On our list of issues worth fighting for, the Wild Sky Wilderness act is near the top. After this bipartisan bill finally got a House hearing last week, it looks like a fight is what it’s going to take.
Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Resources Committee, has become the immovable object keeping Wild Sky from becoming a reality. His anti-wilderness reputation has been verified with his insistence that 16,000 low-land acres be eliminated from the proposed wilderness area northeast of Index. He suggests that doing so could lead to an acceptable compromise.
But cutting those acres from the plan wouldn’t be a compromise, it would be a capitulation to narrow interests that would ruin the whole idea behind Wild Sky.
That idea is to provide wilderness protection to land that the public can actually access and enjoy. High-elevation wilderness areas generally are accessible only to the hardiest recreationists. The concept of Wild Sky is to open wilderness to young and old, protecting accessible areas for generations to come.
The entire bill is the product of good-faith compromise and an inclusive process that won the praise of leaders from both parties. Further compromise was made recently when Rep. Rick Larsen and Sen. Patty Murray, both Democrats and sponsors of the bill, and Rep. George Nethercutt, a Republican who is challening Murray this fall, agreed to a revised plan that eliminated some 3,000 acres from the original plan.
Pombo is having none of it. That leaves supporters of Wild Sky only two realistic options: Bring legislative pressure to bear on Pombo (fellow Republican Nethercutt should play a leading role here) to get him to relent this year, or start again next year. The latter would require again getting the bill through the Senate, which has passed it twice.
Snohomish County Council member Jeff Sax was disingenuous last week when he testified that U.S. 2 might not be able to handle the traffic the wilderness area would generate, saying that Murray had indicated 2.3 million visitors could be anticipated each year. It appears the figure Sax referred to came from a quote from Murray that some 2.5 million citizens would live within driving distance of Wild Sky. Annual visits wouldn’t be anywhere close to 2.3 million. For comparison, Mount Rainier National Park gets about 400,000 visits a year. Empty objections like this only show how little Wild Sky opponents have to go on.
Backers of Wild Sky, including Nethercutt, must keep pushing for a final bill that preserves broad accessibility. A wilderness area lasts for ages. It’s worth waiting to make sure it’s done right.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
