61 



motorized vehicles or no motorized vehicle can enter into the ma- 

 jority of the preserve, you are specifically limiting the amount of 

 people who can go in and enjoy the preserve. 



Instead of saying w^e are going to build more roads to increase 

 recreational opportunities, we are going to open this up as much 

 as possible to increased recreational opportunities, which is what 

 you are sajdng. If you go back and read the bill, it is saying exactly 

 the opposite, that we are going to limit access as much as we pos- 

 sibly can into the preserve. 



Mr. Boyd. I don't think that that is what the bill does. And I'll 

 tell you what the solution is, for you, as a Congressman, and your 

 colleagues, to specifically write into the bill that there shall be 

 roads, and you can even, at future hearings, ask where will the 

 roads be for the recreational opportunities? And you can say, where 

 are the campgrounds going to be? 



I think it's a good idea to go ahead and have all of the rec- 

 reational opportunities spelled out, because the way I understEind 

 it, with all the people that I've worked with, is that those rec- 

 reational opportunities are going to be enhanced. 



Mr. POMBO. I was in an area not far from here, this past sum- 

 mer, which was recently purchased by the Forest Service. It pre- 

 viously had been a privately owned parcel. And it had a beautiful 

 waterfall on it, and it had a road that led up to it, and it was just 

 a beautiful area. 



I was talking with the foresters from the area, and their com- 

 ment was that the road that we drove in on was going to be closed 

 to the public as part of the deal in purchasing of the property. And 

 it was several miles from the nearest road. 



So anyone who would ever want to see what I had got the oppor- 

 tunity to see this summer, after this spring when they are going 

 to close the road, will no longer have access to it unless they have 

 a backpack £ind hike in, or have the opportunity to ride a horse in, 

 if that's allowed under the plan. 



We are continuing to put more and more property off limits to 

 the general public by our actions. And with this kind of bill, with 

 the language that is included in this bill, I see more of that coming 

 into play. We are going to limit access of the general public to this 

 area, for the sake of preserving this in its natural state. 



I think that you have to be honest. If we are going to set it aside 

 and say that this is going to be off limits to the public, and it is 

 going to be preserved in 100 percent natural state, and only certain 

 scientists, biologists, or certain people that work for the Forest 

 Service are the only ones that are going to be allowed in, then you 

 have to be honest with the people and tell them that is what you 

 are doing. 



Don't try to tell them that we are going to increase recreational 

 opportunities, at the same time while in the bill itself, you are lin- 

 ing out exactly how you are going to decrease the ability of people 

 to visit this park. 



Mr. Boyd. I don't think the bill does decrease the opportunities. 

 And I think that if you have that concern, the way to remedy it 

 is for there to be an amended version of the bill with language that 

 is very specific about the recreational areas, so that the truth is 

 our guide, just as Jack Ward Thomas has said. 



80-635 0-94 -3 



