Wilderness designations should not be the result of a quid pro quo. They should rise or fall on their own merits.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Simply put, I believe we should not seek the lowest common denominator when it comes to wilderness and saddle a wilderness designation with exceptions, exclusions, and exemptions.
Madam Speaker, I have spent more than half my life as a member of the Resources Committee. In that time I have supported numerous wilderness designations. In fact, I cannot recall ever opposing a wilderness bill.
As one who has often felt this need, and who has found refreshment in wild places, I attest to the recreational value of wilderness.
There's been progress toward seeing that nature and culture are not opposing terms, and that wilderness is not the only kind of landscape for environmentalists to concern themselves with.
Wilderness, like the national park system, was an American idea.
Wilderness is not defined by the absence of certain activities, but rather by the presence of certain unique and invaluable characteristics.
Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.
I realize the answer is not to create wilderness and walk away.
We all understand that compromise is part of the legislative process, yet at the same time, I would submit that wilderness is not for sale.
The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders.
No opposing quotes found.