SAWS Editorial: Wild Sky Wilderness - The long and winding journey may
soon come to an end
It has been a long and winding
journey down the road against the Wild Sky Wilderness, a proposal for
approximately 106,000 acres of public land within the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie
National Forest near Index, Washington. Unfortunately it appears now that this
journey may soon come to an end.
The other
day, I was having a conversation with Brian Hawthorne, the Public Lands Director for
the BlueRibbon Coalition, and Craig Osterman, the Executive Director
of the Treasure State Alliance. Brian was interested in
knowing where the motorized organizations in Washington State currently stood regarding Wild
Sky. Due to the leadership changes that occurred in the 110th
Congress, Wild Sky would now have a much better chance of being approved. I
promised to look into it and also told him that I would provide him with some
of the history behind Wild Sky. I reiterated that the Snowmobile Alliance of
Western States is still vehemently opposed to Wild Sky. Our organization was
opposed to this proposal even before we were officially formed in August 2004.
Of course, since SAWS is opposed to ALL new wilderness proposals, this
wasn’t any big surprise to Brian. The history laid out below is just from my
involvement and perspective.
As promised I contacted the other
major pro-motorized organizations in this state to see where they currently
stood on this issue. I heard back from the Northwest Motorcycle Association,
the Pacific
Northwest
4-Wheel Drive Association, and the Washington Off
Highway Vehicle Association. NWA and PNW 4WDA said their organizations
were still opposed to Wild Sky as they have been in the past. WOHVA stated that
their “wilderness position in general is
absolutely no more Wilderness, period”. I did not receive a response from
any of the other Washington State pro-motorized organizations that
I contacted, so I can not report their current positions and I will not make
any statements or assumptions as to their current or past positions on this
issue.
Reflecting back on when I first
became aware of Wild Sky being proposed, I can still recall the day - Thursday,
September 6, 2001. I left work early to attend a Wild Sky public meeting at Monroe High School that was sponsored by Senator
Patty Murray’s Office. I had just recently heard about this proposal and I
wanted to give her staff an ear full of my opinions on their wilderness plan.
From the very get go, Patty Murray’s office had slick answers with false
promises, which allowed them to lure in many in support of her proposal.
I spent the next several months
trying to convince my representative from the 8th congressional
district, Jennifer Dunn, along with many others, to oppose the Wild Sky Bill
that had been introduced in the House by Rep. Rick Larsen. Yet on June
7, 2002,
the Seattle Times reported that Rep. Jennifer Dunn co-sponsored the Wild Sky
bill. Her support for this bill was a big blow to motorized recreationists in Washington State. We had felt that without her
opposition to this bill, due to the fact that a portion of this proposed
wilderness was located within her district boundary, there was a good chance
that this bill would become law.
As I continued to investigate this
proposal, on January 4, 2003, I discovered a United States
Forest Service document dated July 30, 2002, with a statement from Abigail Kimbell. At the time, Ms. Kimbell was the Associate Deputy Chief, National
Forest System (you may recall that she is now the Chief Forester), where she
stated in part that “The Department has significant concerns with
approximately 36,000 acres of the 106,000 acres proposed for wilderness
designation. These acres would not be considered suitable for wilderness
designation under the provisions of the 1964 Wilderness Act or under existing Forest Service regulations and planning
direction”. She
also stated “The lands that would help meet the goals of the Wilderness Act,
approximately 70-75,000 acres….” To sum up her report, she stated
that only 70-75,000 acres of the proposed 106,000 acre wilderness meet the
definition as spelled out in the 1964 Wilderness Act.
http://www.usda.gov/agency/ocr/download/FS-Kimbell-7.30.02.pdf
On Saturday June 28, 2003, several hundred pro-access
individuals held a “Just say NO to Wild Sky” rally in Index, Washington, right
across the street from the pro-Wild Sky rally. There were many concerned
individuals, including motorcyclists, 4-wheelers, snowmobilers, and farmers,
that attended the protest rally that day. http://www.sharetrails.org/index.cfm?page=42&story=263
Sometime late in 2003, I heard
about another Wild Sky report. This time by Mark Rey,
Under Secretary, United States Department of Agriculture, which was dated June
4, 2003,
where he repeats much of the same concerns stated by Abigail Kimbell that I reference above. Secretary Rey also stated that “The lands that we believe are
appropriate for designation under the Wilderness Act, approximately 90,000
acres….” What did he say? It appears that somehow, in about one year’s
time, 15,000 to 20,000 additional acres within Wild Sky now qualify for
wilderness, which did not previously qualify when Ms Kimbell
spoke. http://energy.senate.gov/hearings/testimony.cfm?id=775&wit_id=137
Then in July, 2004, a group known
as Forest for People held a letter writing
campaign to encourage people to write letters to House Resources Committee
Chair, Richard Pombo, requesting that he oppose and block the Wild Sky bill.
The bill would soon be up for a hearing in his committee. I sent out our first SAWS alert on this letter writing
campaign (approximately a month before we officially launched SAWS). This letter writing campaign
was successful, and the Wild Sky bill was blocked by Mr. Pombo.
Wild Sky Wilderness Action Alert
In March, 2005, SAWS sent out our second alert
regarding Wild Sky, requesting that our members write their representatives in
Congress and requesting that they oppose Wild Sky. Rep. Dave Reichert had just
recently been elected to replace retiring Rep. Jennifer Dunn. We had hoped that
Rep. Dave Reichert would not support this bill, but on July
28, 2005,
Mr. Reichert became a co-sponsor in support of the Wild Sky bill just as Ms.
Dunn had previously done. This put another nail in the coffin for those of us
that wanted this area to remain open to motorized use.
Wild Sky Wilderness (S 152 and HR 851) in Washington State
Thankfully, due to Richard Pombo
being the Chairman of the House Resources Committee, Wild Sky and several other
wilderness bills, would never make it out of his committee for a full house
vote during the 109th Congress (FY 2005 – 2006). This angered the
extreme environmental organizations to no end. In the fall of 2006, Mr. Pombo,
along with several other representatives supportive of snowmobile access issues
were targeted by several of these extreme green organizations, including the
Defenders of Wildlife (DOW). Many of these targeted representatives, including Mr.
Pombo, lost their bid for re-election to the 110th Congress. DOW not only supports Wild Sky, but DOW has also opposed snowmobile
access in Yellowstone National Park. They were also a plaintiff in
the recent lawsuit to ban snowmobiles from approximately 300,000 acres around Priest Lake, Idaho, centered on the Caribou recovery
issue.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003386512_envirofallout.html
Shortly after the elections the
first week of November, 2006, I wrote an editorial regarding the leadership
changes in the U.S. House and Senate, and how these changes could affect bills
that are negative to snowmobile access to our public lands. I stated in my SAWS editorial, “It is my opinion
that the Wild Sky Wilderness bill WILL be voted into law in the 110th Congress
without Mr. Pombo as the gatekeeper in this committee”.
SAWS Editorial: The climate in D.C. regarding
anti-snowmobile access issues is beginning to heat up
On February
7, 2007,
Rep. Rick Larsen once again introduced a Wild Sky bill (HR886) in the House
with the full support of all Washington State representatives from the western
side of the state. Senator Patty Murray also submitted her Wild Sky bill (S
520) the very same day. The new Chairman of Pombo’s former Committee, Nick
Rahall, stated "Wild Sky is the top wilderness bill priority for the
committee". And sure to his word, on March 7,
2007, the
Wild Sky bill was ordered out of this committee favorably to the House by voice
vote. What this means is that sometime during this session, the full House will
vote on Wild Sky and most likely it will be approved. The Senate will in turn
vote on their Wild Sky bill, where it should easily pass. The Senate has
already approved three previous Wild Sky bills over the past several years.
Then my friends, all that is left is for President Bush to sign the final bill
and Wild Sky becomes law; the first new designated wilderness in Washington State since 1984. Not only will this
area be designated as wilderness, but Wild Sky will still contain many miles of
inventoried roads, and thousands of acres of land, which do not meet the
definition of wilderness as defined in the Wilderness Act of 1964.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/304274_edit1.asp
http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/06/11/13/100loc_a1wildsky001.cfm
Of course there were many other
individuals and organizations involved in the fight for or against the Wild Sky
Wilderness that I did not mention above for various reasons, but mainly due to
time and space considerations. I would like to extend a heart-felt thank you to
ALL of those that have been involved
in opposing the Wild Sky wilderness throughout the years.
I do believe unfortunately that
the Wild Sky bill will be signed into law this year and I felt it was important
to reflect on some of the history behind this battle. I certainly hope I am
wrong, but I am not very optimistic that it won’t become law. I am sure that SAWS will receive some emails over the
next few months as Wild Sky moves forward in Congress with some individuals
asking SAWS “what are you doing to stop Wild
Sky from becoming a
reality?” My answer will be that I don’t believe that there is anything left we
can do to stop it. It may also be time to ask these individuals “where were
you these last 5 years?”
Dave Hurwitz
Snowmobile Alliance of Western States
Copyright © 2007
Snowmobile Alliance of Western
States. All
Rights Reserved. Permission is granted to distribute this information in
whole or in part, as long as Snowmobile Alliance of Western States (SAWS) is acknowledged as the
source. If you are not yet a member of SAWS and you would like
receive our emails, please sign up on our web site today. SAWS is Free to join! http://www.snowmobile-alliance.org/