44 



may be asking of you, we would like to be able to receive that with- 

 in ten days. 



Thank you very much. 



I would like to welcome the next panel. Mr. Richard Bailey, Jerry 

 Hughes, George Hauptman, and Richard Bowers. 



Thank you, panel. I would like to begin the testimony with Mr. 

 Ric Bailey. 



STATEMENT OF RICHARD BAILEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

 HELLS CANYON PRESERVATION COUNCIL 



Mr. Bailey. Thank you, Congresswoman, and I have fashioned 

 my testimony around oversight, because my understanding was 

 that this hearing was specifically on oversight as opposed to specifi- 

 cally on H.R. 2568. 



I want to commend you for holding this hearing, because if Con- 

 gress wished to examine a classic example of recreation use con- 

 flict, it would examine the Snake Wild and Scenic River in Hells 

 Canyon. 



If it wished to showcase a hallmark example of the Federal mis- 

 management of a National treasure, it should point to the Snake 

 River. If it wished to explore a sterling example of injustice in ad- 

 ministering competing recreation uses. Hells Canyon is where it 

 should go. 



To this very day as we sit here, the use large, loud, fast, phys- 

 ically imposing Jetboats on the Snake Wild and Scenic River has 

 never been limited or regulated. There is virtually no limit on the 

 number of daily or seasonal Jetboat launches, no speed limits, and 

 no wake or noise reduction measures. 



There are several astounding aspects of this situation that this 

 committee should know about. First, the 20-year-old law that des- 

 ignated the Snake Wild and Scenic River specifically requires the 

 control of the use and number of both motorized and nonmotorized 

 river craft, yet it has never been done. 



Second, during this 20-year-period of unlimited and uncontrolled 

 use, the number of Jetboats navigating the Snake Wild and Scenic 

 River has escalated five-fold. 



Third, in adding incomprehensible twists to this travesty is the 

 fact that for 18 years, nonmotorized river craft use has been strict- 

 ly regulated with a very distinct use cap. 



Aside from the obvious infringement of such a bizarre system on 

 nonmotorized recreationists, it has resulted in animosity between 

 the two use constituencies. But just as important, this terrible situ- 

 ation has resulted in an expectation on the part of Jetboaters of re- 

 ceiving continued preferential treatment and special privileges. 



They have taken on the attitude that this is their river and ev- 

 eryone else has to play by their rules and put up with the physical 

 intimidation, annoyance, and hazard of their form of recreation. 



I am going to digress just a little bit. I worked on this issue for 

 a number of years, and it has been an issue that has been one of 

 many issues that I have worked on, but this one has become a par- 

 ticularly emotional issue. 



I want to just say that I have repeated all of the analogies and 

 I frankly have grown weary of the rhetoric, my own as well as oth- 

 ers'. The simple fact of the matter is that for two decades, we have 



