Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.. ,..~..m' ,....-_..~ '""'i'."':' <br /> <br />, .-r <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />fj(,;G790 <br /> <br />There is need for a rule of reason in interpreting the <br />act, of course, because wilderness values are to be protected. <br />As I stated in 1972 while chairing a hearing of the Sub- <br />committee on Public Lands: <br /> <br />. . . The Wilderness Act was not deliber- <br />ately contrived to hamstring reasonable <br />and necessary management activities. <br />We Intend to permit the managing <br />agencies. . . latitude. . . where the pur- <br />pose Is to protect the wilderness, its <br />resources and the public visitors within <br />the area. .. [including, for example I <br />minimum sanitation facilities... fire <br />protection necessities... / and J the <br />development of potable water supplies. <br />. . . The issue is not whether necessary <br />management facilities are prohibited; <br />they ore not. The test Is whether they <br />are necessary. 9 <br /> <br />Thus, the wilderness management framework intended <br />by Congress was that the agencies do only what is necessary. <br />The facilities just mentioned may be required - and restric- <br />tions on use may sometimes be needed to protect especially <br />fragile locations. But in adopting regulations, common <br />sense is required. For example, I can understand the Forest <br />Service urging outfitters and guides to make their camps <br />conform to the spirit of a wilderness experience for their <br />clients; but it seems insane to allow wooden tent floors in <br />their camps, only to require them to be packed out of the <br />area each fall before they disappear below the snow and <br />then carried back in again after the spring thaw! <br /> <br />12 <br />