House leader withdraws Wild Sky bill

WASHINGTON – Efforts to create the first new wilderness area in Washington state in 20 years appeared to fail in Congress on Wednesday, as the chairman of the House Resources Committee withdrew a proposed Wild Sky Wilderness bill.

The decision came after members of the state’s House delegation could not agree on competing versions of legislation to protect 106,000 acres in the Cascade Range northeast of Seattle.

The withdrawal was a setback for the entire Washington delegation, which has pushed for a Wild Sky bill for nearly three years.

The defeat was especially troubling for Rep. George Nethercutt, R-Wash., who had pledged to work with GOP leaders to get a compromise version through the Republican-controlled Resources panel.

Nethercutt, who is running for U.S. Senate, introduced a bill last week that he said was satisfactory to Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., the powerful chairman of the Resources Committee and a longtime opponent of wilderness legislation.

Nethercutt’s version would take about 13,000 lowland acres out of a wilderness proposal by Sen. Patty Murray and Rep. Rick Larsen, both D-Wash. The Democratic version has twice passed the Senate but has stalled in the GOP-controlled House.

Nethercutt’s plan would create a 92,700-acre wilderness and a 13,300-acre Backcountry Wilderness Management Area, a less-restrictive federal designation that would allow off-road vehicles. Critics said Nethercutt’s plan would threaten old-growth forests and salmon habitat and leave the door open for development.

Nethercutt’s version was set for a vote Wednesday in the Resources panel, with Democrats prepared to offer their version as a substitute.

But at a hastily called meeting Wednesday morning, Pombo informed Nethercutt and other Washington lawmakers that he would not call the Wild Sky bill for a vote unless he could be assured of bipartisan support.

When Democrats resisted, Pombo withdrew the bill.

Within moments, the fingerpointing began, as lawmakers from both parties blamed the other for the bill’s demise.

“I’m very disappointed,” said Larsen, whose district includes the swath of Snohomish County dubbed Wild Sky. “We ought to be having a vote and we’re not getting one.”

“I think it’s pretty clear the people of Washington state want 106,000 acres” protected as wilderness, Larsen said. “I am not going to sell the district down the Skykomish River to get a bill people don’t want.”

Nethercutt was even more emphatic, blaming Larsen and Democratic Rep. Jay Inslee for squandering a rare opportunity. The Wild Sky bill would protect bears, bald eagles and other wildlife in the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, as well as promote clean water and activities such as fishing, hiking and rafting.

“Let me tell you how disappointed I am that an effort to preserve Wild Sky was lost today because Rick Larsen and Jay Inslee said no,” Nethercutt told reporters. “Richard Pombo was willing to move this bill (through committee) and willing to preserve 106,000 acres, but Rick (Larsen) said no. It was a missed opportunity.”

Larsen and Inslee denied repeated claims by Nethercutt and other Republicans that they had asked Pombo to withdraw the bill, saying in a letter to Pombo on Wednesday that they “have requested and do request a markup on the Wild Sky bill.”

Inslee chastised Pombo, saying the chairman essentially told Democrats, “it was his way or the highway.”

Pombo, a cattle rancher and strong advocate of private property rights, has said wilderness protection should extend only to lands untouched by humans – a standard the Wild Sky proposal does not meet.

In a statement issued by the Resources Committee, Pombo said Larsen “chose to play the stubborn politics of ‘all or nothing’ and asked me to withdraw Mr. Nethercutt’s bill from committee consideration, which I did.”

Pombo said he was “sure that the people of Washington state, like Congressman Nethercutt, understand that 93,000 acres of wilderness for Wild Sky is preferable to no Wild Sky at all. I can only attribute (Larsen’s) decision to the political posturing of an election year.”

But environmentalists said it was Nethercutt who was playing politics.

“Back in May, Representative Nethercutt made a pledge to Washington that he was the one who could deliver the Wild Sky bill through the House. Unfortunately it appears he either lacks the will or lacks the clout to get the job done,” said Jim Young of the Sierra Club.

Nethercutt “is more concerned with winning approval of a conservative committee chairman from California than he is with winning Wild Sky Wilderness designation for future generations of Washingtonians,” Young said.

Murray, who is running against Nethercutt this fall, said she was disappointed the House bill did not move forward, but added, “I’m confident we will see a bill signed into law with real, full protection for the low elevation lands that are the heart and soul of our proposal.”