MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) – Thousands of acres of wilderness will be added to the national forests in Vermont and New Hampshire under a politically charged bill that was revived from near death to win passage in the U.S. House on Wednesday.
Environmental groups and political leaders praised the bill, saying it would preserve forever some of the most scenic places in the forests, but some timber groups and supporters of “traditional uses” denounced it as locking up valuable resources unnecessarily.
In the end, passage of the New England Wilderness Act of 2006 came with no fanfare, clearing the House on a voice vote as Congress labored toward the end of its current session. The bill will be sent to President Bush for his signature.
The legislation calls for expanding wilderness areas in the 400,000-acre Green Mountain National Forest by about 42,000 acres to a total of 101,000 acres, or a quarter of the overall forest. The 800,000-acre White Mountain National Forest’s wilderness areas are slated to grow by 34,000 acres to 115,000 acres.
“These are special areas that now will be the legacy of every Vermonter of today and tomorrow,” Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said in a statement. “This has been a difficult achievement but one that we know has enduring significance and value to the people of our state. I commend the Republican leadership for helping to overcome partisan delays that have slowed this bill, and I hope this will be one of the first signs of a new period of bipartisan cooperation.”
The bill was delayed by political feuding in Vermont. Gov. Jim Douglas helped to delay a vote on the legislation as Congress was nearing the end of its regular session in September, complaining to Republican leaders in the House that it did not reflect concerns of some in Vermont who wanted no expansion of wilderness areas.
After a new round of negotiations, the amount of wilderness expansion in Vermont was reduced by about 6,000 acres and that’s the bill that went to the president.
Ed Larson of the Vermont Forest Products Association said he and his colleagues were angry that any wilderness was being added to the Green Mountain National Forest.
“We feel we were totally ignored in this process,” Larson said. “There’s just no evidence, no need for forever locked-up, forever posted land, to us. That’s not conservation.”
The Vermont Traditions Coalition blames Vermont’s congressional delegation for taking the side of environmental groups over hunters, ATV riders and other users of the national forest.
“They rammed this through without any congressional testimony and without allowing the appeal of the forest plan by the Vermont Traditions Coalition, the Vermont Forest Products Assocaition and Associated Industries of Vermont to be concluded,” said Steve McLeod of the traditions coalition.
The issue was what a wilderness designation means. It’s the strictest regulation in a national forest, prohibiting al motorized access. Vermont opponents say that’s way too restrictive and will not improve wildlife habitat. Supporters say it’s important to have places that are off limits to log skidders, all-terrain vehicles and mountain bikes.
New Hampshire, by contrast, was much more unified about adding wilderness designation to its forest. The wilderness bill was introduced by Sen. John Sununu and co-sponsored by Sen. Judd Gregg, both Republicans, before it was combined with the Vermont version. New Hampshire’s two Republican congressmen helped to push it in the House, although there was a flare-up in September when they unsuccessfully tried to split it from the Vermont controversy.
“The Forest Service plan represents a consensus view of how best to protect land in the White Mountain National Forest while ensuring the forests’ traditional mixed-use role,” Sununu said in a statement. “I am pleased that Congress has approved this bill for the benefit of New Hampshire residents and visitors as well as countless generations to come.”
—
On the Net:
White Mountain National Forest: http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/forests/white-mountain/
Green Mountain National Forest: http://www.fs.fed.us/r9/gmfl/
AP-ES-11-15-06 1725EST
Send questions/comments to the editors.
