If this hearing accomplishes nothing, at least we have accomplished that.

I will introduce myself. I am an attorney here in San Bernardino. Contrary to what some people think, I represent no commercial interests. My interest in this thing is only as a skier and as a resident of this county.

As stated, I am an attorney, being a member of the law firm of Messrs. Wilson, Wilson, and Borror, of San Bernardino, Calif. I was born and raised and educated in San Bernardino, where I have practiced law since 1940. As a member of the Boy Scout troop in my youth, I hiked and camped for three seasons in the area now in controversy.

I am married and have three children, all of whom are skiers. We have been skiing since January in 1962, and would be classified neither as novices nor as experts. We would fall into that great category called intermediate skiers. We ski for recreation only.

Like those who oppose this legislation, I, too, am interested in youth and young people. For 10 years (1950-60) I was a member of the board of directors of the San Bernardino YMCA, and for 4 of those years (1952-56) I was president of the YMCA of San Bernardino. More recently, in 1963 and 1964, I was the committee chairman of Troop 5, Boy Scouts of America, at San Bernardino. In that capacity, I accompanied the boys of our troop on a camping trip into the Slushy Meadow area in the summer of 1963.

I would like to emphasize that I have not been retained by, nor have I any relationship, directly or indirectly, with any organization or group seeking commercial development of this area. My interest in this legislation stems solely from my interest as (a) a skier and (b) as a resident of San Bernardino.

Now, something about our organization.

Following the introduction of Congressman Dyal's bill proposing to provide family winter recreational uses on Mount San Gorgonio, I, together with others holding similar views, were instrumental in organizing San Bernardino County Citizens for San Gorgonio. Our objective is to provide support for legislation permitting skiing on Mount San Gorgonio, but at the same time insure that safeguards will be included in the legislation to preserve existing wilderness values. We are all residents of San Bernardino County. Much of our water comes from the watershed in this area. As a result, we want to see nothing done which will in any way jeopardize our existing water

resources.

I am interested in the watershed as Mr. Break is. I would point out to this committee that the famous Mammoth Mountain and June Lake Ski areas are located in the headwaters of the Owens River Valley and apparently they find no contamination problem there. Similarly, many of us have in the past made use of this area for purposes of hiking and camping. We recognize that in the future many of our children will be attending the numerous youth camps in the Barton Flats area. When they do, they, too, will use the area for hiking and camping purposes. As one member of our committee expressed it, "I am a member of this committee to see to it that although we have skiing on Mount San Gorgonio, the access road does not run through Slushy Meadows." In other words, the objectives of the

-citizens committee is to promote legislation allowing lift skiing in a small portion of the San Gorgonio area, and at the same time to make certain that safeguards are included in the legislation to protect the existing uses and values.

To this end, on June 23, 1965, the San Bernardino County Citizens for San Gorgonio adopted the following resolution:

San Bernardino County Citizens for San Gorgonio endorse legislation to open a small portion of the San Gorgonio Wilderness Area for family winter recreational uses, including lift skiing, in a manner compatible with preservation of present values and uses of the area.

We recommend that legislation for that purpose include the following provisions:

1. The area to be limited to 3,500 acres of the 35,000 acres in the wilderness area and to be above the 9,000-foot level in what is called the San Gorgonio bowl area which is north of Mount San Gorgonio and Jepson Peak and east of Charlton Peak;

2. Any access road shall be east of the South Fork of the Santa Ana River and shall not be visible from nor pass through the areas now principally used for hiking and camping in the South Fork (Slushy) Meadow;

3. No public overnight accommodations permitted;

4. Ski facilities shall not interfere with the watershed;

5. Sanitation shall comply with all State and county requirements; 6. That operator of the lift facilities contribute a reasonable portion of gross receipts to a trust fund to be administered jointly by the U.S. Forest Service district ranger and the executive board of the Sierra Club for the improvement and extension of camping, hiking and outdoor facilities generally in the San Bernardino National Forest. The merits of the legislation: Any proper understanding of the proposed opening of Mount San Gorgonio for lift skiing requires a clear knowledge of the problem that each winter faces thousands upon thousands of family recreational skiers in Southern California. That problem can be simply stated as this:

What do I do in the absence of constant, reliable snow conditions during the winter months?

This problem arises by reason of (a) our southerly latitude and consequent scarcity of rainfall, and (b) the low elevation of existing ski areas. The principal ski areas in the San Bernardino Mountains: The principal areas in the San Gabriel Mountains are at Mount Baldy, Mount Waterman, and near Wrightwood. The principal lift areas in the San Bernardino Mountains are at Snow Valley (Running Spring) and in the Big Bear Lake area. All of these lift areas are located in elevations ranging from 6,000 feet to 8,200 feet in altitude. As a consequence, snow conditions in these areas are extremely "spotty" and unreliable. The history of this past season (1964-65) is a good example. We had some skiable snow for a short period in November of 1964. After it had melted, we had another snowfall sufficient for skiable snow in late December, which continued until mid-January 1965. From mid-January 1965, we had no skiable snow in southern California until approximately April 20, when a late spring storm brought snow that lasted for approximately 2 weeks. There are no arguments such as those presented by Mr. Break and Mr. Hinckley that the skiers can go somewhere else, to other areas. But, that there

are no others because Mount San Gorgonio is a unique area. During the interval of 3 months, from mid-January to mid-April 1965, anyone in southern California desiring to ski was forced to travel 300miles (one way) to Mammoth Mountain, Calif., upon the eastern slope of the Sierra Nevada range. The snowfall for the seasons of 1962-63 and 1963-64 were not much better than those of 1964-65. In short, the real "ski problem" is the absence of constant, reliable snow conditions during the winter period of approximately 4 to 412 months of each

year.

The only solution to this problem lies in the opening of Mount San Gorgonio for lift skiing. Mount San Gorgonio is unique as I said in many respects:

(a) At an elevation of 11,485 feet, it is the highest peak in southern California.

(b) It has vast "bowls" on its north slope that trap and retain the snow for many months.

(c) It lies within 85 miles of millions of southern Californians, and is therefore readily accessible for ski purposes.

The area proposed for development lies between the 9,000- and 11,000-foot elevations. From the standpoint of elevation, Mount San Gorgonio begins where the other areas end. These facts, plus the established reliability and quality of the snowfall in the San Gorgonio area, provide the only answer to the winter recreational needs of many thousands of southern Californians who are recreational skiers, and who ski on a daytime recreational basis only.

The "ski problem" is not merely a matter of overtaxed facilities. It is true that when there is available snow, all existing facilities in southern California are taxed to the limit, and that the "lift lines" are long. However, the addition of one, or for that matter, even five, new ski areas would not solve that problem. There are simply too many skiers in southern California to solve the problem of overcrowding on weekends. The problem, therefore, is not to create just "another ski area," but to take advantage of the only area in southern California that can provide reliable and constant snow conditions during the 4 to 412 months of our winter season.

Once the real "ski problem" is understood and recognized, the fallacy of the arguments of the opponents is self-evident. For example:

(a) It is often argued that the area involved is the "heart" of the San Gorgonio Wilderness Area, and that the "ski problem" can be solved by locating a lift in some other area. This is the only area less than 85 miles from so many skiers. Those who advance this argument simply do not understand the nature of the ski problem. This argument completely overlooks the real problem as above stated. While there may be other areas that lend themselves to development for lift skiing, there is in fact no other area in southern California that has the unique advantage of San Gorgonio (elevation, north slope, and proximity to great population centers). The creation of another lift area elsewhere simply cannot solve the essential problem. Its snowfall would be as unreliable and as unsatisfactory as in existing areas.

(b) It is also argued that the "ski problem" can be solved by "artificial snow." This argument is invalid for the same reasons as above stated. At best, artificial snow can provide just another ski area of

limited size that elevations presently use by existing lifts. They are expensive to install and at best cover areas of a few acres. They are fine for rank beginners, but they offer nothing to anyone who is advanced beyond the beginning states of skiing. Furthermore, "artificial snow" has no more lasting qualities than natural snow. The retention of snow for skiing depends upon climatic conditions. Its retention over a long period of time depends upon cold days and nights. Consequently, "artificial snow" cannot be relied upon to extend or enlarge the ski season for the same reason that natural snow cannot be relied upon. The climatic conditions do not permit it. (c) It is sometimes argued that the San Gorgonio area is now available for skiing and that therefore lifts are unnecessary. This argument completely overlooks the difference between lift skiers (who comprise approximately 98 percent of all skiers) and cross-country skiers. It is true that the area is available for cross-country skiing. However, cross-country skiing is nothing more than hiking on skis. It is totally different from downhill skiing, or lift skiing. It should further be emphasized that while cross-country skiing is a fine activity, and should be encouraged, it is available only to those who have the skill, the strength, the experience, and the endurance to do it. This excludes women, it excludes the thousands of children between the ages of 6 and 18, and it excludes the older skiers, all of whom lack the qualifications to hike from "Poop-out Hill" up to the areas where the bowls of snow exist. This argument is totally fallacious. In short, the present limitation on the use of Mount San Gorgonio area creates a de facto discrimination against 98 percent of the skiing population in favor of a very minority.

When the entire matter in controversy is viewed objectively, and without all of the emotional arguments on either side, certain propositions seem clear and irrefutable. These are:

(a) That this area is public domain. It belongs to all citizens. It belongs as much to those who ski as to those who enjoy hiking and camping. Neither has a prior right or preference:

(b) The area should be developed in such a manner that it may be used and enjoyed by the greatest number of our citizens over the greatest period of time, and should not be preserved as the exclusive domain of the few.

In this connection, it should be emphasized that the wintertime recreational use for skiing and other winter sports is totally compatible with the summertime use for hiking and camping. At present, the principal use of the area is for hiking and camping, most of which occurs between June 1 and Labor Day of each year. It is accomplished in the main by the many children who attend the youth camps in the Barton Flats area. After Labor Day, the use of the area is minimal almost to the point of being nonexistent. There is no reason whatsoever why the present uses of the area for hiking and camping, principally by youth groups, cannot and will not continue, notwithstanding the development of the area for winter recreational use. There is the matter of establishing a "precedent."

One of the arguments most frequently advanced by the opponents is that it will establish a bad precedent with respect to other wilderness areas if the proposed legislation is adopted. This is absolutely untrue. Precedent depends upon similarity of circumstances. The

circumstances here are unique in the extreme. As previously pointed out, the unique qualities of Mount San Gorgonio, as a skiing area, are these:

The extreme altitude (11,485 feet);

(8) The north-facing slopes, having the ability to hold snow for

long periods of time; and

(c) The close proximity to tremendous population centers.

So far as I can determine, these conditions are duplicated nowhere else in the entire wilderness system. Most wilderness areas are remote from population centers. Most have much lower elevations. Few, if any, have suitable snow conditions.

An analogous situation exists with respect to municipal zoning laws. It has never been contemplated that zoning laws are fixed and immutable forever. It is true that they are passed to preserve property values, to stabilize a community and to provide adequate facilities for the entire population by placing certain activities in the most appropriate areas. However, the history of zoning laws has been that wherever it was shown that an area was improperly classified, or that there had been changes which justified a change in the zoning law, the law was changed accordingly. Certainly it was not the intent of the wilderness bill to prevent the development of the public domain for the greatest use and enjoyment by the greatest number of people wherever such need was shown.

Although it initially sounds impressive, the "precedent" argument. is not valid and does not withstand close analysis.

I therefore respectfully urge the honorable members of this committee to report favorably to the Congress of the United States upon legislation designed to open 3,500 acres of Mount San Gorgonio for lift skiing, with appropriate safeguards built into the legislation to protect the existing uses and benefits.

May I conclude by reading to you a list of the organizations in this county that have gone on record by resolution favoring the adoption of this legislation.

The San Bernardino Realty Board; the San Bernardino Motel Association; Victorville Chamber of Commerce; Apple Valley Chamber of Commerce; Asbury Chamber of Commerce, Colton Chamber of Commerce, Menton Chamber of Commerce; the Menton Rotary Club; the High Desert Tourist and Recreation Council; Apple Valley-Victorville-Lucerne; Yucca Valley Realty Board; the Argonaut Club, a service club in San Bernardino; the Lucerne Valley Chamber of Commerce; the San Bernardino Junior Chamber of Commerce; and, the Victor Valley Junior Chamber of Commerce.

Thank you, gentlemen.

Mr. BARING. Are we going to hear from your associates?

Mr. WILSON. Yes, sir; may I seek permission from the committee to offer in evidence 20 copies of a little brochure which our citizens committee has prepared, with reference to my statement?

Mr. HOSMER. I move that with unanimous consent, Mr. Chairman, it be received for the file.

Mr. BARING. Without objection, so ordered.

Mr. WILSON. Thank you, sir.

Mr. HOSMER. Mr. Wilson, Mr. Dolder mentioned six sites that were within 4 hours distance driving from the metropolitan area here which were considered for skiing. Presumably, five of them, that is all of them except San Gorgonio, were approved by the State.