WSPC05430 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

001942 This is llill a long way from the wi Jdemess goal of the Re- newable Resource Program sent 10 Congress by President ford on March 2. 1976. The program suggesls a tolal ofrwenty-five to thiny million acres of National forest wilderness llIIIds by the year 2000. MIUI we go througb the same painful. drawn-out process tbal resulted in lhe present Wilderness System? I sin- cerely hope nolo In helpi"g rwlld out .he Wilderness System, lhe forest Ser- vice is g~ided by the followini principles. whicb I've set forth befon: Congress. . I. Mainlain an enduring system of high-quality wilderness. 2. Pelpetuate the wilderness resources. . 3. Consistent with lhese first IWO principles, provide opportuni- lies for public use. enjoyment and underslanding of wilderness and the unique experien<:es thaI require a wilderness selting. 4. Maintain pWlu and animals indigenous 10 lhe arca. 5. Accommodate and adminisltr Ihose "non-confom,ing. bul accepted" uses provided for in the Acl in a way thaI minimi_ Iheir impacts. . 6. Maintain ~ watel3lleds. . 7. Addraa prolectiOll IlCtds for endangeRel species and thclr habilall. IIIi/ial Forest Service Inventory Many I'tOPle have asked how we anived al the initiallisl o. road less and undeveloped areas-befon: public involvemeill in lhe process. The basic list was developed by Forest Service resource spe cial.ists who work with lhe land daily. Each National ForesI developed an initialroadless area lisl that included: . All existing wilderness and primitive areas . The oripnal roadless arca invemory (RARE I) . Any area missed in the oriJinal inventory lhal contain 5,000 _ or more; or that coarain 1ess'lhaII 5.000 acres but tA.;....olUK. \Ii VII).lo~V6;~V'.)' 6MtU/\J' '\:b~t...uuU "'I~ .;.",M6\.41to~'h. ,u lheir nalllrlll COlIdilions: or thaI are self-contained ecosystems, such as islands. These missed .mos were not added if statutory righls or. Contl'llC\ual agreements existed that wwld preclude fulure management of the areas in the nalural condili_for instance. if there were COst-share road agreements. . Qualified lIeU contiguous t"existing wilderness. primitive areas. or Administration-proposed wildernesses, including those in pulc.s and refuges. . Areas identilied Ii~ RARE I as roadIess through land- management planning. . As a sepuIlle ptIlIp.lIrtIS designated by Congress for wil- derness study, by Administration proposals pendin!! before Congress, and J>y OIher pending legislative proposals endorsed by the Administnltion. Areas allocated Cor nonwildemc:ss use in land-management plans for which linal environmental statements have been filed were nOl on lhe list, if lhe areas were nol included in Administration-endorsed pending wilderness legislation. I asked the Foresl Service 10 "hang loose" on Ibe iniliallist and 10 consider every area over which there is public concern. This includes undeveloped areas for which local people feel affection. I also directed lhe service to con.sider adding contro- versial roadless areas. even if a final EIS has been filed which would allocate the areas 10 nonwildemeu uses.. The Public Inven/ory More Ihan 200 public workshops were beld throughoullbe country during July and August. The workshops had two pur- poses: to have the public suggest possible additions Io-O~ dele- tions from-the present roadless and undevelope~ area ,~ve~- lory. and 10 have the public evaluate or suggest natlo~1 cntena Ihallne Forest Service could use loevaluale areas for WIlderness poleni;al. The llIency also requested written comments by Sep- ~mber 15. In some of the workshops. local people worried thallhe entire in';entory mighl be designated instant wildemess--as much as Ih;,lY 10 forty percenl of a Corest. This will nOl happen. We've been as liberal as possible in drawing uplhe initial inventorr. but we know thalliwly of lhe areal would nol bc:sl_ as Wilder- ness. ~ . Some people have asked. "If Congress set crileria for wllde~- IlCSI in the 1964 Ad, why are you aski. for criteria again?" First ofan. Conaress set crileria Cor all or... of wilde~ss and did not set crileria Cor a National Wilderness Preservallon Sys- !em as a whole. The make"UP of Conpea has chanJed. Con- ~i\'''':o. t._~ I.~u,,,ol.\.w hl.,ll It I..,J Hl..-,^ .....Uito LV u.ac )UfuewlW( \Ju't:r. ent criltrill. for classification, particularly in the EUt. Some people have suuested that lhe forest Service has been 100 "pure" in wilderness considerations. And. finally, /he new Ad. ministratio~ has declarecl a new dedication 10 resolving wilder- nes~ is~ues. Tll<:se invenlories will help de\<e/op the Administration' s wil" . demess proposals lhat will come before Congress and will provide new inCormation for lhe 1980 update of the national assessn~nl of fore!il. and rangelands required by lhe Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Aclof 1974. The Evalua/iOtl During lbe public wor1<shops, lbe question most often asked WI) "How will the criteria and invenlory be used?" In the final analysis, this question will be answered by Congress. lbe only body that can actually designale wilderness. However, I can lell you how we envision the proce5I. and whal we jn the Adminis- tration hope for. . first. lhe criteria will be ulled to identify wllat should be importanl in a qualilY National Wilderness Preservation Sy~ tern. Then an evalualion oftbe invemory will, we hope, result in some sort of package 10 preselII to Congress. We wam 10 speed up the process. We wam 10 telescope some of the steps.so Ihal omnibus-Iype legislalion can be proposed, possibly OIl a.state- by,slate basis. 10 settle permanently lhe .-lias area con~ troversy atiel allow \IS 10 go 01110 other matters in managing our National FOrests. But perhaps lhe moot desired result of a succeu(ul RARE II would be to ensure lhat the mll$\ appropriate laDclaare placed in lhe syslem. The SUCCellS of RARE II depends on lhe altiludes and l<'lions oC alllhosc. interested in lhe public lands. ..hether for wildernes's or other "',soorce uses. Lawsuits could kill RARE n by enlan- gling and delayina Ihe process. . Evcn ir'Il.ARE II is successful, there are still a number of wilderness issues Cacing us. Two of lhe grealest involve user contlictsandmanagemenl of wilderness. Obvrously. RARE' /I is not a panacea for all wilderness controversy, but il would solve one of the first issuesto be faced before we cllllndv address the olhers-lhe classification of area. in/o a comprebCnsive. high- quality National Wilderness Preservation System. 0 Dllri1lR Ih, n'.rl f('w mOIl/lIS. S/~RRA ~;II. I'"J',nI I11t'" urtiel,s on RARE 11. ,,, th~ n~D ;JSut". Clk,r/~s CI"l,n 01 1M Si,rra Club's Wa~;n.Kl<m .a1J!t'(' will ,rsfHmd ID Dr. Calk,', ptY~.at;f)1I of w Admimstl'OlitM I "tw.-Edit.