Contact Jim: jdipeso@rep.org (253) 740-2066 / 2008 Archive / 2007 Archive / 2006 Archive / 2005 Archive

How Much Wilderness Is Not Enough?

July 20, 2006

Someone pinch me. Three wilderness bills that would add more than half a million acres to the National Wilderness Preservation System hightailed it out of Richard Pombo’s Resources Committee and made it to the House floor this week.

Pombo’s committee has been to wilderness bills what the Outer Banks and Columbia River Bar are to sailing ships – a graveyard where wilderness legislation has been dashed to pieces by treacherous ideological waves and shifty political sand bars.

Has Pombo encountered his inner Theodore Roosevelt? More likely the needs of House colleagues to accumulate some positive accomplishments they can talk about on the fall campaign trail won the day.

The three bills, one of which is highly controversial and has divided the conservation community, include:

Mount Hood - A bipartisan bill sponsored by Oregon Congressmen Greg Walden and Earl Blumenauer would grace Oregon’s signature mountain with 77,000 acres of wilderness and give Wild and Scenic status to 23 miles of nearby rivers.

Walden, a rural Republican, and Blumenauer, an urban Democrat, found common cause in a way that would bring a smile to TR, the champion of the “strenuous life.” Walden and Blumenauer hiked and camped their way around the mountain last summer, got to know each other better, talked to the locals, hashed out the issues, and sculpted a bill that Walden was able to get past Pombo.

Walden’s and Blumenauer’s walks in the woods are a refreshing contrast to the poisonous partisanship that usually stinks up the nation’s capital.

Northern California - The wildest coastline still remaining in crowded California would be protected by legislation designating 279,000 acres of wilderness in the Mendocino and Six Rivers National Forests, and BLM lands in three north coast counties.

Conservationists have been working for decades to protect the “Lost Coast.” In this relic landscape of a wilder, quieter California, hikers marvel at the black sandy beaches and hard-core surfers put themselves to the test. With bipartisan support, including the backing of Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, this may be the year that the Lost Coast will be found in the National Wilderness Preservation System.

Central Idaho - A bill sponsored by Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson (R) would designate 315,000 acres in the Boulder-White Clouds as wilderness. It would be the first designation of Idaho wilderness in more than a quarter century.

Passing an Idaho wilderness bill is like undergoing a root canal without anesthesia. The pain is not easily forgotten. It’s easy to see why many conservationists are celebrating the bill’s successful exit from committee.

But not all are. Others, such as the Idaho Wildlife Federation, are concerned that too much is being given up to capture an Idaho wilderness trophy. The bill’s transfer of public lands to nearby local governments and codification of an ORV trail between sections of wilderness were two of the issues that have caused heartburn.

The compromises that went into the Idaho bill are a new development in wilderness politics – designations included in larger packages with other provisions designed to win local support and fulfill other agendas. A bill to designate 220,000 acres of wilderness in Utah – another wilderness root canal state - also includes provisions to sell 40 square miles of BLM land for development, which critics say will feed explosive growth in the St. George area. The legislation's Utah sponsors are Senator Robert Bennett (R) and Congressman Jim Matheson (D).

Such bills raise broader issues, aside from sprawl and ORV trails. The 1964 Wilderness Act speaks eloquently of the intrinsic value of wilderness as part of our American heritage. Is the law’s vision being forsaken when wilderness becomes part of political deals designed to achieve other ends?

Is it better to bargain, throttle back wilderness proposals, give up some qualifying lands, and take half a loaf, knowing that the political ship may not come in again for years? Or is it better to shield the wilderness ideal from other political agendas and press for wilderness-only bills against heavy odds?

Hard issues. Like a voyage across dangerous waters, not easy to navigate. The conservation community, however, needs to figure them out, and soon.