52 



The Black Hills, Badlands and Lakes Association did not support 

 the seven new wilderness areas proposed for the Black Hills and 

 Badlands region by the Sierra Club in 1991. And we do not support 

 the modified Black Hills wilderness draft bill of 1993 that now 

 seeks nine new wilderness areas within this region. 



Our opposition is based on several broad concepts important to 

 the success and viability of the visitor industry. 



This year, we estimate that about 4 million nonresidents are 

 going to come to the Black Hills to experience our region. Yeah, 

 they come for conventions in Rapid City and to gamble in Dead- 

 wood and to go see Reptile Gardens, but mostly they come for these 

 Black Hills, these mountains, because here they enjoy an impres- 

 sive array of outdoor natural resources, forests, lakes, streams, 

 wildlife, minerals, waterfalls, canyons, wonderful scenery. When 

 you think about it, even Mount Rushmore owes some measure of 

 its popularity or its success to its setting in the Black Hills. Visi- 

 tors come to enjoy the public lands of five national parks, two State 

 parks, two national forests, several wildlife refuges, caves and 

 public grasslands. They come here to relax and to recreate — that's 

 re-create — their souls, their minds, their bodies. 



The ornery thing about federal wilderness is that it sets up its 

 exclusionary zones. It sets up preserves for selected outdoorsmen 

 who have the skills, who have the stamina, and who have the time 

 to penetrate these tracts, to seek that solitude they crave. 



Not many of our customers have the outdoor skills or the equip- 

 ment to handle, much less enjoy, wilderness. In other words, most 

 of our visiting guests are city slickers. 



Wilderness designation has the effect of posting "keep out" signs 

 to many types of our customers whose preferred forms of recrea- 

 tion might include snowmobiling or four-wheeling or gold panning 

 or trail biking. They're prohibited. 



Wilderness areas, as a practical matter, are essentially off-limits 

 to the handicapped, the elderly, or the infirm. 



What we are declaring then, first, is that wilderness is neither 

 appealing nor usable to many types of tourists. It excludes too 

 many types of our customers. Alienating whole markets of custom- 

 ers by creating de facto exclusionary zones, that's just not accepta- 

 ble. 



Second, Black Hills, Badlands and Lakes Association is a firm be- 

 liever in the concept of multiple use. Just as we feel recreationa- 

 lists should not be needlessly denied access to public lands, we feel 

 that other vocations of grazing, timber, mining, and other interests 

 need to be accommodated too. We have great confidence in the 

 ability of our public management agencies to regulate, to control, 

 and to limit potencially destructive activities. And that confidence 

 is why this organization supports, with the exception of the wilder- 

 ness designation, the Forest Management plan that has been de- 

 vised by the Black Hills National Forest. 



And, finally, we believe that you almost have to wink when you 

 discuss wilderness in the Black Hills. This is not the Big Empty. 

 Truly wild country is rare here due to years of civilization and set- 

 tlement. The proponents' proposal says, and I quote, "At fto point 

 in any of our proposed wilderness areas is a person more than 2.5 



