POSITION STATEMENT ON RECREATIONAL ACCESS TO LANDS WITHIN
OUR NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM
Back Country Horsemen are witnessing a pervasive trend throughout the country of increasing restrictions directed specifically at recreational opportunities intended in the Wilderness Act. These restrictions are often the result of complaints of a few wilderness extremists who simply do not like seeing horses and mules in wilderness, and find favor with an equally extremist element in the agency who justify the actions as necessary to protect wilderness character.
Back Country Horsemen of America wish to go on record as supporting the wisdom of Congress "to secure for the American people the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness" (Sec 2a, P.L. 88-577) which will be "devoted to the public purposes of recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, conservation, and historical use" (Sec 4b, P.L. 88-577). This intent was affirmed in a 1998 court case of Wilderness Watch, et al., v F. Dale Robertson, et al., Civ. No. 92-740, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, 11988 U. S. Dist. LEXIS 14457, August 31, 1998, which concludes that the statute clearly directs the Forest Service to administer the Wilderness with an eye not only toward strict conservation, but also to ensure the use and enjoyment of the American people.
The efforts of the managing agencies to place a higher emphasis on restoring pristine conditions are the result of a misguided preservation/purity bias that has been prevalent since before the Act was passed. The purity doctrine was addressed by Congress during the 1970's in two important pieces of legislation. The first was a statute adding numerous areas of forests in the eastern states to the wilderness system. The second was the Endangered American Wilderness Act of 1978. The House Report on the Endangered American Wilderness Bill (Report 95-540, July 27, 1977) specifically directed the managing agencies to abandon the purity approach. Congress clearly expected that wilderness would accommodate a wide spectrum of Americans who desired wilderness-type recreation experiences of a nature that were established at the time the law was passed. The intent of Congress (emphasized throughout the Congressional Record) was to preserve existing conditions while providing for existing and future uses. Nowhere does the Wilderness Act or Congressional Record require restoring wilderness to a condition more pristine than that which existed prior to designation.
Therefore, consistent with the intent of law, Back Country Horsemen of America request that:
Recreational and historical uses be recognized as an appropriate purpose of wilderness equal in importance to preservation of natural conditions.
Efforts to improve natural conditions and pristine character be recognized as laudable objectives only to the extent that they can be accomplished without compromising other equally important purposes and values.
Recreational pack and saddle stock be recognized as an appropriate and historical use of wilderness, where that use was established prior to that area being designated wilderness.
No curtailments of recreational equine use, or grazing incidental to that use, be allowed simply because an area is, or has been designated as wilderness, nor should social values, norms and preferences of other wilderness users be used as a reason to restrict, phase out or terminate this historical recreation use.
Page 2
POSITION STATEMENT ON RECREATIONAL ACCESS TO LANDS WITHIN OUR NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM
Restrictions and prohibitions imposed on recreational equine use, and incidental grazing, be the exception rather than the rule and be determined by site specific analysis based on biological and physical criteria rather than subjective social preferences of other wilderness users.
As a result of the unwillingness of the federal agencies to use the flexibilities authorized by Congress, we are seeing a decline in the extent and condition of the trail system. House Report 95-540 directed the agencies to "maximize efforts to construct, maintain, and improve trails and trail systems in wilderness areas, so as to facilitate access and recreational use, as well as to increase opportunities for a high quality wilderness experience for the visiting public." The report also acknowledged that "trails, trail signs, and necessary bridges are all permissible when designed in keeping with the wilderness concept" and instructed the agency in its maintenance and construction efforts to "include the use of mechanical equipment where appropriate and/or necessary."
Therefore, it is further requested that:
Minimum tool analyses, or minimum requirements analysis, consider the mandate of providing for recreation and historic use as well as the physical and biological attributes of wilderness character.
The federal agencies consider use of mechanical/motorized equipment for trail maintenance and reconstruction as an appropriate and necessary tool to accomplish the wilderness purposes in Sec. 4(b) of the Wilderness Act until the tremendous backlog of wilderness trail maintenance and reconstruction is eliminated.
Alan T. Hill, Chairman BCHA
April 27, 2001
(Sent to President Bush on April 28, 2001)
Back to Reports
