83 



are approximately 1,150 pieces of private property owned in this 

 area, and they are all surrounded by the proposed preserve. 



I am also a member of the People for the West, a grassroots cam- 

 paign in support of western communities. This rapidly expanding 

 national organization is committed to the support of multiple use 

 of the public lands. 



I have a proclamation in opposition to H.R. 2153 to enter into the 

 record, signed by Diana Taylor, president of the Tulare chapter of 

 the People for the West, the largest chapter in California. I also 

 have a letter of opposition that I would like to enter into the 

 record, signed by Marvin Stonesifer, the current president of the 

 Upper Tule Association. 



Both of these groups are greatly concerned with this bill as to the 

 vagueness of it and the lack of the response to the recreation and 

 the inholders rights. They feel that with the eight scientific and 

 one lay person on the board, who is going to look after the 

 inholders interest, and who is going to look after the recreational 

 interests within this proposed preserve? 



Will the communities that use surface water be able to continue 

 doing so, or will these water sources be taken to fulfill the purpose 

 of this act? Camp Nelson Water Company users could be without 

 a water supply if their source is lost to this bill. 



Will the mountain homeowners be left without water? How will 

 the board treat the many existing special use permits for roads, 

 driveways, waterlines, powerlines, and cabins? 



And also, on the fire dangers, with the memories of the Southern 

 California fires this past season still fresh in our minds, as a land- 

 owner in the Sequoia National Forest, I have great concerns that 

 the elimination of the fire control activities in the proposed pre- 

 serve would greatly endanger my property, and possibly my life. 



Keeping the Sequoia National Forest as a multiple-use forest 

 would continue its use as a great place that could be enjoyed by 

 many families to have a family picnic, to camp, to ride horses, to 

 hunt, to fish. 



The proposed legislation would change all that. No motorized use 

 of trails would be allowed with the preserve. In the Sequoia Na- 

 tional Forest, this would eliminate 108 miles of motorcycle trails, 

 8 miles of four-wheel drive trails, and approximately 50 percent of 

 the snowmobiling area, as we know it today. These restrictions 

 could be a tremendous blow to the local resorts who rely greatly 

 on the tourist and recreational dollars for their survival. 



H.R. 2153 could be devastating to me, personally. This bill could 

 cost me as much as 50 percent of my business. This bill could also 

 cost me more money as a taxpayer, as it would undoubtedly cost 

 the Federal Government many millions of dollars to manage this 

 442,000 acres as a preserve, rather than a productive multiple-use 

 forest. 



After watching this forest for the past 45 years, and reading H.R. 

 2153, I wonder what this bill would do to enhance the beauty and 

 the health of the forest. With the vagueness and the unknowns of 

 the scientific ideas of the advisory boards, will it produce an eco- 

 system like the magnificent forest we know today? 



