NOTE TO POTENTIAL SIGNATORIES:
After signing our petition, please make sure you confirm your signature. You will be sent an email with a link for you to click which confirms your signing our petition. If you do not confirm your signature it will not appear as a valid signature on our petition, so watch for that confirmation email and make certain it does not get flagged as spam.
(Optionally, you can download a print copy of this letter to sign and send in through the mail here: )
PROTECT THE BOULDER-WHITE CLOUDS FOR RECREATION – .PDF
To The Boulder-White Clouds Region
Wilderness designation closes land to motorized use.
Please enter your information below to show your support for recreational access to the Boulder-White Clouds region.
I, the undersigned citizen, applaud and support the stance of Idaho governor C.L. "Butch" Otter in his opposition to S3194, the Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act (CIEDRA).
I also call on the Idaho Congressional Delegation to support governor Otter's opposition to S3194 (CIEDRA).
Christopher J. Robin
Said: It is called PublicLand for a reason. Make it available for use by all citizens.
Said: I'm in favor of proper management of the resources by involvement of the local populace and state officials. There is too much control being exercised on our lands by outsiders and others who spend little time there.
Said: Please support Idaho's citizens rights to use our public state lands! The feds are illegally trying to take our State lands! Please support us in our fight!
It's unconstitutional for the feds to try & designate state lands as "wilderness areas"!
Remember the feds are the ones who forced us to accept the grizzles & their friends the wolves....That is just one example of the federal wisdom!!
Stand up & be counted....or we will get rid of you & your constituents!!
Said: Please no more wilderness.Enjoy ATVing, Snowmobiling,Huning,Fishing and Boating.
Said: Please stop the wilderness designations. Idaho already has more wilderness than the other lower 48 states. We the people need to have motorized access to these beautiful places, so that we can enjoy them.
Said: This is PUBLIC land! I want to continue to responsibly enjoy this land and be able to show it to my future children.
Said: My family has enjoyed the trails in Idaho responsibly for 30+ years, and are members of Full Throttle Fellowship dirtbiking club, encouraging other riders and families to ride responsibly and enjoy the great outdoors of Idaho while building strong relationships, families and economic opportunities through the OHV community.
Said: It does not help IDAHO or the people therein.
We are in the midst of a huge recession/depression, and spending millions of dollars of tax payer money is ridiculous.
Wilderness is the worst designation that can be applied to any land. Wilderness does not allow any management of the land. It will allow wild fires and disease to destroy what they are trying to protect, because of the lack of care.
Lastly, I believe the state is more than capable of managing lands for the best possible results for the people of Idaho and all American citizens.
Said: Wilderness designation creates management problems without solving any specific problems. Rather, it is being used as a means to an end by anti-motorized extremists. The Boulder-White Clouds Region is already adequately protected, there is no need to create additional Wilderness designation.
Said: I believe we have enough Wilderness designations in the State of Idaho.
Said: NO to Federal Land Grabbing!!
Jon Paul Wilcox
Said: The Sawtooths were much more beautiful before they were made wilderness. Let not destroy the White Clouds too.
Said: I am sick and tired of jerk-off senators and representatives making wilderness to immortalize themselves. It does not help IDAHO or the people therein.
We are in the midst of a huge recession/depression, and spending millions of dollars of tax payer money is rediculous.
Further, the Wilderness Act is an unconstitutional piece of legislative garbage. The federal government does not, and CANNOT legally own land inside the states, except for tracts up to 10 square miles, for building forts and other necessary structures.
I support Idaho law HCR058 which will oppose federal management of our lands inside the state of Idaho and EVICT the US Dept. of Interior, BLM and USFS.
Lastly, I believe the state is more than capable of managing lands for the best possible gains to the people of Idaho, to include construction of state parks.
Paul Hunt Jr
Said: Some people who do not live in Idaho also love to travel the back country on motorized vehicles. The more wilderness in the area the less of my money the local economy will receive.
Said: please leave the boulder white clouds alone. we love to ride that area on our dirtbikes and snowmobiles. its too beatiful to shut us out of this area.
Said: we have to stop land grabs by the corp. cattle peaple please give it back to the generl public!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!etc.
Said: We have enough land set aside for wilderness, it really serves no purpose so why add more? Stop the maddness!
Said: These areas have been enjoyed for years by off road enthusiasts. We are avid about trail maintenance and land conservation. Please allow us and our future generations to enjoy access to this area.
Said: No more wilderness! There are other ways to protect land like this without the extreme measure of wilderness. In fact, BWC is pretty darn well protected now.
Said: Idaho has too much wilderness as it is and with recent Travel Management Plan changes with the USFS, even more access to areas providing access for fishing and firewood cutting are being "unlawfully" cut-off by USFS officials.
The majority of USFS Rangers are NOT adhering to the Code of Federal Regulations governing revisions or adoption of their respective Travel Management Plans.
The Boulder White Cloud area does not need additional protection. Designating it as a wilderness will just cutoff more access to alpine areas and its existing trails will soon become impassable with fallen trees and overgrown vegetation.
We have more than enough wilderness already, please do not take anymore land access away from us and our children. Accessible forest areas are already becoming too populated.
Said: This land is well preserved. Lets keep it accessable for the public to enjoy.
Said: Why is it that so few control so many? What ever happed to democracy? Or terms like The Majority Rules? And how is it that people who have never been west of the mississippi try to control what we can and cant do. If Washinton DC want to lock up our back yards from us lets send them some Grizzlys and Wolves for they back yards. Fair is Fair. Weve got your back Butch!
Said: As a rockhound, I oppose more closures in our state. This should be left multi-porpose for all to use.
We have been stewards of our lands here in Idaho for centuries and I'm opposed to outsiders coming in and telling us what's best for our lands.
Said: We love camping @ Pole Creek, my favorite place in the world. Don't want to lose access to it.
Said: Please leave our public alone. You do not have the money to take care of the land as it is.
Bill L Goff
Said: I do not support CIEDRA. Plesae keep the existing motorized recreation trails open in the Boulder While clouds.
Said: The State of Idaho has enough Wilderness as it is. We don't need the Feds trying to grab more State of Idaho land.
Said: Idaho is a state of Recreation! The BLM has has mismanaged its lands here in idaho to the point where recreation is a joke! Why give more of idaho to the Feds for destruction!!!
Said: No more wilderness, we already have WAY more than we need or want. Leave something for the rest of us to use and enjoy. How about a bill to return some of the existing wilderness back to the people to use and enjoy?
Said: I recreate in Idaho from California. I don't support CIEDRA and urge you to cancal this bill.
Said: Idaho already has more wilderness than any other state in the lower 48. Please do not reduce our access to our lands any farther by supporting an ill thought out, poorly excuted and unsupported plan, S3194.
Said: I have hiked to the top of Castle peak. I have stood at the edge of Lonesome lake. Places you now can only get to by horse or foot. I do not want to lose one more inch of motorized access in the Boulder/Whiteclouds and do not support CIEDRA. It is a "recreation area" as already designated and should stay that way. As a unique opportunity for everyone to enjoy!
Said: PLEASE - NO MORE WILDERNESS
Said: CIEDRA is another attempt to take the valuable timber, metals and grazing rights from Idahoans by outside interests. This is not an Economic Development or Recreation Bill it is a Wilderness Bill and it is a foot in the door to take all Idaho forest lands. Beware! We who live in Custer County will loose our livelyhoods and traditional way of life. See more at wwww.ccteapartypatriots.com
Said: I have lived in Idaho many years before moving to Utah for work, I love to spend time in the great outdoors of Idaho!
Said: I support our Governor in opposition to S3194. Disperse recreation is the best way to provide a high quality back country experience for all users. To crowd everyone into smaller areas will not only ruin the experience but also the environment from over use. Thank you in advance for your help in this matter.
Said: We own a cabin in Idaho and an ATV & motorcycles. We love recreating in the forest and hope that you will not listen to anyone trying to lock up wilderness.
Said: let's work for the good of all interests! not just one special group interests.
Said: Please, no more Wilderness!
Said: Wilderness is no more than rich people's play ground. The less fortunate and handycapped people will never be able to see the beauty and grandure of the wilderness areas. We need to leave what is left of Idaho open to the general public.
Said: idaho has enough wilderness and areas owned by the public already closed to access.
Said: Please don't over step what we placed you in office to do. There is a great deal of economic stimulus that is received by the use of that land. Every year my friends and I take a trip up there to ride bikes. We by gas, we buy food, and we pay to stay in the hotels there. we spend a lot money when we are there. And most of all we enjoy the beauty and the use of the land and we do it in a very repectful manor. So don't take that away!!!! Please!!!!
Said: As a disabled person that can not hike the back country, I feel this act will hinder my favorite activity to explore these areas that I have loved all my life. Please do what ever possible to stop this act. Thank you
Said: Stop the Federal Land Grabs !!
Said: I oppose any wilderness proposals, as an avid motorized vechicle recreationalist I am in the majority of people who recreate in Idaho and I want our legislators to stand up for us.
Said: no more wilderness in idaho----in fact no more wilderness period----please take note of the recent election---more of this to come--stop locking up the country---we nedd to produce our own goods,like lumber and minerals ect.---t5his requires land. thank you for your time and consideration
Said: It is imperative that the recently re-elected and Idaho Delegationas well as Congressman Reisch stand behind governor Otter's opposition to S3194 (CIEDRA). It is what born and bred Idahoans want!
Said: Lets see if I have this right. The gov't says that there has been a 1422% increase in ATV use in the past two decades, therefore they need to close more trails. Hmmm, in most instances when demand for something goes up the most common reaction is to increase the supply. If more people want to use trails it seems to me you would want more trails not fewer. But then common sense never has been a quality possessed by the gov't.
George R Archibald
Said: Please fight to keep the White Clouds area as it is-manageable and maintainable. We have too much wilderness in Idaho already. Leave it open for wise use and don't tie the Forest Service's hands on managing it. Thanks
Said: Please keep our access to these trails!
Said: Access is key!
Said: Please keep our trails open.
BRUCE A. CARTER
Said: we don't need more wilderness because we cannot use the ones we have for things we enjoy such as snowmobiling
Said: We do not need more wilderness that people do not use. The extremist want it closed down but they don't want to share it with anyone. They don't like seeing each other while they are there. Why is it that the only way to "save the land" is to lock everyone out of it. When most people want to use it in muliple ways. Most of us don't own horses or can not spend weeks walking in and carrying everything on our backs. I've been into several wilderness and other than guides who use it as there own private hunting areas without paying for it hardly anyone goes there. Forest Seveice is taking the easy way out and they don't have to work if they close it off.
Said: I do not support the White Cloud Wilderness Bill. Idaho already has enough wilderness areas.
Said: I do not support CIEDRA for its blocking my use of existing motorized trail.
Said: for the sake of our kids.......
Said: leave idaho land alone and let the people run it, not the stupid ass fed
Said: I do not support CIEDRA, NOR CAROL KINGS BILL, NOR ANY BILL THAT BRINGS MORE GOVERNMNET REGULATION TO OUR COUNTY LANDS.
Money is always on one side of the scales - and our future is on the other. What matters most to me is our future.
Michael Lindenfelser II
Said: What used to be land of many uses would then become land of no use! Try seeing just the Frank Church wilderness.
Shaun J. Hickman
Said: It is an outrage that any Federal Government would attempt to control State controlled recreation area! Washington can take care of Washington and stay out of Idaho.
Said: stop turning are public lands in to "Lands of NO Use"
Said: There would be a lot more opposition to this proposal if more Idaho NATIVES were aware of this plan to close our trails to motorized vehicles!
Scott W. Graham
Said: WHAT GOOD IS MORE WILDERNESS IF YOU CAN'T GET IN TO SEE IT? HIKING IN THAT FAR ISN'T ALWAYS AN OPTION FOR SOME!
Said: Let's keep it open for use and, hopefully, keep it belonging to Idaho.
Said: One of the purposes of public land is to allow the public to enjoy them. Wilderness designation eliminates in excess of 90% of the lands previous use and effectively locks the public out of the land. Please keep this land open for the public to enjoy and do not designate it as wilderness.
Said: Stop the madness. Stop CIEDRA now! Idaho does NOT want this!
Said: It is absurd that policy controlling land is being made by those who will never see, use, or love it.
Said: I have been a recreational advocate of the White Clouds, even prior to Frank Church. I have ridden my trail bike upon designated open routes in the White Cloud (SNRA) many times - a right that I have honored and treasured. At 67 years of age, my future access opportunity will only be on a trail bike. Please DO NOT BLOCK me from riding in my beloved White Clouds (Little Boulder & Big Boulder loop)!! The environmentalists already have the VAST Majority of the region to themselves.
Said: I have ridden the area many times and the impact to the land is minimal, the trails through the area are well established and constitute no erosion or damage. Ruducing or eliminating trails such as Grand Prize will eliminate looping opportunities and therefore cause double the use on the other trails such as Germania Creek and others. More people on fewer trails causes conflicts and more erosion of the trail system, causing more maintanance to be done. Do not support S3194 in any form. I do not need more wilderness to enjoy the area. The average person will not walk more than five miles to even see wilderness!!!
Said: Federal Government stay out of Idaho!
Said: Do the right thing this time around. Support Governor Otter on his one.
Said: Don't need more restrictions, need less! Idaho should control these lands, not the bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.!!
Said: May we all be able to enjoy Idaho's wildernss
Said: We have enough wilderness that is not getting used, do we really need more? I feel we can protect the environment with out locking it up to most of the people that live here.
Said: Keep Boulder - Whiteclouds open!
Said: I agree "if it aint broke, dont fix it". Leave the rec. land open for us to enjoy. They say we're saving it for future generations but it won't be open for them to enjoy either. Once it's closed, it's closed for good!
Said: No more wilderness in IDAHO we want access access. I have spent 9 days my wife and I in Frank church wilderness although we love it and look forward to doing it again we don't need more wilderness. B.R
Said: I am a volunteer scout master of young men. Designating the Boulder White Clouds as a wilderness area will preclude us from taking larger youth groups into the back country. It will hurts us just like the Sawtooth Wilderness has hurt us.
Please respect the citizens of Idaho.
Said: Keep the trails in the Boulder-White Clouds open to all trail users
Said: Having hunted, fished, camped, snowmobiled and horsebacked most of the the Boulder and Whitecloud ranges for the past 25 years, when I want or need the total wilderness experience, I head north for access to the Frank Church. It's only a few more miles down the highway. Keep the Boulder/Whiteclouds like they are now.
Said: No more Wilderness. Educate the people on sharing the land. I oppose S3194.
Said: Back in the late 1960's and early 1970's my Dad took my Brother and I into the White Cloud Area on Motorcycles and he was an avid outdoor enviromentally sound motorcycle enthusiast, who taught us about the trails, and using sound judgement when riding on the trails. He told us back then that someday this will all be closed because of the Extreme Radical Government officials (Today these are kinder more gentle words than I would have called them). He was right, because they (being the Government) have taken so many rights away from the Public from the Public lands that are supposed to be for the public to enjoy. Education is the Key word: As long as the Public is educated and the criminals prosecuted there should be no reason to close any area. Motorcycles/4 wheelers/Hikers/Horse riders/Hunters/anyone who enjoys the outdoors, we all need to learn how to share and educate ourselves on land use, instead of closing it down.
Mark von Mettenheim
Said: No more wilderness needed !
Said: they (government) keep taking and taking don't let them take our wildreness and the way we acess it away.
Said: I oppose S3194. Enough is enough!!
Douglas R. Walker
Said: Let Idaho residents decide what is best for Idaho. Let those of us that actually use the puplic lands make those decisions. Washington has ruined enough as it is. Don't let them ruin Idaho as well.
Said: We have plenty of wilderness in the state, let us continue to recreate and enjoy the White CLouds as they are. DOnt deny my children the opportunity to enjoy them.
Said: We already have way more wilderness area than anyone can access now. It is suppose to be for the people, let us use it!!
Said: I am opposed to any more wilderness designations in Idaho and would like to see many on the existing ones removed. In my opinion - those who push Federal Land ownership in Idaho don't care one bit about the land - what they really want is control over the citizens. I want motorized access for my motorbikes and quads.
Said: I am an invirementelest and a motorcyclist and am happy to share the trails with responsible people who are also willing to share the trails. The White Clouds are not being over used!
Said: IF YOU DONT LIVE HERE DONT TRY AND TAKE OUR RECREATION PLACES AWAY!
Jeff M Haines
Said: Protect the trails and recreation, it is the resource, not wilderness!
Said: Idaho has enough Wilderness. Please don't further limit our OHV recreation options. It's the only way many people will ever be able to see such beautiful country. We cherish this land just as much as non-OHV fans and more effort should be made to educate the public, such as the very successful "Stay on Trails" campaign.
Said: Leave our state alone!
Said: I believe some wilderness areas r ok but we definitely don't need anymore.I go into the sawtooths and it is beautiful, but we don't need anymore.Snowmobiles and motorcycles leave such a small amount of damage that sometimes 3 ft. away from a trail u can not even see it...The feds need to stay out of Idaho.
V. Michael Hillman
Said: All the western states have enough wilderness already. It's time to let ALL the public use our public lands.
Said: No more wilderness without motor vehicle acess.
Said: We will take care of our own lands thank you. No more wilderness lands in Idaho!
Said: Before long everything will locked up!
Said: We need the Federal government to get out of our lives. Idaho can manage just fine without the Federal Government telling us what is good for us.
There is already too much "wilderness" land of no use, in Idaho. We need conservation, not dictatorship.
Gordon M Harris
Said: The motorized trails this Wilderness Bill proposes to close are the last of the best for motorized recreation. Why shouldn't people who enjoy riding trail bikes be able to keep these few trails? Please leave these trails open to all and stop closing more public lands to the majority of the public.
Motorized recreation brings in a lot of money to Idaho. That income will be lost if trails are closed to motorized recreation. Closing trails is contrary to the stated purpose of Economic Redevelopment.
Said: More wilderness is not needed in the state of Idaho, leave the White Clouds as is.
Said: Please save our Recreational Access to The Boulder-White Clouds Region.
I support our Governor, C.L."Butch" Otter, in his opposititon to S3194 (CIEDRA).
Said: What about carol King's bill? Is CIEDRA a smoke screen? Her bill has 104 sponsers, CIEDRA has none!
Said: The minerals that are in the hills of; the trees that grow on; the water that falls on, and flows through; and ALL fish and mammals that are within the boundaries of the State of Idaho, are indeed in Idaho's jurisdiction and primarily the concern of ALL citizens of the State of Idaho. Idahoans know what is best for Idaho.
Said: This is public lands to be used by all people not a select few, Stop Ciedra and no more wilderness..
Said: NO MORE CLOSURES.... I am disabled and I am closed out of most areas anymore... Please stop Ciedra....
Said: NO CIEDRA... No more closures..no more wilderness, this is public land, keep it open for all people...
Said: Stop Ciedra...NO more Wilderness at all... This is all public land and should stay that way for all people, not just a select few...NO more closures...
William A Jones
Said: Please listen to the real people of Idaho
Said: CIEDRA has nothing to do with economic development in Central Idaho or with recreation. It is a wilderness bill conceived by East Coast interests and brought to you under false pretense by our own BIG GOVERNMENT Representative Simpson. Don't be fooled, it is more Government and less opportunity for Idaho.
See www.ccteapartypatriots.com for more indepth analysis and opinion.
Said: I have lived, worked and played in Idaho for more than 24 years now. What I can say is we have many beautiful and aesthetically natural features. I have hiked camped and hunted the Frank Church, but even that I've barely touched perhaps an 1/8 of it's wonder, mostly due to it's in inaccessibility, and now we have outside interests wishing to close even more land of which there is no need. I have ridden all through the Pahsimeroi mountains and valleys of the lost river valley range, there is really no large destructive footprint I've encountered cause by OHV vehicles. I as a long term resident do not see any reason for this. I as many are good stewards to the environment, because I want my children's, children to see what I've seen and to enjoy it. If by locking out the land to the common Lay person only the locals will suffer not to mention the local communities that relay on the tourism. Those whom are so intent on this self righteous agenda will be the only ones to reap rewads for this action something underlying to wilderness scheme (hidden agenda).
I say NO!
Said: This bill is an example of environmentalist extremism and its growing stranglehold on our nation! We have lost jobs and industry, been prevented from drilling oil within our own boarders, and have lost many of our basic liberties to the nebulous concept of "protecting the environment" and to the collectivists who advance their own power through that hollow argument. I say to hell with them! Americans have awakened to the lies of the global warming crowd and are not interested in cap and trade or further sacrificing our liberty and money to advance the power of the left. Green is just the new red and all Americans should study who is behind the agenda and what their goals really are, which have nothing to do with "protecting the environment" and everything to do with gathering and holding power over us; the people.
The lands identified in this bill were originally put under national control to guarantee the people's access to them. Now, government in an arbitrary and capricious manner proposes to break that promise of access and virtually deny our ability to utilize that land for recreation (which is what restricting motor access does). All for "saving the environment".
Every four wheeler I know stays on the trail and respects the land. I don't think I have ever seen a huge problem with folks getting off the trails. Rules limiting off road travel to the established trails are ok. Penalties for messing up the land wantonly are ok. Confiscation of our land and blanket denial of the people's access is not ok and stealing our freedom (especially where no compelling justification exists) is unacceptable.
Please join me in fighting this bill by supporting our politicians who have taken a stand against it and by letting those who do support it know that we deeply resent the theft of our money, or liberty and now our basic access to the land that we love dearly in the name of "protecting the environment".
Said: I oppose Ciedra. There are already too many Wilderness areas in Idaho that lock us out from recreating in OUR PUBLIC LANDS
My friends, family, and I want to be able to continue to recreate in the Boulder White Clouds.
Please tell everyone you know that wants to continue to recreate in the Boulder White Clouds to sign this petition!
Said: 70 some percent of Idaho is tied up in 'Public Lands' Closeing off access to more and more of this land is to squander that resource. The right thing to do would be to OPEN it up for more people to enjoy and encourage responcible, sustainable, useage.
Said: My wife and I mountain bike in the affected areas and are glad that you support the opposition to S3194.
Said: no more widerness
Said: Everyone needs to have the right to enjoy these beautiful places. Only those who love and respect the land will be willing to make the effort to get into this rouged country and would want to leave it in its find, unaltered shape. My husband and I both have disabilities and need the aid of motorized vehicles to enjoy this. Please do not limit our access.
Said: This area is rouged enough that it is nearly inaccessible by anything but foot travel. It has been used by many people for years and is still in pristine condition. There is no need to change the way it is now classified. Please leave it as it is.
Said: As a mountain biker, we have been thrown under the bus wheels with CIEDRA. We get in and out of the White Clouds and surrounding area very quickly, rarely spending a night out in the proposed wilderness area. We leave no trace and are of low impact to the land. We have been riding these areas for over 20 years. With the bicycles shut out, and the exception of hunters in the fall, only the day hikes will be used, causing the type of foot damage you see on the ground out of 4th of July trail head, very braided, wide and heavily overused. The dog waste problem and related smell, from the trailhead to the first three lakes this summer was overwhelming! By concentrating our use with the motorized users, the impacts will be greatly noticed by the public. Yet another reason to shut down those trails later.
Said: Less goverment we can be responcible for individual recreation within the state of Idaho.
Said: I think they have already closed off too much of our land. Some of us enjoy seeing the mountain roads and being able to drive deep into the forest. It, also, makes the land of no use.
Said: Idaho already has enough "land of NO use" it is nice to have some land left where we have access.
Dennis L. Largent
Said: Please keep Idaho open to the public. Do not close public lands so only speacilty groups can use it.
Said: Idaho has more wilderness than it needs now.
Said: the majority of Idaho is designated as wilderness or has federal or state land status. We need access to our public lands in order to fully enjoy them.
Said: I am a avid outdoorsman...I mountain bike, backpack, rock climb, ski, snowshoe and MOTORCYCLE.
I don't have any problem finding places to participate in the non motorized sports, but find it nearly impossible to find a place where I can ride my off road motorcycle. There is a great imbalance in the use of our recreational lands. Please OPPOSE CIEDRA.
Born and Raised in Idaho. Recreate in Idaho.
1019 East 19th
Spokane, WA 99203
Ronald R Rasmussen
Said: I am totally against CIEDRA bill # S3194 and respectfully request that this bill NOT PASS!!!
David A. Volkers
Said: Idaho doesn't need more inaccessible areas
Said: My family has been hunting in the Frank Church Wilderness since the late 70's and have seen many well maintained trails and roads closed limiting our access to a lot of remote and quite beautiful land that is supposed to be all of ours
Said: please leave the white clouds as they are. We already have enough wilderness as it is. Besides, who are you trying to satisfy by making it a wilderness area?
Said: This area is already protected adequately. The bill is not in the interest of residents of Idaho or the US and will not improve the preservation of the land over it's current designation. It will harm the economy and quality of life of the area. Idaho already has more than enough "Wilderness" designated land. I moved here because of the access to this land. Without it I will begin my transition out of Idaho.
Said: It's fine now and generates revenue. Don't do something that will cost us more and cut revenue.
Said: this must not pass
Said: Typical federal bureaucrats. Create a huge bill dealing with multiple conflicting issues and call it a success! Why is it that recreational users, the population segment that most uses areas like the Boulder/White Clouds, never get equal representation on bills like this? Could it be because we don’t provide the side benefits of money and power to the politicians that support such legislation?
Check the Idaho Polls, not the pocketbooks of those trying to pass this legislation, Idahoans don’t want more wilderness.
Idaho has enough wilderness already, more than any other State. What is the benefit, TO IDAHO, of limiting recreational use? NONE
The last thing we need is for the federal government to have more power and control over lands in the State of Idaho.
Leave this kind of “Green Legislation” where it belongs and make Washington D.C. a wilderness area instead. An unfettered wolf population already exists there and would fit the wilderness parameters nicely!
Jeff M Haines
Said: To many trails in Idaho that are on federal land are being closed, there is no more logging or mining to speak of anymore so the trails are the resourse!!!! the trails and recreation need to be protected now! No More Wilderness, it does not generate any revenue and costs the taxpayer's millions when it catches fire from being sick with bugs.
Said: This is our land......
Said: The government has control over enough of our land!!!
Robert W. Gill
Said: There is plenty of unused wilderness spaces in Idaho already. The Boulder-White Cloud Region remains one of the great recreation areas left in Idaho, please leave it be so current and future recreationists can enjoy it. Say no to S3194 (CIEDRA).
Said: Keep public lands open to the public.
Jamea A. McDonald
Said: I resent that my representatives are pushing this bill; and I will hold it against them every chance I get.
Said: I would like to add my support of opposition to S3194 and urge others to join my friends and I in an effort to continue and expand access to this beautiful piece of land.
Said: Idaho already has more wilderness/non-motorized designated land than any other state except Alaska. We don't need more, we need to maintain multiple use and retain motorized travel in as much of the remaining public [people's collective land] lands to give the greatest number of Americans the greatest amount of access to their own land. We the people.
Said: Please stop taking public land away from the public by imposing such strenuous use restrictions that limit the access and ability for its enjoyment.
Said: We have far too much wilderness in Idaho already.
You can't go on forever taking a million or so acres, every few years or less, permanantly out of any and all production. They are not making any more of it to slam into economic wasteland (wilderness) every few years.
Said: I have been riding there for years. Do not want to lose this area to riding. Tim Ronsse
Thane W Smith
Said: Wilderness designation is just another ploy of environmentalist to remove access (so called protect by lock-out
Said: Why do we always seem to have people and groups from other States, trying to lock up our Idaho wilderness? Leave our State alone. Closing off areas to motorized vehicles, closes the area to the elderly and the disabled.
Said: At my age motorized vehicles are the only way I can see some of the back country.
Said: This area has been managed very well by the Sawtooth National Recreation Area has been well managed as a multiple use area for many years. It is already protected from mining, logging, commercial deveopment etc. The only thing passing this bill would do is to lock out most of the current users who have enjoyed years of access.
I am no longer able to backpack due to back surgery and two knee surgeries. I can still enjoy this area via use of my trail cycle. If this bill passes I will no longer be able to access by favorite place in the entire world.
Said: No more worthless wilderness. No more wolves.
Said: I think anyone who supports this bill has been bought off by the corrupt wildlife conservancy or lobbyists. If you want the real truth, go to idahoforwildlife.com/outdoorsman issue# 24 and get involved. contact your state representative and demand that they hold the Fish and Game and other groups accountable to the people.
Said: Stop the take over, let all people enjoy the wilderness, some of us handicap people like to explore, and motorized vehicle like ATV's are a way we get around.
Said: Idaho has sufficient acerage designated state or federal property. Enough is enough.
Said: I do not want Idaho to be locked up to the point that nobody can use it with jeeps or atv on approved forest roads or trails. Many handicapped people cannot walk the many miles to enjoy idaho wilderness, but can enjoy it from a jeep.
Said: Idahoans need to get the Federal Government out of Idaho. They already own 64% of Idaho. And shame on Mike Simpson for pushing this agenda.
Said: we have enough wilderness now, we need to retain some multiple use area.
Cory & Shamane Wells
Said: If the Bureaucrats of this nation want wilderness lands let them get it in some other state.
Said: The Boulder White Cloud area is why I visit Idaho every year.
Said: We soon will not have any place to enjoy. The closing of our lands also will be the end to many jobs and business's.
Said: Tell the Feds to keep their corrupt, liberal hands off our state lands....
Said: Please leave forrest access so that my young children may gain the same access and enjoyment that I have gained in the Boulder-White Cloud area.
Said: The country has taken over 70% of Idaho, that's more than enough. Let Idaho citizens decide.
Russell & Tracie Tackett
Said: we are opposed to more wilderness any where in idaho.
Said: Keep your nose and ass out of Idaho. Stay in Washington. It's much safer for you. The wolves will eat you here.
Said: There is no human benefit from making more of Idaho wilderness.
Said: Leave the Boulder White Clouds as is.
Said: Our forests are being closed down we are no longer able to use them. Please keep this open to the public. We do not need any more wilderness!
P T Behm
Said: As a disabled person, I can only enjoy Idaho's wilderness from the seat of at atv. I also stay on trails and try to be a good steward of the land. Will closing off an area from motorized vehicles not violate the spirit, if not the letter of the law regarding the American with Disabilities Act? It certainly will close off areas to those of us not strong enough to hike the area.
The Federal Government is rather arrogant in their attempted "takeover" of Idaho Lands. Please leave this area alone!
Said: There is plenty of wilderness in Idaho and the lands in this bill are already managed/protected. Leave things alone and work on something more constructive, like putting people back to work.
Said: I support management of public land instead of closed/restricted land. Public support will not agree to close land off because managing these remote areas are too difficult. If managing the land is too difficult and cost prohibitive, it must not be blocked off. Please make responsible decisions that are fair and flexible to future changes. Please recognize new sports and evolving users of our public lands and please designate areas for multiple uses and support expanded public access instead of limiting it.
Said: Idaho currently has more square miles of wilderness than any State in the Continental United States. We have given enough. Ask another State to step up!
Said: Being born and raised in this great state. I'm absolutely fed up with people that have never lived, or even stepped foot in our gorgeous mountains, trying to tell us where we can and can't go. I was raised in the hills and I'd be damned if I won't continue to take my children to the places that my father took me, and his father took him. Mind your own business in your big city life, and leave our small town life alone.
Said: OHV recreation is economic stimulus.
Said: Public lands should be managed to benefit all user – not just small group of backpackers.
craig m nielson
Said: We have enough wilderness in the U.S., and I believe Idahoans should make decisions concerning their own land.
Said: Vote NO on CIEDRA. We don't need it!!
Said: My sons and I have ridden those trails over 20 years and find no noticeable difference. Even the stones in the creek crossings were amazingly same unique rock and in the same place. I have found again and again lot of the closure nuts do not know the facts. H.C. Howell and sons... I ride the trails every day during the summer with rare exception.
Said: Let Idaho decide the future of the Boulder White Clouds. We all need to be responsible stewards of our lands and we ALL need to respect everyone's privilege to use our lands in a responsible way.
Said: Please leave our mountains alone. It should be left to each state to decide what we do with our recreation areas. Please abide by the constitution which limits the powers of the federal government!
Said: Thanks but Idaho can manage the land without the fed's interferance.
Said: I am approaching age 60, if lands continue to be locked up under the "wildnerness" concept only twenty something people will be able to visit them. Aircraft have the least impact of any users, and estabolished motorized trail systems are a good and useful wsy to enjoy the beauty of our idaho lands. These ways of getting into the back country need to be continued.
David J Peterson
Said: There is already pleanty of wilderness in Idaho. I have been spending the last 20 years visiting Idaho. This is a recreation area. Keep it open to all not just the elitist. Stop the government take over of our freedoms.
Said: I am a senior citizen who cannot hike/bike like I used to. So taking away my RIGHT to enjoy the wilderness is wrong beyond any words I could ever express. It limits those like me, which are many, in where we can go in the mountains if it is taken away.
Said: We have enough wilderness land locked up in Idaho!
Steven H. Smith
Said: I'm for no development, but feel strongly about keeping roads and trails open.
Said: I have been riding the White Clouds for 25 years and we need to have clear motorcycle/MTB/horse and hiking routes to provide mutliple use in this area..
My family and many freinds ride 5-10 days a year in this area..
I STRONGLY OPPOSE CLOSURE OF THE WHITE CLOUDS!
Said: Federal government, please stay out of Idaho! Thank you.
Said: No MORE WILDERNESS, NOT NOW NOT EVER. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
Said: Please leave the Boulder-White Clouds a place for Idahoans to play.
Mark S. Burgess
Said: I do not want to close the land to motorized use.
Said: We need more motorized access to public lands - not less.
Said: Idaho has enough wilderness and if the outsiders would just butt out we could manage our state better than anyone
Jon T. Mills
Said: The people of Idaho are saying No!!! Does that count in Washington anymore?
Said: We have enough areas off limits to motorized vehicles in Idaho already.
It just seems that certain people/groups will not be happy until all government land is off limits to motorized vehicles and I am getting tired of it.
thomas g. mayo
Said: I HOPE CRAPO, SIMPSON, AND REISCH, AND THE REST OF THE IDAHO DELEGATION PUT A STOP TO THIS GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF THIS COUNTRY!! LESS GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN OUR LIVES IS THE FAR AND AWAY THE BEST SOLUTION TO AMERICAS PROBLEMS!!
james h. starkey jr
Said: One reason I moved to idaho was specifically for the access to the outdoors without govt controlling my freedom of movement and picking my pocket everychance it gets. - Jay Starkey.
Said: Keep it open!
Said: If you vote this I will knot vote for you in the next election.
Said: Please protect access to the Boulder-White Clouds Region.
Said: Why is there a federal land grab?
Jon Paul Wilcox
Said: We want to use our land and enjoy its beauty.
Said: This current national government overruling the wishes of "us common folk" has to STOP NOW!
Colin H. Dye
Said: I have been a paraplgic for over 31 years and a sledder and atv user before and since. Wilderness locks folks who CANNOT walk out.Except for a little fu fu wheelchair trail to phyllis lake some california trust funder wants! At over a millon dollar price tag!But it is not coming out of his pocket.
Said: More government just what we need... NOT!!!
God gave us the land. The government taketh away. Haven't they done enough? I will bite my tongue at this point or I'll be here all day.
Said: As a Disabled American Veteran who has difficulty walking almost any distance, and other disabled people with mobility handicaps, this type of legislation effectively locks us out of many outdoor recreational areas. I am an award winning wildlife artist and photographer, whose ability to access most areas has depended on the use of an atv/snowmobile(seasonally) to carry my equipment and myself. Adding yet another so called "wilderness" designation continues the onslaught of access limitations not only on us with physical limitations, but also to many others, except for those who consider these areas their own private parks. There is room and consideration for everyone, not just the few elitist to whom their own schemes seem to be all that matters.In the past people with mobility disabilities have been ignored. Stop this unnecessary discrimination. We have more than enough wilderness areas!
Said: Even though I still don't live in Idaho (in the Military). I will always feel like Idaho is my home, and I don't want to see another area locked up and closed off.
Said: I can see no necessity for Wilderness protection of these areas as they are already quite adequately protected. Wilderness designation creates management problems without solving any specific problems. Rather, it is being used as a means to an end by anti-motorized extremists.
Said: I am opposed to the S3194 act.
Said: Idaho doesn't need any more wilderness, especially in an area with active recreation users who will be locked out.
Said: As an avid snowmobiler I see wilderness as the land of no use, and see no reason for more of it. I feel snowmobiles leave no tracks or any visible sign that they were there when the snow melts. I also beleive that motorized recreation gives older folks a chance to get out and enjoy all that the Idaho outdoors has to offer, and that they would not be able to do so if they had to walk or ski.
Said: I am 62 years old, I have had three back surgeries
I can not walk for long distances. The only way I can access these areas is by horse back or motorized means.If this area is made widerness you wii be locking me and anyone like me out of this area.
Said: We have enough wilderness in Idaho. The Federal Government needs to state out of Idaho!
Said: We do not need any additional federal intrusion into our state. Who is to say that bureaucrats in D.C. can manage the lands better than the enthusiasts that use and enjoy the land everyday?
You can not even take a camera into the Frank Church without an act of Congress. As a forth generation Idahoan, I do not believe that Simpson's views regarding the Boulder White Clouds reflect the majority view of the citizenry of this state.
Said: No more wilderness, we have enough. Although I'm pretty pissed at the abuses of the ATV crowd I've hunted the White Clouds and there is very little access to begin with. Shutting it down is just another enviro wacko land grab. They can shove it. Time to stop the enviro agenda dead in it's tracks. No more wilderness! We have plenty as it is. It's just a breeding ground for wolves anyways. Another "compromise" that cost us dearly.
Said: It seems that when ever the Federal Government doesn't want to effectively manage our lands they turn it into a drive by on a highway with no access. Since when does some pencil pusher environmentalist in Washington DC have the right to take away our Public lands. Hence the word Public which should indicate that the land belongs to the people not the government. Let's start turning more of the states back East into wilderness if it is necessary to have such legislation and leave Idaho alone!!!
Said: Leave Idaho lands alone!
Said: Idaho does not need more wilderness land! We also do not need to have people (that know nothing about Idaho &/or the people of Idaho), deciding what to do with our land!
Said: I have worked in our wilderness places. I always saw people from out of state. Our own citizens cannot afford to access most of our wilderness, and I am not prepared to allow more rich outsiders to take over our recreation areas.
Said: I absolutely do not support S3194.
Said: Everybody I encountered on my dirtbike has been friendly. Every gets along. What's the problem.
Said: Fewer open trails will lead to more conflicts. I believe the Boulder-White Clouds area can be preserved while keeping motorized use open, or even expanded. The original CEIDRA concept has also been too watered down as a concession to wilderness advocates.
Said: Stop giving control of our state lands to the Feds. Enough of the land grabs!!
Said: Our natural resources should be for the public
Said: "Preserve Our Natural Resources FOR The Public Instead OF FROM The Public"
Said: I'm getting tired of Washington closing off land to 90% of the American public. It's not right to shut down the land to those that only can walk in. Yet they will fine a business for not having enough handicapped access.
Said: 100% opposed, I will check records and vote accordingly.
Said: We already have sufficient wilderness and private property denying access to public lands for the average citizen who does not have the wealth or resources to explore wildnerness areas. Leave the White Clouds ALONE as is!
Said: Idahians should make decisions about their land not the Government,
Said: Federal land grabs have gone too far. This wilderness already has laws in place to protect it. Preserve access!
Said: Let Idaho citizens decide our shared use and balance in our public lands.
Said: Stop the takeover of public lands... There are enough wilderness areas now.
Said: Let Idahoans decide how to manage Idaho, Feds... KEEP OUT!!
Said: One of the great pleasures of living in Idaho is the opportunity we have to acess to this and many other awesome areas. We need a balance in this states wilerness. We already have a great wilderness. We need to maintain all means of access in a controlled and fare environment.
Said: IT IS WRONG TO CLOSE THIS LAND TO THE PUBLIC, WHO HAS ALREADY PROVED ITS RESPECT WHEN USING THE LAND
Brian D. Smith
Said: Typical Federal Govt. control grab. The people are sick of it and the last thing we want is more restrictions put on our lives. This area should be left open to Idahoans who want to enjoy the beautiful areas of recreation. What worries me even more are the other restrictions that come along with wilderness areas... such as those in development, mining etc... I say NO to this bill and am confident that the majority of Idaho residents feel the way I do.
Said: I am a hiker, mountain biker, dirt bike rider, snowmobiller, ATV'er, skier, and avid hunter. I oppose closure of any more Idaho or Northwest land.
Said: Please leave our public land open all the public regardless of the mode of transportation, No more Wilderness
Said: We have enough wilderness already. If the people in Washington, D.C., want more wilderness let them designate some of their own state and leave ours alone.
Ronald Kay Christensen
Said: We have more than enough wilderness already. It limits access to the Rich. I want my children to be able to enjoy our public lands.I have traveled both wilderness and non wilderness and can't in good state of mind support more Wilderness!
Said: We have way more than enough Wilderness already. Wilderness becomes land of little or no use.
Said: I am opposed to any more 'wilderness' areas. A wilderness may sound good to some but the practical side of the argument is that this designation keeps citizens from using and enjoying more and more of the great outdoors.
Said: STOP GIVING AWAY IDAHO TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
Said: We don't need it and the U.S. can not afford it. It is fully protected now.
Said: This is a 10th amendment issue. The federal government has no jurisdiction in the state of Idaho.
Said: Idohans do not want more Wilderness. If more wilderness is needed for folks elsewhere please feel free to make more wilderness areas where ever those folks are.
Said: The Boulder White Clouds are already protected while allowing diverse recreation access. We don't need any more Wilderness in Idaho.
Said: No more closures! We have enough wilderness in this state. Keep the lands in the hands of the citizens. Turn it over to Washington and lose freedom. I stand for freedom!
Said: It is already designated as wilderness, why keep Idaho residents and others from enjoying OUR wilderness.
Said: Stop the feds. Answer this by annexing all federal lands in Idaho. It is unconstitutional for the federal government to own land in a state.
Said: More and more are taken away from us! You politions need to stop now or loos your jobs.
Said: Leave the White Cloud mountains as they are. We have lots of great wilderness areas in Idaho.
Said: Idaho having a larger percentage of its area already designated as wilderness than any other state, we don't need to lock any more up.
Said: Idaho doesn't need anymore wilderness.
Said: Stop trying to take away access to our forests!
Said: Idaho does not want any more Wilderness!!! We have more wilderness than any other state. People who do not live in this state are making decisions about our land and it is not right!
Said: We have lost enough wilderness access. Please leave the Boulder-White clouds as is.
David L. Sargis
Said: Idaho has too much wilderness. The vast majority of Idahoans don't want more! Include me in the majority
Said: The most beautiful parts of Idaho are already non-motorized. Wilderness is not a function of access. Wilderness by mandate is simply a mandate by the minority elite to reduce access by people in general.
Kevin L Miller