In the News |Back

1/19/2010
Rapid City Journal - Grassland group praises Johnson wilderness bill
- Steve Miller

The South Dakota Wild Grassland Coalition is praising Sen. Tim Johnson’s decision to introduce a bill designating 40,000 to 50,000 acres of the Buffalo Gap National Grassland east of Rapid City as wilderness.

Johnson announced last week that his bill would follow recommendations of the U.S. Forest Service to designate land in the Indian Creek, Red Shirt and Chalk Hills areas of the national grassland as wilderness.

Johnson said his bill would keep open the six-mile-long Indian Creek Road by excluding it from the wilderness boundaries, as recommended by the Forest Service.

Johnson and the other two members of the state’s congressional delegation, Republican Sen. John Thune and Democratic Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, have previously held off from supporting wilderness designation for the areas, citing opposition from some local groups.

But local support for wilderness designation has been growing, according to South Dakota Wild Grassland Coalition manager Cheryl Warren of Custer.

“The decision to keep the Indian Creek road open, rather than closing it at the first creek crossing as the citizens' proposal would do, is a tough compromise for us, but one worth making,” Warren said. “The coalition sees the senator's plan as a tremendous step forward in securing a living legacy of South Dakota's and the nation's grassland heritage."

Congressional approval is needed to create new wilderness areas.

“This gets the process started,” Warren said of Johnson’s announcement. She said, however, that the proposal still will need support from Thune and Herseth Sandlin.

Neither has taken a firm position on the bill.

But Herseth Sandlin on Tuesday said, “I applaud Senator Johnson’s goals of preserving this unique land for future generations and increasing the opportunities for recreation and tourism in these areas. As I continue to evaluate this proposal, I think it’s critical that we strike an appropriate balance between preservation and the need to address the concerns of local producers and other stakeholders,” she said in a prepared statement.

Thune didn’t comment directly on Johnson’s bill, but a statement from his staff said he expects to hear more comment from South Dakotans about the proposed wilderness designation. Thune shares concerns of many South Dakotans about the proposal, according to the statement from his office.

South Dakota Wildlife Federation board member Terry Mayes also applauded Johnson for initiating wilderness legislation. Mayes, a member of the 2005 West River Issues Working Group, noted that wilderness is part of the multiple-use concept of public land management. "Wilderness protection ensures that the land will remain as it is, while still allowing hunting and fishing, hiking, camping, rock collecting, disabled access and horseback riding," he said.

Mayes said that, when necessary, wilderness can be managed to control fire, insects and disease, and to protect public health and safety and private property. He also noted that emergency search and rescue operations can be performed in wilderness.

However, significant local opposition remains. Pennington, Custer and Fall River county commissions have passed resolutions in opposition.

The Black Hills Multiple Use Coalition, which represents ranchers who have grazing permits on the national grassland, as well as rock hounds and others, remains opposed, said executive secretary Tom Troxel.

Troxel said that leaving open the six-mile Indian Creek road is an important compromise. “A lot of people enjoy it so it’s a big deal and I think helpful,” Troxel said. “But we still think there are better alternatives than designating wilderness out there.”

Troxel said he still is concerned about the impact of wilderness on the grazing levels of permittees, as well as the Forest Service’s ability to control prairie dogs and noxious weeds.

“Even with the best of intentions, there are lots of groups out there that will use wilderness as a means to challenge those sorts of control activities,” he said.

For example, Troxel said that, technically, the Forest Service has the ability to suppress fires. “But whether or not they can actually get authorization to fight fires and what the constraints are on fighting fires remains a question mark. Getting authorization on time is also a question,” he said.

Troxel said the multiple-use coalition is putting together a letter to Johnson outlining its concerns. He emphasized that the group is continuing its dialogue with Johnson and his staff.

Troxel said an overarching objection is that there are no apparent threats to the national grasslands. “If additional protections are necessary, there are other designations without all the baggage of wilderness designations,” he said.