U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

40-906 PDF 2008

H.R. 5151, WILD MONONGAHELA 

ACT: A NATIONAL LEGACY FOR 

WEST VIRGINIA’S SPECIAL PLACES 

LEGISLATIVE HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, FORESTS 

AND PUBLIC LANDS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 

Serial No. 110-59 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html 

or 

Committee address: http://resourcescommittee.house.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES 

NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia, Chairman 

DON YOUNG, Alaska, Ranking Republican Member 

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan 

Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, American Samoa 

Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii 

Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas 

Frank Pallone, Jr., New Jersey 

Donna M. Christensen, Virgin Islands 

Grace F. Napolitano, California 

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Madeleine Z. Bordallo, Guam 

Jim Costa, California 

Dan Boren, Oklahoma 

John P. Sarbanes, Maryland 

George Miller, California 

Edward J. Markey, Massachusetts 

Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon 

Maurice D. Hinchey, New York 

Patrick J. Kennedy, Rhode Island 

Ron Kind, Wisconsin 

Lois Capps, California 

Jay Inslee, Washington 

Mark Udall, Colorado 

Joe Baca, California 

Hilda L. Solis, California 

Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, South Dakota 

Heath Shuler, North Carolina 

Jim Saxton, New Jersey 

Elton Gallegly, California 

John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee 

Wayne T. Gilchrest, Maryland 

Chris Cannon, Utah 

Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado 

Jeff Flake, Arizona 

Stevan Pearce, New Mexico 

Henry E. Brown, Jr., South Carolina 

Luis G. Fortun ̃ o, Puerto Rico 

Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington 

Louie Gohmert, Texas 

Tom Cole, Oklahoma 

Rob Bishop, Utah 

Bill Shuster, Pennsylvania 

Bill Sali, Idaho 

Doug Lamborn, Colorado 

Mary Fallin, Oklahoma 

Adrian Smith, Nebraska 

Robert J. Wittman, Virginia 

Steve Scalise, Louisiana 

James H. Zoia, Chief of Staff 

Rick Healy, Chief Counsel 

Christopher N. Fluhr, Republican Staff Director 

Lisa Pittman, Republican Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, FORESTS AND PUBLIC LANDS 

RAU ́ L M. GRIJALVA, Arizona, Chairman 

ROB BISHOP, Utah, Ranking Republican Member 

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan 

Neil Abercrombie, Hawaii 

Donna M. Christensen, Virgin Islands 

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey 

Dan Boren, Oklahoma 

John P. Sarbanes, Maryland 

Peter A. DeFazio, Oregon 

Maurice D. Hinchey, New York 

Ron Kind, Wisconsin 

Lois Capps, California 

Jay Inslee, Washington 

Mark Udall, Colorado 

Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, South Dakota 

Heath Shuler, North Carolina 

Nick J. Rahall, II, West Virginia, ex officio 

John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee 

Chris Cannon, Utah 

Thomas G. Tancredo, Colorado 

Jeff Flake, Arizona 

Stevan Pearce, New Mexico 

Henry E. Brown, Jr., South Carolina 

Louie Gohmert, Texas 

Tom Cole, Oklahoma 

Bill Sali, Idaho 

Doug Lamborn, Colorado 

Robert J. Wittman, Virginia 

Don Young, Alaska, ex officio 

(III) 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Hearing held on Tuesday, February 26, 2008 ....................................................... 1 

Statement of Members: 

Bishop, Hon. Rob, a Representative in Congress from the State of Utah ... 4 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 4 

Grijalva, Hon. Rau ́l M., a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Arizona ...................................................................................................... 1 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 2 

Rahall, Hon. Nick J., II, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of West Virginia ............................................................................................ 3 

Statement of Witnesses: 

Bittner, Robert, Member, Board of Directors, Mountaineer Chapter of 

Trout Unlimited ............................................................................................ 23 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 25 

Holtrop, Joel, Deputy Chief, National Forest System, Forest Service, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture ........................................................................... 5 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 6 

Manchester, Hon. John, Mayor, City of Lewisburg, West Virginia .............. 10 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 12 

Price, Michael, President, USW Local 8-89, AFL-CIO .................................. 19 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 20 

Two Resolutions submitted for the record ............................................... 22 

Sparks, Rev. Dennis, Executive Director, West Virginia Council of 

Churches ........................................................................................................ 14 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 15 

Willis, Gil, Owner and Operator, Elk River Touring Center/Elk River 

Inn and Restaurant, Slatyfork, West Virginia ........................................... 26 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 28 

(1) 

LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 5151, TO 

DESIGNATE AS WILDERNESS ADDITIONAL 

NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LANDS IN THE 

MONONGAHELA NATIONAL FOREST IN THE 

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, AND FOR OTHER 

PURPOSES. (WILD MONONGAHELA ACT: A 

NATIONAL LEGACY FOR WEST VIRGINIA’S 

SPECIAL PLACES) 

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands 

Committee on Natural Resources 

Washington, D.C. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:04 a.m. in Room 

1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Rau ́l M. Grijalva, 

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Grijalva, Bishop and Rahall. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE RAU ́ L M. GRIJALVA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Let me call the Subcommittee to order. Today we 

will be receiving testimony on H.R. 5151, the Wild Monongahela 

Act. I would like to thank all our witnesses for being here today 

and look forward to their testimony. H.R. 5151, introduced by 

Chairman Nick Rahall, designates approximately 40,000 acres of 

national forest land in West Virginia as wilderness. 

This includes three additions to existing wilderness areas and 

four new wilderness areas. H.R. 5151 includes some of the wildest 

and most wonderful areas in the wild and wonderful State of West 

Virginia, including critical habitats for various rare and threatened 

species, key areas of trout and small-mouth bass fishing, majestic 

plateaus and valleys, and excellent opportunities for recreation. 

Our full Committee Chairman is to be commended for his fine 

work on this measure. Chairman Rahall and I share a strong commitment to protecting our nation’s truly wild places. Passage of the 

Wilderness Act and subsequent statutes establish the preservation 

of wilderness as one of the fundamental purposes of Federal land 

management and one of the most important areas of jurisdiction of 

this Subcommittee. 

Those who have worked on wilderness bills know that good wilderness proposals require compromise. Input from the agencies 

which manage our Federal lands is important. The Wilderness Act 

is very clear. Congress retains sole authority to designate wilderVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:01 Nov 17, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 L:\DOCS\40906.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY
2 

ness. In practice, this means that a successful wilderness bill will 

be a consensus proposal, taking into account input from all relevant stakeholders. 

The measure before us today is such a proposal. In considering 

this and other wilderness bills, we should be careful to understand 

exactly what wilderness means and what it does not mean. For example, there are those who claim wilderness designations somehow 

conflict with the multiple use mandate of the National Forest 

System. 

In truth, wilderness is a multiple use resource. In fact, Congress 

affirmed the Wilderness Act and the Multiple Use Sustained Yield 

Act. Uses in wilderness include wildlife and watershed protection, 

hunting, fishing, recreation, grazing and even mining under certain 

circumstances. Another misconception is that wilderness somehow 

hinders fire management. 

The fact is the Wilderness Act could not be any more clear. Federal agencies may take such measures as may be necessary in the 

control of fire, insects and disease. Federal agencies are allowed to 

use airplanes, helicopters, bulldozers, fire trucks, chainsaws and 

other equipment they need to fight fires or to manage flammable 

vegetation. 

Fire is not a valid excuse for failing to designate wilderness. In 

the end, wilderness is not defined by the absence of certain activities, but rather by the presence of certain unique and invaluable 

characteristics. The answer to the often asked question why do you 

want this area to be wilderness is these areas are already wilderness. 

We simply want to preserve them as they are and as they have 

been for generations. At this point, let me turn to the Chairman 

of the Committee and the sponsor of the legislation, Mr. Rahall, for 

any statements he may have. 

Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Grijalva follows:] 

Statement of The Honorable Rau ́ l Grijalva, Chairman, 

Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands 

The Subcommittee will come to order. 

Today we will be receiving testimony on H.R. 5151, the Wild Monongahela Act. 

I would like to thank all of our witnesses for being here today and look forward to 

their testimony. 

H.R. 5151, introduced by Chairman Nick Rahall, designates approximately 47,000 

acres of National Forest land in West Virginia as wilderness. This includes three 

additions to existing wilderness areas, and four new wilderness areas. 

H.R. 5151 includes some of the wildest and most wonderful areas in the wild and 

wonderful State of West Virginia, including critical habitat for various rare and 

threatened species, key areas for trout and small-mouth bass fishing, majestic plateaus and valleys and excellent opportunities for recreation. 

Our full Committee Chairman is to be commended for his fine work on this measure. Chairman Rahall and I share a strong commitment to protecting our nation’s 

truly wild places. Passage of the Wilderness Act, and subsequent statutes, established preservation of wilderness as one of the fundamental purposes of federal land 

management and one of the most important areas of jurisdiction of this subcommittee. 

Those who have worked on wilderness bills know that good wilderness proposals 

require compromise. Input from the agencies which manage our federal lands is important but the Wilderness Act is clear—Congress retains sole authority to designate wilderness. In practice, this means that a successful wilderness bill will be 

a consensus proposal, taking into account input from all relevant stakeholders. The 

measure before us today is such a proposal. 

3 

In considering this and other wilderness bills, we should be careful to understand 

exactly what wilderness means—and what it does not mean. For example, there are 

those who claim wilderness designations somehow conflict with the multiple use 

mandate of the National Forest System. In truth, wilderness is a multiple use resource—a fact Congress affirmed in the Wilderness Act and the Multiple Use Sustained Yield Act. Uses in wilderness include wildlife and watershed protection, 

hunting, fishing, recreation, grazing, and even mining, under certain circumstances. 

Another misconception is that wilderness somehow hinders fire management. The 

fact is, the Wilderness Act could not be more clear: ‘‘Federal agencies may take such 

measures as may be necessary in the control of fire, insects, and diseases.’’ Federal 

agencies are allowed to use airplanes, helicopters, bulldozers, fire trucks, chain saws 

and any other equipment they need to fight fires OR to manage flammable vegetation. Fire is not a valid excuse for failing to designate wilderness. 

In the end, wilderness is not defined by the absence of certain activities but rather by the presence of certain unique and invaluable characteristics. The answer to 

the often-asked question, ‘‘why do you want this area to be wilderness?’’ is, these 

areas already are wilderness, we simply want to preserve them as they are and as 

they have been for generations. 

I’d now like to recognize Chairman Nick Rahall, the sponsor of this bill, for any 

statement he may have. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE NICK J. RAHALL, II, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WEST 

VIRGINIA 

Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Chairman Grijalva. I appreciate you 

and Ranking Member Bishop for reserving some of this important 

Subcommittee’s valuable time for the purpose of holding a hearing 

on legislation to designate new wilderness areas within the 

Monongahela National Forest. The Wild Monongahela Act was introduced in the House by Representatives Mollohan, Capito and 

myself, and in the Senate by Senators Byrd and Rockefeller. 

This bill is truly about the heart and soul of West Virginia. As 

West Virginians, we are intimately connected to our land. Our 

roots are planted deeply in our misty hollows and our majestic 

mountains. 

We know that we will be judged by future generations on our 

stewardship of this land that is West Virginia, and so I believe that 

it is of paramount importance that we once again set aside some 

of God’s handiwork in our forests by preserving these Federal lands 

in their pristine state. 

I want to thank those West Virginians who are with us today. 

My good friend, the Mayor of Lewisburg, John Manchester, is here 

to discuss how many communities view wilderness as an engine of 

economic development. Also with us is The Reverend Dennis 

Sparks with the West Virginia Council of Churches. 

Reverend Sparks has compiled a wonderful brochure describing 

how in wilderness we learn about God, how we cultivate our communities and how we cleanse our minds and our spirits. The working men and women of West Virginia are represented today by 

Mike Price with the AFL-CIO, which has endorsed a resolution 

supporting new wilderness in the State. 

Also here today is Bob Bittner, Jr., who is representing Trout 

Unlimited and West Virginia’s avid anglers. I am also pleased that 

Gil Willis is able to join us representing businesses who depend on 

outdoor recreation for their livelihood. There are several other West 

Virginians who have traveled to our nation’s capital today to attend 

4 

this hearing, and I want to thank them as well for all their hard 

work on this legislation. 

I have hiked with many of them in many parts of this proposed 

area—in some parts, not many. It is a very big area, and I have 

not done many parts of it, but I have done a small part. Last, but 

certainly not least, while he is not a witness, in the audience is the 

distinguished and highly capable supervisor of our Monongahela 

National Forest, Clyde Thompson. 

So I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, again for having this 

hearing, and Ranking Member Bishop, and thank you for recognizing me. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Chairman, let me turn to our Ranking 

Member, Mr. Bishop, for any statement he may have. 

Sir. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ROB BISHOP, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF UTAH 

Mr. BISHOP. Thank you, Chairman Grijalva and Chairman 

Rahall. I appreciate this opportunity of being here and listening to 

the discussion about wild and wonderful West Virginia. You did not 

tell which of our Representatives from West Virginia are wild and 

which ones are wonderful, but I am assuming you will do that as 

time goes on. 

If it is OK, I would ask unanimous consent that a full and complete statement be entered into the record. I will say that you seem 

in first blush to have a bill that has the unanimous support of the 

House delegation that has been studied by the Forest Service in 

the seven areas that are mentioned in this bill with a few minor 

adjustments seem to have gone through a rigorous study. 

As long as this bill that we have before us that was introduced 

that is unanimously supported seems to have cleared a lot of the 

hurdles it could easily be done. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, Mr. Bishop. Without objection, the 

material is entered into the record. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bishop follows:] 

Statement of The Honorable Rob Bishop, a Representative in Congress 

from the State of Utah 

My general approach to wilderness bills and other designations that result in 

highly restrictive land use policies is that we should first make sure that we are 

not foreclosing future access to resources that may be critically important to our national well-being and second, that we show some deference to the people who live 

in the area and are most affected by these decisions. 

Those of us who live in the western public land states know that Washington politicians and bureaucrats can be very generous in giving in to the demands of environmental special interest groups at the expense of local people whose daily lives 

and whose ability to provide for their families can be devastated by such federal 

actions. 

Sometimes we enact ‘‘feel good’’ bills and only later discover the unanticipated, 

real world side-effects. Therefore, I look forward to hearing today’s testimony and 

I thank the panel members for their willingness to give us their thoughts on this 

bill and to answer our questions. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Let me call our first panelists up if we may. For 

this panel, as well as the second set of panelists, your statement 

in its entirety will be entered into the record. Any additional mateVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:01 Nov 17, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 L:\DOCS\40906.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY
5 

rials you want to add will also be entered into the record. We have 

five minutes for your testimony. 

With that, let me introduce the Deputy Chief, national Forest 

System, Mr. Holtrop, who has been with us before. Welcome back, 

sir, and with that, your testimony, sir. 

STATEMENT OF JOEL HOLTROP, DEPUTY CHIEF, 

NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM, USDA FOREST SERVICE 

Mr. HOLTROP. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Chairman Rahall, 

Chairman Grijalva, Ranking Member Bishop, it is my privilege to 

be able to submit my formal testimony for the record, but I want 

to sum that up very briefly by making a few key points. I would 

like to start off by expressing my personal appreciation and administration’s appreciation to you for this bill because it allows us to 

focus on something that we at the Forest Service care very deeply 

about and that is wilderness. 

The Forest Service has a long history of establishing areas that 

should be managed for their wild character. We have a long history 

of managing wildernesses that sustain those wilderness qualities, 

and we are proud of that long history. 

Mr. Chairman, I took an opportunity just a few weeks ago to 

visit some of the areas, many of the areas, that are proposed in this 

bill. I saw and visited four of the areas of the seven that are being 

proposed, and I can tell you that they do have a special wildness 

about them that Americans should be able to enjoy for generations 

to come. 

In 2006, the Monongahela National Forest recommended wilderness designation for four of these areas: Cheat Mountain, Cranberry Expansion, Dry Fork Expansion and Roaring Plains West. 

These areas have outstanding wilderness attributes, and the administration strongly supports their wilderness designation. 

We commend the sponsors for including them in this bill. We 

also appreciate the wilderness attributes of the other three areas 

in this bill: Big Draft, the Dolly Sods Expansion and Spice Run. 

The Monongahela National Forest evaluated these areas as part of 

its forest plan revision, and we came to the conclusion that these 

three areas meet the criteria for wilderness. 

To protect their wilderness attributes while striking a balance 

among multiple uses we designated these three areas as 

semiprimitive, nonmotorized areas. Semiprimitive, nonmotorized is 

one of the most restricted allocations the Forest Service can give, 

and we have no objection to designating these three areas as wilderness. 

We do have a few concerns about some of the proposed wilderness boundaries, but we are confident that they can be fixed 

through adjustments that are mostly minor. For example, we have 

some campgrounds that should be adjusted away from the wilderness boundary, power line corridors that we should provide some 

buffer between the power line and the wilderness and perhaps the 

biggest adjustment might be to the Spice Run proposed area. 

The southwestern corner of Spice Run, a 974 acre area, was not 

evaluated for wilderness in the forest plan, and if motorized access 

issues were to come up on three parcels of private land in that portion of the Spice Run area, that would create some issues for us. 

6 

Again, we feel that we have some minor boundary adjustments 

that we think are consistent with the spirit of this wilderness bill 

that would accomplish a lot of the management concerns that we 

have around a few of these minor boundaries. We would appreciate 

the opportunity to present those boundary proposals and to work 

with the Subcommittee on that issue. 

I have been hiking, and camping and climbing in wilderness for 

as long as I can remember. My family and my agency are passionate about wilderness. The Forest Service is charged with stewardship for 407 wilderness areas, and that is a third of the national 

wilderness preservation system. Together with America’s other wilderness stewards we are dedicated to protecting and managing 

America’s wildest lands. 

We strongly support the spirit of this bill, and we are confident 

that working together we can arrive at final wilderness boundaries 

that are sound and manageable. I am pleased to be able to represent Forest Supervisor Clyde Thompson and other members of 

the staff at the Monongahela National Forest who are here with us 

today and all of the people of West Virginia in looking forward to 

a good resolution to this issue. 

I am pleased to be able to answer any questions that you might 

have at this time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Holtrop follows:] 

Statement of Joel Holtrop, Deputy Chief for the National Forest System, 

U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to 

appear before you today to provide the Administration’s view on the Wild 

Monongahela Act: A National Legacy for West Virginia’s Special Places. 

H.R. 5151 would designate about 47,128 acres of the Monongahela National 

Forest as wilderness, adding to three existing wilderness areas and designating four 

new ones. The Administration supports designation of Cheat Mountain, Cranberry 

Expansion, Dry Fork Expansion, and Roaring Plains West as wilderness. For all 

four areas, wilderness designation would be consistent with recommendations by the 

Monongahela National Forest in its 2006 forest plan revision. 

We do not object to wilderness designation for the other three areas proposed by 

the bill. In the environmental impact statement that accompanied the 2006 forest 

plan revision, the Monongahela National Forest determined that Big Draft, the 

Dolly Sods Expansion, and Spice Run are all available for wilderness designation. 

The Monongahela National Forest designated all three areas as ‘‘semiprimitive nonmotorized’’ in order to help maintain their roadless attributes over time while still 

permitting other established uses. 

The Monongahela National Forest has five existing wilderness areas, all of which 

offer outstanding wilderness experiences. I have personally visited some of the seven 

areas proposed in this bill, and I believe that all seven areas have outstanding wilderness attributes. All are rugged forested land minimally affected by outside forces, 

with natural processes operating and vestiges of human impacts (such as old roads 

and clearcuts) rapidly healing over. Ranging in elevation from just under 2,000 feet 

to over 4,000 feet, these landscapes harbor rare ecosystems (such as high-elevation 

red spruce) and habitat for federally listed species. 

That is why the Monongahela National Forest recommended four of the seven 

areas for wilderness study in its revised forest plan in 2006: Cheat Mountain, Cranberry Expansion, Dry Fork Expansion, and Roaring Plains West. These units represent nearly 27,700 acres recommended for wilderness study. The Administration 

supports their inclusion in this bill. 

In its forest plan revision, after consulting with the public, the Monongahela National Forest decided not to include Big Draft, the Dolly Sods Expansion, and Spice 

Run among the areas recommended for wilderness. Instead, we designated all three 

as semiprimitive nonmotorized areas, one of the most restrictive allocations that the 

Forest Service can give. This management prescription protects their naturalness 

7 

while permitting such popular and relatively low-impact uses as mountain biking. 

It also allows the manipulation of vegetation to create wildlife openings. 

However, we recognize the wilderness eligibility of all three areas, and their designation as wilderness would be consistent with values that the Monongahela National Forest’s revised forest plan is designed to protect. In other locations, the 

Monongahela National Forest maintains opportunities for mountain biking and for 

manipulating vegetation to improve wildlife habitat. Therefore, the Administration 

would not object to including Big Draft, the Dolly Sods Expansion, and Spice Run 

in this bill if boundary adjustments and other issues are addressed. 

If all seven areas are designated as wilderness, we would suggest adjusting some 

of the proposed boundaries to avoid conflicts and make the wilderness areas more 

manageable. Some proposed boundaries appear to be based on the boundaries of the 

roadless areas analyzed during the 2006 forest plan revision. Those roadless area 

boundaries were not intended to define wilderness boundaries. Adjustments should 

be made to account for mapping errors; to provide access to state and private land; 

to exclude developed sites and managed wildlife openings; to add offsets for 

powerlines and other features inconsistent with wilderness; and to align the boundaries with existing wilderness boundaries. 

The largest boundary question regards the southwestern corner of the proposed 

Spice Run unit, an area of 974 acres. This area lies outside the area that the 

Monongahela National Forest evaluated for wilderness in its 2006 forest plan because it did not meet the criteria for roadless areas. Should it become designated 

wilderness, motorized access to three adjacent parcels of private land could become 

an issue. 

We would like to work with the bill’s sponsors and the subcommittee to adjust 

the boundaries to accommodate these and other concerns. The Forest Service has 

prepared a set of proposed boundary adjustments, taking care to ensure that our 

proposed adjustments would not detract from the overall wilderness legislation. We 

would welcome the opportunity to provide this information to the subcommittee. 

Removing most of the structures incompatible with wilderness would not be necessary if our proposed boundary adjustments were made. Even with the adjustments, however, a hiking shelter and about 9 miles of road would remain within 

the wilderness boundaries. The shelter would likely be allowed to deteriorate and 

then removed. Unless converted to trails, the roads (currently closed to vehicular 

traffic) would require decommissioning to protect water quality and other natural 

resource values. The Monongahela National Forest would conduct an analysis to determine the appropriate management actions and then make the investments needed, subject to available appropriations, to remove culverts, construct trail, or contour 

the land to reduce erosion. 

We strongly support the spirit of this legislation, and we confirm that all seven 

areas proposed for wilderness designation meet the criteria for wilderness. Working 

with the subcommittee, we are confident that we can remedy boundary deficiencies 

and establish final wilderness boundaries that are sound and manageable. 

This concludes my prepared statement, and I would be pleased to answer any 

questions you might have. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you very much, sir. Thank you for your 

positive testimony today. You have mentioned in your testimony 

many of these areas were recommended as wilderness under the 

forest plan, and the others are currently managed as 

semiprimitive, nonmotorized areas. Could you give us a definition 

of semiprimitive, nonmotorized areas? 

Mr. HOLTROP. I can. It is very restrictive allocation of land in the 

forest plan. It is an area that is being managed for disbursed recreation opportunities, back country type opportunities, and it is an 

administrative designation as opposed to a legislative designation, 

and it does allow some minimum additional uses such as mountain 

biking and some of those types of activities and perhaps some wildlife opening work. 

Those were some of the issues, multiple uses, that we were looking at that led to that designation in the forest plan. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you. One last question. You raise the issue 

of removing culverts on page 4 of your testimony. Would the minVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:01 Nov 17, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 L:\DOCS\40906.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY
8 

imum tools policy already in the Wilderness Act allow you to remove the culverts if necessary in these wilderness areas? 

Mr. HOLTROP. Yes, it would. If that is the approach that we 

would need to take. If the areas were designated wilderness, and 

we had culverts that we felt needed to be removed, we would do 

a minimum tools analysis and do whatever was necessary to protect the resource. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you. Mr. Bishop. 

Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Holtrop, appreciate you being here again. I am 

looking at a map right now of these proposed areas. Can you just 

tell me the names of the four areas that were recommended by the 

Forest Service to be wilderness? 

Mr. HOLTROP. Yes, I can. It is Cheat Mountain, the Cranberry 

Expansion, the Dry Fork Expansion and Roaring Plains West. 

Mr. BISHOP. And the three areas that you say have some characteristics but are to be added as well would be the Spice Run and 

Big Draft? 

Mr. HOLTROP. Spice Run, Big Draft and the Dolly Sods North. 

Mr. BISHOP. OK. Did you do a complete inventory of all the forest 

lands that you have in this area? 

Mr. HOLTROP. Yes, we did. 

Mr. BISHOP. And you are satisfied that these seven fit those requirements? 

Mr. HOLTROP. Yes. Through the forest planning process we 

looked at a total of 18 roadless areas, these seven being seven of 

those 18, and so I am very satisfied that as we went through that 

analysis that these areas do meet the requirements of wilderness. 

Mr. BISHOP. I guess if you had recommended four only then there 

probably are not a whole lot of others that would be coming even 

close to that kind of category, right? 

Mr. HOLTROP. Of the roadless areas that were analyzed through 

the forest planning process many of them had wilderness characteristics and ended up with a designation in the forest plan again 

of the semiprimitive, nonmotorized to protect that wild nature. 

Again, the reasons for not proposing them for wilderness had 

more to do with existing uses or opportunities for other uses that 

through the public process involved in that forest plan process it 

seemed like that was the right place for us to go. 

However, as the testimony mentions, the purposes of the forest 

plan are largely met with a wilderness designation in these three 

areas, and we would need to find opportunities for those uses in 

other areas in the forests, and we would be committed to doing so. 

Mr. BISHOP. Well, the original definition of wilderness in the 

original act was simply untrampled by human man. Even though 

one of those areas does have a shed and a road, that is close 

enough for government work, right? Let me ask you a better question than that one. 

Mr. HOLTROP. I would appreciate that. 

Mr. BISHOP. That was rhetorical anyway. Are there any areas 

within these proposed wilderness boundaries that have been acquired or have been improved with funds from duck stamps or the 

excise tax on hunting and fishing through acts like Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson? 

Mr. HOLTROP. I am sorry. 

9 

Mr. BISHOP. Are there any areas of the proposed wilderness 

boundaries, these seven sections, that were either acquired or improved from funds that came from duck stamps or the excise tax 

on hunting and fishing through bills like the Pittman-Robertson 

bill and the Dingell-Johnson bill? 

Mr. HOLTROP. I don’t have the answer to that question. Be more 

than happy to get an answer for that for the record. 

Mr. BISHOP. And if it is not, that is not an issue. If it is, and 

those monies were specifically taken for management purposes, 

how does that impact if wilderness therefore lacks the kind of management purposes for which that money was acquired and which 

that money—that money is not going to be used if the management 

style does not fit into the concept of wilderness, so would that have 

an impact on the decision if indeed any of those lands were acquired through that means of funding? 

Mr. HOLTROP. I would have to look into that a little bit more 

than I am feeling comfortable in responding to that right now. 

There is plenty of hunting opportunities within wilderness, so I am 

not absolutely certain that I would say that would be inconsistent 

with the purposes of—— 

Mr. BISHOP. Yes, and I don’t think it would prohibit any kind 

hunting activity. It would be the management activities of the 

Forest Service that may have some kind of impact. We have plenty 

of time to look at that between now and the bill further moving 

through this session, so if you could look at that I would appreciate 

it. 

Mr. HOLTROP. Be happy to do that. 

Mr. BISHOP. I will yield back or I will yield to you, sure. 

Mr. RAHALL. Appreciate the gentleman from Utah yielding. In response to your question, it is my understanding that no funds from 

those acts that you mentioned were used for acquisition of these 

proposed wilderness areas, but rather the funds were created by 

the Weeks Act of 1911, as were most all of the wilderness areas 

in the east. I believe that is my understanding of it. 

Mr. HOLTROP. The vast majority of the National Forest System 

lands in the east were acquired through the Weeks Act. That is 

correct. 

Mr. BISHOP. I appreciate it. That may well be the case and may 

be a moot issue, but if you could give me some further detail on 

that I would be appreciative. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, Mr. Bishop. Mr. Chairman, any questions? 

Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just one question. I 

know the answer to it, but I want to be clear and get it on the 

record anyway. I am sure that you are aware that the Governor of 

West Virginia now has a proposal to designate about 4,000 acres 

more of wilderness in what is in the delegations’ bill. 

The Governor supports five of the seven areas in the delegations’ 

bill, but he would drop Cheat Mountain and Spice Run, and he 

would add three more areas, Roaring Plains East and North and 

a portion of Seneca Creek. As I said, I know the answer to the 

question but, for the record, were these three areas considered by 

the Forest Service as part of the roadless review for their wilderness potential as part of the planning process? 

10 

Mr. HOLTROP. Yes, they were. Those are three of the 18 areas 

that I referred to earlier. Through the forest plan designation process each of them were designated for the semiprimitive, nonmotorized. 

Mr. RAHALL. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you. If there is no further questions from 

my colleagues, thank you very much for your testimony. Appreciate 

it. 

Mr. HOLTROP. Thank you very much. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Let me call the next panel up. The Honorable 

John Manchester, Mayor, City of Lewisburg; Reverend Dennis 

Sparks, Executive Director, West Virginia Council of Churches; Mr. 

Mike Price, West Virginia AFL-CIO; Mr. Bob Bittner, Jr., Mountaineer Chapter of Trout Unlimited; Mr. Gil Willis, Elk River Inn 

& Restaurant. Gentlemen. 

Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Yes, sir? 

Mr. RAHALL. If I may just for a moment while they are taking 

their seats. These are a few of the West Virginians that I recognized in my opening comments. 

There are many other West Virginians in attendance, I might 

add, and I know I still will miss some, but I do want to recognize 

Mary Whimer and Beth Whittle, David Seville, Matt Keller, many 

of these individuals with whom, including the Mayor of Lewisburg, 

I hiked portions of the Big Draft a year or two ago. 

I want to welcome them, as well as those I have missed, to this 

Subcommittee hearing this morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me begin with The 

Honorable John Manchester for his testimony. 

Mayor. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN MANCHESTER, 

MAYOR, CITY OF LEWISBURG 

Mr. MANCHESTER. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Rahall, distinguished Members of the Subcommittee, good morning. My name is 

John Manchester, and I am Mayor of Lewisburg, West Virginia, a 

small city of 3,700 people just a few miles from the southern end 

of the Monongahela National Forest in the southeastern part of the 

state. 

I am speaking in favor of H.R. 5151, the Wild Monongahela Act, 

and I appreciate the opportunity to be with you today. As I am 

sure you have heard regularly from Congressman Rahall and the 

other Members of the West Virginia congressional delegation, West 

Virginia is a unique place with unique people. 

My city, Lewisburg, is a good example. Founded in 1872, we are 

one of the oldest towns in West Virginia and the County Seat of 

Greenbrier County. Our lifeblood is tourism, and we have been 

careful to preserve our historic downtown, which is thriving. Our 

vibrant downtown stands in marked contrast with many other 

downtowns throughout West Virginia and across the country which 

have not recognized the value of the asset that an historical downtown represents. 

It is something special, something in which we take pride, something that forms a strong foundation for our local economy and 

11 

something we can pass on to those who follow. As an elected official, I believe it is my charge to maintain assets entrusted to me 

and to pass them along in as good or better condition to my successors. 

I feel the same way about the wild areas of the Monongahela National Forest that would be protected under this legislation. The 

wilderness areas described in this bill are special places to my city, 

to West Virginia and to the rest of the nation. They are natural assets that should be valued and protected as they are, not only for 

the value they offer us today but for the even greater value they 

will have for future generations. 

Roadless areas are scarce in the eastern United States, and if we 

do not take steps now to recognize their value and protect them I 

feel they will disappear year after year in small increments until 

they no longer have real value as wild areas, areas where man 

truly is a visitor amidst the natural world and not the dominant 

feature. 

The scarcity of roadless wild areas that would be protected in 

this bill create specific value to communities like Lewisburg which 

serve as access points to them. Several months ago I had the pleasure of exploring one of the wild areas covered in this bill, the area 

known as Big Draft, with the Chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, Congressman Rahall, and it was a wonderful 

day. 

Big Draft is located just 14 miles from Lewisburg. The proposed 

Spice Run Wilderness Area is about 30 miles away. Lewisburg is 

a natural staging area for visitors and residents alike who seek out 

designated wilderness areas. Just as having a well-preserved historic downtown helps our local economy, so, too, does having designated wilderness areas at our doorstep. 

The added economic stimulus to our tourism-based economy is 

one reason why both Lewisburg City Council and the Greenbrier 

County Convention and Visitors Bureau support additional wilderness areas in the Monongahela National Forest, especially those 

proposed for Greenbrier County, which currently has none despite 

having nearly 108,000 acres of national forest within the county. 

Lewisburg also supports the protection of Big Draft and Spice 

Run in particular because they are a part of the headwaters of the 

Greenbrier River, the source of Lewisburg’s water system, the largest water utility in Greenbrier County, providing top quality water 

to over 10,000 people in our valley. 

Lewisburg is not alone in local government support for additional 

wilderness areas. The following cities and towns have passed resolutions in support of designating additional wilderness areas in the 

Monongahela National Forest: Montgomery, Morgantown, Nitro, 

Nutter Fort, Shepherdstown, Weston, Renick, Whitehall, Grafton 

and Matoaka, as well as the Fayette County Commission. 

I submit into the record Lewisburg’s wilderness support resolution, which was attached to my remarks. The other resolutions are 

very similar. I think H.R. 5151, the Wild Monongahela Act, is a 

very good bill and a great start toward protecting many of the special places within the National Forest in West Virginia, and I hope 

you will support it. 

12 

In closing, I wish to express my appreciations to the Members of 

this Committee for their interest in the wild areas in West Virginia, and in particular, I would like to recognize the leadership of 

West Virginia Congressman Nick Rahall for bringing this legislation to this point. Thank you. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I will now turn to Reverend Sparks for your testimony. 

Sir. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Manchester follows:] 

Statement of The Honorable John Manchester, 

Mayor, Lewisburg, West Virginia 

Good morning. 

My name is John Manchester, and I am mayor of Lewisburg, West Virginia, a 

small city of 3700 people, a few miles from the southern end of the Monongahela 

National Forest in the southeastern part of the state. I am speaking in favor of 

House Bill 5151, The Wild Monongahela Act. I appreciate the opportunity to be with 

you today. 

As I am sure you have heard regularly from Congressman Rahall and the other 

members of the West Virginia Congressional delegation, West Virginia is a unique 

place with unique people. My city, Lewisburg, is a good example. Founded in 1782, 

we are one of the oldest towns in West Virginia and the county seat of Greenbrier 

County. Our lifeblood is tourism, and we have been careful to preserve our historic 

downtown which is thriving. Our vibrant downtown stands in marked contrast with 

many other downtowns throughout West Virginia and across the country which 

have not recognized the value of the asset that an historical downtown represents. 

It is something special, something in which we take pride, something that forms a 

strong foundation for our local economy, and something we can pass on to those who 

follow. As an elected official, I believe it is my charge to maintain assets entrusted 

to me and to pass them along in as good or better condition to my successors. 

I feel the same way about the wild areas of the Monongahela National Forest that 

would be protected under this legislation. The wilderness areas described in this bill 

are special places to my city, to West Virginia and to the rest of the nation. They 

are natural assets that should be valued and protected as they are—not only for 

the value they offer us today but for the even greater value they will have for future 

generations. Roadless areas are scarce in the eastern United States, and if we do 

not take steps now to recognize their value and protect them, I fear they will disappear, year after year in small increments until they no longer have real value as 

wild areas—areas where man truly is a visitor amidst the natural world and not 

the dominant feature. 

The scarcity of roadless, wild areas that would be protected in this bill creates 

specific value to communities like Lewisburg which serve as access points to them. 

Several months ago I had the pleasure of exploring one of the wild areas covered 

in this bill—the area known as Big Draft—with the Chairman of the House Natural 

Resources Committee, Congressman Rahall. Big Draft is fourteen miles from 

Lewisburg. The proposed Spice Run Wilderness Area is about 30 miles away. 

Lewisburg is a natural staging area for visitors and residents alike who seek out 

designated wilderness areas. Just as having a well preserved, historic downtown 

helps our local economy, so too does having designated wilderness areas at our doorstep. The added economic stimulus to our tourism based economy is one reason why 

both Lewisburg City Council and the Greenbrier County Convention and Visitors 

Bureau support additional wilderness areas in the Monongahela National Forest, especially those proposed for Greenbrier County, which currently has none, despite 

having nearly 108,000 acres of the national forest within the county. 

Lewisburg also supports the protection of Big Draft and Spice Run in particular 

because they are part of the headwaters of the Greenbrier River, the source of 

Lewisburg’s water system, the largest water utility in Greenbrier County, providing 

top quality water to over 10,000 people in our valley. 

Lewisburg is not alone in local government support for additional wilderness 

areas. The following cities and towns have passed resolutions in support of designating additional wilderness areas in the Mon—Montgomery, Morgantown, Nitro, 

Nutter Fork, Shepherdstown, Weston, Renick, White Hall, Grafton, and Mataoka— 

as well as the Fayette County Commission. I submit into the record Lewisburg’s wilderness support resolution. The other resolutions are very similar. 

13 

I think House Bill 5151, The Wild Monongahela Act, is a very good bill and a 

great start toward protecting many of the special places within the national forest 

in West Virginia, and I hope you will support it. 

Thank you. 


40906.003.eps
14 

STATEMENT OF REVEREND DENNIS SPARKS, EXECUTIVE 

DIRECTOR, WEST VIRGINIA COUNCIL OF CHURCHES 

Rev. SPARKS. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Members of the 

Committee and Chairman Rahall. I am the Reverend Dennis 

Sparks, Executive Director of the West Virginia Council of Churches. It is a privilege for me today to testify in support of the Wild 

Monongahela Act, H.R. 5151, and offer in part a theological justification for the bill. 

The West Virginia Council of Churches is one of the oldest organizations in the state. Our mission is to make more visible the 

unity of the church, provide a Christian witness on public issues 

and engage in cooperative mission and service for all West Virginians. The Council of Churches currently includes 14 denominations in the state whose membership rolls approach 600,000. 

As an expression of our concern for the environment, the Council 

has endorsed the wilderness recommendations of the West Virginia 

Coalition. It is our belief that each of the 15 special wild areas 

identified by the coalition ultimately deserves to be permanently 

protected as wilderness by Congress. 

In 2006, we expressed this support by cosponsoring the book 

God’s Gift of the Wild and Wonderful Land: A Christian Declaration on Spiritual Values of West Virginia’s Monongahela National 

Forest, the booklet that Congressman Rahall lifted up earlier. This 

declaration, which I would like to provide to the Subcommittee for 

the hearing record, described the many spiritual values that wilderness can provide and called for greater wild land protection for 

the forest. 

Some here today may wonder why our state’s faith community 

cares about wilderness protection for the Monongahela National 

Forest. In fact, many of my fellow West Virginians have long found 

inspiration in this beautiful forest. As Bob Marshall noted in a 

2007 column in the Charleston Gazette, a pastor tells of asking his 

congregation when have you felt closest to God, and reports they 

rarely answer during my sermons. 

Like them, many of us in West Virginia find some of our most 

profound spiritual experiences in the greatest cathedral of them all, 

in solitude beside still waters or in the deep forest lit by sunlight 

dappled through the forest canopy. Bob’s article gives an eloquent 

testimony on behalf of wilderness. 

I request, also, that it be part of the hearing record. As I will explain, the Council of Churches feels that areas in H.R. 5151 should 

remain untouched and stand as permanently protected natural cathedrals. We view preserving such areas as a form of tithing, setting apart some of the natural bounty that God has given us as a 

wild sanctuary. 

We base this position on our shared Christian belief that: 1] our 

wild forests are part of God’s creation; and 2] wilderness, if protected, provides a number of important spiritual and natural beliefs; and 3] we have a spiritual responsibility for protecting our 

forests and wilderness resources on Earth. 

First, God’s creation. As Psalm 24:1 proclaims, the Earth is the 

Lord’s and the fullness thereof the world and all that dwell in it. 

In Genesis, God proclaimed the goodness of the trees and other 

plant life which God had created and in Romans says for since the 

15 

creation of the world is eternal power and divine nature, invisible 

though they are, have been understood and seen through things he 

has made that they are without excuse. 

In our present world, trees and forests are not only crucial components of a healthy environment, they are living symbols of the 

many natural spiritual gifts that God has given us. 

Spiritual values in wilderness. Wilderness provides many spiritual gifts. God’s gift of the wild and wonderful land explored these 

wild land faith benefits from a Christian perspective. Among its 

key findings the declaration noted that wilderness teaches humility, that mountains are big and we are small. 

Surrounded by wilderness, we experience God’s immense creation 

as majestic, yet intricate, into its accountable details. Today, protected wild forests provide us that precious and ever more elusive 

opportunity to be still and know that I am God. 

Finally, stewardship. Before the flood, Noah protected at least 

two of every animal species. After the flood, God said to Noah, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after 

you, and with every living creature that is with you of the birds, 

of the cattle and of every wild animal of the Earth with you. 

As we read the Bible, we see that our faith calls us to be good 

stewards of God’s magnificent creation. Finally, we feel it is our opportunity and duty as people of faith to safeguard wilderness in the 

West Virginia mountains, the oldest mountains in all the world, 

and we support H.R. 5151 and hope to see it strengthened with additional protection for other critical areas that are part of the Wilderness Coalition’s proposal. Thank you for this opportunity. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, Reverend. Turning now to Mr. Price, 

AFL-CIO. 

Sir. 

[The prepared statement of Reverend Sparks follows:] 

Statement of The Reverend Dennis Sparks, Executive Director, 

West Virginia Council of Churches 

Chairman Grijalva and Members of the Subcommittee, I am the Reverend Dennis 

Sparks, Executive Director of the West Virginia Council of Churches. I am pleased 

to testify before you today in support of H.R. 5151, the ‘‘Wild Monongahela: A National Legacy for West Virginia’s Special Places.’’ My task today is to offer a faith 

perspective and foundation for the establishment of the Wilderness classification. 

The West Virginia Council of Churches’ mission ‘‘is to make more visible the unity 

of Christ’s church, provide a Christian witness on public issues, and engage in cooperative mission and service for all West Virginians.’’ As one of the oldest institutions 

in the State of West Virginia, we trace our origins to 1880 and our roots to the 

1820s. In the time between 1880 and the present, the work of a few volunteers has 

blossomed into a cooperative Christian mission and service for all West Virginians. 

The membership of the Council of Churches currently includes 14 church denominations in the state, whose membership rolls approach 600,000. Respecting the traditions of each denomination—while uniting to speak with one voice and to act with 

united hands—we carry the justice message of faith into the public arena. Over the 

years, the West Virginia Council of Churches has been active in areas of social justice, children’s health, economic, environmental and statewide legislative issues, 

interfaith dialogue and cooperation, as well as service programs in disaster recovery. 

We are currently through our ‘‘Beyond the Yellow Ribbon’’ program, organizing support for our military families. 

As an expression of our interest in and concern for the health of the environment 

in West Virginia, the Council acted in 2006 to endorse the Wilderness recommendations of the West Virginia Wilderness Coalition (WVWC). It is our belief that each 

of the 15 special wild areas identified by the WVWC ultimately deserves to be perVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:01 Nov 17, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 L:\DOCS\40906.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY
16 

manently protected by Congress for the benefit of current and future generations 

as part of the National Wilderness Preservation System. 

Our support of these Wilderness recommendations has taken many forms in recent years. We publicly co-sponsored the booklet and later the DVD, ‘‘God’s Gift of 

a Wild and Wonderful Land, A Christian Declaration on the Spiritual Values of 

West Virginia’s Monongahela National Forest,’’ which was released to the public in 

2006. This document carefully outlined the many spiritual values and lessons that 

wilderness can provide. As Jesus often drew apart to wild places to pray, we recognize the continuing power and importance to the human spirit of our remaining wild 

lands. In recognition of these spiritual values, ‘‘God’s Gift of a Wild and Wonderful 

Land’’ also contained a clear call by many of West Virginia’s Christian faith leaders 

for greater care for creation and for the protection of additional wilderness in our 

beautiful state. For the Council of Churches this has been and still is an issue of 

justice that calls for a balance of the natural beauty of creation with the responsibility of human dominion over the earth. 

The Council of Churches has also expressed support for wilderness in correspondence to the Monongahela National Forest during its forest planning process and in 

recent statements in the West Virginia press. Today, as an additional response to 

our stewardship call to protect God’s creation, I would like to express the support 

of the West Virginia Council of Churches for the ‘‘Wild Monongahela’’ legislation, 

H.R. 5151. 

Perhaps some here today are wondering why the West Virginia faith community 

would care about wilderness protection for the Monongahela National Forest. In 

fact, many of my West Virginia colleagues and fellow Christians have long found 

spiritual inspiration in our beautiful national forest. As co-founder of Christians for 

the Mountains, Bob Marshall, noted in a February, 2007 column in the Charleston 

Gazette: 

‘‘An Arizona pastor tells of asking his congregation, ‘When have you felt 

closest to God?’ and reports that they rarely answer, ‘During your sermons.’ 

Like them, many of us here in West Virginia find some of our most profound spiritual experiences in the greatest cathedral of them all—in solitude beside the still waters or in a deep forest lit by sunlight dappled 

through the forest canopy. Or, here in the Monongahela National Forest, 

beside the not-so-still waters of a gloriously wild, rushing mountain 

stream.’’ 

Bob Marshall’s article provides an eloquent testimony on behalf of additional wilderness protection for West Virginia’s wonderful wild lands. I have included it at 

the end of my written statement and request that it be made part of the official 

record of this hearing. 

The Council of Churches asks that the areas identified in H.R. 5151 should be 

allowed to remain untouched by development and stand as permanently protected 

natural cathedrals. Preserving these special areas is a form of tithing, setting apart 

some of the natural bounty that the Creator has given us as a wild sanctuary and 

protecting it in its undefiled natural condition. We are convinced that only permanent, strong protection afforded by Wilderness designation can ensure that the solitude and closeness to God’s creation in nature will still be available in West Virginia 

for all citizens of this great American land to enjoy. If these areas are not moved 

into permanent protective designations, the possibility for future disruption from 

logging operations, off-road vehicles and other uses will always be present. 

Our support for this legislation, and our underlying support for Wilderness protection, is based on our shared beliefs that 1) our forests and wild lands are part of 

God’s creation, 2) Wilderness, if protected, provides a number of important spiritual 

and natural benefits, and 3) we have a stewardship responsibility for protecting our 

forests and wilderness resources on Earth. 

God’s Creation 

As Psalm 24:1 proclaims, ‘‘The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof, the 

world and all that dwell in it.’’ In the Biblical story of creation, trees are the emblem of the living earth and Adam and Eve first encountered creation through two 

trees—the tree of knowledge of good and evil and the tree of life. In Genesis (1:12), 

God proclaimed the goodness of trees and other plant life which he had created. You 

are invited to capture the moment: ‘‘The earth brought forth vegetation: plants 

yielding seed of every kind, and trees of every kind bearing fruit with seed in it. 

And God saw that it was good.’’ As Romans (1:20) explains, ‘‘Ever since the creation 

of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have 

been understood and seen through the things he has made.’’ In our present world, 

as this passage from Romans reminds us that, trees are not only crucial components 

of a healthy environment, they are living symbols of the many good gifts that God 

17 

has given us—including clean streams, fresh air, bountiful fish and wildlife habitats, and sources of spiritual inspiration. 

Spiritual Values of Wilderness 

Upon reflection, we see that there are many spiritual values and lessons that can 

be gained in the Wilderness. ‘‘God’s Gift of a Wild and Wonderful Land’’ explored 

the faith values provided by protected wilderness areas and explained why such 

areas are important from a Christian perspective. Among the many key aspects of 

wilderness, the declaration noted that: 

• In wilderness we learn about God. When we leave the crowds of town and city 

and enter the quiet and peace of wild places, the deep questions of human life 

rise to the surface. 

• Wilderness is God’s gift of creation undefiled. Without wilderness, we lose a reminder of what creation is like in its pristine condition. The clean air, the cold 

water, the quiet of trees, the moist earth and everything in between help us 

to clarify our thinking so that we can open to God and the nature of creation. 

• Wilderness teaches humility. The mountains are big and we are small. Surrounded by wildness, we experience God’s immense creation as majestic yet intricate in its uncountable details. 

In centuries past, people of the Judeo-Christian heritage as well people of other 

ancient faiths had a strong understanding of the spiritual values to be found in the 

wilderness. In Hebrew tradition Moses lead the Israelites into the wilderness; from 

the Christian experience, Jesus went to the wilderness to prepare for his ministry. 

The saints went to the wilderness to find a deeper experience of God. For many of 

us today, protected Wilderness areas and other wild forests provide us that precious—and ever more elusive—opportunity to, ‘‘Be still, and know that I am God.’’ 

Stewardship 

Before the Flood, Noah and his family protected at least two of every animal species. After the Flood, God said to Noah, ‘‘Behold, I establish my covenant with you, 

and with your seed after you, and with every living creature that is with you, of 

the birds, of the cattle, and of every wild animal of the earth with you’’ (Genesis 

9:9). As we read these and other biblical passages, we see that our religious heritage 

calls us to be good stewards of the Creator’s magnificent creation. 

With respect to the protection of our forests and our state’s environment, we see 

that the choices originally presented by two trees to Adam and Eve are still choices 

before us today. It is through our trees of forest that we will choose life and may 

perhaps know the difference between good and evil. We can choose to honor the Creator and respect the creation and the integrity of the good earth, or we can follow 

the path of exploitation and loss. As the Reverend Billy Graham has said, ‘‘It is not 

right for us to destroy the world that God has given us...We Christians have a responsibility to take the lead in the caring for the earth.’’ 

Conclusion 

The words of the Psalmist (1:3) compared the pursuit of happiness as the ‘‘trees 

planted by streams of living water, which yield their fruit in its season, and their 

leaves do not wither. In all that they do they prosper.’’ In short, we believe that 

it is both our ecological and economic opportunity and moral duty as people of faith 

to safeguard our Wilderness resources and forest wild lands. This safeguard relates 

to a now famous line found in President John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address: 

‘‘God’s work must truly be our own.’’ As one author stated in response to the President, ‘‘More importantly, in an era of heightened human impact upon the entire 

planet, our own work must truly be God’s’’ (Earth Community Earth Ethics, Larry 

L. Rasmussen, 1996, page 293). 

As an area of federal land belonging to all Americans, the Monongahela National 

Forest can uniquely provide opportunities for reflection and inspiration that are becoming ever scarcer in our rapidly modernizing and developing world. We believe 

that carefully protecting this wonderful national forest and its Wilderness-quality 

lands not only has a sound biblical foundation, but is also the best and most practical course of action for safeguarding the beauty, abundance, and ecological health 

of the world which we will pass along to our children’s children. 

We thank the Chairman and other members of the West Virginia delegation for 

their good efforts and share in the West Virginia Wilderness Coalition’s hope to see 

the bill strengthened before it is passed with additional protection for other critical 

areas that are part of the West Virginia Wilderness Coalition’s proposal. Thank you 

for considering our testimony today. 

18 

THE CHARLESTON GAZETTE

WILDERNESS: GOD’S GREATEST CATHEDRAL

2 / 18 / 2007

However much time you and I spend in our churches, my guess is that like me, 

you find that a particularly fitting place to commune with your God is in His own 

wilderness. 

An Arizona pastor tells of asking his congregation, ‘‘When have you felt closest 

to God?’’ and reports that they rarely answer, ‘‘During your sermons.’’ Like them, 

many of us here in West Virginia find some of our most profound spiritual experiences in the greatest cathedral of them all—in solitude beside the still waters or 

in a deep forest lit by sunlight dappled through the forest canopy. Or, here in the 

Monongahela National Forest, beside the not-so-still waters of a gloriously wild, 

rushing mountain stream such as Seneca Creek. 

As a Christian who reads the Bible regularly, I know that the greatest prophets 

sought the wildest places in nature for their most intense spiritual renewal. Moses 

convened with God on Sinai for ‘‘forty days and forty nights’’ (Exodus 24:18). And 

Mark tells us that Jesus sojourned in the wilderness for ‘‘forty days’’ (Mark 1:13). 

In short, wilderness is part of our Biblical heritage. 

The Lord, I believe, did not place us in this earthly garden to see us despoil every 

part of it, or to turn every acre to our immediate needs for food, fiber and money. 

There is a deep inborn reason that our hearts respond with a joyous leap to great 

vistas of unspoiled nature. His Creation as He created it. 

This is why I am working through my organization, Christians for the Mountains, 

and religious leaders in our state, including the West Virginia Council of Churches, 

to encourage our Members of Congress to protect additional areas of wilderness. 

Thanks to the visionary and bipartisan Wilderness Act that Congress passed in 

1964, we have the means through our democratic process to see that a reasonable 

sample of the wilderness solitudes of the Monongahela National Forest will be preserved for all time to serve many values, not least being our spiritual needs. 

For us, this is an act of humility. Surely it would be immoral for our generation 

to deny future generations of West Virginians what the Wilderness Act terms ‘‘the 

benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness.’’ Our obligation to them, and to our 

Creator, runs deeper. Preserving wilderness areas such as Seneca Creek, Spice Run 

and the Dolly Sods Expansion, is a form of tithing, setting apart some of the natural 

bounty given to us as a wild sanctuary, protecting it in its undefiled natural condition for the benefit of generations unborn. 

So, we ask our elected officials to take a political action in a nonpartisan way. 

We ask them to preserve more of the wilderness of the Mon. Far into the future 

our descendents in these mountains will lift their eyes unto the hills. They will need 

and treasure these quiet reserves of God’s wild solitudes so much more in their 

crowded world than we can even imagine. 

The great Republican Teddy Roosevelt spoke of our obligation to the future, railing against ‘‘the shortsighted men who in their greed and selfishness will, if permitted, rob our country of half its charm by their reckless extermination of all useful and beautiful wild things.’’ 

The ‘‘greatest good for the greatest number,’’ Roosevelt reminds us, ‘‘applies to the 

number within the womb of time, compared to which those now alive form but an 

insignificant fraction. Our duty to the whole, including the unborn generations, bids 

us restrain’’ ourselves ‘‘from wasting the heritage of these unborn generations.’’ I 

personally want to know that my four grandchildren, and their children, will be afforded the same opportunity to experience the awe inspiring wild places we seek to 

protect. 

Today, you and I bear this moral responsibility to those within the womb of time. 

Yes, we could develop the remaining unprotected wild places in our national forest 

if we chose to; that decision is in our hands. But in a very real way, all those yet 

unborn are watching us, praying (as writer Terry Tempest Williams so eloquently 

puts it) ‘‘for us to see beyond our own time. They are kneeling with clasped hands 

hoping that we might act with restraint.’’ 

We humans live only by grace, and Williams reminds us that it is within our legislative powers—held by our elected representatives—to take care that a good, big, 

generous sample of God’s wilderness lives on as well. Wilderness areas such as 

Cranberry Glades and Dolly Sods that Congress has already protected in this way, 

offer places to play in, to be sure, for hunters, fishermen, campers and hikers, young 

families, and sturdy mountaineers who remain young at heart. 

And, for many of us, wilderness offers the very best places in which to pray. 

19 

[Bob Marshall, of Kenna, is a native West Virginian, avid fly fisherman, hunter 

and a practicing veterinarian. He co-founded Christians for the Mountains, and 

helps lead the Religious Campaign for Wilderness. For information about citizen 

wilderness proposals, visit www.wvwild.org.] 

STATEMENT OF MIKE PRICE, WEST VIRGINIA AFL-CIO 

Mr. PRICE. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee. I would like to thank you, Mr. Rahall, for introducing this 

bill. I am Mike Price of the West Virginia AFL-CIO. I am a member of the United Steel Workers Local 889. I have a resolution from 

the AFL-CIO in support of this that I would like to put in the 

record and also one from my local union. 

On October 2, 2007, at the West Virginia AFL-CIO’s Constitutional Convention in Wheeling, West Virginia, over 180 delegates 

representing different unions unanimously voted to adopt a resolution to secure permanent protection for the wilderness forest areas, 

as proposed by the West Virginia Wilderness Coalition. This included Seneca Creek and the East Fork of the Greenbrier. 

We did so believing that wilderness designation will protect one 

of our state’s most valued assets, scenic beauty. These special wild 

places encompass the development of rural communities as people 

are attracted to or stay in places that are clean, beautiful and 

where they have ample opportunity to connect with nature. 

These wilderness areas provide outdoor recreation, such as hunting, fishing, which improves the quality of life of West Virginians. 

Wildlife management to restore native wildlife populations can continue to occur in wilderness so long as it maintains the wilderness 

character of the area. Wilderness designation is the best way to 

protective sensitive wildlife species from development pressures. 

Wilderness provides priceless clean water, clean air and a 

healthy environment for neighboring communities. Watershed protection results in protection of clean drinking water, as well as decreased potential for flooding downstream. West Virginia’s more 

than 15 million acres are nearly 80 percent forested. 

Ninety-eight percent of this forest land is classified as timberland 

or commercial forest land with 98 percent of this owned by private 

individuals or corporations. Wilderness designation would have no 

impact on these private lands that produce over 95 percent of West 

Virginia’s commercial harvested timber. 

The wilderness proposal put forth would affect only five-tenths of 

a percent of the state’s commercial timberland, thus preserving 

West Virginia’s timber-based economy while providing the enhancement of a broad array of other forest areas. After all, the 

Monongahela National Forest slogan is land of many uses. 

Protecting wilderness helps diversify and stabilize economies by 

attracting and retaining businesses, residents and a local workforce 

in addition to generating travel and tourism, one of the fastest 

growing sections of West Virginia’s economy. 

The AFL-CIO recognizes that wilderness designation will attract 

business, creating many job opportunities. Unions have always 

supported legislation which creates jobs and protect a healthy environment. I am a United Steel Worker affiliated with the AFL-CIO 

and also an outings lead with the Sierra Club. 

20 

United Steel Workers has a blue/green alliance with the Sierra 

Club which works together on environmental issues. Unions recognize the importance of protecting our special places, the environment and creating green-based job opportunities. As an outings 

lead for the Sierra Club, security and protection for these special 

places in Monongahela creates endless opportunities for leading 

trips into wild places in our beautiful state. 

The designation of wilderness status to the areas proposed in 

Monongahela in no way hurts the economy in West Virginia. It will 

enhance the economy and quality of life and ensure that future 

generations have unexplored wilderness to enjoy. To speak specifically about one particular area of importance included in the Wild 

Monongahela Act, I will quote Elizabeth Little of Hillsboro, West 

Virginian who has likely spent more time in the area than anyone 

else alive. 

‘‘In the summer of 1995, I spent the day with a Forest Service 

team and a group of concerned citizens touring the Little Fork 

area, part of what is now the Cranberry Expansion. This was occasioned by the Forest Service announcement that they were preparing a management plan for the area.’’ 

‘‘On that field trip and in an ensuing letter, I pointed out to the 

Forest Service that the Cranberry wilderness wasn’t big enough. 

Previously, a Forest Service ranger from the Gauley District and 

I had walked the Cranberry and frequented several hunters and 

camps along the way. This means the wilderness provides a minimum range for large wildlife that is intolerant to disturbance.’’ 

‘‘Since the Cranberry is already the largest wilderness in the 

Monon and is bounded by roads on all sides, the Cranberry Expansion is the only possibility for variety and a larger undisturbed territory. The elevation in the central ridge in the Cranberry Expansion is over 4,000 feet and was originally dominated ridge forest, 

which the Forest Service has been actively working to regenerate.’’ 

‘‘The Cranberry Expansion is not a showy attraction for tourists. 

There are no specular views or thunderous waterfalls. It is a place 

of deep coves, forest folded with mountain streams. It is a place of 

abiding peace and quiet, of psychic renewal for humans, but mostly 

a place of trees that will only become magnificent with time.’’ 

So we would recommend that you all pass this. We thank the 

Committee and the Chair, and especially you, Representative 

Rahall, for introducing this bill. Thank you. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, Mr. Price. Now, Mr. Bittner, Mountaineer Chapter of Trout Unlimited. Your testimony, sir. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Price follows:] 

Statement of Michael Price, President, USW Local 8-89, AFL-CIO 

On October 2, 2007 at the West Virginia AFL-CIO’s Constitutional Convention in 

Wheeling, WV over one hundred eighty delegates representing many different 

unions unanimously voted to adopt a resolution to ‘‘Secure Permanent Protection 

For West Virginia’s Wilderness Forest Areas’’ as proposed by the West Virginia Wilderness Coalition. This included Seneca Creek, all of Roaring Plains and the East 

Fork of the Greenbrier in addition to area in H.R. 5151. 

The Convention delegates took this action to support Wilderness legislation believing that protecting one of our states most valued assets, its scenic beauty, will 

help enable the development of rural communities. 

21 

People are attracted to, and businesses want to locate or stay in, places that offer 

a high quality of life, are clean, beautiful and where there are ample opportunity 

to connect with nature. 

These Wilderness areas provide outdoor recreation such as hunting, fishing and 

hiking which improves the quality of life for West Virginians. 

Wildlife management to restore native wildlife populations can continue to occur 

in wilderness areas so long as it maintains the wilderness character of the area. 

Wilderness designation is the best way to protect sensitive wildlife species from development pressures. 

Wilderness protects watersheds, provides clean air, and provides a healthy environment for neighboring communities. Watershed protection results in protection of 

clean drinking water sources and the lack of disturbance decreases potential for 

flooding downstream. 

West Virginia’s more than fifteen million acres are nearly 80% forested. 98% of 

this forest land is classified as timberland or ‘‘commercial forest land.’’ 98% of these 

commercial forest lands are owned by private individuals or corporations. Wilderness designation would have no impact on these private lands that produce over 

95% of West Virginia’s commercially harvested timber. The wilderness proposal put 

forth would affect only 0.5% of the state’s commercial timberland, thus preserving 

West Virginia’s timber-based economy while providing for the enhancement of a 

broad array of other forest uses. After all the Monongahela National Forest’s slogan 

is ‘‘Land of Many Uses.’’ 

Protecting wilderness helps diversify and stabilize economies by attracting and retaining business, residents and a local workforce in addition to generating travel 

and tourism, one of the fastest growing sections of West Virginia’s economy. The 

AFL-CIO recognizes that wilderness designation will attract businesses creating 

many job opportunities now and into the future. Union’s have always supported legislation which creates jobs and protects the health and a healthy environment. 

I am a United Steel Worker member affiliated with the AFL-CIO and I am also 

an Outings Leader with the Sierra Club. The USW has a ‘‘Blue/ Green Alliance’’ 

with the Sierra Club which works together on environmental issues. 

Union’s recognize the importance of protecting our special places, the environment, and creating ‘‘green based job opportunities.’’ As a Sierra Club Outings Leader, having protected special places in the Monongahela creates endless opportunities 

for me to share our state’s beautiful wild places with others. 

The designation of wilderness to the areas proposed in the Wild Monongahela Act 

will enhance the economy of West Virginia and the quality of life for West Virginians. It will ensure that future generations have unspoiled wilderness to enjoy 

as we do today. 

To speak specifically about one particular area of importance included in the Wild 

Monongahela Act, I’ll quote Elizabeth Little of Hillsboro, WV who has likely spent 

more time in this area than any one else alive: 

’In the summer of 1995, I spent the day with a Forest Service team and a group 

of concerned citizens touring the Little Fork Area, part of what is now the Cranberry Expansion. This was occasioned by the Forest Service announcement that 

they were preparing a management plan for the area. 

On that field trip and in an ensuing letter, I pointed out to the Forest Service 

that the adjacent Cranberry Wilderness wasn’t big enough. 

Previously, a Forest Service Ranger from the Gauley District and I had walked 

across the Cranberry at a long oblique angle in only six hours, even though we 

stopped frequently to converse with several hunters in camps along the way. This 

means the existing Wilderness provides a minimal range for large wildlife that is 

intolerant of disturbance. Since the Cranberry is already the largest Wilderness in 

the Mon and is bounded by roads on all other sides, the Cranberry Expansion is 

the only possibility for providing a larger undisturbed territory. 

Apparently they heard me. When I phoned the next year to find out how their 

planning was going, the team leader informed me that they had tabled the planning 

because of the wilderness issues raised; and then, in the recent Forest Plan, the 

Cranberry Expansion was formally recommended by the Forest Service for Wilderness designation. 

There may have been additional things to influence their recommendation. The 

elevation of the central ridge in the Cranberry Expansion is over 4000 feet and was 

originally dominated by red spruce forest, which the Forest Service has been actively working to regenerate. During the 1995 field trip we learned that the discovery of threatened and endangered species would change the location of a proposed road and cause logging in the area to be cancelled. Studies on the location 

of northern flying squirrels would continue, and the presence of goshawk nests indicated that they were returning. With this uncertainty about where a road could be 

22 

built, and the fact that the Little Fork area is at ‘‘the end of the road’’ because it 

is next to the Cranberry Wilderness, the investment of miles of new road might not 

make financial or ecological sense. 

The Cranberry Expansion is not a showy attraction for tourist consumption. There 

are no spectacular views or thunderous waterfalls. It is a place of deep cove forest 

folded with mountain streams. It is so shady that the automatic flash goes off when 

you try to take a picture. It is so moist that even on a sunny summer day your rear 

gets wet if you sit on the ground. 

It is a place of abiding peace and quiet, of psychic renewal for humans, but mostly, a place of trees that will only become more magnificent with time. 


40906.001.eps
23 

STATEMENT OF BOB BITTNER, JR., MOUNTAINEER CHAPTER 

OF TROUT UNLIMITED 

Mr. BITTNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Robert Bittner, I am a member of the 

Board of Directors of Mountaineer Chapter Trout Unlimited. The 

mission of Trout Unlimited, both nationally and locally, is to conserve, protect and restore our cold water fisheries and their watersheds. 

The native and wild trout in these ecosystems represent not only 

an unsurpassed recreational opportunity but also connect us to the 

natural heritage of our country. For those of us lucky enough to 

live in West Virginia, the embodiment of our heritage is the Eastern Brook Trout. These beautiful, speckled trout require intact, undisturbed watersheds to flourish. 

Because of this, Mountaineer Chapter Trout Unlimited wholly 

supports the Wild Monongahela: A National Legacy for West Virginia’s Special Places legislation. The Eastern Brook Trout is the 

only native trout for the eastern United States. 

This stunning fish, with its flanks splashed in red and blue 

spots, creamy white underbelly washed with orange, pectoral fins 

striped white, black and orange and its veined dark olive back, 


40906.002.eps
24 

holds a special place in the hearts of West Virginia’s anglers and 

residents. 

Stranded in our mountain streams and rivers after the retreat of 

the last glaciation, the trout of the springs, Salvelinus Fontinalis, 

symbolizes the wildness and beauty that was our nation before European settlement. Just like our special places, the hollows, ridges 

and cricks of West Virginia, the Brook Trout faces threats from development, poor logging and agricultural practices and energy production. 

Federal wilderness designation permanently protects portions of 

the national trust. It allows these forests and watersheds to heal 

and mature. An intact and undisturbed forest is one of the best 

management tools for protecting Brook Trout. Forest floors, free of 

the compaction of roads and logging trails, absorb, cool and slowly 

release rain water to streams. 

They help minimize the flooding and subsequent soil erosion of 

extreme precipitation events. This keeps the stream bed gravels 

clean and free of siltation, which allows the Brook Trout to successfully reproduce. The mature forest canopy provides vital thermal 

protection, shading our streams and rivers from an increasingly 

warming climate. 

Warming waters above 68 degrees Fahrenheit do not contain 

enough oxygen for the trout and the insects, crustaceans and forage 

fishes upon which they feed. Federal wilderness designation will 

also give the included streams a Tier 3 protection level under the 

antidegredation rule of the Federal Clean Water Act. 

This is the highest level of water quality protection and provides 

citizens and government officials with an important tool to safeguard the sources of much of our drinking water. Maintaining high 

water quality in the headwaters of many of our larger watersheds 

may provide flexibility in the regulation of downstream nonFederal 

lands development and agricultural production. 

This may become invaluable for residents within the Chesapeake 

Bay regulatory watershed. Wilderness is a management designation that allows fisheries biologists many options to monitor and 

improve the health of Brook Trout populations. The reestablishment of native species is a primary goal in wilderness. Creel and 

size limits and their effect on population dynamics can still be 

managed. 

The opportunity to fully study populations and their response to 

environmental changes is unsurpassed in a wilderness area. Many 

other states, most notably Montana and Idaho, constantly monitor 

and manage their native fish populations within wilderness areas 

and use this data as a baseline for work outside of wilderness 

areas. 

Wilderness also allows for the protection of native fish from 

invasive, nonnative species. The protection of native Brook Trout 

from introduced nonnative trout species is becoming an important 

part of fisheries management. H.R. 5151, the Wild Monongahela: 

A National Legacy for West Virginia’s Special Places, will be a 

large and first step toward conserving and protecting the Eastern 

Brook Trout and their watersheds in the 21st Century. 

Mountaineer Chapter Trout Unlimited supports and encourages 

its passage by Congress and its approval by the President. The 

25 

membership of Mountaineer Chapter Trout Unlimited would also 

urge the Congress to add two of the finest limestone karst geology 

Brook Trout watersheds in West Virginia to the bill. 

Seneca Creek and its watershed, listed by Trout Unlimited National as one of America’s top 100 hundred streams, as well as the 

East Fork of the Greenbrier River, both support wild native Brook 

Trout. These two areas are overdue for the protection Congress can 

provide with wilderness designation. 

I would like to take this opportunity to also express my personal 

support for the Wild Mon legislation. I am a resident and business 

owner from Pendleton County, West Virginia. I hold a Bachelor of 

Science degree in environmental sciences with a major in forest 

and land use management from Stockton State College in New Jersey. 

My business is related to the timber industry. Robert Bittern 

Cabinetmaker is a custom design, build proprietorship specializing 

in furniture and architectural millwork. Supplies of quality wood 

are the lifeblood of my craft. Given that more than 97 percent of 

the state’s timber harvest comes from private land, I know that the 

Wild Mon legislation will not adversely affect my business. 

However, keeping the image of West Virginia as wild and wonderful will benefit my business. My disappointment in the bill is 

that it does not yet include the crown jewel of West Virginia’s native trout streams, Seneca Creek in Pendleton County. I hope that 

Seneca will become part of the Wild Mon Act before the President 

signs the bill. 

I thank you for your time and your interest. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you very much. The final panelist, Mr. Gil 

Willis, Elk River Inn & Restaurant. Sir, your testimony. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bittner follows:] 

Statement of Robert Bittner, Member, Board of Directors, 

Mountaineer Chapter Trout Unlimited 

The mission of Trout Unlimited, both nationally and locally is to conserve, protect 

and restore our cold water fisheries and their watersheds. The native and wild trout 

in these ecosystems represent not only an unsurpassed recreational opportunity but 

also connect us to the natural heritage of our country. For those of us lucky enough 

to live in West Virginia, the embodiment of our heritage is the Eastern Brook Trout. 

These beautiful speckled trout require intact, undisturbed watersheds to flourish. 

And because of this, Mountaineer Chapter Trout Unlimited wholly supports the 

Wild Monongahela: a National Legacy for West Virginia’s Special Places legislation. 

The Eastern Brook Trout is the only native trout for the eastern United States. 

This stunning fish with its flanks splashed in red and blue spots, creamy white underbelly washed with orange, pectoral fins striped white black and orange and its 

veined dark olive back holds a special place in the hearts of West Virginia’s anglers 

and residents. Stranded in our mountain streams and rivers after the retreat of the 

last glaciation, the ‘‘trout of the springs’’ Salvelinus Fontinalis symbolizes the wildness and beauty that was our nation before European settlement. Just like our special places the hollows, ridges and cricks of West Virginia, the Brook Trout faces 

threats from development, poor logging and agricultural practices and energy production. 

Federal wilderness designation permanently protects portions of the national 

trust. It allows these forests and watersheds to heal and mature. An intact and undisturbed forest is one of the best management tools for protecting Brook Trout. 

Forest floors, free of the compaction of roads and logging trails absorb, cool and 

slowly release rainwater to streams. They help minimize the flooding and subsequent soil erosion of extreme precipitation events. This keeps the stream bed gravels 

clean and free of siltation, which allows the Brook Trout to successfully reproduce. 

The mature forest canopy provides vital thermal protection, shading our streams 

and rivers from an increasingly warming climate. Warming waters, above sixtyVerDate Aug 31 2005 16:01 Nov 17, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 L:\DOCS\40906.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY
26 

eight degrees Fahrenheit, do not contain enough oxygen for the trout and the insects, crustaceans and forage fishes upon which they feed. 

Federal wilderness designation will also give the included streams a Tier 3 protection level under the anti-degradation rule of the Federal Clean Water Act. This is 

the highest level of water quality protection and provides citizens and government 

officials with an important tool to safeguard the sources of much of our drinking 

water. Maintaining high water quality in the headwaters of many of our larger watersheds may provide flexibility in the regulation of downstream (non-federal lands) 

development and agricultural production. This may become invaluable for residents 

within the Chesapeake Bay regulatory watershed. 

Wilderness is a management designation that allows fisheries biologists many options to monitor and improve the health of Brook Trout populations. The re-establishment of native species is a primary goal in wilderness. Creel and size limits and 

their effect on population dynamics can still be managed. The opportunity to fully 

study populations and their response to environmental changes is unsurpassed in 

a wilderness area. Many other states, most notably Montana and Idaho, constantly 

monitor and manage their native fish populations within wilderness areas and use 

this data as a baseline for work outside of wilderness areas. Wilderness also allows 

for the protection of native fish from invasive, non-native species. The protection of 

native Brook Trout from introduced non-native trout species is becoming an important part of fisheries management. 

H.R. 5151—The Wild Monongahela: A Natural Legacy for West Virginia’s Special 

Places will be a large and first step towards conserving and protecting the Eastern 

Brook Trout and their watersheds in the twenty-first century. Mountaineer Chapter 

Trout Unlimited supports and encourages its passage by Congress and its approval 

by the President. The membership of Mountaineer Chapter Trout Unlimited would 

also urge the Congress to add two of the finest limestone karst geology Brook Trout 

watersheds in West Virginia to the bill. Seneca Creek and its watershed, listed by 

Trout Unlimited National as one of Americas top one hundred streams, as well as 

the East Fork of the Greenbrier River both support wild native Brook Trout. These 

two areas are overdue for the protection Congress can provide with Wilderness designation. 

I would like to take this opportunity to express my personal support for the Wild 

Monongahela (Wild Mon) legislation. I am a resident and business owner from Pendleton County, West Virginia. I hold a Bachelor of Science Degree in Environmental 

Sciences with a major in Forest and Land Use Management from Stockton State 

College in NJ. My business is related to the timber industry; Robert Bittner Cabinetmaker is a custom design/build proprietorship specializing in furniture and architectural millwork. Supplies of quality wood are the lifeblood of my craft. Given that 

more than ninety-seven percent of the state’s timber harvest comes from private 

land, I know that the Wild Mon legislation will not adversely affect my business; 

however, keeping the image of West Virginia as wild and wonderful will benefit my 

business. My disappointment in the bill is that it does not yet include the crown 

jewel of West Virginia’s native trout streams, Seneca Creek, in Pendleton County. 

I hope that Seneca will be in the Wild Mon act before the President signs the bill. 

Thank you for your time and interest. As a citizen, I appreciate the opportunity 

to express my personal support and the endorsement of Mountaineer Chapter Trout 

Unlimited for this important legislation. 

STATEMENT OF GIL WILLIS, ELK RIVER INN & RESTAURANT, 

SLATYFORK, WEST VIRGINIA 

Mr. WILLIS. Good morning, and thank you for having me. I would 

like to thank the Subcommittee Chairman and my Congressman, 

Nick Rahall, and Members of the Committee for allowing me to 

speak today in support of the Wild Monongahela Act. This is an 

historic piece of legislation that will help ensure the future of West 

Virginia’s greatest national treasure, our national forest. 

Let me begin my comments by commending Congressman Rahall 

and the entire West Virginia congressional delegation for their 

commitment to working and listening to the people of West Virginia. This bill truly reflects the thoughts and concerns of residents 

of the Mountain State who appreciate our natural forests and the 

wild areas that are included in these lands. 

27 

Our congressional team has developed a proposal that protects 

our forests and meets the needs of the forest’s many users. I especially appreciated the open process Congressman Rahall and his 

staff has had and the entire delegation’s willingness to meet with 

me and other concerned West Virginians and their desire to work 

with all of us to develop a proposal that truly represents West Virginians and the will to ensure the future of our state’s forests for 

generations to come. 

As a member of West Virginia’s business community whose business is dependent on our state’s wild and wonderful landscape, I 

am very supportive of efforts to ensure the wild future of our forests. My wife and I own and operate Elk River Inn Restaurant 

Touring Center which is open year round as a skiing, fly fishing, 

cycling and hiking resort. 

We have been at the forefront of the outdoor industry since its 

infancy in West Virginia over 30 years ago. Our company currently 

employs over 20 full and part-time staff. I also for the last 15 years 

have sat on the Pocahontas County Convention and Visitors Bureau Board of Directors. Our remote mountain setting in Pocahontas County relies on quality wild outdoor places to survive. 

All of the counties which the new wilderness areas are located 

in will benefit both socially and economically from this bill and the 

high quality of visitors that they will attract. West Virginia’s 

mountain region is the last best place in the mid-Atlantic. This of 

course is a marketing term which hits close to the heart. 

Wilderness designation for those areas included in the Wild 

Monongahela Act will provide unparalleled primitive and traditional outdoor recreation opportunities, such as hunting, fishing, 

hiking, horseback riding, camping, back country skiing, 

snowshoeing and much more. These areas and the activities not 

only keep us competitive in regional and national markets but also 

provide a much needed and affordable outdoor experience for our 

local residents. 

Protecting our rivers and our forests with wilderness designation 

is an investment in West Virginia’s future. The state’s abundance 

of God given natural resources have been providing coal, natural 

gas, wood products and chemical ingredients to the Nation and the 

world for almost 200 years. Our economic landscape has changed, 

and our natural resources will not last forever. 

The northern mountains which fall into the border of the 

Monongahela National Forest are very important to the future as 

a region. We have a real connection to our mountains and our forests and have a responsibility to leave these special places as clean 

and pristine to our children and our children’s children. 

Pocahontas County is referred to as the birthplace of rivers. 

There are eight rivers that begin in Pocahontas County. Much of 

the clean water for the mid-Atlantic originates from our county and 

bordering counties. This renewable resource cannot be taken for 

granted. 

I would like to see in the future even more Federal protection for 

our valuable and vanishing clean water resources in the great 

State of West Virginia, which affects the whole mid-Atlantic region’s future and health. While I wholeheartedly support the Wild 

28 

Monongahela Act I am concerned about a number of special areas 

that are not included in the legislation. 

Specifically, I would like to see the delegation amend this legislation to include Seneca Creek, Roaring Plains and East Fork of 

Greenbrier. Like the other special places included in the legislation, these areas represent some of the last truly wild places in the 

east and they deserve Congress’ protection. 

Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you once 

again for allowing me to voice my support for this historic legislation. West Virginians have a strong connection and desire for protecting our one of a kind forest, and the legislation goes a long way 

toward helping us live up to this responsibility. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Willis follows:] 

Statement of Gil Willis, Owner and Operator of the 

Elk River Touring Center/Elk River Inn and Restaurant 

I would like to thank Subcommittee Chairman Grijalva and my Congressman, 

Nick Rahall and members of the committee for allowing me to speak today in support for the Wild Monongahela Act. This is an historic piece of legislation that will 

help insure the future of West Virginia’s greatest natural treasure—our National 

Forest. 

Let me begin my comments by commending Congressman Rahall and the entire 

West Virginia congressional delegation for their commitment to working and listening to the people of West Virginia. This bill truly reflects the thoughts and concerns 

of residents of the Mountain State who appreciate our national forests and the wild 

areas that are included in those lands. Our Congressional team has developed a proposal that protects our forest and meets the needs of the forest’s many users. 

I especially appreciated the open process that Congressman Rahall has had and 

the entire delegation’s willingness to meet with me and other concerned West Virginians and their desire to work with all of us to develop a proposal that truly represents West Virginians and will ensure the future of our state’s forests for generations to come. 

Recreation/Business: 

As a member of the West Virginia business community whose business is dependant on our state’s wild and wonderful landscape, I am very supportive of efforts to 

ensure the wild future of our forests. My wife and I own and operate Elk River Inn, 

Restaurant & Touring Center, which is open year round as a skiing, fly fishing, cycling and hiking resort. We have been at the forefront of the outdoor industry since 

its infancy in West Virginia for over 30 years. Our company currently employees 

over 20 full and part time staff. I also for the last 15 years have sat on the Pocahontas County Convention and Visitors Bureau Board of Directors. Our remote 

mountain setting in Pocahontas County relies on quality wild outdoors places. All 

of the counties which the new wilderness areas are located in will benefit both socially and economically from this bill and the high quality of the visitors that they 

will attract. West Virginia’s mountain region is ‘‘the last best place’’ in the mid Atlantic. This of course is a marketing term which hits close to the heart. 

Wilderness designation for these areas included in the Wild Monongahela Act will 

provide unparalleled primitive and traditional outdoor recreation opportunities, such 

as hunting, fishing, hiking, horseback riding, camping, backcountry skiing and 

snowshoeing and much more. These areas and the activities not only keep us competitive in regional and national markets but also provide a much-needed and affordable outdoor experience for our local residents. 

Environmental/future generations: 

Protecting our rivers and our forests with wilderness designation is an investment 

in West Virginia’s future. The state’s abundance of God-given natural resources 

have been providing coal, natural gas, wood products and chemical ingredients to 

the nation and world for almost 200 years. Our economic landscape has changed, 

and our natural resources will not last forever. The northern mountains which fall 

into and border of the Monongahela National forest are very important to our future 

as a region. We have a real connection to our mountains and forests and have a 

responsibility to leave these special places as a clean and pristine environment to 

our children and our children’s children. 

29 

Pocahontas County is referred to as the ‘‘Birthplace of Rivers’’. Much of the clean 

water for the Mid-Atlantic originates from our county. This renewable resource cannot be taken for granted. I would like to see in the future even more federal protection for our valuable and vanishing clean water resources in the great State of West 

Virginia which affects the whole Mid-Atlantic region’s future and health. 

Specific places included in the bill 

Cranberry Expansion—connected ecologically and recreationally to the existing 

wilderness with a network of hiking trails that feed into it. It also would protect 

the scenic backdrop for the world class fly fishing along the Cranberry River that 

borders the area. 

The Big Draft Area—would protect wilderness in the iconic Greenbrier River Valley, where none exists currently. Big Draft is home to excellent trout and bass fishing as well as an excellent whitewater run that would be our state’s first whitewater 

trip in a designated wilderness 

The Spice Run Area—a place containing deep dark forest and wonderful mystique. 

One of the wildest places in our wild and wonderful state that has been a prime 

spot for hunting and native brook trout angling. 

Areas left out of the proposal—we’ll have to see what the situation is with this 

While I wholeheartedly support the Wild Monongahela Act I am concerned about 

a number of special areas that are not included in the legislation. Specifically, I 

would like to see the delegation amend this legislation to include Seneca Creek, 

Roaring Plains and East Fork of the Greenbrier. Like the others special places included in the legislation, these areas represent some of the last, truly wild places 

in the east and they deserve protection. As I have mentioned I am deeply concerned 

about our states water quality and Seneca Creek and East Fork of the Greenbrier 

River. 

Conclusion: 

Chairman Grijalva and members of the subcommittee, thank you once again for 

allowing me to voice my support for this historic legislation. West Virginian’s have 

a strong connection and desire for protecting our one of a kind forests and this legislation goes a long way towards helping us live up to this responsibility. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, Mr. Willis, and all our panelists, 

thank you very much. As I indicated to the first panelist, any testimony or additional material that you have will also be included as 

part of the record. Thank you. 

Mr. Mayor, appreciate your testimony. I think one of the common 

misconceptions that we deal with in wilderness designation is that 

this designation would somehow harm local economies. In your testimony, you state that this particular designation could be an asset 

to the community that you represent. 

Could you just talk about what that economic stimulus from a 

wilderness designation would do for the community you represent? 

Mr. MANCHESTER. It is another piece of the marketing puzzle 

that is an asset for any area that is close by. In Lewisburg’s case 

we are, as I mentioned, about 12 miles away from the Big Draft 

proposed wilderness area. We have the other end of the spectrum 

pretty well covered. Anybody who has ever been to the Greenbrier 

Resort in White Sulfur Springs knows that sort of high end pampering of a resort guest is far removed from wilderness. 

Right now, we have no wilderness areas in Greenbrier County, 

so if you look at the other end of the spectrum, being able to market and to be able to offer amenities on the wilderness end for 

those people who seek out that on a national basis I think will 

really help our economy, our small shops, our places. 

There are about 100 businesses throughout the state, many of 

which are in my community, who have signed on in support of the 

additional wilderness areas simply because they see the value of 

people coming into town, staying at the shops, shopping there, and 

dropping some money and improving the local economy. 

30 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you. Reverend Sparks, mostly a comment. 

I really don’t have a question, just extend my appreciation for your 

testimony. I think your testimony, relative spiritual values in wilderness I believe is very profound, very thoughtful. In the discussions about wilderness, and conservation efforts on public lands 

and important lands across this country, that testimony is becoming more and more prominent. 

I want to thank you for bringing it to the Committee today. Appreciate it very much. Sir. 

Rev. SPARKS. Well, thank you. I would say there is also a practical side to our testimony. Just as an example, as we seek tourism 

coming to West Virginia, through our work in flood recovery our 

preliminary research a couple of years ago said the churches have 

already brought $15 million worth of work projects to West Virginia. 

That is not counting those church groups who go out and do 

whitewater rafting or whatever afterwards. So we are really talking about new spiritual journeying into the wilderness, and we 

think so there will be a practical dimension from the faith side of 

this as well. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you. Mr. Price, one quick question. I think 

that as the Reverend and the Mayor also have discussed, some 

comments on what you believe the economic benefits will be. Congratulations on the Blue/Green Initiative. I think it is a very important precedent on this wilderness legislation. Congratulate all 

the parties for their cooperation on this issue. 

First of all, how many members in the AFL-CIO in West Virginia, and second, what do you see those economic benefits being 

down the road? Sir. 

Mr. PRICE. Approximately 60,000 under the West Virginia AFLCIO representing approximately 420 unions. We see this as a possibility to open up many avenues of business coming in. They like 

to locate into places where the areas are clean and have beautiful 

places. Companies like to come into that. All these tourism businesses. It will create businesses. 

The union is always for any type of creating jobs for work, 

whether they be union or nonunion. We are always for that. This 

could even go into any type of the green-based type of economy, 

which we hope to get into these. So there is many, many possibilities there that this could create. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, sir. Mr. Bittner, I had a question, but 

you answered it in your testimony. That had to do with the pressing threats on the Eastern Brook Trout, its habitats and what a 

wilderness designation would do to help to remedy and protect 

that. Unless there is something additional you would like to add 

to the comments you had in your testimony? 

Mr. BITTNER. Well, I am glad that you picked that up from the 

statement. The loose forest litter floor, when that hasn’t been compacted, it functions so much as a sponge to hold and absorb that 

water that is just so critical to us. 

Then, studies from the Forest Service have also shown that when 

you have an intact canopy and you have a rain event, it actually 

breaks up the size of the raindrops that hit the ground, also helping to disburse and prevent flooding. So anything that we can do 

31 

to keep our streams cold and clean is going to benefit the Brook 

Trout. That is about all I have to contribute. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you, sir. Mr. Willis, just same economic 

question. What do you anticipate as a consequence of these designations, the increase in the amount of business that you receive 

in your establishment? 

Mr. WILLIS. Our county, we are in Pocahontas, which is about 63 

percent state and Federal owned, so we have a large, large chunk 

of the Monongahela National Forest in there, numerous, probably 

four, five, six state parks. Cranberry Glades, back country and current wilderness areas are in our county. 

Our population is about a little over 10,000 residents. The an- nual income for Pocahontas County’s residents is about $12,000 a 

year. This economy for years and years was a timber-based. There 

were some people tanning leather there. As we all know, those industries have moved on, with the exception of the timber industry. 

I live right next door to a very large sawmill and a very large 

land owner, a private operator. So to lay all that out—we also have 

of course a large ski area, too, the largest in the southeast in the 

south Snowshoe Resort. 

We have become more of a service industry over the last 20 to 

30 years, but tourism is not the only thing that is going to keep 

us living there. We have to kind of coexist with the timber industry 

and the other services that are going on there. The National Radio 

Astronomy facility is also there in Greenbank. So we have a real 

interesting dynamic there for the county. 

What has happened over the last 20 years is how Cranberry has 

impacted my personal economy and my business, and I think the 

economy of the county, is that people do come and use the wilderness. Some of them are primitive campers. You never see them. 

You might see their car parked along the road. The other part of 

that group is staying locally in a hotel, eating out, buying services. 

Some of those people like the area enough to where there are a 

lot of second homes there. We have a lot of retired community. 

That is the biggest boom right now is second home development. 

I hope I answered your question. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you very much. Let me thank all of you 

and turn to Chairman Rahall for any questions he might have. Sir. 

Mr. RAHALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I ask my questions, let me observe to this panel that history is in the making 

today. I sat in this room as a young freshmen Member over 30 

years ago when we passed the legislation which established the 

new River Gorge National River in 1978. In 1983, from this Committee, I advanced the Cranberry Wilderness bill, along with the 

Lower Fork North and South. 

And it was in this room that I proposed the designation that 

Gauley River National Recreation Area and Bluestone National 

Scenic River in 1988 and signed into law by then President 

Reagan. It was here, also, that I moved to create the National Coal 

Heritage Area in southern West Virginia, and to put the Upper 

New River in wild and scenic study status. 

Today, we are once again advancing the notion that we in West 

Virginia while making solid contributions to our nation’s energy 

and security, we will draw the line when it comes to preserving 

32 

some of our most special places, that we recognize that we have a 

duty to future generations to do this and this, then, is the stuff of 

legacy. 

To those of you who have come forward, know that after we are 

all long gone, as you have referred to in your testimony, Mr. 

Mayor, what we do here today will stand as testimony to our beliefs, our culture and our society. 

Gil, you have very well described Pocahontas County. My wife 

and I have stayed with you and Mary in your place of business. We 

have seen how you coexist with what is going on around you, and 

you have very accurately described what Pocahontas County is all 

about. 

You have also described from the business perspective what this 

means to economic development, as has the Mayor in answer to 

Chairman Grijalva’s questions, because as Chairman Grijalva referred to, we often hear about that misperception from the business 

community that we are going to cost jobs in developing wilderness 

areas, but we know that to be untrue and that just the opposite 

is what we are doing here today. 

It is the economic value of wilderness that is important to our 

people and important for producing jobs, Mike, as you have so intimately been involved with over your years with the AFL-CIO. 

I do have one question for Mr. Bittner, and you have given very 

excellent testimony and responded to the Chairman well. Can you 

talk a bit about the importance of headwaters protection that these 

wilderness designations would provide and how that can benefit 

the communities that are downstream from these headwaters? 

Mr. BITTNER. All right. The least nice way to put it is what we 

call the delusion solution, OK? You have most of my neighbors are 

involved in agricultural production. They run cattle, they have 

poultry operations, they water their livestock, they spread 

composted litter and what not on their fields, which some of the 

nutrients in that eventually winds up into the watersheds in their 

area. 

As regulatory moves happen to deal with the Chesapeake Bay, 

because I live in the Potomac drainage, move upstream from us 

and try to restrict what they can do because of its effect all the way 

down in the bay, having the sources of really cold, really clean, absolutely pure water flowing in there provides a buffer for what they 

can do on their operations so that they have regulatory wiggle 

room. 

We saw that just a few years back on the North Fork of the 

South Branch where it became an impaired watershed, and the 

groups of farmers got together, changed some of their practices, instituted other management practices and got that taken off of the 

impaired waters list, working together. 

A stream like Seneca Creek or some of the others that are either 

proposed or in the legislation provides that source of water to provide essentially a diluting effect for downstream producers. 

Mr. RAHALL. Thank you. 

Mr. WILLIS. Sir, could I also comment on that? I live on the headwaters of the Elk River, and I have about eight miles of what is 

called Old Field Fork which is above my farm that I live on. I am 

literally right on the river. Headwaters are so important, and it 

33 

takes a long time living in that area to understand intimately what 

is going on with nature and how things fit together and evolve up 

in those areas. 

This part of West Virginia gets a lot of snow, and it gets a lot 

of rain. We have four true seasons throughout the year which make 

it spectacular of course. As an example, last year when we had this 

terrible drought on the western side of the state along the Ohio 

River, Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, up and down the east coast, 

we continued to get rain in my valley. 

I am at 3,000 feet, and I am right on the river, so the ridges behind me go up to about 5,000 feet. So this whole area from the 

southern part of the Cranberry all the way to Canaan, a little east 

of us, a little west of us, Elkins is about the dividing line on the 

western side, we are in this rain zone, and when everyone else is 

in drought we are getting rain there. 

So it is such a valuable resource because all these springs up 

there continue to produce clean water. Last year it was up into August. So it is just a resource that is sort of in some ways being 

overlooked and in some ways it is not. Today, we are not overlooking it. We are looking out for it and we hope are going to protect it. 

These headwater areas also have a critical part to do with our 

flooding problem in West Virginia. The state and Federal government has spent a lot of money in the last 30 years with the 1985 

flood, the 1993 flood, the 1996 flood. So more of these areas that 

are protected and have less activity going on in them, the more 

that water is held back, communities don’t suffer, people don’t get 

relocated. 

It is a chain reaction after a flood. I know, Congressman Rahall, 

you were in the middle of the 1985 flood, and the two other floods 

and it floods all over this country, but in our region it is a very 

serious thing. I think that headwater protection here today and 

down the road, as I mentioned in my testimony, is critical to fish 

species, to communities surviving, clean water, agriculture and the 

list goes on and on. 

Mr. RAHALL. Beautiful. Beautiful. Thank you, Gil. Thank you, 

Bob, Mike, Reverend Sparks. This is beautiful, too. Very well put 

together, and I want more copies of it. Mayor, thank you for being 

with us today. Thank each of you. Excellent testimony. Thank you, 

Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. Thank you. Mr. Bishop. 

Mr. BISHOP. Thank you. I will make this fairly brief. To the five 

of you who have testified today, I want to thank you for your willingness to come here and speak before this particular Subcommittee in this room. It is very kind of you. I appreciate the testimony. It was well-delivered, and the results we will have from it. 

I want to make two comments that I think I found as I was listening to this presentation of this hearing on this particular bill 

that is being introduced. Whenever you deal with the concept of 

wilderness red flags are thrown up all over the place. Coming up 

with a consensus on wilderness is a difficult path, too. 

I think Mr. Rahall in the introduction of the bill that is before 

us has been able to deal with that consensus concept. It is difficult, 

especially in the environment we have here, to have bipartisan 

34 

input, but this consensus bill has bipartisan input. I think that is 

very important. 

Not only does it do that, it meets the Federal forest standards 

for the seven parcels that are being considered here today and does 

not impinge on successful management practices by the forest. So, 

indeed, there is something unique about the legislation that is here 

today in the fact that it is a consensus, it is a bipartisan consensus 

and it can move forward in that manner very effectively, probably 

more effectively than some other things we have here today. 

Appreciate the testimony, also, on the byproducts that this would 

be. I recognize that in river health as well as fishing health is concerned, river pooling is extremely important, especially you have a 

species that does any kind of spawning. That pooling concept is 

much different to accomplish in new growth forests as it is into old 

growth forests. Has a different connotation to it. 

Those are all important elements to be there. I was specifically 

pleased to hear the concept that this would not be an impediment 

to the industry of the area of West Virginia because most of the 

industry with which you are dealing is done on private lands. West 

Virginia should be complimented for having a very healthy and 

positive ratio between private lands and public lands. 

If we in the west had that same kind of ratio, there would be 

fewer problems that we would have concerned, and we would be 

able to solve more of our own problems and actually open up the 

goodness of individuals when you empower them to take their own 

responsibility of their own issues. 

I am waiting for that day when we have the same ratio that you 

have, Mr. Rahall, from the State of Utah because it makes a difference, and it solves a lot of these problems ahead of time. So I 

appreciate your testimony and being here, and I appreciate the opportunity and thank you. Thank you very much. 

Mr. RAHALL. Would the gentleman from Utah yield just one 

final—— 

Mr. BISHOP. Do I have to? 

Mr. RAHALL. Well, I am just going to offer an invitation for the 

next time your caucus holds their retreat at the Greenbrier in 

White Sulphur Springs right next to Lewisburg that after the passage of this proposal, perhaps more of your colleagues on your side 

of the aisle will be able to get out into the wilderness and experience what this legislation is going to create. 

Mr. BISHOP. You notice, first of all, that when he is the Chairman, you have to yield, but, yes, I would be happy to do that if you 

can come out and see some private timber harvesting in Utah, if 

it ever existed again. 

Mr. GRIJALVA. That is the bipartisan spirit that I love. Mr. 

Chairman, thank you for the legislation. Ranking Member Bishop, 

thank you for your comments. Mr. Holtrop and the five panelists 

before us today, thank you so much. With that, the hearing is 

adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:10 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

Æ