great growth, just in the past five years or so, in the number of hikers, campers, and pack trips that go into the Wilderness. They go right past our cabin. It is interesting to note the number of young people that are doing this. Many of them are small groups of kids such as Boy Scouts, many are young married couples-these types are usually hiking. Then there are the older folks that don't want to hike that far-they usually borrow or rent horses, if they don't have their own, and do their own packing, that is they are not with a professional packer or dude ranch operator. Then there are the hunters-the vast majority of which are local Central Montana people, such as ranchers etc. who regularly every year, go back into the area to hunt in the fall or to fish in the summer.

The point I want to make here is that the argument you hear so often that the Wilderness areas are only for the wealthy, as only they can afford an expensive pack trip or dude ranch outing, is just plain wrong. The people of this type that we see all summer and fall going past our cabin, are in the very small minority. The big majority are just everyday folks who want to get out on their own and rough it. Parenthetically, I might add that all dude ranches are not so expensive that only the very wealthy can afford to patronize them. Klick's Ranch, just below our cabin is one of the best in the state as you know, yet their weekly price is $110 per person per week, including all meals, a horse to ride whenever you want it, use of heated swimming pool, use of a boat if you want to fish in the lake etc. which figures out to $15.70 per day. Where else can you take a vacation today at that figure, including meals and entertainment? As a result, we should perhaps correct the impression that only rich people go to dude ranches, as Klick's have a lot of clients who are only moderately well off. And of course they also have some wealthy ones too. But anyone who can afford any sort of vacation away from home can afford a dude ranch.

Being in the grain elevator business we get a good chance to sample the opinion of our farmers on this subject. We find that by far the majority are not only in favor of preserving the wilderness areas such as the Lincoln Back County, but they are quite vociferous in their opposition to any dam in the Sun River Canyon, such as at Lower Sun Butte or Castle Reef. This is understandable when one realizes that the Sun River Canyon is the best and most widely used access area to the Bob Marshall from this side of the mountains. (There are really three even fairly good access routes on this side-Sun River, Benchmark and via the Teton-the Sun route gets most of the volume). These ranchers use this route to go fishing and hunting, and they don't want it disturbed-same of course is true of the hunters and fishermen in and around the city of Great Falls.

I will not repeat the point that this area is particularly fragile, as this has been covered by others, but it is true. We visited on a pack trip four years ago, this back country about the first of July. Heavy rains had occurred the week before, and erosion was evident in many places. Roads, timber cutting, any sort of 'rearranging' nature, would cause very heavy erosion in much of the Lincoln back country area. Also, as has been stated, the streams are small, and would not stand heavy fishing without repeated stocking-and there are already too many streams in "open" areas that need restocking now, more than can be accommodated.

If letters to other Senators would help, please advise.
Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

U.S. SENATE INTERIOR COMMITTEE,
Washington, D.C.

C. B. ANDERSON.

KALISPELL, MONT., September 30, 1968.

GENTLEMEN: I submit this statement to you relative to S1121, proposing to establish as wilderness the Lincoln Back Country. I am past president of the Montana Wildlife Federation, a former National representative to the National Wildlife Federation, am a member of the Board of directors of the Montana Wilderness Association. Almost 30 years, or ards of my life has been involved in wilderness recreation. At the present time I am Chairman of the State Advisory Committee on Recreation of the Montana Fish & Game Commission.

I sincerely support and urge your endorsement and support of $1121. I believe that this bill resulted from recommendations and suggestions of sportsmen, wilderness supporters and conservationists. The area involves land in three different National Forests. Some of us suggested that reconsideration be made of this area, after a report from the supervisor of one of the National Forests directly affected the future of this area.

I believe that much of the opposition to the Bill comes from those timber interests that actually endorse wilderness where there is no timber whatsoever. Wilderness is like priceless porcelain-once destroyed or invaded, never replaceable. I sincerely submit that a true wilderness area of necessity must have defined boundaries, must include some timber and water areas. The portion of a wilderness area that can be used and enjoyed by man is primarily water-course

areas.

The primary question and issue as to the Lincoln Back Country is what is its primary value. The timber species in the area is primarily fir, lodgepole and some spruce. The cost ratio of constructing roads to required specifications for the harvest of this timber lowers the timber economic value considerably. This area is now accessible for quality recreational use, and with further trial construction and maintenance will enhance its recreational use value. Also it will not adversely affect the fishery problem that is so peculiar to much of our mountainous portion of Montana. Due to the cold water temperature, limited food supply, and limited species of fish that can survive and propogate, roads have adversely affected such fisheries in Montana.

I believe that mass recreational use-motorist use of an area-requires blacktop roads, expensive construction and maintenance; and also the "people" problems that results from road invasion. Many areas that now have roads are in dire need of such development before the motorist of today accepts such an area.

This area is not replaceable as a wilderness use. It has a high value as an area of the whole for wilderness, negligible value as a whole for timber or other use. Without the low quality timber area as part of the whole, it would be much like "macaroni without the cheese".

Respectfully yours,

ROBERT C. SYKES,
Judge, District Court.

TROUT UNLIMITED.

CHAIRMAN, PUBLIC LANDS SUBCOMMITTEE,
Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, New Senate Office Building,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR SIR: The Yellowstone and Montana Chapters of Trout, Unlimited are most seriously concerned in regard to the Lincoln-Scapegoat Wilderness proposal and request this letter be made a part of the hearing record.

Under Wilderness status protection of the five wilderness rivers concerned would be assured. This must be done to protect spawning grounds of one of the few remaining native stocks of the cutthroat trout from the erosion of road construction and development.

The lakes in the area as well as the small streams now provide excellent fishing and other recreational benefits. The opening up of access to this area would result in severe deterioration of this as they are not of nature that will support intensive use.

Any opening up of a wilderness area immediately destroys for all time its wilderness value, and at the same time destroys the industry based upon the wilderness condition.

The opening up of the Lincoln-Scapegoat area seems to us a short sighted action when one balances its tremendous present value against the very limited value gained by altering its status.

Yours very sincerely,

WELLS MORRIS, Jr., President, Montana Chapter. WARREN SHEPARD,

President, Yellowstone Chapter.

BIGFORK, MONT., September 20, 1968.

Senator QUENTIN BURDICK,
Subcommittee on Public Lands, Senate Interior Committee, New Senate Office

Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR BURDICK: This is in regard to the hearing that you are holding September 23 in Great Falls on S. 1121 to make the Lincoln Back Country and Scapegoat Mountain area a part of the Wilderness System.

I am a rancher and also do some guiding and outfitting. I have been in the Lincoln Back Country. It is a fine area of wild country that should be left undeveloped for wilderness use. Part of it can't be logged and a scenic road be put through it without ruining the whole area for guiding and outfitting purposes. More than 20 outfitters now make a living for themselves and their families taking guests into this area. They gross about 4 million dollars a year. This important industry would be destroyed if the area is developed.

I support S. 1121 to make the Lincoln Back Country and Scapegoat Mountain a Wilderness Area. Sincerely,

GENE SULLIVAN.

Senator LEE METCALF,
Washington, D.C.

MISSOULA COUNTY TRADES & LABOR COUNCIL,

Missoula, Mont., September 17, 1968.

DEAR LEE: At a meeting of the Missoula County Trades & Labor Council on Thursday, September 12, 1968 we voted to oppose the proposed wilderness classification for the Lincoln Back Country and parts of the Lewis and Clark and Lolo National Forests.

We would much rather have the Forest Service put their proposed management for Blackfoot-Sun River Divide Area plan into effect. We would rather see the area opened up so more people would be able to use the area in recreation, managed logging and a scenic drive such as the Forest Service proposed. Very truly yours,

LLOYD WISE, Secretary-Treasurer.

Senator QUENTIN BURDICK.
Chairman, Public Lands Subcommittee,
Interior and Insular Affairs Committec,
Washington, D.C.

CITIZENS STATE BANK. Hamilton, Mont., September 20, 1968.

DEAR SENATOR BURDICK: It is our understanding that you and members of your committee will have a hearing in Great Falls, Montana, on Monday, September 23, for the purpose of hearing arguments pro and con concerning plans to develop or leave alone, the proposed 240,500 acre Lincoln-Scapegoat Wilderness Area. It is impossible for us to appear in person, hence this letter to outline our thinking on this matter.

We are opposed to the inclusion of this 240,500 acre Lincoln-Scapegoat area being included as a part of the Bob Marshall Wilderness complex.

We have a population explosion in the United States. Furthermore, work weeks have been shortened and vacations lengthened and everything indicates that this situation will continue. The citizens of this great United States of ours have more leisure time than ever before in the history of our nation. With this leisure time, they want to enjoy the great outdoors. If it isn't readily available, to them, for access, by roads, trails and facilities, it is impossible for them to enjoy the benefits of this great outdoors as their time is limited and they plan on seeing a number of attractions during their vacation. A few, and I'm sure it is a very few, of the privileged class of people in the United States, can take three weeks or a month off and either hike or arrange for an expensive pack train trip to take them into wilderness areas. These trips are too rugged for women and children and the average male. Wilderness areas, therefore, limit the use of the area to a very, very small percentage of our population.

We believe that these areas should be opened up so the man on the street can enjoy them. That roads should be constructed, facilities provided and access available. Our two National Parks, Yellowstone and Glacier, here in Montana, are typical examples of this type of utilization.

We are heartedly in accord with the suggestions for the development of this area, as outlined in the 1968 edition entitled, "Patterns for Management Blackfoot-Sun River Divide Area," "Lolo-Helena-Lewis and Clark National Forests," which was just recently published by the United States Forest Service and which I feel sure you have a copy of in your files. We need more recreational areas for our people instead of more wilderness area, with its stringent development restrictions, which in actuality make it practically physically impossible for the average citizen of the United States of America to view the area.

Yours very truly,

CHAIRMAN, PUBLIC LANDS SUBCOMMITTEE,
Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
New Senate Office Building,

Washington, D.C.

V. C. HOLLINGSWORTH, President.

EASTERN MONTANA COLLEGE, Billings, Mont., September 19, 1968.

DEAR SIR: Since I shall not be able to attend the meeting of the committee holding a hearing at Great Falls, Montana on Sept. 25th. on the LincolnScapegoat Wilderness Proposal, I wish to have this letter entered as a part of the hearing printed record.

I wish to report to the committee my belief that this Lincoln-Scapegoat Area of 240,000 acres be made a part of the wilderness. This area should not be opened to mass recreation and timber harvesting, but should be preserved for the enjoyment of future generations under the wilderness proposal. Since man's activity in the past has been much limited in this area, it provides a tremendous place where one may enjoy solitude among the beautiful scenic mountains and valleys containing an abundance of wildlife. Let us keep it wild!

Very sincerely yours,

GEORGE H. GLOEGE. Professor of Chemistry.

SHERIDAN COUNTY SPORTSMAN CLUB,
Plentywood, Mont., September 20, 1968.

Hon. LEE METCALF,
Care of Rainbow Hotel,

Great Falls, Mont.

DEAR SENATOR METCALF: The Sheridan County Sportsman Club want to go on record as wholeheartedly supporting your Senate bill #1121 and Congressman Battin's bill #7148 in preserving the Lincoln Back Counrty as a wilderness

area.

Sincerely yours,

BERNT F. WARD, Sceretary.

MISSOULA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE,
Missoula, Mont., September 19, 1968.

RESOLUTION

To: Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Senator Henry M. Jack

son, Chairman.

Public Lands Subcommittee, Senator Quentin N. Burdick, Chairman.

From: The Missoula Chamber of Commerce, Missoula, Mont.

Whereas we believe the economic development of Montana depends in large part upon the development of national forest lands with multiple use values for optimum return as long as such management is consistent with conservation principles, and

Whereas the area proposed by S. 1121 is not of wilderness character but better suited to management under the multiple-use concept as recommended by the U.S. Forest Service, and

Whereas the resources of the area are vital to the recreational and economic needs of Western Montana, and

Whereas the full development and use of the area would benefit both the local and national economics and render the 950,000 acre Bob Marshall Wilderness area more useable: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, the Missoula Chamber of Commerce, Missoula, Montana, opposes the enactment of Senate bill 1121 for the following reasons:

1. The establishment of Wilderness Areas on the national forests by legislation, in direct opposition to the recommendation of the agency charged with and well qualified to manage such lands for the greatest good, is improper.

2. Designation for the "Lincoln Back Country" area as Wilderness area would limit the recreational use to a limited few.

3. There is a pressing need for family-type recreation on the national forests in this area and we feel the recreational potential of the "Lincoln Back Country" should be developed for all the people who may wish, now or in the future, to travel therein by foot, horseback, boat, airplane or motor vehicle and to camp, hunt, fish, ski, or participate in other recreational activities.

4. The commercial stands of timber should be managed and used to make a proper contribution to the local and national economics. Trees are a soil crop and cannot be preserved.

5. Vast areas of Western Montana have already been reserved as wilderness. The recreational use provided by these areas is only one percent of the total use on the national forests. There is no need for more.

6. The withdrawal of such areas, best suited for multiple-use management, deprives the counties in which such national forest lands are created of revenuesharing funds derived from the sale of timber. We maintain roads to service the areas leading to the national forests and schools to educate the children of families who work and play in such areas. We do not oppose the wilderness areas as such but believe the "Lincoln Back Country" deserves sensible and proper management.

Senator BURDICK,

MISSOULA, MONT., September 23, 1968.

Chairman, U.S. Senate Committee, Cascade County Courthouse,
Great Falls, Mont.

DEAR SENATOR BURDICK: I feel that I must express my feelings concerning the decision your committee is considering on the Lincoln wilderness area. It is my feeling that enough of the area has been put on the wilderness program and that this particular area be reserved for the multiple use of the public. I feel that families should be allowed to utilize the various recreational facilities which can be developed if the area is kept for multiple recreational use. I feel that if this area were locked up in the wilderness program, that my children and I would certainly not benefit by your committee's action.

I certainly hope that you will consider these views since the Forest Service has done such an outstanding job in evaluating the area and has recommended that the Lincoln Forest area be utilized for multiple recreational use.

Respectfully,

Senator QUENTIN BURDICK,

AL D. PONTRELLI.

HAMILTON, MONT., June 7, 1968.

Chairman, Lincoln-Scapegoat Back Country Hearing,

Great Falls, Mont.

DEAR SENATOR BURDICK: I am writing with regard to the proposed establishment of the Lincoln-Scapegoat Wilderness in the area north of Lincoln in western Montana.

I have been a citizen of Montana for the past twenty years, during which time I have served as a microbiologist on the staff of the Rocky Mountain Laboratory, U.S. Public Health Service, at Hamilton, Montana. My wife and I moved to Hamilton from Lincoln, Nebraska in 1948. At that time, we intended to stay in Montana only five years, as a maximum, because of the seeming remoteness and isolation of this area. As time went on, however, we soon became very fond of Montana's remoteness, the beauty of its mountains, lakes and streams, and the peace and tranquility of its forests. Now we consider this state as our permanent home and hope to be able to remain here.

Naturally we believe strongly on the preservation of our existing wilderness areas and the establishment of new areas of this kind wherever possible. Few, if any, other states are blessed as Montana is blessed in still having large tracts of land not yet showing the scars of civilization. It seems to me very short-sighted if we, as a nation, do not consider that the greatest value of these lands lies in the recreational pleasures that they, if kept in their present natural state, can give to many generations of Americans, most of them yet unborn.

Senator Eugene McCarthy, in his remarks after the tragic slaying of Robert Kennedy, mentioned that our country is no longer a frontier state. This is true in many different ways-probably some that even he did not have in mind at the time. In this period of our history when we see so frequently the barbaric acts