Advocates of a wilderness bill covering 20 million acres in five states finally got a chance to make their case before a congressional subcommittee.
dialogue April 12 at the first public hearing of the Northern
Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act (NREPA) pitted Western lawmakers
against the bill's sponsor, New York Rep. Carolyn Mulroney,
NREPA, which would establish wilderness in
Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Oregon and Washington, currently has 58
sponsors, but none hail from the affected
Rep. Pat Williams, D-Mont., repeatedly
told Mulroney to keep her hands off the wilderness issue in his
state, reports the Billings Gazette. "Take care of the
Adirondacks," he told the freshman lawmaker, referring to the
mountain range in New York. "They're a damn mess."
Coming to Mulroney's aid was Rep. George Miller,
D-Calif., who chairs the Natural Resources Committee. Miller said
representatives have an obligation to bring up issues from other
parts of the country when they are in the national
Williams was especially angered by a
full-page advertisement plugging NREPA that ran in the New York
Times a day earlier. The ad, paid for by several members of the
Sierra Club, blasted Williams' wilderness bill.
"Your tax dollars pay $1 million/week to cut
down your public forests in Montana," the ad read. "The so-called
"Montana Wilderness Bill," introduced by Rep. Pat Williams,
continues the waste. In fact our yearly losses will climb to over
$60 million per year if the Williams bill passes."
The Williams bill, which would protect just over
2 million acres as wilderness, is slated for a vote before the
House of Representatives some time in May. The conventional wisdom
among many environmentalists and politicians is that NREPA is a
political longshot while the Williams bill has a chance of gaining
Despite the critical
language in the newspaper ad, the Sierra Club endorses both NREPA
and the Williams bill, a position adopted by the group's board of
directors following an internal rift (HCN, 11/27/93). Debbie Sease,
the club's legislative director, testified at the NREPA hearing,
touting the virtues of both bills.
executive director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies, which
drafted NREPA, says "It must be a strain to do two things at once
that are mutually exclusive. I wouldn't want to be in their (Sierra
Sease admits supporting both
bills is not easy. "We're all still walking under the same banner,
but is it tense? Is it tenuous? Well, yes."
"release" language in the Williams bill remains the major bone of
contention. Sease says the language currently in the bill is
"innocuous' and would not change the federal government's current
management of the state's undesignated roadless areas or prevent
environmentalists from asking Congress to designate more wilderness
in the future. But, she says, "Our hope is that we can strip the
language from the bill on the House floor. There's no need for it."
That would please activists like Bader, who fear
that Montana Sens. Conrad Burns, R, and Max Baucus, D, might insert
release language in the Williams bill that would turn over the
state's remaining roadless areas to the timber industry.
As for NREPA, Bader says the hearing was a
successful first step for the legislation, if for no other reason
than it flustered Williams, who has long reigned over the state's
wilderness debate. "He was losing control," says Bader. "We
accomplished what we wanted to."