In the latest wilderness related legislation, Rep. Mike Simpson (Idaho, R) is attempting to re-introduce HR 222, CIEDRA (Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act) and it is causing quite a stir. Conservationists and recreationists are on either side of the bill, which, if passed, would designate 312,000 acres of wilderness. However, it would also set aside 500,000 acres of land adjacent to the wilderness that would give motorized vehicles access (think snowmobiles, ATVs, etc). The bill was originally introduced in 2007, but stalled after being referred to committee.
Conservationists are upset that the bill as being touted as a “wilderness” bill because the inclusion of motorized vehicle access. Recreationists are in favor of the bill, as it sets aside more land for them to play on. The problem with the CIEDRA bill is one we are seeing more frequently these days–”wilderness” legislation rolled into other, less related topics. Because the real focus of the bill is somewhere else, legislation affected wilderness slips by unnoticed. Luckily, organizations like Sierra Club are getting the word out about these issues.
One of the most obvious problems with the CIEDRA bill is the “no net loss” of recreational land included in the wording. That means if a trail or area is closed due to overuse and environmental damage, another trail or area of equal size must be opened to replace it.
Joe Rember, a former wilderness ranger in Central Idaho wrote a nice (but long) commentary on the CIEDRA bill in the Boise Weekly when the legislation was originally introduced–though a few years old now, many of his points still hold true today.
