54 



Wilderness areas, as a practical matter, are off-limits to the handicapped, the el- 

 derly, or the infirm. 



What we are declaring, first, is that wilderness is neither appealing nor usable by 

 many types of tourists. It excludes too many types of our customers. Alienating 

 whole markets of customers ... by creating de facto exclusionary zones . . . that is 

 not acceptable. 



Second, BHB&L Assn. is a firm believer in the concept of multiple use. Just as we 

 feel recreationalists should not be needlessly denied the access and use of public 

 lands, we feel that the vocations of grazing, timber, mining and other interests must 

 also be accommodated. We do not advocate pillaging the Hills. We have great confi- 

 dence in the ability of our public management agencies to regulate, control and 

 limit potentially destructive activities. That confidence is why this organization also 

 supports implementation of the Forest Management Plan that has been devised 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 20 years of settlement and civilization. The proponents' proposal says, and I 

 quote: "At no point in any of our proposed wilderness areas is one more than 2.5 

 miles from a road." Un-quote. We're not really sure they really mean real wilder- 

 ness. 



Tourists frequently use one particular adjective to describe the appeal of the 

 Black Hills. That word is "intimate." They are saying that they enjoy these moun- 

 tains because they can get right into them, right onto them. The Black Hills have 

 18 peaks over 7,000 feet high — and you can climb to the summit of every one. Our 

 gorges and canyons are spectacular — and totally accessible. Wildlife is plentiful — yet 

 there are no wild bears to bother campers or hikers. You can wade or fish every 

 stream and brook. Nobody's gotten life-threateningly lost in the Black Hills for dec- 

 ades. 



These Black Hills are friendly mountains, begging to be hiked, explored, experi- 

 enced. And outlining wilderness tracts on a map really does nothing to improve 

 upon that. 



More federal wilderness in the Black Hills? No, that won't be good for tourism or 

 for small business in South Dakota. We urge the Congress to reject these wilderness 

 proposals. 



Senator Pressler. Good. I very much appreciate your taking spe- 

 cific stands on these wilderness areas and other issues because that 

 helps me. 



Some in the audience may wonder what becomes of these hear- 

 ings. I'll tell you what I'm going to do with this one. I'm going to 

 give a speech on the Senate floor next week summarizing what has 

 been said here and calling my colleagues' attention to the hearing 

 record, which anybody that wishes may read. Also, I'm going to 

 mention in my speech on the Senate floor the size of the turnout 

 here on a Saturday morning. I think that you have voted with your 

 feet that you're very concerned. There's a great deal of concern 

 here about what's happening. And I appreciate this because I know 

 on a Saturday morning there are many better things to do. I've 

 held many meetings in my day, and this is about as good a turnout 

 as I've seen on a Saturday morning. So I do appreciate it. But, also, 

 I'd be willing to send anybody who wants a copy of this speech, if 

 they just leave their address with us. I'd be happy to send you 

 some of the voting records on the appeals process issue as well. 

 Also, I'm going to have a meeting with the Forest Service and 

 other officials as a result of this hearing. 



I didn't mean to interrupt you. Bill. I did appreciate the specific 

 stands that you took on some of these issues, and they are record- 

 ed. 



Larry Mann, Government Affairs representative of Homestake 

 Mining Company, Lead, SD. 



