The “Eastern Wilderness Act” turns 50

Posted on August 6th, 2025 in Blog
Dolly Sods Wilderness

By Katie Bilodeau, Wilderness Watch

The Eastern Wilderness Areas Act celebrates its 50th anniversary this year. Like handfuls of statutes that designated multiple Wilderness areas, this statute—which technically declares no statutory title despite being commonly known as the “Eastern Wilderness Act”—designated 15 Wildernesses and 17 Wilderness Study Areas in the eastern states to be managed as Wilderness until the U.S. Forest
Service (USFS) evaluated them for Congress. The statute is remarkable, however, for the story leading
up to its January 1975 passage. It emerged as law despite USFS attempts to severely limit Wilderness on our national forests and effectively end wilderness designation in the East.

The USFS attempted to limit the reach of the new National Wilderness Preservation System on national forests as soon as Congress passed the Wilderness Act. Congress had instructed the USFS in the 1964 Wilderness Act to spend that first decade reviewing and recommending acreage within national forests that Congress could preserve and designate as Wilderness. But the USFS, already entrenched in its get-out-the-cut culture of post-WWII America, had pushed back against the idea of a Wilderness System during congressional deliberation. The Wilderness Act imposed new obligations where the agency previously enjoyed discretion. In 1965, the USFS self-limited what it would recommend as Wilderness. The agency plucked the most restrictive criteria from language in the Wilderness Act, requiring any USFS wilderness recommendations to be areas “untrammeled by man,” to “retain[]its primeval character and influence,” and to be no less than 5,000 acres. Areas previously impacted in just about any way could not clear these hurdles. While that reduced potential wilderness acreage in the West, the USFS admitted these criteria excluded much of the East entirely.

Wilderness advocacy groups responded. They argued that the USFS misinterpreted the Wilderness Act, which was written forward-looking and phrased more broadly. An eligible area “generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature” and “has five thousand acres of land or is of a
sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation…”. The Wilderness Act did not exclude “national forest lands predominantly of wilderness value” that may have been trammeled in the past. In effect, Congress had intended for more than what met the USFS’s “purity” test.

The debate on the USFS’s purity test landed before Congress as competing bills in the early 1970s. On one side—the legislation drafted and promoted by the USFS—was the Wild Areas Act of 1972. It invented alternative designation criteria because the bill explicitly concluded that almost no eastern areas could satisfy the 1964 Wilderness Act’s definition of “Wilderness.” Conservationists criticized this bill as codifying agency misinterpretation. They countered with a competing bill.

The competing bill that proponents referred to as the Eastern Wilderness Areas Act would protect numerous areas in the East under the 1964 Wilderness Act. Proposed areas in this omnibus wilderness bill were delineated by local citizen groups with grassroots support. Proponents of the Eastern Wilderness Areas bill argued that the USFS’s new criteria in the Wild Areas bill was unnecessary for eastern wildlands because the Wilderness Act applied everywhere. The 1964 Wilderness Act had two standards. The first was practical and permissive, allowing areas with prior human impact to be considered for and designated as Wilderness. After Congress designated Wilderness, however, a stricter standard applied—moving forward, agencies must manage Wilderness to maintain an untrammeled (i.e., unmanipulated, uncontrolled) quality.

Idaho Senator Frank Church reinforced this view in a 1973 speech—“The Wilderness Act Applies to the East”—just days after he introduced the bill. Senator Church noted he was “deeply involved in [the Wilderness Act’s] construction and in the full debate it received before passing the Senate by an overwhelming margin,” and expressed concern that “this important law is being misinterpreted by some officials in the very agencies which have the duty and responsibility to apply it.”

Senator Church noted that while the USFS would have everyone “believe that no lands ever subject to past human impact can qualify as wilderness…Nothing could be more contrary to the meaning and intent of the Wilderness Act.” He called out the agency for anti-wilderness maneuvering and trying to divide the Wilderness System into two, refashioning the current nationwide Wilderness System into a western one. Church repeated his previous statements that the Wilderness Act allows for the designation of formerly disturbed areas: “This is one of the great promises of the Wilderness Act. We can dedicate formerly abused areas where the primeval scene can be restored by natural forces. In this way, we can have a truly national wilderness system.”

In rebutting the assertions that no areas in the East can meet the definition of Wilderness, Church highlighted the three eastern Wilderness areas with past land abuse (Great Gulf, NH; Shining Rock, NC; and Linville Gorge, NC) that Congress designated with the original 1964 Wilderness Act. This move, he noted, “was, and is, a standing and intentional precedent to encourage such areas to be found and designated under the act in other eastern locations.”

Ultimately, Congress chose the conservationists’ bill over the Wild Areas Act, rejecting the USFS’s unreasonable purity criteria and reinforcing the 1964 Wilderness Act’s practical guidance for designating Wilderness. Areas with past impact can become Wilderness. Once designated, however, the Wilderness Act protects from further manipulation. Untrammeled means, moving forward, nature
decides. The unequivocal reinforcement of these values to prevent warping the 1964 Wilderness Act is what we—in the East and the West—owe to the “Eastern Wilderness Act.”

Katie in D.C.

Katie is Wilderness Watch’s Legislative Director and Policy Analyst.

Photos: Top—Dolly Sods Wilderness by Ethan Miller; Above—Lye Brook Wilderness by Dawn Serra.

168 Comments

  • Our natural, untouched landscapes and the wildlife and ecosystems they support belong to all of us, not just the greedy corporate robber baron few who would pillage and destroy these treasures simply for their own short-term financial gain.

  • The Wilderness Act not only recognizes the power of Nature, but encourages the preservation of the ecological balance of the Earth itself. There is a haunting song that speaks of paving over Paradise. Guess what happens then….. yeah, we will perish from the earth.

  • Leave the “Eastern Wilderness Act” Alone.
    Leave our Public Lands Alone !!
    Thank you:)

  • Our poor, poor planet is much too close to her tipping point for us to be enacting policies that will only serve to push her over the edge. We must preserve whatever precious little wilderness remaining, regardless of how “pristine” it may or may not be, and re-wild much of that stolen from the animal nations.

  • We have to stand together and brave together to save the animals from extinction and save the habitats into the future forever and ever.

  • With this Government in charge new stand to loose 10’s of millions of lives, acres of land and natural resources. Our air, water and Mother Earth suffer to the point that it can’t be saved. The illegal hunting, killing for sport is getting worse. ITS ALL RIGHT IN FRONT OF OUR FACES AND SO MANY THINK ITS FAKE , OR ITS SHORT TERM, EVEN WORSE MANY DON”T THINK OF IT AT ALL! WE have to do EVERYTHING “WE” can to SAVE what we have or there won’t be anything left …..

  • Back in 1979-84 I was one of the original AZ Wilderness Coalition members and I had trouble convincing some of our own enviro folks that an old historic structure or mine headframe, etc. did not disqualify areas from Wilderness designation. I showed them fotos from the Hoover Wilderness in CA to convince them.
    Keep up the good work. At 86 I can’t keep up the fight but I’m counting on you young ones to stop Trump and his evil crew.

  • As a born US citizen, I want to be assured that no more wilderness is gobbled up by those who would ultimately profitize off of what should rightfully be OUR public lands. Once they’re gone, they are gone forever!

  • This is wonderful to know. These folks certainly had the right approach to the preservation and protection of wild spaces, and thanks for sharing this! EBP

  • We have one planet. I don’t understand why anyone thinks it’s okay to destroy our planet for profit.

  • By killing off other species and destroying the environment we are dooming ourselves to extinction.

  • “Areas with past impact can become Wilderness. Once designated, however, the Wilderness Act protects from further manipulation. Untrammeled means, moving forward, nature decides.”

    Losing the wilderness designation means losing a part of environmental history that cannot be recovered. Our legacy deserves better.

  • The Eastern Wilderness Act should be preserved as should the Eastern lands protected by it. Once these lands are destroyed, it is difficult if not impossible to recover them. Don’t mess with the few wilderness areas we have left! Please.

  • We only have one planet. There is no site B. There is no tomorrow. We must protect and preserve our natural resources for our grandchildren and our future survival. Our National Treasures must be protected.

  • I really appreciate this post, it was really informative and helpful to understanding not only how the Wilderness areas are designated but also the legislative process. These areas should be protected and we need to reengage our efforts to make sure ALL future generations have the opportunity to experience wilderness areas. We are beneficiaries or previous generations and owe the same for future generations.

  • It is a moral and rational imperative to protect and expand public lands — for future generations and for biodiversity protection (including agricultural pollinators). The climate crisis is an existential threat, and atmospheric carbon analysis (including radioactive carbon from atmospheric nuclear testing in the 1940’s – 50’s) has proven that fossil fuel-combustion ‘carbon 12’ is what has been, and continues to be, released. This proves that climate change is a MAN-MADE effect. Protecting and expanding public lands leads to forest protection and other climate-friendly actions — KEEP FIGHTING FOR PUBLIC LANDS!

    Nick Ratto, Pharm.D.

  • So much is being destroyed in the name of profit, if all they’re going to have left once everything is gone is a pile of money then I don’t really see the point and will most certainly never understand it.

    • It’s not just profit, it’s also overconsumption. Americans need to stop being such hogs and consuming so much. If we all reduce our consumption substantially, the extraction/destruction industries wouldn’t be able to make any profit from killing and destroying.

  • The Wilderness Act is a vital piece of the push to protect the environment, and must be upheld and expanded. There’s no Planet B, people.

  • it’s awesome that it turns 50 yrs old. and it’s good for the environment and wild animals 2 live in peace and people 2 learn from the beautiful sites they go 2 and help save these places. it’s good 2 always protect these lands from stupidity of people only wanting 2 destroy the beauty and the environment. keep the wilderness alive 2 understand the animals and help them survive. don’t let people that r only in it 4 money 2 destroy the natural resources that we have!!

  • Thank you for the education, Katie. Your history lesson is an important one exposing how the government agencies authorized to implement the Wilderness Act have historically done so reluctantly. Sadly, the same agencies carry that reluctance forward to the present.

  • Katie,

    Thankyou very much for your history lesson on Wilderness and WSAs. I learned a lot from your article, but still cannot figure out why the USFS has been so opposed to Wilderness.

    Regards,

    Mike
    Bozeman, Montana

  • The Wilderness ACT applies in the East and all over our nation. The USFS needs to comply always.

  • People in the East need wilderness, too, as much as people in the West. Ecosystems need to regenerate, or be conserved, for the services they provide to the biosphere, the mental health and recreational needs of the population and so on. It should not matter that some areas have been used by humans in the past.

  • Ghe Dolly Sods a piece of land in the Monglehela National Forest brought down by glaciers from Canada!

  • Apparently the greedy exploiters of natural resources won’t be satisfied until America is nothing more than an asphalt parking lot adjacent to entertainment parks. West Virginia & Eastern Kentucky are prime examples of the devastation wrought by greed, despoiling the landscape and leaving the residents poverty stricken, without even clan water. Another example is Southern Louisiana, same thing. Even the once untouchable Florida Everglades is falling under the greed of developers. This has to stop.

  • Having wilderness areas is wonderful. They should be all across the country where appropriate.

  • As a Minnesotan who loves the outdoors and enjoys canoeing, camping, hiking, fishing, orienteering and exploring, I always enjoyed visiting our big wilderness area – the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCA), in the northeastern part of the state that bordered a canoe wilderness area in Canada! I love wilderness and the Quetico-Superior ecosystem, so I’ve always fought to protect the BWCA from mining, etc, and maintain it being managed as wilderness! We MUST ALL protect OUR Public Lands, no matter the size, from all types of human interference, including climate change, across the country in order to benefit ALL life, including mankind!!