C. L. "BUTCH" OTTER
GOVERNOR
June 14, 2010
The Honorable Mike Crapo United States Senate
The Honorable James E. Risch United States Senate


RE: Senate Bill 3294-Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act

Dear Senators,

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on S. 3294-the Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act (CIEDRA). I apologize for not being there to testify in person; however, I would request this letter be read at the hearing and placed in the record as my official comments

I am fully aware of the effort expended by Idaho's Congressional Delegation, especially Congressman Simpson, in developing CIEDRA. Congressman Simpson has worked tirelessly for the last decade to make his dream a reality. like most Idahoans, I share his goal of preserving special places for future generations. However, while I support preserving certain areas, I cannot support protection at the cost of access, sacrificing recreational or hunting opportunities or impacting state endowment lands.

My opposition to CIEDRA and additional wilderness areas in Idaho should not surprise anyone. I recognize the need for economic development in Custer County, Clayton and the surrounding communities, but remain unconvinced that the answer is more wilderness acres and federal red-tape. Even though I support parts of this new bill (i.e. maintenance of the Murdock Creek Trail as a wheelchair-accessible trail, releasing wilderness study areas and transferring federal lands to local communities), I still believe a better alternative exists to protect the proposed areas, create economic development and recreational opportunities in the region.

CIEDRA will provide little, if any, additional protection for these special areas, their character and the landscape. All of the land proposed as wilderness is protected from future development under the most restrictive provisions of the Idaho Roadless Rule, which was authored by then-Governor Risch in 2006. A vast majority of the proposed lands also receive protection as part of the Sawtooth National Recreation Area (SNRA), which was developed by Senator Church and then-Congressman McClure in 1972.Under the Idaho Roadless Rule the three areas (Hemingway-Boulders, White Clouds and Jerry Peak Wilderness Areas) are designated as "Wild Land Recreation," which, like wilderness, directs the U.S. Forest Service to manage in a manner that shows "little evidence of human-caused disturbance and [allows] natural conditions and processes [to] be predominant." Similarly, the SNRA, which covers a large portion of the lands was specifically created:

"In order to assure the preservation and protection of the natural, scenic, historic, pastoral, and fish and wildlife values and to provide for the enhancement of the recreational values associated therewith ...."

16 U.s.c. § 460aa. The SNRA as a national recreation area is protected by Congress from development much like wilderness, but without the limits on recreational opportunities or access associated with wilderness. Even without CIEDRA the Boulder-White Clouds and Jerry Peak would be protected from future development under the Idaho Roadless Rule and SNRA.

As an alternative to designating the proposed lands as wilderness areas, Congress could consider expanding the boundaries of the SNRA to cover parts of these areas outside of the recreation area. While this option is not perfect because of previous judicial decisions concerning wolf management in the SNRA, it would provide additional certainty and protection from future development without impacting existing access or recreation. (see footnote 1)

Opportunities abound, even without CIEDRA, for people to enjoy and experience wilderness areas in Idaho. Idaho already has over 4.5 million acres of wilderness in 12 different areas, including the Sawtooth Wilderness Area (217,000 acres) and the Frank Church/River of No Return Wilderness Area (2.3 million acres) within an hour or two of the areas proposed under CIEDRA. Additionally, the Idaho Recreation Council estimates that less than 3% of visitors to national forests ever visit a wilderness area. Which again raises the question why these areas are necessary as wilderness given their close proximity to two established wilderness areas?

Not only is CIEDRA unnecessary, but it will also impact state lands. The State of Idaho currently has over 3,700 acres of endowment land within the proposed Jerry Peak Wilderness Area. Endowment lands were granted to Idaho at statehood for the express purpose of providing revenue for various state institutions. The lands in the Jerry Peak proposal support Idaho's public schools, and we are vitally concerned about our ability to continue our current and future land management activities, in light of the proposed wilderness designation. While the most recent version of CIEDRA includes two provisions that may address the state's concerns, we are nonetheless fearful that once enacted these assurances will be undermined through administrative agency opposition to state land management activities and litigation. I am concerned that agency and environmental interests may seek to undermine state management by arguing that access to state parcels is allowed only to the extent it is consistent with the wilderness designation. Courts have repeatedly ruled that wilderness values trump access provided by Section 5(a) of the Wilderness Act.

In the end, I believe CIEDRA will also negatively impact state wildlife management, mechanized recreation and grazing. Despite my opposition to CIEDRA, I would offer the following suggestions if Congress decides to proceed:

• CIEDRA should contain language that all conveyances should be treated as conditions precedent to designating the three areas as wilderness. Alternatively, should either secretary fail to complete the required transfers under CIEDRA then the designated wilderness areas should revert to their former status;
  
• Provide specific language that imposes an affirmative duty on the secretaries to purchase or exchange the state endowment lands inside the Jerry Peak Wilderness Area for parcels outside of the wilderness area, instead of just providing "adequate access";
  
• CIEDRA should explicitly state that the only limitation on hunting, fishing or trapping in these areas
  should be for public safety only and specific language should be included permitting Idaho wildlife managers to land in these areas by plane or helicopter to manage or collar wildlife;
  
• CIEDRA should contain additional language pertaining to water rights that expressly prohibits, without exception the establishment of any federal water rights for the wilderness areas; and
  
• CIEDRA should contain language that requires the Forest Service and BlM to aggressively eradicate
  all invasive or noxious species in the proposed areas.
  
  I understand the sacrifice and devotion Congressman Simpson has committed to this process, which makes opposing this legislation even more difficult for me personally. I know there is a better way to achieve all of the protections necessary to preserve these areas, increase economic activity and recreational opportunities, without locking this land up under wilderness. My dream is for these areas to thrive economically and remain open to all existing uses and recreational opportunities so Idahoans can continue to access and enjoy these lands as they do today for generations to come.
  
  As Always -Idaho, "Esto Perpetua"
  
  C.L."Butch" 0tter
  Governor of Idaho
  
  Cc: The Honorable Mike Simpson,The Honorable Walt Minnick

(1) If Congress explores expanding the boundaries of the SNRA as an alternative to designating the proposed areas as wilderness it could also revisit and balance grazing, hunting and wildlife management interests within the recreational area.

---

 

 

Press Release: Twin Falls---April 9, 2010

Idaho Recreation Council

Subject: Tarrance Group Opinion Poll of potential 2 nd Congressional District Republican Primary Voters concerning the Boulder White Cloud Wilderness Bill, otherwise known as CIEDRA

Twin Falls : A recently conducted opinion poll of Republican voters in the 2nd Congressional District indicated overwhelming opposition to Congressman Mike Simpson’s Boulder White Cloud Wilderness bill. According to Mel Quale, President of the Idaho Recreation Council, 70% of respondents opposed the bill. Quale said, “We felt confident that, based on results of a narrower poll conducted in 2008, the majority of the 2 nd District voters would oppose more wilderness in the Boulders, but we were astonished by the amount of opposition.”

Those polled were asked the question: “As you may or may not know, the proposed Boulder White Cloud Wilderness will designate 319,000 acres of the Boulder-White Cloud Roadless area as “Wilderness” and eliminate many historic recreation uses such as mountain biking and snowmobiling. Thinking about this-Do you favor or oppose this wilderness proposal?” A surprising 70% were against the bill, 14% were unsure and only 16% favored it.

Quale went on to say, “I hope the results of this poll will give Congressman Simpson some pause for thought about his pursuit of wilderness designation of the Boulder White Clouds and encourage him to listen to what his constituents are saying. The Boulder White Clouds are well managed as part of the Sawtooth National Recreation Area. Those polled in the 2 nd District spoke clearly, “leave them alone”

---

Do you enjoy single-track motorcycle trails? Enjoy meeting others who do?
Want a bigger role in maintaining trails open to motorized recreation?
BECOME A MEMBER OF MVTMA
Family membership is $30.00/yr.
Call 733-7455
or contact any Magic Valley off-highway motorcycle dealer