[House Hearing, 106 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
HEARING ON: H.R. 3605, TO ESTABLISH THE SAN RAFAEL WESTERN LEGACY
DISTRICT IN UTAH, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS AND PUBLIC LANDS
of the
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 2, 2000, WASHINGTON, DC
__________
Serial No. 106-70
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
house
or
Committee address: http://www.house.gov/resources
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
64-874 WASHINGTON : 2000
______________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone (202) 512�091800 Fax: (202) 512�092250
Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
DON YOUNG, Alaska, Chairman
W.J. (BILLY) TAUZIN, Louisiana GEORGE MILLER, California
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey BRUCE F. VENTO, Minnesota
ELTON GALLEGLY, California DALE E. KILDEE, Michigan
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, California Samoa
WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
KEN CALVERT, California SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
RICHARD W. POMBO, California OWEN B. PICKETT, Virginia
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
HELEN CHENOWETH-HAGE, Idaho CALVIN M. DOOLEY, California
GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California CARLOS A. ROMERO-BARCELO, Puerto
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North Rico
Carolina ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
WILLIAM M. (MAC) THORNBERRY, Texas PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
CHRIS CANNON, Utah ADAM SMITH, Washington
KEVIN BRADY, Texas CHRIS JOHN, Louisiana
JOHN PETERSON, Pennsylvania DONNA MC CHRISTENSEN, Virgin
RICK HILL, Montana Islands
BOB SCHAFFER, Colorado RON KIND, Wisconsin
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada JAY INSLEE, Washington
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
GREG WALDEN, Oregon TOM UDALL, New Mexico
DON SHERWOOD, Pennsylvania MARK UDALL, Colorado
ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
MIKE SIMPSON, Idaho RUSH D. HOLT, New Jersey
THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado
Lloyd A. Jones, Chief of Staff
Elizabeth Megginson, Chief Counsel
Christine Kennedy, Chief Clerk/Administrator
John Lawrence, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah, Chairman
ELTON, GALLEGLY, California CARLOS A. ROMERO-BARCELO, Puerto
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee Rico
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
RICHARD W. POMBO, California BRUCE F. VENTO, Minnesota
GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California DALE E. KILDEE, Michigan
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North DONNA CHRISTIAN-CHRISTENSEN,
Carolina Virgin Islands
CHRIS CANNON, Utah RON KIND, Wisconsin
RICK HILL, Montana JAY INSLEE, Washington
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana MARK UDALL, Colorado
DON SHERWOOD, Pennsylvania JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
RUSH D. HOLT, New Jersey
Allen Freemyer, Counsel
Todd Hull, Professional Staff
Liz Birnbaum, Democratic Counsel
Gary Griffith, Professional Staff
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held March 2, 2000....................................... 1
Statements of Members:
Cannon, Hon. Chris, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Utah.............................................. 16
Prepared statement of.................................... 17
Hansen, Hon. James V., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Utah.............................................. 1
Prepared statement of.................................... 2
Statements of witnesses:
Curtis, Wesley R., Director, Governor's Rural Partnership
Office..................................................... 47
Prepared statement of.................................... 49
Johnson, Commissioner Randy, Emery County, Utah.............. 49
Prepared statement of.................................... 23
McUsic, Molly, Counselor to the Secretary, Department of the
Interior, accompanied by Sally Wisely, UT State Director,
Bureau of Land Management.................................. 18
Prepared statement of.................................... 20
Martin, Wilson, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer,
Utah Division of State History-Preservation Office......... 39
Prepared statement of.................................... 82
Matz, Mike, Executive Director, Southern Utah Wilderness
Alliance................................................... 50
Prepared statement of.................................... 53
Staff Report, Price Field Office......................... 63
Nelson, Courtland, Director, Utah Division of Parks and
Recreation................................................. 41
Prepared statement of.................................... 44
Petersen, Commissioner Kent, Chair, Emery County, Utah....... 27
Prepared statement of.................................... 29
Meadows, William H., The Wilderness Society, comments on H.R.
3605....................................................... 87
Additional material supplied:
The Wilderness Society, comments on H.R. 3605................ 78
Text of H.R. 3605............................................ 4
HEARING ON: H.R. 3605, TO ESTABLISH THE SAN RAFAEL WESTERN LEGACY
DISTRICT IN UTAH, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 2000
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on National Parks
and Public Lands,
Committee on Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m., in Room
1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. James V. Hansen
[chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Hansen, Duncan, Cannon,
Kildee, and Udall.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES V. HANSEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF UTAH
Mr. Hansen. Good morning and welcome. We appreciate your
coming to be with us today. You probably all realize that
Congress passed their last vote of the week yesterday, so many
of our members are on holiday. We appreciate those who are
here.
This morning we will hear testimony on Congressman Chris
Cannon's bill, H.R. 3605, that would establish the San Rafael
Legacy District and National Conservation Area in Eastern Utah.
The San Rafael region is host to many unique resources
representative of the American West. These include influences
from Native American culture, exploration, pioneering, and
industrial development. H.R. 3605 will protect these resources
while also ensuring the economic viability of the surrounding
communities.
As many of the members are aware, Mr. Cannon has worked
very hard to protect this area. But we have had some problems
doing it, and he is continuing to work on it. We will return
again this Congress with similar legislation that has been
worked out with the administration and the local community.
Similar to past legislation, this bill provides real
protection for an area that deserves national recognition and
conservation. H.R. 3605 is legislation that should serve as a
model of how local communities can come together, work with the
Department of Interior, and work out a plan that preserves the
land in a fashion that conserves and protects while respecting
traditional users and values.
The Western Legacy District will be located in Emery County
and will consist of approximately 2.8 million acres. The
District, much like its heritage area, will be used to promote
the development of historical, cultural, and recreational
resources related to the heritage of the San Rafael region and
the State of Utah.
Working through the Bureau of Land Management, the
Secretary of the Interior will appoint a 10-member Legacy
Council who will be charged with advising the Secretary as to
the interpretation, conservation, and planning for the many
resources located within the Legacy District. Again, this plan
calls for constant interaction between the local communities
and the BLM to make sure this Legacy District is a success.
Within the Heritage District, H.R. 3605 establishes the San
Rafael National Conservation Area. This land, consisting of
almost a million acres, will be established to conserve the
many unique biological, aesthetic, and recreational resources
for future generations.
This includes some of the wildest lands in Utah, some of
the greatest off-road recreation and the best bighorn sheep
herd in the State. All of these resources are in need of a
comprehensive management plan to balance all of these
interests. The National Conservation Area approach establishes
these goals.
I want to thank Congressman Cannon for his efforts in
sponsoring this bill. Moreover, I want to thank Commissioners
Randy Johnson and Kent Petersen for their undaunted courage to
keep working towards a solution. If these men were paid by the
hour, the county would go broke. They have worked literally for
years to craft a compromise that works on the ground and can
survive the political games played.
Needless to say, a great deal of time and effort have gone
into its preparation. My thanks go to our State
representatives, Wes Curtis and Courtland Nelson, who represent
the Governor here today, as well as the rest of our witnesses
for being here.
Finally, I want to thank Molly McUsic, Secretary Babbitt,
and Sally Wisely for their dedication and work in bringing this
legislation forward and working with Emery County. We sincerely
appreciate the great work so many folks have done on this very
difficult piece of legislation.
I would like to turn to my colleague from Utah, Mr. Cannon,
the sponsor of this bill, for his opening statement.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hansen follows:]
Statement of Hon. James V. Hansen, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Utah
Good morning. The Subcommittee on National Parks and Public
Lands will come to order. This morning we will hear testimony
on Congressman Chris Cannon's bill H.R. 3605, that would
establish the San Rafael Legacy District and National
Conservation Area in Eastern Utah.
The San Rafael region is host to many unique resources
representative of the American West. These include influences
from Native American culture, exploration, pioneering, and
industrial development. H.R. 3605 will protect these resources
while also ensuring the economic viability of the surrounding
communities.
As many of the Members are aware, Mr. Cannon and myself
worked very hard during last Congress to protect this area but
in the end were unable to provide the necessary protections
because a few local extreme environmentalists would rather
misrepresent the facts and fund raise rather than solve a
problem.
Well we return again this Congress with similar legislation
that has been worked out with the Administration and the local
community. Similar to past legislation, this bill provides real
protections for an area that deserves national recognition and
conservation. H.R. 3605 is legislation that should serve as a
model of how local communities can come together, work with the
Department of Interior and work out a plan that preserves the
land in a fashion that conserves and protects while respecting
traditional uses.
The Western Legacy District will be located in Emery County
and will consist of approximately 2.8 million acres. The
District, much like a heritage area, will be used to promote
the development of historical, cultural and recreational
resources related to the heritage of the San Rafael region and
the State of Utah.
Working through the Bureau of Land Management, the
Secretary of the Interior will appoint a ten member Legacy
Council who will be charged with advising the Secretary as to
the interpretation, conservation and planning for the many
resources located within the Legacy District. Again, this plan
calls for constant interaction between the local communities
and the BLM to make this Legacy District a success.
Within the Heritage District, H.R. 3605 establishes the San
Rafael National Conservation Area. This land, consisting of
almost a million acres, will be established to conserve the
many unique biological, aesthetic and recreational resources
for future generations. This includes some of the wildest lands
in Utah, some of the greatest off road recreation and the best
big horn sheep herd in the State. All of these resources are in
need of a comprehensive management plan to balance all of these
interests. The National Conservation Area approach accomplishes
these goals.
I want to thank Congressman Cannon for his efforts in
sponsoring this bill. Moreover, I want to thank Commissioners
Randy Johnson and Kent Peterson for their undaunted courage to
keep working towards a solution. If these men were paid by the
hour, the County would be broke. They have worked literally for
years to craft a compromise that works on the ground and can
survive the political games played around here. Needless to
say, a great deal of time and effort have gone into its
preparation. My thanks also goes to our State representatives,
Wes Curtis and Courtland Nelson who represent the Governor here
today as well as the rest of our witnesses for being here today
to testify. Finally, I want to thank Molly McUsic, Secretary
Babbitt, and Sally Wisely for their dedication and work in
bringing this legislation forward and working with Emery
County.
[The Bill H.R. 3605 follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.012
STATEMENT OF HON. CHRIS CANNON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF UTAH
Mr. Cannon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
Subcommittee's holding this hearing this morning. As you know,
we have worked hard and long on this legislation to provide for
the reasonable management of the San Rafael Swell.
I would like to thank everyone who is here today, and also
those who are at home, who have been involved in formulating
this legislation. Randy Johnson, Kent Petersen, Val Payne, Ira
Hatch, Wes Curtis, Wilson Martin, Courtland Nelson, who
traveled from Utah. And we also have Mike Matz who is here with
us today, and Larry Young--Larry has not traveled, but he is
from Utah. We appreciate the sacrifice you have made to be here
today.
I am sure their testimony will be helpful, and I look
forward to the discussion of the merits of this legislation
this morning.
I appreciate the support of the administration as expressed
by Molly McUsic's testimony that she provided on behalf of the
Department of the Interior. And, frankly, I am eager to send
this bill to the President for his signature.
But I would especially like to thank Sally Wisely, who
worked long, long hours on this legislation, and Molly McUsic,
and Secretary Babbitt, for their work on behalf of the BLM and
the Department of the Interior.
H.R. 3605 outlines a process to preserve the remarkable
area famous for such outlaws as Butch Cassidy and the Sundance
Kid.
Over the last three years, people in Emery County, Utah,
have come together with county officials, landowners, and
Bureau of Land Management to develop and support this plan. The
San Rafael Legacy and National Conservation Area Act would
place 2.8 million acres into a Legacy District to be managed
for the conservation of the region's historical and cultural
resources.
This bill allows management that would guarantee the
preservation of the dramatic canyons, wildlife, and historic
sites of the San Rafael Swell. Additionally, this bill sets
aside almost a million acres as a National Conservation Area,
withdrawn from future mining claims and providing increased
protection for primitive and semi-primitive areas.
The Secretary of Interior, in conjunction with an Advisory
Council, would develop a management plan for the National
Conservation Area that would allow various land uses, while
simultaneously preserving the natural resources of the area for
future generations.
Many of you may remember a similar bill that I introduced
in the last Congress. The concern with that previous bill
related to the designation of wilderness. This time, the County
Commissioners sat down with BLM and the people who live near
and care about the San Rafael Swell and set up a process for
dealing with management of the whole area.
We, as Americans, are united in our love for the land and
our desire to use it appropriately.
This bill preserves a beautiful part of the State of Utah,
while taking into account local needs and interests. It
provides a process for managing access for people who come to
enjoy the area. Additionally, this bill represents a
breakthrough in land management
policy and provides a balance between preservation and
recreation. It proves that consensus can be achieved from the
ground up rather than from Washington down.
Again, Mr. Chairman, thank you for your work on this issue,
and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Cannon follows:]
Statement of Hon. Chris Cannon, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Utah
Thank you Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the Subcommittee
holding this hearing this morning. You know we have worked long
and hard on this legislation to provide for the reasonable
management of the San Rafael Swell area. I would like to thank
everyone who is here today and those at home who have played a
role in formulating this legislation. Randy Johnson, Kent
Peterson, Val Payne, Ira Hatch, Wes Curtis, Wilson Martin, and
Courtland Nelson have traveled from Utah. I recognize the
sacrifice they have made to be here. I am sure their testimony
will be helpful and I look forward to their discussion of the
merits of our legislation this morning. I appreciate the
support of the Administration as expressed in Molly McUsic's
testimony provided by the Department of Interior. I am eager to
send this bill to the President for his signature. I would
especially like to thank Sally Wisely and Molly McUsic for
their work on behalf of BLM.
H.R. 3605 outlines a process to preserve the remarkable
area famous for such outlaws as Butch Cassidy and the Sundance
Kid. Over the last three years, people in Emery County, Utah
have come together with county officials, landowners, and the
Bureau of Land Management to develop and support this plan.
The San Rafael Legacy and National Conservation Area Act
would place 2.8 million acres into a Legacy District to be
managed for the conservation of the region's historical and
cultural resources. This bill allows management that would
guarantee the preservation of the dramatic canyons, wildlife,
and historic sites of the San Rafael Swell.
Additionally, this bill sets aside almost a million acres
as a National Conservation Area, withdrawn from future mining
claims and providing increased protection for primitive and
semi-primitive areas. The Secretary of Interior, in conjunction
with an Advisory Council, would develop a management plan for
the National Conservation Area that would allow various land
uses, while simultaneously preserving the natural resources of
the area for future generations.
Many of you may remember a similar bill that I introduced
in the last Congress. The concern with the previous bill
related to the designation of wilderness. This time the County
Commissioners sat down with BLM and the people who live near
and care about the San Rafael and set up a process for dealing
with management of the whole area.
We, as Americans, are united in our love of the land and
our desire to use it appropriately. This bill preserves a
beautiful part of the state of Utah while taking into account
local needs and interests. It provides a process for managing
access for people who come to enjoy this area.
Additionally, this bill represents a breakthrough in land
management policy. It provides a balance between reservation
and recreation. It proves that consensus can be achieved from
the ground up, rather than Washington down.
Mr. Chairman thank you for your work on this issue and I
look forward to hearing from our witnesses.
Mr. Hansen. I thank the gentleman from Utah.
Our friend from Michigan, Mr. Kildee?
Mr. Kildee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I
appreciate you having this hearing today. We are anxious to
work out some concerns we have on this bill, but I think that
we can work those concerns out. I look forward to working with
Mr. Cannon and yourself, Mr. Chairman, to get this bill in the
proper shape. And I think we all have goodwill here in this,
want to work together and move the bill forward.
Mr. Chairman, I also have another meeting of the Forest
Committee right down the hall, so I----
Mr. Hansen. I understand.
Mr. Kildee. [continuing] will be popping in and out here
today.
Mr. Hansen. We understand and appreciate your being with us
for a few moments.
The gentleman from Tennessee has no opening statement.
We will call on our first panel, then. Molly McUsic, the
Counselor to the Secretary, Department of the Interior. She is
accompanied by Sally Wisely, Utah State Director, Bureau of
Land Management. And we will also on this panel have
Commissioner Randy Johnson from Emery County and Commissioner
Kent Petersen from Emery County.
If the four of you folks would like to come up. I am sure
Nancy there can figure out where you are supposed to sit.
We surely appreciate all of you being with us today, and we
appreciate Molly McUsic being with us, especially knowing that
she has just come back from maternity leave. Thank you very
much for being with us.
We are probably going to be a little liberal on time today.
So, Nancy, don't get excited if they go over. And you see that
little gizmo in front of you that says ``five minutes,'' well,
if you need extra time--for all our witnesses--we will be more
than happy to give you a little extra time.
We will turn to you. Molly, pull that mike just a little
closer to you, please.
STATEMENT OF MOLLY McUSIC, COUNSELOR TO THE SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ACCOMPANIED BY SALLY WISELY, UT
STATE DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
Ms. McUsic. Let me begin by thanking you, Chairman Hansen,
for encouraging me last summer--and Sally and Barbara Weyman--
to go out and see the San Rafael area and to begin talking to
the County Commissioners to see if we could find some common
ground. I have to admit, as you probably realize, I was quite
skeptical of the possibility of any success in that regard. And
I am very pleased that at the end we were able to reach a bill
that the administration could support.
And as you and Congressman Cannon mentioned, a great deal
of that credit has to go to the Emery County Commissioners and
the amount of work that they did to come up with a bill that we
could support.
None of us got everything that we wanted, not what they got
or what we got. And if we could write the bill in a perfect
world, of course it would be different. But it is a good bill,
and I am very pleased to be here today to testify in support of
it.
As the Chairman well knows, the San Rafael area is an
amazingly beautiful place and well-deserving of the special
designation and protection that this bill confers. The
administration supports this legislation because of the
substantial protections that arise for these important public
lands, including the withdrawal for mineral leasing and sale
and exchange. There were very important restrictions on off-
road vehicle use and the innovative provisions of the Legacy
District.
However, we would like the opportunity to work with the
Chairman and the Committee and Congressman Cannon to address a
few of our concerns. And I want to just highlight one today,
which is we urge the need to modify the water language in
202(k) prior to markup. And we can talk about that.
As you are well aware, and as you can see from the map,
both the National Conservation Area and the Legacy District are
wholly within Emery County. What you may not be aware of is
that Emery County contains the longest American highway without
any highway services--over 110 miles. And what I like to
imagine is some tourist whipping down there about 75 miles per
hour and then suddenly being shocked by the amazing beauty of
the cliffs and pinnacles and ridges that are there, and just
thinking wow.
And if they stop for a minute and look at the map, I think
they would be equally shocked and surprised by the wonderful
place names in Emery County that suggest the great Western
history there--places like Black Dragon and Robbers Roost and
Convulsion Canyon, to name just a few.
Today, Emery County is poised to meet its economic future
by living in harmony with the beauty and history of this land.
What is striking to me about this legislation is that it
reflects a recognition that the Federal lands can provide
opportunities for economic growth in ways not simply on
extraction of resources but also with protection and
preservation of the resources.
The legislation simultaneously provides the opportunity for
economic growth and protection with a unique two-tiered
approach. First, which is the inner boundary there, is a nearly
one million acre National Conservation Area. And then the outer
boundary is the larger Legacy District, and that is the two
tiers.
The first one, the National Conservation Area, has
important protections. A number of them, it is withdrawn from
mining, mineral leasing, sale and exchange. It also has
important management language which requires the Secretary to
only allow such uses as are consistent with conservation of the
area.
It also, importantly, provides a limitation on vehicular
travel cross country. Travel for off-road vehicles would be
limited to designated roads and trails. The designation of
which roads and trails, along with other management issues like
that, would be decided at the local level in a planning
process. And there would be, of course, a great deal of
complete public input and partnership with the County
Commissioners in determining that.
But, of course, while the planning process was going on--
and even after the plan was finished--BLM continues to have the
authority and the obligation to prevent any resource
degradation caused by off-road vehicle use or any other use
that damages the resource.
The National Conservation Area also encompasses six
wilderness study areas and about 350,000 acres of land that
have been found to have wilderness characteristics by the BLM
in its 1999 inventory. This legislation has no effect on the
wilderness status of these plans. It essentially has a hold
harmless clause. It doesn't make any wilderness, and it doesn't
release any of the lands from management, either as a WSA or
the interim management of BLM.
Section 202(k) deals with water, and we have serious
concerns about that language. It contains sweeping language
that is not contained in any other law dealing with public
lands. We would appreciate the opportunity to work with the
Committee and with Chairman Hansen and Congressman Cannon to
resolve this before the bill goes to markup. We would also like
to clarify some accurate acreages and map issues before the
bill is marked up.
The second tier of this legislation, the larger boundary,
is the Western Legacy District. And it is a new and unique
concept that we think will work well here. As the Chairman
mentioned, it encompasses over 2.8 million acres of land, of
which a little over two million is BLM-managed public land.
The role of the Western Legacy District is to promote the
conservation, history, and natural resources of this area, and
this in turn will provide new economic opportunities for the
local community. The bill also authorizes a total of $10
million in matching grants and technical assistance.
This money would be available for a wide range of projects,
including planning, historic preservation, and educational
facilities. We believe that this will allow the local community
to more fully realize the potential economic benefits derived
from the protection of the San Rafael Swell area.
In sum, what is wonderful about this legislation is that it
both provides considerable new protection for the public lands.
At the same time, it provides the local community with
opportunities for economic growth.
Let me end, then, Mr. Chairman, by commending, again, the
Emery County Commissioners and the efforts they have made.
Randy Johnson, Kent Petersen, and Ira Hatch deserve enormous
amounts of credit for the bill before the Subcommittee today.
Thank you, and I would be happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. McUsic follows:]
Statement of Molly McUsic, Counselor to the Secretary, Department of
the Interior
Thank you for the opportunity to testify regarding H.R.
3605, the San Rafael Western Legacy District and National
Conservation Area Act. As the Chairman well knows, the San
Rafael Swell is an area of immense beauty that deserves the
special designation and protections that this bill confers. The
Administration supports this legislation because of the
additional protections it provides for important public lands
including the withdrawal from mineral development and sale or
exchange, restrictions on off highway vehicle (OHV) use and
innovative provisions for a Legacy District. However, we would
like the opportunity to work with the Committee and Congressmen
Cannon and Hansen to address particular concerns.
The modification of the sweeping water language in section
202(k) must be addressed before markup. Furthermore, we believe
the issue of NCA boundaries may need further modification.
Wilderness designation for an appropriate portion of this area
is a difficult issue that remains. The Administration believes
that wilderness protections for a significant portion of this
area is warranted and would have preferred that it could have
been resolved in this legislation.
Both the NCA and the Legacy District are wholly within
Emery County, in central Utah--an expanse of nearly 4,500
square miles populated by only 11,000 hardy souls. Emery County
contains the longest stretch of interstate highway in America
(110 miles from Green River to Salina) without highway
services. Even with a 75 MPH speed limit, the stark and
stunning beauty of the vertical cliffs, buttes, ridges, alcoves
and pinnacles captures the eye and the imagination of nearly
every daytime traveler who uses this remote stretch of
interstate to traverse this extraordinary area. The place names
of Emery County (Black Dragon, Robbers Roost, Humbug and
Convulsion Canyon to name but a few) speak to a storied past
and a promising future inextricably linked to the human
history, rugged grandeur and harsh demands of these lands.
The beauty of the San Rafael Swell area began 40 to 60
million years ago when a massive uplift formed a geologic
structure called an anticline. This bulge in the earth's crust
was later eroded to leave high mesas, deep canyons, domes,
spectacular arches and spires. The terrain varies from sheer
cliffs and dazzling canyons to more gently eroded badlands
broken by shallow washes. The fins and folds of the San Rafael
Reef jut through the southeast side of the area with dramatic
sheer-walled cliffs, pinnacles, knobs, twisted canyons and
valleys of stunning colors. Few canyons can compare to the
entrenched, narrow gorges of the Black Boxes of the San Rafael
River which twists and turns through the San Rafael Swell. The
rugged nature of the region has long served to discourage
exploration and settlement except by the hardiest of
individuals.
Human occupation of the area dates to at least 11,000 years
ago. Petroglyphs and pictographs attest to occupation of
indigenous people of the Fremont culture at the turn of the
first millennium. Early European exploration of the area
probably dates to the mid-to late 18th century Spanish
explorers. Through the 1800s American explorers traveled
through and around the San Rafael Swell region and were as
awestruck by the area as we are today. Lieutenant E. G.
Beckwith, a member of a 1853 railroad exploration expedition,
wrote this of the region:
Desolate as is the country over which we have just passed, and
around us, the view is still one of the most beautiful and
pleasing I have seen. As we approached the river yesterday, the
ridges on either side of its banks to the west appeared broken
into a thousand forms--columns, shafts, temples, buildings, and
ruined cities could be seen, or imagined, from the high points
along our route.
Nineteenth Century settlement of the area can be traced to the last
colonizing mission called by Brigham Young. Fifty families were sent to
settle Castle Valley by Brigham Young in August 1877, less than a week
before the West's greatest colonizer left this life. In 1880 Emery
County was created by the Utah Territorial Legislature and the 1880
Census counted 556 people, a number which increased to 4,657 by 1900.
Today, Emery County, which includes both the San Rafael Swell Area
as well as more hospitable grasslands and river bottoms, is poised to
meet the future by living in harmony with what these lands hold. The
legislation before us today shows reflects a recognition that the
Federal lands offer opportunities for economic growth that do not rely
simply on extracting from the land but also on preserving and
protecting special areas.
The San Rafael Western Legacy District and National Conservation
Act provides important protections for this beautiful area, insuring
future generations may also enjoy it. Not only will the people of Emery
County have the opportunity to rediscover and rejoice in their own
considerable history and contributions to the region but they will be
able to share this history with the rest of the country--what a gift to
all Americans.
The bill takes a unique two-tier approach to protecting this
important region. First, H.R. 3605 creates a nearly one million acre
National Conservation Area. The San Rafael National Conservation Area
created by the bill encompasses approximately 959,000 acres of BLM
managed public lands. (There may be room to consider whether these are
the most appropriate boundaries or if modifications may be advisable.)
Subject to valid existing rights these lands will be withdrawn from
mining, land laws and mineral leasing providing important protections.
The Secretary is charged under the bill with allowing only such uses of
the NCA as further the purposes for which the conservation area is
established--another critical protection.
Importantly, vehicular travel within the NCA will be limited to
roads and trails designated for their use. The designation of roads and
trails, along with many other aspects of management, will be finally
determined as part of a management plan. This management plan will be
developed with complete public input and involvement, and in
partnership with the Emery County Commissioners.This bill does not in
any way constrain current BLM authority to limit OHV use as necessary
to prevent resource degradation. The BLM is committed to taking
whatever interim actions are necessary to protect the resources of the
area while the management plan is being developed.
The NCA encompasses six Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) totaling
269,736 acres and an additional 354,866 acres of lands with wilderness
characteristics as determined by the BLM in its Utah Wilderness
Inventory 1999. This legislation addresses wilderness with a hold
harmless clause. Section 4(l) of the bill makes clear that nothing in
the bill alters the provisions of the Wilderness Act and FLPMA as they
pertain to wilderness resources within the NCA. Appropriate wilderness
designation is a component of providing full protection for these
irreplaceable lands, and the Administration would like to have seen the
wilderness issue resolved as part of this bill. However, this bill does
protect these areas against degradation.
We are concerned about the language in section 202(k) of the bill
that deals with water. It contains sweeping language not contained in
any other law dealing with public lands. We would like the opportunity
to work with the Committee and Congressmen Cannon and Hansen to resolve
this and clarify accurate acreages before the bill is marked up. Also,
it is our understanding that the map, dated February 8, 2000, and
created by the BLM for the Emery County Commissioners, is the map that
the bill will reference after markup.
The second tier of this legislation, a Western Legacy District, is
a new and unique concept, and one that we believe can work well in this
situation. This concept was developed from the Heritage Area model
which has been so successfully used in the East, but here has been
tailored to work in a western landscape dominated by Federal lands. The
San Rafael Western Legacy District encompasses over 2.8 million acres
of Federal, state and private lands. The vast majority of these lands
are 2 million acres of BLM-managed public lands. The Western Legacy
District encompasses the NCA and is coterminous with the boundaries of
Emery County.
The role of the Western Legacy District is to promote the
conservation, history and natural resources of the area. This in turn
will provide new economic opportunities to the local community. The San
Rafael region has a story just waiting to be told to a public
fascinated with the history of the old west. Emery County doesn't need
Hollywood to create that story--the people of Emery County lived it!
Whether it's a retelling of Sid's Leap which commemorates a daring and
dramatic leap on horseback over a 100-foot deep canyon by one of the
Swazey Brothers or the attempt by another brother to tame a mountain
lion, there is a tale to be told to a public eager to come, see, and
hear it.
The bill establishes a Legacy Council which will provide the
Secretary advice and recommendations for management of the entire area.
The bill also authorizes a total of $10 million (no more than $1
million in any one year) to be available for matching grants and
technical assistance. These monies may be used for a wide range of
projects including: planning, historic preservation and educational and
interpretive facilities. We believe it will allow the local community
to more fully realize the potential economic benefits derived from the
protection of the San Rafael region.
In addition to retelling the history of the settlement of the West,
there are other opportunities for increased tourism, and economic
growth. Within the proposed NCA boundary in northern Emery County is
one of the world's foremost sites for dinosaur fossils--the Cleveland-
Lloyd Dinosaur Quarry. Over 12,000 bones including those of the
Allosaurus (the largest carnivore of the Jurassic Age) and its prey
including Stegosaurus, Diplodocus and three distinct dinosaur species
found only in Emery County have been excavated at the site. While
scientists have explored the quarry since the early part of the 20th
century, it has become a growing tourist attraction in more recent
years. The Visitor Center with its mounted Allosaurus attracts 5-7,000
visitors annually. This site arguably rivals Dinosaur National Monument
and the potential for increased visitation is excellent.
Mr. Chairman, the legislation before us provides considerable new
protections for these important lands. It provides the local community
with opportunities for economic growth and it does so in a rational,
realistic manner.
Finally, Mr. Chairman let me take a moment to commend the Emery
County Commissioners and the efforts they have made. Randy Johnson,
Kent Peterson and Ira Hatch deserve enormous amounts of credit for the
bill before this Subcommittee today.
I would be happy to answer any questions.
Mr. Hansen. Thank you so very much.
Sally Wisely, do we turn to you?
Ms. Wisely. Mr. Chairman, I would simply echo what Ms.
McUsic has said today, and, again, lend my support to the bill
and the recognition, again, of the County Commissioners and the
work that they have put into the bill.
Mr. Hansen. Well, thank you, and we want to tell you how
much we appreciate your working with the County Commissioners,
and in a reasonable, thoughtful way trying to resolve a very
tough problem. Thank you so very much.
Commissioner Johnson, we will turn to you, sir.
STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER RANDY JOHNSON, EMERY COUNTY, UTAH
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Hansen, members of the
Committee. I would also like to express my appreciation to
Molly and Sally, and all of the others who have been willing to
spend so much time with us.
It is with great pleasure that I testify on behalf of H.R.
3605 today establishing the San Rafael Western Legacy District
National Conservation Area. With your considered help, I
believe that this bill could represent the future of public
land management in America, not just because of how well it
protects our public lands, but also because of the extensive
process that has brought us to this point.
H.R. 3605 withdraws over a million acres of the San Rafael
Swell area for special protection, thereby creating the San
Rafael National Conservation Area. Working in tandem with this
protective withdrawal would be a 2.9 million acre Western
Legacy District, which is designed to protect the wonderful
heritage and history of the San Rafael Swell.
These two plans are designed to work together. They
complement each other. When we combine the special protection
afforded by the NCA with the unique features of the Legacy
District, our historical sites are protected, visitors to the
San Rafael Swell are well instructed and receive an enhanced
tourist experience, and the more pristine areas of the NCA are
protected from unnecessary impacts.
The Western Legacy District part of the plan addresses the
wonderful blend of man and nature which is unique to the San
Rafael. Here the footprints of history trace themselves across
the rugged beauty of the Swell. Dinosaur remains scatter the
area. There is also ample evidence of Native American cultures
throughout the Legacy District, with many of examples of their
wonderful history preserved in rock art.
Further, the heritage of the early settlers of this
unforgiving land is woven into the area and is every much as
deserving of protection as the rocks surrounding them. Such
treasures as Sid's Leap, Swasey's Cabin, and Temple Mountain
are as much a part of the San Rafael Swell as sand and wind and
deep canyon draws.
The Legacy District works to identify and protect these and
other wonderful sites for the enjoyment of all who come to the
San Rafael. Few other places in the world can provide such an
ample supply of heritage sites. This wonderful blend of man and
his world is the very heart and soul of this plan.
Tracking the various footprints of natural history and
human heritage through the San Rafael Swell gives the breath of
life to these lands and causes all who become hooked by the
excitement and mystery of the area to take some share of
ownership in the process of preservation and protection.
The National Conservation Area part of the bill works to
preserve the more pristine areas of the San Rafael Swell in
various levels of protection as directed by the land. We have
been criticized by some because our bill does not contain any
wilderness, but that is the very point of what we have tried to
accomplish here. It is a process.
H.R. 3605 is wilderness neutral. We recognize that there
are many complex issues to address in determining public land
management policy. Consequently, we have proposed that we first
withdraw more than a million acres and then, with that
protective designation in place, we establish a four-year
planning process in which we develop the permanent management
plan.
It is during that process that we will work to protect the
more pristine lands at an appropriate level. The result is
protection within protection.
H.R. 3605 would establish permanent protection for over a
million acres through congressional action, and it does it in a
correct manner. It is built from the ground up, with all
possible stakeholders and managers having a hand in the
process, and drawing from those who know and understand the
land best. It is permanent protection--protection within
protection.
I would just like to point out several reasons why I
believe that H.R. 3605 is important at this time. First, I
think it is time for us to break the seemingly eternal logjam
that we have had in the public land debate. And I think that
H.R. 3605 would allow us to do that in a way that preserves and
properly protects the land.
Second, H.R. 3605 allows for the involvement, in a
respectful manner, of all possible stakeholders. Our public
lands are owned by all of the people of this Nation, and they
all have a right to their say in how these lands are managed.
H.R. 3605 is a product of that extensive dialogue, and,
consequently, there is a sense of ownership in the goals of
this bill that builds a feeling of responsibility and respect
in all of those who have played a part in the development of
our bill and who use our public lands.
Third, H.R. 3605 combines the protective withdrawal of the
National Conservation Area with the Western Legacy District,
thus coordinating the management of the land with the
management of the people who visit the land, to the benefit of
both. This hybrid combination will enhance our ability to
protect the land because we will be able to better focus the
human interaction with the land.
H.R. 3605 has, with deliberate intent, drawn all possible
stakeholders into the development stages. It, further, has
worked to assure that all relevant ideas and concerns are
addressed. This bill is not just about helping people carefully
and respectfully coexist with the land; it is about helping
people coexist with people, with respect for the opinions and
ideas of each other while working for common solutions.
H.R. 3605, Mr. Chairman, represents a dream for our public
lands, a dream of using our best work, through vision, science,
and cooperative effort, to protect and care for our public
lands. Also, it contains a prescribed manner for applying that
vision for the land in such a way that the dream can actually
be accomplished.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Johnson follows:]
Statement of Commissioner Randy G. Johnson
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee:
It is with great pleasure that I testify on behalf of H.R.
3605, establishing the San Rafael Western Legacy District/
National Conservation Area. With your considered help, I
believe that this bill could represent the future of public
land management in America--not just because of how well it
protects our public lands, but also because of the extensive
process that has brought us to this point.
H.R. 3605 withdraws over 1,000,000 acres of the San Rafael
Swell area for special protection, thereby creating the San
Rafael National Conservation Area (NCA). Working in tandem with
this protective withdrawal would be a 2.9 million acre Western
Legacy District which is designed to protect the wonderful
heritage and history of the San Rafael Swell.
These two plans are designed to work together. They
compliment each other. When we combine the special protection
afforded by the NCA with the unique features of the Legacy
District, our historical sites are protected, visitors to the
San Rafael Swell are well instructed and receive and enhanced
tourist experience, and the more pristine areas of the NCA are
protected from unnecessary impacts.
The Western Legacy District part of the plan addresses the
wonderful blend of man and nature which is unique to the San
Rafael. Here, the footprints of history trace themselves across
the rugged beauty of the Swell. Dinosaur remains scatter the
area, focusing at the Cleveland Lloyd Dinosaur Quarry, one of
the largest sources of fossil remains in the world. There is
also ample evidence of early Native American cultures
throughout the Legacy District, with many examples of their
wonderful history preserved in rock art. Further, the heritage
of the early settlers of this harsh and unforgiving land is
woven into the area, and is every much as deserving of
protection as the rocks surrounding them. Such treasures as
Sid's leap, Swasey's Cabin, and Temple Mountain are as much a
part of the San Rafael Swell as sand and wind and deep canyon
draws.
The Legacy District works to identify and protect these and
other wonderful sites for the enjoyment of all who come to the
San Rafael. Few other places in the world can provide such an
ample supply of heritage sites. Places such as Swasey's Leap
Historical site, Outlaw Joe Walker Trail Corridor, Hidden
Splendor Historical Site, the Spanish Trail Corridor, Copper
Globe Historical Area, Rock Art Historic Corridor, and many,
many others. Access to these destinations will be accomplished
by means of existing and long-used roads and trails. Most
importantly, the ever-increasing flow of tourists will find a
greatly enhanced visit to the San Rafael Swell, while we are
able to better manage that flow of people and better protect
the more pristine parts of the San Rafael lands.
This wonderful blend of man and his world is the very heart
and soul of this plan. Tracking the various footprints of
natural history and human heritage through the San Rafael Swell
gives the breath of life to these lands, and causes all who
become hooked by the excitement and mystery of the area to take
some share of ownership in the process of preservation and
protection. It is a user-friendly plan, and everyone benefits
from its manageable approach.
The National Conservation Area part of the bill works to
preserve the more pristine areas of the San Rafael Swell in
various levels of protection as directed by the land.
We have been criticized by some because our bill does not
contain any wilderness. But that is the very point of what we
have tried to accomplish here. It is a process. H.R. 3605 is
wilderness neutral. We recognize that there are many complex
issues to address in determining public land management policy.
Consequently, we have proposed that we first withdraw more than
a million acres, and then, with that protective designation in
place, we establish a four year planning process in which we
develop the permanent management plan. It is during that
process that we will work to protect the more pristine lands at
an appropriate level. The result is protection within
protection.
We have also been criticized because, while there are many
layers of protection already on the land, it is not permanent.
They say that only wilderness can make it permanent. H.R. 3605
establishes permanent protection for over 1,000,000 acres,
through congressional action, and it does it in the correct
manner. It is built from the ground up, with all possible
stakeholders and managers having a hand in the process, and
drawing from those who know and understand the land best. It is
permanent protection--protection within protection--resulting
from collaboration and cooperation rather than something being
thrust down from above and forced into position whether it fits
or not.
I would like to point out several reasons why I believe
that H.R. 3605 is important at this time:
First, it is time to break the seemingly eternal logjam we
have had in the public land debate. Wilderness purists would
have us believe that until we accept huge and ever-increasing
areas of wilderness, we will never adequately protect our
lands. And since our bill does not accomplish that, it is
``anti-wilderness.'' But the wilderness advocates are not
interested in what protection our bill does offer. They are
only concerned that it is not all wilderness, and therefore it
does not meet their moveable acreage quotas. But, how long must
we remain hostage to such impossible tactics? It is time to
move forward with new ideas and renewed commitment to resolve
issues and solve problems. H.R. 3605 will allow us to do just
that.
Second, H.R. 3605 allows for the involvement, in a
respectful manner, of all possible stakeholders. Our public
lands are owned by all the people of this nation, and they all
have a right to their say in how those lands are managed. The
current debate does not allow that. But H.R. 3605 is a product
of that extensive dialogue, and consequently, there is an sense
of ownership in the goals of this bill that builds a feeling of
responsibility and respect in all those who have played a part
in the development of our bill and who use our public lands.
This sense of ownership will create a better quality of
protection than any amount of attempting to just ``lock people
out'' could ever do.
Third, H.R. 3605 combines the protective withdrawal of the
National Conservation Area with the Western Legacy District,
thus coordinating the management of the land with the
management of the people who visit the land, to the benefit of
both. This hybrid combination will enhance our ability to
protect the land because we will be able to better focus the
human interaction with the land.
Part of the problem with the current debate is that it
omits the human equation. There is a growing number of people
who love the public lands and who have every right to expect to
be able to visit and enjoy them in their own way. Wilderness
proposals ignore this human element, but the San Rafael
National Western Legacy District/National Conservation Area
bill takes into account the people part of the equation and
works to resolve it. The result will be a better brand of
protection.
I would like to further illustrate this point by pointing
out the differences between H.R. 3605 and current wilderness
proposals:
Wilderness purists remain focused on one thing only--
wilderness. They will not be part of any discussion that may
vary from that focus.
H.R. 3605 takes into account all possible points of
view and works to draw each perspective into the process.
Wilderness purists rely on contention and controversy,
and therefore they continually work to escalate the urgency of
their claims.
H.R. 3605 is designed to resolve long-standing issues
and works for permanent and genuine resolution.
Wilderness purists claim that all public lands are
beautiful, all public lands are at risk, and that only
wilderness will protect them from the risk.
H.R. 3605 recognizes all levels of need, takes into
account current protections, and views wilderness as one tool
in a complex management system.
Wilderness purists refuse to come to the discussion
table, refuse any form of dialogue, and reject any type of
consensus building.
H.R. 3605 recognizes all the values of the land and
all the people who use it. It works to resolve land management
issues with respect for all stakeholders.
Wilderness purists view man as a harmful intruder in
the natural world.
H.R. 3605 asserts that man and nature can and must
coexist in a sensitive and respectful manner.
Wilderness purists believe that as long as there is no
progress in the debate, they have won their cause. A loggerhead
is a victory.
H.R. 3605 contends that we have the science, the
understanding, and the inclination to address our public land
management issues to the benefit of the land and all who use
it.
Wilderness purists use such words as ``War,'' ``Fight
to the death,'' and ``No net loss'' in the public land debate.
H.R. 3605 uses such words as ``Solution,''
``Cooperation,'' and ``Peaceful resolution'' in development of
its on-going planning process.
Lastly, the third, perhaps most compelling reason for H.R.
3605 is because we need a solution to our public land
management dilemma. We have been at loggerheads for far too
long. I believe that H.R. 3605 has the potential to move around
the blockade and create a positive future for public land
management in America.
Unfortunately, in a nation where diversity is the central
thread in our national fabric, we have created a situation in
the public lands debate where gross generalities dictate the
parameters of the discussion and diverse opinions are no longer
welcome.
We have always had widely diverse points of view on all the
different issues of running this nation. And, we have always
been able to draw those viewpoints to the table to create
solutions that are a blend of the best ideas and are the best
for all involved. It is important to have a process where these
viewpoints can come together to establish common ground and to
seek common solutions.
Unfortunately, we do not have that ability in the current
wilderness debate. Consensus building and dialogue are
considered to be hostile to the vision of ``pure'' wilderness.
It is deeply concerning to me that, in this nation, any
group or individual would be able to say, ``Our idea is so
sacred and so perfect that no other perspectives will be
entertained.'' What is even more alarming is that such a group
could gather enough power as to be able to essentially hold
hostage any democratic process and thwart any true progress
toward resolution of the issues in question.
Quite frankly, the wilderness issue is just such a scene.
The wilderness vision, as defined by current advocates, cannot
do all things that the land needs, and creates enemies of
people who should be cooperative allies.
In deep contrast, H.R. 3605 has, with deliberate intent,
drawn all possible stakeholders into the development stages. It
further has worked to assure that all relevant ideas and
concerns are addressed. This bill is not just about helping
people carefully and respectfully coexist with the land, it is
about helping people coexist with people--with respect for the
opinions and ideas of each other while working for common
solutions.
We have become much too intolerant of each other, unwilling
to bend, unwilling to consider the needs of the other. Perhaps
it is because we have become so consumed with the issue itself
that we have lost sight entirely of who we are.
A great man once said, ``Tolerance may be a virtue, but it
is not the commanding one. There is a difference between what
one is and what one does. What one is may deserve unlimited
tolerance; what one does only a measured amount. A virtue when
pressed to the extreme may turn into a vice. Unreasonable
devotion to an ideal, without considering the practical
application of it, ruins the ideal itself''.
No dream has real value unless there is a practical
application of its vision.
The wilderness dream has no practical application. It is
laden with difficulty. Wherever it is proposed it creates far
more problems than it could ever solve.
H.R. 3605, on the other hand, represents a dream for our
public lands--a dream of using our best work, through vison,
science, and cooperative effort to protect and care for our
public lands. But also, it contains a prescribed manner for
applying that vison to the land in such a way that the dream
can actually be accomplished.
H.R. 3605 is Vision and Reality as cooperative partners.
We believe that we must re-evaluate our public lands
management philosophy. We must look at the conflict we have
created, and ask ourselves where we are going and who benefits
from the continual contention.
I close my testimony with the Words of Thomas Jefferson,
from the walls of the Jefferson Memorial:
``I am not an advocate for the frequent changes in law and
constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand
with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more
developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new
truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the
change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep
pace with the times. . .''
It is time to move beyond the loggerhead. It is time to
keep pace with the times. It is time to do the right thing.
Thank you.
Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Commissioner Johnson.
Commissioner Petersen?
STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER KENT PETERSEN, CHAIR, EMERY COUNTY,
UTAH
Mr. Petersen. Chairman Hansen, and members of the
Committee, my name is Kent Petersen, and I am Chairman of the
Emery County Commission. I am just happy to be here.
The San Rafael Western Legacy District includes all of
Emery County--2.8 million acres--and it will be established
really to take care of the historical, cultural, natural, and
scenic resources of the San Rafael region and will help the
local communities to continue to exist. Perhaps most
importantly, it will collect the history and stories of the San
Rafael and tell these stories to the people who come to visit.
It will also help us to develop a control basis for a
tourism-type economy that will benefit the local people but
will not overrun us. The San Rafael National Conservation Area
will provide enhanced management and protection for about 1.1
million acres on the San Rafael Swell. It will manage the land
and the people who come to visit. Combining the Legacy District
with the NCA will provide a plan for managing and protecting
the land and managing the people who come to visit.
Geologically, as it has been explained a little bit, the
San Rafael Swell is an uplifted dome that has eroded over
millions of years to leave amazing canyons, buttes, pinnacles,
and even open grassland. And the San Rafael Swell, it must be
pointed out, is in the middle of the conservation area. The
conservation area surrounds it and contains all of it.
It is a land of scenic beauty, but it is much more than
that. It has a unique history and heritage. Many of the
dinosaur skeletons on display in museums throughout the world
came from the Cleveland Lloyd Quarry on the edge of the Swell.
Rock art and other remnants of the early Native Americans
abounds throughout the Swell.
Butch Cassidy and the Robbers Roost gang frequented the
Swell. Cowboys have managed their livestock on the Swell from
the early 1870s until today. Prospectors and miners searched
for and mined valuable uranium on the Swell from the early
1900s until the late 1960s.
If you protect the San Rafael as all wilderness, as many
here today may suggest that we should do, you will have one
more area of fantastic rocks, but that isn't unusual in Utah.
If you don't hear the stories, you miss the best part of the
Swell.
This proposal will not only preserve the land, but it will
preserve and pass on the story. If you go and visit the Lower
Black Box, you will see a magnificent gorge about 20 feet wide
and 300 feet deep, with the San Rafael River in the bottom. If
you know the stories, you can imagine Sid Swasey jumping his
horse across the canyon to win a bet with his brother Charlie.
Since the early 1900s, the people of Emery County have
worked with the government to protect the land. In the early
1900s, they petitioned for the existence of the Manti National
Forest. Again, in the 1930s, we worked to help to develop the
Taylor Grazing Act and protect the land that is now the San
Rafael.
Following in this tradition, Emery County, in 1992, became
a pilot county in an effort to resolve the Utah wilderness
issue, in a project developed by Project 2000, A Coalition for
Utah's Future, which is a broad-based public interest group. We
met with a widely diverse group of stakeholders, including
environmentalists, oil and gas interests, everybody. And we
reached consensus on many issues, but we didn't reach final
solution because of outside pressures.
But this led to the development of the Emery County Public
Lands Council, which meets regularly with all of the citizens
and the public agents. They were responsible, with the
Department of the Interior, for the development of this bill.
We found that we all wanted the land protected. We also
found that wilderness isn't the only method. In fact, sometimes
it isn't the best method.
We studied various protection methods and determined that
the National Conservation Area, with various protection schemes
inside the NCA, would be the best way for managing the Swell.
And that is what is proposed in this bill.
You will probably recall we bought H.R. 3605 to this
Committee about two years ago. It was received friendly in some
places, but then was shot down in the Omnibus bill at the end
of the session. After that, we thought we ought to get back
together and see what we could do to make this thing work. And
that is when we talked to the Department of the Interior.
Molly came out to see us, Molly and Sally. We drove around
the San Rafael, and we even arranged for a small band of
bighorn sheep to be sitting right underneath the ledge when we
arrived there for them to see. I think that probably helped
Molly in selling her on the concept.
And we invite all of the members of the Committee, even the
ones who aren't here--and members of the environmental
community--to come out and see us. We will show you around the
San Rafael. We will talk to you, tell you some of the stories,
tell you about our views, and we will serve you some good food
while we are there.
We think this is a good bill, and we think that it may be
able to provide a blueprint for resolving public lands issues
in the West. In many ways, it is similar to the establishment
of a national monument, which seems to have been popular with
this administration and the environmental community, except
that it was started from the ground up.
Details for the management of the lands in the conservation
area will be developed over a four-year planning process, just
as was done with the Escalante Grand Staircase National
Monument.
And the first area to be considered in this management plan
is the development of an access management plan, which will
control the use of ORVs in the Swell. When this plan is
developed, it will be enforced in probably the only way that
something like this can be adequately enforced. It will not
just be the BLM, but the Emery County Sheriff's Department will
be involved. We think that is a way to accurately take care of
it.
Thanks to you for giving me the opportunity testify, and
thanks, Chairman Hansen, for holding this hearing.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Petersen follows:]
Statement of Kent R. Petersen
Chairman Hansen and members of the Committee, my name is
Kent Petersen. I am chairman of the Emery County Commission. I
was elected to the Commission in 1992. I am pleased to be here
to talk to you about H.R. 3605, The San Rafael Western Legacy
District and National Conservation Area.
The San Rafael Western Legacy District includes all 2.8
million acres of land in Emery County. It will be established
to preserve, conserve, and interpret the historical, cultural,
natural, and scenic resources of the San Rafael region of the
state of Utah, as well as the economic viability of rural
communities in the region. The San Rafael National Conservation
Area will provide enhanced management and protection of 1.1
million acres located on the San Rafael Swell in the heart of
the Legacy District.
Only 8 percent of the land in Emery County is in private
ownership, 82 percent is in Federal ownership, and 10 percent
belongs to the state of Utah. The citizens of Emery County have
a long history of caring for the land whether it was private,
Federal, or state. In the late 1890's and early 1900's you
could tell the location, from the valley floor, of the sheep
and cattle herds 15 miles away on the mountains, by the clouds
of dust they kicked up from the severely over grazed land.
Large herds of cattle from outside the area, of cattle from
outside the area, even from outside of the, state were grazing
uncontrolledly on the public lands. Local citizens petitioned
the government for the establishment of the Manti National
Forest. Through cooperative efforts of the local ranchers and
the Forest Service the lands have recovered and are once again
very productive.
In the 1930's we cooperated with the Federal Government to
establish Taylor Grazing Act, on the lands in the San Rafael
Swell. Again grazing was limited to holders of grazing
allotments. Through conservation efforts of local users and the
BLM, the condition of the land is again improving.
The San Rafael Swell which is within the National
Conservation Area is a land of scenic beauty, but it is much
more than this. It has a unique history and heritage. Many of
the dinosaur skeletons on display throughout the world have
come from the Cleveland Lloyd Quarry operated by the BLM on the
northern edge of the Swell. Rock art, and other remnants of the
early Native Americans, abounds throughout the Swell. Butch
Cassidy and the Robbers Roost gang frequented the Swell and
used it as a getaway route after more than one robbery. Cowboys
have managed their livestock on the swell from the early 1870's
until today. They also named most of the landmarks and places
of interest. Prospectors and miners searched for, and mined
valuable uranium on the Swell during the 1950's and 60's. These
are only a part of the history and legacy we will be protecting
with the San Rafael Western Legacy District and National
Conservation Area.
When I was elected to the County Commission in 1992 the
wilderness debate had been going on for more than 10 years with
no solution in sight. We in Emery County decided we should work
for our own solutions. We became the pilot county in an effort
to resolve the Utah wilderness issue developed by Project 2000,
A Coalition for Utah's Future. They are a broad based public
interest organization. We met with a widely diverse group of
stakeholders to see if we could come to a consensus resolution
of the wilderness issue in Emery County.
The stakeholders included members of state and national
environmental groups, oil, gas, mining and utility interests,
OHV users, ranchers, local government, state and Federal land
management agencies, and local citizens. We met for about two
years. We were able to reach consensus on many issues but were
unable to come to a final resolution because of outside
political pressures.
These discussions led to the formation of the Emery County
Public Lands Council. It is a broadbased group of local
citizens that meet on a regular basis to discuss and resolve
public land issues. We have signed Memorandums of Understanding
(MOU's) with the BLM, Forest Service, and State Agencies. We
decided if we were going to have a say in our destiny we would
have to become proactive and seek workable solutions. These
discussions also led to the demise of the Utah Wilderness
Association, the main environmental group working with us. They
were blackballed by the other Utah environmental organizations
for working with us.
While meeting with Project 2000, The Coalition for Utah's
Future we found that our goals for the land were not all that
different from most members of the environmental community. We
all wanted the San Rafael to remain forever as it is today. The
differences were in how we were to accomplish this goal.
At a public meeting in Castle Dale, Montell Seely, a local
sheep rancher and historian, and George Nickas, a member of the
Utah Wilderness Association, described very similar visions for
Sid's Mountain in the heart of the San Rafael. They differed
only in the methods for accomplishing their vision. George, the
environmentalist thought it should be made a part of a large
wilderness area. Montell said that it should always remain wild
and that its location would ensure that it would. H.R. 3605
will satisfy both of their visions.
We determined that we all wanted the land protected. We
also found that wilderness was only one method of land
protection and is often not the best method. It is, in fact, a
non management tool. We studied various protection methods and
determined that a National Conservation Area (NCA) with various
protection schemes inside the boundary would be the most
effective method from the ground up. Details for management of
lands within the Conservation Area will be developed during the
four year planning process.
This is a bill started at the local level with strong
consideration of national interests. It will protect some very
important lands. It will protect and manage the wildlife who
live on these lands. It will manage the people who visit and
use these lands. And it will protect the heritage and the
history of those who have called these lands home.
I am sure that after careful study you will agree that H.R.
3605 is the ideal management tool for the San Rafael Swell and
for all of Emery County, Utah. Maybe it will be the model for a
new way to resolve public land disputes in the west.
Thanks to you for giving me the opportunity to testify, and
thanks to Chairman Hansen for holding this hearing.
Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Commissioner Petersen. We appreciate
your testimony.
Commissioner Petersen is quite renowned for his cowboy
poetry, too, and the last time he was here he----
Mr. Petersen. Well, thank you.
Mr. Hansen. [continuing] delighted the Committee with a few
extra things concerning the San Rafael Swell.
Questions for the panel? We will start with you,
Congressman Cannon.
Mr. Cannon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, Ms. McUsic, let me congratulate you on the
new addition to your family. It is nice to see you.
Could you comment, Ms. McUsic, on the role of the BLM after
the previous bill was determined to be unsatisfactory. What
happened after that? I mean, you guys were wonderful about
taking some initiative there.
Ms. McUsic. Sure. Let me actually defer to Sally Wisely of
the BLM to explain how the BLM helped.
Mr. Cannon. Great.
Ms. Wisely. Shortly after I came to Utah--actually, on my
very first round after I was appointed Director, in the visit
with all of you, you asked me to take a look, thought there
were some good ideas in the previous bill and asked me to
revisit that.
And, again, Ms. McUsic and myself and Barbara Weyman, at
the Commissioner's invitation, went out to the Swell to spend a
couple of days with them, taking a look on the ground at the
issues and what opportunities there might be.
In the interim, then, our office has been talking a lot
with the County Commissioners, as they really took the lead in
terms of making suggestions and really taking a hard look at
what we thought worked and what we thought maybe there were
some problems with in the last bill, to craft something, then,
that everyone felt good about.
Mr. Cannon. Ms. Wisely, thank you in particular for all of
the time that you did spend on this. I know that it was a lot
of time, and I think the bill reflects your efforts there.
For either you, Ms. Wisely, or Ms. McUsic, how do you
anticipate dealing with OHVs? Has the county worked with BLM so
far in setting up management for off-highway vehicle use?
Ms. Wisely. If I could take a shot at that. First of all,
let me just mention that we are aware that we have some OHV
issues in that general area. There is no question that we have
some issues there.
What we have been doing within BLM is taking a hard look at
trying to figure out what those issues are, how to get our arms
around that, how best, then, to address that. We have been
having some discussions with the Commissioners, and what I
would expect is that very shortly here we will then take some
actions to kind of lay out a strategy in terms of how to
approach that.
Mr. Cannon. Thank you. I just wanted to say that I went on
a four-wheeler trip in the area last summer, and it was really
truly a remarkable experience. It is beautiful. It is
interesting. I was deeply concerned about what kind of damage
might be done. Where we went--the country can handle that. We
were with a very responsible group of OHV handlers, and--I
think it is an important element of what we do.
Commissioner Johnson, thank you, again, for coming. Would
you mind elaborating a little bit on the process used to
establish the outline for this bill?
Mr. Johnson. Yes, sir. As you recall, last year when we
presented this bill, we essentially used the San Rafael Swell
itself as the outline for the National Conservation Area.
But in the process of working with the Department of the
Interior, we looked at all of the other lands that had, you
know, the need for some form of management and the need for
this sort of special protection afforded by an NCA, and decided
that we would expand those boundaries to cover those lands that
would benefit from this four-year process. And, essentially,
that is what we came up with in that process--you know, taking
into account all of the factors of the land itself.
Mr. Cannon. Is it your sense that the people in the county
support the bill?
Mr. Johnson. When we came to terms with this bill with the
Department of Interior and BLM, we felt it was essential that
we let our constituents in Emery County know where we were with
this bill. It certainly is a movement for the local
constituents in terms of its new concept and its sort of
expansive dream.
And so we decided that we would take it to as many people
as we could. And in the process of doing that, we went to town
councils, to water boards, cattlemen associations, OHV groups,
every organization that met in our county in any manner--we
attended their meetings and presented this plan to those folks.
We also held a public hearing at the end of that process
and invited folks to come and give their input on the plan. And
they were overwhelmingly in support of our proceeding with this
bill.
Now, I would hope that we, in some way, could express to
you what a wonderful concept this is for the folks of Emery
County, who largely have sort of had these concepts of land
management thrust down upon them over the last 20 or 30 years
in a manner which has made them feel that they have not
adequately taken care of those lands, and that they could not
adequately continue to take care of those lands.
So it has caused them to be a bit defensive. For them to
recognize the status of public lands issues at this time in the
history of this process, and for them to be willing to take
this kind of a step to protect those lands, I think is a
remarkable thing and a tribute to the understanding and
willingness of the folks in Emery County to take good care of
the San Rafael Swell area.
Mr. Cannon. I also think it is a remarkable thing.
Mr. Chairman, I notice my time has expired. Could I ask
unanimous consent to extend my time for another five minutes?
[Laughter.]
I won't do that, but I do have a few more questions.
Let me just ask you, Commissioner Johnson, one other
question, or a compound question, actually. The bill doesn't
provide specifically for wilderness designation. Could you talk
a little bit about the advantages that has? And do you
anticipate that some of the land will actually be managed in
the same way as wilderness?
Mr. Johnson. There is no question that much of the land
will be managed as wilderness. Whether we call it wilderness,
or whether we call it primitive, or what it ends up calling, I
can't predict that. But I will tell you that there will be much
of the land within that NCA that there is no question in my
mind will be managed for its primitive qualities.
And I think that there should be no threat to the fact that
there isn't wilderness there. I think it should be more
threatening if it was, because part of this whole process is
that we have four years to look at that land in a very
deliberate manner with a planning team that has expertise in
recognizing qualities of the land and how they should be
protected.
And in that four-year process, I believe it will come up
with a management scheme that fits the land very well. So I am
comfortable that the land will be managed for--in the manner
that it needs to be managed, and that those pristine lands will
be adequately addressed.
Mr. Cannon. The county has rights of way and access on many
roads in the area. Do you expect to be trading off some of
those rights in the context of an overall plan?
Mr. Johnson. I don't know if trading off those rights would
be an accurate way to say it. I think that there are places
within this NCA where there is some indiscriminate use. But I
would hope that folks would understand that there is a small
handful of folks that sort of ignore the rules and the laws
governing OHV use.
It is the same in any other area of law. There is always a
handful of folks who ignore the law and do what they want to
do. And I would not want to paint a picture of OHV use being
just indiscriminate whenever anybody starts a four-wheeler.
Emery County has a lot of roads and a lot of trails in that
area that we assert as RS2477. But we recognize that an early
part of this planning process would be that we identify an
access plan and work with the BLM and the Department of the
Interior to come up with that access plan. And there most
certainly would be some spurs and some trails and some roads
that we would close as a result of that, because they are
unnecessary or they are causing some undue degradation.
But we also remind you that having a proper access plan is
an essential part of the Legacy District. And so we would
identify those roads which would most benefit getting to and
from the sites that the tourists would want to see and that we
need to preserve and protect and provide access to. So that
will all be part of that plan.
But the reason that I believe this will work in this plan
to the benefit of all is because, in a cooperative effort, we
draw everyone into this discussion, and the end product
everyone has ownership in. And so if we have opened the road,
everyone has decided that road is essential.
If we close a road, everybody has decided that road is
unessential. And we don't just have something that people feel
threatened by, and, therefore, those handful of folks that are
going to break the laws anyway are continuing to go into.
The other part of it is that you have a couple of factors
enter into it because of this process. One is we have the
ability and the finances to do a far better job of educating
the public. Some of the damage that is done down there is not
deliberate.
It is done because they are unsure where the trail is or
where to go in some circumstances, and where they can and can't
go. We would have a good, extensive education process that
would come out of this to keep people in the proper places.
The second thing that would come out of it is that we would
have a cooperative enforcement effort. Now, the BLM simply
doesn't have the manpower to handle a county the size of
Connecticut with one man, essentially. When the county enters
into it, then we would become partners in that protection, and
we would help them make sure that the roads and trails that do
remain part of this access plan are used properly and that
undue degradation doesn't occur.
Mr. Cannon. Thank you, Commissioner.
Commissioner Petersen, I really enjoyed your comment, your
idea that, I think you said, if you don't hear the stories, you
have missed the best part of the Swell. So we need a commitment
from you--and I haven't quite formulated this yet--but it has
got to have to do with numbers of years you commit to live and
number of poems you write per year.
I suspect in the meantime we could get away with just a
commitment that, as people visit, that you will share some of
your cowboy poetry with them.
Mr. Petersen. Well, we will certainly commit to doing that.
Mr. Cannon. And you and I can talk later on about the other
output issues.
Mr. Petersen. If you will give me a guarantee on the number
of years, I will be glad to accept it.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Cannon. Maybe we could increase the output over the
years and then it is your responsibility to do the output and
then get the years or something. I don't know.
Could you talk a bit about what the purpose of the Legacy
District is, and what some of the problems are that you are
currently having that it will solve?
Mr. Petersen. Well, we look at the Legacy District as a way
to pull the whole thing together and make the local area part
of it. This is the thing that will help to preserve the
stories. In fact, we are out there doing that right now. Even
as we speak, we have a couple of people who are out gathering
oral histories to continue to have the history of the San
Rafael Swell, and they are doing it with modern technology, so
they have videotapes in addition to audio.
But we want to have the stories, and we want--we know there
are people that come to visit the Swell right now. I drive
across it fairly regularly. Molly talked about the I-70 across
there. I wonder what people think who have no idea what they
are coming on, they have never heard of the San Rafael, and
they are coming from the east and they see the San Rafael Reef,
and then they drive across the Head of Sinbad, and they see all
of that country, and they don't have the slightest idea what it
is. I just wonder what people think.
We want to tell those people what they are seeing. We want
to get them into our community, so that perhaps they can leave
a few dollars. We want to focus the visitors so they can go out
and have a good experience, so they can hear the stories and
they can see the things out there, but they don't destroy what
they are seeing in the meantime. We don't want to have
everybody in the world coming out there and tramping around,
but we do want some of them to come and help us to sustain some
kind of an economy with it.
Mr. Cannon. I have to say that drive over I-70 is one of
the most remarkable on earth. It is breathtaking. I love to
travel my district. I really love going over that stretch of
highway.
Can you talk a little bit about what kind of dialogue you
have had on off-highway vehicle use within the county?
Mr. Petersen. There has been a lot of it. I guess that
would summarize it fairly well. But I think we need to make
this point very clear. I think the majority of people down
there already feel that we think the off-road vehicle use
should be on designated roads and trails.
We have talked a lot with the BLM. I suppose when we get
right down on a few roads we might have some very interesting
dialogue. But overall, I think we can agree that we want to
control it. The ORV community has joined together to work with
the BLM to try and protect some areas, and we have some very
interesting things that have been done.
They volunteered to put in some of the signage. We think
that if a sign is out there, if it isn't a sign that just says
the BLM says this is wilderness, you can't go, but is something
done by the local ORV community saying, ``This is where the
road goes, up here. If you stay on this road, this is what you
will see. Don't get off this road. You will destroy our land,''
those kind of things we think will work.
Mr. Cannon. Great. Thank you, Commissioner.
Mr. Chairman, you have been very generous with the time. I
would just like to thank this panel. This group has been
remarkably assiduous in a long and difficult task, and I think
that the product is really good for Utah public lands and for
America and for the citizens of America.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Mr. Cannon.
The gentlemen from New Mexico, Mr. Udall, any questions for
this panel?
Mr. Udall. I will pass, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much,
though.
Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Mr. Udall.
Molly, let me just submit to you some questions. As I have
been getting up to speed on this bill, it seems like if there
is a little rough spot we have got to kind of sand down a
little bit, it may be on water rights. And so if I could, I
would like to probably not really ask you specifically here but
maybe submit to you questions about the administration's
concerns on that.
And also--and I am sure you realize the in-stream flow
right of the State of Utah that they have in the San Rafael
River. If I could prevail upon you to respond to those by
letter, I would really appreciate it. I could get that to you.
And I do want to tell you and Sally Wisely how much we
appreciate your testimony today.
Commissioner Johnson, one of the debates we have had around
this Committee for the last 20 years is where do we stand on
just--I want your opinion. I know few individuals, you and
Commissioner Petersen, who have spent more time on the lands of
Utah. And there seems to be a debate that always is prevalent
in this Committee. Is wilderness the only way to protect
ground?
I have heard this debated since the day I walked in here in
1980. And, actually, under the past two administrations they
argued, as this one has sometimes, that the management plans of
BLM, Forest Service, Park Service does a better job of
protection.
There seems to be a perception out there that is fast
dwindling, is what is the best way to protect ground? A man of
your stature and your understanding, I would like you to
respond to that issue.
Mr. Johnson. Well, certainly not trying to offend anyone,
but just responding to you from my personal perspective, I
would say that it is concerning to me when we have a concept or
an idea that is held by one group or individual that they feel
is so pure and so perfect that all other ideas are hostile to
that, and that it becomes so pervasive that it sort of
deadlocks and logjams all other considerations.
And I am afraid that what was once an excellent concept of
setting aside certain exemplary lands has so permeated the land
management discussion that it causes us to be at odds with each
other all the time, it causes us never to be able to make
progress, and it causes us to constantly be in turmoil over
what we should do on our public lands.
Now, what I am saying is that the original vision of
wilderness I think was a good one, but it has been taken to the
point where it makes it impossible for us to even get any work
done, and because of that I don't like the concept of
wilderness. Not because I don't like that vision, but because I
don't like where it has been taken.
What we have tried to do with this discussion is to
recognize that everyone has an opinion on how our public lands
should be managed. It is interesting to me, because when I pull
up through I-70--or I used to live up in the Oregon area years
and years ago, and there are some wonderful arching bridges
that cut across some of those canyons and gorges down the
Columbia River Gorge.
It is a remarkable thing to me to see the engineering of
man as you watch a glistening highway cut across some of those
lands or a beautiful bridge cut across against those green
hills. I think it is a wonderful thing to see the ingenuity of
man blended against the beauty of nature. I think that is
wonderful.
There are those who think that any sign of man is a scar on
the land. Am I wrong and they are right? Are they wrong and I
am right? And, see, that is where we have been thrust with this
whole wilderness debate. There are many opinions that ought to
be valued.
We have the OHV use, for example. The way that we have
portrayed that is that anybody who gets on a four-wheeler and
wants to go down and visit those beautiful lands is evil and
destructive, and they are going to go off and do bad things.
That is largely untrue. In fact, some of the OHV clubs in the
State of Utah are the most responsible users of our public
lands, and yet their voice is constantly pushed to the side
because of the image that is created.
What we have tried to do with this bill, sir, is draw
everyone possible to the table and say, ``We value your
opinion. Let us come up with a package that can protect these
lands properly, that can manage the use of those lands, that
factors in the human equation that we cannot ignore, and then
comes up with a protective package that does all of that
properly.''
I think that we can do that with this bill, and I think
that that is where we need to go with public lands issues,
because we simply can't abide a deadlock for the rest of our
lives. I am tired of the fight, and I think a lot of people
are.
Mr. Hansen. I appreciate that well thought out answer. You
know, I think that the agencies--BLM, Forest Service, Park
Service--have really done a remarkable job over the years in
taking care of the public lands. You have got to hand it to
them for working very well.
Of course, there has been an entire industry built around
one word, and, really, kind of a misconception in many areas.
We have done a very unscientific area of what happens to an
area once it is put in wilderness. It draws a lot of attention.
It is almost like a big, red, sore thumb sitting there saying,
``Come and see us.''
And sometimes areas that are never mentioned have the most
pristine qualities to them. Always a tough issue, but it is one
of the biggest issues that we face in this Committee, if I may
say so. Appreciate your comments.
The gentleman from Utah, the gentleman from New Mexico, any
further questions for this panel? Anybody inspired to say
anything?
[Laughter.]
Mr. Udall. A couple of questions, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hansen. This is one of those easy days. Nothing is
going on on the floor, and they rarely happen this way. You
know, most of the time we are pressed for every second.
The gentleman from New Mexico?
Mr. Udall. The last discussion we just had was about
wilderness and the idea that it had been taken too far. My
understanding is there are some lands within this area that may
well have wilderness values. Do you agree with that? I would
ask the members of the panel. And if you do, what are your
intentions as far as getting these into wilderness? And I
would--go ahead, Commissioner, we will start with you, and
then----
Mr. Johnson. Since this is rather--a little less stressful
than some I have testified at in this area, I would like to
recognize that I have my granddaughter Libby with me today, and
she has come to share this experience, Mr. Chairman, and then I
will answer your question.
I would be the first to acknowledge that there are lands
within this NCA that have pristine qualities. Absolutely. And I
would be the first to assure you that in this planning process
those areas would be addressed to protect those pristine
qualities.
Again, I reiterate, I don't know the answer as to whether
we will call that wilderness or we will call it something else.
But it will address the wilderness qualities of the land and
protect for them. Within this area, there are already
established WSAs, and so nothing about this bill would take
away the BLM's responsibility to manage those WSAs for non-
degradation.
So they are under an obligation to address those lands in
the planning process, because they are already in WSA status.
There are also some lands in here that have been
reinventoried and found to have some wilderness qualities. So
you can see that we are not trying to sidestep that issue by
this planning process. We recognize that in the four-year plan
we will have to address those, and we will do so willingly.
Mr. Udall. Thank you. Any other members of the panel that
wish to comment on that?
Ms. McUsic. Yes, Congressman Udall. We believe strongly
that there is a significant portion of this area that is
deserving of wilderness protection. There is at least some over
600,000 acres of land that has WSA status currently or were
inventoried to find wilderness characteristics.
There is nothing in this bill that is inconsistent with
ultimately having wilderness protection or the continued
management of these WSAs and interim protections. This
essentially holds harmless while the debate continues. It
provides significant protections for these lands by eliminating
the mining and leasing and providing off-road vehicle
protections. But, yes, we believe that a significant portion of
this land should be protected.
Mr. Udall. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Mr. Udall. We appreciate your
comments.
We want to thank the Committee. You have been very generous
with your time, and we appreciate your being with us,
appreciate the excellent testimony from all of you, and
recognize Libby, Commissioner, and we are glad your
granddaughter could be with you at this particular time.
At this time, we will call our second panel. Our last panel
is Mr. Wilson Martin, Deputy State Historic Preservation
Officer, Utah Division of State History; Courtland Nelson,
Director, Utah Division of Parks and Recreation; Wesley R.
Curtis, Director of the Governor's Rural Partnership Office;
and Mike Matz, Executive Director of the Southern Utah
Wilderness Alliance.
Folks, please come up. We appreciate your being here with
us. Get everybody in their place there and ready to go.
Mr. Martin, we will start with you, and the same thing
holds. It is one of those easier days. You can go ahead and----
STATEMENT OF WILSON MARTIN, DEPUTY STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION
OFFICER, UTAH DIVISION OF STATE HISTORY-PRESERVATION OFFICE
Mr. Martin. Well, Mr. Chairman, it is good to be here
again. I am glad to have Sally Wisely back in Utah. It was just
a few years ago that we worked together on the Four Corners
Heritage Council, which I currently serve as Chair, and she was
very helpful and instrumental in helping us bring that
partnership together, which has some similarities with this
partnership.
So I am glad to have her back on board. She spent a little
stint in Alaska, and then came back to us in Utah. So we are
glad to have you back, Sally.
Mr. Chairman, some two years ago, this Committee considered
another proposal similar to this, and we found and made good
progress because of this effort and also the BLM's commitment,
providing some funding to help us move the Legacy District
concept along. Also, the County Commission has held numerous
meetings, which have been very helpful in establishing a
dialogue on the Legacy District.
In partnership with Utah State University, we have also
developed a database of heritage shops and businesses and
attractions which we think will be very important in planning
this legacy area. The county has also committed a significant
number of assets, but it is interesting, the history.
Edward Geary said the earliest European-American travelers
clearly on record as visiting the county was Jedidiah S. Smith
during a southwestern expedition of 1826. Smith found the
region unpromising, he said, describing it as very barren,
rocky, with little appearance of Indians, and quite scarce in
the area of mountain sheep and antelope. Now we have seen a
change in that.
The Old Spanish Trail reached its further northernmost
point in Emery County in order to skirt the canyonlands and
take advantage of the Green River crossing and the relatively
low elevation of the Wasatch Pass. In some places, visible
traces of thousands of horses and mules that traveled the trail
remained imprinted on the land until the mid 20th century.
Now only the San Rafael name has remained to memorialize
the era, though at one time many landmarks bore Spanish names.
Huntington Canyon was known as San Marcus, Cottonwood Creek as
San Mateo, Muddy Creek as Rio del Morro or Castle River, and
Ivie Creek as Rio del Puerto or the River of the Pass.
Most of the recorded impressions of the Emery County region
by early travelers carried on the uncomplimentary tradition
established by Jedidiah Smith. George Yount, a member of the
1830 William Wolfskill party, remembered Castle Valley as the
most desolate and forlorn dell in the world. ``Everything about
it was repulsive and supremely awful,'' he said.
Hanna Seely, compelled to trade a spacious brick home in
Mount Pleasant for one-room log cabin on the banks of the
Cottonwood Creek, was initially less optimistic than her
husband about the region's prospects. She later recalled, ``The
first time I ever swore was when we arrived in Emery County.''
[Laughter.]
I said, ``Damn a man who would bring a woman''--can I say
that? ``Damn a man''--I guess I can. ``Damn a man who would
bring a woman to such God-forsaken country,'' she said.
The district, however, contains examples of pre-Columbian
and Native American culture, Paleontological resources,
geologically unique land features, and the history of
exploration, pioneering, settlement, ranching, outlaws,
prospecting, and mining. The San Rafael's resources support the
development of a Legacy District.
The rock now exposed contains a wealth of a geological
record, including fossils of dinosaurs, as we have talked about
before at the Cleveland Lloyd. Over 300 Pictograph and
Petroglyph panels are scattered throughout this complex maze of
canyons and cliffs in a region along with Paleo-Indian sites,
the Black Dragon Canyon Pictographs, Ferron Box Pictographs and
Petroglyphs, Rochester-Muddy Creek Petroglyphs, and the Temple
Mountain Wash Pictographs.
All are listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
These sites have national significance for their beauty and for
their age--many historic sites, and also attractions, that
exist in the communities.
Other destinations include Cedar Mountain Driving Tour,
which gives the public access to archaeological sites of the
area. There are not just National Register sites that can
attract visitors, but sites from the 1950s, including Temple
Mountain Uranium Mines, where unique stories can be told.
Emery County residents not only cherish their rural
heritage, but also place a high value on easy access to both
the Wasatch Plateau and the San Rafael Swell. Local people tend
to read their own and their families' histories in these public
lands. They return year after year to the same mountain
campsites or take their Easter excursions to some favorite
destination in the San Rafael.
Ask Kent about those experiences. The Easter celebrations
in San Rafael are notorious.
They show their children and grandchildren where a pioneer
ancestor scratched his name on a rock, or where a sheepherding
great-uncle carved an inscription on the smooth white bark of a
quaking aspen. The trails where the family's cattle were once
driven to the summer range on the mountains or the winter range
in the desert, the forest clearing where a relative once
operated a sawmill, the ledge where grandpa almost struck it
rich during the uranium boom, all have deep personal meaning,
according to Ed Geary.
Wallace Stegner remarked on the aloofness with which this
country greeted human intrusion and the effect it had on its
settlers. The plateau remains aloof and almost uninhabited, but
the valleys are a collaboration between land and people, and
each has changed the other.
The San Rafael Swell has the resources, the people, and the
organizations to develop a Legacy District. Together they can
assist in conserving this important heritage area, establish
and maintain interpretive destinations, develop recreational
opportunities and increased public awareness, and appreciation
of the natural, historical, and cultural resources.
Not only this, but economic development can be realized.
Much of the land is Federal and managed by the Bureau of Land
Management, which makes the Legacy District a good idea and a
good fit.
The Legacy District, developed in conjunction with
businesses, local, State, and Federal partners, has an
excellent opportunity for success. Most importantly, it is a
partnership for economic development and has, as we call it in
Utah, the opportunity to develop a heritage industry, a
partnership between private and public sector to achieve
economic success through the use and protection of our past.
These landscapes and culture and heritage of these people
and these communities will better be protected and served
through the designation of the county as the San Rafael Western
Legacy District, where they will serve as a living part of our
national historic heritage for current and future generations.
We strongly support the passage of House Resolution 3605 to
create the San Rafael Western Legacy District in Utah.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Martin follows:]
Mr. Hansen. Well, thank you very much for that very
interesting testimony. I like that part where you said grandpa
almost struck it rich.
Mr. Martin. There is a lot of stories like that out there,
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hansen. My father was one of those.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Cannon. Maybe this was from him. I don't know.
Mr. Hansen. Courtland Nelson, grateful to have you with us.
We will turn the time to you, sir.
STATEMENT OF COURTLAND NELSON, DIRECTOR, UTAH DIVISION OF PARKS
AND RECREATION
Mr. Nelson. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members. I am
Courtland Nelson, Director of the Utah Division of Parks and
Recreation. Under the direction and support of Governor Michael
Leavitt, our organization has worked diligently to cooperate
with local and Federal agency partners to protect Utah's
natural, cultural, and recreational areas.
Specifically, in Central and Southern Utah, we have several
parks which have direct or collateral responsibilities with the
Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service in the
protection of resources and the management of recreation on
State and Federal lands. Our joint planning efforts and
management activities, whether initiated by Federal
requirements or State policy, have led me to some observations
regarding the San Rafael area.
The San Rafael Swell has been discovered. Bisected by I-70,
in close proximity to Moab, and within 250 miles of two million
people, the ever-growing impacts are real. Every year, each
spring, comes more and more users to the area. The users are
wide and varied in their interests, but visitors have impacts
which need to be managed.
Second, without a plan which has come from local, State,
Federal, and special interest groups, management and the public
good will be lost on individual issues. This bill spells out a
solid four-year planning process desperately needed for an area
that is on the front end of significant change.
Parenthetically, House Bill 701, the Conservation and
Reinvestment Act, could be a very strong financial tool for the
application of this plan.
Number three, wilderness values need to be an important
part of the planning discussion. Certain areas within the Swell
have significant wilderness components. The six wilderness
areas, however, are often adjacent to locations, showing the
impacts of 150 years of man's influence, whether it is
ranching, mining, or recreational activity.
The history of the Swell is a geological, biological, and
cultural story. For our purposes, the stories have different
audiences--wilderness proponents, educational interests,
grazing leaseholders, archaeological enthusiasts, miners, and
so on. Let us find a way to have the beauty and wonder of
wilderness protected but not at the exclusion of other
legitimate activities.
I have hiked the Swell in the dead of winter and the blast
furnace heat of summer, meandering from slot Canyons to scenic
mountaintops with vistas of 200 miles or more. I have traveled
on roads lined with ancient Petroglyph panels, sneaking a peek
at the more modern autographs of the Butch Cassidy gang on the
same wall.
I have camped on Sid's Mountain, in old mining camps, in an
isolated mesa where my family and I enjoyed the solitude of the
high desert on a cloudless evening. I have enjoyed dirt bikes,
mountain bikes, day hikes, dutch oven dinners, cowboy poetry,
spring water in the heat of the day at Swasey's Cabin, and the
campfire stories of geologic wonders and human blunders while
recreating in the Swell. The San Rafael is a wonderful place.
However, as Director of Utah State Parks System, I am
deeply concerned with the ramifications of population growth in
the inner mountain area, compounded by ever-increasing tourism.
Both of these trends result in greater and greater impacts on
natural and cultural resources. The abundance of wildlife
populations, the presence of irreplaceable cultural resources,
the variety of recreational opportunities and majestic
landscapes, are all elements which can be negatively affected
by the sheer growth of unbridled recreation use.
This scenario is being replicated across Utah and
throughout the West, as we all know. All land management
agencies, local, State, and Federal, struggle with this
relatively new condition. One way our agency has found to deal
with this problem is by working together across boundaries to
resolve issues of mutual concern.
Utah State Parks partners with the BLM in places as diverse
as Yuba Reservoir, Coral Pink Sand Dunes, the Colorado River,
and to assist in the problems of protection of the resources
and public. We work with local governments in places like
Goblin Valley in Emery County and Antelope Island in Davis
County and the Great Salt Lake to do the same.
I believe that H.R. 3605 is a recipe for just such a
collaborative effort. I support the bill because I believe the
planning process it outlines will ultimately bring more human
and financial resources to the planning table.
And what a wonderful piece of American West the San Rafael
Swell is--an anticline of immense proportions, cut by deep
canyons, rare, arid, high evaluation grasslands, ringed by
sandstone domes, buttes and mesas. It is a land of secret,
hidden springs surrounded by grand, vast, open vistas.
It is an ecosystem supporting one of the largest bighorn
sheep herds in Utah. The western saga has also left its
imprint, which Wilson covered.
As the Committee well knows, the land use issues that are
currently--we are dealing with are some of the most divisive,
rancorous, and emotions facing the American West. Only by
working together, building respect, trust, and confidence, can
we ever hope to truly and permanently solve some of our land
use issues.
In conclusion, the variety and range of resources in the
San Rafael Swell demands a sophisticated approach in utilizing
the land manager's entire tool set.
H.R. 3605 conceptualizes a planning process to bring
together citizens with diverse interests and values to work
with Federal, local, and State agencies to protect these lands
and benefit the public. The Division of Parks and Recreation
and our sister agencies in the Department of Natural Resources
stands ready to roll up our sleeves and work with the
citizenry, the BLM, the Department of Interior, and Emery
County to do a wonderful thing in the San Rafael Swell.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nelson follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.015
Mr. Hansen. I thank you, Mr. Nelson. Also, I wanted to
thank you for taking me into that area and spending time with
me and explaining a lot of things to me. That was very kind of
you to do that.
Mr. Wesley Curtis, we will turn to you, sir.
STATEMENT OF WESLEY R. CURTIS, DIRECTOR, GOVERNOR'S RURAL
PARTNERSHIP OFFICE
Mr. Curtis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Wes Curtis.
I am a member of the Governor of Utah's senior staff, as well
as Director of the Governor's Rural Partnership Office. I am
here today representing Governor Leavitt and the interests of
the State of Utah. I do appreciate this opportunity to talk to
you about a remarkable proposal for protecting one of the
Nation's unique public land and heritage treasures--the San
Rafael Swell.
I begin by stating that H.R. 3605, the San Rafael Western
Legacy District and the National Conservation Area, has the
full endorsement and support of Governor Leavitt.
H.R. 3605 is the product of years of work and a long
process of public involvement. It is a marvelous manifestation
of local initiative acting in the national interest. It is a
remarkable example of the innovation and quality that can occur
when public processes are allowed to take root and develop in a
natural and healthy way.
The product of this effort is a proposal that addresses
both the protection needs of the public lands, as well as the
long-term economic future of the region. It is a unique
proposal that could only be designed by those who are closest
to the lands and who understand its intricacies and nuances.
This proposal is evidence of a positive and courageous
attitude on the part of the local leaders in Emery County as
well. They have been willing to break ranks with many of their
sister counties and actively pursue a legitimate conservation
initiative. They have done this because they honestly want to
see the Swell managed in a responsible manner that will protect
all of its resources, both natural and historic.
Consider for a minute what this measure will do. First, the
National Conservation Area will provide comprehensive
management for what amounts to an entire ecosystem, preserving
the integrity of the whole resource.
Second, this proposal withdraws the threats of new oil
drilling, mining, and timbering from the lands within the NCA
boundary--a remarkable concession for a rural county with an
economy based on mineral extraction.
Third, it recognizes the new economic realities being faced
by rural communities in the West. Thus, it provides an
innovative means for helping the region transition from an
extractive/resource-based economy to a new sustainable economy,
while at the same time preserving nationally important
historical treasures.
This will be accomplished through the creation of a Western
Legacy District. Preserving the scenic and historic resources
of the Swell is viewed locally as caring for the goose that can
lay the golden eggs. It is critical to the future economic
viability of the area.
This legislation is viewed as an important step in the
direction of environmental protection, as well as being a far-
sighted approach to achieving a greater degree of economic
sustainability in the San Rafael region.
At this point, I would like to address two other important
concepts related to the objectives and the intent of this
legislation.
The first has to do with the potential for future
wilderness designations within the National Conservation Area.
This bill has deliberately avoided any attempt to designate any
specific lands as wilderness because there are other processes
in motion--on the part of the BLM and others--that will
ultimately determine which lands will receive wilderness
designation.
It is important to note that this bill is wilderness
neutral. It does not affect nor delay these wilderness review
processes in any way. It allows the wilderness issue to be
dealt with through the processes and mechanisms that are
already in place, without hampering nor hindering those
processes.
In that same context, it is also important to note that
this bill does not contain any wilderness release language, so
no lands with wilderness potential are adversely affected by
this legislation.
What this bill does do is provide a much higher degree of
protection for these lands during the time that wilderness
issues are being reviewed and debated--namely, withdrawal from
mining and drilling. This bill is not a compromise on the
wilderness issue, nor is it an attempt to circumvent the
wilderness processes. It simply, and deliberately, does not
deal with the issue. It is, however--and I emphasize this--an
important step forward, a step toward protecting these lands
until these issues are ultimately resolved.
The second issue I wish to address has to do with the
management of off-road vehicle use within the San Rafael Swell.
I can assure you that the State of Utah, along with the local
citizens of the San Rafael region, are very concerned about the
damage that is being caused by the misuse of OHVs. It is
reassuring to note that there is strong local support for
addressing this concern and for taking action to stop the
bleeding.
For this reason, Emery County has formally asked the BLM to
address this issue and to develop a comprehensive
transportation management plan for the area as soon as
possible. Emery County recognizes that this issue must be
addressed whether or not this legislation passes. The BLM has
responded positively and affirmatively, and is already moving
forward in addressing this OHV issue.
It needs to be clearly understood that the implementation
of a BLM OHV management plan will not have to wait on the four-
year planning process associated with the National Conservation
Area. These wheels are already in motion under existing NEPA
processes, and may well be completed before the NCA planning
process even begins.
In conclusion, may I repeat that this legislation takes an
important step forward in the conservation and management of
one of the Nation's most important natural and historic
resources. At the same time, it is also sensitive and
innovative in dealing with future economic needs of the
affected region. There is no down side to this proposal.
Passage of this legislation just simply makes good sense.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for providing me the opportunity
to address this Committee.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Curtis follows:]
Statement of Wes Curtis, Director, Governor's Rural Partnership
Office,State of Utah
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the
Subcommittee, my name is Wes Curtis. I am a member of the
Governor of Utah's senior staff, as well as director of the
Governor's Rural Partnership Office. I am here today
representing Governor Leavitt and the interests of the State of
Utah. I appreciate this opportunity to talk to you about a
remarkable proposal for protecting one of the nation's unique
public land and heritage treasures--the San Rafael Swell.
I begin by stating that H.R. 3605, the San Rafael Western
Legacy District and National Conservation Area, has the full
endorsement and support of Governor Leavitt.
H.R. 3605 is the product of years of work and a long
process of public involvement. It is a marvelous manifestation
of local initiative acting in the national interest. It is a
remarkable example of the innovation and quality that can occur
when public processes are allowed to take root and develop in a
natural and healthy way.
The product of this effort is a proposal that addresses
both the protection needs of the public lands, as well as the
long-term economic future of the region. It is a unique
proposal that could only be designed by those who are closest
to the lands and who understand its intricacies and nuances.
This proposal is evidence of a positive and courageous
attitude on the part of local leaders in Emery County. They
have been willing to break ranks with many of their sister
counties and actively pursue a legitimate conservation
initiative. They have done this because they honestly want to
see the ``Swell'' managed in a responsible manner that will
protect all of its resources--both natural and historic.
Consider for a minute what this measure will do:
First, the National Conservation Area will provide
comprehensive management for what amounts to an entire eco-
system, preserving the integrity of the whole resource.
Second, this proposal withdraws the threats of new oil
drilling, mining and timbering from the lands within the NCA
boundary--a remarkable concession for a rural county with an
economy based on mineral extraction.
Third, it recognizes the new economic realities being faced
by rural communities in the West. Thus, it provides an
innovative means for helping the region transition from an
extra active/resource based economy to a new sustainable
economy--while at the same time preserving nationally important
historical treasures. This will be accomplished through the
creation of a Western Legacy District. Preserving the scenic
and historic resources of the Swell is viewed locally as caring
for the goose that can lay the golden eggs. It is critical to
the future economic viability of the area.
This legislation is viewed as an important step in the
direction of environmental protection, as well as being a far-
sighted approach to achieving a greater degree of economic
sustainability in the San Rafael region.
At this point, I would like to address two other important
concepts related to the objectives and intent of this
legislation.
The first has to do with the potential for future
wilderness designations within the National Conservation Area.
This bill has deliberately avoided any attempt to designate any
specific lands as wilderness because there are other processes
in motion--on the part of the BLM and others--that will
ultimately determine which lands will receive such designation.
It is important to note that this bill is ``wilderness
neutral.'' It does not affect nor delay these wilderness review
processes in any way. It allows the wilderness issue to be
dealt with through the processes and mechanisms that are
already in place, without hampering nor hindering those
processes.
In that context, it is also important to note that this
bill does not contain any wilderness release language, so no
lands with wilderness potential are adversely affected by this
legislation.
What this bill does do is provide a much higher degree of
protection for these lands during the time that wilderness
issues are being reviewed and debated--namely, withdrawal from
mining and drilling. This bill is not a compromise on the
wilderness issue nor is it an attempt to circumvent wilderness
processes. It simply, and deliberately, does not deal with the
issue. It is, however, an important step forward--a step toward
protecting these lands until these issues are ultimately
resolved.
The second issue I wish to address has to do with the
management of off-road vehicle use within the San Rafael Swell.
I can assure you that the state of Utah, along with the local
citizens of the San Rafael Region, are very concerned about the
damage that is being caused by the misuse of OHVs. It is
reassuring to note that there is strong local support for
addressing this concern and for taking action to ``stop the
bleeding.''
For this reason Emery County has formally asked the BLM to
address this issue and to develop a comprehensive
transportation management plan for the area as soon as
possible. Emery County recognizes that this issue must be
addressed whether or not this legislation passes. The BLM has
responded affirmatively, and is already moving forward in
addressing the OHV issue.It needs to be clearly understood that
implementation of a BLM OHV management plan will not have to
wait on the four year planning process associated with the
National Conservation Area. These wheels are already in motion
under existing NEPA processes.
In conclusion, may I repeat that this legislation takes an
important step forward in the conservation and management of
one of the nation's most important natural and historic
resources. At the same time, it is also sensitive and
innovative in dealing with future economic needs of the
affected region. There is no down-side to this proposal.
Passage of this legislation just simply makes good sense.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for providing the opportunity to
address this Committee.
Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Mr. Curtis.
Mr. Mike Matz, we will turn to you, sir.
STATEMENT OF MIKE MATZ, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SOUTHERN UTAH
WILDERNESS ALLIANCE
Mr. Matz. Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee, my
name is Mike Matz, and I am the Executive Director of the
Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Utah's largest conservation
organization with 18,000 members, over half of whom live in our
beautiful State.
We are very grateful for the opportunity to present our
views today on H.R. 3605, legislation which would establish the
San Rafael Western Legacy District, and the San Rafael National
Conservation Area. We wish also to express our lament and
concern that we don't see Representative Vento on the dais
there with you, but we understand he is making progress,
walking a mile a day, even as he undergoes treatment, and we
hope he is back among you in good health very soon.
As you well know, Mr. Chairman, the Utah wilderness to date
has been an arduous one. You and Senator Garn passed
legislation in 1984 to designate wilderness for lands
administered on behalf of the American public by the U.S.
Forest Service, and we applaud you for that legislation.
Since then, the as yet unanswered question of how much
public land administered by the Bureau of Land Management
should be designated as wilderness has lingered. The
conservation community has united behind H.R. 1732, a bill
which would answer this question completely by designating a
bit under 40 percent of BLM land in Utah as wilderness.
It is a reasonable resolution that has considerable
support. The majority of people in Utah stand behind the
citizens' proposal and the national interest is apparent in the
fact that more than 150 members of Congress have co-sponsored
this legislation.
Five years ago, Mr. Chairman, you sponsored legislation
that would have designated a little more than 180,000 acres of
wilderness in the same region covered by the legislation on
which today you are taking testimony. Two years ago, another
bill like H.R. 3605, introduced by Representative Cannon,
included about 140,000 acres of wilderness--less than what you
had earlier proposed. Neither of those bills passed.
Today, this Subcommittee is gathering testimony on
legislation that would designate no wilderness. This is
movement in the wrong direction and signals a disappointing
backwards regression.
The administration has indicated its interest in H.R. 3605,
based on its discussions with Emery County officials, and
testimony by the Interior Department has covered the detail. We
would like to take a step back and point out the bigger
picture.
The Clinton Administration has of late exercised its
rightful authority under the 1906 Antiquities Act to establish
new national monuments much like the Grand Staircase Escalante
in our own State.
Secretary Babbitt has announced his intention to create a
legacy of what he calls national landscape monuments, which is
a proposition we avidly support, as does the general public.
Mr. Babbitt would like to ensure that large tracts are
withdrawn from mineral development and oil and gas development,
two of the more serious threats.
By moving legislation to do just that for the San Rafael
Swell, you are helping Secretary Babbitt and we support your
assistance in accomplishing his goal.
We are very appreciative this legislation would prevent oil
and gas development or mining from spoiling most of the San
Rafael Swell. Secretary Babbitt understands that these
activities are harmful to any landscape, yet he and others at
the Interior Department are perhaps not fully aware of the
specific problem in the San Rafael Swell.
Field professionals in the Bureau of Land Management are
acutely aware of the specific problem. This place is being
overrun by off-road vehicles. BLM has documented widespread
soil erosion, airborne dust, degradation of water supplies,
impacts to wildlife and its habitat, and serious loss of native
vegetation. Written field reports are awash with examples of
ORV abuses.
If I could, Mr. Chairman, I would like to enter these BLM
field reports into the record.
Mr. Hansen. No objection.
Mr. Matz. This legislation does nothing to deal with that
pervasive problem. H.R. 3605 makes the problem worse, actually,
because it would postpone anything from happening until four
years from the date of enactment. During that four-year period,
as yet another plan for this region is prepared--and likely
beyond that time, as the experience with other plans
demonstrates--continued abuse of off-road vehicles will occur.
Mr. Chairman, my written testimony provides details
regarding rampant use of ORVs in the San Rafael Swell. So let
me conclude by simply summarizing. We would very much like to
see resolved the general issue of wilderness in Utah. H.R. 3605
makes no progress in this regard. The bill, as written,
unfortunately makes the problem in that region even worse.
We would like to support H.R. 3605, but until two
significant deficiencies are remedied we cannot. One is that
the legislation should include all of the San Rafael Swell. The
other is that ORVs have to be dealt with in a meaningful
manner.
Again, we appreciate the opportunity to testify, and I am
happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Matz follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.024
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.030
Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Mr. Matz. Appreciate your testimony.
Mr. Cannon, you are recognized for questions for the panel.
Mr. Cannon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again, thank you all for coming. We appreciate your time
here. If I could just start, Mr. Matz, with just one question
for you. You heard earlier Ms. McUsic noted that this bill
provides considerable new protections for this land.
In our discussions, and with others in the room who have
had this continuing discussion about wilderness, we are looking
at a long time--maybe 10 years is the number that has been
bounced around--before we really--I think before many people in
your association expect to solve the wilderness problem.
Isn't some protection, as set forth in this bill--and as
Ms. McUsic said--better than just letting things go as they are
in the status quo?
Mr. Matz. What I heard the earlier panel say was that what
seemed to me was a great deal of support and acknowledgement on
the part of Emery County and the Interior Department, that
there are areas here that qualify as wilderness, that those
areas should have protection. So it is kind of perplexing to us
to see that wilderness designation isn't included in this
legislation.
Now, that is not to say that withdrawing the area from oil
and gas development, or mineral development, aren't steps
forward. It is just that it doesn't move in the direction of
providing resolution for this area, for this particular area.
Mr. Cannon. Thank you. I appreciate your input on that. You
did raise--if I might, just one other question. You raised
Secretary Babbitt's national landscape monuments, and said that
you--and I expect you are speaking for your organization--
support those.
If you would just--have you considered the legal
implications of national landscape monuments in the context of
the law itself, the Antiquities Act, which requires that the
minimum amount of land reasonable be used, and that the law
exists only to protect cultural and historical objects, which,
of course, are defined? Have you considered the implications of
the Secretary's proposal in the context of what the law
actually says?
Mr. Matz. It is my understanding that Secretary Babbitt is
on solid legal footing. I mean, for instance, President
Carter's Interior Secretary made a proclamation to establish
130 million acres of national monuments in Alaska, and all of
those--that one included, and all of those previous, have
withstood legal challenges. So I believe that the Secretary is
on very solid footing, using the 1906 Antiquities Act to set
aside landscape national monuments.
Mr. Cannon. Thank you.
Mr. Curtis, appreciate your being here today. Would you
talk a bit about who you view in Utah today as being supporters
of this bill?
Mr. Curtis. Who has been supporters?
Mr. Cannon. Who are the groups of supporters out there of
the bill?
Mr. Curtis. Over the years--this is a process that wasn't
completed overnight. It has been a long process. It has taken
many years. And over that period of time, there have been a lot
of interested parties and stakeholders involved in the
discussions regarding this bill. And, for the most part, many
of those are supportive of these things.
Certainly, the State of Utah is supportive. We have a great
deal of support locally from the public, from local leaders.
And we, of course, extend an invitation to any who have
concerns to work with Emery County in the planning process as
they proceed to develop the actual management plan for this
National Conservation Area.
Mr. Cannon. Are you aware of any other proposals out there
right now that have the potential to address land management in
this area?
Mr. Curtis. I am not aware of any real legitimate proposal
that has any momentum or traction going for it at this point in
time. I think the point that really needs to be made clear on
this legislation is that the intent of this legislation is to
conserve the resources of the San Rafael Swell, and to better
manage the visitors and to control abuses that may be taking
place right now.
It is a good, solid, environmentally sound bill. I think
the real threat would be to let the status quo continue as it
is, to not create this NCA and provide the protections that
this bill offers, but be a step backwards. This is a
significant step forward.
Mr. Cannon. Thank you. You know, I am deeply appreciative
of all of the effort you have put into this bill, and thank you
again for that.
Mr. Nelson, aside from the fact that you have the neatest
job on earth, would you tell us a little bit about how you
anticipate working with BLM under this bill?
Mr. Nelson. Mr. Chairman, Representative, we hold a series
of responsibilities in the State of Utah--law enforcement
activities as they relate to off-highway vehicles, education
responsibilities, working with the local law enforcement
agencies as well as the Federal agencies.
In a number of cases around Utah, we have been successful,
we feel, in educating the recreators, which is the first step
that you need to take any time you are trying to effect a
change or to keep certain activities from happening.
The second is a presence. You have to have a presence to
underscore the education, and to give support to those who are
trying to do the right thing. The comments that were made
earlier about the off-highway vehicle club members and the
other associations is very accurate. Those aren't the people
who are, in general, causing problems.
It is others who either through their position of not being
informed or of what we call the five percenters, those to whom
rules don't mean a whole lot, and will take opportunities as
they come in any recreational activity. You have to have this
presence in order to make sure that the impacts of those
individuals are lessened.
And then the third is to make sure that individuals
understand what it is you are trying to protect, the bigger
picture, the values of the area that they are playing in, and
there are many successful examples that we would think would be
appropriate for the San Rafael.
There needs to be an effort in this planning design, should
this come to pass, to really talk to these potential users, no
matter what their background or their interest about the
history, the background of the Swell, why it is important that
we have those individuals' support for the protection of the
area, and, at the same time, explaining to them what the fun
opportunities are, what there is to learn, where they can go to
enjoy those natural resources.
Mr. Cannon. Thanks. Do you expect changes in how you manage
Goblin Valley State Park? And what do you expect those changes
would be?
Mr. Nelson. Mr. Chairman, Representative, we certainly
would expect the continued growth in the visitation at Goblin,
as well as at Huntington and Millsite. For those individuals
who are not familiar, in the southeast corner of the Swell is a
State park that has gone from 10,000 visitors to over 80,000 in
the last year.
We are the only permanent presence in that area. And
everybody who has any kind of a problem, any kind of a need,
whether it is information or a medical emergency or a law
enforcement situation, they come to us first. And I would think
that that is a toehold. That would be a great opportunity for
us to work with the BLM and the county in these issues of
control and management and education.
There would certainly be an opportunity, should our
partners want to take advantage of that presence, for us to
expand our involvement.
Mr. Cannon. Thank you. And I appreciate the time you have
taken to come out here from what I know is a busy schedule with
all the work you are doing in preparation for the Olympics and
all of the other normal pressures of the incredible park system
that we have in Utah. I appreciate your management.
Mr. Nelson. Mr. Chairman, Representative, thank you.
Mr. Cannon. And, Mr. Martin, I really appreciate your
comments and insights. I love this area, and I love the stories
of the area. What role do you think the Legacy District will
play in determining what sites visitors come to see?
Mr. Martin. Well, Representative, we often find that the
visitors direct themselves. And if we don't have a plan to
direct them to the sites that we have designated, they will
continue to visit whatever site they choose. By having a
planning effort, we will be able to direct the public to the
sites that are most capable of taking the visitor and we will
be able to interpret those sites.
The dilemma without the plan is visitors go undirected, and
that is one of the efforts that the Legacy District does is
help us build that plan to direct them to the best sites that
are best prepared to accept the visitor.
Mr. Cannon. This is early in the process, and we haven't
done much planning. But do you actually anticipate changes in
what people will want to see and where they will go as
information becomes--as you make information available, or
identify information that you want to make available through
the planning process, and then making it available?
Mr. Martin. We have done that on the Four Corners area by
what we call marketing and demarketing. We market the
attractions that we feel we can accept the visitors to, that
have the best opportunity for interpretation, that have the
best ability to sustain the site as well as entice the visitor,
and have a diverse experience. We demarket sites that are
fragile, that are not capable of sustaining that kind of
activity.
We think we can be successful through a good planning
effort of marketing and demarketing, to direct them to the
sites that give them a wide breadth of experience, but also
provide the opportunity for them to come in contact with the
past, which is what they want to do. They want to touch the
past, and that is what they want to do.
Mr. Cannon. And this gives them the human past and a much
longer past beyond that.
Mr. Martin. Both.
Mr. Cannon. Sort of puts our lives in perspective. Thank
you very much for your testimony.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Mr. Cannon.
Let me point out to you that this hearing is basically H.R.
3605, and I have been pretty liberal, let everything else come
up, like national monuments. And let me point out in respect to
everybody here, the case with President Carter settled. It
wasn't resolved; it was settled, due to other legislation being
passed.
And the majority of people who have looked at this feel
that the 1906 antiquity law is an unconstitutional law. There
is a lot of legal thought on this. If there is any bill that I
have ever--or any law I have ever seen passed, that I would
like to see the Supreme Court rule on, it would be that one.
We have since looked at it in detail, as you know, in this
Committee. And I can't see, and none of the people we have had
look at it can find one tool that it gives to BLM, Park
Service, whoever, that they don't already have under the
management plan. In the opinion of some folks on this
Committee, it is more of a facade. I don't mean to get into
that, but it has been raised here, so----
Mr. Cannon. I would like to thank the Chairman for making
those comments. Recognizing that the focus of this Committee, I
didn't want to respond myself, but I want to associate myself
with the comments you have made.
Mr. Hansen. Well, I would hope that folks would realize
also that this bill has 270,000 acres of de facto wilderness in
it now. And also to realize that de facto wilderness is treated
in a more pristine manner than wilderness per se. It is not as
if it doesn't have something in it.
Our friend from New Mexico, Mr. Udall?
Mr. Udall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
To maybe jump off on the point of the Chairman's comment
about de facto wilderness, Mr. Matz, could you tell me, how
would wilderness designation address the ORV use in the San
Rafael Swell?
Mr. Matz. Because of the definition of wilderness included
in the 1964 Wilderness Act, motorized recreation is not allowed
or permitted legally in designated wilderness. And so it would
provide a very effective handle to be able to remedy a serious
problem on the San Rafael Swell now the agency itself has been
unable to deal with.
They had a resource management plan in 1991 that proposed
to close 9 percent of the entire resource area to ORVs in order
to protect some sensitive habitats. And in order to do that,
they needed to pull together a travel plan, which they began to
do in 1992. By 1997, five years later, they had released a
draft travel plan, but that plan was never made in final.
So we are still now, 10 years later, dealing with not just
the problem that resulted in a recognition in 1991 that it
needed to be dealt with, but 10 years of very increasing use
there that has caused even more significant problems, to the
point where BLM now has, unfortunately, been required to
develop a habitat management plan to try to protect some
endangered species in the San Rafael Swell.
Wilderness designation would give us a much better legal
handle to stem the tide of ORV abuse in the San Rafael Swell.
Mr. Udall. You say BLM was forced. Was that as a result of
a lawsuit?
Mr. Matz. I am not sure if it was a lawsuit, Congressman,
or if it was just the requirements under the Endangered Species
Act.
Mr. Udall. Could you, Mr. Matz, give me your opinion on
this boundaries issue? It seems to me that the boundaries here,
if we are talking about protecting the San Rafael Swell, the
San Rafael Swell--my understanding--doesn't end at the
boundaries of the--is it--it is Emery County. They don't end
right there, do they? What are your thoughts on that?
Mr. Matz. It is disappointing to us to see that something
called the San Rafael National Conservation Area does not, in
fact, constitute all of the San Rafael Swell. There are
important areas to the west, including Eagle Canyon, Molen
Reef, and Mussentuchit Badlands, that are left out. To the
south, on the southern end of the reef, there is Factory Butte,
which is a very notable feature, and Upper Muddy Creek, that
are omitted from this legislation.
So from our perspective, it turns it into more of a county
recreation park than it does a conservation area intended to
maintain the integrity of the San Rafael Swell as a whole.
Mr. Udall. Under this piece of legislation, under H.R.
3605, there are created some advisory groups. I mean, what has
your experience been working with advisory groups like this?
Mr. Matz. Again, there is ample opportunity under the
existing planning processes that BLM undertakes for local
citizen involvement. And we have no disagreement that local
involvement should be made a priority, but it should not be
made--be prominent priority. And in establishing another
Advisory Council of this type and makeup, it makes it--it
defers too much to the local authorities and does not take into
consideration--or actually abrogates the duty of BLM to take
into consideration the national interest in what are America's
public land.
Mr. Udall. In trying to find some common ground here
between proposals for wilderness and this proposal that is
before the Committee, what would you need included in H.R. 3605
in order to support it?
Mr. Matz. It is simple, really. The two significant things
that need to be remedied are, one, the boundaries for the NCA
should be extended to include all of the areas of the San
Rafael Swell. So that would include the areas to the west that
spill over into Sevier County, and the areas to the south that
spill over into Wayne County.
And then, secondly, I think since there is such wide
recognition, apparently, of the wilderness attributes in
portions of the Swell, it is a mystery to us why there wouldn't
be wilderness designation included in this legislation, and
hopefully to take that issue off the table.
Mr. Udall. To the other members of the panel, do you have
any objection to expanding beyond Emery County, to include the
other areas of the Swell?
Mr. Curtis. If I may answer that, Mr. Chairman. We really
have a misrepresentation here of what constitutes the San
Rafael Swell. The boundaries of this National Conservation
Area, in fact, are just about double in acreage the actual
acres of the San Rafael Swell. The San Rafael Swell, that
geologic feature is a small--it is a central piece of this
National Conservation Area. But these boundaries go well beyond
the San Rafael Swell as they stand right now.
These other areas that are being referred to aren't even
contiguous to the NCA boundaries as they exist right now. They
are several miles to the west of these boundaries, and it just
really doesn't make sense geographically or in any other way to
include those lands. And, of course, this bill, this proposal,
is not going to adversely affect the future of those lands in
any case.
Mr. Udall. Any comments from other panel members there? No?
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hansen. I thank you, Mr. Udall. Appreciate your
comments.
You know, I really think this is a well-drafted piece of
legislation. We look at a lot of legislation in this Committee,
probably more than any other committee. And some of them are
very poorly drafted. This is well put together. This has got--
takes care of a lot of things. I think, as I mentioned earlier,
there is ample protection in this area--270,000 acres of WSA,
which subsequently someone could act upon if they are so
inclined to do.
And I think that area--the 270,000 acres--does fit the
criteria of the '64 Wilderness Act Mr. Matz talked about. That
is a big issue. We talk about it all of the time. And I surely
understand that.
And it is kind of like beauty in a way; it is kind of in
the eye of the beholder. Really, the '64 Wilderness Act
probably should be refined a little bit because it is really
tough to figure out a lot of things--roads, things such as
that.
Now, in my many years on this Committee, it has kind of
switched. It used to be that the right of access was with the
cattlemen, the timbermen, and the miners. It has kind of fallen
to the wayside. The access question now is with the guy who
rides a motorbike, an ATV, a back country pilot, a river
runner, hunter. It has kind of switched that way.
And people want access to public ground. I actually think
the majority of Americans are pretty good conservationists.
They really want to take care of it. A lot of you have alluded
that there are always a few bad apples, and they should be
treated that way. They should be brought up short for doing
those areas.
Now, I honestly feel of all the pieces of legislation that
I have seen come before this Committee regarding Utah, this is
one that really ought to make it. And we will do our best to
see that it does. Does it need some refinement? Probably so. I
think Molly brought up something. Sally brought up an area. And
we will work on those things.
I would like to ask this panel, if I could, what is a big
concern--and, really, hung it up last time--was Sid's Mountain.
And there you folks from Utah have put in, what, the desert
bighorn sheep? It means an awful lot to some people.
I have had more letters--this is the first time in my 20
years on this Committee that I have had more letters from
people on the other side, because the others are orchestrated.
I mean, you know, one guy writes it and 10,000 of them come in.
But these are really from the heart with people who are in this
sheep bunch.
And I don't know too much about it except they go out and
they do what is called a Grand Slam. Courtland, you probably
know more about this than I would. Or Wes would probably know.
Where they shoot five sheep--one is in Mongolia, one is in
Siberia, and one is in Sid's Mountain, and a few other areas--
these people are very, very concerned about this legislation
and they feel very strongly about Sid's Mountain, where they
have the desert bighorn sheep.
And they have guzzlers in there, you know, where they
evaporate, things to get water from, because there is not a
natural flow of water in that area.
Maybe Mr. Nelson, Mr. Curtis, you would want to comment on
that. What are you doing on this desert bighorn sheep? Which is
a big issue to a lot of folks all around America, not just
Utah.
Mr. Nelson. Mr. Chairman, I think there are several points
to be made, as I understand them. First of all, the advocates
for the bighorn sheep are not only the hunters, not only the
consumptive people, but those individuals who would like to see
the continued expansion of the range of bighorn sheep for other
non-consumptive values.
The Sid's Mountain area I think is unique in a couple of
ways. Number one, there is an observation opportunity for
people who are willing to make some effort where they can see
bighorn sheep. And I think in some of the tourism plans that
are in place or would be desired to be in place by Emery County
folks that that is an important item.
Secondly, the sheep activity in Utah has been expanded
greatly over the last number of years. There are now many
places where an individual can go and have a hunt, either have
an opportunity to hunt or an opportunity to photograph various
subspecies of the bighorn population.
As you well know, we have recently introduced California
bighorn sheep on Antelope Island. And that, Mr. Chairman, is a
nursery herd. And when that herd reaches a certain size, then
we will trap and relocate, possibly down to the San Rafael
area, where yet more people can have an opportunity to see
those species down there.
There is a definite attraction for individuals who want to
see what is colloquially called the Charismatic Mega Fauna by
some groups. Those large species, the ungulates, that are
attractive to watch, that give a sense of natural history, that
go back even to Native American times. And I think the major
effort here is to secure the strong biological presence of that
sheep herd, as well as to provide various opportunities for
people to harvest, to photograph, or otherwise just be aware
that those sheep are out there in their native habitat.
Mr. Hansen. But this bill and this whole thing we are
working on does allow for citizens to see this bighorn sheep.
Is that a correct statement?
Mr. Nelson. Mr. Chairman, I think I will defer to Wes on
that particular item, as it relates to the location of Sid's
Mountain in viewing opportunity.
Mr. Curtis. Mr. Chairman, yes. In answer to your question,
it does allow--does not guarantee that they will see those
bighorn sheep, obviously, but----
Mr. Hansen. How did you possibly arrange it for these
people from the BLM? How did you train the sheep to come in?
Mr. Curtis. That is a local secret. We are not going to
share that.
[Laughter.]
But, no, we take a great deal of pride locally in the
bighorn sheep there. And, in fact, in the previous proposal two
years ago, it was proposed to create a desert bighorn sheep
natural area to really emphasize and promote this aspect of the
Swell. That idea certainly hasn't gone away, and I think you
will see over time that we will attempt to develop those types
of activities that make it possible for the public to enjoy
that great natural resource.
Mr. Hansen. Well, that was the one issue that probably
brought this thing down last time, if we worked a little harder
on it, but we didn't work that hard on it. But we will work
hard on this one.
Mr. Matz. Mr. Chairman, may I address this?
Mr. Hansen. Surely. Surely.
Mr. Matz. I just wanted to quote here from one of these
field reports. One of the biggest problems in the San Rafael
Swell related to the bighorn sheep is the problem of ORVs.
I just wanted to cite here that a Division of Wildlife
Resources biologist told the BLM the herd numbers were stable
but distribution was quite different from previous
observations. They annually fly the herd units in a helicopter.
This year, in some of the areas--they usually see sheep--
instead, they saw new OHV tracks. The sheep were found now in
areas unaccessible to vehicles. This was in 1997.
The areas of concern that haven't had OHV use in were Upper
Red Canyon in Mexican Mountain WSA, Cactus Flatts, Mesquite
Wash, Saddle Horse, and McCarty Canyons, in the Sid's Mountain
WSA. So even with the WSAs there that you mention, we still
have the problem of ORV use getting into these areas and
disturbing the bighorn sheep population.
Mr. Hansen. Comment? Mr. Cannon?
Mr. Cannon. I just want to clarify, that would be illegal
use of ORVs in areas where they are already prescribed, would
it not?
Mr. Matz. That is correct. They should not be in WSAs.
Mr. Cannon. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hansen. Mr. Curtis, you had another comment?
Mr. Curtis. Yes. If I could speak to that for just a
minute. OHV misuse is certainly a concern that we all share,
and we share that with the State of Utah, with the local
citizenry, and with the BLM and Department of Interior. As
everybody here knows, OHV use has accelerated dramatically over
the past few years. It has accelerated faster than we have been
able to get a handle on it, management-wise.
And whether we designate an area wilderness or any other
designation, it still doesn't guarantee that we have the
manpower and the ability to enforce those designations. That is
a concern that we have.
Let me just, if I could, point out some of the things that
are taking place locally with regard to this OHV issue. I think
a rather significant, a real change in attitude that I have
observed over the years--in Emery County, they are taking
several different approaches trying to help the BLM and address
this issue.
In the first place, they are currently making an in-depth
inventory of the routes and trails on the San Rafael Swell to
determine which ones are important and which may be considered
for elimination. Emery County is putting together an access
management team, which will include representatives from
resource management agencies, both State and Federal, as well
as many different user groups and stakeholders.
And the intent is to develop a consistent and
understandable access plan. Along with this, to provide
education, to provide signing, to in some cases build
barricades if necessary to help protect these lands.
The Emery County Sheriff's Office is applying for a grant
and exploring the possibility of providing some trail rangers.
This is on the part of the local county government to help
police and monitor what is going on out there. The Recreation
Subcommittee, the Public Lands Council in Emery County, has
initiated an education program to help teach the youth the
importance of not abusing their privileges in using their
vehicles out there.
And on National Public Lands Day this past summer--and,
Representative Cannon, you attended this gathering--170 people
representing many different organizations gathered out on the
Copper Globe area of the San Rafael Swell. They marked
legitimate trails. They erected barricades blocking
illegitimate trails. They put up signs. They did many different
things. They seeded, they raked, they did a lot of things to
restore lands that had been abused.
There really is a strong local movement to deal with this
issue. And I think we ought to, rather than point fingers and
say, ``Look, here is a problem,'' let us all work together and
continue this effort to resolve the problem.
Mr. Hansen. I thank you four members of the panel, thank
Mr. Cannon, Mr. Udall, for being with us. I realize that most
members are headed to the four corners of the earth right now
somewhere and should be back next Wednesday.
So with that said, thanks so very much to the panel, and
all of you who are here today. And we appreciate the excellent
testimony.
This hearing is adjourned.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T4874.038
[Whereupon at 11:50 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Statement of William H. Meadows, President, The Wilderness Society
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, as President
of The Wilderness Society, and I am pleased to offer testimony
regarding a matter of great significance for our nation's
natural resources and public lands: the protection of the
magnificent red rock canyons and other public lands in Utah. We
have convened to discuss these important lands on many prior
occasions, in April 1 of 1998, for example, I testified
regarding H.R. 3625, ``The San Rafael Swell National Heritage
Conservation Act,'' introduced by Representative Chris Cannon
in that same month.
The Wilderness Society has a longstanding commitment to the
protection of Utah wilderness and the wild and beautiful San
Rafael Swell and its many natural values. This magnificent
area--a great uplifted dome of sedimentary rock--rises 1,500
feet above the surrounding desert. Jagged cliff faces, deep
gorges, narrow slot canyons, and hidden valleys make the Swell
one of the most popular primitive recreation areas in Utah.
Citizen wilderness inventories conducted during the 1980's and
recently updated (1998) have thoroughly cataloged, mapped, and
identified the wilderness and related values of the San Rafael
Swell.
As a result of these extensive efforts, the Utah Wilderness
Coalition, of which The Wilderness Society is a member, has
Identified 17 wilderness quality areas in the San Rafael area--
magnificent and remote places with evocative names including
Devils Canyon, Red Desert, Wild Horse Mesa, Lost Spring Wash,
and Mexican Mountain. Taken together, these areas include 1.03
million acres of wilderness quality lands located not only in
Emery, but also in Sevier and Wayne counties.
But before I proceed further, I would like to thank both
Representative Cannon and the leaders of Emery County for their
continuing efforts to address the protection of the San Rafael
Swell. Although The Wilderness Society can not support H.R.
3605 in its enjoyment of wilderness resources. Too often, ORV
use and its resulting noise, pollution, erosion, and other
impacts undercut opportunities for many longstanding public
uses of these lands, including hiking, horsepacking, hunting,
fishing and wildlife observation and therefore displace other
public land users. ORV travel can degrade an area's naturalness
and other wilderness values and create routes that
antiwilderness interests seek to characterize as ``roads'' in
order to disqualify the area for wilderness protection.
The BLM and other Federal agencies have the authority to
manage and control ORV use to protect Federal resources.
Nevertheless, in too many cases--and particularly in Utah--the
BLM has failed to use its management and planning authority to
adequately manage ORV use and prevent resource degradation. The
BLM has repeatedly failed to produce and implement adequate ORV
management policies and resource damage to fragile natural
resources has resulted. As a result of the BLM's ongoing
failure to properly control ORV use and prevent resource damage
on public lands in Utah, The Wilderness Society recently joined
with the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) in a lawsuit
challenging the agency's ORV planning and management failures.
In light of the BLM's poor record of performance in
creating and implementing land and resource management plans
that adequately manage ORV use, we believe that the ORV
planning requirements contained in H.R. 3605 will not
adequately address the threat of ORV resource damage to
wilderness quality lands. In light of the severity of the
resource damage caused by ORVs and the fragility and relative
scarcity of wilderness quality lands remaining in Utah and
across the West, The Wilderness Society supports the
elimination of all ORV use on all Wilderness Study Areas and
other wilderness quality lands managed by the BLM.
Conclusion
The Wilderness Society and its members have been active
participants in the effort to identify and protect Utah
wilderness and the San Rafael Swell for at least 2 decades. TWS
has actively fought numerous threats to these magnificent
public land wilderness resources. Our understanding of these
threats--mining, road construction, and off-road vehicular use,
to name but a few--has led us to the strong conclusion that
Utah's remaining public land wilderness resources deserve the
highest level of protection Congress can afford--designation as
part of the National Wilderness Preservation System. We urge
this Committee and the Congress to amend H.R. 3605 to address
the Issues outlined in this testimony to provide full
protection for the 17 wilderness quality areas found within the
Swell.