Wilderness designation more than title

The proposed Scotchman Peak “wilderness designation” has been a silent and concerted effort by its proponents for the better part of a decade.

Proponents insist that “management of the area would not change as a result of the legislation,” yet have invested ten years and tens of thousands, if not $100,000-plus, for simply a change in title description?

No, it’s about locking up land in the hands of the federal government, for a term of … forever. This deprives current and future generations of Idahoans of the “equal footing” doctrine of state land ownership, with wide-ranging and detrimental implications.

Proponents also claim it would “establish the first protected wilderness area within the Panhandle region of Idaho.” So, conceivably not the last? Proponents minimize some of what the Wilderness Designation Act would prohibit: mechanical uses of equipment necessary to reduce wildfire danger, allowing it only for “emergencies involving the health and safety of persons within the [wilderness] area.” Notably, most proponents do not live in proximity to Scotchman Peak and would therefore not be in danger.

Idaho does not need this wilderness designation.

I would support a “state park” designation for Scotchman Peak, but will vote against the wilderness designation.

Jackie Domke

Priest River