The President of the United States Transmitting

93d Congress, 2d Session ------House Document No. 93-319

PROPOSALS FOR THE ADDITION OF FIFTEEN NEW AREAS TO THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM

MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TRANSMITTING

PROPOSALS FOR THE ADDITION OF FIFTEEN NEW AR- EAS TO THE NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM, THE AUGMENTATION OF TWO PREVIOUSLY- SUBMITTED PROPOSALS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS AGAINST INCLUSION IN THE SYSTEM OF SEVEN ROAD- LESS AREAS STUDIED, PURSUANT TO SECTION 3 OF THE WILDERNESS ACT OF 1964 [16 USC 1132]

PART 8

MILLE LACS AND RICE LAKE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE MINNESOTA

JUNE 13, 1974. —Message and accompanying' papers referred to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs and ordered to be printed with illustrations

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1974 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

To the Congress of the United States: There is no greater challenge facing America today than the dis- covery and development of new energy resources. As we move toward national self-sufficiency in energy, however, u we must be diligent in protecting and preserving our natural heritage of unspoiled wilderness areas and the ecosystems which they support. With this goal in mind, and pursuant to the Wilderness Act of 1964, I am today proposing 15 new additions to our National Wilderness Pres- ervation System. These additions comprise more than 6 million acres and would nearly double existing wilderness acreage. I would also like to take this opportunity to urge once again that Congress enact the eastern wilderness legislation I recently submitted, now embodied in legislation labeled S. 2487 and H.R. 10469. On May 31, the Senate passed a bill which would designate certain wilderness areas in the Eastern United States. The Senate bill, I believe, is inadequate. I urge the House to give early and favorable consideration to wilderness legislation incorporating the Administration proposal, and I urge the Congress to adopt it as the most balanced approach to studying and designating wilderness areas in the Eastern United States. Briefly described, the additions I am proposing today are: (1) Crater Lake National Park, Oregon —122,400 acres. Crater Lake is the deepest lake in the country and, in its ancient caldera setting, one of the most beautiful. The lake is surrounded by rugged and varied ter- rain, most of which is recommended for wilderness designation. (2) Havasu National Wildlife Refuge, California-2,510 acres of Sonoran desert land. Located in one of the hottest and driest areas of the country —rainfall averages only 4.73 inches per year—this refuge is the home of such rare or endangered species as the Yuma clapper rail, the Gila monster, and the peregrine falcon. (3) Semidi National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska —256,000 acres com- prising nine islands and surrounding submerged lands in the western Gulf of Alaska. The refuge's fragile estaurine system is a breeding ground for vast colonies of sea birds and other forms of wildlife. (4) Hawaiian Islands National Wildlife Refuge, Hawaii—1,742 acres on various islets and reefs distributed among some 800 miles of ocean between the main Hawaiian Islands and Midway Island. Among the rare forms of wildlife found within this refuge are the Laysan teal, found only on Laysan Island; the Hawaiian monk seal; and the green sea turtle. (5) Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge, Illinois-4,050 acres. This refuge is a haven for such migratory waterfowl as Canada geese, snow and blue geese, and mallard ducks. (6) Zion National Park, Utah —120,620 acres. This park is a superla- tive example of the effect of erosion on an uplifted plateau. The great bulk of its towering peaks and pinnacles, arches, and natural bridges are recommended for wilderness designation. (7) Katmai National Monument, Alaska — 2,603,547 acres. Situated near the base of the Alaskan Peninsula, this massive area comprises three entirely different ecosystems: a coastal area dotted with fjord- like bays; a mountainous area atop ancient volcanic basement rocks; and a plain crisscrossed by lakes of glacial origin. (8) Rice Lake and Mille Lacs National Wildlife Refuges, Minne- sota-1,407 acres. Consisting largely of bog, forest, and lakes, Rice Lake National Wildlife Refuge supports a variety of birds, notably the ring- necked duck. Both of the islands which constitute the small, nearby Mille Lacs National Wildlife Refuge are also included in this recommendation. (9) Glacier National Park, Montana—927,550 acres. Located in the Rocky Mountains of Montana, this park—nearly all of which is suitable for wilderness designation —contains some 50 small glaciers and 200 lakes. (10) Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge, Montana-32,350 acres. Although it harbors a multitude of ducks, as well as such mam- mals as moose, elk, deer, and antelope, the primary purpose of this refuge is to protect the once-rare trumpeter swan, largest of all Amer- ican waterfowl. (11) Olympic National Park, Washington-862,139 acres. The home of more than 50 wildlife species, this landscape of rain forests and sea- shore lies in the wettest winter climate in the lower 49 States. (12) Tamarac National Wildlife Refuge, Minnesota-2,138 acres. One of the most important sanctuaries along the Mississippi Flyway, this area hosts thousands of pairs of ducks during the annual nesting season. (13) Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado —239,835 acres char- acterized by massive peaks, Alpine lakes, and mountain forests. Among the wildlife found here are wapiti, mule deer, and bighorn sheep. (14) Missisquoi National Wildlife Refuge, Vermont —620 acres. Lo- cated less than a mile from the Canadian border, this refuge supports primarily waterfowl but also a population of 100 whitetail deer, a species which was all but nonexistent in this area 30 years ago. (15) Unimak Island (Aleutian Islands National Wildlife Refuge), Alaska —973,000 acres. A rich diversity of wildlife, including the Alaskan brown bear and the one-rare sea otter, inhabit this island. Its scenic coastline, rugged mountains, and volcanic remnants make the island ideal for the study of interrelated marine and terrestrial ecosystems. In addition, two proposals which have been previously submitted — Pinnacles National Monument and Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Parks, all in California —have been augmented by sufficient acreage to warrant resubmission to the Congress. The enlargements, which are attributable to revised management philosophy and plans and the recent acquisition of private inholdings, amount to 5,970 acres in the case of Pinnacles and 68,800 acres in the case of Sequoia-Kings Canyon. Three other areas—previously proposed —Cabeza Prieta Game Range, Arizona; Desert National Wildlife Range, Nevada; and Glacier Bay National Monument, Alaska—contain surface lands suitable for wilderness designation. However, because two of these areas are open to mining, and all three may contain minerals vital to the national interest and have not been subjected to adequate mineral surveys, I am recommending that action on these proposals be deferred pending the completion of such surveys. After a review of roadless areas of 5,000 acres or more and roadless islands, the Secretary of the Interior has concluded that seven areas are not suitable for preservation as part of the National Wilderness Preservation System. These are: Savannah National Wildlife Refuge, Georgia; Little Pend Oreille National Wildlife Refuge and Turnbull Na- tional Wildlife Refuge, Washington; Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge and the National Bison Range, Montana; National Elk Refuge, Wyo- ming; and Horicon National Wildlife Refuge, Wisconsin. In addition to this message, I am transmitting herewith to the Congress letters and reports from the Secretary of the Interior regard- ing these wilderness proposals. I concur with the recommendation of the Secretary in each case, and I urge the Congress to give early and favorable consideration to all of these proposals. RICHARD NIXON. THE WHITE HOUSE, June 13,1974. United States Department of the Interior

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY June 5, 1974 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240

Dear Mr. President:

It is with pleasure that I recommend the establishment of areas total- ing approximately 1,U07 acres in Rice Lake National Wildlife Refuge and Mille Lacs National Wildlife Refuge, Minnesota, as part of the Wilderness Preservation System.

The recommendation stems from this Department's responsibility under the Wilderness Act (78 Stat. 890) to recommend to the President areas within its jurisdiction suitable for designation as wilderness. Having reviewed potential areas in these two refuges, we conclude that 1,406.27 of the 18,056 acres in Rice Lake and all of the .6 acre in Mille Lacs should be designated wilderness.

Established by Executive Order 7221 on October 31, 1935, with several subsequent additions, Rice Lake National Wildlife Refuge lies in east- central Minnesota. Consisting largely of bog, forest, and lakes, the refuge supports a variety of birds, the most notable of which is the ring-necked duck. Rice Lake itself is famous for the wild rice har- vested there by Indians each fall. A share of the proceeds from this harvest is returned to the refuge for seeding of the lake. Save f<. r sand and gravel exposed on ridges, no known mineral deposits exist in the refuge.

We have determined that a l,l*00-acre bog in the southwest corner of the refuge and the 6.27-acre Rice Lake Island are suitable for wilderness designation in that they evince no sign of man's presence and will best meet refuge objectives if left in their natural condition. We consider the remainder of the refuge to be unsuitable for wilderness designation because management prerogatives there conflict with wilderness values.

Located about twenty-five miles southwest of Rice Lake, the Mille Lacs National Wildlife Refuge comprises two islands in Lake Mille Lacs. Reserved by Executive Orders 2199 and 33^0, dated May lit, 1915, and October 13, 1920, respectively, the islands consist of unvegetated boulders, sand, and gravel and serve as a nesting ground for gulls and terns. Though small, the entire refuge is suitable for wilderness designation. In accordance with the requirements of the Wilderness Act, a public hearing on the recommendations was held at McGregor, Minnesota, on September 27, 1973. Analyses of the records and written expressions received, together with the letters received from other Federal agencies, are contained in the enclosed synopsis. Complete records have been compiled and are available for inspection by the public.

Enclosed is a draft bill which, if enacted, would incorporate the recommended areas of Rice Lake and Mille Lacs National Wildlife Refuges into the National Wilderness Preservation System.

Sincerely yours,

SeclJetary of the Interior

The President The White House Washington, D. C. 20500

Enclosures To designate certain lands in the Rice Lake National Wildlife Refuge, Minnesota, and the entire Mille Lacs National Wildlife Refuge, Minnesota, as wilderness.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, in accordance with section 3(c) of the Wilderness Act of September 3,

1961* (78 Stat. 890, 892; 16 U.S.C> 1132(c)), certain lands in the

Rice Lake National Wildlife Refuge, Minnesota, and the entire

Mille Lacs National Wildlife Refuge, Minnesota, which comprise about one thousand four hundred and seven acres and which are depicted on a map entitled "Mille Lacs and Rice Lake Wilderness - Proposed" and dated April 1973, are hereby designated as wilderness. The map shall be on file and available for public inspection in the offices of the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, Department of the

Interior.

SEC. 2. As soon as practicable after this Act takes effect, a map of the wilderness areas and a description of their boundaries shall be filed with the Interior and Insular Affairs Committees of the United States Senate and House of Representatives, and such map and description shall have the same force and effect as if included in this Act: Provided—>-«™- ,™~ , however, That correction of clerical and typographical errors in such description and map may be made. SEC. 3. 5he wilderness areas designated by this Act shall

"be known as the "MLlle Lacs and Rice Lake Wilderness" and shall be administered by the Secretary of the Interior in accordance with the provisions of the Wilderness Act governing areas designated by that Act as wilderness areas, and any reference in that

Act to the Secretary of Agriculture shall be deemed to be a reference to the Secretary of the Interior.

SEC. k. Nothing' in this Act shall be construed as altering in any way the hunting, fishing, or ricing activities of the Mille

Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians or the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe in the area designated as wilderness by this Act. MILLE LACS AND RICE LAKE WILDERNESS PROPOSAL

PUBLIC HEARING ANALYSIS

The public hearing for the Mille Lacs and Rice Lake wilderness

proposal was held at McGregor, Aitkin County, Minnesota at

7:30 p.m. on September 27, 1973. A total of forty-five persons

registered and seventeen presentations were made for the record

by the public after the Bureau statement of the proposal was read.

A discussion period followed the presentations of statements.

Most of the people in attendance at the hearing and the organizations represented were from within a 100-mile radius of the refuge.

No representatives were present from any political sources nor were any state or other federal agencies than the Bureau of Sport

Fisheries and Wildlife represented. Most of the organizations represented were in favor of the Bureau proposal while some organizations, such as the Wilderness Society, proposed additions to the proposal.

The Chippewa Indians were well represented at the hearing. They appeared to be misinformed about the proposal and thought their ricing priviledges on Rice Lake might be in jeopardy. It was explained that ricing would no way be affected by the proposal. The Indians also challenged the Bureau ownership of the Mi lie Lacs

Islands. In order to clear up this question, a request for an opinion on ownership of the Mille Lacs Islands (Hennepin and Spirit) was made to the Field Solicitor, Twin Cities, Minnesota. The Solicitor's opinion states that the Mille Lacs Lake Band of Indians currently has no claim to title of these islands. (Copy of Solicitor's letter is attached).

PUBLIC HEARING:

Upon completion of the study of the potential of the Rice Lake and Mille

Lacs Islands Wilderness Proposal, it was concluded that the areas qualified for wilderness consideration. Consequently, a Public Hearing Notice was published in the Federal Register on July 26, 1973 and a public hearing was held at McGregor, Aitkin County, Minnesota.

A "package" of information was sent to the concerned public officials, departments, agencies and all other organizations and individuals known to have an interest in the proposal. The information "package" included the Mi lie Lacs-Rice Lake Wilderness Summary, a notice of the hearing, and a letter inviting each to make known his or her opinion on the proposal by writing or by giving a statement at the hearing. More than 1,200 "packages" were sent out to organizations and individuals. Public officials departments and agencies were sent more than 200 "packages". The public hearing was held as announced on September 27, 1973 in the McGregor High School, McGregor, Minnesota, beginning at

7:30 p.m. The hearing was called to order by Hearing Officer

Elmer Nitzschke, Field Solicitor, Department of the Interior,

Minneapolis, Minnesota. Mr. Gordon H. Hansen, Regional Land

Management Supervisor, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife,

Minneapolis, Minnesota, presented the Bureau's statement. A total of 45 persons registered at the meeting and 16 presentations were made for the record. A question and answer period followed the presentation of statements.

COMMUNICATIONS FROM ELECTED PUBLIC OFFICIALS

One letter was received from an elected public official, Representa- tive John A. Blatnik, expressing a favorable opinion for the 1, 406 acre proposal. COMMUNICATIONS FROM STATE AND LOCAL OFFICIALS, STATE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources expressed the view that the Mille Lacs Islands inclusion in the wilderness system serves no significant purpose. Minnesota DNR also was opposed to the proposal within Rice Lake Refuge for wilderness on the grounds that wildlife improvement measures within the wilderness area would be precluded and mistakenly that wilderness designation would restrict their fish salvage operations in Rice Lake.

Michigan Department of Natural Resources stated that they were in agreement with the Bureau proposal but did not favor any increase in size of the proposal.

The U. S. Soil Conservation Service expressed no objections to the proposal. The U. S. Forest Service continues to refuse to recognize the island portion of the Wilderness Act and the portion providing for inclusion of areas of less than 5, 000 acres.

Other agencies we re contacted and replied, but had no comment on the proposal. COMMUNICATIONS FROM ORGANIZATIONS

Sixteen organizations submitted statements. Fourteen were in favor

of the proposal, one was opposed and one had no opinion. The letter

in opposition was from the Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians

and their challenge of island ownership is answered by the Solicitor's

opinion attached to the Analysis.

COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS

Total communications numbered 201. Of these, 191 were in favor of

wilderness, eight letters expressed no opinion and two were in

opposition. One hundred and seventy-four letters were from

citizens favoring the proposal. A further breakdown of those

citizens in favor show 81 letters in favor of the proposal as outlined

by the Bureau and 110 letters resulting from the Wilderness

Society's brochure recommending an increase in the size of the

proposal to 2, 050 acres. The remainder of the correspondence

has been discussed above.

34-893 O - 74 - pt. 8 - - 3 IN REPLY REFER TO. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR Office of the Field Solicitor 686 Federal Building, Fort Snelling Twin Cities, Minnesota 55111 November 12, 1973 Hr. Jack Hemphill Regional Director Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Federal Building, Fort Snelling Twin Cities, Minnesota 55111

Attention: Land Management - Branch of Refuges

Re: Rice Lake Wilderness Hearing

Dear Mr. Hemphill:

By memorandum of November 7, 1973, you asked for our opinion on the basis for and validity of the claim by Chippewa Indians to two islands located inMille Lacs Lake, being Spirit Island and Hennepin Island, which were included in your recent wilderness proposal. From the information available to us, it appears that these islands were included in areas reserved by the United States for the Chippewa Indians by the Treaty of February 22, 1855, 10 Stat. 1165, the Mille Lacs area reservation beiag described as:

". . .the following fractional townships, viz: forty-two north, of range twenty-five west; forty-two north, of range twenty-six west; and forty-two and forty-three north, of range twenty-seven west, and, also, the three islands in ; the southern part of Mille Lac." f

The Nelson Act, January 14, 1889, 25 Stat. 642, provided for the complete f cession and relinquishment of all lands on all Chippewa reservations in 1 Minnesota with the exception of White Earth and Red Lake. This act was I accepted by the Indians and the cession effectuated on October 5, 1889, I and, although it does not specify the two islands here in question, must I be interpreted as including them. The act also permitted such of the [ Indians as did not wish to remove to the White Earth Reservation to take | allotments on the reservations where they lived at that time. The Land f Titles and Records Division of the Bureau of Indian Affairs has advised f us that they have no records of any allotment selection which included these - islands, and we thus must conclude that they remained available for with- drawal and designation as wildlife refuges by Executive Orders 2199 and 3340. Later orders which restored lands ceded by the Nelson Act to the Indians did not include lands which had previously been sold or withdrawn, and would not have included Spirit or Hennepin Islands. It Is thus our opinion, based on the materials available to us, that the Mllle Lacs Band currently has no claim to title of these islands, though ve do not have information on whether or not these lands are included in those for which the Chippewas are being paid under current claims commission awards. This is not to say, however, that the band has no claim to hunting, fishing or rice gathering on the islands. In light of the recent Federal District Court ruling in United States v. Minnesota, Civil No. 3-70-228, it is at least possible that such rights do exist as alleged in Mr. Aanerud's letter of October 22, 1973. The supposed existence of these rights should not, however, interfere with establishment of these islands as part of the Wilderness System.

Sincerely,

iriana R. Shulstad/^ For the Field Solicitor