" in character. The topography
varies from the deep gorges of the Salmon and Middle Fork of the Salmon Rivers
with a low annual precipitation to the rugged mountain peaks with an alpine
climate. This lt-million-acre Primitive Area is one of the largest in the
Nation.
Fishing, wilderness camping, mountain climbing, and hunting are major attractions.
White-water boating on the Middle Fork and main Salmon Rivers is a unique
recreation activity. Parts of the area are truly spectacular. The Big Horn
Crags contain over sixty alpine lakes and many scenic peaks. Mount McGuire, at
lO,o82 feet, is the highest. Other portions of the Idaho Primitive Area are
characterized by continuous stands of lodgepole pine and other mixed species. It
is easy to feel isolated in this vast area.
A colorful history dates back to the days of the mountain men of the Hudson's Bay
Company. Captain Bernard and his troopers from Fort Boise traversed many of the
twisting canyons and the alpine meadows of this area during the Sheepeater War of
the 1870's. Discovery of gold in 1860 on the Salmon River and in 1904 on Monumental
Creek touched off the Salmon River and Thunder Mountain gold rushes. The
lure of gold brought an estimated 20,000 people into this back country.
With the influx of people, homesteads were staked on most level tracts of land,
particularly along the main and Middle Fork of the Salmon Rivers. Many did not
go to patent. However, there are 8,465 acres in State and private ownership
within the Idaho Primitive Area.
Air travel first occurred within the Idaho Primitive Area in 1928, when aircraft
began landing at such places as Chamberlain Meadows. This use preceded the
establishment of the original Primitive Area. Because of the expanse of this
back country, air travel became a common means of access. Mail runs and grocery
flights are made weekly to service the isolated ranchers and settlers. Some 14
back-country strips, mostly on private land, are presently being used. These
airfields provide access for hunters in the fall, as well as bases for fire control
operations within the Primitive Area.
-2-
SPECIAL SITUATIONS AND FEATURES
The northern boundary of the Idaho Primitive Area is the main Salmon River, which
is a mutual boundary between the Idaho and Salmon River Breaks Primitive Areas.
The Salmon River Breaks Primitive Area, also under study, is located in the Bitterroot
and Nezperce National Forests of the Northern Region, with regional headquarters
in Missoula, Montana.
The Idaho Primitive Area has some special situations and features which need
careful consideration in determining suitability or nonsuitability for Wilderness.
Some of these are:
1. The Middle Fork of the Salmon River, which runs through the area, is
designated as a Wild and Scenic River. It is becoming increasingly popular, and
boat campsites are receiving heavy use.
2. The Salmon River is receiving increasing use by powerboats and float
boats. This river is being studied as to its potential for a Wild and Scenic
River as directed by the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.
3. There are extensive stands of mature and ovetmature timber.
4. It is an important habitat for wildlife, including bear, elk, deer, bighorn
sheep, mountain goat, cougar, and many other species. The deer and elk
winter range is in poor condition from overuse.
5. The rivers and tributary streams have significant waters for salmon,
steelhead, and other fish.
6. Fire control, in many places, is a serious problem because of fuel conditions,
precipitous topography, and accessibility. Aircraft are used for fire
control purposes.
7. Many acres are a high quality wilderness country.
8. Approximately 8,465 acres of State and private land are located within
the boundary. Some of these are developed for summer homes and dude ranches.
The owners use motorized equipment on these lands.
9. Mining roads to patented and unpatented mining claims penetrate the
Primitive Area, and mineral prospecting activity is increasing.
10. In addition to powerboats, landing strips and the use of aircraft for
access are established uses. Mechanical equipment is used to maintain some of
these strips.
11. Guide and outfitter camps are located within the Idaho Primitive Area.
- 3 -
Meroh 16, 1971
Mr. end Mn. Wayne D. Skiver
644 w. Pine Av•ue
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Deer Mr. end Mn. Skiver:
Thank you for .. ncUno me a copy of the well•ruaoned
brochure, "The WUdemeaa:Juat How llluoh is Wild."
I oonour 1n the author'• oenerel oonviotiOil thot we oen
retain an adequate eo,..o• In wUdera••• whlle permitting
developmeat of our natural reaouroes end tourlam. Thla
certainly eppeen to be tNe In Idaho, where the populet101l
dena tty 11 anly about 8 inhabitant a per aquare mU•.
Your Interest 11 appreciated.
w 1th ell good w 11h••.
Sincerely,
Len B. Jorden
United Stat•• Senator
LJ:rmr
